Conjuring the Art of Giving

?raddhayā deyam | a?raddhayā’deyam | ?riyā deyam | hriyā deyam | bhiyā deyam | sa?vidā deyam |

Give with faith and reverence. Give as much as you can according to your wealth. Give with modesty. Give with empathy.

India has an ancient tradition of giving. Giving or philanthropy is not a choice but a duty in our culture. Its seers not only glorified philanthropy but also spoke about how to give. This short extract from the Taittiriya Upanishad sets down the principles for giving.

If we were to understand what is giving, earliest references from the Quran say that Charity or alms, also called “Zakat” or “Sadka” in Arabic, is the third of the five pillars of Islam. Being charitable and taking care of the ones less privileged is an essential aspect of the Islamic character. Similar references are there in Christianity, Hinduism, and other religions. In Buddhism, Monks till date are dependent on the “Grihastha” or householder for sustenance. Generosity in early ages was never reserved for a season, month or week. It was an act ingrained in daily activities. Very small but meaningful actions which made living and giving synonyms to each other. A separately cooked special food was given to cows, dogs, crows, ants, and then the food for the family was made, showing symbiosis. Even the white Rangoli made in front of houses, made from rice powder was in the end eaten by ants.

The modern world has still not been able to change the definition of giving. When we look at generosity, we often understand it as giving away freely, without expecting anything in return. The two norms of distributive justice that feels important to be maintained are Equity and Need. Some blessed with more and hence the act of sharing looks logical to even out these mismatches at a systemic level. Hence fulling the mutual needs of the giver and the receiver. If all actions, thoughts, and emotions circle back to the needs of the person only, then giving as a word need a recalibration. As every act of giving creates a reciprocal energy to nourish back the giver as much as it fulfils the needs of the receiver. These reciprocal energies hence become the powerhouse for emotions of gratitude, abundance, empathy, compassion, positive intent and more. Makes me wonder who received more the giver or the receiver?

If the equations are so straightforward then what makes generosity such a rare phenomenon??Does every person who has been blessed with sufficiently enough believe in unconditional sharing? Why people and organizations with surplus do not believe in the law of equity and need, and that unmet needs of others can be fulfilled by simple gestures of compassion. The inference is not that people do not have compassion within them. Let’s try to decipher this with the help of “Yogic Vidya” or the science of Yoga. According to Yoga, there are several energy centres in our body starting from the crown of the head to the base of the spine, which correspond to certain nerve bundles and major organs in the body. To function at their best, these energy centres need to remain unblocked or open or balanced. If these are blocked, a person can experience physical or emotional stress related to a particular chakra. The 4th major Chakra, or heart Chakra or Anahata located near our heart is responsible for our ability to love and show compassion. So according to this trusted scientific practice of Yoga, every person is bestowed with these chakra’s and these energies. It is a matter of blocking and unblocking that creates all the difference. If organizations are living organisms how does one work with the heart energy to build more compassion and abilities for collective sharing.

Where do you place yourself or the organization you work with in this quantum?

We once happen to do the body and mind or soul work for few of our Associates in the organization. Only to realise that people and teams with higher Heart energies were able to not only amplify and build healthy relationships but were also relatively happier and more successful in the organization. Their abilities to un-conditionally give created a positive magnetism around them and their function hence creating more resourcefulness and feeling of abundance. They gave not because they had enough but because they believed in interdependence and holding space for the other was as important as holding space for oneself. Incidentally shifting the “I” mindset to “We” reframing the question from what’s in it for me? to what’s in it for us?

Skepticism related to Giving: Symptom vs Cause

There is a universal understanding on what are the principles of helping, but there is a famous gap between what we ought to do and what we put into action. We are illusioned by the self-interest which clouds our thought process and makes us think that we must sacrifice substantively to help others, and this is perhaps the worry that holds us back. In order to generate more perspectives on the topic I asked few people from several diversity about giving. Sampling out some very interesting responses heard in the conversation

1.?I need to have enough before I start giving.

2.?There is a right time to give for it to be valued.

3.??Giving needs to be trigger oriented, will share when someone ask for it.

4.??Measurable elements of life often qualify under giving. The tangibles of food, shelter, clothing, time etc.

5.?Giving requires reciprocation, acknowledgment or at just a two-letter word Thank You.

6.??Giving is episodic, need base and event centric.

7.??Emotions, presence, silence, space, togetherness etc the intangibles often get unseen under giving.

8.?If I give too much, I will need to refill my reservoir. A belief that giving in itself does not hold regeneration capacity.

9.?Giving first begins in my circle of influence and then transcends upwards. Give yourself, to family / team, Organization, Society, Universe, and higher realities.

10.Giving brings power and hence puts a person on a pedestal.

11.The last one is my personal favorite; I haven’t paused enough to know what to give.

What does one strive for?

If the principles of giving and personalities were to be mapped, where would you identify yourself in the appended framework:

Where do you find your self when you look at the four quadrants? Is there a fifth one that emerges for you? Practising giving is what matters, then maybe one day we can be like Myanmar, a lower-middle income country which has a high giving index of about 58%, defined by the “Charities Aid Foundation”. Would also like to spotlight Jeff Bezos, “2 Pizza rule” here, which states, that the sharing is possible between smaller teams, so that everyone can have a slice of pizza. You may not have to go all out and finish up your resources and not be able to effectively satisfy many people, but sustainably support 1 or 2 people. That little is also enough.

Beyond the boundaries of measure of success, tangible results and financial outcomes a measure that often qualifies the health of an individual or an organization is the giving index. Just for a moment let’s look at giving from a non-financial lens. When an organization works on collective purpose to make the world healthier together it is giving back much more to the society, when individuals offer comfort and assurance to a person who failed a project, when there is more compassion in the room when somebody is taking just a little extra time to learn something new and when you shared your positive emotions to light-up a stranger’s day.?These moments are like stars scattered in the night sky waiting for the light to pass. The good news is that we are both the stars and the light at different moments in life. What we wish to do in these moments is what differentiates us.