Approach Towards Philanthropy → Alms To Beggars?
As soon as a child is born he imbibes matters in his mind through his surroundings and what gets inculcated in him is dependent upon his inherent personality, and hence it is not always that a person in dismal surroundings situation always adapts evil but may turn a saint too, for the sake of instance, we can consider the case of ‘Ashoka The Great’ and that of Siddharta turned Gautam Buddha from Royal/hostile and Royal to Saintly and Saintly respectively. However, such cases are negligible in number and the environment or surroundings experienced by an individual have much impact in the development of their personality. This is so as human brain is too docile to get adapted to numerous of situations, but this is not a hard and fast rule, and hence drift from generic notion of only environment impacting individuals’ personality exists. And as human brain is capable to adapt to most of the situations and developing most types of personalities, yet there is much scope for the most likely inherent virtues to become buoyant and come to the top though being shrouded in adverse situations. This has been proved by the likes of SA Ramanujam, an Indian mathematician, T Nasreen, M Jackson (on his faith conversion during the last days of his life), lovestrucks,etc. who move on with the factors most befitting their inherent personality and in defiance of orientation towards surrounding or the environment they are exposed to. Hence, we see that any radical change in any sort of environment is made by 'an individual’ or a very few.
Now as far as the surroundings are most likely to impact the personality of a child, they experiencing selfishness and autocracy tends to concentrate on the factors in his own interest or in the interest of those too proximate to him, as this is what they has learnt. The child makes their career plans and endeavours in the direction towards the goals ultimate to them or the situation that pleases them. If they really cannot make efforts towards their self determined goals, still no matter what, their temperament or desires to attain the same goals persist as they have ascertained for themselves. Though on actual or pragmatic grounds being unable to make efforts in that direction, like, becoming day dreamer in lethargy, joining notorious company, getting addicted to intoxication or such likes of adversity.
But once, whatever trade they adopt and adapt to, though may be experiencing fluctuations in career, once they gain success to a certain extent to their satiation or to the extent commonly known as to their satiation complying to what they factually deserve, now, gaining this success there is much more often than not, an element of dis-satiation to some degree or the other regarding their overall opinion about their career and social status. However, accepting whatever the destinies have decided for them, they attempt working for the well being of themselves and of their kith and kin. Once getting fed-up with the routine or mundane life or in the quest of doing something favorably different they may sometimes turn philanthropic. And in order to satiate themselves they go a less beneficial way as regards philanthropy. Here we can take the instances of all those who directly try to contribute to society by setting up direct aid organizations with a massive portion of their little fortunes directly spent on generic welfare causes like in the fields of health, education, employment generation, feeding, sheltering, etc. of the needy and so on.
But never a prudent individual would do so if they are purely altruist. The above forms of philanthropy are adopted by self-centered people who in their own interest of mental satisfaction and in the pursuit of keeping away from adverse divine rewards carry out such exertions and hence belong to that school of thought. Live instances of the matter under consideration being those signing the pledge floated by Mr. Buffet for all the billionaires asking them to part off with at least half of their fortune for philanthropy. Those signing the pledge are to the likes of Mr. Gates, Zuck, Mr. Buffet himself, and so on. While contrary to this such a pledge is neither accepted nor endorsed by the likes of late Mr. Jobs and have truly beneficial policies and plans for philanthropy to even I, the author, am an exponent of. According to the latter school of thought which I follow, is to perform ones’ own natural duty well, by the way of which far much more benefits can be generated with the same amount of money,efforts and other resources at our disposal with these benefits growing further with leaps and bounds and still continuing. Say, one exerts to their optimum capacity in the interest of a business firm viz. Apple, they generate and amass more wealth in economy, thereby boosting the economy and income, hence more demand, hence more production, hence more income, hence more consumption and taxation, and hence more development which will be in the interest of the entire local and global economy. So as the result to this, all people gain higher living standards, better facilities (like education, health and anything at all), and hence uttermost philanthropy this way.
And if one really wants to spare sometime of their own for philanthropy, they can utilize it in a better way by forming alliance of those having faith in their own school of thought and can brand the alliance to the likes of 'Tax Payers’ Association’, 'Rights Activists’, etc. buttressing the welfare activities with their enhanced capacity developed by performing better in heir own career and duty.
This way they can even influence the State and International Authorities in the interest of the mass and hence following the right and optimal approach towards philanthropy where one is proving to be a true altruist and do not shell off their own wealth to their satisfaction as offering alms to the needy which degenerates them and makes them incapable or dependent on others and hinders the progress of all humankind. While adopting this second approach endorsed by Jay, the author, the philanthropist will be more altruist, more powerful, more dignified,more just, more contributing, providing more power/self-reliance to the needy, etc. And on the part of the beneficiaries, they remain dignified with self-reliance through a better economy, duty oriented people and more of State help (because of more taxation), which is their own fundamental right. So better sentiments will always prevail under this approach while there being several setbacks and adversities under the former approach. For e.g., the recipient does not reciprocate favorably to the donor in nay way, specific or generic, may cause frustration, depression and trauma to both and rift between them as a direct donor, even if he already does not expect favorable rewards of any type for his philanthropy efforts, but when they experience adverse actions or reactions, or even opinions of the beneficiaries for that matter, definitely aggrieves them and hence evolve worst effects of the best efforts performed at their capacity level.
Now, as the child under the exemplary analysis keeps growing older becomes subjected to several adversities like mid-life crisis, late life crisis, dis-satiation over authenticity of spiritual or religious knowledge, panic of demise, etc. And such adversities in an individual weakens them and call further adversities or deterioration of their condition, and as the age progresses, the process of ageing and meekness progress too, while the mental and physical power recedes. And then such an individual out of fear, frustration and dis-satiation starts performing weird deeds and making weird decisions. Live instances to this is the likes of those pledging to part off with a major chunk of their fortunately earned fortune for the welfare of others which is not the right welfare approach. All this is because they they realize and accept the so called 'Ultimate Truth’.
So the far this Ultimate Truth is from an individual the more composed and competent they are, and if there is no realization or approval of this Ultimate Truth, or it is eliminated altogether, the results will be a 'havoc of blessings’. This is because such weird acting individuals estimate their life tenure and start making arrangements and provisions accordingly. And as they have absolute faith on the same being 'The Ultimate Truth’, they are absolutely following the right path ( as this faith leads to what they really believe in ). This acceptance of generic truth and firm faith therein along with natural advancement in age makes one’s personality decline. This is called 'Jay’s Law of Declining Personality’. This decline in personality can be easily negotiated. Now consider– an individual in generic, estimates their life span to be around a maximum of 100 years.,and their tentative retirement age being around 60. Hence, the more one gets closer to this 60 and that 100, the more they start reacting to age progression by making weird decision like parting off with 99% or 95% of their multi-billion dollar fortune for others’ welfare. Though a very few may perform such weird deeds by pledging top part off with at least 50% of their fortune which is the effect of the surroundings they are in and getting carried away by their counterparts, though being too young, but with a much less intense sentiment for sure, and being too prone to annul such pledge. Similarly, we can take the live instance of the one who is known to be the all-time richest till date, inflation adjusted. He had only two major ambitions. One, to earn at least US$ 100,000, and the second being to live for at least a 100 years. The first wish was probably fulfilled but the second was missed with about 2.5 years. Having this so called 'Ultimate Truth’ as the ultimate for him, spent half of his life amassing his massive wealth (valued at over US$ 336 Bn today , being adjusted for inflation) and the rest half in shelling it off for philanthropy.
Now consider, he aspired and estimated his life to be of 200 years. Would he still start up philanthropy and give-in to the Government breaking his monopoly while he reaching late mid-age or old one? As an answer to this most of us would agree that by then his late mid-age or commencement of old age would be no sooner than 150 years of living and hence must have 100 years of youth tenure and so much of wealth, resources, mental stability and whatever it takes to be more powerful. Now, under these circumstances being so young, say around 50, with plenty of time for him to do so much and then pass away, would contend with the Government, might be bring it down, take over, but nohow give-in to it, on the contrary make it to give-in to him and make far more miracles in history. Thus he was lost, not to the Government or the rivals but to his accepted 'Ultimate Truth’.
For the attainment or inculcation of the 'Real Ultimate Truth’, in this rapidly changing world with great scientific and technical advancements like gene therapy and cloning, there may be advancement in enhancement of human life-span.
Now, say, those estimating their lives to be of around 100 years, now with scientific and spiritual advancements, estimate it to be of 200 years, hence the youth period probably lasting for around the age of 150 with vigour and potential at peak,and the age of retirement being around 170 years. Now, is it imaginable that a person being so young at 58 along with his wife would decide and declare parting off with 95% of his total wealth or a person being so young in his 60s make decision to part off with 99% of his full fortune for others? To the farthest stretch of imagination it does not sound to be pragmatic at all. This is because now he is too young to make such decisions and such a concept cannot even creep into his mind even for an instant as he has much to perform, much to explore, much to achieve and stay much ambitious at a much higher degree and be preoccupied with making plans and in performance in implementing them.
Hence, the acceptance of this phenomenon as the Ultimate Truthand Life Span Estimation ( while people do not consider premature death like with accidents or attacks), deprives all human beings from deriving the optimum from their lives. So, if this so called Ultimate Truth is gone, the havoc of blessings and bliss would arrive.
Now, having considered an individual’s life span to be of 200 years with spiritual and scientific advancement, say, an individual from 58 reaches 98, not even having covered half the tenure of his estimated life, comes to know about a spiritual, scientific or otherwise breakthrough with the application or adoption of which he can now estimate his life span to be of 500 years. Now, being so young or kiddish at 98, not even having covered 20% of his life term as estimated, will start feeling more energetic, more powerful, more ambitious, more demanding from life, etc. Then, further consider another such breakthrough occurring at his age of 258 years enabling him to estimate his life term to be of 2000 years. Then being at such a young age of 258, having covered roughly under 10.5% of their life term only it would be mocking at humanity to say them being beyond seven seas, might be they being above seventh heaven would suffice. Now in such a situation can anyone even out of insanity give evolution to the concept of such former type of philanthropy in his mind?
So here it is proved that the elimination of the concept of the so known 'Ultimate Truth’, there will be no need of such hypocritical philanthropy, or all will be philanthropists. In other words, all will be self reliant as all will be performing their duties well with more confidence, more ambitions, more expectations from life and be free from all currently existing psychological flaws, and to a great extent all physical too. Now taking this merely hypothetical instance of individuals turning immortals at 1200 years of their age at a given time under all spiritual, scientific and otherwise advancements, now though they may carry out philanthropy in any way as individual preferences differ, but the instance of taking extraordinary steps will altogether, be eliminated.
Though under the current times and circumstances immortality is impossible as immortality will then have to betaken as as infinity. But as human presence in nature has a certain instance of birth, hence to the best of current knowledge and the circumstances, they are bound to die out. AS known till date, only that entity does not end which has never evolved, like, time and space. But as it is, that human has an origin and thereby will have end too. Hence cessation of life can be procrastinated but not eliminated. But that is not all. Human knowledge till date is very limited and many changes may occur in the universal environment in future, beneficial or harmful. Hence there will persist a ray of hope of immortality too, as like human existence is energy existence, and energy only changes its form but never gets eliminated or vanished to nowhere. Hence, efforts between these lines and between the lines of infinite possibilities will keep the lamp glowing.
Still, it would be better if the former type philanthropists start following the latter path and in lieu of making their type philanthropic efforts, start making more or most appropriate efforts like promoting spirituality, life sciences, the allied ones and all the others for a sustainable balance. And the sceptics must believe that what is today’s dream, is reality tomorrow. With the attainment of access to manipulation of human genome, sheep cloning, and aids like human level and beyond artificial intelligence to be evolving in the near future the lingering on of life cessation to a very far distance is quiet possible now. And as an optimist lives longer natural life, stays more healthy, is more likely to succeed, while a pessimist or sceptic ceases early naturally and mostly flunks. Hence now there remains nothing more to be said but done.
Hence, the human community being most witty and wise among all should know that the Ultimate Truth is not 'Death’, though may not even be infinity, but 'Uncertainty’ for certain, and for sure. Hence, it is 'Uncertainty’ and only 'Uncertainty’ which is the 'Real Ultimate Truth’ and it also accounts for the generally unaccountable premature or accidental deaths and hence is the only and perfectly the 'Real Ultimate Truth’. And as 'Uncertainty’ is liberal too hence also encompasses the possibility of infinity at some stage of futuristic time, no matter what. This is what is known as 'Jay’s Ultimate Truth’or 'The Real Ultimate Truth’.
So, for betterment of all as a philanthropic effort, a minor little advice pertaining to my stand, as above. → 'Believe it, it will give you hope. Work on it, it will turn your hope into reality’.