Wednesday, July 10, 2013

For the greater good.



A few days back, a homeless man on the street asked me for money as I was about to step into a restaurant for dinner, and I gave him a dollar.
 Just as I was about to get in, I caught a look of semi disapproval on my companion’s face, and I asked what the matter was.
Here’s the gist of what I got: most of the people on the streets are homeless because they choose not to work, they are able bodied and not old, so by giving them money, I am just making them lazy.
What about children? (I haven’t seen kids begging on the streets here, but such conversations almost automatically take us to India, hence my question) . “With children, it is even worse, because you are teaching them that there can be an easy way out at a very young age, and that they don’t need to work,” my friend said.
What if it is someone really in need? “None of the money (in India) goes to those begging anyway, their pimps will take it all away from them, so what is the point? For the greater good, we must not give them money."
This is not the first time I’ve been hit with that logic, I  give out money to those asking for it if I have cash on me. I give food if people ask and don't  really understand how people can keep gorging on their sundaes and burgers while shooing away underfed kids latching on to them at the same time, children claiming to be hungry for days. Never mind if the claim is right or wrong, they obviously need help!
So,  I’ve been badgered with the “why are you doing this” question for forever now.

There’s a simple answer to why I do it: because I feel bad that while I’m going to spend $30 on one meal there’s someone who might not have eaten for the day. So if I can, I will.

There’s also the not-so-simple answer, which is that I do not agree with the “logic” in the “what are you doing” line of thinking. Just because while I know a lot of people (especially in America) might just be begging to raise enough money so they can buy their next hit, there are many who are genuinely in need and I would rather give people the benefit of doubt.
Now I obviously don’t suggest helping shady looking men lounging in the subway station looking visibly stoned and potentially inviting trouble, but that man on the street corner looking hungry?
 I also don’t really live under a rock, so I know the horror stories of how they force their kids to wail to make people give them money, I know how some people cut off limbs off young kids so that they “look needier” and I know that many of those on the roads are drifters who have cut class.
But beyond the granular details of why exactly are they begging, can anyone deny that no matter what the reason, they are doing it because they need help? So yes, they cut off the young boys legs so that his situation tugs at some Ritchie Rich’s heartstrings and brings him a 50 instead of a 10.  I’d count it as a criminal offence (same as I would when my classmate’s dad broke his arm when he beat him up in standard 6), but don’t you see the difference here?
The boy lost his legs for it. Who in their right mind would do that if they had an option? And if the deed is already done, how on earth is it “more helpful” to not part with the little money they are asking for, for which he lost his limbs is the first place? Do you really think starving them to death is going to make their manager (or whatever the term is) any less cruel, instead of their finding other meaner ways to earn money?

Of course there are practical considerations. I can’t help every single person asking me because a) I don’t make enough to be charitable on that scale, and b) I traded cash for the convenience of cards ever since I got to operate my own bank account. So many times I mumble a “I don’t have anything on me”. The post, I guess, is more about the intent. Or the lack of it.

Here’s another story I’ll tell you. Stone ages ago when I was in college, an old man wearing worn out but a a neat pajama-kurta came up to me and my friends and asked for money to catch a cab. His story was made of text-book con artist stuff: he claimed he knew the Principal of our college (he knew Father Principal's name, but then so does half of the city), he was an ex student, he was in the neighbourhood on an errand and he lost his wallet so now he’s stranded and can’t go back home. So will we help him? He will return the money the next day.

Like everyone else, I saw through the story, but gave him 20/-. That’s all I had on me, saving my own bus ride home. If you were born after 1990 like my kid brother, you would find that silly but believe me, once upon a time we did go to college with all of 25/- in our wallets. And that covered minor trips to local eateries at the back gate of my college.
Anyway, none of my other friends gave him anything and one girl admonished me severely after the old man had thanked me and gone away. “Don’t you see he’s lying? Which self respecting elderly man asks young college girls for help if he really just lost his wallet? You lost your wallet last month, did you beg?”
Of course I knew he was lying, but is it really that difficult to understand why I would still give him the money? A well spoken greying old man is reduced to conning kids less than half his age for a mere tenner or twenty. I doubt that was a matter of choice. He might have been an employee at some factory or firm that closed shutters. He might be lying for food. It might not have been anything sinister, but I doubt he’d do what he did if he had other options. So, even if he was lying, I played along. And I'm hoping those you would thought like my friend in the first instance, will now understand why I say if this happens once more, I'll do the same thing again..

“So if he is in need why can he not just beg? Why lie? I hate liars,” said my friend. Right, because it is that easy to swallow your pride and share your misfortune with a bunch of giggly college girls and unfeeling strangers who are not likely to help in any case. Or is it because it is infinitely better and fulfilling to stand on a high pedestal and be charitable, than to help without the fanfare associated with it?

On my last visit home, I gave a beggar at a bus stop 50/- because I didn’t have change and she looked needy. I got the usual dose of “tor shobtatey barabari” (You always overdo it). I'm kind of used to that by now (trick is to ignore or smile depending on who you're with and let it slide), but I still find it supremely strange that those who find my giving away 50/-  (I can’t afford to do that regularly, it was a once in a while thing because like I said, she looked like she could use some help and I didn’t have change) are also the ones who would blame the Buffetts, Birlas, Murdochs and Ambanis for  “not doing enough for society”.   Of course they don’t know that many of them actually have made many charitable contributions. But to the question of “not enough”, here’s my rider: absolutely for the reason of argument, let’s say 50/- to you is 50,000/- to a very rich man. Meaning he will spend 50,000 with the same nonchalance or thrift you would 50/-. If   you can’t bear to part with your share or even bear the sight of another person parting with it for a good cause, why do you expect a rich man to part with his 50k?
And shouldn't you only grumble about other more famous men of not doing their fair share only when you know you do yours well?

I work with a voluntary non-profit organization that has adopted a few schools in various parts of rural India and tries to keep them going.  We buy them supplies (think chalk, notebooks, pens through mid-day lunch), counsel the teachers (not many well educated and qualified candidates want to get posted to rural public schools, so they often get very under qualified teachers) and now we have also started a campaign asking people who can to "adopt a child".

No prizes for guessing how much that has flourished. Things have come to such a head that we might have to let a couple of our schools go, because we don’t have enough money to give them. I once wrote an email to all my friends and acquaintances asking them to help, explaining that it was not for my benefit and that a onetime donation could cost less than a mug of weekend beer. Very few did, and I got a lot of “I gave money the last time you guys were asking.”
Right, because parting with $10 more than once a year is going to make them destitute. Not to mention the vanity in announcing how they paid up once before.

And what is it we sing at all prayer meets? Par dukhkhey upkaar karey toh yeh mann abhimaan na aaney rey.

I wonder if it is in the chasing of "money" and "career" ( Sir says, none of us are actually making any serious money or have that important a career anyway, we just delude ourselves into thinking this will get us somewhere in life) that has made us all insensitive. So much so that not only do we not help others in need, we come up with brilliant excuses to justify why we shouldn't.
Only, I sometimes wonder if these reasons ever come back to haunt people sometimes, when they are with themselves and with their thoughts? Or have we killed that inner voice absolutely and completely?

10 comments:

  1. Thanks thanks thanks for writing this. I wonder how these homeless people bear the callous weather and live on streets during winters. Why would they do it if they had any choice? Resistance acts in its willful ways when we try to use our money for someone who needs it more than us. But the same amount of money seems nothing when we spending it on our lavish vanities. I guess not everyone has the power or clarity of mind and soul to overcome that resistance. "The greater good" is always expected from great people. And when you and I do what our heart says, people admonish. I have tried so many times to help people understand and think from this perspective that you mentioned above. But, you know what, just like other simple and great things (such as honesty, sincerity and admitting mistakes) this too has to come from within.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I totally agree with your line of thought Nivi and I think if giving some money won't make you starve so be it. Go - be generous. And you have nothing to lose.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dear Nivedita Di,

    Warm regards. This post is brutally honest, and an absolutely wonderful piece of writing. This is reality, without any sugar-coating, and the state of incidents almost everywhere.

    Sir's blog post, "http://suvrobemused.blogspot.in/2010/12/there-are-such-people-around-us-too.html", deals with this very same issue, and you two think exactly alike! More people should be thinking the very same. I definitely do, and will keep on thinking in this manner.

    Sir's blog has this extremely apt little poem , that says it all, I believe:

    "I am reminded of the old Bengali doggerel-

    ota ke re? / ami khoka / mathay ki re?/ aamer jhankaa / khash na kano?/ daante poka / bilosh na kano?/ ore baba!

    Which, crudely translated, would sound like this:

    Who’s there? – just the kid
    What are you carrying? – mangoes under a lid
    Why don’t you eat them? – this toothache’s horrid
    Give them away then? – God forbid!"

    It has been a pleasure to read this post, Nivedita Di. I thank you once again for this treat.

    With best wishes,
    Debarshi.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks for the support, Neena, Amith, Debarshi.
    Neena, I should thank you and Chandan for letting me do my itsy bitsy bit for Asha, and Amith, I know how much you already do, so I was thinking you would agree.
    Debarshi, I'm going to take it as a massive compliment, that you said I think like Sir. Also, thanks for pointing his post out, I am ashamed to say I had missed it completely till now. I just read it now, and it answers a few doubts I had in my head even when I was writing this post. Now I can with double the conviction that the entire "let them fend for themselves" argument really is an excuse for avoiding moral responsibility. Or so I think.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dear Nivedita Di,

    Warm regards. Indeed, I did mean it as a compliment! I am giving you another link to Sir's post (its a different one, but again you'll notice how similar the thoughts are..):

    http://suvrobemused.blogspot.in/2008/09/charity-and-other-things.html

    Indeed, I believe, as Sir points it out- You do it essentially because you want to, you feel for them, you feel with them, and because you believe in conscience, karma, and the nature of the soul. After all, one doesn't choose one's birth circumstances- a quirk of fate could easily have landed me on the other side of society, in these places, whose development/help we neglect( most of us, sadly)- and thus society as a whole, ignores its existential possibilities, also for further evolution of this concept of society. And to those who say, helping them makes them want to get it easy always, and makes them choose the wrong path:

    "The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons.
    -
    Fyodor Dostoevsky, The House of the Dead (1862)".

    If a sense of fellow-feeling isn't there, we aren't really in a society.

    With best wishes,
    Debarshi.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good to read your thoughts, Nivedita. I remember watching a Madhur Bhandarkar movie titled 'Traffic Signal'. It showcases the rackets of beggars that operate in a metro. I took a firm stand after that - I am not going to do any charity on the roads and add to the menace. I believe in education for all. Have been contributing to this cause in all ways possible.

    The only time I see myself parting away with a 10-rupee note is in the less than 15 minutes journey on a fast train from Andheri to Bandra where a young abled fellow comes and plays beautiful Sarangi - a musical instrument. It acts like a stress buster at the end of a long day. He never asks for money. Its a young girl who accompanies him who does the rounds for collection. I appreciate his art and I pay him for it. Its not alms.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dear Niveditadi,

    This is a post after my own heart. For more than one reason, thank you very much for putting this up.

    Firstly, I admire your passion, will and courage to get so closely associated with an NGO. You need accolades for it. I know you don’t do it for admiration or praise, but how many of us actually turn our thoughts and intentions into actions?

    I completely agree with you. Most of the explanations that people give for not lending a helping hand are mere excuses. They only want to shirk responsibility. I have heard my share of “You shouldn’t do all this. You are spoiling them” too. I have a few incidents to share with you-

    One of my students is a son of a moderately-rich businessman whose entire family makes frequent trips to the holy places spread around India. My student’s father has a number of flats in Kolkata itself, spends a lakh of rupees for performing an annual ‘puja’ and likes to frequently gorge at fancy restaurants. When his son looks at a beggar on the street and wishes to give a few rupees, his father admonishes him saying that he could buy candy out of that money but absolutely not give it in charity.

    In my teens, I used to travel with my father frequently by train. Outside the station, there used to be a row of beggars, some in a very poor condition. My father narrated me the story of how a man who taught a poor man to fish had done a ‘real help’ instead of the man who gave him fish every day. He told me that in a similar vein, he avoided giving any money to the beggars. Of course, I never bought his explanation. If I am not in a position to teach fishing, is it not better that I give one fish and make sure that the poor man and his family lives another day? And then there are so many who will never be able to fish.

    Niveditadi, I see the contempt in the faces of so many people looking at the poor and destitute. They are simply proud of their fate, which, as Debarshi has pointed out, is a very foolish thing to do because we have no control on our fate; do we? I despise people with that contemptuous look.

    Only today, my mother-in-law told me that the man who comes to wash the stairs of the buildings in our complex hurt his foot very badly which started bleeding profusely. This happened in our neighbouring building and apparently, its inmates did not provide him with any first-aid and even refused to give him some money so that he could visit a doctor! Ma of course bandaged his foot and Ma and Sayan gave him a couple of hundred rupees so that he could visit a doctor if need be, but then, we both wondered aloud if such people deserve to be called human beings.

    I too have my faults because I have not yet begun giving money for charity on a regular basis but I am trying to get over my weakness and I don’t give any excuses, even to myself for not beginning yet. It is only sloth, nothing else.

    Thank you once again for writing this post. It acted as a little nudge and I got a lot of food for thought.

    Warm regards
    Rashmi

    P.S. Your mention of the second line of ‘Vaishav jan to’ made me skip a heartbeat because Sayan and I have been listening to the song quite a lot recently. We both aver that little else is more worthwhile than the pursuit of becoming a Vaishnav of the sort which the song describes. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Beautifully written. Reminds me of the Poverty class I took in law school. Experiences like the ones you have shared make me wonder if Marx's prophetic ideas about revolution would actually come to fore. We indulge in so much opulence, what is stopping the poor man out on the street to come to us and take his share. He's underprivileged not because he's not willing to work hard or take opportunities but because the institutions that run the society don't let him.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks for all the comments. Radhika, I watched that movie but I would still say the upshot remains the same. They are reduced to begging and tricking and conning, yes. But isn't is more about why? Like Rashmi says, if we can't teach him how to fish, why can't we buy him a fish till he figures it out? I agree with Amith when he says if it isn't killing you, there's not much to lose by being generous. Until we find a better, more sustainable solution, of which I have little hope.
    Namit, thanks a lot for the comment, but I have to say I felt quite a chill when I read yours. But you're right, of course. Nothing is really stopping the poor man, except for maybe that we've taught them for so long that they're weak, they believe in it. One never knows when that changes and we all know what happens when it does.
    Rashmi, I feel a little sad for the student. There's a good chance he'll grow up thinking that's the way to be and then like my friend in college, will admonish others who have been lucky to be able to think otherwise. And he'll never even realize WHY that is wrong, unless you or someone else tells him, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  10. First things first. So absorbing was the write up that iI was totally engrossed in it. The points raised are really worth debate. My view is thus : varius attributes govern our mind from time to time eg. Pity, anger, rebuke, fear, etc. when pity evokes, and we perform an act, we get to receive fruits according to the act. Now other person who may be cheating, or be real needy one, receives fruits according to his deeds.
    I had written a post on bodhidharma, which gives some insight on charitable deeds.
    Abhimaan para is touching one.

    ReplyDelete

let me know what you think. it helps.