|
CONTRIBUTE BLOGS
04/02/2009 18:22
by Marcia Stepanek
When in Britain last week at the Skoll World Forum, I was referred to a recent article in The Observer written by Joss Garman, the 24-year-...
03/02/2009 22:35
by Marcia Stepanek
As the recent copyright woes of Obama poster artist Shepard Fairey show, there's a war raging over what some now are calling a new art form in ...
02/16/2009 07:24
by Marcia Stepanek
I just finished reading an advance copy of "The Blue Sweater: Bridging the Gap Between Rich and Poor in an Interconnected World,&qu...
| |
Perspectives
THE ALTRUIST
Sharing reconsidered as part of a natural cycle
A HOLOCAUST SURVIVOR CAME TO THE
ASHRAM where I was studying and asked my teacher, “What is Love?” He
was a successful Israeli doctor but seemed clawed inside by his
experience.
My teacher, instead of answering him
directly, called her students and sat silently with us over the next
two and a half hours as we tried to answer the doctor’s question. We
offered him every scriptural, philosophical, and, finally, popular
definition of love that we knew, East and West. None satisfied him.
Still, by the time we were through, his face had softened and whatever
burning need had brought him there seemed quelled.
When he had gone, our teacher asked us if
we’d answered the doctor’s question. We shook our heads. She thought
for a moment, then said: “Why didn’t you tell him, ‘Love
is...sacrifice?’ After his experiences, that’s something he might have
understood.”
Up until then, I had thought very little
about the subject of sacrifice, and for good reason. The word,
“sacrifice” can have painful associations. Who among us aspires to a
life of sacrifice? Then again, I was well aware that every real
achievement in life—a scholastic degree, victory on the playing fields,
a thriving business or family, and excellence in any form is almost
always the result of a tremendous sacrifice in terms of time, focus,
energy, and money.
Sacrifice, I realized, is the quality that
makes love real, that saves love from being another four-letter word.
Where there is love, we give of ourselves and of our
substance—willingly.
This concept of sacrifice is at the core of
a world view reflected in many of our religious traditions, from which
our philanthropic ones descend. Sacrifice is at the heart of
Christianity and is the sacred imperative behind the Old Testament’s
“burnt offerings.” What the Bible leaves unsaid is that while a portion
of the ritual sacrifice was devoted to Yahweh and his priests, the rest
of the now-sanctified goods or animals was often distributed among the
community, including the poor.
The Indian scriptures enunciate this same
world view, though in different terms, declaring: “Everything in this
universe is food and food eater.” This claim, exotic as it may sound,
is simply an archaic formulation of the first law of thermodynamics,
which states that energy cannot be created nor destroyed— only stored,
transferred, or transformed.
What does this have to do with philanthropy?
Surprisingly, everything. Philanthropy—in terms of physics—is the
transfer of energy from one system to another, from one with a surfeit
of power to one with a deficit.
When we send a planeload of food to a
devastated area, the core biological purpose of our assistance is to
transfer the energy in that food to the food eaters, whose bodies
transform it into prana—life energy—which they can use to heal, to bury
their dead, and to remake their lives, their homes, and their
communities.
But
where does food come from? There’s no food without rain. The Indian
Bhagavad Gita, one of the seminal texts of yoga, explains the cycle of
sacrifice thusly: From food comes forth living beings, and from rain
food is produced; from sacrifice arises rain, and sacrifice is born of
work. Thus rain is sacrificed to food, and food to the digestive fire
in our stomach. From the energy we get from food, we’re able to perform
our work and to reap the treasures of the earth.
When a part of these treasures is offered
back, the gods become pleased and send their blessings in the form of
rain. Thus the circle of sacrifice is completed. This is the ancient
paradigm.
Note the vital importance of wealth. The
earning and accumulation of wealth is not regarded with disdain.
Indeed, it’s just the opposite. Because energy cannot be created,
sacrifice or philanthropy demands an existing pool of resources that
can be “sacrificed” to those in need. Thus, in the ancient Jewish
tradition, sacrifices were made from domestic animals, not wild ones,
because wild animals do not belong to anyone.
In fact, one might say that the ultimate
purpose of rain, food, and work is the creation of wealth and value—but
with one essential caveat: that this money be used
righteously and unselfishly, and that a portion of it be returned to
its source and plowed back into the community. Thus, the cycle of
sacrifice is completed, and a new one can begin. The study of this
subject over the years has altered my own attitude toward money. I’d
often been told that money was “the root of all evil.” But the original
Latin adage reads Radix malorum est cupiditas—“Greed is the root of all
evil,” not money.
What is greed? We often envision it as a
rapacious desire for more. But just as often, greed wears a more
pedestrian face and takes the form of simply not giving.
Today, as we cast about for better ways to
make our giving count, ways “that integrate social, ethical, and
environmental principles,” as the author and environmentalist Paul
Hawken puts it, we could do worse than to reexamine this old model, or
cycle of life.
However we view it, the Circle of Sacrifice
positions philanthropy within a larger context. Philanthropy here is
more than a “random act of kindness.” It is an integral, regular,
regenerative link in the circle of community and life. According to
this ancient viewpoint, without giving, without philanthropy, the wheel
of life would stop.
Of course, you may be wondering how
relevant this perspective can be today when many of us don’t believe in
a quid pro quo between the pleasing of supernatural powers and the fall
of life-giving rain. But the gods of antiquity were closely identified
with the classical elements: Fire, Air, Earth, and Water, and can be
viewed just as truly as the forces of nature.
Given the many streams that come together in
philanthropy—and the present state of our biosphere—a broad and
integrated approach like this one feels overdue.
Peter Hayes is a New York writer and consultant whose short fiction
has appeared in The Atlantic Monthly. He is the author of
The Supreme Adventure, a book about personal growth.
Comments? Send an e-mail to editors@ contributemedia.com.
Illustration by Celia Johnson
|