Skip to main content

Willingness to Contribute

Why do we want to contribute to the lives of others? Why do we want to do charity? To get some intangible benefits in the form of name and fame? Or to accumulate some "good deeds" in our balance sheer of life so that when we die, these "good deeds" help us secure a good position in the next life? Or do we feel an enhanced "self-esteem"? Can there be giving without any associated desire to get any of these things? 

I feel that till there is "contribution", there will always be a commensurate desire to get something tangible or intangible in return. The moment there is a feeling that we are contributing, there will always be an associated feeling that we are "making an effort" and whenever there is an effort, we are naturally conditioned to expect something in return, whether tangible or intangible. However, there may also be a possibility where we are just enjoying the manifestation of a possibility and then leave it for others to accept or reject the same. For example, Ramakrishna did whatever he wanted to do and people who wanted to explore spirituality, got inspired by his life and started reading about him. Similarly, Mahatma Gandhi carried out all the experiments throughout his life, and in the process, so many people got inspired by his explorations. Kabira explored truth by being aware of whatever he noticed and so many people got inspired by his way of living.

I feel that the best contribution in this world is when there is no keenness to make a contribution. Keenness to contribute to some person's life brings restlessness. The greatest personalities in this world have all just lived their lives to explore different possibilities. Einstien just explored what he wanted to explore and in the process, he became a role model for almost everybody pursuing theoretical physics. Buddha explored the nature of reality through meditation and in the process inspired people over many centuries. 

If we just be authentic in our lives, that is sufficient to inspire people. Since we are just being what we are, there is no question of contribution. We live an authentic life as per our convictions and realizations. Somebody likes to explore literature and he explores literature and writes many books and his books inspire generations. Somebody likes painting and he paints authentically, and his paintings inspire generations. Somebody likes unravelling the secrets of nature and he does the same with authenticity and passion and his experiments inspire people over generations. Why do we take pain to "contribute"? Just being authentic self is sufficient to inspire generations.

Authenticity is not easy. That is why very few people inspire us. Authenticity requires complete awareness. Only when we understand ourselves fully, at both the conscious and unconscious levels, can we be authentic. Otherwise, in most cases, we do not even know ourselves, and hidden desires from our unconscious mind drive our behavior, leading us to lie and pretend. Our minds often have many conflicting desires; we want to be successful while also being "goody-goody" with our friends. Krishna had to choose to leave his friends for the purpose of his life; he couldn't be overly accommodating to the Gopis. He was never inauthentic to pretend that his friends were more important to him than the purpose of his life. I believe that nobody can change another person. Only control-freaks attempt to change others. All the enlightened individuals in this world have authentically explored different possibilities, inspiring millions in the process. Efforts to consciously contribute to the lives of others often stem from hidden motives, which generally cause more damage to the world than those who lack the willingness to contribute. On the other hand, all the enlightened people in this world have followed their passion authentically and in the process millions have benefitted. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Weak Minds

 I don't know what Rama would have felt like when he developed Vairagya looking around at the temporariness of life, and all the material objects. He had the blessed company of saints like Vashistha and Vishvamitra who could answer hundreds of his questions with example and their experiences. King Dashratha was spiritually mature and therefore rather than snubbing the Vairagya of Rama, he could request Vashistha and Vishvamitra to answer the questions asked by Rama. When Siddhartha had similar questions in his mind, he had nobody to answer and his father, in fact, tried to keep him away from the questions about life. That is the strategy of probably the entire society today. If you can not answer the question, prove the question itself to be wrong.  That is what happens to anybody having these questions about the purpose of life. The first response he gets from society is that all these questions are a waste of time. In the entire history of humanity, we have not been able to ...

Choice of Happiness

I often wonder as to what is the meaning of equality? Some are born into families that can spend thousands of crore rupees to make their kids happy, and many can not buy enough food for their kids and their kids sleep hungry stomach and still remain happy and grateful. Some travel by private jet while many have to travel in the locals like cattle. Some own many buildings worth thousands of crores while many sleep on the streets. If somebody knows how to manipulate the systems, the sky is the limit in this world. However, all these hold true, if we believe that happiness is a by-product of money. In fact, I see that the reality is quite the contrary. First of all, life is much more than money. There are 12 houses in Astrology representing 12 different dimensions of life. The first house represents health, the second wealth, the third initiatives and younger siblings, the fourth vehicles, properties, and everything that comes as a result of our initiatives, the fifth new direction, and k...

Use of AI to understand the purpose of Life

I was listening to an interesting debate on the following YouTube link that ignited a series of thoughts in my mind: https://youtu.be/o2aAx3wk6dg?si=qLSwKnR0Cp4TyLPC It is interesting to imagine a world where we can get almost everything done with just a command right from driving a car to flying a plane, doing the homework to making presentations for the meeting, taking care of the plants to taking care of the parents, getting the food cooked to get the surgeries done.  After listening to the discussions, I was quite amazed at the idea of delegating the decision-making to the AI and investing our time in exploration. Decisions about whatever is in the domain of known may be taken by the AI in the future and human beings may be busy exploring new possibilities.  However, how will AI make the decisions? Suppose, during the Ramayana times, AI was fully developed. How Kaikeyi would have taken the decision? I believe for AI or anybody to make a decision, the desired goal has to be...