Philanthropic work

Expressions researched:
"philanthropic activity" |"philanthropic and humanitarian workers" |"philanthropic work" |"philanthropic workers"

SB Canto 3

Unless one has good engagements in spiritual service, it is not possible to get out of the attachment to material service. Those who are not devotees, therefore, are interested in so-called humanitarian or philanthropic work, such as opening a hospital or charitable institution.

SB 3.25.27, Purport:

When one engages in devotional service to the Lord in the nine different kinds of bhakti-yoga, as enunciated in authoritative scriptures, such as hearing (śravaṇam), chanting (kīrtanam), remembering, offering worship, praying and offering personal service—either in one of them, or two or three or all of them—he naturally has no opportunity to engage in the service of the three modes of material nature. Unless one has good engagements in spiritual service, it is not possible to get out of the attachment to material service. Those who are not devotees, therefore, are interested in so-called humanitarian or philanthropic work, such as opening a hospital or charitable institution. These are undoubtedly good works in the sense that they are pious activities, and their result is that the performer may get some opportunities for sense gratification, either in this life or in the next. Devotional service, however, is beyond the boundary of sense gratification. It is completely spiritual activity. When one engages in the spiritual activities of devotional service, naturally he does not get any opportunity to engage in sense gratificatory activities.

Instead of leaving proprietorship, enjoyment and the actual position as the friend of all living entities to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, we claim that we are the proprietors, the enjoyers and the friends. We perform philanthropic work, thinking that we are the friends of human society.

SB 3.27.4, Purport:

Conditional existence is described here as dhyāyato viṣayān asya. Viṣaya means "an object of enjoyment." As long as one continues to think that he can enjoy material advantages, he is in conditioned life, but as soon as he comes to his senses, he develops the knowledge that he is not the enjoyer, for the only enjoyer is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As confirmed in Bhagavad-gītā (5.29), He is the beneficiary for all the results of sacrifices and penances (bhoktāraṁ yajṣa-tapasām), and He is the proprietor of all the three worlds (sarva-loka-maheśvaram). He is the actual friend of all living entities. But instead of leaving proprietorship, enjoyment and the actual position as the friend of all living entities to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, we claim that we are the proprietors, the enjoyers and the friends. We perform philanthropic work, thinking that we are the friends of human society. Someone may proclaim himself to be a very good national worker, the best friend of the people and of the country, but actually he cannot be the greatest friend of everyone. The only friend is Kṛṣṇa.

SB Canto 4

There is no philanthropic work within this material world but Kṛṣṇa consciousness that can engage a person twenty-four hours a day.

SB 4.12.36, Purport:

Here is a description of two aspects of the Vaikuṇṭha planets. The first is that in the Vaikuṇṭha sky there is no need of the sun and moon. This is confirmed by the Upaniṣads as well as Bhagavad-gītā (na tad bhāsayate sūryo na śaśāṅko na pāvakaḥ [Bg. 15.6)). In the spiritual world the Vaikuṇṭhalokas are themselves illuminated; there is therefore no need of sun, moon or electric light. It is in fact the illumination of the Vaikuṇṭhalokas which is reflected in the material sky. Only by this reflection are the suns in the material universes illuminated; after the illumination of the sun, all the stars and moons are illuminated. In other words, all the luminaries in the material sky borrow illumination from Vaikuṇṭhaloka. From this material world, however, people can be transferred to the Vaikuṇṭhaloka, if they incessantly engage in welfare activities for all other living entities. Such incessant welfare activities can really be performed only in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. There is no philanthropic work within this material world but Kṛṣṇa consciousness that can engage a person twenty-four hours a day.

Pṛthu Mahārāja was perfect in his shyness and in his gentle behavior, and when he engaged in some philanthropic activity, he worked as if he were working for his own personal self.

SB 4.22.62, Translation:

In his personal behavior, Pṛthu Mahārāja exhibited all good qualities, and in spiritual knowledge he was exactly like Bṛhaspati. In self-control he was like the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. As far as his devotional service was concerned, he was a great follower of devotees who were attached to cow protection and the rendering of all service to the spiritual master and the brāhmaṇas. He was perfect in his shyness and in his gentle behavior, and when he engaged in some philanthropic activity, he worked as if he were working for his own personal self.

Pṛthu Mahārāja was also very humble, meek and gentle, and whenever he performed any philanthropic work or welfare activity for the general public, he would labor exactly as if he were tending to his own personal necessities.

SB 4.22.62, Purport:

Also, like all Vaiṣṇavas, Mahārāja Pṛthu was devoted to cow protection, spiritual masters and qualified brāhmaṇas. Pṛthu Mahārāja was also very humble, meek and gentle, and whenever he performed any philanthropic work or welfare activity for the general public, he would labor exactly as if he were tending to his own personal necessities. In other words, his philanthropic activities were not for the sake of show but were performed out of personal feeling and commitment. All philanthropic activities should be thus performed.

CC Adi-lila

The distinction between Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu’s gift to human society and the gifts of others is that whereas so-called philanthropic and humanitarian workers have given some relief to human society as far as the body is concerned, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu offers the best facilities for going back home, back to Godhead, with love of Godhead.

CC Adi 8.20, Purport:

The distinction between Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu’s gift to human society and the gifts of others is that whereas so-called philanthropic and humanitarian workers have given some relief to human society as far as the body is concerned, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu offers the best facilities for going back home, back to Godhead, with love of Godhead. If one seriously makes a comparative study of the two gifts, certainly if he is at all sober he will give the greatest credit to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. It was with this purpose that Kavirāja Gosvāmī said:

śrī-kṛṣṇa-caitanya-dayā karaha vicāra

vicāra karile citte pābe camatkāra

"If you are indeed interested in logic and argument, kindly apply it to the mercy of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. If you do so, you will find it to be strikingly wonderful." (Cc. Ādi 8.15)

CC Madhya-lila

Many jṣānīs or sannyāsīs have to come down to the material platform to engage in philanthropic activity.

CC Madhya 19.149, Purport:

The jṣānīs cannot be desireless because their intelligence is unsound. They want to merge into the Brahman effulgence, but even though they may be raised to that platform, they cannot be satisfied there. There are many jṣānīs or sannyāsīs who, after taking sannyāsa and giving up the world as false, return to the world to engage in politics or philanthropy or to open schools and hospitals. This means that they could not attain the real Brahman (brahma satyam). They have to come down to the material platform to engage in philanthropic activity. Thus they again cultivate desires, and when these desires are exhausted, they desire something different. Therefore the jṣānī cannot be niṣkāma, desireless.

A pure Vaiṣṇava does not have material desires, and he is not interested in so-called learning and philanthropic work.

CC Madhya 24.252, Purport:

A pure Vaiṣṇava is one who has no ulterior motive. He has totally dedicated himself to the service of the Lord. He does not have material desires, and he is not interested in so-called learning and philanthropic work. The so-called learned scholars and philanthropists are actually karmīs and jṣānīs, and some are actually misers engaged in sinful activity. All are condemned because they are not devotees of Lord Kṛṣṇa.

Nectar of Devotion

Because the impersonalists cannot reach the point of devotional service, they fail to achieve the goal, and they again come back to material activities, such as philanthropic work and political agitation.

Nectar of Devotion 14:

The impersonalists, who try to avoid everything material, may undergo severe austerities, but they miss the opportunity of being engaged in the service of the Lord. Thus their renunciation is not sufficient for perfection. There are many instances where, following such artificial renunciation without any contact with devotional service, the impersonalist again fell down and became attracted to material contamination. There are many supposed renouncers even at the present moment who officially become sannyāsīs, or renouncers, and outwardly claim that spiritual existence is truth and material existence untruth. In this way, artificially they make a show of renunciation of the material world. However, because they cannot reach the point of devotional service, they fail to achieve the goal, and they again come back to material activities, such as philanthropic work and political agitation. There are many examples of so-called sannyāsīs who gave up the world as untruth but again came to the material world, because they were not seeking their real repose at the lotus feet of the Lord.

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura remarks that if sannyāsīs do not engage themselves in the devotional service of the Lord but become attracted by philanthropic work, they find only trouble from such engagements, not only in this life but in the next.

Krsna Book 87:

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura remarks in this connection that if sannyāsīs (persons in the renounced order of life, who have left their homes for self-realization) do not engage themselves in the devotional service of the Lord but become attracted by philanthropic work, such as opening educational institutions, hospitals or even monasteries, churches or temples of demigods, they find only trouble from such engagements, not only in this life but in the next. Sannyāsīs who do not take advantage of this life to realize Kṛṣṇa simply waste their time and energy in activities outside the jurisdiction of the renounced order. A devotee’s attempt to engage his energies in such activities as constructing a Viṣṇu temple, however, is never wasted. Such engagements are called kṛṣṇārthe akhila-ceṣṭā, variegated activities performed to please Kṛṣṇa. A philanthropist’s opening a school building and a devotee’s constructing a temple are not on the same level. Although a philanthropist’s opening an educational institution may be pious activity, it comes under the laws of karma, whereas constructing a temple for Viṣṇu is devotional service.

Renunciation Through Wisdom

Neither the execution of social responsibilities nor philanthropic work is ultimately good action. Devotional service to the Supreme Lord, which is beyond the three modes, must be accepted as the only good action.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 5.1:

Individual material cravings are less harmful to the world than mass movements for sense gratification. If the material desires of an individual are unfulfilled, he certainly becomes depressed, but when the mass of people remain dissatisfied, the distress is much greater and gives rise to social conflict. In any case, mundane yearnings bring suffering, both individual or collective. Even if a person starts out not intending enjoy the fruits of his actions, once those fruits come he is forced to enjoy them because he thinks of himself as the doer, influenced as he is by the three modes nature—goodness, passion, and ignorance. These fruits are not without the bitter seeds of anxiety, entanglement, frustration, and disruption. Therefore, neither the execution of social responsibilities nor philanthropic work is ultimately good action. Devotional service to the Supreme Lord, which is beyond the three modes, must be accepted as the only good action.