“If we can realize our needs, then we will be able to satisfy ourselves and still be able to find ourselves in a position to help others without sacrificing and feeling any pain of loss. Not only will it bring happiness to others, but also help us lead a more fulfilling life.”
What would you think of a person who donated his kidney to a complete stranger and, when asked for the reason for such an act, he says the chances of dying as a result of the act would be 1 in 4000, a very low probabilistic event? Sounds crazy? But this is the story of a real-life person Zell Kravinsky who donated his kidney to an African-American woman with low income when he found that it is very difficult for low-income African-Americans to obtain a kidney. And he justified the act by looking from a very different perspective, saying that the chances of dying are 1 in 4000, which means you have to value your own life worth more than 4,000 lives of others in order to not donate the kidney. And that he finds “obscene.”
Another story is of a woman named Julia Wise and her husband Jeff, who started to live their life by satisfying their minimal and essential requirements and subsequently donated 49% of their combined income in 2012 and continued to do so. These are two modern examples of people living in a developed country that values materialism over spiritualism. Despite their cultural values and expectations from society, they decided to act differently, live differently. And if we look for the answer to the question of what led to these changes, the answer comes to be that they started to ask themselves how much they need to keep for themselves in order to lead a good life, and any extra money that they spend could have been spent on someone else who needs it more, who is more vulnerable, who has not been as lucky as them.
One could ask why I should give away such a high proportion of my earnings/wealth. Should I not worry about myself? Or I am just a middle-class man/woman? These are valid questions that need to be addressed with scientific facts and evidence. Psychologists like Daniel Kahneman have found that after the basic requirements are satisfied, additional income/wealth does not bring any happiness to individuals. That means there is no difference in happiness between earning one lakh per month and earning five lakhs per month. According to research, this additional income is not adding to the happiness levels of individuals. One might question now, “I am different and certainly extra money would help me if not others.” In another study, Kahneman and Angus Deaton, an economist, found that adding extra income does not lead to any increase in happiness but leads to an imaginary sense of a life better than others.
These findings are relatively new in modern science, but they have been the very basis of Vedic culture. The history of our country is replete with examples of great men who sacrificed their comforts and riches for the larger good and attained the highest bliss. This is not an argument to persuade one to become a monk or live like an ascetic. This is just an attempt to make one take a step back and review his/her life, expenses, needs, and differentiate the needs from desires that are not leading anywhere. If we can realize our needs, then we will be able to satisfy ourselves and still find ourselves in a position to help others without sacrificing and feeling any pain of loss. Not only will it bring happiness to others, but also help us lead a more fulfilling life.
A life of fulfillment is better than a life in the pursuit of pleasure, which is never-ending. Psychologists have coined a term for this, “hedonic treadmill,” which means running for pleasure but not going anywhere.
