Both activities of Learning and Giving are divine. These are concepts that are not bound by any yardstick of limits of time, place, or any scale of measurement. With unlimited elasticity, both co-extend their boundaries in accordance with the internal mental makeup of an individual. Enlightened minds in any era of human existence have always been few compared to the population of the time.
On the level of philosophy, learning is seen as a step that brings about a change in a person—not necessarily of irrevocable permanence but malleable enough to absorb a fresh body of knowledge relating to behaviour, knowledge, capability, or even skills arising from experience. Inherently, learning has to remain dynamic—it cannot be static.
To the proverb, Reading maketh a man, I would add, and “Company” giveth a moral compass to any individual. Gunamudian David Boaz, the famous Indian psychologist who earned a PhD from Oxford University in 1935, made the following observation: Learning is the process by which the individual acquires various habits, knowledge, and attitudes that are necessary to meet the demands of life in general. It follows that learning is a consequence of experience.
Those who have command over their knowledge, as limited as it may be, shouldn’t fear sharing it because, whatever it is, it is known best to the possessor. Globally, but more so in our cultural context, once a new body of knowledge is learned—or even when existing knowledge is modified—there is a general reluctance to share it. The least an enlightened manager must do is to manage learning by creating, capturing, sharing, distilling, validating, adopting, and proliferating it with a willing desire to help improve others.
Giving is a holy act. The word giving commonly connotes, to most minds, the parting of material things and, in particular, the giving of money as a gift or as charity. This is a myopic, view of the concept of Giving. The concept is not restricted to the giving of material things alone; it involves the non-material and the intangible.
In corporate and business settings, I have seen great reluctance on the part of managers, supervisors, and leaders to share with their colleagues or teammates information and knowledge that, in my view, can help others grow in their careers and acquire wisdom. People do not give time to one another. Many distressed individuals in society are simply desirous of being heard, yet we tend not to even lend them our ears.
Philanthropy must not be viewed solely in the context of giving material things. The selflessness of a teacher who gives more than the value of wages received to their pupils is an act of the highest form of philanthropy.
The Giving Pledge movement, founded and promoted by Warren Buffet and Bill & Melinda Gates, was restricted to voluntary pledging of half of the wealth possessed by billionaires around the world. This, too, did not happen. How productive it would be for world peace if all billionaires pledged their moral and material support, in addition to time, attention, and resources, to alleviate the suffering of innocent men, women, and children in Gaza and other theatres of war and instability. The fact that such a move has not occurred reflects the selfishness and stinginess of the privileged, who cannot feel the pain of the oppressed Palestinians, Kashmiris, Ukrainians, etc. Money cannot ever buy morality or happiness. Nobility of intent, thought, and action alone leads to noblesse oblige. Nothing else can or will.
Giving must not be contextualised within the confines of appearing as a two-way street. Nay, giving must remain a one-way street to retain its nobility. Giving has to be without expectations of any return or reward.
Knowledge, skills, and talent must not be cold-stored, warehoused, or hoarded. In my view, the most grievous crime against humanity is to prevent the seeking of knowledge and understanding. Monarchies in some democratic societies relentlessly pursue the goal of keeping the populace illiterate. They deviously ensure that giving freedom to think remains absent, for it may lead people to question their rule: Who are you to lord over us? They give material comforts but deny the freedom to imagine. The possibility of such a question haunts many nations from Morocco to Indonesia.
Learning must remain a cradle-to-grave question. However, what is learned should not be taken to the grave. Knowledge should not be buried; the only way to give it immortality is to share it with others.
Those who are unafraid to learn will remain fearless in sharing what they know. We must learn as much as we can. However, being a reservoir of knowledge is not a better station than being a flowing stream, where any aspirant can sip from it.
Sirajuddin Aziz
The writer is a Senior Banker & Freelance Columnist.