The Ballad of the Mukti-Path

More than two decades ago, a kind-hearted relative and neighbour extended a helping hand to an exceptionally energetic and talented young boy. It would hardly be an exaggeration to say that the seed planted that day has now grown into a great tree called “Mukti.” Just as a great tree provides a home for many different forms of life, each following its own way of living, Mukti too is made up of many different kinds of people, exists for many different kinds of people, and must grow and spread its branches while embracing a diversity of opinions, abilities and weaknesses.
Many organisations are born out of a particular ideology. That, of course, does not prevent their service from being universal, because the ideology itself may contain the principle that all human beings—or even all living beings—have an equal right to receive care and service. The histories of organisations such as the Ramakrishna Mission and the Red Cross offer different examples of this. Mukti, on the other hand, did not begin its journey with any clearly articulated ideology. It was born and grew out of certain natural, spontaneous human feelings and a sense of responsibility. And so, those whose hearts were touched by Mukti’s work gradually found their way into it. Their different philosophies of life may, perhaps quite unknowingly, have also found their way into Mukti’s own thinking and work.
The very people whose welfare Mukti primarily seeks to promote have themselves taken the helm and become the wind in its sails. At the same time, people who have grown up in entirely different social and cultural environments have also become important and integral parts of Mukti. Within both these groups, there are people for whom working with Mukti is also their livelihood, while there are others whose personal livelihoods have no connection whatsoever with their work for Mukti.
In other words, we can look at the people associated with Mukti along at least two dimensions: whether or not they belong to the communities for whom the work is being done, and whether or not their work with Mukti is connected to their livelihood. These two dimensions alone give us at least four different categories of people.
But the diversity does not end there. If we were to ask people within each of these four groups why they work with Mukti, we would undoubtedly receive a wide variety of answers.
Those answers might contain many different elements—livelihood, the acquisition of experience or skills (whether professional or personal), personal fulfilment, recognition, social awareness, political convictions, philosophy of life, religious belief, a sense of humanity, empathy, or spiritual aspiration. These elements may be present in very different proportions in the same person’s motivation, and in many cases they are intertwined with one another.
There is another important point: these words themselves may mean very different things to different people. We can easily imagine how widely people’s social and political philosophies, skills, religious beliefs or spiritual perspectives can differ. Even when two people are working towards the same goal, one may be driven primarily by a sense of humanity, while another may be motivated more by a sense of duty, a spiritual conviction, a personal experience, or a search for meaning in life.
Human motivation, therefore, cannot easily be divided into two neat categories — “selfish” and “selfless.” The presence of a desire for personal fulfilment, livelihood or self-development does not diminish the social value of a person’s contribution.
Each aspect of this diversity among the people associated with Mukti has its own value. The contribution of someone we call a volunteer has one kind of character and value; the contribution of someone who gives the organisation the labour and time of their entire working life has another. A person who belongs to the very community for which the work is being done may have a deep understanding of its needs and realities. Someone who comes from a different social environment, on the other hand, may bring a perspective or a particular expertise that would be difficult to find from within the community itself.
These different forms of contribution therefore cannot easily be ranked as inherently greater or lesser. Their roles and their value are different.
The same may be true of differences in people’s social and economic ideas. Perspectives leaning towards capitalism and those rooted in socialist thought may each have something to teach Mukti or something to contribute to it, perhaps in ways that complement one another. A scientifically minded atheist and a spiritually oriented person who believes in the underlying unity of all creation may bring very different perspectives and abilities, yet the organisation can be enriched by both. One may approach a problem through data, evidence and experimentation; the other may remind us of human relationships, compassion and the intrinsic dignity of every person. There are, of course, many other examples one could give.
None of this is to suggest that such diversity of ideals is invariably a good thing. There is no doubt that this diversity can, and will, also present Mukti with difficult tests. Diversity of thought becomes a strength only when it exists within a shared commitment to a larger common purpose. If the plurality of views were to make that fundamental purpose itself unclear, diversity could become a source of weakness rather than strength.
It is in this context that Mukti’s organisational philosophy becomes so important. Some people have now begun thinking about how that philosophy might be given a clearer form and language; hopefully, a draft will soon be placed before all members of Mukti for their consideration and views.
Keeping in mind the history of Mukti’s birth and evolution, perhaps we will see emerge a philosophy that is open, inclusive and pluralistic, allowing space for the coexistence of different philosophies of life among its members. But pluralism cannot mean that everything is equally acceptable to Mukti. Alongside the coexistence of different personal beliefs and philosophies, there must also be certain values about which Mukti is unwilling to compromise.
Looking at Mukti’s journey over the past twenty to twenty-five years, we may perhaps discern some such enduring principles. I take the liberty of suggesting a few here, purely as my own personal conjectures:

1. Equal dignity and freedom from discrimination, regardless of identity
No person should be discriminated against on the basis of caste, religion, gender, nationality, language, occupation, age, or any other aspect of their identity.
2. Respect for the dignity of those with whom Mukti works
Service or assistance must never come at the cost of a person’s dignity or self-respect.
3. The right of communities to participate in Mukti’s work
The people whose lives the organisation seeks to improve must have their own knowledge, opinions and decisions recognised as an integral part of that work.
4. Empowerment as a priority over assistance
There will, of course, be situations in which immediate assistance is necessary. But in the long term, the goal should not be to create dependence; it should be to develop people’s own capabilities and capacity to shape their lives.
5. Accountability towards those we serve, our supporters, employees and members
Mukti must remain committed to honesty, transparency and a sense of responsibility towards everyone who is connected with it in one way or another.
6. Protection of the natural environment
Human development cannot be viewed in isolation from the larger natural environment of which human beings are a part.

Ultimately, it is Mukti’s organisational philosophy that will determine whether the diversity that is inevitably present among its members becomes a problem or a source of strength.
Our motivations are not all the same. Our philosophies of life are not the same, nor are our experiences and abilities. Perhaps Mukti’s fulfilment does not lie in making all of us alike. Perhaps its true strength lies instead in its ability to bring together people who are different, with their different strengths, experiences and motivations, and direct them towards a shared human purpose.
The leaves of a great tree are not all alike, nor do all its branches grow in the same direction. Yet they all belong to the life of one tree.
Perhaps that is Mukti’s greatest challenge for the future—and at the same time, its greatest possibility.