Parsi, thy name is charity” is a common expression that probably traces its roots to the time of the British Raj. No less a person than Mahatma Gandhi has acknowledged, “I am proud of my country, India, for having produced the splendid Zoroastrian stock, in numbers beneath contempt, but in charity and philanthropy, perhaps unequalled, certainly unsurpassed.

Religious ethos
The driving force behind a Parsi’s charitable instinct is his religious ethos. From a religious point of view, Parsis consider poverty, suffering and want as an affliction of evil. To remove poverty, disease and suffering is not only a religious duty, but an act of spiritual merit, depriving “evil” of sustenance. If Christ asked his followers to love their neighbours, Zarathushtra asked his followers to attain happiness by making others happy. (Yasna 43.1)

Many religious traditions have looked down upon wealth and its acquisition. Orthodox Christians believe “it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven”. A Hindu considers wealth as “Maya” (illusion) which leads to bondage. A Parsi, on the other hand, considers wealth to be fundamentally positive, provided it is acquired through righteous means and used for righteous purposes.

Wealth as a positive resource

No other quality has brought so much fame to the Parsis as their charities – cosmopolitan as well as communal. Says Dr. E. Kulke, “This charity system was made possible and furthered by the basic attitude of the Parsis, motivated by their religion, that wealth is fundamentally positive, that it brings, however, certain social obligations along with it.”

The Pahlavi Dinkard recommends cultivation of five virtues which are of religious merit – truthfulness; Charity; Skill; Endeavour; and encouraging others in good deeds. In the Handarz literature, Aturput Mahraspand, the High Priest at the court of the Sassanian King, Shapur II, speaks of three grades of charity: to give without being asked or requested to give; to give immediately on being asked or required to give;
to give at the promised time, if one has promised.

Aturput Mahraspand adds that charity is good when one expects nothing from the receiver in return and entertains no such expectations. Good charity, according to him, is never done for personal gain or fame.

From a Zoroastrian point of view, wealth is not only a positive resource but a tool with which social injustices can be addressed. Poverty, illiteracy, disease, hunger, want, etc., are all afflictions of evil and wealth can be a very powerful and positive tool to vanquish all these forms of evil through the establishment of educational, health care and skills development institutions.

Institutional Philanthropy
Apart from individual acts of charity, Institutional Philanthropy began to take shape around the 18th century. According to Shapur F. Desai: “Some kind of a fund was at the disposal of the Parsis” way back in 1732. There is no record to show how the money was collected and who kept it and dispensed it. It was probably an ad hoc arrangement to collect and disburse the money, as and when circumstances demanded.

The birth of the Parsi Punchayet of Bombay can be placed anywhere around 1672 – 1675. The history of this august institution is as old as the history of Bombay. From a sleepy cluster of seven islands inhabited by the Koli fishermen, Bombay owes its development and growth largely to the contribution of the Parsis. Gerald Aungier, the then Governor of Bombay, recognized that it would not be an easy job to rule over a foreign population having deep-rooted social and religious mores. He therefore asked all communities living in Bombay to form their own social organizations to govern their own people, keeping law and order within the bounds of the Government. All communities formed their own bodies called “Punchayets”. Over time, the Punchayets of all communities, except the Parsis, died out.

The first fund on record started by the Punchayet was in 1826, for funeral expenses. Four months later, another fund was started for giving maintenance relief to the poor and destitute of the community. Since then, various funds have come into existence and reportedly the Punchayet, today maintains over 1,200 khatas or separate funds.

From Charity to Philanthropy
Today, the world is shifting its focus from charity to philanthropy. People often use the terms “charity” and “philanthropy” interchangeably and think the two are synonymous. This is incorrect. Charity (which mostly involves alms-giving) generally addresses the symptoms, while philanthropy (defined broadly as “love for humanity”) tends to strike at the root of various issues facing society.
Contemporary philanthropy has come to be recognized as being broadly concerned with improving the quality of life for all members of society by promoting their welfare, happiness and culture. It focuses on interests and concerns of all income classes, such as protecting the environment, preventing diseases, improving education and recreational facilities, enhancing the arts, preserving historic landmarks, etc. Charity, on the other hand, has come to mean serving mainly, if not only, the poor, the disabled and the needy.
Also, philanthropy is not about giving of one’s wealth alone. It includes giving of one’s time, experience, expertise and labour. Says Late Mr. Rusi M. Lala, noted author and former Director of the Sir Dorabji Tata Trust, “Men are more important than funds – men, dedicated to serving their fellowmen… in a country of India’s size, diversity and problems, the way to uplift the nation is to light the spark in a million hearts and let them find their momentum. Funds are needed to assist them. But if you start with creating large organizations and expect them to do the job, you are beginning at the wrong end… We need the men who will plan the strategy, have the dedication and also give of themselves.”

From a Zoroastrian point of view, wealth is not only a positive resource but a tool with which social injustices can be addressed.

When one thinks of philanthropy, the name ‘Tata’ immediately comes to mind. The patriarch of the Tata family, Jamsetji, lived in an age when philanthropy was its own reward – tax rebate for charitable donations was unknown then. Between themselves, the Tata Trusts have created an infrastructure for the balanced development of the nation in science, technology, social science, arts and culture.
Parsi charity, both, in terms of size and scope, has been staggering. From public schools and public hospitals to welfare of women, children and the aged, the Parsis have given back to the country it adopted as its home sometime around the 9th century A.C., it’s due, many times over.

Charity (which mostly involves alms-giving) generally addresses the symptoms, while philanthropy (defined broadly as “love for humanity”) tends to strike at the root of various issues facing society.