His Holiness XIV Dalai Lama with BODHI's founders, Dharamsala, India, 1990. Taken by Tenzin Geyche Tethong (His Holiness's secretary at that time)
BODHI (Benevolent Organisation for Development, Health and Insight) is a way that people who care about reducing poverty and improving human well-being can make a real difference, especially if they have an interest in Buddhism. BODHI is a development charity, co-founded by Dr (now Professor) Colin Butler and the late Susan Woldenberg Butler in 1989. BODHI has had 501(c)3 status since 1991, and is registered in California. Susan was born in the US(Layfayette, LA), Colin in Australia. We have supporters and well wishers in many countries, and from several faiths.
BODHI has a strong Buddhist influence – it may even be the second oldest Buddhist influenced development NGO based in the West, after Karuna in the UK. Tzu Chi, founded in Taiwan, is about two decades older and at least 100 times bigger (branches in many countries, wonderful hospitals in Taiwan, perhaps elsewhere, one is planned in Indonesia.)
BODHI's history
Susan and Colin first met in Delhi (at a way station for Western Buddhists called Tushita) in 1985 and later corresponded. At that time, Susan was a valley girl on a Buddhist pilgrimage, Colin was a Australian medical student spending 10 months studying health mainly in low-income settings (including in Nigeria, Nepal and India). Colin had had sought a Buddhist-influenced NGO to volunteer for, with no success (in those pre-internet days). Colin returned to Australia, Susan to the States. Colin (a Buddhist by conviction since his teen years) met Susan two days after his first meeting with the Dalai Lama, in Dharamsala, HP, India
They next met in Los Angeles, in May 1989, when they both attended the historic Kalachakra teachings in LA, co-organised by Susan's teacher. Geshe Gyeltsen, and given by His Holiness the Dalai Lama. During those teachings (where they briefly met His Holiness the Dalai Lama). they decided to form BODHI, though at that stage they did not have the name (it came later as Colin was meditating). Susan and Colin were married in Los Angeles, in 1991, a few months after they published their first newsletter, called BODHI Times. A longer summary of the history of BODHI is here.
Until Susan's death in October 2014 BODHI's projects were mainly in India (Pune and the Changlang district of Arunachal Pradesh) and Bangladesh, with Moanoghar in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT). We also provided some scholarships for poor Muslim girls, in Dhaka. We continued the projects in India until September 2016, but are now focussing on the projects in Pune and with Moanoghar.
BODHI has a strong Buddhist influence – it may even be the second oldest Buddhist influenced development NGO based in the West, after Karuna in the UK. Tzu Chi, founded in Taiwan, is about two decades older and at least 100 times bigger (branches in many countries, wonderful hospitals in Taiwan, perhaps elsewhere, one is planned in Indonesia.)
BODHI's history
Susan and Colin first met in Delhi (at a way station for Western Buddhists called Tushita) in 1985 and later corresponded. At that time, Susan was a valley girl on a Buddhist pilgrimage, Colin was a Australian medical student spending 10 months studying health mainly in low-income settings (including in Nigeria, Nepal and India). Colin had had sought a Buddhist-influenced NGO to volunteer for, with no success (in those pre-internet days). Colin returned to Australia, Susan to the States. Colin (a Buddhist by conviction since his teen years) met Susan two days after his first meeting with the Dalai Lama, in Dharamsala, HP, India
They next met in Los Angeles, in May 1989, when they both attended the historic Kalachakra teachings in LA, co-organised by Susan's teacher. Geshe Gyeltsen, and given by His Holiness the Dalai Lama. During those teachings (where they briefly met His Holiness the Dalai Lama). they decided to form BODHI, though at that stage they did not have the name (it came later as Colin was meditating). Susan and Colin were married in Los Angeles, in 1991, a few months after they published their first newsletter, called BODHI Times. A longer summary of the history of BODHI is here.
Until Susan's death in October 2014 BODHI's projects were mainly in India (Pune and the Changlang district of Arunachal Pradesh) and Bangladesh, with Moanoghar in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT). We also provided some scholarships for poor Muslim girls, in Dhaka. We continued the projects in India until September 2016, but are now focussing on the projects in Pune and with Moanoghar.
Colin (L) with the late Lord Avebury, a prominent UK campaigner for human rights (2012, London)
Human Rights
Currently, our main target communities in South Asia are people who face caste discrimination
(eg dalits (formerly known as "untouchables") and Sudras, and Jummas (some of the Indigenous
people) of Bangladesh. There are between 10 and 30 million dalits in India who have converted
to Buddhism, in an effort to escape the discrimination and violence of the caste system. The
Jummas, including Chakmas, are an Indigenous people mostly found in southern Bangladesh and
adjacent states in north-east India, such as Mizoram and Tripura. But there are also about 100,000
Jummas living in Arunachal Pradesh, many of whom are Buddhist.
Currently, our main target communities in South Asia are people who face caste discrimination
(eg dalits (formerly known as "untouchables") and Sudras, and Jummas (some of the Indigenous
people) of Bangladesh. There are between 10 and 30 million dalits in India who have converted
to Buddhism, in an effort to escape the discrimination and violence of the caste system. The
Jummas, including Chakmas, are an Indigenous people mostly found in southern Bangladesh and
adjacent states in north-east India, such as Mizoram and Tripura. But there are also about 100,000
Jummas living in Arunachal Pradesh, many of whom are Buddhist.
Private school, near Mainpuri, UP, India 2009. Photo: Colin Butler
Education and health
BODHI's funds go mainly for education. We have found that the easiest and most effective way, though it needs honest and effective school administrators. We also provide support for livelihood training (a kind of education) and health. We work exclusively with NGOs based in developing countries, with whom we have established trust. This takes time to achieve. If BODHI was to try to directly administer a school or clinic, from the US, it would be too hard, too expensive, and probably could not be sustained for long - though we have never tried to do that.
Health is difficult to promote, though we at times have funded community health clinics, in villages and in a slum in Pune. But BODHI's focus has been more on trying to improve the "determinants" of health, especially education and human rights.
BODHI's funds go mainly for education. We have found that the easiest and most effective way, though it needs honest and effective school administrators. We also provide support for livelihood training (a kind of education) and health. We work exclusively with NGOs based in developing countries, with whom we have established trust. This takes time to achieve. If BODHI was to try to directly administer a school or clinic, from the US, it would be too hard, too expensive, and probably could not be sustained for long - though we have never tried to do that.
Health is difficult to promote, though we at times have funded community health clinics, in villages and in a slum in Pune. But BODHI's focus has been more on trying to improve the "determinants" of health, especially education and human rights.
No funds for religion or politics
Since its start, BODHI has been very strict in providing no funds for overtly religious or political purposes. Religion is fine, but it's far more important to get adequate nutrition as a child, and to learn to read, write and count. It's also important to receive kindness, to not be exploited and to grow up and learn in an ethical environment; but no religion or philosophy has a monopoly on those characteristics.
Since its start, BODHI has been very strict in providing no funds for overtly religious or political purposes. Religion is fine, but it's far more important to get adequate nutrition as a child, and to learn to read, write and count. It's also important to receive kindness, to not be exploited and to grow up and learn in an ethical environment; but no religion or philosophy has a monopoly on those characteristics.
Aid: it has critics, it has supporters and it has problems - but it is worth doing
There are many critics of aid (eg William Easterly), and there are some strong and prominent supporters, eg Jeffrey Sachs. A lot of aid is wasted, and there are many reasons for that. A big problem is that few rich countries have genuine interest in lifting the living standards of the poor, but instead use aid to buy political influence (eg so a poor country votes for a rich country in the UN). There is phantom aid and there is boomerang aid.
A really big problem is that corrupt governments in many poor countries have minimal if any interest in the general welfare of their own people, instead favouring one tribe, ethnic group, religion, gender, or perhaps the military. Paul Collier's book "The Bottom Billion" has a pretty good discussion of aid, and is far less dismissive of it than Easterly. However Collier has some blind spots, especially about environmental determinants of well-being, and also to the harmful effects of rapid population growth, which contribute to entrapment in poverty. After more than 25 years of experience we know aid is hard to do well. But there is definitely a niche for groups of our size (though we'd like to get a bigger).
Even when aid gets to the government, the chance of much trickling down to the marginalised groups BODHI works with is minimal. For example, the morale and accountability among Indian teachers, especially those who work in poor or remote areas, is abysmal. There are numerous factors in India an Bangladesh which limit their capacity for self-development. For example, teachers in under-privileged parts of India should be paid more (than in richer parts), but that won't work unless it's properly enforced. It's also very hard for illiterate, under-nourished parents of children whose education is being neglected, to effectively complain to some official; in fact it's virtually impossible. (As was recognised almost 40 years ago by Paulo Friere, in his classic work "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed".
There are many critics of aid (eg William Easterly), and there are some strong and prominent supporters, eg Jeffrey Sachs. A lot of aid is wasted, and there are many reasons for that. A big problem is that few rich countries have genuine interest in lifting the living standards of the poor, but instead use aid to buy political influence (eg so a poor country votes for a rich country in the UN). There is phantom aid and there is boomerang aid.
A really big problem is that corrupt governments in many poor countries have minimal if any interest in the general welfare of their own people, instead favouring one tribe, ethnic group, religion, gender, or perhaps the military. Paul Collier's book "The Bottom Billion" has a pretty good discussion of aid, and is far less dismissive of it than Easterly. However Collier has some blind spots, especially about environmental determinants of well-being, and also to the harmful effects of rapid population growth, which contribute to entrapment in poverty. After more than 25 years of experience we know aid is hard to do well. But there is definitely a niche for groups of our size (though we'd like to get a bigger).
Even when aid gets to the government, the chance of much trickling down to the marginalised groups BODHI works with is minimal. For example, the morale and accountability among Indian teachers, especially those who work in poor or remote areas, is abysmal. There are numerous factors in India an Bangladesh which limit their capacity for self-development. For example, teachers in under-privileged parts of India should be paid more (than in richer parts), but that won't work unless it's properly enforced. It's also very hard for illiterate, under-nourished parents of children whose education is being neglected, to effectively complain to some official; in fact it's virtually impossible. (As was recognised almost 40 years ago by Paulo Friere, in his classic work "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed".
Non-monetary benefits of involvement with an aid group
There are benefits from involvement in BODHI which greatly exceed the monetary value of the projects. These take the form of learning (including about how to improve world health), they also serve as a model, a prompt, for others, Buddhist or not. Perhaps BODHI and other NGOs give others hope.
There are benefits from involvement in BODHI which greatly exceed the monetary value of the projects. These take the form of learning (including about how to improve world health), they also serve as a model, a prompt, for others, Buddhist or not. Perhaps BODHI and other NGOs give others hope.
Getting funds to the poorest of the poor
Getting funds to the poorest of the poor is almost impossible. Such groups need champions, and their champions rarely if ever have the means and skill to even communicate with us, let alone account for money that we might send. But, not far above the really really poor there are (in India and elsewhere) millions of people who are still extremely poor and with whom progress can be made. BODHI's work is mainly with that group. We can hope that, gradually, some of them - who are locally based - will in turn work with even poorer people.
In mid-2014 Colin was interviewed by an Indian journalist, working for Down to Earth. They discussed poverty in India. The journalist expressed concern about the poor but mentioned how her own parents were not very sympathetic to the poor. But perhaps her parents had grown up in relative hardship (or maybe her grandparents had). There seems to be an early stage of wealth accumulation where concern to reduce the poverty of others is really rare, but after a while, at least some people start to feel more secure, and start to share a bit, not to resent paying taxes (especially if they can see tax money being used for the benefit of poor), agitate for public health, education or the fair application of laws.
There are also some people who seem intent on just getting richer and richer, though there are exceptions: both Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have pledged to give lots of it away; and in Gates' case he has. (Though I am not so impressed by the Gates Foundation's approach to health, which seems to me to show insufficient understanding of health determinants; that's another story.)
Getting funds to the poorest of the poor is almost impossible. Such groups need champions, and their champions rarely if ever have the means and skill to even communicate with us, let alone account for money that we might send. But, not far above the really really poor there are (in India and elsewhere) millions of people who are still extremely poor and with whom progress can be made. BODHI's work is mainly with that group. We can hope that, gradually, some of them - who are locally based - will in turn work with even poorer people.
In mid-2014 Colin was interviewed by an Indian journalist, working for Down to Earth. They discussed poverty in India. The journalist expressed concern about the poor but mentioned how her own parents were not very sympathetic to the poor. But perhaps her parents had grown up in relative hardship (or maybe her grandparents had). There seems to be an early stage of wealth accumulation where concern to reduce the poverty of others is really rare, but after a while, at least some people start to feel more secure, and start to share a bit, not to resent paying taxes (especially if they can see tax money being used for the benefit of poor), agitate for public health, education or the fair application of laws.
There are also some people who seem intent on just getting richer and richer, though there are exceptions: both Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have pledged to give lots of it away; and in Gates' case he has. (Though I am not so impressed by the Gates Foundation's approach to health, which seems to me to show insufficient understanding of health determinants; that's another story.)
We always have the choice – we can look the other way, or try to do something. We don’t need to be saints to do something.
