With the increased disparities in general society, especially within the rural sector, there is an urgent need for more stakeholders to take part and help alleviate the various problems lurking throughout rural communities. Various government agencies and international organizations such as the United Nations have been in dialogue with religious institutions to understand how they can and also should be involved in the fight against social oppressions and disparities. Many discourses have taken place in recent years inviting dialogue and partnership with Faith Based Organizations (FBOs) to consider the positive role they can play in helping the secular world resolve issues.
One such exchange entitled “Religion and Development Post-2015: Challenges, Opportunities and Policy Guidance” was hosted by UNFPA in its capacity as Convener of the UN- IATF-FBO and co-sponsored by George Mason University, City University London and Digni, a religious umbrella organization from Norway. The roundtable event took place on 12-13 May 2014 in New York. The nexus of religion and development concerns both faith-based organizations (FBOs) as well as so-called secular ones. Here are a few comments made by the organizers of the conference:
Strategic thinking about religion and development requires a transformational shift in the attitudes of secular development actors — starting from simple stakeholder analysis undertaken from a presumed position of secular predominance, to considerations of a level playing field based on complementarity and parity between actors. The work of development has always been the domain of faith-based entities. The ‘intruders’ may well be socalled secular organizations. FBOs provide perhaps as much as 50-60 per cent of health care, social services and education in rural areas of the developing world. So they are embedded in their communities in geographic areas where national governments are unlikely to provide much support. (25)
As stated above, FBOs have traditionally played a major role in providing health care, education and various social services to large numbers of needy persons. Having substantial numbers of followers, they have also played a significant role in fund raising. For these and other reasons, government should recognize and welcome their participation. The Vedic perspective, however, is that religious leaders, brahmanas, were meant to serve as advisors or even Ministers to the Heads of States ensuring that the King/Prime Minister would rule based on the principles of dharma. This should actually be the primary reason why FBOs should be connected and involved with government institutions since the government itself is first and foremost meant to take up welfare activities in the area of health, education and social services. From Vedic literatures we learn that the three main areas of concern in Vedic governance are 1) protection, 2) administration and 3) welfare.
As pointed out by UN officials, religions organizations are not meant to directly be involved in political affairs and surely not meant to take over governments. In the context of Vedic culture, there is a distinct separation of power between the brahmanas and the ksatriyas. Brahmanas teach and guide individuals and society. In particular they are meant to guide those who head up nations. The typical example we find in Indian history is the well-known moralist and philosopher, Canakya Pandita. Being a very qualified brahmana well versed in political affairs he was able to trained Chandra Gupta to become the next king. The writings of Canakya, in particular his Kautilya’s Arthashastra (26) and Niti Shastra (27), are often quoted and relied upon to underline key fundamental instructions