In a powerful yet often overlooked passage from Young India (1925, see Appendix), Mahatma Gandhi addressed a subtle dilemma: Is it honourable or humiliating to serve the public while being paid for it? His reflections—focused then on the Congress party—continue to resonate far beyond the politics of his time.
Gandhi wrote that even a peon would consider it an honour to belong to an organization like the Congress if it earned real prestige—not just popularity, but moral credibility. But in the meantime, he urged paid workers in the Congress to uphold the institution’s reputation by practicing integrity, devotion, and ceaseless application.
The line between honour and humiliation in public service remains thin even today. Regardless of how noble a public-serving entity may appear, its workers—whether paid staff or volunteers—are often subject to silent judgments. Their motives may be questioned. Their rewards—monetary or otherwise—scrutinized. This is especially true in a culture where many still view unpaid service as more virtuous.
I have reflected on this in several of my writings, including posts on religious charity and reconversion efforts, where I observed how service—once a calling—has at times become a tool for institutional survival or personal gain. What Gandhi warned about nearly a century ago is now plainly visible: public service, whether in political, religious, or social spheres, can easily become a livelihood disconnected from the people it claims to serve.
See: https://dayanandbharati.in/charity-in-mahatmajis-view/
Yet, there are still exceptions—organizations that have earned deep respect, where even unpaid voluntary service is a privilege, not an entitlement. They are few, and getting involved with them is difficult, if not nearly impossible. I refrain from naming any, lest my view be seen as biased. Readers can recognize them for themselves.
What stands out to me most is how Gandhi dealt with this issue—not with blame, but with an appeal to conscience. His leadership brought a rare moral authority to the Congress, even if only for a limited period. Today, as that legacy is increasingly traded for nostalgia, his challenge to all who serve the public remains deeply relevant: serve with integrity, or risk becoming a burden to the very people you claim to help.
We must ask ourselves: Are we honouring the call to serve, or merely using it to honour ourselves?
Ashram, May 9, 2025
Humiliation or Honour?
…Indeed, when the Congress acquires real prestige, which it has not at present — its popularity is merely comparative and not absolute — even a peon will consider it to be an honour to belong to this national service and to take less than the market wage. Meanwhile, I would urge all honest paid workers in the Congress organization, whether at the centre or in the educational, khaddar or the Swarajist bran- (p. 340) ches, to make the service and the institution popular and attractive by strictest integrity, devotion, and ceaseless application.
Those who are conscious that they are giving all the time and attention that they bargained for to the paid national service need feel no compunction about belonging to it. The more progress we make in the work of construction, the more paid workers we shall need. We are too poor as a nation to afford a large number of whole-time honorary workers. We will have to fall back more and more upon paid workers. The sooner, therefore, the idea of humiliation about accepting payment, when it is a necessity, is given up the better it will be for the nation.—p. 341
Young India, 15-10-1925, CWMG, vol. 28, pp. 340-341
Leave a Reply