DISCUSSION ON WEALTH
Doret wrote;
So far, I have only read your little pocket edition, "Beyond Religion: The Gita Doctrine," which was a welcome review of basic teachings. I should ask you, however, how "earning wealth" --one of the four goals of human life--should be interpreted in case I am asked. "Wealth" carries the denotation of riches, abundance of material possessions. The word makes me nervous and may strike others the same way. Does it mean, in context, simply earning a living, supporting one's family?
Please enlighten me.
Harry replied;
Thank you for your interest...
Guess everyone interprets words in their own way. As far as I can see there is nothing wrong with wealth. It all depends on how you accumulate wealth, how you utilize it and how you feel about being wealthy. Praying for wealth is only natural. If you use your wealth to benefit others (creating employment etc) indeed that is very noble. If you use your wealth to create undesirable activities then of course the use of wealth is not appropriate. Wealth is bestowed upon you as a "custodian". It is only yours as long as the Lord wishes you to be wealthy... We cannot all be poor nor can we all be wealthy.
Am not sure if I have answered your question. Please let me know if I can help. Like you I am trying to live my life by the Gita Doctrine
Peace !!
Doret wrote;
A dictionary definition is not just the way everyone wants to interpret a word. It establishes the boundaries of meaning. The dictionary definition of "wealth" is riches, an accumulation of possessions. It's not just a livelihood or decent-paying job. Think of the adjective "wealthy." If you hear that someone is a wealthy man, what do you think of? You think of someone who has more than he needs, who has an excess, who can afford things the rest of us can't, who lives in style with the finest possessions, and has money in the bank.
If we are to live without desire or aversion, without attachment to the fruit of work, without selfish motives, why would we pray for wealth?
A "goal of life" is a serious aim, especially if there are only four. If one of the four is "earning wealth," I don't understand that goal in the context of the Gita. I suspect the term needs to be explained, perhaps as "earning a living" or "supporting ourselves." I try to imagine being asked about it by one of my prisoner-correspondents or even by a friend who picks up the Gita in my office. Then I try to imagine what I would say in reply.
So far, I would define "earning wealth" as merely "earning a living.”
Harry wrote;
Thank you for your comments..
In my opinion the world cannot exist without wealth. Naturally, there must be the rich, the poor, the strong, the weak & so on. Possessions themselves are not the issue. The issue is the method in which one obtains them and the attachment to them. Use of wealth is the other big issue to my mind.
Verse 7.16 refers to four types of virtuous ones worship or seek the Lord...
One can work towards attaining wealth but do the work to the best of your ability, accept whatever comes through His will.
Doret wrote;
I don't understand. I have a mental block against asking to be wealthy or seeing it as a life goal. Yes, I noted Verse 7.16. I hope no one ever asks me to explain it. I wouldn't know how.
I appreciate your opinion, though. Thanks for trying to make it clear. Maybe when I have read Dr. Prasad's complete translation of the Gita, I will find the answer.
You have been very patient. Thank you.
Harry wrote;
I have enjoyed our dialogue. I wonder if I may add the following..
Wealth is as natural as poverty. Mankind has to handle both. Desire is as natural an emotion as hunger. Desires should enter the mind without disturbing tranquility of mind, as river water enters an ocean without causing a disturbance. Desire for wealth is natural and must be handled not ignored or suppressed.
Peace
Doret wrote;
You say very eloquently that "Wealth is as natural as poverty. Mankind has to handle both. Desire is as natural an emotion as hunger. Desires should enter the mind without disturbing tranquility of mind, as river water enters an ocean without causing a disturbance. Desire for wealth is natural and must be handled not ignored or suppressed."
I also see desires as "natural," to be "handled," not "ignored or suppressed," but to "handle" them I would recognize them, then let go of them "to attain peace of mind and tranquility" (p. 13 of BEYOND RELIGION). I would try to "be one to whom a clod, a stone, and gold are alike" (p. 40), so as to avoid thinking, "I have gained this today, I shall fulfill this desire; I have this much wealth, and will have more wealth in the future" (p. 45).
"Absorbed in the Supreme Being, the serene one neither grieves nor desires; becoming impartial to all beings" (p. 55).
It would seem that a desire for wealth works against serenity and non-attachment.
How do you reconcile these apparent opposites?
(I don't want to be stubborn. I just want to understand.)
Harry wrote;
The Ultimate is of course Total Control over desire, but I think that is very hard for me to achieve. Think first I have to learn to let desire enter my mind without causing unpeacefulness, envy etc.. If I am lucky enough to achieve that then perhaps I can take the next step..
If I am little slow in answering e-mail for the next few days pls forgive me, have guests in town !!
Harry continued;
This morning I answered your mail in a hurry...was on my way to the airport.
Here are some more thoughts on the questions you raised:
Practically speaking I think the statement,.."be one to whom a clod, a stone, and gold are alike" (p. 40), takes for granted that your natural needs are met. (Food, reasonable comfort etc.) Someone who is starving can obviously not be expected to treat gold and stone alike. Therefore, I think this statement implies "contentment" with whatever the Lord has given you.
There are people who think (I know I was one) "I have gained this today, I shall fulfill this desire; I have this much wealth, and will have more wealth in the future"(p. 45).
I believe one has this kind of thought pattern when one follows what used to be known as "individualism", meaning there is nothing beyond the individual. Basic concept being one makes ones own fortune, wealth, problems etc.. In North America I think we are moving away from "individualism" and going back to recognizing God.
"Absorbed in the Supreme Being, the serene one neither grieves nor desires; becoming impartial to all beings" (p. 55)... Accepting whatever comes your way by His grace is the key.
A farmer has control over how he works his land but no control over the harvest. Yet he can not expect a harvest if he does not work his land. Am sure in the process of working his land the farmer desires a good harvest but must learn to accept whatever comes by His grace.
Desire/expectation is natural, acceptance of the result/outcome requires understanding.
Regarding your comment, “It would seem that a desire for wealth works against serenity and non-attachment..”
In my view if your desire does not disturb you then, it does not disturb your serenity.
Peace !!
Dr Prasad wrote;
"One should ask Lord's help in getting what one needs, and not what one wants . . . In surrender one lets the divine plan rule his or her life without giving up one¹s best effort. It is the complete renunciation of individual existence or the ego. . . . put the reins of your life-chariot in His hands . . . It is the feeling: O my beloved Lord, nothing is mine everything ‹ including my body, mind, and ego ‹ is Yours . . . This is the lesson of ultimate surrender that one must learn. . . . He is the goal, the path, the traveler, as well as the obstacles on the path . . ."
--Ramanand Prasad, from THE FIFTH TRACK OF SPIRITUAL JOURNEY
Doret wrote;
I much appreciate the time and care you have given to my concerns. I think I understand where you are coming from, and your ideas make sense. You understand human beings and human needs.
I am especially grateful for the explanations you and Dr. Prasad have volunteered because I keep BEYOND RELIGION: THE GITA DOCTRINE on my desk and another friend dropped by today and discovered it and took it home to read. No one has asked me any questions yet but I had better have some answers in case they do.
Thank you again. You have been very generous and helpful.
|
|