Like knowledge, money has its true value when it is shared. Accumulation of wealth for the sake of personal enjoyment leads to a sense of isolation and false happiness. True joy arises from service to others, from sharing with those in need. One's wealth is more secure in the bank of society than in any other place. However, it is essential that we organise our society in such a way as to facilitate this distribution of wealth, thereby serving the individual and society at large.
Money, like any tool, must be handled with wisdom and empathy. It should not become an end in itself but rather a means to serve and uplift others. This reminds me of Gandhiji's perspective on money. He held the view that money should be invested in a way that brought the highest interest and security. Yet in today's context, I believe we need to reassess this principle and strive towards a system where wealth is used primarily for service and not merely profit.
Remember, the value of acts of service cannot be calculated in economic terms. A man who jumps into a river to save a drowning person does not do so with the expectation of an economic reward. This act is ethical in nature, and this is how we should perceive service towards society. It is not about monetary gain; it is about the joy of giving, the fulfillment of sharing, and the serenity that comes from knowing you have made a positive difference in someone's life.
The sources below helped generate your response ...
- there is a saying current among the people
that knowledge increases two-fold by imparting,
and it is usually thought that in this respect wealth
is different in nature from knowledge. but this
is really not so. in economics increase of wealth
44 swaraj sastra
through parting with it is called increase in the
purchasing power of the people. the lender sees
an increase in his own wealth when he gives all
of it to the borrower. obviously, there is an
even greater increase when wealth is distributed.
but society has to be organised in such a way as
to facilitate distribution. such an organisation
is part of an ideal system of government. society
is the bank of the individual. his money will be
more secure in this bank than in any other.
27. man's happiness lies in giving, but the idea of the
right of ownership acts as an obstacle.
the glory of attractiveness that attaches to the
capacity of capable individuals lies in nothing
else than in service of the people. in such service
also lies human contentment. as man is a social
being he is never happy when he partakes of a good
thing by himself without any one to share it with
him. at the same time it is also a fact that the
tich who shut themselves up as though in cattle-
pounds enjoy some kind of outward happiness
although they are aware of and see the semi-
starved all around them.
Source: 259635067-swaraj-sastra.txt... - it takes the position that every kind of service rendered
by a man, whether it is physical or mental, is ethical in its
nature ; the salary which is given to him is economic in its
nature, the value of an ethical act cannot be calculated in
economic terms. 'there is no meaning in asking how many
hours there are in a mile ; a mile must be measured in yards,
not in hours. 'the two things are diferent in nature, and one
cannot be converted into the other.
'a man was drowning in a river, and another man jumped
in and saved him. the job took ten minutes, and it was
physical, not mental, labour, are we then to pay him an anna
as wages for ten minutes' work ? if you were to offer him
a hundred rupees he would not accept ithe would say that it
is not a question of money at all. his action was ethical in its
nature and any piece of work whatever, physical or mental,
which is useful to society, is also ethical in its nature and has
no telationship to economic values, it is the individual's
hunger that is related to economic values. a man who feels
the threefold vision of nal talim 71
:wo rupees' worth of hunger has a right to two rupees' worth
of food, ang it is the duty of society to give him that two rupees.
Source: 259613149-Thoughts-on-Education.txt... - e
15
let go the gross
grasp the sub'le
i once wrote to shri mavlankar asking
him if it was proper for moneys in the gandhi smarak
nidhi and kasturba nidhi to be lent out on interest.
he pointed out that gandhiji had held the view that
money should be so invested as to bring the highest
interest and be secure.
what could i say to this ? gandhiji, if he had been
living today, would certainly have repudiated this pri-
nciple, or he would have found himself in trouble.
collecting money, increasing it by lending it on inte-
rest, spending it on work are things that belong to a
past age. what form this must take in the present
technological age is a question that gandhiji would
have had to answer if he were alive. but god took
him away so that he did not have to answer this difficult
question. god in his wisdom willed that the image
of this devotee should be undimmed and that questions
of the new age should be answered by the people of the
new age.
shri ghanshyamdas birla in his book of reminis-
cences of bapu has cited an incident throwing light on
bapu's practical bent of mind in money matters. he
mentions how bapu, notwithstanding his numerous
~123 -
124 vinoba on gandhi
pre-occupations, found time to ask him whether a certain
fund had been deposited in a good bank and whether
the rate of interest was adequate.
Source: 259705654-On-Gandhi.txt...