Wealth, Knowledge..Perception

[Guest guest]

Isn't it all abt perception. Even when money might be

perceived as the most significant contributor for

wealth, there might be some for whom its a mere

diversion.

Wasn't someone like Mahatma Gandhi wealthy..with all

the love and respect he received all over the world.

Yogananda Paramhansa was wealthy. Swami Vivekananda.

In contrast someone like Micheal Jackson, a rich man

or a pauper. Each his own individual analysis and own

oyster of illusion.

What to some might be important for sustenance, of a

certain degree of physical comfort to another might be

insignificant at that level.

Knowledge as well, isnt a finite defined criteria for

basis of evaluation of who might be knowledgable and

who not.

And all this might be perceived differently even by

each of us during different phases of life. When a

child is sick, the value of money might be different

than when we are at the end of our lives yearning for

the sight of our loved ones.

 

Just my 2 cents. Each his own.

 

 

 

 

 

_________

All new Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine

http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html

[Guest guest]

ji

 

In a way, all is perception - say "maya"; but in worldly terms, if we

try to assess "wealth" of a person (and the planets as candidate for/

against) during any specific dasha / bhukti - we need to apply

defintion of wealth. Here, we might not be inclined to see the value

of money in relation to the need of that hour, but in general we see -

if factors are contributing to wealth or opposing them.

 

I am sure, not many who are using intangible defintion of "wealth",

will like to point at these relative definitions.

 

and can a worldly person - live on those "intangible wealth".

 

Many may choose to disagree, but I meant that tangible definition of

tangible wealth has changed with the yuga; And rationally the

significators as well.

 

regards / Prafulla

 

vedic astrology, <

wrote:

>

> Isn't it all abt perception. Even when money might be

> perceived as the most significant contributor for

> wealth, there might be some for whom its a mere

> diversion.

> Wasn't someone like Mahatma Gandhi wealthy..with all

> the love and respect he received all over the world.

> Yogananda Paramhansa was wealthy. Swami Vivekananda.

> In contrast someone like Micheal Jackson, a rich man

> or a pauper. Each his own individual analysis and own

> oyster of illusion.

> What to some might be important for sustenance, of a

> certain degree of physical comfort to another might be

> insignificant at that level.

> Knowledge as well, isnt a finite defined criteria for

> basis of evaluation of who might be knowledgable and

> who not.

> And all this might be perceived differently even by

> each of us during different phases of life. When a

> child is sick, the value of money might be different

> than when we are at the end of our lives yearning for

> the sight of our loved ones.

>

> Just my 2 cents. Each his own.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> _________

> All new Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity

and ease of use." - PC Magazine

> http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html

>