Money does not seem to me to be a neutral thing or a "form of energy" that just naturally flows like water. Rather money seems much closer to a manufactured abstraction over reality controlled and created by people who came to power through bullying and violence. A complex game of monopoly played to the death. I don't see it as necessary and it only has value when people are made desperate for it.
I think if there was an ideal situation where like minded people employed all the ideas in this post they'd soon find money had no value at all because people would come to realize it's an overhead when they could just cooperate freely.
Also the idea one can opt for right livelihood as expressed in buddhism under a monetary system is nearly impossible. Most jobs have some form of exploitation built into the business model and governments and banks dictate the winners and losers in all these markets and who can even play. Not to mention it's a form of coerced labor, or slavery with a few extra steps.
Thank you for this perspective. I hear you — but I’d argue it’s not money itself that’s corrupt, just as fire isn’t corrupt because it can burn, or water isn’t evil because it can drown. These are forces, tools — that take on the character of the hands that wield them.
Money is just a way to simplify exchange between humans — it serves a practical, organizing purpose, but it’s not inherently moral or immoral.
Why are you conflating natural things with something like money that is a man made invention? In that capacity you could just as easily say that a nuclear bomb isn’t moral or immoral, it’s just a tool to get people to comply and it’s the way you use it that matters. Torture and prison are just tools too.
However I suppose nothing really is moral or immoral as it’s kind of a judgment, but it’s clear somethings were created with an intent that creates suffering, many times that intent is to manipulate and control others for personal gain. I’d argue strongly that money very much is one of those things. It came to be prevalent primarily in dominator societies and you can’t ignore its manipulative divisive effects.
Not to mention there’s nothing democratic about it. It’s always controlled autocratically, so if you’re for forcing people to live in a particular way against their will that happens to create mass suffering and has 100% of the time it’s used resulted in mass inequality and a pyramid scheme, then I’d say that’s one shitty tool you’re working with if the intent of money is to be “practical, organizing purpose,” which by the way is a line taken almost directly from the dismal science of economics that never questions status quo thinking of western civilization.
Lastly, you’re riding on an assumption that humans somehow aren’t smart enough or have the capacity to work cooperatively sans money, when clearly we have shown the ability to do so.
It may be a tool, but I don’t see it as a tool that fosters love or greater understanding between people.
A lot of wisdom here that I will return to on several occasions, I'm sure, to digest more fully. Thank you for writing this.
I also appreciated you sharing the tensions in writing the piece. I write about these kind of tensions in my latest post and you may appreciate this perspective:
Left this like a coin in the temple donation box—silent, but intentional:
This wasn’t a blog post. It was a sutra for the financially disillusioned.
You named the tension without trying to resolve it. That’s the real Zen flex. Money isn’t evil or enlightened—it just amplifies our karma. Whether we weaponize it or bless with it depends on our awareness.
Loved the reminders about impermanence, simplicity, and especially dana. When money flows like water, may it irrigate more than ego.
I like to look at the similarities between ancient faith traditions. In Buddhist non-attachment I see some of the lessons from the New Testament. The story of the rich man who won't sell everything he owns and give the proceeds to the poor in order to follow Jesus comes to mind. There are others as well. At the end of the day, regardless of where the teaching comes from, it makes sense to me that attachment is a source of individual emotional suffering and the collective suffering that manifests as a result. As always, acting in what Buddhists call a "skillful" manner based on that realization is easier said than done. That's why I like the Buddhist use of the word "practice" to describe how they attempt to incorporate the teachings in their daily lives. Safe travels and many blessings.
Money does not seem to me to be a neutral thing or a "form of energy" that just naturally flows like water. Rather money seems much closer to a manufactured abstraction over reality controlled and created by people who came to power through bullying and violence. A complex game of monopoly played to the death. I don't see it as necessary and it only has value when people are made desperate for it.
I think if there was an ideal situation where like minded people employed all the ideas in this post they'd soon find money had no value at all because people would come to realize it's an overhead when they could just cooperate freely.
Also the idea one can opt for right livelihood as expressed in buddhism under a monetary system is nearly impossible. Most jobs have some form of exploitation built into the business model and governments and banks dictate the winners and losers in all these markets and who can even play. Not to mention it's a form of coerced labor, or slavery with a few extra steps.
Thank you for this perspective. I hear you — but I’d argue it’s not money itself that’s corrupt, just as fire isn’t corrupt because it can burn, or water isn’t evil because it can drown. These are forces, tools — that take on the character of the hands that wield them.
Money is just a way to simplify exchange between humans — it serves a practical, organizing purpose, but it’s not inherently moral or immoral.
Why are you conflating natural things with something like money that is a man made invention? In that capacity you could just as easily say that a nuclear bomb isn’t moral or immoral, it’s just a tool to get people to comply and it’s the way you use it that matters. Torture and prison are just tools too.
However I suppose nothing really is moral or immoral as it’s kind of a judgment, but it’s clear somethings were created with an intent that creates suffering, many times that intent is to manipulate and control others for personal gain. I’d argue strongly that money very much is one of those things. It came to be prevalent primarily in dominator societies and you can’t ignore its manipulative divisive effects.
Not to mention there’s nothing democratic about it. It’s always controlled autocratically, so if you’re for forcing people to live in a particular way against their will that happens to create mass suffering and has 100% of the time it’s used resulted in mass inequality and a pyramid scheme, then I’d say that’s one shitty tool you’re working with if the intent of money is to be “practical, organizing purpose,” which by the way is a line taken almost directly from the dismal science of economics that never questions status quo thinking of western civilization.
Lastly, you’re riding on an assumption that humans somehow aren’t smart enough or have the capacity to work cooperatively sans money, when clearly we have shown the ability to do so.
It may be a tool, but I don’t see it as a tool that fosters love or greater understanding between people.
A lot of wisdom here that I will return to on several occasions, I'm sure, to digest more fully. Thank you for writing this.
I also appreciated you sharing the tensions in writing the piece. I write about these kind of tensions in my latest post and you may appreciate this perspective:
https://open.substack.com/pub/ecad/p/balance-is-the-key?r=hljjw&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
Great!!! Thank You so much.
Left this like a coin in the temple donation box—silent, but intentional:
This wasn’t a blog post. It was a sutra for the financially disillusioned.
You named the tension without trying to resolve it. That’s the real Zen flex. Money isn’t evil or enlightened—it just amplifies our karma. Whether we weaponize it or bless with it depends on our awareness.
Loved the reminders about impermanence, simplicity, and especially dana. When money flows like water, may it irrigate more than ego.
Bow of respect,
Virgin Monk Boy
I like to look at the similarities between ancient faith traditions. In Buddhist non-attachment I see some of the lessons from the New Testament. The story of the rich man who won't sell everything he owns and give the proceeds to the poor in order to follow Jesus comes to mind. There are others as well. At the end of the day, regardless of where the teaching comes from, it makes sense to me that attachment is a source of individual emotional suffering and the collective suffering that manifests as a result. As always, acting in what Buddhists call a "skillful" manner based on that realization is easier said than done. That's why I like the Buddhist use of the word "practice" to describe how they attempt to incorporate the teachings in their daily lives. Safe travels and many blessings.
I almost didn’t publish this piece — and that hesitation is the breath of Zen in digital form.
Because Zen isn’t a certificate you hang once you’ve renounced everything.
It’s the silent pause before you choose — even when shadows surround the choice.
You acknowledged that tension.
You didn’t resolve contradiction — and that’s exactly why this piece lives.
Zen isn’t purity. It’s permission.
To need, to doubt, to choose anyway — without asking the system for spiritual approval.
This tension is the teaching.
And that’s the only Zen option that matters.