Economics of Mahaveera

SR No.: 006926
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Mahapragna Acharya
Publisher: Adarsh Sahitya Sangh
Publication Year: 2008
Total Pages: 176
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 14 MB

Page 118

102 -
ECONOMICS OF MAHAVIRA
compassion. In the reduction of personal consumption, the inspiration is from moderation. The vrati shravakas (devout followers) of Mahavira did not make use of spurious means for earning money while they exercised limits in matters of personal life. Use of standard and fair means of earning wealth, maintaining a definite limit to accumulation of wealth and exercising moderation in personal consumption — these three directives together lead to the fulfilment of the pledge of limiting desires.
Question of Religion and Poverty A pledge of restraint and control of desires is not a pledge of economic distress. There is no relation between religion and poverty. In Mahavira's view, it is erroneous to think that a poor person alone can be religious or that a religious person has to be poor. Neither the poor nor the affluent necessarily practises religion. Anybody who has experienced the awakening of the feeling of peace can practise religion, be he poor or rich. A religious person who remains away both from poverty and affluence is a real renouncer.
By Birth and by Action
We have given religions the form of castes. In our times, those who belong to a particular religion are so by birth. For a person born in a particular tradition, the religion of that family tradition becomes his religion. For a person who is religious by birth, the pledge of limiting desires is not meaningful. It becomes meaningful for those who are religious by action. Such religious persons are not as rare as saints, but in the context of total population, they are rare. Based on them, neither economic validity is established nor do they become obstacles in economic progress.
However, most ‘religious persons' are followers of religion only by birth. They do not believe in reduction of desires, control on accumulating wealth, restraint on luxuries, and in moral principles. Their religion is devoid of morality. They do not consider it necessary to be moral while being religious. They