Like it. Loathe it. Want it. Waste it. But you just cannot ignore it. What is with money, that rumpled piece of printed-paper in your wallet that the world bows to its power? The secret lies in your own mind!

Let's talk money! Mammon's earthly incarnation. Satan's weapon of temptation. Capitalism's rightful expression. We are talking about a piece of paper, right? A scrap created from wooden goo that wouldn't even fetch a glass of water if used for trade on the basis of its actual worth.

So what makes money tick? We love it, we condemn it. We go all out to get as much of it as we can, then we berate it for being a temptation! We live with it and realize our dreams through it, yet are the first to say 'money can't buy everything'. Why?

But then, how do you evaluate the worth of something that in itself defines worth, at least commercially? Is money a capitalist weapon for exploitation? Or the most tactile evaluation and reward of our capabilities?

Rand went a step further in recognizing money as the means of sustenance. "Money is the source of survival," she wrote in Atlas Shrugged. "The verdict you pronounce upon the source of your livelihood is the verdict you pronounce upon your life." Perhaps it is worthwhile to wonder why money still draws so much flak. Why is it that most people hesitate to proclaim that they actually like money? What's the taboo all about? When did a simple tool for exchange metamorphose into an ambivalent entity that is at once a source of shame and exultation?

"The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it," proclaims Ayn Rand boldly.

IS MONEY EVIL?
Remember your first salary check? And the pride you felt to have earned something? How would you have felt if somebody had pointed out that it was wrong to like money? That the pride you were feeling was evil?

But the scriptural truth was far from this bribe-God-be-happy image. Notes American financial consultant and inspirational author J. Grady Cash in his book Value-Based Money Management: "Money is not evil. The actual Biblical quote that leads to this common misconception is 'for the love of money is the root of all evil'. The ancient Aramaic text might more accurately be translated as 'for the lust after money is the root of all evil'. It's perfectly acceptable to want to make more money. Only when money is accumulated for its own sake or its accumulation hurts others does money become bad."

Ditto in Hinduism. Artha, or wealth, is legitimate; money is indispensable in the present state of society. A man of the world without money is a failure; he cannot keep body and soul together. In fact, according to an injunction of Hinduism, first comes the body and next the practice of religion. Furthermore, money is needed to build hospitals, schools, museums, and educational institutions, which distinguish a civilized society from a primitive one. Money gives leisure, a key factor in the creation of culture. But money must be earned according to dharma; otherwise it debases a man by making him greedy and cruel.

The basic issue, therefore, is not whether money is evil but whether it has been earned ethically.

THE ETHICS OF WEALTH
Despite knowing this, many of us still shy away from talking about it openly. As New Age guru Deepak Chopra puts it: "Most people find it difficult to tell someone exactly how much money they make. This is because they believe that they are worth only what they earn."

John Stussel, host of the 20/20 American TV show's episode on the positive side of greed, accurately puts it: "Bill Gates is a good example. He's now one of the world's richest men. He's got about $40 billion. But does his having $40 billion mean the rest of us have lost $40 billion? No."

According to Stussel, in a trade-driven economy even if a person is greedy for more wealth, he just can't grab it from others. "To get your money, he has to persuade you, entice you. To do that, he has to make something that you will willingly give him money for. All commerce requires both parties to benefit. Take the simple example. I buy a quart of milk from a farmwoman. I hand her the dollar; she gives me the milk. We both benefit, because she wanted the dollar more than the milk, and I wanted milk more than the dollar."

Ram Piparaiya, Chairman, Aridhi Hitech Industries, Mumbai agrees: "Money does not corrupt. It depends on the user. Corrupt people become more corrupt with it." He, however, feels that those who don't earn but win money, especially through lotteries or gambling, are more likely to be corrupted by it.

B.R. Tangri, chief manager (PR) at the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Delhi, has a pointblank response to the debate: "How can money be evil? After all, can one survive without money?"

Actually, the notion that money corrupts is itself debatable. Money, intrinsically, is a means of trade. And the person who holds more money has greater power to dictate the terms of trade. Now, we have all heard that 'power corrupts'. But does power corrupt all? What about great leaders who have had the power to shape history, yet did it with integrity and wisdom? Then, shouldn't the responsibility of not being corrupt lie with the person and not the object of temptation?

"A knife can be used by a terrorist or by a surgeon," agrees Somani. "Bofors guns can be used to defend the country or get embroiled in an underhand deal. Whether money corrupts or not depends on one's attitude and character."

"Your attitude towards money," says Pradhyot Somaiya, management accountant with Davnet Telecommunications in Sydney, "has a significant reflection on your attitude to life. Some people see money as a means to an end, some as a tool to wield power, some as an end in itself-thinking it will bring them happiness. A person who sees money as only a means to satisfy needs will be relaxed and more benevolent than one who craves money for providing self-worth, security or power."

THE RIGHT ATTITUDE
So what may be the right attitude to money? Joan Sotkin, inspirational teacher and creator of www.prosperityplace.com, views human-money interaction as another form of relationship and argues that laws applicable to any other healthy relationship also govern the attitude towards money. "Your individual relationship with money," she says, "is similar to your relationship with yourself and others. In other words, you deal with money the same way you deal with yourself and others. Your financial relationships develop along the same energy pathways as everything else in your life."

"Money," says Somaiya, "is necessary for my life. Money keeps me comfortable, but it is not the only reason for my happiness. Happiness comes from within me. Money is an indicator of practical success, but not of my self-worth."

The general attitude towards money, however, is two-fold-we are either eternally running after it or are busy berating our fate for keeping us away from more of it. The grapes are eternally sour and yet we keep jumping for the ever-higher bunch. The few of us who manage to break this vicious cycle are the ones who have a good relationship with money.

In his book, You'll See It When You'll Believe It, Dr Wayne Dyer warns against this anomalous attitude: ''If we have a scarcity mentality," he argues, "it means that we believe in scarcity, that we evaluate our life in terms of its lacks. The theme of so many people's life is 'I simply do not have enough', or 'I would be a lot happier if I had...' People believe that they live a life of lack because they are unlucky, instead of recognizing that their belief system is rooted in scarcity thinking. Yet as long as they live with a scarcity mentality, that is what they will attract to their lives."

Most personal growth trainers, however, insist that this attitude is easily rectified. All it needs is a change in thought patterns regarding money. Says John McMurphy, author of Living Deliberately: "Money is only a state of mind; not a reality in, of, or for itself. If money remains a state of mind, therefore a spiritual reality and not an end in itself, then you always will have what you truly need and deserve."

SUCCESS V/S MONEY
Like it or not, most often success is judged in terms of a person's bank balance. In a consumer-driven economy, a penchant for selling—ideas, concepts or products—goes a long way in earning money, as well as in being materially successful. "If you don't want to sell what you produce," asks Lester, "why would you produce it?"

Which is why, today, even spiritual leaders and healers need to advertise their unique capabilities because the most successful are those who reach out to a wide variety of people. After all, how would a person sitting in Timbuktoo know where to go for something as esoteric as rudraksha therapy, if not through advertisements?

Despite consumerism, it would be a mistake to read success as a synonym for money. Although the two often go hand in hand, money itself cannot make you a success, and vice-versa. Take A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, former chief of India's Defence Research and Development Organization. A simple man who came from a not-so-well-to-do family, nobody can deny that he is a success. Yet, who is interested in how much money he makes? What makes him a success is his intellect and achievements.

What about the sages who left all to seek something much more intangible? Were they any less of a success? Would the Buddha have been more successful had he stayed with his palace and wealth?

AMBITION OR GREED?
In the '80s, Gordon Gecko—a reptilian stockbroker played brilliantly by Michael Douglas in Oliver Stone's movie Wall Street—extolled greed thus: "The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works… Greed captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit." Like it or not, in the market-oriented world of today, Gecko might just be stating the obvious. The word greed is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as 'intense or inordinate longing, especially for wealth or food; avarice; covetous desire'. It is the inordinate desire for wealth and affluence that has made material evolution possible. At least in terms of trade. Had we not wanted money, would we have got it in the first place?

But even if one accepts Gecko's argument as factually true, it may not necessarily be ethically correct. As N.K. Sohal, who retired as manager of Hongkong Bank, Northern India says: "Money is functional as it sustains life. Human beings have certain basic requirements. Once those are fulfilled, then we begin thinking of comfort. I don't condemn that because anybody who is working hard is entitled to a certain amount of comfort. But anything beyond that falls under the category of greed."

"A person who desires money," says Canada-based Adarsh Jain, a professor of philosophy, "desires it for a purpose. If you are greedy, you will forever covet, irrespective of how much you have. And this has nothing to do with your social or monetary status. A millionaire can be as greedy as a daily wage earner."

In fact, in one of political science's greatest ironies, the twin concepts of communism and socialism-which arose from a desire to overthrow greedy capitalism-also gave in to greed in their practical application.

"The government," says Nathan Newman, "transfers wealth to business in indirect ways—society pays to educate and train workforce, takes care of their workers when they are sick, pays for transit system maintenance and provides a whole range of public goods extracted through the public purse. This is a transfer of wealth that is not purely zero-sum, but raises the whole question of whether average folk are getting their fair share of this deal."

Fair share! This is a topic that keeps cropping up each time we talk about money. Somehow, fair share is often taken to mean equal share, where, irrespective of your capabilities, you get as much as everybody else.

"Why is it," asks US-based software designer Tony, "that people should eye what others have earned? Isn't it against the very basis of religion to covet? Then why should it be considered okay for a 'have not' to covet what a 'have' has? And isn't this greed the very basis of communistic and social welfare philosophy?"

Gecko equated greed with ambition, with the desire to better your own self. Actually there is a subtle difference between the two, and one can easily be transmuted into the other. The difference, most often, lies in the motive. Dan Sullivan, a US-based personal growth trainer, notes: "Ambition is the desire to have more, but greed is the desire to have more at the expense of others. Ambition is natural and rational, but greed is a product of fear. Where there is no fear, there is no greed."

Would this mean that even charity has a pecuniary purpose?

There is a school of thought that considers charity to be a personal issue-if you want to give, go ahead and do so. "It doesn't matter whether charity brings in more money or not," explains Somaiya. "A philanthropist may treat charity like business and put money where there are chances of a return. In that case, he's not a philanthropist. Charity, by definition, is an activity carried out without expecting material returns."

As Roy Davies, a librarian at the University of Exeter, England, puts it: "Ideally, philanthropy should have nothing to do with acquiring money."

The person who amasses great wealth through hard work, and the person who gives away all in the blink of an eye share the same platform from a spiritual perspective. Both are following their dharma. Money plays but a negligible role in terms of their spiritual evolution, since money is the outcome, not the source of their perspectives on life.

"Money does not define us", says Tom. " We define what money means." And so long as our life is governed by a reliance on our swadharma, the innate correctness of action that one is born with, the money that we earn would not just benefit us, but also contribute to a better and prosperous society.

1. Intention: It is being clear about your

2. Preparation: Reading, going to school, formal and informal discussion and above all, questioning everything. Argue pros and cons until you come to a point of understanding the 'why' of something. This helps convert information into wisdom.

3. Attention: It's about staying in the present moment. Actually being in your body and observing what is going on with you and around you. Your body will give you very important clues, which will help you make more informed choices.