Imagine you’re a fierce warrior in the middle ages. You’re a proud soldier in a fearsome army who brought devastation to the enemy horde and soldiers praise your name as a specimen of the warrior. Now, by some miracle, you traveled into future to the 21st century. Would you be surprised by the social structure?
Today the best lifestyle isn’t with kings or army generals. But with a successful businessman. An army general’s salary isn’t even nearer to a businessman’s. Why?
Because we are living in an Age of Money or as per our Vedas, the age of Vaishyas. This doesn’t predominantly point a caste, but the caste-profession. Hence, the age of Brahmin is the age of Knowledge; the age of Kshatriya is the age of Warrior skills and Militarism; the age of Shudra is the age of Individualism.
In the age of Kshatriya, the proficient in warfare and violence are at the highest status in the society; the creators of wealth through business will be so in this age of Vaishyas.
In the age of Militarism, the most important currency of change was violence. Today, we live in the age of Money or the way of vaishyas. Now, the most efficient currency of change is money but not violence.
Some accept rules of age and prosper; others don’t and suffer.
Did India shift from Militarism to Money? I think we’re in a muddle. We had our share of violent adventurism. Slowly, we have been pulled out of the age of kshatriyas. Have we entered the age of Vaishyas wholeheartedly? No. Our relation with money is complicated.
Money damages society and causes harm. So did violence in the age of kshatriya, knowledge in the age of Brahmins or Individualism in the age of Sudra. It is never money alone that is the problem, but our attitude towards it.
In the age of Kshatriyas, there are warriors who fight with a code or purpose for protection of the weak. But there are also Adharmic warriors, who preferred violence and torture. Similarly, today there are dharmic and also adharmic money makers.
We should shed our hypocrisy and surrender to the rules of age. Preaching “money is evil” is like being irresponsible by those who preached non-violence in the age of Militarism.
We should respect and encourage dharmic money makers. Finally, we should accept knowledge, violence, and individualism are also relevant in our age but not as effective as money.
Pakistan has attempted to change its global status using violence, while China used money as a tool of transformation. Which nation is more successful?
More importantly, even when knowledge is used today, its success is achieved only support by money. Even thinkers and intellectuals are largely ignored unless they’re well marketed.
We live in the age of Money. Maybe the age of knowledge, militarism or individualism will follow; it might most likely to be the Age of Individualism. But today, e should understand the rules of our Age:
To earn money is GLORIOUS