Defining Riches

All too often people confuse riches with wealth. In a previous post "Defining Wealth" I listed a dictionary definition that illustrates how conventional wisdom contributes to the confusion. It says that "Wealth is a state of being rich."

Wealth is definitely a state of being however I will argue that it does not require riches to be wealthy because not all "rich people" are truly wealthy. It is a virtual paradox which many people never get past. There is no contradiction in my earlier statement however conventional wisdom has most of turning to the "better" J.O.B. or a higher education or the lottery in hopes of some day being rich.

So what are riches and why don't they make a person wealthy?

First off nothing outside of you can make you anything. The only things that are real come from within. So where do we start?

Lets grab the Double Day Dictionary and see how it defines "Riches."

1) Abundant possessions; wealth.
2) Abundance of whatever is precious.

Immediately you can see the unending loop (paradox) conventional wisdom has thrown over our heads. You've been taught that to be wealthy you must have riches and that riches make you wealthy.

Looking at the definitions above, if indeed riches are an abundance of whatever is precious then you'll never be wealthy unless you acquire said "abundance of things that are precious." Therefore, having riches are about having possessions.

In history many well known people have become rich doing exactly that, they have acquired a fortune of precious things but they died a very unhappy person. Just consider Howard Hughes who was so obsessed over controlling possessions that in the last decades of his life, he had no life any body would want to live. I would say that he died not having true wealth in spite of the fact he was certainly rich.

So lets take a look at what the dictionary says about the word "rich."

It defines "Rich" like this:

1) Having large possessions, as of money, goods, or lands; wealthy.
2) Abundantly supplied: with in or with
3) Yielding abundant returns; plentiful: a rich source of oil.
4) Of precious materials, fine workmanship, etc., rich fabrics.
5) Luxuriant; sumptuous
6) Having many choice ingredients such as butter, cream, etc.
7) Pleasingly full and resonant; rich tone
8) Deep, intense; rich color
9) Very fragrant, pungent; rich perfume
10) Containing a high percentage of fuel to air: said of fuel mixtures
11) Abounding in desirable qualities: rich soil
12) Informal, very funny; a rich joke

Rich it would appear is a word used to describe a "condition" or a "state" of things we are familiar with such as rich food or rich color. Does this mean a person is a thing that can exists in a state of or a condition we call rich? Yes they can just as Howard Hughes was rich but his "state of being" was not wealthy (or healthy) because it lacked the essence of what makes life and living rich. You see without other people who love and admire you and without a peaceful heart and benevolent spirit we cut ourselves off from the source of all that really matters which is a part of the world we live in and giving love and being loved.

I will argue that Mother Theresa was far more wealthy than Howard Hughes for this reason; even though she did not possess any "riches" in the conventional sense she none the less had a "rich life."

When I die I would much rather have an epitaph that acknowledged all of the contributions I had made to ease the suffering and create value for humanity. I know that Howard Hughes made many worth while contributions and I don't argue that he did; but my point is this, Howard's last years were not at all a tribute to his successes and contributions and I'll invite you to do a Google search on him to discover what I mean.

Conventional wisdom has taught us that to be wealthy we must acquire riches and to do so is to be rich which suggests a state of being. Ultimately it comes down to deciding for yourself where you put the most value in this life. Is your value based solely on possessions or are you the kind of person who sees that the real value in this life lies in the human personality?

If you look at being wealthy as Howard Hughes did then I suggest you probably will never reach that goal. Why you ask? Because you are most likely a very decent and practical person who has been educated in our conventional ways of thinking and as a result you know that people like him are an exception and not the rule and so you look at or believe that kind of wealth is not obtainable in this life time. Your inability to identify with that definition of wealth and your belief that it is not obtainable will guarantee you'll never have to worry about it.

If you describe yourself as a person who sees the true value of other people and human potential then I would agree you have the highest potential of living your life in a "state of being" that I call wealthy and as such all the riches of your hearts desire will be a part of your living and lifestyle.

It all comes down to a matter of choice and whether you believe what you've been told about the rich and famous and extremely wealthy or whether you believe you get to decide what you think and believe in spite of what you've been told.