{Justification [continued]}[4th September 1988]

[Redbook5:342][19880904:2022j]{Justification [continued]}[4th September 1988]

.2022

[continued]

This* has practical implications. Such a Society would not insist that everyone must work to earn material wealth by providing goods or services which were purchased by others, because – provided there was enough to go round** – the Spiritual development of the Individual alone*** would be regarded as a legitimate and significant contribution to the development of Society, as well as a valued end in itself. This is important because it is obvious that even**** in the best of cultures, not everyone who develops himself spiritually can be {necessarily} needed to {assist} others to do so, in sufficient {numbers} to “finance” himself. While the cares of excessive riches are a distraction from spiritual progress, the worries of poverty can also be a distraction from the Spirit – particularly for those with families.#

*[See last previous entry.]

**(There is a better chance of that now (& in the future) than ever before.)

***[This is ambiguous – it probably means that one would not be expected to make any other legitimate and significant contribution, not that nothing else would be regarded as a legitimate and significant contribution.]

****(or especially)

#{The standard of living of those materially supported would have to be maintained at a level low enough to put off those whose real interest was in unnecessary material acquisition without productive work. (I suspect that any attempt to assess the ‘spiritual’ validity of individual cases would lead to great abuses.)}

<880904/5>

--------

<880926>

[PostedBlogger02042019]