A ‘mean’, stingy or miserly person is certainly sending out many disempowering messages. But at least he is not stealing ‘spiritual rewards’ from another, which is what a lot of ‘good’ people do in the belief that they are doing the ‘right thing’….
A miser, by clinging onto his wealth is a person ruled by fear. Fear that his personal value lies in his material wealth, and further that material wealth is limited and thus reduced when shared. Another misconception he has is that giving is material in nature and that anything given is lost. Such a ‘tight fisted’ approach by contrast not only does not save the miser material wealth or money, it loses him opportunity for making more. A closed fist cannot grasp, any more than it cannot give. The energy, whether material or not cannot use him as a conduit. Everybody knows that a pump in order to draw water well needs to be ‘primed’, and pipes need a good flow of water to pass through them to take out the air locks which cause irregularities in the flow.
Misers tend to become known, become avoided, and thus become cut off from others.
However there is a worse affliction, sinister in that it is unseen, so much so, that an English word does not even exist for this serious condition. I learnt from it as a child in South Africa. My father would often visit his friends, two brothers who owned a superette takeaway, in the evenings and take me with him.
One evening, one of the brothers, Pandeli, knowing that I had not yet had supper, asked me what he could make me to eat. I very ‘politely’ said, ‘no, nothing thank you’, at which he took off at me, calling me ‘akatadhektos’. An akatadhekto (Greek) is a person who will not accept. The height of rudeness. Refusing the hospitality/gift/gesture of another. Denying him the blessing of giving. The glow of satisfaction of having given or offered something.
A miser is miserable out of his own choice. A generous person is, however, frustrated by, or appears to be victimized by a person who denies him the opportunity, the blessing, of giving. The English language is seriously compromised by the lack of a word for this, far more serious than miserly condition/behaviour. I invite readers to come up with a word which we can submit for formal integration into the English Language, for it is only when this condition is recognized and named that one can identify it and act upon it.
When you are offered something as a gift, do not in any way feel indebted or obligated to the giver, otherwise you will negate the spirit in which it was given, knowing that, some way, some how, the giver will certainly be rewarded.
There are obviously situations where to be in integrity you would not accept a gift, for instance a tobacco product or other narcotic if you are not a user, or a meat dish if you are a vegetarian. In this case you clarify that the intent of giving is fully accepted and appreciated.
There may also be situations where the offerer is secretly hoping you wont accept the offer. In this case accept it nonetheless as the onus of insincerity is his, not yours, and by accepting you are actually helping him become more honest and sincere.
However, the non accepting of gifts is not the only situation where one may be akatadhektos. Another, less obvious situation is providing a service and not accepting payment, or accepting less than a market related price.
One such situation where this kind of akatadhetia is common is in the area of therapy and the healing arts.
Often the argument is posited that since the therapist has a ‘God given gift’, it should not be charged, or that only donations would be accepted. However, are the arts of good carpentry, designing, architecture, book keeping, sculpting, etc, and even housecleaning not also ‘God given’? Why charge unashamedly for ‘non healing gifts’ but not for ‘healing gifts’? I know of Spiro Atteshli, (known as Daskalos) since passed away, who was a great healer in Cyprus. He refused to charge for his work, and kept a full time post office job. Had he charged for his work, he would have been able to dedicate himself full time to his healing and thus benefited many times more people a lot more. In addition, he deprived someone else of an office job. So he lost, the world lost, and a job was lost.
Accepting gifts is thus a gift in turn for the offerer. Accepting payment for a service is the same principle.
In the former example the ‘reward’ comes both in the joy of giving and the certainty that what has been given will definitely be returned, many fold, though not necessarily (in fact very seldom) by the person to whom you have given. The universe, though endless, is a closed, self contained system. Jesus said, ‘Caste your bread upon the waters’. He didn’t say that God will reward the giver, or that the giver was ‘good’. He merely stated that it would be returned ‘7×7’ times over. That’s not a bad rate of return, is it? But this only happens when the giving is done unconditionally. If it is done for purposes of prestige, return favours or showing off, this principle no longer applies, as it is no longer giving but trading.
Paying (for a good or service provided) in Greek is pleeromee , derived from pleeris,=completion.
Thus, paying is the act of completing a transaction. The interchange of energy, on the one hand in the form of a good or service, and response usually in money, or possibly in exchange for another good or service. As we have not yet evolved to the state where the result(reward) of our feelings, thoughts and actions manifest immediately (it will come in the not too distant future), payment in money or in kind. Another vital factor is that healing may not be complete unless the healing session is complete, and that happens through payment.
Further, from my own experience, free is not appreciated as much, and therefore the good or service is not utilized properly. Note for those of you who want to provide a free talk or seminar. You will have many more people attending and hardly no cancellations or no shows if you charge a nominal amount. This then becomes a (completed) contractual obligation.
This lack of exchange and its concomitant problems has entered relationships and sexuality, with most problems in these areas coming from an imbalance in give and take.
In conclusion, we see that the ability to give and to receive are merely two sides to the same transaction, the same coin, so to speak. Giving is simultaneously an act of receiving, and in the same way, receiving is simultaneously giving another an opportunity to give.
It is relationship, or in other words, giving and receiving which is the basis of all life, microcosmic to macrocosmic, what makes ecosystems and societies work. If blocked or unhealthy, it leads to a system breakdown, but if flowing healthily leads to healthy functioning. For instance a healthy exchange with microbes (small life forms) is essential to our life as a macrobe (large life form), whereas an unhealthy exchange , i.e by person who is dis-eased will create an unhealthy relationship with the microbes, which are then mistakenly blamed as the cause of illness.
It is our openness to healthy exchange to freely give, and just as freely and willingly receive, which determines our wellbeing and that of those and our environment around us.
Apollo has just scheduled his first webinar – get the details now by visiting: Receiving is Giving Webinar Event
Apollo Pampallis is a Life Mentor and can be contacted on Apollo@discoveringthenow.com. He is establishing new web pages in an exciting new alliance. For ongoing information, upcoming webinars, consultations, ebooks and other news please contact him on the above email