Contemplating the latest bout of politics at the office, I resolved that rather than get drawn in I would attempt to cultivate a more “religious” attitude. I imagined a more detached me; forgiving, unencumbered, quite possibly a bit smug too.

I warmed to the idea, wondered how practical it would be; realized the more I could afford to adopt a religious attitude essentially depended upon the less I needed to “care” about work.

By “care” I don’t mean doing a good job, or the work itself, which I care very much about, but the actual need to do so – in short how much I needed the job.

I realized that I was able to contemplate a more spiritual attitude because I was approaching a position financially where – partly due to savings, partly other possibilities – I did not need to rely on this particular job as my sole source of income. So I could afford to “care” less and thereby cultivate a better me.

It has always been thus, but it reminded me of the fundamental role financial security plays in our spiritual lives. Of course the poor are often among the most religious and spiritually generous, but equally I suspect there is a particular advantage in having reached the summit of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

Gandhi’s poverty grew out of his life experience – built upon privilege. But would the man who did so much to champion the cause of the “untouchables” have chosen this asceticism had he been born of “untouchables”? More – had he been born of untouchables and somehow managed to improve his status, would he have chosen the trappings of poverty over wealth? Having laboured so hard, would he even have had the space to explore his spirituality? Instead would his truth be born of the grim realities of poverty and his determination never to return to them?

Not that I want to diss Gandhi (heaven forbid!) but I think we all have a tendency to underestimate the influence of wealth upon spirituality, and the implications of this – how economics can influence access to that higher aspect of ourselves. I believe Schopenhauer had this in mind when he wrote poverty is slavery. 

This for me is the key reason why religion is indivisible from social action – not out of pity, or even physical need, but because a life not fully lived is an inherently poor one. 

Politics matters, although office politics I will henceforth attempt to rise above.

While I can afford to.