Our Gemara on Amud Beis rules that ein matbeya nikneh be-chalifin coinage cannot be acquired via chalifin (a legal symbol exchange of a minor object, that in Jewish law, affirms an agreement or acquisition of property or goods.) We can intuitively understand why this might be so. Money is symbolic, especially paper money, as it has no intrinsic worth. In ancient times, when a precious metal was used, there was some actual value to the coin, based on its weight. Nevertheless, it still is heavily symbolic as it serves no utility, unlike an item of jewelry made out of precious metals.  Even a raw lump of the same precious metal is less symbolic because it’s function is anticipated, that is, it will be formed into an object. However, coinage that is minted will never have a functional or practical use. 

One cannot hold an entire field or even cattle in his hands, so how is possession demonstrated? The legal mechanism that affirms and enacts transactions and transfers is via a symbolic action such as a handshake, signature, payment or downpayment of the value, in order to render the abstract idea of acquisition more concrete. It then follows to reason that too much symbolism could dilute the significance of the action, and thereby not make it effective. If chalifin is a symbol, and coinage is symbolic, there might be too little that is concrete to allow chalifin to demonstrate transfer and ownership of coinage. 

This is also true from a mystical perspective. Likkutei Moharan (23) speaks of the transient nature of money, and because of that, love of money it is not just metaphorically idolatrous, but it actually IS idolatry. After all, what is idolatry if not the poor substitution of the true Deity with a moraly lazy and concrete projection? The abstract, unified omnipotent God is substituted with a pantheon of fickle gods, represented in various forces of nature that seem to act independently. A refusal to burden the brain with the idea that one Creator has a unified purpose and plan to everything that happens, which by definition makes the world morally accountable. Instead, the idolator chooses to explain the complex and incomprehensible by accepting the warring forces of nature at face value. If the forces of nature are at war, then man can engage in psychological splitting and not hold himself accountable. If Mommy and Daddy don’t agree, and undermine each other, then the child has little incentive to believe or respect either parent. 

Money is the arbitrary placement of value on something that is intangible, therefore Likkutei Maharan says the sages are reminding us that ein matbeya nikneh be-chalifin coinage cannot be acquired via chalifin. Meaning that the true value of the world we live in cannot be exchanged or imagined superficially; we cannot allow our wish fulfillment needs to project a distorted reality onto the spirituality of the world. The actual value must be fully ascertained and acquired.