Everyone wants to be like chownah, that is a buddhist dream for layperson.Manopubbangama wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:59 pmThats your full time paid profession?
Can we only play not work?
Re: Can we only play not work?
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27839
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Can we only play not work?
Greetings,
I have two paid jobs...
One job is a Monday to Friday professional job, and as far as a well-paid job to support the family etc. it's ideal - it's Right Livelihood, it's close to home, I get to work with good people, I get one RDO per fortnight, it aligns with my skills and interests etc. It's got everything I could realistically want in a job, but it took a while to find... so if you need to earn an income you've got to keep your eye out for a primary job that ticks as many boxes as possible. Work done which ticks some (but not all) boxes is useful as a stepping stone to something that ticks more.
My other job is a regular Saturday night DJ'ing gig which pays well too, but it's only about 4.5 hours per week on average, so I couldn't rely on it alone to pay the bills. That said, I love doing it, so for me it's more of a paid hobby than a job. I'd do it for free because (to use Sarath's definitions) I regard it as "play", but in the long-run I doubt my wife would let me do it for free, so it's probably a good thing I do get paid to do it...
Metta,
Paul.
I have two paid jobs...
One job is a Monday to Friday professional job, and as far as a well-paid job to support the family etc. it's ideal - it's Right Livelihood, it's close to home, I get to work with good people, I get one RDO per fortnight, it aligns with my skills and interests etc. It's got everything I could realistically want in a job, but it took a while to find... so if you need to earn an income you've got to keep your eye out for a primary job that ticks as many boxes as possible. Work done which ticks some (but not all) boxes is useful as a stepping stone to something that ticks more.
My other job is a regular Saturday night DJ'ing gig which pays well too, but it's only about 4.5 hours per week on average, so I couldn't rely on it alone to pay the bills. That said, I love doing it, so for me it's more of a paid hobby than a job. I'd do it for free because (to use Sarath's definitions) I regard it as "play", but in the long-run I doubt my wife would let me do it for free, so it's probably a good thing I do get paid to do it...
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: Can we only play not work?
I don't see what your question has to do with the topic the op wants to discuss which is how the difference between work and play is a state of mine....a fabrication. Maybe you can clarify how your question relates to that topic.
chownah
Re: Can we only play not work?
I don't see what your questions have to do with the topic the op wants to discuss which is how the difference between work and play is a state of mine....a fabrication. Maybe you can clarify how your questions relate to that topic.
chownah
Re: Can we only play not work?
I doubt that you are right. I think that most buddhist laypeople are of the mind to fabricate my activities as being work....and then it wouldn't be play for them but just plain old ordinary work.form wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:52 pmEveryone wants to be like chownah, that is a buddhist dream for layperson.
I'm sort of thinking that the arising of delight is a key feature which leads people to describe their activities as being either work or play.
chownah
Re: Can we only play not work?
Agree.I think that most buddhist laypeople are of the mind to fabricate my activities as being work
Many people do not see how their work is integrated into the society and benefit of many.
We are now motivated by profit not by the benefit they provide to society.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: Can we only play not work?
U r talking about a higher level of looking at your actions mindfully which is certainly correct.chownah wrote: ↑Mon Jan 21, 2019 1:38 amI doubt that you are right. I think that most buddhist laypeople are of the mind to fabricate my activities as being work....and then it wouldn't be play for them but just plain old ordinary work.
I'm sort of thinking that the arising of delight is a key feature which leads people to describe their activities as being either work or play.
chownah
At a level of right livelihood, most of us will envy u. Owning a farm or orchard is easier to be wholesome than for example working in a corporate office or an office of a politician where dhamma is not in existence.
I quote something i read from MN recently, "when Dhamma is not followed, the strong devour the weak".
Re: Can we only play not work?
Not really , because you mentioned about organic farming , I did ask if you don't mind . My place didn't have genuine organic fruit or vegetable .chownah wrote: ↑Mon Jan 21, 2019 1:32 amI don't see what your questions have to do with the topic the op wants to discuss which is how the difference between work and play is a state of mine....a fabrication. Maybe you can clarify how your questions relate to that topic.
chownah
You always gain by giving
Re: Can we only play not work?
Interesting.I quote something i read from MN recently, "when Dhamma is not followed, the strong devour the weak".
I can't recall reading it.
Appreciate if you find the Sutta.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: Can we only play not work?
Ok. I will post the ref. when i see it again these few days. MN is amazingly interesting to me this round.
Re: Can we only play not work?
Thanks.
You can PM if you can't find this thread.
You can PM if you can't find this thread.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”