[Buddha-l] Making a living

[Franz Metcalf]

Gang,

Wong Weng Fai just declared,

> One who practices art so that they can earn enough money to get on  
> with their real life is not a true artist. Similarly, one who  
> preaches wisdom and compassion so that they can earn enough money to  
> get on with their real life is also not genuine.

I agree with you, Weng Fai, if you mean that the means here is art or  
preaching and the end is getting on with real life. But I hope you  
don't mean that if the end is spreading the dharma, and the practice  
of that provides support for real life, that too is not genuine. That  
is too high a standard as someone, somewhere, must foot the bill for  
the real life of those spreading the dharma. If it is not the  
listeners, it will be others. Is it not fair for those benefiting most  
to contribute most? If not, then who should do it? (How about the  
government? I've considered applying for one of my outgoing [!]  
president's faith-based community initiatives. After all, what is  
faith but confidence in the dharma, and who can argue that "community"  
is in fact "sangha"? I'm a shoo-in!)

I write these comments with some reservation, as I've always so deeply  
appreciated the "free" offering of dharma and been creeped out by high  
costs for dharma retreats and memberships and so on. If I believe the  
dharma should be free, I can hardly expect listeners to pay. But if I  
believe that real life must and shall require payment, then someone  
will have to supply it. Who else might it be? I am trapping myself in  
yet another papanca.

Oh, and in the interest of full disclosure, my real life is funded in  
good part by royalties from my attempts to spread the dharma. You may  
thus discount anything I say.

Franz

===========================================
Franz Metcalf, PhD.  323.467.3267  http://mind2mind.net
Buddhist Author, Teacher, Scholar, Husband, Dad, Beginner