Having a Sense of Purpose in Work

 What gives work a sense of purpose? In this reflection, I suggest that the sense of purpose in work cannot relate to external things, such as points or praise. Rather, it needs to come from a deeper sense of nonduality between self and others, or between who one is and what one does. Being and doing need to be seen as connected in a deep way that is inexplicable and immeasurable. But in order to explore this concept, I need to articulate why external markers do not give work a sense of purpose even when they drive a person's sense of identity in relation to others.

   It's clear that work needs to be externally acknowledged and measured in some way. Otherwise, there would be no way to really evaluate whether a person is working successfully to achieve certain goals or not. A person needs to be identified in terms of what they do. However, does this give work (or anything, for that matter) a sense of purpose? If people only rely on external gratification or a sense of having achieved numbers in some way, then one's sense of purpose is bound to fluctuate from one day to the next. This is especially the case since work is not always so cut and dry: some problems simply take longer to resolve than others, for instance. So, what is the inner driving factor behind work and its deeper motivation or purpose?

   When one really thinks deeply about it, the concept of worker and work is already an alienating one. It assumes that there is a "self" that needs to do heavy lifting, and this creates an inherent boundary between "being" and "doing". In fact, neither being nor doing exist as discrete entities. As I am writing these sentences, I may be sitting on a chair and not exerting too much physical effort, yet doing still flows from my being in the moment. Even the simple act of breathing is a form of doing--a constant process that takes place through a variety of different elements coming together and interacting for a single moment. Is there a point where doing ceases and there is only being? This would be like trying to imagine a lake being so still that there are no waves or ripples ensuing from it. In fact, being and doing behave inseparably, and it's only my conceptualizing them as such that makes them appear as separate entities.

   A person committed to the idea that their value depends on what they do has already separated the self (subject) from the results of one's work (object), without seeing that they intermingle in complex ways. The sense of who I am is continually being constructed from the different elements of experience. Being and doing are an inseparable part of the flow of existence. Naturally, identifying only with one's achievements constitutes a kind of distortion of sorts.

   On the other hand, a person committed to the idea that their value only depends on being (separate from doing) is also making the mistake of separating being from doing, and essentially reifying it. IN this way, being and doing are separated in an unnatural way. 

   If being and doing are inseparable, then work itself becomes a play on one's being in the moment: not turning "doing" into something reified, and not turning "being" into something that is separate from actions. This is a tricky sort of balance because it suggests that while doing is part of life, it is not a measure of a person's worth. Moment to moment, it is only an expression of the conditioned nature of events and experiences.

   When I let go of attachment to doing or being, work becomes a joy, and not something to be resisted or reacted to. But it can be difficult to separate these things, and that is the tricky practice that we need to keep revitalizing through work itself.