Should Teachers Charge $$ For Teaching?

[Stigweard]

What are the ethical considerations around charging students money for tuition?

 

On one hand you have the quite valid argument that as soon as a teacher becomes financially dependent on a student showing up to class the "authentic" student/teacher relationship degenerates. The teacher may structure their classes different to "string the student out", the teacher may hold back from saying the "right thing" (i.e. perhaps another teacher would be best for you) for fear of the student leaving the class.

 

On the the other hand you have an equally valid argument that the student should pay the teacher as a show of commitment and to balance out the "exchange of energy". It has been often said that the more a student pays for tuition the more they respect and value it.

 

What's your thoughts on this??

 

I have posted my views here: Should Teachers Charge $$ For Teaching??

[Protector]

No one is entitled for anything

[Aetherous]

Hey Stig,

 

I think there's no problem with charging fairly. If you are sharing your time, and what you have is something of value, then there are two reasons to charge.

 

If the teacher wants to develop the student more personally, and form that kind of bond, then in my view they shouldn't charge. The student's dedication is payment enough, and the teacher gains the satisfaction of sharing what they're passionate about. Why teach if you only care about the money? That's a fair exchange...and to me, it feels more correct and natural. For spirituality this is especially true...whereas for something like taiji, it makes more sense to involve money.

 

On the the other hand you have an equally valid argument that the student should pay the teacher as a show of commitment and to balance out the "exchange of energy".

 

I think this kind of argument is the biggest crock of shhhhhhhh I've ever heard (no offense intended, I know you heard it elsewhere). Like I said, there are more valid ways of having a fair exchange. And there are also valid ways of making the teaching seem valuable...for instance, make the training challenging so that the student earns it. Also, if you have a passion for it, that will come through in the teaching. Money can get in the way of that!

 

Anyway, the choice is always up to the teacher. There are pros and cons to every decision. Some people will hate you, some will love you, no matter what. Think about what kind of character of students you want, and what your character is...then decide based on that, and let the pieces fall where they may.

[Warrior Body Buddha Mind]

Charge cause if you dont, people take advantage and also dont give a shit if they come or go!!!

[mYTHmAKER]

Of course they should.

Are you willing to do whatever it is you do for nothing?

Funny this question never comes up with body work, yoga, music lessons, personal training, etc.

[Warrior Body Buddha Mind]

Amen to you brother Mythmaker amen...

[Shizukanako]

A teacher must pay rent, buy food and clothing, and do everything else that a non-teacher does.

[Phosphor]

This is in fact a very old tradition, and is not new. Yes it is very true that many "acclaimed" fraudulent teachers today charge way too much, and so you need to watch out, but true teachers will charge a fee as well. A teacher charges the student for a few reasons. The first is that there is a karmic exchange between the student and teacher, if we are talking about giving spiritual practices and experiences. A true master has the ability to burn off the student's karma through his or her own meditation. The teacher will often balance this dept by having the student make a sacrifice which burns a bit. Today money usually suffices, since it not only is a good sacrifice and so lessens the karmic load of the student the teacher has to handle but it also pays for the school. Everything costs money today, and even a true teacher living in today's world has expenses. Another reason is that if there were no fee then everyone under the sun would want to learn from the teacher, regardless of their intentions, like Warrior just mentioned. When there is a small sacrifice to give, then most insincere seekers will lose interest at the first sight of it, which means the teacher can focus more on the students who really care.

 

Now, this refers to acclaimed teachers who are taking on students for spiritual purposes. While taichi and chikung have spiritual benefits, most teachers of it are not in charge of their students' spiritual evolution. So this doesn't really apply to those teachers. If you are asking about these teachers, then it just depends on whether it is being taught as a job or for philanthropic purposes. It all has to do with motives.

 

From the student's perspective, he or she should be very suspicious at first, and ask themselves whether the teacher is genuine. A true spiritual teacher can give experiences, and he will produce positive changes in the students.

[Informer]

Hey Stig,

 

I think there's no problem with charging fairly. If you are sharing your time, and what you have is something of value, then there are two reasons to charge.

 

If the teacher wants to develop the student more personally, and form that kind of bond, then in my view they shouldn't charge. The student's dedication is payment enough, and the teacher gains the satisfaction of sharing what they're passionate about. Why teach if you only care about the money? That's a fair exchange...and to me, it feels more correct and natural. For spirituality this is especially true...whereas for something like taiji, it makes more sense to involve money.

 

 

 

I think this kind of argument is the biggest crock of shhhhhhhh I've ever heard (no offense intended, I know you heard it elsewhere). Like I said, there are more valid ways of having a fair exchange. And there are also valid ways of making the teaching seem valuable...for instance, make the training challenging so that the student earns it. Also, if you have a passion for it, that will come through in the teaching. Money can get in the way of that!

 

Anyway, the choice is always up to the teacher. There are pros and cons to every decision. Some people will hate you, some will love you, no matter what. Think about what kind of character of students you want, and what your character is...then decide based on that, and let the pieces fall where they may.

 

I think you make some good points Scotty. I think it would be absurd for a teacher to deny one aid or guidance due to financial circumstances, especially in regards to the spirit.

 

Learning to fight to beat people up or to learn self defence is another story, it is like a trade and a training environment does need to be maintained. It would prob be cheaper just to by a gun if one is in need of peace of mind in regards to personal safety.

 

The external materialistic mind demands compensation for such things that it deems to own. A mind that can find articulation of that which is within would give it freely, as he would know it is not "his" to own, sell, or even be compensated for.

 

Does a teacher not teach? If a teacher does not teach, then he is not a teacher.

If a man sells knowledge for money, I would consider him more akin to a peddler or salesman.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Informer

[Informer]

Student: I need to learn about the spirit within and learn to develope it.

Salesman: Pay me for it and I will teach you.

Teacher: (probably after some questions) You can begin by . . .

 

Student: I have trouble meditating, how can I turn off internal dialogue?

Salesman: Buy this DVD I made, it explains it all.

Teacher: (proposes a solution)

 

Really we are all forever teachers and students within the realm of duality and non. I don't know of anyone alive that is beyond learning, and the odds are extremely improbable and impossible when factored with infinity.

[Aetherous]

Are you willing to do whatever it is you do for nothing?

 

Of course.

 

A teacher must pay rent, buy food and clothing, and do everything else that a non-teacher does.

 

That's what jobs are for.

 

A teacher charges the student for a few reasons. The first is that there is a karmic exchange between the student and teacher, if we are talking about giving spiritual practices and experiences. A true master has the ability to burn off the student's karma through his or her own meditation. The teacher will often balance this dept by having the student make a sacrifice which burns a bit. Today money usually suffices, since it not only is a good sacrifice and so lessens the karmic load of the student the teacher has to handle but it also pays for the school.

 

The karma burning will happen regardless. The student's sacrifice should be their passion and effort.

 

I don't buy the karmic exchange theory for charging money at all.

 

Paying for "the school" might be legitimate. But why are there any costs for the school? A teacher can easily pay for a website from their own pocket. You can meet in a public place, or in the teacher's home to learn...or through written word online (a new concept to the spiritual world).

 

There are usually ways that you can get out of charging students money.

 

And there are always lazy excuses for charging a lot!

 

Another reason is that if there were no fee then everyone under the sun would want to learn from the teacher, regardless of their intentions, like Warrior just mentioned. When there is a small sacrifice to give, then most insincere seekers will lose interest at the first sight of it, which means the teacher can focus more on the students who really care.

 

And do they still charge the students that really care? If so, then this isn't a valid argument.

 

Another way to do this is by simply observing each student's effort...and continuing to teach those who show they care, while refusing to teach those that don't show it. This doesn't involve money.

[Gerard]

The problem is not the money but what the student is going to do later on with the teachings being passed on to him.

 

Is exactly the same quality going to be maintained down the line with future generations?

[deci belle]

[Rishi Das]

I have no right to speak from a teacher's point of view, but will say that as a student I feel it is necessary to pay respect to the teacher. That being said, respect can show up in many different forms: money, true passion for the teachings, cooking, cleaning, helping out in the garden, running errands. When it's all said and done, the teacher will ultimately decide which compensation is most appropriate. What I am coming to understand is that when you are ready, a true teacher will present him/herself to you; searching far and wide may end up in disaster, as many have stated their are a lot of people claiming something that cannot be offered.

[Birch]

Depends what and why the teacher is teaching.

 

How about a sliding scale and 'in-kind' exchanges like gardening etc for willing folks that want but can't...

 

Can't pay bills with cabbages.

[Informer]

Depends what and why the teacher is teaching.

 

How about a sliding scale and 'in-kind' exchanges like gardening etc for willing folks that want but can't...

 

Can't pay bills with cabbages.

 

Well, you can reduce the bills with cabbage. If you consider food as a bill then you are paying a bill with cabbage. I guess that statement doesn't really make since to me, considering it is already a necessity that doesn't need to be converted to money.

 

If you sell the cabbages then you can pay the bills with the money . .

[Birch]

Well, you can reduce the bills with cabbage. If you consider food as a bill then you are paying a bill with cabbage. I guess that statement doesn't really make since to me, considering it is already a necessity that doesn't need to be converted to money.

 

If you sell the cabbages then you can pay the bills with the money . .

 

Ah the literal :-)

 

Alright. So in addition to teaching the teacher should also broker the in-kind goods that he or she can neither eat nor use nor exchange? Sounds great.

[Informer]

I think looking at the teachers life-style could help you decide as well. Is his lifestyle full of consumption and attaining desires? Or does he use the money for sustainability to benefit more than him? I would look at it from the perspective of an investor in this regard. What is he going to do with the money? Will he put it to better use than what you could do with it? Could you put it to better use to help others than what he would? These are the kind of things I would be resolving.

[Informer]

Ah the literal :-)

 

Alright. So in addition to teaching the teacher should also broker the in-kind goods that he or she can neither eat nor use nor exchange? Sounds great.

 

You lost me -K-. Have you been drinking?

 

Maybe ask a cabbage farmer how he does it? Could that cabbage farmer also be a teacher at the same time? Oh the horror~! It might make his work easier to have is students help him in exchange for instructions or something. After-all, instructions can be considerably less physical labor in comparison to working in the field. That would seem to be a pretty equal exchange.

[Informer]

Ok, let's figure how beneficial that could be. With just 5 students equally exchanging time of 2 hours. 2hours labor = 2 hours of instruction. So the are 5 students, each dedicating 2 hours in the field. 5x2 = 10 hours of labor and 10 hours faster than what the farmer would have been able to do the same work on his own. Exchanging 10 hours of physical labor for 2 hours of instructions seems like a bargain to me. Obviously experience plays a role as the farmer would be more efficient, but that is a pretty reasonable guestimation imo.

 

So how much more valuable is one man's time then another? Say you work a job that makes $10 and hour, to get to $1000 dollars you would have to work 100 hours. A really popular guru is throwing a party for that much and is giving out 10 hours of instruction throughout a weekend. He has 50 people register for the party. So he reaps $50,000 dollars or 5000 hours of time. This means that he values his time to be 5000 times more than the man who makes $10 hr. Could this be indicitive of an inflated egoic-structure and self-interest? As you can see there is tons of profit that could be made, and obviously people will take advantage of that.

 

That doesn't seem to be the way, imo.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Informer

[Birch]

You lost me -K-. Have you been drinking?

 

Maybe ask a cabbage farmer how he does it? Could that cabbage farmer also be a teacher at the same time? Oh the horror~! It might make his work easier to have is students help him in exchange for instructions or something. After-all, instructions can be considerably less physical labor in comparison to working in the field. That would seem to be a pretty equal exchange.

 

No. Have you?

 

I forgot that I should always be very very exact on this forum:-)

My intended point, to argue that teachers should be paid to the extent that they can't pay for everything they need to live in kind (such as housing for a start) was not making a case for extravagant lifestyles nor taking advantage of less fortunate students. Note this may not always have been the case. Check out some bagua stories of village masters (objective was a bit different though, martial.)

 

*Sigh* Farming is a job. Not suggesting teachers shouldn't have jobs either. In fact, I'd prefer they have an independant source of income for the reasons suggested by DB above.

 

Initial suggestion was that it depends on what is being taught (i.e if "just" breathing techniques, visualisations and physical exercise) then that's probably IMO a case for paying students. For those students that can't pay, IMO if the teacher wants an "in-kind" arrangement (see RV's idea above) that's up to them and the student.

 

If we're talking "lineage transmission" well, whole other ball game IMO:-)

[Informer]

No. Have you?

 

I forgot that I should always be very very exact on this forum:-)

My intended point, to argue that teachers should be paid to the extent that they can't pay for everything they need to live in kind (such as housing for a start) was not making a case for extravagant lifestyles nor taking advantage of less fortunate students. Note this may not always have been the case. Check out some bagua stories of village masters (objective was a bit different though, martial.)

 

*Sigh* Farming is a job. Not suggesting teachers shouldn't have jobs either. In fact, I'd prefer they have an independant source of income for the reasons suggested by DB above.

 

Initial suggestion was that it depends on what is being taught (i.e if "just" breathing techniques, visualisations and physical exercise) then that's probably IMO a case for paying students. For those students that can't pay, IMO if the teacher wants an "in-kind" arrangement (see RV's idea above) that's up to them and the student.

 

If we're talking "lineage transmission" well, whole other ball game IMO:-)

 

Please excuse my inability to read between the lines

 

I think a sliding scale is a wonderful Idea.

[de_paradise]

If the student loves money too much, would that mean he doesnt deserve, or is not ready for teachings, tranfers, healings, support? If a student loves running around night clubs, does he have time to devote to practise? Its perfect, the students who are not interested stay away. You think a serious teacher would not test your path in some way? Are we starving Ethiopians?

[Informer]

If the student loves money too much, would that mean he doesnt deserve, or is not ready for teachings, tranfers, healings, support? If a student loves running around night clubs, does he have time to devote to practise? Its perfect, the students who are not interested stay away. You think a serious teacher would not test your path in some way? Are we starving Ethiopians?

 

Hmm . . . So by this rationale, one who makes $1000 dollars an hour should have 100x easier path than one who makes $10hr.?

 

What about the one who has inhereted it all and worked for nothing? If that is a test is seems to be a fairly inconsistent one. Seems like an excuse for greed tbh. There are way more effecient ways to test a persons resolve, imo.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Informer

[C T]

Depends on one's progress and realizations, one's level of attainment.

 

The more advanced one is, the less one 'pays', until some point money becomes meaningless when getting deeper teachings or transmissions.

 

Many teachers intermittently get teachings and transmissions throughout their lives - from secret yogis, siddhas and hermits living in caves... of what use is money to these beings, hidden among the mist and the bamboo groves in the mountains?

 

Thumbs up to Scotty's and Informer's points!

Edited November 30, 2011 by C T