Teachers who accept money vs. teachers who teach for free

[sillybearhappyhoneyeater]

I have been watching the thread about true vs. false teachers unfolding and how it has come around to monetary issues and a discussion of whether teachers ought to accept payments or not, and have some thoughts on the subject which I think merit their own thread.

 

At first, I was a little hesitant to offer my thoughts on this subject, since as many people here know, I do have a horse in the race.  Upon longer term consideration, I think that these things do need to be discussed openly and frankly, and I do think it is important to have an informed discussion about the relative merits of both ways of teaching.

 

Starting with a general historical overview of Daoist and Chinese cultural ideas surrounding lineage and patronage, I would like to start by suggesting that there is no example of a teacher who accepted students in Chinese history who did not receive something from the students in return.

What teachers obtain from students can take many forms, but I think we can drill these rewards down to these major points:

- livelihood in the form of support, food, housing, and money:   Most full time teachers require their students to give them something in return, and whether this is a red envelope on important days of the year, a place to live, food to eat, or any other type of material appreciation, this is something that is intrinsically built into Chinese culture to such an extent that for the most part, the teacher doesn't even have to ask, it is simply a known thing.

- people to carry on his or her teachings:  The teacher desperately needs qualified disciples to carry on the teachings of their school, and this is always a major consideration of every teacher.

- adulation:  this is a dirty but true fact about Chinese traditional culture.  Teacher worship is a genuine consideration of all masters of respective fields, be it religion and spirituality, martial arts, pottery, fine art, poetry or anything else.   Egotistical considerations are a huge part of the life of a teacher of traditional Chinese arts and Chinese students are always willing to reciprocate with exceptionally high levels of adoration and will even go so far as to attack rival schools in order to promote the ideas of their teachers.  This brings to mind an incident I was told about in 2012 that involved two teachers of Tibetan Buddhism in Tianjin who were locked into a bitter dispute over students going from one to the other teacher.  One of these men was considered in his lineage to be highly enlightened, and yet this issue still took place.   It would be a good thing for all students of spirituality to allow the scales to fall from their eyes in this regard.  Teachers are people too and have lots of flaws.

 

So having discussed some of the mechanical reasons why teachers take students, lets address these points in a bit more detail.

 

Money:  teachers teach for money for many different reasons.  For people like me, it is because I have a family to feed and because teaching is a supplement to my income (although it doesn't even account for a quarter of my yearly earnings).  For some other people, teaching is a business that they make a full time living from.  Some full time teachers are very good while others are not so good, thus is the environment of a market economy.   Can teaching for money be called into question? Of course, it can and should be, because there are many very nasty people teaching these arts and money certainly does contribute a lot to drawn out course material, having to pay up to get "high level instruction," and many other not so savoury business practices which we should be aware of and avoid.  On the other hand, even Wang Chongyang go material benefit from teaching his students, even if it wasn't in the form of money,  so discussing material benefit is a very tricky and difficult subject, and certainly isn't a morally black and white issue.

 

Lineage:  this is when things get really complicated, because for a teacher to pass on his lineage, he needs to have serious students who are totally dedicated to mastering his school and will not pollute his ideas with their own shortcomings.  This says a lot about the issue of student quality and raises a tremendously important problem which our current western cultural ideology doesn't really talk about, the issue of low quality students wanting to take up all of the teacher's time and getting in the way of his passing on real information to qualified people.  One of the major solutions to this has been the culture of outer and inner door students, and certainly a teacher's main source of revenue can consist of outer door students who only by proving their dedication can enter into his home and study directly with him.

 

Personal considerations:   it is a fact that many teachers teach simply for the high they get from interacting with their loving students.  Whether this was the case when they started teaching, or whether it was developed over time, this addiction to "face" is one of the biggest problems in the spiritual community, and really can't be overstated.

 

Usually, these three big subjects are not independent of one another, but rather merge in unexpected ways and can really shape the way a teacher teaches.   It is very symptomatic of our own ideas of self worth to assume that we are worth the time of a teacher who is teaching out of the goodness of his or her heart and passing along real knowledge.    I can say with great certainty from my own experience that about 90% of people who come to study with my teacher will never get past the outer door.  Most of these people come to class twice a week, socialize, practice a bit at home, and treat the classes as a leisure activity.  Since my teacher started a new career, he has cut out a great deal of his old classes and adjusted his system so that only the more serious students are held on to and the trouble makers are let go as fast as possible, but nonetheless, it isn't a foregone conclusion that he will have only dedicated students who are worthy of learning the depth and breadth of knowledge he has accumulated in his lifetime.

 

I am very sceptical of teachers who charge high fees for limited pieces of information and it has been a personal choice of mine to be exceptionally generous with my own teachings, often leaving very detailed curriculum information in forums like this and not asking for anything in return.  On the other hand, I do take money for teaching, because in my own ethical model of the world, it is the best way to promote the benefits of practice to a wide group of people while at the same time leaving me with enough free time in my schedule to research and practice by myself.    Certainly if I were not already a business person (I run an international tea import and export service) and had to work a full time job, I would not have time or energy to teach, and probably would have a lot less time to research and practice by myself, so at least within my own world view, I consider a moderate fee structure to be acceptable to me, although I also understand that other people may disagree with me for both ideological and practical reasons.

 

I guess what I would like to leave behind, without being too long winded, is that everyone ought to be very sceptical.  Not only sceptical of teachers, whether in the public market place, or people who teach for reasons best known to themselves, or even of themselves as students and prospective students.   People's intentions are almost never as clear as simply receiving or refusing money, and to simplify it to such an extent is really an injustice not only to the teachers, but also to the students themselves, since in the long run, a student's ability to discern things on a subtle level is what will lead to finding the right teacher and the results that the student wishes to achieve.

 

I think I'll leave it there and wait for others to chime in.  I suspect that this will be a somewhat controversial thread, which I don't think it should be, but certainly I'm open to all opinions and as always, I'm sure that many of the people who post here will make me stop and reconsider my own positions.

 

Best wishes,

 

Robert.

[SeekerOfHealing]

Post is too long, it can be put in simple words and couple sentences.

 

It does not matter if teacher teaching for free or for money as long as it's bring results. Sincere connection which I have with my teachers are priceless. Nobody even thinking or mention thing about money. Spiritual cultivation is like feeding the poor, how do you expect to pay you if you are food holder (in spiritual sense?)

 

The teaching for liberation are free anyway, just open the suttas.

 

If teaching are good and proper by bringing results you can not help it, it's bound that students will pay you by the feeling of the results. It's just can not be other way. If you teachings brings life changing experience you will be having good base of students to naturally would like to keep teachings alive by contributing without asking.

Edited February 8, 2017 by SeekerOfHealing

[windwalker]

I may look at a little differently.  There is no free. Only commitment

or not.  Payment, is one of many ways of showing commitment.

 

Becoming or accepting a discipleship is another.

 

The question might be posed as to follow a teacher or follow a “way” or “path”

 

As to reasons of teaching or reasons for learning. Who can say?

 

Which is why I ask those I work with to be very clear in what they're looking for and also suggest to them others that maybe can offer what they seem to be seeking.

Not all people are clear in this.

 

I also make it very clear not to follow a teacher,  but follow the “way”

 

At best I can only help  them to see and feel a “way”

I've found and followed, hoping this will help

them to find their own “way”

Edited February 8, 2017 by windwalker

[johndoe2012]

There is no free will for anyone to follow a teacher or not following a teacher.

[RiverSnake]

A balanced transaction between teacher and student is the key principle here.

 

We can coat that transaction with many things (money, service, devotion....etc), as long as its balanced. Relationships cannot last long or be mutually beneficial if there is no balance. 

Edited February 9, 2017 by OldWolf

[Earl Grey]

One of my teachers experimented with paying and teaching for free. He discovered that even if he had the two students coming in the same time and learning the same lessons, the one who paid was objectively better, and it wasn't his bias--it was other teachers and students comparing the two who didn't know about their arrangement. It has to do with the law of exchange and even for the student who didn't pay, he didn't do anything for the teacher, he just came in, learned the form and lessons, and left.

 

Another teacher learned over the years when he didn't charge at all, he never retained students. When he charged too little, he didn't find many students at all. When he charged a premium, he attracted many more students. 

 

I believe in paying my teachers, because while it's priceless and beyond value, there is simply something that does not connect without giving to one's teacher.

 

The caveat is that the lineage must be good and the teacher must also be of outstanding character, for the teachers I have weren't approached for just their style, but their good hearts. I don't care what style one teaches, if he is a good man (or she a good woman), I will learn under them because I wish to be like them. 

[Marblehead]

Well, really, if it doesn't cost anything it must not be worth anything.  Right?  We've seen that in taxpayer supported public housing over and over again.

[[email protected]]

As I know chinese mentality always assumed that a disciple must not only do what teacher says but also do some works for him without arguing that its too much etc.

From the other side someone who teaches also lives to some extent in society and also needs money to buy necessary things.

This is a simple rational why it is fair that teaching costs money.

Rgrds, Ilya

[cold]

You are lucky when you get what you paid for, pay nothing get no real value in return.

[qicat]

mmmmmmmmmm..............

 

....in my tradition.....

 

....when you go to a shaman....

 

....he is not allowed to ask for money....

 

...but don't you dare not to pay....

 

...you pay what you can...

 

...if you are rich, you gift a horse....

 

..if you are poor, you gift whatever you have - even a matchstick, a coin...

 

...why?....

 

spirit work...

 

...spirits are very sensitive creatures... easily offended... who needs a feud...

 

so, if you need a gymnastics teacher ( I suggest you pick a young cute "yoga bunny" white blond, they are the best in spiritual bullshitting), you either pay or do not pay - your choice...

 

but if you are really into energy/spirit work learning - I STRONGLY suggest you pay. Even if teacher does not accept it. Just leave the "gift"( i.e. money, actual gift, service, etc) with the teacher. 

 

also, there is a tradition of declining a gift/payment of three times... I hope you know it...

Edited February 9, 2017 by qicat

[[email protected]]

This is like the teacher gives you some part of himself and you in respect give some valuable for you to the teacher.

In this kind of exchange you become a part of a teacher and thus become able to receive his knowledge, spirit and energy.

Rgrds, Ilya

[SeekerOfHealing]

There are immortal teachers and spirit who teach for free if you are willing and have "destiny". Just initiate yourself. But in such cultivation you need effort which is priceless.

Edited February 10, 2017 by SeekerOfHealing

[Rocky Lionmouth]

I'm a firm believer in showing appreciation and commitment, money and time is a way to do that, just as helping each other out and offering support. Balanced reltionship, respect and face. Face is important, and trying to find a balanced relationship and getting to know eachother, money does affect behaviour and having a little business between a studen and teacher gives the opportunity for both to see the other in a situation that is serious and hard to avoid.

[CloudHands]

Balanced reltionship, respect and face. Face is important

 

What do you mean by face ?

[qicat]

What do you mean by face ?

 something like that

http://www.yoyochinese.com/blog/What-Does-Losing-Face-Mean-Importance-Face-Chinese-Culture

 

http://www.echinacities.com/expat-corner/When-to-Hold-Your-Tongue-The-Importance-of-Respecting-Face

[CloudHands]

 something like that

http://www.yoyochinese.com/blog/What-Does-Losing-Face-Mean-Importance-Face-Chinese-Culture

 

http://www.echinacities.com/expat-corner/When-to-Hold-Your-Tongue-The-Importance-of-Respecting-Face

 

I get it. So yes we (I and generally people as I can observe) tend to idealize teachers and "realized" persons. I recall a conversation with a friend when I was a teen saying that people generally try to appear better, deeper, smarter, etc than they are. The perfect illustration of it are pictures, you keep the one you like your face.

The interaction between what you thinkwant to be and what people expect you to be... when you are "just" someone that is more knowledgeable/a bit (or more) advanced on a path... hard to manage I guess.

 

My teacher once somewhat summed the situation up : "If you had only one face, you'd be a robot".

Edited February 11, 2017 by CloudHands

[Spotless]

Compensation is no problem. Obviously it is easily and often over compensation But just as easily and often it is under- compensation. There are many many who find asking for or charging enough very difficult - and a far greater number of students willing to receive for nothing - in fact nearly requiring it and often coming with all sorts of harsh prove-it energy and diaper rash.

[Rocky Lionmouth]

I get it. So yes we (I and generally people as I can observe) tend to idealize teachers and "realized" persons. I recall a conversation with a friend when I was a teen saying that people generally try to appear better, deeper, smarter, etc than they are. The perfect illustration of it are pictures, you keep the one you like your face.

The interaction between what you thinkwant to be and what people expect you to be... when you are "just" someone that is more knowledgeable/a bit (or more) advanced on a path... hard to manage I guess.

 

My teacher once somewhat summed the situation up : "If you had only one face, you'd be a robot".

That is exactly what the issue can be. Hardest part about having a teacher, even one who tries to live up to kung fu or realized standards (meaning a deep sense of responsibility and a far reaching vision) is to allow them to be themselves and trust that they have your back and development in safe keeping.

[[email protected]]

It is a mutual responsibility. A disciple is responsible to do practice according to exact guidelines of a teacher, and a teacher is responsible for giving the exact directions according with individual qualities and level of a student.

Rgrds, Ilya

[Daeluin]

From another perspective - what are the costs of being a human living in modern society? Food and shelter cost money.

 

A teacher who dedicates them-self completely to their art, then must also do something that has value to others in order to pay for these things.

 

Why should the art itself not be treated as something worthy of receiving payment for?

 

Naturally there will be those who sell something that is not real. Naturally there will be those who sell something that they do not know very well. For these types of people, they will only make money if they are able to convince others of the value. The arts of the dao are subtle and not easily understood, which means it is easy for someone to tell believable stories.

 

Aside from the intentional swindlers and con artists, there are other cases like this, where the moral gray area is not clear. When a student studies with a true teacher for many years, what they learn may not be much at all, but to them it might feel like quite a large part of their life. They may reach a point where they are not learning any more and leave. Their teacher might close the school. They may disagree with their teacher about what is right or wrong about a subtle point. Then they go on to teach others, and what they have to teach most certainly contains some truths - enough to convince others of its value - but how far can it lead? It might lead quite some ways in a clear fashion before there are questions that cannot be answered. It might be muddled from the beginning. A teacher like this may even be completely virtuous and dedicated, and simply have been unable to go very far. What their students receive may indeed have value, even without the capacity to take one very far.

 

If it takes one any distance at all, is this not valuable? Perhaps the better question to keep in mind is related to where one wants to go. A western martial artist may study until getting a black belt, and go on to teach martial arts with full qualifications and recommendations from their teacher. This does not mean what they teach will be the same as what they learned, but they still possess the qualifications to be a teacher. Nor does this mean the teaching compares to something like internal martial arts in any way. And yet still something has been taught. Time has been spent by the teacher, with the student. This is time spent in a body that needs to pay for food and shelter. This teacher could be building something to sell for their next meal, but instead they are spending time with a student. Is this exchange of time not worth something in return?

 

It has been mentioned earlier that payment can be viewed as a type of sincerity. I had a personal friend who taught miso making classes for free, because she believed in teaching for free. However she found that the people who signed up for her classes would frequently not show up, and people she spoke with weren't sure if a free class would be worth their time. After she started charging for her classes, more people began to sign up for the class, and more of them would show up to the class and study what she was teaching sincerely.

 

There is a very strong sense in modern money-based societies that you get what you pay for. Universities cost much more than community colleges, but this does not always mean the quality of class is better at the university level. I once took a high level math course twice at the university level. The first class was taught by someone who didn't speak english fluently and half the class dropped out of it, including me. The second class was taught by a teacher's assistant, and again there was a language barrier. I finally ended up taking the same class at a community college and the teacher was easy to understand and very good at explaining difficult equations. The credit for this class transferred to the university level, even though it did not cost as much. In the end I had to take the class three times, and paid much more than I could have, but because I did not give up I was able to learn the material. Again this was a case where my money paid more for time than for the material, but I also ended up paying more in one case where there was a bigger reputation.

 

When learning from a teacher who lives and charges based on a modern economic system, one should not ignore these principles. However it is difficult, as there are fewer standards to go by. It might be considered a blessing to learn taijiquan from someone who studied with a true lineage holder, but this does not mean their kungfu is the same quality as their teacher, or that one will gain indoor status. Often when there are few teachers of an art, the quality levels will be very different, regardless of the price. If one is dedicated to learning, they might consider themselves lucky to have found any teacher at all.

 

As has been mentioned, effort is another factor, and it goes hand in hand with time. A teacher cannot do the work for the student. The student must put in the effort to listen and apply what the teacher is instructing. This is what leads to results. It is not what one does, but how one does it. Sloppy practicing doesn't build a strong foundation. A teacher may continue to teach such a student, and yet the student does not make progress. Is this the fault of the teacher or the student? In my school there are some advanced forms that I have not learned yet, and do not know if I ever will. I have learned that they are actually very simple to perform with the physical body, but to do so as to produce the energetic results they were designed for requires one's energy to be fairly advanced. It would be simple to teach the movements to anyone at all, but it would be somewhat pointless to do if their energetic components could not be accessed.

 

Teaching something like this to someone who is not ready is how profound arts become lost.

 

One doesn't become an indoor student because the teacher is playing favorites (this would be a warning sign). How could the teacher teach their highest, most mysterious arts to any random person?

 

These days there are many forms like this that one may go to a seminar and learn to practice. These arts may be said to be extremely high level, and thus one may pay a premium to learn them. (Or feel like they are paying a premium because of travel expenses.) And perhaps these arts truly do contain something very mysterious and valuable. But is one truly able to learn how to perform this form to the highest level from a seminar? Probably not. And yet that does not mean those who teach forms like this are swindlers, not at all. If one is truly dedicated to their practice, perhaps the form will reveal its secrets over time. In the end, time and effort are the most important ingredients to progress.

 

----

 

All of this has been about teachers who charge money and work within the modern economic framework. Surely there exist those who do not need to depend upon food and shelter for their survival. And yet too these people probably do not pay for a classroom or advertising. Any students they take are likely connected by destiny - that is, they are people who naturally cross the path of the teacher without advertising, simply because like attracts like. We might say Wang Liping found his Longmenpai teachers in this fashion.

 

There are also teachers who do not charge for other reasons. Dan Millman's teacher "Socrates" taught while he worked the night shift at a gas station, completely for free. But later it is revealed they are connected by blood. There are many qigong teachers who teach for free to promote healthy living. Sometimes these are medical practitioners or simply highly compassionate people. How much can a student ask of such a teacher, and how far will the teachings lead? It depends. Some may lead very far indeed. But this is not something one is assured of knowing from an ad, or even taking a single class. The best sign is that one's teacher might seem to be somewhat mysterious and subtle, and one feels a strong resonance with the class. But does one imagine that all who achieve the way come back to teach the full path to the way, even if they teach some of it?

 

Then there are older times. Times before land was something one had to pay for. Times when one built one's shelter from trees right there. Times before vehicles to transport people and goods. Times when food needed to be procured from the land.

 

Back then, a student might need to walk many hours to meet with their teacher. Yet again, the cost of time spent teaching a student is time not spent attending to the needs of one's home and body. For a student to be taught, is it not expected that there is some exchange? Perhaps this would be hauling a bucket of water from the well a mile away, or mending a broken wall or weeding a garden. These are all things the teacher would otherwise be doing. Is life in a monastery any different? Even though everyone is living together, there are still the requirements of body and home.

 

It may be that the teacher, or monastery are a little bit off the beaten path, away from the bad energy of towns and cities - up on a mountain or in the woods, where the energy is better and there is more peace. And yet, even living a simple life, this means it is more difficult to acquire food and any work must be done by those present.

 

In the end... is compensation for teaching really any different from anything else?

 

And yet.... it has also been mentioned that spiritual guides can teach us. They do not need to support a physical body, and can only be found through destiny anyway. And even so, all of us have them, and they are here to teach us, for free, as soon as we are able to discern them.

[Daeluin]

A lot of the above seems very logical to me. However this logic could easily be confused when we overlay the self-effacing nature of chinese culture.

 

It seems that this self-effacing nature has roots in confucianism and daoism (dare not to be ahead of anything else under heaven), but that in modern times it has developed into a highly sophisticated political art. In martial arts, one who is lower can more easily upset the foundation and roots of the other, making them fall. In social arts, especially in a society sensitized to this, it seems that the same tactics can be used to upset the foundations of one's "face."

 

Thus perhaps it hurts one's face to appear to be asking too much, and even when one isn't asking too much at all, it is very easy for someone to say they are and create drama that causes them to lose face.

 

In my own school, we are very removed from these concepts, and yet I have learned much about true humility that does not care about the politics of face. A principle of daoist cosmology is that in the direction of creation, the true becomes hidden within the false. A block of wood becomes carved and painted, and who then can tell what it was made from?

 

Students who do not have good experiences with their teachers are likely to talk about it a lot, and in outside circles rumors may spread about the teacher. The thing is... this type of face killing can only touch the painted carving, not the block of wood. If the teacher relies on advertising and reputation to gain students, they will be hurt by any who wish to damage their reputation. If they rely on destiny to find their students, and are sincere in their dao, the dao will bring them true students no matter what anyone does to their reputation.

 

I've talked with some other martial artists in the area, and sometimes my teacher will come up. It is interesting to hear what they believe about my teacher - it is all based on what others say and has nothing to do with the truth. Over time I heard from my teacher that he simply doesn't care what other say about him - he pays it no mind and focuses on the art.

 

This is a layer of obfuscation - one easily manipulated by anyone - that prevents people from knowing how to place value on something. And yet, from my very first day in class, I knew immediately that this was the right teacher for me. No words were needed.

 

In the end we can only know ourselves from the inside out, and everything else from the outside in. The more time we spend studying things from the outside in, the more we lose our grasp on what is true and false based on it's own merit. True discernment of this merit comes from becoming more connected to our own center - our own uncarved block - which then comes into deeper resonance when we contact other things that have a deeper center.

 

If we truly need a method to place value on things - it seems to me much more effective to do so from the inside, rather than from the outside.

[dionysiac]

I think a key distinction is not being made here:

 

Accepting money is very different than charging money.

 

One is optional and the other is not. 

[Daoisme]

Teachers are human beings too they need money, also information is valuable so it makes sense for them to charge. However just because you're paying for it doesn't make it good knowledge, and just because some knowledge is free it can still be very valuable to know.

[[email protected]]

Lets look at this from pragmatic side - if teacher does not take money then he goes to do some job instead of giving his knowledge to disciples. Imagine for a while that ALL teachers don't take money (f.e. taking money for spirichual teachings etc. becomes strictly prohibited...). Then people's opportunities to receive this kind of knowledge stream to a minimum. Is it what Budda, Huandi and other great patriarchs wanted to achieve?

Rgrds, Ilya

[Orion]

A bit of a different situation, but as a healer I have struggled with this. In the beginning I felt guilty about charging people money for healing because they were suffering and I had skills that could help them, so I kept my fee low. Eventually I started to get burned out and I also felt that people undervalued my work based on the monetary value. More often than not people would not entirely follow my recommended protocols, or they would ignore my advice entirely.

 

Now I charge more money and see fewer people. Everyone who sees me commits to the process. I do charitable works and give some treatments away, but I ask for the full free from everyone who can.

 

Having said all that... there are some teachers charging outrageous amounts of money. There was a Qi Gong school I was interested in within the United States that was charging $2000 for a 4 day course, which was part 1 of 4 parts. Each part was an additional $2000. While I believe that high rates ensure commitment, I also believe it's unethical to have no options for low income people who also want to commit. It's a throwback to the classical period where only nobles and gentry could get educated. It makes it seem like that best knowledge and personal attainment are only for wealthy people, which I'm 100% against. We live in the 21st century, get your act together.

 

If it's your path though, you'll come up with the money. I've found that most of the best teachings I've ever received have been in reciprocal friendships where we share our attainments and gifts with one another before eventually parting ways. My path in this life does not appear to be guru-centric like it is for some.

Edited March 5, 2017 by Orion