Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

[Medusa]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

It's been touched on but not directly addressed, so I am just wondering: do some people think that money is a negative entity and has no place in a spiritual life? Although I feel greed is a bad thing, I believe it is the responsibility of the individual to foster a positive attitude towards money. Otherwise, I think earning money, including large amounts, can be a spiritual experience. Of course, so can spending it.

If the OP considers money and wealth to be contrary to his spiritual beliefs, then I can understand his feelings on this subject far better.

Except before there was money, there was bartering and trade. Historical facts prove this to be so. Regardless if you like it or not.

[Ophidia]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

It's been touched on but not directly addressed, so I am just wondering: do some people think that money is a negative entity and has no place in a spiritual life? Although I feel greed is a bad thing, I believe it is the responsibility of the individual to foster a positive attitude towards money. Otherwise, I think earning money, including large amounts, can be a spiritual experience. Of course, so can spending it.

If the OP considers money and wealth to be contrary to his spiritual beliefs, then I can understand his feelings on this subject far better.

Most of my opinions about money & spirituality comes from Vodou. In Vodou, it is perfectly acceptable - and expected - to pay for services. Before there was a currency exchange, the payment was done in goods & services - but all that stuff, be it money or goats, goes back to the community. When a spirit asks for an offering, the spirit eats - and so does everyone else involved. It's kind of interesting that the spirits usually only ask what the supplicant can afford when it's something the supplicant really needs, but who am I to question the ways of the lwa?

I believe in sacrifices. In order to gain anything, there should be something given up - time, goats, money, first born children, whatever. When I go to work, I am sacrificing my time and energy (and a good portion of my sanity most days) to receive the means to live in modern society. When I buy food I am sacrificing the money in order to eat, or sacrificing money to keep the lights on or the water flowing, whatever. In the US, you can't buy food with time, and you can't eat money. There's a constant exchange and flow of energy going on there. Unfortunately, it seems like we all spend too much time in exchange for too little money, which raises the value of that particular sacrifice beyond the energy received on the other end - everything costs more.

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

It's been touched on but not directly addressed, so I am just wondering: do some people think that money is a negative entity and has no place in a spiritual life?

[Jennii]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

Yes I think it's wrong.
I wouldn't charge to share my wisdom and I definitely wouldn't pay someone for theirs. There are other ways to make a living (with financial rewards), spiritual guidance shouldn't be one of them imo.

[Denarius]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

You don't like it, you won't be invole yourself with it. That's all well and good, but what about people who want to buy and people who want to sell?

Do you believe such things should be outlawed, or frowned on, or punished? If not, then why does it matter at all?

As far as I am concerned there is a huge difference between acting as a priest, and acting as a scholar.

[JamesByrne]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

It's been touched on but not directly addressed, so I am just wondering: do some people think that money is a negative entity and has no place in a spiritual life? Although I feel greed is a bad thing, I believe it is the responsibility of the individual to foster a positive attitude towards money. Otherwise, I think earning money, including large amounts, can be a spiritual experience. Of course, so can spending it.

If the OP considers money and wealth to be contrary to his spiritual beliefs, then I can understand his feelings on this subject far better.

I would say that monetising initiation or training is something contrary to my spiritual beliefs yep.
More then that Id have to ask if anyone genuinely believes that something as old, highly valued and necessarily complex as neopagan spiritual belief will be sold like a cd in a bargain basement sale?

A qualified teacher can help people improve in a workshop fair enough but things like a degree system exist because all instruction necessarily has the experience of the student in mind. For example you cant tell a first degree student something that only a third degree student has the experience to grasp and expect it to be worth what the first degree student has paid...

Theres also the issue of how is spirituality learned rather then how is it taught. Can you really be a doctor if youve never had practical training and can you understand Zen buddism by reading a book? Or do you need to learn from doing and reflection on what youve done. If the former is true its hard to put a value on initiation or instruction - because the student can learn without it its arguably valueless. If the latter is true its hard to put a value on initiation and instruction because the real business of learning is again down to the student. If we really put a monetary value one instruction in the latter case what would the teachers time and effort be in comparason to the students? On the basis of that how much should the student pay... say if the effort is 50/50 should it be half the price a teacher asks, if its not an equal balance and lets face it even a good teacher doesnt produce good results without the effort of the student... is it less then half? I think if we really looked at effort required from either party as a means of setting a price of a payment to the teacher the price would be low.

If things are learned through experience and doing over time rather then a one off upload of data to the brain then instruction will have to take place in small parts as the student is ready over the medium to long term. A book or a a workshop that you might pay a one off fee for isnt going to accomplish that. There has to be a relationship between student and teacher, the teacher valuing the student and watching to see when they are ready for each experience and the understanding that follows and the student valuing the teacher enough to put sincere effort into learning. If you put a monetary worth on instruction it diminishes if not negates that relationship by turning it into producer and consumer and while it makes sense on a fiscal level it doesnt make sense on a spiritual one IMO.

You can attempt to justify charging for instruction by looking at the past but that you need to justify it at all means you already know youre not entirely happy with it.

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

You can attempt to justify charging for instruction by looking at the past but that you need to justify it at all means you already know youre not entirely happy with it.

I have to say I don't agree with this. It's a bit of a non-sequitur IMHO. I commented on this thread which you started in good faith. I tried to explain what I do, how I do it and why. Explanation is not justification.

If you believe everything must be free that's fine by me. But in my experience, everything has a price tag of some sort. And coinage is a damned sight more honest than many other types of payment.

[Denarius]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

if anyone genuinely believes that something as old, highly valued and necessarily complex as neopagan spiritual belief will be sold like a cd in a bargain basement sale?

If you have enough money you can buy just about anything. Anything that has value can be traded, we attach value to wisdom and we attach value to slips of green paper. If an arrangement can be made in which both parties are content with swapping, why should that be a bad thing?

If you don't like it, don't be a part of it. No one is forcing you. It is hurting no one, and is usually a mutually beneficial transaction. Any moral stance that you or I or anyone can take on such is nothing more than an opinion.

In other words, unless you are an interested party (A buyer or seller) your opinion doesn't matter. The only third party opinion that theroetically would is that of a god or the spirits involved, and even then it's debatable.

[Ophidia]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

In other words, unless you are an interested party (A buyer or seller) your opinion doesn't matter. The only third party opinion that theroetically would is that of a god or the spirits involved, and even then it's debatable.

Even though it's not exactly specific to this argument, this is like saying the only way you can truly judge art is if you are an artist. People know what they do and don't like, and sometimes they even know why they do or don't like it, even if they aren't a participant. It's perfectly ok to have an opinion & discuss it with others - that's why we have forums

[Jennii]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

Even though it's not exactly specific to this argument, this is like saying the only way you can truly judge art is if you are an artist. People know what they do and don't like, and sometimes they even know why they do or don't like it, even if they aren't a participant. It's perfectly ok to have an opinion & discuss it with others - that's why we have forums

I agree lol.

[Denarius]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

When it comes to art, and media in general, the viewer IS an interested party. But yes, one non-professional viewer's opinion probably isn't going to matter. At least to the artist, or the viewers in general.

I'm not saying you shouldn't talk about stuff, or even make judgement calls about such, but I am just pointing out that a transaction between two people isn't likely to affect you unless you are one of the two people involved.

This entire argument seems hardly any different from the "Same sex marriage is defiling the sanctity of marriage" thing.

Basic point: It's not hurting anyone, you are not involved, and it's a mutually beneficial arrangement between consenting and well informed adults. I don't see a problem!

The entire argument essentially boils down to "I don't like it," or "That's how we've always done it," and those are not very good arguments for a matter of morality.

What I am trying to say, is that I have yet to see an argument for why a person who doesn't believe this is wrong should stop doing so.

[JamesByrne]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

Basic point: It's not hurting anyone, you are not involved, and it's a mutually beneficial arrangement between consenting and well informed adults. I don't see a problem!

The entire argument essentially boils down to "I don't like it," or "That's how we've always done it," and those are not very good arguments for a matter of morality.

What I am trying to say, is that I have yet to see an argument for why a person who doesn't believe this is wrong should stop doing so.

Thats the difference between living in a facist state where one opinion overrules all others and one where we have atleast the sense of freedom. Id never tell someone they cant Id just say its a very bad idea because it retards the relationships necessary, creates the circumstances that allow charlatans to scam people out of their money and could lend itself to spirituality being availble only to people who can afford it if neopaganism ever rivalled abrahamic religions...

That said [its only my opinion not a cultural one] there are people who charge here. Druids for example, I know one lad who has been on disability for 20 years but through his courses has managed to buy land, fancy cars and to build his own druid teaching facility. Personally if I had a glass of water and he was on fire Id drink deep of the refreshing goodness. But I wouldnt tell him he cant do it. I wouldnt show his students an ounce of respect but I wouldnt tell them they arent druids, Id just try to sell them a bridge or somethin.

[Jembru]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

Thats the difference between living in a facist state where one opinion overrules all others and one where we have atleast the sense of freedom. Id never tell someone they cant Id just say its a very bad idea because it retards the relationships necessary, creates the circumstances that allow charlatans to scam people out of their money and could lend itself to spirituality being availble only to people who can afford it if neopaganism ever rivalled abrahamic religions...

That said [its only my opinion not a cultural one] there are people who charge here. Druids for example, I know one lad who has been on disability for 20 years but through his courses has managed to buy land, fancy cars and to build his own druid teaching facility. Personally if I had a glass of water and he was on fire Id drink deep of the refreshing goodness. But I wouldnt tell him he cant do it. I wouldnt show his students an ounce of respect but I wouldnt tell them they arent druids, Id just try to sell them a bridge or somethin.

See this is fraud so I am also against it. Although I'd probably pee in his general direction after drinking that water. If he charged the same for his courses but declared his earnings so they could be considered when calculating the benefits, if any, he is entitled to, then I'd bne pleased that despite his disability, he was able to forge a career he is physically able to do. As he isn't (to use an expression my partner uses) 'playing it properly', then he's just another tw*t making a mockery of a system that is meant to help people.


I'm also against those disgusting people who sell 'spells' on ebay for ridiculous amounts of money. Although I did once know a couple who put up a mirror as 'haunted', caused a bidding war, and ended up with a nice healthy sum. That just amused me though.

[Ophidia]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

Preventing and detecting fraud is part of why I support spiritual businesses & business people actually being 'businesses'. Here in Las Vegas/Clark County, NV, if you want to operate a psychic business, you have to go through an FBI background check, purchase a tax bond & apply for a business license - which may be refused. You can only work in areas with zoning approved for such businesses. It's an expensive and lengthy process - but we don't have 'psychics on every corner'. You also have to get special event temporary licensing to work at Renaissance Faires & such - you can't set up a tent & ask for 'love donations'. People may still be doing business from their homes, but it's extremely on the downlow, because Las Vegans know all they have to do is run to the County business licensing agency & scream 'fraud!' & it will make that psychic's life a living hell.

Right now, the way the IRS' non-profit rules work, very few Christian churches would qualify. Why? Because they are all up in the politics, using their influence to push voters in one direction or another. But they get away with it, just like people charging thousands of dollars for 'house cleansings'. If everyone, no matter what denomination or brand of spirituality they practiced, were treated the same under business & tax codes, you'd probably see less of both.

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: Do you think its right to charge to teach about neopaganism?

I think it's important to get a few issues straight here. Fraud is fraud. It does concern everyone, because it's a scam and it's designed to prey upon the weak and the vulnerable, brings everything of a psychic and/or spiritual nature into disrepute and generally leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. I for one am all in favour of keeping fraudsters out of the equation.

Some people would say the best way of doing that is to ban ALL psychic work... but I haven't seen any arguments in favour of that so far on this thread.

But fraud is also a fairly grey area. There are psychics who genuinely believe they are gifted - and they're not. I know a couple. And I wouldn't go to them if they were paying me. They may bring spiritual teachings from Aleister Crowley on the other side (for a price)... and they believe they are genuine. Their charges may be very modest. But if they are mistaken... well, technically it's still a fraud.

Then there are people who put information out there free gratis - which will doubtless thrill some. But if that information is wrong... then what they are doing is still in that grey area of fraud. They are misleading others, they are claiming gifts they do not possess (knowingly or otherwise.) And those who cut and paste this info (I mean hey! It's free!) are perpetuating the fraud.

What I am trying to show here is that money does not create fraud. People can - as I've mentioned earlier - demand payment by other means. They can even ask for no payment at all, but it doesn't mean their information is going to be in any way purer. Charlatans don't just follow the money - they often follow the power, which is a different thing entirely IMHO.

In my reply (#33 on this thread) I went into some detail about what I do and do not charge for. What some of you are missing is that there is money, and there is ALL ABOUT the money. Those who have been on this forum for some time will know that I will always try and go the extra mile to help. It's one thing to charge for a book that has taken months, even years to write. Quite another to charge for every single act of kindness.

And that, I believe is where the difference lies. I have no problem with people charging for books, divination, teaching etc., much as they would for any other service. Don't forget that it sets up a legal contract - the consumer has rights once they have paid for something, in a way you don't get with a free service.

What I have a problem with is people who charge for every little thing. And also with those people who want everything free because they are too damned lazy and arrogant to either do the work themselves or to pay someone to help them.

It's like wanting to party all night, every night, not wanting to spend a penny on extra coaching, and then turn up to sit the exam expecting to pass.