Comment on the teacher’s pompous answer to a devotee’s sincere question

BY HUMBLE WITNESS

I have to comment on the teacher’s pompous answer to a devotee’s sincere question posted by anon on 4/19 @ 5:10 PM under “Ravishankar’s Hankering for NPP (part 2)”. I remember going through the teacher’s training part 2, and having to debate over this course price issue. I also felt that the price of the course was a barrier to those who most “needed” the course, and I was hoping for a chance at the TTC to air my concerns and get reassurance that in fact the exorbitant cost of courses was justified. This was not allowed—instead, we were made to defend an opinion that opposed our own in a sort of group debate. How clever of them to try and get us to do our own brainwashing, and I am sure it worked on some. As for me, I became only more convinced that AoL caters to the rich and ignores the poor because rs is interested in the money, and not in rendering any kind of service.

“Q> I am a staunch follower of Art of living and have done part 1, part 2 and Sahaj Samadhi courses. I thoroughly enjoyed them and love Guruji. But I always felt the courses are expensive. I thought spiritual knowledge should be distributed at the minimal cost and it is upto the seeker to offer how much ever it pleases him/her for Guru Dakshina. There were a few other situations when I was a bit under financial pressure to donate atleast $300. This has bothered me quite a bit even though I am a philanthropist. If people are rich and can afford it, it is a different matter. Sorry for my ignorance. I am not really clear. But if you can please explain to me in detail, I would really appreciate it.”


The answer posted by the teacher on his/her blog is clearly a compilation of arguments that the teacher trainers have taught us all to parrot, and some of the arguments are misleading, silly, evasive, or simply untrue.

“Spiritual Knowledge has never been at minimal cost .. earlier you would have had to go and do Seva in an Ashram for 10-15 years before you even got a whiff of learning about meditation… Then after all that, you would give a Guru Dakshina if at all…”

Okay, so why doesn’t AoL accept service and time commitment as payment for a course? These days, volunteers are asked to pay to volunteer at an event, especially for those events where rs will be in attendance. And why pressure course participants to give a dakshina at the end of the course? I am a westerner, and I might be misunderstanding the concept, but shouldn’t Dakshina come from one’s own inspiration, and not a result of external pressures? Clearly in this argument, traditions of the past are being twisted to justify the practices of aol today. Either stick to tradition, or call it what it is—a business.

“…The Art of Living courses are typically 18-40 hours in length, assuming you are paying $300 for an approximately 25 hour course, you are paying $12 per hour which is utterly exploitative … Would you even be able to get your toilet fixed for $12 an hour? Are you not willing to spend more money on getting your mind fixed, than you would on your loo?!...”

AoL courses are typically 18 h for a part 1, and 26 h for a YES plus. And since there is a 12-person minimum for the number of course participants, we’re talking at least $140-$150 per hour. And what’s “utterly exploitative” is the fact that the volunteers and teachers who do the work don’t see any of this money. And personally, I would rather pay that money to get my toilet fixed, because at least the money would have gone to a good cause--something real and tangible and useful to me. Claiming the AoL course fixes the mind is preposterous, and as we have seen for many who have shared their experiences on this site, being involved in AoL has done quite the opposite.

“…You talk about yourself, but you do realize that there are so many teachers and an entire organisation to run which has expenses… No government, corporate, UN agency funds Art of Living. When teachers travel, they have to pay the bus/train/air fare. In our homes we have to pay telephone and electricity bills, and for the food we eat.
We have to pay for the hall rent, the rent for the audio system used on the course, etc … Many people work to make an Art of Living course happen, we have to pay them at least their expenses. There is a pretty big bill thats there at the end of the course.
$300 is peanuts to pay for a course that you know gives you so very much….”

I have been involved in every aspect of course organization from the recruiting to the accounting and everything in between. Only 25% of a part 1 course revenue is allowed to go to such expenses as the teachers’ travel, hall rental, etc. For a part 2 course, its even less—a set amount ($300) has to go to VVM for each participant, and food/lodging is a separate expense that each participant has to pay. Often, volunteers have to dip into their own wallets to make ends meet for such courses, and hosting expenses for the teacher are non-refundable. So keeping things in perspective, if one pays $300 for a part 1 course, only $75 of it is allowed to go towards all those expenses this teacher has mentioned. Where does the rest go?

“…Another thing that we wanted was that we did not want people to be obligated and pay. We charge a certain fee for a service rendered. Its nice and clean….”

I’m confused. People ARE obligated to pay if they want to take a course, aren’t they? Also, this sounds more like a business transaction to me, than a service rendered by a charitable organization.

“…Finally, if you want to buy yourself a car, a solid education, a home… at this point you dont say its too expensive do you? You take a loan and get it. An Art of Living course is on par with these big investments of life. If needed, take a loan… you know its worth it….”

So is this teacher suggesting that one who cannot afford an AoL course should take out a loan for it? I personally object to this—I have seen people in my area who do exactly that in response to the prodding and pressure to take this or that “amazing” AoL course. These people cannot afford the basic necessities, and yet are asked to beg for, borrow the money, or launch a fundraising effort to take the next AoL course, instead of being smacked back to reality and told to get their life in order before going off the deep end with these courses. Its sick. Also, I’m sorry, but an AoL course is certainly not “on par” with a solid education, a car, a home, or even a functioning toilet.

“…Finally, some of the money collected on courses is pumped back into society, it doesn’t line anyone’s pockets. It could be used to rehab prisoners, or in some disaster area, or in some war zone to help people. It could be used to help children, women, etc…”

I have yet to see a single “service project” come from the money that has been raised in my area and pumped into the AoL national/ravishankar’s bank account. In addition to courses, I have helped to organize rs’s visit to my city, and have helped raise thousands of dollars for the org. through that event. We were allowed to keep a small fraction of the profit for our city to help offset costs of future aol events, but then had to return any unspent money after one year. The only “service” that money was used for (while we still had it) was to organize more courses. On a separate occasion, when I was ready and willing to join in a trauma relief effort overseas in a war-torn area, I had to seek out my own source of funding, and apply for a grant. I was told by the aol accountant that money raised in a particular area stays in that area, and does not go toward service projects overseas. We had to do our own fundraising campaign for that. So if aol “service projects” are funded by external sources and our own fundraising efforts, then where does all the course revenue go?

“… It could also be used to take care of our full time teachers and their families whenever needed, It could also be used to build up our Ashram infrastructure so that when you come there, you can be taken better care of…
”

Really, the full-time teachers and their families are taken care of using hard-earned aol course dollars?? Do full-timers have any health insurance? Do they earn at least minimum wage for their efforts? I don’t think so. As for the ashram infrastructure, I have yet to see any improvement to the Montreal ashram after donating to that cause year after year.

“…Our idea of doing Seva is not out of an empty bowl, so that we have to go to various people to get us money so that we can do Seva....”

So I see as of late, you’ve been reaching into Nithy’s bowl to do your “seva” (sorry, I couldn’t resist).

“…Our teachers and volunteers work hard to make courses happen, a solid value is given to the participants in the course and then out of the profits that are made on the courses, our bowl are filled…. “

Yes indeed your bowl is filled by the hard work of the teachers and volunteers—the first truthful and direct statement I’ve seen.

Out of a full bowl which has been made so by dint of hard work, we do philanthropy. (Though of late, quite a few funding agencies have finally woken up to the fact that Art of Living is doing some great work and have expressed a desire to partner with us towards mutual goals… and thats a nice feeling too 
I think thats quite noble,…”

I and others have yet to see any philanthropy come out of the “full bowl”. From what I can tell, anything positive that has come out of the org has come from the good intentions and inspiration of some of the duped participants who eventually wise-up and leave. And didn’t this teacher just say in the beginning that no corporate organization funds AoL? Anyway, someone should alert these funding agencies about the AoL fraud.

“… and you should feel privileged to give money to such an organization… even if it means a bit of a stretch for you….”


No thanks, I think I’d rather flush my hard-earned money down my working toilet than to give it to such an organization.

I do hope that the poor devotee who had the guts to pose his/her question was able to see through all the AoL B.S. in that teacher’s answer, and has since left the org. If not, then God Bless and good luck.