authfriend wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: >> >>> Oh yes, in fact. As I pointed out to Barty, you >>> need to keep in mind that there aren't a whole lot >>> of such cushy jobs, and many people aren't qualified >>> for the ones there are. If you insist spiritual >>> teachers must teach for free by getting a high-paying >>> job that leaves them lots of free time, you're >>> restricting the pool of teachers to folks who are >>> highly educated and trained to start with, which in >>> effect means people from relatively well-to-do >>> backgrounds for the most part. >>> >> "Barty" here. I love it when Judy gets so mad >> she can't type. :-) >> >> Just to provide a counterpoint to what she so >> mistakenly says above, >> > > (Which Barry smugly thinks he's refuted but > actually has not...) > > here's what the Rama > >> guy (even with his many faults) did to try >> to help his students get careers that would >> allow them the money and freedom to pursue >> their spiritual lives. >> > <snip Lenz's program, which sounds admirable as > far as it goes> > >> This is not a career path (or a spiritual path, >> for that matter) for everyone, but I firmly >> believe that it can be *done* by everyone. >> I've seen it done by hundreds. Judy's idea that >> this approach to teaching would restrict the >> pool of teachers to the well-educated is sheer >> educational bias on her part. T'ain't true. >> It ain't the "well-educated" who get the well- >> paying jobs, it's the people who are *motivated* >> who get the well-paying jobs. >> > > Says Barry, ignoring my qualifying phrase "for > the most part." There are always highly > motivated folks who manage to rise above the > eight-ball. > > It's not a matter of "educational bias," of > course, but of cold, hard reality: getting a > high-paying job with easy hours is a lot easier > for those who are well educated to begin with. > > And for those who have managed to get a good > education but are struggling to pay off college > loans because they couldn't afford to pay > tuition out of pocket, investing substantial > amounts of time and money in additional training, > especially if they're supporting a family, is > going to be exceptionally difficult. > > Making sacrifices is fine, but you shouldn't > *have* to sacrifice family life in order to be > a spiritual teacher. That isn't good for your > teaching or your students, and it's distinctly > not good for your family. > > That's why the tantric path is the most appropriate if you want to become a spiritual teacher and have a family at the same time. That's what it was designed for. :)
