Theos-Talk Archives (July 2002 Message tt00151)

ramadoss@gbronline.com wrote:
> In all the meetings I have attended in Texas Branches of TS(Adyar), none of
> them charged anything for their meetings for the last 25 years I had
> personally known. May be other states can learn something from the
> experience of Texas branches.

Well, the New York Branch doesn't charge for its meetings, either. But,
as I mentioned before, when we charged little or nothing for our
classes, we got pretty much only people who cared for little more than
the money (we had a 10 week meditation class, taught by Dr. Janet
Macrae; we charged $25 for the whole class, and had students come up and
say, "I can't make this week's class. Can I have $2.50 back, please?"
When we brought the class price up to the local prices, we had not only
far more people sign up, but these people were more interested in
learning than saving a few pennies (and, for those who could not afford
to go but really wanted to learn, we made arrangements). 

Money is not some magickal substance that corrupts all who touch it. It
is a symbol. In a proper exchange, it balances out karma on both sides.
In a New York setting, giving classes for free or at cost would end up
creating karma; by charging a reasonable fee, the karma created is
minimized.

Let me give you another example. According to a New York friend who
worked at Texas Instruments for some time, where he was in Texas, if
people were angry, they would speak loudly and in an animated manner. If
they were trying to be nice, they would speak softly, slowly and
enunciate every word. In New York, if people are interested in what the
other person is saying, they would speak loudly and in an animated
manner. If they were really angry and trying to show that they were
holding their temper in, they would speak softly, slowly, and enunciate
every word. Two people who might otherwise be enjoying each other's
company could easily get into a major fight, simply because the customs
of one area are being misapplied in another, or misunderstood to one
from another culture.

There was a movie called "Do the Right Thing." It involved a pizzeria
in a black community. There is a scene which is overlooked by most
critics, but which I consider to be part of the key to everything that
happens in the movie. There is a yuppie-type who owns a brownstone in
the community (played by John Savage). There is a method of conflict
resolution in the neighborhood, clearly shown, where both parties yell
threats at each other, then walk away. When the yuppie type accidentally
steps on somebody's foot, he is clearly aware of the method, and the
conflict is resolved. Yet, when the pizzeria owner is confronted with
the same method, he clearly has no understanding of what is going on,
takes the threats seriously, triggering off the events that result in
the disastrous climax. The point made is that here is this newcomer and
here is this person who has been in the neighborhood since there WAS as
neighborhood, yet the interloper is already part of the neighborhood,
while the person who has been there since day one has NEVER been part of
the neighborhood. 

Bart Lidofsky