Western paradox—you can't give it away—if it doesn't cost,
no one wants it—if you give it to them anyway, they’ll pay anyway, and resent
it!
There is no mendicant tradition in the west—there is only homelessness
and social welfare—everything personal is a monetary transaction.
Giving something away in the west implies an economic status
of homelessness and welfare—not a spiritual status of mendicant and
householder.
Those who automatically trash the unfortunate economic side
of spirituality in the west misunderstand the hard facts of a materialist west.
I'm a nobody giving away a book & already i can see the
associations involved in the transaction. Nobody wants to be accused of
homelessness.
Re-evaluate the associative values of said book, he said,
working out on twitter an experience he had last night, $7 richer but nothing
more.
So Chopra has it right! Disregarding absolute quality of
teachings, he is the mendicant allowing householders to fund his spiritual
research.
And the scientific guru-basher has it wrong—not only is its
higher technical language occluding in itself but its economics are
materialist.
Mendicant-householder economics is a spiritual
one, benefiting both parties—the mendicant in research and the householder’s
instant karma.
