When Socrates was put on trial in Athens for corrupting the youth, part of his defense was that he never requested payment for attending to the concerns of other people and encouraging them to live a more virtuous, examined life; instead he came to people individually "like a father or elder brother" (Plato, Apology, 31b), acting out of care for their souls. In a little-noted passage in Nicomachean Ethics IX.1 (1164a33-b6), Aristotle seems to expand on this line of thinking. First he observes that in relationships founded on excellence of character - such as, say, the relationship of parent to child or elder sibling to younger sibling - the parties engage in good deeds toward each other and return favors through their own free choice and mutual commitment. Drawing an analogy between interpersonal love and the love of wisdom, he then says:
And it seems to be this way too with those who have shared in philosophy, for its worth is not measured in money and no honor could be of equal weight with it, but perhaps it is enough, as with gods and one's parents, to give what is possible.
If indeed Aristotle offered wise counsel to the people with whom he interacted philosophically (see my notes on Nicomachean Ethics X.9), it seems likely that he did this work as a gift and that, just as with Socrates before him, he did not ask to be paid - for wisdom is literally priceless and (like love and friendship) stands outside the monetary economy. However, those who benefited from his attentive care might have returned the favor by "giving what is possible", for instance by bestowing gifts upon him or honoring him in distinctive ways. Indeed, in the generation after Aristotle, Epicurus seems to have had a similar attitude, as captured in Vatican Saying #32: "Honoring a sage is itself a great good to the one who honors." Although I haven't looked, I think we could find similar quotes among the ancient Confucians, Taoists, Buddhists, Hindus, and Stoics.
Nowadays we find this way of thinking to be quite foreign, even impertinent: how dare you consider your services to be above remuneration, as if you're some kind of godlike sage? Given that Socrates referred to the people in his circle as friends (not students since he felt he had nothing to teach), the analogy of friendship might be more welcome. For instance, you don't pay a friend to meet you for lunch so that you can talk through a tough situation you're facing, yet sometime afterward (though not in a quid pro quo manner) you might give your friend an extra special gift. I suspect this is how many of the ancient philosophers conceived of the counsel and instruction they gave.
(Cross-posted at philosopher.coach.)
FOR FURTHER EXPLORATION