Introduction
Sadhana Forest is an international volunteer-based, non-profit organization focused on environmental renewal and sustainable living. Founded in 2003 by Yorit and Aviram Rozin, it has locations in Auroville, India, as well as projects in Haiti and Kenya. The project in Auroville aims to reforest the Tropical Dry Evergreen Forest and promote water conservation. Volunteers are expected to engage in "Seva," which translates to selfless service, for approximately 25-35 hours per week. This includes tasks such as planting, mulching, watering trees, maintaining the community area, and helping with community tasks like cooking and cleaning. While Sadhana Forest presents itself as a community built on compassion, health, and sustainability, my experience there revealed a starkly different reality.
Seeking healing and belonging after a past psychotic episode and fueled by my passion for mental health advocacy, I arrived at Sadhana Forest on January 17, 2025, with high hopes. The promise of community, sustainability, and an alternative lifestyle, reinforced by glowing testimonials and a captivating Instagram presence, drew me in. Articles like the one in Viva Plant magazine painted a picture of a transformative experience, and I even envisioned myself DJing at their upcoming Vegan Forest Festival. I planned to stay for two months, possibly even indefinitely. Sadly, my experience was far from the idyllic image portrayed, and after just nine days, I found myself packing my bags, unable to bear it any longer.
Initial Impressions and Emerging Cracks
The initial impression was undeniably positive. The water conservation efforts, compost toilets, and sustainable practices were impressive. The communal dorms were comfortable, the mud pool was a tranquil oasis, and I enjoyed some volunteer-led workshops, like the sound bath and cow connection session. The non-talent show also provided a moment of levity. The concept of an ecological, vegan community resonated deeply. However, cracks in the façade quickly began to appear. The forced greeting ritual, where everyone monotonously chanted "Kyle, welcome," felt cult-like and inauthentic. A pervasive sense of unease settled over me. Normally, travel brings me freedom and happiness, but at Sadhana, I felt downtrodden, afraid to speak my mind.
Red Flags and Control Issues
Instead of feeling like an individual, I felt like another cog in a machine, expected to follow along unquestioningly. The long-term volunteers maintained an almost robotic presence, a stark contrast to the ever-present smiles and laughter on their Instagram feed, which now seemed like a carefully curated façade, hiding the exhaustion and disillusionment felt by many. Conversations with other volunteers revealed a disturbing pattern: Aviram, the founder, seemed to favor those vulnerable to manipulation. Luke, a long-term volunteer, was described by some as "Aviram's lap dog," suggesting a dynamic of control and dependence. The irony wasn't lost on me that Luke was always busy with community tasks while Aviram remained aloof.
Numerous red flags emerged. Hygiene was questionable; the provided soap was ineffective, and I often felt generally unclean. Water usage was also contradictory, with volunteers hauling water long distances for bucket showers while large amounts were wasted cleaning floors. The strict meal-time routine, with its requirement to serve others before oneself, added mental strain after a day of physical labor. Limited electricity further contributed to a sense of isolation. Arbitrary rules, such as the mud pool restriction during visitor hours, lacked clear justification.
This rigid and uncompassionate atmosphere extended even to those who genuinely wanted to contribute. On a Sunday, when volunteers were asked to sign up for tasks, I volunteered to help with breakfast organization. However, when I started on Monday, I was met with a stressful and hostile environment. Long-term volunteers were rigid and critical, offering no guidance or support. This made me feel awful, and I ultimately decided not to continue with the task for the rest of the week. The experience left me feeling disillusioned and unappreciated.
Theft, Safety, and Deception
Food theft was rampant. A mother and child's peanut butter disappeared, and my own peanuts vanished from the designated storage area. When questioned, the project manager, Olga, first offered a vague excuse:
"Some things are in the kitchen manager's cabinet because they are processed or include white sugar. Everything will be returned when people leave. We couldn’t tell people because we didn’t know who it belonged to."
Later, when another volunteer directly asked about it, she outright denied knowing anything. It was clear she was lying. One volunteer confided in me that she once left her phone in the kitchen for five minutes, only to find it stolen upon returning.
One of the most disturbing accounts I heard involved a man caught taking inappropriate photos of women in the mud pool. Another volunteer shared their experience:
"Ahh, yeah so my last days were like that too but I was told to write positive in the review. There was apparently a person there who had come as a volunteer that time. And I had keenly observed him as his vibes weren't great. He snapped pictures of women in the mud pool and I caught him red-handed. Told the folks there but they were too secretive of the matter and told that they would internally talk and 'resolve.' It was 3 days, but he was not told to leave or anything:/ It gave me a trigger and made the last days not so great."
This "mud pool event" highlighted a severe lack of accountability and concern for volunteer safety. Despite being reported, management took no visible action, leaving the community uninformed and potentially unsafe.
Contradictions and Exploitation
For an organization that claims to be deeply rooted in sustainability, I was shocked to see the amount of food waste produced. Large quantities were thrown out daily, even though much of it could have been repurposed. While some of this waste was given to the cows, a significant portion was not suitable for them, and sometimes the waste was left to rot before it could be used. It was disheartening to witness this disregard for resources, especially given that many of the discarded items could have been creatively incorporated into meals.
There was also an odd contradiction in their approach to food sourcing—despite claiming to be mindful of environmental impact, they still consumed out-of-season fruits, which required extensive resources to cultivate and transport. And while they claim to be a community focused on sustainable food practices, they don't actually grow any of their own food. The justification given is that food is plentiful in Tamil Nadu, making it unnecessary to grow their own. However, this seems more like a convenient excuse to justify the 600 rupee daily contribution fee. If they were truly self-sufficient in food production, there would be no justification for charging volunteers.
The robotic Friday tour, mandatory plant-based propaganda film, and forced greeting ritual felt more like indoctrination than a welcome. Furthermore, there was a noticeable absence of local involvement. While there were many Indian volunteers, most came from far away, and I rarely encountered anyone from the local area. This disconnect was even brought up at the Tuesday sharing circle and the community Q&A, highlighting a missed opportunity for genuine community integration and collaboration.
The communal lunches felt emotionally detached, and the 5:30 AM morning circles, with their obligatory hugging, soon lost their authenticity. Rule enforcement was inconsistent, with long-term volunteers often exempt. Volunteers also reported being reprimanded for discussing politics, further limiting freedom of expression. The stated reasons for nighttime restrictions on movement felt like another layer of control.
The very name "Sadhana Forest" felt like a misnomer, a disingenuous appropriation of a term associated with spiritual practice. The reality of Sadhana Forest was far from the genuine pursuit of enlightenment; it felt more like a system built on control and exploitation.
Suppression and Gaslighting
Sadhana Forest actively suppresses individual expression and gaslights those who raise concerns. This is particularly potent in the context of Indian culture, where respect for elders and authority figures is deeply ingrained. Many Indian volunteers I spoke with came from backgrounds of abuse or were seeking refuge from societal pressures, making them particularly susceptible to exploitation. For some, Sadhana Forest was their first experience away from their hometowns and the control of their families. This newfound freedom, coupled with the cultural predisposition towards respecting authority, could create a situation where they are less likely to question or challenge the existing power structures, even when faced with concerning behavior. Furthermore, trapped in a cycle of unpaid labor and with limited resources, they may feel they have no other option but to remain silent and comply.
My own mental health deteriorated, contradicting the initial improvement I felt during a weekend without Seva. This was further evidenced by two incidents: the long-term volunteer who experienced vision problems from the rocket stoves and was reprimanded for refusing to use them, and the volunteer questioned for going out to dinner after sustaining an injury. Instead of acknowledging the potential health hazards and exploring alternative cooking methods, Aviram dismissed concerns about the stoves, demonstrating a lack of compassion and a refusal to take responsibility for the well-being of volunteers.
When volunteers suggested a sharing circle to discuss concerns, they were met with resistance. Management stated that there is already an organised sharing circle on a Tuesday, but there is no opportunity to discuss. The volunteer-led sharing circle echoed my own unspoken thoughts, but a long-term volunteer aggressively defended the system and was later overheard to have attended specifically to "spy."
Later, the two individuals who organized the sharing circle were asked to leave for speaking out, echoing similar accounts from other former volunteers. This created a sense of fear and self-censorship among the remaining volunteers. They were accused of creating a "toxic" environment, highlighting the project's intolerance of dissent.
I even have an audio recording of Luke fabricating a rule on the spot to justify expelling the volunteers who organized the sharing circle.
Transcribed Audio
00:00 Luke: Okay, so first I just want to share, we've received multiple complaints from multiple people about your workshop and the toxicity that you brought. So there's this and two, you're very dishonest with me. I
00:15 Luke: I ask very clearly if this is a workshop where you have challenges or anything wrong with Sadhana Forest, it's best to do it when I'm there so I can address everything, I can give the context.
Volunteer 1: But we will address it to you.
Luke: No, but you lied to me.
Volunteer 1: We still...
Luke: No, no, no. You said we want to share stories and have fun.
Volunteer 1: That's what we did.
Luke: And that's not what I heard from multiple people.
Volunteer 1: You can ask more people. That's exactly what we did.
Luke: No, no, no. It doesn't matter about more people. I asked multiple people who I very much trust. So if you...
00:45 Volunteer 1:...multiple people, how many? It's a different... and we did that and the full workshop, there were stories, there was fun, there was a lot of…
Luke: I'm not saying there wasn't fun, but you said the intention of your workshop…
Volunteer 1: Why didn't you come then?
Luke: Because I was in a meeting.
Volunteer 1: Well, we can do it again and we tell you exactly what we said, so...
Volunteer 2: We said something and then I was feeling maybe you would misunderstand, so I clarified that we don't know what we gonna talk...
01:15 Luke: I am saying she was dishonest with me, she said... I still...
Volunteer 1: No, no, no, I was honest with you, we still did stories, we still had fun, so no.
Luke: We can... we can move on from that. So if you want to have addressed any challenges, anything that you find troubling here, anything wrong, any problems, you can come speak to me or Aviram directly.. If you want to speak to anyone else, you'll have to leave the community. Come speak to us directly.
01:45 Volunteer 2: Pardon?
Luke: I'm telling you now. It's not written anywhere.
Volunteer 2: So you're gonna write it down?
Luke: No, no, no. I'm saying to you, because we've had multiple complaints. I really wanted to work with you. I had an amazing idea of things to do. So I feel very sad.
Volunteer 2: So you think in this case, anyone who do this kind of thing?
Luke: No, no. I have a trouble with people spreading toxic behavior to new volunteers that they were shocked that they came to this.
Volunteer 1: So we don't have freedom of expression?
Luke: No, no, you have freedom of expression...
02:15 Volunteer 1: So we don't have freedom of expression with anybody, we have to only talk to the team leaders?
Luke: Yeah, if it's anything related to Sadhana Forest, any problems that you have with what we're doing, because we want to resolve the issues. We don't want to spread toxic behavior.
Volunteer 1: Let's have this talk right now then. Yeah. So I feel like there's a hierarchy there.
Luke: There is a hierarchy.
Volunteer 1: And I feel that I'm belittled and I'm not being listened enough.
Luke: How do you feel like you're belittled?
02:45 Volunteer 1: Like I don't feel heard.
Luke: Can you give me an example, please?
Volunteer 1: Right now, I can't feel about anything because I'm not feeling safe with you because of the way that you were saying that I'm being dishonest and like, I don't feel safe.
Luke: So the multiple people that informed me about the talk, they said they, right from the beginning, there was no fun stories, there was no sharing, it was people complaining about different things happening. So if you understand, this is what I've heard and you told...
03:15...me that we'll be sharing fun stories and because we want to meet each other, you said we don't get the opportunity to get to know everyone. This is...
Volunteer 1: Yeah, but I... I wasn't the one who started with unpositive things.
Luke: But you were... the first thing you said was negative. No?
Volunteer 1: No, no, who said that?
Luke: I... I'm just assuming, um, that's... yeah, it could be wrong, but so you were talking about fun stories, the first thing you spoke about...
Volunteer 1: Yeah, and I didn't start with it, like there were other people who...
03:45...Why is it only us? It's not only us, like we conducted the circle, yes, but I just thought like…
Luke: I felt from what I've heard from multiple people that the intention of this was not... and do you stand by that the intention was this to... to share fun stories and to enjoy it, to get to know each other, or do you feel like it was more to address challenges people having?
Volunteer 1: Everything, it was about everything, and that's what happened.
Luke: So when I said if this is about to addressing challenges in the community...
04:15...You said no, no, this is about for us to share stories. And now you're saying it's everything.
Volunteer 1: But I'm not...
Luke: But you didn't say it's everything in there, right?
Volunteer 1: Stop, stop. I didn't predict what people would say.
Luke: Yeah, yeah, for sure.
Volunteer 1: Can I predict that?
Luke: No, no, of course not.
Volunteer 1: So people address their challenges...
Luke: So you're saying...
Volunteer 1: Would I tell them no, don't say anything like that?
Luke: But so you're saying you had no intention...
04:35...that this space would be a place for people to address challenges and problems they have in their circle?
Volunteer 1: They can say whatever they want, freedom of expression. It was about freedom of expression.
Luke: But how come when I said this, you said no, no, it's not like that?
Volunteer 1: What I said is that we don't get to talk and give feedback to the sharing circle, and I want this to be somewhere where we can give feedback, listen to each other, listen to stories and experiences. Wait, I said whether it's fun or not...
05:05 (Enter Volunteer 3)...You can join, because we are having problems, we are having some issues, because supposedly people are saying that it was very toxic. And it was just being honest.
Luke: Did you find it toxic?
05:18 Volunteer 3: What's the problem?
Luke: The discussion. We had multiple complaints from multiple people saying it was quite toxic. Did you find it quite toxic?
Volunteer 3: No, I didn't find it toxic.
Volunteer 2: Everybody has different opinions. Some people might feel toxic, but some people...
Volunteer 3: It ended on a really nice note.
Luke: No, no, I'm talking at the beginning. The beginning part.
Volunteer 1: If it was toxic, they could leave.
Volunteer 3: I wouldn't call it toxic.
Luke: Okay, talking about negative stuff.
Volunteer 3: It wasn't negative, actually. It was like something...
05:48...Everybody is in emotional... being me, things they might process deeply, some might not. So they were just sharing their own emotional, like how they felt in that situation. It wasn't... well, toxic.
Luke: Okay, okay, so that's fine. We can move on from that. So I just want to have a private conversation with you two, but I appreciate your feedback.
Volunteer 2: I thought he was also part of it.
Luke: Yeah, yeah, it's okay. I'm not here to talk to him.
06:18 Volunteer 1:...because we conducted the workshop.
Luke: Just from what I've heard from multiple people, I want to address this.
Volunteer 1: So they can come to us too, they can come here and tell us.
Luke: No, no, I want you to tell me what you're finding challenging.
Volunteer 2: So anyway, when we find challenges...
Luke: If I can just have a private conversation...
Volunteer 3: That's fine.
Luke: Thank you.
Volunteer 2: So, so you said now...
06:39...when anyone have challenges...
Luke: Come speak to me, please.
Volunteer 2: If we talk to you or Aviram, if we just talk to each other, we have to leave? This rule, you made it just now?
Luke: For you two.
Volunteer 1: So why?
Luke: Well, if other people were getting complaints that they are spreading this toxic energy in the community...
Volunteer 1: So that is not a democracy?
Luke: It's not a democracy here. When did we say this was a democracy? We are a hierarchy, we are not a democracy.
Volunteer 2: I know, I know, but then are you gonna inform this...
07:09...openly about we are like this? So then you know... if I knew this before, I wouldn't come. Like if it's written in the book, yeah...
Luke: I'm really... I'm really sorry that you felt misled in that. We're very happy to refund all your food contributions, yeah...
Volunteer 1: From the beginning?
Luke: If you would like to... if you want to take the money, then okay, no problem, yeah, both of you. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Volunteer 2: All the things, 20 days, yeah, no problem. Yeah, yeah, let's go. Okay, go.
Following their departure, a "community forum" was held, ostensibly to address concerns. However, it quickly became clear that Aviram was more interested in controlling the narrative than addressing the issues. He and Luke denied asking the volunteers to leave, despite evidence to the contrary. A new rule was seemingly created on the spot, prohibiting negative comments about Sadhana Forest.
During the forum, my questions about improving the process for raising concerns were met with defensiveness. Aviram's response – "We do not want people who have a problem with authority" – revealed a deep-seated authoritarian mindset. He dismissed concerns raised by a volunteer from the UK, essentially admitting he had no intention of changing anything.
Another volunteer raised a crucial point, questioning the very need for volunteers to hold a separate sharing circle to discuss negative experiences. They asked:
"Regardless of whether the sharing circle was toxic or not, or whether it should have involved management, don't you think the fact that volunteers are getting together to discuss their negative experiences shows red flags about Sadhana Forest? Are these problems things you are listening to and wish to work with?"
This question, which addressed the root of the issue, was met with a dismissive response. Aviram simply reiterated the "if you're not happy, leave" mantra, further highlighting his lack of accountability and unwillingness to address the systemic problems within the organization.
Aviram openly stated that Sadhana Forest is not a community, claiming that "democracy does not work" and advocating for a tribal structure. His claim of wishing "nothing but happiness" for the expelled volunteers felt insincere, especially as he sat on a solar panel, cracking it beneath him, seemingly indifferent to the damage he was causing. This lack of concern for the community was further highlighted during the Q&A session when one of the expelled volunteers returned and attempted to ask Aviram a question. Aviram became visibly angry, his carefully constructed mask of benevolence slipping, and refused to answer the question in front of the crowd, insisting on a private conversation instead. This refusal to address the concerns openly and honestly further eroded any remaining trust in his leadership and intentions.
Financial Opacity and Exploitation
Conversations with other Aurovillians confirmed my suspicions: Sadhana Forest was widely seen as a commercial venture. This was further reinforced when I learned that another volunteer at a different Sadhana Forest project had inquired about the project's donors, only to be met with a refusal. I, too, sent an email requesting financial transparency and a list of donors, but received no reply, despite their prompt response to my initial volunteering inquiry.
This lack of transparency raises serious questions about the organization's financial practices and motivations. The "gift economy" they preach feels disingenuous when volunteers are essentially paying for the privilege of working. It seems likely that the Friday tour and free meal are a calculated tactic to lure people into volunteering and contributing financially.
A Stifling and Paradoxical Environment
The rigid work schedule, with its numerous unreasonable rules and lack of incentive for efficiency, felt more akin to a strict correctional facility than a community. This was further compounded by the paradoxical treatment of children and adult volunteers. While "unschooled" children were allowed freedom and flexibility, adult volunteers were subjected to rigid structures and treated like children in an institutional setting. This created a pervasive atmosphere of control and disempowerment.
Almost everyone at Sadhana seemed to unconsciously adopt a managerial role, constantly discussing work tasks and schedules, highlighting the pervasive work-centric culture. This left little room for personal growth, reflection, or genuine connection. Burnout was rampant, and the lack of true leisure time created a sense of exhaustion and disillusionment.
A Pattern of Exploitation
Similar patterns of control, lack of transparency, and disregard for volunteer well-being have been observed at other Sadhana Forest locations, including the branch in Kenya. Volunteers there reported financial opacity, labor exploitation, and a lack of genuine community building. The project director's dismissive attitude and the rushed, superficial approach to tree planting further underscored the focus on image over impact. Here are some experiences shared by volunteers at the Kenya location:
"Volunteers paid a daily fee but were given little transparency on where the money went. Tasks were labor-intensive, and community-building was non-existent. The project director dismissed concerns and provided no real leadership, leaving volunteers feeling lost and unsupported."
"Tree planting was supposed to be the focus, but the majority of our time was spent cooking or doing unrelated tasks. When we finally planted trees, it was rushed, and the local community was barely involved, making it clear that this was more about image than impact."
These accounts further underscore the systemic issues within the Sadhana Forest organization.
Harmful to Veganism and Sustainability
I believe Sadhana Forest is actually harmful to the veganism movement. True change requires community and compassion, not individualistic efforts driven by ego. Sadhana Forest's focus on control and exploitation undermines the potential for positive change.
Instead of fostering a welcoming and supportive environment for those interested in veganism and sustainable living, Sadhana Forest alienates and demoralizes. It feels more like a business venture, with volunteers as a source of cheap labor, generating profit and stroking Aviram's ego, rather than a genuine effort to promote sustainability and community.
This is particularly disheartening considering the potential Sadhana Forest holds. It's a small drop in a very large ocean, but with over 17,000 volunteers passing through its doors, the impact could be immense. Many of these volunteers are not vegan, and the opportunity to inspire them to embrace compassion and make more conscious choices is far greater than simply planting trees. Imagine if every volunteer left with a positive experience, feeling empowered and motivated to incorporate vegan principles and eco-conscious habits into their lives. The ripple effect could be tremendous. However, Sadhana Forest's current model squanders this potential, prioritizing control and exploitation over genuine community building and education. This not only harms the individuals involved but also hinders the progress of the veganism movement as a whole.
Final Thoughts
Sadhana Forest, in my view, is a personal vanity project masquerading as a noble cause. It exploits free labor under the guise of Seva, prioritizing Aviram's ego over genuine community well-being. It could have been a powerful movement, but instead, it operates like a dystopian reflection of capitalism. I left disillusioned and drained, questioning the compassion of a project that felt so profoundly uncompassionate. My advice to anyone considering volunteering at Sadhana Forest: Do your research, read the critical reviews, and ask yourself if a project rooted in compassion actually feels compassionate.
It's clear that Sadhana Forest, despite its initial appeal, has devolved into a rigid, controlling, and exploitative environment. While it may have once been a genuine community, it now prioritizes profit and control over the well-being of its volunteers and the ideals it claims to uphold. This raises serious questions about the sustainability of such a model and its impact on the individuals who dedicate their time and resources to its cause.
Future Implications
Myself, and others will be contacting festivals and Viva charity to publish an article on the truth of Sadhana Forest. Watch this space.
Reviews used in the article:
Articles:
Thank you for taking the time to share your experiences and research Sadhana Forest more deeply. I too felt the organisation to be disingenuous and not interested in valid criticism from the volunteers who wanted to help.