personal beliefs

[Guest guest]

Some health aspects of religious daoism have always fascinated me and

in fact drew me to the field. The health and immortality quest, the

maintenance of youthful vigor, the supernatural abilities, etc.

however many of these practices have turned out to be ill advised when

self-prescribed by those without actual chinese medical training. for

example, many martial arts gurus advise excessive use of tonics for

young people. this does make one fierce in combat, but also shortens

one's life according to the scholarly tradition. the alteration of

consciousness through internal alchemy has also been a keen interest

since undergrad days. any or all of these things might have value of

either physical, psychological or spiritual significance. I just don't

think any of them are inherent parts of chinese medical practice. I

think exercise and meditation benefit everyone, but whether one adopts

a spiritual worldview has no effect on treatment outcomes, IMO.

 

So while I recommend meditation, yoga and qi gong to most patients, its

for the physiological benefits, not for their spiritual cultivation.

If people want to be publicly spiritual, it does not matter to me. But

if I chose to advise and guide in this area, I would do it knowing that

healing the soul does not necessarily dovetail with healing the

bodymind complex. When one chooses to be a priest, one has made a

choice. Mine was to relieve suffering in this world, not provide

ultimate salvation. I think it is a mistake to make this eastern

spirituality a central part of our education, especially in america

where religion is supposed to be a personal matter, not one

institutionalized in any way. It is a deeply offensive idea to me to

suggest that there is a spiritual philosophy at the core of chinese

culture that informs the medicine in a fundamental way and that we must

either embrace this religion (of balancing body mind and spirit, yadda,

yadda) or we are heretics to the true ideals of the field. Perhaps it

is the spiritualists who truly defile this great secular tradition.

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

FAX:

 

 

[Guest guest]

You go, guy!

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

Whew!

 

This is a long post, so I am going to try to reply simply, and to the

point as to not belabor the subject excessively.

 

1) I agree with you on philosophical daoism vs. religious daoism. I'm

with Lao Zi on this. Having said that, the contributions of daoism to

Chinese medicine may be greater than you indicate here.

 

2) I agree with you that Chinese medicine is not a religion. I don't

support, for example, treating 'spirits of points' to get results

based on the point names, many of which are mistranslated and

misinterpreted by followers of Jack Worsley (in my opinion). I also

don't look at five phases (Five Elements) as a spiritual doctrine in

Chinese medicine, determining the basis of human personalities. I see

it as a philosophical and clinical tool, the same as six channel, yin

and yang, eight principle, or four aspect pattern differentiation.

 

3) We are digressing on the issue of spirituality, because we are

defining it differently. You say you took up medicine to help relieve

suffering. What can be more spiritual than that? Spirituality is not

about esoteric practices, it is about being as fully human as possible.

It is not owned by religions, and it doesn't sacrifice this world for

the sake of the next one. In this sense, I conceive of Chinese

medicine as spiritual, and that practicing Chinese medicine can be part

of one's spiritual development. Not that it is a spiritual path in and

of itself, but that its practice can be a great instrument for

developing one's humanity.

 

If you want to call it something else, that is fine with me.

 

 

P.S: Where do you see Eastern spirituality as a core focus of CM

education? It certainly isn't at PCOM.

 

 

On Apr 20, 2004, at 11:26 AM, wrote:

 

> Some health aspects of religious daoism have always fascinated me and

> in fact drew me to the field. The health and immortality quest, the

> maintenance of youthful vigor, the supernatural abilities, etc.

> however many of these practices have turned out to be ill advised when

> self-prescribed by those without actual chinese medical training. for

> example, many martial arts gurus advise excessive use of tonics for

> young people. this does make one fierce in combat, but also shortens

> one's life according to the scholarly tradition. the alteration of

> consciousness through internal alchemy has also been a keen interest

> since undergrad days. any or all of these things might have value of

> either physical, psychological or spiritual significance. I just don't

> think any of them are inherent parts of chinese medical practice. I

> think exercise and meditation benefit everyone, but whether one adopts

> a spiritual worldview has no effect on treatment outcomes, IMO.

 

 

>

> So while I recommend meditation, yoga and qi gong to most patients, its

> for the physiological benefits, not for their spiritual cultivation.

> If people want to be publicly spiritual, it does not matter to me. But

> if I chose to advise and guide in this area, I would do it knowing that

> healing the soul does not necessarily dovetail with healing the

> bodymind complex. When one chooses to be a priest, one has made a

> choice. Mine was to relieve suffering in this world, not provide

> ultimate salvation. I think it is a mistake to make this eastern

> spirituality a central part of our education, especially in america

> where religion is supposed to be a personal matter, not one

> institutionalized in any way. It is a deeply offensive idea to me to

> suggest that there is a spiritual philosophy at the core of chinese

> culture that informs the medicine in a fundamental way and that we must

> either embrace this religion (of balancing body mind and spirit, yadda,

> yadda) or we are heretics to the true ideals of the field. Perhaps it

> is the spiritualists who truly defile this great secular tradition.

[Guest guest]

You say you took up medicine to help relieve

> suffering. What can be more spiritual than that?

 

Z'ev,

 

This rhetorical question seems to me an example of highly questionable

logic. What is your definition of " spiritual? " A desire to alleviate

suffering can be an expression of humanism pure and simple. I see no

semantic, philosophical, or theological basis for your assertion that

compassion is necessarily spiritual. Your response reminds me of Alice

in Wonderland: It is spiritual because I say it is.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

In Jewish tradition, transmitted for generations from Mt. Sinai,

compassion is a gift from G-d. The potential for compassion is built

into us by the Creator, who in modern vernacular is the 'master

designer' of the human being. When it awakens in us, our spiritual

potential is awakened as well.

 

Spiritual in Jewish tradition is simply the potential for a human being

to grow and get more in touch with their soul/spirit. Spirit is a

non-physical aspect of humanity that is a spark of the infinite

Creator, but is intimately identified with the body in this world.

 

What do you think is the source of compassion in a humanistic point of

view?

 

 

On Apr 21, 2004, at 7:49 AM, Bob Flaws wrote:

 

> You say you took up medicine to help relieve

>> suffering. What can be more spiritual than that?

>

> Z'ev,

>

> This rhetorical question seems to me an example of highly questionable

> logic. What is your definition of " spiritual? " A desire to alleviate

> suffering can be an expression of humanism pure and simple. I see no

> semantic, philosophical, or theological basis for your assertion that

> compassion is necessarily spiritual. Your response reminds me of Alice

> in Wonderland: It is spiritual because I say it is.

>

> Bob

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

On Apr 21, 2004, at 11:49 AM, wrote:

 

> What do you think is the source of compassion in a humanistic point of

> view?

 

I know you're talking to Bob Flaws on this one, but I figured I'm

flawed, so I can chime in too. ; )

 

I look at mammals and am amazed at our ability to allow another being

to suck out our jinye for its own nourishment. A baby is a total

parasite that offers nothing in return but MAYBE some funding for a

nicer nursing home than Medicare provides in our declining years. This

is of course a rather cold interpretation of what's really going on,

but it is from that hard wired desire to feed, cloth, and care for our

offspring that compassion is found, at least the maternal kind.

 

Seeing your own pain in another and treating it accordingly doesn't

require a higher power beyond the divinity in our own hearts. Maybe

we're just using our teat suckling nature and applying it to our

patients. Perhaps it is something more, I don't know. I've met saints

who were atheists and daily read about religious leaders who could

learn more from their flock than their own life example.

 

Compassion seems to be a choice that we make, or perhaps a part of our

nature that we chose to use or not. It is not amplified by G-d nor

taken away from those who have no relationship with The Almighty. It

just doesn't seem to matter and this is the crux of it all for me.

Nothing seems to matter.

 

Be a good person, work hard, do what the Good Book suggests, and die in

poverty. When its all said and done, I do as best I can with as much

ethics as I can muster (imperfect as they may be), only because it is

my nature, not because I'm going to get something from it in the

afterlife, or because G-d asks this of me. It is who I am.

 

-al.

 

--

 

Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

-Adlai Stevenson

[Guest guest]

Al,

These are excellent points and questions. What I've decided to do is

send my responses to you personally, rather than on CHA, as I don't

know if this is an appropriate discussion at this point. If others on

the list are interested in continuing this, and if this is OK with you

let me know.

 

 

On Apr 21, 2004, at 12:55 PM, Al Stone wrote:

 

>

> I look at mammals and am amazed at our ability to allow another being

> to suck out our jinye for its own nourishment. A baby is a total

> parasite that offers nothing in return but MAYBE some funding for a

> nicer nursing home than Medicare provides in our declining years. This

> is of course a rather cold interpretation of what's really going on,

> but it is from that hard wired desire to feed, cloth, and care for our

> offspring that compassion is found, at least the maternal kind.