Teachers and political opinions

[Iskote]

On 4/22/2021 at 2:28 AM, Vajra Fist said:

I've run into a couple of teachers from qigong systems that I'm curious about, and from a quick look at their social media profiles, both are strongly anti-vaccine, anti-PC, anti-mask.

 

Do you really want to learn from a qigong teacher who is anti-reality?   

To each their own, however. 

 

[carcinise]

On 4/23/2021 at 7:42 AM, SirPalomides said:

I think there are some issues where taking an attitude of “the truth is somewhere in the middle” is dishonest, irresponsible, cowardly, and beneficial to oppressors. There are some situations where a supposedly niche or extreme position is actually the sanest one to take. I’d rather everyone make their positions clear than affect a vapid impartiality.

 

Quoting this because it strikes me as the heart of the issue. Simply put, when we are presented with 2 viewpoints, we are conditioned to believe that "balance", "equanimity", or "moderation" lie at the center. That in and of itself can mislead, as the 2 viewpoints can be so far removed from reality that merely considering them is enough to trap you in delusion.

 

Forgive the crude metaphor, but it basically amounts to this: If group 'A' wants to selfishly exploit 50 people and group 'B' wants to selfishly exploit 100 people, the most "enlightened" course of action is not to compromise by selfishly exploiting 75 people. This should be obvious to anyone, but treating others with skillful kindness and compassion is a better course of action than hurting and using them for selfish reasons. But if the gradient of exploiting 50-100 people is taken as the only matter of course, treating people kindly is not even an option.

 

 

 

 

 

If this comes off as argumentative, I apologize, but I think that the way this question is framed is not constructive. Basically, the "correct" path is simply correct. Whether it is extremely political or not at all, is something that happens after-the-fact. One can practice non-attachment and engage in politics (Or anything else) simply by acting purely and not engaging more than is necessary.

 

To end, sometimes people need to be political because their lives depend on it. Sometimes, merely existing is enough to politicize a person's life. If you were a Palestinian, you would have no choice but to engage with politics. We live in the physical world, which means that there is work to be done and delusions to let go of in the physical world. As practitioners, we should be wary of mundane delusions, which don't require amazing siddhis or spiritual practice to work through, as my personal experience tells me that even remarkable seekers and talents can fall prey to them.

[Toni]

The majority of qi gong teacher I know are also anti-mask and anti-vaccines

[Cleansox]

3 hours ago, Toni said:

The majority of qi gong teacher I know are also anti-mask and anti-vaccines

Add anti-western medicine, and that would sum up the ones I know. 

[Toni]

3 hours ago, Cleansox said:

Add anti-western medicine, and that would sum up the ones I know. 

Yes, correct

[doc benway]

That’s an interesting observation.

The majority of Chinese  nationals and Chinese Americans I come into contact with have far more confidence in allopathic medicine than TCM and qigong. I say allopathic because it’s certainly not limited to the west. Allopathic health care is very sophisticated in much of Asia.

[Master Logray]

1 hour ago, steve said:

That’s an interesting observation.

The majority of Chinese  nationals and Chinese Americans I come into contact with have far more confidence in allopathic medicine than TCM and qigong. I say allopathic because it’s certainly not limited to the west. Allopathic health care is very sophisticated in much of Asia.

 

In fact TCM is dying in China itself, though qigong is very popular among the aged or middle aged.

[forestofclarity]

3 hours ago, Master Logray said:

 

In fact TCM is dying in China itself, though qigong is very popular among the aged or middle aged.

 

The whole medical thing is an ongoing issue for me. Personally, I don't trust modern medicine-- and not because of the science behind it, but rather the rushed aspect and over-reliance in my mind on drugs and surgery. I also don't think most doctors take the time to properly assist us with resolving issues. Of course, it is difficult given the complexity of the human body. Finally, it is so body centered. 

 

TCM, from what I can tell, is actually fairly new having largely been modernized by the Party in the 1950's/1960's to provide cheap health care to a large population. I wonder how much efficacy got lost in the process. It is one thing for a practicing qigong/neigong person with first hand experience of the internals to use it in medicine, but I'm not so sure about the modern sterilized version. In addition, I hear that some aspects, such as pulse reading, are too hard for many people to learn and apply properly. In addition, it is very holistic, so I doubt the quick treatment model is the way to go. 

 

Of course, there is the modern medicine version of acupuncture, which cuts out even more and essentially reduces the whole thing to poking pins in bodies. 

 

There are certainly a lot of TCM schools/doctors/practitioners in my neck of the woods, but if I had to guess, I'd bet like qigong most of what is out there is fairly worthless. 

 

[doc benway]

At least traditional approaches emphasize and support personal responsibility and cultivation of health. Allopathic diagnosis and treatment is traditionally far too focused on the illness and the body, as you say, although that is changing (at a glacial pace).Too little support for the mind and energy. Too little support for healthy lifestyle and personal power and responsibility. Both have their roles in the modern world for me. Sadly it is challenging to make the most of either, albeit for different reasons.

[liminal_luke]

...

Edited May 13, 2021 by liminal_luke

[Cleansox]

14 hours ago, steve said:

That’s an interesting observation.

The majority of Chinese  nationals and Chinese Americans I come into contact with have far more confidence in allopathic medicine than TCM and qigong. 

I think it is, at least partly, a psychological defence mechanism. When someone immerses him/herself in a tradition coming from another culture, it is very to facilitate that by dissociating oneself from the cultural context one has left. 

 

That would sort of explain why Bruce Frantzis once stated on a seminar that "allopathic medicine studies anatomy while TCM studies the living body", as if physiology isn't a major subject in allopathic medicine. 

 

Damo Mitchell basically does the same mistake in Heavenly Streams, stating that allopathic medicine "understands living creatures as being comprised of numerous systems such as the respiratory system, the nervous system and so on. The Daoist view of the body differs in that it considers there only to be one system; this is the system of the body." 

 

In reality, both systems have in them to see Branches and Roots, and it depends on the skill and knowledge of the practitioner which level the treatment is based on. 

[Master Logray]

19 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

 

The whole medical thing is an ongoing issue for me. Personally, I don't trust modern medicine-- and not because of the science behind it, but rather the rushed aspect and over-reliance in my mind on drugs and surgery. I also don't think most doctors take the time to properly assist us with resolving issues. Of course, it is difficult given the complexity of the human body. Finally, it is so body centered. 

 

TCM, from what I can tell, is actually fairly new having largely been modernized by the Party in the 1950's/1960's to provide cheap health care to a large population. I wonder how much efficacy got lost in the process. It is one thing for a practicing qigong/neigong person with first hand experience of the internals to use it in medicine, but I'm not so sure about the modern sterilized version. In addition, I hear that some aspects, such as pulse reading, are too hard for many people to learn and apply properly. In addition, it is very holistic, so I doubt the quick treatment model is the way to go. 

 

Of course, there is the modern medicine version of acupuncture, which cuts out even more and essentially reduces the whole thing to poking pins in bodies. 

 

There are certainly a lot of TCM schools/doctors/practitioners in my neck of the woods, but if I had to guess, I'd bet like qigong most of what is out there is fairly worthless. 

 

 

One of the major reasons for the dying of Chinese medicine is due to the education system.  Students studying Chinese medicine in the China universities also study western medicine.  They have the qualification to practise western medicine.   In China, western medicine pays much better, not from salary but by other channels.  The result is many Chinese medicine doctors are not confident to write a full prescription of various ingredients.   So there is a loss in quantity and quality.  The original aim of modernizing traditional medicine is good, the integration of Chinese and western medicine is excellent.  But the result is not as expected.

 

The same thing happened in Hong Kong.  In the past there was very little control over Chinese herbal medicine.  Then it was decided to build a modern Chinese medicine hub, with safety to the people using them.   So it comes with all the requirements like laboratory tests and so on.  Before the change, there were roughly 15,000 kinds of pills, oils.  After that only a very small portion get registered.  Most of these are lost forever and some of the more popular ones claim to be "supplements" or "health foods" from now on and changing the look to reflect their new identities.  It is a pity as there could be some very potent medicines. 

 

It would seem sometimes something is better to be left alone and may be left rotten, as any help would hasten its demise.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Limahong]

14 hours ago, Cleansox said:

 

In reality, both systems have in them to see Branches and Roots, and it depends on the skill and knowledge of the practitioner which level the treatment is based on. 

 

 

Hi Cleansox,

 

System Thinking?

 

 

 

- Anand

 

 

[Limahong]

22 hours ago, steve said:

 

Too little support for the mind and energy. Too little support for healthy lifestyle and personal power and responsibility. 

Both have their roles in the modern world for me. Sadly it is challenging to make the most of either, albeit for different reasons.

 

 

Hi steve,

 

Enlightening.

Thank you.

 

- Anand

 

 

[Limahong]

3 hours ago, Master Logray said:

 

The original aim of modernizing traditional medicine is good, the integration of Chinese and western medicine is excellent.  But the result is not as expected.

 

 

Hi Master Logray,

 

East plus West

As ONE - best?

 

3 hours ago, Master Logray said:

 

It would seem sometimes something is better to be left alone and may be left rotten, as any help would hasten its demise.

 

 

 

 

 

- Anand

 

 

[Master Logray]

15 hours ago, Limahong said:

 

Hi Master Logray,

 

East plus West

As ONE - best?

 

 

 

If it is workable. 

[forestofclarity]

27 minutes ago, Master Logray said:

 

If it is workable. 

 

I am not sure that it is. It appears to me that Chinese medicine is very contextual and subjective. It depends on a thorough knowledge of internal states, is very personalized, and relies on a paradigm largely rejected by materialist culture. It would be one thing if people could move smoothly between two paradigms, but generally we take one as THE truth. 

 

So what you described above--- an attempt to integrate, but then modern medicine becoming dominant and Chinese medicine slipping away, is exactly what I would expect to happen. And look at what has happened when the West encountered meditation: it ends up stripping out the essential parts and reducing it down to relaxation or a way to more efficiently work for a company. 

 

 

[doc benway]

I have a bit more optimism about integration.

 

I am encouraged by so many university programs opening their minds and curricula to alternatives to a formerly sole and rigid allopathic focus. A good friend runs a very popular program of meditation and energy practices in a major national cancer center. Most hospitals in my area now offer mindfulness programs for self care of staff and providers.I see more and more people asking about alternatives to pharmacology and surgery. 

 

I see the Dharma taking root in the US, Central, and South America, Europe, and the former Soviet nations, among others. Teachings that were once too secret and completely out of reach for 99.999% of people are now available at the touch of a button to at least 60% of the world’s population - truly miraculous. Many of these teachers and Dharma centers have the goods and are healthy and growing. No doubt the world of avarice and opportunism is adopting what it can to forward its agenda in both East and West but that is to be expected.

 

I think when we look at the big picture, especially through the filter of media and hearsay, it can be frustrating and unpleasant. And certainly I am surrounded by frustration and ignorance daily. On the other hand, when I look at my personal connections and experience in the Dharma community and the expansion of open mindedness in my personal experience in the medical community, I feel lots of hope and enthusiasm. What’s important to me is more what I can personally do to improve the situation for myself and to those with whom I’m connected. Nothing more I can do. The more I focus on that, the less discouraged I feel about what seems to be impossible goals and frustrated expectations on a larger, more abstract scale.

 

[Master Logray]

4 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

 

I am not sure that it is. It appears to me that Chinese medicine is very contextual and subjective. It depends on a thorough knowledge of internal states, is very personalized, and relies on a paradigm largely rejected by materialist culture. It would be one thing if people could move smoothly between two paradigms, but generally we take one as THE truth. 

 

So what you described above--- an attempt to integrate, but then modern medicine becoming dominant and Chinese medicine slipping away, is exactly what I would expect to happen. And look at what has happened when the West encountered meditation: it ends up stripping out the essential parts and reducing it down to relaxation or a way to more efficiently work for a company. 

 

 

Completely agree with what you say.  Different Chinese medicine doctors could have vastly different views on the same patient, apply opposing remedies.  Nowadays the so-called integration frequently put Chinese medicine as one of the ancillary services like physiotherapy, dietitian, psychiatrist, pain management and so on - dissecting it and stripping out the usable parts. 

 

[Master Logray]

2 hours ago, steve said:

I have a bit more optimism about integration.

 

I am encouraged by so many university programs opening their minds and curricula to alternatives to a formerly sole and rigid allopathic focus. A good friend runs a very popular program of meditation and energy practices in a major national cancer center. Most hospitals in my area now offer mindfulness programs for self care of staff and providers.I see more and more people asking about alternatives to pharmacology and surgery. 

 

I see the Dharma taking root in the US, Central, and South America, Europe, and the former Soviet nations, among others. Teachings that were once too secret and completely out of reach for 99.999% of people are now available at the touch of a button to at least 60% of the world’s population - truly miraculous. Many of these teachers and Dharma centers have the goods and are healthy and growing. No doubt the world of avarice and opportunism is adopting what it can to forward its agenda in both East and West but that is to be expected.

 

 

What you mention as an example is life or spiritual progress.  Taoist cosmology, religion and philosophy can learn from the Dharma experience.  But Taoist medicine and Taoist inner alchemy are not exactly the same.  They are more functional and are basically a technique or a tool.   Tools and the system behind it don't mix too well with other systems.

[Cleansox]

2 hours ago, steve said:

I have a bit more optimism about integration.

 

I am encouraged by so many university programs opening their minds and curricula to alternatives to a formerly sole and rigid allopathic focus. /... ... /

I see more and more people asking about alternatives to pharmacology and surgery. 

 

I'm less optimistic about integrative medicine. 

 

I base that on having seen one integrative projekt follow another, both on a local and on a national level, for the last 25 years. 

 

It sounds like a good idea, but in my neck of the woods it is actually hard to get qualified therapists/teachers in a non-allopathic medical tradition to step in and work together with the system. 

Instead, it tends to be amateur night with whatever practice that is the flavour of the month. 

 

There are alternatives to pharmacology within the allopathic medical system, practitioners who can do spot-on treatments which affect both root and branch of a problem. 

 

The problem is that, again in my neck of the woods, the system rather pays one physician to prescribe pharma than 2-3 people (that would be the same cost for the system) who use behavioural medicine to change eating habits, basic exercise habits, and how to work with autonomic and emotional regulation. 

[Cleansox]

25 minutes ago, Master Logray said:

Different Chinese medicine doctors could have vastly different views on the same patient, apply opposing remedies. 

And when faced with a situation where a lab test doesn’t provide an answer, allopathic medicine mirrors this. 

[Limahong]

12 hours ago, Master Logray said:

 

If it is workable. 

 

 

 

When there is no...

 

 

... what is workable?

 

Will a general acceptance of the philosophical ONE be more inclusive?

 

And a rejection of it be more divisive?