The Principle of the Wholeness of the Being

A Who You Are entry published on December 18, 2009


The human being is global.

There are at least two different ways of understanding the human being, in our society.
One of them likes to cut the human being in parts;
The other likes to see the human being as a whole, in its integrity, as one.

People who think the human being is nothing but a sum of parts often play different roles when they’re at home or at work, when they are at the church or amongst friends, when they are talking to their subordinates or to their bosses.
This cleavage is driven by fear and it reinforces duality and, hence, scarcity, fear itself and pain.

How can you be two different persons in different moments, in different places?
And what will you do if you, your boss, your subordinates, your family, your friends and the priest meet?
Who will you be?

Creating so much separation in your life kills you!
It’s your ego that is in control.

We often hear about conventional modern medicine and alternative medicine (the traditional sort, mostly).
Does this separation make sense to you?

It is true that some “modernphysicians” like to separate the individual in pieces to address their illness (I will call this the localized approach) but you also have other modern physicians who prefer to see the individual as a whole.
And it is also true that some “alternative therapists” like to separate the individual in pieces but others prefer to see him as a whole.

Those people who play different roles according to where and with whom they are, tend to prefer the localized medical approach, be it alternative or modern.
They are so insecure that they don’t want anybody to be aware of their fragilities.

They are afraid to show all they are.
They just can’t vibrate genuinely.

I am a supporter of those that look at the human being as a whole.
In my life, I’ve experienced the diagnosis of “global modern doctors”, of “localized modern doctors”, of “global alternative therapists” and of “localized alternative therapists”.
I can tell the difference.
I know now that I don’t like the “localized” approach, be it alternative or modern.

Actually, I think that in the global approach, there is not a conventional modern medicine and than an alternative medicine. They are complementary. They need each other.

If I have a headache , taking some pills will help me getting rid of the symptom, but it won’t eliminate the cause.

If I have a headache, taking some plants or herb teas will also help me get rid of the symptom, but it won’t eliminate the cause.

Treating your headache with an aspirin or with any other chemical drug works probably as much as treating it with herb teas or plants.

It alters the pain, indeed.
But none of these approaches solve the causes.

The big advantage of herb teas and plants is they do not cause any collateral damage.

But none of these therapies addressed the real cause.

From my point of view, the problem with any localized therapy is that it only looks at the problem.
The localized physicians often specialize in illnesses and symptoms, but not in health.

Health specialists never forget the human being is whole.

Health specialists must not be considered similar to illness specialists.

Can you tell the difference?

« Will Faith Save the World? Workshop in Estoril - Portugal - January 29, 30 & 31 2010 »

No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

© Copyright by Luís Martins Simões, developed by RUPEAL