RE: [BardonPraxis] Re: Application of Hermetic skills (Healing)

["Johan Pretorius" <africure@...>]

Dear Rawn,

Not many people would be able to see what the patients karma is.
And not all disease is due to karma. So what right do I have to go
around starting to guess about what is caused by karma, and what not.
I take it that you meant that Pranic Healing does not conform to
Universal Legality? I do not agree. The healer cannot interfere with
the patients karma. No amount of healing I do will cure a patient if
his illness is due to his karma that has not been worked out.Worrying
about incurring karmic debt in this case would be like worrying about
incurring karmic debt every time one steps on an ant by accident:)
And as a healer one discusses these issues with a patient. I talk to
the patient and try to determine the cause of the illness. It is discussed
that if certain changes are not made then the illness might recur. I teach
them
about introspection and meditation etc. It is up to the patient to then
change
and learn. I must add that if I know what the problem is, and I know that
the
patient is unwilling to learn and change, then I would consider withholding
treatment. I have recently had a case like that with family.

What I meant was that if someone pays me to heal them, and I take the money,
then I have to do the healing. If they do not have the money and they should
ask for healing, then I have the choice to heal or not. It is important that
the patient not be burdened financially. I have no problem to heal for free
all the time. I put the same effort in every healing session I do. My point
is that
if I do not ask money, then the bank will repossess my car, I could not buy
fuel to go heal,
and my son and I would die of hunger:)
I did not seek support for my view, or care if anyone wants to pass
judgment:)
I just stated a point of view:)

I just wanted to repeat that I was in no way implying that TMO WG has
anything but the
best and most noble intensions.

My post are not meant to criticize or insult. These are my views now. They
may or may not change in the future:)
I do hope that those reading our posts will ponder these issues for
themselves.
Especially those in modern medicine:)

I thank you for your kindness and great replies Rawn.
You always make me think:)

Best Regards

Johan

-----Original Message-----
From: Rawn Clark [mailto:rawnclark@...]
Sent: 11 April 2004 07:03
To: BardonPraxis@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [BardonPraxis] Re: Application of Hermetic skills (Healing)


Dear Johan,

>> I too have taken up Pranic Healing, and will soon be a registered
Pranic Healer and plan to do it full time. <<

Good for you. :)

>> First I would like to say that I do not think that Karmic debt is a
problem for a healer. If I work on a patient I do so with
loving-kindness and compassion. If the patients Karma is such that he
must die, I will not be able to heal him at any rate. At the most I will
be able to ease suffering. Karmic debt will then be positive for me. <<

We fear disease and fear witnessing another suffer, so we tend to think
of illness and suffering as a negative things that must be obliterated
as soon as possible and by whatever means available. However, from a
perspective of Universal Legality, illness is a gift that is meant to
teach us an important karmic lesson that we have not been able to learn
in the absence of disease. A healer interferes with a patient's karma
the moment they remove the symptoms of disease without assuring that the
patient does indeed learn the lesson that the disease was meant to teach
them. If the patient does not learn the karmic lesson then what the
"healer" has done is taken away an opportunity for the patient's growth.
That specific opportunity that the "healer" has taken away was the most
appropriate way that was available for the patient to learn their karmic
lesson. This means that the patient will still have to learn that
lesson, either by other means or by a recurrence of the same disease
that the "healer" has just treated.

>From a Legalistic perspective, true healing occurs when the subject has
learned the karmic lesson that the disease is intended to teach. So in
effect, when only the symptoms of disease are eliminated and the lesson
is thus avoided (albeit, temporarily) the evolution of the patient has
been slowed or diverted. This does incur a karmic debt for the
"healer".

>> My charging money, and your TMO group not accepting money is less
about philosophy, and more about practicality. <<

To my mind, issues of practicality are where questions of philosophy are
the most important. Claims of practicality should not be used as an
excuse to ignore philosophy. :) This would be the same as saying that
the ends justify the means.

>> I have spent a long time pondering the subject, and I have now
started to
charge money for healing. My fee is much less than other healers, and if
the patient cannot afford, I do it for free. Most of my patients have a
hunger for spiritual advancement, and I do sometimes spend hours with
them, and I feel strongly that I cannot receive money for that. For me
to be a great healer I have
to heal on a regular basis. By that I mean full time. And working on my
own
progress is also a full time affair. I need not say more:) As healer I
am rendering a service, and am entitled to compensation. I have very
real costs as I have to travel. And the courses I take to become a
better healer is not cheap. <<

Your decisions and the rationale you use to justify them are your
business, not mine, and I'm *not* standing in judgment of them. :)

>> The law also states that what you sow, so shall you reap. If the
patient pays for healing, is he not more entitled to receive healing? <<

Why on earth would *any* one be *less* entitled to healing than anyone
else? What you've just implied is that those who have money are *more*
entitled to healing than those who do not have money. What about your
statement above that if someone can't afford your fee you will treat
them for free? Does it then follow that you will treat them less
thoroughly because they have less of an entitlement to treatment?

>> As TMO working group is a service you render after hours, and not the
work you do, It would be inappropriate to make money. <<

That has nothing to do with our decision.

>> If a patient does offer money, would it not perhaps be more
appropriate to gracefully accept, and then donate the money to a
worthwhile charity. Then the patient has been able to sow, and your
group has incurred positive karma, as you have channeled the money for
good? <<

To my mind, all that this would accomplish is a reinforcement of the
capitalist ethic of "you get what you pay for". Instead, when we
decline payment, we are promoting a different ethic that says there are
folks who exist with motivations other than making a buck, folks who
choose to give simply because they can and not for personal gain. It
places our interaction on an entirely different footing -- that of
simple human kindness and sharing. Kindness and sharing are actions
that multiply positivity in the world.

>> When healing for free one also has to be on guard as not to feel
morally and
spiritually superior to those who do charge. <<

For the TMO-WG, feelings of superiority have no place in our work and
what others do or do not do has no relevance to what we do. Our healing
work is not about *us* -- it is about our subjects.

My best to you,
:) Rawn Clark
11 April 2004
rawnclark@...
rawn@...
http://www.ABardonCompanion.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BardonPraxis
http://E.webring.com/hub?ring=arionthebardonwe




Yahoo! Groups Links