|
|
 |
FUNDAMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY ( FP )
Part III
FP and HEALTH
(Y-(Psi)-TECHNIQUE)
Chapter 11. HEALERY
a a a a a a aa
11.2. To BE or NOT to be
11.2.1 REFUSAL to heal
|
Every good can be turn into evil a a a a a a
Îâèäèé
Practice of goods is muchmore effectively
than struggle against sin
Îòåö Àëåêñàíäð (Åëü÷àíèíîâ)
|
è
A weighty argument against a wide using of healing is that these methods can be used in the bad purposes by unfair people. Even not agreeing with this opinion at all, it would be wrong to ignore it.
Really, each practicing healer can face cases of harming (maleficent, damage, bedevilment etc.) which methods are few differ technically from the healing. Such patients often get eventually just to a healer for these cases are usually for both diagnostics, and treatment by means of the academic medicine methods. As victims of wrecking can become more likely persons with unstable mentality (or weak nervous system), for example children, but that can be not only people too: cattle can be put the evil eye [ 34 , ò. 4, ñòð. 164]. To put the evil eye means not certainly to look. A priest can put the evil eye through a stone wall [ibidem]. The same not certainly a harming is a deliberate act: one can to put the evil eye upon himself too. A harming can be a by-product of a low moral level of a harmer wrecker. An envious is wreckable [ibidem].
It is naive, however, to hope that restriction of healing practice would be possible to neutralize harming even in small measure. More likely is the opposite. But even if it would so, is it expediently to refuse useful technology only because of fear, what it will be used for a harm?
Everything, that facilitates our life, can become a source of disasters. Fire can warm, but can become a fire source. The more effectively technology is, the more dangerous it is too. The more sharp a knife is, the easier one can wound itself with it too, and the heavier the wound can be. A thought is the most effective instrument. To go in a correct direction is more important, than to go quickly.
Attempts to prohibit a technology appear provisional and useless, if not harmful: the loyal initiator of a prohibition wastes time, and he can appear is not ready to neutralize the aggressive opponent, who broke it. Here it can be pertinent recollect an aphorism If you want peace, prepare for war..
A real, business and humane approach to the problem prompts another, the opposite decision: it is necessary to not limit, especially to not forbid healing, feigning simultaneously that harming does not exist at all, BUT to warn more widely and earnestly that harming is dangers, and to accent at that the danger for an active (harming) side, the high probability that his negative information will return to him (that was considered in ch. 10). For a passive side the best kind of protection (see also section 11.5) is moral purity of an object of such aggression, his high ethical level. If you fill entirely your mind with good, malicious spirits cannot find a place to live (Levi [ 155 ]).
è
|
 |
|
|
