Displaying 1 - 5 of 5
Traditional medical systems are challenging because their theories and practices strike many conventionally trained physicians and researchers as incomprehensible. Should modern medicine dismiss them as unscientific, view them as sources of alternatives hidden in a matrix of superstition, or regard them as complementary sciences of medicine? We make the latter argument using the example of Tibetan medicine. Tibetan medicine is based on analytic models and methods that are rationally defined, internally coherent, and make testable predictions, meeting current definitions of "science." A ninth century synthesis of Indian, Chinese, Himalayan, and GrecoâPersian traditions, Tibetan medicine is the most comprehensive form of Eurasian healthcare and the world's first integrative medicine. Incorporating rigorous systems of meditative selfâhealing and ascetic selfâcare from India, it includes a worldâclass paradigm of mind/body and preventive medicine. Adapting the therapeutic philosophy and contemplative science of Indian Buddhism to the quality of secular life and death, it features the world's most effective systems of positive and palliative healthcare. Based on qualitative theories and intersubjective methods, it involves predictions and therapies shown to be more accurate and effective than those of modern medicine in fields from physiology and pharmacology to neuroscience, mind/body medicine, and positive health. The possibility of complementary sciences follows from the latest view of science as a set of tools--instruments of social activity based on learned agreement in aims and methods--rather than as a monolith of absolute truth. Implications of this pluralistic outlook for medical research and practice are discussed.
This article offers an overview of meditation research: its history, recent developments, and future directions. As the number and scope of studies grow, the field has converged with cognitive and affective neuroscience, and spawned many clinical applications. Recent work has shed light on the mechanisms and effects of diverse practices, and is entering a new phase where consensus and coherent paradigms are within reach. This article suggests an unusual path for future advancement: complementing conventional research with rigorous dialogue with the contemplative traditions that train expert meditators and best know the techniques. It explores the Nalanda tradition developed in India and preserved in Tibet, because its cumulative approach to contemplative methods produced a comprehensive framework that may help interpret data and guide research, and because its naturalistic theories and empirical methods may help bridge the gulf between science and other contemplative traditions. Examining recent findings and models in light of this framework, the article introduces the Indic map of the central nervous system and presents three testable predictions based on it. Finally, it reviews two studies that suggest that the multimodal Nalanda approach to contemplative learning is as well received as more familiar approaches, while showing promise of being more effective.
This paper reviews current behavioral health interventions and introduces a self-healing program based on the Indo-Tibetan tradition. While most work on behavior change emphasizes cognition and motivation, this review highlights stress-reactivity as a rate-limiting resistance to learning. Surveying cognitive-behavioral theories, it finds these limited in modeling stress-reactivity. Reviewing current interventions that address stress by integrating relaxation, mindfulness, imagery, or movement with cognitive-behavioral education, it attributes their limited effectiveness to the limits of their model of stress and their strategy of eclectically mixing techniques. Next, the article explores the Indic model of stress-cessation and self-healing assumed by mindfulness practice, concluding that it more fully reflects current findings on stress and learning. It reviews the theory and practice of mindfulness and of two less known contemplative “vehicles” preserved in Tibet, using more advanced techniques and insights better suited to lay lifestyles and secular cultures. It suggests that the Tibetan tradition of integrating all three vehicles of contemplative insight and skill in one self-healing practice should maximize coherence and effectiveness while minimizing confounding variables caused by eclecticism. Finally, the paper introduces an intervention that integrates mindfulness with techniques of cognitive analysis, affect modulation, motivational imagery, and reinforcing breathing, tailored over centuries into a complete, threefold path of self-healing. A pilot study of this intervention in women treated for breast and other gynecologic cancers suggests that the whole spectrum of Indo-Tibetan mind/body practices can be readily mastered and effectively used by Westerners to reduce stress and enhance learning and quality of life.
Meditation research has begun to clarify the brain effects and mechanisms of contemplative practices while generating a range of typologies and explanatory models to guide further study. This comparative review explores a neglected area relevant to current research: the validity of a traditional central nervous system (CNS) model that coevolved with the practices most studied today and that provides the first comprehensive neural-based typology and mechanistic framework of contemplative practices. The subtle body model, popularly known as the chakra system from Indian yoga, was and is used as a map of CNS function in traditional Indian and Tibetan medicine, neuropsychiatry, and neuropsychology. The study presented here, based on the Nalanda tradition, shows that the subtle body model can be cross-referenced with modern CNS maps and challenges modern brain maps with its embodied network model of CNS function. It also challenges meditation research by: (1) presenting a more rigorous, neural-based typology of contemplative practices; (2) offering a more refined and complete network model of the mechanisms of contemplative practices; and (3) serving as an embodied, interoceptive neurofeedback aid that is more user friendly and complete than current teaching aids for clinical and practical applications of contemplative practice.
Traditional medical systems are challenging because their theories and practices strike many conventionally trained physicians and researchers as incomprehensible. Should modern medicine dismiss them as unscientific, view them as sources of alternatives hidden in a matrix of superstition, or regard them as complementary sciences of medicine? We make the latter argument using the example of Tibetan medicine. Tibetan medicine is based on analytic models and methods that are rationally defined, internally coherent, and make testable predictions, meeting current definitions of "science." A ninth century synthesis of Indian, Chinese, Himalayan, and Greco-Persian traditions, Tibetan medicine is the most comprehensive form of Eurasian healthcare and the world's first integrative medicine. Incorporating rigorous systems of meditative self-healing and ascetic self-care from India, it includes a world-class paradigm of mind/body and preventive medicine. Adapting the therapeutic philosophy and contemplative science of Indian Buddhism to the quality of secular life and death, it features the world's most effective systems of positive and palliative healthcare. Based on qualitative theories and intersubjective methods, it involves predictions and therapies shown to be more accurate and effective than those of modern medicine in fields from physiology and pharmacology to neuroscience, mind/body medicine, and positive health. The possibility of complementary sciences follows from the latest view of science as a set of tools--instruments of social activity based on learned agreement in aims and methods--rather than as a monolith of absolute truth. Implications of this pluralistic outlook for medical research and practice are discussed.