Revision: Today I stopped to ask myself: "Did I fail to understand something clearly about Meir's approach?" Turns out I did, which took me entirely by surprise. For me to misunderstand something almost never happens (from my experiences that few have ever pointed out any errors in my thinking as well as how some people often change their minds when I show them something they'd never thought of). This slipped by me somehow...and it should've not...and no one pointed it out to me, so I corrected myself. Now let me repair any misunderstanding I may have created.
Meir does seem to understand somewhat the relaxation principle behind the Bates Method, and he understands that "the eye is one of the hardest working organs in the body, and people who use their eyes a lot become fatigued more rapidly than others ... Think about how your muscles would feel if you used them without stopping for every waking moment." [Citation: p. 197,
The Handbook of Self-Healing] Publication date: 1994.
This is despite his vague use of words like 'exercises'. 'Technique' is a much better word, because it doesn't imply that the muscles need to be worked out. Also, he doesn't always clearly distinguish his ideas as being either Bates or non-Bates, which can easily lead to some misleading impressions among people who read his books.
Now, my confusion began while reading his online interviews and Movement for Self-Healing book because of two things:
1) He makes it look like all muscles of body need working out, at times, because of the multi-facet approach he takes. He sometimes says things that are inconsistent with other things he's saying, such as the previous quote I showed you. Here's an example of an inconsistent statement he made: "What I'm offering is natural. Eyes can be exercised, but it's different exercises. Like the heart, arms and circulation can be exercised. It's not a miracle cure. It is what can be practiced in every optometrist's office." [Citation:
Interview#1 with Meir Schneider] Here, he seems to address the eye muscles as needing exercise like the heart and arms do. This is based on a recent interview from June 10, 2006.
2) In his book
Movement for Self-Healing: An Essential Resource for Anyone Seeking Wellness, he mentions how he was shown the Bates Method by a boy named Isaac, then he proceeds to explain some non-Bates ideas without mentioning they weren't Bates' own ideas. This led to the implication that they were Bates' own ideas, which can confuse a lot of people.
I'm not sure what happened to Schneider during that recent interview, his statement obviously conflicts with the eye methods he teaches in his books and DVDs. Maybe he was under time constraint and blurted out a confusing statement.
Maybe he changed his mind about how the eye muscles work, but this wouldn't make sense because he overcame his blindness using palming and sunning to relax the eye muscles. I think the boldfaced portion is exactly what has happened. He's gotten confused by some researchers who think they're conclusive regarding things like the lens and its muscles but aren't due to the misleading Helmholtz's Theory. This theory changes nearly everything regarding what causes refractive errors and diseases of the eye, so researchers can very easily come to flawed conclusions.
Schneider's second interview (two paragraphs underneath this one) reveals that he's accepted some of the researchers' conclusions, and it seems he doesn't understand how big of an impact Helmholtz's Theory can have on everything. You have to understand all this when reading Schneider's works because it seems like he switches back and forth between Bates and non-Bates ideas many times without distinguishing between the two, potentially leading to the impression that everything he recommends for the eye has to do with Bates. Both this and his understanding of the researchers' own conclusions are like a paradigm shift illusion, where you have a single picture that can be interpreted as either a rabbit or duck.
The Rabbit and Duck Illusion You may not be aware there exists two different perceptions, until you have discovered both first.
But I did check into this today to make sure I wasn't assuming anything, and it turns out I had been. He incorporates other ideas which don't always strictly follow with what Bates taught, and proper wording is something I wish he'd thought about. However, all this is brought into much better focus when you read this statement by Meir in an excellent interview:
"
It seems to me that you have incorporated into your programme elements of techniques like Feldenkrais, Alexander, massage, Bates and so on. Is that true and in your programme for training practitioners, do they need to be already qualified in anatomy and physiology before they come into your programme?
These are two separate questions; let's look at them one by one. My work is very original and is not really influenced by any of those methods, but a lot of the elements of those methods would take us to my system of work because they have good ideas. There was no reason in the world for me not to incorporate them. It is unique âââ‰â¬Å it is a complete system on its own that expands with all the other systems.
The Bates method has really helped me. I can't be grateful enough to Dr Bates. I cured myself from blindness as a result of the work that he did, but I'm definitely seventy years ahead of the work that he did and I think that a lot of the Bates practitioners who are not too traditional are also many years ahead as they should be, because he was living in the beginning of the century. In some deep ways you can't improve on something perfect like his work that was very effective.
But on the other hand, a lot of new information came to the world. Many of his theories can be disputed and are not very defensible and so we had to theorise from the very beginning the ideas of eye exercises...." [Citation:
Interview#2 with Meir Schneider]
It's your choice to decide what you want to believe about Meir and his approach to the Bates Method. Well, there you have it, guys. bkowalski, I'm sorry if it appeared that I was hijacking your thread.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(post slightly modified below - my belief regarding how he addresses the body other than the eye hasn't changed. This is my original post for bkowalski's topic)
I haven't had a similar experience, but I find it's easy to work with digital letters through the use of closed captions on the TV. This gives you a easy "Snellen Chart" digital-wise every time you are standing at a certain spot, and gives you a way to gauge progress whenever you are watching TV. Try it sometimes!
I have two of Meir Schneider's books:
Movement for Self-Healing: An Essential Resource for Anyone Seeking Wellness and
The Handbook of Self-Healing: Your Personal Program for Better Health and Increased Vitality. The Handbook of Self-Healing is a very good book, get it if you haven't already. Meir Schneider has a different approach which is not entirely Bates-based, in which he uses some Bates techniques and some complimentary eye-strengthening exercises. He's stated before about a certain program of his that "The biggest part of the program is to strengthen the lens and its muscles so you can prevent cataracts; strengthen the pupils so you can see well in strong light and in dim light."
This isn't quite the Bates Method I had in mind... Bates was able to experimentally produce instant cataracts by squeezing an animal's eyeball, and as soon as the pressure was let go of, the cataract disappeared. The idea behind this is that muscular tension squeezes eyeball out of proportion = cataract formation. Let go of muscular tension and eyeball returns to normal shape = no cataract. (I know, poor animal)...
I recognized that although Schneider might have not strictly followed the Bates Method, he often uses Bates techniques like palming, sunning, and swinging which leads to relaxation of the eye muscles.
I got his books for two different reasons: 1) I thought he might have some interesting and practical ideas of his own about how to help the eyes regardlessly, and 2) I believed that regardless of his loose approach in regards to what Bates taught, he could indeed be a genius at other things like massage, breathing, blinking, circulation, and dealing with serious physical diseases like polio, multiple sclerosis, and arthritis using a holistic approach. And man, did I hit the nail on the head about that one.
He discloses what he knows from his own brilliance of those things and much of it is contained in his Handbook of Self-Healing. That book is a real gem.
My approach is two-fold:
1. Bates' own works and forums when addressing the eyes. (eyes)
2. Schneider when addressing body, not including the eyes. (non-eyes)
Schneider's understanding of the body helps to directly address the body's often very misunderstood and neglected needs, which can indirectly affect the eyes. This is the best approach, addressing everything possible that can help bring about quicker recovery. This helps to retain youthfulness and further prevent diseases.
Sorry I went off on a mini-rant, but I just wanted to know if you knew that Schneider's views of Bates Method sounds slightly confusing. I don't know what Schneider means by strengthen the "pupil" since it's just a "hole" in the eye.
