TCM/5E

[Guest guest]

At this point I feel obligated to give my rap about TCM and defending it in

this way: TCM was created as a way for many people to learn

in a short time and fairly comprehensively. Before, most of the tradition was

passed down through the families. The Chinese Government wanted to popularize

the medicine and for the most part they have succeeded. It has allowed 100's

of thousands of people to learn it across the world. First in China and now

in the West. (They also wanted to control it too... so that the many esoteric

practices would not conflict with an aethistic communism.)

I would agree that it is not " the true medicine " or maybe not even the best

medicine for many cases but I am grateful that I was able to learn something

about and to gain an entry into the medicine. In a year or

so I could needle people, in two work in a clinic and be fairly good, I

think, and within 3 graduate and eventually have a license. Looked at this

way one can see the strengths and weaknesses without judging the motives of

those that " invented " TCM.

[Guest guest]

It seems to me, more and more, that there is not realy any

deep fundamental difference between the two approuches

we are talking about. The point where things might have

taken a differnt turn, is where the professional starts to rely

on the treatment recepies. In the TCM it is pointed out that

the 5 elements as pairs of organ/viscera are interdependent

on each other and mutualy conected to form an entirety.

If one goes further into these expositions, it is clearly

noted that it is not sugested in any way that one should

depart from the vision of the human being as a whole.

Maybe the so called 5E school of acup. trys to take advantage,

or looks more intensly, or considers more fundamental, in

order to " see " the nature of the weak link in the chain

of 5 elements, the psichical or mental manifestations.

But the TCM approuche is not far from that, by looking into

the " general " deviations of the individual - things like heat,

damp, humid, active etc...Both approuches are envisioning

the human entity as an entirety. The real " gap " appears, it seems

to me, in the end part of these TCM books, where they suddenly

go on into expounding the recepies for the " cure " of different

desieses. In one hand i feel that those recepies are indeed important

data gathered through centurys of clinical practice....but maybe they

lead the less attent practicioner to slip into the notion that that is

the important or fundamental part of the whole " teaching " .

 

All i can say ,at this point of my inquiery, that maybe one should,

reavaliate the real meaning of the acup. recepies. They must

have a definite place in the tottality of the acup. knowledge, for

they may represent some statistical reality...but not exactly where

they seem to fit.

 

geovani

[Guest guest]

said:

>At this point I feel obligated to give my rap about TCM and defending it in

>this way: TCM was created as a way for many people to learn

>in a short time and fairly comprehensively.

 

Also, in my experience, the standard Chinese-governent endorsed TCM just

forms the skeleton of acupuncture education in an American TCM-based

acupuncture school. My teachers, including the Chinese ones, always

included the spiritual and more " esoteric " stuff, the

macro-cosm/micro-cosm, 5 elements, Hun and Po. In our school we had

Tai-chi classes, qi-gong, and we could optionally study energetic healing

from Western traditions such as Cranio-sacral, Therapeutic Touch,

Homeopathy.

 

 

Furthermore, when comparing the relative " spirituality " of Chinese

acupuncture and British acupuncture (which is what I consider 5E) keep

in mind that the Chinese as a culture don't separate out Spiritual or

Psychological dimension from the physical as much as we do. So the

spiritual and psychological are mingled with the physical/physiological

in such a way that they don't stand out, but it doesn't mean they're not

there. I can think of one my Chinese acupuncture teachers in particular

who would always laugh at the idea of a " God " , but in his presence and

actions he was a very " spiritual " person. He was one of the most

powerful channelers of Qi that I have personally met.

 

Anyway, the way I see it, 5-E and TCM are both modern adaptations of a

very traditional approach to healing, and in each case are simply a

launching pad from which practitioners can develop their own connection

with qi and healing.

 

-- Greg

[Guest guest]

--- Greg Dember <dember wrote:

In our school we had

> Tai-chi classes, qi-gong, and we could optionally study energetic

> healing

> from Western traditions such as Cranio-sacral, Therapeutic Touch,

> Homeopathy.

 

Hi Greg, I am going to TCM school in Denver, Colorado USA. I was

fascinated by your post here. I am equally interested in the TCM, 5E

and Homeopathy. I can't seem to find sources of info for homeopathy

and TCM although I know I cannot be the only one that has seen some

similarities... May I ask where did you go to school? How much

Homeopathy did they teach there? Any people you could refer me to?

 

Thanks, Christina Schultz

[Guest guest]

<< When you say " TCM " , you are probably refering to some kind

of " compilation " in order to form some compact and fairly homogeneous body,

In what year do you think this

" compilation " took place? >>

 

Exactly. " TCM " was put together by Mao Tse-Tung (in 1952?) soon after the

Chinese Revolution (1949?). Hundreds of doctors were called together analyze

all the traditions and put together a " national " medicine. Nearly all of the

Chinese Doctors from the Mainland after this time were trained in this

compilation.

It is one reason that acupuncture has been " herbalized " that follows the

Zang-fu diagnosis and not the body energetics. This type of acupuncture is

more easily taught from a book to a large group of people.

the first use of TCM was to send thousands of Barefoot Doctors to the

country-side. Some were well trained in Western Medicine others had little

Western or Chinese training, just enough to get by in the villages.

[Guest guest]

 

 

At this point I feel obligated to give my rap about TCM and defending it in

this way: TCM was created as a way for many people to learn

in a short time and fairly comprehensively. Before, most of the tradition was

passed down through the families. The Chinese Government wanted to popularize

the medicine and for the most part they have succeeded. It has allowed 100's

of thousands of people to learn it across the world. First in China and now

in the West. (They also wanted to control it too... so that the many esoteric

practices would not conflict with an aethistic communism.)

 

geovani: I see. When you say " TCM " , you are probably refering to some kind

of " compilation " in order to form some compact and fairly homogeneous body,

I supose (correct me if i am wrong). Yes, one can see the scenary of China of

let's say...a few centurys ago. A huge (enormous) country with this knowledge

about healing methods scatered all over that imensity. In what year do you

think this

" compilation " took place? Or maybe it was done in several episodic steps....

Although.....i have been reading....some old texts where found, with quite a

full " body " .....with let's say...a beguining middle and an end. And those where

realy old stuff....no?

 

I would agree that it is not " the true medicine " or maybe not even the best

medicine for many cases but I am grateful that I was able to learn something

about and to gain an entry into the medicine.

 

geovani: Yes, indeed...and sometimes it may happen

to be the true medicine...

 

In a year or

so I could needle people, in two work in a clinic and be fairly good, I

think, and within 3 graduate and eventually have a license. Looked at this

way one can see the strengths and weaknesses without judging the motives of

those that " invented " TCM.

 

geovani: Yes....I like the " one can see the strengths and weaknesses without

judging the motives " ...I think it is exactly this kind of perspective that will

make one be

realistic and true to oneself and towards others. And i also feel that this kind

of progressive insight into the nature of this interesting science of healing,

will

perhaps enable one to take the moust advantage ot it possible. No hiding the

head in the sand of delusion... :^)