SV: TCM/5E

[Guest guest]

I'm very curious about where indeed the discourse of

TCM vis á vis 5 Elements stems from?

 

Does anyoe here really know the answer to this question?

 

In Sweden TCM means Traditional

Within this paradigm Yin/Yang and Wu Xing are an integral

part of TCM.

 

No ancient writings nor modern translations of these writings

that I've read suggest that TCM is either this or that.

 

In diagnosing we take into consideration Yin/Yang, Wu Xing,

The 6 energy levels: Tai Yang, Shao Yang, Yang Ming, Tai Yin,

Tsue Yin, and Shoa Yin, also

The 8 extraordinary Meridians:Du Mai, Ren Mai, Chong Mai,

Dai Mai, Yin/Yang Qiao, and Yin/Yang Wei.

 

There is indeed different spelling for these concepts depending

on what " school " one's knowledge was acquired.

 

It is quite intriguing to listen to this sort of discourse in fact

the rhetoric of many in this discussion is confusing. This approach

or that approach has an heir of " us and/or them " .

 

I concur with Geovani about recipes.I believe a recipe is not and

individual approach and often forgets to that symptoms and sickness

can come from many different sources. There are a few points that

are always specific for some imbalances but then there are always

individual points as well.

 

Regards

 

Patrick Dooley

 

 

-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----

Från: geovani [inandor]

Skickat: den 22 november 1999 15:19

Till: acupuncture

Ämne: acupuncture TCM/5E

 

 

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