Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

? about TCM & Buddhism(needles and srotas)

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Chinese Traditional Medicine , marcos <ishk18> wrote:

>

> Hello Vinod,

> Interesting, they needled the channels in the same manner as the

> Chinese?

> Please, what is the difference between the srotas and the nadis?

> And I (reviewing it)agree with you that MTCM is a more accurate

> way to refer to what is nowadays called TCM.

> May the Hun be with you,.

> Marcos

 

They did not needle the channels in the same way as the modern

Chinese - but neither did the Chinese use needles in ancient times

as they do now. Nadi's are the pathways of the nervous system -

Srotas are the same as meridians. These channels are the energy

pathways of the organs themselves and also they are the channels

through which the organs and the different sides of the body

communicate with each other. They are extraneous to the nervous

system and perform differnt functions from the Nervous system. Nadi

is nervous system and srota is meridian system - both are under the

control of Vata dosha (they facilatate motion and activity). Both

systems are obviously associated with Qi since they move energy -

the movement is Qi and the thing moved is Qi.

 

Many schools have recognized a system of circulation which is called

by differnt names (meridian, srota, etc.)but this system is

understood in slightly different ways by different schools - and the

ways of minipulation of this system are differentin the different

schools. As example in China today there are several schools of

accupuncture - my prejudice is for the Five-Element system -

although I am not an Accupucturist - still I prefer a pure Five-

Element system for all diagnosis and treatment.

 

In Tibet they have a slightly different system. I met the great Dr.

Dolma who was an authority in using moxa on the head points. They

perform miraculous cures treating these Points with emphasis in

balancing the CNS and ANS. the Tibetan Lamas use a ssytem of

manipulating head points for 'spiritual' development. I have met

many Tibetan Lamas - including the Dalai Lama - they have little

scar patterns on their heads from the manipulation of these points

in different ways.

 

In Ayurveda the points on the Srotas are called Marma points - there

are many schools of manipulating the Marma points several books have

been written in modern times on Marma therapy.

 

Yogi's believe that the major benefits of asana practice are

strengthening of the nadis, opening of the joints, and stretching of

the Srota - this combined with diet therapy and mind control is

considered a cure for all non-genetic disease processes. This is the

system practiced by my father.

 

The various systems of movement therapy developed in China and other

countries are based on manipilation of the maridians (Chi Kung. Tai

Chi, etc.). There are also several schools of massage therapy

derived from these schools of thought - again I prefer the Eive-

Element System of massage. In South India we have a system of

martial arts called Kalari which is based on prana develpoment -

this sytem has developed an elaborate system of manipulating the

Marma points that cures injuries from fighting - there are several

clinics here that use these theories to treat a variety of diseases -

accident injuries, arthritis, paralysis, etc. Kalari is taught by a

hand full of famous families and many of these families have

develpoed independent schools of therapy - based on ancient theories

of healing - that are actually off-shoot schools of the ancient

Dravidian system that is somewhat different from Ayurveda.

Southeast Asia has several schoolsof channel manipulation from the

famous Thai massage system (one of the worlds best systems in the

hands of a mastter) - Indonesia has it's on school, etc.

 

Your mentioning TCM and MTCM is important to understand because

there is a huge theoretical battle going on between

the 'traditionalists' and the 'modern' theorists. The old school

says - we are the pure unadulterated your school is an

unneeded hybrid - that does not have suffecient experience behind it

to be validated. The new school says the old school is primitve and

needs updating to suit modern disease processes and social

considerations - plus new therapies have been discovered. Actually

the MTCM school is the one generally supported by the government

since it is a synthasis school of Eastern and Western - therfore

considered more 'modern'. I am on the side of both schools of

thought - becuase I belive the old masters's were complete in their

theory - but it is true that new techniques of therapy and ways of

using herbs have been developed in the past century. Many out of

date therapies and formulas are being revived because of their

usefulness in modern times (some are being modified for modern

cases)- this as an example is happening in the revival of the

Central Chi formulas that we have discussed recently. Xiao Yao Wan

as an example is being used in differnt ways today than in the past -

most traditional physicians see Rambling Pills as a classic

medicine for PMS and other blocked Qi female disorders. Yet today it

is seen as an important medicine in many stagnation problems. Exmple

may athletes use it to keep Qi flowing - it is frequently used

nowadays for Liver stagnation (a primary theory for the development

of the formula in the first place).

 

Medicine is not static it has always been evolving and adapting to

new conditions - we are nowhere near the development of

a 'completed' medical system - the next years are going to see an

explosion of medical thought - I for one am happy to see this

development - but what we have to be careful of is to make sure that

our new 'developments' are not in contradiction to the enlightened

masters of the past. In fact using the framework of the great and

glorious past to hang our 'new' ideas is a good starting point for a

trully new and 'valid' system of improved theraputics. This is my

approach. My father is a very strict traditionalist and I am a very

broad ranging modernist. So far he and I do not feel that we have

parted ways in our theoretical understandings.

 

Some have wondered why I always refer to my father - this is because

in my mind he is the symbol of the pure traditional way of thinking

as opposed to many subjects we discuss here which I see diferently

than the traditionalists - it is not that I disagree with them - it

is that I think the traditional systems need to be adapted to modern

lifestyle and economic situations. Example traditional medicene in

traditional society is cheap - in modern society it is not - so I

feel it is the responsibility of modern thinkers to help make

medicine affordable and accessable to the widest number of people.

Theraputics is in revolution and i agree that it needs it - but we

must be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Actually the signs in general look good for the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...