Shi/Xu/Xie/Bu ? you lost me there :)

May 2, 2004

I am awed at the intellectual clarity and emotional maturity that

some of the members of this forum exibit. I have none of the above

in sufficient quantity but I do have insights based on practical

experimentation, so please don't get put off if I come across as

simplistic.

The human body is the same body wether I speak Chinese, english or

Zulu, The basics of the human body is three brain centres: physical

body structure (muscles,ligaments,tendons). Emotional body linked

to hormonal function, organs. And mental body, abstract

perceptions and limiting beleif systems.

The chinese had an extremely advanced system of observation and

interpretation based on relationships within the human body and its

environment. (Yin female, emotional nature).

The Modern west (Yang, male intellectual , reductionist nature ) is

unsupassed in its ability to make sense of the physicial workings of

the body.

The old classics and modern (TCM) from the little I have read. Pay

lip service to the power of our held in unexpressed emotions to

distort the workings of the human body. rather, they imply, that

man / woman is a victim to the elements. all the patterns of

differentiation that I learned at school I have found to be

inaplicable to the majority of patients that I have met. And the

assumptions, that a menu of acupuncture point or combination of,

will cure every person displaying a set of symptoms has, sadly, not

proved to be the case in my experience.

The Chinese system developed concepts to explain their peceptions of

the illneses afflicting people of their era. no different from any

other indigenous population around the world. Clearly, The human

body is the same anywhere.

Humanity has always been split in to multiple factions, this is a

macrocosm that reflects the microcosmic multiple splits with in the

average individual' s psyche. As well as the multiple splits of our

apprach and understanding of illnesses within the human body.

For us to come together as one human race, one world one people

also means that we have to come together as one system of

understanding illness and effecting health. (Pie in the sky ? maybe).

Like I have said I am very poor in academic meanings but I am very

strong in experiential observation. How can I have such a high

success rate with my patients 90% + when I have such a poor

understanding of the classics?

I think that a new paradigm is required to be an effective healer.

one that takes the best of the East and marries it to the best of

the West. New perceptions are required, applicable to our

observations of the causes of illness today.

for example, excessive worry (emotion) will disturb the SP, thanks

to western research, we know that muscles generate lactic acid and

that the lympathic system is responsible for draining the lactic

acid to the liver for transformation. When a person feels physically

heavy after a 10 minute walk, we may, with our oriental hat on,

recognize the symptom of Damp and with our western hat understand

that process. by the same process this person who has trouble moving

fluids in their system will not be be happy in an external watery/

damp environment because their body has enough problems dealing with

its internal fluids.

what's more,with that understanding, we will be able to more

readily separate physical heaviness SP from say emotional weariness

LIV. where the person is still tired but it is much more focused

around the eyes.

I supose what i am really saying is that I beleive that we need to

move on from dissecting what the ancients had to say, wise though

they were. That we have a wealth of information today that allows us

to build effective templates to marry the information of the past to

the present. and that the cause of most illneses are rooted in the

interplay of our emotions and our beleif sytems.

I am starting to sound like a commercial with 'what I beleive'

sorry yet i can't get away from the fact that part of our

difficulties with 'concepts'is that we need more focus on the

development of our energetic abilities that we may move beyond

theory to direct perception.

salvador

www.meridian-qi-acupuncure.com

May 2, 2004

Dear Salvador,

If I may comment from my own experiences:

>

> The human body is the same body wether I speak Chinese, english or

> Zulu,

I find each person to be quite substantially different - first at the

Shen (heart/mind) level - i.e., the basis for our existence, and then

the manifested physical level. To treat every person's body

(existence) as the same, I believe, is the most major error in Western

medical practice. One only needs to palpate two people to understand

the problem with this perspective. Each person is not only not the

same, but entirely different. This is one of the reasons I am more

inclined to use tuina (shiatsu)- because the actual physical palpation

reveals so much about the uniqueness of each individual at all layers.

> The chinese had an extremely advanced system of observation and

> interpretation based on relationships within the human body and its

> environment. (Yin female, emotional nature).

> The Modern west (Yang, male intellectual , reductionist nature ) is

> unsupassed in its ability to make sense of the physicial workings of

> the body.

I believe that the early " medical practitioners " in Asia possesed

unsurpassed awareness of the deep underlying nature of human life and

that which was necessary to support life. From my own readings, this

same awareness existed in early western thoughts also - e.g. Egypt. It

is my own feeling, that people who rely on their senses have a much

better idea of the human body than those who rely on instrumentality -

though both types of perspective are necessarily incomplete because

they rely on subjective interpretations based upon individual experiences.

>

> The old classics and modern (TCM) from the little I have read. Pay

> lip service to the power of our held in unexpressed emotions to

> distort the workings of the human body. rather, they imply, that

> man / woman is a victim to the elements.

My readings are a bit different. What I understand from the early

classics is that humans are the manfestation of the basic Yin (earth)

and Yang (heaven) energies, and that we are at " one " with nature and

we have the same cyclic birth/death patterns. So to observe nature at

the macroscopic or microscopic level is the same.

> all the patterns of

> differentiation that I learned at school I have found to be

> inaplicable to the majority of patients that I have met. And the

> assumptions, that a menu of acupuncture point or combination of,

> will cure every person displaying a set of symptoms has, sadly, not

> proved to be the case in my experience.

Yes, I very much agree. This has been my experiences also. This

approach (based upon some of my readings) seems to be a result of the

way TCM was developed in China in the 1980w (ref. Mark Seems).

Classical Chinese medicine apparantely has a totally different

perspective - one that is more likely to be practiced by traditional

family trained doctors rather than those that have been trained in the

universities with the more " modern " TCM approach. I have observed both

types of practitioners and it is interesting to note the vast

differences in approach.

>

> For us to come together as one human race, one world one people

> also means that we have to come together as one system of

> understanding illness and effecting health. (Pie in the sky ? maybe).

I do not think this is possible or desireable. I think, each

practitioner has their own special skill - and while the paths may be

different, the results may very likely be the same. I have friends who

practice quite differently, and each seems to have their own share of

successes within their own domain.

>

> Like I have said I am very poor in academic meanings but I am very

> strong in experiential observation. How can I have such a high

> success rate with my patients 90% + when I have such a poor

> understanding of the classics?

This is your gift. I believe that the discovery of health and

maintaining health exists in all of us. I know of a doctor who has a

totally different perspective than yours (he understands the classics

very well) and applies his approach with equal success. He has treated

chronic illnesses (tumors, high blood pressure, arthritis) and acute

(flu, injuries, etc.) with similar success rates. His patients are

cured and do not come back, but new patients are referred all the time

which keeps him very busy.

> what's more,with that understanding, we will be able to more

> readily separate physical heaviness SP from say emotional weariness

> LIV. where the person is still tired but it is much more focused

> around the eyes.

The texts also explain that all emotions begin in the heart/mind

(Shen). It is an interesting area to investigate - that is to what

extent the Shen (heart/mind) lies at the core of human health.

> yet i can't get away from the fact that part of our

> difficulties with 'concepts'is that we need more focus on the

> development of our energetic abilities that we may move beyond

> theory to direct perception.

Yes, I very much agree. As a person who has been involved with Asian

mediciine for many years, yet still just beginning to learn, I very

much enjoyed reading your ideas on this subject. I am very eager to

learn more. :-)

Regards,

Rich

>

May 2, 2004

--- Rich <rfinkelstein wrote:

> the manifested physical level. To treat every

> person's body

> (existence) as the same, I believe, is the most

> major error in Western

> medical practice.

That is patently false: if every single person were

different, then we would need a different system of

medicine for every person. As everyone ont hsi list

should know, that is not necessary. In fact, we can

treat the vast majority of people using one system

(not ref to TCM). This actually proves that we are all

similar (or even identical) - and it's just that we

find ourselves in a different space and time and

experience. The human body is amazingly true to its

form. I must reiterate that, if it weren't, we would

_not_ be able to treat people using the same system.

We would have to use a different system for each

person if we were all fundamentally different.

The problem with western medicine is _not_ that it

thinks everyone is the same, but rather that it very

very much denies the fullness of interaction that

occurs in existence. The environment, the diet, the

emotions, choice, understanding, the community, the

past, the future - _everything_. That is western

medicine's problem - it is simplistic and denies

fullness of consequence.

Then again, you might be right, above is just my

opinion. I don't know why I bother writing

sometimes!!!

Thanks for reading, sorry just whipped this one off,

I know it was curt. Bye!

Hugo

__________

Messenger - Communicate instantly... " Ping "

your friends today! Download Messenger Now

http://uk.messenger./download/index.html

May 2, 2004

Not at all Hugo,

Thanks for sharing and clarifing one of my points

salvador

> Then again, you might be right, above is just my

> opinion. I don't know why I bother writing

> sometimes!!!

> Thanks for reading, sorry just whipped this one off,

> I know it was curt. Bye!

> Hugo

May 3, 2004

Hi Hugo,

> That is patently false: if every single person were

> different, then we would need a different system of

> medicine for every person.

It depends what is considered a " system " and the flexibility of the

system. My own personal experiences is that Classical

(I differentiate this from TCM) is a very comprehensive system (though

not necessarily complete) and at the same time very flexible so that

it can respond to the differences that necessarily exist in each

person. For example, the doctors that I have met recognize that exach

person's meridian structure is very unique to each individual and it

is necessary for the doctor to recognize and respond to these

differences. This " flexibile responsiveness " is at the core of

Classical Chinese medicine which is evident in other associated

practices such as Taiji and Qigong - both of which are also,

fundamentally, very flexibile.

> This actually proves that we are all

> similar (or even identical) - and it's just that we

> find ourselves in a different space and time and

> experience.

Space, time, experiences at all levels of the human existence

(intellectual, emotion, spiritual, physical) is what I believes

defines the uniqness of each individual. I find that this manifests

itself in my own practices as I palpate individuals and discourse with

clients. It is difficult to find similarities much less actual

" sameness " . Everyone is sooooooo different and each person I treat in

a way that corresponds to their needs as opposed to a predetermined

protocol.

> The human body is amazingly true to its

> form. I must reiterate that, if it weren't, we would

> _not_ be able to treat people using the same system.

The system I use may be quite different from yours. It is more of an

interaction. I " sense " and then respond and then sense again. It is a

complete, interactive system that is both comprehensive yet very

flexible. Those who practice Taiji Push Hands in a manner that each

person " listens " and then " responds " may understand the parallel that

I am suggesting.

> We would have to use a different system for each

> person if we were all fundamentally different.

Not a different system - just one that is " flexible " enough to

respond. It must include a " feedback loop " that is sensitive enough to

respond in a relative as opposed to an absolute manner. I am not sure

whether TCM incorporates this approach, but certainly classical

chinese medicine does. It is fundamental.

>

> The problem with western medicine is _not_ that it

> thinks everyone is the same, but rather that it very

> very much denies the fullness of interaction that

> occurs in existence. The environment, the diet, the

> emotions, choice, understanding, the community, the

> past, the future - _everything_. That is western

> medicine's problem - it is simplistic and denies

> fullness of consequence.

Yes, here we are in complete agreement. It is the agreggate of all of

these factors (energies that are flowing within the " closed system "

(the human body) and from external systems (the universe) into the

human body that creates the unique " energetic system " that needs to be

addressed. The only thing I look at is whether energy is flowing

freely within the body and between the body and the " universe " (e.g.

food, air, relationships, etc.)

>

> Then again, you might be right, above is just my

> opinion. I don't know why I bother writing

> sometimes!!!

I think Mark Seems makes a very excellent point very early on in his

book that everyone is at a different " space " on the continuum and that

all points of view and perspectives should be respected. That is what

makes us all " individuals " . :-)

> Thanks for reading, sorry just whipped this one off,

> I know it was curt. Bye!

> Hugo

Thank you very much for taking the time to respond. I enjoyed reading

your message and I hope my response makes some sense.

Regards,

Rich

May 3, 2004

Rich,

I'm afraid Hugo proved your point before you made it by simply disagreeing with

you in the extreme. Clearly you and Hugo are not nearly identical. Your

points, however, are well taken.

Respectfully,

Emmanuel Segmen

-

Rich

Chinese Medicine

Sunday, May 02, 2004 4:43 PM

Re: Shi/Xu/Xie/Bu ? you lost me there