Healing crisis (fact/truth/'never')

[Guest guest]

Hi Chris,

 

> >statements of fact. ...

 

What I have found in my experiences is that someone's " fact " is

someone else's " fiction " . For example, there are a very significant

number of people that believe that the whole fundamental premise of

Chinese medicine - i.e. all matter is composed of qi and that qi

arises from the dynamics of yin/yang - is pure fiction. In my own

studies, I have learned that good health is not dependent upon

" balance " (a " dead pond " is in balance) but instead is dependent on

" free flowing qi " . This may be heresy to some, but it is how many

Chinese doctors practice despite what is codified in some textbooks.

So I have long given up on the notion of establishing " facts " and have

instead adopted the viewpoint of " ideas that merit attention " . Every

fact known in history has eventually changed - so what do we call

" changing facts " ? Learning?

 

Regards,

Rich

[Guest guest]

Rich,

It is not a contradiction to say that insuring flow of qi is a

prerequisite for good health, this concept is in Chinese medical

literature, especially that dealing with acupuncture. I think this is

not a good example for your case.

If you are studying a system of medicine, it must be based on

certain principles. The principles of qi, yin and yang, no matter what

one believes, is the core of Chinese medical theory, all schools. If

you substitute something else, it is no longer Chinese medicine.

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't you a practitioner of LA (Worsley)

acupuncture? Don't you have core principles, such as five phase theory

and causative factors?

 

" Statements of fact " are simply principles on which one bases one's

diagnosis and treatment. Without principle, how do you decide what to

do in clinic? How do you communicate what you do with other

practitioners?

 

 

 

 

 

On Jul 21, 2004, at 8:13 AM, Rich wrote:

 

> Hi Chris,

>

>>> statements of fact. ...

>

> What I have found in my experiences is that someone's " fact " is

> someone else's " fiction " . For example, there are a very significant

> number of people that believe that the whole fundamental premise of

> Chinese medicine - i.e. all matter is composed of qi and that qi

> arises from the dynamics of yin/yang - is pure fiction. In my own

> studies, I have learned that good health is not dependent upon

> " balance " (a " dead pond " is in balance) but instead is dependent on

> " free flowing qi " . This may be heresy to some, but it is how many

> Chinese doctors practice despite what is codified in some textbooks.

> So I have long given up on the notion of establishing " facts " and have

> instead adopted the viewpoint of " ideas that merit attention " . Every

> fact known in history has eventually changed - so what do we call

> " changing facts " ? Learning?

>

> Regards,

> Rich

>

[Guest guest]

Zev,

 

> Rich,

> It is not a contradiction to say that insuring flow of qi is a

> prerequisite for good health, this concept is in Chinese medical

> literature, especially that dealing with acupuncture.

 

Yes. I agree. I go a bit further than most in this area. Whereas many

practitioners that I talk to will suggest that their basic principle

is " to balance " , my basic principle is to " ensure flow " . In fact, I

have come to think that " imbalances " may be the natural state of the

human condition and it is this imbalance that excites the flow of qi

(i.e. motion). Attempts to create " balance " (via herbal or acupuncture

treatments) may not only lead to frustrations (because it may not

bepossible) but may also lead to an unhealthier. A " balanced

condition " can be analogized to a teeter-totter or a balance scale,

wherein both of these models are characterized as having " no motion "

when in a balanced state. " No motion " or very little motion seems to

be in conflict with good health. That is, the human body exists to

" move " , i.e. " to create change " . So balance ==> " no motion " and

imbalance ==> motion (change). But these are just ideas. My primary

principle is to remove obstructions so that the body itself can seek

its own " natural state of motion " .

 

> Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't you a practitioner of LA Worsley?

 

I have adopted tuina/qigong as my primary method of treatment. Within

this, I agree that I have a core principle, which is to assist my

client in removing obstructions to qi flow.

 

> " Statements of fact " are simply principles on which one bases one's

> diagnosis and treatment.

 

If this is what you mean by " fact " , i.e. core principles, then I very

much agree that each practitioner has their own that they work with.

In the case of my own tuina/qigong chinese doctor, he does no

diagnosis. He simply " moves qi " using physical tuina and energietic

qigong techniques, and eliminates obstructions that he and/or the

client feels is obstructing flow. It is a very simple model and set of

principles. In order to confirm that the obstructions are " flowing "

out of the body, he pretty much uses the same principles as codified

in Herings Law, though he has never read or heard of Hering's Law. He

learned it as an apprentice in China and through his own experiences.

 

 

> How do you communicate what you do with other practitioners?

 

Each practitioner appears to have their own set of experiences and

skills. Sometimes communication is very easy - sometimes not.

Different core principles can be used to effect the same result. For

example, homeopathy is based upon the Law of Similars (i.e. likes cure

likes). A totally different principle from yet it is

possible to achieve similar " curative " results. Of course, there must

exist overarching principles, since curing is curing no matter what so

it is no surprise that Hering's Law is also applicable to Chinese

Medicine even though it may be codified in a different manner in

.

 

I believe that there is probably a unifying principle which explains

the nature of the many different curative modalities whether it be

homeopathy, herbs, qigong, tuina/shiatsu (i.e., touch) acupuncture

stimulation, flower remedies, etc.. I believe all of these modalities

seek to work at a " vibrational level " , that harmonizes and " excites "

the qi of the body/mind/spirit in such a way that it allows the person

(conciousness) to " evolve " into a new " state " that the consciousness

is seeking. Once at that " state " , it all starts again. :-)

 

Anyways, these are just ideas and certainly subject to much change as

I too evolve to new states of consciousness. :-)

 

As always, any further thoughts on this matter are appreciated.

 

Regards,

Rich

[Guest guest]

Hi Rich and Z'ev,

 

I wanted to briefly note that " balance " is virtually the opposite of equilibrium

which is stillness, no motion. In biochemistry equilibrium implies death.

Balanced homeostasis not only means life but also implies unimpeded flow. So I

believe that your idea of " ensuring flow " is right on. I further believe that

it also implies balance since in any steady state homeostasis there is

continuous input and output. Balanced blood pH implies a great deal of motion

from breathing to digestive processes to the uninhibited flow of the blood.

 

Respectfully,

Emmanuel Segmen

Re: Healing crisis (fact/truth/'never')

 

 

Zev,

 

> Rich,

> It is not a contradiction to say that insuring flow of qi is a

> prerequisite for good health, this concept is in Chinese medical

> literature, especially that dealing with acupuncture.

 

Yes. I agree. I go a bit further than most in this area. Whereas many

practitioners that I talk to will suggest that their basic principle

is " to balance " , my basic principle is to " ensure flow " . In fact, I

have come to think that " imbalances " may be the natural state of the

human condition and it is this imbalance that excites the flow of qi

(i.e. motion). Attempts to create " balance " (via herbal or acupuncture

treatments) may not only lead to frustrations (because it may not

bepossible) but may also lead to an unhealthier. A " balanced

condition " can be analogized to a teeter-totter or a balance scale,

wherein both of these models are characterized as having " no motion "

when in a balanced state. " No motion " or very little motion seems to

be in conflict with good health. That is, the human body exists to

" move " , i.e. " to create change " . So balance ==> " no motion " and

imbalance ==> motion (change). But these are just ideas. My primary

principle is to remove obstructions so that the body itself can seek

its own " natural state of motion " .

 

> Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't you a practitioner of LA Worsley?

 

I have adopted tuina/qigong as my primary method of treatment. Within

this, I agree that I have a core principle, which is to assist my

client in removing obstructions to qi flow.

 

> " Statements of fact " are simply principles on which one bases one's

> diagnosis and treatment.

 

If this is what you mean by " fact " , i.e. core principles, then I very

much agree that each practitioner has their own that they work with.

In the case of my own tuina/qigong chinese doctor, he does no

diagnosis. He simply " moves qi " using physical tuina and energietic

qigong techniques, and eliminates obstructions that he and/or the

client feels is obstructing flow. It is a very simple model and set of

principles. In order to confirm that the obstructions are " flowing "

out of the body, he pretty much uses the same principles as codified

in Herings Law, though he has never read or heard of Hering's Law. He

learned it as an apprentice in China and through his own experiences.

 

 

> How do you communicate what you do with other practitioners?

 

Each practitioner appears to have their own set of experiences and

skills. Sometimes communication is very easy - sometimes not.

Different core principles can be used to effect the same result. For

example, homeopathy is based upon the Law of Similars (i.e. likes cure

likes). A totally different principle from yet it is

possible to achieve similar " curative " results. Of course, there must

exist overarching principles, since curing is curing no matter what so

it is no surprise that Hering's Law is also applicable to Chinese

Medicine even though it may be codified in a different manner in

.

 

I believe that there is probably a unifying principle which explains

the nature of the many different curative modalities whether it be

homeopathy, herbs, qigong, tuina/shiatsu (i.e., touch) acupuncture

stimulation, flower remedies, etc.. I believe all of these modalities

seek to work at a " vibrational level " , that harmonizes and " excites "

the qi of the body/mind/spirit in such a way that it allows the person

(conciousness) to " evolve " into a new " state " that the consciousness

is seeking. Once at that " state " , it all starts again. :-)

 

Anyways, these are just ideas and certainly subject to much change as

I too evolve to new states of consciousness. :-)

 

As always, any further thoughts on this matter are appreciated.

 

Regards,

Rich

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Membership requires that you do not post any commerical, swear, religious,

spam messages,flame another member or swear.

 

http://babel.altavista.com/

 

and adjust

accordingly.

 

If you , it takes a few days for the messages to stop being

delivered.