Guest guest Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 Hi Greg & All, Greg wrote: > Here is my take on the " meridians " now that i can read Nei Jing in > Chinese. Greg, my understanding differs from yours. The Chinese terms Jing. Luo, Mai, respectively, refer to the Main Channels (Meridians, JING), the 15 Collaterals (Linking Network Vessels, LUO) and the 8 Extraordinary Vessels (MAI). Mai also refers to blood vessels (and the pulses), as you said For example, Hand Shaoyin Heart Channel is Shou-Shao-Yin-Xin-Jing Foot Yangming Stomach Channel is Zu-Yang-Ming-Wei-Jing whereas the 8 Mai (\vessels) are: Dumai (GV) Renmai (CV) Chongmai Daimai Yangqiaomai Yinqiaomai Yangweimai Yinweimai Best regards, HOME + WORK: 1 Esker Lawns, Lucan, Dublin, Ireland Tel: (H): +353-(0) or (M): +353-(0) < " Man who says it can't be done should not interrupt man doing it " - Chinese Proverb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 Hi Phil, > Greg, my understanding differs from yours. The Chinese terms Jing. > Luo, Mai, respectively, refer to the Main Channels (Meridians, JING), > the 15 Collaterals (Linking Network Vessels, LUO) and the 8 > Extraordinary Vessels (MAI). Actually, I think you have become slightly confused because of poor translation of these terms into English. Mai means vessel. it has variously been translated as " channel " , " meridian " , etc., but I think it should be translated as vessel. Mai is not " extraordinary " vessel. See below. Jing mai are, as you said, the " Main Channels " . Luo Mai are, again as you said, " Collaterals " . Qi mai are the " extraordinay " vessels. Unfortunately, my attempts to post Chinese characters to this site have failed, but in all cases, the pinyin word " mai " here is the same character- " vessel " (or channel, meridian, etc., if you prefer, but not very accurate translation in my opinion). Sometimes the entire system of Jingmai and Luomai is abreviated as jingluo. > > Mai also refers to blood vessels (and the pulses), as you said Yes, that's correct. > > For example, > > Hand Shaoyin Heart Channel is Shou-Shao-Yin-Xin-Jing > Foot Yangming Stomach Channel is Zu-Yang-Ming-Wei-Jing This is an abreviation, for Nei Jing refers to these as Mai as well (again, I can't post the Chinese, but here's the pinyin from Neijing Lingshu, Jing Mai: " xin shou shaoyin zhi mai " ). The jing, luo, sun, and qi( " extraordinary " ) are all " mai " . > > whereas the 8 Mai (\vessels) are: > Dumai (GV) > Renmai (CV) > Chongmai > Daimai > Yangqiaomai > Yinqiaomai > Yangweimai > Yinweimai I hope this does not come across as arrogance- i do not mean it that way at all. I am quite humble about my knowledge and abilities in CM. But this is a more correct understanding, I believe. Hope that helps clarify things. Warm regards, Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 Hi Phil, You got me thinking so I've done a bit of research in some if my Chinese textbooks. In fact, according to my Nei Jing textbook, the " qimai " (extraordinary vessels) are also jingmai, although I can't find that language in the Neijing itself (it may be there, I just couldn't find it). The full name of the extraordinary vessels in Chinese is " qi jing ba mai " , which was first coined in the Nan Jing. A direct translation of these four characters would roughly read, " extraordinary jing eight vessels " , although I take issue with the term " extraordinary " and am not sure how to properly translate jing (my copy of the Wiseman dictionary is at the hospital, so can't reference that at the moment). Thanks for bringing this up and helping me clarify it in my own mind! Warm regards, Greg Chinese Medicine , " Greg A. Livingston " <drlivingston@g...> wrote: > > Hi Phil, > > > Greg, my understanding differs from yours. The Chinese terms Jing. > > Luo, Mai, respectively, refer to the Main Channels (Meridians, JING), > > the 15 Collaterals (Linking Network Vessels, LUO) and the 8 > > Extraordinary Vessels (MAI). > > Actually, I think you have become slightly confused because of poor translation of these > terms into English. Mai means vessel. it has variously been translated as " channel " , > " meridian " , etc., but I think it should be translated as vessel. Mai is not " extraordinary " > vessel. See below. > > Jing mai are, as you said, the " Main Channels " . Luo Mai are, again as you said, " Collaterals " . > Qi mai are the " extraordinay " vessels. Unfortunately, my attempts to post Chinese > characters to this site have failed, but in all cases, the pinyin word " mai " here is the same > character- " vessel " (or channel, meridian, etc., if you prefer, but not very accurate > translation in my opinion). > > Sometimes the entire system of Jingmai and Luomai is abreviated as jingluo. > > > > > Mai also refers to blood vessels (and the pulses), as you said > > Yes, that's correct. > > > > > For example, > > > > Hand Shaoyin Heart Channel is Shou-Shao-Yin-Xin-Jing > > Foot Yangming Stomach Channel is Zu-Yang-Ming-Wei-Jing > > This is an abreviation, for Nei Jing refers to these as Mai as well (again, I can't post the > Chinese, but here's the pinyin from Neijing Lingshu, Jing Mai: " xin shou shaoyin zhi mai " ). > The jing, luo, sun, and qi( " extraordinary " ) are all " mai " . > > > > > whereas the 8 Mai (\vessels) are: > > Dumai (GV) > > Renmai (CV) > > Chongmai > > Daimai > > Yangqiaomai > > Yinqiaomai > > Yangweimai > > Yinweimai > > I hope this does not come across as arrogance- i do not mean it that way at all. I am quite > humble about my knowledge and abilities in CM. But this is a more correct understanding, > I believe. Hope that helps clarify things. > > Warm regards, > > Greg > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 Greg, If you post your message in Chinese via the group's website and select at the bottom the correct corresponding language, then it should except the characters. Warm regards, Attilio D'Alberto Doctor of (Beijing, China) B.Sc. (Hons) T.C.M. M.A.T.C.M. Editor Times 07786 198900 enquiries <http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com/> www.chinesemedicinetimes.com Unfortunately, my attempts to post Chinese characters to this site have failed, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 Thanks, Attilio. In the future I will try that. Cheers, Greg PS: here's a test to see if it works: ??? Chinese Medicine , " Attilio D'Alberto " <attiliodalberto> wrote: > > Greg, > > If you post your message in Chinese via the group's website and select at > the bottom the correct corresponding language, then it should except the > characters. > > Warm regards, > > Attilio D'Alberto > Doctor of (Beijing, China) > B.Sc. (Hons) T.C.M. M.A.T.C.M. > Editor > Times > 07786 198900 > enquiries@c... > <http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com/> www.chinesemedicinetimes.com > > > Unfortunately, my attempts to post Chinese > characters to this site have failed, > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 Looks like it didn't work. Any other suggestions? Greg > > Thanks, Attilio. In the future I will try that. > > Cheers, > > Greg > > PS: here's a test to see if it works: ??? > > Chinese Medicine , " Attilio D'Alberto " > <attiliodalberto> wrote: > > > > Greg, > > > > If you post your message in Chinese via the group's website and select at > > the bottom the correct corresponding language, then it should except the > > characters. > > > > Warm regards, > > > > Attilio D'Alberto > > > > Unfortunately, my attempts to post Chinese > > characters to this site have failed, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 Chinese Medicine , " Greg A. Livingston " <drlivingston@g...> wrote: > Actually, I think you have become slightly confused because of poor translation of these > terms into English. Mai means vessel. it has variously been translated as " channel " , > " meridian " , etc., but I think it should be translated as vessel. Mai is not " extraordinary " > vessel. See below. Interestingly, the people that we work with on English term standards at the World Federation of Societies and the State Administration of TCM (PRC) take issue with Wiseman's translation of mai as vessels, precisely because they think that it suggests a connection with blood vessels that doesn't exist in the Chinese medical concept. As non-native speakers of English, they do not understand that the word vessel has a wide range of use that is not limited to blood vessels. The Chinese authorities favor " vessels " as a translation for what is governed by the heart, but they prefer the translation of " channels " for the word mai when used in the context of the eight extraordinary vessels. We disagree because there is no difficulty for native English speakers to understand that " extraordinary vessels " are not talking about the same " vessels " as blood vessels (and we don't want to see the distinction that appears in Chinese vanish when translated into English). But the Chinese scholars in charge of PRC English terminology nonetheless vehemently argue against any connection between blood vessels and the eight extraordinary vessels, thus they prefer to use the same English word for both jing and mai. We agree that that the eight extras are a totally distinct concept from blood vessels, but we prefer to maintain an English terminology that is as comprehensive as the Chinese terminology; thus we continue to differentiate the use of mai and jing when translating. As an aside, I think that there are fundamental flaws in the idea that channels are closely related to blood vessels. Needling a blood vessel produces a completely different sensation than needling a channel. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Hi Eric and all, Again, I am not suggesting that the mai4 " vessels " are exactly the anatomical blood vessels and that they should be needled, although there are obviously techniques such as bleeding that do directly prick blood vessels, so your last contention is not 100% correct. I am saying that the ancient Chinese knew about the cardiovascular system (and even blood circulation, 2000 years before Harvey) and that they attributed the functions of what are variously called " channels " and " meridians " to the blood vessels (mai4), in the same way that they attributed various related functions and phenomenon to all the organs. Why is no one looking for the CM Liver? It is obvious that it's not exactly the same thing as the anatomical liver. Why aren't we looking for the CM Spleen? Is there an invisible Spleen somewhere in the body, providing the functions that Neijing describes? Do we imagine that the ancient Chinese believed there were invisible organs, or do we think that they were ascribing functions to actual anatomical entities that we now know don't entirely belong? What is the difference and why is there a difference then, between what we think about the CM organs and the CM vessels? I think it has been overlooked that these are the same paradigm. Warm regards from Hangzhou! Greg PS: Eric, are you friends with Gabe Fuentes? He said a friend of his named Eric, who lives in Beijing, may be travelling wih him in China in March and that you guys might like to meet up. I'd love to meet you if you come o Hangzhou. Chinese Medicine , " Eric Brand " <smilinglotus> wrote: > > Chinese Medicine , " Greg A. > Livingston " <drlivingston@g...> wrote: > > > Actually, I think you have become slightly confused because of poor > translation of these > > terms into English. Mai means vessel. it has variously been > translated as " channel " , > > " meridian " , etc., but I think it should be translated as vessel. Mai > is not " extraordinary " > > vessel. See below. > > Interestingly, the people that we work with on English term standards > at the World Federation of Societies and the State > Administration of TCM (PRC) take issue with Wiseman's translation of > mai as vessels, precisely because they think that it suggests a > connection with blood vessels that doesn't exist in the Chinese > medical concept. As non-native speakers of English, they do not > understand that the word vessel has a wide range of use that is not > limited to blood vessels. The Chinese authorities favor " vessels " as > a translation for what is governed by the heart, but they prefer the > translation of " channels " for the word mai when used in the context of > the eight extraordinary vessels. > > We disagree because there is no difficulty for native English speakers > to understand that " extraordinary vessels " are not talking about the > same " vessels " as blood vessels (and we don't want to see the > distinction that appears in Chinese vanish when translated into > English). But the Chinese scholars in charge of PRC English > terminology nonetheless vehemently argue against any connection > between blood vessels and the eight extraordinary vessels, thus they > prefer to use the same English word for both jing and mai. We agree > that that the eight extras are a totally distinct concept from blood > vessels, but we prefer to maintain an English terminology that is as > comprehensive as the Chinese terminology; thus we continue to > differentiate the use of mai and jing when translating. > > As an aside, I think that there are fundamental flaws in the idea that > channels are closely related to blood vessels. Needling a blood > vessel produces a completely different sensation than needling a channel. > > Eric > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Chinese Medicine , " Greg A. Livingston " <drlivingston@g...> wrote: > > Hi Eric and all, > > Again, I am not suggesting that the mai4 " vessels " are exactly the anatomical blood > vessels and that they should be needled, although there are obviously techniques such as > bleeding that do directly prick blood vessels, so your last contention is not 100% correct. Yes, I understand that you aren't equating modern blood vessels with mai. But I think the word mai has a different meaning in different contexts. The thing that is governed by the heart (the vessels-mai) is different in meaning than the same word vessels (mai) in the context of the eight extraordinary vessels (qi jing ba mai). One meaning is closer to blood vessels and the other is closer to channels. Yet another meaning of mai is used to talk about the pulse. And yes, bloodletting is a therapeutic method but if the main channel points were related to blood vessels, why do the main points always miss the visible blood vessels instead of targeting them directly? >I > am saying that the ancient Chinese knew about the cardiovascular system (and even blood > circulation, 2000 years before Harvey) But this is not really true. They ancient Chinese knew about the movement of blood throughout the body, but they didn't understand the modern cardiovascular system per se. There is no evidence that the Chinese ever conceptualized the heart as a pump before the influence of Western medicine. Many Chinese people use the notion of blood movement as evidence that the Chinese were more advanced than Westerners historically, but there was actually no highly developed theory of a mechanical circulatory system in Chinese medicine before Western medicine. Of course, they knew that blood moved but their concept of this movement doesn't fit the model that Harvey developed. > PS: Eric, are you friends with Gabe Fuentes? He said a friend of his named Eric, who lives in > Beijing, may be travelling wih him in China in March and that you guys might like to meet > up. I'd love to meet you if you come o Hangzhou. Yes, I am friends with Gabe. I live in Beijing some of the time and Taipei the rest of the time. I'd love to see the famously beautiful city of Hangzhou, but time seems to always be in tragically short supply. Thanks for the invite, I'm sure I'll make it down there someday (or you could come say hello in Beijing). Best, Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Have you considered that mai differentiation might be due to area that it penetrates? Mai in relation to the blood vessels might be that part that is connected or in contact with the actual blood vessel. These are just thoughts and consideration to the anatomical work conducted by Bonghan and Soh. I think that if we consider these discoveries we might better be able to understand and make light of what ancient theory might mean. Mike W. Bowser, L Ac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Hi Eric, Unfortunately, my vacation has come to an end today, so I won't have much time to reply from here on. I have made a few remarks here, though. > Yes, I understand that you aren't equating modern blood vessels with > mai. But I think the word mai has a different meaning in different > contexts. The thing that is governed by the heart (the vessels-mai) > is different in meaning than the same word vessels (mai) in the > context of the eight extraordinary vessels (qi jing ba mai). One > meaning is closer to blood vessels and the other is closer to > channels. Yet another meaning of mai is used to talk about the > pulse. I'm not so sure I agree. How do you know that qijing bamai is not a referrence to blood vessels? I'm not saying that it is, but I also can't say that it's not. Why couldn't it be? Mai as in pulse may also be somewhat inaccurate, since maibo means pulse, and Neijng talks about palpating the mai- couldn't this just mean touching the blood vessels (in order to feel the pulse)? > And yes, bloodletting is a therapeutic method but if the main channel > points were related to blood vessels, why do the main points always > miss the visible blood vessels instead of targeting them directly? I never said the main channel points were related to blood vessels. I just said the Chinese ascribed the phenomenon of the " mai " to the blood vessels the way they described groups of related physiology functions to all the organs. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less. > >I > > am saying that the ancient Chinese knew about the cardiovascular > system (and even blood > > circulation, 2000 years before Harvey) > > But this is not really true. They ancient Chinese knew about the > movement of blood throughout the body, but they didn't understand the > modern cardiovascular system per se. There is no evidence that the > Chinese ever conceptualized the heart as a pump before the influence > of Western medicine. Many Chinese people use the notion of blood > movement as evidence that the Chinese were more advanced than > Westerners historically, but there was actually no highly developed > theory of a mechanical circulatory system in Chinese medicine before > Western medicine. Of course, they knew that blood moved but their > concept of this movement doesn't fit the model that Harvey developed. I didn't mean to say that they had a highly developed theory of mechanical blood circulation on par with Harvey, just that they know the blood circulated in the body. > Yes, I am friends with Gabe. I live in Beijing some of the time and > Taipei the rest of the time. I'd love to see the famously beautiful > city of Hangzhou, but time seems to always be in tragically short > supply. Thanks for the invite, I'm sure I'll make it down there > someday (or you could come say hello in Beijing). If I ever make it Beijing when you're there, I'll be sure to look you up. I try to avoid Beijing though, since the last time I lived there I had bronchitis that wouldn't quit until I moved away! Warm Regards, Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Hi Mike, Eric, et al, Again, I am not suggesting that the blood vessels themselves ARE the mai4, just like I wouldn't suggest that the CM Liver IS the anatomical liver. I am saying that I tend to think that the ancient Chinese ascribed the phenomenon of the " mai4 " to the blood vessels in the same way they ascribed groups of related physiological function/phenomenon to all the organs. This is just my guess. I do not say this as a fact, so please do not think I am suggesting that I am the end-all authority here. This is just what I tend to think, and I am open to changing my views if someone can show me something more convincing. In respect and friendship, Greg PS: this may be the last you hear of me for a while since I have to get back to work today, so if I don't reply much in the future, please don't think I'm ignoring you all or avoiding the subject- just busy with work, studies, and family- I have a three year old son :-) Chinese Medicine , " mike Bowser " <naturaldoc1@h...> wrote: > > Have you considered that mai differentiation might be due to area that it > penetrates? Mai in relation to the blood vessels might be that part that is > connected or in contact with the actual blood vessel. These are just > thoughts and consideration to the anatomical work conducted by Bonghan and > Soh. I think that if we consider these discoveries we might better be able > to understand and make light of what ancient theory might mean. > > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.