Lung 5

[Guest guest]

Hi David

 

Yes....on one hand we can not blindly believe what people say or

purportedly translated (??) and on the other we also cannot blindly believe that

everything has been uncovered or explained.

 

As to Lung 5 you are again correct that on one hand the point as with many

if not all points there exists a leeway of location but that was not what I

was addressing.

 

Some of the so-called literati in TCM/AOM think who the heck is this

person to challenge written concepts.

I questioned the status quo with Lung 5 ........not on the basis as you

suggest which is also true..... but on the basis of poor teaching from the

AOM night-trade-schools who in turn, in part, apparently base their ideas on

translations (??) which could either be incorrect or certainly lacking in

clarity.

 

The location of Lung 5 as depicted in most writings.... even going back to

the Classics..... is lacking in clarity and specificity. I contend, in

part, because it was unnecessary for the masters to give every obvious detail

but more so today because some have taken things in a most limited

understanding way and propound what they think they know as Gospel.

 

I also asked my dear friend and mentor Wu Laoshi (Wu, Boping, MD OMD PhD -

China) many years ago about liquid in the acupuncture channels.

 

At first he was perturbed responding that there was only Qi in the

channels/meridians.

 

But then I mirrored back to him one of his axiomatic statements which was

that " qi and xue and other fluids are only separate when we are dead " .

 

Therefore I asked him again whether or not there was moisture in the

acupuncture channels. To which he replied after pondering for awhile.... " now you

are getting very profound " . My response was that the human body/being was

already profound and since it was at least 70% flowing fluids there HAD to

be liquid/moisture in the channels.

 

Couple this with what Wu Laoshi has said that there are at least 2,000

extremely important books out of about another 10,000 TCM books which have

NEVER been translated into modern Chinese no less English.

 

Richard

 

 

 

 

In a message dated 09/29/09 12:23:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

singlewhip2001 writes:

 

 

 

 

Hello Richard:

 

Well this is exactly what I am saying. We can not blindly believe what

people say or what a book says. But if one is referencing a book atleast we

should look at what they say.

 

I think there is a good reason why Lung 5 is not exactly desctibed,

because the location is not a rigid thing, it can have a range. The Nei Jing is

clearly about palpating, feeling, these precise cun measurements got listed

by people trying to standardize our medicine. The needle depths in books is

just a standard, it needs to be adjusted for the shape of every person.

 

The Renying/Cukuo pulse is about listing to the body response and stopping

a treatment when the pusle indicates the body has responded, not a fixed

time for every patient to make the practioners job easier.

 

Yes, as times goes on practioners apply new applications based on

principles in the old literature, but how many of us really study the

literature,

dedicate time and effort to it?

 

regards,

david