qi gong

[Guest guest]

I was doing some qi gong exercises and afterwards trying to reconcile

the sensation of qi with the meanings ascribed to that term. As you

know, I oppose the equation of qi=energy, as it is inaccurate and

misleading. Qi is used in TCM to mean variously a property, a function,

a material substance or an ethereal force, to name a few. It is clearly

not a monolithic term, nor ever defined as a discrete force such as the

gravity of physics. Unschuld's " finest matter influences " or merely

" influences " perhaps captures the range of possible meanings with most

flexibility. I think this matter is best discussed in Birch's

" Understanding Acupuncture " .

 

Now certain aspects of qi are perhaps akin to a human bioenergy field,

such as channel qi, which has been suggested by Manaka and Becker,

according to Birch. Yet qi is also present in nonliving matter, a fact

glossed over by those who equate it with the life force or vital force

of early western medicine. I think perhaps qi is closer to the modern

idea of the self-organizing nature of systems. All closed systems

eventually reach equilibrium, i.e. death. Yet some property of nature

fights this force of entropy, whether to produce complex particles or

living cells. Qi is the opponent of entropy, yet no one is suggesting

that entropy is a natural energy. It is a process, but not a discrete

force. On the physical level, perhaps part of this process is a

bioelectromagnetic field.

 

Now one of things we may experience during qi gong or acupuncture is the

flow of qi or holding the qi ball reverberating in one's palms. In both

cases, the perception is electromagnetic in quality. In particular, my

experience of the qi ball feels very much like when two same poles of a

magnet are brought close together. The slight repulsion suggests that

my body is emanating an identical polar charge from each hand, an

electromagnetic phenomenon. This may be imagined, but I do not believe

so.

 

Qi gong is a mental exercise that consciously focuses one on subtle

processes. Researchers often mock the idea of bioenergy because of the

signal to noise ratio. In other words, the electromagnetic properties

of the body are drowned out by other information in complex organisms.

Birch agrees with this, but speculates that this primitive signaling

system (the channels) which existed in the egg before there was complex

nervous system, can be accessed in a variety of ways (acupuncture and qi

gong). So under normal circumstances, the channel system is not the

primary control mechanism of the body. It is more like a reset switch,

which if properly stimulated brings order to the higher level control

systems temporarily (the CNS and endocrine). Kind of like rebuilding

your computer desktop. First, restore order at the foundational level,

then the other levels fall into line.

 

Acupuncture uses mechanical stimulation to cause the same restoration of

order (that's why they say " rectify the qi " ). Herbs use biochemical

stimulation. Personally, I think the experience of doing qi gong,

receiving acupuncture and taking herbs have qualitatively different

effects on the body. Qi gong is the only one of the three that seems to

produce this bodily felt experience of qi all on its own. I think that

acupuncture only produces a similar experience when a conscious act of

guidance is taken by either the patient or the healer. In that case,

acupuncture and qi gong have actually been combined (i.e. when you tell

a patient to breathe and visualize the meridians). Likewise, herbs also

cause this type of experience only when combined with movement,

breathing, contemplation, etc. Without this psychospiritual component

, these methods are merely mechanical and biochemical, I think.

 

The point of this ramble is to suggest that the qi experienced by the qi

gong px is not one and the same with the qi experienced during

acupuncture treatment. Qi is the language that describes similar,

analogous, but ultimately different processes. So perhaps our personal

experience of the ethereal influences of consciousness and mental

processes in the form of qi gong has colored our understanding of

acupuncture and TCM. We can no longer receive acupuncture without doing

qi gong (i.e. meridian visualization) so our acupuncture experience is

different from those who cannot make this visualization (i.e. our

patients).

 

To be clear, I do consider the bodymind to be an integrated system, but

I do not believe that some monolithic life energy permeates and controls

every level. It makes more sense to me that different aspects of a

system use different energies (physical, biochemical, mental) in a

cosmic PROCESS that permeates every level. For instance, the rules of

systems science apply to all systems; I think the qi paradigm is more

general in nature like systems science than it is like the

electromagnetic theory of physics (classical physics, by the way, not

even quantum). Has anyone read Whitehead's Process and Reality lately?

Or check out Needham in Celestial Lancets.

 

Now you can observe a process and make generalizations about a process,

but you cannot really measure a process. You are always measuring a

part of the process. Yeast ferments alcohol, but we measure the level

of yeast or sugar or alcohol or time, but we can never measure the

process itself. This is really why I question the plethora of

techniques and devices that purport to measure and manipulate the qi as

if it were reducible and quantifiable (yes, measurement is inherently

reductionistic also; you all know I am a fan of measurement, but that

does not extend to qi). No doubt, in some cases, something is being

measured by these devices, but how can it be the qi?