Guest guest Posted December 7, 2001 Report Share Posted December 7, 2001 Interesting questions: > It seems then, that if qi is not equated with energy, our current > methodology to teaching qi gong and Tai chi would have to change. Why? I've known several native Asian teachers, not only of the martial arts, but also of massage, cooking , Chinese medicine and acupuncture, yet none of them talked about qi as energy and those who used the word `energy' admitted to doing so because that is how their students talked. They primarily spoke about developing and controlling qi -- gong fu. The idea of energy is hardly inseperable from teaching the martial arts. The word `energy' never arrose in years of Chinese art history classes in which qi was steadily discussed. Go to an exhibition of Chinese art and ask youself whether the principle that holds the image together and communicates to you is about force and power, or about form and relationship. Is the qi of a Chinese landscape painting the energy of the human motions through it, or is it their insignificance and impermance against the frame of the vast, towering and ancient mountains? Are those mountians without qi becuase they exhibit no energy? Is the qi of the painted mountain stream its ability to turn a water wheel, or the sense of connectedness it inspires in the human viewer? What is the qi of a smile -- the light that transmits the image or the sensitivities that give and receive the response? Is the change of the I Jing driven by the straight-line forces of will and power, or by the flowing responses of things not related in the energetic universe of time and space but in shared qualities, qi? It is concept of qi, not the word `energy,' that is necessary to qi arts. > What is > it then that we are cultivating through Nei Gong and Qi gong practice? And > what would be the appropriate language to convey this to our > students/patients? You are cultivating qi, what else? I think in each of these cases the answer is to stop trying to use words to avoid approaching the conceptual difficulties (and to stop trying to use lay understandings as the standard of expert comunications). This is exactly like the on-going translation debate where people are so concentrated on proving that the words they have always used are `right' that the main issue -- the frame of reference for the ideas -- is lost. We can choose to bring ourselves to the Chinese ideas by reading the literature broadly, studying the culture, absorbing the art, interacting with the people, and embracing the conceptual difficulties of a knowledge that is rooted in cultural experiences that are not our own. Or, we can choose to fit the Chinese concepts to ourselves by stuffing its concepts into our own ideas. The problem with substituting the concept of energy for the concept of qi is not that it does or does not best satisfy the hightly compound definitions of qi . The problem is that we stop thinking about qi and start thinking about energy -- and that is a considerable loss. Bob bob Paradigm Publications www.paradigm-pubs.com 44 Linden Street Robert L. Felt Brookline MA 02445 617-738-4664 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2001 Report Share Posted December 7, 2001 " Robert L. Felt " wrote: > > The problem with substituting the concept of energy for the concept of qi is not that it does or does not best satisfy the hightly compound definitions of qi .. The problem is that we stop thinking about qi and start thinking about,energy -- and that is a considerable loss. > Thank you, fernando Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2001 Report Share Posted December 7, 2001 > > > > > The problem with substituting the concept of energy for the concept of qi is not that it does or does not best satisfy the hightly compound definitions of qi . The problem is that we stop thinking about qi and start thinking about,energy -- and that is a considerable loss. > > > > Thank you, Thank you, indeed. This is of such fundamental importance that it cannot be stressed enough. Chinese medicine is literally woven from and into the fabric of Chinese life and culture. Qi4 is the thread. Referring to qi4 as energy is like trying to separate it from this generative matrix and is more or less like admiring a beautiful tapestry, finding one or two particular threads that seem of special interest, and pulling them out of the whole composition. Of course all one will end up with is a handfull of string. It will have lost its form and function, not to mention its beauty, when it is disentangled from the whole. There are no doubt misunderstandings about energy, as Alon suggests. And that is another key aspect of the problem associated with rendering qi4 as energy, i.e. that it invokes these misunderstandings and further shits our attention away from the integral meanings of qi4. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 OK,but if your patient ask you about Qi, what Qi is, how would you explain Qi? Like " prana " ? In some translations made by Chinese in China into English I saw " energy " as the word. It very rough and simple but somehow it is explanation for the layperson. Am I wrong? Patient needs answer and not too elaborate. Yuri --- dragon90405 <yulong wrote: This is of such fundamental > importance that it cannot be stressed enough. > Chinese medicine is literally woven from and > into the fabric of Chinese life and culture. > Qi4 is the thread. Referring to qi4 as energy > is like trying to separate it from this generative > matrix and is more or less like admiring a > beautiful tapestry, finding one or two particular > threads that seem of special interest, and pulling > them out of the whole composition. Of course all > one will end up with is a handfull of string. It > will > have lost its form and function, not to mention > its beauty, when it is disentangled from the whole. > > There are no doubt misunderstandings about > energy, as Alon suggests. And that is another > key aspect of the problem associated with > rendering qi4 as energy, i.e. that it invokes > these misunderstandings and further shits > our attention away from the integral meanings > of qi4. > > Ken > > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 In medicine, I think the qi is what the symptoms and signs for qi are, nothing more nothing less. Alon - leah tynkova Saturday, December 08, 2001 10:19 AM Re: Re: Appropriate language for qi, OK,but if your patient ask you about Qi, what Qi is,how would you explain Qi? Like "prana"? In sometranslations made by Chinese in China into English Isaw "energy" as the word. It very rough and simple butsomehow it is explanation for the layperson. Am Iwrong? Patient needs answer and not too elaborate.Yuri--- dragon90405 <yulong wrote:This is of such fundamental> importance that it cannot be stressed enough.> Chinese medicine is literally woven from and > into the fabric of Chinese life and culture. > Qi4 is the thread. Referring to qi4 as energy > is like trying to separate it from this generative > matrix and is more or less like admiring a > beautiful tapestry, finding one or two particular > threads that seem of special interest, and pulling > them out of the whole composition. Of course all > one will end up with is a handfull of string. It> will > have lost its form and function, not to mention> its beauty, when it is disentangled from the whole.> > There are no doubt misunderstandings about> energy, as Alon suggests. And that is another> key aspect of the problem associated with> rendering qi4 as energy, i.e. that it invokes> these misunderstandings and further shits> our attention away from the integral meanings> of qi4.> > Ken> > Send your FREE holiday greetings online!http://greetings.The Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 , leah tynkova <leahhome> wrote: > OK,but if your patient ask you about Qi, what Qi is, > how would you explain Qi? Like " prana " ? In some > translations made by Chinese in China into English I > saw " energy " as the word. It very rough and simple but > somehow it is explanation for the layperson. Am I > wrong? Patient needs answer and not too elaborate. > Yuri Yuri One of the rules of translation is that it should be done by a native speaker of the language that is being translated into. Ideally, this would in concert with a native in the source language, but given the choice, a native in the target language is preferred. this is not my opinion, but rather standard practice amongst all professional translators. The lack of familiarity with english has certainly led native chinese to do some of the most horrendous translations. I am sure the same is true when americans translate english into chinese. so the chinese choice of energy for qi does not mean that this is somehow a good choice. However, when talking to patients, perhaps energy is still a good choice. It is amongst ourselves when trying to understand qi and perhaps even explain it to western scientists that the use of the word energy is precarious. It skews our proper understanding and opens us to ridicule from science. Information or the self-organizing force is probably closer to the mark, but this is too complex to explain to the average patient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 Stephen Morrissey OMD Botanica BioScience Corp P.O. Box 1477 Ojai, CA 93024 Ph: 805-646-6062 Fx: 805-646-3026 email: stephen web: www.botanica-bioscience.com It skews our proper understanding and opens us to ridicule from science. Information or the self-organizing force is probably closer to the mark, but this is too complex to explain to the average patient. I think the " self organizing force " is an interesting stab at paraphrasing qi, but I'm not sure it would elicit any less ridicule than one's use of the term " energy " . Also, can you clarify how you would differentiate the " self organizing force " from " energy " as an umbrella term for electromagnetism, gravity and the nuclear force. Thanks Stehpen Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 , " stephen " <stephen@b...> wrote: > > > I think the " self organizing force " is an interesting stab at > paraphrasing qi, but I'm not sure it would elicit any less ridicule than > one's use of the term " energy " . well, neither grasp the essence of qi, but I think scientists who actually understand systems science would see the congruity between qi and self-organization, while I don't think any serious scientist would accept the idea of energy as it is understood in physics being equated with qi (see below) Also, can you clarify how you would > differentiate the " self organizing force " from " energy " as an umbrella term > for electromagnetism, gravity and the nuclear force. Thanks I thought these are considered the four fundamental forces of physics. I did not think they are considered forms of energy. I think energy is consumed to produce or maintain these forces and these forces can also be a source of energy, but I am not sure if they are energy themselves. However, it has been a long time since physics 101. Regardless, to my understanding energy is chaotic and energetic systems tend towards entropy. Equlibrium is the end state of chemical processes and in a living organism, chemical equlibrium only occurs at death. So the mere presence of energy can't account for life or the complex organization of even inanimate things like rocks or mountains. In addition to energy, which is no doubt a requirement of all systems, these must be organization. Systems science has referred to this as the dysentropic force. And complex systems must counterbalance the tendency towards entropy with this other force. It is what brings order out of chaos. Also, this dysentropic force is considered an inherent property of complex systems, not some discrete form of energy. It may be analogous to gravity, which is an inherent property of things with mass, from which it cannot be separated (though I am not sure how " artificial gravity " is produced). And this also seems congruous with my limited understanding of the idea of the tao and the 10,000 things. Is it the qi that orders the emanations of the tao into the 10,000 complex structured " things " ? Perhaps this is all subtle semantics, but I think the distinction between the dysentropic force of self-organization and " energy " is fairly clear. Entropy is still the stronger force and always wins, which is why we all die. And when entropy overcomes dysentropy, the system disorganizes. I can help but think that the attachment to the concept of some discrete ethereal energy flowing through the channels that somehow animates dead matter is in part a projection of judeo christian culture. that the soul animates the flesh and when it leaves, the flesh dies. By conceiving qi as a discrete energy, are we euphemistically clinging to this idea that something permanent animates us and that eternal energy will live on after death. Granted this idea also exists in the philosophies native to India, but it does not seem to be central to native chinese thought. According to Needham, the idea of an eternal soul only became considered amongst taoists after the introduction of buddhism into China. and this was largely for political reasons, because buddhism was eclipsing taoism partially due to its message of guaranteed immortality. Taoism did not espouse the idea of rebirth in this early era and the only way to achieve immortality was through special practices. Otherwise, you were eventually nothing more than worm food. This all Needham's interpretation, so perhaps there are other thoughts on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 , " 1 " <@i...> wrote: > , leah tynkova <leahhome> wrote: Information or > the self-organizing force is probably closer to the mark. todd, Interesting point. Now, the question is: from where does the organism obtain its force and ability to self-organize and/or to transmit information within the numerous body systems? Could this be mediated through the same mechanism as for cell differentiation? Some form of intelligence too complex to explain to the average patient, practitioner, scholar, etc? Is Qi the information and self-organization or is it the ability/force to self-organize and inform? And, when you say " force " do you mean energy? One more item. Is the use of energy for qi, a translation of Manfred Porkert or is it a translation from Soulie de Morant? Fernando Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 , " fbernall " <fbernall@a...> wrote: > todd, > > Interesting point. Now, the question is: from where does the organism > obtain its force and ability to self-organize and/or to transmit > information within the numerous body systems? this is considered an inherent property of complex systems, like gravity is a force of all things that have mass. see my last post. Could this be mediated > through the same mechanism as for cell differentiation? Some form of > intelligence too complex to explain to the average patient, > practitioner, scholar, etc? perhaps it is the soul or cosmic intelligence. But I don't know what chinese medicine has to say about the intelligence of qi. Is qi a form of god becoming manifest in the flesh. Perhaps Ken or others who know more about all these things than me can tell us. > Is Qi the information and self-organization or is it the ability/force > to self-organize and inform? hmmm. good question. I don't think there is any separation between the doer and the doing here. again, perhaps someone else has more insight into either information theory and/or taoist/neoconfucian ideas on these matters. And, when you say " force " do you mean > energy? I don't think force and energy are synonyms. I think energy is consumed to produce force. So if you starve a system of energy, it will no longer be able to have the force to self-organize. But energy is an external input to the system, whose ability to organize is inherent. To go any further than this explanation takes us out of science and into religion, where perhaps the final truth resides. So this force is either a mindless force of the universe or a mystical form of intelligence residing in the body. But I am not sure how the answer to that affects our practice of medicine. It certainly affects how or whether we pursue a spiritual path, which perhaps does affect our practice of medicine, on second thought. > > One more item. Is the use of energy for qi, a translation of Manfred > Porkert or is it a translation from Soulie de Morant? I believe it was soulie de Morant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 opens us to ridicule from science. >>>That is probably the most important aspect of the debate Alon - 1 Saturday, December 08, 2001 12:11 PM Re: Appropriate language for qi, , leah tynkova <leahhome> wrote:> OK,but if your patient ask you about Qi, what Qi is,> how would you explain Qi? Like "prana"? In some> translations made by Chinese in China into English I> saw "energy" as the word. It very rough and simple but> somehow it is explanation for the layperson. Am I> wrong? Patient needs answer and not too elaborate.> YuriYuriOne of the rules of translation is that it should be done by a native speaker of the language that is being translated into. Ideally, this would in concert with a native in the source language, but given the choice, a native in the target language is preferred. this is not my opinion, but rather standard practice amongst all professional translators. The lack of familiarity with english has certainly led native chinese to do some of the most horrendous translations. I am sure the same is true when americans translate english into chinese. so the chinese choice of energy for qi does not mean that this is somehow a good choice. However, when talking to patients, perhaps energy is still a good choice. It is amongst ourselves when trying to understand qi and perhaps even explain it to western scientists that the use of the word energy is precarious. It skews our proper understanding and opens us to ridicule from science. Information or the self-organizing force is probably closer to the mark, but this is too complex to explain to the average patient.ToddChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 force >>I like this term ALon - 1 Saturday, December 08, 2001 3:13 PM Re: Appropriate language for qi, , "stephen" <stephen@b...> wrote:> > > I think the "self organizing force" is an interesting stab at> paraphrasing qi, but I'm not sure it would elicit any less ridicule than> one's use of the term "energy".well, neither grasp the essence of qi, but I think scientists who actually understand systems science would see the congruity between qi and self-organization, while I don't think any serious scientist would accept the idea of energy as it is understood in physics being equated with qi (see below) Also, can you clarify how you would> differentiate the "self organizing force" from "energy" as an umbrella term> for electromagnetism, gravity and the nuclear force. ThanksI thought these are considered the four fundamental forces of physics. I did not think they are considered forms of energy. I think energy is consumed to produce or maintain these forces and these forces can also be a source of energy, but I am not sure if they are energy themselves. However, it has been a long time since physics 101. Regardless, to my understanding energy is chaotic and energetic systems tend towards entropy. Equlibrium is the end state of chemical processes and in a living organism, chemical equlibrium only occurs at death. So the mere presence of energy can't account for life or the complex organization of even inanimate things like rocks or mountains. In addition to energy, which is no doubt a requirement of all systems, these must be organization. Systems science has referred to this as the dysentropic force. And complex systems must counterbalance the tendency towards entropy with this other force. It is what brings order out of chaos. Also, this dysentropic force is considered an inherent property of complex systems, not some discrete form of energy. It may be analogous to gravity, which is an inherent property of things with mass, from which it cannot be separated (though I am not sure how "artificial gravity" is produced). And this also seems congruous with my limited understanding of the idea of the tao and the 10,000 things. Is it the qi that orders the emanations of the tao into the 10,000 complex structured "things"? Perhaps this is all subtle semantics, but I think the distinction between the dysentropic force of self-organization and "energy" is fairly clear. Entropy is still the stronger force and always wins, which is why we all die. And when entropy overcomes dysentropy, the system disorganizes. I can help but think that the attachment to the concept of some discrete ethereal energy flowing through the channels that somehow animates dead matter is in part a projection of judeo christian culture. that the soul animates the flesh and when it leaves, the flesh dies. By conceiving qi as a discrete energy, are we euphemistically clinging to this idea that something permanent animates us and that eternal energy will live on after death. Granted this idea also exists in the philosophies native to India, but it does not seem to be central to native chinese thought. According to Needham, the idea of an eternal soul only became considered amongst taoists after the introduction of buddhism into China. and this was largely for political reasons, because buddhism was eclipsing taoism partially due to its message of guaranteed immortality. Taoism did not espouse the idea of rebirth in this early era and the only way to achieve immortality was through special practices. Otherwise, you were eventually nothing more than worm food. This all Needham's interpretation, so perhaps there are other thoughts on this. Todd Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 Interesting point. Now, the question is: from where does the organism obtain its force and ability to self-organize and/or to transmit information within the numerous body systems? >>>That is the Nobel prize question Alon - fbernall Saturday, December 08, 2001 3:24 PM Re: Appropriate language for qi, , "1" <@i...> wrote:> , leah tynkova <leahhome> wrote: Information or > the self-organizing force is probably closer to the mark.todd,Interesting point. Now, the question is: from where does the organism obtain its force and ability to self-organize and/or to transmit information within the numerous body systems? Could this be mediated through the same mechanism as for cell differentiation? Some form of intelligence too complex to explain to the average patient, practitioner, scholar, etc?Is Qi the information and self-organization or is it the ability/force to self-organize and inform? And, when you say "force" do you mean energy?One more item. Is the use of energy for qi, a translation of Manfred Porkert or is it a translation from Soulie de Morant?FernandoChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 Hello, It occurs to me that some members of this group may only have been exposed to the word 'qi4' in its medical context and do not know what a wide range of meanings it has in the general everyday Chinese language. Here are the meanings in the Far East Chinese-English Dictionary: qi4 1. air; gas; vapor; the atmosphere 2. breath 3. spirit; moral 4. influence [unschuld uses this one] 5. bearing; manner 6. smells; odors 7. to be angry; to be indignant; rage; anger 8. to provoke; to goad; to make angry; to annoy 9. weather While none of these really seem to cover the medical meanings very well, we should remember that to a Chinese, the above meanings are part of the connotations [or actually denotations] of the word, especially 1-5 and 9. There are many many compound terms using qi, and each of these can change the meaning to a different focus. Since I have studied fengshui for a little while, I have also observed the term is used a little differently in that art/science. For example, in fengshui, there is luan2tou (basically form) versus li3qi4 (basically a calculation of the qi). My opinion is also that the term qi cannot be translated without stripping it of much of its essence. Lorraine PS: to see an on-line dictionary's definitions of qi, go to http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/cgi-bin/agrep-lindict?query=%AE%F0 & category=whol\ erecord However, you cannot read the characters without software to read Chinese. You can still read the English there, without this software. ===== Lorraine Wilcox L.Ac. Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 Native English speakers don't have a monopoly on poor translation of Chinese medical and cultural terminology. Qi is a difficult concept to translate, so perhaps these particular Chinese translators were 'playing to the crowd', so to speak. This attitude may make difficult concepts easier to digest, but it removes many of the essential shades of meaning. On Saturday, December 8, 2001, at 08:19 AM, leah tynkova wrote: > OK,but if your patient ask you about Qi, what Qi is, > how would you explain Qi? Like " prana " ? In some > translations made by Chinese in China into English I > saw " energy " as the word. It very rough and simple but > somehow it is explanation for the layperson. Am I > wrong? Patient needs answer and not too elaborate. > Yuri > --- dragon90405 <yulong wrote: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 It was a very good clarification and i appreciate that. Prasad "Lorraine Wilcox L.Ac." <xuankong wrote: Hello,It occurs to me that some members of this group mayonly have been exposed to the word 'qi4' in itsmedical context and do not know what a wide range ofmeanings it has in the general everyday Chineselanguage.Here are the meanings in the Far East Chinese-EnglishDictionary:qi41. air; gas; vapor; the atmosphere2. breath3. spirit; moral4. influence [unschuld uses this one]5. bearing; manner6. smells; odors7. to be angry; to be indignant; rage; anger8. to provoke; to goad; to make angry; to annoy9. weatherWhile none of these really seem to cover the medicalmeanings very well, we should remember that to aChinese, the above meanings are part of theconnotations [or actually denotations] of the word,especially 1-5 and 9.There are many many compound terms using qi, and eachof these can change the meaning to a different focus.Since I have studied fengshui for a little while, Ihave also observed the term is used a littledifferently in that art/science. For example, infengshui, there is luan2tou (basically form) versusli3qi4 (basically a calculation of the qi).My opinion is also that the term qi cannot betranslated without stripping it of much of itsessence.LorrainePS: to see an on-line dictionary's definitions of qi,go to http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/cgi-bin/agrep-lindict?query=%AE%F0 & category=wholerecordHowever, you cannot read the characters withoutsoftware to read Chinese. You can still read theEnglish there, without this software.=====Lorraine Wilcox L.Ac.Send your FREE holiday greetings online!http://greetings.The Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 > > > Entropy is still the stronger force and always wins, which is why we > all die. And when entropy overcomes dysentropy, the system > disorganizes. I think you've done a good job explaining some of the essentials of complexity theory, summed up by the line above (for space concerns, I didn't repeat the entire post). I agree with what you've said so far. > I can help but think that the attachment to the concept > of some discrete ethereal energy flowing through the channels that > somehow animates dead matter is in part a projection of judeo christian > culture. As I've said before, I think it is correct to separate the principles of Judaism and Christianity, as they are essentially very different. > that the soul animates the flesh and when it leaves, the > flesh dies. By conceiving qi as a discrete energy, are we > euphemistically clinging to this idea that something permanent animates > us and that eternal energy will live on after death. In the Zohar, the main Kabbalistic text, it talks about internal wisdoms (Kabbalah and Torah) and external wisdoms (philosophy and science). That which is in the realm of soul and spirit is attached to human life, but not dependent on it. It is not of the nature of physical matter, and cannot be defined by life sciences as we know them. It survives the death of the body and personality, but we mostly move through life with only a vague awareness about it, if at all. The soul in Kabbalah has five ascending levels of refinement, each connected to a more refined spiritual world/universe. Nowhere is there any comparison to or interpretation in terms of 'energy'. > Granted this idea > also exists in the philosophies native to India, but it does not seem > to be central to native chinese thought. According to Needham, the > idea of an eternal soul only became considered amongst taoists after > the introduction of buddhism into China. and this was largely for > political reasons, because buddhism was eclipsing taoism partially due > to its message of guaranteed immortality. Taoism did not espouse the > idea of rebirth in this early era and the only way to achieve > immortality was through special practices. Otherwise, you were > eventually nothing more than worm food. This all Needham's > interpretation, so perhaps there are other thoughts on this. In Jewish philosophy,the life of this world is the main focus, not reincarnations, even though the Kabbalistic literature talks about them in depth. The fine balance is to live in this world effectively without denial of the so-called spiritual world. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2001 Report Share Posted December 8, 2001 A couple of points: First, the discussion of qi4 tends to follow two interrelated paths. One seeks to discover what it is. What is qi4? The other seeks to discover what have the Chinese had to say about it. Since it is a concept that it so inextricably interwoven into the fabric of Chinese life and thought, I prefer to pursue the latter in taking the first steps to approach the former. First and foremost we need to understand what the Chinese think qi4 is. Once we approximate this understanding we can more reasonably expect to achieve results from seeking after the nature of qi4. Qi4 is a tool. In fact one of its many meanings, through association with another word, min3, is tool. It's a kind of formal term that would appear in phrase like " laboratory equipment " equipment and tool having more or less the same meaning here, i.e. the stuff you use to get work done. Min3 means " utensil. " The work is coming to understand qi4. But to use the tool called qi4, you first have to understand what it is and how it functions, as with using any other tool. You cannot expect someone with no idea of what a hammer is or a laser beam or any tool to be able to pick it up and use it profitably without devoting some time and attention to learning about the tool itself. It's more reasonable to expect that someone with little to no knowledge of the tools they possess is likely to get relatively little done and may even injure themselves and others. I think Lorraine was pointing out that the word qi4 has lots of meanings and that it's quite useful to know them. What my wife and I discovered over the course of several years of what turned into a kind of obsessive research project was that you really have to know a lot of different things in order to even begin to understand what the Chinese have meant for the past few thousand years when they use the word qi4. We followed along the second path describe above, and at every step, new material appeared until it dawned on us that we'd need to write a whole book. The table of contents lists out the categories of phenomena, ideas, and artifacts that we find indispensable to the study and eventual understanding of what qi4 is. If you want to tell your patients and your students what they've come to hear and seek to know about qi4, then tell them it is a big subject and though you can certainly start to help them understand what it is today, the day they ask you the question, it will take years and years for them to develop a deep and meaningful grasp of what qi4 is all about. Tell them that unlike so many of the cultural artifacts of our modern lives, qi4 is not something that can be quickly or easily understood. It's a little mysterious and that even after studying it for many years, you still don't have much more than a good feeling of what it is all about. If that last part is not true or does not apply to you, then please share with us all what qi4 is. I know a lot of people in China who would love to know...and they've been working to find out for their whole lives. > perhaps it is the soul or cosmic intelligence. But I don't know what > chinese medicine has to say about the intelligence of qi. Is qi a form > of god becoming manifest in the flesh. Perhaps Ken or others who know > more about all these things than me can tell us. I am, obviously, happy to talk about the experiences that I've had while working with my wife to compile material that we acquired while following the path of research leading to an understanding of what the Chinese have to say about qi4. One of the things that they say is that the work of following the path of coming to know qi4, to know the nature and the complex and subtle operations of qi4, this work is accomplished individually, privately, within the confines of one's own mind/body. Another thing that they say is that there is something mysterious about qi4. It is a mystery when you first begin to look for it. It remains a mystery the entire time that you are engaged in the quest. And it endures as a mystery long after you have vanished from the face of the earth. Faced with these constraints, I don't find much of meaning that I can say about what qi4 is. I find Todd's use of the notion of self- organizing forces particularly useful in conveying some of the metaphysical and physical concepts embodied by the Chinese word. And, as I said before, I also like to use the notion of connectivity when asked " So, what is it? " Qi4 is what connects all causes with their effects. But the importance of the inclusion of the mystery in the overall undertanding of qi4 ought not be downplayed. I believe it exhibits some of the most significant robustness of Daoist epistemology, i.e. the self-referrential awareness that Bohr described as being both actors and audience. Zheng Man Qing said that the qi4 should be accumulated in the dan1 tian2. For the Daoist, said the Professor, there is no other way. He emphasized this point again and again. When he addresssed the special characteristic of tai4 ji2, he wrote that it is the capcity that it engenders to sink the qi4 and the mind to the dan1 tian2. I include mention of these here, because according to Prof. Zheng, all the answers to the questions that people have who seek to understand the nature of qi4 can best be answered by following this method. Without the accumulation and refinement of one's personal qi4, regardless of the method one uses, the " appropriate language for qi4 " really never comes to mean much at all. > > > Is Qi the information and self-organization or is it the ability/force > > to self-organize and inform? > > > hmmm. good question. I don't think there is any separation between > the doer and the doing here. again, perhaps someone else has more > insight into either information theory and/or taoist/neoconfucian ideas > on these matters. There is a great " debate " that spans centuries concerning qi4 and li3. The Song scholar Zhu Xi authored a doctrine that held that li3 (the cosmic principle, logos) preceeded qi4 (which, in this usage can perhaps be understood as substantial forces and forms). The earlier trend in thinking, such as is found in Zhuang Zi and Meng Zi, among many other sources, is that qi4 is the most fundamental " stuff " and includes the transformations of the stuff. I don't claim any great insight into this issue. I've always construed the argument Zhu Xi advanced as further evidence of his compulsive and oppressive character that was brought so forcefully to bear upon Chinese culture starting a couple centuries or so after his death. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 9, 2001 Report Share Posted December 9, 2001 I think you are asking the question the wrong way--- " What is qi? " It isn't anything in itself. Consider " qi " as emergence or the emergent property of the behavior of a system---a good fit with ideas about complexity theory and self- organizing systems. Thought of this way, it fulfills the requirements of living systems that emergent phenomena are, typically, persistant patterns with changing components; and the context in which a persistant emergent pattern is embedded determines its function. For example, jing qi, zheng qi, etc. I would also consider the 'emergent property' as a common thread through most of the definitions that Lorraine offered; and why " qi " can never be defined as simply the sum of its parts. Jim Ramholz , " dragon90405 " <yulong@m...> wrote: > A couple of points: > > First, the discussion of qi4 tends to follow two interrelated paths. > One seeks to discover what it is. What is qi4? The other seeks to > discover what have the Chinese had to say about it. Since it is a > concept that it so inextricably interwoven into the fabric of Chinese > life and thought, I prefer to pursue the latter in taking the first > steps to approach the former. First and foremost we need to > understand what the Chinese think qi4 is. Once we approximate this > understanding we can more reasonably expect to achieve results from > seeking after the nature of qi4. > > Qi4 is a tool. In fact one of its many meanings, through association > with another word, min3, is tool. It's a kind of formal term that > would appear in phrase like " laboratory equipment " equipment and tool > having more or less the same meaning here, i.e. the stuff you use to > get work done. Min3 means " utensil. " > > The work is coming to understand qi4. But to use the tool called qi4, > you first have to understand what it is and how it functions, as with > using any other tool. You cannot expect someone with no idea of what > a hammer is or a laser beam or any tool to be able to pick it up and > use it profitably without devoting some time and attention to > learning about the tool itself. It's more reasonable to expect that > someone with little to no knowledge of the tools they possess is > likely to get relatively little done and may even injure themselves > and others. > > I think Lorraine was pointing out that the word qi4 has lots of > meanings and that it's quite useful to know them. What my wife and I > discovered over the course of several years of what turned into a > kind of obsessive research project was that you really have to know a > lot of different things in order to even begin to understand what the > Chinese have meant for the past few thousand years when they use the > word qi4. We followed along the second path describe above, and at > every step, new material appeared until it dawned on us that we'd > need to write a whole book. > > The table of contents lists out the categories of phenomena, ideas, > and artifacts that we find indispensable to the study and eventual > understanding of what qi4 is. If you want to tell your patients and > your students what they've come to hear and seek to know about qi4, > then tell them it is a big subject and though you can certainly > start to help them understand what it is today, the day they ask you > the question, it will take years and years for them to develop a deep > and meaningful grasp of what qi4 is all about. Tell them that unlike > so many of the cultural artifacts of our modern lives, qi4 is not > something that can be quickly or easily understood. It's a little > mysterious and that even after studying it for many years, you still > don't have much more than a good feeling of what it is all about. > > If that last part is not true or does not apply to you, then please > share with us all what qi4 is. I know a lot of people in China who > would love to know...and they've been working to find out for their > whole lives. > > > perhaps it is the soul or cosmic intelligence. But I don't know > what > > chinese medicine has to say about the intelligence of qi. Is qi a > form > > of god becoming manifest in the flesh. Perhaps Ken or others who > know > > more about all these things than me can tell us. > > I am, obviously, happy to talk about the experiences that I've had > while working with my wife to compile material that we acquired while > following the path of research leading to an understanding of what > the Chinese have to say about qi4. > > One of the things that they say is that the work of following the > path of coming to know qi4, to know the nature and the complex and > subtle operations of qi4, this work is accomplished individually, > privately, within the confines of one's own mind/body. Another thing > that they say is that there is something mysterious about qi4. It is > a mystery when you first begin to look for it. It remains a mystery > the entire time that you are engaged in the quest. And it endures as > a mystery long after you have vanished from the face of the earth. > > Faced with these constraints, I don't find much of meaning that I can > say about what qi4 is. I find Todd's use of the notion of self- > organizing forces particularly useful in conveying some of the > metaphysical and physical concepts embodied by the Chinese word. And, > as I said before, I also like to use the notion of connectivity when > asked " So, what is it? " Qi4 is what connects all causes with their > effects. > > But the importance of the inclusion of the mystery in the overall > undertanding of qi4 ought not be downplayed. I believe it exhibits > some of the most significant robustness of Daoist epistemology, i.e. > the self-referrential awareness that Bohr described as being both > actors and audience. > > Zheng Man Qing said that the qi4 should be accumulated in the dan1 > tian2. For the Daoist, said the Professor, there is no other way. > > He emphasized this point again and again. When he addresssed the > special characteristic of tai4 ji2, he wrote that it is the capcity > that it engenders to sink the qi4 and the mind to the dan1 tian2. > > I include mention of these here, because according to Prof. Zheng, > all the answers to the questions that people have who seek to > understand the nature of qi4 can best be answered by following this > method. Without the accumulation and refinement of one's personal > qi4, regardless of the method one uses, the " appropriate language for > qi4 " really never comes to mean much at all. > > > > > > > Is Qi the information and self-organization or is it the > ability/force > > > to self-organize and inform? > > > > > > hmmm. good question. I don't think there is any separation > between > > the doer and the doing here. again, perhaps someone else has more > > insight into either information theory and/or taoist/neoconfucian > ideas > > on these matters. > > There is a great " debate " that spans centuries concerning qi4 and > li3. The Song scholar Zhu Xi authored a doctrine that held that li3 > (the cosmic principle, logos) preceeded qi4 (which, in this usage > can perhaps be understood as substantial forces and forms). The > earlier trend in thinking, such as is found in Zhuang Zi and Meng Zi, > among many other sources, is that qi4 is the most fundamental " stuff " > and includes the transformations of the stuff. I don't claim any > great insight into this issue. I've always construed the argument Zhu > Xi advanced as further evidence of his compulsive and oppressive > character that was brought so forcefully to bear upon Chinese culture > starting a couple centuries or so after his death. > > Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 9, 2001 Report Share Posted December 9, 2001 Hello Qi-hunters, To fully understand Qi all of our expertise together won't be sufficient. The important question to me is more how to explain this word to patients and lay-persons. I like to use the 3 levels (and 3 treasures) you find everywhere in chinese culture. earth - man - heaven jing - qi - shen Now look again on the other notions of qi, like weather, air, breath, gas, even tool as Ken mentioned. We are not animated by qi, we are animated by shen. When shen and jing (heaven and earth) get in contact, this is qi (this is man). Weather is nothing else than interaction of heaven (sky) and earth. Air is what connects it, breath is our form of air. Now gas and tool: it has the ability to do something (Wirkkraft), which is close to the definition of energy. What is man doing on this earth, in this life? We are doing something all the time, working things, just like a tool or energy can do (Gas for me is air + energy) and maybe we are even being a tool. So Qi to me and how I explain it normally is the connection between heaven and earth, the high voltage between Yin and Yang (U =R x I ?!?). This of course is not all about Qi, but as I said above it's a somehow comprehensible picture for patients or other interested people. Patrick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 9, 2001 Report Share Posted December 9, 2001 I don't have any texts to here to quote. But what of the " Hun " in Chinese medical thought. Isn't the " Hun " the spiritual aspect of the " Liver " (as it has been translated to English) that leaves the body at death. Frederick Court wrote: That which is in the realm of soul and spirit is > attached to human life, > but not dependent on it. It is not of the nature of > physical matter, > and cannot be defined by life sciences as we know > them. It survives the > death of the body and personality, but we mostly > move through life with > only a vague awareness about it, if at all. The soul > in Kabbalah has > five ascending levels of refinement, each connected > to a more refined > spiritual world/universe. Nowhere is there any > comparison to or > interpretation in terms of 'energy'. > > > > Granted this idea > > also exists in the philosophies native to India, > but it does not seem > > to be central to native chinese thought. --- <zrosenbe wrote: > > > > > > Entropy is still the stronger force and always > wins, which is why we > > all die. And when entropy overcomes dysentropy, > the system > > disorganizes. > > I think you've done a good job explaining some of > the essentials of > complexity theory, summed up by the line above (for > space concerns, I > didn't repeat the entire post). I agree with what > you've said so far. > > > > I can help but think that the attachment to the > concept > > of some discrete ethereal energy flowing through > the channels that > > somehow animates dead matter is in part a > projection of judeo christian > > culture. > > As I've said before, I think it is correct to > separate the principles of > Judaism and Christianity, as they are essentially > very different. > > > that the soul animates the flesh and when it > leaves, the > > flesh dies. By conceiving qi as a discrete > energy, are we > > euphemistically clinging to this idea that > something permanent animates > > us and that eternal energy will live on after > death. > > In the Zohar, the main Kabbalistic text, it talks > about internal wisdoms > (Kabbalah and Torah) and external wisdoms > (philosophy and science). > That which is in the realm of soul and spirit is > attached to human life, > but not dependent on it. It is not of the nature of > physical matter, > and cannot be defined by life sciences as we know > them. It survives the > death of the body and personality, but we mostly > move through life with > only a vague awareness about it, if at all. The soul > in Kabbalah has > five ascending levels of refinement, each connected > to a more refined > spiritual world/universe. Nowhere is there any > comparison to or > interpretation in terms of 'energy'. > > > > Granted this idea > > also exists in the philosophies native to India, > but it does not seem > > to be central to native chinese thought. > According to Needham, the > > idea of an eternal soul only became considered > amongst taoists after > > the introduction of buddhism into China. and this > was largely for > > political reasons, because buddhism was eclipsing > taoism partially due > > to its message of guaranteed immortality. Taoism > did not espouse the > > idea of rebirth in this early era and the only way > to achieve > > immortality was through special practices. > Otherwise, you were > > eventually nothing more than worm food. This all > Needham's > > interpretation, so perhaps there are other > thoughts on this. > > In Jewish philosophy,the life of this world is the > main focus, not > reincarnations, even though the Kabbalistic > literature talks about them > in depth. The fine balance is to live in this world > effectively without > denial of the so-called spiritual world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 9, 2001 Report Share Posted December 9, 2001 Dear Friends Very briefly.....In my current states of understanding .....I would define Qi as Relationship to Life....therefore for example Qi manifests as Spleen Qi relationship to life as Transformation and Transportation, etc. Too simple? Works for me. Is not Yin and Yang a relationship of polarity? I hope this is helpful. Turiya Hill .. - " dragon90405 " <yulong Saturday, December 08, 2001 7:01 PM Re: Appropriate language for qi, > A couple of points: > > First, the discussion of qi4 tends to follow two interrelated paths. > One seeks to discover what it is. What is qi4? The other seeks to > discover what have the Chinese had to say about it. Since it is a > concept that it so inextricably interwoven into the fabric of Chinese > life and thought, I prefer to pursue the latter in taking the first > steps to approach the former. First and foremost we need to > understand what the Chinese think qi4 is. Once we approximate this > understanding we can more reasonably expect to achieve results from > seeking after the nature of qi4. > > Qi4 is a tool. In fact one of its many meanings, through association > with another word, min3, is tool. It's a kind of formal term that > would appear in phrase like " laboratory equipment " equipment and tool > having more or less the same meaning here, i.e. the stuff you use to > get work done. Min3 means " utensil. " > > The work is coming to understand qi4. But to use the tool called qi4, > you first have to understand what it is and how it functions, as with > using any other tool. You cannot expect someone with no idea of what > a hammer is or a laser beam or any tool to be able to pick it up and > use it profitably without devoting some time and attention to > learning about the tool itself. It's more reasonable to expect that > someone with little to no knowledge of the tools they possess is > likely to get relatively little done and may even injure themselves > and others. > > I think Lorraine was pointing out that the word qi4 has lots of > meanings and that it's quite useful to know them. What my wife and I > discovered over the course of several years of what turned into a > kind of obsessive research project was that you really have to know a > lot of different things in order to even begin to understand what the > Chinese have meant for the past few thousand years when they use the > word qi4. We followed along the second path describe above, and at > every step, new material appeared until it dawned on us that we'd > need to write a whole book. > > The table of contents lists out the categories of phenomena, ideas, > and artifacts that we find indispensable to the study and eventual > understanding of what qi4 is. If you want to tell your patients and > your students what they've come to hear and seek to know about qi4, > then tell them it is a big subject and though you can certainly > start to help them understand what it is today, the day they ask you > the question, it will take years and years for them to develop a deep > and meaningful grasp of what qi4 is all about. Tell them that unlike > so many of the cultural artifacts of our modern lives, qi4 is not > something that can be quickly or easily understood. It's a little > mysterious and that even after studying it for many years, you still > don't have much more than a good feeling of what it is all about. > > If that last part is not true or does not apply to you, then please > share with us all what qi4 is. I know a lot of people in China who > would love to know...and they've been working to find out for their > whole lives. > > > perhaps it is the soul or cosmic intelligence. But I don't know > what > > chinese medicine has to say about the intelligence of qi. Is qi a > form > > of god becoming manifest in the flesh. Perhaps Ken or others who > know > > more about all these things than me can tell us. > > I am, obviously, happy to talk about the experiences that I've had > while working with my wife to compile material that we acquired while > following the path of research leading to an understanding of what > the Chinese have to say about qi4. > > One of the things that they say is that the work of following the > path of coming to know qi4, to know the nature and the complex and > subtle operations of qi4, this work is accomplished individually, > privately, within the confines of one's own mind/body. Another thing > that they say is that there is something mysterious about qi4. It is > a mystery when you first begin to look for it. It remains a mystery > the entire time that you are engaged in the quest. And it endures as > a mystery long after you have vanished from the face of the earth. > > Faced with these constraints, I don't find much of meaning that I can > say about what qi4 is. I find Todd's use of the notion of self- > organizing forces particularly useful in conveying some of the > metaphysical and physical concepts embodied by the Chinese word. And, > as I said before, I also like to use the notion of connectivity when > asked " So, what is it? " Qi4 is what connects all causes with their > effects. > > But the importance of the inclusion of the mystery in the overall > undertanding of qi4 ought not be downplayed. I believe it exhibits > some of the most significant robustness of Daoist epistemology, i.e. > the self-referrential awareness that Bohr described as being both > actors and audience. > > Zheng Man Qing said that the qi4 should be accumulated in the dan1 > tian2. For the Daoist, said the Professor, there is no other way. > > He emphasized this point again and again. When he addresssed the > special characteristic of tai4 ji2, he wrote that it is the capcity > that it engenders to sink the qi4 and the mind to the dan1 tian2. > > I include mention of these here, because according to Prof. Zheng, > all the answers to the questions that people have who seek to > understand the nature of qi4 can best be answered by following this > method. Without the accumulation and refinement of one's personal > qi4, regardless of the method one uses, the " appropriate language for > qi4 " really never comes to mean much at all. > > > > > > > Is Qi the information and self-organization or is it the > ability/force > > > to self-organize and inform? > > > > > > hmmm. good question. I don't think there is any separation > between > > the doer and the doing here. again, perhaps someone else has more > > insight into either information theory and/or taoist/neoconfucian > ideas > > on these matters. > > There is a great " debate " that spans centuries concerning qi4 and > li3. The Song scholar Zhu Xi authored a doctrine that held that li3 > (the cosmic principle, logos) preceeded qi4 (which, in this usage > can perhaps be understood as substantial forces and forms). The > earlier trend in thinking, such as is found in Zhuang Zi and Meng Zi, > among many other sources, is that qi4 is the most fundamental " stuff " > and includes the transformations of the stuff. I don't claim any > great insight into this issue. I've always construed the argument Zhu > Xi advanced as further evidence of his compulsive and oppressive > character that was brought so forcefully to bear upon Chinese culture > starting a couple centuries or so after his death. > > Ken > > > > > > Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 9, 2001 Report Share Posted December 9, 2001 The Hun1 character has the combination of yun1, or cloud, and gui3 (ghost). . . .a floating spirit, that is supposed to depart through the bai3 hui4 hole at the top of the head (Du 20) at the time of death. While the character gives us clear pointers as to the meaning of this term, the cultural milieu of Hun1 is more difficult to construct. With spirituality, it is difficult to comprehend a culture-bound concept without totally immersing oneself in that culture, especially when the host culture no longer gives much importance to the concept (of Hun1). I use Jewish concepts of spirituality because the Jewish map is much more accessible to me. Not too long ago, I went to an incredible exhibit at the San Diego Museum of Art, called Rolling Thunder, with artifacts and reproductions of a Tang dynasty feudal lord's tomb. The world he and his people inhabited was millenia away not only in time but in how the world was viewed. . . similar to the ancient Egyptian world, where one brought objects (and sometimes servants and loved ones, or their terra cotta representations) with one to the next world when they died by burying them in their tombs. I don't think this concept of spirituality still exists on our planet at this time, at least that I am aware of. So, in conclusion, while I believe the medicine of China can be drawn on and applied practically to the modern world, it is more difficult to relate the concept of Hun1 to our present day. Do our scholars of Chinese culture want to weigh in on this? On Sunday, December 9, 2001, at 07:50 AM, Frederick Court wrote: > > I don't have any texts to here to quote. But what of > the " Hun " in Chinese medical thought. Isn't the " Hun " > the spiritual aspect of the " Liver " (as it has been > translated to English) that leaves the body at death. > > Frederick Court > > wrote: > That which is in the realm of soul and spirit is >> attached to human life, >> but not dependent on it. It is not of the nature of >> physical matter, >> and cannot be defined by life sciences as we know >> them. It survives the >> death of the body and personality, but we mostly >> move through life with >> only a vague awareness about it, if at all. The soul >> in Kabbalah has >> five ascending levels of refinement, each connected >> to a more refined >> spiritual world/universe. Nowhere is there any >> comparison to or >> interpretation in terms of 'energy'. >> >> >>> Granted this idea >>> also exists in the philosophies native to India, >> but it does not seem >>> to be central to native chinese thought. > > > > > > --- <zrosenbe wrote: >>> † >>> >>> Entropy is still the stronger force and always >> wins, which is why we >>> all die.† And when entropy overcomes dysentropy, >> the system >>> disorganizes.† >> >> I think you've done a good job explaining some of >> the essentials of >> complexity theory, summed up by the line above (for >> space concerns, I >> didn't repeat the entire post). I agree with what >> you've said so far. >> >> >>> I can help but think that the attachment to the >> concept >>> of some discrete ethereal energy flowing through >> the channels that >>> somehow animates dead matter is in part a >> projection of judeo christian >>> culture.† >> >> As I've said before, I think it is correct to >> separate the principles of >> Judaism and Christianity, as they are essentially >> very different. >> >>> that the soul animates the flesh and when it >> leaves, the >>> flesh dies.† By conceiving qi as a discrete >> energy, are we >>> euphemistically clinging to this idea that >> something permanent animates >>> us and that eternal energy will live on after >> death.† >> >> In the Zohar, the main Kabbalistic text, it talks >> about internal wisdoms >> (Kabbalah and Torah) and external wisdoms >> (philosophy and science). >> That which is in the realm of soul and spirit is >> attached to human life, >> but not dependent on it. It is not of the nature of >> physical matter, >> and cannot be defined by life sciences as we know >> them. It survives the >> death of the body and personality, but we mostly >> move through life with >> only a vague awareness about it, if at all. The soul >> in Kabbalah has >> five ascending levels of refinement, each connected >> to a more refined >> spiritual world/universe. Nowhere is there any >> comparison to or >> interpretation in terms of 'energy'. >> >> >>> Granted this idea >>> also exists in the philosophies native to India, >> but it does not seem >>> to be central to native chinese thought.† >> According to Needham, the >>> idea of an eternal soul only became considered >> amongst taoists after >>> the introduction of buddhism into China.† and this >> was largely for >>> political reasons, because buddhism was eclipsing >> taoism partially due >>> to its message of guaranteed immortality.† Taoism >> did not espouse the >>> idea of rebirth in this early era and the only way >> to achieve >>> immortality was through special practices.† >> Otherwise, you were >>> eventually nothing more than worm food.† This all >> Needham's >>> interpretation, so perhaps there are other >> thoughts on this.† >> >> In Jewish philosophy,the life of this world is the >> main focus, not >> reincarnations, even though the Kabbalistic >> literature talks about them >> in depth. The fine balance is to live in this world >> effectively without >> denial of the so-called spiritual world. >> >> >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> > > > > > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings. > > > Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed > healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate > academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety > of professional services, including board approved online continuing > education. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 9, 2001 Report Share Posted December 9, 2001 Also, can you clarify how you would > differentiate the " self organizing force " from " energy " as an umbrella term > for electromagnetism, gravity and the nuclear force. Thanks I thought these are considered the four fundamental forces of physics. I did not think they are considered forms of energy. Todd Technically, I believe you are correct, that " forces " is the term more commonly used rather than energy. However it is my understanding that the four " force-carrying particles " which manifest these four classes of force, are the source of all energy. These classifications are commonly considered to be man-made for purposes of communication. There is the opinion among many physicists that the primary goal in physics today is identification of a unified theory capable of explaining all four forces as different aspects of a single force. Perhaps that unifying force is what will best describe the meaning of Qi in scientific terminology. Stephen Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 9, 2001 Report Share Posted December 9, 2001 While reading this afternoon, I unexpectedly found support for my notion of qi as an emergent property of the behavior of a system, in Elizabeth Hsu's essay, " Pulse Diagnosis in the Western Han " (found in Innovation in , edited by E. Hsu, Cambridge University Press, 2001). Her thoughts parallel my own. In it, she states, " Qi as a categorizer in compound words seems to have a grammatical function similar to the the above suffixes: han cold can be a verb, adjective, or noun while han qi (cold qi) is always a noun. Compound words with the categorizer qi may also share certain semantics: the categorizer qi may well indicate a particular aspect of the noun. Thus, if the doctor said that he perceived liver qi, liver qi might point to an abstraction of liver, say, the Chinese variant of 'liverness'. " And later, " This 'potential for change' would refer to an aspect of a process, regardless of whether change is about to happen or whether it was once in the past about to happen and has now happened. A 'mode of being', like the 'potential for change', which concerns both 'that which has happened' and 'that which may possibly happen' may strike a modern reader aw awkward, since we tend to order events chronologically, but it seems to be intrinsic to many notions of the scholarly medical traditions in Asia. " And still later, " Assuming that qi is a categorizer signifying 'potential for change', reasoning in terms of compound words with the categorizer qi would express adherence to the worldview that a 'potential for change' is immanent in the things or qualities referred to by the first constituent. . . . In other words, the quality of the qi in the mai [pulse] determines bing [disorder]. " Jim Ramholz , " jramholz " <jramholz> wrote: > I think you are asking the question the wrong way--- " What is qi? " It > isn't anything in itself. > > Consider " qi " as emergence or the emergent property of the behavior of a system---a good fit with ideas about complexity theory and self-organizing systems. Thought of this way, it fulfills the > requirements of living systems that emergent phenomena are, > typically, persistant patterns with changing components; and the > context in which a persistant emergent pattern is embedded > determines its function. For example, jing qi, zheng qi, etc. > > I would also consider the 'emergent property' as a common thread > through most of the definitions that Lorraine offered; and why " qi " can never be defined as simply the sum of its parts. > > Jim Ramholz > 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.