Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Zang-Fu and Bioscience terms

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

 

 

>The author of this book clearly does not understand either the

 

 

 

>TCM liver functions or the modern concept of detoxification. If

 

 

 

>one understands the modern idea, it is clear that the chinese

 

 

 

>had no idea of this concept. The herbs in TCM that clear toxin do

 

 

 

>not work by stimulating TCM liver function. For example pu gong

 

 

 

>ying clears toxins mainly via the urine. It has well known western

 

 

 

>liver detox function. But it does not course the liver or nourish

 

 

 

>liver blood. It may be used for liver dampheat, but this does not

 

 

 

>have anything to do with TCM liver function, per se. In other

 

 

 

>words, I do not think the chinese conceived of this herb working

 

 

 

>by altering liver function. Of the herbs that course the liver, a few

 

 

 

>have effects on liver detox function (like chai hu), but many, if not

 

 

 

>most, do not (like xiang fu, qing pi, chuan lian zi). So the fact that

 

 

 

>chai hu and others affect liver detox is more a fluke than some

 

 

 

>rule of TCM, IMO.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>Todd

 

 

 

> Thu, 6 Jun 2002 09:13:41 -0700

 

 

 

> ""

 

 

 

>Re: TCM Liver detoxifies?

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>Well, for me this confirms that the author is mixing apples and oranges,

 

 

 

>Chinese medicine and Western naturopathic concepts. And the idea that

 

 

 

>the 'Chinese liver' detoxifies the spirit'.. . . .a total fantasy that

 

 

 

>makes no sense at all. It appeals to the American pop-spiritual

 

 

 

>mentality, but is not based on any shred of Chinese medical literature.

 

 

 

>I think it would be difficult to find any description of the

 

 

 

>hun/ethereal soul that would match this description.

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

>

 

 

 

The two messages by Todd and Zev evoke the conundrum that I have been trying to resolve: Why did the translators of CM decide to apply these western biological terms (ie, the organs such as liver, spleen, and others) to CM organs systems (the Zang-Fu)?: Why not just leave the Gan as it is, instead of calling it the Liver?

 

 

 

I have observed clients, Non-CM health practitioners, and even CM practitioners talk of Western and CM organs systems as being equivalent phenomenons. I have often tried to untangle this confusion among the abovementioned groups. Sometimes they get it and sometime they don't.

 

 

 

Luckily, no has challenged me to explain the historical origins of why the Zang-Fu got translated that way. If they did, all I would have to offer are my hypothesis and the speculation of other CM practitioners. Both of which are not currently adequate in my opinion.

 

 

 

I haven't seen Suhbuti, Heiner Fruehauf, Blue Poppy, Maciocia, Bensky, or any of the discussion groups I belong address this issue. However, I haven't read alot of Unshuld, Needham, Sivin, Elizabeth Hsu or any other CM scholars. If there's an explanation, please let me know.

 

 

 

Malino

 

 

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

(I use 'sign' instead of 'chinese character' throughout the text.)

 

>Why not just leave the Gan as it is, instead of calling it the Liver?

 

It is characteristical for our 'alphabet-spelling' languages that we

can adopt different spellings for same/similar/different things.

So in different context we use different spellings (we say QiGong

instead of EnergyWorking we say Chakra instead of wheel).

 

One chinese sign is like a painting from daVinci or a glas of

expensive red wine. It looks and tastes different to an art professor

than to a laundry woman.

 

In China there is only one sign. The sign 'Gan' is used to describe

the liver as it is sold at the market aswell as the human-liver

aswell as some psychological functions 'ganqi' 'ganhuo', when western-

medicine entered china they needed a sign for it, they used 'gan'.

When telephone entered china they called it lightning-language (the

sign for thunder/lightning was adopted for everything electrical). So

the western medical terms entered dictionaries, (old 'stupid

unmodern' TCM-terms were lost...) and translators looked up the words.

 

When I meet a patient I describe the zangfu on his personal level.

I try not to use liver, kidney, spleen as this makes

people 'narrowminded' because we have our western association with

these words. Chinese folks traditionally have broader, different

associations.

To a psychiatrist MD I had to use totally different words/sentences

to describe shizophreny/ADD/dementia from TCM point of view.

To someone who already has knowledge about the Qi-body I use

different terms than in front of a MD.

 

The chinese texts have yet not been translated in a manner that would

describe zangfu adequately.

Mao banned all 'nonsense' texts (texts that dont contribute to his

definition of development) in TCM, so a lot of texts that would clear

up some questions are lost forever.

Every now and then an 'alternative' author finds different words for

zangfu and publishes his personal experiences. Those who come close

to the higher levels of sign interpretation (from my point of view)

are laughed about and put as nonsense.

I found my interpretations and connections from zangfu to other

healing systems but I shall never speak to MDs (or people who

interpret TCM-texts fundamentalistically) about it as they usually

reply 'next thing you wanna say is you believe in ghosts and demons?

OK, I take all of that as a bad joke because I know you and you would

never believe in this BS you just told me.'

My understanding of TCM diagnosis and treatment shifted gears when I

grasped zangfu.

 

Modern text-interpreters tend to say: 'umm...they must have forgotten

some words inbetween to connect/associate this context, let me ADD

this and that word so it makes sense as I like it to make sense.'

This is the feeling I get comparing english to chinese texts.

 

One sign can be read on different education-levels. A professor

interprets them different than a monk or a child.

There is no difference in languages like here in western language

countries. Medicals and patients communicate using the signs but

everyone has his/her own depth of interpretation.

 

 

 

Greetings Tay

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...