Ayurveda - MTC - Tibetan medicine

[Guest guest]

Hi

 

Ayurveda and MTC are probably not easily reconcilable, but what do you think

about the Tibetan medicine that integrates the concepts of hollow and solid

organs in an ayurvedic-like system ? The Tibetan knowledge of anatomy is also

important due to the ancient practice of " celestial burial " which consists in

ritual dissection of the deceased. In Tibetan medical theory, the hollow and

solid organs are closely related to the sequential spreading of illnesses in the

body, that first reach the solid organs and then the hollow ones. Is there such

a concept in Indian ayurveda ?

 

I think Tibetan medicine is worth studying, because it has integrated TCM

concepts into an ayurvedic tradition that has never been disrupted, and because

there remains a traditional and interesting interaction between physicians and

astrologers, Tibetan astrology being in the same way a synthesis of both Indian

and Chinese systems.

 

Best regards

Thierry

______________

Of course the problem here lies in trying to reconcile concepts that aren't

inherently reconcilable. In the zhang-fu theory of TCM, the organs don't

actually match up all that well with the actual viscera. In contrast, Ayurveda

has a very lucid model of the body, probably because there wasn't the taboo

against surgery or observing dead and decaying bodies

[Guest guest]

> Hi

>

> Ayurveda and MTC are probably not easily reconcilable, but what do

> you think about the Tibetan medicine that integrates the concepts

> of hollow and solid organs in an ayurvedic-like system ? ...

 

> I think Tibetan medicine is worth studying, because it has

> integrated TCM concepts into an ayurvedic tradition that has never

> been disrupted, and because there remains a traditional and

> interesting interaction between physicians and astrologers, Tibetan

> astrology being in the same way a synthesis of both Indian and

> Chinese systems.

 

Hi Thierry

 

As you mention, Tibetan medicine is partly syncretic, but on the

whole, it bears more similarity to Ayurveda than TCM. The primary

text of Tibetan medicine is the rGyud bzi, which is stated to be a

redaction of the Amrta Hyrdaya Ashtanga Guhyaupadesha Tantra, brought

to Tibet with Buddhism in the 8th cent CE. However, its logical to

contend that the practice of medicine was already present in Tibet

prior to this time, but with this text and Buddhism generally, Tibet

became more " Indianized " . Certainly there are many similarities

between the native religion of Tibet, i.e. Bon, and Hinduism, with

many similar concepts and ideas, as well as holy places. Some

scholars suggest that we can trace tantric practices (the fifth veda)

to the ancient religion of Tibet (as goes the story of Shiva cutting

off Brahma's head), and its subsequent influence upon India and the

development of tantric practices, shaivism, shaktism etc. At one

time there was a large empire called Zhang Zhung that encompassed

much of Tibet and regions west and south (Gilgit, Kasmir, Nepal),

centered around Mount Kailash in Western Tibet as its spiritual/

geographical center. Although the empire died out with the arrival

of Buddhism in Tibet, some scholars believe that it was a very

ancient culture that evolved when Tibet was actually much more

hospitable than it is nowadays, and served as a conduit for many of

the concepts and ideas that are considered to be a part of Hinduism,

and some aspects of Ayurveda may be a part of this. Physical

evidence of this however is weak, because the Zhang Zhung were

largely nomads, much like Genghis Khan, and didn't leave a lot of

artifacts behind - or at least, there hasn't been much research into

this as Zhang Zhung scholarship is still in its infancy.

Caldecott

todd

www.toddcaldecott.com