Guest guest Posted September 18, 2002 Report Share Posted September 18, 2002 I've found that it is best not to get hung up on property examples. Classifying Yang as male and Yin as female, doesn't mean that females are Yin and males are Yang, if you understand what I mean. Females are used as an example of something that embodies many principles of yin, males are used as an example of something that embodies many principles of yang. If one gets hung up, one begins to become confused. This happened with Five element theory. The great sceptical philosopher Wang Chong (AD 27-97) criticized the theory of the 5 elements as being too rigid to interpret all natural phenomena correctly. He said: " The rooster pertains to Metal and the hare to Wood. If Metal really conquers Wood, why is it that roosters do not devour hares? " (Foundations of , pg. 16) Part of it probably has to do with the tendency to use the same word for a specific object and a broad generalization. Like in English, the word Orange. Orange is a fruit but is also a color. The color Orange is orange. But an orange (the fruit) is orange, yellow, white, lots of colors. Mbanu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 18, 2002 Report Share Posted September 18, 2002 Wang Chong forgot that roosters aren't carnivorous it seems, anybody put them to fight each other to see what happens? I'm curious too! Marcos > --- walmart_hurts <jcc escreveu: >The great sceptical philosopher Wang Chong (AD 27-97) criticized >the theory of the 5 elements as being too rigid to interpret all >natural phenomena correctly. He said: ;The rooster pertains to >Metal and the hare to Wood. If Metal really conquers Wood, why >is it that roosters do not devour hares?; (Foundations >of >, pg. 16 _____________________ GeoCities Tudo para criar o seu site: ferramentas fáceis de usar, espaço de sobra e acessórios. http://br.geocities./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2002 Report Share Posted September 19, 2002 On second thought I guess one can say that worms are 'meat' so that would make roosters carnivorous. But then the 'wood' of the hares are too 'big' for the 'metal' of the roosters, so you have wood dominating(or nearly so) metal. The rooster would need to be much BIGGER to have enough 'metal' too eat the hare! Marcos >The great sceptical philosopher Wang Chong (AD 27-97) criticized >the theory of the 5 elements as being too rigid to interpret all >natural phenomena correctly. He said: " The rooster pertains to >Metal and the hare to Wood. If Metal really conquers Wood, why >is it that roosters do not devour hares? " (Foundations of Chinese >Medicine, pg. 16) _____________________ GeoCities Tudo para criar o seu site: ferramentas fáceis de usar, espaço de sobra e acessórios. http://br.geocities./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2002 Report Share Posted September 19, 2002 > wood dominating(or nearly so) metal. The rooster > would need to be > much BIGGER to have enough 'metal' too eat the hare! > Marcos There is also another point to be made that roosters, whether or not they devour hares, are much more aggressive than hares. Hugo Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2002 Report Share Posted September 19, 2002 >I've found that it is best not to get hung up on property examples. >Classifying Yang as male and Yin as female, doesn't mean that females >are Yin and males are Yang, if you understand what I mean. Females >are used as an example of something that embodies many principles of >yin, males are used as an example of something that embodies many >principles of yang. If one gets hung up, one begins to become >confused. This happened with Five element theory. I so agree. It really gets in the way of people just being true to themselves. Creates a lot of false expectations and standards. There actually are males who are reluctant to take Dong Quai because it is identified by some as a " woman's herb. It's a Blood tonic herb, and males too can become Blood Deficient - especially as they age or following an accident with a loss of blood. It's just that younger women are more prone to Blood Deficiency than younger men because of the monthly loss of blood, the loss of Blood during childbirth, and in the modern West, fad dieting. Dong Quai, aka Radix (root of) Angelicae Sinensis, is particularly good for Blood Deficiency in cases where there also is Blood Stasis and/or Deficiency Cold. It invigorates Blood (gets it moving) and disperses Cold in addition to tonifying Blood. It also has some pain relieving properties and is " used for abdominal pain, traumatic injury, and carbuncles due to blood stasis, especially when there is also cold from deficiency. " It's also particularly good in cases of Blood Deficiency combined with " chronic wind-damp painful obstruction " (arthritis/ rheumatism). (Chinese Herbal Medicine, revised edition, Dan Bensky & Andrew Gamble, pp. 329-330.) When any herb is thought of primarily as a " woman's herb " or a " man's herb " , the subtleties of the herb's best uses are overlooked. Victoria _______________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2002 Report Share Posted September 19, 2002 In a message dated 09/19/2002 7:49:09 AM Pacific Daylight Time, kitcurtin writes: << If you had to continue the domination theme.... >> Very interesting observation Kit. The Five Element system incorporates the ideas of nurture and control. Control meaning ... keeps the other and eachother in check by adjusting tension. It's utilizes the idea of give and take from my understanding ... not control by force. The body continuously seeks equilibrium (whether it be emotional or physical in manifestation) to prevent this " control " from occurring. Thus one can look at these manifestations and gain further insight. Lynn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2002 Report Share Posted September 19, 2002 I am wondering why the assignment of elements to these animals has to pertain to one eating the other??? BTW: If you had to continue the domination theme....at present size, I think that the rooster would clearly win a fight.....given that the hare hadn't already taken off and left the rooster in his dust. Kit At 10:55 PM 9/18/02 -0300, you wrote: > > On second thought I guess one can say that worms are 'meat' so > that would make roosters carnivorous. But then the 'wood' of the > hares are too 'big' for the 'metal' of the roosters, so you have > wood dominating(or nearly so) metal. The rooster would need to be > much BIGGER to have enough 'metal' too eat the hare! > Marcos > > > >The great sceptical philosopher Wang Chong (AD 27-97) criticized > >the theory of the 5 elements as being too rigid to interpret all > >natural phenomena correctly. He said: " The rooster pertains to > >Metal and the hare to Wood. If Metal really conquers Wood, why > >is it that roosters do not devour hares? " (Foundations of > Chinese >Medicine, pg. 16) > > > > > _____________________ > GeoCities > Tudo para criar o seu site: ferramentas fáceis de usar, espaço de sobra e > acessórios. > <http://br.geocities./>http://br.geocities./ > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2002 Report Share Posted September 19, 2002 In a message dated 09/19/2002 11:22:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time, subincor writes: << If the rooster tied up the hare so it couldn't run and then beat it, would 1. the rooster still want to eat the hare, or having expended its wood-growth energies would it feel satiated (or even depressed?) and 2 ............ >> Neither. The hares buddy the boar would be hiding in the bushes. As the rooster neared the vulnerable hare ... the boar would jump out from the bush and get in the roosters way. The rooster would become very tired in an attempt to get past this large pesky creature. Alas ... the hare starts to stir from the commotion and figures he'd better get his act together. The hare wakes up his other buddy the horse (he had been resting comfortably with the hare). The horse see's what is occurring .... and stampedes the rooster while the hare scurries off. Oh I just love happy endings ............ Lynn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2002 Report Share Posted September 19, 2002 --- Kit <kitcurtin wrote: > I am wondering why the assignment of elements to > these > animals has to pertain to one eating the other??? Because that can be entertaining. > BTW: If you had to continue the domination > theme....at present > size, I think that the rooster would clearly win a > fight.....given that > the hare hadn't already taken off and left the > rooster in his dust. That's yin using yang. See you, Hugo Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2002 Report Share Posted September 19, 2002 --- GDurst1774 wrote: > In a message dated 09/19/2002 7:49:09 AM Pacific > Daylight Time, > kitcurtin writes: > > << If you had to continue the domination theme.... > >> > Very interesting observation Kit. The Five Element > system incorporates the > ideas of nurture and control. We've explored the domination aspect a little, but I wonder if pursuing it further could help us understand bdsm. If the rooster tied up the hare so it couldn't run and then beat it, would 1. the rooster still want to eat the hare, or having expended its wood-growth energies would it feel satiated (or even depressed?) and 2. would the hare's alternative (to running) passive release of yang (via struggling and screaming through a gag) perform the same function as running but within a context of mutually-respected security therefore allowing the hare to come back the next evening for more? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Yes, the hare does look more agile than the rooster(given it's woody quality) while the rooster certainly looks more 'rigid',ergo;the hare wood take off like the wind and the rooster would strut around dignified like it owned the place. Marcos >I am wondering why the assignment of elements to these >animals has to pertain to one eating the other??? >BTW: If you had to continue the domination theme....at present >size, I think that the rooster would clearly win a >fight.....given that >the hare hadn't already taken off and left the rooster in his >dust. >Kit At 10:55 PM 9/18/02 -0300, you wrote: > > On second thought I guess one can say that worms are 'meat' so > that would make roosters carnivorous. But then the 'wood' of the > hares are too 'big' for the 'metal' of the roosters, so you have > wood dominating(or nearly so) metal. The rooster would need to be > much BIGGER to have enough 'metal' too eat the hare! > Marcos > > > >The great sceptical philosopher Wang Chong (AD 27-97) criticized > >the theory of the 5 elements as being too rigid to interpret all > >natural phenomena correctly. He said: " The rooster pertains to > >Metal and the hare to Wood. If Metal really conquers Wood, why > >is it that roosters do not devour hares? " (Foundations of > Chinese >Medicine, pg. 16) > _____________________ GeoCities Tudo para criar o seu site: ferramentas fáceis de usar, espaço de sobra e acessórios. http://br.geocities./ 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.