5 Element

[Guest guest]

Hello Everyone,

 

I trained at a Five Element college. 5 Element is very different to modern TCM (even to this day i am not sure what damp is). Classical 5 Element looks at the internal causes of disease like sadness, anger etc and views external causes ( damp, heat) as more of a symptom of the internal. It is much more that understanding the flow of Qi through the Five Phases with such concept as The Spirits of the Points ,Entry Exit Blocks, Causative Factor and Possession as part of its workings

 

About a year ago I had an article published in our Australian Journal which explained diagnosis and treatment of an "Earth" patient. For those interested in it is available online at

 

http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/~5element/page10.html

 

or have a look at the 5 Element Acupuncture Information site at

 

http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/~5element/

 

I hope this helps those wanting to investigate this style of acupuncture more,

 

All the best,

 

Gye

Message: 2 Sat, 26 Oct 2002 13:14:17 +0100 "Nuno Melo e Sousa" <druirRe: Elements (Re: nightshades)-"victoria_dragon" <victoria_dragon<Chinese Traditional Medicine >Friday, October 25, 2002 2:46 PM[Chinese Traditional Medicine] Elements (Re: nightshades)>> Not all TCM schools teach 5 Elements, but I recommend learning it. A> 5 Elements approach can be invaluable when trying to work> with "knotty" (complex) cases.Hi VictoriaHow can this be? How can you have TCM without 5 elements?I'm a TCM student in Portugal and I don't have much contact with differentviews of TCM other than the one I'm taught at school. And my surprise comesfrom the fact that 5 element theory is exactly where we started at. Thefirst notions to TCM diagnosis came from 5 element theory.All the best,Nuno__________Message: 3 Sat, 26 Oct 2002 10:06:17 -0500 Kit <kitcurtin5E vs 8PHow can this be? How can you have TCM without 5 elements?TCM diagnosis came from 5 element theory.Hi Nuno, If I may.....You are right. However, the TCM that came out of China was courtesy of Chrmn. Mao. He apparently didn't care for the spiritual side of the medicine. So thanks to him schools in the West emphasize diagnosis using the 8 Principles. We, of course, are taught the basics of 5E but do not use it much in clinic. There are a very few schools that have returned to the roots and spirituality/mind/emotion based medicine.That is what Victoria is refering to.... I believe this branch of learning began with the Worsley school out of England. I'm not sure how many are in the US....3-5, I think. Licensing exams are based on 8P. Kit

[Guest guest]

Thanks, Gye.

 

For readers wishing to learn more about 5 Elements, this is a very

good article to start with.

 

> http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/~5element/page10.html

 

At first, some of the concepts are going to seem overwhelming to

some, but stick with it, and like so much of TCM it will start to

fall into place.

 

Different healers have different talents and aptitudes. Some healers

will find it easiest to pick up on emotional clues. Others will be

best at observing signs such as complexion tones and smells. Still

others will be best at evaluating symptoms. Etc.

 

But in the coarse of learning, everyone is going to become a little

bit more aware and a little bit more knowledgeable about all aspects

of healing.

 

Some readers are going to be confused about the characteristics of

the different Elemental types (Fire, Earth, Metal, Water, and Wood),

seeing bits of themselves in more than one Element. Everyone does

have all 5 Elements in there makeup, well people as well as sick

people. But in the case of sick people - the people who are way out

of balance - one Element is going to predominate. Think of it as a

prime cause. Or better still, as a linchpin.

 

A linchpin is something around which all else revolves. Linchpins

hold things together - like physical axles or shafts, or, ideas and

concepts, or, different components of an illness. Correct the

linchpin, and all else follows.

 

The descriptions in the article of the 5 types is very brief. These

descriptions are reviews for those already having some background in

Elemental types and beginnings for those wishing to learn more. For

a more detailed look at Elemental types and the " quality " of energy

of the different Elements, consult Dagmar's Letter From China

newsletters in the message base.

 

Sometimes there will be more than one linchpin in an individual's

health problems, but more often than not a single Element can account

for a host of problems in various Elements. Think of branching rows

of dominoes all going down because one domino was tipped over. Only

in healing, unlike with dominos, setting that one domino back up can

result in all the dominoes coming back up. It is the prime cause.

 

Thanks,

Victoria

[Guest guest]

I studied 5 Element acupuncture and started practicing in that style and

very quickly realised that there were some situations that this style didn't

help me to treat. This is especially so if one is unable to identify the CF

(constitutional imbalance) and that happens quite often if 5 Element

practitioners are honest.

I went on to study TCM on a postgraduate course which aimed to integrate the

two approaches. Initially I swung completely towards the TCM style and

forgot my 5 Element training, but then found it again. Overall I believe

that you can use both styles as both have their strengths and weaknesses. I

do think that you can use herbs with the 5 Element style. Of course Worsley

took some aspects of classical theory and developed what worked for him,

just as TCM developed out of the needs of 20th century china and is also a

subset of the classics. It would be childish to try and compare one with

the other, which is more classical or correct. What matters is defining a

system which works, is reproducible and therefore may be taught.

Some practitioners prefer TCM and others 5 Element, personally I think they

are both wonderful and I don't think I could choose between them.

 

People who have a really strong bias either way seem to be those who have

only studied either 5 element or TCM, perhaps they should put aside their

fears and learn about other styles.

regards

Susie

 

 

 

 

The Worsley Five Element practice is a CONSTITUTIONAL theory, like

the SASANG theory that is practiced in Korea. It is a theory unto

itself that can not be combined with the theories of TCM. It does

not use herbs in its practice and it has very specific ways of

analyzing people, which are completely different from TCM. Really

the only similarity between TCM and Five Element Constiutional

practices are the use of acupuncture needles, the point locations

and the four needle technique.

 

We need to be clear about the definition of our own practice if we

expect others to gain any kind of understanding about what we do. We

need to be clear if we hope to educate the public so that they can

make good decisions about their health.

 

It is our responsibility to have a marked degree of understanding

and clarity about our use of terms that describe the medicine we

practice.

 

Please take time to understand what you do. If we hope to gain a

degree of acceptance and respect in this Western society, we need to

educate ourselves.

 

Naomi

[Guest guest]

Hi Susie,

 

I like your comment below regarding putting away one's fears to learn other

styles. I'm a perennial student ... always a beginning ... heartened and even

excited by small gains.

 

I hoped you could explain something since you are trained in what you refer to

as 5 Element acupuncture from Mr. Worsley. You indicated the trials and

challenges of studying with Worsley who, of course, studied though one or more

family lineages. Hence his connection to five elements from apprenticeship ...

even if it is not derived from classical literature. Matt Bauer was kind enough

to note to Brian some of the high points in classical literature that is in

translation at this point by some scholars of merit. I guess so many Westerners

like Worsley have apprenticed with lineage trained practitioners of merit and

managed to find a way to personally translate their teachers' training into some

personal English vocabulary. Or not. Worsley was a successful businessman who

codified and institutionalized his personal English vocabulary while he created

schools to train practitioners. These practitioners now use the Worsley

vocabulary when making reference to some aspect of what might be deemed five

element classical theory. However most people refer to five element theory with

English words that others like Paul Unschuld or Craig Mitchell have translated

from classical literature.

 

What I see some of my colleagues struggling with both on list here and off list

as well is the disconnect between 5 Element practice from Mr. Worsley (using his

vocabulary) and what could be called classical Chinese medicine with references

to classical literature. TCM is, of course, not presented in the five element

format but rather in the eight principle format though it actually does have

references to classical literature. Perhaps my question here is vague, but I'm

observing some real struggling on the part of some colleagues as they read

Worsely initiates (disciples) presenting Worsely vocabulary as " the " classical

Chinese medicine ... or perhaps as a perspective on classical Chinese medicine.

You have the initiation of both Worsley and TCM. Would you also posit beyond

Worsely and TCM that there is the general lineage training common to so many

practitioners in Chinese medicine? Perhaps Jason Robertson, Z'ev, or Robert

Hayden can jump in here and assist my verbal stumbling. But I thought that I'd

ask you first, Susie, having read your post below. I'm not a Sinologist like

Paul Unschuld or Marne Ergil, so I figured you could help me. Thanks in

advance for your observations.

 

Respectfully and gratefully,

Emmanuel Segmen

 

-

Susie Parkinson

Chinese Medicine

Sunday, July 04, 2004 12:18 PM

RE: 5 element

 

 

I studied 5 Element acupuncture and started practicing in that style and

very quickly realised that there were some situations that this style didn't

help me to treat. This is especially so if one is unable to identify the CF

(constitutional imbalance) and that happens quite often if 5 Element

practitioners are honest.

I went on to study TCM on a postgraduate course which aimed to integrate the

two approaches. Initially I swung completely towards the TCM style and

forgot my 5 Element training, but then found it again. Overall I believe

that you can use both styles as both have their strengths and weaknesses. I

do think that you can use herbs with the 5 Element style. Of course Worsley

took some aspects of classical theory and developed what worked for him,

just as TCM developed out of the needs of 20th century china and is also a

subset of the classics. It would be childish to try and compare one with

the other, which is more classical or correct. What matters is defining a

system which works, is reproducible and therefore may be taught.

Some practitioners prefer TCM and others 5 Element, personally I think they

are both wonderful and I don't think I could choose between them.

 

People who have a really strong bias either way seem to be those who have

only studied either 5 element or TCM, perhaps they should put aside their

fears and learn about other styles.

regards

Susie

[Guest guest]

Hi Emmanuel

 

You have asked some really interesting questions and got me thinking - thank

you!

In giving you an answer, which can only be my opinion, I may offend some 5

Element practitioners.

 

I didn't train with Jack Worsley, he was long gone from Leamington when I

trained. I did meet him and he treated me and he was a very impressive

character. It is generally accepted that Worsley was not an academic and I

suspect that is why there is such an emphasis on " the oral tradition " with 5

Element people. Worsley tried to copyright the term " classical five element

acupuncture " and failed, but I think that is why he and his business

partners clung to the classical description. As you say Worsley was a

businessman. He came from very humble beginnings and had only a basic

education and he could not have introduced his method of acupuncture in

current times when there are so many CM scholars outside China. When he

started, there wasn't much competition and he took advantage of that and

made his fortune.

 

When you are trained the Leamington way and the Worsley way, it is not easy

to ask questions or challenge the theory as this is discouraged (in my

experience and of many I have spoken to). Humility is preached but not

taught by example. Worsley was quite a dictator and could be quite

intimidating. I don't think he and those who followed his tradition could

really cope with questions, because it shows up the weakness in the theory.

So you have to accept what they say or you don't get your qualification.

 

The other problem of " an oral tradition " is the same as chinese whispers -

the message can get corrupted. There isn't any research on 5 element

acupuncture which causes further problems. At Leamington we were taught

that TCM was bad, that it was a corruption of original teaching. We learned

to look down on TCM practitioners!

 

Having said all that, 5 Element acupuncture is a wonderful system, it is

hard to diagnose accurately, but when you do, it can have fantastic results.

I am happy that I studied 5 Element acupuncture but don't feel that my

practice would be as successful as it is, had I not studied TCM. The two

together are very powerful. I like TCM because you can question and

understand how something came to be and also because there are so many texts

I can keep on learning (I'm a perpetual student). I also notice that there

are a number of 5 Element practitioners on this list and wonder what they

want to learn and what they feel the gaps in Worsley style acupuncture are.

 

I'm sure there will be many who disagree with me and that's great, these are

my opinions.

Regards

Susie

 

> Message: 3

> Mon, 5 Jul 2004 00:30:46 -0700

> " Emmanuel Segmen " <susegmen

> Re: 5 element

>

> Hi Susie,

>

> I like your comment below regarding putting away one's fears to

> learn other styles. I'm a perennial student ... always a

> beginning ... heartened and even excited by small gains.

>

> I hoped you could explain something since you are trained in what

> you refer to as 5 Element acupuncture from Mr. Worsley. You

> indicated the trials and challenges of studying with Worsley who,

> of course, studied though one or more family lineages. Hence his

> connection to five elements from apprenticeship ... even if it is

> not derived from classical literature. Matt Bauer was kind

> enough to note to Brian some of the high points in classical

> literature that is in translation at this point by some scholars

> of merit. I guess so many Westerners like Worsley have

> apprenticed with lineage trained practitioners of merit and

> managed to find a way to personally translate their teachers'

> training into some personal English vocabulary. Or not. Worsley

> was a successful businessman who codified and institutionalized

> his personal English vocabulary while he created schools to train

> practitioners. These practitioners now use the Worsley vocabulary

> when making reference to some aspect of what might be deemed five

> element classical theory. However most people refer to five

> element theory with English words that others like Paul Unschuld

> or Craig Mitchell have translated from classical literature.

>

> What I see some of my colleagues struggling with both on list

> here and off list as well is the disconnect between 5 Element

> practice from Mr. Worsley (using his vocabulary) and what could

> be called classical Chinese medicine with references to classical

> literature. TCM is, of course, not presented in the five

> element format but rather in the eight principle format though it

> actually does have references to classical literature. Perhaps

> my question here is vague, but I'm observing some real struggling

> on the part of some colleagues as they read Worsely initiates

> (disciples) presenting Worsely vocabulary as " the " classical

> Chinese medicine ... or perhaps as a perspective on classical

> Chinese medicine. You have the initiation of both Worsley and

> TCM. Would you also posit beyond Worsely and TCM that there is

> the general lineage training common to so many practitioners in

> Chinese medicine? Perhaps Jason Robertson, Z'ev, or Robert

> Hayden can jump in here and assist my verbal stumbling. But I

> thought that I'd ask you first, Susie, having read your post

> below. I'm not a Sinologist like Paul Unschuld or Marne Ergil,

> so I figured you could help me. Thanks in advance for your

> observations.

>

> Respectfully and gratefully,

> Emmanuel Segmen

>

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine , " Susie Parkinson "

<susie@p...> wrote:

 

>

> The other problem of " an oral tradition " is the same as chinese

whispers -

> the message can get corrupted. There isn't any research on 5 element

> acupuncture which causes further problems.

 

Not to mention that the 'oral tradition' is a great scapegoat when

someone asks a question like " where is that from " -- " oh we have no

record is a secret oral tradition, you must believe... " or & #61664; " Is the=

re

any research... " the answer " oh 3000 years, this stuff is the real

acupuncture, we have lineage…' no thanx I will pass – I would like

to see Worley's lineage… How long did he actually study with a master????

 

-

[Guest guest]

To me, 5 E thinking forms a basis which, taken in at breakfast at first

flush,

one is expected to knock to pieces by dinner time, to develop your own

extension of understanding and application.

 

To follow a school of thought to the exclusion of all others, is to limit

possibilities.

And whatever is limited, soon wants to insist it is the whole universe.

 

5 E philosophy allows you to interpret the self same design in 5 different

ways, and

all of them seem logical. That is it's fascination.

 

5 E philosophy allows you to stay with one design in one exclusive way, and

all of them seem logical. That is it's damnation.

 

A 5 elementalist is essentially an independent artist, setting script by his

or her

hand, amending it this way or that by simple willfulness.

 

For 5 E to develop, it must change. Every aspect of the interplay of

elemental

attribute is forever in a flux.

 

There is no Fire qi with a greater yang, nor a cutting qi Metallic, nor a

settled down,

damp Splenic qi which never moves, nor qi which flies with the winds across

lifetimes on exquisite wings frozen in the rigidity of Wood, nor the dank

cold

sunken qi of Watery depths.

 

Qi is many things, and nothing at all. If it stands at one of the 5 doors,

it, like an

errant illusionist, wears the coat recognized there.

 

Nothing much can be written about 5 E, nor can it be reduced to one school

of thought, as though it were a child's primer.

 

It is a play of some kind of wakefulness which is our capability, and works

best

when it has no rigid form.

 

There are no 5 E schools of thought, but presumptions that this is a school

of

thought.

 

If you are a 5 E being, throw away books and run free. What you have in you

is

what the other were seeking.

 

Dr. Holmes Keikobad

MB BS DPH Ret. DIP AC NCCAOM LIC AC CO & AZ

www.acu-free.com - 15 CEUS by video.

NCCAOM reviewed. Approved in CA & most states.

[Guest guest]

Dr. Holmes,

Without the Nei Jing and Nan Jing, no five element theory. Without

5 element theory, no practice. Without textbooks, no schools. Without

schools, no practitioners. Medicine without any scholarship is pure

folly.

 

 

On Jul 6, 2004, at 7:28 AM, Dr. Holmes Keikobad wrote:

 

> There are no 5 E schools of thought, but presumptions that this is a

> school

> of

> thought.

>

> If you are a 5 E being, throw away books and run free. What you have

> in you

> is

> what the other were seeking.

>

[Guest guest]

Everything I've ever read, experienced or observed about 'oral

traditions' is that they are handed on from teacher to disciple in an

unbroken chain/lineage. This type of teaching is impossible in a

school or university setting. So using it as an argument for a style

of acupuncture is, in my opinion, highly misleading.

 

 

On Jul 6, 2004, at 7:20 AM, wrote:

 

> Chinese Medicine , " Susie Parkinson "

> <susie@p...> wrote:

>

>>

>> The other problem of " an oral tradition " is the same as chinese

> whispers -

>> the message can get corrupted. There isn't any research on 5 element

>> acupuncture which causes further problems.

>

> Not to mention that the 'oral tradition' is a great scapegoat when

> someone asks a question like " where is that from " -- " oh we have no

> record is a secret oral tradition, you must believe... " or & #61664;

> " Is the=

> re

> any research... " the answer " oh 3000 years, this stuff is the real

> acupuncture, we have lineage…' no thanx I will pass – I would like

> to see Worley's lineage… How long did he actually study with a

> master????

>

> -

>

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine , " "

<zrosenbe@s...> wrote:

> Dr. Holmes,

> Without the Nei Jing and Nan Jing, no five element theory. Without

> 5 element theory, no practice. Without textbooks, no schools. Without

> schools, no practitioners. Medicine without any scholarship is pure

> folly.

>

>

 

I have to agree with Z'ev - To give free reign and allow people who

'practive medicine' to do whatever they want seems quite foolish. It

is a total copout... I can't think of any indication that Chinese

Medicine was ever in history practiced with such disregard.

 

-

 

 

> On Jul 6, 2004, at 7:28 AM, Dr. Holmes Keikobad wrote:

>

> > There are no 5 E schools of thought, but presumptions that this is a

> > school

> > of

> > thought.

> >

> > If you are a 5 E being, throw away books and run free. What you have

> > in you

> > is

> > what the other were seeking.

> >

[Guest guest]

Hi Susie,

 

Thank you for your well-considered remarks. You compared your experience with

practicing in the tradition taught by Mr. Worsley and then in the tradition

taught at a TCM school. As Z'ev notes, five element theory arises from the

ancient literature which has now been rendered in translation quite a number of

times ... recently in Paul Unschuld's Suwen which many of us are now attempting

to penetrate. In my original question to you, I had alluded to struggling

fellow colleagues who note that Worsley's vocabulary seems not to be the

vocabulary of any of these translations. Hence, when many people refer to

concepts or sensibilities about five element theory, they are referring to their

study of the Nei Jing and the Nan Jing. If they attempt to have a discussion

with a person trained in Worsley's lineage, very often confusion arises due to

the disconnect with vocabularies.

 

I can hear colleagues saying, " Here's the agreed upon vocabulary. Here's some

of the sensibilities or interpretations of what's meant. Now please tell me in

this context what you are talking about. " No doubt you've come across this.

There is a sense that if you " speak Worsley " then it might blow someone's mind

that you also refer to it as " classical Chinese medicine " or even 5 element

theory ... especially to a Sinologist who reads and/or translates Nei Jing and

Nan Jing or recently (or not so recently) uncovered manuscripts. I'm wondering

if there is any attempt on the part of Worsley initiates to cross that divide?

I'm pretty much gathering from your presentation that Worsley himself was not

likely to cross that divide, and so his initiates might also not feel the need

to go where their teacher did not bother to go.

 

So then I'm further puzzled by Naomi's experience of having to endure (painfully

so) a presentation of " classical " CM which comes in the guise of Worsley Chinese

Medicine. I'm reluctant myself to call this 5 Element Chinese medicine since it

does not connect to anyone's actual translation of the classical literature. I

can feel some empathy with Naomi and her fellow students. If I had paid good

money to go to an accredited institution to study Chinese medicine, I would also

feel injured (perhaps as injured as Naomi) if I was presented with some sort of

sectarian teachings. This is especially true in the UK where Oxford University

sponsors the work of luminaries such as Dr. Volker Scheid, Dr. Elizabeth Hsu and

Dr. Vivienne Ho. It seems to me that it would be well within the means of any

professional school to simply invite these great scholars across town to at

least present a weekend seminar. My medical school flew research experts from

other countries or from across the U.S. to deliver lectures to us. We did pay a

lot of money - $23,000/year - at a public university. But you all must have

paid some serious money as well for your education.

 

But then graduate professional schools do have their political issues to work

out along with their curriculum issues. Right? I believe every medical student

of either CM or WM I've spoken with has related injurious experiences with their

school administration.

 

Thanks again for your generous and thoughtful post. I've managed to learn a

good deal through your words.

 

Respectfully and Gratefully,

Emmanuel Segmen

 

-

Susie Parkinson

Chinese Medicine

Tuesday, July 06, 2004 6:36 AM

Re: 5 element

 

 

Hi Emmanuel

 

You have asked some really interesting questions and got me thinking - thank

you!

In giving you an answer, which can only be my opinion, I may offend some 5

Element practitioners.

 

I didn't train with Jack Worsley, he was long gone from Leamington when I

trained. I did meet him and he treated me and he was a very impressive

character. It is generally accepted that Worsley was not an academic and I

suspect that is why there is such an emphasis on " the oral tradition " with 5

Element people. Worsley tried to copyright the term " classical five element

acupuncture " and failed, but I think that is why he and his business

partners clung to the classical description. As you say Worsley was a

businessman. He came from very humble beginnings and had only a basic education

and he could not have introduced his method of acupuncture in current times when

there are so many CM scholars outside China. When he

started, there wasn't much competition and he took advantage of that and made

his fortune.

 

When you are trained the Leamington way and the Worsley way, it is not easy to

ask questions or challenge the theory as this is discouraged (in my experience

and of many I have spoken to). Humility is preached but not taught by example.

Worsley was quite a dictator and could be quite

intimidating. I don't think he and those who followed his tradition could

really cope with questions, because it shows up the weakness in the theory. So

you have to accept what they say or you don't get your qualification.

 

The other problem of " an oral tradition " is the same as chinese whispers - the

message can get corrupted. There isn't any research on 5 element acupuncture

which causes further problems. At Leamington we were taught that TCM was bad,

that it was a corruption of original teaching. We learned to look down on TCM

practitioners!

 

Having said all that, 5 Element acupuncture is a wonderful system, it is hard

to diagnose accurately, but when you do, it can have fantastic results. I am

happy that I studied 5 Element acupuncture but don't feel that my practice would

be as successful as it is, had I not studied TCM. The two

together are very powerful. I like TCM because you can question and understand

how something came to be and also because there are so many texts I can keep on

learning (I'm a perpetual student). I also notice that there are a number of 5

Element practitioners on this list and wonder what they want to learn and what

they feel the gaps in Worsley style acupuncture are.

 

I'm sure there will be many who disagree with me and that's great, these are

my opinions.

Regards

Susie