5 Element

[Guest guest]

Hello All,

 

Just a couple of half sentence answers ( from my perspective only) to a couple

of questions in recent posts.

 

- Generally " Five Element Acupuncture " is a proper noun, just the way the

Worsley schools call their particular style not as far as I understand claiming

exclusivity over the Five Elements or the 5 phases of Qi or transfers between

deficient/excess elements. There is a guy in Sydney who sees up to 80 people a

day! and all he does is transfers between element on the transfer points. He

calls himself a " Yellow Emperor " style, his school was in rainforest of the

Daintree (???)

 

- The Word " Classical " came from a visit to Leamington Spa in the early 80s

from a set of teachers from China who said " yes we know your style it is a

classical style of acupuncture " He grabbed it and it is now copyrighted ;(

Think Worsley was a businessman you should meet his wife!)

Again nothing to do with exclusivity or superiority, just a proper noun.

 

- Someone asked me for my Han Dynasty references. Sorry my copy of " Following

the Footsteps of the Yellow Emperor " with a friend once I get it I will give you

the best answer I can. If anyone is interested it is a fascinating story of the

growth of Acupuncture in the West thought the 20th century. It not only

explains about what Worsley did but what we see as TCM style, who brought it

back from the East, how it was affected, what was dropped and what was

emphasised.

 

- I am not sure how useful " he made it up " comments are to the different styles

understanding and growing in knowledge from each other.

 

- Now cat among the pigeons time. I recently read an article about the

" Herbalisation of Acupuncture " . I am trying to find it again. Saying that

using Acupuncture to treat external syndromes or support herbs was only a small

branch or acupuncture through the ages even though it has now become the main

focus in modern China. I suppose it my way of saying please be careful about

hinting that the TCM style is the only form of traditional medicine and all us

others are just aberrations.

 

All the best,

 

Gye

 

 

[Guest guest]

Gye,

It certainly is not my viewpoint that TCM is the only style of

traditional medicine. In fact, I think so-called TCM acupuncture is a

minority style historically. Most 'traditional' styles of acupuncture

in China are channel-based, and in some manner or form are derived from

the Nei Jing or Nan Jing. TCM acupuncture is more based on

zang-fu/viscera-bowel pattern differentiation, which was adapted from

the practice of internal (i.e. herbal) medicine.

 

The large majority of medical texts over the long history of China

cover internal/herbal medicine, and a majority of practice of

traditional medicine today in China is herbal. There is much more

agreement on protocols for prescribing herbal prescriptions and

diagnostics than in the acupuncture traditions, which tend to have more

variation in style and practice. This doesn't mean that they aren't

complimentary (I tend to use channel-based acupuncture, also utilizing

extraordinary vessels and five phase), but that they are different

practices with different criteria.

 

The bottom line is that Chinese medicine, and its further spread to

Korea, Japan, Europe and America, is a vast tradition with many streams

and schools. However, we do need to keep the record straight and be

accurate on what we are describing.

 

 

On Jul 6, 2004, at 4:07 PM, Gye Bennetts 5 Element Acupuncture wrote:

 

> - Now cat among the pigeons time. I recently read an article about

> the " Herbalisation of Acupuncture " . I am trying to find it again.

> Saying that using Acupuncture to treat external syndromes or support

> herbs was only a small branch or acupuncture through the ages even

> though it has now become the main focus in modern China. I suppose it

> my way of saying please be careful about hinting that the TCM style is

> the only form of traditional medicine and all us others are just

> aberrations.

>

> All the best,

>

> Gye

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine , " "

<zrosenbe@s...> wrote:

 

>

> The bottom line is that Chinese medicine, and its further spread to

> Korea, Japan, Europe and America, is a vast tradition with many streams

> and schools. However, we do need to keep the record straight and be

> accurate on what we are describing.

 

I agree here, and think really this is the only thing that is being

said, atleast from me. Let us keep the record straight and not just

MSU, that is it. No one is saying one modality is better than the

other. For I, like Z'ev, use TCM, 5 phase, pre-TCM modalities etc...

But let us be clear in what we do so that we can communicate with

others correctly...

 

-

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine , " Gye Bennetts 5 Element

Acupuncture " <five-element@o...> wrote:

> > - Now cat among the pigeons time. I recently read an article about the

" Herbalisation of Acupuncture " . I am trying to find it again. Saying that

using

Acupuncture to treat external syndromes or support herbs was only a small branch

or

acupuncture through the ages even though it has now become the main focus in

modern China. I suppose it my way of saying please be careful about hinting

that the

TCM style is the only form of traditional medicine and all us others are just

aberrations.

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

I don't know that this is what anyone here is saying. I don't hear anyone

calling

Japanese or Korean or even French-Vietnamese forms of East Asian medicine

aberrations, and they are largely channel-based non- " herbalized " forms of

acumoxa

therapy.

 

I do think there is a good deal of prejudice on both sides of the 5E/TCM fence,

and

FWIW, risking playing with dynamite, there are a few issues that i see more TCM-

oriented people having difficulty with. Please understand that I am not flaming

anyone here, and don't necessarily to these points of view myself, but

I do

think these perceptions exist and are not always brought out and examined.

 

1) Worsley's style is seen by some as a European style of acupuncture that has

only a

very tenuous connection with East Asian primary sources. Worsley AFAIK did not

read

Chinese (I may be wrong here), and relied upon classical translations by Veith

and

Soulie de Morant, the reliability of which have both been called into question

in more

recent times.

 

2) While there is no question that he studied with at least one Chinese (Hsiu)

and one

Japanese (likely Ono), the length of study was nowhere near what would be

considered

a valid apprenticeship in East Asia.

 

3) 5E acupuncture has an almost religious overtone to much of it: it addresses

primarily the " spirit " , deals with " possession " by " devils " , many adherents

routinely

discuss their clinical results in terms of " miracles " , etc. Worsley himself is

revered as

a " healer " and even a " shaman " . At a time when many acupuncturists are seeking

greater integration with biomedicine, this is precisely the kind of orientation

that

makes some in the profession uncomfortable.

 

4) There may be some rancor directed at Worsley and his senior students by those

who know/knew them for their perceived arrogance. Of course, in my mind, this

puts

them squarely in CM tradition -- certainly I have met some great Asian as well

as

non-Asian practitioners who easily could be labeled arrogant as well!

 

5) Arguments from 5E proponents that TCM represents an " herbalized " form of

acupuncture are simplistic and ignore many developments coming out of post-Mao

China. Westerners interning in private Chinese clinics report a very dynamic

system of

acumoxa featuring sophisticated application of channel theory and very deep

classical

knowledge. This is in contrast to the perception that some hold of 5E being

rather

static and not developing in accordance with new translations of primary sources

previously unavailable during the time Worsley was learning acupuncture.

 

All of that having been said, it is clear by the very durability of the Worsley

school that

it addresses a need in the West. It has managed to survive the TCM hegemony

over

acupuncture education in the West that has been in place since the late 80's and

even

seems to be enjoying something of a renaissance in terms of interest.

 

I must say that I know mostly the perceptions of Worsley 5E styles and not much

of

the style itself. This i'm sure is quite obvious on reading this post But I

will say that

one way to consider Worsley style is as a lineage style itself, albeit a young

one.

There are certainly examples of autodidacts in Japan who founded major styles of

Japanese acumoxa (the most notable example probably being Sawada). It may also

help to know that many Japanese practitioners I've met, even ones with very long

and

distinguished careers, feel defensive about the survival of their style vs TCM,

which is

becoming increasingly popular in Japan and is seen by some to be superior to the

somewhat more theoretically concise Sino-Japanese and native Japanese styles.

Interestingly, some of the Meridian Therapy masters I've had opportunity to

study with

present arguments against TCM that are quite similar to those of the 5E school.

So

take heart, 5E people, you're in good company

 

Lastly, I wonder: since it has come to light that Worsley studied with Ono

Bunkei, have

any 5E practitioners endeavored to go to Japan to study with him or his Tohokai

group

at all? I did teach Toyohari classes to TAI graduates and I know there are some

5E-

trained practitioners in Toyohari, but Toyohari is quite different in emphasis

from

Ono's style. IIRC Ono passed away but Tohokai is still active.

 

respectfully submitted,

robert hayden