Placebo, Big Pharma and Ted Kapchuk - and Ayurveda

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine ,

<zrosenbe wrote:

 

 

" What makes you think that Chinese medicine arose from Ayurveda?

Everything I've ever read and researched shows independent development of both

medical cultures.. . . "

 

 

Prior to studying TCM, I began a study of Ayurveda.

 

Many teachers of this 'science of life' consider that in its history - as far

back as 6500 BC - the existence of trade routes, and the evolution of Buddhism -

and in particular Buddhism's gradual development and spread to the East -

enabled a flow of information, practices, substances, and medicinal knowledge.

The period of the Han Dynasty, for example, saw China experiencing a time of

" outward focus " with the opening up of the Silk Road, and China's navigational

explorations during that era added to Chinese knowledge.

 

Though Ayurvedic scholars acknowledge it is always going to be debatable that

TCM arose directly from Ayurveda, they never discount it, and point to the

chronology of the development of major early Ayurvedic texts such as the

" Charaka Samhita " , which pre-date, for example, " The Yellow Emperor's Inner

Classic " . Ayrveda it seems, is considered an older life science than the Chinese

science.

 

Some examples:

 

Lade & Svoboda [in " Tao and Dharma " ] have noted that Hua Tuo's surgical

techniques " bear a striking resemblance to the surgical methods expounded in

Ayurvedic texts, in particular the usage of a concoction of hemp to engender an

analgesic effect... prior to the operation "

 

They also note that from very early on, there was a highly developed theory of

Five Elements within Ayurveda, and compare this with an archaic concept of five

fundamental substances existing in China before the 4th century BC. They think

it reasonably probable that Zou Yin's expounding of Chinese Five Element

doctrine may have come from Indian theory, which was then modified by the

Chinese to suit their own world view.

 

There is also a tradition of acupucture in Ayurveda - though it was preserved

within family traditions, and not shared openly. [Frawley in Ros " The Lost

Secrets of Ayurvedic Acupuncture " ]

 

The practice of acupuncture - as I know it- has had a more consisitent and

'public' evolution in Indo-China and the Far East, than in India itself.

 

Of particular interest to me, is the profound importance placed by Ayurveda, of

managing the mind, as in this system of healing all diseases are considered to

arise from " the failure of wisdom " . We need only look at diseases and disorders

of modern living, to see that this may be so.

 

" Placebo effect " might also be considered one form of a certain innate wisdom,

yes? Or no? If I stretch the idea a little, does placebo effect have anything to

do with the Po, as much as the Shen?

 

I don't feel we can ever say the two great systems of Indian & Chinese medicine

developed independently of each other. I do not state that Chinese medicine

definitely arose from Ayurveda, but I cannot ignore that ideas and concepts

evident in TCM today, were predated by markedly similar ideas in India. And on

the medicinal value of cow's milk, the twain shall never meet!

 

In less scholarly vein, there is apparently, a light-hearted debate as to

whether Marco Polo gave China the noodle [pasta] or whether China gave

noodle-making to the world.

 

Ultimately, does it matter, as long as we can nourish ourselves?

 

Margi Macdonald

http://margihealing.wordpress.com/

[Guest guest]

Hi Margi, there is no historical evidence showing that CM originated from

Ayurveda. There is much evidence of mutual influence, but not of one system

founding the other. The base philosophy of Yin Yang (4 point relational) and

Sanhkya (2-vector bifurcative) are sufficiently different that the easier

assumption is that the two philosophies of dualism arose independently. There is

also no mention of the three doshas anywhere in CM, and that is *the* major

theoretical construct in Ayurveda after Samkhya.

And yes, it matters where we come from.

 

 

I also believe that Hua Tuo was actually a Chinese-nationalised Indian.

 

Hugo

 

 

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.chinesemedicaltherapies.org

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

margi.macdonald <margi.macdonald

Chinese Medicine

Sunday, 13 September, 2009 22:19:23

Re: Placebo, Big Pharma and Ted Kapchuk - and Ayurveda

 

 

Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine ,

<zrosenbe@.. .> wrote:

 

" What makes you think that Chinese medicine arose from Ayurveda?

Everything I've ever read and researched shows independent development of both

medical cultures.. . . "

 

Prior to studying TCM, I began a study of Ayurveda.

 

Many teachers of this 'science of life' consider that in its history - as far

back as 6500 BC - the existence of trade routes, and the evolution of Buddhism -

and in particular Buddhism's gradual development and spread to the East -

enabled a flow of information, practices, substances, and medicinal knowledge.

The period of the Han Dynasty, for example, saw China experiencing a time of

" outward focus " with the opening up of the Silk Road, and China's navigational

explorations during that era added to Chinese knowledge.

 

Though Ayurvedic scholars acknowledge it is always going to be debatable that

TCM arose directly from Ayurveda, they never discount it, and point to the

chronology of the development of major early Ayurvedic texts such as the

" Charaka Samhita " , which pre-date, for example, " The Yellow Emperor's Inner

Classic " . Ayrveda it seems, is considered an older life science than the Chinese

science.

 

Some examples:

 

Lade & Svoboda [in " Tao and Dharma " ] have noted that Hua Tuo's surgical

techniques " bear a striking resemblance to the surgical methods expounded in

Ayurvedic texts, in particular the usage of a concoction of hemp to engender an

analgesic effect... prior to the operation "

 

They also note that from very early on, there was a highly developed theory of

Five Elements within Ayurveda, and compare this with an archaic concept of five

fundamental substances existing in China before the 4th century BC. They think

it reasonably probable that Zou Yin's expounding of Chinese Five Element

doctrine may have come from Indian theory, which was then modified by the

Chinese to suit their own world view.

 

There is also a tradition of acupucture in Ayurveda - though it was preserved

within family traditions, and not shared openly. [Frawley in Ros " The Lost

Secrets of Ayurvedic Acupuncture " ]

 

The practice of acupuncture - as I know it- has had a more consisitent and

'public' evolution in Indo-China and the Far East, than in India itself.

 

Of particular interest to me, is the profound importance placed by Ayurveda, of

managing the mind, as in this system of healing all diseases are considered to

arise from " the failure of wisdom " . We need only look at diseases and disorders

of modern living, to see that this may be so.

 

" Placebo effect " might also be considered one form of a certain innate wisdom,

yes? Or no? If I stretch the idea a little, does placebo effect have anything to

do with the Po, as much as the Shen?

 

I don't feel we can ever say the two great systems of Indian & Chinese medicine

developed independently of each other. I do not state that Chinese medicine

definitely arose from Ayurveda, but I cannot ignore that ideas and concepts

evident in TCM today, were predated by markedly similar ideas in India. And on

the medicinal value of cow's milk, the twain shall never meet!

 

In less scholarly vein, there is apparently, a light-hearted debate as to

whether Marco Polo gave China the noodle [pasta] or whether China gave

noodle-making to the world.

 

Ultimately, does it matter, as long as we can nourish ourselves?

 

Margi Macdonald

http://margihealing .wordpress. com/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine , Hugo Ramiro <subincor

wrote:

 

" There is also no mention of the three doshas anywhere in CM, and that is *the*

major theoretical construct in Ayurveda after Samkhya.

 

.... And yes, it matters where we come from. "

 

 

No doshas in CM, sure - yet if we understand the doshas through and through, we

know that they are each energised, infused, made of [ pick a few concepts] a

pair of each of the 5 elements.

 

It's as equally simple, elegant and complex as the Generating & Controlling

cycles which hold CM 5 Element theory together, and possible more so, as there

are so many sub-doshas!

 

I'm not sure that 3 Dosha theory is THE mmajor theoretical construct in Ayurveda

after Samkya... that's way too reductionist!

 

My studies to date have taught me that some of the 'big' constructs in CM arose

later than in Ayurveda, after times of ancient Chinese expansion and discovery.

 

Is there anyone reading along who might like to argue that Ayurveda arose from

the ancient Greek and Islamic systems, with their understandings of the

phlegmatic, choleric, melancholic and sanguine biological humors?

 

Where do we come from?

The TCM we practice today is a hybrid - like any continually evolving species -

and is neither fixed in form, nor frozen in time. How it is disseminiated in the

world today, might be something that gives us concern... who here is comfortable

- for example - with the WHO standardisation process?

 

Margi Macdonald

http://margihealing.wordpress.com/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________

> Hugo Ramiro

> http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

> http://www.chinesemedicaltherapies.org

>

>

>

>

>

> ________________________________

> margi.macdonald <margi.macdonald

> Chinese Medicine

> Sunday, 13 September, 2009 22:19:23

> Re: Placebo, Big Pharma and Ted Kapchuk - and Ayurveda

>

>

> Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine ,

<zrosenbe@ .> wrote:

>

> " What makes you think that Chinese medicine arose from Ayurveda?

> Everything I've ever read and researched shows independent development of both

medical cultures.. . . "

>

> Prior to studying TCM, I began a study of Ayurveda.

>

> Many teachers of this 'science of life' consider that in its history - as far

back as 6500 BC - the existence of trade routes, and the evolution of Buddhism -

and in particular Buddhism's gradual development and spread to the East -

enabled a flow of information, practices, substances, and medicinal knowledge.

> The period of the Han Dynasty, for example, saw China experiencing a time of

" outward focus " with the opening up of the Silk Road, and China's navigational

explorations during that era added to Chinese knowledge.

>

> Though Ayurvedic scholars acknowledge it is always going to be debatable that

TCM arose directly from Ayurveda, they never discount it, and point to the

chronology of the development of major early Ayurvedic texts such as the

" Charaka Samhita " , which pre-date, for example, " The Yellow Emperor's Inner

Classic " . Ayrveda it seems, is considered an older life science than the Chinese

science.

>

> Some examples:

>

> Lade & Svoboda [in " Tao and Dharma " ] have noted that Hua Tuo's surgical

techniques " bear a striking resemblance to the surgical methods expounded in

Ayurvedic texts, in particular the usage of a concoction of hemp to engender an

analgesic effect... prior to the operation "

>

> They also note that from very early on, there was a highly developed theory of

Five Elements within Ayurveda, and compare this with an archaic concept of five

fundamental substances existing in China before the 4th century BC. They think

it reasonably probable that Zou Yin's expounding of Chinese Five Element

doctrine may have come from Indian theory, which was then modified by the

Chinese to suit their own world view.

>

> There is also a tradition of acupucture in Ayurveda - though it was preserved

within family traditions, and not shared openly. [Frawley in Ros " The Lost

Secrets of Ayurvedic Acupuncture " ]

>

> The practice of acupuncture - as I know it- has had a more consisitent and

'public' evolution in Indo-China and the Far East, than in India itself.

>

> Of particular interest to me, is the profound importance placed by Ayurveda,

of managing the mind, as in this system of healing all diseases are considered

to arise from " the failure of wisdom " . We need only look at diseases and

disorders of modern living, to see that this may be so.

>

> " Placebo effect " might also be considered one form of a certain innate wisdom,

yes? Or no? If I stretch the idea a little, does placebo effect have anything to

do with the Po, as much as the Shen?

>

> I don't feel we can ever say the two great systems of Indian & Chinese

medicine developed independently of each other. I do not state that Chinese

medicine definitely arose from Ayurveda, but I cannot ignore that ideas and

concepts evident in TCM today, were predated by markedly similar ideas in India.

And on the medicinal value of cow's milk, the twain shall never meet!

>

> In less scholarly vein, there is apparently, a light-hearted debate as to

whether Marco Polo gave China the noodle [pasta] or whether China gave

noodle-making to the world.

>

> Ultimately, does it matter, as long as we can nourish ourselves?

>

> Margi Macdonald

> http://margihealing .wordpress. com/

>

 

[Guest guest]

All excellent points, Margie.

 

Yes, medicine is evolving, changing, and there are constant streams of

cross-fertilization at work, especially in modern times. However,

your point was that TCM came from Ayurveda, and that is simply not

possible historically. The reality is much more complex than that. I

would reframe it by saying that both systems co-evolved together in

vastly different cultures, and were destined to meet in a later era.

 

 

 

On Sep 14, 2009, at 3:28 PM, margi.macdonald wrote:

 

> Chinese Medicine , Hugo Ramiro

> <subincor wrote:

>

> " There is also no mention of the three doshas anywhere in CM, and

> that is *the* major theoretical construct in Ayurveda after Samkhya.

>

> ... And yes, it matters where we come from. "

>

> No doshas in CM, sure - yet if we understand the doshas through and

> through, we know that they are each energised, infused, made of

> [ pick a few concepts] a pair of each of the 5 elements.

>

> It's as equally simple, elegant and complex as the Generating &

> Controlling cycles which hold CM 5 Element theory together, and

> possible more so, as there are so many sub-doshas!

>

> I'm not sure that 3 Dosha theory is THE mmajor theoretical construct

> in Ayurveda after Samkya... that's way too reductionist!

>

> My studies to date have taught me that some of the 'big' constructs

> in CM arose later than in Ayurveda, after times of ancient Chinese

> expansion and discovery.

>

> Is there anyone reading along who might like to argue that Ayurveda

> arose from the ancient Greek and Islamic systems, with their

> understandings of the phlegmatic, choleric, melancholic and sanguine

> biological humors?

>

> Where do we come from?

> The TCM we practice today is a hybrid - like any continually

> evolving species - and is neither fixed in form, nor frozen in time.

> How it is disseminiated in the world today, might be something that

> gives us concern... who here is comfortable - for example - with the

> WHO standardisation process?

>

> Margi Macdonald

> http://margihealing.wordpress.com/

>

> _______________________________

> > Hugo Ramiro

> > http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

> > http://www.chinesemedicaltherapies.org

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ________________________________

> > margi.macdonald <margi.macdonald

> > Chinese Medicine

> > Sunday, 13 September, 2009 22:19:23

> > Re: Placebo, Big Pharma and Ted Kapchuk - and

> Ayurveda

> >

> >

> > Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine , Z'ev

> Rosenberg <zrosenbe@ .> wrote:

> >

> > " What makes you think that Chinese medicine arose from Ayurveda?

> > Everything I've ever read and researched shows independent

> development of both medical cultures.. . . "

> >

> > Prior to studying TCM, I began a study of Ayurveda.

> >

> > Many teachers of this 'science of life' consider that in its

> history - as far back as 6500 BC - the existence of trade routes,

> and the evolution of Buddhism - and in particular Buddhism's gradual

> development and spread to the East - enabled a flow of information,

> practices, substances, and medicinal knowledge.

> > The period of the Han Dynasty, for example, saw China experiencing

> a time of " outward focus " with the opening up of the Silk Road, and

> China's navigational explorations during that era added to Chinese

> knowledge.

> >

> > Though Ayurvedic scholars acknowledge it is always going to be

> debatable that TCM arose directly from Ayurveda, they never discount

> it, and point to the chronology of the development of major early

> Ayurvedic texts such as the " Charaka Samhita " , which pre-date, for

> example, " The Yellow Emperor's Inner Classic " . Ayrveda it seems, is

> considered an older life science than the Chinese science.

> >

> > Some examples:

> >

> > Lade & Svoboda [in " Tao and Dharma " ] have noted that Hua Tuo's

> surgical techniques " bear a striking resemblance to the surgical

> methods expounded in Ayurvedic texts, in particular the usage of a

> concoction of hemp to engender an analgesic effect... prior to the

> operation "

> >

> > They also note that from very early on, there was a highly

> developed theory of Five Elements within Ayurveda, and compare this

> with an archaic concept of five fundamental substances existing in

> China before the 4th century BC. They think it reasonably probable

> that Zou Yin's expounding of Chinese Five Element doctrine may have

> come from Indian theory, which was then modified by the Chinese to

> suit their own world view.

> >

> > There is also a tradition of acupucture in Ayurveda - though it

> was preserved within family traditions, and not shared openly.

> [Frawley in Ros " The Lost Secrets of Ayurvedic Acupuncture " ]

> >

> > The practice of acupuncture - as I know it- has had a more

> consisitent and 'public' evolution in Indo-China and the Far East,

> than in India itself.

> >

> > Of particular interest to me, is the profound importance placed by

> Ayurveda, of managing the mind, as in this system of healing all

> diseases are considered to arise from " the failure of wisdom " . We

> need only look at diseases and disorders of modern living, to see

> that this may be so.

> >

> > " Placebo effect " might also be considered one form of a certain

> innate wisdom, yes? Or no? If I stretch the idea a little, does

> placebo effect have anything to do with the Po, as much as the Shen?

> >

> > I don't feel we can ever say the two great systems of Indian &

> Chinese medicine developed independently of each other. I do not

> state that Chinese medicine definitely arose from Ayurveda, but I

> cannot ignore that ideas and concepts evident in TCM today, were

> predated by markedly similar ideas in India. And on the medicinal

> value of cow's milk, the twain shall never meet!

> >

> > In less scholarly vein, there is apparently, a light-hearted

> debate as to whether Marco Polo gave China the noodle [pasta] or

> whether China gave noodle-making to the world.

> >

> > Ultimately, does it matter, as long as we can nourish ourselves?

> >

> > Margi Macdonald

> > http://margihealing .wordpress. com/

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >