Tweet
In a previous thread Sifu Stier emphasized the importance of properly locating an acupuncture point for correct treatment. It makes perfect sense on its face, and also is meaningful in the sense that within the context of a particular system or art, the definitions provided by that system should be closely followed. Here a medicine system prescribes that to locate an individual acupuncture point you should, as Sifu Stier already said, establish the patient's unit of measurement, utilize appropriate landmarks, and then exactly locate the acu point instead of "guestimating."
An experienced practitioner can appreciate that results are more important than method. Methods, such as proper and exact point location, are always taught first, but part of mastery is the ability to achieve results without being confined by the method. From the single perspective of a particular school of Chinese medicine, acupuncture point X is always located a certain way. From the larger perspective of an experienced practitioner who has studied or been exposed to multiple systems, the result is more important than the method. This is proven by the fact that there are different point location methods for different acu points, and each method can be equally effective.
For example, the current teaching in the US for the acupunture point Kidney-1 (Yongquan) puts the point closer to the toes than older texts and schools from just 20-30 years ago. Different practitioners may use one method and not the other and still achieve equally good results. The master who taught me Taijiquan locates at least two points (Lung-7 / Lieque, and L.I.-4 / Hegu) differently from an equally accomplished master in his office, and both achieve equally impressive results. If this is true, it shows a lessening in importance of the physical level of Chinese medicine because if acu point X can be located in different ways by different systems with equivalent results, then it shows the rigid definition of physical point location is not equal in importance to the higher levels of qi and shen in the art of Chinese medicine.
The higher levels of all internal arts in Chinese terms are the qi and shen levels, which I believe are accessed by true masters, who are not constrained by method or technique. They can achieve results by operating primarily at the shen level, and then work their way downward to the qi and finally the jing (physical) level. Non-masters start at jing and work their way up, and are bound by the constraints and necessary definitions of going from bottom to top.
While it would be irresponsible to start teaching someone in a Chinese medicine curriculum that the physical point location is not important, in fact, for a beginner in any art the jing level is the starting point, I am fascinated by those teachers and arts who can quickly move their students to the higher levels.
The ideas at play can be applied to any internal art, not just medicine. For example, in martial arts, one system may dictate that you should never move both feet at once, but another system may allow this. The fact that each system can achieve desired results shows that rigid definitions are a starting point and a means to an end.
Michael
An experienced practitioner can appreciate that results are more important than method. Methods, such as proper and exact point location, are always taught first, but part of mastery is the ability to achieve results without being confined by the method. From the single perspective of a particular school of Chinese medicine, acupuncture point X is always located a certain way. From the larger perspective of an experienced practitioner who has studied or been exposed to multiple systems, the result is more important than the method. This is proven by the fact that there are different point location methods for different acu points, and each method can be equally effective.
For example, the current teaching in the US for the acupunture point Kidney-1 (Yongquan) puts the point closer to the toes than older texts and schools from just 20-30 years ago. Different practitioners may use one method and not the other and still achieve equally good results. The master who taught me Taijiquan locates at least two points (Lung-7 / Lieque, and L.I.-4 / Hegu) differently from an equally accomplished master in his office, and both achieve equally impressive results. If this is true, it shows a lessening in importance of the physical level of Chinese medicine because if acu point X can be located in different ways by different systems with equivalent results, then it shows the rigid definition of physical point location is not equal in importance to the higher levels of qi and shen in the art of Chinese medicine.
The higher levels of all internal arts in Chinese terms are the qi and shen levels, which I believe are accessed by true masters, who are not constrained by method or technique. They can achieve results by operating primarily at the shen level, and then work their way downward to the qi and finally the jing (physical) level. Non-masters start at jing and work their way up, and are bound by the constraints and necessary definitions of going from bottom to top.
While it would be irresponsible to start teaching someone in a Chinese medicine curriculum that the physical point location is not important, in fact, for a beginner in any art the jing level is the starting point, I am fascinated by those teachers and arts who can quickly move their students to the higher levels.
The ideas at play can be applied to any internal art, not just medicine. For example, in martial arts, one system may dictate that you should never move both feet at once, but another system may allow this. The fact that each system can achieve desired results shows that rigid definitions are a starting point and a means to an end.
Michael
Comment