Guest guest Posted June 10, 2000 Report Share Posted June 10, 2000 Luke I think you hit the nail on the head here when you said " If you have paid attention, you will note that many translations of the classics include notes from practitioners in era far removed from the origin. " I have also noticed this, but this suggests to me that the classics serve as a continual source of renewal and inspiration for every generation. When you said, " I have no doubt that the classics are of value. In fact, I spend many hours each week reviewing them. I merely state that we must move beyond them " , I assume you speak of a form of transcendence or evolution in understanding and practice. So is that evolution to be be grounded in the foundations and successful adaptations of the past or will it arise de novo? Personally, I think the " force " of evolution works on all systems in an analogous fashion. So like animals and plants, conceptual models adapt by both small incremental adaptations which are punctuated by periods of radical change and transformation. But in either case, the baby is never thrown out with the bathwater. That is why we share most of our genes with all other mammals. That is why our mitochondria came from bacteria 3 billion years ago and plants chloroplasts likewise from algae. Transformation always includes the elements that were transformed, but just organizes them in another more adaptable fashion. Likewise, I would argue that successful long lasting transformations of conceptual models do not arise out of nowhere. Even where change is radical, the foundations must be solid to endure. As an analogy, consider what endured from the soviet era in russia. They completely tore down their authoritarian czarist regime to replace with some idealized communist utopia. But because the utopian branches were not grounded in utopian roots, the branches withered quickly and all that remained was the old authoritarian roots. The same thing is happening again as democracy without foundation collapses and yields to those old authoritarian roots. Completely authoritarian regimes never become democracies overnight. all the successful democracies have evolved into the present state of affairs through a gradual transformation of authoritarian structures. Why did the american revolution succeed and the french fail miserably? Perhaps because the french had no real democratic institutions in 1789, while existing british common law had long laid a quasi-democratic foundation for the american colonists system of justice. So if Chinese medicine is to be forever and irreversibly radically transformed (and you may be surprised to know that I am one who believes this will most certainly be the case), I think this transformation will only make a long lasting impact if it is solidly rooted in the past. This does not mean that we should practice using the classics as just one more " cookbook " . We have enough of those already. It is more like what one of my chinese teachers used to say about classical formulae: they are just ideas from the minds of men; the great physician adapts those ideas to the time and place, but never applies them blindly or in rote fashion. We only have to look to Japan, Korea and Vietnam, where the establishment of very unique schools of thought all originally developed from careful study of the chinese classics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2000 Report Share Posted June 10, 2000 Luke, A comment in response to your question below. Like all literature Chinese medical classics are best studied in the context of their origins. One of the important features in this cultural context from which the medical classics emerged is the position of the Yi Jing, or Classic of Change at the root of China's various literary traditions. As you note, medical classics throughout Chinese history have always accumulated commentaries from doctors and scholars of later eras. They are virtually all aggregate structures that really ought to be understood in this light. With respect to the influence of the Yi Jing, it is a more or less given that all Chinese classics on all subjects have to be studied and brought alive in each successive era. They do not stand, as holy books in other traditions, as static icons one dare not alter in any slightest way or risk the rath of an angry god. They are living documents that require not only study but care. As the current generations into whose hands they have fallen, we not only have access to their principles, theories, methods, and formulas, we bear a commensurate responsibility. If the classics become or remain outdated, we have no one to fault but ourselves. It only shows that we have not brought them to life within our own study and practice of the subject. To do so is a group undertaking. I am interested in knowing the identities of those who are interetsed in contributing to this undertaking. Ken > I question whether or not we can fall back on the out-dated notions of classics in the face of modern reality. I have no doubt that the classics are of value. In fact, I spend many hours each week reviewing them. I merely state that we must move beyond them. If you have paid attention, you will note that many translations of the classics include notes from practitioners in era far removed from the origin.< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2000 Report Share Posted June 10, 2000 >These studies brought to home the idea that " to move Qi, move the blood " . > >During the past 20 years I have learned to adapt. I have yet to find a >school of thought that knows it all. I appreciate the attitude of many >here, that we don't know nearly enough about Chinese medicine. But I must >comment that Chinese medicine does not have all the answers. Whether or not Chinese medicine 'has all the answers' is not the issue.. . .. .it is whether we are truly competant in practicing it, Luke. Personally, I think Chinese medical PHILOSOPHY is a universal medical philosophy, based on cosmic and natural law, and can be applied to any clinical situation with any treatment method. Let's not confuse method with philosophy here. Also, many health professionals are eclectic. This is fine if they are trained or competant in those methods, however, many just dabble. If we dabble in other methods, many new and experimental, how can we expect M.D.'s, D.O.'s or D.C's to respect Chinese medicine as a system? > >As much as we can benefit from the further expansion of Pure Chinese medical >literacy, we must be aware that we do not live in pre-Western mystical >China. What do you mean by 'mystical China'? Chinese medicine has been practical from the Nei Jing onwards! > >We do not wake with the rising sun, nor do we sleep as it sets. We do not >eat native foods.... None the less, we should do our best to do so as much as possible. Chinese medicine is also a lifestyle, and we must be aware of when we verge off course at so many different levels, and how to rectify the imbalance. Otherwise, disease is the result. The loss of sleep, dietary work and travel rhythms is probably the major course of illness in my patients, and myself. My teacher, Michael Broffman, recommended for an OCD (obsessive-compulsive disorder) patient I had to move to the countryside, work on a farm, and follow natural sleeping-waking rhythms to bring his cycles back to normal from going to sleep from 4-11 AM. > > >My personal goal is first and foremost, to help my patients. I choose to >use any and all tools in this regard. I'm not a big proponent of patent >medicines. But I have found that American patients seem much more willing >to take a tablet, tincture or capsule, rather than to comply with >traditional Chinese herbal methods. Such is life, and I believe that Daoist >thought suggests that one adapt! I also find this to be true. However, for some patients, I boil up the decoctions myself, and have them bring a thermos! > >In _Acupuncture Case Histories from China_ , edited by Chen Jirui, MD and >Nissi Wang, M.Sc., most patients were treated daily, for a course of ten >days. Many cases were resolved after three courses (daily treatment for 10 >days, a pause, then 10 more daily treatments, a total of 30 treatments in >just over a month). I wonder about that book. . . .some of the results seem a bit suspicious to me. Any one else feel this way? > >This book lead to my inquiry. I have not had the good fortune of seeing my >patients as frequently. And though I agree with Z'ev, that I can still help >my patients, I question whether or not we can fall back on the out-dated >notions of classics in the face of modern reality. I have no doubt that the >classics are of value. In fact, I spend many hours each week reviewing >them. I merely state that we must move beyond them. If you have paid >attention, you will note that many translations of the classics include >notes from practitioners in era far removed from the origin. For you to say 'outdated notions of classics' shows you do not understand the idea of what a classic is. Classics are universal philsophy applied to reality. . . .they are not 'ancient', they apply here and now. We just need to learn to read them properly. Without them, there is no practice of herbal medicine or acupuncture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2000 Report Share Posted June 10, 2000 Very true, Ed. There are entire schools of thought based on this one prescription. It is my favorite as well. >Luke, >Health and happiness to you, > >I understand that no one system has " all the answers " . >I believe that if one can truly master just one formula - for example- Bu >Zhong Yi Qi Tang. Then one may be able to help ten thousand people. However, >if one only merely sorta knows ten thousand formulas than one may not be >able to help even one person. > >For myself I I can't get enough Rou Gui ! > >Ed Kasper L.Ac., in Sunny Santa Cruz, Californiiia > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2000 Report Share Posted June 10, 2000 >Luke > >I think you hit the nail on the head here when you said " If you have >paid attention, you will note that many translations of the classics >include notes from practitioners in era far removed from the origin. " Of course this is true. Like the Talmudic tradition, commentaries are always written to elucidate nuances in the original text, share experiences of later generations, and apply the teachings practically. This in no way reduces the importance of the classic text. > > >So if Chinese medicine is to be forever and irreversibly radically >transformed (and you may be surprised to know that I am one who believes >this will most certainly be the case), I think this transformation will >only make a long lasting impact if it is solidly rooted in the past. >This does not mean that we should practice using the classics as just >one more " cookbook " . We have enough of those already. It is more like >what one of my chinese teachers used to say about classical formulae: >they are just ideas from the minds of men; the great physician adapts >those ideas to the time and place, but never applies them blindly or in >rote fashion. We only have to look to Japan, Korea and Vietnam, where >the establishment of very unique schools of thought all originally >developed from careful study of the chinese classics. > >Todd > Transformation is fine. . . .however, right now, I think a certain stand of preservation is order, because of the profound transformations that have occured in the practice of indigenous medicines everywhere by the influx of modern medicine. As the famous medical historian Arthur Kleinman stated at a recent conference in Seattle: " indigenous forms of medicine will be eventually destroyed by modern medicine, unless modern medicine rediscovers it roots in Greek medicine " . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2000 Report Share Posted June 10, 2000 Ken, Count me in a hundred times over. Where do we start? > >A comment in response to your question below. >Like all literature Chinese medical classics >are best studied in the context of their origins. >One of the important features in this cultural context >from which the medical classics emerged is the >position of the Yi Jing, or Classic of Change >at the root of China's various literary traditions. > >As you note, medical classics throughout Chinese >history have always accumulated commentaries from >doctors and scholars of later eras. They are virtually >all aggregate structures that really ought to be >understood in this light. > >With respect to the influence of the Yi Jing, it >is a more or less given that all Chinese classics >on all subjects have to be studied and brought alive >in each successive era. They do not stand, as holy >books in other traditions, as static icons one dare >not alter in any slightest way or risk the rath of >an angry god. > >They are living documents that require not only >study but care. As the current generations into >whose hands they have fallen, we not only have >access to their principles, theories, methods, and >formulas, we bear a commensurate responsibility. > >If the classics become or remain outdated, we >have no one to fault but ourselves. It only shows >that we have not brought them to life within our >own study and practice of the subject. To do so >is a group undertaking. I am interested in knowing >the identities of those who are interetsed in >contributing to this undertaking. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2000 Report Share Posted June 10, 2000 Ken, 10 years ago , my teacher (Pr Leung Kokyuen, from HK, Oregon Acupuncture license # 1 (1972) and retired in Vancouver ,Canada) has selected 94 TCM (i.e. " CCM " ) textbooks, a first start (and an OPEN one) to what we may name, <The library of TCM>. Two reference lists have been established: The first one, with 40 texts (from a small booklet to an encyclopedia!) seems to be the " basics " . then, the second list (54 texts) would be part of our continuing (lifetime)education program!. This list encompasses all aspects of TCM/CCM. I will be very happy to share these informations with a Committee designed to establish standards where to go /what to translate.. for the benefit of all Students of TCM. Philippe Riviere Vancouver British Columbia Registered Acupuncturist D.T.C.M. Specialised in TCM oncology for 12 years Master's degree in Chinese language Studies. .... We develop our knowledge in the first place by studying books, and we should thus study as many works of the ancient scholars as we can. We should spend a great deal of time studying and assimilating them, thereby acquiring a solid foundation of basic knowledge. From ancient times to our own, many individuals have written " medical " books, which is why works on Chinese medicine are so abundant. It would be a difficult task to collect all these works, and moreover, it is not necessarily so that the more of them we possess, the better off we are. Some of the books written by ancient scholars provide us with correct theories, others with incorrect theories. On the theoritical level, some authors develop personal conceptualizations that desaerve to be known. Others develop theories that deviate from the " fundamental doctrines " (note: a Confucian continuum?) and become incorrect theories. It is difficult for those just beginning the study of Chinese medicine to distinguish between correct and incorrect theories.If one attemps to assimilate all these books, one may well find oneself adrift in a sea of theories. Indeed, one runs the risk of believing some esoteric theories, thereby embarking on the path of deviation. That is why one must be very cautious with regard to such books. If one wishes to acquire the basic knowledge, one should choose books of a certain quality which contain accurate theorital and practical discussions. These are the books one should study. Nevertheless, one should become familiar with some books based on incorrect theories, because once one has mastered the correct theories, if one read books containing incorrect theories one can increase one's knowledge a little and one will become more capable of evaluating them. One who begins by acquiring sound theoritical knowledge in the first place will be able to form opinions about incorrect theories. This is a factor to keep in mind when one begins to choose what books to use to study Chinese medicine. One must realize that priority must be given to the study of books based on correct theories.After that one can consult the other works.This the best way to proceed. When we begin to study Chinese medicine, what books should we choose? What books provide correct teachings? Pr Leung Kokyuen (translated in 1994) Note: <Nanjing> and <Maijing> belong to the first list. <Zhongzang jing> and <Piweilun> to the second list of reference TCM textbooks. For famous books as the " Neijing " , " Shanghan lun and Jingui " , the problem is to select the " right " commentaries. Philippe 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.