Blood and Yin Tonics

[Guest guest]

 

So one of my Materia Medica students asks why do herbs that supplement

the liver blood also often supplement the liver and kidney yin (such as shu

di, gou qi zi,, he shou wu, sang shen, e jiao), but not vice versa. Well, I

had a fancy TCM hypothesis worked out, when something else occurred to me.

 

Perhaps it is merely the arbitrariness of categories. In fact, were gou qi

zi, he shou wu, shu di and sang shen typically considered yin tonics (as I

know they are in some sources), then the student might well be asking the

opposite question, i.e. how come so many yin tonics also tonify the blood,

....? :-)

 

I write:

A similar discussion occured in my herb class with my teacher Mary Kay Ryan.

According to her, the categorizing of herbs are partly a reflection of the

professional academic herbalism( as opposed to folk traditions of

herbalism). Those in academia had the time, and resources to categorize

details of a large volume materia medica. Most folk herbalist often used

what was available to them in the local area area, and did not engage in the

complexity and details of categorizing like the academic herbalist.

 

Further more, Mary Kay believes that herbs don't come to being in order to

comply with human hypothesizing and concept models; they don't grow up and

decide to be be in one materia medica categories and have a fixed number and

set types of characteristics. On this point I agreed with her. This topic

came up in relation to a different class she was teaching, where her

students didn't believe that gou qi zi tonified yin, because the herb was

classified as a blood tonifier in Bensky.

 

Malino

 

_______________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

 

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at

http://profiles.msn.com.

[Guest guest]

Further more, Mary Kay believes that herbs don't come to being in order to comply with human hypothesizing and concept models; they don't grow up and decide to be be in one materia medica categories and have a fixed number and set types of characteristics. On this point I agreed with her. This topic came up in relation to a different class she was teaching, where her students didn't believe that gou qi zi tonified yin, because the herb was classified as a blood tonifier in Bensky.>>>>I guess the herb never read the book

alon

 

-

Malino Khun

Friday, September 22, 2000 7:31 AM

Blood and Yin Tonics

 

So one of my Materia Medica students asks why do herbs that supplementthe liver blood also often supplement the liver and kidney yin (such as shu di, gou qi zi,, he shou wu, sang shen, e jiao), but not vice versa. Well, I had a fancy TCM hypothesis worked out, when something else occurred to me.Perhaps it is merely the arbitrariness of categories. In fact, were gou qi zi, he shou wu, shu di and sang shen typically considered yin tonics (as I know they are in some sources), then the student might well be asking the opposite question, i.e. how come so many yin tonics also tonify the blood, ...? :-)I write:A similar discussion occured in my herb class with my teacher Mary Kay Ryan. According to her, the categorizing of herbs are partly a reflection of the professional academic herbalism( as opposed to folk traditions of herbalism). Those in academia had the time, and resources to categorize details of a large volume materia medica. Most folk herbalist often used what was available to them in the local area area, and did not engage in the complexity and details of categorizing like the academic herbalist.Further more, Mary Kay believes that herbs don't come to being in order to comply with human hypothesizing and concept models; they don't grow up and decide to be be in one materia medica categories and have a fixed number and set types of characteristics. On this point I agreed with her. This topic came up in relation to a different class she was teaching, where her students didn't believe that gou qi zi tonified yin, because the herb was classified as a blood tonifier in Bensky.Malino_______________________Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.The Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

Further more, Mary Kay believes that herbs don't come to being in order to comply with human hypothesizing and concept models; they don't grow up and decide to be be in one materia medica categories and have a fixed number and set types of characteristics. On this point I agreed with her. This topic came up in relation to a different class she was teaching, where her students didn't believe that gou qi zi tonified yin, because the herb was classified as a blood tonifier in Bensky.

>>>That is part of what I referred to in past emails as, there is a lot of bool in TCM. Another example is many of the modern books on TCM treatments of Western diseases. These books are full of theoretical differential diagnosis and often have nothing to do with real patients. Since TCM is mostly a system of correspondences this process is easy to do but has nothing to do with reality. The process of TCM formation was confined by these early and limited categorizations. That is also the reason I believe we can integrate newer information into the way we think and do not have to be restricted by older terminology. The classics give us a point of view that we can now expand. The better one knows this information the freer one becomes to depart from old ideas.

alon

 

-

Malino Khun

Friday, September 22, 2000 7:31 AM

Blood and Yin Tonics

 

So one of my Materia Medica students asks why do herbs that supplementthe liver blood also often supplement the liver and kidney yin (such as shu di, gou qi zi,, he shou wu, sang shen, e jiao), but not vice versa. Well, I had a fancy TCM hypothesis worked out, when something else occurred to me.Perhaps it is merely the arbitrariness of categories. In fact, were gou qi zi, he shou wu, shu di and sang shen typically considered yin tonics (as I know they are in some sources), then the student might well be asking the opposite question, i.e. how come so many yin tonics also tonify the blood, ...? :-)I write:A similar discussion occured in my herb class with my teacher Mary Kay Ryan. According to her, the categorizing of herbs are partly a reflection of the professional academic herbalism( as opposed to folk traditions of herbalism). Those in academia had the time, and resources to categorize details of a large volume materia medica. Most folk herbalist often used what was available to them in the local area area, and did not engage in the complexity and details of categorizing like the academic herbalist.Further more, Mary Kay believes that herbs don't come to being in order to comply with human hypothesizing and concept models; they don't grow up and decide to be be in one materia medica categories and have a fixed number and set types of characteristics. On this point I agreed with her. This topic came up in relation to a different class she was teaching, where her students didn't believe that gou qi zi tonified yin, because the herb was classified as a blood tonifier in Bensky.Malino_______________________Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.The Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

on 9/22/00 8:39 AM, alonmarcus at alonmarcus wrote:

 

 

In response to the e-mails on the classics, herb categorization, et al:

 

Some herbal medicinals fall into more than one category. What is so upsetting about that? Herbal medicinals have multiple qualities. . . .the categories are simply organzing tools, but most medicinals are more complex than one primary action. Until someone (or group of people) translates a text such as the zhong yao da ci dian/Great Dictionary of Chinese Medicinals, with 4500 ingredients and much more information than any present English text, or enough people learn to read medical Chinese, we will have these discussions.

 

It seems we are falling into the empirical vs. rational duality that has been a part of medical debate for millenia (see Harris Coulter's Divided Legacy). Certainly, there is an experiential level at which herbal medicinals, acupuncture points, etc. can be understood. But without medical theory (rational), there is no way to organize the information into a coherent whole.

 

It is one thing to update the tradition. . .but without mastery of the basics of the tradition, that is impossible. There have been fervent debates over classical texts for centuries, but they have been done with (for the most part) respect, and in the spirit of uncovering what is real and true. I have seen similar debates in the Jewish tradition. The Talmudic tradition is based on debate and wrestling with the texts, but with respect and reverence for what has come before. Otherwise there is no basis for discussion.

 

I wonder how Alon has determined what is bool in the tradition.. . .it seems to be based on his own value judgements. I don't share his perceptions of pattern diagnosis. If some mainland authors put out poor quality work, and fantasize in print, it doesn't mean pattern diagnosis is some simplistic, outdated method for diagnosing patients. There are methods of examining, discussing, debating and applying classical literature in any tradition that can be applied to our medical tradition as well. It may be a difficult idea in the West, where the idea of a classical medical literature seems to be non-existent despite the (limited) availability of such a literature, but it is an essential part of Chinese medicine.

 

 

 

Further more, Mary Kay believes that herbs don't come to being in order to

comply with human hypothesizing and concept models; they don't grow up and

decide to be be in one materia medica categories and have a fixed number and

set types of characteristics. On this point I agreed with her. This topic

came up in relation to a different class she was teaching, where her

students didn't believe that gou qi zi tonified yin, because the herb was

classified as a blood tonifier in Bensky.

>>>That is part of what I referred to in past emails as, there is a lot of bool in TCM. Another example is many of the modern books on TCM treatments of Western diseases. These books are full of theoretical differential diagnosis and often have nothing to do with real patients. Since TCM is mostly a system of correspondences this process is easy to do but has nothing to do with reality. The process of TCM formation was confined by these early and limited categorizations. That is also the reason I believe we can integrate newer information into the way we think and do not have to be restricted by older terminology. The classics give us a point of view that we can now expand. The better one knows this information the freer one becomes to depart from old ideas.

alon

[Guest guest]

I wonder how Alon has determined what is bool in the tradition.. . .

 

What is "bool"? This word does not exist in my vocabulary. If Alon means bull as in bullshit I would like to request a more articulate expression of the issues in question.

 

 

[Guest guest]

I submit that this thread is yet another

example of how we suffer when we believe

in things that we don't understand.

 

There is an implicit assumption going on

here that " categories " in the sense that

it is employed in the " categories of Chinese

herbal medicines " means the same thing

and can therefore be understood in the same

way as " categories " in the Western

sense that it is employed in a phrase like

" categorial imperative " for example.

 

Western thinking is based on dualistic

right/wrong or good/evil dichotomies.

Don't take my word for it, have a look

at Kant himself.

 

Chinese epistemology is different. Hence

a category in Chinese terms does not equal

a category in the Western sense. The whole

underlying pattern of thinking is different.

 

As if the study of the Chinese medical literature

were not difficult enough in and of itself,

we face this other substantial set of considerations

before we can make heads or tails out of these

materials: we must come to understand the broader

traditions of literary composition and intellectual

organization from which the medical literature

emerged.

 

It's altogether fitting and proper that we undertake

to improve upon the ideas of the past. The Chinese

themselves have been working to do this since

time immemorial. Only they tend to proceed from

a basis of familiarity with those past traditions

on which they seek to improve. And virtually without

exception, those who succeed at actually making

such improvements are those who are thoroughly

familiar with the legacy their predecessors

left for them to study.

 

Here are some specific questions to consider

for those who would like some resolution to

the issue about the classification of herbs

that appear in the Yin and Blood categories:

 

1. What does Yin mean?

2. What does blood mean?

3. What is the relationship between Yin and Blood?

4. What is the purpose of categorizing herbs?

5. Whence did traditional categories of herbs emerge?

 

If you're going to scratch your head over the

conflicts or apparent mis-categorizations of

certain herbs, why not take the opportunity

to examine the underlying definitions and

precepts.

 

I suggest that it is there in the more basic

material that valuable insights can be acquired.

If the root is in confusion...

 

And if you know it all already, then how

about just checking to see how you came to

know it. Was it from an authentic source?

Was it from someone who interpreted original

materials? Did you figure it out for yourself?

 

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

Just as I was about to type the below msg. I see Ken has already said what I

think needs to be said / asked?

 

To expand:

 

IS Yin a deeper level than bld? (Taken from the continuum theory yang-->

qi --> xue --> yin)

Is this continuum realistic? (maybe this is a very western concept, trying

to categorize)

 

Why then are there so many essence herbs in the blood tonic category

(primarily xue tonic?)

And why are the primary yin tonic herbs semi-superficial in comparison to

the blood tonics? (compare mai men dong, sha shen, yu zhu etc.. with he shou

wu, shu di, e jiao etc...)

 

Those yin herbs (feel) far less substantial than the lets say shu di etc.

 

What is yin, what are fluids? Wiseman states that fluids are different from

yin (fluids primarily damaged during external attack, while yin from

substantial chronic disease) and then is bld somewhere in the middle?

(continuum theory)? or what?

 

I definitely have no answers..

And anyone who does, I don't believe, but would like to hear what people

think...

 

*** It is has been very interesting to watch how many answers people have,

and as Ken said how does one know? How does anyone know that chai hu

destroys yin or not? IS it from 40 years experience or 2000 years of

history? or just some idea one's head? (does any of these make it correct?)

What is an authenticate source? A classic??? a lifelong mentor/ teacher? a

healer who cured 80% of people that one followed? (was it the herbs that

cured them? or the power of the individual to instill healing in that

person, or divine intervention?...)????

 

As far as Todd's original question, I was unsure of what your answer to the

class was? could you elaborate?

 

-

 

p.s. 1 final question then: what are you doing when you tonify someone's

bld? or yin? (and why is the word substance not used or something, it seems

yin and yang are words of comparison?)

 

>

> I submit that this thread is yet another

> example of how we suffer when we believe

> in things that we don't understand.

>

> There is an implicit assumption going on

> here that " categories " in the sense that

> it is employed in the " categories of Chinese

> herbal medicines " means the same thing

> and can therefore be understood in the same

> way as " categories " in the Western

> sense that it is employed in a phrase like

> " categorial imperative " for example.

>

> Western thinking is based on dualistic

> right/wrong or good/evil dichotomies.

> Don't take my word for it, have a look

> at Kant himself.

>

> Chinese epistemology is different. Hence

> a category in Chinese terms does not equal

> a category in the Western sense. The whole

> underlying pattern of thinking is different.

>

> As if the study of the Chinese medical literature

> were not difficult enough in and of itself,

> we face this other substantial set of considerations

> before we can make heads or tails out of these

> materials: we must come to understand the broader

> traditions of literary composition and intellectual

> organization from which the medical literature

> emerged.

>

> It's altogether fitting and proper that we undertake

> to improve upon the ideas of the past. The Chinese

> themselves have been working to do this since

> time immemorial. Only they tend to proceed from

> a basis of familiarity with those past traditions

> on which they seek to improve. And virtually without

> exception, those who succeed at actually making

> such improvements are those who are thoroughly

> familiar with the legacy their predecessors

> left for them to study.

>

> Here are some specific questions to consider

> for those who would like some resolution to

> the issue about the classification of herbs

> that appear in the Yin and Blood categories:

>

> 1. What does Yin mean?

> 2. What does blood mean?

> 3. What is the relationship between Yin and Blood?

> 4. What is the purpose of categorizing herbs?

> 5. Whence did traditional categories of herbs emerge?

>

> If you're going to scratch your head over the

> conflicts or apparent mis-categorizations of

> certain herbs, why not take the opportunity

> to examine the underlying definitions and

> precepts.

>

> I suggest that it is there in the more basic

> material that valuable insights can be acquired.

> If the root is in confusion...

>

> And if you know it all already, then how

> about just checking to see how you came to

> know it. Was it from an authentic source?

> Was it from someone who interpreted original

> materials? Did you figure it out for yourself?

>

>

> Ken

>

>

> Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed

> healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate

> academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a

> variety of professional services, including board approved online

> continuing education.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Blood is very last manifestation of Yin.

It's already close to Yang.

 

Yin is a broader spectrum than Blood.

What materialize or something already materalized is Yin.

Even such tendency can be Yin.

Jing and fluid are special form or phase of Yin.

[Guest guest]

, <@o...>

wrote:

 

>

> As far as Todd's original question, I was unsure of what your

answer to the

> class was? could you elaborate?

 

I deferred an answer until running it by the list. I believe it is

merely an artifact of categorization and our western understanding

thereof, as Ken points out. that is what I will tell them next

tuesday.

[Guest guest]

There are methods of examining, discussing, debating and applying classical literature in any tradition that can be applied to our medical tradition as well.

>>Of course

alon

 

-

 

Friday, September 22, 2000 9:09 AM

Re: Blood and Yin Tonics

 

on 9/22/00 8:39 AM, alonmarcus at alonmarcus wrote:

In response to the e-mails on the classics, herb categorization, et al:Some herbal medicinals fall into more than one category. What is so upsetting about that? Herbal medicinals have multiple qualities. . . .the categories are simply organzing tools, but most medicinals are more complex than one primary action. Until someone (or group of people) translates a text such as the zhong yao da ci dian/Great Dictionary of Chinese Medicinals, with 4500 ingredients and much more information than any present English text, or enough people learn to read medical Chinese, we will have these discussions. It seems we are falling into the empirical vs. rational duality that has been a part of medical debate for millenia (see Harris Coulter's Divided Legacy). Certainly, there is an experiential level at which herbal medicinals, acupuncture points, etc. can be understood. But without medical theory (rational), there is no way to organize the information into a coherent whole. It is one thing to update the tradition. . .but without mastery of the basics of the tradition, that is impossible. There have been fervent debates over classical texts for centuries, but they have been done with (for the most part) respect, and in the spirit of uncovering what is real and true. I have seen similar debates in the Jewish tradition. The Talmudic tradition is based on debate and wrestling with the texts, but with respect and reverence for what has come before. Otherwise there is no basis for discussion.I wonder how Alon has determined what is bool in the tradition.. . .it seems to be based on his own value judgements. I don't share his perceptions of pattern diagnosis. If some mainland authors put out poor quality work, and fantasize in print, it doesn't mean pattern diagnosis is some simplistic, outdated method for diagnosing patients. There are methods of examining, discussing, debating and applying classical literature in any tradition that can be applied to our medical tradition as well. It may be a difficult idea in the West, where the idea of a classical medical literature seems to be non-existent despite the (limited) availability of such a literature, but it is an essential part of Chinese medicine.Further more, Mary Kay believes that herbs don't come to being in order to comply with human hypothesizing and concept models; they don't grow up and decide to be be in one materia medica categories and have a fixed number and set types of characteristics. On this point I agreed with her. This topic came up in relation to a different class she was teaching, where her students didn't believe that gou qi zi tonified yin, because the herb was classified as a blood tonifier in Bensky.>>>That is part of what I referred to in past emails as, there is a lot of bool in TCM. Another example is many of the modern books on TCM treatments of Western diseases. These books are full of theoretical differential diagnosis and often have nothing to do with real patients. Since TCM is mostly a system of correspondences this process is easy to do but has nothing to do with reality. The process of TCM formation was confined by these early and limited categorizations. That is also the reason I believe we can integrate newer information into the way we think and do not have to be restricted by older terminology. The classics give us a point of view that we can now expand. The better one knows this information the freer one becomes to depart from old ideas.alonChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.