Guest guest Posted November 21, 2001 Report Share Posted November 21, 2001 A question to anyone who has formally studied the SHL in china (*or semi-formally from a Chinese teacher)… Where you taught that you HAVE to have Alternating Fever & Chills to DX a shaoyang Disorder? If so, do you know a source for this…? - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2001 Report Share Posted November 21, 2001 In a message dated 11/21/01 12:55:36 PM Pacific Standard Time, writes: A question to anyone who has formally studied the SHL in china (*or semi-formally from a Chinese teacher)… Where you taught that you HAVE to have Alternating Fever & Chills to DX a shaoyang Disorder? Absolutely not. This is a most unfortunate and misleading fixation. Read the Shao Yang chapter and it states all you need is one symptom from the Shao Yang category to name Shao Yang. Will Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2001 Report Share Posted November 21, 2001 In a message dated 11/21/01 10:01:54 PM Pacific Standard Time, writes: So, I am actually looking for someone who has studied in China or with a Chinese teacher in regard to this issue – and I am looking for ‘their’ SOURCE –. Will, Just curious where your interpretation is from… Are you reading an English translation?? This is based on 15 years experience w/ the model, discussions in Taiwan, Dr. Yang Maiqing's opinion, And yes....the Paradigm press, China Ocean Press, and OHAI Press English translations. I'll stand by my opinion. Mandating alternating chills and fever will cause one to miss Shao Yang syndromes a high percentage of the time. The text says 'any one symptom,' not 'any one symptom in addition to chills and fever.' Just work the characters out in the Paradigm Press version and you'll see. Will Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2001 Report Share Posted November 21, 2001 Will, Thanx for the idea, but I am aware of what the SHL says about needing 1 symptom… This statement is not as clear cut as you might interpret. Actually many people (Chinese especially due to nuances of the language and SHL) understand this to include (by default) alternating fever and chills and 1 other symptom – This has been taught to me by my Chinese instructor in a SHL class. Also ‘the one other symptom’ is of course much more than just HAVING 1 symptom… So, I am actually looking for someone who has studied in China or with a Chinese teacher in regard to this issue – and I am looking for ‘their’ SOURCE –. Will, Just curious where your interpretation is from… Are you reading an English translation?? -Jason WMorris116 [WMorris116] Wednesday, November 21, 2001 8:30 PM To: Re: Shaoyang In a message dated 11/21/01 12:55:36 PM Pacific Standard Time, writes: A question to anyone who has formally studied the SHL in china (*or semi-formally from a Chinese teacher)… Where you taught that you HAVE to have Alternating Fever & Chills to DX a shaoyang Disorder? Absolutely not. This is a most unfortunate and misleading fixation. Read the Shao Yang chapter and it states all you need is one symptom from the Shao Yang category to name Shao Yang. Will 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. Your use of is subject to the Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2001 Report Share Posted November 21, 2001 , " " <@o...> wrote: Actually many people (Chinese especially due to nuances of > the language and SHL) understand this to include (by default) > alternating fever and chills and 1 other symptom - This has been taught > to me by my Chinese instructor in a SHL class. I was taught by Heiner Fruehauf that it is indeed just one sx, not alt chills and fever plus one other sx. You refer to many people believing what you said. Has anyone besides your SHL teacher actually told you this personally? You well know that more commentaries have been written on SHL than other book in TCM and there is no absolute consensus on this matter, only opinion and experience. I don't have a copy of mitchell's SHL, but I wonder if he includes any commentary on this matter. Also 'the one other > symptom' is of course much more than just HAVING 1 symptom. what do you mean by this? that the patient has many sx, one of which is pathognomic for shaoyang? who ever just has one symptom? at the very least, everyone has a tongue and pulse. > So, I am actually looking for someone who has studied in China or with a > Chinese teacher in regard to this issue - and I am looking for 'their' > SOURCE -. Why a chinese teacher? I have met several europeans whose ability to read classical chinese is generally agreed to exceed that of the average chinese physician (in the opinion of other chinese physicians, that is, not me). finally, are you suggesting that xiao chai hu tang can only be used with alt. chills and fever or for shaoyang dz., not by an alternate analysis of the herb functions. I recently read in the BP newsletter that xiao chai hu tang has been used to treat colds in women since the latter han dynasty without any shaoyang sx at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2001 Report Share Posted November 21, 2001 Todd: > > I was taught by Heiner Fruehauf that it is indeed just one sx, not alt > chills and fever plus one other sx. And? No one is arguing that it is not taught..? but 'indeed'? TODD: You refer to many people believing > what you said. Has anyone besides your SHL teacher actually told you > this personally? Yes.. Will mentioned " This is a most unfortunate and misleading fixation... " is he referring to having heard this by others in the past? Will? TODD: You well know that more commentaries have been > written on SHL than other book in TCM and there is no absolute > consensus on this matter, only opinion and experience. This is precisely my point.. Did anyone say otherwise? I never said I agree with this stance or that it is the only way, it is only an idea... I don't have a > copy of mitchell's SHL, but I wonder if he includes any commentary on > this matter. Yes I have read this, see below... TODD> > Also 'the one other > > symptom' is of course much more than just HAVING 1 symptom. > > what do you mean by this? that the patient has many sx, one of which > is pathognomic for shaoyang? who ever just has one symptom? at the > very least, everyone has a tongue and pulse. This is explained very well in the commentary in Mitchell's version... I am unclear what you are getting at...?? > > > So, I am actually looking for someone who has studied in China or with a > > Chinese teacher in regard to this issue - and I am looking for 'their' > > SOURCE -. > > Why a chinese teacher? I have met several europeans whose ability to > read classical chinese is generally agreed to exceed that of the > average chinese physician (in the opinion of other chinese physicians, > that is, not me). No one is arguing this.... a) Are these master (Classical) translators on this list? If so then let's hear from them... b) I trust the average educated Chinese teacher/ practitioner much more than the average American teacher/ practitioner. - There are always exceptions... but Chinese do have a distinct undeniable advantage... Just my opinion... c) My source has specialized in Classical literature study - specifically SHL. HE was one of the heads of the SHL society in China for many years. Etc... I respect his opinion, much more than the average white boy on such issues. But at the same time, I do not worship it or even agree with.. No one said it is some truth.. But that FACT that he mentioned it, taught it, and was so adamant about it, suggests that it is a solid stance that many believe... I personally can see both sides... It is funny how defensive people get when a different opinion is suggested... (not you Todd- just in general).. d) I am looking for Chinese source because I know the English translations and teachers do not normally teach this.. So I am tracing it back to China, to its roots.... > > finally, are you suggesting that xiao chai hu tang can only be used > with alt. chills and fever or for shaoyang dz., not by an alternate > analysis of the herb functions. Where did this ever come from? Who mentioned X.C.H.T. only for shaoyang? That is of course outrageous... I am talking about ideas surrounding diagnosing a shaoyang disorder... -Jason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2001 Report Share Posted November 21, 2001 WMorris116 [WMorris116] .. The text says 'any one symptom,' not 'any one symptom in addition to chills and fever.' Just work the characters out in the Paradigm Press version and you'll see. Will, I am not suggesting that the characters do not say this or that.. The idea is that alternating fever and chills is understood in the context of the syndrome. It is assumed that it is the primary symptom, written or not (see below)… Anyone that has remotely studied classical Chinese understands the concept/ possibility that: a) many words are left out and paragraphs are open to interpretation… 4 characters can be translated into many lines and multiple ways, there is definitely no correct interpretation on many issues. b) that Dr. Zhàng Jï multiple times did not write all the symptoms in various paragraphs, assuming the reader knew what was previously written or knew enough about a given situation/pattern and would not bother to incorporate the ‘obvious’ details.. This is precisely the issue I am suggesting here. This of course creates debate, I again see both sides… There is no right answer and probably never will be, and I am curious why others think they ‘know’ - that it is so clear cut – especially the whities out there? I believe this concept is valid, and respect this less popular opinion (at least in America). I think this brings up an interesting issue when it comes to American interpretations of Chinese theory… When I was 1st in school I was told that any problem that comes and goes is shaoyang – now it is latent heat… Yes everyone is entitled to there opinion, but something I have found zero substantiation in Chinese texts or Chinese teachers, especially experts in SHL, leads me to believe they were/are probably wrong -- and they are just misinterpreting a Chinese concept – not seeing the whole picture and trying to fit things into the boxes… -Jason .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 Jason....have you read the passages in Feng's version from Paradigm? The contextual discussion places chills alternating with heat effusion lower in the hierarchical chain than dizzy vision, dry throat, and a bitter taste in the mouth. Read or reread the passages, then we can discuss it, hopefully without racial slurs. Will Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 wrote: and I am curious why others think they ‘know’ - that it is so clear cut – especially the whities out there? -Jason Jason, As a non-white Latino TCM practitioner, I take issue with your "white boy", "whities" lingo. This type of language gives me a bitter and sour taste in the mouth, it makes me very irritable, and on this Thanksgiving day, I do not want any nausea and vomiting nor a reduced appetite and my pulse is wiry enough as it is! Furthermore, this give the impression that only Asians and white Americans practice TCM or go to China to study; it also weakens the value of your question! I do appreciate your fervor, but please, let's chill! Sinceramente, Fernando Bernall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 Jason, As a non-white Latino TCM practitioner, I take issue with your " white boy " , " whities " lingo. This type of language gives me a bitter and sour taste in the mouth, it makes me very irritable, and on this Thanksgiving day, I do not want any nausea and vomiting nor a reduced appetite and my pulse is wiry enough as it is! Please.. Please.. I am just joking around with the term, please don’t take it seriously… Sorry about your nausea… I will change the term to ‘Westerner’… Didn’t mean to offend the other races… I am just making fun of my own race.. that is it.. Please enjoy your T-Day Furthermore, this give the impression that only Asians and white Americans practice TCM or go to China to study; it also weakens the value of your question! Yes every can go to China to study… But am unclear how this weakens the value of my question…? Sorry again.. -JAson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 wrote: [Jason ] Please.. Please.. I am just joking around with the term, please don’t take it seriously… Sorry about your nausea… I will change the term to ‘Westerner’… Didn’t mean to offend the other races… I am just making fun of my own race..that is it.. Please enjoy your T-Day Furthermore, this give the impression that only Asians and white Americans practice TCM or go to China to study; it also weakens the value of your question! [Jason ] Yes every can go to China to study… But am unclear how this weakens the value of my question…? Sorry again.. -JAson mei wen ti! Only because it detracts from it. Enjoy the game! fernando Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 In a message dated 11/22/01 11:00:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, writes: The response is the SHL in its original form is no longer, paragraphs have been lost, misplaced etc.. hence the source of many of the debates and controversies that lie within. This is one of them… If you just read the text at face value I see what you see… Very clear.. Jason - The argument seems to be we can make up stuff and insert it because of lacunae in ancient texts. Such opinions contain less veracity for me than clear passages confirmed by clinical experience - especially when corroborated by senior practitioners. I suppose the question is what do we do when our seniors don't agree? I check it out for myself. Happy Thanksgiving everyone - there's a lot to be thankful for Will Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 Will, Yes… I have read this already.. This, as mentioned previous, is not the point… Sorry to keep saying the same thing over… I actually pointed out the above paragraph to my teacher… The response is the SHL in its original form is no longer, paragraphs have been lost, misplaced etc.. hence the source of many of the debates and controversies that lie within. This is one of them… If you just read the text at face value I see what you see… Very clear.. But his point is that there is more to It than that.. He states that His and others clinical experience, oral transmission, and commentaries on the text (I am looking for this source), state otherwise. It is not a straightforward hierarchy, HE says… I am not debating if this is true or NOT, I am aware of the paradigm text… Just looking for some sources to this IDEA… And I still support this idea as being valid, as well as yours… Also… He has pointed out many controversies that are not even mentioned in this very-well written paradigm SHL… There are many more ideas that little book contains… Hence a lesson for all of us… a) Just because some book says something does not mean it is correct, even if it is a great translation … b) These classic texts present more controversy than truth… We can not point at a line and say it says “blah blah blah” see I told you.. This Bible philosophy is un-Chinese (Sorry about the religious slur… you can substitute your favorite book for BIBLE – it is a general term…) c) I believe there are nuances in the language that are very deep are hard to understand… Hence the argument to learn to read. There are 3 sides to every tai ji circle… Happy T-DAY off to eat BBQ… -Jason WMorris116 [WMorris116] Thursday, November 22, 2001 7:56 AM To: Re: Shaoyang Jason....have you read the passages in Feng's version from Paradigm? The contextual discussion places chills alternating with heat effusion lower in the hierarchical chain than dizzy vision, dry throat, and a bitter taste in the mouth. Read or reread the passages, then we can discuss it, hopefully without racial slurs. Will 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. Your use of is subject to the Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 As a non-white Latino TCM practitioner, I take issue with your "white boy", "whities" lingo. This type of language gives me a bitter and sour taste in the mouth, it\ >>>Dont be so sensetive Alon - fb Thursday, November 22, 2001 8:00 AM Re: Shaoyang wrote: and I am curious why others think they ‘know’ - that it is so clear cut – especially the whities out there? -Jason Jason, As a non-white Latino TCM practitioner, I take issue with your "white boy", "whities" lingo. This type of language gives me a bitter and sour taste in the mouth, it makes me very irritable, and on this Thanksgiving day, I do not want any nausea and vomiting nor a reduced appetite and my pulse is wiry enough as it is! Furthermore, this give the impression that only Asians and white Americans practice TCM or go to China to study; it also weakens the value of your question! I do appreciate your fervor, but please, let's chill! Sinceramente, Fernando Bernall 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 ) Just because some book says something does not mean it is correct, even if it is a great translation … b) These classic texts present more controversy than truth… We can not point at a line and say it says “blah blah blah” see I told you.. This Bible philosophy is un-Chinese (Sorry about the religious slur… you can substitute your favorite book for BIBLE – it is a general term…)>>>I agree c) I believe there are nuances in the language that are very deep are hard to understand… Hence the argument to learn to read.>>>>That is why an approach that takes a formulary approach to translation does not work. - Thursday, November 22, 2001 1:30 PM Re: Shaoyang On Thursday, November 22, 2001, at 10:45 AM, wrote: Also…He has pointed out many controversies that are not even mentioned in this very-well written paradigm SHL… There are many more ideas that little book contains… Hence a lesson for all of us… a) Just because some book says something does not mean it is correct, even if it is a great translation … b) These classic texts present more controversy than truth… We can not point at a line and say it says “blah blah blah” see I told you.. This Bible philosophy is un-Chinese (Sorry about the religious slur… you can substitute your favorite book for BIBLE – it is a general term…)Jason, the point as I see it is not literal 'worship' of the single word or phrase, but to see the dance of yin and yang in the text, to see the conceptual grid of the SHL and apply it to clinical thinking and application. It has survived, despite errors in transmission, because of its incredible conceptual structure. There are generations of commentaries, largely debating the inconsistencies and subtle points that you mention. c) I believe there are nuances in the language that are very deep are hard to understand… Hence the argument to learn to read.Undoubtedly so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 On Thursday, November 22, 2001, at 10:45 AM, wrote: > > > > > Also…He has pointed out many controversies that are not even mentioned > in this very-well written paradigm SHL… There are many more ideas that > little book contains… Hence a lesson for all of us… a) Just because > some book says something does not mean it is correct, even if it is a > great translation … b) These classic texts present more controversy > than truth… We can not point at a line and say it says “blah blah blah” > see I told you.. This Bible philosophy is un-Chinese (Sorry about the > religious slur… you can substitute your favorite book for BIBLE – it is > a general term…) Jason, the point as I see it is not literal 'worship' of the single word or phrase, but to see the dance of yin and yang in the text, to see the conceptual grid of the SHL and apply it to clinical thinking and application. It has survived, despite errors in transmission, because of its incredible conceptual structure. There are generations of commentaries, largely debating the inconsistencies and subtle points that you mention. > > c) I believe there are nuances in the language that are very deep are > hard to understand… Hence the argument to learn to read. > Undoubtedly so. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 > ) Just because some book says something does not mean it is correct, > even if it is a great translation … b) These classic texts present more > controversy than truth… We can not point at a line and say it says > “blah blah blah” see I told you.. This Bible philosophy is un-Chinese > (Sorry about the religious slur… you can substitute your favorite book > for BIBLE – it is a general term…) It is debatable to say that " classic texts provide more controversy than truth " . . .that is simply opinion. It depends on what you define as truth in this context. As far as " Bible philosophy " . . . .Jewish philosophy on the Torah and Talmud is commentary and debate, but still anchored in the source texts. A literal reading may not always hit the mark. I actually think that Jewish Bible philosophy and Chinese philosophy are very close with the centuries of debate, cross-referencing and finding of new ideas in the canons. And, of course, both approaches require scholarship. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 Jewish philosophy on the Torah and Talmud is commentary and debate, but still anchored in the source texts. A literal reading may not always hit the mark. I actually think that Jewish Bible philosophy and Chinese philosophy are very close with the centuries of debate, cross-referencing and finding of new ideas in the canons. And, of course, both approaches require scholarship.>>>There was probably sharing of ideas Alon - Thursday, November 22, 2001 1:50 PM Re: Shaoyang ) Just because some book says something does not mean it is correct, even if it is a great translation … b) These classic texts present more controversy than truth… We can not point at a line and say it says “blah blah blah” see I told you.. This Bible philosophy is un-Chinese (Sorry about the religious slur… you can substitute your favorite book for BIBLE – it is a general term…)It is debatable to say that "classic texts provide more controversy than truth". . .that is simply opinion. It depends on what you define as truth in this context. As far as "Bible philosophy". . . .Jewish philosophy on the Torah and Talmud is commentary and debate, but still anchored in the source texts. A literal reading may not always hit the mark. I actually think that Jewish Bible philosophy and Chinese philosophy are very close with the centuries of debate, cross-referencing and finding of new ideas in the canons. And, of course, both approaches require scholarship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2001 Report Share Posted November 22, 2001 , " " <@o...> wrote: > : > > > > I was taught by Heiner Fruehauf that it is indeed just one sx, not alt > > chills and fever plus one other sx. > > And? No one is arguing that it is not taught..? but 'indeed'? What Heiner taught me is the consensus among SHL scholars at Chengdu college. My understanding is that Chengdu is the premier college for study of the SHL in China. Our new professor Tan tan huang hails from there. You might want to talk to him when he arrives next year. > > TODD: You refer to many people believing > > what you said. Has anyone besides your SHL teacher actually told you > > this personally? > > Yes.. Well, I have had a dozen chinese teachers tell me otherwise and none have told me what you are stating. > > > This is precisely my point.. Did anyone say otherwise? I never said I > agree with this stance or that it is the only way, it is only an idea... The implication of your statements was that the common opinion the rest of us hold was wrong. You may not have meant this, but that is the impression you gave everyone who has commented so far. I > am unclear what you are getting at...?? ditto b) I trust the average > educated Chinese teacher/ practitioner much more than the average > American teacher/ practitioner. - There are always exceptions... but > Chinese do have a distinct undeniable advantage... I disagree. Most chinese docs do not read classical language nor have they studied history and linguistics extensively. I'll trust a european scholar with extensive time in china and years of clinical experience on this point ... hands down But that FACT that he > mentioned it, taught it, and was so adamant about it, some people are adamant about everything they say, whether it is commonly acepted or not. that means nothing to me. some teachers are also adamant that most american tongues appear tender and most american patients are jing xu. I don't think that is commonly accepted either, by chinese or non chinese. > > finally, are you suggesting that xiao chai hu tang can only be used > > with alt. chills and fever or for shaoyang dz., not by an alternate > > analysis of the herb functions. > > > Where did this ever come from? Who mentioned X.C.H.T. only for > shaoyang? That is of course outrageous... I am talking about ideas > surrounding diagnosing a shaoyang disorder... How can you separate XCHT from this discussion? Isn't the passage in question about alt chills and fever in a SHL clause about the use of this formula? 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.