Teaching

[Guest guest]

Emmanuel wrote:

>>>   On a positive note, there are a lot of clinical professors of great merit in China who face forced retirement at age 55, which I consider to be their prime.  If there was a good American institution where they could come, you could get some of the finest of China's clinical professors to teach here.   If they could stand the culture shock, of course.>>>

 

I think the great amount of interest in the subject of teaching--more like hitting a nerve--reflects the fact that not only do many of us on this list teach, but we know that the future and survival of our profession depends on the quality of education, which in America is nowhere near where it should be. I would love to create a home for some of China's elder statesmen of medicine to come here and teach. But I think our paradigm needs to shift a bit more than it has. I refer to Bob's impassioned post about training methods for one thing, and thinking about all this I thought how I would really like to see a school that focuses not primarily on theory, facts, testing and such but on the direct experience of qi.

 

Who invented this medicine? People who directly experienced the qi of the body, plants, the earth, etc.--the feng shui of life and the environment. How can we reasonably be expected to add to something as miraculous as this unless we are "walking the talk" and asking the same of our students? What good is it to have students who know every possible fact about TCM but can't feel the qi? How can they add to the field when the field, rigorously logical as it is, is essentially about a subtle sensing of the murmurings of the universe?

 

I don't mean to whine or oversimplify things. I am reminded of stories of the Kototama school which existed years ago in New Mexico. Master Nakezome (spelling?), a world-famous aikido master and clinician, founded a school based on the idea that the best student was not the one who could take tests well but the one who could do the best--read a pulse dramatically well, diagnose a patient thoroughly, transmit qi wonderfully, read subtle complexion colors, needle painlessly and effectively, etc., etc. Those who could not cut it did not last, and this included many "A" students elsewhere. He required students to meditate in group from 5:00 to 9:00 am every morning--no excuses whatsoever--you missed meditation, you got cut from the school. This is how serious he took it, and those who graduated from him are some of the finest people walking the planet.

 

My dream of a school is one in which medical theory and practicum stand as one of several pillars, the others being qi gong and tai chi practice, feng shui, and the ancient arts--calligraphy, painting, archery and music. This would create people who know how to live a whole different kind of life, not just people who know how to put better bandaids on people's problems in a better way. I include myself in the latter category because when it comes right down to it, I am not really living all that different a life from many of the sickos who come to me, and with the possibility of present company excepted, most students and practitioners are doing much the same.

Joseph Garner

[Guest guest]

.... the direct experience of qi.Who invented this medicine? People who directly experienced the qi of the body, plants, the earth, etc.--the feng shui of life and the environment. How can we reasonably be expected to add to something as miraculous as this unless we are "walking the talk" and asking the same of our students? What good is it to have students who know every possible fact about TCM but can't feel the qi? How can they add to the field when the field, rigorously logical as it is, is essentially about a subtle sensing of the murmurings of the universe?

.....

Joseph Garner Great post, Joseph. This is where going to college would make you stronger and more fit ... and more fit to be a practitioner. Well stated.

 

Emmanuel Segmen

[Guest guest]

On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 05:38 PM, acugrpaz wrote:

 

> Who invented this medicine? People who directly experienced the qi of

> the body, plants, the earth, etc.--the feng shui of life and the

> environment. How can we reasonably be expected to add to something as

> miraculous as this unless we are " walking the talk " and asking the

> same of our students? What good is it to have students who know every

> possible fact about TCM but can't feel the qi? How can they add to the

> field when the field, rigorously logical as it is, is essentially

> about a subtle sensing of the murmurings of the universe?

 

I agree with you, Joseph. I always quote Zhang Xi-chun in my classes,

who said (Fruehauf translation) that " a physician must first

thoroughly understand the workings of one's own body transformations,

and then naturally becomes a teacher who is capable of instructing

others how to regulate their bodies' qi metabolism (transformation), "

>

> I don't mean to whine or oversimplify things. I am reminded of stories

> of the Kototama school which existed years ago in New Mexico. Master

> Nakezome (spelling?), a world-famous aikido master and clinician,

> founded a school based on the idea that the best student was not the

> one who could take tests well but the one who could do the best--read

> a pulse dramatically well, diagnose a patient thoroughly, transmit qi

> wonderfully, read subtle complexion colors, needle painlessly and

> effectively, etc., etc. Those who could not cut it did not last, and

> this included many " A " students elsewhere. He required students to

> meditate in group from 5:00 to 9:00 am every morning--no excuses

> whatsoever--you missed meditation, you got cut from the school. This

> is how serious he took it, and those who graduated from him are some

> of the finest people walking the planet.

 

I lived for several years in Santa Fe, and sat in on a few classes in

Masahilo Nakazono's Kototama Institute. It was perhaps the closest

school that approached the apprenticeship experience that has ever

existed in the U.S. Originally, you couldn't practice until he felt

you were ready. Ultimately, this educational method was not for

everyone. I respect it a lot more now than I did then (I was in my

20's), but not everyone is made for such an approach. It seemed very

autocratic to me at the time. My appreciation of Japanese acupuncture

began by observing the work done at this school, and I also respect

practitioners of Kototama medicine very much. Dr. Nakazono was a great

healer, and I still enjoy his book on Kototama Medicine. He also

studied with George Ohsawa (macrobiotics) and Master Uyeshiba (Aikido).

>

> My dream of a school is one in which medical theory and practicum

> stand as one of several pillars, the others being qi gong and tai chi

> practice, feng shui, and the ancient arts--calligraphy, painting,

> archery and music. This would create people who know how to live a

> whole different kind of life, not just people who know how to put

> better bandaids on people's problems in a better way. I include myself

> in the latter category because when it comes right down to it, I am

> not really living all that different a life from many of the sickos

> who come to me, and with the possibility of present company excepted,

> most students and practitioners are doing much the same.

 

 

A few months ago, I wrote about my experiences visiting the Ayurvedic

Institute in New Mexico last summer, and how I felt that some of the

more lifestyle cultivation approaches were missing from CM education.

I agree with you that we need to address quality of life issues. How

to do this practically is another issue all together.

 

My own concerns focus on diet. Some may not agree, but watching

students eat the worst quality junk food in class week after week in

class makes me think that there is a certain dimension missing in CM

education.