Guest guest Posted September 5, 2003 Report Share Posted September 5, 2003 Message: 6 Fri, 05 Sep 2003 11:25:02 -0000 " " < Re: Oats The fact that an entry already exists for oats in the chinese literature is a stark reminder of the pitfalls of not reading chinese. I'm not so sure it is a pitfall. So far my Chinese interpretation of oat seem pretty right on. I'll be happy to load a couple more for you to look at. On the other hand I do read a little Chinese, however, I don't have a whole library to choose from. Further, the information put forth by Bob is on the mature seed as a food, not the immature seed as a medicine. There is a difference. There are a few cases where I don't necessarily agree what is written in the Chinese literature, is this so wrong? thomas Chinese Herbology and Acupuncture acupuncture and herbal information " Knowing nothing, you will be aware of everything. " Lao Tzu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 6, 2003 Report Share Posted September 6, 2003 , " " < @e...> wrote: > > I'm not so sure it is a pitfall. So far my Chinese interpretation of oat > seem pretty right on. There are a few cases where I don't necessarily agree what is > written in the Chinese literature, is this so wrong? In order for work in chinese medical literature to gain wide acceptance amongst the community of chinese practitioners and americans who put similar stock in the classical written tradition, I think it is necessary that at least one member of an editorial team have access to chinese sources. An american work that describes western herbs already present in the chinese tradition without extensive consultation with chinese sources would be unacceptable to me. I think such a book would be appealing amongst some americans, but would not have a lasting influence on the field without the input I describe. that would be a shame, because you have worked hard and thoughtfully and with insight so far. With all due respect to others who taken on this endeavor in the past, I do not believe their books have ultimately had much impact on TCM itself and I believe it is because what I consider such a fundamental issue has been overlooked. So there is nothing wrong or bad about your approach. I just believe all new information in TCM is always deeply grounded in what came before. I would like to see your book written with editorial footnotes about herbs for which you differ from TCM. For example, noting how and why you differed from the zhong yao da ci dian, etc. That would be truly a work of some import. Presenting new ideas in the appropiate historical and clinical context would pave the way for a lasting set of monographs. 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.