Guest guest Posted November 12, 2003 Report Share Posted November 12, 2003 Ken, Agreed. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2003 Report Share Posted November 12, 2003 " Bob Flaws " <pemachophel2001> Wed Nov 12, 2003 7:05 pm Re: standards> It is much more complicated than that... We are not basing > everything on these ancient texts, but instead a development of ideas > that extend through to modern times. Granted that modern texts > usually start out with " in the suwen it says, blah blah blah, " but > this most of the time has little relevance to what then is actually > said. It is just a fashionable way to try to legitimize ideas. So I > really don't think it is that big of deal. Our standards seem to be > from what is working, and this yes has roots in the classic texts, > but it is not some direct transmission, skipping the next 2000 years > of development of ideas, trial and error etc. >I have a (somewhat vague) remembrance of a supposedly Sufi teaching, i.e., don't read commentaries of scriptures written in previous generations. Each generation has its own environment and needs. In other words, scripture needs to be constantly reinterpreted in terms of the current situation. I think this is sort of what Jason is getting at. There's no way to really know what the original authors of the Su Wen, Ling Shu, etc. thought they were saying. Even as a contemporary author, I am blown away by the various interpretations of things I have written compared to what I thought I had written/intended to say. Bob> Bob and other colleagues, This is one of the reasons why I consider that we have to acknowledge the meditative basis of CM. The authors of the Su Wen, Ling Shu, etc., were clearly trying to impart something about their understanding and experience, and it is within the Chinese tradition that their words, perhaps a bit like koans, have to be considered in the light of one's own experience and understanding, not with definite, absolute meaning, but as provisional insights. However, I don't see why one should have to discard the insights of previous generations who considered these same questions and statements. Their statements become additional material to re-evaluate in the light of our current situation. The physicist David Bohm, in his book 'Wholeness and the Implicate Order', argued that in science, a somewhat analogous situation applies. There are no facts - we should not think of experiments and scientific endeavour yielding concrete results, but rather, temporary insights, along the lines of 'in the light of looking at things this way, or performing this experiment, the following are provisionally suggested.' One should not think of facts as nouns, as something that exist, but rather as verbs, relating to activity that in reality is ongoing. (I'm not sure I'm expressing this as well as I should be, but it will have to do for right now - I don't have time to do it better.) Bohm also pointed out that this is not how scientists do, in actuality, approach science. To most scientists, facts are definitively determined realities, things that in a sense have a definite existence, from which edifices of knowledge are built. (It has been observed that modern science draws much of its imagery from architecture.) Bohm argues that this attitude is grossly in error, and leads to personal fragmentation. In my opinion, these are among the issues that we need to consider in our evaluation of CM and science/biomedicine. Wainwright Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2003 Report Share Posted November 12, 2003 , " kenrose2008 " > Someone can probably provide you with > a copy of the handouts from the workshop, > and I'll be happy to discuss the details with > you or anyone else whenever anyone is > ready and willing. >>> Ken: It would help immensely if you or someone could post the handouts to the " Files " section of the forum. Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2003 Report Share Posted November 12, 2003 , " Bob Flaws " wrote: > Each generation has its own environment and needs. In other words, scripture needs to be constantly reinterpreted in terms of the current situation. I think this is sort of what Jason is getting at. There's no way to really know what the original authors of the Su Wen, Ling Shu, etc. thought they were saying. Even as a contemporary author, I am blown away by the various interpretations of things I have written compared to what I thought I had written/intended to say. >>> Bob: Ditto. And, I would add that the classics are often not well written or explicit; so we are confronted by that problem too. Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2003 Report Share Posted November 12, 2003 You would have loved the Su Wen seminar with Paul, Jim. Z'ev On Nov 12, 2003, at 3:43 PM, James Ramholz wrote: > And, I would add that the classics are often not well written or > explicit; so we are confronted by that problem too. > > > Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2003 Report Share Posted November 12, 2003 Alon, and All, > >>>>>I will have to agree and also say that at least some of the designers of TCM that i have spoken to emphasize this stating that the so-called standardization is of necessity to save lives. > Alon > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2003 Report Share Posted November 12, 2003 Hello Jason, Excuse me. Did you just suggest that Unschuld show his " data " for suggesting that statistics is out of balance in our culture? Emmanuel Segmen - Wednesday, November 12, 2003 10:14 AM Re: standards I agree with Todd 100%... Once again I have a hard time understanding where PU is coming from... I would love to get him involved in the group so we can hear 'first hand' his thoughts and what data he has to back up his ideas. I am also still interested in his claims (if it is his) that we have been lied to and what we practice in not chinese medicine. Everything that comes down the pipe has had little to back it up, and personally I have a hard time resonating with... I say, " show us where IT doesn't work " and then we have something to go on... - - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2003 Report Share Posted November 12, 2003 Paul never made that claim to my knowledge. It would be preposterous. On Nov 12, 2003, at 4:44 PM, Jason wrote: > I am also still interested in his claims (if > it is his) that we have been lied to and what we practice in not > chinese medicine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2003 Report Share Posted November 12, 2003 , " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > You would have loved the Su Wen seminar with Paul, Jim. > > Z'ev > On Nov 12, 2003, at 3:43 PM, James Ramholz wrote: > > > And, I would add that the classics are often not well written or > > explicit; so we are confronted by that problem too. Was this part of his lecture different from his book---or video taped or recorded? Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2003 Report Share Posted November 12, 2003 It was videotaped, and recorded. Z'ev On Nov 12, 2003, at 5:34 PM, James Ramholz wrote: > , " " > <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: >> You would have loved the Su Wen seminar with Paul, Jim. >> >> Z'ev >> On Nov 12, 2003, at 3:43 PM, James Ramholz wrote: >> >>> And, I would add that the classics are often not well written or >>> explicit; so we are confronted by that problem too. > > > > Was this part of his lecture different from his book---or video > taped or recorded? > > > Jim Ramholz > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2003 Report Share Posted November 13, 2003 The lack of an appropriate English language Su Wen is indeed a problem - I am always trying to translate things for my students so that they do not have to suffer through the translations that are out there. I am somewhat concerned about Unschuld's Nei Jing project however. What does that mean? I think its a great project, but I'm not really sure that the huge 18 volume (or so) edition that he is working on is the answer to our problem - I would hope that he would consider publishing an " abridged " version much like his Nan Jing translation so that it is accessible to student/clinicians without having to go through 18 volumes. Marnae At 06:06 PM 11/12/2003 +0000, you wrote: > > >Paul is not suggesting that we eschew standards. Paul's >discourse touches relatively little on standards. When he >does talk about them, he points out that what matters is >how they emerge, who sets them, and how they are >implemented. > >The critical questions is, Who do you want to control you. > >There are standards. There have always been standards. >There will always be standards. > >Why do we have the standards that we have? > >What standards do we actually need? > >Who is going to set the standards? > >And on the basis of what knowledge? > >One of the things that we saw with some clarity >in Paul's workshop over the past couple of days >is that with respect to what is arguably the most >basic text in Chinese medicine, the Su Wen, >extant English language versions present >highly idiosyncratic interpretations of the >original which often have little if anything >to do with what is written in the original. > >Does that matter? > >Are we wed to what 2,000 year old authors >have had to say, for whatever their reasons >and based on whatever sort of logic they >employed to expresses themselves? > >Well, either we are or we aren't. > >If we are, how shall we go about employing >such seminal texts in the construction of >our standards? > >Shall we rely on the work of invidivudals >who have little to know knowledge or >understanding of the source materials and >whose renditions stray significantly from >what a careful reading of the text reveals? > >Paul is the first to point out how varied >the reading of a text like the Su Wen can >and should be. But it is clear to the thirty >people or so who participated in his workshop >that many of the extant English language >versions of the Su Wen fail miserably to >represent in English what one finds in >the Chinese text. > >Is this a problem? > >If not, why bother studying or making any >slightest reference to the Chinese text >or to the fact of it's even being Chinese? > >If so, how shall we proceed to develop solutions? > >There's no " you guys " and " us guys " here. > >We're all in the same boat. > >I think it's time to row. > >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. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2003 Report Share Posted November 13, 2003 Hi Marnae Its more than a single volume which I would prefer myself as well, but it isn't as bad as 18 volumes. It's a total of 6 volumes of which 3 volumes contain the the original chinese text with translation and the other 3 are supporting volumes. This is what is published about this project on his Munich-Uni WEB- page: - Huang Di Nei Jing Su Wen. Huang Di's Inner Classic. Basic Questions. Vol. 1: Treatises 1 through 25. Vol. 2: Treatises 26 through 65, 75 through 81. Vol. 3: Treatises 66 through 71 and 74. The Original Chinese Text with Annotated Translation, in collaboration with Hermann Tessenow and Zheng Jinsheng. Vol. 4: Annotated Bibliography, by Zheng Jinsheng, Zhang Tongjun, Hermann Tessenow, and P.U.U. Vol. 5: Glossary, by P.U.U., Hermann Tessenow, and Ursula Holler. Vol. 6: Concordances, by Rupprecht Mayer and Hermann Tessenow. Alwin --- Marnae Ergil wrote: > I think its a great project, but I'm not really sure that the huge > 18 volume (or so) edition that he is working on is the answer to > our problem - I would hope that he would consider publishing > an " abridged " version much like his Nan Jing translation so that it > is accessible to student/clinicians without having to go through 18 > volumes. --------------> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2003 Report Share Posted November 13, 2003 Alwin - Thank you for this. If this is indeed what he intends, then it seems appropriate, especially in that the volumes clearly indicate what is contained within each. I really look forward to seeing them. What is the website address? Marnae At 06:53 PM 11/13/2003 +0000, you wrote: >Hi Marnae > >Its more than a single volume which I would prefer myself as well, >but it isn't as bad as 18 volumes. It's a total of 6 volumes of which >3 volumes contain the the original chinese text with translation and >the other 3 are supporting volumes. >This is what is published about this project on his Munich-Uni WEB- >page: > >- Huang Di Nei Jing Su Wen. Huang Di's Inner Classic. Basic >Questions. >Vol. 1: Treatises 1 through 25. >Vol. 2: Treatises 26 through 65, 75 through 81. >Vol. 3: Treatises 66 through 71 and 74. The Original Chinese Text >with Annotated Translation, in collaboration with Hermann Tessenow >and Zheng Jinsheng. >Vol. 4: Annotated Bibliography, by Zheng Jinsheng, Zhang Tongjun, >Hermann Tessenow, and P.U.U. >Vol. 5: Glossary, by P.U.U., Hermann Tessenow, and Ursula Holler. >Vol. 6: Concordances, by Rupprecht Mayer and Hermann Tessenow. > >Alwin > > >--- Marnae Ergil wrote: > > I think its a great project, but I'm not really sure that the huge > > 18 volume (or so) edition that he is working on is the answer to > > our problem - I would hope that he would consider publishing > > an " abridged " version much like his Nan Jing translation so that it > > is accessible to student/clinicians without having to go through 18 > > volumes. >--------------> > > > > >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 13, 2003 Report Share Posted November 13, 2003 --- Marnae Ergil wrote: > What is the website address? ----------> This is his page on the Munchen Uni WEB-site where faculty staff is presented: http://www.igm.med.uni-muenchen.de/personal/mittemitte/unschuld.htm Alwin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2003 Report Share Posted November 13, 2003 , " Alwin van Egmond " wrote: > Its more than a single volume which I would prefer myself as well, > but it isn't as bad as 18 volumes. It's a total of 6 volumes of which 3 volumes contain the the original chinese text with translation and the other 3 are supporting volumes. >>> Alwin: When will this be available? Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2003 Report Share Posted November 13, 2003 Even as a contemporary author, I am blown away by the various interpretations of things I have written compared to what I thought I had written/intended to say. Bob Bob, Oral traditions as well as contemporary written traditions have this effect. You just do your job and accept that people are hearing what they need to hear and realizing what they are prepared to realize. The Sufis also say that the same message which is a lullaby to some is a clarion call to action for others. There is always a need to make the message new for our times ... but only after long periods of steeping in the original. There may be a few who have steeped long enough to be able to speak to the present. I don't sense the general populace practicing CM have this level of initiation. You've mentioned this in the past yourself. Respectfully, Emmanuel Segmen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2003 Report Share Posted November 13, 2003 Hi Jim Unfortunately the WEB-site doesn't say. It only says that this work is 'in preparation' without mentioning a publication date. I haven't read about any planned date anywhere else. We'll just have to be patient I guess. Alwin --- " James Ramholz " wrote: > When will this be available? > Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2003 Report Share Posted November 14, 2003 Only the PRC has done the legwork and laid out a university model of education in CM. Until someone else does something of equal magnitude, it is the only game in town. Oh yeah. It also works damn well the vast majority of the time. >>>What about Vietnam and Koreia and Taiwian (and Japan to lesser extent?) I would be very intrested in PRC and the countries above on there legwork and univeristy model(s) (?) But where can one find such information? Marco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2003 Report Share Posted November 14, 2003 This is probably true for modern Chinese versions as well i would think. While obviously a problem one can not be expected to become a classical Chinese expert as well as a modern practitioner. >>>>>>One reaseon why either in undergraduate and or both postgraduate (via internet?) study groups of say Huang di su wen and ling shu would be a usefull idea... Marco 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.