Kendall/ShamanicVs.Materialist/historical background

[Guest guest]

I'm glad to see the recent interest in Kendall's work.

 

Since first reading several of his early articles on the neurophysiological

basis for acupuncture, I felt that his ideas offered a sane alternative to my

own early experiences in acupuncture training during the early 1980's in

California. My own health responded very positively to Chinese herbal formulas,

and I chose to focus on learning TCM herbology. Yat Ki Lai, from whom I learned

most of my early herbal skills, point-blank warned us that although we should

study the acupuncture texts to pass the licensing exams, we should focus our

efforts on gaining herbal expertise because that is what would get results in

spite of poor acupuncture technique. (Lai was a very good herbalist, and I feel

fortunate to have had him as a teacher.) We learned from " Acupuncture - A

Comprehensive Text " (O'Connor and Bensky) and " Essentials of Chinese

Acupuncture " (Beijing), which were standard TCM college texts at the time.

 

Part of the school's curriculum required us to intern with acupuncturists

outside the school, and this was a revelation to me. What I witnessed was a

variety of techniques, point selection algorithms, and philosophies that, in

many cases, had little to do with the official textbooks. I witnessed one

practitioner who used the same set of points on almost every client - this

individual was very charismatic, had a high volume practice and got remarkable

results. From having studied a bit of cultural anthropology on my own, I

recognized the tell-tale symptoms of shamanic practice, and believe that much of

what I was witnessing had little to do with acupuncture technique and a lot to

do with personal magnetism, shamanism. The New Age was reaching its peak in

California at the time, and I remember feeling simultaneously dazzled and

disturbed by it, as if I were a spectator in a Fellini movie (Satyricon comes to

mind).

 

I eventually chose to give up the practice of acupuncture and focus exclusively

on herbs.

I had decided that either my acupuncture technique was poor, or that the system

I had been taught simply did not work very well; which was really the case did

not concern me much since I was already getting good results with herbs.

 

 

In the mid 1990's, a student of mine, Bob Doane, gave me a copy of one of

Kendall's early articles on the neurophysiological basis of acupuncture, and I

remember being impressed by it as a theory, but also recognizing that unless a

theory can predict which specific points will work in specific situations, it

will remain only of limited usefulness clinically. However, the history and

politics behind what had happened gave me some perspective on why acupuncture

knowledge had become so distorted by the time it reached American in the 1970's.

Doane had talked with Kendall at length and told me some of the highlights of

this history. (I'm basing this on my memory of a conversation I had over 8 years

ago, so please take this into account.) Apparently, when French translations of

Chinese acupuncture texts were made several hundred years ago, the French

assumed that the Chinese could not possibly have known about the anatomy of

circulation, the nervous system, lymphatic circulation, etc. After all, it is

European dogma that William Harvey first discovered the pathways of blood

circulation. The French translations gave a heavy emphasis to the metaphysical

aspects, ignoring clues, including detailed anatomical charts, that the ancient

Chinese had knowledge of anatomy and physiology.

 

During this period, and well into the early 20th century, China had been in a

state of long-term cultural decline as an empire, with increasing poverty,

chaos, religious cults, superstition, and drug abuse (Opium wars) - all of the

typical phenomena that happen during the declining phase of empire (ref. -

Arnold Toynbee). According to Toynbee's theory of the evolution of

civilizations, during the decline of empires, knowledge is stored in the form of

religions and religious dogma. This preserves the knowledge (do not tamper with,

under pain of death - a typical religious attitude) until the declining phase

has exhausted itself, allowing a new civilization to rise from the ashes. At

this time, the religious dogma is released from its time capsule, much like a

butterfly emerging from a chrysalis, and a new phase of scientific inquiry and

social expansion occurs.

 

Getting back to the story of acupuncture, after the Communist revolution, Mao Ze

Dong determined to revive the ancient knowledge of Chinese medicine, and since

herbal doctors predominated politically and professionally, they were given the

task to compile an official version of Chinese medical knowledge and were

assigned to committees to achieve this objective. Herbalism and acupuncture were

often practiced as separate professions, so the herbalists on these committees

attempted to question people in the acupuncture profession about their

techniques. Apparently, the acupuncturists felt threatened by this move and did

not wish to reveal their trade secrets. Another difficulty is that acupuncture

knowledge had for many centuries accumulated as a collection of religious-type

dogmas of competing and conflicting sects. Unlocking knowledge from the

chrysalis of religion is often like decoding an encrypted message or working out

a puzzle. What happened next is reminiscent of what happened to European herbal

knowledge when Catholic church henchmen tortured herbalist-midwives, accusing

them of witchcraft, to obtain their knowledge of herbal medicine and consolidate

the Church monopoly over medical licensing. To get revenge in the only way

possible, many of these herbalist-midwives gave false information, such as using

toxic and carcinogenic herbs for abdominal pain. Much of European herbal lore is

still tainted by this type of information that reappears in modern textbooks. It

is difficult to know how much acupuncture knowledge was distorted by similar

events in China's recent history, since what happened during the Cultural

Revolution is considered by many Chinese to be an embarrassment that should not

be discussed, especially with foreigners. In any case, some of the herbalists on

these committees may have suspected they were being fed a combination of

superstition and/or disinformation, and took the next step of having the

17th(?)-century French texts on acupuncture ***re-translated back into

Chinese***, thereby compounding the errors in translation and understanding of

the French. This is what is now considered TCM-acupuncture dogma in many

American TCM colleges, and I would be surprised if this changes, because these

errors have become institutionalized, made the basis of state licensing and

certification exams, and a lot of people have a vested interest in seeing this

system remain locked in place.

 

 

Note: I have yet to read Kendall's recent book - am looking forward to it, based

on his early articles.

 

 

 

 

 

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

[Guest guest]

, rw2@r... wrote:

>

> I'm glad to see the recent interest in Kendall's work.

>

> Since first reading several of his early articles on the

neurophysiological basis for acupuncture, I felt that his ideas

offered a sane alternative to my own early experiences in acupuncture

training during the early 1980's in California. My own health

responded very positively to Chinese herbal formulas, and I chose to

focus on learning TCM herbology. Yat Ki Lai, from whom I learned most

of my early herbal skills, point-blank warned us that although we

should study the acupuncture texts to pass the licensing exams, we

should focus our efforts on gaining herbal expertise because that is

what would get results in spite of poor acupuncture technique. (Lai

was a very good herbalist, and I feel fortunate to have had him as a

teacher.) We learned from " Acupuncture - A Comprehensive Text "

(O'Connor and Bensky) and " Essentials of Chinese Acupuncture "

(Beijing), which were standard TCM college texts at the time.

>

> Part of the school's curriculum required us to intern with

acupuncturists outside the school, and this was a revelation to me.

What I witnessed was a variety of techniques, point selection

algorithms, and philosophies that, in many cases, had little to do

with the official textbooks. I witnessed one practitioner who used

the same set of points on almost every client - this individual was

very charismatic, had a high volume practice and got remarkable

results. From having studied a bit of cultural anthropology on my

own, I recognized the tell-tale symptoms of shamanic practice, and

believe that much of what I was witnessing had little to do with

acupuncture technique and a lot to do with personal magnetism,

shamanism. The New Age was reaching its peak in California at the

time, and I remember feeling simultaneously dazzled and disturbed by

it, as if I were a spectator in a Fellini movie (Satyricon comes to

mind).

>

> I eventually chose to give up the practice of acupuncture and focus

exclusively on herbs.

> I had decided that either my acupuncture technique was poor, or

that the system I had been taught simply did not work very well;

which was really the case did not concern me much since I was already

getting good results with herbs.

>

>

> In the mid 1990's, a student of mine, Bob Doane, gave me a copy of

one of Kendall's early articles on the neurophysiological basis of

acupuncture, and I remember being impressed by it as a theory, but

also recognizing that unless a theory can predict which specific

points will work in specific situations, it will remain only of

limited usefulness clinically. However, the history and politics

behind what had happened gave me some perspective on why acupuncture

knowledge had become so distorted by the time it reached American in

the 1970's. Doane had talked with Kendall at length and told me some

of the highlights of this history. (I'm basing this on my memory of a

conversation I had over 8 years ago, so please take this into

account.) Apparently, when French translations of Chinese acupuncture

texts were made several hundred years ago, the French assumed that

the Chinese could not possibly have known about the anatomy of

circulation, the nervous system, lymphatic circulation, etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Soulie de Morant taught acupuncture to french physicians in the

early 20th century. He translated Qi as energy and the character

jing as meridian. It seems that at some point in his studies, Soulie

began to invest much of his conception of how acupuncture works into

certain abstract concepts of " energy. " His books were

titled " Energy " , " Mangement of Energy " and " Physiology of Energy " .

According to Kendall, he believed that science would eventually come

to confirm his " meridians " and the energy flowing through them.

Willem ten Rhijne gave a different account in 1683. While in

Japan, he traded some knowledge of western medicine for information

on some acupuncture diagrams he had gotten from China. He later wrote

that Chinese physiology was focused largely on blood circulation in

the vessels and that they were aware of veins, arteries and nerves.

His association of the Greek humoral system with did

give it a " primitive " casing, as far as physicians were concerned.

This encumbered any kind of real research into the physical

foundation of chinese medicine for some time to come.

 

matt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

After all, it is European dogma that William Harvey first discovered

the pathways of blood circulation. The French translations gave a

heavy emphasis to the metaphysical aspects, ignoring clues, including

detailed anatomical charts, that the ancient Chinese had knowledge of

anatomy and physiology.

>

> During this period, and well into the early 20th century, China had

been in a state of long-term cultural decline as an empire, with

increasing poverty, chaos, religious cults, superstition, and drug

abuse (Opium wars) - all of the typical phenomena that happen during

the declining phase of empire (ref. - Arnold Toynbee). According to

Toynbee's theory of the evolution of civilizations, during the

decline of empires, knowledge is stored in the form of religions and

religious dogma. This preserves the knowledge (do not tamper with,

under pain of death - a typical religious attitude) until the

declining phase has exhausted itself, allowing a new civilization to

rise from the ashes. At this time, the religious dogma is released

from its time capsule, much like a butterfly emerging from a

chrysalis, and a new phase of scientific inquiry and social expansion

occurs.

>

> Getting back to the story of acupuncture, after the Communist

revolution, Mao Ze Dong determined to revive the ancient knowledge of

Chinese medicine, and since herbal doctors predominated politically

and professionally, they were given the task to compile an official

version of Chinese medical knowledge and were assigned to committees

to achieve this objective. Herbalism and acupuncture were often

practiced as separate professions, so the herbalists on these

committees attempted to question people in the acupuncture profession

about their techniques. Apparently, the acupuncturists felt

threatened by this move and did not wish to reveal their trade

secrets. Another difficulty is that acupuncture knowledge had for

many centuries accumulated as a collection of religious-type dogmas

of competing and conflicting sects. Unlocking knowledge from the

chrysalis of religion is often like decoding an encrypted message or

working out a puzzle. What happened next is reminiscent of what

happened to European herbal knowledge when Catholic church henchmen

tortured herbalist-midwives, accusing them of witchcraft, to obtain

their knowledge of herbal medicine and consolidate the Church

monopoly over medical licensing. To get revenge in the only way

possible, many of these herbalist-midwives gave false information,

such as using toxic and carcinogenic herbs for abdominal pain. Much

of European herbal lore is still tainted by this type of information

that reappears in modern textbooks. It is difficult to know how much

acupuncture knowledge was distorted by similar events in China's

recent history, since what happened during the Cultural Revolution is

considered by many Chinese to be an embarrassment that should not be

discussed, especially with foreigners. In any case, some of the

herbalists on these committees may have suspected they were being fed

a combination of superstition and/or disinformation, and took the

next step of having the 17th(?)-century French texts on acupuncture

***re-translated back into Chinese***, thereby compounding the errors

in translation and understanding of the French. This is what is now

considered TCM-acupuncture dogma in many American TCM colleges, and I

would be surprised if this changes, because these errors have become

institutionalized, made the basis of state licensing and

certification exams, and a lot of people have a vested interest in

seeing this system remain locked in place.

>

>

> Note: I have yet to read Kendall's recent book - am looking forward

to it, based on his early articles.

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

> contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

> Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

> Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

[Guest guest]

, rw2@r... wrote:

 

>>Apparently, when French translations of Chinese acupuncture texts

were made several hundred years ago, the French assumed that the

Chinese could not possibly have known about the anatomy of circulation,

the nervous system, lymphatic circulation, etc. Soulie de Morant taught

acupuncture to french physicians in the early 20th century. He

translated Qi as energy and the character jing as meridian. It seems

that at some point in his studies, Soulie began to invest much of his

conception of how acupuncture works into certain abstract concepts of

" energy. "

 

>>Mao Ze Dong determined to revive the ancient knowledge of Chinese

medicine, and since herbal doctors predominated politically and

professionally, they were given the task to compile an official version

of Chinese medical knowledge and were assigned to committees to achieve

this objective. Herbalism and acupuncture were often practiced as

separate professions, so the herbalists on these committees attempted

to question people in the acupuncture profession about their

techniques. Apparently, the acupuncturists felt threatened by this move

and did not wish to reveal their trade secrets. Another difficulty is

that acupuncture knowledge had for many centuries accumulated as a

collection of religious-type dogmas of competing and conflicting sects.

 

>>In any case, some of the herbalists on these committees may have

suspected they were being fed a combination of superstition and/or

disinformation, and took the next step of having the 17th(?)-century

French texts on acupuncture ***re-translated back into Chinese***,

thereby compounding the errors in translation and understanding of the

French. This is what is now considered TCM-acupuncture dogma in many

American TCM colleges,

 

: If this is an accurate portrayal of recent chinese history, then

it answers a key question left unanswered by Kendall. Why would the

chinese themselves be so confused about qi and the channels. While

most of my chinese teachers and colleagues have been primarily

herbalists and don't think twice about the channels in daily practice,

there are plenty of journal articles written by folks with chinese

names where the idea of qi is basically presented as invisible energy

and the meridians as invisible conduits. In fact, I can't think of any

articles on acupuncture authored by a native

practitioner/teacher that claim qi is merely oxygen and jing mai is the

neurovascular system. Lots of people say that the jing mai has many

similarities with the neurovascular system, but no native Chinese

Medicine practitioner/teacher I know of has written in English that

they are one and the same. Either they are writing to cater to our

ignorance (nobody understands acupuncture anyway, so if we want to call

it energy, so be it) or they don't believe any differently themselves.

 

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

FAX:

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Kendall also says that the ideas of lines as the channels is French, however how

about old Chinese drawings\

Alon

 

 

[Guest guest]

,

wrote:

> , rw2@r... wrote:

>

> >>Apparently, when French translations of Chinese acupuncture

texts

> were made several hundred years ago, the French assumed that the

> Chinese could not possibly have known about the anatomy of

circulation,

> the nervous system, lymphatic circulation, etc. Soulie de Morant

taught

> acupuncture to french physicians in the early 20th century. He

> translated Qi as energy and the character jing as meridian. It

seems

> that at some point in his studies, Soulie began to invest much of

his

> conception of how acupuncture works into certain abstract concepts

of

> " energy. "

>

> >>Mao Ze Dong determined to revive the ancient knowledge of

Chinese

> medicine, and since herbal doctors predominated politically and

> professionally, they were given the task to compile an official

version

> of Chinese medical knowledge and were assigned to committees to

achieve

> this objective. Herbalism and acupuncture were often practiced as

> separate professions, so the herbalists on these committees

attempted

> to question people in the acupuncture profession about their

> techniques. Apparently, the acupuncturists felt threatened by this

move

> and did not wish to reveal their trade secrets. Another difficulty

is

> that acupuncture knowledge had for many centuries accumulated as a

> collection of religious-type dogmas of competing and conflicting

sects.

>

> >>In any case, some of the herbalists on these committees may have

> suspected they were being fed a combination of superstition and/or

> disinformation, and took the next step of having the 17th(?)-

century

> French texts on acupuncture ***re-translated back into Chinese***,

> thereby compounding the errors in translation and understanding of

the

> French. This is what is now considered TCM-acupuncture dogma in

many

> American TCM colleges,

 

 

I often wonder if it is an issue of semantics. The concept of Qi

seems very malleable and is often used to refer too all sorts of

phenomenon. Kendall's perspective on the meaning of Qi is a

classical and medically-oriented perpective. Neo-classical

philosophical perspectives on Qi, saw it as matter itself. In the

Analects, Qi is seen as material force. The earlier one goes back

into the history of the term's usage; the more Qi becomes ethereal

and vapor-like.

Maybe many Chinese doctors are simply comfortable with it's

multiple meanings and realize that their own intentions will become

clear in a certain confined context.

There was recently a book called " Ideograms " which was released

by the University of Hawaii press. It claims that characters don't

have any real individual meaning outside of the context they find

themselves in.

Since Qi refers too so many things from the air we breathe, too

the flavor of food; maybe the Chinese felt that the concept of Qi was

best left as an abstract concept????

matt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

>

>

: If this is an accurate portrayal of recent chinese history,

then

> it answers a key question left unanswered by Kendall. Why would

the

> chinese themselves be so confused about qi and the channels. While

> most of my chinese teachers and colleagues have been primarily

> herbalists and don't think twice about the channels in daily

practice,

> there are plenty of journal articles written by folks with chinese

> names where the idea of qi is basically presented as invisible

energy

> and the meridians as invisible conduits. In fact, I can't think of

any

> articles on acupuncture authored by a native

> practitioner/teacher that claim qi is merely oxygen and jing mai is

the

> neurovascular system. Lots of people say that the jing mai has

many

> similarities with the neurovascular system, but no native Chinese

> Medicine practitioner/teacher I know of has written in English that

> they are one and the same. Either they are writing to cater to our

> ignorance (nobody understands acupuncture anyway, so if we want to

call

> it energy, so be it) or they don't believe any differently

themselves.

>

>

>

> Chinese Herbs

>

>

> FAX:

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

On May 5, 2004, at 12:01 PM, facteau8 wrote:

 

> Kendall's perspective on the meaning of Qi is a

> classical and medically-oriented perpective.  Neo-classical

> philosophical perspectives on Qi, saw it as matter itself.  In the

> Analects, Qi is seen as  material force.  The earlier one goes back

> into the history of the term's usage; the more Qi becomes ethereal

> and vapor-like.

>         Maybe many Chinese doctors are simply comfortable with it's

> multiple meanings and realize that their own intentions will become

> clear in a certain confined context. 

 

Perhaps. but the other possibility I have raised is that there was

mainstream medical practice and there was chinese philosophy. The

domains overlap to some degree, but the use of qi in medical circles

appears to be much more restricted than in philosophical texts. I

think sometimes we tend to confuse the use of qi in philosophy as if

doctors typically used it in the same broad way. So I do agree this is

a semantic and contextual issue, but somewhat the opposite of what you

suggest. Not that is correct to consider all meanings of qi in our

minds whenever we use the word in medicine, but that we should

interpret qi much more narrowly in the medical context as all secular

chinese herbalists seem to have done in their writings. I would

suspect that cosmological philosophy infiltrates the medicine more

amongst practitioners whose training is rooted in religious cults or

martial arts than medicine, per se. Finally, Kendall says qi is air,

function or vitality, all terms that suggest they straddle the line

between substance and activity, same as the classical concept. I want

to clarify that I am not disparaging the clinical value of practices

rooted in mysticism or martial arts, I just don't think they were part

of the mainstream traditions, they are not well developed methodologies

and I don't want our profession to defined by ideas that were never

mainstream in China herself.

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

FAX: