Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 So are you saying that there's no other road to understanding or knowing the substance of what those classical texts are saying besides deriving them from Chinese sources? My friends, the problem here is that truth is truth, and BS is BS whether regardless of the cultural context or jargon that is used. I detect a strain of radical fundamental TCM -ers that wants everyone to conform to their language, ideas and standards and thus far there are still more people, who seem to be respected by all, who don't care to. Whether one likes it or not everything that we understand and ultimately utilize will have to be filtered through the lens of our personal cultural orientation and whether anyone likes it or not, CM has changed a lot in the West just as it has been influenced by Western medicine and changed in China. The Chinese have no problem adopting Western herbs or Western uses for Western herbs. Witness the gradual shift of emphasis of hawthorn berry for instance classified as a digestive herb in the materia medica and increasingly being used for its blood moving properties to conform to Western herbalists who have used its as a cardiovascular herb. As they say, 'the truth should set one free " -- whether you find it out by memorizing the classics or from experience or from other sources, ultimately it makes no difference. The major problem I have found with students and new practitioners is an inability to trust themselves. No wonder with a bunch of blow hard pedants telling them how little they know and will never know unless they do this, then that, then this, then that, then this, then that ad nauseum. It really is medical elitism, no different that what happened in 16th century England when all the schools and doctors would only converse in Latin to each other which had the same disempowering effect as the church keeping the bible in Latin for 1500 years. Nicholas Culpepper read the elitism that mostly served to show the inadequacies of the practitioners. He violated the rule by translating the major medical herbal text into English so it would be available to everyone and then went further and wrote his now famous herbal which along with the Bible has been the most continuously published book in the English language. Li ShiZhen did essentially the same in China and around the same time. There are many ways to learn and while we seek to deepen our insight, knowledge and understanding no one should have to be subjected to ridicule or criticism, especially by one who seeks respect as a teacher. Michael Tierra _____ On Behalf Of Thursday, February 21, 2008 4:09 PM Re: Re: in support of creative thought in Jazz, classical vs improv Doug, I've always enjoyed that chapter of Sun Simiao's from the Qian Jin Fang, but I always take it in context. Several of the medical classics he mentioned are lost to us by time and decay, for example, but certainly the Shang Han Za Bing Lun and Mai Jing should be taught in the West. The Confucian classics may be another story, but the rigorous philosophy does have value for us today, in training our minds in yin/yang theory. I think the central idea of this essay is that a broad education, broad literacy and an active mind are essential in the study of medicine. We don't need to turn tortoise shells perhaps these days Fei Boxiong has a similar 'criteria-based' essay translated by Volker Scheid that I quote here: " Anyone desiring to study medicine without first studying the classics of acupuncture - the Essential Questions and the Spiritual Pivot - will never gain a clear understanding of the channels and collaterals. Therefore, they will never understand how disorders evolve. If they do not also study the classics of herbal medicine - the Discussions on Cold Damage and the Essential Prescriptions from the Golden Cabinet- they will not know how to compose a prescription and to treat appropriately. Those who do not read the four great masters of the Jin- Yuan dynasties, finally, will never understand how to employ the methods of supplementing, draining, warming or cooling and how to vary the different treatment principles in an appropriate manner. " Certainly we can follow Fei Bo-xiong's advice today. . . Bob is right about clear and transparent translation methodology. I've seen a marked improvement in student comprehension of the PCOM cirriculum since we've had more teachers and students accessing the Wiseman dictionary and translated works, and it has improved comprehension of the Eastland texts as well. A high percentage of teachers at PCOM have some level of medical Chinese literacy, and the improvement in education can be seen in a much higher percentage of graduates who actually prescribe herbal formulas for their patients as opposed to just using supplements, kineseology, or tuning forks. Which basic and essential texts are you referring to Doug? On Feb 21, 2008, at 3:51 PM, wrote: > Bob, Without getting personal, I continually find great value in these > essential and basic texts that admittedly were not part of my > education. And of course many people who don't understand CM go into > other modalities all too quickly and our scope of practice allows them > to. But the " have to " part of your statement gets to me. What I don't > understand, and you'll have to give me the benefit of the doubt, is > how I and many of my American trained colleagues ended up in the same > place as our Chinese contemporaries. Given our herb texts (that really > don't stray that much from the original Chinese) we end up with the > almost the same formulas. So for the sake of argument again grant me > the conceit, that I or any number of the practitioners can write a > formula that cures patients just as well as those who " had to " > memorize the texts. When see something special in a formula and ask > about it, invariably it is not of that is basic knowledge but > something passed on from a teacher far from the classroom. > > It's been said that the Asian model (I want go as far as to say > " mind " ) is to educate first to get the specifics and then to find the > general whereas the Western model is to get the general in order to > make sense of the specific details. > > We've been around and around on this so many times. The reality is > that the schools can only accept the best memorizers, therefore > decreasing enrollment by 80%, (probably would of been myself as well) > or adapt teaching methods to some type of sanity as opposed to the > half-a... half-adopted Chinese methods we have now. It's clear that > you have invested a lot in the last decade of your long career in > Chinese texts, I just don't know the best way to get this approach in > to my own mind and those of my students. > Doug > > And for those who think they are pretty up on the classics I offer: > > http://www.classica <http://www.classicalchinesemedicine.org/translations/sunsimiao.htm> lchinesemedicine.org/translations/sunsimiao.htm > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Michael, I assume this e-mail is addressed to me, so I'll give you my two cents on this. How can you understand ancient Chinese texts without understanding the context, language, and source materials? I don't know any discipline or science where this is not done. Just reading a questionable translation and then interpreting it is rife with potential for error. There have been over a dozen translations of the Su Wen attempted, and none of them have got it right. Paul Unschuld's is the first one to actually represent the text with some accuracy, and he had to put out a 650 page dictionary first to explain the terms and concepts within. Getting back to the original music metaphor, Bob Dylan, perhaps the greatest bard of our age, is constantly immersed in the 'source music' of America, including Hank Williams, Robert Johnson, and the like. The music doesn't just come out of thin air, and neither does the practice of medicine. How do you determine what is the Truth? Do you think that what one feels about a classical text is more 'true' than the cultural context it comes from? These classical texts are a life time study, my friend, and then some. To then demonize some imagined (yes, imagined) cadre of fundamentalists who 'control' the source of knowledge is simply false. There is no power structure in our field, judging by the success and numbers generated by those who use tuning forks, crystals, Egyptian mysticism and homeopathic theories in their seminars and call it " Chinese medicine " . The reason many practitioners don't trust themselves are many. One is pressure from the biomedical establishment to 'fit in', that a more technological 'primitive' form of medicine just doesn't rate. But my experience again as a teacher of thousands is that having clear terminological choices, even a basic knowledge of medical Chinese and continued study increases confidence and clinical results. Anything else is just intellectual laziness. The Chinese have adapted Western herbs, and I hope we will adapt our native herbs over time. But the process in China was slow, as it takes time and the consensus of many practitioners to apply the criteria of Chinese medicine to new medicinals, and then to use these medicinals in prescriptions. To conclude, if we are to continue this discussion, I'd like to request that you don't make your argument by false demonization of a fundamentalist establishment that simply doesn't exist. It may play to the choir of those who feel that their knowledge base is inadequate (all of us), but it belittles the work of those who work very hard, for pennies, to expand and enrich our limited knowledge base in Chinese medicine. On Feb 21, 2008, at 7:54 PM, Michael Tierra wrote: > So are you saying that there's no other road to understanding or > knowing the > substance of what those classical texts are saying besides deriving > them > from Chinese sources? My friends, the problem here is that truth is > truth, > and BS is BS whether regardless of the cultural context or jargon > that is > used. > > I detect a strain of radical fundamental TCM -ers that wants > everyone to > conform to their language, ideas and standards and thus far there > are still > more people, who seem to be respected by all, who don't care to. > Whether > one likes it or not everything that we understand and ultimately > utilize > will have to be filtered through the lens of our personal cultural > orientation and whether anyone likes it or not, CM has changed a lot > in the > West just as it has been influenced by Western medicine and changed in > China. The Chinese have no problem adopting Western herbs or Western > uses > for Western herbs. Witness the gradual shift of emphasis of hawthorn > berry > for instance classified as a digestive herb in the materia medica and > increasingly being used for its blood moving properties to conform to > Western herbalists who have used its as a cardiovascular herb. > > As they say, 'the truth should set one free " -- whether you find it > out by > memorizing the classics or from experience or from other sources, > ultimately > it makes no difference. > > The major problem I have found with students and new practitioners > is an > inability to trust themselves. No wonder with a bunch of blow hard > pedants > telling them how little they know and will never know unless they do > this, > then that, then this, then that, then this, then that ad nauseum. It > really > is medical elitism, no different that what happened in 16th century > England > when all the schools and doctors would only converse in Latin to > each other > which had the same disempowering effect as the church keeping the > bible in > Latin for 1500 years. Nicholas Culpepper read the elitism that > mostly served > to show the inadequacies of the practitioners. He violated the rule by > translating the major medical herbal text into English so it would be > available to everyone and then went further and wrote his now famous > herbal > which along with the Bible has been the most continuously published > book in > the English language. Li ShiZhen did essentially the same in China and > around the same time. > > There are many ways to learn and while we seek to deepen our insight, > knowledge and understanding no one should have to be subjected to > ridicule > or criticism, especially by one who seeks respect as a teacher. > > Michael Tierra > > _____ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Michael, The fact that we can even know there is such a thing as Chinese medicine is because people took the time to learn it and then translate it into englsh. This way us westerners could attain even a minor grasp of it. It makes perfect sense to think that the people who spent so much time learning chinese so as to help deepen our understanding of this deep medical field would want to strive for deeper clarity in it. When it comes down to the learning and practise of chinese medicine, who am I going to trust in terms of learning it? For me it is obviously from someone who has a good grasp of both the language, with all its techinical terms, and good clinical experience of the topic. Learning it from anyone else poses the problem of lost ideas, philosophies, techniques, ect. I always like to come back to dermatology because it is truly an area I think that Chinese medicine excels at and is an area that many practitioers are weak with. When I took the time and spent the money to seek out good teachers with good clinical success with skin treatments I was literally blown away. It was like Bob says about learning Chinese, until we have tasted what chocolate is like, we can never know how truly great it is. Before training with someone truly learned and skilled in Chinese medical dermatology, I was left to follow the example of western chinese practitioners who, when the going got tough, had to resort to other eclectic modalities and without proper success. If someone didn't do the time to truly learn the depths of what chinese medicine had to offer in this one area, Dermatology, then a whole area of medicine would be alien to me. I would be blind. Of course there needs to be medical elitism. It is in our interest to have this. Without it we may have to re-invent the wheel again. I am not interested in doing that. This does not mean us westerners cannot be good practitioners and get good results. All it means is that there are people focusing on the purity of chinese medicine as it is in china, so that a whole world is not lost to us. One of may favorite ethobotanists, Wade Davis, has dedicated his life to helping cultures perserve their unique languages and customs. It happens way to often that unique practices have been lost because some other culture came in and decided that their own culture was more important. Imagine what amazing ideas would still be intact if europeans hadn't barged into " Turtle island " , calling everyone in sight a barbarian and basically genociding massive amounts of good functioning culture. I feel it is immensely important to perserve the integrity of chinese medicine as it is, without mixing it up with our own western influenced biases too much. There is so much good literature that has not been translated into english yet on chinese medical dermatology that I have no access to. Why? Because I have not got the skills to read it yet and the people whom I respect and who have imparted CM to me in the first place have not translated it yet. I can only dream how good it would be to have access to that deep pool of knowledge. Sure I can spend my life focusing on learning chinese medicine a little bit here and first nations medicine a little bit there and so on. And I may get good results in certain areas of health. But I may never know the depth of what is truly hidding behind one really good system of thought, that is very different from anything else around. For me, it can mean that when the going gets tough, intead of scrambling for answers in a broad sense, I can look deeper in to one system and find answers. I cannot truly critisize chinese medicine until I can truly say that I have searched the depths and applied it clinically. I think that all of us strive to practise CHinese medicine, as pure as we can. But how can we say we practise chinese medicine unless we can refer to the work of our techers, whom I would hope have learned from chinese sources. If there is no solid link to the chinese then what is it that we are doing, and do we have the right to call our selves chinese medical practitioners?? Conforming to a language is really only for the sake of being clear. Otherwise your apple is my orange, and who are we to declare it is either an apple or an orange in the first place, unless we have access to the original definition of that fruit?? It really doesn't need to be such a battle of wits and protection of ego's, it is just about being clear. My wife is training to be a mid wife now, but before this she was a professional writer and editor. I remember reading to her some of my old journal writings, which I was so proud and fond of. She quickly pointed out that the feelings I was getting from my writing was not the same as what the reader/ audience was getting and that the art of writing was about conveying our message in way that everyone can relate to, not just me. This is an art and takes much skill, much more than I could ever attest to. I think that the chinese medical fundamentalists are here for a purpose, they are here to help edit out the BS, so that we are getting a clearer picture of what CM is trying to say, in a clear fashion that everyone can understand and relate to. My 2 cents, Trevor , " Michael Tierra " <mtierra wrote: > > So are you saying that there's no other road to understanding or knowing the > substance of what those classical texts are saying besides deriving them > from Chinese sources? My friends, the problem here is that truth is truth, > and BS is BS whether regardless of the cultural context or jargon that is > used. > > I detect a strain of radical fundamental TCM -ers that wants everyone to > conform to their language, ideas and standards and thus far there are still > more people, who seem to be respected by all, who don't care to. Whether > one likes it or not everything that we understand and ultimately utilize > will have to be filtered through the lens of our personal cultural > orientation and whether anyone likes it or not, CM has changed a lot in the > West just as it has been influenced by Western medicine and changed in > China. The Chinese have no problem adopting Western herbs or Western uses > for Western herbs. Witness the gradual shift of emphasis of hawthorn berry > for instance classified as a digestive herb in the materia medica and > increasingly being used for its blood moving properties to conform to > Western herbalists who have used its as a cardiovascular herb. > > As they say, 'the truth should set one free " -- whether you find it out by > memorizing the classics or from experience or from other sources, ultimately > it makes no difference. > > The major problem I have found with students and new practitioners is an > inability to trust themselves. No wonder with a bunch of blow hard pedants > telling them how little they know and will never know unless they do this, > then that, then this, then that, then this, then that ad nauseum. It really > is medical elitism, no different that what happened in 16th century England > when all the schools and doctors would only converse in Latin to each other > which had the same disempowering effect as the church keeping the bible in > Latin for 1500 years. Nicholas Culpepper read the elitism that mostly served > to show the inadequacies of the practitioners. He violated the rule by > translating the major medical herbal text into English so it would be > available to everyone and then went further and wrote his now famous herbal > which along with the Bible has been the most continuously published book in > the English language. Li ShiZhen did essentially the same in China and > around the same time. > > There are many ways to learn and while we seek to deepen our insight, > knowledge and understanding no one should have to be subjected to ridicule > or criticism, especially by one who seeks respect as a teacher. > > Michael Tierra > > _____ > > > On Behalf Of Z'ev Rosenberg > Thursday, February 21, 2008 4:09 PM > > Re: Re: in support of creative thought in Jazz, > classical vs improv > > > > Doug, > I've always enjoyed that chapter of Sun Simiao's from the Qian Jin > Fang, but I always take it in context. Several of the medical > classics he mentioned are lost to us by time and decay, for example, > but certainly the Shang Han Za Bing Lun and Mai Jing should be taught > in the West. The Confucian classics may be another story, but the > rigorous philosophy does have value for us today, in training our > minds in yin/yang theory. I think the central idea of this essay is > that a broad education, broad literacy and an active mind are > essential in the study of medicine. We don't need to turn tortoise > shells perhaps these days > > Fei Boxiong has a similar 'criteria-based' essay translated by > Volker Scheid that I quote here: > > " Anyone desiring to study medicine without first studying the classics > of acupuncture - the Essential Questions and the Spiritual Pivot - > will never gain a clear understanding of the channels and collaterals. > Therefore, they will never understand how disorders evolve. If they do > not also study the classics of herbal medicine - the Discussions on > Cold Damage and the Essential Prescriptions from the Golden Cabinet- > they will not know how to compose a prescription and to treat > appropriately. Those who do not read the four great masters of the Jin- > Yuan dynasties, finally, will never understand how to employ the > methods of supplementing, draining, warming or cooling and how to vary > the different treatment principles in an appropriate manner. " > > Certainly we can follow Fei Bo-xiong's advice today. . . > > Bob is right about clear and transparent translation methodology. > I've seen a marked improvement in student comprehension of the PCOM > cirriculum since we've had more teachers and students accessing the > Wiseman dictionary and translated works, and it has improved > comprehension of the Eastland texts as well. A high percentage of > teachers at PCOM have some level of medical Chinese literacy, and the > improvement in education can be seen in a much higher percentage of > graduates who actually prescribe herbal formulas for their patients as > opposed to just using supplements, kineseology, or tuning forks. > > Which basic and essential texts are you referring to Doug? > > > On Feb 21, 2008, at 3:51 PM, wrote: > > > Bob, Without getting personal, I continually find great value in these > > essential and basic texts that admittedly were not part of my > > education. And of course many people who don't understand CM go into > > other modalities all too quickly and our scope of practice allows them > > to. But the " have to " part of your statement gets to me. What I don't > > understand, and you'll have to give me the benefit of the doubt, is > > how I and many of my American trained colleagues ended up in the same > > place as our Chinese contemporaries. Given our herb texts (that really > > don't stray that much from the original Chinese) we end up with the > > almost the same formulas. So for the sake of argument again grant me > > the conceit, that I or any number of the practitioners can write a > > formula that cures patients just as well as those who " had to " > > memorize the texts. When see something special in a formula and ask > > about it, invariably it is not of that is basic knowledge but > > something passed on from a teacher far from the classroom. > > > > It's been said that the Asian model (I want go as far as to say > > " mind " ) is to educate first to get the specifics and then to find the > > general whereas the Western model is to get the general in order to > > make sense of the specific details. > > > > We've been around and around on this so many times. The reality is > > that the schools can only accept the best memorizers, therefore > > decreasing enrollment by 80%, (probably would of been myself as well) > > or adapt teaching methods to some type of sanity as opposed to the > > half-a... half-adopted Chinese methods we have now. It's clear that > > you have invested a lot in the last decade of your long career in > > Chinese texts, I just don't know the best way to get this approach in > > to my own mind and those of my students. > > Doug > > > > And for those who think they are pretty up on the classics I offer: > > > > http://www.classica > <http://www.classicalchinesemedicine.org/translations/sunsimiao.htm> > lchinesemedicine.org/translations/sunsimiao.htm > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Good points Trevor with which I am in full accord. I just don't like the tendency for some people to shut down the opinions of others because it may not agree with their own current views. Michael Tierra _____ On Behalf Of Trevor Erikson Friday, February 22, 2008 10:31 AM Re: The fundamentalist branch of TCM Michael, The fact that we can even know there is such a thing as Chinese medicine is because people took the time to learn it and then translate it into englsh. This way us westerners could attain even a minor grasp of it. It makes perfect sense to think that the people who spent so much time learning chinese so as to help deepen our understanding of this deep medical field would want to strive for deeper clarity in it. When it comes down to the learning and practise of chinese medicine, who am I going to trust in terms of learning it? For me it is obviously from someone who has a good grasp of both the language, with all its techinical terms, and good clinical experience of the topic. Learning it from anyone else poses the problem of lost ideas, philosophies, techniques, ect. I always like to come back to dermatology because it is truly an area I think that Chinese medicine excels at and is an area that many practitioers are weak with. When I took the time and spent the money to seek out good teachers with good clinical success with skin treatments I was literally blown away. It was like Bob says about learning Chinese, until we have tasted what chocolate is like, we can never know how truly great it is. Before training with someone truly learned and skilled in Chinese medical dermatology, I was left to follow the example of western chinese practitioners who, when the going got tough, had to resort to other eclectic modalities and without proper success. If someone didn't do the time to truly learn the depths of what chinese medicine had to offer in this one area, Dermatology, then a whole area of medicine would be alien to me. I would be blind. Of course there needs to be medical elitism. It is in our interest to have this. Without it we may have to re-invent the wheel again. I am not interested in doing that. This does not mean us westerners cannot be good practitioners and get good results. All it means is that there are people focusing on the purity of chinese medicine as it is in china, so that a whole world is not lost to us. One of may favorite ethobotanists, Wade Davis, has dedicated his life to helping cultures perserve their unique languages and customs. It happens way to often that unique practices have been lost because some other culture came in and decided that their own culture was more important. Imagine what amazing ideas would still be intact if europeans hadn't barged into " Turtle island " , calling everyone in sight a barbarian and basically genociding massive amounts of good functioning culture. I feel it is immensely important to perserve the integrity of chinese medicine as it is, without mixing it up with our own western influenced biases too much. There is so much good literature that has not been translated into english yet on chinese medical dermatology that I have no access to. Why? Because I have not got the skills to read it yet and the people whom I respect and who have imparted CM to me in the first place have not translated it yet. I can only dream how good it would be to have access to that deep pool of knowledge. Sure I can spend my life focusing on learning chinese medicine a little bit here and first nations medicine a little bit there and so on. And I may get good results in certain areas of health. But I may never know the depth of what is truly hidding behind one really good system of thought, that is very different from anything else around. For me, it can mean that when the going gets tough, intead of scrambling for answers in a broad sense, I can look deeper in to one system and find answers. I cannot truly critisize chinese medicine until I can truly say that I have searched the depths and applied it clinically. I think that all of us strive to practise CHinese medicine, as pure as we can. But how can we say we practise chinese medicine unless we can refer to the work of our techers, whom I would hope have learned from chinese sources. If there is no solid link to the chinese then what is it that we are doing, and do we have the right to call our selves chinese medical practitioners?? Conforming to a language is really only for the sake of being clear. Otherwise your apple is my orange, and who are we to declare it is either an apple or an orange in the first place, unless we have access to the original definition of that fruit?? It really doesn't need to be such a battle of wits and protection of ego's, it is just about being clear. My wife is training to be a mid wife now, but before this she was a professional writer and editor. I remember reading to her some of my old journal writings, which I was so proud and fond of. She quickly pointed out that the feelings I was getting from my writing was not the same as what the reader/ audience was getting and that the art of writing was about conveying our message in way that everyone can relate to, not just me. This is an art and takes much skill, much more than I could ever attest to. I think that the chinese medical fundamentalists are here for a purpose, they are here to help edit out the BS, so that we are getting a clearer picture of what CM is trying to say, in a clear fashion that everyone can understand and relate to. My 2 cents, Trevor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Hi Trevor, I have also been a big fan of Wade Davis (for many reasons) ever since I was an Anthropology undergrad. It was because of Wade and his mentor, Richard Evans-Schultes that I have been passionately studying Amazonian medicine alongside for years. There is an idea in Anthropology of the “participant observer” that evolved out of the criticisms of the early Eurocentric writings. People started realizing that the objects of their observation (“savages”,etc) were never even closely understood because the observer hadn’t made the effort to become “one of them”. Yet, interestingly, no matter how hard we try to be a “local”, we eventually have to surrender to the notion that we can’t avoid our own personal, social, and cultural lenses that taint how we see the world. I totally agree that if we are invested in as a paradigm, and want to call what we practice “”, we should always strive to get as close as possible to the heart of medicine to fully grok it- including working at being able to read source texts in their source language and spending time in the cultural source of that medicine. Even then, one can be a very skilled technician of the Medicine and know it cerebrally and academically, but my question is: how many of us actually strive to live in accordance with the Dao, do Qi cultivation work, study esoteric branches within the medicine like Astrology and the Daoist uses of crystals/gems, spend healthy amounts of time outside with the very plants that we prescribe? How many of us could even identify the plants in our pharmacies either in the wild, or at a farm? How many of us do even a fraction of the work that Sun Si Miao, Li Shi Zhen, etc claim is necessary (even as a local) that is required to fully grasp the medicine. My guess is – not that many. I’m sure we could come up with thousands of justifications- family, time, work, money, other obligations… very similar to people who know that meditation would help them but always find reasons why they can’t. So, in short, we do what we can and humbly (I hope) accept our own strengths and limitations, and have compassion for others in their own stages of process. In a previous thread, Jason asked how many people out there utilize plant spirit medicine as part of their Chinese herbal practice. No one responded. I wonder why….My teachers in the Peruvian Amazon always say that a true herbalist is only as good as his communication skills are WITH THE PLANTS THEMSELVES. You don’t need to know Quechua or Shipibo to talk to a plant. You just have to be willing to spend as much time cultivating a heart to heart relationship with the plants as we do in the libraries between our ears. Then, once we actually listen to what the plants have to say about prescription, differential diagnosis, obscure uses and preperations, etc. then we can take that information and plug it into the paradigm that we are working with and try it out. There’s my penny, Kip _____ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Trevor and Kip - I don't really chime in that much on this group because I don't usually have the time (kids, patients, etc.) - but I just wanted to say thanks to both of you for reminding this practitioner (of slightly over a decade now - and I know that means I basically an infant in diapers by chinese medicine standards) of why I got into the this practice to begin with: to try to help alleviate some of the suffering of others, to heal myself, and to try to grow spiritually while I'm here for this brief sojourn. It's the very fact that at it's deepest and most ancient levels, chinese medicine is really a spiritual and energetic medicine. Thanks again, Ray Rubio On Feb 22, 2008, at 3:49 PM, <kip wrote: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2008 Report Share Posted February 23, 2008 Now I think we might be getting somewhere in this discussion. Thank you Kip for broadening the perspective a little more. I'd like to also thank Michael T. for stirring up the pot a little. As a new practitioner, and one who is relatively new to the practice of Chinese herbalism with a general fascination in the plant kingdom and how it relates to the animal I have been following the recent thread with a great deal of curiosity. Unfortunately I think some of the arguments have been about who has a right to think of themself as the greater authority and, while I don't dispute that some of this is out of responsibility to the client or patient (and perhaps to a purification or distillation of what actually comprises Traditional ) it is nevertheless something that hopefully has evolved a little in terms of the " patient " beginning to have a restored responsibility for their own health. In this sense perhaps medicines from authoritarian cultures (even traditional ones) can benefit from some of the revolt out there and why the more " artistic " approach to learning has perhaps saved medicine in general from finally again coming to be less about profit and more about healing, which it was originally meant to be. Indeed that is why many of us began to search outside of our native cultures in the first place. It seems to me that all of us can benefit both from deeper focused study (which includes studying the language that the particular discipline originated in) and from stepping back and appreciating the bigger picture from time to time. I hold the opinion however that this is no excuse for those who have been privileged to master the language over those who have not, although I do recognize that this will probably always be the case in societies where everything is exploited for advantage (I live in Quebec where the language card is especially used to maintain advantage). I'm not sure that turning it into a competitive, adversarial, one up type of game really gets us very far at all, except to divide us into different cliques and camps that really have more to do with more of the same that this world would benefit without. As healers and aspiring healers I hope we can transcend the power games and share information with ultimate freedom. Recognizing that we all need help now and again the ultimate empowerment is that we all be able to know enough to heal ourselves and, if not, to be able to trust those in the know to bring us along to a point that we can. Cheers, Greg Campbell kip wrote: > Hi Trevor, > > > > I have also been a big fan of Wade Davis (for many reasons) ever since I was > an Anthropology undergrad. It was because of Wade and his mentor, Richard > Evans-Schultes that I have been passionately studying Amazonian medicine > alongside for years. There is an idea in Anthropology of > the “participant observer†that evolved out of the criticisms of the early > Eurocentric writings. People started realizing that the objects of their > observation (“savagesâ€,etc) were never even closely understood because the > observer hadn’t made the effort to become “one of themâ€. Yet, interestingly, > no matter how hard we try to be a “localâ€, we eventually have to surrender > to the notion that we can’t avoid our own personal, social, and cultural > lenses that taint how we see the world. > > > > I totally agree that if we are invested in as a paradigm, > and want to call what we practice “â€, we should always > strive to get as close as possible to the heart of medicine to fully grok > it- including working at being able to read source texts in their source > language and spending time in the cultural source of that medicine. Even > then, one can be a very skilled technician of the Medicine and know it > cerebrally and academically, but my question is: how many of us actually > strive to live in accordance with the Dao, do Qi cultivation work, study > esoteric branches within the medicine like Astrology and the Daoist uses of > crystals/gems, spend healthy amounts of time outside with the very plants > that we prescribe? How many of us could even identify the plants in our > pharmacies either in the wild, or at a farm? How many of us do even a > fraction of the work that Sun Si Miao, Li Shi Zhen, etc claim is necessary > (even as a local) that is required to fully grasp the medicine. My guess is > – not that many. I’m sure we could come up with thousands of justifications- > family, time, work, money, other obligations… very similar to people who > know that meditation would help them but always find reasons why they can’t. > So, in short, we do what we can and humbly (I hope) accept our own strengths > and limitations, and have compassion for others in their own stages of > process. > > > > In a previous thread, Jason asked how many people out there utilize plant > spirit medicine as part of their Chinese herbal practice. No one responded. > I wonder why….My teachers in the Peruvian Amazon always say that a true > herbalist is only as good as his communication skills are WITH THE PLANTS > THEMSELVES. You don’t need to know Quechua or Shipibo to talk to a plant. > You just have to be willing to spend as much time cultivating a heart to > heart relationship with the plants as we do in the libraries between our > ears. Then, once we actually listen to what the plants have to say about > prescription, differential diagnosis, obscure uses and preperations, etc. > then we can take that information and plug it into the paradigm that we are > working with and try it out. > > > > There’s my penny, > > Kip > > > > _____ > > > Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services, including a practitioner's directory and a moderated discussion forum. > > > > 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.