Guest guest Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Is there a good guidebook on the more esoteric functions of Chinese herbs? Thanks, Noah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Noah, The original esoteric functions of Chinese herbs book is the Shen nong ben cao jing... translated by Yang Shou-Zhong into English. Also, there is Jeffrey Yuen's transcripts of his lectures on " Herbs and the Mind " and " Plants and Spirituality " available at www.herbalroom.com click on General info / Jeffrey Yuen transcripts. Thea Elijah has her own perspective of the " personalities " of the herbs... She wrote a chapter in Lonny Jarrett's " the Clinical Practice of Chinese Medicine " and teaches classes in the Spirit of Plants. In non-Chinese herbs, Stephen Buhner " The Secret Teaching of Plants " , Eliot Cowan " Plant Spirit Medicine " , Gurudas " the Spiritual properties of herbs " , Vasant Lad/ David Frawley " the Yoga of Herbs " , Scott Cunningham " the Encyclopedia of Magical Herbs " , any book by Richard Evans Schultes or his students... all of these are good bets. K On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Noah Samuels <noahsamuelswrote: > > > Is there a good guidebook on the more esoteric functions of Chinese herbs? > Thanks, > Noah > > > -- "" www.tcmreview.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Kokko or anyone who cares to answer, Having never opened the Shen Nong Ben Cao, I'm curious as to what in it is 'esoteric' and has anyone explored any unusual applications of common or uncommon herbs as guided by this text? Having read the Jeffrey Yuen lecture transcripts, I was delighted by his suggestion to develop relationships with herbs by ingestion of, bathing in, communing with (he directs the audience to a specific vacant lot in Harlem I believe to view Scrophularia growing as a weed), etc. As I recall, in the lecture I listened to he goes through a list of plants and presents psychospiritual attributes to them. I'm pretty sure that he doesn't corroborate to any source texts and that it is a presentation of his own experience/transmission as fact. Why I found myself enraptured by this transcript while I still make fun of people who are really into flower essences I'm not sure but I did. Ben johnkokko Sat, 19 Dec 2009 18:52:36 -0800 Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? Noah, The original esoteric functions of Chinese herbs book is the Shen nong ben cao jing... translated by Yang Shou-Zhong into English. Also, there is Jeffrey Yuen's transcripts of his lectures on " Herbs and the Mind " and " Plants and Spirituality " available at www.herbalroom.com click on General info / Jeffrey Yuen transcripts. Thea Elijah has her own perspective of the " personalities " of the herbs... She wrote a chapter in Lonny Jarrett's " the Clinical Practice of Chinese Medicine " and teaches classes in the Spirit of Plants. In non-Chinese herbs, Stephen Buhner " The Secret Teaching of Plants " , Eliot Cowan " Plant Spirit Medicine " , Gurudas " the Spiritual properties of herbs " , Vasant Lad/ David Frawley " the Yoga of Herbs " , Scott Cunningham " the Encyclopedia of Magical Herbs " , any book by Richard Evans Schultes or his students... all of these are good bets. K On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Noah Samuels <noahsamuelswrote: > > > Is there a good guidebook on the more esoteric functions of Chinese herbs? > Thanks, > Noah > > > -- "" www.tcmreview.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Homeopathy is more difficult to validate its method of actions than flower essences... Essential oils have been scientifically researched and documented since the times of the alchemists... anti-bacterial, anti-viral, anti-fungal, sedative etc... Flower essences are the jing-shen of the plant (the soul if you will), very powerful. Jeffrey Yuen uses flower essences, not homepathic remedies as far as I know. The Shen nong ben cao jing is esoteric 1. in the sense that no body reads it any more (the definition of esoteric)... 2. almost every herb has a psycho-physical/ spiritual function. Why is jade the 1st remedy listed? Why is Ling zhi the first plant listed? What about all of the stones (mineral remedies/ gem therapy) in the text? Eric, How's the shen nong ben cao class going with J. Yuen? K On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 10:48 PM, ben zappin <btz23 wrote: > > Kokko or anyone who cares to answer, > > Having never opened the Shen Nong Ben Cao, I'm curious as to what in it > is 'esoteric' and has anyone explored any unusual applications of common or > uncommon herbs as guided by this text? > > Having read the Jeffrey Yuen lecture transcripts, I was delighted by his > suggestion to develop relationships with herbs by ingestion of, bathing in, > communing with (he directs the audience to a specific vacant lot in Harlem I > believe to view Scrophularia growing as a weed), etc. As I recall, in the > lecture I listened to he goes through a list of plants and presents > psychospiritual attributes to them. I'm pretty sure that he doesn't > corroborate to any source texts and that it is a presentation of his own > experience/transmission as fact. > > Why I found myself enraptured by this transcript while I still make fun of > people who are really into flower essences I'm not sure but I did. > > Ben > > > > johnkokko > Sat, 19 Dec 2009 18:52:36 -0800 > Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? > > > > > > Noah, > The original esoteric functions of Chinese herbs book is the Shen nong ben > cao jing... translated by Yang Shou-Zhong into English. > Also, there is Jeffrey Yuen's transcripts of his lectures on " Herbs and the > Mind " and " Plants and Spirituality " available at www.herbalroom.com click > on General info / Jeffrey Yuen transcripts. > Thea Elijah has her own perspective of the " personalities " of the herbs... > She wrote a chapter in Lonny Jarrett's " the Clinical Practice of Chinese > Medicine " and teaches classes in the Spirit of Plants. > > In non-Chinese herbs, Stephen Buhner " The Secret Teaching of Plants " , Eliot > Cowan " Plant Spirit Medicine " , Gurudas " the Spiritual properties of herbs " , > Vasant Lad/ David Frawley " the Yoga of Herbs " , Scott Cunningham " the > Encyclopedia of Magical Herbs " , any book by Richard Evans Schultes or his > students... all of these are good bets. > > K > > On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Noah Samuels <noahsamuels > >wrote: > > > > > > > Is there a good guidebook on the more esoteric functions of Chinese > herbs? > > Thanks, > > Noah > > > > > > > > -- > > > "" > > > www.tcmreview.com > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 On Dec 22, 2009, at 1:48 AM, ben zappin wrote: > I'm pretty sure that he doesn't corroborate to any source texts and > that it is a presentation of his own experience/transmission as fact. Jeffrey Yuen's relationship to source texts is a clear example of the difference between grasping the fundamentals, versus becoming fundamentalist. I am reminded of something that happened to me in a classroom with Elisabeth Rochat de la Valle back in the early 90's. It completely changed my orientation towards source texts, and towards the specific rigors of being a Western mind seeking to understanding Chinese medicine. Elisabeth was lecturing about a particular acupuncture point (L.I. 16, but that is not relevant). She was listing indications for usage of the point, and all of them were very extreme symptoms-- the sorts of presentations which would inspire a student to call 911 rather than try acupuncture. One of the indications was in her words, " ze vomiting of blood, or somesings like zis. " I sat there trying to think of " something like " the vomiting of blood, and couldn't come up with anything. Since I was tired and bored with endless descriptions that were extreme beyond anything I would commonly expect to see in my actual practice, I raised my hand and asked her, " Elisabeth, what do you mean, the vomiting of blood and things like this? I can't think of anything else LIKE the vomiting of blood-- can you give me an example? She looked at me and said with surprise, " Oh, when ze Chinese say ze vomiting of blood, zey do not mean ze vomiting of blood. " This was news to me-- earth-shattering news. Until this moment I had been completely convinced that when the Chinese said the vomiting of blood, then the vomiting of blood was exactly what they meant. It was an implicit assumption of mine. Suddenly the abyss opened before me-- if, when the Chinese said the vomiting of blood, the did not mean the vomiting of blood, what else did they say and not mean? and what DID they mean? I asked, " When the Chinese say the vomiting of blood, if they do not mean the vomiting of blood-- what do they mean? " Elisabeth explained to me patiently, as though speaking to an utter moron, " They mean SOMESING LIKE ze vomiting of blood, " and she turned back to the blackboard to move on to the next point. On the edge of conceptual void, I felt that I had to have this clarified or my entire conception of Chinese medicine was completely shattered. I said, " Elisabeth, I know I am belaboring the point, but I really don't understand-- I cannot think of something LIKE the vomiting of blood. Can you give an example? " Elisabeth launched into a long explanation, the gist of which ran something like this: " When the Chinese say 'ze voMITing of blood', we have ze voMITing, which means ze StoMACH, ze upward movement of ze StoMACH, of ze voMITing; and ze blood, zis means we are talking about ze LiVER; we have ze violent action of ze LiVER on the StoMACH-- somesing like zis. " Oh. From this example, and the many more that followed over the years, Elisabeth made it clear that the descriptions in classical texts were meant to be read as signifiers, rather than parameters. Elisabeth explained-- and Jeffrey Yuen also states this frequently in his lectures-- that the physical symptoms listed are not to be taken as physical symptoms only, but energetic descriptions somewhat akin to personals ads (where we are meant to read between the lines and understand what is implied by " long walks after midnight " or some such phrase). There is clearly a rigor to this, but it is not the Euclidean rigor of Western mind. It is a fractal method of signification such as the Chinese explicitly utilize in the correspondences. In English, we primarily use words to encapsulate meaning, like a walnut shell around a walnut (this is what I mean by Euclidean style). Chinese is, as we know, much more about associative thought which has its own rigor but it is more of a fractal rigor, based on recognition of self-similar forms (or energetics). I can speak at greater length about Euclidean- style definitions and meanings (such we use in as the English language) and how this differs from fractal-style methods of signification (as comes more naturally in Chinese) if anyone wishes. The main point is, one is rarely ever going to be able to point to classical source texts in order to find direct citations of the more " esoteric " uses of the herbs-- if by this we are meaning the more psycho-spiritual indications. These are all inherent directly within the physical descriptions; it is a matter of understanding how to read them. Elisabeth Rochat de la Vallee, Ted Kaptchuk, Jeffrey Yuen and Heiner Fruehauf all speak to this, and teach from the rigor of this methodology. I was discussing this with Heiner Fruehauf a couple of weeks ago. We were talking about the perils of fundamentalism creeping into Western understanding of Chinese medicine because of exactly this common misunderstanding. I spoke (fractally!) about a friend of mine who is a highly intelligent and meticulously scholarly fundamentalist Christian, for whom if Jesus didn't say it, in so many words, then it ain't Christianity. The fact that Jesus spoke in parables and allegories, and that one CANNOT understand his words without understanding them as signifiers rather than definitive parameters, cut no more ice with him than it does with some interpreters of Chinese medical descriptors in classical texts. Learning to interpret Chinese text as fractal signifiers requires a great deal of rigor so that we can truly expand the fractal (as it was meant to be expanded) without " making things up, " although we will most certainly-- and intentionally-- be speaking things that may never have been spoken before (as in the case of Jeffrey Yuen). Thea Elijah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Just curious here, when you say anti-viral, anti-bacterial what exactly do we mean? Since we are not ingesting these, how do they work? Are you saying that if you put some oil on an acu point, smell it, or just where it that it is proven to have these effects? I would like to see this data. -Jason On Behalf Of Homeopathy is more difficult to validate its method of actions than flower essences... Essential oils have been scientifically researched and documented since the times of the alchemists... anti-bacterial, anti-viral, anti-fungal, sedative etc... Flower essences are the jing-shen of the plant (the soul if you will), very powerful. Jeffrey Yuen uses flower essences, not homepathic remedies as far as I know. The Shen nong ben cao jing is esoteric 1. in the sense that no body reads it any more (the definition of esoteric)... 2. almost every herb has a psycho-physical/ spiritual function. Why is jade the 1st remedy listed? Why is Ling zhi the first plant listed? What about all of the stones (mineral remedies/ gem therapy) in the text? Eric, How's the shen nong ben cao class going with J. Yuen? K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 , Thea Elijah <parkinglot wrote: > I sat there trying to think of " something like " the vomiting of blood, > and couldn't come up with anything. In Chinese medicine, the term " tu xue " (often translated as blood ejection or vomiting of blood) refers to ejection of blood via the mouth. While it generally refers to vomiting of blood from the stomach, it can also refer to expectoration of blood that comes from the respiratory system. This should be normal TCM 101 theory, certainly it is easy to find the answer by looking the term up in a book like the Practical Dictionary of . To me, it makes more sense to look something up rather than to make something up. A lot of us enjoy Chinese medicine because we like having our theory rooted in the consensus of thousands of source texts written across thousands of years. Why bother making stuff up when there is already so much that we still haven't mastered? Not that there is any problem with making stuff up, but if you want to make stuff up, why look to Chinese medicine instead of going for some good old fashioned roots shamanism? Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 K, You wrote: " The Shen nong ben cao jing is esoteric 1. in the sense that no body reads itany more (the definition of esoteric)... " Really? How do you know? I happen to know many practitioners, including myself, have read it and go back to reference it from time to time. This is particularly true for those who practice Jing Fang. Oh... maybe we are those " nobody? " :-) Mike L. --- On Tue, 12/22/09, <johnkokko wrote: <johnkokko Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? Tuesday, December 22, 2009, 9:15 AM Homeopathy is more difficult to validate its method of actions than flower essences... Essential oils have been scientifically researched and documented since the times of the alchemists... anti-bacterial, anti-viral, anti-fungal, sedative etc... Flower essences are the jing-shen of the plant (the soul if you will), very powerful. Jeffrey Yuen uses flower essences, not homepathic remedies as far as I know. The Shen nong ben cao jing is esoteric 1. in the sense that no body reads it any more (the definition of esoteric)... 2. almost every herb has a psycho-physical/ spiritual function. Why is jade the 1st remedy listed? Why is Ling zhi the first plant listed? What about all of the stones (mineral remedies/ gem therapy) in the text? Eric, How's the shen nong ben cao class going with J. Yuen? K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Ah. I see that you completely mistake my intended meaning. I will retire and do my best to think of another way to express my point. thank you-- Thea Elijah On Dec 22, 2009, at 4:40 PM, smilinglotus wrote: > > > , Thea Elijah > <parkinglot wrote: > > > I sat there trying to think of " something like " the vomiting of > blood, > > and couldn't come up with anything. > > In Chinese medicine, the term " tu xue " (often translated as blood > ejection or vomiting of blood) refers to ejection of blood via the > mouth. While it generally refers to vomiting of blood from the > stomach, it can also refer to expectoration of blood that comes from > the respiratory system. This should be normal TCM 101 theory, > certainly it is easy to find the answer by looking the term up in a > book like the Practical Dictionary of . To me, it > makes more sense to look something up rather than to make something > up. > > A lot of us enjoy Chinese medicine because we like having our theory > rooted in the consensus of thousands of source texts written across > thousands of years. Why bother making stuff up when there is already > so much that we still haven't mastered? Not that there is any > problem with making stuff up, but if you want to make stuff up, why > look to Chinese medicine instead of going for some good old > fashioned roots shamanism? > > Eric > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Kokko or anyone else, I've had a hard time swallowing flower essences as I've never seen anything that suggested a transmission other than peoples personal epiphanies about their applications i.e. Bach Flower Remedies. While I do believe that people can have very strong personal relationships to plants that defy the physical realm, I'm challenged that one can standardize an such an application. Does anyone have any literature suggesting any lineage or textual transmissions substantiating the use of flower essences or any other means of transmitting the Jing/Shen of a plant besides oral tradition. I'm not trying to debunk their validity here, I'm just trying to get feedback from level headed people I trust. Ben > > johnkokko > Tue, 22 Dec 2009 09:15:16 -0800 > Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? > > Homeopathy is more difficult to validate its method of actions than flower > essences... Essential oils have been scientifically researched and > documented since the times of the alchemists... anti-bacterial, anti-viral, > anti-fungal, sedative etc... Flower essences are the jing-shen of the > plant (the soul if you will), very powerful. Jeffrey Yuen uses flower > essences, not homepathic remedies as far as I know. > > The Shen nong ben cao jing is esoteric 1. in the sense that no body reads it > any more (the definition of esoteric)... > 2. almost every herb has a psycho-physical/ spiritual function. > Why is jade the 1st remedy listed? Why is Ling zhi the first plant listed? > > What about all of the stones (mineral remedies/ gem therapy) in the text? > > Eric, > How's the shen nong ben cao class going with J. Yuen? > > K > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Thea, I liked your story... it's refreshing to hear personal stories... especially when they're written in dialogue form. The Nei jing was written that way. We like to think that if we speak about things in the 3rd person (upper right quadrant), than it must have more validity than speaking from the 1st person (upper left quadrant). There's a lot of programming and conditioning from society that brings us to this point. My zen teacher said to me... only speak from 1st person and only what you have experienced directly yourself. I don't do that very well, but there is something authentic and sincere about this form of communication. K On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Thea Elijah <parkinglotwrote: > > > Ah. I see that you completely mistake my intended meaning. I will > retire and do my best to think of another way to express my point. > > thank you-- > > Thea Elijah > > > On Dec 22, 2009, at 4:40 PM, smilinglotus wrote: > > > > > > > --- In <%40>, > Thea Elijah > > <parkinglot wrote: > > > > > I sat there trying to think of " something like " the vomiting of > > blood, > > > and couldn't come up with anything. > > > > In Chinese medicine, the term " tu xue " (often translated as blood > > ejection or vomiting of blood) refers to ejection of blood via the > > mouth. While it generally refers to vomiting of blood from the > > stomach, it can also refer to expectoration of blood that comes from > > the respiratory system. This should be normal TCM 101 theory, > > certainly it is easy to find the answer by looking the term up in a > > book like the Practical Dictionary of . To me, it > > makes more sense to look something up rather than to make something > > up. > > > > A lot of us enjoy Chinese medicine because we like having our theory > > rooted in the consensus of thousands of source texts written across > > thousands of years. Why bother making stuff up when there is already > > so much that we still haven't mastered? Not that there is any > > problem with making stuff up, but if you want to make stuff up, why > > look to Chinese medicine instead of going for some good old > > fashioned roots shamanism? > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Jason, you wrote: " Are you saying that if you put some oil on an acu point, smell it, or just where it that it is proven to have these effects? I would like to see this data. " I'd like to just put out a perspective that's right underneath our nose, literally. The Chinese have been working with the oils of plants topically and aerially for a long time... mugwort is burned and applied directly on the skin, where essential oils are rubbed off and released. Cold moxa therapy, hot moxa therapy, plasters and oils are tried and true remedies. White flower oil, Po sum on oil, Wood lock oil, Kwan loong oil etc.. all of these have aromatic oils that are applied to the skin with practical applications, especially pain-relief, shen-calming and exterior-releasing properties. Most of them contain some mixture of Bo he, Gui zhi etc... Another thought is what happens when we boil herbs... and the aromatics permeate through the patient's kitchen? or what about the " breathing herbs " tradition where the patient covers their heads under a towel and breathes in herbs such as ma huang, jing jie, bai zhi etc. ? The Europeans, especially the Germans and French have done the most analytical research on essential oils and it's effects on physiology. An instructive book on the subject is " Advanced Aromatherapy.. the science of essential oil therapy " by Kurt Schnaubelt, Ph.D. K On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 10:47 AM, < > wrote: > > > Just curious here, when you say anti-viral, anti-bacterial what exactly do > we mean? Since we are not ingesting these, how do they work? Are you saying > that if you put some oil on an acu point, smell it, or just where it that > it > is proven to have these effects? I would like to see this data. > > -Jason > > > > <%40> > [ <%40>\ ] > On Behalf Of > > Homeopathy is more difficult to validate its method of actions than flower > essences... Essential oils have been scientifically researched and > documented since the times of the alchemists... anti-bacterial, anti-viral, > anti-fungal, sedative etc... Flower essences are the jing-shen of the > plant (the soul if you will), very powerful. Jeffrey Yuen uses flower > essences, not homepathic remedies as far as I know. > > The Shen nong ben cao jing is esoteric 1. in the sense that no body reads > it > any more (the definition of esoteric)... > 2. almost every herb has a psycho-physical/ spiritual function. > Why is jade the 1st remedy listed? Why is Ling zhi the first plant listed? > > What about all of the stones (mineral remedies/ gem therapy) in the text? > > Eric, > How's the shen nong ben cao class going with J. Yuen? > > K > > -- "" www.tcmreview.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Ben, this is an important discussion that every serious herbalist should think about... since flowers are so important for our discipline. I would love to read some literature other than transcripts from J Yuen's lectures about this subject.. in Chinese medicine. I've tried taking different flowers at minute doses through just steaming one flower, inhaling it and then drinking the hydrosols that are in the cup.... For instance, He huan hua has such a different feeling that is elicited than He huan pi. For me, one flower of he huan hua made me feel sad, which is the opposite effect of he huan pi. One flower of ju hua made me feel livery (Qi rising), while five flowers made me feel peaceful (Qi descending). Drinking a hot decoction makes the Qi rise, while drinking a cold decoction of ju hua makes the Qi descend. These are just personal experiences. Dosing is a lost or never truly found science. Prognosis is something that I have very little experience with, since I haven't been practicing long enough to see the past-present and future and would love to hear more about that on the list group. Maybe others can share their experiences and maybe we can do " provings " of herbs, which will be revolutionary for our medicine. We are not the same people as the Chinese were 2000 years ago and the herbs are evolving as well, so I think that our medicine should stay in the " here and now " , while being informed by the classics. K On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 5:21 PM, ben zappin <btz23 wrote: > > > Kokko or anyone else, > > I've had a hard time swallowing flower essences as I've never seen anything > that suggested a transmission other than peoples personal epiphanies about > their applications i.e. Bach Flower Remedies. While I do believe that people > can have very strong personal relationships to plants that defy the physical > realm, I'm challenged that one can standardize an such an application. > > Does anyone have any literature suggesting any lineage or textual > transmissions substantiating the use of flower essences or any other means > of transmitting the Jing/Shen of a plant besides oral tradition. I'm not > trying to debunk their validity here, I'm just trying to get feedback from > level headed people I trust. > > Ben > > > <%40> > > johnkokko <johnkokko%40gmail.com> > > Tue, 22 Dec 2009 09:15:16 -0800 > > > Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? > > > > Homeopathy is more difficult to validate its method of actions than > flower > > essences... Essential oils have been scientifically researched and > > documented since the times of the alchemists... anti-bacterial, > anti-viral, > > anti-fungal, sedative etc... Flower essences are the jing-shen of the > > plant (the soul if you will), very powerful. Jeffrey Yuen uses flower > > essences, not homepathic remedies as far as I know. > > > > The Shen nong ben cao jing is esoteric 1. in the sense that no body reads > it > > any more (the definition of esoteric)... > > 2. almost every herb has a psycho-physical/ spiritual function. > > Why is jade the 1st remedy listed? Why is Ling zhi the first plant > listed? > > > > What about all of the stones (mineral remedies/ gem therapy) in the text? > > > > Eric, > > How's the shen nong ben cao class going with J. Yuen? > > > > K > > > > -- "" www.tcmreview.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Mike, You and your friends and the 1% of 1% of practitioners are the " nobody " I was mentioning who consult the Shen nong ben cao jing.... this user group is like a " smoking room " for very cool intellectuals. Just being true to ourselves is esoteric. Being true to others is exoteric. Best wishes to nobody and everybody, K On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Mike Liaw <mikeliaw wrote: > > > K, > > You wrote: " The Shen nong ben cao jing is esoteric 1. in the sense that no > body reads itany more (the definition of esoteric)... " > Really? How do you know? > I happen to know many practitioners, including myself, have read it and go > back to reference it from time to time. This is particularly true for those > who practice Jing Fang. > Oh... maybe we are those " nobody? " :-) > Mike L. > > --- On Tue, 12/22/09, <johnkokko<johnkokko%40gmail.com>> > wrote: > > <johnkokko <johnkokko%40gmail.com>> > > Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? > <%40> > Tuesday, December 22, 2009, 9:15 AM > > > Homeopathy is more difficult to validate its method of actions than flower > essences... Essential oils have been scientifically researched and > documented since the times of the alchemists... anti-bacterial, > anti-viral, > anti-fungal, sedative etc... Flower essences are the jing-shen of the > plant (the soul if you will), very powerful. Jeffrey Yuen uses flower > essences, not homepathic remedies as far as I know. > > The Shen nong ben cao jing is esoteric 1. in the sense that no body reads > it > any more (the definition of esoteric)... > 2. almost every herb has a psycho-physical/ spiritual function. > Why is jade the 1st remedy listed? Why is Ling zhi the first plant listed? > > What about all of the stones (mineral remedies/ gem therapy) in the text? > > Eric, > How's the shen nong ben cao class going with J. Yuen? > > K > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Interesting post. However, I do find it interesting that I have never seen anything in Chinese that suggests that we should just be making stuff up. If this is the way classics were to be read, I think we should be able to find some evidence in the immense number of resources that exist commentating on the classics that have been written in Chinese over the last 1800+ years. Of course, I am always open to someone presenting some sources that support such a stance, but without this, such liberties, IMO, are only a nice story. Finally, there is a big difference between fundamentalism and actually trying to learn from past physicians e.g. understanding how THEY thought and hence the treatments they used for " their view " on disease. Making up interpretations based on owns current world view, misunderstandings of Chinese terms, and predilections towards things e.g. more esoteric, may satisfy one's creative (and spiritual) stance, however, it is a clearly a slippery slope when unraveling the depths of Chinese medicine. As we have seen to of had this discussion a few times in the past, I do not think I need to beat a dead horse. My two cents... -Jason Acupuncture www.ChineseMedicinedoc.com On Behalf Of Thea Elijah Oh. From this example, and the many more that followed over the years, Elisabeth made it clear that the descriptions in classical texts were meant to be read as signifiers, rather than parameters. Elisabeth explained-- and Jeffrey Yuen also states this frequently in his lectures-- that the physical symptoms listed are not to be taken as physical symptoms only, but energetic descriptions somewhat akin to personals ads (where we are meant to read between the lines and understand what is implied by " long walks after midnight " or some such phrase). There is clearly a rigor to this, but it is not the Euclidean rigor of Western mind. It is a fractal method of signification such as the Chinese explicitly utilize in the correspondences. In English, we primarily use words to encapsulate meaning, like a walnut shell around a walnut (this is what I mean by Euclidean style). Chinese is, as we know, much more about associative thought which has its own rigor but it is more of a fractal rigor, based on recognition of self-similar forms (or energetics). I can speak at greater length about Euclidean- style definitions and meanings (such we use in as the English language) and how this differs from fractal-style methods of signification (as comes more naturally in Chinese) if anyone wishes. The main point is, one is rarely ever going to be able to point to classical source texts in order to find direct citations of the more " esoteric " uses of the herbs-- if by this we are meaning the more psycho-spiritual indications. These are all inherent directly within the physical descriptions; it is a matter of understanding how to read them. Elisabeth Rochat de la Vallee, Ted Kaptchuk, Jeffrey Yuen and Heiner Fruehauf all speak to this, and teach from the rigor of this methodology. I was discussing this with Heiner Fruehauf a couple of weeks ago. We were talking about the perils of fundamentalism creeping into Western understanding of Chinese medicine because of exactly this common misunderstanding. I spoke (fractally!) about a friend of mine who is a highly intelligent and meticulously scholarly fundamentalist Christian, for whom if Jesus didn't say it, in so many words, then it ain't Christianity. The fact that Jesus spoke in parables and allegories, and that one CANNOT understand his words without understanding them as signifiers rather than definitive parameters, cut no more ice with him than it does with some interpreters of Chinese medical descriptors in classical texts. Learning to interpret Chinese text as fractal signifiers requires a great deal of rigor so that we can truly expand the fractal (as it was meant to be expanded) without " making things up, " although we will most certainly-- and intentionally-- be speaking things that may never have been spoken before (as in the case of Jeffrey Yuen). Thea Elijah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:09 PM, <johnkokko wrote: > > > We like to think that if we speak about things in the 3rd person (upper > right quadrant), > than it must have more validity than speaking from the 1st person (upper > left quadrant). > There's a lot of programming and conditioning from society that brings us > to > this point. > I don't know how widely these terms (quadrants) are used, but I have read about them in Ken Wilbur books. The point that John is expressing is that the we can look at anything in four ways (though I'll do it in three, which is easier and may be recognizable to fans of Greek philosophy). There's the " truth " which is the quantifiable truth. Science hangs out there. Ken Wilbur considers this the " upper right quadrant. " There's the meaning that something has to the individual, or " beauty " as the Greeks called it. Ken Wilbur puts that into the upper left quadrant. And there's the lower left quadrant or the " good " which is basically something's affect or value to society. I can see where vomiting blood can be code for " stomach and liver " I get that. I don't think that's so far out, really. There's this interesting way in which classics will use five element theory to say something like " tendons are the mother of the vessels " instead of " wood is the mother of fire. " But I also very much agree that it is very easy for us to project our modern ideas on to the words of the past. Especially in the " esoteric " realm. The problem that I have with the psycho-spiritual applications is that it is extremely difficult to measure any outcomes. I was enamored with Jeffrey Yuan and Worsley brand five element theory early on, but while I enjoyed the beauty of its humanity, I couldn't find its measurable truth and ultimately that made me question its good, or value to society. We assess the body through the human senses (as opposed to lab tests and x-rays, etc.), and our diagnostic findings can arise in patterns recognizable only to the human mind, but I'm not certain that every symptom or finding is a symbol of something larger, deeper, or more esoteric. I would be interested in Heiner Fruehauf's take on this. -- , DAOM Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional. http://twitter.com/algancao Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 On Dec 23, 2009, at 1:58 AM, Al Stone wrote: > I would be interested in Heiner Fruehauf's take on this. I encourage you to seek it out. It was a long conversation with Heiner, sitting around his dining room table drinking tea a couple of weeks ago, that preceded my decision to post these views. It is distressing to me, however, that people reading my post seem to think that I am advocating making things up. I have re-read my post; this is not what I am saying! I am saying that to understand Chinese texts, we must read them as they were intended to be read. And OF COURSE " there is a big difference between fundamentalism and actually trying to learn from past physicians e.g. understanding how THEY thought and hence the treatments they used for " their view " on disease. " I am slightly astounded that I have been read as though I am saying otherwise. Perhaps because there is an impression of having beaten a dead horse, people are simply responding to what they believe I am saying, based on what others have said here in the past? respectfully, Thea Elijah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 John, Your response is true, Chinese have used topical application of herbs for some time, but this really is not the point (and much different than our discussion here). I will try to elaborate. 1) If you are saying that such and such as in oil is antibacterial and antiviral than what is this mean. You said this such properties are scientifically documented. Please explain... 2) the way that people are using essential oils is much different than what you describe via Moxa or topical plasters for the relief of pain. In regard to oils, I have no opinion either way about their efficacy. I personally enjoy them, but not in practice. So if we are going to claim something, e.g. that this or that oil is antimicrobial, let us just be clear in what this really means. Of course, if just putting some bacteria or viruses in a bath of essential oils, kills them, this is so far from evidence that sniffing them or whatever will have the same effect internally to actually get it of some infection. Can you present some data (that you mentioned) to help us? -Jason Acupuncture www.ChineseMedicinedoc.com On Behalf Of Tuesday, December 22, 2009 7:49 PM Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? Jason, you wrote: " Are you saying that if you put some oil on an acu point, smell it, or just where it that it is proven to have these effects? I would like to see this data. " I'd like to just put out a perspective that's right underneath our nose, literally. The Chinese have been working with the oils of plants topically and aerially for a long time... mugwort is burned and applied directly on the skin, where essential oils are rubbed off and released. Cold moxa therapy, hot moxa therapy, plasters and oils are tried and true remedies. White flower oil, Po sum on oil, Wood lock oil, Kwan loong oil etc.. all of these have aromatic oils that are applied to the skin with practical applications, especially pain-relief, shen-calming and exterior-releasing properties. Most of them contain some mixture of Bo he, Gui zhi etc... Another thought is what happens when we boil herbs... and the aromatics permeate through the patient's kitchen? or what about the " breathing herbs " tradition where the patient covers their heads under a towel and breathes in herbs such as ma huang, jing jie, bai zhi etc. ? The Europeans, especially the Germans and French have done the most analytical research on essential oils and it's effects on physiology. An instructive book on the subject is " Advanced Aromatherapy.. the science of essential oil therapy " by Kurt Schnaubelt, Ph.D. K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 I think Thea is speaking to this. When Elizabeth la Roche says tu xue or " something like blood ejection " does she have an insight to a broader English dictionary meaning or beyond Fundamentals 101? Does Jeffery Yuen " make things up " (Ok, easy target) or does he have insight? What we may think about the above teachers I do believe they have a vast knowledge of classical Chinese texts and language. Thea was asking for a deeper meaning, this is not " tripping " or MSU. I'll play devil's advocate, maybe we are missing deeper meanings (esoteric or just true meaning?) if we stop at our dictionary explanations. Doug , " smilinglotus " <smilinglotus wrote: > > > > , Thea Elijah <parkinglot@> wrote: > > > I sat there trying to think of " something like " the vomiting of blood, > > and couldn't come up with anything. > > In Chinese medicine, the term " tu xue " (often translated as blood ejection or vomiting of blood) refers to ejection of blood via the mouth. While it generally refers to vomiting of blood from the stomach, it can also refer to expectoration of blood that comes from the respiratory system. This should be normal TCM 101 theory, certainly it is easy to find the answer by looking the term up in a book like the Practical Dictionary of . To me, it makes more sense to look something up rather than to make something up. > > A lot of us enjoy Chinese medicine because we like having our theory rooted in the consensus of thousands of source texts written across thousands of years. Why bother making stuff up when there is already so much that we still haven't mastered? Not that there is any problem with making stuff up, but if you want to make stuff up, why look to Chinese medicine instead of going for some good old fashioned roots shamanism? > > Eric > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Here is a clinical study on the antibacterial effect of an essential oil: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15066738?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.P\ ubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum & ordinalpos=4 , " " wrote: > > John, > > > > Your response is true, Chinese have used topical application of herbs for > some time, but this really is not the point (and much different than our > discussion here). I will try to elaborate. > > 1) If you are saying that such and such as in oil is antibacterial and > antiviral than what is this mean. You said this such properties are > scientifically documented. Please explain... > > 2) the way that people are using essential oils is much different than what > you describe via Moxa or topical plasters for the relief of pain. > > > > In regard to oils, I have no opinion either way about their efficacy. I > personally enjoy them, but not in practice. > > So if we are going to claim something, e.g. that this or that oil is > antimicrobial, let us just be clear in what this really means. Of course, if > just putting some bacteria or viruses in a bath of essential oils, kills > them, this is so far from evidence that sniffing them or whatever will have > the same effect internally to actually get it of some infection. Can you > present some data (that you mentioned) to help us? > > > > -Jason > > > > > Acupuncture > > > > > > > www.ChineseMedicinedoc.com > > > > > > > > > > > On Behalf Of > Tuesday, December 22, 2009 7:49 PM > > Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? > > > > > > Jason, > you wrote: " Are you saying that if you put some oil on an acu point, smell > it, or just where it that it > is proven to have these effects? I would like to see this data. " > > I'd like to just put out a perspective that's right underneath our nose, > literally. > The Chinese have been working with the oils of plants topically and aerially > for a long time... > mugwort is burned and applied directly on the skin, where essential oils are > rubbed off and released. > > Cold moxa therapy, hot moxa therapy, plasters and oils are tried and true > remedies. > White flower oil, Po sum on oil, Wood lock oil, Kwan loong oil etc.. all of > these have aromatic oils > that are applied to the skin with practical applications, especially > pain-relief, shen-calming and exterior-releasing properties. > Most of them contain some mixture of Bo he, Gui zhi etc... > > Another thought is what happens when we boil herbs... and the aromatics > permeate through the patient's kitchen? > or what about the " breathing herbs " tradition where the patient covers their > heads under a towel and breathes in herbs such as ma huang, jing jie, bai > zhi etc. ? > > The Europeans, especially the Germans and French have done the most > analytical research on essential oils > and it's effects on physiology. An instructive book on the subject is > " Advanced Aromatherapy.. the science of essential oil therapy " by Kurt > Schnaubelt, Ph.D. > > K > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 I think context speaks to everything. I believe the modern practice of Chinese medicine does have a fairly direct and understandable term set, and that 'tu xue', vomiting blood, means just what it says. In the context of a classical text, with differing understandings of human life and health, cultural mores and terminological variances, it is possible that what Elisabeth speaks about is possible. There is a fine line between clear understanding, obfuscation, and interpretation. When studying classical sources, we always walk that line. " Fundamentalism " may err in the direction of rigidity, but those who choose to interpret according to an understanding based on personal bias may also err by losing the plot. That fine line is understanding cultural context, deep study of texts and their principles, clinical applications, and comparison of translations and term sets. Elisabeth is an scholar, not a clinician, so within her discipline, interpretation and nuance are very important. For a clinician, however, more clear definitions serve what is needed more directly. I personally like both, one for inspiration, one for practical application, but clarity is always important. On Dec 23, 2009, at 10:52 AM, wrote: > > I think Thea is speaking to this. When Elizabeth la Roche says tu xue or " something like blood ejection " does she have an insight to a broader English dictionary meaning or beyond Fundamentals 101? Does Jeffery Yuen " make things up " (Ok, easy target) or does he have insight? > What we may think about the above teachers I do believe they have a vast knowledge of classical Chinese texts and language. Thea was asking for a deeper meaning, this is not " tripping " or MSU. > I'll play devil's advocate, maybe we are missing deeper meanings (esoteric or just true meaning?) if we stop at our dictionary explanations. > Doug > > , " smilinglotus " <smilinglotus wrote: > > > > > > > > , Thea Elijah <parkinglot@> wrote: > > > > > I sat there trying to think of " something like " the vomiting of blood, > > > and couldn't come up with anything. > > > > In Chinese medicine, the term " tu xue " (often translated as blood ejection or vomiting of blood) refers to ejection of blood via the mouth. While it generally refers to vomiting of blood from the stomach, it can also refer to expectoration of blood that comes from the respiratory system. This should be normal TCM 101 theory, certainly it is easy to find the answer by looking the term up in a book like the Practical Dictionary of . To me, it makes more sense to look something up rather than to make something up. > > > > A lot of us enjoy Chinese medicine because we like having our theory rooted in the consensus of thousands of source texts written across thousands of years. Why bother making stuff up when there is already so much that we still haven't mastered? Not that there is any problem with making stuff up, but if you want to make stuff up, why look to Chinese medicine instead of going for some good old fashioned roots shamanism? > > > > Eric > > > > Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Thanks for this study, I think this is a little different than (at least) I am getting at. It is clear there are all sorts of substances that when come into direct contact with pathogens will kill them, including oils. This study talks about a tea tree oil wash. However this is much different than suggesting that by inhaling the scent or putting them on an acupoint that it has similar effects. Maybe (I again) am misunderstanding something, but it is my understanding that this is the way people use oils, not to directly kill pathogens by putting it onto a wound etc. I think this type of therapy (direct contact) makes perfect logical sense (even though in the study ,mentioned the tea tree oil was not the most effective treatment). What I am questioning is the use in CM, they way people like JY are teaching. Many people in my area use oils and attribute all sorts of functions to them (just from smelling or rubbing them on a point etc). I have no opinion either way, but if they are scientifically proven to do this, I would like to know. Thoughts? -Jason On Behalf Of bill_schoenbart Wednesday, December 23, 2009 12:21 PM Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? Here is a clinical study on the antibacterial effect of an essential oil: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15066738?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubm ed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15066738?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pub med.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum & ordinalpos=4> & ordinalpos=4 <%40> , " " wrote: > > John, > > > > Your response is true, Chinese have used topical application of herbs for > some time, but this really is not the point (and much different than our > discussion here). I will try to elaborate. > > 1) If you are saying that such and such as in oil is antibacterial and > antiviral than what is this mean. You said this such properties are > scientifically documented. Please explain... > > 2) the way that people are using essential oils is much different than what > you describe via Moxa or topical plasters for the relief of pain. > > > > In regard to oils, I have no opinion either way about their efficacy. I > personally enjoy them, but not in practice. > > So if we are going to claim something, e.g. that this or that oil is > antimicrobial, let us just be clear in what this really means. Of course, if > just putting some bacteria or viruses in a bath of essential oils, kills > them, this is so far from evidence that sniffing them or whatever will have > the same effect internally to actually get it of some infection. Can you > present some data (that you mentioned) to help us? > > > > -Jason > > > > > Acupuncture > > > > > > > www.ChineseMedicinedoc.com > > > > > > > > > > <%40> > [ <%40> ] On Behalf Of > Tuesday, December 22, 2009 7:49 PM > <%40> > Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? > > > > > > Jason, > you wrote: " Are you saying that if you put some oil on an acu point, smell > it, or just where it that it > is proven to have these effects? I would like to see this data. " > > I'd like to just put out a perspective that's right underneath our nose, > literally. > The Chinese have been working with the oils of plants topically and aerially > for a long time... > mugwort is burned and applied directly on the skin, where essential oils are > rubbed off and released. > > Cold moxa therapy, hot moxa therapy, plasters and oils are tried and true > remedies. > White flower oil, Po sum on oil, Wood lock oil, Kwan loong oil etc.. all of > these have aromatic oils > that are applied to the skin with practical applications, especially > pain-relief, shen-calming and exterior-releasing properties. > Most of them contain some mixture of Bo he, Gui zhi etc... > > Another thought is what happens when we boil herbs... and the aromatics > permeate through the patient's kitchen? > or what about the " breathing herbs " tradition where the patient covers their > heads under a towel and breathes in herbs such as ma huang, jing jie, bai > zhi etc. ? > > The Europeans, especially the Germans and French have done the most > analytical research on essential oils > and it's effects on physiology. An instructive book on the subject is > " Advanced Aromatherapy.. the science of essential oil therapy " by Kurt > Schnaubelt, Ph.D. > > K > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Thea, Thanks for the response. I guess when I read things such as " .although we will most certainly-- and intentionally-- be speaking things that may never have been spoken before. " I take this as making stuff up. We have seen a wide range of opinions on this subject, ranging from a) you can make up whatever you like to b) the strictness linear interpretations are best. So you have my sincere apologies if I have mistaken your stance. But I do agree with Eric that terms in and of themselves are pretty well defined. A modern dictionary such as a PD might not suffice for pre-modern / classical sources, but it is a start. However, for a given term, when one goes beyond what is written in classical and modern commentaries (a new meaning), then we have some interesting to talk about. That is, since tens of thousands of doctors and scholars have thought about such issues and written much on what such terms mean (such as tu xue), to say they are missing something is a hard sell. Especially if that person (with the new stance) has e.g. a known " spiritual " slant and then reads this kind of nuance into it. (I am not talking about anyone in particular). Terms are pretty thought out and have been for some time. I guess I just find it hard to believe that we (especially some westerner) can have a more truer interpretation than what generations of Chinese have thought. Especially those generations who many times are very close in time (and hence word understanding) with the original author. That is of course if we are going for a purest unadulterated meaning that we can find. We should remember one of the most educated linguists, N. Wiseman, really just presents what is already in Chinese. So, to address Doug's 'devil's advocate' - I think he has a good point. What might we be missing? Is there more esoteric stuff there? First looking at things from a English dictionary is not the answer. There are volumes written in Chinese about definitions and usages throughout the ages. One must access this before one even attempts this subject. If one's stance is contained in such a source, then bam, done deal, if not, we have an issue. To introduce a new perspective is a bit bold. When one has new idea after new idea on classic texts then I question them. Surely though there are many possible interpretations of the classics, and there is no right answer. However, as a whole, they are contained within a certain sphere of meanings. But one thing is for sure, serious scholar is needed to enter this arena. To sum up, we must be flexible in such endeavors, especially when interpreting passages as a whole, which many times are not as straightforward. Consequently, this " tu xue " may have a deeper meaning in the passage that was discussed. I have no opinion without seeing it. However the chances of the " original author's intention " not appearing in either commentaries or time-period dictionaries is IMO, slim. IT was said, " that the physical symptoms listed are not to be taken as physical symptoms only, but energetic descriptions somewhat akin to personals ads. " - IF this is true, we should find evidence in Chinese, otherwise they are just putting their personal beliefs onto already defined terms. It would be useful to pick some specific example and look at the Chinese and try to dissect this and learn from this approach. Can you or someone supply something we can engage in? Thoughts?... and Happy holidays to all, -Jason On Behalf Of Thea Elijah Wednesday, December 23, 2009 1:20 AM Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? On Dec 23, 2009, at 1:58 AM, Al Stone wrote: > I would be interested in Heiner Fruehauf's take on this. I encourage you to seek it out. It was a long conversation with Heiner, sitting around his dining room table drinking tea a couple of weeks ago, that preceded my decision to post these views. It is distressing to me, however, that people reading my post seem to think that I am advocating making things up. I have re-read my post; this is not what I am saying! I am saying that to understand Chinese texts, we must read them as they were intended to be read. And OF COURSE " there is a big difference between fundamentalism and actually trying to learn from past physicians e.g. understanding how THEY thought and hence the treatments they used for " their view " on disease. " I am slightly astounded that I have been read as though I am saying otherwise. Perhaps because there is an impression of having beaten a dead horse, people are simply responding to what they believe I am saying, based on what others have said here in the past? respectfully, Thea Elijah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Jason, You wrote, " ... I do find it interesting that I have never seen anything in Chinese that suggests that we should just be making stuff up. If this is the way classics were to be read, I think we should be able to find some evidence in the immense number of resources that exist commentating on the classics that have been written in Chinese over the last 1800+ years. " From reading Paul Unshulds, History of pharmaceutics, which follows 4 main currents of the Shen Nong Ben cao, it seems that some pretty major theorizing happened throughout the last 1500 years. In the original Ben Cao, herbal usages were written about, but the action was not, or only very briefly discussed. For example Chuan Xiong was said to be good for headache, but it did not explain why it was good or how it worked. Starting around 1000 AD is when physician scholars tried to explain the why, which lead to many debates as, in a sense, they were " making it up " . They were basically combining the theories of systemic correspondence (ie five element), a confucian philosophy presented in the early acu classics, with the Taoist knowledge of plant usage. It seems that the theories of how herbs worked was constantly modified right up to our present era. Scholars have agreed and disagreed on the how and why for a very long time. Throughout history, new herbs were constantly added to the Ben Cao from local folk sources within China and from foreign lands outside. Each time a new one was added, theories about how it worked had to be developed. I am sure that there was a lot of theorizing and debating that took place over this. Again, it seems that in Paul's investigations, many authors of " source texts " did not agree. I am not at all sure about how effective the use of aromatic oils placed on Acu points are, or what, if any, references exist for this usage. This is obviously different than having a debate over why Chuan Xiong can relieve a headache, as the result is clear and the method of administration is the same, only the theory of why may differ. In the case of oils, if no references exist, then the whole concept is brand new and will need much investigation to verify it's place in our medicine- as both the proof that it works and the theory of why it works will have to be agreed upon. Of course being able to back ones ideas up with classical sources is good, but in reality it is how the herb preforms in clinic that is the most important. As Fei Bo Xiong, 17 century I believe, said: " Skillful action is of necessity based on customary rules Reality, however, is rarely so well behaved " Trevor , " " wrote: > > Interesting post. However, I do find it interesting that I have never seen > anything in Chinese that suggests that we should just be making stuff up. If > this is the way classics were to be read, I think we should be able to find > some evidence in the immense number of resources that exist commentating on > the classics that have been written in Chinese over the last 1800+ years. Of > course, I am always open to someone presenting some sources that support > such a stance, but without this, such liberties, IMO, are only a nice story. > > > > > Finally, there is a big difference between fundamentalism and actually > trying to learn from past physicians e.g. understanding how THEY thought and > hence the treatments they used for " their view " on disease. Making up > interpretations based on owns current world view, misunderstandings of > Chinese terms, and predilections towards things e.g. more esoteric, may > satisfy one's creative (and spiritual) stance, however, it is a clearly a > slippery slope when unraveling the depths of Chinese medicine. > > > > As we have seen to of had this discussion a few times in the past, I do not > think I need to beat a dead horse. > > > > My two cents... > > > > -Jason Acupuncture > > > > > > > www.ChineseMedicinedoc.com > > > > > > > > > > > On Behalf Of Thea Elijah > > > > > Oh. > > From this example, and the many more that followed over the years, > Elisabeth made it clear that the descriptions in classical texts were > meant to be read as signifiers, rather than parameters. Elisabeth > explained-- and Jeffrey Yuen also states this frequently in his > lectures-- that the physical symptoms listed are not to be taken as > physical symptoms only, but energetic descriptions somewhat akin to > personals ads (where we are meant to read between the lines and > understand what is implied by " long walks after midnight " or some such > phrase). > > There is clearly a rigor to this, but it is not the Euclidean rigor of > Western mind. It is a fractal method of signification such as the > Chinese explicitly utilize in the correspondences. In English, we > primarily use words to encapsulate meaning, like a walnut shell around > a walnut (this is what I mean by Euclidean style). Chinese is, as we > know, much more about associative thought which has its own rigor but > it is more of a fractal rigor, based on recognition of self-similar > forms (or energetics). I can speak at greater length about Euclidean- > style definitions and meanings (such we use in as the English > language) and how this differs from fractal-style methods of > signification (as comes more naturally in Chinese) if anyone wishes. > > The main point is, one is rarely ever going to be able to point to > classical source texts in order to find direct citations of the more > " esoteric " uses of the herbs-- if by this we are meaning the more > psycho-spiritual indications. These are all inherent directly within > the physical descriptions; it is a matter of understanding how to read > them. > > Elisabeth Rochat de la Vallee, Ted Kaptchuk, Jeffrey Yuen and Heiner > Fruehauf all speak to this, and teach from the rigor of this > methodology. I was discussing this with Heiner Fruehauf a couple of > weeks ago. We were talking about the perils of fundamentalism creeping > into Western understanding of Chinese medicine because of exactly this > common misunderstanding. I spoke (fractally!) about a friend of mine > who is a highly intelligent and meticulously scholarly fundamentalist > Christian, for whom if Jesus didn't say it, in so many words, then it > ain't Christianity. The fact that Jesus spoke in parables and > allegories, and that one CANNOT understand his words without > understanding them as signifiers rather than definitive parameters, > cut no more ice with him than it does with some interpreters of > Chinese medical descriptors in classical texts. > > Learning to interpret Chinese text as fractal signifiers requires a > great deal of rigor so that we can truly expand the fractal (as it was > meant to be expanded) without " making things up, " although we will > most certainly-- and intentionally-- be speaking things that may never > have been spoken before (as in the case of Jeffrey Yuen). > > Thea Elijah > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 I haven't seen any science regarding oils on acupoints. I would also like to see that. - Bill , " " wrote: > > Thanks for this study, I think this is a little different than (at least) I > am getting at. It is clear there are all sorts of substances that when come > into direct contact with pathogens will kill them, including oils. This > study talks about a tea tree oil wash. > > > > However this is much different than suggesting that by inhaling the scent or > putting them on an acupoint that it has similar effects. Maybe (I again) am > misunderstanding something, but it is my understanding that this is the way > people use oils, not to directly kill pathogens by putting it onto a wound > etc. > > > > I think this type of therapy (direct contact) makes perfect logical sense > (even though in the study ,mentioned the tea tree oil was not the most > effective treatment). What I am questioning is the use in CM, they way > people like JY are teaching. Many people in my area use oils and attribute > all sorts of functions to them (just from smelling or rubbing them on a > point etc). I have no opinion either way, but if they are scientifically > proven to do this, I would like to know. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > -Jason > > > > > On Behalf Of bill_schoenbart > Wednesday, December 23, 2009 12:21 PM > > Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? > > > > > > Here is a clinical study on the antibacterial effect of an essential oil: > > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15066738?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubm > ed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum > <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15066738?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pub > med.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum & ordinalpos=4> & ordinalpos=4 > > > <%40> , " " > <@> wrote: > > > > John, > > > > > > > > Your response is true, Chinese have used topical application of herbs for > > some time, but this really is not the point (and much different than our > > discussion here). I will try to elaborate. > > > > 1) If you are saying that such and such as in oil is antibacterial and > > antiviral than what is this mean. You said this such properties are > > scientifically documented. Please explain... > > > > 2) the way that people are using essential oils is much different than > what > > you describe via Moxa or topical plasters for the relief of pain. > > > > > > > > In regard to oils, I have no opinion either way about their efficacy. I > > personally enjoy them, but not in practice. > > > > So if we are going to claim something, e.g. that this or that oil is > > antimicrobial, let us just be clear in what this really means. Of course, > if > > just putting some bacteria or viruses in a bath of essential oils, kills > > them, this is so far from evidence that sniffing them or whatever will > have > > the same effect internally to actually get it of some infection. Can you > > present some data (that you mentioned) to help us? > > > > > > > > -Jason > > > > > > > > > > Acupuncture > > > > > > > > > > > > > > www.ChineseMedicinedoc.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40> > > [ > <%40> ] On Behalf Of > > Tuesday, December 22, 2009 7:49 PM > > > <%40> > > Re: Esoteric Herbology Book? > > > > > > > > > > > > Jason, > > you wrote: " Are you saying that if you put some oil on an acu point, > smell > > it, or just where it that it > > is proven to have these effects? I would like to see this data. " > > > > I'd like to just put out a perspective that's right underneath our nose, > > literally. > > The Chinese have been working with the oils of plants topically and > aerially > > for a long time... > > mugwort is burned and applied directly on the skin, where essential oils > are > > rubbed off and released. > > > > Cold moxa therapy, hot moxa therapy, plasters and oils are tried and true > > remedies. > > White flower oil, Po sum on oil, Wood lock oil, Kwan loong oil etc.. all > of > > these have aromatic oils > > that are applied to the skin with practical applications, especially > > pain-relief, shen-calming and exterior-releasing properties. > > Most of them contain some mixture of Bo he, Gui zhi etc... > > > > Another thought is what happens when we boil herbs... and the aromatics > > permeate through the patient's kitchen? > > or what about the " breathing herbs " tradition where the patient covers > their > > heads under a towel and breathes in herbs such as ma huang, jing jie, bai > > zhi etc. ? > > > > The Europeans, especially the Germans and French have done the most > > analytical research on essential oils > > and it's effects on physiology. An instructive book on the subject is > > " Advanced Aromatherapy.. the science of essential oil therapy " by Kurt > > Schnaubelt, Ph.D. > > > > K > > > > > > > > > > > > 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.