shen nong ben cao con't

[Guest guest]

Herman, Lonny, John, et al,

 

 

 

Thanks for the reply; I will try to comment as best I can on your many

questions. First of all, we should first put into context the shen nong ben

cao jing. This text's material was written around 200CE and is essentially

our first materia medica. The author was daoist. This book definitely had

wide influence and many versions have existed throughout the centuries.

However, if Lonny, or others, have some lost version that differs from

China's current versions, it would be very helpful for them to upload a

scanned page so that we can see the actual differences.

 

 

 

There is no question that this text has quite a different slant than modern

TCM. For example, an important component is its alchemical ideas such as

achieving immortality (literally), gaining supernatural powers and

abilities, flying in the sky, warding off demons and ghosts etc.. It was

asked, what was the significance that Cinnabar and other toxic elements are

at the forefront of the book and represent a certain makeup of this materia

medica. Quite simply, this book is a comprehensive materia medica (of the

time) of substances that not only treat disease but aid in immortality. It

was believed that Cinnabar had many magical properties as well as an

important component in making elixirs for immortality. Actually many people

believe that such Daoists that took the elixirs started to believe they

could fly etc. simply due to toxicity. Since the quest for immortality was

the ultimate goal for many of these Daoists such medicinals are listed

first.

 

 

 

However, such grandiose achievements as flying in the sky have little to do

with our modern concept of " spiritual " nor provide any evidence that for

example ming refers to destiny. It only demonstrates the inclusion of an

alchemical thread that runs through Chinese history. For example Li

Shi-Zhen, who had a great interest in demonology, in his Comprehensive

Outline of the Materia Medica, talks about tao ren in the " treatment of all

manner of ghostly or demonic influences. "

 

 

 

So I concede that there is clearly a shamanic, Taoist alchemy, Confucian

alchemy thread that does not appear in " mainstream " Chinese medicine. These

ideas certainly pop their head up here and there in various texts,

specifically from authors who had an interest like Li Shi-Zhen. But in most

cases these types of discussions are missing from most medical texts. Quite

simply, I see these as two separate currents that intersect here and there.

One is focusing on the internal cultivation of the practitioner the other is

focused on healing patients.

 

 

 

More importantly, later doctors such as Li criticized these early practices

for example of " ingesting mercury for the purposes of achieving alchemical

transmutation and immortality. " Such criticisms represent an important

evolutionary step in thought. Just because ancient doctors felt that the

sesame seed (a Daoist panacea) could cure everything, does not make it so.

Li criticized many of these practices saying that the claims of Daoists are

simply overblown, and that those who engage in immortality practices go

overboard. Does anyone disagree? Quite simply, Li was " a well-informed

individual bent on rectifying what he perceives to be inaccuracies and

superstitions in a body of knowledge he deeply respects. "

 

 

 

Just as shamanism may be appealing to some this has also been weeded out

most of Chinese medicine. Granted many may think this is a tragedy and hence

practice acupuncture that releases demons etc. but if you think for a minute

that what you are doing with a acupuncture demon treatment is even remotely

related to what shamans were doing han and pre-han dynasty then I have a

magical elixir I can sell you that will make you live forever.

 

 

 

Is this the spiritual or spirit with a capital " S " . that people are

referring to? Is this " the soul " of what people think has been stripped out

of TCM? I cannot argue that this might not be important to some, for me it

is just interesting historical banter and clinically really has no relevance

-- but that is just me. But this purging of material happened centuries

before the " communist " ever got a hold of Chinese medicine.

 

 

 

[Con't in next post]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Acupuncture

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

However, such grandiose achievements as flying in the sky have little to do with

our modern concept of " spiritual " nor provide any evidence that for example ming

refers to destiny.

 

 

Lonny: Hello Jason, your post focuses only on the external application of

cinnabar to lengthen life span. It wholly misses the use of the use of the term

" Cinnabar " throughout the spiritual literature as a metaphor for the

transmutation of ego (lead) into enlightened consciousness (gold). The herb

itself is used in formulas that " root or calm the shen, " small " s " to settle it

and make room for the emergence of Shen large " S " . And what is the shen rooted

in? Emptiness, the transcendence of self, small " s " .

 

One just has to keep digging a little deeper for the bigger picture to emerge.

It's easy to belittle the Daoist myths and superstitions and it's harder again

to grapple with what really is being pointed to that has depth and value.

 

" Making the body light " certainly can refer externally to the Daoist myth of

flying. But the inner meaning points to the transparency of illuminated

awareness evident as yang as the force of heaven builds internally and evidences

in the brightness of the eyes.

 

Notice in " Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, " the definitive documentary on the

Qing dynasty, that the Jade Fox cannot fly as high as the others and seems

heavy. This is a direct statement on the lower degree of her spiritual

attainment and impure motive.

 

Regards, Lonny

[Guest guest]

There is no question that many daoist (and others) were focused on

transmutation of ego into enlightened consciousness. I agree that this may

be important. I agree that as practitioners this might be something to

consider. But these types of methods are not how doctors were treating

patients, at least according to major medical texts like SHL, JGYL, piweilun

etc etc etc.

 

 

 

-

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Lonny

Friday, March 12, 2010 10:25 AM

 

Re: shen nong ben cao con't

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, such grandiose achievements as flying in the sky have little to do

with our modern concept of " spiritual " nor provide any evidence that for

example ming refers to destiny.

 

Lonny: Hello Jason, your post focuses only on the external application of

cinnabar to lengthen life span. It wholly misses the use of the use of the

term " Cinnabar " throughout the spiritual literature as a metaphor for the

transmutation of ego (lead) into enlightened consciousness (gold). The herb

itself is used in formulas that " root or calm the shen, " small " s " to settle

it and make room for the emergence of Shen large " S " . And what is the shen

rooted in? Emptiness, the transcendence of self, small " s " .

 

One just has to keep digging a little deeper for the bigger picture to

emerge. It's easy to belittle the Daoist myths and superstitions and it's

harder again to grapple with what really is being pointed to that has depth

and value.

 

" Making the body light " certainly can refer externally to the Daoist myth of

flying. But the inner meaning points to the transparency of illuminated

awareness evident as yang as the force of heaven builds internally and

evidences in the brightness of the eyes.

 

Notice in " Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, " the definitive documentary on the

Qing dynasty, that the Jade Fox cannot fly as high as the others and seems

heavy. This is a direct statement on the lower degree of her spiritual

attainment and impure motive.

 

Regards, Lonny

 

0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2741 - Release 03/12/10 02:42:00

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Jason: There is no question that many daoist (and others) were focused on

transmutation of ego into enlightened consciousness. I agree that this maybe

important. I agree that as practitioners this might be something to consider.

But these types of methods are not how doctors were treating patients, at least

according to major medical texts like SHL, JGYL, piweilun etc etc etc.

 

 

Lonny: Well, now we've come a long way. Very good. Certainly there's historical

precedent that physicians were treating this way. Hur Jun's words regarding ego

transcendence and the realization of the miraculous, impersonal, and universal

provide a perfect example. Sun Si Miao, unless I'm mistaken, wrote calligraphic

characters, burned them, and rubbed the ashes on his patients.

Most importantly, a great many of us are treating this way now. This

isn't just something we think " might be something to consider " but what we have

actually given our lives to, some of us 30 years in the context of the medicine.

What I have offered in my own work is a historic perspective and a synthesis

that transcends it (I hope!). I was well aware of Unschuld's translation of the

SNBC when I published my original work. When I queried experts on my

interpretation of ming as " destiny " the answer that came back was, " Technically

we can't say that, but the message is important and one that needs to be said " .

This from leading scholars, translators, sinologists, practitioners, and Daoist

lineage holders.

I openly admit, and have never made a secret of the fact, that I went

through history looking to confirm what I was actually doing daily in my

clinical practice. I asked, " What if I read the character ming in the SNBC as

" destiny " ? Can I find a lineage of thought throughout the medicine and culture

that supports this? " I, and many others, believe that I have. Perhaps it has

only ever been a minority view. But it seems clear that I, and others, have

provided enough evidence that it cannot be ignored and certainly should not be

denigrated.

It only makes sense that, from our vantage point in this global world,

a synthesis and top down perspective is possible that has never occurred before.

It's interesting to me that my work has only ever been criticized on technical

grounds but never on theoretical or practical grounds.

 

It is my conclusion that Chinese medicine is huge and that many of us could

evidence a lot more interest in what we don't already know.

 

Medicine cannot be separated from philosophy. We may note, for example, that the

politics that avoid the hard issues of economic and social justice based on

materialistic values wait until the twin towers come down and then initiates

" surgical " strikes against the enemy. This is exactly the same way that the

medicine based on materialistic values waits until illness arrives to treat it.

And the outcome of a materialistic value system is the same across all fields in

which it is expressed as we've seen in the financial sector over the last few

years.

 

One thing is certain, to have a life is to have a destiny and the outcome of

that destiny is determined by the choices we make both consciously and

unconsciously. Perhaps some of us might agree that one of the highest purposes

of medicine is to increase the percentage of consciously made choices.

 

Regards, Lonny

 

Yi, the legendary master archer, can teach you how to shoot, but he

cannot make you hit the bull's-eye. Wang Liang, the famous warrior,

can teach you how to handle a battle cart, but he cannot prevent you

from toppling over. In the same vein, the essential details of the art of

medicine can be communicated through words, but their inner meaning cannot be

fully transmitted through the medium of language; they can be expressed through

the rationale of numbers, but they cannot be fully understood through this

rationale alone. When faced with the unlimited potential of life's changes,

therefore, one must ultimately rely on the truth that flows from one's own heart

rather than on the rigid adherence to orthodox principles—otherwise loss will be

certain.– FROM FANG XIAORU (MING DYNASTY),

" The Physician in Touch with the Source " (Translated by Heiner Freuhauf for the

introduction to my 2nd text)

[Guest guest]

When I say, " Most importantly, a great many of us are treating this way now. "

I'm not implying that we burn calligraphic characters and rub ashes on our

patients! Though I wouldn't " write it off " .

[Guest guest]

Lonny: Perhaps some of us might agree that one of the highest purposes of

medicine is to increase the percentage of consciously made choices

 

Daniel: Ultimately, all the academic discussions about how to interpret or

translate this or that Chinese word aside - we must, in the end, be pragmatic

and grounded in clinical reality. And this statement of Lonny's pretty much

hits the bull's eye. I find as a practitioner with a conscience, I eventually

hit a serious ethical wall when after years of practice, I felt I was engaged in

far far too much collusion with my patients - collusion in their ongoing process

of sleepwalking their lives through an endless stream of poor choices. Most of

the things patients come to us for help with have a very significant basis in

lifestyle and life choice. So we have a choice to make. Do we just alleviate

symptoms and never ever confront anything deeper in the patient (are we just

about providing unexamined comfort?) - or do we get really serious about holding

our patients fully accountable for their choices and their responsibilities to

that which is bigger. The former course, is arguably, not even medicine but

collusion of the worst kind. The latter perspective is the high art of

medicine. And is so exquisitely designed to be a springboard

from which to engage our patients - it's always a terrible waste not to use it

as such.

My practice is much more rewarding since I started to get serious about this.

Its also busier. The interesting thing I have found is that our patients are

actually very interested in a discussion about the truth of their lives (a few

aren't and I may lose them, but I seem to gain far more to offset that).

[Guest guest]

(see below inserts)

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Lonny

 

 

 

 

 

Lonny: Well, now we've come a long way. Very good. Certainly there's

historical precedent that physicians were treating this way. Hur Jun's words

regarding ego transcendence and the realization of the miraculous,

impersonal, and universal provide a perfect example. Sun Si Miao, unless I'm

mistaken, wrote calligraphic characters, burned them, and rubbed the ashes

on his patients.

 

And who still practices this way? Actually Sun Si-Miao did

many many quirky practices that Later practitioners did not follow. At this

time, people rubbed dog poo under a full moon to cure night blindness. Later

generations, after time testing, decided this does not work. So I am unsure

of what your point is here. But, if someone is using such practices in their

clinic and has over and over gotten clear results then by all means please

write up these case studies so we all can learn from them. Otherwise, this

is just historical entertainment as far as I'm concerned.

 

 

Lonny: Most importantly, a great many of us are treating this way now.

 

I am just curious what practices you are talking about? Do

you burn Chinese characters and rub the ashes on your patients? Do you throw

spears in the corner of rooms to kill evil spirits? From what I have read

from Lonny and others that practice this " spiritual " medicine, their methods

are nothing remotely like these ancient doctors practiced. Just because Sun

Si-Miao practiced in a eccentric way does not validate the idea that

modern new age integration of Chinese medicine has some classical basis.

 

But from a practical side, it would be interesting to see some case study

that actually demonstrate these concepts in action. We have gone around and

around talking about this and that and have seen nothing really substantial

demonstrating these obscure " classical " ideas in action. It is really easy

to say one must practice from the heart, but how does this change one's

treatment? What does this really mean? I can say I practice 100% from the

heart, but this does not change my herbal prescribing -- I prescribed based

on patterns.

 

Lonny: This isn't just something we think " might be something to consider "

but what we have actually given our lives to, some of us 30 years in the

context of the medicine.

 

the reason I say " might be something to consider " is because

quite simply it is not necessary for practice of medicine. It is only a

given individual's preference.

 

Lonny: When I queried experts on my interpretation of ming as " destiny " the

answer that came back was, " Technically we can't say that, but the message

is important and one that needs to be said " . This from leading scholars,

translators, sinologists, practitioners, and Daoist lineage holders. I

openly admit, and have never made a secret of the fact, that I went through

history looking to confirm what I was actually doing daily in my clinical

practice.

 

I think if this was said in the beginning there would have

been no arguments. As you say, no sinologists or educated Chinese medicine

practitioner will agree that ming = destiny. They clearly stated,

" technically we can't say that " . However, I would love to see a list of

sinologists and translators who think that it is important to misrepresent

what classical Chinese authors said because the message is so " important. "

My experience with translators and sinologists is that they could care less

about the proving some point and strive to represent things as accurately as

possible.

 

Lonny: I asked, " What if I read the character ming in the SNBC as " destiny " ?

Can I find a lineage of thought throughout the medicine and culture that

supports this? " I, and many others, believe that I have.

 

 

 

As stated, the philosophy and classical texts one can justify anything one

likes. When one sets out on a mission how can they fail? The only can fail

in representing something as truthfully as possible. I do not think we can

hide behind the idea that " texts can be read on multiple levels " --

therefore having free reign to say what we want. This is just creative MSU.

 

Lonny: Perhaps it has only ever been a minority view.

 

this is for sure! And I think we must go back your original

claims about " S " pirit and medicine. But again, citing Sun Si-Miao's quarky

treatment methods gives little credence to supporting our modern

superimposition of spirit on classical texts.

 

Lonny: But it seems clear that I, and others, have provided enough evidence

that it cannot be ignored and certainly should not be denigrated.

It only makes sense that, from our vantage point in this global world, a

synthesis and top down perspective is possible that has never occurred

before. It's interesting to me that my work has only ever been criticized on

technical grounds but never on theoretical or practical grounds.

 

1. The evidence you present, if I'm hearing you correctly,

really only revolves around your interpretations. 2. actually it can be

ignored and is by the majority of doctors. 3. These doctors practice

medicine a high level without taking such ideas into consideration. This is

not at all to say that your ideas are not important to you and even others.

Let us not think that one must believe in your " philosophy " to be a good

doctor, a compassionate human being, or even " enlightened. "

 

But as far as I am concerned, the criticisms I have strictly revolve around

misrepresenting classical texts. Consequently theory built upon

misrepresentations is on flimsy grounds. I have no opinion about the

practical applications of your ideas. Although, they might not be strictly

Chinese medicine, they are probably quite good. That has never been my beef.

Consequently once we're over this technical conversation, I look forward to

seeing case studies of how Lonny integrates all the ideas. This is always

the most interesting to me.

 

But if we one keep getting technical, since we have dissected this shen nong

ben cao passage fairly well, I would be happy to look at some of the NeiJing

quotes involving " spirit " (Shen). (I have already presented some) I think we

will find the same thing in many instances. That is, my original thesis

here, that many instances where people are interpreting this grandiose idea

of spirit onto the word shen is really only talking about something much

more basic and down to earth.

 

Lonny: Medicine cannot be separated from philosophy.

 

if you are referring to yin yang etc. I completely agree.

But medicine can definitely be separated from shamanistic, spiritual,

religious, matters of consciousness, alchemical or whatever else we seem to

be talking about, and can be completely effective. Actually TCM, in, as you

say " materialistic " state, is completely effective without the injection of

all of this extra " stuff. " This is my other beef. When people from this

" spiritual camp " think that TCM (or the majority of CM) because it does not

inject these " spiritual " ideas into the medicine, that it somehow not

effective or somehow inferior. As a stated before, CM does not differentiate

treating physical, and emotional problems. They are completely integrated,

and it works. And I am sure Lonny's system works. There are many roads to

healing and I think it is a complete misperception that TCM is missing some

major component and must be inferior.

 

Lonny: We may note, for example, that the politics that avoid the hard

issues of economic and social justice based on materialistic values wait

until the twin towers come down and then initiates " surgical " strikes

against the enemy. This is exactly the same way that the medicine based on

materialistic values waits until illness arrives to treat it.

 

this is just incorrect. TCM in many places talks about

treating illness before it arrives and I personally do this every day with

patients and without injecting any new age, spiritual, or religious beliefs

on to the medicine or them.

 

 

One thing is certain, to have a life is to have a destiny and the outcome of

that destiny is determined by the choices we make both consciously and

unconsciously. Perhaps some of us might agree that one of the highest

purposes of medicine is to increase the percentage of consciously made

choices.

 

 

 

whatever you say... but very simply, " life " does not equal destiny in

linguistics and classical writers often use the word " life " without any

implication of destiny.

 

Thanks for the convo,

 

-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

But from a practical side, it would be interesting to see some case study that

actually demonstrate these concepts in action.

 

Lonny: Actually, Jason, I've published about 30 case studies. Three of these

were about 23 pages each. As self critique, in the past I was too interested in

the psychological. Unfortunately I haven't done any recently to reflect my

current understanding. Still, I think these hole up rather well.

 

For example: Contemporary and Acupuncture, Churchill

Livingston. Philidelphia, 2002

[Guest guest]

the reason I say " might be something to consider " is because

quite simply it is not necessary for practice of medicine. It is only a given

individual's preference.

 

Lonny: Well, actually it is necessary for the practice of holistic and integral

medicine.

 

Jason:But medicine can definitely be separated from shamanistic, spiritual,

religious, matters of consciousness, alchemical or whatever else we seem to

be talking about, and can be completely effective.

 

Lonny: It depends on what one thinks " effective " means.

 

Jason: As a stated before, CM does not differentiate

treating physical, and emotional problems. They are completely integrated,

and it works.

 

Lonny: Not according to Hur Jun.

 

Jason:

this is just incorrect. TCM in many places talks about

treating illness before it arrives and I personally do this every day with

patients and without injecting any new age, spiritual, or religious beliefs

on to the medicine or them.

 

Lonny: You completely missed my point. I was pointing to the fact that medicine

and philosophy are inextricably linked.

 

Jason:but very simply, " life " does not equal destiny in

linguistics and classical writers often use the word " life " without any

implication of destiny.

 

Lonny: Life span is the exterior dimension, destiny is the interior dimension.

Nothing could be clearer.

[Guest guest]

Lonny: Not according to Hur Jun.

 

Lonny

Could you give us a reference where Hur Jun is referring to this in his book?

Title and chapter would be nice. In Chinese or Korean would be even better. My

self as well as some of my Korean colleges would like to explore this further.

Thanks in advance

Gabe Fuentes

 

 

 

 

________________________________

Lonny <revolution

 

Fri, March 12, 2010 7:13:54 PM

Re: shen nong ben cao con't

 

 

 

the reason I say " might be something to consider " is because

quite simply it is not necessary for practice of medicine. It is only a given

individual's preference.

 

Lonny: Well, actually it is necessary for the practice of holistic and integral

medicine.

 

Jason:But medicine can definitely be separated from shamanistic, spiritual,

religious, matters of consciousness, alchemical or whatever else we seem to

be talking about, and can be completely effective.

 

Lonny: It depends on what one thinks " effective " means.

 

Jason: As a stated before, CM does not differentiate

treating physical, and emotional problems. They are completely integrated,

and it works.

 

Lonny: Not according to Hur Jun.

 

Jason:

this is just incorrect. TCM in many places talks about

treating illness before it arrives and I personally do this every day with

patients and without injecting any new age, spiritual, or religious beliefs

on to the medicine or them.

 

Lonny: You completely missed my point. I was pointing to the fact that medicine

and philosophy are inextricably linked.

 

Jason:but very simply, " life " does not equal destiny in

linguistics and classical writers often use the word " life " without any

implication of destiny.

 

Lonny: Life span is the exterior dimension, destiny is the interior dimension.

Nothing could be clearer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Can you upload one or two to the group or send me them privately?

 

 

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Lonny

Friday, March 12, 2010 8:02 PM

 

Re: shen nong ben cao con't

 

 

 

 

 

But from a practical side, it would be interesting to see some case study

that actually demonstrate these concepts in action.

 

Lonny: Actually, Jason, I've published about 30 case studies. Three of these

were about 23 pages each. As self critique, in the past I was too interested

in the psychological. Unfortunately I haven't done any recently to reflect

my current understanding. Still, I think these hole up rather well.

 

For example: Contemporary and Acupuncture, Churchill

Livingston. Philidelphia, 2002

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

It is funny for all the things that are just " clear " have so much debate. I

guess we choose to disagree on the below points.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Lonny

Friday, March 12, 2010 8:14 PM

 

Re: shen nong ben cao con't

 

 

 

 

 

 

the reason I say " might be something to consider " is because

quite simply it is not necessary for practice of medicine. It is only a

given individual's preference.

 

Lonny: Well, actually it is necessary for the practice of holistic and

integral medicine.

 

Jason:But medicine can definitely be separated from shamanistic, spiritual,

religious, matters of consciousness, alchemical or whatever else we seem to

be talking about, and can be completely effective.

 

Lonny: It depends on what one thinks " effective " means.

 

Jason: As a stated before, CM does not differentiate

treating physical, and emotional problems. They are completely integrated,

and it works.

 

Lonny: Not according to Hur Jun.

 

Jason:

this is just incorrect. TCM in many places talks about

treating illness before it arrives and I personally do this every day with

patients and without injecting any new age, spiritual, or religious beliefs

on to the medicine or them.

 

Lonny: You completely missed my point. I was pointing to the fact that

medicine and philosophy are inextricably linked.

 

Jason:but very simply, " life " does not equal destiny in

linguistics and classical writers often use the word " life " without any

implication of destiny.

 

Lonny: Life span is the exterior dimension, destiny is the interior

dimension. Nothing could be clearer.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Jason,

 

I hope that doesn't mean that you disagree with " medicine and philosophy are

inextricably linked " because if that's so, we'd have to start all over again.

 

Herman

 

, " " wrote:

>

> It is funny for all the things that are just " clear " have so much debate. I

> guess we choose to disagree on the below points.

>

>

>

> -Jason

>

>

>

>

> On Behalf Of Lonny

> Friday, March 12, 2010 8:14 PM

>

> Re: shen nong ben cao con't

the reason I say " might be something to consider " is because

> quite simply it is not necessary for practice of medicine. It is only a

> given individual's preference.

>

> Lonny: Well, actually it is necessary for the practice of holistic and

> integral medicine.

>

> Jason:But medicine can definitely be separated from shamanistic, spiritual,

> religious, matters of consciousness, alchemical or whatever else we seem to

> be talking about, and can be completely effective.

>

> Lonny: It depends on what one thinks " effective " means.

>

> Jason: As a stated before, CM does not differentiate

> treating physical, and emotional problems. They are completely integrated,

> and it works.

>

> Lonny: Not according to Hur Jun.

>

> Jason:

> this is just incorrect. TCM in many places talks about

> treating illness before it arrives and I personally do this every day with

> patients and without injecting any new age, spiritual, or religious beliefs

> on to the medicine or them.

>

> Lonny: You completely missed my point. I was pointing to the fact that

> medicine and philosophy are inextricably linked.

>

> Jason:but very simply, " life " does not equal destiny in

> linguistics and classical writers often use the word " life " without any

> implication of destiny.

>

> Lonny: Life span is the exterior dimension, destiny is the interior

> dimension. Nothing could be clearer.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Daniel,

 

Of course some people like talk therapy, and which has the potential to lead the

patient to living a more ethical life or whatever else you feel is important.

But do you think that people that do not use talk therapy (or even talk about

spiritual stuff) are treating at an inferior level? Do you think that a properly

constructed herbal formula or an acupuncture cannot also achieve the same

result? I am quite certain that bringing the body into balance (through herbs

and acu) can have (just) as a profound impact on all of these emotional/

spiritual / ethical levels- as much a talk therapy.

 

For example, I needled a young woman once who had GOD talk to her (at least she

beliefs this). She still considers that session one of the most influential days

in her life. Did I talk about this before hand, no! Did I just treat what was in

front of me (the pattern)? YES! What about the sex addict who no longer has

problems due to treating his Liver fire? Or just the person who now craves (and

eats) healthy organic locally grown food now (instead of fast food / junk food

that they craved) by treating their Spleen damp. I have story after story like

this. And yes using just TCM / CM.

 

I understand you and some others like to use psychology, or whatever you entitle

it, to work with your patients, and I think this is great. But if you think that

not doing this is somehow less " effective " at achieving these more profound

changes then I beg to differ.

 

It is not that I (or even Chinese " TCM " practitioners) don't talk to my (their)

patients, that is misunderstanding the issue. Many times I / they do. Actually

check out Transforming Emotions with (Zhang) for some great

case studies of how (normal) TCM doctors engage patients on this

psycho-spiritual level. This type of conversation is quite routine in some

clinics that I have studied in and not some common in others. But I am quite

certain that one DOES NOT have to do this to get profound results. There are

many roads.

 

Furthermore, do we think we are just alleviating symptoms with TCM / CM? Again

this is a misunderstanding of the full potential of the medicine. For example,

if one always gives hu po or some sleep aid like Confucian pillow to every

insomnia patient then yes you are just treating symptoms, and there are some

practitioners that do this. However because TCM / CM is inherently holistic when

one treats the correct pattern then yes the sleep gets better but also their

emotions change, other symptoms improve, their life decisions etc. change, and

many times people just have positive movement in various aspects of their lives.

I have seen this over and over. But of course one has to treat correctly and not

just give symptomatic therapies. This is though basic CM.

 

But, Daniel, I applaud you for stepping up and confronting these issues with

your patients - I many times do also. But different practitioners do this in

different ways; some just by pure example. For example, sometimes I only talk

about how I deal with life and let the patient see my choices and never engage

them directly.

 

Finally, I think every patient needs something a little different and one must

learn to read people and be flexible in their approach. Therefore no one

methodology is best for everyone.

 

Thoughts?

 

-

[Guest guest]

Herman: I hope that doesn't mean that you disagree with " medicine and

philosophy are inextricably linked " because if that's so, we'd have to start

all over again.

 

 

 

1. I tried to explain this in the previous email. This is what I

believe.

 

 

 

" if you are referring to yin yang etc. I completely agree.

But medicine can definitely be separated from shamanistic, spiritual,

religious, matters of consciousness, alchemical or whatever else we seem to

be talking about, and can be completely effective. " - I also in my last

email explained this " effective " - But yes som aspects are linked and

aspects of philosophy can be stripped.

 

 

 

2. My response was in response to with Lonny's statement of: " .

medicine based on

materialistic values waits until illness arrives to treat it. " - This is a

little tricky because one can interpret this many ways. But quite simply

even using TCM / CM from a purely technical perspective one can surely treat

illness before it arrives. I personally believe that TCM / CM is inherently

holistic and contains mind, body, and spirit all in one.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

2. My response was in response to with Lonny's statement of: " .

medicine based on

materialistic values waits until illness arrives to treat it. " - This is a

little tricky because one can interpret this many ways. But quite simply

even using TCM / CM from a purely technical perspective one can surely treat

illness before it arrives. I personally believe that TCM / CM is inherently

holistic and contains mind, body, and spirit all in one.

 

 

Lonny: Again, my metaphor had nothing to do with Chinese medicine. I was giving

an example of how medicine and philosophy are inextricably linked by linking

current political, biomedical, and economic outcomes to an underlying philosophy

based upon materialism.

[Guest guest]

Do you think that a properly

constructed herbal formula or an acupuncture cannot also achieve the same

result? I am quite certain that bringing the body into balance (through herbs

and acu) can have (just) as a profound impact on all of these emotional/

spiritual / ethical levels- as much a talk therapy.

 

Lonny: Jason, you are conflating shen, small " s' with Shen, Large " S " . As I said

in my original post, which Bob applauded, is that Spirit, Large " S " doesn't need

" therapy " . Hur Jun is pointing to an attainment that can be reached through

needles or herbs, etc.

 

" To treat before this stage, this is the terrain of healing the core—the heart;

to treat afterwards, this is the realm of dietary therapy, herbal therapy,

acupuncture, and moxibustion. Although there are these two types of therapeutic

paths, there is really only one core law of healing: All disease comes from the

heart. "

 

Rather, Hur Jun is pointing to a shift in identification from shen to SHEN:

 

" If you wish to bring about real healing, you must first and foremost treat a

person's heart. You must bring the heart on the right path, so that it can be

filled and sustained by a universal sense of truth. You must get it to a place

where it can safely abandon all doubting and worrying and obsessing in

senselessly looping patterns, where it can let go of any anxiety provoking

imbalances, and where it is willing to surrender all " me, me, me " and all " this

is his/her fault! " "

 

The body and mind are merely objects in consciousness (Shen, Large " S " ). Shen,

large, " S " exists entirely outside the domain of " patterns " . You can't " treat "

the Spirit. One can only create a context in treatment for the emergence of

Spirit into a patient's awareness and, at best, needles and herbs can provide a

higher state experience of an unrealized potential. But it is our own experience

and development in the face of our experience, the actual stage of development

in Spirit that we are holding as practitioners, that provides the motive force

and confidence in the possibility of this change within the patient.

 

This is a medicine practiced on the self first and foremost. " Bringing the body

into balance " has little to do with this aspect of medicine. What is being

pointed to by Hur Jun is a possibility for anyone in any level of physical

health as long as there isn't severe organic brain pathology.

 

Until this shift occurs to a 51% identification of self with Shen, Large " S " you

can treat patterns all you want but you have done not one thing to remove the

fundamental source of the problem at a root level.

 

Hur Jun: " This situation can be compared to the process of pruning tree branches

while neglecting the tap root, or to working downstream without awareness of the

properties of the wellspring. Is this not an ignorant way to go about the

business of medicine? If you wish to bring about real healing, you must first

and foremost treat a person's heart. "

 

You see, the heart here is referring to heart large " H " as the sources of

universal and not individual consciousness.

 

 

1. Jason, just so we know we are on the same page, perhaps you could write a bit

about the difference, in your own experience and intellectual understanding,

between the small shen and large Shen?

 

2. What is your understanding of the Chinese term ming4 as applied to destiny

and it's reltionship to ming4, " life " , " life span " , " command " . And how is this

related to the small and large Shen and enlightenment?

 

I would think that to translate appropriately one would have to have a

significant understanding of these usages, for example, so that when reading the

medicinal texts one would be able to determine if shen or SHEN is implied.

 

Thank you, Lonny

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the clarification.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Lonny

Saturday, March 13, 2010 3:51 PM

 

Re: shen nong ben cao con't

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. My response was in response to with Lonny's statement of: " .

medicine based on

materialistic values waits until illness arrives to treat it. " - This is a

little tricky because one can interpret this many ways. But quite simply

even using TCM / CM from a purely technical perspective one can surely treat

illness before it arrives. I personally believe that TCM / CM is inherently

holistic and contains mind, body, and spirit all in one.

 

Lonny: Again, my metaphor had nothing to do with Chinese medicine. I was

giving an example of how medicine and philosophy are inextricably linked by

linking current political, biomedical, and economic outcomes to an

underlying philosophy based upon materialism.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hur Jun is pointing to an attainment that can be reached through

needles or herbs, etc.

 

Meant " CAN'T "

[Guest guest]

Lonny,

 

 

 

1st: I'm not conflating anything and stick to my original statement.

 

 

 

2nd: I am a bit confused here, and feel this is turning into some giant word

game - I feel like I am arguing history with Glenn Beck. Since this is a

Chinese herb Academy, and we are talking about Chinese medicine -- and we

are treating people with herbs, diet therapy, moxibustion, and acupuncture -

it is my desire to focus on what most of us perceive as Chinese medicine.

You might believe that this is not the true Chinese medicine and that anyone

that uses herbs are acupuncture is somehow inferior (not treating the Heart,

Spirit or whatever else). But I just don't buy it.

 

 

 

You have quoted this Hur Jun paragraph over and over and honestly it is

pretty meaningless to me. There are literally millions of other paragraphs

that seem to be ignored. One can always find some little segment to support

their thesis. You happen to like this Korean doctor from the 1600s. Ok.. But

nothing tangible has been presented beyond that. Anyone can say anything,

but we have no clinical examples of how he (or you) uses these ideas in

practice. How did the " sage healers of ancient times heal the heart of

humanity " ? Nothing is ever stated or explained beyond just some criticism of

modern doctors. Did these ancient sages use Psychotherapy? shamanism? This

paragraph is completely opaque in this regard. Honestly, I prefer to look at

doctors who present their case studies and are actually healing people.

 

 

 

Furthermore, you're saying, through quoting Hur Jun, that *real* healing is

NOT using dietary therapy, herbal therapy, acupuncture, or moxibustion but

it is treating a person's heart. You also say, " you can treat patterns all

you want but you have done not one thing to remove the fundamental source of

the problem at a root level. " This is pretty much insulting everyone on this

list that practices actual Chinese medicine (herbs and acupuncture). Give me

a break. Honesty you clearly have a very poor understanding of CM's full

potential via the treatment of patterns. I completely question your

education and knowledge of Chinese medicine. And anyone, including Hur Jun,

who thinks they are beyond such treatments and just " heals " people's spirit

and destiny / heart or whatever else, is just full of themselves.

 

 

 

Hur Jun further states that such therapies (Chinese medicine, herbs and acu)

are " only used by average physicians who spring into action only after

disease has become apparent. " As my previous e-mail stated, this is just

incorrect and TCM / CM very effectively treats conditions before physical

disease manifests. So I guess, TCM / CM is treating through the heart??

 

 

 

You also say that the Spirit, Large " S " doesn't need therapy however Hur Jun

says " " To treat before this stage, this is the terrain of healing the

core-the heart " Notice the word " treat " . So it seems that he disagrees. You

say one's Spirit doesn't need 'therapy' but only real " healers " treat the

Spirit/through the heart. This seems like a bunch of doubletalk.

 

 

 

Just to be clear, are you not using herbs or acupuncture in your practice?

If you are not, then why are you on this list? If you are, then I guess you

are not practicing " real " healing (as you say) and hence are not even

practicing what you are preaching and are so adamantly arguing about.

 

 

 

I am done responding until someone produces some tangible examples of how

people are actually using these ideas in practice. People have asked over

and over for something more than this one paragraph from Hur Jun. I find it

odd that it seems you haven't even read anything else from Hur Jun and you

just keep quoting the same paragraph. Your argument is quite thin IMHO.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Lonny

Saturday, March 13, 2010 4:54 PM

 

Re: shen nong ben cao con't

 

 

 

 

 

Do you think that a properly

constructed herbal formula or an acupuncture cannot also achieve the same

result? I am quite certain that bringing the body into balance (through

herbs and acu) can have (just) as a profound impact on all of these

emotional/ spiritual / ethical levels- as much a talk therapy.

 

Lonny: Jason, you are conflating shen, small " s' with Shen, Large " S " . As I

said in my original post, which Bob applauded, is that Spirit, Large " S "

doesn't need " therapy " . Hur Jun is pointing to an attainment that can be

reached through needles or herbs, etc.

 

" To treat before this stage, this is the terrain of healing the core-the

heart; to treat afterwards, this is the realm of dietary therapy, herbal

therapy, acupuncture, and moxibustion. Although there are these two types of

therapeutic paths, there is really only one core law of healing: All disease

comes from the heart. "

 

Rather, Hur Jun is pointing to a shift in identification from shen to SHEN:

 

" If you wish to bring about real healing, you must first and foremost treat

a person's heart. You must bring the heart on the right path, so that it can

be filled and sustained by a universal sense of truth. You must get it to a

place where it can safely abandon all doubting and worrying and obsessing in

senselessly looping patterns, where it can let go of any anxiety provoking

imbalances, and where it is willing to surrender all " me, me, me " and all

" this is his/her fault! " "

 

The body and mind are merely objects in consciousness (Shen, Large " S " ).

Shen, large, " S " exists entirely outside the domain of " patterns " . You can't

" treat " the Spirit. One can only create a context in treatment for the

emergence of Spirit into a patient's awareness and, at best, needles and

herbs can provide a higher state experience of an unrealized potential. But

it is our own experience and development in the face of our experience, the

actual stage of development in Spirit that we are holding as practitioners,

that provides the motive force and confidence in the possibility of this

change within the patient.

 

This is a medicine practiced on the self first and foremost. " Bringing the

body into balance " has little to do with this aspect of medicine. What is

being pointed to by Hur Jun is a possibility for anyone in any level of

physical health as long as there isn't severe organic brain pathology.

 

Until this shift occurs to a 51% identification of self with Shen, Large " S "

you can treat patterns all you want but you have done not one thing to

remove the fundamental source of the problem at a root level.

 

Hur Jun: " This situation can be compared to the process of pruning tree

branches while neglecting the tap root, or to working downstream without

awareness of the properties of the wellspring. Is this not an ignorant way

to go about the business of medicine? If you wish to bring about real

healing, you must first and foremost treat a person's heart. "

 

You see, the heart here is referring to heart large " H " as the sources of

universal and not individual consciousness.

 

1. Jason, just so we know we are on the same page, perhaps you could write a

bit about the difference, in your own experience and intellectual

understanding, between the small shen and large Shen?

 

2. What is your understanding of the Chinese term ming4 as applied to

destiny and it's reltionship to ming4, " life " , " life span " , " command " . And

how is this related to the small and large Shen and enlightenment?

 

I would think that to translate appropriately one would have to have a

significant understanding of these usages, for example, so that when reading

the medicinal texts one would be able to determine if shen or SHEN is

implied.

 

Thank you, Lonny

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I look forward to your explication of Destiny, Orders, Life, and life span as

relates to understanding the meaning and purpose of a human life in Chinese

history. This discourse set the cultural, intellectual, and philosophical

context for the evolution and practice of the medicine. It would seem that in

order to understand the usage of words in texts, one would have to be familiar

with the multiple dimensions of their meanings.

 

 

Simply how are these characters related? :

 

Ming-Destiny,orders,fate, life, life span

Ming-Enlightenment, sun and moon, illumination, light

Ming-Sleep, meditation, hell

Ming-name

 

Seems like a simple question. Could you please address it?

 

Regards, Lonny

[Guest guest]

I find it a little odd that every time someone asks you a question or

requests that you disclose your sources, you decide not to answer and just

ask more questions (somehow meant to divert the conversation). I have no

interest in allowing you to steer this conversation into a philosophical

void where there is no such answer/resolution. I will wait for something of

substance, Mr. word man.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Lonny

Sunday, March 14, 2010 6:37 AM

 

Re: shen nong ben cao con't

 

 

 

 

 

I look forward to your explication of Destiny, Orders, Life, and life span

as relates to understanding the meaning and purpose of a human life in

Chinese history. This discourse set the cultural, intellectual, and

philosophical context for the evolution and practice of the medicine. It

would seem that in order to understand the usage of words in texts, one

would have to be familiar with the multiple dimensions of their meanings.

 

Simply how are these characters related? :

 

Ming-Destiny,orders,fate, life, life span

Ming-Enlightenment, sun and moon, illumination, light

Ming-Sleep, meditation, hell

Ming-name

 

Seems like a simple question. Could you please address it?

 

Regards, Lonny

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Jason,

 

It has taken me a while to respond because I’ve been traveling to

teach. The only reason I can comprehend for your constant rudeness is to

endeavor to make it so unpleasant for people to deal with you that few find it

worth the effort to hold you to establish the integrity of your position.

Perhaps you're not accustomed to being challenged, and perhaps it's been your

experience that people walk away once you've been sufficiently rude. I can’t

imagine a single premise in Chinese medicine important enough to compromise

one's dignity for. As to your assertion above regarding " substance, " I've been

perfectly transparent in identifying my sources in my texts and articles. Far

more transparent then you’ve been in responding to others on this site who

disagree with your translations or to my queries.

 

I find the statement, “ " .......it is important to face some truths. If you

don't read the original Chinese then people who do, are not likely to take what

you say very seriously†to be baseless. I have excellent working relationships

with many fluent readers of Classical Chinese. This oft repeated statement here

at CHA (to the point of superstitious incantation) should read only, " My

friends and I wont take anyone seriously whose reading of Classical Chinese

doesn't agree with ours " .

 

 

The practice of approaching the classic texts as if they are computer manuals

where characters have fixed, limited, and one dimensional meanings represents an

artificial imposition of scientific materialism on the medicine. I have always

found the notion of a one to one system of transliteration to be problematic for

this reason. Fixed readings of characters to often corresponds to seeing

patients as syndrome patterns that can be addressed by fixed point and herbal

prescriptions. Then we arrive at the pluralistic notion that, “if I identify

and treat the syndrome pattern I’ve treated the spirit. And anything I do is

as “spiritual†as anything that can be done. I can’t be judged.†When

one approaches the language with this kind of reductionism one sees only a

medicine that never existed-a medicine divorced from Spirit.

 

What is missing in all this is the critical distinction between spirit and

Spirit, beyond the merely abstract and intellectual which you have evidenced no

understanding of, or willingness to discuss.

 

As to providing “substance†to support my views, I’ve published 1500 fully

documented pages. As you have already found nothing of substance in Chinese

history and culture regarding the importance of Spirit to the practice of

medicine I don’t know what further I could submit that would suffice. It’s

telling how casually you dismiss Hur Jun, the most significant figure in the

history of Korean medicine when he disagrees with you. It’s interesting that

you ask for something of “substance†since that which we are discussing,

Spirit, has no substance. In this regard demonstrating “substance†goes

beyond defending the notion that only those who read Classical Chinese up to a

certain standard can be respected to comprehend the medicine or take it further.

Insisting on a narrow and concretized definition of a single character in an

ancient text represents only the avoidance of discussing the substance of the

medicine and actually demonstrating what one does, and does not know regarding

the place of Spirit in medicine. Frankly, I hardly think we know what it is and

yet I can think of nothing more important to take responsibility for and

discover together in this largely soulless and materialistic society at this

crucial point in history.

 

 

I am providing in a subsequent communication a letter from Mr. Heiner Freuhauf

stating, as I have asserted, that the issue of translating the character ming4

in the SNBC as “destiny†represents nothing more than preference for an

inner reading of the text. At this point it’s safe to say that such

interpretations come down to the value system of the reader. Let’s not pretend

it’s more than that.

 

 

Sincerely, Lonny Jarrett

[Guest guest]

From Heiner Freuhauf.

 

Lonny,

 

It appears to me that this argument is simply about translating the inner and

the outer dimensions of the text. " Nourishing Destiny " captures the

inner/spiritual meaning of the word ming, while " benefitting longevity " captures

the outer/physical meaning. My Chinese colleague Liu Lihong often quotes the

following line from the Yijing’s Dazhuan commentary in arguments like this:

" If you look at this text with the eyes of love and compassion, you will see

nothing but love and compassion; if you look at it with the eyes of wisdom, you

will see nothing but wisdom " --by extension, this means that the

multi-dimensionality of classical texts allows for different perspectives. If

you are looking at a text through the lenses of scientific materialism, you are

more prone to seeing only the physical dimensions reflected in the words, and

vice versa.

 

From a philological perspective, there are two points that can corroborate your

translation of yangming as “nourishing destinyâ€:

 

1) The primarily " spiritual " meaning of the term ming at the time the Shen Nong

bencao jing was written: during the 2nd century, the meaning of " life " and

" longevity " was inseparable from the original meaning of ming, " (heavenly)

command " (LIVE!). More specifically, 1,800 years ago ming made an inseparable

pair with the term xing (xingming), " (heavenly) human nature, " very much like

yin and yang and jing and shen were inseparable at the time. When translating

very ancient Chinese texts (Han Dynasty or before), regular dictionaries

(including ones for so-called classical Chinese) are generally insufficient.

Proper sinological procedure requires to establish a collection of passages from

extant literature written during the time in question, to see what the exact

etymological spectrum of meaning was for the word at the time of authorship. The

nuances of meaning in Chinese words vary greatly from one era to the next, and

it would be unwise to use 11th century or 19th century understanding of a word

to translate it in the context of a text from the 3rd century BCE. I am

attaching my personal collection of classical sources covering the era between

500 BC and 250 AD, which provide a comprehensive synthesis of the usage of ming

at the time when the Shen Nong bencao came into being: overall, it stood for

xingming, the " heavenly mandate of exercising heavenly virtues in the concrete

form of a physical body/lifetime; " more specifically, in contrast to xing, ming

referred to the shaping (“hardeningâ€) process of universal forces being

channeled into a concrete physical existence.

 

2) The full passage in the SNBCJ sentence in question reads " zhu yangming yi

yingtian, " which I would translate as: " [these herbs] nourish/cultivate ming to

achieve responsiveness to the mandate of Heaven.†No matter how ming is

translated here, the words yingtian make it clear that the author of this text

had a more expansive meaning of ming in mind than mere physical benefit. This

reading is corroborated in the 3rd century literature collection Wenxuan, where

the piece " Yangsheng lun " (Treatise on Nourishing Life) uses the first sentence

of the SNBCJ as an example that illustrates the sages’ more expansive,

" destiny " oriented approach to medicine, in contrast to a more material approach

by the commoner.

[Guest guest]

Lonny,

 

 

 

I'm sorry that you find it rude when someone asks for sources and examples (e.g.

case studies). People can say anything, and without some academic rigor and

sourcing we can easily end up with a bunch of westerners with many times

" un-educated " opinions. This is not directed at anyone particular.

 

 

 

For the record, not only is the quote about reading the " original Chinese "

(below from your last post) taken out of context, I didn’t even say it. I am

pretty sure it was Thomas. However, you make it sound like this stance is that,

no one can have an opinion about anything if they can't read Chinese. This is

far from the point.

 

 

 

I will not speak for Thomas, but my only beef is if you are going to discuss the

intricacies of Classical Chinese and the translations and cannot read Chinese,

then yes I personally will not take you seriously. If you are going to disagree

with the centuries of commentaries, then yes I think you should have a pretty

good source to present.

 

 

 

Finally, no one has ever denied that classical Chinese cannot be interpreted

many ways. In addition, I for one have never suggested one should have a

one-to-one system of translation. I merely ask if one is going to have an

opinion that one substantiate it – or say it is just “one’s beliefâ€.

Your portrayal of people who do not find " SPIRIT†in all the classical texts,

as reading these texts like a computer manual (with fixed meanings) or through

the eyes of scientific materialism is really just showing ignorance on the

perspectives in Chinese history. Again how can we even have a conversation about

how to read classical texts (let alone Chinese) when you can't even read them?

 

 

 

To be clear, I co-authored a paper specifically discussing why one should not

use fixed meanings for translation. Toward a Working Methodology for Translating

 

<Chinese Medicine/wp-content/uploads/Pract_articles/Translating\

%20TCM%20Lantern.pdf> :

 

Chinese Medicine/practitioners/articles/

 

 

 

But excepting multiple meanings and possibilities does not mean one can still

just insert any meaning they like. There are still rules.

 

 

 

I second someone's previous observation that you tend to polarize positions

making them seem ridiculous. This is what you have done here in your post. For

example, saying that I have found nothing of importance regarding Spirit in

Chinese history and culture is so far from my point in my previous posts and

something that I have never said.

 

 

 

I have found it completely impossible to have a discussion on this topic with

you because you won't address anything directly. Hence, why you may sense some

rudeness when I keep asking for some source (which I have found lacking) etc.

For this I apologize, but at this point I have no intention of trying to work

this out.

 

 

 

So besides all of this, I am happy to agree to disagree…

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Lonny

 

 

 

 

 

I find the statement, “ " .......it is important to face some truths. If you

don't read the original Chinese then people who do, are not likely to take what

you say very seriously†to be baseless. I have excellent working

relationships with many fluent readers of Classical Chinese. This oft repeated

statement here at CHA (to the point of superstitious incantation) should read

only, " My friends and I wont take anyone seriously whose reading of Classical

Chinese doesn't agree with ours " .