Guest guest Posted April 16, 2010 Report Share Posted April 16, 2010 Well I didn't say " intelligence " I said " response. " Doesn't the most basic theory of the body following the principles of Yin/Yang denote " response? " I think you're having a kind of knee-jerk anti-Jeffrey moment here. RoseAnne On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 5:19 AM, wrote: > this is an issue i always harp on and one is where I disagree with how its > expressed in the Yuen " school " . That is that dampness collects as a response > or heat as a response to damp etc... To me this suggests a body > " intelligence " of creating another, usually pathogenic substance, to correct > an imbalance. I know that damp can follow heat or vice versa, whatever, but > these can be explained in zang-fu, 5 element or more general CM terms rather > than inherent responses to pathogens. > Doug > > > , RoseAnne Spradlin > <roseanne.spradlin wrote: > > > > I wasn't going to write in on this one, since I consider myself not as > > experienced in TCM/CM as many of you. But a thought came to me when this > > subject came up. That is, from the Jeffrey Yuen point of view (and > others, > > I'm sure) there is always a relationship between heat and dampness in the > > body. One or the other can be seen as the primary pathological process. > > When there's heat, dampness often collects as a response; or when there's > > dampness, heat will come as a response. Phlegm in the LU or upper burner > > can be a response to heat, maybe even a kind of insulation to the heat. > If > > the heat has penetrated to the ST as well, and is damaging the ST Yin, > then > > the phlegm could likely go there as well. The idea to swallow the phlegm > > may be a way of acknowledging what the body is trying to do in its > response > > to heat. The more one spits it out, the harder the body has to work to > make > > more phlegm. Maybe 'digesting' the phlegm in the ST is beneficial in > some > > way. > > > > The above is all conjecture. I have no idea, but am just trying to think > it > > through. > > > > RoseAnne > > > > > > --- > > Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services, including a > practitioner's directory and a moderated discussion forum. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2010 Report Share Posted April 16, 2010 Doug, Thanks for your opinion, but the idea that the body responds to pathogenic factors and that the result of that reaction is a complex pathology is not part of a " Yuen " school of thought. It is core to much of the history of CM, even if some modern students and practitioners may lose sight of life's dynamic responsive nature while busy learning to classifying clinical manifestations into diagnostic categories. For instance, in SHL heat is not even considered a pathogenic factor, but a physiological (yang) response which may not be successful in resolving wind or cold that has internalized. Of course, there are many cold herbs used in SHL, so there is clearly recognition that when yang becomes entangled rather than simply releasing to the exterior, it generates clinical heat manifestations that can be very problematic. All of life is responsive to current circumstances, generally guided by various essential urges to survive. Sometimes those responses don't fulfill their original goal, and the individual exhibits what has now become a " complex " pathogenic factor. During the vast majority of Chinese medical history pathology has been understood as a progression, which often transforms (because of the individual's physiological responses to it -- all of which can be sorted out), rather than a manifestation to be classified. Steven Alpern CCMforHealing.com On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 2:19 AM, wrote: > > > this is an issue i always harp on and one is where I disagree with how its > expressed in the Yuen " school " . That is that dampness collects as a response > or heat as a response to damp etc... To me this suggests a body > " intelligence " of creating another, usually pathogenic substance, to correct > an imbalance. I know that damp can follow heat or vice versa, whatever, but > these can be explained in zang-fu, 5 element or more general CM terms rather > than inherent responses to pathogens. > Doug > > --- In <%40>, > RoseAnne Spradlin <roseanne.spradlin wrote: > > > > I wasn't going to write in on this one, since I consider myself not as > > experienced in TCM/CM as many of you. But a thought came to me when this > > subject came up. That is, from the Jeffrey Yuen point of view (and > others, > > I'm sure) there is always a relationship between heat and dampness in the > > body. One or the other can be seen as the primary pathological process. > > When there's heat, dampness often collects as a response; or when there's > > dampness, heat will come as a response. Phlegm in the LU or upper burner > > can be a response to heat, maybe even a kind of insulation to the heat. > If > > the heat has penetrated to the ST as well, and is damaging the ST Yin, > then > > the phlegm could likely go there as well. The idea to swallow the phlegm > > may be a way of acknowledging what the body is trying to do in its > response > > to heat. The more one spits it out, the harder the body has to work to > make > > more phlegm. Maybe 'digesting' the phlegm in the ST is beneficial in some > > way. > > > > The above is all conjecture. I have no idea, but am just trying to think > it > > through. > > > > RoseAnne > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2010 Report Share Posted April 16, 2010 I give RoseAnne ten points for the clarity of her explanation which bodes well for her level of understanding of the topic. I get what J. Yuan is teaching (as explained by RoseAnne) and in a way there is some intuitive recognition that dampness may be created as a response to other noxious factors. I am reminded of how when I get an allergen or irritant in my throat, my eyes will water, my nose will start to run and I'll cough up some phlegm. Phlegm of course is also known as both a " thief and a victim " in that it is the result of prior pathological processes as well as the cause of additional pathologies. However, at least from my particular perspective, phlegm damp is not created in the Lungs as a protective response, but as in the case of so-called " substantial fire " . The heat damages the yin of the lungs, which makes it thicker and phlegmy. As for this process taking place in the Stomach, that's news to me. Important part of course is that there is a treatment principle and a successful intervention for this condition. RoseAnne, do you know what Jeffrey Yuan suggests for this particular situation? Heat causing dampness or phlegm in the Stomach? -al. > > > > --- In <%40> > <%40>, > > RoseAnne Spradlin <roseanne.spradlin wrote: > > > > > > I wasn't going to write in on this one, since I consider myself not as > > > experienced in TCM/CM as many of you. But a thought came to me when > this > > > subject came up. That is, from the Jeffrey Yuen point of view (and > > others, > > > I'm sure) there is always a relationship between heat and dampness in > the > > > body. One or the other can be seen as the primary pathological process. > > > When there's heat, dampness often collects as a response; or when > there's > > > dampness, heat will come as a response. Phlegm in the LU or upper > burner > > > can be a response to heat, maybe even a kind of insulation to the heat. > > If > > > the heat has penetrated to the ST as well, and is damaging the ST Yin, > > then > > > the phlegm could likely go there as well. The idea to swallow the > phlegm > > > may be a way of acknowledging what the body is trying to do in its > > response > > > to heat. The more one spits it out, the harder the body has to work to > > make > > > more phlegm. Maybe 'digesting' the phlegm in the ST is beneficial in > some > > > way. > > > > > > The above is all conjecture. I have no idea, but am just trying to > think > > it > > > through. > > > > > > RoseAnne > -- , 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 April 16, 2010 Report Share Posted April 16, 2010 Al et. al., I concur about RoseAnne's attempt to pull apart this issue. Good work! Yet, as I stated on one of the other threads on this topic, this is not just " Yuen's " school of thought. It really is more broadly how Chinese medicine was thought about before various forces of modernization developed contemporary clinical doctrine. There have been many ways to think about how phlegm develops throughout CM history, including the one that was eventually integrated into modern theory. In our contemporary theory the spleen is responsible for transporting fluids to the lungs; Li Dongyuan attributed part of that responsibility to the stomach. According to him, the stomach is responsible for initiating the process of separating pure from impure (which is done further by the SI), and ascends each of them to fulfill their purposes. The impure jin-fluids become tears and saliva and they go to the lungs domain to transform into wei qi. When those turbid fluids are too turbid in the stomach, they congeal their. In modern parlance that congealed material is called phlegm, though historically it was generally referred to as turbidity in the stomach. In any case, that's why banxia goes to the stomach in addition to the spleen and lungs. So, " phlegm " can come from the stomach, both from it's being disharmonious (banxia) and as a response to control stomach heat (for which Li Dongyuan suggested huanglian). Steven Alpern CCMforHealing.com On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Al Stone <al wrote: > > > I give RoseAnne ten points for the clarity of her explanation which bodes > well for her level of understanding of the topic. > > I get what J. Yuan is teaching (as explained by RoseAnne) and in a way > there > is some intuitive recognition that dampness may be created as a response to > other noxious factors. I am reminded of how when I get an allergen or > irritant in my throat, my eyes will water, my nose will start to run and > I'll cough up some phlegm. > > Phlegm of course is also known as both a " thief and a victim " in that it is > the result of prior pathological processes as well as the cause of > additional pathologies. > > However, at least from my particular perspective, phlegm damp is not > created > in the Lungs as a protective response, but as in the case of so-called > " substantial fire " . The heat damages the yin of the lungs, which makes it > thicker and phlegmy. > > As for this process taking place in the Stomach, that's news to me. > Important part of course is that there is a treatment principle and a > successful intervention for this condition. > > RoseAnne, do you know what Jeffrey Yuan suggests for this particular > situation? Heat causing dampness or phlegm in the Stomach? > > -al. > > > > > > > --- In <%40> > <%40> > > <%40>, > > > > RoseAnne Spradlin <roseanne.spradlin wrote: > > > > > > > > I wasn't going to write in on this one, since I consider myself not > as > > > > experienced in TCM/CM as many of you. But a thought came to me when > > this > > > > subject came up. That is, from the Jeffrey Yuen point of view (and > > > others, > > > > I'm sure) there is always a relationship between heat and dampness in > > the > > > > body. One or the other can be seen as the primary pathological > process. > > > > When there's heat, dampness often collects as a response; or when > > there's > > > > dampness, heat will come as a response. Phlegm in the LU or upper > > burner > > > > can be a response to heat, maybe even a kind of insulation to the > heat. > > > If > > > > the heat has penetrated to the ST as well, and is damaging the ST > Yin, > > > then > > > > the phlegm could likely go there as well. The idea to swallow the > > phlegm > > > > may be a way of acknowledging what the body is trying to do in its > > > response > > > > to heat. The more one spits it out, the harder the body has to work > to > > > make > > > > more phlegm. Maybe 'digesting' the phlegm in the ST is beneficial in > > some > > > > way. > > > > > > > > The above is all conjecture. I have no idea, but am just trying to > > think > > > it > > > > through. > > > > > > > > RoseAnne > > > > -- > , 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 April 16, 2010 Report Share Posted April 16, 2010 Group, First, the original statement was talking about the relationship between damp and heat, not phlegm and heat. IMO, phlegm and damp are separate pathological substances. It was stated, " there is always a relationship between heat and dampness in the body. One or the other can be seen as the primary pathological process. When there's heat, dampness often collects as a response; or when there's dampness, heat will come as a response. " I do agree it is standard theory that heat can engender damp, and damp can engender heat. The term " response " may be a little stange of a word choice for my tastes, but I get the point. Heat dries fluids and produces phlegm and damp creates constraint which leads to heat. Fairly straightforward. But I am not sure I agree with the idea that there is ALWAYS a relationship between heat and damp. Often these pathogens are not related, meaning both can occur from their own separate etiological / pathological process and then they combine. For example damp in a yin sticky substance that can " attract " other pathogens such as cold, heat, or wind. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2010 Report Share Posted April 16, 2010 Jason, When you say " phlegm and damp are separate pathological substances " , do you mean that as an absolute? Can it be said that phlegm is a subset of damp? ann On Apr 16, 2010, at 3:26 PM, wrote: > Group, > > First, the original statement was talking about the relationship between > damp and heat, not phlegm and heat. IMO, phlegm and damp are separate > pathological substances. > > It was stated, " there is always a relationship between heat and dampness in > the body. One or the other can be seen as the primary pathological process. > When there's heat, dampness often collects as a response; or when there's > dampness, heat will come as a response. " > > I do agree it is standard theory that heat can engender damp, and damp can > engender heat. The term " response " may be a little stange of a word choice > for my tastes, but I get the point. Heat dries fluids and produces phlegm > and damp creates constraint which leads to heat. Fairly straightforward. But > I am not sure I agree with the idea that there is ALWAYS a relationship > between heat and damp. Often these pathogens are not related, meaning both > can occur from their own separate etiological / pathological process and > then they combine. For example damp in a yin sticky substance that can > " attract " other pathogens such as cold, heat, or wind. > > - > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2010 Report Share Posted April 16, 2010 My short answer to that question is that phlegm is a disorder of fluids. Sometimes that involves damp. Doug > > Jason, > > When you say " phlegm and damp are separate pathological substances " , do you mean that as an absolute? > > Can it be said that phlegm is a subset of damp? > > ann > > > > On Apr 16, 2010, at 3:26 PM, wrote: > > > > > Group, > > > > > > First, the original statement was talking about the relationship between > > > damp and heat, not phlegm and heat. IMO, phlegm and damp are separate > > > pathological substances. > > > > > > It was stated, " there is always a relationship between heat and dampness in > > > the body. One or the other can be seen as the primary pathological process. > > > When there's heat, dampness often collects as a response; or when there's > > > dampness, heat will come as a response. " > > > > > > I do agree it is standard theory that heat can engender damp, and damp can > > > engender heat. The term " response " may be a little stange of a word choice > > > for my tastes, but I get the point. Heat dries fluids and produces phlegm > > > and damp creates constraint which leads to heat. Fairly straightforward. But > > > I am not sure I agree with the idea that there is ALWAYS a relationship > > > between heat and damp. Often these pathogens are not related, meaning both > > > can occur from their own separate etiological / pathological process and > > > then they combine. For example damp in a yin sticky substance that can > > > " attract " other pathogens such as cold, heat, or wind. > > > > > > - > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2010 Report Share Posted April 16, 2010 ..... and the long answer? 8-) On Apr 16, 2010, at 4:24 PM, wrote: > My short answer to question is that phlegm is a disorder of fluids. Sometimes that involves damp. > Doug > > , " A. Brameier " <snakeoil.works wrote: > > > > Jason, > > When you say " phlegm and damp are separate pathological substances " , do you mean that as an absolute? > > Can it be said that phlegm is a subset of damp? > > ann > > > > On Apr 16, 2010, at 3:26 PM, wrote: > > > > > Group, > > > > > > First, the original statement was talking about the relationship between > > > damp and heat, not phlegm and heat. IMO, phlegm and damp are separate > > > pathological substances. > > > > > > It was stated, " there is always a relationship between heat and dampness in > > > the body. One or the other can be seen as the primary pathological process. > > > When there's heat, dampness often collects as a response; or when there's > > > dampness, heat will come as a response. " > > > > > > I do agree it is standard theory that heat can engender damp, and damp can > > > engender heat. The term " response " may be a little stange of a word choice > > > for my tastes, but I get the point. Heat dries fluids and produces phlegm > > > and damp creates constraint which leads to heat. Fairly straightforward. But > > > I am not sure I agree with the idea that there is ALWAYS a relationship > > > between heat and damp. Often these pathogens are not related, meaning both > > > can occur from their own separate etiological / pathological process and > > > then they combine. For example damp in a yin sticky substance that can > > > " attract " other pathogens such as cold, heat, or wind. > > > > > > - > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2010 Report Share Posted April 16, 2010 The long answer is read Stephen Claveys's book! ;-) Doug , " A. Brameier " <snakeoil.works wrote: > > .... and the long answer? 8-) > > On Apr 16, 2010, at 4:24 PM, wrote: > > > My short answer to question is that phlegm is a disorder of fluids. Sometimes that involves damp. > > Doug > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2010 Report Share Posted April 16, 2010 haha... have to get back to that one.... just thought you'd like to give a summation... you know, w/ flow charts 'n stuff :-) On Apr 16, 2010, at 5:40 PM, wrote: > The long answer is read Stephen Claveys's book! ;-) > Doug > > , " A. Brameier " <snakeoil.works wrote: > > > > .... and the long answer? 8-) > > > > On Apr 16, 2010, at 4:24 PM, wrote: > > > > > My short answer to question is that phlegm is a disorder of fluids. Sometimes that involves damp. > > > Doug > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2010 Report Share Posted April 16, 2010 Steven said " For instance, in SHL heat is not even considered a pathogenic factor, but a physiological (yang) response " I agree that your idea is one way to the explain how SHL conceptualizes heat, I know Arnaud likes to explain things in this manner. Hence it is not unique to Yuen. However it is just as valid to view heat (a pathogen) as a mere transmutation of the cold pathogen. I don't think the SHL says either way and these are all the stories that we make up, to explain what we see. But the " transformation idea " is not some modern creation, it is well established in pre-modern literature. Furthermore there are numerous SHL commentaries that discuss this concept of heat equaling a pathogen. Even, for example, established commentary states that in certain situations when the SHL mentions yang qi this is not defensive yang of the patient but pathogenic qi. In my opinion, it doesn't really matter, the treatment will be the same either way. So whatever story you like, go for it, but remember it is not the only story. -Jason On Behalf Of Steven Alpern Thanks for your opinion, but the idea that the body responds to pathogenic factors and that the result of that reaction is a complex pathology is not part of a " Yuen " school of thought. It is core to much of the history of CM, even if some modern students and practitioners may lose sight of life's dynamic responsive nature while busy learning to classifying clinical manifestations into diagnostic categories. For instance, in SHL heat is not even considered a pathogenic factor, but a physiological (yang) response which may not be successful in resolving wind or cold that has internalized. Of course, there are many cold herbs used in SHL, so there is clearly recognition that when yang becomes entangled rather than simply releasing to the exterior, it generates clinical heat manifestations that can be very problematic. All of life is responsive to current circumstances, generally guided by various essential urges to survive. Sometimes those responses don't fulfill their original goal, and the individual exhibits what has now become a " complex " pathogenic factor. During the vast majority of Chinese medical history pathology has been understood as a progression, which often transforms (because of the individual's physiological responses to it -- all of which can be sorted out), rather than a manifestation to be classified. Steven Alpern CCMforHealing.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2010 Report Share Posted April 17, 2010 Doug and all, I like your short answer: phlegm is a disorder of fluids. IT is clearcut. It is subject to discussion as for the following sentence.'Sometimes that involves damp'. It is common to see phlegm-damp but the other way around becomes 'damp phelgm'. There are also heat phlegm which refers to the causation and its nature. The best way to describe phlegm should be phlegm-rehum as it is more neutral, not referring to its cause. It is important in Qigong practice that we engender and swallow our own saliva. Saliva is considered as valuable fluid in our body. It is highly desirable when we practice Qigong and are able to engender lots of saliva. Saliva has enzymes that helps digestion (sorry to discuss biomedicine). However, phelgm is a disorder of fluid that should be spitted out. Dampness is one of the six evils (pathogens). Phlegm/phlegm-rheum is a byproduct; also an excess. It can cause many symptoms in the lung, heart (cardio) & brain (neuro) issues. TCM has a lot to offer when it comes to phelgm. Zhang Zhong-jing has a thorough discussion of phelgm-rheum in his publication, the Essentials of Golden Cabinet. In the overview of Chapter 12, Pulses, Patterns, and Treatment of Phlegm-rheum and Coughing of my book, Understanding the jin Gui Yao Lue, A Practical Textbook, Phlegm-rheum disease is a general term for conditions associated with water-fluid retention in a localized area. It can manifest with coughing, panting, vomiting, glomus, fullness, palpitation, dizziness, swelling, and inhibited urination etc. This describes phlegm-rheum disease in a broad sense, however, fluid retention limited to the stomach and intestines may also be referred to as phlegm-rheum. In this chapter, phlegm-rheum disease can also be divided into four main categories: phlegm-rheum (in the stomach and intestines), suspended rheum, spillage rheum, and propping rheum. Other rheum patterns include lodged rheum, deep-lying rheum, and mild rheum. However, these terms are more descriptive in nature, and as such are not included in the four major categories of phlegm-rheum disease. As the disease name and pattern identification methods originated with Zhang Zhong-jing, this chapter provided a solid foundation in the historical development of phlegm theory. This chapter provides an extensive discussion on the etiology, pathomechanism, pulses, patterns, treatment, and prognosis of phlegm-rheum disease. Coughing, as discussed in this chapter, should be considered only as a sign specifically associated with phlegm disease. There are over 20 formulas to tackle such an single excess. Very interesting and powerful if we can use and even expand their usages. Sung, Yuk-ming Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2010 Report Share Posted April 18, 2010 In response to my previous comment concerning heat in SHL, Jason wrote: I agree that your idea is one way to the explain how SHL conceptualizes heat, I know Arnaud likes to explain things in this manner. Hence it is not unique to Yuen. However it is just as valid to view heat (a pathogen) as a mere transmutation of the cold pathogen. I don't think the SHL says either way and these are all the stories that we make up, to explain what we see. But the " transformation idea " is not some modern creation, it is well established in pre-modern literature. Furthermore there are numerous SHL commentaries that discuss this concept of heat equaling a pathogen. Even, for example, established commentary states that in certain situations when the SHL mentions yang qi this is not defensive yang of the patient but pathogenic qi. In my opinion, it doesn't really matter, the treatment will be the same either way. So whatever story you like, go for it, but remember it is not the only story. Steven: Well, we may be having a difficulty with language and history. Of course, Arnaud discusses heat in SHL the way I described, because that is SHL. As I said, it isn't some " Yuen school of thought. " However, during the past 1800 years there have been MANY commentaries inspired by SHL, including many that were also heavily influenced by ideas that were current at the time the commentary was written. So, in the case of SHL, there have been modernizing influences for at least a thousand years. While all these ideas warrant study (I think especially within their historical contexts), many are not consistent with SHL theory, regardless of whether the author called his work a study of SHL. I believe that Lui Wansu during the 12th century was the first CM writer to introduce the idea of heat as a pathogenic factor, rather than as a response to some blockage. Of course, this idea was much developed and widely d to during the subsequent centuries, but we can learn something (as Xu Dachun insisted) by going back to the " pre-modern " ideas -- in his case the developments from the Jin-Yuan period were what he considered " modern. " We don't further our understanding of the nature of human life through the study of Chinese medicine by limiting our focus to recent commentators because they're easier to read and seem " juicier. " The Chinese medicine of the Qing Dynasty included a lot of biases, and I also think we should clearly understand that there was no academic freedom in Imperial China. During any period, much of what was written and published was controlled by the Imperial government, and since then there have been other historical biases including the much discussed modern materialist influence. If we want to understand the depth of wisdom in Chinese medicine, I believe we have to do an extensive " thought experiment " by visualizing a (pre-modern) worldview based on CM theory, including that the human body is always responding to its circumstances (both external and internal) to sustain life. Much of this was never written by Chinese authors, either because it was historically understood or because Chinese intellectual tradition was somewhat different from our western one -- much of philosophy was generally considered personal and beyond languagerather than our current discursive standard. " The dao that can be spoken is not the eternal dao " was widely read, studied, and respected (beyond just " Daoists " ) in historical China. How can one make the claim that: " it doesn't really matter, the treatment will be the same either way. So whatever story you like, go for it, but remember it is not the only story " unless one works to understand the older ideas? I'm aware that there are multiple stories throughout the history of CM, and that they lead to different ways of looking at real clinical manifestations. Are you willing to openly check out some of the ones that don't agree with your current beliefs? Steven Alpern CCMforHealing.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2010 Report Share Posted April 18, 2010 Steven, Thanks for the thorough explanation. However I'm having a hard time believing that there is some official (or true) interpretation of the SHL and that the other commentaries are somehow false (not conforming to the true ¡°SHL theory¡±). I'm sure these other commentators would say the same about your position... Do not forget, Arnaud is a modern commentator also, trying, like many others, to have the most accurate version. Do you think he has a better ability to transcend time compared to a Qing or Song dynasty physician? Actually, anyone that thinks they have the true understanding of the SHL is suspect to me. One of the reasons there are so many SHL commentaries is that when it popped back onto the scene in the Song dynasty it was very unclear what the SHL was actually saying and how it was really meant to be used clinically. Hence many doctors scrambled to make sense of it (to deal with the current epidemic). Furthermore, The SHL has so many versions (some cleaner than others) of people trying to make sense of what it meant who can really say who had the correct ideas? In addition, I think it is pretty much a fact that we do not have the original text in today's time. Finally, I'm not truly understanding your thinking behind Liu Wan-Su being the first person to discuss ¡°heat as a pathogenic factor.¡± Your argument really revolves around if heat is merely a response of the body or an actual pathogen. Whatever created the pathogen is a relevant. If constraint created a pathogen or the environment created the pathogen this is much different than just a response of the body. Isn¡¯t it well-established in the NeiJing that heat is one of the six qi that invades the body? It also discussed for example, ¡®heat¡¯ (an entity) entangling with grain qi. Clearly there are times when ¡°heat¡± is not a response of the body but a pathological entity. Consequently, Unschuld points out that the chapter on ¡°heat discourse¡± specifically discusses heat as both a cause and result of disease. Furthermore, there are terms in the NeiJing such as re qi (ÈÈÆø) and re du £¨Èȶ¾£©that are specifically defined as pathogens/pathogenic qi by commentaries. So prior to the SHL this idea seemed to exist. I guess the real question would be, is there somewhere in the SHL that clearly says that all the heat conditions are from the body¡¯s response and NOT from viewing heat as a pathogen? If not, then it is up for debate. So if you believe this point of view or not, the fact remains that there is debate. If there is debate then how can you be so certain you point of view is correct? Quite simply, a large percentage of commentators think they are presenting the most accurate and authentic (old) version of what is written. As far as my current belief, I have already said I think both are valid ways to approach the SHL. I am not the one here, taking a specific side. I am merely pointing out there are different ways to view this situation. Therefore, I will ask back to you ¡°are you willing to openly check out some of the ones that don't agree with your current beliefs¡± This is a very interesting topic. However I will be traveling shortly and may not be able to respond, but I think it is worthwhile examining. -Jason On Behalf Of Steven Alpern Sunday, April 18, 2010 9:31 AM Re: responding to phlegm In response to my previous comment concerning heat in SHL, Jason wrote: I agree that your idea is one way to the explain how SHL conceptualizes heat, I know Arnaud likes to explain things in this manner. Hence it is not unique to Yuen. However it is just as valid to view heat (a pathogen) as a mere transmutation of the cold pathogen. I don't think the SHL says either way and these are all the stories that we make up, to explain what we see. But the " transformation idea " is not some modern creation, it is well established in pre-modern literature. Furthermore there are numerous SHL commentaries that discuss this concept of heat equaling a pathogen. Even, for example, established commentary states that in certain situations when the SHL mentions yang qi this is not defensive yang of the patient but pathogenic qi. In my opinion, it doesn't really matter, the treatment will be the same either way. So whatever story you like, go for it, but remember it is not the only story. Steven: Well, we may be having a difficulty with language and history. Of course, Arnaud discusses heat in SHL the way I described, because that is SHL. As I said, it isn't some " Yuen school of thought. " However, during the past 1800 years there have been MANY commentaries inspired by SHL, including many that were also heavily influenced by ideas that were current at the time the commentary was written. So, in the case of SHL, there have been modernizing influences for at least a thousand years. While all these ideas warrant study (I think especially within their historical contexts), many are not consistent with SHL theory, regardless of whether the author called his work a study of SHL. I believe that Lui Wansu during the 12th century was the first CM writer to introduce the idea of heat as a pathogenic factor, rather than as a response to some blockage. Of course, this idea was much developed and widely d to during the subsequent centuries, but we can learn something (as Xu Dachun insisted) by going back to the " pre-modern " ideas -- in his case the developments from the Jin-Yuan period were what he considered " modern. " We don't further our understanding of the nature of human life through the study of Chinese medicine by limiting our focus to recent commentators because they're easier to read and seem " juicier. " The Chinese medicine of the Qing Dynasty included a lot of biases, and I also think we should clearly understand that there was no academic freedom in Imperial China. During any period, much of what was written and published was controlled by the Imperial government, and since then there have been other historical biases including the much discussed modern materialist influence. If we want to understand the depth of wisdom in Chinese medicine, I believe we have to do an extensive " thought experiment " by visualizing a (pre-modern) worldview based on CM theory, including that the human body is always responding to its circumstances (both external and internal) to sustain life. Much of this was never written by Chinese authors, either because it was historically understood or because Chinese intellectual tradition was somewhat different from our western one -- much of philosophy was generally considered personal and beyond languagerather than our current discursive standard. " The dao that can be spoken is not the eternal dao " was widely read, studied, and respected (beyond just " Daoists " ) in historical China. How can one make the claim that: " it doesn't really matter, the treatment will be the same either way. So whatever story you like, go for it, but remember it is not the only story " unless one works to understand the older ideas? I'm aware that there are multiple stories throughout the history of CM, and that they lead to different ways of looking at real clinical manifestations. Are you willing to openly check out some of the ones that don't agree with your current beliefs? Steven Alpern CCMforHealing.com [ <> Terms of Use .. <http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=201013/grpspId=1705060815/msgId= 48382/stime=1271608454/nc1=4025373/nc2=3848640/nc3=4836041> 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.