Guest guest Posted September 21, 2004 Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 Dear Group, I am treating a patient who had cancer of the nasal sinus. He had a 6-week course of radiation, f/b probably about 5 months of weekly chemo. He just finished chemo mid-September. My question is -- now he has bleeding from both ears. Treating Sp1 to stop bleeding and the spleen to control blood has not helped. Are there any herbal supplements or topicals that could help? Would Yunan Bai yao (sorry, don't know how to spell it) help him? On the note of qi gong and Rich's credentials - there was a fellow in my TCM school who mainly apprenticed all his knowledge. While he was in school for the " book learning " education to get his license, his main body of knowledge came from learning from another master. I think we need to be careful in dismissing others just because they don't have " school " knowledge.. If this was addressed in later notes, please forgive me. I am several digests behind in my reading. Diane Bryson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Hi Dianne, Yannan pai yao is the single most remarkable herb I have ever come across. I have used it successfully in several cases of bleeding problems involving a wide spectrum of different disorders. By all means, have your patient try it. 2-3 capsules, three times a day. If it is going to work, it will work in the first two or three days. - Matt - thechidoctor Chinese Medicine Tuesday, September 21, 2004 7:40 PM Bleeding from Ears; Qi Gong Dear Group, I am treating a patient who had cancer of the nasal sinus. He had a 6-week course of radiation, f/b probably about 5 months of weekly chemo. He just finished chemo mid-September. My question is -- now he has bleeding from both ears. Treating Sp1 to stop bleeding and the spleen to control blood has not helped. Are there any herbal supplements or topicals that could help? Would Yunan Bai yao (sorry, don't know how to spell it) help him? On the note of qi gong and Rich's credentials - there was a fellow in my TCM school who mainly apprenticed all his knowledge. While he was in school for the " book learning " education to get his license, his main body of knowledge came from learning from another master. I think we need to be careful in dismissing others just because they don't have " school " knowledge.. If this was addressed in later notes, please forgive me. I am several digests behind in my reading. Diane Bryson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Hi Diane, Thank you for your very kind and gracious comment. For me it has been a continuum of learning over the last 25 years. Taiji, qigong, and yoga practice provides me with a certain amount of awareness (internal and external) which I am able to incorporate in my health practices. Being able to sense and manipulate qi makes Chinese medicine very real to me. Because of this, the Classics carry lots of meaning for me. I am able to experience in a very direct manner, what the ancient writers were writing about and do not need to depend upon accurate translations - assuming that " qi " has not changed over the last 5000 years. :-). I believe that qigong is a very nice practice that can enhance anyone's understanding of Chinese medicine and I highly recommend it to all students of Chinese medicine - whether or not they are attending a school - which as you indicated is only one way to learn about Chinese medicine. This knowledge also provides me with a sense of " freedom " in that I feel that nowadays, I can pass the " desert island test " . That is, if my family and I were washed ashore on a desert island - no pharmaceuticals, no herbs, no needles, no doctor - I would still be able to care for everyone. As long as I have my breath and hands. Or at least one limb. :-) Everything my family and I need is already in our bodies - it is matter of " knowing " that it is there and learning how to use it. I am quite certain you understand what I mean. Hope you are having a very fine day! Regards, Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 I am sorry Rich, You invite criticism with outrageous statements like these. This claim is totally false to anyone with common sense. If you are reading an inaccurate translation of a classical text, how could you experience what the ancient writers were saying? If you can't check the original Chinese against the translation with glossaries and/or dictionaries, how do you know if the translation is accurate or not? Are you implying that you 'feel the qi' of the text? Mind you, there is great inspiration in classics such as the Nan Jing, Nei Jing, Shang Han Lun and others. But it is no more possible to 'experience the qi' of a text than it is to absorb knowledge by putting one's hand on a book without opening it. On Sep 21, 2004, at 8:40 PM, Rich wrote: > I am able to experience in a very direct manner, what > the ancient writers were writing about and do not need to depend upon > accurate translations - assuming that " qi " has not changed over the > last 5000 years. :-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Hi, You have had the experiences of " Nothingness is the Best Prescription or Dr.! " it is great. Guigen Qigong http://www.g321g.org guigen_qigong Qigong Department, Xiyuan Hospital, Beijing. - Rich Chinese Medicine Wednesday, September 22, 2004 11:40 AM Re: Bleeding from Ears; Qi Gong Hi Diane, Thank you for your very kind and gracious comment. For me it has been a continuum of learning over the last 25 years. Taiji, qigong, and yoga practice provides me with a certain amount of awareness (internal and external) which I am able to incorporate in my health practices. Being able to sense and manipulate qi makes Chinese medicine very real to me. Because of this, the Classics carry lots of meaning for me. I am able to experience in a very direct manner, what the ancient writers were writing about and do not need to depend upon accurate translations - assuming that " qi " has not changed over the last 5000 years. :-). I believe that qigong is a very nice practice that can enhance anyone's understanding of Chinese medicine and I highly recommend it to all students of Chinese medicine - whether or not they are attending a school - which as you indicated is only one way to learn about Chinese medicine. This knowledge also provides me with a sense of " freedom " in that I feel that nowadays, I can pass the " desert island test " . That is, if my family and I were washed ashore on a desert island - no pharmaceuticals, no herbs, no needles, no doctor - I would still be able to care for everyone. As long as I have my breath and hands. Or at least one limb. :-) Everything my family and I need is already in our bodies - it is matter of " knowing " that it is there and learning how to use it. I am quite certain you understand what I mean. Hope you are having a very fine day! Regards, Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Dear Z'ev, > I am sorry Rich, > You invite criticism with outrageous statements like these. Outrageous? Millions upon millions of people study - in various practices - and experience qi every day in their lives. >This claim is totally false to anyone with common sense. Hmmm .. you may be insulting many people other than myself. >If you are reading an inaccurate translation of a classical text, >how could you experience what the ancient writers were saying? I merely said that I experience the flow of qi that is probably the same experience that the ancient writers experience. When I experience the flow of qi through the channels, it is probably the same what the ancient writers experienced - unless the nature of " qi " and the human channel system itself has changed since ancient times. If this is true, then all of the classics are irrelevant. When I experience the qi arising from the Po, Hun, Shen, it is probably the same qi that the ancient writers experienced. It should be all the same because we are all experiencing exactly the same thing, the same qi that existed 500 years ago exists today. It is all qi - though most probably Consciousness itself has evolved. Qi, in my view, being a manifestation of Consciousness. But I do not claim this to be a strict TCM perspective. However, the Classics certainly talk about the body arising from the Shen. I believe the first step toward understanding qi, so that it can be " treated " , is studying it - i.e. the qigong. Regards, Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Hi & Rich, In my opinion, you two are discusion on TCM, but you are stand on different dimensions. TCM can be divide into to dimension, herb and Qi or functional and energy. Both of your opinion are right. Guigen Qigong http://www.g321g.org guigen_qigong Qigong Department, Xiyuan Hospital, Beijing. - Chinese Medicine Wednesday, September 22, 2004 10:28 PM Re: Re: Bleeding from Ears; Qi Gong I am sorry Rich, You invite criticism with outrageous statements like these. This claim is totally false to anyone with common sense. If you are reading an inaccurate translation of a classical text, how could you experience what the ancient writers were saying? If you can't check the original Chinese against the translation with glossaries and/or dictionaries, how do you know if the translation is accurate or not? Are you implying that you 'feel the qi' of the text? Mind you, there is great inspiration in classics such as the Nan Jing, Nei Jing, Shang Han Lun and others. But it is no more possible to 'experience the qi' of a text than it is to absorb knowledge by putting one's hand on a book without opening it. On Sep 21, 2004, at 8:40 PM, Rich wrote: > I am able to experience in a very direct manner, what > the ancient writers were writing about and do not need to depend upon > accurate translations - assuming that " qi " has not changed over the > last 5000 years. :-). http://babel.altavista.com/ and adjust accordingly. If you , it takes a few days for the messages to stop being delivered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 On Sep 22, 2004, at 7:52 AM, Rich wrote: > Dear Z'ev, > >> I am sorry Rich, >> You invite criticism with outrageous statements like these. > > Outrageous? Millions upon millions of people study - in various > practices - and experience qi every day in their lives. Don't be patronizing. This is not what you claimed in your post. You claimed to understand what the ancient writers were talking about without an accurate translation of a text. > > > >> This claim is totally false to anyone with common sense. > > Hmmm .. you may be insulting many people other than myself. I see it more as you insulting this list with your grandiose claims. OK, then, let's here from other people. Can you experience what the ancient authors of classical texts were without accurate translations of those texts, without access to the Chinese language, or without even reading the text? And how would you know? I certainly wouldn't. By 'feeling their qi'? > >> If you are reading an inaccurate translation of a classical text, >> how could you experience what the ancient writers were saying? > > I merely said that I experience the flow of qi that is probably the > same experience that the ancient writers experience. When I experience > the flow of qi through the channels, it is probably the same what the > ancient writers experienced - unless the nature of " qi " and the human > channel system itself has changed since ancient times. If this is > true, then all of the classics are irrelevant. You are making a claim that you cannot defend in any manner other than your experience. Why should I buy it? Just because you say so? > > When I experience the qi arising from the Po, Hun, Shen, it is > probably the same qi that the ancient writers experienced. It should > be all the same because we are all experiencing exactly the same > thing, the same qi that existed 500 years ago exists today. It is all > qi - though most probably Consciousness itself has evolved. Qi, in my > view, being a manifestation of Consciousness. But I do not claim this > to be a strict TCM perspective. However, the Classics certainly talk > about the body arising from the Shen. Again, you are making statements and claims that you cannot backup in any fashion, except your own personal experience. As you say, 'in your view' qi is a manifestation of consciousness. So, now we need to know what you mean by consciousness. Also, what you mean about 'the body arising from the shen'. What are your sources? What do you mean? Stop making grand, generalized statements about things without source materials or quotations. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Hi again Guigen, > In my opinion, you two are discusion on TCM, but you are stand on different dimensions. > > TCM can be divide into to dimension, herb and Qi or functional and energy. > > Both of your opinion are right. > > Guigen Qigong Yes, I agree. The paradoxes (or duality) of Life. I've learned to live with them and still remain satisfied. They sure are not going away. :-) Regards, Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2004 Report Share Posted September 23, 2004 What has poor Rich done to deserve this outpouring of vitriol? I read his comments and didn't see them as outrageous or grandiose. It seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that the experience of qi, like breathing, is the same for people 2000 years ago as it now. He said it in a general conversational style and I read it that way. What I find particularly absurd is the suggestion that no-one can say anything on this list without having a PH.D in ancient Mandarin, and without citing some ancient text which " proves " what they are saying, and without also " proving " that this is an accurate translation. You don't need to know the recipe of a cake to know that it is delicious! Rich's comments reminded me of an article on the Mawangdui manuscripts by Vivienne Lo (JCM55 Sept97) where she notes that descriptions of qicong exercises (which pre-date acupuncture) are rooted in direct experience of qi in the body: " A further group of texts found in the tomb consists of nurturing life texts (yangsheng). This is a broad term which includes gymnastics (qigong), dietary regulation, and sex and breath cultivation. My particular interest and the hypothesis in my thesis is that it is in the context of nurturing life culture - all these kinds of practices and the literature that they generate - that concepts of yin and yang and the circulation of qi are brought to the internal aspect of the body... Zhongji, later used as the name of REN-3, appears in a sex cultivation text in relation to orgasm. It's really an anatomical location that's given this fancy name, and the texts also similarly mention Quepen, later to be ST-12, which is the supraclavicular fossa. I began to wonder how such a construction of the body came about, with all its lyrical language, and it seems to me to make more sense that it developed from the immediate experiences of sex and breath cultivation, where subjective experience is likely to be more lyrical about the body, for example talking about `spurting seas' or `rushing this and that' reflects an experience of the body in health and pleasure. I do think the discovery of the points came about primarily as a result of such an inner vision or experience... " The point is that, two millenia ago, Chinese people evolved an experiential knowledge of qi and its cultivation which lie at the roots of their medicine. Are we to put them on a pedestal and say that humans these days can never gain a similar understanding through direct experience? What I find particularly worrying about Z'ev's outbursts is that the approach is very much like the aggressive line taken by the WM quackbuster sceptic's. For them,the practice of any non-orthodox medicine has to be justified on the basis of some external Authority (scientific proof, RCTs etc). Demanding quotations, sources for anything that's said in a conversation is a similar kind of aggression in the TCM world. Who controls this Knowledge? - a handful of academic medical historians? Who controls the dispensation of this Knowledge in the west? - a handful of TCM Colleges in whose interests it is to " academicize " any discussions. This denial of the ordinary individual's ability to obtain knowledge through experiential means, reminds me of the Pre-Reformation Church. It was heresy to read the Bible in English - services were in Latin, the Bible was in Latin - the ordinary folk had no access to their " Truth " except via the 'experts' - the priests. An individual's relationship with divinity could only be by means of intermediaries, controlled by powerful vested interests - never through what they felt or experienced directly. So I feel this argument is very much about our's views about what constitutes " Knowledge " or " Truth " , and whether we are willing to deny personal experience of something, in favour of an external " authority " . Best wishes, Godfrey Bartlett Chinese Medicine , " " <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > > On Sep 22, 2004, at 7:52 AM, Rich wrote: > > > Dear Z'ev, > > > >> I am sorry Rich, > >> You invite criticism with outrageous statements like these. > > > > Outrageous? Millions upon millions of people study - in various > > practices - and experience qi every day in their lives. > > Don't be patronizing. This is not what you claimed in your post. You > claimed to understand what the ancient writers were talking about > without an accurate translation of a text. > > > > > > > >> This claim is totally false to anyone with common sense. > > > > Hmmm .. you may be insulting many people other than myself. > > I see it more as you insulting this list with your grandiose claims. > > OK, then, let's here from other people. Can you experience what the > ancient authors of classical texts were without accurate translations > of those texts, without access to the Chinese language, or without even > reading the text? And how would you know? I certainly wouldn't. By > 'feeling their qi'? > > > >> If you are reading an inaccurate translation of a classical text, > >> how could you experience what the ancient writers were saying? > > > > I merely said that I experience the flow of qi that is probably the > > same experience that the ancient writers experience. When I experience > > the flow of qi through the channels, it is probably the same what the > > ancient writers experienced - unless the nature of " qi " and the human > > channel system itself has changed since ancient times. If this is > > true, then all of the classics are irrelevant. > > You are making a claim that you cannot defend in any manner other than > your experience. Why should I buy it? Just because you say so? > > > > When I experience the qi arising from the Po, Hun, Shen, it is > > probably the same qi that the ancient writers experienced. It should > > be all the same because we are all experiencing exactly the same > > thing, the same qi that existed 500 years ago exists today. It is all > > qi - though most probably Consciousness itself has evolved. Qi, in my > > view, being a manifestation of Consciousness. But I do not claim this > > to be a strict TCM perspective. However, the Classics certainly talk > > about the body arising from the Shen. > > Again, you are making statements and claims that you cannot backup in > any fashion, except your own personal experience. As you say, 'in your > view' qi is a manifestation of consciousness. So, now we need to know > what you mean by consciousness. Also, what you mean about 'the body > arising from the shen'. What are your sources? What do you mean? > Stop making grand, generalized statements about things without source > materials or quotations. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2004 Report Share Posted September 23, 2004 HI Godfrey, Lovely!, Many thanks for expressing yourself so clearly, I Wholeheartedley support your statement and am in agreement with your observations with regards both to Rich and the value of direct experience. salvador Chinese Medicine , " acu_qichina " <acu@q...> wrote: > What has poor Rich done to deserve this outpouring of vitriol? > > I read his comments and didn't see them as outrageous or grandiose. It > seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that the experience of qi, like > breathing, is the same for people 2000 years ago as it now. He said it > in a general conversational style and I read it that way. > > What I find particularly absurd is the suggestion that no-one can say > anything on this list without having a PH.D in ancient Mandarin, and > without citing some ancient text which " proves " what they are saying, > and without also " proving " that this is an accurate translation. > > You don't need to know the recipe of a cake to know that it is > delicious! > > Rich's comments reminded me of an article on the Mawangdui manuscripts > by Vivienne Lo (JCM55 Sept97) where she notes that descriptions of > qicong exercises (which pre-date acupuncture) are rooted in direct > experience of qi in the body: > " A further group of texts found in the tomb consists of > nurturing life texts (yangsheng). This is a broad term which > includes gymnastics (qigong), dietary regulation, and sex > and breath cultivation. My particular interest and the hypothesis > in my thesis is that it is in the context of nurturing > life culture - all these kinds of practices and the literature > that they generate - that concepts of yin and yang and the > circulation of qi are brought to the internal aspect of the body... > > Zhongji, later used as the name of REN-3, appears in a sex cultivation > text in relation to orgasm. It's really an anatomical location > that's > given this fancy name, and the texts also similarly mention Quepen, > later to be ST-12, which is the supraclavicular fossa. I began > to wonder how such a construction of the body came about, > with all its lyrical language, and it seems to me to make > more sense that it developed from the immediate experiences > of sex and breath cultivation, where subjective experience > is likely to be more lyrical about the body, for > example talking about `spurting seas' or `rushing this and > that' reflects an experience of the body in health and pleasure. > I do think the discovery of the points came about > primarily as a result of such an inner vision or experience... " > > The point is that, two millenia ago, Chinese people evolved an > experiential knowledge of qi and its cultivation which lie at the > roots of their medicine. Are we to put them on a pedestal and say that > humans these days can never gain a similar understanding through > direct experience? > > What I find particularly worrying about Z'ev's outbursts is that the > approach is very much like the aggressive line taken by the WM > quackbuster sceptic's. For them,the practice of any non-orthodox > medicine has to be justified on the basis of some external Authority > (scientific proof, RCTs etc). Demanding quotations, sources for > anything that's said in a conversation is a similar kind of aggression > in the TCM world. Who controls this Knowledge? - a handful of academic > medical historians? Who controls the dispensation of this Knowledge in > the west? - a handful of TCM Colleges in whose interests it is to > " academicize " any discussions. > This denial of the ordinary individual's ability to obtain knowledge > through experiential means, reminds me of the Pre-Reformation Church. > It was heresy to read the Bible in English - services were in Latin, > the Bible was in Latin - the ordinary folk had no access to their > " Truth " except via the 'experts' - the priests. An individual's > relationship with divinity could only be by means of intermediaries, > controlled by powerful vested interests - never through what they felt > or experienced directly. So I feel this argument is very much about > our's views about what constitutes " Knowledge " or " Truth " , and whether > we are willing to deny personal experience of something, in favour of > an external " authority " . > > Best wishes, > > Godfrey Bartlett > > > > > > Chinese Medicine , " " > <zrosenbe@s...> wrote: > > > > On Sep 22, 2004, at 7:52 AM, Rich wrote: > > > > > Dear Z'ev, > > > > > >> I am sorry Rich, > > >> You invite criticism with outrageous statements like these. > > > > > > Outrageous? Millions upon millions of people study - in various > > > practices - and experience qi every day in their lives. > > > > Don't be patronizing. This is not what you claimed in your post. > You > > claimed to understand what the ancient writers were talking about > > without an accurate translation of a text. > > > > > > > > > > > >> This claim is totally false to anyone with common sense. > > > > > > Hmmm .. you may be insulting many people other than myself. > > > > > > > I see it more as you insulting this list with your grandiose claims. > > > > OK, then, let's here from other people. Can you experience what > the > > ancient authors of classical texts were without accurate > translations > > of those texts, without access to the Chinese language, or without > even > > reading the text? And how would you know? I certainly wouldn't. > By > > 'feeling their qi'? > > > > > >> If you are reading an inaccurate translation of a classical > text, > > >> how could you experience what the ancient writers were saying? > > > > > > I merely said that I experience the flow of qi that is probably > the > > > same experience that the ancient writers experience. When I > experience > > > the flow of qi through the channels, it is probably the same what > the > > > ancient writers experienced - unless the nature of " qi " and the > human > > > channel system itself has changed since ancient times. If this is > > > true, then all of the classics are irrelevant. > > > > You are making a claim that you cannot defend in any manner other > than > > your experience. Why should I buy it? Just because you say so? > > > > > > When I experience the qi arising from the Po, Hun, Shen, it is > > > probably the same qi that the ancient writers experienced. It > should > > > be all the same because we are all experiencing exactly the same > > > thing, the same qi that existed 500 years ago exists today. It is > all > > > qi - though most probably Consciousness itself has evolved. Qi, > in my > > > view, being a manifestation of Consciousness. But I do not claim > this > > > to be a strict TCM perspective. However, the Classics certainly > talk > > > about the body arising from the Shen. > > > > Again, you are making statements and claims that you cannot backup > in > > any fashion, except your own personal experience. As you say, 'in > your > > view' qi is a manifestation of consciousness. So, now we need to > know > > what you mean by consciousness. Also, what you mean about 'the > body > > arising from the shen'. What are your sources? What do you mean? > > Stop making grand, generalized statements about things without > source > > materials or quotations. > > > > > > > > > > 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.