pathogenesis

[Guest guest]

Dear Friends, colleagues, and teachers,

 

I believe that one of the unique hallmarks of our medicine is the importance

of determining pathogenesis, and that for chronic illness, it is, IMHO, even

more of a priority than diagnosis. (I am explicitly referring here to Western

Biomedical diagnosis, and am not referring to the process of pattern

identification and differential diagnosis which give us essential information

as to the current status of the patient's functioning and interconnectness.)

For the fact is that illness never occurs in a vacuum, and by working with our

patients to determine from whence illness originated, we are able to, G-d

willing, unmask and render benign the monster that may have been slowly,

insidiously destroying our patient's health. Again, I want to emphasize, that

signs and symptoms, and differential diagnosis all provide important clues,

but IMVHO, the key is what we do with those clues, some of which may appear to

be unrelated. It is our ability to view the larger

panaramic picture, that will determine the degree of our success as agents of

healing. Just as when one's brakes begin to squeak, he knows that an important

aspect of his car needs to be addressed, so too, if they stop squeaking, it

would be foolish for him to think that the problem with his brakes had

spontaneously resolved itself. With that lengthy introduction, I would like to

posit that there are 3 basic pathogenic causes to chronic illness: inflammation,

vacuity, and damage to spleen and stomach. Please forgive me is this sounds

like dumbing down reductionism, but as a clinician, my first concerns are how I

can determine why my patient is suffering, from when was there a change to the

worse, and what event or life-change occurred then to engender that change.

Even though the four manifestations of inflammation: redness, heat, swelling

and pain are not identified as a unified pattern in Chinese medicine and are

rather identified as stasis or stagnation,

IMHO, inflammation preceeds, coexists with, and is far more pervasive than

just stasis. Though one might ask " what about cold stagnation, where

inflammation clearly is not a consideration? " I would contend that there the

root of the cold pathogen would be its damage to the Spleen and Stomach, and by

invigorating the digestive tract, by drying dampness, by warming the spleen,

cold stagnation will be resolved.

 

'Just thinking out loud.

 

I welcome your thoughts and criticisms

 

 

Sincerely,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hello Yehuda,

 

I have been thinking about this very concept myself, but (and I too am just

thinking out loud) I would start even sooner then with your suggestion of where

the disease process starts.

 

 

You posit in your idea that “there are 3 basic pathogenic causes to chronic

illness: inflammation, vacuity, and damage to spleen and stomach.” I don’t want

to be too esoteric here, but in some sense in my practice, how can I afford not

to. We are taught that vacuity, SP/ ST damage, and Stagnation are end

diagnosis. But I don’t believe in the end that they are – I believe that these

diagnoses are still just the branch issue and not the true root issue.

 

I am very interested in pathomechanisms, and study my patients quite deeply.

In my own practice I see the pathomechanisms as being a bleed down from spirit/

shen, to Emotion, and finally to the physical.

 

Let me take this one step further. That this pathomechanism theory really is

two fold, that which comes in from outside, and that which come from inside.

The outside is all of our traditional theory such as 6 stage/ 4 level, etc. We

have a pathomechanism picture for the way these things evolve from classics such

as the Shang Han Lun and Wen Bing. What we don’t have is a pathomechanism

picture for the evolvement of internal disease.

 

I will constrain my discussion here of pathomechanisms then to the “inside.”

 

You said: “For the fact is that illness never occurs in a vacuum, and by

working with our patients to determine from whence illness originated, we are

able to, G-d willing, unmask and render benign the monster that may have been

slowly, insidiously destroying our patient's health.”

 

I believe you hit the nail on the head here. The question is what was a

patient doing before they became vacuous, or before they had inflammation, or

before they had SP/ ST damage? I believe it is their habits that have caused

these conditions for the most part. I believe that a majority of us look at

diet, and what a patient consumes when we are thinking of our treatment plan.

But how many of us look at how our patients think, and better yet what are the

thoughts that are recurring in a patients head, especially as they do the habits

that are self destructive to them.

 

I believe that this is an even deeper issue then thought though. Thought is

still a branch diagnoses. We as the practitioners have to look even deeper to

the motivations behind the thoughts, or what I call the conditioning. We are

all set up to have disease, by our cultures, I don’t care which one you come

from. This dis-ease comes from conditioning of thought. These are our habitual

emotions. Lets take Anger for example: When someone does something to make you

Angry, whose fault is it really that you are angry? Is it their fault or your

fault? What does that anger bring up inside of each of us that makes us want to

explode? Well in the generation cycle, Fear comes before Anger – and when you

talk to most people after they have had an anger explosion (or implosion) they

will upon questioning reveal that the other person’s actions were simply a

trigger which incited a fear reaction within themselves, which created Anger.

 

How many times a day does this happen to our patients, how many times to they

not complete the generation cycle of fear to anger to joy? Who teaches them to

reclaim the energy in their fear? find the wisdom in their anger? and passion

in their joy? Without balance of the five emotions they too turn to disease.

 

I am going to go even one step further then this even, which is that the

generation cycle still is just a branch for something even more subtle. That is

that of Tai Chi – or the Supreme Ultimate – or the patient’s relationship and

affinity to their own soul/ shen. I treat a lot of patients for pathomechanisms

that I was never taught in school that relate to the shen, but have nothing to

do with mania and only cause a small amount of anxiety. For answers when I am

stuck on a pathomechanism problem of this magnitude, I turn to Classical texts

such as Zhu Dan Xi’s text.

 

To sum up, I guess for me it is not just about understanding a patient from

the perspective of where they are now – but to truly understand the pathogenesis

– I have to attempt to wrap my mind around everywhere they have been and

everywhere that they want to go. It is only after I have come to an

understanding of this that I begin to look at the many branch diagnoses and

begin to tease the strings apart as to what is important and needs treatment,

and what is not important and will resolve on it own.

 

As always I appreciate the discussion.

 

Sincerely,

 

L.Ac.

The Database

Chinese Medicine

 

 

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search.

 

[Guest guest]

I would agree, as Dr. Candace Pert has discovered in her Molecues of Emotion. We

perceive our environment,

we react to the nonphysical by sensory perception which becomes physical in the

reaction,therefore where the emotion goes, the molecue goes. To see this another

way

as a result of our perception of what happens, we make a decision ( which sets

up the receptors that come to the cell surface) and therefore a reaction, occurs

based on a

cascade of molecues........the physical which then determines the body's

physical response and therefore psychosomatic dis ease or not.Dr. Deepok Chopra

speaks of how this occurs in his

New Physics of Healing Cd and the Cd from Dr. Pert Your Body is Your Subconcious

Mind. Now we see how the Chinese were right all along knowing the emotions were

the root of all dis ease, the lack of homeostasis

occurs when the emoting results in " stuck " responses, like the continual cycling

with in the stress response, the HPA axis (hypothalmus-pituatary-adrenal axis)

is where the Triple Heater can be modulated to either stay stuck, discharging

negative or modulating the emotions via acupuncture and herbs, and Qi Gong,Tai

Chi,, Tui Na Ah Mo, Chinese Diet Therapy can all help however this has to happen

somewhat inside the body of disease, the lightbulb has to come on that helps the

body " see " how to escape the cycle of negative charge, to jump out of the loop

of reactivity, to enable himself to reach homeostasis again.Intergration of

mind, body and spirit is what Chinese medicine does best and why western

mediicne will always fail.You can use TCM just like allopathic medicine although

more successfully to affect the integrated body mind spirit however, at some

point the self needs to figure out how to control the emotions and keep out of

disharmony.I believe animals, which do emote, even 4 celled organisms emote,

outside of humans, they " react " instinctively and have less control without the

prefrontal cortex to " learn " how to " see " how to step out of their mind body

spirit system and " observe the perception process and realize the effect of

" reaction " and then understand what they need to do overide stuck patterns,

control negative charge, calm strong reactions and therefore CHANGE, CONSCIOUSLY

CHANGE their molecues (physical response) and therefore the outcome, approach

homeostasis again.Because animals will respond directly to the use of TCM

principles, you can make the shift occur.However, what I am finding in animals

is that animals have the ability to " entrain " to the human caretaker's emotional

discordance if one is present.In this case, only the healing of the caretaker

will also result in a healing of the companion animal.I am not sure if the

entrainment of the animal to the human is conscious or not, you would think not,

if you think it may be possible for that to be a CONSCIOUS decision on the part

of the companion animal, this gives an entirely new significance to the

classification " companion animal " .Many times, the animals entrainment to the

emotional discordance of the human caretaker is better able to illustrate for a

non conscious (of the reality of the situation)caretaker or for the conscious

perception of a perceptive healing channeler around them, what is actually

happening as a result of the emtoional discordance of the caretakers.Again,

expands the significance of the role of companion aniamls and their significance

to human health.I see TCM as what's on top, now, with the advancements we are

learning where the Chinese were observing what was happening but just unable at

that time to know how it was happening.When western medicine seperated out the

body from the mind and spirit, giving the soul and spirit care to the church,

they disected out the trillogy and effectively killed their chances of ever

being able to " heal " . In this age of psychoneuroimmunology, we are seeing that

an integrative approach is the only way to effect to the root.Intergrative being

integrating the body mind spirit (soul)back into one.You can not and will not

get healing by working only with a few pieces of the puzzle.Now, miracles happen

especially when the body of the dis eased, becomes conscoiusly aware of what

state they are in and why.Spontaneous cures happen when the patient " sees " and

makes a response towards homeostasis.Sincerely,Patricia Jordan DVM,CVA,CTCVM &

Herbology

 

 

: jonk2012:

Fri, 21 Dec 2007 12:25:56 -0800Re: pathogenesis

 

 

 

 

Hello Yehuda,I have been thinking about this very concept myself, but (and I too

am just thinking out loud) I would start even sooner then with your suggestion

of where the disease process starts.You posit in your idea that “there are 3

basic pathogenic causes to chronic illness: inflammation, vacuity, and damage to

spleen and stomach.” I don’t want to be too esoteric here, but in some sense in

my practice, how can I afford not to. We are taught that vacuity, SP/ ST damage,

and Stagnation are end diagnosis. But I don’t believe in the end that they are –

I believe that these diagnoses are still just the branch issue and not the true

root issue.I am very interested in pathomechanisms, and study my patients quite

deeply. In my own practice I see the pathomechanisms as being a bleed down from

spirit/ shen, to Emotion, and finally to the physical.Let me take this one step

further. That this pathomechanism theory really is two fold, that which comes in

from outside, and that which come from inside. The outside is all of our

traditional theory such as 6 stage/ 4 level, etc. We have a pathomechanism

picture for the way these things evolve from classics such as the Shang Han Lun

and Wen Bing. What we don’t have is a pathomechanism picture for the evolvement

of internal disease.I will constrain my discussion here of pathomechanisms then

to the “inside.” You said: “For the fact is that illness never occurs in a

vacuum, and by working with our patients to determine from whence illness

originated, we are able to, G-d willing, unmask and render benign the monster

that may have been slowly, insidiously destroying our patient's health.”I

believe you hit the nail on the head here. The question is what was a patient

doing before they became vacuous, or before they had inflammation, or before

they had SP/ ST damage? I believe it is their habits that have caused these

conditions for the most part. I believe that a majority of us look at diet, and

what a patient consumes when we are thinking of our treatment plan. But how many

of us look at how our patients think, and better yet what are the thoughts that

are recurring in a patients head, especially as they do the habits that are self

destructive to them. I believe that this is an even deeper issue then thought

though. Thought is still a branch diagnoses. We as the practitioners have to

look even deeper to the motivations behind the thoughts, or what I call the

conditioning. We are all set up to have disease, by our cultures, I don’t care

which one you come from. This dis-ease comes from conditioning of thought. These

are our habitual emotions. Lets take Anger for example: When someone does

something to make you Angry, whose fault is it really that you are angry? Is it

their fault or your fault? What does that anger bring up inside of each of us

that makes us want to explode? Well in the generation cycle, Fear comes before

Anger – and when you talk to most people after they have had an anger explosion

(or implosion) they will upon questioning reveal that the other person’s actions

were simply a trigger which incited a fear reaction within themselves, which

created Anger.How many times a day does this happen to our patients, how many

times to they not complete the generation cycle of fear to anger to joy? Who

teaches them to reclaim the energy in their fear? find the wisdom in their

anger? and passion in their joy? Without balance of the five emotions they too

turn to disease. I am going to go even one step further then this even, which is

that the generation cycle still is just a branch for something even more subtle.

That is that of Tai Chi – or the Supreme Ultimate – or the patient’s

relationship and affinity to their own soul/ shen. I treat a lot of patients for

pathomechanisms that I was never taught in school that relate to the shen, but

have nothing to do with mania and only cause a small amount of anxiety. For

answers when I am stuck on a pathomechanism problem of this magnitude, I turn to

Classical texts such as Zhu Dan Xi’s text.To sum up, I guess for me it is not

just about understanding a patient from the perspective of where they are now –

but to truly understand the pathogenesis – I have to attempt to wrap my mind

around everywhere they have been and everywhere that they want to go. It is only

after I have come to an understanding of this that I begin to look at the many

branch diagnoses and begin to tease the strings apart as to what is important

and needs treatment, and what is not important and will resolve on it own.As

always I appreciate the discussion.Sincerely, L.Ac.The Chinese

Medicine DatabaseChinese MedicineLooking for last

minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search.[Non-text portions of

this message have been removed]Be a better

friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.[Non-text

portions of this message have been removed]

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________

Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.

http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_122007

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Jon and Patricia

 

Thank you! Your ideas are missing and obviously essential complements to

painting an accurate picture of where our patients go wrong. Again, there are

no accidents, nor does illness occur in a vacuum. Our jobs, together with our

patients, are, of course, to be detectives, but also translators and tour

guides. And that means, helping our patients re-live those seminal events which

changed their lives.

 

If either of you happen to live in the LA area, I would love to meet with you

personally and explore this further in person.

 

Yehuda

 

Patricia Jordan <coastalcatclinic wrote:

 

I would agree, as Dr. Candace Pert has discovered in her Molecues of Emotion. We

perceive our environment,

we react to the nonphysical by sensory perception which becomes physical in the

reaction,therefore where the emotion goes, the molecue goes. To see this another

way

as a result of our perception of what happens, we make a decision ( which sets

up the receptors that come to the cell surface) and therefore a reaction, occurs

based on a

cascade of molecues........the physical which then determines the body's

physical response and therefore psychosomatic dis ease or not.Dr. Deepok Chopra

speaks of how this occurs in his

New Physics of Healing Cd and the Cd from Dr. Pert Your Body is Your Subconcious

Mind. Now we see how the Chinese were right all along knowing the emotions were

the root of all dis ease, the lack of homeostasis

occurs when the emoting results in " stuck " responses, like the continual cycling

with in the stress response, the HPA axis (hypothalmus-pituatary-adrenal axis)

is where the Triple Heater can be modulated to either stay stuck, discharging

negative or modulating the emotions via acupuncture and herbs, and Qi Gong,Tai

Chi,, Tui Na Ah Mo, Chinese Diet Therapy can all help however this has to happen

somewhat inside the body of disease, the lightbulb has to come on that helps the

body " see " how to escape the cycle of negative charge, to jump out of the loop

of reactivity, to enable himself to reach homeostasis again.Intergration of

mind, body and spirit is what Chinese medicine does best and why western

mediicne will always fail.You can use TCM just like allopathic medicine although

more successfully to affect the integrated body mind spirit however, at some

point the self needs to figure out how to control the emotions and keep out of

disharmony.I believe animals, which do

emote, even 4 celled organisms emote, outside of humans, they " react "

instinctively and have less control without the prefrontal cortex to " learn " how

to " see " how to step out of their mind body spirit system and " observe the

perception process and realize the effect of " reaction " and then understand what

they need to do overide stuck patterns, control negative charge, calm strong

reactions and therefore CHANGE, CONSCIOUSLY CHANGE their molecues (physical

response) and therefore the outcome, approach homeostasis again.Because animals

will respond directly to the use of TCM principles, you can make the shift

occur.However, what I am finding in animals is that animals have the ability to

" entrain " to the human caretaker's emotional discordance if one is present.In

this case, only the healing of the caretaker will also result in a healing of

the companion animal.I am not sure if the entrainment of the animal to the human

is conscious or not, you would think not, if you think

it may be possible for that to be a CONSCIOUS decision on the part of the

companion animal, this gives an entirely new significance to the classification

" companion animal " .Many times, the animals entrainment to the emotional

discordance of the human caretaker is better able to illustrate for a non

conscious (of the reality of the situation)caretaker or for the conscious

perception of a perceptive healing channeler around them, what is actually

happening as a result of the emtoional discordance of the caretakers.Again,

expands the significance of the role of companion aniamls and their significance

to human health.I see TCM as what's on top, now, with the advancements we are

learning where the Chinese were observing what was happening but just unable at

that time to know how it was happening.When western medicine seperated out the

body from the mind and spirit, giving the soul and spirit care to the church,

they disected out the trillogy and effectively killed their

chances of ever being able to " heal " . In this age of psychoneuroimmunology, we

are seeing that an integrative approach is the only way to effect to the

root.Intergrative being integrating the body mind spirit (soul)back into one.You

can not and will not get healing by working only with a few pieces of the

puzzle.Now, miracles happen especially when the body of the dis eased, becomes

conscoiusly aware of what state they are in and why.Spontaneous cures happen

when the patient " sees " and makes a response towards

homeostasis.Sincerely,Patricia Jordan DVM,CVA,CTCVM & Herbology

 

 

: jonk2012:

Fri, 21 Dec 2007 12:25:56 -0800Re: pathogenesis

 

 

 

 

Hello Yehuda,I have been thinking about this very concept myself, but (and I too

am just thinking out loud) I would start even sooner then with your suggestion

of where the disease process starts.You posit in your idea that “there are 3

basic pathogenic causes to chronic illness: inflammation, vacuity, and damage to

spleen and stomach.” I don’t want to be too esoteric here, but in some sense in

my practice, how can I afford not to. We are taught that vacuity, SP/ ST damage,

and Stagnation are end diagnosis. But I don’t believe in the end that they are –

I believe that these diagnoses are still just the branch issue and not the true

root issue.I am very interested in pathomechanisms, and study my patients quite

deeply. In my own practice I see the pathomechanisms as being a bleed down from

spirit/ shen, to Emotion, and finally to the physical.Let me take this one step

further. That this pathomechanism theory really is two fold, that which comes in

from outside, and that

which come from inside. The outside is all of our traditional theory such as 6

stage/ 4 level, etc. We have a pathomechanism picture for the way these things

evolve from classics such as the Shang Han Lun and Wen Bing. What we don’t have

is a pathomechanism picture for the evolvement of internal disease.I will

constrain my discussion here of pathomechanisms then to the “inside.” You said:

“For the fact is that illness never occurs in a vacuum, and by working with our

patients to determine from whence illness originated, we are able to, G-d

willing, unmask and render benign the monster that may have been slowly,

insidiously destroying our patient's health.”I believe you hit the nail on the

head here. The question is what was a patient doing before they became vacuous,

or before they had inflammation, or before they had SP/ ST damage? I believe it

is their habits that have caused these conditions for the most part. I believe

that a majority of us look at diet, and what a

patient consumes when we are thinking of our treatment plan. But how many of us

look at how our patients think, and better yet what are the thoughts that are

recurring in a patients head, especially as they do the habits that are self

destructive to them. I believe that this is an even deeper issue then thought

though. Thought is still a branch diagnoses. We as the practitioners have to

look even deeper to the motivations behind the thoughts, or what I call the

conditioning. We are all set up to have disease, by our cultures, I don’t care

which one you come from. This dis-ease comes from conditioning of thought. These

are our habitual emotions. Lets take Anger for example: When someone does

something to make you Angry, whose fault is it really that you are angry? Is it

their fault or your fault? What does that anger bring up inside of each of us

that makes us want to explode? Well in the generation cycle, Fear comes before

Anger – and when you talk to most people after

they have had an anger explosion (or implosion) they will upon questioning

reveal that the other person’s actions were simply a trigger which incited a

fear reaction within themselves, which created Anger.How many times a day does

this happen to our patients, how many times to they not complete the generation

cycle of fear to anger to joy? Who teaches them to reclaim the energy in their

fear? find the wisdom in their anger? and passion in their joy? Without balance

of the five emotions they too turn to disease. I am going to go even one step

further then this even, which is that the generation cycle still is just a

branch for something even more subtle. That is that of Tai Chi – or the Supreme

Ultimate – or the patient’s relationship and affinity to their own soul/ shen. I

treat a lot of patients for pathomechanisms that I was never taught in school

that relate to the shen, but have nothing to do with mania and only cause a

small amount of anxiety. For answers when I am

stuck on a pathomechanism problem of this magnitude, I turn to Classical texts

such as Zhu Dan Xi’s text.To sum up, I guess for me it is not just about

understanding a patient from the perspective of where they are now – but to

truly understand the pathogenesis – I have to attempt to wrap my mind around

everywhere they have been and everywhere that they want to go. It is only after

I have come to an understanding of this that I begin to look at the many branch

diagnoses and begin to tease the strings apart as to what is important and needs

treatment, and what is not important and will resolve on it own.As always I

appreciate the discussion.Sincerely, L.Ac.The

DatabaseChinese MedicineLooking for last minute

shopping deals? Find them fast with Search.[Non-text portions of this

message have been removed]Be a better friend,

newshound, and know-it-all with Mobile. Try it

now.

[Guest guest]

Z'ev,

 

I don't think my education in TCM was any more or less shallow than

other acupuncturists I have talked to at conferences and training

courses. My complaint is fairly common. The problem may be that a 3

year program does not allow the time to go into things in depth which

is why I have been studying non-stop for the last 7 years.

 

Furthermore, it has not been my experience, studying with Niki

Bilton, that she is imposing a Western view of emotions onto Chinese

thinking. As a matter of fact, she rarely uses the word emotions but

stays more with the will of the Official. Her teaching is based

directly on the work of Larre and de la Vallee and makes their work

immediately applicable to acupuncture treatments.

 

It would take me hours to explain the complexity and subtlety of

Bilton's teaching, so suffice to say that unless you have studied

with her or some one of her caliber you cannot make an accurate

judgement about the Worsley approach.

 

Zinnia

[Guest guest]

Zinnia,

I think that what is true in life can be expressed in a somewhat

simple manner, so rather than obfuscating the issue of spirit and

official, why don't we begin to discuss this by clearly defining

terms. In order to do so, we need to know what the Chinese characters

are, their pinyin equivalents, and English definitions. What do you

and your teacher mean by 'spirit'? What is the original Chinese term

for 'officials'? What dictionary, glossary, or interpretation are you

using for these statements?

 

I have a lot more experience with the Worsley material than you

might think, and I don't define myself as just TCM in scope. I feel

quite qualified to challenge what I feel what are interpretations of

Chinese source materials, and I am not alone in my views. I've also

read and enjoyed all of the Larre/de la Valle texts. I think you are

avoiding my point about Western ideas about spirit vs. Chinese. These

need to be understood clearly, not just interpreted as one wishes to.

 

 

On Dec 29, 2007, at 7:10 AM, zinnia wrote:

 

> Z'ev,

>

> I don't think my education in TCM was any more or less shallow than

> other acupuncturists I have talked to at conferences and training

> courses. My complaint is fairly common. The problem may be that a 3

> year program does not allow the time to go into things in depth which

> is why I have been studying non-stop for the last 7 years.

>

> Furthermore, it has not been my experience, studying with Niki

> Bilton, that she is imposing a Western view of emotions onto Chinese

> thinking. As a matter of fact, she rarely uses the word emotions but

> stays more with the will of the Official. Her teaching is based

> directly on the work of Larre and de la Vallee and makes their work

> immediately applicable to acupuncture treatments.

>

> It would take me hours to explain the complexity and subtlety of

> Bilton's teaching, so suffice to say that unless you have studied

> with her or some one of her caliber you cannot make an accurate

> judgement about the Worsley approach.

>

> Zinnia

>

>

>

 

 

Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

San Diego, Ca. 92122

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Zev,

 

I agree with your point about the characters but these have changed and

so have their meanings over time. Who is to say what we think this or

that character means when none of us were there and things have

changed a great deal since then? What are we to do with our own

understanding and the way in which we all see the world? I see these

as huge barriers to achieving what you and many others are proposing

and I do not have any solutions. One caution is that one idea equals one

character is too simplistic. I know from my own martial arts studies that

terms have many levels of meaning and each with their own level of technique.

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

: zrosenbe:

Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:51:12 -0800Re: re:pathogenesis

 

 

 

 

Zinnia,I think that what is true in life can be expressed in a somewhat simple

manner, so rather than obfuscating the issue of spirit and official, why don't

we begin to discuss this by clearly defining terms. In order to do so, we need

to know what the Chinese characters are, their pinyin equivalents, and English

definitions. What do you and your teacher mean by 'spirit'? What is the original

Chinese term for 'officials'? What dictionary, glossary, or interpretation are

you using for these statements?I have a lot more experience with the Worsley

material than you might think, and I don't define myself as just TCM in scope. I

feel quite qualified to challenge what I feel what are interpretations of

Chinese source materials, and I am not alone in my views. I've also read and

enjoyed all of the Larre/de la Valle texts. I think you are avoiding my point

about Western ideas about spirit vs. Chinese. These need to be understood

clearly, not just interpreted as one wishes to.On Dec 29, 2007, at

7:10 AM, zinnia wrote:> Z'ev,>> I don't think my education in TCM was any more

or less shallow than> other acupuncturists I have talked to at conferences and

training> courses. My complaint is fairly common. The problem may be that a 3>

year program does not allow the time to go into things in depth which> is why I

have been studying non-stop for the last 7 years.>> Furthermore, it has not been

my experience, studying with Niki> Bilton, that she is imposing a Western view

of emotions onto Chinese> thinking. As a matter of fact, she rarely uses the

word emotions but> stays more with the will of the Official. Her teaching is

based> directly on the work of Larre and de la Vallee and makes their work>

immediately applicable to acupuncture treatments.>> It would take me hours to

explain the complexity and subtlety of> Bilton's teaching, so suffice to say

that unless you have studied> with her or some one of her caliber you cannot

make an accurate> judgement about the Worsley approach.>> Zinnia>>> Z'ev

RosenbergChair, Department of Herbal MedicinePacific College of Oriental

MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text portions of this message have been

removed]

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________

The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an Xbox 360

Console.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/

 

 

[Guest guest]

I am sorry, Mike,

But in my mind what you are saying is a cop out. If someone

implies that Worsley acupuncture is superior to TCM because it treats

the spirit in a public forum, that statement has to be qualified. No

one is saying that one character has only one meaning, but let's at

least be clear about what we mean by 'spirit'. If a person is

claiming one approach is superior to another, the onus is on that

individual to make their case, other than saying that you need to

study with their teacher.

 

I'll give you an example of what I mean. You cannot find in any

Chinese source the interpretations of the acupuncture point names

given by the Worsley school. You want to interpret acupuncture point

names according to 'spirit'? Fine, but don't claim that that was what

the Chinese sources intended originally, or even over the many

generations since. I have no problem with the Worsley approach to

acupuncture, it has a lot of merits, but we must qualify our claims in

an accurate, academic manner.

 

 

On Dec 30, 2007, at 10:12 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

> Zev,

>

> I agree with your point about the characters but these have changed

> and

> so have their meanings over time. Who is to say what we think this or

> that character means when none of us were there and things have

> changed a great deal since then? What are we to do with our own

> understanding and the way in which we all see the world? I see these

> as huge barriers to achieving what you and many others are proposing

> and I do not have any solutions. One caution is that one idea equals

> one

> character is too simplistic. I know from my own martial arts studies

> that

> terms have many levels of meaning and each with their own level of

> technique. Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

> : zrosenbe

> : Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:51:12 -0800Re: re:pathogenesis

>

> Zinnia,I think that what is true in life can be expressed in a

> somewhat simple manner, so rather than obfuscating the issue of

> spirit and official, why don't we begin to discuss this by clearly

> defining terms. In order to do so, we need to know what the Chinese

> characters are, their pinyin equivalents, and English definitions.

> What do you and your teacher mean by 'spirit'? What is the original

> Chinese term for 'officials'? What dictionary, glossary, or

> interpretation are you using for these statements?I have a lot more

> experience with the Worsley material than you might think, and I

> don't define myself as just TCM in scope. I feel quite qualified to

> challenge what I feel what are interpretations of Chinese source

> materials, and I am not alone in my views. I've also read and

> enjoyed all of the Larre/de la Valle texts. I think you are avoiding

> my point about Western ideas about spirit vs. Chinese. These need to

> be understood clearly, not just interpreted as one wishes to.Z'ev

> RosenbergOn Dec 29, 2007, at 7:10 AM, zinnia wrote:> Z'ev,>> I don't

> think my education in TCM was any more or less shallow than> other

> acupuncturists I have talked to at conferences and training>

> courses. My complaint is fairly common. The problem may be that a 3>

> year program does not allow the time to go into things in depth

> which> is why I have been studying non-stop for the last 7 years.>>

> Furthermore, it has not been my experience, studying with Niki>

> Bilton, that she is imposing a Western view of emotions onto

> Chinese> thinking. As a matter of fact, she rarely uses the word

> emotions but> stays more with the will of the Official. Her teaching

> is based> directly on the work of Larre and de la Vallee and makes

> their work> immediately applicable to acupuncture treatments.>> It

> would take me hours to explain the complexity and subtlety of>

> Bilton's teaching, so suffice to say that unless you have studied>

> with her or some one of her caliber you cannot make an accurate>

> judgement about the Worsley approach.>> Zinnia>>> , L.

> Ac.Chair, Department of Herbal MedicinePacific College of Oriental

> MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text portions of this message have

> been removed]

>

> ________

> The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an

> Xbox 360 Console.

> http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/

>

>

[Guest guest]

Group,

 

 

 

Z'ev's point is important and stands on solid ground.

 

 

 

Worsely's students have for sometime made considerable aggressive statements

against TCM / CM. I have never been clear of their motives to put down CM

while propping themselves up with labels such as " classical acupuncturists "

 

 

 

For the record, I also have no problem with their practice of medicine, only

their claims and attacks I take offense to.

 

 

 

I think 5 element acupuncturists should take it upon themselves (as many CM

and TCM practitioners routinely do) to search through the historical records

and find out where their information comes from. I for one have never seen

many of these purported " classical acupuncture " ideas and terms that they

use in Chinese literature past or present. One should ask, if one cannot

find source texts to verify such approaches, then IMHO one should be content

in accepting that many of these ideas are " modern Western adaptations " and

realize the clinical implications of this.

 

 

 

Furthermore, if one cannot find sects of doctors in China (or other parts of

Asia) practicing these styles then one also must think about where it comes

from.

 

 

 

I am open to reading anything in Chinese that someone can find that

discusses the Worsley style, I actually have looked a few times and have not

much luck finding anything.

 

 

 

In addition, I have recently seen these " spiritual - emotional " ideas being

applied to herbal medicine. I again just ask where does it come from? Such

an approach becomes problematic when it is taught as CM and at the same time

replaces fundamental knowledge that many students routinely lack. If we can

not answer, where does it come from, then how can we even begin to evaluate

its efficacy. But I guess the new-age descriptions override any of these

concerns.

 

 

 

As Z'ev has pointed out, CM has a long history of treating emotional and

spiritual issues. There is no shortage on information. One just needs to

search deep. I think that my contention is that the Worsley's approach is

not inline with what we see in CM literature (past or present). Therefore to

call it " classical Chinese medicine " is just uninformed and arrogant.

Moreover, to say that TCM / CM doesn't treat emotions or the spirit (or is

any less classical) is ridiculous. IMO, such a stance just further divides

our profession.

 

 

 

Consequently, if one is going to make claims (x system being better than y

for a disorder) let us see some research. If one wants us to evaluate terms

like " will of the official " it would be helpful for us see the Chinese

characters so we can all get on the same page. BTW (Zinnia) - Chinese

Medicine (from China) uses the term " emotions " very often.

 

 

 

Finally, this is in no way saying that there are not great Worsley (or any

other style) practitioners helping people. My point is merely to support the

request to try to accurately source the information that we use.

 

Merely stating that " one must study with my teacher " or " this is all oral

tradition " is IMHO just a cop-out and does not serve in the process of an

academic discussion. If one disagrees with the claim that the Worsely style

is " based on Western sources and interpretations of psyche, emotion and

spirit, superimposed on the Chinese medical framework " then please present

something of contrary, that we can all evaluate. However, at this point in

time I agree with Z'ev.

 

 

 

Respectfully,

 

 

 

-

 

 

 

 

 

_____

 

Chinese Medicine

Chinese Medicine On Behalf Of Z'ev

Rosenberg

Sunday, December 30, 2007 12:55 PM

Chinese Medicine

Re: re:pathogenesis

 

 

 

I am sorry, Mike,

But in my mind what you are saying is a cop out. If someone

implies that Worsley acupuncture is superior to TCM because it treats

the spirit in a public forum, that statement has to be qualified. No

one is saying that one character has only one meaning, but let's at

least be clear about what we mean by 'spirit'. If a person is

claiming one approach is superior to another, the onus is on that

individual to make their case, other than saying that you need to

study with their teacher.

 

I'll give you an example of what I mean. You cannot find in any

Chinese source the interpretations of the acupuncture point names

given by the Worsley school. You want to interpret acupuncture point

names according to 'spirit'? Fine, but don't claim that that was what

the Chinese sources intended originally, or even over the many

generations since. I have no problem with the Worsley approach to

acupuncture, it has a lot of merits, but we must qualify our claims in

an accurate, academic manner.

 

 

On Dec 30, 2007, at 10:12 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

> Zev,

>

> I agree with your point about the characters but these have changed

> and

> so have their meanings over time. Who is to say what we think this or

> that character means when none of us were there and things have

> changed a great deal since then? What are we to do with our own

> understanding and the way in which we all see the world? I see these

> as huge barriers to achieving what you and many others are proposing

> and I do not have any solutions. One caution is that one idea equals

> one

> character is too simplistic. I know from my own martial arts studies

> that

> terms have many levels of meaning and each with their own level of

> technique. Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

> Traditional_

<Chinese Medicine%40From>

Chinese_Medicine: zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT)

<zrosenbe%40san.rr.comDate> rr.comDate

> : Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:51:12 -0800Re: re:pathogenesis

>

> Zinnia,I think that what is true in life can be expressed in a

> somewhat simple manner, so rather than obfuscating the issue of

> spirit and official, why don't we begin to discuss this by clearly

> defining terms. In order to do so, we need to know what the Chinese

> characters are, their pinyin equivalents, and English definitions.

> What do you and your teacher mean by 'spirit'? What is the original

> Chinese term for 'officials'? What dictionary, glossary, or

> interpretation are you using for these statements?I have a lot more

> experience with the Worsley material than you might think, and I

> don't define myself as just TCM in scope. I feel quite qualified to

> challenge what I feel what are interpretations of Chinese source

> materials, and I am not alone in my views. I've also read and

> enjoyed all of the Larre/de la Valle texts. I think you are avoiding

> my point about Western ideas about spirit vs. Chinese. These need to

> be understood clearly, not just interpreted as one wishes to.Z'ev

> RosenbergOn Dec 29, 2007, at 7:10 AM, zinnia wrote:> Z'ev,>> I don't

> think my education in TCM was any more or less shallow than> other

> acupuncturists I have talked to at conferences and training>

> courses. My complaint is fairly common. The problem may be that a 3>

> year program does not allow the time to go into things in depth

> which> is why I have been studying non-stop for the last 7 years.>>

> Furthermore, it has not been my experience, studying with Niki>

> Bilton, that she is imposing a Western view of emotions onto

> Chinese> thinking. As a matter of fact, she rarely uses the word

> emotions but> stays more with the will of the Official. Her teaching

> is based> directly on the work of Larre and de la Vallee and makes

> their work> immediately applicable to acupuncture treatments.>> It

> would take me hours to explain the complexity and subtlety of>

> Bilton's teaching, so suffice to say that unless you have studied>

> with her or some one of her caliber you cannot make an accurate>

> judgement about the Worsley approach.>> Zinnia>>> , L.

> Ac.Chair, Department of Herbal MedicinePacific College of Oriental

> MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text portions of this message have

> been removed]

>

> ________

> The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an

> Xbox 360 Console.

> http://www.xbox. <http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>

com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/

>

>

[Guest guest]

Zev,

 

I understand and agree with what you are saying but am pointing out

another very important and fatal flaw in our exact definitions of terms.

 

When I was in undergrad and took several classes in anthropology, the

idea of definitions was very speculative and I consider that this has

not changed, even though ancient terms and understanding over time have.

 

The truth is that even with the best evidence, we do not really know

much about ancient thoughts and beliefs and how this impacted our

medicine.

 

As this is very relevant to learning OM, how do you propose dealing

with this problem in a legit way as we have largely ignored it?

 

Second, why has there not been more of this type of influence applied

to many of the TCM curricula thus far? If this is such a major issue,

then why is there not a larger emphasis to support change to improve

things?

 

There is no cop out here. I am simply wanting to bring our discussion

into the application realm and we need to first have a better feel for what

is happening.

 

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

: zrosenbe:

Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:54:53 -0800Re: re:pathogenesis

 

 

 

 

I am sorry, Mike,But in my mind what you are saying is a cop out. If someone

implies that Worsley acupuncture is superior to TCM because it treats the spirit

in a public forum, that statement has to be qualified. No one is saying that one

character has only one meaning, but let's at least be clear about what we mean

by 'spirit'. If a person is claiming one approach is superior to another, the

onus is on that individual to make their case, other than saying that you need

to study with their teacher.I'll give you an example of what I mean. You cannot

find in any Chinese source the interpretations of the acupuncture point names

given by the Worsley school. You want to interpret acupuncture point names

according to 'spirit'? Fine, but don't claim that that was what the Chinese

sources intended originally, or even over the many generations since. I have no

problem with the Worsley approach to acupuncture, it has a lot of merits, but we

must qualify our claims in an accurate, academic manner.On Dec 30,

2007, at 10:12 AM, mike Bowser wrote:> Zev,>> I agree with your point about the

characters but these have changed > and> so have their meanings over time. Who

is to say what we think this or> that character means when none of us were there

and things have> changed a great deal since then? What are we to do with our

own> understanding and the way in which we all see the world? I see these> as

huge barriers to achieving what you and many others are proposing> and I do not

have any solutions. One caution is that one idea equals > one> character is too

simplistic. I know from my own martial arts studies > that> terms have many

levels of meaning and each with their own level of > technique. Mike W. Bowser,

L Ac>> :

zrosenbe > : Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:51:12 -0800Re: TCM -

re:pathogenesis>> Zinnia,I think that what is true in life can be expressed in a

> somewhat simple manner, so rather than obfuscating the issue of > spirit and

official, why don't we begin to discuss this by clearly > defining terms. In

order to do so, we need to know what the Chinese > characters are, their pinyin

equivalents, and English definitions. > What do you and your teacher mean by

'spirit'? What is the original > Chinese term for 'officials'? What dictionary,

glossary, or > interpretation are you using for these statements?I have a lot

more > experience with the Worsley material than you might think, and I > don't

define myself as just TCM in scope. I feel quite qualified to > challenge what I

feel what are interpretations of Chinese source > materials, and I am not alone

in my views. I've also read and > enjoyed all of the Larre/de la Valle texts. I

think you are avoiding > my point about Western ideas about spirit vs. Chinese.

These need to > be understood clearly, not just interpreted as one wishes

to.Z'ev > RosenbergOn Dec 29, 2007, at 7:10 AM, zinnia wrote:> Z'ev,>> I don't >

think my education in TCM was any more or less shallow than> other >

acupuncturists I have talked to at conferences and training> > courses. My

complaint is fairly common. The problem may be that a 3> > year program does not

allow the time to go into things in depth > which> is why I have been studying

non-stop for the last 7 years.>> > Furthermore, it has not been my experience,

studying with Niki> > Bilton, that she is imposing a Western view of emotions

onto > Chinese> thinking. As a matter of fact, she rarely uses the word >

emotions but> stays more with the will of the Official. Her teaching > is based>

directly on the work of Larre and de la Vallee and makes > their work>

immediately applicable to acupuncture treatments.>> It > would take me hours to

explain the complexity and subtlety of> > Bilton's teaching, so suffice to say

that unless you have studied> > with her or some one of her caliber you cannot

make an accurate> > judgement about the Worsley approach.>> Zinnia>>> Z'ev

Rosenberg, L. > Ac.Chair, Department of Herbal MedicinePacific College of

Oriental > MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text portions of this message have >

been removed]>> ________> The

best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an > Xbox 360

Console.> http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>> [Non-text portions of

this message have been removed]>>> Chair, Department of

Herbal MedicinePacific College of Oriental MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text

portions of this message have been removed]

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________

The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an Xbox 360

Console.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/

 

 

[Guest guest]

Mike,

We've veered from the original topic (pathogenesis) pretty far by

now, and also we've veered somewhat from the discussion about the

definition of 'spirit'.

 

Chinese medicine is a technical undertaking, and therefore has a more

exacting language than the average subject. While many Chinese

characters can have more than one English equivalent, a majority are

well suited by one term. Most sources translate shen2 as spirit, so

the question is, what do we mean by spirit? We need to understand the

Chinese context of spirit, because it is an integral part of the

medicine. As difficult as it may be to understand, we must make the

effort. Otherwise, we only superimpose our own cultural attitudes and

beliefs on Chinese medicine.

 

As I continue to work on a text on classical Chinese medicine, I

confront these issues almost daily. However, I've discovered there is

a lot about Han dynasty thought (when the Nan Jing and Shang Han Lun

were written) that is universal and not difficult to understand. It

is more difficult to think different, as Steve Jobs used to say, and

adapt a different logical system and algorithms than exists in

biomedicine.

 

To answer your question as to why these influences have not penetrated

the standard CM school cirricula, at least in the West, it is simple

lack of knowledge or exposure to this material. As Dan Bensky said in

one of his lectures, if we are never exposed to the six channels

differentiation of the Shang Han Lun, we will never be able to see

patients from this perspective, and will be limited in what we can do

to heal our patients.

 

 

On Dec 31, 2007, at 8:49 AM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

> Zev,

>

> I understand and agree with what you are saying but am pointing out

> another very important and fatal flaw in our exact definitions of

> terms.

>

> When I was in undergrad and took several classes in anthropology, the

> idea of definitions was very speculative and I consider that this has

> not changed, even though ancient terms and understanding over time

> have.

>

> The truth is that even with the best evidence, we do not really know

> much about ancient thoughts and beliefs and how this impacted our

> medicine.

>

> As this is very relevant to learning OM, how do you propose dealing

> with this problem in a legit way as we have largely ignored it?

>

> Second, why has there not been more of this type of influence applied

> to many of the TCM curricula thus far? If this is such a major issue,

> then why is there not a larger emphasis to support change to improve

> things?

>

> There is no cop out here. I am simply wanting to bring our discussion

> into the application realm and we need to first have a better feel

> for what

> is happening.

>

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

> : zrosenbe

> : Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:54:53 -0800Re: re:pathogenesis

>

> I am sorry, Mike,But in my mind what you are saying is a cop out. If

> someone implies that Worsley acupuncture is superior to TCM because

> it treats the spirit in a public forum, that statement has to be

> qualified. No one is saying that one character has only one meaning,

> but let's at least be clear about what we mean by 'spirit'. If a

> person is claiming one approach is superior to another, the onus is

> on that individual to make their case, other than saying that you

> need to study with their teacher.I'll give you an example of what I

> mean. You cannot find in any Chinese source the interpretations of

> the acupuncture point names given by the Worsley school. You want to

> interpret acupuncture point names according to 'spirit'? Fine, but

> don't claim that that was what the Chinese sources intended

> originally, or even over the many generations since. I have no

> problem with the Worsley approach to acupuncture, it has a lot of

> merits, but we must qualify our claims in an accurate, academic

> manner.On Dec 30, 2007, at 10:12 AM, mike Bowser

> wrote:> Zev,>> I agree with your point about the characters but

> these have changed > and> so have their meanings over time. Who is

> to say what we think this or> that character means when none of us

> were there and things have> changed a great deal since then? What

> are we to do with our own> understanding and the way in which we all

> see the world? I see these> as huge barriers to achieving what you

> and many others are proposing> and I do not have any solutions. One

> caution is that one idea equals > one> character is too simplistic.

> I know from my own martial arts studies > that> terms have many

> levels of meaning and each with their own level of > technique. Mike

> W. Bowser, L Ac>> To:

> Chinese Medicine: zrosenbe

> > : Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:51:12 -0800Re: TCM -

> re:pathogenesis>> Zinnia,I think that what is true in life can be

> expressed in a > somewhat simple manner, so rather than obfuscating

> the issue of > spirit and official, why don't we begin to discuss

> this by clearly > defining terms. In order to do so, we need to know

> what the Chinese > characters are, their pinyin equivalents, and

> English definitions. > What do you and your teacher mean by

> 'spirit'? What is the original > Chinese term for 'officials'? What

> dictionary, glossary, or > interpretation are you using for these

> statements?I have a lot more > experience with the Worsley material

> than you might think, and I > don't define myself as just TCM in

> scope. I feel quite qualified to > challenge what I feel what are

> interpretations of Chinese source > materials, and I am not alone in

> my views. I've also read and > enjoyed all of the Larre/de la Valle

> texts. I think you are avoiding > my point about Western ideas about

> spirit vs. Chinese. These need to > be understood clearly, not just

> interpreted as one wishes to.Z'ev > RosenbergOn Dec 29, 2007, at

> 7:10 AM, zinnia wrote:> Z'ev,>> I don't > think my education in TCM

> was any more or less shallow than> other > acupuncturists I have

> talked to at conferences and training> > courses. My complaint is

> fairly common. The problem may be that a 3> > year program does not

> allow the time to go into things in depth > which> is why I have

> been studying non-stop for the last 7 years.>> > Furthermore, it has

> not been my experience, studying with Niki> > Bilton, that she is

> imposing a Western view of emotions onto > Chinese> thinking. As a

> matter of fact, she rarely uses the word > emotions but> stays more

> with the will of the Official. Her teaching > is based> directly on

> the work of Larre and de la Vallee and makes > their work>

> immediately applicable to acupuncture treatments.>> It > would take

> me hours to explain the complexity and subtlety of> > Bilton's

> teaching, so suffice to say that unless you have studied> > with her

> or some one of her caliber you cannot make an accurate> > judgement

> about the Worsley approach.>> Zinnia>>> , L. >

> Ac.Chair, Department of Herbal MedicinePacific College of Oriental >

> MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text portions of this message have

> > been removed]>>

> ________> The best

> games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an > Xbox

> 360 Console.> http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>> [Non-

> text portions of this message have been removed]>>> ,

> L. Ac.Chair, Department of Herbal MedicinePacific College of

> Oriental MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text portions of this

> message have been removed]

>

> ________

> The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an

> Xbox 360 Console.

> http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/

>

>

[Guest guest]

Zev,

 

Sorry for the deviation but I must disagree with your assumptions about

the exactness of what the terms mean. While I support the idea of creating

a more exact translation, I do not think we really knew what others thought.

 

Can you say you know what a character or term really means during the Han,

Sheng or Xia times? I cannot be so bold.

 

The issue of culture is important but understanding of the principles I think

will allow us more adaptability and less difficulty with modern applications.

Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

: zrosenbe:

Mon, 31 Dec 2007 12:40:08 -0800Re: re:pathogenesis

 

 

 

 

Mike,We've veered from the original topic (pathogenesis) pretty far by now, and

also we've veered somewhat from the discussion about the definition of

'spirit'.Chinese medicine is a technical undertaking, and therefore has a more

exacting language than the average subject. While many Chinese characters can

have more than one English equivalent, a majority are well suited by one term.

Most sources translate shen2 as spirit, so the question is, what do we mean by

spirit? We need to understand the Chinese context of spirit, because it is an

integral part of the medicine. As difficult as it may be to understand, we must

make the effort. Otherwise, we only superimpose our own cultural attitudes and

beliefs on Chinese medicine.As I continue to work on a text on classical Chinese

medicine, I confront these issues almost daily. However, I've discovered there

is a lot about Han dynasty thought (when the Nan Jing and Shang Han Lun were

written) that is universal and not difficult to understand. It is more difficult

to think different, as Steve Jobs used to say, and adapt a different logical

system and algorithms than exists in biomedicine.To answer your question as to

why these influences have not penetrated the standard CM school cirricula, at

least in the West, it is simple lack of knowledge or exposure to this material.

As Dan Bensky said in one of his lectures, if we are never exposed to the six

channels differentiation of the Shang Han Lun, we will never be able to see

patients from this perspective, and will be limited in what we can do to heal

our patients.On Dec 31, 2007, at 8:49 AM, mike Bowser wrote:>

Zev,>> I understand and agree with what you are saying but am pointing out>

another very important and fatal flaw in our exact definitions of > terms.>>

When I was in undergrad and took several classes in anthropology, the> idea of

definitions was very speculative and I consider that this has> not changed, even

though ancient terms and understanding over time > have.>> The truth is that

even with the best evidence, we do not really know> much about ancient thoughts

and beliefs and how this impacted our> medicine.>> As this is very relevant to

learning OM, how do you propose dealing> with this problem in a legit way as we

have largely ignored it?>> Second, why has there not been more of this type of

influence applied> to many of the TCM curricula thus far? If this is such a

major issue,> then why is there not a larger emphasis to support change to

improve> things?>> There is no cop out here. I am simply wanting to bring our

discussion> into the application realm and we need to first have a better feel >

for what> is happening.>> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac>> To:

Chinese Medicine: zrosenbe > :

Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:54:53 -0800Re: re:pathogenesis>> I am sorry,

Mike,But in my mind what you are saying is a cop out. If > someone implies that

Worsley acupuncture is superior to TCM because > it treats the spirit in a

public forum, that statement has to be > qualified. No one is saying that one

character has only one meaning, > but let's at least be clear about what we mean

by 'spirit'. If a > person is claiming one approach is superior to another, the

onus is > on that individual to make their case, other than saying that you >

need to study with their teacher.I'll give you an example of what I > mean. You

cannot find in any Chinese source the interpretations of > the acupuncture point

names given by the Worsley school. You want to > interpret acupuncture point

names according to 'spirit'? Fine, but > don't claim that that was what the

Chinese sources intended > originally, or even over the many generations since.

I have no > problem with the Worsley approach to acupuncture, it has a lot of >

merits, but we must qualify our claims in an accurate, academic > manner.Z'ev

RosenbergOn Dec 30, 2007, at 10:12 AM, mike Bowser > wrote:> Zev,>> I agree with

your point about the characters but > these have changed > and> so have their

meanings over time. Who is > to say what we think this or> that character means

when none of us > were there and things have> changed a great deal since then?

What > are we to do with our own> understanding and the way in which we all >

see the world? I see these> as huge barriers to achieving what you > and many

others are proposing> and I do not have any solutions. One > caution is that one

idea equals > one> character is too simplistic. > I know from my own martial

arts studies > that> terms have many > levels of meaning and each with their own

level of > technique. Mike > W. Bowser, L Ac>> >

Chinese Medicine: zrosenbe > > :

Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:51:12 -0800Re: > re:pathogenesis>> Zinnia,I

think that what is true in life can be > expressed in a > somewhat simple

manner, so rather than obfuscating > the issue of > spirit and official, why

don't we begin to discuss > this by clearly > defining terms. In order to do so,

we need to know > what the Chinese > characters are, their pinyin equivalents,

and > English definitions. > What do you and your teacher mean by > 'spirit'?

What is the original > Chinese term for 'officials'? What > dictionary,

glossary, or > interpretation are you using for these > statements?I have a lot

more > experience with the Worsley material > than you might think, and I >

don't define myself as just TCM in > scope. I feel quite qualified to >

challenge what I feel what are > interpretations of Chinese source > materials,

and I am not alone in > my views. I've also read and > enjoyed all of the

Larre/de la Valle > texts. I think you are avoiding > my point about Western

ideas about > spirit vs. Chinese. These need to > be understood clearly, not

just > interpreted as one wishes to.Z'ev > RosenbergOn Dec 29, 2007, at > 7:10

AM, zinnia wrote:> Z'ev,>> I don't > think my education in TCM > was any more or

less shallow than> other > acupuncturists I have > talked to at conferences and

training> > courses. My complaint is > fairly common. The problem may be that a

3> > year program does not > allow the time to go into things in depth > which>

is why I have > been studying non-stop for the last 7 years.>> > Furthermore, it

has > not been my experience, studying with Niki> > Bilton, that she is >

imposing a Western view of emotions onto > Chinese> thinking. As a > matter of

fact, she rarely uses the word > emotions but> stays more > with the will of the

Official. Her teaching > is based> directly on > the work of Larre and de la

Vallee and makes > their work> > immediately applicable to acupuncture

treatments.>> It > would take > me hours to explain the complexity and subtlety

of> > Bilton's > teaching, so suffice to say that unless you have studied> >

with her > or some one of her caliber you cannot make an accurate> > judgement >

about the Worsley approach.>> Zinnia>>> , L. > > Ac.Chair,

Department of Herbal MedicinePacific College of Oriental > > MedicineSan Diego,

Ca. 92122[Non-text portions of this message have > > been removed]>> >

________> The best > games are

on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an > Xbox > 360 Console.>

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>> [Non- > text portions of this

message have been removed]>>> , > L. Ac.Chair, Department of

Herbal MedicinePacific College of > Oriental MedicineSan Diego, Ca.

92122[Non-text portions of this > message have been removed]>>

________> The best games are

on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an > Xbox 360 Console.>

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>> [Non-text portions of this

message have been removed]>>> Chair, Department of Herbal

MedicinePacific College of Oriental MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text

portions of this message have been removed]

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________

Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.

http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_122007

 

 

[Guest guest]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. With continuous scholarship

of classical texts over the centuries, I am confident that we know

what the texts are about. While there are questions and obscurities,

the majority of the material in the Shang Han Lun, Nan Jing, and Suwen

among other texts is quite legible and clear.

 

 

On Dec 31, 2007, at 3:39 PM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

> Zev,

>

> Sorry for the deviation but I must disagree with your assumptions

> about

> the exactness of what the terms mean. While I support the idea of

> creating

> a more exact translation, I do not think we really knew what others

> thought.

>

> Can you say you know what a character or term really means during

> the Han,

> Sheng or Xia times? I cannot be so bold.

>

> The issue of culture is important but understanding of the

> principles I think

> will allow us more adaptability and less difficulty with modern

> applications. Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

San Diego, Ca. 92122

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Mike, Z¡¯ev, and group,

 

 

 

Hi¡­ I am just catching up with some past emails, so pardon me if I missed

something crucial. However, I am curious what Mike means below. Is he

suggesting that ¡°we¡± should come up with our own definitions for Chinese

terms? And suggesting that we do this because we really don¡¯t know what the

terms mean?

 

 

 

If this is the case, I am a bit puzzled, maybe someone could explain more.

 

 

 

The way I see it, terms gain their meaning through context (of passages).

Scores of scholars and physicians have evaluated the meaning of terms and

ideas in Classical Chinese texts up to 2000 years (in the case of the Nei

jing). This evaluation is not only through deeply studying the text (in

question) and commentaries but comparing words and usages to other

non-medical (i.e. philosophy) texts of the time. Hence I agree with Z¡¯ev,

we have a pretty good idea (from hard work of the past) of what these texts

are saying, and what words mean in given situations.

 

 

 

But I also agree with Mike, exactness of terms can be very misleading. This

as pointed out is especially true in regard to context. There are so many

situations where one defines a term (with a dictionary or within a text)

that is just not how another is using it. Context is everything!

 

 

 

Therefore there is little black and white. For example, in most classical

texts there is debate over a certain words or passages. Some may suggest

that a given character is incorrect and should be another. There may be

debate over the meaning of a given passage or term. Does this ambiguity give

free license (for us) to start making up our own interpretations?

 

 

 

I have a hard time supporting such a venture, unless one has spent a

lifetime becoming an expert in the topic at hand. For example, such issues

have been mulled over by some of the greatest minds in CM for centuries.

Such experts have written commentaries discussing these very issues. The

primary text is only the beginning. Understanding the full scope of the

debate, through previous commentaries, is the norm. Finally, many times

decisions may be based on their clinical experience (sometimes 40-50 years).

Therefore, most of the issues are thoroughly mapped out.

 

 

 

I hope I don¡¯t offend anyone, but I just have a hard time seeing how many

Westerners have the audacity to think they are qualified to start redefining

terms or making up new interpretations for such texts. Especially since many

times these people can¡¯t even read Chinese, therefore have no idea what has

been said before them.

 

 

 

If we are convinced that we don¡¯t really understand the terms, then IMO

this suggests that we are not only deficient in the topic, but definitely

should not be making up our own definitions. Just because we do not

understand something doesn¡¯t mean that others do not.

 

 

 

It is not that there is no debate (over terms and ideas) or that we should

not question the past. Of course we should evaluate everything we read,

especially in the clinic. However, to start to question fundamental

understanding of terms etc. we should understand the full scope of the

issues. This unfortunately usually requires strong background in classical

Chinese, as well as just being well-read in the primairy text, commentaries

and dictionaries.

 

 

 

Finally, debating words it completely nonsensical without discussing the

context where it occurs. For example, if one wants to debate the meaning of

Éñ £¨shen4£©one must look at its usages. Just in the Nejing, we see that a

Chinese NeiJing dictionary demonstrates 7 different usages / definitions for

the term. Different passages use the word to mean different things. People

much smarter than you and I have already figured this stuff out. Very

qualified practitioners have also figured out how to apply these classical

ideas in the modern clinic (i.e. Huang Huang¡¯s SHL applications). BTW- an

English NeiJing dictionary should soon be out using non-Wiseman terminlogy.

 

 

 

Therefore I am more inclined to agree with the people that have spent so

much time figuring this stuff out before us. However, I agree with Mike,

there is always some element of unknown. But is our unknown because of our

lack of knowledge of Chinese culture, Language, and CM or from China¡¯s lack

of knowledge of .

 

 

 

Finally what is the alternative? To say we don¡¯t know anything and start

MSUing (making stuff up) is also not attractive??? Mike asks how to we start

doing this in a ¡°legit way¡± ¨C This is very simply, start educating

ourselves in the topic. Read Chinese and read widely and then apply this to

the clinic. CM, in the West, is still in its infancy, we are ants¡­

 

 

 

But Mike also would like to shift this discussion to the ¡°application

realm.¡± I agree! So let¡¯s look at some real examples. Maybe someone could

show where the Chinese definition and/ or understand of a passage / term is

incorrect or fails clinically. Then we can go from there.

 

 

 

I think we must be careful in our assumptions of what we actually know and

if we are qualified to start rolling out our own ideas, when many times we

have no idea what the past or present is even about.

 

 

 

Respectfully,

 

 

 

-

 

_____

 

Chinese Medicine

Chinese Medicine On Behalf Of mike

Bowser

Monday, December 31, 2007 4:40 PM

Chinese Traditional Medicine

RE: re:pathogenesis

 

 

 

Zev,

 

Sorry for the deviation but I must disagree with your assumptions about

the exactness of what the terms mean. While I support the idea of creating

a more exact translation, I do not think we really knew what others thought.

 

Can you say you know what a character or term really means during the Han,

Sheng or Xia times? I cannot be so bold.

 

The issue of culture is important but understanding of the principles I

think

will allow us more adaptability and less difficulty with modern

applications. Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

Traditional_ <Chinese Medicine%40From>

Chinese_Medicine: zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT)

<zrosenbe%40san.rr.comDate> rr.comMon, 31 Dec 2007 12:40:08

-0800Re: re:pathogenesis

 

Mike,We've veered from the original topic (pathogenesis) pretty far by now,

and also we've veered somewhat from the discussion about the definition of

'spirit'.Chinese medicine is a technical undertaking, and therefore has a

more exacting language than the average subject. While many Chinese

characters can have more than one English equivalent, a majority are well

suited by one term. Most sources translate shen2 as spirit, so the question

is, what do we mean by spirit? We need to understand the Chinese context of

spirit, because it is an integral part of the medicine. As difficult as it

may be to understand, we must make the effort. Otherwise, we only

superimpose our own cultural attitudes and beliefs on Chinese medicine.As I

continue to work on a text on classical Chinese medicine, I confront these

issues almost daily. However, I've discovered there is a lot about Han

dynasty thought (when the Nan Jing and Shang Han Lun were written) that is

universal and not difficult to understand. It is more difficult to think

different, as Steve Jobs used to say, and adapt a different logical system

and algorithms than exists in biomedicine.To answer your question as to why

these influences have not penetrated the standard CM school cirricula, at

least in the West, it is simple lack of knowledge or exposure to this

material. As Dan Bensky said in one of his lectures, if we are never exposed

to the six channels differentiation of the Shang Han Lun, we will never be

able to see patients from this perspective, and will be limited in what we

can do to heal our patients.On Dec 31, 2007, at 8:49 AM, mike

Bowser wrote:> Zev,>> I understand and agree with what you are saying but am

pointing out> another very important and fatal flaw in our exact definitions

of > terms.>> When I was in undergrad and took several classes in

anthropology, the> idea of definitions was very speculative and I consider

that this has> not changed, even though ancient terms and understanding over

time > have.>> The truth is that even with the best evidence, we do not

really know> much about ancient thoughts and beliefs and how this impacted

our> medicine.>> As this is very relevant to learning OM, how do you propose

dealing> with this problem in a legit way as we have largely ignored it?>>

Second, why has there not been more of this type of influence applied> to

many of the TCM curricula thus far? If this is such a major issue,> then why

is there not a larger emphasis to support change to improve> things?>> There

is no cop out here. I am simply wanting to bring our discussion> into the

application realm and we need to first have a better feel > for what> is

happening.>> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac>> Traditional_

<Chinese Medicine%40From>

Chinese_Medicine: zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT)

<zrosenbe%40san.rr.comDate> rr.comDate > : Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:54:53

-0800Re: re:pathogenesis>> I am sorry, Mike,But in my mind

what you are saying is a cop out. If > someone implies that Worsley

acupuncture is superior to TCM because > it treats the spirit in a public

forum, that statement has to be > qualified. No one is saying that one

character has only one meaning, > but let's at least be clear about what we

mean by 'spirit'. If a > person is claiming one approach is superior to

another, the onus is > on that individual to make their case, other than

saying that you > need to study with their teacher.I'll give you an example

of what I > mean. You cannot find in any Chinese source the interpretations

of > the acupuncture point names given by the Worsley school. You want to >

interpret acupuncture point names according to 'spirit'? Fine, but > don't

claim that that was what the Chinese sources intended > originally, or even

over the many generations since. I have no > problem with the Worsley

approach to acupuncture, it has a lot of > merits, but we must qualify our

claims in an accurate, academic > manner.On Dec 30, 2007, at

10:12 AM, mike Bowser > wrote:> Zev,>> I agree with your point about the

characters but > these have changed > and> so have their meanings over time.

Who is > to say what we think this or> that character means when none of us

> were there and things have> changed a great deal since then? What > are we

to do with our own> understanding and the way in which we all > see the

world? I see these> as huge barriers to achieving what you > and many others

are proposing> and I do not have any solutions. One > caution is that one

idea equals > one> character is too simplistic. > I know from my own martial

arts studies > that> terms have many > levels of meaning and each with their

own level of > technique. Mike > W. Bowser, L Ac>> > Traditional_

<Chinese Medicine%40From>

Chinese_Medicine: zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT)

<zrosenbe%40san.rr.comDate> rr.comDate > > : Sat, 29 Dec 2007

17:51:12 -0800Re: > re:pathogenesis>> Zinnia,I think that

what is true in life can be > expressed in a > somewhat simple manner, so

rather than obfuscating > the issue of > spirit and official, why don't we

begin to discuss > this by clearly > defining terms. In order to do so, we

need to know > what the Chinese > characters are, their pinyin equivalents,

and > English definitions. > What do you and your teacher mean by >

'spirit'? What is the original > Chinese term for 'officials'? What >

dictionary, glossary, or > interpretation are you using for these >

statements?I have a lot more > experience with the Worsley material > than

you might think, and I > don't define myself as just TCM in > scope. I feel

quite qualified to > challenge what I feel what are > interpretations of

Chinese source > materials, and I am not alone in > my views. I've also read

and > enjoyed all of the Larre/de la Valle > texts. I think you are avoiding

> my point about Western ideas about > spirit vs. Chinese. These need to >

be understood clearly, not just > interpreted as one wishes to.Z'ev >

RosenbergOn Dec 29, 2007, at > 7:10 AM, zinnia wrote:> Z'ev,>> I don't >

think my education in TCM > was any more or less shallow than> other >

acupuncturists I have > talked to at conferences and training> > courses. My

complaint is > fairly common. The problem may be that a 3> > year program

does not > allow the time to go into things in depth > which> is why I have

> been studying non-stop for the last 7 years.>> > Furthermore, it has > not

been my experience, studying with Niki> > Bilton, that she is > imposing a

Western view of emotions onto > Chinese> thinking. As a > matter of fact,

she rarely uses the word > emotions but> stays more > with the will of the

Official. Her teaching > is based> directly on > the work of Larre and de la

Vallee and makes > their work> > immediately applicable to acupuncture

treatments.>> It > would take > me hours to explain the complexity and

subtlety of> > Bilton's > teaching, so suffice to say that unless you have

studied> > with her > or some one of her caliber you cannot make an

accurate> > judgement > about the Worsley approach.>> Zinnia>>> Z'ev

Rosenberg, L. > > Ac.Chair, Department of Herbal MedicinePacific College of

Oriental > > MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text portions of this message

have > > been removed]>> >

________> The best > games

are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an > Xbox > 360 Console.>

http://www.xbox. <http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>

com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>> [Non- > text portions of this message have

been removed]>>> , > L. Ac.Chair, Department of Herbal

MedicinePacific College of > Oriental MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text

portions of this > message have been removed]>>

________> The best games

are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an > Xbox 360 Console.>

http://www.xbox. <http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>

com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>> [Non-text portions of this message have

been removed]>>> Chair, Department of Herbal

MedicinePacific College of Oriental MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text

portions of this message have been removed]

 

________

Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.

http://www.windowsl

<http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_122007

> ive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_122007

 

 

[Guest guest]

Zev,

 

A quick of check of the many translations should show us this is not the case

as many cannot agree on the same terminology and therefore we have many

opinions. I do find that reading of the classics is helpful in trying to learn

principles and tendencies and think this is not focused upon enough. Mike W.

Bowser, L Ac

 

 

: zrosenbe:

Mon, 31 Dec 2007 16:26:25 -0800Re: re:pathogenesis

 

 

 

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. With continuous scholarship of

classical texts over the centuries, I am confident that we know what the texts

are about. While there are questions and obscurities, the majority of the

material in the Shang Han Lun, Nan Jing, and Suwen among other texts is quite

legible and clear.On Dec 31, 2007, at 3:39 PM, mike Bowser wrote:>

Zev,>> Sorry for the deviation but I must disagree with your assumptions >

about> the exactness of what the terms mean. While I support the idea of >

creating> a more exact translation, I do not think we really knew what others >

thought.>> Can you say you know what a character or term really means during >

the Han,> Sheng or Xia times? I cannot be so bold.>> The issue of culture is

important but understanding of the > principles I think> will allow us more

adaptability and less difficulty with modern > applications. Mike W. Bowser, L

AcChair, Department of Herbal MedicinePacific College of

Oriental MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text portions of this message have

been removed]

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________

Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary!

http://club.live.com/chicktionary.aspx?icid=chick_wlhmtextlink1_dec

 

 

[Guest guest]

Jason,

 

You bring up many good points in your response. My greatest concern about

translations and exactness of definitions is that none of us were around during

the great Chinese dynasties and may have a bit of a problem with taking these

terms outside of cultural context. IMO, we can try to make the wording so exact

in English that it no longer fits with the cultural reality and a bigger

potential problem

of us not knowing the energetic principles. To make matters more

challenging we also have characters changing meaning or several characters

being used for the same terms. There is no exact one-to-one wording and

therein lies a big problem. Each of us does have a different take on what we

learned and how we see the world, even through OM theories, and yet I hear

that this is not being encouraged. I somehow find fault with thinking that

debate cannot take place in our times and yet it did during ancient China.Mike

W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

:

: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 08:13:49 -0700RE:

re:pathogenesis

 

 

 

 

Mike, Z’ev, and group,Hi… I am just catching up with some past emails, so

pardon me if I missedsomething crucial. However, I am curious what Mike means

below. Is hesuggesting that “we†should come up with our own definitions for

Chineseterms? And suggesting that we do this because we really don’t know what

theterms mean?If this is the case, I am a bit puzzled, maybe someone could

explain more. The way I see it, terms gain their meaning through context (of

passages).Scores of scholars and physicians have evaluated the meaning of terms

andideas in Classical Chinese texts up to 2000 years (in the case of the

Neijing). This evaluation is not only through deeply studying the text

(inquestion) and commentaries but comparing words and usages to othernon-medical

(i.e. philosophy) texts of the time. Hence I agree with Z’ev,we have a pretty

good idea (from hard work of the past) of what these textsare saying, and what

words mean in given situations. But I also agree with Mike, exactness of terms

can be very misleading. Thisas pointed out is especially true in regard to

context. There are so manysituations where one defines a term (with a dictionary

or within a text)that is just not how another is using it. Context is

everything!Therefore there is little black and white. For example, in most

classicaltexts there is debate over a certain words or passages. Some may

suggestthat a given character is incorrect and should be another. There may

bedebate over the meaning of a given passage or term. Does this ambiguity

givefree license (for us) to start making up our own interpretations? I have a

hard time supporting such a venture, unless one has spent alifetime becoming an

expert in the topic at hand. For example, such issueshave been mulled over by

some of the greatest minds in CM for centuries.Such experts have written

commentaries discussing these very issues. Theprimary text is only the

beginning. Understanding the full scope of thedebate, through previous

commentaries, is the norm. Finally, many timesdecisions may be based on their

clinical experience (sometimes 40-50 years).Therefore, most of the issues are

thoroughly mapped out.I hope I don’t offend anyone, but I just have a hard

time seeing how manyWesterners have the audacity to think they are qualified to

start redefiningterms or making up new interpretations for such texts.

Especially since manytimes these people can’t even read Chinese, therefore

have no idea what hasbeen said before them. If we are convinced that we don’t

really understand the terms, then IMOthis suggests that we are not only

deficient in the topic, but definitelyshould not be making up our own

definitions. Just because we do notunderstand something doesn’t mean that

others do not. It is not that there is no debate (over terms and ideas) or that

we shouldnot question the past. Of course we should evaluate everything we

read,especially in the clinic. However, to start to question

fundamentalunderstanding of terms etc. we should understand the full scope of

theissues. This unfortunately usually requires strong background in

classicalChinese, as well as just being well-read in the primairy text,

commentariesand dictionaries.Finally, debating words it completely nonsensical

without discussing thecontext where it occurs. For example, if one wants to

debate the meaning of神 （shen4）one must look at its usages. Just in the

Nejing, we see that aChinese NeiJing dictionary demonstrates 7 different usages

/ definitions forthe term. Different passages use the word to mean different

things. Peoplemuch smarter than you and I have already figured this stuff out.

Veryqualified practitioners have also figured out how to apply these

classicalideas in the modern clinic (i.e. Huang Huang’s SHL applications).

BTW- anEnglish NeiJing dictionary should soon be out using non-Wiseman

terminlogy.Therefore I am more inclined to agree with the people that have spent

somuch time figuring this stuff out before us. However, I agree with Mike,there

is always some element of unknown. But is our unknown because of ourlack of

knowledge of Chinese culture, Language, and CM or from China’s lackof

knowledge of . Finally what is the alternative? To say we

don’t know anything and startMSUing (making stuff up) is also not

attractive??? Mike asks how to we startdoing this in a “legit way†– This

is very simply, start educatingourselves in the topic. Read Chinese and read

widely and then apply this tothe clinic. CM, in the West, is still in its

infancy, we are ants…But Mike also would like to shift this discussion to the

“applicationrealm.†I agree! So let’s look at some real examples. Maybe

someone couldshow where the Chinese definition and/ or understand of a passage /

term isincorrect or fails clinically. Then we can go from there.I think we must

be careful in our assumptions of what we actually know andif we are qualified to

start rolling out our own ideas, when many times wehave no idea what the past or

present is even about.Respectfully,-_____

Chinese Medicine [Chinese Medicine\

@] On Behalf Of mikeBowserMonday, December 31, 2007 4:40

PM: RE: TCM -

re:pathogenesisZev,Sorry for the deviation but I must disagree with your

assumptions aboutthe exactness of what the terms mean. While I support the idea

of creatinga more exact translation, I do not think we really knew what others

thought.Can you say you know what a character or term really means during the

Han,Sheng or Xia times? I cannot be so bold. The issue of culture is important

but understanding of the principles Ithinkwill allow us more adaptability and

less difficulty with modernapplications. Mike W. Bowser, L AcTraditional_

<Chinese Medicine%40From>Chinese_Medicine@yaho\

ogroups.comzrosenbe (AT) san (DOT) <zrosenbe%40san.rr.comDate> rr.comDate:

Mon, 31 Dec 2007 12:40:08-0800Re: re:pathogenesisMike,We've

veered from the original topic (pathogenesis) pretty far by now,and also we've

veered somewhat from the discussion about the definition of'spirit'.Chinese

medicine is a technical undertaking, and therefore has amore exacting language

than the average subject. While many Chinesecharacters can have more than one

English equivalent, a majority are wellsuited by one term. Most sources

translate shen2 as spirit, so the questionis, what do we mean by spirit? We need

to understand the Chinese context ofspirit, because it is an integral part of

the medicine. As difficult as itmay be to understand, we must make the effort.

Otherwise, we onlysuperimpose our own cultural attitudes and beliefs on Chinese

medicine.As Icontinue to work on a text on classical Chinese medicine, I

confront theseissues almost daily. However, I've discovered there is a lot about

Handynasty thought (when the Nan Jing and Shang Han Lun were written) that

isuniversal and not difficult to understand. It is more difficult to

thinkdifferent, as Steve Jobs used to say, and adapt a different logical

systemand algorithms than exists in biomedicine.To answer your question as to

whythese influences have not penetrated the standard CM school cirricula,

atleast in the West, it is simple lack of knowledge or exposure to thismaterial.

As Dan Bensky said in one of his lectures, if we are never exposedto the six

channels differentiation of the Shang Han Lun, we will never beable to see

patients from this perspective, and will be limited in what wecan do to heal our

patients.On Dec 31, 2007, at 8:49 AM, mikeBowser wrote:> Zev,>> I

understand and agree with what you are saying but ampointing out> another very

important and fatal flaw in our exact definitionsof > terms.>> When I was in

undergrad and took several classes inanthropology, the> idea of definitions was

very speculative and I considerthat this has> not changed, even though ancient

terms and understanding overtime > have.>> The truth is that even with the best

evidence, we do notreally know> much about ancient thoughts and beliefs and how

this impactedour> medicine.>> As this is very relevant to learning OM, how do

you proposedealing> with this problem in a legit way as we have largely ignored

it?>>Second, why has there not been more of this type of influence applied>

tomany of the TCM curricula thus far? If this is such a major issue,> then whyis

there not a larger emphasis to support change to improve> things?>> Thereis no

cop out here. I am simply wanting to bring our discussion> into theapplication

realm and we need to first have a better feel > for what> ishappening.>> Mike W.

Bowser, L Ac>> To:

Traditional_<Chinese Medicine%40From>Chinese_M\

edicine: zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT) <zrosenbe%40san.rr.comDate>

rr.comDate > : Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:54:53-0800Re: TCM -

re:pathogenesis>> I am sorry, Mike,But in my mindwhat you are saying is a cop

out. If > someone implies that Worsleyacupuncture is superior to TCM because >

it treats the spirit in a publicforum, that statement has to be > qualified. No

one is saying that onecharacter has only one meaning, > but let's at least be

clear about what wemean by 'spirit'. If a > person is claiming one approach is

superior toanother, the onus is > on that individual to make their case, other

thansaying that you > need to study with their teacher.I'll give you an

exampleof what I > mean. You cannot find in any Chinese source the

interpretationsof > the acupuncture point names given by the Worsley school. You

want to >interpret acupuncture point names according to 'spirit'? Fine, but >

don'tclaim that that was what the Chinese sources intended > originally, or

evenover the many generations since. I have no > problem with the

Worsleyapproach to acupuncture, it has a lot of > merits, but we must qualify

ourclaims in an accurate, academic > manner.On Dec 30, 2007,

at10:12 AM, mike Bowser > wrote:> Zev,>> I agree with your point about

thecharacters but > these have changed > and> so have their meanings over

time.Who is > to say what we think this or> that character means when none of

us> were there and things have> changed a great deal since then? What > are weto

do with our own> understanding and the way in which we all > see theworld? I see

these> as huge barriers to achieving what you > and many othersare proposing>

and I do not have any solutions. One > caution is that oneidea equals > one>

character is too simplistic. > I know from my own martialarts studies > that>

terms have many > levels of meaning and each with theirown level of > technique.

Mike > W. Bowser, L Ac>> >

Traditional_<Chinese Medicine%40From>Chinese_M\

edicine: zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT) <zrosenbe%40san.rr.comDate>

rr.comDate > > : Sat, 29 Dec 200717:51:12 -0800Re: >

re:pathogenesis>> Zinnia,I think thatwhat is true in life can be > expressed in

a > somewhat simple manner, sorather than obfuscating > the issue of > spirit

and official, why don't webegin to discuss > this by clearly > defining terms.

In order to do so, weneed to know > what the Chinese > characters are, their

pinyin equivalents,and > English definitions. > What do you and your teacher

mean by >'spirit'? What is the original > Chinese term for 'officials'? What

>dictionary, glossary, or > interpretation are you using for these >statements?I

have a lot more > experience with the Worsley material > thanyou might think,

and I > don't define myself as just TCM in > scope. I feelquite qualified to >

challenge what I feel what are > interpretations ofChinese source > materials,

and I am not alone in > my views. I've also readand > enjoyed all of the

Larre/de la Valle > texts. I think you are avoiding> my point about Western

ideas about > spirit vs. Chinese. These need to >be understood clearly, not just

> interpreted as one wishes to.Z'ev >RosenbergOn Dec 29, 2007, at > 7:10 AM,

zinnia wrote:> Z'ev,>> I don't >think my education in TCM > was any more or less

shallow than> other >acupuncturists I have > talked to at conferences and

training> > courses. Mycomplaint is > fairly common. The problem may be that a

3> > year programdoes not > allow the time to go into things in depth > which>

is why I have> been studying non-stop for the last 7 years.>> > Furthermore, it

has > notbeen my experience, studying with Niki> > Bilton, that she is >

imposing aWestern view of emotions onto > Chinese> thinking. As a > matter of

fact,she rarely uses the word > emotions but> stays more > with the will of

theOfficial. Her teaching > is based> directly on > the work of Larre and de

laVallee and makes > their work> > immediately applicable to

acupuncturetreatments.>> It > would take > me hours to explain the complexity

andsubtlety of> > Bilton's > teaching, so suffice to say that unless you

havestudied> > with her > or some one of her caliber you cannot make anaccurate>

> judgement > about the Worsley approach.>> Zinnia>>> Z'evRosenberg, L. > >

Ac.Chair, Department of Herbal MedicinePacific College ofOriental > >

MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text portions of this messagehave > > been

removed]>> >________> The best

> gamesare on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an > Xbox > 360

Console.>http://www.xbox.

<http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>>

[Non- > text portions of this message havebeen removed]>>> , > L.

Ac.Chair, Department of HerbalMedicinePacific College of > Oriental MedicineSan

Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-textportions of this > message have been

removed]>>________> The best

gamesare on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an > Xbox 360

Console.>http://www.xbox.

<http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/>>

[Non-text portions of this message havebeen removed]>>> , L.

Ac.Chair, Department of HerbalMedicinePacific College of Oriental MedicineSan

Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-textportions of this message have been removed]

________Share life as it

happens with the new Windows

Live.http://www.windowsl<http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wa\

ve2_sharelife_122007>

ive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_122007[Non-text portions of

this message have been removed][Non-text portions of this message have been

removed]

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________

Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.

http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_122007

 

 

[Guest guest]

Mike,

Translation is a profession, like any other, with specific

qualifications, and you'll find that many of the translations are far

from authoritative. Paul Unschuld made that a them of one if his

seminars in San Diego a few years ago. This is especially true of the

Nei Jing corpus, including the Su Wen and Ling Shu. I agree with

Jason that the upcoming publication of Unschuld's Su Wen dictionary

will be a great tool, and the entire translation of the Su Wen will

appear in 2009.

On Jan 1, 2008, at 3:11 PM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

> A quick of check of the many translations should show us this is not

> the case

> as many cannot agree on the same terminology and therefore we have

> many

> opinions. I do find that reading of the classics is helpful in

> trying to learn

> principles and tendencies and think this is not focused upon enough.

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

 

 

Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

San Diego, Ca. 92122

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Zev,

 

The issue of lack of authority is what I am most concerned with

and have been mentioning all along. Our profession is a little odd

in that we are now very reliant upon others for our own definitions.

I am also excited by Unschuld's upcoming works. I was there for

the lecture you mentioned as well. It was very informative. Mike W. Bowser, L

Ac

 

 

: zrosenbe:

Tue, 1 Jan 2008 17:29:53 -0800Re: re:pathogenesis

 

 

 

 

Mike,Translation is a profession, like any other, with specific qualifications,

and you'll find that many of the translations are far from authoritative. Paul

Unschuld made that a them of one if his seminars in San Diego a few years ago.

This is especially true of the Nei Jing corpus, including the Su Wen and Ling

Shu. I agree with Jason that the upcoming publication of Unschuld's Su Wen

dictionary will be a great tool, and the entire translation of the Su Wen will

appear in 2009.On Jan 1, 2008, at 3:11 PM, mike Bowser wrote:> A quick of check

of the many translations should show us this is not > the case> as many cannot

agree on the same terminology and therefore we have > many> opinions. I do find

that reading of the classics is helpful in > trying to learn> principles and

tendencies and think this is not focused upon enough. > Mike W. Bowser, L AcZ'ev

RosenbergChair, Department of Herbal MedicinePacific College of Oriental

MedicineSan Diego, Ca. 92122[Non-text portions of this message have been

removed]

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________

Get the power of Windows + Web with the new Windows Live.

http://www.windowslive.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_powerofwindows_122007

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hello Group,

 

I would like to bring this discussion back on to the topic of Pathogenesis.

(I must preface what I am about to write: that this commentary is based solely

on my observation of the 1,400 patients I treated this year. I am working on

having texts such as the Chun Qiu Fan Lu “Abundant Dew of the Spring & Autumn

Annals” & the Bai Hu Tong De Lun “Discussions In the White Tiger Hall”

translated in order to be able to understand better the Chinese medicine theory

described in this thread, but these texts will take some time to translate, and

interest on behalf of the Chinese medicine community to help fund the

translation.)

 

I mentioned earlier at the beginning of this thread, about how I believe that

pathogenesis is greater then the physical, and really must encompass emotions

and spirit, as well.

 

This is how I understand this to work. The Spirit – which I interpret to be the

Shen/ Ling is influenced by several factors. These are Karma, Destiny/ Fate,

Astrology, and Soul purpose/ objective. I will explain what I mean by this:

 

Karma affects our patients by giving them the opportunity to make correct

choices now for incorrect actions from past lives (or this life). We see our

patients in various stages of their karma. Karma is the mural or painting which

each of us stands in, it is self created and self resolved. It is both tangible

and

illusion. Often our patient’s health or lack of health directly stems from the

unconscious choices that they have made this life because of other lives.

Acupuncture does not resolve karma in my opinion, but it can offer a patient the

clarity of mind/ body/ shen and allow them to come to decisions from a place of

balance, as well as see the pattern with which they have been involved. Karmic

events seem to come with statements or ideals like: “It seemed like the natural

thing to do”, “It was all just so easy”, “It was almost like I had done all of

this

before.” Karma brings into play the element of (Space).

 

Destiny is more of a microcosm where Karma is a macrocosm. Destiny tracks

where a patient is in their life (Space + Time). We all have multiple

Destinies,

but it is as if they are layered one over the other, like the pages in a book.

Like

a book there is a certain chain of events that cause these Destinies to be

triggered. Which one might say, goes back to individual choice. Generally,

Destiny has a common thread, like the binding on a metaphorical book, which

unites all of the different pages into a cohesive unit. Retrospection allows

many

people to connect these dots. (Many of my patients, when asked, can trace a

path from where they are today, back to their childhood.) Throughout one’s

Destiny there is a common current, which generally keeps one heading on the

correct path. This common current is the primary Destiny – the Destiny which

most of us will live out. It is very hard to change this Destiny, but it can be

done, often through acts of great self sacrifice or through expenditure of a

great

amount of qi. When one makes this switch it is to an alternate Destiny – or

what many people via Quantum physics will call a parallel universe. I believe

that as a practitioner, for the most part I can not change my patient’s Destiny,

but if they are so willing, that the patient can change their own Destiny. It

is my

role as a practitioner to recognize what can and or can not be treated for a

particular patient, and then be supportive of that which I can treat.

 

 

 

Astrology creates the basic personality type – I track stem and branch for

Chinese astrology for all of my patients, with Western astrology to reinforce

the

data if needed. For Chinese, I track birth year. For Western, I track sun sign.

As a practitioner a patient’s astrology lets me know several things right from

the

beginning. First and foremost, it lets me know how they Hear. Each astrology

sign processes information differently, if I as the practitioner only

communicate

in one style, I will lose patients who can not relate to my style of

communication.

In my practice, I try to meet my patients in the place that they can hear me.

Secondly, astrology tells me this patient’s Core Strength/ Core Weakness. Each

Astrological sign has its Achilles heel so to speak. This Core Strength/ Core

Weakness makes this astrological sign great, but at the same time is also its

greatest weakness. A great example of this is the Dog: The Dog’s greatest

strength is loyalty. Dogs will stay by your side through thick and thin, but

their

weakness is that they tend to stay in things way longer then they should. In my

experience, it is the Dog which tends to stick with an abusive relationship/

work

situation/ family situation, etc. because of their loyalty. (Astrology is the

Central

Pole between Space and Time).

 

 

 

Soul purpose/ objective – this is something that appears to be either “on or

off.”

A person with Soul purpose has passion, a person without Soul purpose tends

to be numb. From watching my patient’s, I think that in a majority of them,

this

has been snuffed out as children. Things such as poor parenting, drugs (both

pharmaceutical and recreational), sexual abuse, peer abuse, traumatic

relocation,

or any other thing that can happen to children which will literally “break their

root,” all has the end result of snuffing the Soul purpose. Actually, the Soul

purpose does not go out (like a candle), but the Shen goes into a place of

Hibernation. To all objective signs, a patient that is in hibernation is

healthy

enough, but they all have an apparently slight to moderate qi deficiency

(usually

spleen). I say apparently, because often these patients feel like batteries –

like

they contain a massive amount of qi, and yet they appear deficient. This is

because they are in a place where they are simply not expressing any qi – and

hence the apparent qi deficiency. These patients also tend to have very lucid

dreams as well as a very active dream life in general. Acupuncture can in my

opinion ignite Soul Purpose in patients. By clearing the channels of

obstruction,

resolving and releasing old emotion, resolving and draining damp, and nourishing

the shen and jing of a patient, the Soul Purpose can ignite – first as anger,

and

then as passion. (Soul Purpose is the life fire that fuels the Central Pole &

unites

Space & Time).

 

 

 

In my opinion it is these four things that define the pathogenesis for the Shen

level of disturbance. My practice is based on looking beyond the physical

structure that is presented, to understand what is healable and what is not

healable. This is like looking through a patient’s window, which may or may not

happen on the first visit, but often will take several visits to begin to

accumulate

enough data to see clearly. I say patient’s window, because it is like looking

through a real window with all of its parts – frame, glass, exterior. The

window

frame is the construct/ physical, the glass of the window is the emotional, and

the

exterior of the window is the Shen. In my own practice, I have had to be

willing

to look through my own window, before I was able to recognize the windows

of my patients.

 

Thoughtfully,

 

L.Ac.

 

The Database

 

Chinese Medicine

 

 

 

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.