David

[Guest guest]

David: What? The US is easily as or more totalitarian than China and a

far more destructive system as far as the health of the planet is

concerned (war, plunder and environmental devastation [including

outsourced polluting factories and garbage shipped to China, etc.]).

 

 

Lonny: I agree we have our problems. However in the context of the

current discussion I'll point out that we had a quality of freedom

growing up (I'm 50) that the Chinese didn't have and don't have. For

example, in 1970 I had the writings of Zhuangzi, Hanfeizi, Gongfuzi,

Laozi and the Yijing. These books were considered pornography in

China. China was in the midst of a genocide ( " cultural revolution " )

that killed about 500,000 people. I agree the US is a mess. But all

things are not equal and I don't think we can compare. We have the

benefit of the clean water act, the clean air act and the endangered

species list, the civil rights act. China isn't close (I understand

the current administration is trying to close the gap).

 

From my perspective saying that the USA is a worse totalitarian

government than that of China seems more than a bit extreme in the

service of making a point and also suggests the lack of the ability to

recognize hierarchical differences.

 

 

 

David: There is freedom of religion in China unless it is a religion

that seeks to

overthrow the government (Buddhism, including Tibetan, is OK), for

example,

Falun Gong.

 

Lonny: Any authentic spirituality would be a serious threat to their

government. Why? Because all authentic spirituality is about freedom

in it's highest implications. That's not to imply that Falun gong

qualifies. Aren't we talking about a government that's still occupying

Tibet? How do you think wearing a picture of Green Tara on a shirt and

walking through Beijing would go over for a citizen there? (I'm told

by a student who was raised there it wouldn't go over so well).

 

 

 

David: Chinese medicine emergent from the Chinese culture and that

culture still exists, especially in the TCM aspects, and is constantly

being refined and developed through practice and research as well as

in depth understanding of a wealth of historical materials.

 

Lonny: Yes, and all from a perspective and value system that reflects

a time period somewhere between Confucius and 1840. They certainly

wouldn't understand the relationship of the historic material and its

application to a culture that has had freedom for 240 years. They

wouldn't understand the application of medicine to highly individuated

narcissists either.

 

 

 

 

 

David: Practitioners with 50 or more years experience in China just

might have touched that same heart. Not that your experience is any

less valuable, but having access to translated material seems to be a

valuable tool for most practitioners to enhance their understanding

and ability.

 

Lonny: Maybe. 50 years takes them to 1958, ten years after the

revolution. What makes you think they've had access to the original,

unedited, texts? I've met history professors from China who had never

seen a copy of the Shan Hai Jing. I know for a fact that the Chinese

altered many of the texts to reflect the values of dialectical

materialism.

Anyway, I'm all for translations! Of course, the value system of

the translators will be an issue and that's a whole can of worms we

might not want to get into here. Did someone say " vacuity " ?

 

 

 

 

David: It is the true source of Chinese medicine.

With no translations, none of us

would even be practicing Chinese medicine.

 

 

Lonny: I beg to differ. The true source of the medicine exists prior

to ethnocentric consciousness. It exists in the heart of each human. I

practice in a lineage that, for better or worse, had no textual basis

and was handed down from one man, JR Worsley. Actually I contributed

substantially to creating the textual basis for the lineage.

 

Detroit doesn't make the best automobiles, Hollywood doesn't make the

best movies, and China doesn't necessarily do the best medicine. At

least not as it's relevant to our culture at this point in history.

 

I'm interested in seeing Western practitioners fully empowered to

become enlightened to the heart of the medicine and cannot abide any

inference of a dependence on a culture whose values system is quickly

moving into the mid 1800's . Both cultures can learn a lot from each

other and I'm open to the idea that when it comes to treating physical

issues the Chinese may well be quite advanced. But in the deepest and

highest aspects of the medicine I think we have the edge. I think we

in the West should stand up and take responsibility for the freedoms

we've had in our lifetime because any consciousness based medicine

that recognizes the primacy of spirit in all things can only flourish

in a culture that holds freedom as it's highest value (and yes I know

about American hypocrisy but the constitution was born in

enlighenment and you and I enjoy freedoms and options the Kings of old

never dreamed of and the Chinese population at large have never enjoyed).

 

 

 

Daivid: Of course, we all have a chance to incorporate our own

experiences and insights

and yours are definitely extraordinary and wonderful.

 

 

Lonny: Well thank you sir, that's kind of you to say.

 

 

 

David: There have been many

schools of thought in Chinese medicine and there continue to be new

developments

and ways of expressing our understanding of this medicine, e.g.,

Jeffrey Yuen (who certainly works from " the source " ).

 

 

Lonny: Sure.

 

David: Freedom of insight is inherent in a culture that spawned Daoism

and embraced

Buddhism as well as Qi Gong, Tai Ji.

 

 

Lonny: Detroit made the Ford Mustang, the Corvette, and the AMC pacer.

China hasn't significantly advanced the medicine in it's depth for at

least 200 years. More Pacer lately than Mustang. Their damming of the

Yangzi river is an ironic recreation of their creation mythology (Yu

dammed the river and was sent to Hell for it). It will be interesting

to see how this plays out. Freedom of insight isn't inherent in the

culture and the State homogenized all the arts to the point of

mediocrity. That doesn't mean exceptional people don't exist there,

I'm sure they do. But CM is now a world medicine. We can call it

" " as a sign of respect but it's no more Chinese

Medicine now than making cars or movies are an " American " endeavor.

 

 

 

David: The Scholar Tradition is a major factor in

developing and deepening understanding the medicine. Good translations are

important (or you wouldn't have been able to write your book using

point names

to express your insights).

 

 

Lonny: Sir, I am ALL FOR TRANSLATIONS. But I wholly reject the idea

that we are " limited " in our progression in the medicine without them.

I will not abide any inference that diminishes the capacity of the

Western practitioner to become enlightened to the heart and soul of

the medicine. It's really odd to see Westerners buy into this myth!

it's really based on the ethnocentric concept that Westerners cannot

become enlightened. Drop it.......It just isn't true.

 

 

When Leon Hammer used to ask Dr. Shen about certain points of

information in the classics Dr. Shen would answer " book wrong " . I'm

interested in what the books say but I don't to the theory

that the longer a Chinese person has been dead the more credibility

their clinical insights have.

 

One thing the historical Chinese didn't have was a perspective

elevated enough to see their own blind spots, which we do now have.

 

Historically the Chinese were more " right brained " and the

Westerner more " left brained " (sorry for the over simplification, I

published 50 or so pages on this see, for example, Ch 37 of Clinical

Practice.). many of us can think synthetically/inductively and

linearly/deductively simultaneously to yield an actual form of

integral consciousness that has never existed before on the planet.

 

We actually have a form of integrated consciousness and historical

perspective that the original authors of the medicine just did not have.

 

 

In China such development has been slower due to the totalitarian

regulation of information and inquiry. I've met only one integral

thinker who was raised in China. I'm sure there are more, But I bet

there aren't 2000. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

 

 

David: The western culture has given us the deep wisdom found in

entheogens. Perhaps

this is what you are referring to?

 

Lonny: What did I say that led you to believe I was talking about

hallucinogens? (no wise cracks please).

 

 

 

 

David: By the way, no matter what you write, we all are enjoying

hearing from you and having a chance to argue constructively (?).

 

 

Lonny: It's all about communication and relationship. I'm glad to be

here. I hope we aren't arguing but constructively looking into things.

For the sake of the medicine everything should be on the table. Thanks

for your time.