Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org
Sign in to follow this  
Guest guest

Insomnia

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Chiming in:

Jason:

for people who are orthodox SHL practitioners such an approach

will never be acceptable.

 

Stephen:

As one, I agree - the formula you posted is not a SHL formula -

it is a Wen Bing style formula. There is nothing wrong with Wen

Bing approach - when appropriate

 

If you posted that formula as an example of a good substitution

of chishao for baishao I'd have to say I don't feel that it was a

useful example

1) your author merely states that there was an unresolved

pathogen in taiyang - not much history

2) the S/Ss listed aren't consistent with the claim of needing to

use GZT method

3) The fact that the author gave a tongue description versus

pulse shows that he was looking through the eyes of a Wen Bing

practitioner.

4) showing a formula that has only 1 of 5 herbs cannot be called

GZT method - sorry.

 

Jason:

Furthermore, I can assure you that Sheng jiang, Gan cao and Da

zao are far from integral for a gui zhi tang method to work.

 

Stephen:

What, in your opinion, is the function of Sheng Jiang in Guizhi

Tang?

 

As far as what constitutes " true and valid " SHL style of practice

- one cannot say. There are many lineages in the SHL tradition,

and they all argue about what is true and good and correct.

I have to agree with Stephen Bonzak and Kokko -

 

Jason:

Therefore, precision is not about adhering rigidly to the

original formula, precision is addressing the whole patient in

front of you, modifying things as needed

 

Stephen:

Precision is about knowing the presentation that the original

formulas address, addressing what needs attention now, modifying

by combining formulas in proven, harmonious combinations based on

knowing in detail which formulas are called for.

 

We can address the whole patient that is in front of us while

adhering to proper formula methods. It is not necessary to tear a

formula apart and put together something completely different.

(and many of us will always wonder - how can someone say that

they are using the GZT method without using GZT?)

 

You obviously like the style you presented, and that is fine.

There are many styles and to be truly good at any of them

requires skill and dedication. Nobody will convince another

practitioner to change styles.

 

BTW, you posted that you are friends with Suzanne - who started

this thread - can you ask her for an update on her insomnia

patient?

 

 

Stephen Woodley LAc

www.shanghanlunseminars.com

 

 

 

--

http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and

love email again

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

First of all, Chi shao is not astringent and does not regulate the nutritive

with the protective.

If you're going to call it the " Gui zhi tang method " here,

you need to choose Bai shao.

Does Chi shao regulate ying? I've never heard of that before.

 

Second of all, show me even one Gui zhi tang family formula in all of the

Shang han za bing lun

that lacks even one of the following ingredients: Sheng jiang, Gan cao or

Da zao,

let alone lacking all three in a formula.

 

Here is a list of Gui zhi tang modifications documented in the Shang han za

bing lun:

Gui zhi jia fu zi tang, Wu tou gui zhi tang, Gui zhi jia gui tang, Gui zhi

jia shao yao tang,

Gui zhi jia ge gen tang, Gui zhi jia da huang tang, Gui zhi jia hou po xing

zi tang

and Gui zhi jia shao yao sheng jiang ge yi liang ren shen san liang xin jia

tang (Gui zhi tang + Ren shen)

 

What you will notice is that ALL of these formulas contain Sheng jiang, Gan

cao and Da zao (without fail)

and for good reason. They're not just flavors to make the formula taste

good, but are crucial components

in the functional dynamic of the formula.

 

Gui zhi qu shao yao tang, Gui zhi qu shao yao jia fu zi tang, Gui zhi qu

shao yao jia shu qi mu li long gu jiu ni tang,

and Gui zhi qu shao yao jia ma huang xi xin fu zi tang don't contain Shao

yao.

So, if anything, Shao yao can be left out in Gui zhi tang method

formulas, as detailed by Zhang Zhong Jing.

 

Like I said, please explain how you can call a formula that has Gui zhi and

Chi shao in it,

but no Sheng jiang, Gan cao or Da zao in it

among 9 other herbs and still call this the " Gui zhi tang method " ?

 

K

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 8:24 AM, Al Stone <al wrote:

 

>

>

> Mentioning " gui zhi tang " isn't always a reference to five herbs as much as

> a treatment principle that includes a pungent flavor outhrusting and a sour

> flavor that astringes.

>

> Classics based practitioner Tiende Yang often speaks of adding " bu zhong yi

> qi tang " or " bao he wan " to a formula. This may have only meant the

> addition

> of Chai hu, shan zha and mai ya because he was speaking about the treatment

> principles of lifting clear yang or descending turbid yin.

>

> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 5:01 AM, Gabriel Fuentes

<fuentes120<fuentes120%40>

> >wrote:

>

>

> >

> >

> > leaving out Sheng jiang, Gan cao and Da zao (which are vital in

> regulating

> > ying/wei).

> >

> > Actually the two most vital herbs in regulating construction and defense

> > in guizhitang are guizhi and shaoyao.

> > Gabe Fuentes

> >

> > ________________________________

> > <johnkokko <johnkokko%40gmail.com><johnkokko%

> 40gmail.com>>

> > <%40>

> <%40>

>

> > Fri, March 19, 2010 9:21:17 PM

> > Re: Insomnia

> >

> >

> >

> > Jason,

> > I have the same question as Steven Boznak, posted at

> > http://www.chinesem edicinedoc. com/case- studies/tai- yang-gui-

> zhi-tang-

> > dgr/

> >

> >

> > I'm not arguing with Ding Gan-Ren's methodology, especially with the

> > limited

> > information given.

> >

> > I " m just curious how he could call this a Gui zhi tang modification?

> >

> > ...just because it has Gui zhi and Shao yao (Chi shao) in it between 13

> > herbs,

> > leaving out Sheng jiang, Gan cao and Da zao (which are vital in

> regulating

> > ying/wei).

> > None of the other medicinals in his formula regulate ying/wei.

> >

> > In his formula, the dose of Gui zhi is 8 fen and Chi shao 1.5 qian.

> > Gui zhi tang's ratio is Gui zhi 3 qian , Shao yao 3 qian 1:1, not 1:2.

> >

> > For the case presentation, how come he didn't add the three medicinals

> that

> > are integral to Gui zhi tang... Sheng jiang, Gan cao and Da zao?

> >

> > With the greasy coat, he could've just reduced the dose of Da zao or

> taken

> > it out altogether, but why eliminate Sheng jiang and Gan cao?

> >

> > Please explain.

> >

> > Secondly, to take it to another level, we could say that the Ding Gan-Ren

> > formula that you posted is a modification of Ma huang tang, because it

> has

> > Gui zhi and Xing ren in it... or Xiao qing long tang, because it has Gui

> > zhi and Ban xia in it... or Gui zhi fu ling tang because it has Gui zhi

> and

> > Fu ling in it... or Ban xia hou po tang because it has Ban xia and Fu

> ling

> > in it... or Dang gui shao yao san because it has Shao yao and Fu ling in

> > it.

> >

> > In other words, for someone who likes precision, how can we be precise in

> > our claims of root formula modifications when the herbs and dosages are

> so

> > off?

> >

> > K

> >

>

> --

> , DAOM

> Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

> http://twitter.com/algancao

>

>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Yes this is the what I have been taught by my Shang Han teachers.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Gabriel Fuentes

 

 

 

 

 

Actually the two most vital herbs in regulating construction and defense in

guizhitang are guizhi and shaoyao.

Gabe Fuentes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

John,

 

 

 

As stated by someone previously, bai shao and chi shao were not

differentiated in SHL. Many people have used chi shao instead of bai shao

and many SHL experts and commentators actually have thought that chi shao

is the preferred choice. John, I am not going to argue with you, but I can

assure you that there are a large percentage of very famous clinicians and

SHL experts who don't hold the rigid stance that you present below. Quite

simply, there are those that grasp on to the exact words of the original

text and those who take the principles and apply clinically. Honestly, I

think you should read some commentary before making such strong assumptions

as below.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of

Saturday, March 20, 2010 11:52 PM

 

Re: Insomnia

 

 

 

 

 

First of all, Chi shao is not astringent and does not regulate the nutritive

with the protective.

If you're going to call it the " Gui zhi tang method " here,

you need to choose Bai shao.

Does Chi shao regulate ying? I've never heard of that before.

 

Second of all, show me even one Gui zhi tang family formula in all of the

Shang han za bing lun

that lacks even one of the following ingredients: Sheng jiang, Gan cao or

Da zao,

let alone lacking all three in a formula.

 

Here is a list of Gui zhi tang modifications documented in the Shang han za

bing lun:

Gui zhi jia fu zi tang, Wu tou gui zhi tang, Gui zhi jia gui tang, Gui zhi

jia shao yao tang,

Gui zhi jia ge gen tang, Gui zhi jia da huang tang, Gui zhi jia hou po xing

zi tang

and Gui zhi jia shao yao sheng jiang ge yi liang ren shen san liang xin jia

tang (Gui zhi tang + Ren shen)

 

What you will notice is that ALL of these formulas contain Sheng jiang, Gan

cao and Da zao (without fail)

and for good reason. They're not just flavors to make the formula taste

good, but are crucial components

in the functional dynamic of the formula.

 

Gui zhi qu shao yao tang, Gui zhi qu shao yao jia fu zi tang, Gui zhi qu

shao yao jia shu qi mu li long gu jiu ni tang,

and Gui zhi qu shao yao jia ma huang xi xin fu zi tang don't contain Shao

yao.

So, if anything, Shao yao can be left out in Gui zhi tang method

formulas, as detailed by Zhang Zhong Jing.

 

Like I said, please explain how you can call a formula that has Gui zhi and

Chi shao in it,

but no Sheng jiang, Gan cao or Da zao in it

among 9 other herbs and still call this the " Gui zhi tang method " ?

 

K

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Bingo.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of Al Stone

 

 

 

Mentioning " gui zhi tang " isn't always a reference to five herbs as much as

a treatment principle that includes a pungent flavor outhrusting and a sour

flavor that astringes.

 

Classics based practitioner Tiende Yang often speaks of adding " bu zhong yi

qi tang " or " bao he wan " to a formula. This may have only meant the addition

of Chai hu, shan zha and mai ya because he was speaking about the treatment

principles of lifting clear yang or descending turbid yin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Stephen,

 

 

 

As stated previously to John, there's no sense in arguing this. But the

reality is, what you say can't be called " GZT method " simply is by many

(famous) doctors. You have a choice, you can try to understand what Ding

Gan-Ren is talking about or dismiss it as " craziness. " Don't forget, he was

one of the most famous clinicians and teachers in the last two centuries.

All that I can say is try to open your mind and get a larger vantage point,

and try to take religion out of the SHL text.

 

 

 

Finally, just because an herb has a certain function in a formula does not

mean it cannot be swapped out for another herb with a similar function. Even

one that is not originally in the SHL. Consequently though, I do not doubt

that your " lineage " may not allow such substitutions or expanded formulas--

but many others do and we need to be accepting of both points of view. Just

as you question anyone who uses formulas that are " torn apart " I will always

question people who believe that all problems can be solved with stock SHL

formulas, only using modifications from the original text. This quite simply

is to deny 1800 years of knowledge that followed the SHL and is only

limiting. Many doctors have spent their lifetime expanding SHL usages (e.g.

incorporating tongues), why would anyone deny this knowledge? Maybe because

the books are not in English?

 

 

 

But that is just where we are probably happy to disagree.

 

 

 

Best,

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of stephen woodley

Saturday, March 20, 2010 11:28 PM

 

Insomnia

 

 

 

 

 

Chiming in:

Jason:

for people who are orthodox SHL practitioners such an approach

will never be acceptable.

 

Stephen:

As one, I agree - the formula you posted is not a SHL formula -

it is a Wen Bing style formula. There is nothing wrong with Wen

Bing approach - when appropriate

 

If you posted that formula as an example of a good substitution

of chishao for baishao I'd have to say I don't feel that it was a

useful example

1) your author merely states that there was an unresolved

pathogen in taiyang - not much history

2) the S/Ss listed aren't consistent with the claim of needing to

use GZT method

3) The fact that the author gave a tongue description versus

pulse shows that he was looking through the eyes of a Wen Bing

practitioner.

4) showing a formula that has only 1 of 5 herbs cannot be called

GZT method - sorry.

 

Jason:

Furthermore, I can assure you that Sheng jiang, Gan cao and Da

zao are far from integral for a gui zhi tang method to work.

 

Stephen:

What, in your opinion, is the function of Sheng Jiang in Guizhi

Tang?

 

As far as what constitutes " true and valid " SHL style of practice

- one cannot say. There are many lineages in the SHL tradition,

and they all argue about what is true and good and correct.

I have to agree with Stephen Bonzak and Kokko -

 

Jason:

Therefore, precision is not about adhering rigidly to the

original formula, precision is addressing the whole patient in

front of you, modifying things as needed

 

Stephen:

Precision is about knowing the presentation that the original

formulas address, addressing what needs attention now, modifying

by combining formulas in proven, harmonious combinations based on

knowing in detail which formulas are called for.

 

We can address the whole patient that is in front of us while

adhering to proper formula methods. It is not necessary to tear a

formula apart and put together something completely different.

(and many of us will always wonder - how can someone say that

they are using the GZT method without using GZT?)

 

You obviously like the style you presented, and that is fine.

There are many styles and to be truly good at any of them

requires skill and dedication. Nobody will convince another

practitioner to change styles.

 

BTW, you posted that you are friends with Suzanne - who started

this thread - can you ask her for an update on her insomnia

patient?

 

Stephen Woodley LAc

www.shanghanlunseminars.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...