Comments on: The Differences Between Traditional Chinese Medicine and Classical Chinese Medicine http://deepesthealth.com/2007/the-differences-between-traditional-chinese-medicine-and-classical-chinese-medicine/ Learning Chinese Medicine and letting it inform all aspects of life Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:58:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Eric http://deepesthealth.com/2007/the-differences-between-traditional-chinese-medicine-and-classical-chinese-medicine/comment-page-1/#comment-5028 Eric Sun, 01 Nov 2009 17:18:33 +0000 http://deepesthealth.com/?p=7#comment-5028 Hey James, All of those are good resources, particularly Goodman's texts. Porkert is a good read, of course. While not necessarily language focused, for a feel of Classical Chinese medicine with a language inspired spin, you can't beat Heiner Fruehauf. While he doesn't have any commercially available books, his Associates Forum is a wealth of information. I know they are thinking about working with monthly memberships and other options, so if the current price point is a little too rich, I'd visit again soon. (www.classicalchinesemedicine.org). I can also recommend anything written by Unschuld - I assume you've already found him, though. Good luck! I hope to see you back here commenting - we can always use more folks in the community. Eric Hey James,

All of those are good resources, particularly Goodman’s texts. Porkert is a good read, of course. While not necessarily language focused, for a feel of Classical Chinese medicine with a language inspired spin, you can’t beat Heiner Fruehauf. While he doesn’t have any commercially available books, his Associates Forum is a wealth of information. I know they are thinking about working with monthly memberships and other options, so if the current price point is a little too rich, I’d visit again soon. (www.classicalchinesemedicine.org).

I can also recommend anything written by Unschuld – I assume you’ve already found him, though.

Good luck! I hope to see you back here commenting – we can always use more folks in the community.

Eric

]]> By: James Pannozzi http://deepesthealth.com/2007/the-differences-between-traditional-chinese-medicine-and-classical-chinese-medicine/comment-page-1/#comment-5026 James Pannozzi Sun, 01 Nov 2009 01:10:00 +0000 http://deepesthealth.com/?p=7#comment-5026 As I am a recent graduate of a TCM Medical College and am in the process of studying classical Chinese language, I found these comments to be quite interesting and thank all for providing leads and insights. Having done work with Japanese back in the 1980's, many of the Hanzi are simply old friends with new names with whom I am becoming reacquainted. Bob Flaws books are a major source of both inspiration and knowledge and I use them a lot. I do wish that Blue Poppy would provide some newer books for the Chinese Medical language student - I have avoided buying the one they offer because of the lack of PinYin accents, which is a constant source of frustration for me when I read Maccocia and other TCM books which omit this. But otherwise it looks like it is quite useful for learning medical Chinese and I may get it later. If anyone has other suggestions, they are welcome. I do have Goodman's recent book, an ideal intro to Classical Medical Chinese and he has VERY wisely provided the mp3 sound files for the textual passages, an essential for any Oriental language. Though the reading is quite difficult with a rather curious Latin derived nomenclature, I am finding Manfred Porkert's books to be quite intriguing and, might I say, eye opening. As a distinguished Sinologist, his comments seem authoritative and for me, this seems to be a good route to get some feel of what CCM is about. Obviously, these are things which are learned over months and years. As I am a recent graduate of a TCM Medical College and am in the process of studying classical Chinese language, I found these comments to be quite interesting and thank all for providing leads and insights. Having done work with Japanese back in the 1980’s, many of the Hanzi are simply old friends with new names with whom I am becoming reacquainted.

Bob Flaws books are a major source of both inspiration and knowledge and I use them a lot. I do wish that Blue Poppy would provide some newer books for the Chinese Medical language student – I have avoided buying the one they offer because of the lack of PinYin accents, which is a constant source of frustration for me when I read Maccocia and other TCM books which omit this.
But otherwise it looks like it is quite useful for learning medical Chinese and I may get it later. If anyone has other suggestions, they are welcome. I do have Goodman’s recent book, an ideal intro to Classical Medical Chinese and he has VERY wisely provided the mp3 sound files for the textual passages, an essential for any Oriental language.

Though the reading is quite difficult with a rather curious Latin derived nomenclature, I am finding Manfred Porkert’s books to be quite intriguing and, might I say, eye opening. As a distinguished Sinologist, his comments seem authoritative and for me, this seems to be a good route to get some feel of what CCM is about. Obviously, these are things which are learned over months and years.

]]> By: Abdallah B. Stickley http://deepesthealth.com/2007/the-differences-between-traditional-chinese-medicine-and-classical-chinese-medicine/comment-page-1/#comment-3755 Abdallah B. Stickley Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:47:37 +0000 http://deepesthealth.com/?p=7#comment-3755 Sammy, I have spent over 10 years studying pulse with Dr. Hammer, and been continually rewarded by this single-minded pursuit. And then, in the manner of a role-model of mine, Cheng Menxue, I sought to also work hard to grow from "a specialist in one area to widely acquainted with the entire field 由專而博“ and then again, to return to another style of single-minded study of the Shang Han Lun tradition, that is 上 溯 到 根 本。 I am not in the habit of deriding the contributions of Bob Flaws in bringing translations of texts to the public, nor do I doubt his sincerity. But he has published a book called "the secret of Chinese pulse diagnosis" or something like that, suggesting that simply memorizing the definitions of the pulses is the key to using the pulse well. And he has written an article suggesting that because my teacher does not read Chinese, that this obviates about 25 years of close association between Dr. Shen and Hammer. He purports to understand Dr. Shen's ideas based on sending some patients to Dr. Shen and reviewing the prescriptions. I have several hundred pages of Dr. Shen's hand-written formulas, and about 9,000 documents from Dr. Hammer. And so I can safely say that the statements he makes about the "systems model" of Dr. Shen are conjecture, and erroneous. All of that is to say that indeed the oral tradition of transmission is a more sound guarantor of depth and rectitude. And that when Dr. Shen would say, "book wrong" he was not denigrating the Classics as a resource but elevating the direct transmission. So the "secret" to efficacy is not found in seminars, or cheap books. It is only found in hard work, discipleship, constant revision, practice from a set of principles, and self-cultivation (including treating one's elders with respect). These are the elements that distinguish the Classical model from the non-classical. As the Annals of the Historian says, "all doctors who diagnose according to the pulse are disciples of Bian Que." So there can be no less aspiration on my part than to be a worthy student, and to know that what was possible in the past can be possible now, if only we embody the principles that enlivened such sages. They did not rely on mass market publications, or 2-day seminars. They relied on determined swimming upstream to the roots of the tradition; they relied on the transmission from their teachers as a guide to the classic texts. Without guidance it is no surprise that people feel cheated and mediocre. Sammy, I have spent over 10 years studying pulse with Dr. Hammer, and been continually rewarded by this single-minded pursuit. And then, in the manner of a role-model of mine, Cheng Menxue, I sought to also work hard to grow from “a specialist in one area to widely acquainted with the entire field 由專而博“ and then again, to return to another style of single-minded study of the Shang Han Lun tradition, that is 上 溯 到 根 本。 I am not in the habit of deriding the contributions of Bob Flaws in bringing translations of texts to the public, nor do I doubt his sincerity. But he has published a book called “the secret of Chinese pulse diagnosis” or something like that, suggesting that simply memorizing the definitions of the pulses is the key to using the pulse well. And he has written an article suggesting that because my teacher does not read Chinese, that this obviates about 25 years of close association between Dr. Shen and Hammer. He purports to understand Dr. Shen’s ideas based on sending some patients to Dr. Shen and reviewing the prescriptions. I have several hundred pages of Dr. Shen’s hand-written formulas, and about 9,000 documents from Dr. Hammer. And so I can safely say that the statements he makes about the “systems model” of Dr. Shen are conjecture, and erroneous. All of that is to say that indeed the oral tradition of transmission is a more sound guarantor of depth and rectitude. And that when Dr. Shen would say, “book wrong” he was not denigrating the Classics as a resource but elevating the direct transmission. So the “secret” to efficacy is not found in seminars, or cheap books. It is only found in hard work, discipleship, constant revision, practice from a set of principles, and self-cultivation (including treating one’s elders with respect). These are the elements that distinguish the Classical model from the non-classical. As the Annals of the Historian says, “all doctors who diagnose according to the pulse are disciples of Bian Que.” So there can be no less aspiration on my part than to be a worthy student, and to know that what was possible in the past can be possible now, if only we embody the principles that enlivened such sages. They did not rely on mass market publications, or 2-day seminars. They relied on determined swimming upstream to the roots of the tradition; they relied on the transmission from their teachers as a guide to the classic texts. Without guidance it is no surprise that people feel cheated and mediocre.

]]> By: G. Michael Reynolds http://deepesthealth.com/2007/the-differences-between-traditional-chinese-medicine-and-classical-chinese-medicine/comment-page-1/#comment-3748 G. Michael Reynolds Mon, 20 Apr 2009 01:17:09 +0000 http://deepesthealth.com/?p=7#comment-3748 With respect, if this indeed is the question then I contend that you do not in fact understand the importance of learning the classics. If you've truly seen and apprehended them, this is no longer a question as they become self evident once applied in practice. However, you MUST have the oral tradition in order to fill in the huge gaps left by the classics, especially the Su Wen. There simply is no replacement for the correct approach. Please know that I did not attend a classical school but rather a TCM school, and the difference between good medicine and bad medicine quite literally saved my life. TCM, even in the hands of PhD's from Beijing, had me on my way out the door. A doctor with an understanding of the Shang Han Lun is why I'm still here. For me personally, I know all about the TCM methods and anyone can say whatever they like about inexperience or erudition and make themselves the gold standard as much as they please but none f that changes the fact that you simply cannot conceive the difference in efficacy between the way we were all taught in the best intentions of TCM vs. simply doing things the way laid out by Zhang Zhong Jing. Bob himself in his book "The Successful Chinese Herbalist" points out that his favorite and most useful formula is Xiao Chai Hu Tang. Where did that come from? What's the possibility that the mind that spawned that formula may have had some other good ideas? Considered the possibility that maybe the new ways aren't necessarily the best ways? Don't take my word for it. Who am I? Go digging for yourself. Make your own decisions. There are folks out there who are still part of extant SHL lineages who can make very clear what it is that's between the lines, both in China and the West. But until you've seen the power and efficacy of the Other approach, you don't really understand what it is that you are questioning. So go find out! With respect, if this indeed is the question then I contend that you do not in fact understand the importance of learning the classics. If you’ve truly seen and apprehended them, this is no longer a question as they become self evident once applied in practice. However, you MUST have the oral tradition in order to fill in the huge gaps left by the classics, especially the Su Wen. There simply is no replacement for the correct approach. Please know that I did not attend a classical school but rather a TCM school, and the difference between good medicine and bad medicine quite literally saved my life. TCM, even in the hands of PhD’s from Beijing, had me on my way out the door. A doctor with an understanding of the Shang Han Lun is why I’m still here. For me personally, I know all about the TCM methods and anyone can say whatever they like about inexperience or erudition and make themselves the gold standard as much as they please but none f that changes the fact that you simply cannot conceive the difference in efficacy between the way we were all taught in the best intentions of TCM vs. simply doing things the way laid out by Zhang Zhong Jing. Bob himself in his book “The Successful Chinese Herbalist” points out that his favorite and most useful formula is Xiao Chai Hu Tang. Where did that come from? What’s the possibility that the mind that spawned that formula may have had some other good ideas? Considered the possibility that maybe the new ways aren’t necessarily the best ways? Don’t take my word for it. Who am I? Go digging for yourself. Make your own decisions. There are folks out there who are still part of extant SHL lineages who can make very clear what it is that’s between the lines, both in China and the West. But until you’ve seen the power and efficacy of the Other approach, you don’t really understand what it is that you are questioning. So go find out!

]]> By: Sammy http://deepesthealth.com/2007/the-differences-between-traditional-chinese-medicine-and-classical-chinese-medicine/comment-page-1/#comment-3747 Sammy Sun, 19 Apr 2009 23:07:26 +0000 http://deepesthealth.com/?p=7#comment-3747 In my last post, I meant to thank ERIC for his great blog but mistakenly wrote Greg. Eric, Have you listened to Bob Flaws' 2 podcasts? In one of them he defines the terms Golden Ageism and Romanticism so I don't see his use of those terms as ad hominem. I would love to hear a more substantive discussion on this topic, where you address the specific points Bob Flaws makes in those podcasts and why you think the CM he's referring to is inferior. For 10 years I have attempted to learn the most clinically efficacious theories and methods in our field. Sadly, that effort has resulted in: diddleysquat. In other words, I feel like one of those 'mediocre' practitioners Bob Flaws refers to. (Yes, I'm feeling a bit sorry for myself at the moment.) Despite being intelligent, I wasn't well-suited (psychologically) to find my way in a muddled field. I think it's muddled because it's recently transplanted and is based on a massive body of literature and practice. I'm very happy to hear that there are pockets of erudition, competence and efficacy out there. You students give me hope for our profession. For the "classicists": I understand the importance of studying the classics ... but what is it about all the scholarship of the last thousand+ years that makes it seem inferior? What makes you believe that the authors of the classics were at the pinnacle of their art(?) form--that the medicine was basically completed then and subsequent work was irrelevant? Thank you for the stimulating discussion, Sammy In my last post, I meant to thank ERIC for his great blog but mistakenly wrote Greg.

Eric, Have you listened to Bob Flaws’ 2 podcasts? In one of them he defines the terms Golden Ageism and Romanticism so I don’t see his use of those terms as ad hominem. I would love to hear a more substantive discussion on this topic, where you address the specific points Bob Flaws makes in those podcasts and why you think the CM he’s referring to is inferior.

For 10 years I have attempted to learn the most clinically efficacious theories and methods in our field. Sadly, that effort has resulted in: diddleysquat. In other words, I feel like one of those ‘mediocre’ practitioners Bob Flaws refers to. (Yes, I’m feeling a bit sorry for myself at the moment.) Despite being intelligent, I wasn’t well-suited (psychologically) to find my way in a muddled field. I think it’s muddled because it’s recently transplanted and is based on a massive body of literature and practice. I’m very happy to hear that there are pockets of erudition, competence and efficacy out there. You students give me hope for our profession.

For the “classicists”: I understand the importance of studying the classics … but what is it about all the scholarship of the last thousand+ years that makes it seem inferior? What makes you believe that the authors of the classics were at the pinnacle of their art(?) form–that the medicine was basically completed then and subsequent work was irrelevant?

Thank you for the stimulating discussion,

Sammy

]]> By: Mining for gold : Best of Deepest Health | Deepest Health: Exploring Classical Chinese Medicine http://deepesthealth.com/2007/the-differences-between-traditional-chinese-medicine-and-classical-chinese-medicine/comment-page-1/#comment-3635 Mining for gold : Best of Deepest Health | Deepest Health: Exploring Classical Chinese Medicine Sat, 11 Apr 2009 02:01:51 +0000 http://deepesthealth.com/?p=7#comment-3635 [...] The differences between Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and Classical Chinese Medicine (CCM) : this post was one of those things I wrote on the spur of the moment because I realized that not everyone was using the same terminology that I was using.  There are a lot of things I would do differently in that post, mostly make it longer and explain myself more clearly.  However, the discussion in the comments is the real gold.  Check it out. [...] [...] The differences between Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and Classical Chinese Medicine (CCM) : this post was one of those things I wrote on the spur of the moment because I realized that not everyone was using the same terminology that I was using.  There are a lot of things I would do differently in that post, mostly make it longer and explain myself more clearly.  However, the discussion in the comments is the real gold.  Check it out. [...]

]]> By: Abdallah B. Stickley http://deepesthealth.com/2007/the-differences-between-traditional-chinese-medicine-and-classical-chinese-medicine/comment-page-1/#comment-3633 Abdallah B. Stickley Sat, 11 Apr 2009 01:19:57 +0000 http://deepesthealth.com/?p=7#comment-3633 As a recent appointment to the full-time faculty of NCNM, I echo Eric's sentiments. I have found something quite unique in this institution: a group of committed faculty representing not one or another set of techniques (such as those systems that can be learned in highly commercialized one-off weekend seminars for example), but rather practicing the time-honored tradition of transmitting one's own unique lineage, both in the classroom and the clinic. I have never seen a more committed faculty, representing a broader spectrum of sophisticated, lineage-based, highly erudite, and focused clinical efficacy. Indeed, in place of romanticism, I perceive scholarship, and collegiality. I daresay, after 8 years of successful `practice, and 11 years of study with one masterful Doctor myself, that the students at NCNM are more sophisticated in their understanding, and more erudite in their scholarship than the vast majority of practicing acupuncturists whom I have met, and taught, over the years. An important element of this as well, is that the program does not foster a blind adherence to a set of texts. In fact, if anything, the school recognizes that medicine is best learned through adherence to the oral transmission through which it has been largely preserved in practice for millennia. The Classics function as the guideposts for our growth, practically like mnemonic devices that create the discourse for classical learning to flourish. But up until our times, much of this learning was preserved within families and "currents of tradition." Nevertheless, I know of no other student body as well-versed in the Classics, and who seem so engaged with proving the texts and practices valid and efficacious in practice. As a recent appointment to the full-time faculty of NCNM, I echo Eric’s sentiments. I have found something quite unique in this institution: a group of committed faculty representing not one or another set of techniques (such as those systems that can be learned in highly commercialized one-off weekend seminars for example), but rather practicing the time-honored tradition of transmitting one’s own unique lineage, both in the classroom and the clinic. I have never seen a more committed faculty, representing a broader spectrum of sophisticated, lineage-based, highly erudite, and focused clinical efficacy. Indeed, in place of romanticism, I perceive scholarship, and collegiality. I daresay, after 8 years of successful `practice, and 11 years of study with one masterful Doctor myself, that the students at NCNM are more sophisticated in their understanding, and more erudite in their scholarship than the vast majority of practicing acupuncturists whom I have met, and taught, over the years. An important element of this as well, is that the program does not foster a blind adherence to a set of texts. In fact, if anything, the school recognizes that medicine is best learned through adherence to the oral transmission through which it has been largely preserved in practice for millennia. The Classics function as the guideposts for our growth, practically like mnemonic devices that create the discourse for classical learning to flourish. But up until our times, much of this learning was preserved within families and “currents of tradition.” Nevertheless, I know of no other student body as well-versed in the Classics, and who seem so engaged with proving the texts and practices valid and efficacious in practice.

]]> By: Eric http://deepesthealth.com/2007/the-differences-between-traditional-chinese-medicine-and-classical-chinese-medicine/comment-page-1/#comment-3632 Eric Fri, 10 Apr 2009 23:51:38 +0000 http://deepesthealth.com/?p=7#comment-3632 Bob, I appreciate your perspectives and look forward to hearing more from you in the years to come. I will put forward one question of the many that come to mind. You say, "I also want to know what does and does not work in clinic based on valid evidence." What do you mean by valid evidence? Respectfully, Eric Grey Blog owner PS: I'm sorry if you felt attacked by either my post or any ensuing comments. I assume that you felt this way, as a scholar of your standing seems unlikely to resort to the ad hominem use of "romantic golden ageism." I should note that here's been remarkably little romanticism in my education - just a lot of very hard work and a lot of very happy patients who have been to a lot of doctors with a lot of approaches before finding success with us. If that's romantic, I'll take it. Bob,

I appreciate your perspectives and look forward to hearing more from you in the years to come. I will put forward one question of the many that come to mind. You say, “I also want to know what does and does not work in clinic based on valid evidence.”

What do you mean by valid evidence?

Respectfully,

Eric Grey
Blog owner

PS: I’m sorry if you felt attacked by either my post or any ensuing comments. I assume that you felt this way, as a scholar of your standing seems unlikely to resort to the ad hominem use of “romantic golden ageism.” I should note that here’s been remarkably little romanticism in my education – just a lot of very hard work and a lot of very happy patients who have been to a lot of doctors with a lot of approaches before finding success with us. If that’s romantic, I’ll take it.

]]>