Hello everyone -
I’m happy to offer an interview for this edition of the podcast. Dr. Heiner Fruehauf, founding professor of the school of Classical Chinese Medicine at National College of Natural Medicine in Portland, OR, agreed to talk with Deepest Health readers about the nature of Classical Chinese Medicine. I’m incredibly grateful to Heiner for offering his time and wisdom – I think it will be a treat for all of you.
Dr. Fruehauf has been a great inspiration to me as I navigate the deep waters of this discipline, and he is beloved by students of Chinese medicine all over the world. He currently practices at his clinic in Corbett, OR as well as teaching classes at NCNM. He runs the incredible website, Classicalchinesemedicine.org, which is an excellent resource for anyone interested in learning more about the roots of Chinese medicine. In fact, I have an exciting proposition for folks concerning a discounted membership to the site that I will talk about in a separate post sometime this coming week. Stay tuned. If you haven’t perused the great free content Heiner has put up on the site, do visit and check it out.
I want to mention that Dr. Fruehauf also recently launched a line of high quality, professional grade herbal capsules based on Classical principles for a variety of common conditions. Check out the site and see what you think. Every effort has been made to ensure that this is a high quality product. This product is unrivaled by anything on the market of which I am aware.
This podcast was split into two parts – the first of which you can access below. The second part will be released on Monday or Tuesday. Each section is around 30 minutes long. Enjoy!
[display_player]
Related posts:
- Deepest Health Chinese Medicine podcast : Episode 9 : Interview with Dr. Heiner Fruehauf, Part II
- Deepest Health Chinese Medicine Podcast Episode 12 : Interview with Dr. Arnaud Versluys LAc, PhD (Part 2 of 3)
- Deepest Health Chinese Medicine Podcast : Episode 7 : Clinical confidence and memorization
- Deepest Health Chinese Medicine Podcast Episode 5 : Interview with Abdallah B. Stickley
- Deepest Health Classical Chinese Medicine Podcast 13 : Interview with Mark Silver concerning business in natural medicine
{ 1 trackback }
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
Fantastic stuff. Eagerly awaiting the 2nd part. Heiner makes a great point about WHY Yin/Yang is being put forth wrongly in our time, as its the influence of Marxism’s ideal of everyone and everything as *total* equals (as opposed to say equal in rights or needs or responsibility or what have you) which of course effectively slaps the cuffs on the entire transformative process of energy, no matter where you’re looking at it (even the socioeconomic arena). It’s also good for me personally to be reminded by someone as estimable as Heiner to remember that you’re trying to look THROUGH the matter and into the energy, that you’re interested in affecting the real power and source and its activities, much like treating the patient with the scraped knee instead of just trying to sew up the rip in his pants.
Anyway, can’t wait for part 2.
The case for erudition for most of us aspiring “mid-level physicians” definitely struck a chord in me. I have always loved learning and study for its own sake, but my study of Zen made me really question what the spiritual outcome of that would be. To what extent am I just filling my head, distracting myself from real spiritual practice, from this present moment and to what extent is my life enriched by study? It was a very interesting inner tension to live with while studying philosophy. But I think I am getting closer to seeing past the duality of study and practice, which ought to position me quite nicely when it comes time to start school for Chinese medicine.
Recently, I had read an article by Dr. Leon Hammer, author of Dragon Rises, Red Bird Flies entitled “Tradition and Revision.” In it, he issues a warning to students of the classics, whereby he first draws a distinction between the tradition of the court physicians which spawned the classic texts that have passed down through the various dynasties and into modern times and the unwritten, oral lineages of healing which were mostly kept secret.
Now, I don’t think Dr. Hammer is discouraging study of the classics, but he does say that “clinically, there is no contest between the efficacy of these verbally transmitted traditions and the often mystifying classics.” I guess I’m jumping the gun by not having even begun study of the classics, but I wanted to hear from others, what do these very poetic but seemingly very abstract texts, offer in terms of actual practice?
The other line from the article that made me think was “the human organism is constant, but the stresses to which it is subject have changed exponentially during these past three centuries. Currently, pulse diagnosis relies on information gathered in a largely agrarian culture expressed in a largely archaic language almost incomprehensible to the twentieth century practitioner. What is available today is material passed down 1900 years from civilizations whose daily life is so variant from our own that the information is often no longer clinically relevant.” So my question is again to teachers and current students of the Chinese classics, what is the continuing value of the classics, and what room is there for innovation in the various methods of diagnosis, needling, herbal remedies etc (and by innovation, I guess I mean new approaches to the human organism constant). How do we approach the classics with respect and at the same time, a critical eye, so that we can clearly perceive useful from not.
I suspect I opened up a can of worms, and again, all my questions are qualified as one who has only begun to skim the surface of Chinese medicine, as one not even technically a current student of this great art and science.
Eager to hear the rest of the interview. Thanks, Eric.
I am both a long-time student of Dr. Hammer, a teacher of his method, and a student of the classics, Jason. I will respond to your questions as soon as time permits.
-Abdallah
Thanks so much! I believe the tension between tradition and innovation is an important one that keeps a tradition living and dynamic, but I’m not sure what that means in practical terms for Chinese medicine.
The advent of Marxism was a pivotal change in history, as well as politics, sociology, and the sciences. It is amazing that China held on its tradition of medicine and even employed it during its modern period. The podcast did shed some light on the metaphorical usage of the classics, showing another “descriptive” development of an understanding of nature as is. Credibility is where we stand today as physicians, and is the true test of the Doctor, whichever grade he may be. I struggle in looking at the classics getting an intuitive grasp of the understanding, usually in an energetic framework, though, I try not to look at it as an “as is” perspective, nor do I set myself in believing randomized controlled double blind experimentation as validation in what my work is to be. Rather in knowing and opening myself to the transparency of reality, does an understanding take place. It is really through self cultivation that I have my breakthroughs and am able to further helping others.
Hi Eric,
I very much enjoyed listening to Heiner talk about classical Chinese medicine. Listening to him was very reminiscent of listening to my own teacher at Jung Tao School of Classical Chinese Medicine in Sugar Grove, North Carolina.
One of the most important things that I learned, while I was a student, was that a change in mass is always preceded by a shift in energy.
It’s good to know that there’s another school, besides the one that I graduated from, that’s teaching classical Chinese medicine.
Todd,
It’s great to hear from a graduate of Jung Tao. I have been a fan of Drs. Van Nghi, Tran, Marshall et al. for years. I think you are right in your assessment of the similarities, and I agree that it is good for the profession to have those programs out there. I’ve seen a few comments made by Ed Neal, MD, a teacher at NCNM that were very reminiscent of the Van Nghi/Tran style. There’s a link to it on the Life-Giving Sword blog, I think.
Jason-
I have not forgotten about your initial comment. I am going to contribute a full post on the subject.
Abdallah
-Abdallah
Right you are, sir! It can be found here: http://lifegivingsword.net/2008/04/acupuncture-treatment-of-cancer-classicaltcm-differences-illustration/