Talk:Classical Chinese medicine

message: This could use a rewrite; the tone is pretty defensive (for lack of a better word).  Changing the tone would be a good idea.  170.158.82.51 14:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite? 

message: The remark about texts being intentionally written in a confusing manner such as with no punctuation is plain wrong.  Classical Chinese (古文, Gǔwén, "Ancient Writing"; or more literally 古典漢語 Gǔdiǎn Hànyǔ "Classical Chinese") and the later development (文言文, Wényánwén, "Literary Writing", or more colloquially just 文言 Wényán) has no punctuation.  Modern editions add in punctuation to make it easier to read.  Except maybe for certain Daoist texts none of the classical medical writings (Han dynasty) nor any of the Tang, Song, Ming or Qing dynasty medical classics were ever written in an intentional obscure manner.  Written Chinese is by definition terse and requires a great deal of skill and literacy to understand.   
Family traditions had there secrets, but none of the great medical works were intentionally written in a obscure or confusing manner.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.53.102.37 (talk) 22:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Misleading statements

message: It is imperative that CCM remain distinct from TCM. The ideologies and theories behind them are uniquely different. TCM is really a synthesis of CCM which occurred at a later date (under the direction of Mao in the 1960's). The purpose of starting this particular article was to create that distinction.  13:31, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that CCM should maintain its own page. After all, if it is merged with TCM, what are we going to call it? Is TCM a hierarchy above CCM? No. --71.146.23.225 (talk) 00:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important to maintain a separate article 

message: .The CCM deeply differ from TCM.Yes,they share common terms,but in the core,in the concepts it is very different.Unfortunately for the humanity,Mao-tse try to destroy the ancient culture of China and make it Communist and materialist,so the medicine become western/modern.only after that it combined with the CCM,but remain western in its concepts,core.Thats how the TCM was created.The CCM is the original,ancient chinese medicine,loyal to the ancient teachings and methods,far more deep,wide,and "chinese",CCM based purely on the classical medical writings,-and the chinese physicians lineage,and rooted in the philosophical background,-mainly the Daoist teachings,confucianism and neo-confucianism as well.Fore example:In CCM the explanation for disease is not symptomatic,like in the western medicine and TCM,it is personaly,and depended on many conditions not taken in the TCM.The things are not permanent,but part of a whole cosmos,as the daoists teach.The meaning of time,points in time,cosmology-another different. 
During Mao-tse revolution,many of the chinese physicians run away to the periphery,mainly to Taiwan and Vietnam.One of the scholars studied the CCM from chinese physician was J.D. Van Buren,ducht.He brought it to the west and had many students.
Here i hope i helped you a bit at the development of the article(which has to remain separated from TCM!!!).
Im a student at CCM school in Israel,first year.
Good luck. 84.108.9.51 (talk) 02:07, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The different CCM-TCM 

message: Here some reliable sources,as i got it from my theachers,and checked it myself:
Paul Unschuld-"Chinese Medicine"
-and other books.What he call "traditional"(chinese medicine),is actualy "classic".
Mao Shing Ni:"Yellow Emperor`s classic",-the best translation of the Su-Wen.
P. Unschuld is about to publish a good,reliable traslation of the classics.84.108.9.51 (talk) 14:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable sources 

message: This "CCM" article is pure WP:CFORK for TCM. In fact, there is not even a different word for the two in Chinese! The article creator made the whole thing up, and admits it above - "TCM is really a synthesis of CCM which occurred at a later date (under the direction of Mao in the 1960's). The purpose of starting this particular article was to CREATEe that distinction." The article has no RS content whatsoever that is not in TCM. Unless there is a good source stating that there is a distinction in the Chinese langauge, I will merge and redirect. PPdd (talk) 03:09, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:CFORK]]