Cold Temperature Argument In Qing Dynasty

Both the doctrine of shanghai (febrile diseases caused by exogenous pathogenic factors) and the doctrine of seasonal febrile diseases was theoretical systems in the science of traditional Chinese medicine for febrile diseases due to exogenous evils. The controversy about the febrile diseases due to cold-evils and warm-evils began from Jin Dynasty, and was in vogue in Ming and Qing Dynasties. It was a big, long-lasting and wide academic debate in the history of TCM development. Particularly in Qing Dynasty, with growing maturation of the school of seasonal febrile diseases, the width and depth involved in cold-evil and warm-evil debate was most extensive and profound.In this paper, by sorting out, summing up, and analysis of the literatures, and other methods of investigation, the related literatures and information are conscientiously read, studied and analyzed. Every effort was made to explore fully the historical profile in Qing Dynasty on the debate about the febrile diseases due to cold-evils and warm-evils, and to sum up an objective and scientific conclusion.The main conclusions of this paper are as follows:1. The debate on febrile diseases due to cold-evil and warm-evil included mainly the debate between pestilence and shanghai, the debate between seasonal febrile diseases and shanghai, as well as the debate between seasonal febrile diseases caused by recent attack of exogenous evil and latent evil in the internal body, and others. The sequence in development phases was roughly: in early Qing Dynasty, the argument was against the doctrine of shanghai, in the middle Qing Dynasty the debate was around the doctrines of shanghai and seasonal febrile disease, especially the febrile diseases due to recent attack of exogenous evil, and in the later stage of Qing Dynasty was the contention between the doctrine of shanghai and the doctrine of seasonal febrile diseases, as well as the return again of the doctrine for seasonal febrile diseases due to latent evil in the interior of the school of seasonal febrile diseases.2. The contents involved in the debate were very abundant and complicated, but the essence lay in: does shanghai include or not include seasonal febrile diseases? Can the method and recipe in shanghai be applied to treat seasonal febrile diseases? The school of shanghai believed that the《Treatise on Exogenous Febrile Diseases》written by Zhang Zhong-jing was an encyclopedia for febrile diseases due to exogenous evils, and even was also a special book for internal diseases other than those caused by exogenous evils. Zhang Zhong-jing had already a keen insight on implications in seasonal febrile diseases; and in the treatment of seasonal febrile diseases, the methods in shanghai could also be used, but used in an intricate way. However, the school of seasonal febrile diseases believed that shanghai did not include seasonal febrile diseases. Shanghai included only those febrile diseases due to cold-evils in the winter months, and was completely different from seasonal febrile diseases in terms of their etiology, routes of getting evils, progress of disease and treatment, and so the method and recipe in shanghai could not be applied to treat seasonal febrile diseases.3. The scholars of seasonal febrile diseases and the school of shanghai were all studying the related theories about seasonal febrile diseases, and their difference was that the scholars of seasonal febrile diseases believed that they were exploring what Zhang Zhong-jing had not clarified before, while the scholars of shanghai believed that they were just elaborating the essence given by Zhang Zhong-jing. As to the etiology and pathogenesis of shanghai, the points of views of both schools were basically similar, but the views on the etiology and pathogenesis of seasonal febrile diseases were different. The school of shanghai emphasized the diseases due to latent evils, while the school of seasonal febrile diseases stressed febrile diseases due to recent attack of evils. The school of pestilence believed that "pestilence" was the etiology of seasonal febrile diseases, and emphasized that it entered from the mouth and nose, first hit on "middle warmer", and then spread to elsewhere.4. In the TCM development histories, the ideas of "shanghai" and "seasonal febrile diseases" had experienced an alternating process of rise one after another. The debates of the relationship between shanghai and seasonal febrile diseases were, in fact, a debate between ideas, a debate between broad sense and narrow sense of shanghai. The rise and fall of the two ideas had already changed their original features, and reflected the medical progress based on continuous deepening in recognition of the diseases, and the continuous detailing in classification of diseases.5. In Qing Dynasty, there was a great difference in the views on whether seasonal febrile diseases and pestilence were of the same kind of diseases or not. Mainly, there were three points of views: seasonal febrile diseases were different from pestilence, seasonal febrile diseases and pestilence were the same, and seasonal febrile diseases included pestilence. In later stage of Qing Dynasty, some inter-crossing phenomena gradually appeared from two separate parallel lines of development for the school of seasonal febrile diseases and the school of pestilence. This was also an important integration and progress in the doctrine of seasonal febrile diseases.6. In Qing Dynasty, the febrile diseases due to latent evils were always in the mainstream until the birth of《Treatise on Seasonal Febrile Diseases》of Ye Tina-shi. Ye's doctrine had reached a peak in the study of febrile diseases due to recent attacks of exogenous evils. Later, Wu Ju-tong and others inherited Ye's doctrine, and applied his doctrine of the study of febrile diseases due to recent attacks of exogenous evils to unprecedented wide area. However, the theory of febrile diseases due to latent evils in the body had not withdrawn from the arena of the doctrine of seasonal febrile diseases, and had a great tendency to return again in the later stage of Qing Dynasty.7. The debate of seasonal febrile diseases in Qing Dynasty was also manifested as sprouts of fusion of cold- and warm-evils. Since the middle stage of Qing Dynasty, first in the interior of the school of shanghai appeared some works on fusion of cold-and warm-evils. The《Popular Treatise on Shanghai》written by Yu Gen-chu and《Handbook on Shanghai》written by Wu Zhen were the representative works. The《Handbook on Shanghai》was a treatise more on "assembly", while the《Popular Treatise on Shanghai》was a treatise more on "combination.". The fusion of cold- and warm evils was also manifested as the appearance from the middle Qing Dynasty of a lot of works on the exogenous febrile diseases neither named "cold-evils" or "warm-evils".8. In Qing Dynasty, the doctrine of seasonal febrile diseases developed prosperously and had profound influences, and it had already been in the mainstream in the folk. On the other hand, the classification of medicine by government of Qing Dynasty always followed the old system, using "shanghai" to sum up all exogenous febrile diseases. In medical education, the teaching was always based on the traditional ideas of the school of shanghai. In this aspect, it might be said that the doctrine of seasonal febrile diseases had never been approved and paid great attention to by the regulatory authorities of medicine, and it had also not obtained any official important position.9. The debate on "cold- " and "warm-evils" in Qing Dynasty pushed the doctrine of seasonal febrile diseases into maturation, promoted the progress in TCM science on febrile diseases due to exogenous evils, and had an active historical significance in the academic advancement of TCM, especially in the history of the treatment for febrile diseases due to exogenous evils.