Dear Ferras Hekkak,
Is it directed against me ? From the tenor of your
posting,I infer so.
Did I interpret ? Read again. I showed the thread
running thru these rubrics.
The aspect of analysis is never mechanical and can
never be. In your previous posting you wrote about the
state. To identify the state we need a study of PPP.
Sehgal would never use a rubric like Loquacity. He
would go to the sub rubrics or to those that point to
the present tense- the doing rubrics. This study of
mine is a pointer to a direction and not the direction
as such.
You wrote
1.'So, reading Dr Sehgal's books do not make us ROH
homeopaths'-
Did I say so ? Or was it your assumption ?
2.You also wrote "We have to gather a very deep
understanding of our remedies and the patients"
Excellent.The first part is a lifetime work and we all
are trodding the path and at various levels. As for
the latter ,Sehgal decided to ignore the innates and
preferred to study his present state. When I go by his
method I do this.
3. You then wrote:"We have to be unprejudiced
observers to prescribe, and to achieve this state we
have to put aside our ego and superego and just
watch."
Prejudice is the premise of the uncertain. On the
other hand, do all these show a prejudice on your part
to see a seemingly plain observation- which was a
relationship of Rubrics.
The ego and superego you mentioned are off topic and
only those who possess these 'virtues' have to answer
your comment.
regards and the very best
J.venkatasubramanian
--- Feras Hakkak wrote:
---------------------------------
Please note that we cannot use the rubric
interpretations mechanically. We have to feel the
patient and understand what he is conveying through
his speech, gestures, and actions. So, reading Dr
Sehgal's books do not make us ROH homeopaths. We have
to gather a very deep understanding of our remedies
and the patients. We have to be unprejudiced observers
to prescribe, and to achieve this state we have to put
aside our ego and superego and just watch.
Sincerely,
Feras Hakkak
"V.T. Yekkirala" wrote:
J.VENKATA SUBRAMANIAN wrote on Sat, 27 Sep 2003
15:54:39 +0100 (BST)
urge to speak
rubric
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
ATTENTION PLEASE:
The Minutus Group is established purely for the
promotion of Homoeopathy and educational benefit of
its members. It makes no representations regarding the
individual suitability of the information contained in
any document read or advice or recommendation offered
which appears on this website and/or email postings
for any purpose. The entire risk arising out of their
use remains with the recipient. In no event shall the
minutus site or its individual members be liable for
any direct, consequential, incidental, special,
punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever
caused.
****
If you do not wish to receive individual emails, send
a message with the subject of 'Digest' to
ashahrdar@yahoo.com to receive a single daily digest.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
minutus-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner online.
Go to http://yahoo.shaadi.com
Khalil Gibron on Loquacity
-
Julian Winston
- Posts: 622
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: Khalil Gibron on Loquacity
At 12:03 AM +0000 9/28/03, Albert wrote:
Yes it does.
Hard to explain.
Obviously something you have not experienced
JW
Yes it does.
Hard to explain.
Obviously something you have not experienced
JW
-
Feras Hakkak
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2001 10:00 pm
Re: Khalil Gibron on Loquacity
Dear Venkata,
What I wrote was my experience. I have tried many times to use the interpretations without knowing them deeply and I have failed many times. Also I have had many successful presriptions. I was wondering why it is so, and I think I have found it in ROH book series volume 9. There we learn that three things are important:
- What he says
- How he says
- Why he says
So we have to understand what the patient is conveying to us and understand why he is doing that.
I wrote: "reading Dr Sehgal's books do not make us ROH
homeopaths". I meant if we just study the books and do not try to understand them deeply we will have problem. This may be mostly because in prescription the gestures of the patient helps to use the correct rubrics and this cannot be illustrated in the books. This is my own experience.
I wrote: "We have to be unprejudiced observers to prescribe, and to achieve this state we
have to put aside our ego and superego and just watch". When the ego and superego control us we are not able to accept and feel the patient as he is. The closer we get to this state, the more we will have unprejudiced mind. This is what I have learned from SahajaYoga and I have experienced it a bit.
With best regards,
Feras
"J.VENKATA SUBRAMANIAN" wrote:
Dear Ferras Hekkak,
Is it directed against me ? From the tenor of your
posting,I infer so.
Did I interpret ? Read again. I showed the thread
running thru these rubrics.
The aspect of analysis is never mechanical and can
never be. In your previous posting you wrote about the
state. To identify the state we need a study of PPP.
Sehgal would never use a rubric like Loquacity. He
would go to the sub rubrics or to those that point to
the present tense- the doing rubrics. This study of
mine is a pointer to a direction and not the direction
as such.
You wrote
1.'So, reading Dr Sehgal's books do not make us ROH
homeopaths'-
Did I say so ? Or was it your assumption ?
2.You also wrote "We have to gather a very deep
understanding of our remedies and the patients"
Excellent.The first part is a lifetime work and we all
are trodding the path and at various levels. As for
the latter ,Sehgal decided to ignore the innates and
preferred to study his present state. When I go by his
method I do this.
3. You then wrote:"We have to be unprejudiced
observers to prescribe, and to achieve this state we
have to put aside our ego and superego and just
watch."
Prejudice is the premise of the uncertain. On the
other hand, do all these show a prejudice on your part
to see a seemingly plain observation- which was a
relationship of Rubrics.
The ego and superego you mentioned are off topic and
only those who possess these 'virtues' have to answer
your comment.
regards and the very best
J.venkatasubramanian
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
What I wrote was my experience. I have tried many times to use the interpretations without knowing them deeply and I have failed many times. Also I have had many successful presriptions. I was wondering why it is so, and I think I have found it in ROH book series volume 9. There we learn that three things are important:
- What he says
- How he says
- Why he says
So we have to understand what the patient is conveying to us and understand why he is doing that.
I wrote: "reading Dr Sehgal's books do not make us ROH
homeopaths". I meant if we just study the books and do not try to understand them deeply we will have problem. This may be mostly because in prescription the gestures of the patient helps to use the correct rubrics and this cannot be illustrated in the books. This is my own experience.
I wrote: "We have to be unprejudiced observers to prescribe, and to achieve this state we
have to put aside our ego and superego and just watch". When the ego and superego control us we are not able to accept and feel the patient as he is. The closer we get to this state, the more we will have unprejudiced mind. This is what I have learned from SahajaYoga and I have experienced it a bit.
With best regards,
Feras
"J.VENKATA SUBRAMANIAN" wrote:
Dear Ferras Hekkak,
Is it directed against me ? From the tenor of your
posting,I infer so.
Did I interpret ? Read again. I showed the thread
running thru these rubrics.
The aspect of analysis is never mechanical and can
never be. In your previous posting you wrote about the
state. To identify the state we need a study of PPP.
Sehgal would never use a rubric like Loquacity. He
would go to the sub rubrics or to those that point to
the present tense- the doing rubrics. This study of
mine is a pointer to a direction and not the direction
as such.
You wrote
1.'So, reading Dr Sehgal's books do not make us ROH
homeopaths'-
Did I say so ? Or was it your assumption ?
2.You also wrote "We have to gather a very deep
understanding of our remedies and the patients"
Excellent.The first part is a lifetime work and we all
are trodding the path and at various levels. As for
the latter ,Sehgal decided to ignore the innates and
preferred to study his present state. When I go by his
method I do this.
3. You then wrote:"We have to be unprejudiced
observers to prescribe, and to achieve this state we
have to put aside our ego and superego and just
watch."
Prejudice is the premise of the uncertain. On the
other hand, do all these show a prejudice on your part
to see a seemingly plain observation- which was a
relationship of Rubrics.
The ego and superego you mentioned are off topic and
only those who possess these 'virtues' have to answer
your comment.
regards and the very best
J.venkatasubramanian
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-
carolromanella
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: Khalil Gibron on Loquacity
The Prophet has been my favourite book for a lifetime now. How wonderful that you can think of it in homeopathical terms.
-
APEX PRECITECH
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 11:00 pm
Re: Khalil Gibron on Loquacity
Dear Feras Hakkak,
Oh! another mix up! Sorry. Sometimes even a well meant
remark provokes reactions. I am no exception and seem
to have some Albert in me. Sorry again.
Now will you tell me what and how you learned in your
practice of Sahaja Yoga and how much beneficial it was
in your practice.
Regards
J.venkatasubramanian
--- Feras Hakkak wrote:
---------------------------------
Dear Venkata,
What I wrote was my experience. I have tried many
times to use the interpretations without knowing them
deeply and I have failed many times. Also I have had
many successful presriptions. I was wondering why it
is so, and I think I have found it in ROH book series
volume 9. There we learn that three things are
important:
- What he says
- How he says
- Why he says
So we have to understand what the patient is conveying
to us and understand why he is doing that.
I wrote: "reading Dr Sehgal's books do not make us ROH
homeopaths". I meant if we just study the books and do
not try to understand them deeply we will have
problem. This may be mostly because in prescription
the gestures of the patient helps to use the correct
rubrics and this cannot be illustrated in the books.
This is my own experience.
I wrote: "We have to be unprejudiced observers to
prescribe, and to achieve this state we
have to put aside our ego and superego and just
watch". When the ego and superego control us we are
not able to accept and feel the patient as he is. The
closer we get to this state, the more we will have
unprejudiced mind. This is what I have learned from
SahajaYoga and I have experienced it a bit.
With best regards,
Feras
"J.VENKATA SUBRAMANIAN"
wrote:
Dear Ferras Hekkak,
Is it directed against me ? From the tenor of your
posting,I infer so.
Did I interpret ? Read again. I showed the thread
running thru these rubrics.
The aspect of analysis is never mechanical and can
never be. In your previous posting you wrote about the
state. To identify the state we need a study of PPP.
Sehgal would never use a rubric like Loquacity. He
would go to the sub rubrics or to those that point to
the present tense- the doing rubrics. This study of
mine is a pointer to a direction and not the direction
as such.
You wrote
1.'So, reading Dr Sehgal's books do not make us ROH
homeopaths'-
Did I say so ? Or was it your assumption ?
2.You also wrote "We have to gather a very deep
understanding of our remedies and the patients"
Excellent.The first part is a lifetime work and we all
are trodding the path and at various levels. As for
the latter ,Sehgal decided to ignore the innates and
preferred to study his present state. When I go by his
method I do this.
3. You then wrote:"We have to be unprejudiced
observers to prescribe, and to achieve this state we
have to put aside our ego and superego and just
watch."
Prejudice is the premise of the uncertain. On the
other hand, do all these show a prejudice on your part
to see a seemingly plain observation- which was a
relationship of Rubrics.
The ego and superego you mentioned are off topic and
only those who possess these 'virtues' have to answer
your comment.
regards and the very best
J.venkatasubramanian
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
ATTENTION PLEASE:
The Minutus Group is established purely for the
promotion of Homoeopathy and educational benefit of
its members. It makes no representations regarding the
individual suitability of the information contained in
any document read or advice or recommendation offered
which appears on this website and/or email postings
for any purpose. The entire risk arising out of their
use remains with the recipient. In no event shall the
minutus site or its individual members be liable for
any direct, consequential, incidental, special,
punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever
caused.
****
If you do not wish to receive individual emails, send
a message with the subject of 'Digest' to
ashahrdar@yahoo.com to receive a single daily digest.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
minutus-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner online.
Go to http://yahoo.shaadi.com
Oh! another mix up! Sorry. Sometimes even a well meant
remark provokes reactions. I am no exception and seem
to have some Albert in me. Sorry again.
Now will you tell me what and how you learned in your
practice of Sahaja Yoga and how much beneficial it was
in your practice.
Regards
J.venkatasubramanian
--- Feras Hakkak wrote:
---------------------------------
Dear Venkata,
What I wrote was my experience. I have tried many
times to use the interpretations without knowing them
deeply and I have failed many times. Also I have had
many successful presriptions. I was wondering why it
is so, and I think I have found it in ROH book series
volume 9. There we learn that three things are
important:
- What he says
- How he says
- Why he says
So we have to understand what the patient is conveying
to us and understand why he is doing that.
I wrote: "reading Dr Sehgal's books do not make us ROH
homeopaths". I meant if we just study the books and do
not try to understand them deeply we will have
problem. This may be mostly because in prescription
the gestures of the patient helps to use the correct
rubrics and this cannot be illustrated in the books.
This is my own experience.
I wrote: "We have to be unprejudiced observers to
prescribe, and to achieve this state we
have to put aside our ego and superego and just
watch". When the ego and superego control us we are
not able to accept and feel the patient as he is. The
closer we get to this state, the more we will have
unprejudiced mind. This is what I have learned from
SahajaYoga and I have experienced it a bit.
With best regards,
Feras
"J.VENKATA SUBRAMANIAN"
wrote:
Dear Ferras Hekkak,
Is it directed against me ? From the tenor of your
posting,I infer so.
Did I interpret ? Read again. I showed the thread
running thru these rubrics.
The aspect of analysis is never mechanical and can
never be. In your previous posting you wrote about the
state. To identify the state we need a study of PPP.
Sehgal would never use a rubric like Loquacity. He
would go to the sub rubrics or to those that point to
the present tense- the doing rubrics. This study of
mine is a pointer to a direction and not the direction
as such.
You wrote
1.'So, reading Dr Sehgal's books do not make us ROH
homeopaths'-
Did I say so ? Or was it your assumption ?
2.You also wrote "We have to gather a very deep
understanding of our remedies and the patients"
Excellent.The first part is a lifetime work and we all
are trodding the path and at various levels. As for
the latter ,Sehgal decided to ignore the innates and
preferred to study his present state. When I go by his
method I do this.
3. You then wrote:"We have to be unprejudiced
observers to prescribe, and to achieve this state we
have to put aside our ego and superego and just
watch."
Prejudice is the premise of the uncertain. On the
other hand, do all these show a prejudice on your part
to see a seemingly plain observation- which was a
relationship of Rubrics.
The ego and superego you mentioned are off topic and
only those who possess these 'virtues' have to answer
your comment.
regards and the very best
J.venkatasubramanian
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
ATTENTION PLEASE:
The Minutus Group is established purely for the
promotion of Homoeopathy and educational benefit of
its members. It makes no representations regarding the
individual suitability of the information contained in
any document read or advice or recommendation offered
which appears on this website and/or email postings
for any purpose. The entire risk arising out of their
use remains with the recipient. In no event shall the
minutus site or its individual members be liable for
any direct, consequential, incidental, special,
punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever
caused.
****
If you do not wish to receive individual emails, send
a message with the subject of 'Digest' to
ashahrdar@yahoo.com to receive a single daily digest.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
minutus-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner online.
Go to http://yahoo.shaadi.com
-
APEX PRECITECH
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 11:00 pm
Re: Khalil Gibron on Loquacity
Dear Carolromanella,
Thanks for enjoying. The profoundness of his words are
striking.
I read the book while waiting for a presentation and
there Gibran laid threadbare the act of talking and
the talking mind. Philosophy has surely guided me here
to make a few observations. All credit to Gibran.
Regards, Peace and the very best
J.venkatasubramanian
--- carolromanella wrote:
---------------------------------
The Prophet has been my favourite book for a lifetime
now. How wonderful that you can think of it in
homeopathical terms.
Thanks for enjoying. The profoundness of his words are
striking.
I read the book while waiting for a presentation and
there Gibran laid threadbare the act of talking and
the talking mind. Philosophy has surely guided me here
to make a few observations. All credit to Gibran.
Regards, Peace and the very best
J.venkatasubramanian
--- carolromanella wrote:
---------------------------------
The Prophet has been my favourite book for a lifetime
now. How wonderful that you can think of it in
homeopathical terms.
-
carolromanella
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: Khalil Gibron on Loquacity
Dear J. Venkatasubramanian:
The book is, like Homeopathy, a treasure. I have read it many times and everytime I do, I see something new - yesterday I realized yet again - everything is open to interpretation and that's what books do - they open us up to possibilities and that is what Hahnemann gave his life to - challenging people to look at another way and thank God some of us did and still do.
I do not wish to venture into the arena of argument for we are all humans with thoughts and opinions and how very dull the world would be if it weren't that way. However, let me just quote not from the Prophet but what the Chicago Post said of Gibrans's work:
"Cadenced and vibrant with feeling, the words of Kahlil Gibran bring to one's ears the majestic rhythm of Ecclesiastes. If there is a man or woman who can read this book without a quiet acceptance of a great man's philosophy and a singing in the heart as of music born within, that man or woman is indeed dead to life and truth."
I think this is the point you were trying to make with your original sharing of this book - there are many words written to remind us to seek the truth. How unfortunate that some did not see your intention.
Thank you for sharing this with us. May peace and light be with you also.
Albert - you may be extremely intelligent but as Jeremy Sherr said recently at his seminar here - Homeopathy is about being subtle - people don't listen when you try to hit them over the head with your point. I pray you don't do that with your patients.
The book is, like Homeopathy, a treasure. I have read it many times and everytime I do, I see something new - yesterday I realized yet again - everything is open to interpretation and that's what books do - they open us up to possibilities and that is what Hahnemann gave his life to - challenging people to look at another way and thank God some of us did and still do.
I do not wish to venture into the arena of argument for we are all humans with thoughts and opinions and how very dull the world would be if it weren't that way. However, let me just quote not from the Prophet but what the Chicago Post said of Gibrans's work:
"Cadenced and vibrant with feeling, the words of Kahlil Gibran bring to one's ears the majestic rhythm of Ecclesiastes. If there is a man or woman who can read this book without a quiet acceptance of a great man's philosophy and a singing in the heart as of music born within, that man or woman is indeed dead to life and truth."
I think this is the point you were trying to make with your original sharing of this book - there are many words written to remind us to seek the truth. How unfortunate that some did not see your intention.
Thank you for sharing this with us. May peace and light be with you also.
Albert - you may be extremely intelligent but as Jeremy Sherr said recently at his seminar here - Homeopathy is about being subtle - people don't listen when you try to hit them over the head with your point. I pray you don't do that with your patients.
-
V.T. Yekkirala
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:00 pm
Re: Khalil Gibron on Loquacity
Dear J.V,
My remarks are for what you wrote as follows :
"Loquacity is essentially a mentally morbid sign.The rubric
Loquacity is huge.Dr Sehgal used to write that the urge to speak
out isa equal to bare open oneself and used the rubric
Naked,"
If you simply stated that as your personal idea, I wouldn't have
wasted even 2 words to comment. Since you utilised the name
of Dr.Sehgal and there are some on the list who joined to
learn homeopathy, I felt that such an idea will be +vely
injurious if left uncontested.
Thanks to Feras Hakkak for his well meaning clarification
to extricate the name of Dr.Sehgal from this and unfortunately
you saw something directed against you even in his clarification.
Once again I want to reiteate that the repetetion of remedies
in rubrics does not mean any thing and trying to connect them
by this method instead of thro' the MM is a wrong route that will
lead us astray and confusion. Thus equating the rubrics loquacity
and desire to be naked is a over simplification as I already mentioned.
Now , if you don't agree with this let us agree to disagree.
My other comment that whoever uses the 2 rubrics as synonymous
"betrays poverty of understanding and
perversion of the thought process of whoever indluges in such"
means just that, nothing more and nothing less. It includes me
or you or even Dr.Sehgal and whoever uses them as synonymous.
Is it your contention that the opposite is true ?
Let me say also that I meant no disrespect to you if
that is how you have taken it.
with best wishes,
V.T.Yekkirala.
_________________________________________________________________
Share your photos without swamping your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage
today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
My remarks are for what you wrote as follows :
"Loquacity is essentially a mentally morbid sign.The rubric
Loquacity is huge.Dr Sehgal used to write that the urge to speak
out isa equal to bare open oneself and used the rubric
Naked,"
If you simply stated that as your personal idea, I wouldn't have
wasted even 2 words to comment. Since you utilised the name
of Dr.Sehgal and there are some on the list who joined to
learn homeopathy, I felt that such an idea will be +vely
injurious if left uncontested.
Thanks to Feras Hakkak for his well meaning clarification
to extricate the name of Dr.Sehgal from this and unfortunately
you saw something directed against you even in his clarification.
Once again I want to reiteate that the repetetion of remedies
in rubrics does not mean any thing and trying to connect them
by this method instead of thro' the MM is a wrong route that will
lead us astray and confusion. Thus equating the rubrics loquacity
and desire to be naked is a over simplification as I already mentioned.
Now , if you don't agree with this let us agree to disagree.
My other comment that whoever uses the 2 rubrics as synonymous
"betrays poverty of understanding and
perversion of the thought process of whoever indluges in such"
means just that, nothing more and nothing less. It includes me
or you or even Dr.Sehgal and whoever uses them as synonymous.
Is it your contention that the opposite is true ?
Let me say also that I meant no disrespect to you if
that is how you have taken it.
with best wishes,
V.T.Yekkirala.
_________________________________________________________________
Share your photos without swamping your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage
today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
-
APEX PRECITECH
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 11:00 pm
Re: Khalil Gibron on Loquacity
Thanks Mr VT for your time and attention.
I want to dwell more on this loquacity as a rubric.
Mark Mackormack in his book 'what they don't teach you
at the harward business school' writes this on
negitiation. The words are not exactly remembered but
I write from memeory.
'After you told your customer the terms of your deal
just keep quiet. Allow the silence to continue, just
don't fill it. Even if the silence be deafening.
Whoever fills up the silence, emerges the weaker'
Now the talkativenes is clearly portrayed as a timid
act, a deficiency of sorts. What I saw in Gibran's
words was a reiteration of the connecting thread with
various acts though visibly unconnected. I request you
to see some cases of Dr Sehgal where even for words
like , 'I want to tell you' proposed the rubric'naked
wants to be' . I was more conservative. Read those
words of Gibran again,and look over those rubrics
again and you might see a pattern. Personally since I
stammered from childhood, I have done a lot of
thinking and researching on this topic.
If you look at the theory that everyone is a chronic (
Our own karma theory that thought is a bondage. Speech
is the child of thought and more bonding). Peace is
somewhere described as a thoughtless state( sankara's
Bhaja Govindam- Satsangatve nissangatwam, nissangatve,
nirmohatwam, nirmohatve nischala tatvam, nischala
tatve jeeven mukthi').
When we all claim homeopathy as a spiritual medicine
and hahnemann's had his own understanding of the vital
principle. ( in a society where materialism
flourished)
all these thoughts are bound to enrich the already
rich homeo heritage. Mine may just be an aberration or
an affirmation of something already understood.
Anyway, Thanks for provoking these things in me.
Gibran will forever remain etched in memory.
Regards, Peace and the very best.
J.venkatasubramanian
--- "V.T. Yekkirala" wrote:
---------------------------------
Dear J.V,
My remarks are for what you wrote as follows :
"Loquacity is essentially a mentally morbid sign.The
rubric
Loquacity is huge.Dr Sehgal used to write that the
urge to speak
out isa equal to bare open oneself and used the rubric
Naked,"
If you simply stated that as your personal idea, I
wouldn't have
wasted even 2 words to comment. Since you utilised the
name
of Dr.Sehgal and there are some on the list who joined
to
learn homeopathy, I felt that such an idea will be
+vely
injurious if left uncontested.
Thanks to Feras Hakkak for his well meaning
clarification
to extricate the name of Dr.Sehgal from this and
unfortunately
you saw something directed against you even in his
clarification.
Once again I want to reiteate that the repetetion of
remedies
in rubrics does not mean any thing and trying to
connect them
by this method instead of thro' the MM is a wrong
route that will
lead us astray and confusion. Thus equating the
rubrics loquacity
and desire to be naked is a over simplification as I
already mentioned.
Now , if you don't agree with this let us agree to
disagree.
My other comment that whoever uses the 2 rubrics as
synonymous
"betrays poverty of understanding and
perversion of the thought process of whoever indluges
in such"
means just that, nothing more and nothing less. It
includes me
or you or even Dr.Sehgal and whoever uses them as
synonymous.
Is it your contention that the opposite is true ?
Let me say also that I meant no disrespect to you if
that is how you have taken it.
with best wishes,
V.T.Yekkirala.
an
conclusions.
whoever
and
why
looked
_________________________________________________________________
Share your photos without swamping your Inbox. Get
Hotmail Extra Storage
today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
ATTENTION PLEASE:
The Minutus Group is established purely for the
promotion of Homoeopathy and educational benefit of
its members. It makes no representations regarding the
individual suitability of the information contained in
any document read or advice or recommendation offered
which appears on this website and/or email postings
for any purpose. The entire risk arising out of their
use remains with the recipient. In no event shall the
minutus site or its individual members be liable for
any direct, consequential, incidental, special,
punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever
caused.
****
If you do not wish to receive individual emails, send
a message with the subject of 'Digest' to
ashahrdar@yahoo.com to receive a single daily digest.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
minutus-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner online.
Go to http://yahoo.shaadi.com
I want to dwell more on this loquacity as a rubric.
Mark Mackormack in his book 'what they don't teach you
at the harward business school' writes this on
negitiation. The words are not exactly remembered but
I write from memeory.
'After you told your customer the terms of your deal
just keep quiet. Allow the silence to continue, just
don't fill it. Even if the silence be deafening.
Whoever fills up the silence, emerges the weaker'
Now the talkativenes is clearly portrayed as a timid
act, a deficiency of sorts. What I saw in Gibran's
words was a reiteration of the connecting thread with
various acts though visibly unconnected. I request you
to see some cases of Dr Sehgal where even for words
like , 'I want to tell you' proposed the rubric'naked
wants to be' . I was more conservative. Read those
words of Gibran again,and look over those rubrics
again and you might see a pattern. Personally since I
stammered from childhood, I have done a lot of
thinking and researching on this topic.
If you look at the theory that everyone is a chronic (
Our own karma theory that thought is a bondage. Speech
is the child of thought and more bonding). Peace is
somewhere described as a thoughtless state( sankara's
Bhaja Govindam- Satsangatve nissangatwam, nissangatve,
nirmohatwam, nirmohatve nischala tatvam, nischala
tatve jeeven mukthi').
When we all claim homeopathy as a spiritual medicine
and hahnemann's had his own understanding of the vital
principle. ( in a society where materialism
flourished)
all these thoughts are bound to enrich the already
rich homeo heritage. Mine may just be an aberration or
an affirmation of something already understood.
Anyway, Thanks for provoking these things in me.
Gibran will forever remain etched in memory.
Regards, Peace and the very best.
J.venkatasubramanian
--- "V.T. Yekkirala" wrote:
---------------------------------
Dear J.V,
My remarks are for what you wrote as follows :
"Loquacity is essentially a mentally morbid sign.The
rubric
Loquacity is huge.Dr Sehgal used to write that the
urge to speak
out isa equal to bare open oneself and used the rubric
Naked,"
If you simply stated that as your personal idea, I
wouldn't have
wasted even 2 words to comment. Since you utilised the
name
of Dr.Sehgal and there are some on the list who joined
to
learn homeopathy, I felt that such an idea will be
+vely
injurious if left uncontested.
Thanks to Feras Hakkak for his well meaning
clarification
to extricate the name of Dr.Sehgal from this and
unfortunately
you saw something directed against you even in his
clarification.
Once again I want to reiteate that the repetetion of
remedies
in rubrics does not mean any thing and trying to
connect them
by this method instead of thro' the MM is a wrong
route that will
lead us astray and confusion. Thus equating the
rubrics loquacity
and desire to be naked is a over simplification as I
already mentioned.
Now , if you don't agree with this let us agree to
disagree.
My other comment that whoever uses the 2 rubrics as
synonymous
"betrays poverty of understanding and
perversion of the thought process of whoever indluges
in such"
means just that, nothing more and nothing less. It
includes me
or you or even Dr.Sehgal and whoever uses them as
synonymous.
Is it your contention that the opposite is true ?
Let me say also that I meant no disrespect to you if
that is how you have taken it.
with best wishes,
V.T.Yekkirala.
an
conclusions.
whoever
and
why
looked
_________________________________________________________________
Share your photos without swamping your Inbox. Get
Hotmail Extra Storage
today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
ATTENTION PLEASE:
The Minutus Group is established purely for the
promotion of Homoeopathy and educational benefit of
its members. It makes no representations regarding the
individual suitability of the information contained in
any document read or advice or recommendation offered
which appears on this website and/or email postings
for any purpose. The entire risk arising out of their
use remains with the recipient. In no event shall the
minutus site or its individual members be liable for
any direct, consequential, incidental, special,
punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever
caused.
****
If you do not wish to receive individual emails, send
a message with the subject of 'Digest' to
ashahrdar@yahoo.com to receive a single daily digest.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
minutus-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner online.
Go to http://yahoo.shaadi.com