Lord of The Rings fan and a homoeopath as well?

[Shannon Nelson]

on 9/25/04 7:54 AM, J Lucas at j.lucas@ntlworld.com wrote:
Oh boy, tell us about it?

Shannon

[Liz Lalor]

Yes and what constitution is the ONLY constitution that is able to resist
the desire of the Ring long enough to complete the task. My premise is that
the constitution has to have one part that is "good" and already has an
internal CONTINUAL debate going on inside. That is constantly choosing good
over evil.
Whats more the remedy picture has to be a cancer miasmic remedy because the
drive needed to complete the Quest could only be completed by a cancer
miasmic remedy picture.
If you then use Sankaran's charts and analyse it is only Anacardium.
Then Anac. has the physicals that then match the origins of the remedy as
described by Vermeulen. Are you familar with his book Prisma?
Then Frodo suffers with the Eyes, internal piercing pain and has the
innersight given by the Ring that all match Anac..
So it is based on several fronts and then I have cross referenced again and
again....etc.

[J Lucas]

Dear Liz, my points ***, Joy

on 26/9/04 4:49 am, liz lalor at lalor@ozonline.com.au wrote:

Yes and what constitution is the ONLY constitution that is able to resist
the desire of the Ring long enough to complete the task. My premise is that
the constitution has to have one part that is "good" and already has an
internal CONTINUAL debate going on inside. That is constantly choosing good
over evil.

**** I would say that just about includes every living person ****
Whats more the remedy picture has to be a cancer miasmic remedy because the
drive needed to complete the Quest could only be completed by a cancer
miasmic remedy picture.

**** Not exclusively. As a fan of Sankaran you will know that the struggle
to achieve, to overcome, to go forward, to cleanse, to do the will of
another etc etc can be seen in the acute miasm, the typhoid miasm, the
ringworm miasm and even the sycotic miasm has an acceptance level which
leads to disease.

If you then use Sankaran's charts and analyse it is only Anacardium.
Then Anac. has the physicals that then match the origins of the remedy as
described by Vermeulen.

**** Such as?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Shannon Nelson]

I still can't swallow the idea that having both the drive and the ability to
*do what must be done* is the mark of a disease state...

In your (anyone's!) opinion, what would a *healthy* person do when asked to
sacrifice himself to save the world (aka his home, loved ones, all that is
good, all that he loves and believes in)? The alternative being to stand
and watch them all, and himself too, be defiled and then swalled by the
thing that he could (perhaps) have defeated, and saved them all from? If
that's "disease", then bring it on, we need *more* of it!!!
on 9/26/04 4:41 AM, J Lucas at j.lucas@ntlworld.com wrote:

[J Lucas]

It isn't a mark of a diseased state until the disease starts but everyone
has that potential. if the *do what must be done* becomes inappropriate to
good health, i.e. the balance shifts away.

My (much) earlier point about soldiers fighting in wars, giving up their
lives willingly etc is the fighting spirit you talk about?

But on the other hand, if people refused to fight that would be a world we
don't know anything about but it kind of sounds just as good

I think much of this discussion has been about 'where does the disease state
begin in each individual'.

Best, Joy

www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
on 26/9/04 5:32 pm, Bob&Shannon at shannonnelson@tds.net wrote:

I still can't swallow the idea that having both the drive and the ability to
*do what must be done* is the mark of a disease state...

In your (anyone's!) opinion, what would a *healthy* person do when asked to
sacrifice himself to save the world (aka his home, loved ones, all that is
good, all that he loves and believes in)? The alternative being to stand
and watch them all, and himself too, be defiled and then swalled by the
thing that he could (perhaps) have defeated, and saved them all from? If
that's "disease", then bring it on, we need *more* of it!!!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Shannon Nelson]

on 9/26/04 12:04 PM, J Lucas at j.lucas@ntlworld.com wrote:
I assume you mean, when the person *thinks* something must be done, when it
would in fact be better not to do it? It's self-contradictory to say that
"doing what must be done" is inappropriate...
Some probably are, and some probably aren't. Most of our *people* aren't
truly healthy, and so most of our (over-stressed and under-nourished)
soldiers presumably aren't either. And of course "health" is a different
thing from either "understanding" or "personal choice", that that's a whole
new can of worms, IMO.
Sure. And that refusal to fight also could come from either a healthy or an
unhealthy basis. But wouldn't it be a lovely thing to see!
I agree, and also, "How do we differentiate the patient's 'disease state'
from their circumstances', and how does that distinction enter into the
prescribing process?

Cheers,
Shannon

[Liz Lalor]

What anyone decides they need (if anything) to do will always reflect their
constitutional picture. I disagree that it will be a disease state that
motivates action?????