Hahnemann, Homeopathy and Organon - Off shoot of Lachesis and Potencies LONG

[muthu kumar]

Any one leaving a legacy would want it to grow beyond them- If Freud
had said what he said in his work was the final word on psycho
analysis there would be no growth and newer adaptations...This is the
state of affairs in any field of knowledge pursuit - the Father or
Mother or Founder of any branch of medicine and science gets
superceded by the Sons and Daughters...The original work is not
forgotten - but is complemented and supplemented with additions-

Homeopathy is bigger than Hahnemann, predated Hahnemann- Yes Hahnemann
discovered the codified Homeopathic system of medicine, made it come
into existence in a scientific manner and what he said couple of
centuries back is still true in most aspects. But homeopathy as a way
of administering medicines predated Hahnemann and carries a broader
definition.

Hahnemann added 3 things to it 1) Diluted the medicines to prevent
aggravations 2) Created formal provings to give us indications 3) Made
it a single medicine administration so that we can map the symptoms of
natural disease to the provings. Potentization came about as a
by-product - not the intention of diluting. But even without these
things homeopathicity can still occur.

In Homeopathy too there have been growths, expansions- but which never
got into Organon- As I like to call it - it is a book of guidelines, A
Best Practices Collection when it appeared - it is NOT the only way to
practice 200 years later..it is highly recommended and very
scientific- but still is not something writ on stone and carried down
by Moses...

If I take an obscure plant, give it to someone and note down the
symptoms and then prepare a potency of the same in my own way, 1/100
as the first and then 1/50 of that as the next potency and 1/200 of
that as the third and then use this as a medicine -is it still
homeopathy or not? The fundamentals are there - not exactly the way
Hahnemann put it - but still there-even if I give the mother tincture
I am still practicing Homeopathy even if I do not know all the
aphorisms by heart and even if I do not own the latest computer software-

Works like organon grow out of practical experience - Which comes
first - poetry or grammar? Always poetry comes first and then the
guidelines ( grammar) based on that... the next poet follows the
grammar but then supercedes in some way - you do not throw out the
work but expand the grammar later to accomodate this-

This is what has not been happening in Homeopathy- we have had
excellent practitioners, observers, thinkers in Homeopathy- that is
the practice ( poetry) of homeopathy has grown a lot but the Organon -
the Best Practices Library- still reflects the Best Practices 150
years back- Instead of being a living document it has become a partial
museum piece- most of it still good - some parts clearly
anachronistic- instead of being a 2 way street - where it informs our
practice and then evolving more out of that practice - it became a
stick in people's hand to poke into eyes that look in different directions

-Organon is like getting a map of the area from Mapquest or Google -
but still local conditions might dictate how you drive or find your way-

But still we have people throwing it at people who do not follow it-
people who use it like a police baton-- the fault is not that of the
practitioners who practice outside of Organon ( not always at least)
it is the fault of all of us as a profession still referring to a
museum piece for all guidelines and not being tolerant mindful of the
fact that we ourselves do not follow all the tenets of the work

Doctors worth their salt do not practice out of books- true practice
comes out of books a little but over a period of time comes out of
their observation and experience- and if the Book concurs, good for it
- we can appreciate the timelessness of it- if it does not - then go
ahead and practice what you think is the best in the given situation,
what your intuition and experience tells you is best for the patient-
whether or not Organon has it-

At a time when only Organon 30th edition would suffice we cannot still
have 6th being thrust into our throats every step of the way- it is
the best we have - sure - but then what if it is not good enough? I
might want to use only parts of it that are still relevant-

[Joy Lucas]

as I understand it Hahnemann thought he had pretty much perfected the situation, but who knows.

The thing is it isn't a question of being 'stuck in time', or 'frozen' or 'not growing' - the question is that there is absolutely no need to to re-invent or change homeopathy - how Hahnemann left it to us is perfectly ok, it works folks, no need to worry.

Give me reasons why we would want to re-invent it. If you want more medicines (remedies) then go and prove them in a Hahnnemanian manner and spread the data, then you have sx similarity

but to re-iterate - give me reasons why there is need to change Homeopath as Hahnemann left it to us.

Joy

http://www.joylucashomeopathy.com
http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/provings

[muthu kumar]

Sheri-
Calm down- Too much frothing at the mouth - even for you who does it a
lot- is not good for health-
( if there is a vaccine for that- you might consider to have it -
seriously)

I cannot bring down Classical Homeopathy just by posting on this
list- So clamp it
Nothing - I do not want to leave even the 4th edition - I just
wanted to see your reaction by posting it
I am not dissing him - see even he is not complaining-
Agreed - it was not a system- but homeopathic mode of administration
was practised by a lot of the ancients
Because of these 3 things which are THE most important of all

seen the incredible power of his methods of> dosing.

I am sorry too -every time I open Luc's book it puts me to sleep- I
think probably that is my simillimum right there

wrong,> then you really can't say, now can you.

No I cannot but I am saying it anyway
What an admirable choice of words-

I hope you keep your sanity for longer periods at least there...( but
come on Sheri- this is just an opinion - you do not have to give up,
accept defeat and run to start another list just because of one post-
what would Hahnemann's spirit think of you if you run away without
defending him from the likes of "evil" me..) And being here might be
therapeutic as well...you have heard of desensitization, haven't you?
The more you can tolerate me without losing your temper -adds so many
more years to your life-

[muthu kumar]

Agreed - even 4th edition works for me-In fact a few aphorisms are
enough to practice- the rest are for reference in times of doubt but
not the core-
Correct- but there is not much hue and cry when so many more medicines
are being added to all our reference works without such provings- so
either we prevent that or change our methodology in Organon to be
consistent- since we do not have the power, inclination or attitude to
do anything like that - this post was just for "shock and awe"
Nothing at all

[Shannon Nelson]

What do you mean by "re-invent"? I have not heard anyone here talk
about that, only about continuing to work with, develop, and better
understand the work that H left us.
Shannon

[muthu kumar]

If you take all the aphorisms in Organon and compare them with the
practice of ANY of the leading homeopathic thinkers and circuit gurus,
we can easily prove that they are transgressing the Word of the Master
( sounds like I am writing Harry Potter - but anyway). Why is that?
How is that they are successful and have a wide following-all of the
followers singing the praises of these different methods?

May be there are a couple of people who claim they are exactly
following the Organon - and even there I suspect that they have made a
career out of saying that - and to show that they are the best and
deserve the mantle...

But the point is *we do not have to update the Organon* but *not
practice according to ALL the aphorisms either* (if we look at all the
different practices around) as long as we are faithful to some of them
esp. the law - Like cures like - to be called Homeopaths- otherwise
except those few alluded above - our camp would be pretty empty-and
even these faithfuls might stop being so - how can they have meetings,
run courses or sell books with an empty camp?

[Shannon Nelson]

I don't know what others are doing. Many trained in 4th ed are
slowly gaining understanding of 5th/6th--but continuing to use 4th ed
method where it seems preferable; which certainly has us continuing to
"develop" as homeopaths.
Most of the "innovations" presently popping up can be practiced with
*either* 4th ed or 5th/6th ed posology. (Sankaran, Scholten, et al.)
This does get really difficult to talk about "in the abstract", and
various issues are being all mushed together...

[muthu kumar]

How about some of these for starters???

We can start by proving with low potenices( in water potencies if that
would satisfy some) and get to see if there are any physiological and
biochmeical markers that change with provings- if they do we can
stipulate that any new provings incorporate these as well...

We can start by proving the same medicine with people from different
backgrounds and across globe ( with different eating habits) - and lay
down this as one of the conditions for a proving to be accepted as
authentic- and probably strictly say that Dream and Meditation
provings are NOT allowed / or allowed - whatever the case may be - but
make it official

We can start by using formal methods of mental status examination
before, during and after provings to see if there is any change in that-

Hahnemann never advised using a standard form of questionnaire with
the patient - but a lot of leading homeopaths do- we can assess if
having such a questionnaire really adds value - and if it does - can
update Organon with that information-

We can add the value of computers - how they allow one to analyze the
patient and symptoms etc.- and see if we can set some guidelines for
using it correctly and update the Organon with that-

Since there is a wide spread misunderstanding of Psora , Syphilis and
Sycosis and different authorities differing on their take on it- that
could be analyzed more thoroughly and Organon updated with that-
Suggestion is for keeping Organon as a Current Practice Manual... not
to become so irrelevant that one needs to goad people into trying the
5th and the 6th...

does not the fact that so many people have to be goaded to reading it
by itself prove that how irrelevant it has become for many?
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Sheri Nakken wrote:
about
understand
so how
'frozen' or
perfectly
manner and
Homeopath
next ones

[muthu kumar]

Even take the issue of vaccinations-

Vaccinations are more pervasive now than ever before- definitely more
so than during Hahnemann's time - what do you do when you get patients
who are not willing to give up vaccinations but still want homeopathy
or who have taken vaccinations already but want to counter the ones
taken, who want to concurrently be on allopathic medication while on
homeopathy, practice situations that arise day in and day out which
are much more complex than Hahnemann's time - how do we get them into
Organon?

Allopathy has grown so much and become better in some ways and worse
in others - how do you deal with that in the present world- what
advice could we give to the young homeopath? When do we refer to the
allopath, what of their services do we utilize ? And this ties
directly to the problems we are facing the world over in practice
constraints- Because we do not have an official practice policy...

In Hahnemann's time most of the homeopaths had allopathic
qualifications; so there was not so much referring to other allopaths
since homeopaths themselves knew the "other" science- not so now-
should not the organon reflect this change in practitioner profile and
suggest ways of doing things??

All of these must be addressed officially by the Organon - is that not
the purpose of the book?

We are adding to the materia medica and to the repertory - but where
are the practice guidelines updated accordingly? How do we update the
philosophy?

[Shannon Nelson]

On May 11, 2007, at 7:43 AM, hahnemannian2002 wrote:
Naaah...
*That* would be an overly optimistic view of human behavior!
)