Aph 11 - Organon 6

[John Harvey]

Hi, Fran & Venkatasubramanian --
You make some powerful points here. And whilst the completeness or otherwise of Hahnemann's knowledge of microorganisms doesn't enter into what he meant by a term such as "more than one single, simple medicinal substance", it's interesting to consider that his concept of the dynamics of disease is potentially consistent with the part that microorganisms play. Thank you.
Cheers!
John
2009/7/26 J.venkatasubramanian >

[J.VENKATASUBRAMANIAN]

Dear Soroush

Let me ask you another question.

Will anybody be 100 % sure to get small pox even if surrounded by a
number of people affected by it ?
Venkat

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
body be

[Sheri Nakken]

who was the first person to 'get' smallpox?
who did they 'get' it from?

Sheri

At 05:50 PM 7/26/2009, you wrote:
------------------------------------------
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm & http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases Reality
Next classes start July 29 & 30

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear Venkat
Why do you think I wrote that you needed two elements:
1- The specific micro organism
2- Susceptibility
????
Rgds
Soroush

________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of J.venkatasubramanian
Sent: 27 July 2009 01:51
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Minutus] Re: Aph 11 - Organon 6
Dear Soroush

Let me ask you another question.

Will anybody be 100 % sure to get small pox even if surrounded by a
number of people affected by it ?

Venkat

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com , wrote:
body be

[J.VENKATASUBRAMANIAN]

Soroush

I did not have time when I first read your query. Let me go at it again. You asked
I now use Sheri's question though in a different angle. How do you think the first case of small pox come in ? Which came first ? Small pox or its virus ?

Now we come to the chicken or egg situation.

The answer is- health and disease co-exist. In fact health is the other side of disease. One cannot exist without the other. This is called the complimentary existence.

The other conclusion we make here is that life and the health or disease also co exist. the difference is that health or disease have a relative existence to life.

Now we come to the entity called microbe. Microbe is not a condition for disease since it has its own life. But when microbes act , disease is produced. But neither their presence nor action is a condition for disease.

So in every argument, microbial theory is a secondary cause and is only established circumstantially . But what we are certain is that disease is a dynamic disturbance of vital force caused by dynamic agents (which, the microbes are not).

Also, disease is caused by
1. injury
2. Occupation
3. Stress
4. Overwork/ fatigue
5. Radiation
6. Medicinal substances
7. Fear
8. Weather
9. Excessive emotions like happiness
10. Accumulated body toxins
11. Hereditary defects
12. Hunger or overeating

In the above list, please find one that covers your microbe theory. But yet, they account for more than 2/3 rd of all the illnesses we can think of.

So the correct explanation for disease will still be 'disturbance of the vital force by an inimical one'

despite the microscope.

Venkat
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, wrote:

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear Venkat
Hn in this particular case is talking about a specific contagious disease and that is what we were discussing.
The steel needle becomes itself magnetic, even at a distance when the magnet does not touch it, and magnetises other steel needles with the same magnetic property (dynamically) with which it had been endowered previously by the magnetic rod, just as a child with small-pox or measles communicates to a near, untouched healthy child in an invisible manner (dynamically) the small-pox or measles, that is, infects it at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected.
Is the transfer of contagious disease as Hn is describing it above?
My question was how can someone catch measles or smallpox without the direct involvement of the micro organism?
Or in another words, one can be as susceptible as possible, but without the introduction of the relevant micro organism the person would not be affected by smallpox, measles etc
I have no problem with the other points that you have written but they are not directed towards the subject of discussion above.
Rgds
Soroush

________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of J.venkatasubramanian
Sent: 27 July 2009 16:39
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Minutus] Re: Aph 11 - Organon 6
Soroush

I did not have time when I first read your query. Let me go at it again. You asked
I now use Sheri's question though in a different angle. How do you think the first case of small pox come in ? Which came first ? Small pox or its virus ?

Now we come to the chicken or egg situation.

The answer is- health and disease co-exist. In fact health is the other side of disease. One cannot exist without the other. This is called the complimentary existence.

The other conclusion we make here is that life and the health or disease also co exist. the difference is that health or disease have a relative existence to life.

Now we come to the entity called microbe. Microbe is not a condition for disease since it has its own life. But when microbes act , disease is produced. But neither their presence nor action is a condition for disease.

So in every argument, microbial theory is a secondary cause and is only established circumstantially . But what we are certain is that disease is a dynamic disturbance of vital force caused by dynamic agents (which, the microbes are not).

Also, disease is caused by
1. injury
2. Occupation
3. Stress
4. Overwork/ fatigue
5. Radiation
6. Medicinal substances
7. Fear
8. Weather
9. Excessive emotions like happiness
10. Accumulated body toxins
11. Hereditary defects
12. Hunger or overeating

In the above list, please find one that covers your microbe theory. But yet, they account for more than 2/3 rd of all the illnesses we can think of.

So the correct explanation for disease will still be 'disturbance of the vital force by an inimical one'

despite the microscope.

Venkat
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, wrote:

[J.VENKATASUBRAMANIAN]

Dear Soroush

Have not we visited this before ?

The microbes are transmitted even in health and other wise.

Venkat
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
disease
magnet
magnetic
the
to a
anything
to be
direct
without the
affected
are
Behalf Of
again. You
any body
think the
its
other side
disease
relative
for
only
is a
the
But yet,
of.
the

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear Venkat
I do not understand your comment. Please expand.
Rgds
Soroush

________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of J.venkatasubramanian
Sent: 28 July 2009 11:30
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Minutus] Re: Aph 11 - Organon 6
Dear Soroush

Have not we visited this before ?

The microbes are transmitted even in health and other wise.

Venkat
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com , wrote:
disease
magnet
magnetic
the
to a
anything
to be
direct
without the
affected
are
Behalf Of
again. You
any body
think the
its
other side
disease
relative
for
only
is a
the
But yet,
of.
the

[J.VENKATASUBRAMANIAN]

Dear Soroush

Sorry for such a long gap. All this time I was thinking on this.

Your question was on this aphorism whether Hn was right or wrong.
++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++

1. Microbes go from person to person in health and disease

2. it is the human body which creates disease, not the microbes

3. Disease is not conditional to microbes

4. A contagious disease is one in which an enemy vital force is transferred.

5. If one argues that microbes alone created a contagious disease, then the egg or the chicken question arises whether disease came first or microbe first. It is logical if we deduct that disease and microbe existed together eternally.

6. What we call susceptibility is the capability of our own VF to resist the enemy VF.

Conclusion:

Going by the above, the microbe is not a cause but a concomittant of a disease.

If it is a cause , then by the law of similars, it should be able to cure it.

Venkat
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, wrote:

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear Venkat
Hn is talking about named diseases (epidemics) which have a very similar set of symptoms in most of the patients (measles, smallpox etc).
My specific qn was that if the micro-organism for smallpox did not exist, would people still get smallpox?
[I understand the role of susceptibility!]
In attempting to answer you last section, the blue high-lighted, micro organisms cause natural diseases. To cure, one needs a stronger, short lasting artificial similar disease to eradicate it. This is the service provided by our proved remedies.
Rgds
Soroush

________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of J.venkatasubramanian
Sent: 05 August 2009 10:41
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Minutus] Re: Aph 11 - Organon 6
Dear Soroush

Sorry for such a long gap. All this time I was thinking on this.

Your question was on this aphorism whether Hn was right or wrong.
++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++

1. Microbes go from person to person in health and disease

2. it is the human body which creates disease, not the microbes

3. Disease is not conditional to microbes

4. A contagious disease is one in which an enemy vital force is transferred.

5. If one argues that microbes alone created a contagious disease, then the egg or the chicken question arises whether disease came first or microbe first. It is logical if we deduct that disease and microbe existed together eternally.

6. What we call susceptibility is the capability of our own VF to resist the enemy VF.

Conclusion:

Going by the above, the microbe is not a cause but a concomittant of a disease.

If it is a cause , then by the law of similars, it should be able to cure it.

Venkat
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, wrote: