Minutus

At least if carefully blinded!

I am not disputing the validity of the Med Proving. In fact in a proving that I was involved a parallel med proving was done and there was an incredible amount correlation.
What I am saying is that the Hn proving system has solid foundation - Med proving do not. Hence the risk of causing major problems with our MM which our one MAJOR asset.
Rgds
Soroush

________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
Sent: 24 November 2008 21:01
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Meditative provings - was Emerald
You are correct as far as the public image goes.
But for curiosity's sake, just compare a regular and a meditative proving.........it is amazing; and I did that with a very abundant dose of skepticism, the resemblances kept creeping up to such a point that I cannot dismiss them any more.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind".
Visit http://drjoesnaturalmedicine.blogspot.com for some articles and comments.

I will have to look that up when I have time......so don't hold your breath.... )
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind".
Visit http://drjoesnaturalmedicine.blogspot.com for some articles and comments.

Hi Shannon,

Maybe not. Some can "meditate" on a unknown external substance or hold it in their hand
and describe.
I was thinking about this too. Usually the "meditative prover" type, ingesting the substance is more aware than a regular prover ingesting the substance.

Not saying one is better than the other it's just different levels of awareness.

Leilanae
--------------------------------------

Or it could be the other way around. Meditative type provings have a
broader range of exploration and may become our more refined method.
I don't doubt at all Hahnemann would be all over this, as they are
methods to reach the more quantum/complete levels of information.

We should not be concerned with aligning to orthodox science and it's
methods of 'proving' anyway....aren't we quite certain it's limited
and incorrect most of the time anyway? If they would grow a little in
their consideration/understanding we could then meet somewhere
Liz

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "tamarque@..." wrote:
proving.........it is amazing; and I did that with a very abundant
dose of skepticism, the resemblances kept creeping up to such a point
that I cannot dismiss them any more.
and comments.
technique. This is the part that gives a good feel for the properties
of substance and therefore how to apply it. Please see Aph 3 of
Organon 6.
our system of medicine. Just imagine what a bonus we would give them
if they found out that the properties of homeopathic remedies are
decided up on by one or a group of people going into a state of
meditation. They would have a field day. I can already see the
headline in the Guardian or the Lancet!
Behalf Of Sue Smith

Soroush, they are already doing that anyway. You only need to look at the quackometer
websites, Gimpy's blog, etc, they are all discussing it, including Peter Chappell's remedies
as well.
My question is - what do I care? If my patients are getting better, the skeptics are always
going to be there; if they don't have a field day on this one, they will find another bone to
chew. These people are really determined, look what's happening with the Ghana
Homeopathy Project. Our website has only been up for a few weeks, and they already have
a full website just about us and what we are doing in Ghana.
As far as I am concerned, I will just continue doing the best I can, working from the heart,
with the best of intentions. As for the rest....the Universe will sort it out. Best wishes,
Grace

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

I share the views of Soroush somewhat, but I also know that if the mind is pure, the heart is clean, that neutrality exists for the sole purpose of serving humanity, then truth can prevail through the etheric fields of energy.
The answers are already there.
I believe in this instance, each one to his/her own as such. If it works for you, don’t change it. If it doesn’t work, move on, don’t waste time.
If its in your destiny, you’ll see it eventually.
Each Homeopath is an ARTIST. No artist can paint the same picture on the same canvas – so don’t get too caught up in it. We are not here to necessarily cause more confusion with ideas but to learn with the GOAL of serving patients. Too much discussion on one topic leads to negative vibrations which leads to a quantum state of imbalance.
Atiq
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of finrod@finrod.co.uk
Sent: 24 November 2008 21:30
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Minutus] Meditative provings - was Emerald
I am not disputing the validity of the Med Proving. In fact in a proving that I was involved a parallel med proving was done and there was an incredible amount correlation.
What I am saying is that the Hn proving system has solid foundation - Med proving do not. Hence the risk of causing major problems with our MM which our one MAJOR asset.
Rgds

Soroush
________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
Sent: 24 November 2008 21:01
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Meditative provings - was Emerald

You are correct as far as the public image goes.
But for curiosity's sake, just compare a regular and a meditative proving.........it is amazing; and I did that with a very abundant dose of skepticism, the resemblances kept creeping up to such a point that I cannot dismiss them any more.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.

"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind".

Visit http://drjoesnaturalmedicine.blogspot.com for some articles and comments.