I somewhat take exception to your post below in that it would seem incumbant to know MORE about homeopathy and study exceedingly dutifully in order to further Sankaran's methods in one's practice. Sankaran has maintained that an extremely thorough grounding in the Materia Medicas and repertoies, both plural, are quite necessary to understand how to incorporate his methods. On the contrary to what I seem to infer from your post, Sankaran has done extensive study and work to associate the periodic table with "states" that are present in the patient, a work that relies on his 25 years of study and practice. It is not "willy-nilly" homeopathy. Additionally, Sankaran underscores that his work is not complete, that it is an offering to further homeopathy. Hahneman never said that his own work was the end of the road. If Sankaran's methods helps some homeopaths to get to the cure, then I suspect that his methods will be furthered. If they do not, then no.
But I assert that a deeper study is performed, quite rightly, by those who use his methods.
Brian
hahnemannian2002 wrote:
Good suggestions-
Caveats-
1)What about discussing Sankaran's, Jurgen Becker's, Scholten's
methods? I would not consider them Hahnemannian Homeopathy. Last time
I saw, Hahnemann did not suggest making "designer' remedies out of
periodic table without proper proving. Or diagnosing medicines based
on Kingdoms - (even last week we saw someone suggesting Aconite
because plants have water or whatever....) Yet we see a lot of people
in this forum gung-ho about the periodic table process - laziness?
creativity?
He did not suggest giving Naja because a woman's saree looked like a
snake skin. He never asked one to theorize about Core Delusion... He
did not advice to do meditative proving... he did not ask people to
use Free Association ( in Divya's style) or talk about the mask or the
wall....
If these things can also be removed from discussion postings we can
start calling this Hahnemannian Classical homeopathy...( and still
would run into dry dose, water dose, 4th edition, 6th edition problems)
Would we consider discussing Burnett and Clarke proper for this forum?
How about Boericke- in some instances he talks about giving injections
by the grains-
Many great homeopaths from India have also used alternating remedy
practice...along with single medicine practice...
Once again I am not saying combos are good or should be suggested /
taught to every aspirant...I am just pointing out the inconsistencies
in these arguments... In this whole wide spectrum of practices there
is a corner available for combos as well... as long as we understand
that this is not a generally advised practice -
any new student who cannot see that this so - must have come from
Mars- without any kind of background... it is upto the educators,
trainers to point out the various ways of practice available and point
out the commonly accepted one( which is not delusional practice)...
Do you have to believe in miasms to be a "Classical" homeopathy
practitioner?
Visit Minutus Website at
http://www.minutus.org
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.
****
ATTENTION PLEASE!!
If you do not wish to receive individual emails, you can simply change your setting at
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus to receive a single daily digest.
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]