Minutus

You would have to contact Paul Herscu directly.
I think it is material that he wants to publish
eventually and he is only giving it out to his
students.

Roger

Hi Joy,

In a way all symtoms are compensations for the lost internal balance.
The word compensation could also be confusing, in the sense that the patient
is hiding his true symptoms by compensating them. i.e. an irritable person
is compensating by being friendly etc.
The opposite symptoms in a picture are not of that nature, because they are
solid symptoms belonging to the Nux-v picture.
Ananda Zaren defines those symptoms belonging to the "wall" which protect
the internal wound, and the compensation by the patient as the "mask".
Polarity are opposites, because they express i.e. the same emotion, but in a
different direction. It is like love and hate, in fact they are the same
emotion, but from a different angel.
The same we see in temperature symtoms, the remedies can hot or cold, only
not in the same patient.

This is the way I see this.

Kind regards, Piet

What is the name of the MM by Mathur?

on 1/27/06 3:20 PM, Kathryn Ellen Madono at kemadono@ybb.ne.jp wrote:

Systematic Materia Medica of Hom¦opathic Remedies.
Mathur, Kailesh Narayan: New Delhi: Jain Pub.
_
Mathur, KN, MD
1906-1977
Country: India.
Ex-Principal and Professor of Medicine: The Athurasramam Hom¦opathic
Medical College, Kottayam. Ex-Director: The Nehru Hom¦opathic College and
Hospital, New Delhi.

Best,
A

Hi Robin-
You are expressing exactly my sentiments in this and your previous
posting on this topic. Thanks.
These pictures of NV and other remedies are just snapshots. We
cannot say NV is like this or Pulsatilla is like this, They are
commonly associated with such symptoms but that does not make these
symptoms the only symptoms that should go into a making a "typical"
( I hate this word in homeopathy) Nux vomica or typical Pulsatilla.
This is like taking a picture of a river in a particular spot and
saying this is how the river looks like. Every remedy portrays only
a slice of its possibilities in any proving, the remedy is more like
a town than a person. It is a federation. There is a whole lot of
generalization going on about mental characteristics and if any of
these is missing people sagely avoid giving the remedy.
Neither Hering nor Kent practised that way. Hering says the location
of the remedy action ( even a thumb) is sometimes important. Looking
back, in most of my known cures, the medicine was not selected
based on any prominent mental symptom. The remedy was worked out
using the complaints, sensations, modalities etc, and had worked a
cure.

There is no harm in making sure that the mental symptom is present-
but to build a whole approach just based on that and going on
whether it is compensation or secondary or a personality trait etc.
is altogether taking it in the wrong direction.

Rajan Sankaran's discussions of Naja and Lachesis are laughable to
say the least. His deriving the mental symptom of Thallium is
misleading and spoils all the careful work of the masters. I am not
singling him out. There are other masters who make many such
statements to increase their marketability and increase attendance
in conferences. I am not denying that they have good original ideas
or they have contributed to homeopathy, But they get carried over,
make unwarranted generalizations, misapply principles and then just
because of their guru status get validated all over the place and
what they say goes as gospel.

Given the highly influential nature of physician - patient
relationship esp. in homeopathy ( where there are practitioners who
take 2 hours for their first consultation) what the physician wants
the patient gives... expectation breeds what is expected ( which is
a known phenomenon).

I know I am throwing a rock at the bee hive and getting ready with
Apis.
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "robin9168" wrote:
from
reason
rep.:
(Impolite)
to)
feels
disposition
(Talk;
(Answers;
talk,

Hi Robyn and H2002,
I well understand the problem with being limited by a "snapshot"
understanding of a remedy. Yet the other problem that I've run into
over and over, is where a given remedy "reps well", "runs thru all the
rubrics", etc.--but fails to work. Yes that might be because the
rubrics are poorly chosen; or because the needed remedy is "small" or
"local"; or because casetaking or analysis were incomplete; or etc.
But what I've come to appreciate is the great value of understanding
remedies in a way that goes beyond the "laundry list of symptoms", and
goes into their "gestalt", or "personality", whatever. As it's been
expressed by others, to know the remedy as you know a familiar
person--not just the hair color, eye color, height, etc., but to know
the "movements", habits, predilictions; so you could say "Oh, George
(or Apis or whatever) wouldn't do it that way, he'd have done this
instead." But that is so much harder to teach / learn than the
"laundry list"! And I think that is where the "images" and "essences"
and many various approaches can be useful, *if* we keep sight of the
fact that they are properly used to *augment* the search for of symptom
correspondence, not to replace it. (At least as a rule and a starting
point, and at least not with remedies whose symptom picture is
known...)
Shannon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I don't think anyone is suggesting we only adhere to red line sx of a
rx but that is what they are and what leads us to the simillimum time
and again and of course we have to look further than that. I think the
exercise here, as asked by Soroush, was to examine how the same named
particular sx varies from rx to rx - very useful I think.

I also don't think that anyone is saying that we should only look at
emotional sx of a case (you seem to be mixing emotional up with
mental), that would be ridiculous anyway.

Where are you looking at to say that there is a lot of mental
generalisations?

Suddenly we have gone from talking about rx to slashing at those who
make money out of the homeopathic gravy train and poor practice whereby
the client gives the practitioner what they want to hear - they are
other subjects surely. Joy

http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
http://www.homeopathicmateriamedica.blogspot.com
http://homepage.mac.com/joylucas/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear hahnemannian,

You wrote:

" These pictures of NV and other remedies are just snapshots. We
cannot say NV is like this or Pulsatilla is like this, They are
commonly associated with such symptoms but that does not make these
symptoms the only symptoms that should go into a making a "typical"
( I hate this word in homeopathy) Nux vomica or typical Pulsatilla.
This is like taking a picture of a river in a particular spot and
saying this is how the river looks like. Every remedy portrays only
a slice of its possibilities in any proving, the remedy is more like
a town than a person. It is a federation. There is a whole lot of
generalization going on about mental characteristics and if any of
these is missing people sagely avoid giving the remedy. "

Have to say that this is my approach too - as human nature means we pretty much
have all the same 'tendencies', but in varying amounts dependent upon personality
/ character, and external situations can force out 'darker' aspects, or they will be
suppressed, in accordance with learned behaviour, fear, etc., etc.

I've also encountered some pretty unpleasant Pulsatillas (check out 'Anger,
irasciblity, temper tantrums') and some v. sympathetic Nux's., Scorpions, and
Lyssin - the more the compensation it seems, the more the rubrics polarise
perhaps ?)
However, when you say:

" There are other masters who make many such statements to increase their
marketability and increase attendance in conferences. I am not denying that they
have good original ideas or they have contributed to homeopathy, But they get
carried over, make unwarranted generalizations, "

Surely that is a sweeping (and probably unfair) assumption, as you cannot know that
is why they do as they do ? Plus you have just also generalised too, so are you not
guilty of the same here !
" I know I am throwing a rock at the bee hive and getting ready with Apis."

Glad to hear you are sensitive to any comments - but that I or anyone else would
want to 'sting' you is perhaps coming from your own desire to 'sting'? Doesn't
everyone have a valid and thought-provoking point of view ? We just individually
sort out what we value or feels right, I suspect.

BW, Barbara
(Haughty)

But Barbara

Regarding the second comment, but aren't there books written and lectures /
presentations etc given by some people that do not reflect their present
stance or cannot be squared with fundamentals of homoeopathy?

The sad thing is that when they do change their minds and ideas they do not
withdraw such materials which remain on reference lists to mis-guide future
readers.

The effect one bad teacher/guide may be impossible to correct.
Rgds
Soroush

Hi Soroush,

I think you may be picking up on something I wasn't saying ? I was just
trying to suggest that there might be other possibilities as to why people
write books, hold seminars, other than what was presumed. Of course there
is a mix of reasons, but we can't be sure of which one unless we are
mind-readers !

I guess we differ on the value of "the effect of one bad teacher/guide" - as
I would say that without one, we cannot have the other, so either way, we
still learn and are eventually drawn to how we want to practise. Just my
opinion anyway.

bw, Barbara

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Finrod" wrote:
Of