John Harvey wrote:
I don't think so - you are eloquent in your writing - I just don't agree
with your views on the subject.
What you mean by it does not have relevance for me as I do not accept
the concept of Homeopathy without potency.
The principle of like cures like was not one devised or invented or by
Hahnemann and is really not why homeopathy exists at all. The Like cures
Like principle can be observed by anyone and had beenobserved and
recorded - and was around for more than two THOUSAND years before
Hahnemann was even a glint in his father's eye. So that principle,
though it inspired Hahnemann, is not homeopathy's core principle.
That "Like cures like" was also recorded after observation by several
others before Hahnemann, starting with Hippocrates (also considered the
father of allopathic medicine) about 4 or 5 hundred years BC! (I don't
remember exactly when, it was a little before my time.)
So the like cures like issue is not to do with Hahnemann's work.
Hahnemann used it - but what he did was to show that it is energy and
not substance that is the curative force involved in that principle.
Even mother tinctures that are usable in the like cures like context
(nontoxic but effective ones) cure due to energy and not due to substance.
To present these mother tincture cures to allopaths as being the core of
homeopathy helps nothing - as they will not see that the true homeopathy
discovery is that of ENERGY causing cure as opposed to substance causing
cure. It is only after you dilute out any substance (and many remedies
don't have any to start with - cell phone waves for example) and
potentize the energy of it, that you get to the homeopathy that
Hahnemann developed and thus beyond the common observation that like
cures like, and the mistaken assumption that substance is involved in
that principle rather than energy.
It is WHY like cures like that matters - the fact that it is an energy
issue and not a substance issue is what matters.
Even Einstein had difficulty teaching the world that energy is what's
relevant in our universe - but that does not change the fact that energy
indeed is what makes the whole place tick.
So I disagree entirely with your approach of playing around with mother
tinctures, it completely misses the energy point to be made.
Far better if you want to teach allopathy something - is to start where
there is common ground - Hippocrates - not Hahnemann - and point out
that Hippocrates was smart enough to spot the like cures like principle
which is nobody's invention but an integral part of our world - and to
progress from there to the discovery that it is energy and not
substance, that is medicinal in that principle, and is what Hahnamann
developed and studied and documented - very scientifically and
meticulously. You ALSO need the similar-not-identical energy principle.
You can then use some examples in allopathy that apply. For example, the
energy in a TB vaccination is too identical to TB to help prevent TB but
is similar to Leprosy and helps prevent it. And there are other
examples, where the allopathic "principles" fail but the homeopathy ones
hold every time. Any scientific mind will want to know why this is so.
The only plausible explanation is tha gt it is the energy signature at
work on the vaccine, NOT the antibody titer, contrary to popular
allopathic belief.
Add in the study on smallpox vaccine when supplies ran low - in which
they tested whether a dilute vaccine would still be effective. Of the
five dilutions tested they found the MOST dilute most effective. Again -
the homeopathy principle held up and the allopathic one fell apart -
showing there is energy signature at work rather than substabnce.
There is no short-cut to explaining homeopathy. It's what it is - an in
depth investigation by Hahnemann that took a brilliant man a lifetime to
prove - and which work was continued by others. Allopaths wanting a
short-cut are not going to get it - short of a demonstration for
something wrong with them personally. Or perhaps if their imaginations
are sufficiently triggered by examples where the homeopathic energy
holds true and allopathic principle fails.
As with Einstein's work or that of any deep thinker and scientist - it
takes some study to understand it fully. Lazy ridicule will not get any
homeopathy critic to the truth. And prevarication about the truth by
homeopaths using mother tinctures for examples will only muddy the
waters of that energy-based truth.
That's my view. I cannot see Hahnemann's work as anything less than the
development AFTER the "like cures like" principle had been known for a
couple millennia - of a way to use ANY FORM OF ENERGY SIGNATURE as a
medicine, by using its energy signature at various strengths in
accordance with the strength of that which is to be cured. To me THAT
is homeopathy. It is "energy medicine using like cures like" - not
limited to the like cures like principle itself, which came before
Hahnemann's work. Definitely, omitting the energy aspect leads the
observer astray by suggesting that mother tincture - namely substance -
has anything to do with homeopathy. That substance is present is
coincidental in that case. It is the energy of the substance which acts
- not the substance in a mother tincture - and it is also the energy
which acts in a high potency medicine.
So you cannot define the core of homeopathy wihthout its energy
signature principle. "Like cures like" was merely a starting place - the
foundation on which homeopathy was grown - it is not homeopathy.
Homeopathy is the use of energy signatures at various strengths to
overcome disease of similar (not identical) energy signature.
Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."
