Minutus

contradict his
Working thru your spelling etc. I figured that you were mentioning
me... I have never said that these methods do not work.. I have used
Sankarans' "delusions" myself...and some other methods - did it work -
yes - like the same way combinations worked for me-
When a tried and tested method works that is what I would use compared
to an experiemental one

in fact I have used Siddha medicines per se and in also potentized
form... everything depends on the time, season and reason... what is
the main approach and what is used when the main approach does not
work... even in allopathy this is accepted- some drugs are introduced
even when all pharmaceutical development phases are not complete IF
the medicine is radically new and promises a lot for some disease that
does not have a known medicine-

I agree that may be fasting makes you garrulous...

Hahnemann was a genius and the work of the founding fathers and
the really "classical" masters is a guiding light for the rest of us.
Their observations are true even now, derived from pure reason and
each and every word is proven by being effective in practice which is
our yardstick any way. But for their toil against odds, we will not
even be discussing Homeopathy here. If we are able to observe and
treat even half as much as Hahnemann did esp. when we have all
diagnoses done for us by others - we would have only successful cases.

If there is an aura of perfection and holiness around them -
probably it is well deserved. Not that they did not have faults but
such faults only make them great for what they have achieved and given
us. I would not be ashamed to emulate them in my practice if that were
possible at all.
Instead of looking at their faults if we can concentrate on their
true legacy, we might achieve more in practice and benefit our
patients. Of course if it can be proved that their method is wrong and
does not work, that is something we need to know. Otherwise may be we
should just leave it to historians to decide what is what... and
concentrate on things that would help us in practice
-- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Gillen" wrote:
Wisdom and
beings with
two men
and be
Throughout
if you
create
Allopathic
need for a
clinics were
rate in
opposition, and
within
even this
Homoeopaths as
treatment is
Organon of
not only
that when
dose, not
cutting
Carbo-veg!
the Vital
more sick
understanding
which

I can only shake my head in disbelief - this storm of reaction to a
by-the-way remark of mine goes beyond my understanding.

Perhaps the reason is that I am a Buddhist:

I think that if I in a discussion with Buddhists that "by this
definition Buddha was not a true monk or an avatar or whatever" hardly
anyone would bash an eyelash. They might contradict me - as Rolf did -
and try to show why it did into the definition and we might argue
that. I do not think, however, that there would pages upon pages to
show how great a person Buddha was and what he has achieved and how
great his teaching is .... all things I know myself.

As I have said before: If I thought otherwise about Hahnemann and v.
Boenninghausen, I would not be spending big chunks of my time and
effort in retirement , and also enough money to be felt in my but
moderately filled purse, to study their true legacy (casebooks etc),
write it up to be available for others etc. At least the typing up is
not all that fascinating - and trying to decipher is often hard
work;-)

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Luise Kunkle wrote:
That is exactly what it is -right? - beyond your understanding -
Looks like people are reading what you are writing

It was not a storm - just a reiteration of positions as goes on in
this group from time to time-

Looks like it will be an issue till I retire too...