Minutus

Dear Kerry
You are not alone!
Hahnemann's work is based on experimentation and he works out a logic / philosophy for each action - of which we should be proud.
I could not see any logic in RamaKrishnan's idea. It is perhaps that I do not know my MM and relation of remedies as well as he does.
If there is a logic to his work, could those that understand his logic please explain.
Regards
Soroush

Dear Soroush
I salute people like yourself, David Little and Dr Luc for your tireless support for Hahnemann’s teaching. You all have such patience to keep bashing away. I remember reading Dr Luc saying that 50% of the homeopaths in the US would not be well trained enough to practice if licensing was brought in; it surprises me that this many would actually still be well trained enough to practice. Perhaps the well trained ones are the silent majority. I remember one homeopath saying that she couldn’t understand why I bothered to read an outdated tome like the Organon and that Hahnemann was not relevant today; needless to say she was another pseudo-homeopath who brought disgrace on the name of Homeopathy. If there is truly a heaven, then yourself and the others like you who promote Hahnemann’s true teachings, will have a special place there.
I don’t have the patience or the time due to work commitments so I shall once again disappear to catch up on my backlog of work.
May your God bless you.
Kerry

Hi Soroush.
I think that Dr. Ramakrishnan's biggest source of confusion to others is that he is not prone to explain very well why he concludes what he does.
His method is actually very classical. I think he was trying with the book to attract some allopaths to using homeopathic remedies, and therefore it sounds rather like a "cookbook" approach.
But when you watch him work with patients, he has a marvelous grasp of the Materia Medica of the common remedies and some small ones -- with much more clinical experience than most non-Indians would be able to accumulate in a lifetime (remember, he started learning as a small child, watching his father -- an enviable level and length of training!.).
Anyway, he himself in his work with patients does take a classical case and analyze the primary symptoms according to classical homeopathic paradigms. Sometimes I've seen him get it wrong. Many more times he's gotten it right, and frustratingly he hasn't explained his rubric logic very well so it's really hard to figure out what he was thinking. When I finally figure out what must have been his prioritization and ask him, generally that was indeed his line of thinking. Sometimes, however, I never would have arrived at the same thought process or answer. However, with more experience, I'm arriving at the same remedy conclusions as he has, more often than before.
Also, his alternation of remedies and his dosing protocols are derived from experience -- experimenting over a very long time -- and are actually based on the Organon and other classical writings. He uses centesimal potencies in water, plussing, and repetition of the same remedy plussed. His primary paradigm shift, I think, is that he conceives of a serious illness that is immediately life-threatening as similar to a life-threatening acute, with the need to treat it as vigorously as if we were treating an acute. There's some logical sense to considering that an immediately life-threatening disease requires frequent dosing and high potencies if we are to stave it off, but that concept is not applied specifically in the Organon to life-threatening acute states of a chronic disease. Otherwise, he's following Aphorisms 246-247. He does not use polypharmacy or combination remedies. I see a great deal of similarity between the urgency of treating metastatic cancer and the urgency of treating something like FIP, which we've been discussing on the list -- there's a high level of time pressure to affect the disease process.
Personally, I think if Dr. Ramakrishnan were willing to focus more on teaching his logic and reasoning in depth to other homeopaths, his legacy would be more widespread and durable. But his focus is on treating patients, and while he does travel and teach to the point of exhaustion, he doesn't work long-term with most students so they can duplicate his insights and work, unfortunately. Taking advantage of one of his invitations to do a clinical residency with him in India is one way to gain a bit more insight, for those who are able to make such a trip.
My experience in studying with him and watching him work has been that he's a master homeopath in a totally classical sense, with a level of experience vastly greater than one could conceive of in a European or American context.
Rosemary