Hi,
Please look at this movie -- and especially at the last third of it:
www.remedia.at/homeopathy/Movies.html
and select AURUM METALLICUM movie there.
This is the first time that I see how pharmacies medicate globules.
WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ABOUT WHAT YOU SEE?
TIA
Rafy
MEDICATING REMEDIES
-
Dave Hartley
- Posts: 992
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 3:47 pm
Re: MEDICATING REMEDIES
Hi Rafy,
In the Aurum 'movie' ..
I see someone claiming that their pharmacy is using "pure gold leaf" -and claiming that "other" pharmacies
are using gold which is affected by chemical extraction.
In Hahnemann's proving of Aurum, he states that he used "the finest gold-leaf (its fineness is 23 carats, 6 grains)"
He further states emphatically:
(Materia Medica Pura)
"In this place I will speak only of gold, and not of this metal altered by the ordinary chemical processes, consequently not of it dissolved by the action of acids nor percipitated from its solution (fulminating gold), both of which have been declared to be, if not useless, then absolutely noxious, apparently because they cannot be taken without dangerous consequences when given in what is called a justa dosis, or, in other words, in excessive quantity.
No! I speak of pure gold not altered by chemical manipulations."
--------
So, this must mean 23.2 carat pure "nugget" gold .. gold found pure; not needing to be purified. Fulmination was the common means of purifying gold in Hahnemann's time (using Mercury.) He mentions use of acids, which is a method not commonly used in his time, which HOWEVER .. is how the 1883 "American Homeoapthic Pharmacopia" indicates that the gold is purified prior to trituration:
http://books.google.com/books?id=80WV1tHAEA4C
In 1887, J.C. Burnett engaged in a self-proving of "aurum foliatum" ("Gold as a Remedy in Diseases")
-and details a great deal of study of, and employment of the Rx
-all seemingly consistent with Hahnemann's proving.
I think we must assume that the purification process in common use at that time would have been what Burnett used, as he made no comment otherwise than noting that Hahnemann's "own idea would seem to be that the pure metal is to be preferred on account of its noble simplicity and superior merits" which is offered as a comment contrasting Hahnemann's listing symptoms of Aurum Muriaticum and Arum Fulminans .. which is in itself a bit odd, since he clearly studied Hahnemann's work in intimate detail, occasionally qouting a phrase in German.
Somehow, Hahnemann's objection to use of acid in purification of Aurum Met / Aurum Fol has fallen out of literature soon after Hahnemann himself fell out of this world.
It seems safe to presume, based on Burnett's yeoman work with Aurum including his self-proving .. that the Aurum which Burnett used produced the same range of symptoms as Hahnemann's.
I wonder if the pharmacy Remedia has some evidence otherwise?
I think it is probably well intentioned, but ends up being more of a marketing thing than a 100% accuracy thing..
Because: if the "pure gold leaf" that Hahnemann used was in fact (as he stated) NOT "pure" but instead 23.2 carat,
there is a large-ish (.8 carat; 3.45%) UN-known impurity.
Unless I am missing some secret Masonic alchemical knowledge, 24 carat @ .9999 "fine" (99.99% pure) gold, processed in a way which Hahnemann would not have been fully aware, though it does indeed use acids, which he strongly objected to..
-is nevertheless
1) of greater purity than Hahnemann's originally proven gold
2) proven again by Burnett, and found consistent with Hahnemann's proving
3) consistently available vs. Hahnemann's defintely unique sample with 3.45% unknown impurities.
my $.02
warm wishes,
david 510.776.5914 fax: 510.336.6671
www.holistiq.com
www.DavidHartley.com
I.T. support: www.cafegratitude.com
co-founder: www.GratefulMindandBody.com
web developer: www.iamResourceful.com
2009/5/13 HomeoDidact >:
In the Aurum 'movie' ..
I see someone claiming that their pharmacy is using "pure gold leaf" -and claiming that "other" pharmacies
are using gold which is affected by chemical extraction.
In Hahnemann's proving of Aurum, he states that he used "the finest gold-leaf (its fineness is 23 carats, 6 grains)"
He further states emphatically:
(Materia Medica Pura)
"In this place I will speak only of gold, and not of this metal altered by the ordinary chemical processes, consequently not of it dissolved by the action of acids nor percipitated from its solution (fulminating gold), both of which have been declared to be, if not useless, then absolutely noxious, apparently because they cannot be taken without dangerous consequences when given in what is called a justa dosis, or, in other words, in excessive quantity.
No! I speak of pure gold not altered by chemical manipulations."
--------
So, this must mean 23.2 carat pure "nugget" gold .. gold found pure; not needing to be purified. Fulmination was the common means of purifying gold in Hahnemann's time (using Mercury.) He mentions use of acids, which is a method not commonly used in his time, which HOWEVER .. is how the 1883 "American Homeoapthic Pharmacopia" indicates that the gold is purified prior to trituration:
http://books.google.com/books?id=80WV1tHAEA4C
In 1887, J.C. Burnett engaged in a self-proving of "aurum foliatum" ("Gold as a Remedy in Diseases")
-and details a great deal of study of, and employment of the Rx
-all seemingly consistent with Hahnemann's proving.
I think we must assume that the purification process in common use at that time would have been what Burnett used, as he made no comment otherwise than noting that Hahnemann's "own idea would seem to be that the pure metal is to be preferred on account of its noble simplicity and superior merits" which is offered as a comment contrasting Hahnemann's listing symptoms of Aurum Muriaticum and Arum Fulminans .. which is in itself a bit odd, since he clearly studied Hahnemann's work in intimate detail, occasionally qouting a phrase in German.
Somehow, Hahnemann's objection to use of acid in purification of Aurum Met / Aurum Fol has fallen out of literature soon after Hahnemann himself fell out of this world.
It seems safe to presume, based on Burnett's yeoman work with Aurum including his self-proving .. that the Aurum which Burnett used produced the same range of symptoms as Hahnemann's.
I wonder if the pharmacy Remedia has some evidence otherwise?
I think it is probably well intentioned, but ends up being more of a marketing thing than a 100% accuracy thing..
Because: if the "pure gold leaf" that Hahnemann used was in fact (as he stated) NOT "pure" but instead 23.2 carat,
there is a large-ish (.8 carat; 3.45%) UN-known impurity.
Unless I am missing some secret Masonic alchemical knowledge, 24 carat @ .9999 "fine" (99.99% pure) gold, processed in a way which Hahnemann would not have been fully aware, though it does indeed use acids, which he strongly objected to..
-is nevertheless
1) of greater purity than Hahnemann's originally proven gold
2) proven again by Burnett, and found consistent with Hahnemann's proving
3) consistently available vs. Hahnemann's defintely unique sample with 3.45% unknown impurities.
my $.02
warm wishes,
david 510.776.5914 fax: 510.336.6671
www.holistiq.com
www.DavidHartley.com
I.T. support: www.cafegratitude.com
co-founder: www.GratefulMindandBody.com
web developer: www.iamResourceful.com
2009/5/13 HomeoDidact >: