Minutus

I have to question whether there is only 1 road to the correct remedy? As so many times remedies deal with
parts of a case which leads closer into the core, it seems that we need to look at the process and analysis that
a practitioner applies and not just the final remedy.
And even if it were conceptually possible to find the 1 perfect remedy first shot round, is it realist to expect that
every practitioner will be able to do this all the time. Based on what I have seen over the years, it seems like a
desirable goal but one that rarely can happen. It seems that when a brilliant remedy is chosen and a case is
written up, the analysis winds up trying to describe where the intuition led.
tanya

Hi Tanya,

And sometimes intuition is nothing more than a long familiarity with how a remedy presents so that it is recognised, even subconsciously, before the writing of symptoms begins. That recognition comes from observation based on our senses and our memory, not intuition.

If you don't believe me, try making a prescription without hearing the sound of the person telling their symptoms, without being able to smell that person, without being able to see what they are doing and how they are behaving, without being able to touch them, etc. Why, if intuition was that good, there would be no need for the consult.

We all call on our 'sixth sense' but to rely on intuition or psychic abilities alone leads to nothing but delusions. I still say it it the most unreliable way to make a prescription and should not be held up as a higher way of doing things.

And the leading to the core part is just homeopathy in the hands of someone able to interpret responses to the remedy. Those responses always guide the way to where to go next. I have never felt is up to us to dictate to the body how it should heal. Our job is to understand what it is already trying to do, as shown by the symptoms of its struggle, and to mimic those effort with our remedy. How it reacts to our intervention tells us whether we have got it right, or whether we need to prescribe again, or whether yes, it has been helped to achieve what it was trying to achieve and now we have to help it with what it is doing now. It is arrogance if we think we control healing with our remedies - all we can do is try to assist with what the body is already doing so it can heal.

Kind regards, Fran.
--
Kind regards,

Fran Sheffield

And yes, I know that even that is not completely correct - its a little more complicated than that - but the remedies do not create the healing.
--
Kind regards,

Fran Sheffield
Homeopathy Plus! (Tutorials - Remedies - Immunisation)
http://www.homeopathyplus.com.au
Do No Harm Initiative (Free Information on Homeopathic Immunisation)
http://www.d-n-h.org
Homeopathy for Autism (Guidelines for Treatment - Search for Practitioners)
http://www.homeopathy4autism.com

did i say that ONLY intuition is to be employed? please don't put words in my mouth.

I agree with Fran on this. I see the same in recognising disease: it is a familiarity with the symptom picture so that you can recognise it instantly, subconsciously, before you even start to examine the animal properly. With some animals, before I even touch them, I know what I am about to find. That isn't my intuition, it is from many years of dealing with similar problems: I know the very subtle signs that another person would not even notice. For a busy homeopath with years of experience I can well imagine that even before taking the case a remedy from the MM starts to come to the fore in their mind. Isn't this also warned against as it is likely to make a prejudiced observer rather than an unprejudiced one? I recall reading from one Homeopath that they wrote down in the sidelines of their notes the remedy that immediately pops into their minds and then they take the case without thinking of that remedy again. Sometimes the remedy is the one needed, but sometimes it isn't.

Kerry

all of that is true. but there are times when the details of the case are not expressing the case well but there is a sense of
something elese happening on another level and you go in that direction. does this always have to do with healing experience,
or mm knowledge, or other empathetic connections--i don't think it matters. the idea is there is more than just material or
mechanical recording of symptoms; there are other levels of perceiving the case--which by the way is very hahnemanian.
SH taught to use ALL your senses, not just the usually recognized 5
tanya

Peter Chappell once told us a story!
Sankran was sitting by Peter in Peter's rooms when a patient came in to see Peter.
Sankran had been doodling and when the patient had sat down he had written something on a corner of his paper torn it and folded it up many times and placed it on Peter's desk.
Peter took the case and then both Peter and Sankran had analysed the case and decided on a remedy.

At that stage Sankran had said to Peter, open the rolled up paper.
The chosen remedy's name appeared!!
Is that intuition or recognition?
When I was a boy and mad on cars, from a distance by just seeing one part of the car I could often tell the model, make and year of manufacture. Is that how we should know our remedies?
Rgds

Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fran Sheffield
Sent: 22 October 2011 12:44
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re: Intuition vs Symptoms: WAS (Fluid in the innerear)
Hi Tanya,

And sometimes intuition is nothing more than a long familiarity with how a remedy presents so that it is recognised, even subconsciously, before the writing of symptoms begins. That recognition comes from observation based on our senses and our memory, not intuition.

If you don't believe me, try making a prescription without hearing the sound of the person telling their symptoms, without being able to smell that person, without being able to see what they are doing and how they are behaving, without being able to touch them, etc. Why, if intuition was that good, there would be no need for the consult.

We all call on our 'sixth sense' but to rely on intuition or psychic abilities alone leads to nothing but delusions. I still say it it the most unreliable way to make a prescription and should not be held up as a higher way of doing things.

And the leading to the core part is just homeopathy in the hands of someone able to interpret responses to the remedy. Those responses always guide the way to where to go next. I have never felt is up to us to dictate to the body how it should heal. Our job is to understand what it is already trying to do, as shown by the symptoms of its struggle, and to mimic those effort with our remedy. How it reacts to our intervention tells us whether we have got it right, or whether we need to prescribe again, or whether yes, it has been helped to achieve what it was trying to achieve and now we have to help it with what it is doing now. It is arrogance if we think we control healing with our remedies - all we can do is try to assist with what the body is already doing so it can heal.

Kind regards, Fran.
--

Kind regards,

Fran Sheffield