Minutus

one can discuss psoric or tuberculin type and they have positive
and negative qualities not just positive qualities. I have never
seen
anyone with just perfect positive qualities of the mind and body
with no
symptoms. I think positive and negative are two sides of the human
condition and found in all human beings. I think they are always
present.
There is only relative states of health not absolutes. Everyone will
die
from something sooner or later. The seeds of our demise are already
present. Homeopathy is about improving the quality of life not
making
people perfect. That is expecting far too much.
Show me a so-called healthy person and I will show you signs
and symptoms
the symptoms come first and they may fit a number of
patterns by

I think positive and negative are two sides of the human
condition and found in all human beings. I think they are always
present.
There is only relative states of health not absolutes.
Best, David

Forgive my cut & paste effort......
My interpretation of Dr. Little's comments is descriptive of the
symbolic presentation of the yin/yang symbol of taoist philosophy
and model of the concepts of oriental medicine. The symbol depicts
the 'interconsuming, intertransformation, of mutually interdependent
aspects which make up the 'great circle'. It is a taoist depiction
of the life forces of the Universe. And it is the basis upon which
I find such great similarity in these two extraordinary systems of
healthcare.

One begins with two opposite parts of what will become two halves of
a circle. Name one yin and the other yang. A pre requisite for
life is the presence in the Universe of each; that they are
opposites; that there is a mutual interdependance to their
relationship. An example is day and nite.

The joint of these two aspects is a curve line rather than straight
to symbolise the dynamics of their relationship rather than static.
This is the intertransformative aspect of their relationship. So
day and nite is in a state of flux.

Lastly is the 'seed' of the opposite within the greater
presentation. This is intended to symbolise the interconsuming
aspect of their relationship. At midnight you would reflect this as
a dominance of one and merely a seed of the opposite. Likewise for
mid day. As the transformation unfolds it is reflective of a
dimishment of the dominent and a blossoming of the seed into its
opposite.

regards

Hello Minutus,

1.When we say in Classical Homeopathy we always treat 'constitutionally', we mean we always treat the whole disease, not just local. We say local disease doesn't exist, only localized disease.

2. When we say we prescribe someone's 'constitutional remedy' we mean we also include more or less healthy characteristics, beside the symptoms in our prescription, which the person has for a long time.
This is covered by aph 5, so in Hahnemann tradition.
Paul explained this very well.

3. Some say (Masi) that someone's constitutional remedy stays the same through a person's whole life.
This is not true, constitution healthy or not, changes (acquired part see APH 5) within the limits of the inherited constitution.
Maybe on a deeper level the 'state of the soul' stays the same, but this is not covered by Aph 5. But very intersting of course.
Kind regards, Piet
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Colleagues

I agree that this can be a difficult question to answer fully and properly.

A child is born and from their symptoms early on you decide to prescribe
them Sil. Does this mean that they always remain Sil?

The answer is NO!

Our Vital Force in a way resembles a country and the type of regime and
government at any given time.
So as you can have various regimes in a country from fascist to the extreme
left (which in some aspects extreme left and right are not too dis-similar!)
to various shades in between.
Then through various processes we can have a change of government - some
after many decades.

The same applies to our VF. We can require one remedy for a long time and
all of a sudden (through some kind of an influence) the picture changes
completely. As if the whole thing has changed. "My world has been turned up
side down!"

At this stage may I use the example of an onion.
If an onion is not stored properly, it will start to decay, but also in the
process it may send out some shoots - so you can see that there is some
vitality left.

If we examine this onion we see that the outer skin is no longer shiny and
smooth but shrivelled up. If we remove the first couple of layers we can
come across a leaf that has gone brown and even mouldy, remove a couple of
layers more and you can see good leaves that smell ok and can even taste OK.
Remove these and you come to a hidden layer which has also gone brown and
looks completely different - (this is alike to miasm?)
remove this and we get back to some healthy leaves and then to the shoot.

Looking at the outer leaves it if often difficult to see the brown rotten (
miasmatic) layer in the middle, our attention is very much taken but the
external state of decay and appearance. However, those who are experienced
will know from the appearance of the outer leaves what is going on inside.

Also one shrivelled up onion may look very much like others of the onion
family and bulbs. So it is only by examining the symptoms we can distinguish
whether it is an onion we are holding or a shallot. And also what type of an
onion is, red, white, green etc.

To a degree we see the same in our patients. We see the syph/psor/syc
influences in the face, and body, we see it in the way they approach the
interview etc., so we can form an educated view. But the extent of the
problem is not always easy to see.

So I think if we can mix the two analogies of the onion and the government,
you can see how the constitution works and changes. And in the same way that
there are layers with in a government (some pretty corrupt) and some indeed
acting against it, we can see that the thing starts to make some sense.

In prescribing a 'constitutional' remedy, we are basically aiming to
prescribe the Similimum for that state. This may hold good for a very long
time and may even cure 'acutes' but then we need to be vigilant for any
under-currents and changes and influences affecting the patient.

This is why your Sulph pt may become, a Lyc and then a Calc and then even
revert back to a Sulph again!

Only when our normal means of treatment seems to fail to produce the
expected results, we then have to think about what is hindering our remedy's
action (assuming there is no maintaining cause) and then consider whether we
have reached a miasmatic layer.

This we can do in any case by taking the full presenting symptom picture and
apply our best training and experience to come up with as similar a remedy
as we can.

I do not think there are any other safe short cuts.

Hope this has been of help.

Soroush
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Shannon -

forgive lengthy ...

remedy" would be a
underly whatever
symptoms that
characteristics.

answers in the further below ... kind of ... I hope

of what the term
once this is clear,
others don't, will
better understand

I can live with the various definitions already presented by
many others, as any and all of them are mere intellectual
constructs and models -
we can classify in so many ways, and none would necessarily
be any more right or wrong - more below ... (regards 'need
for an agreed upon definition'... )

is
definition *within
conversations on the
yet...

Exactly !
only that, as I see it, 'within the context of *homoeopathy*
' - *like cures likes*,
the concept of 'constitution' may have less application than
we think ....
Or, if it does, possibly in a whole different manner than we
are pursuing at present ... ?
The difficulty of defining the term comes, as I see it, when
we make statements such as
" ... the *person is* a Phos/Lyc ... "
or
" ... *he was* a Sil, and then *he became* a Lyc ... "
and thus end up with:
remedies =equal= *the person's 'constitutional ' type* -
Some claim the constitution is 'received'/'imparted' ... at
conception -
well ... fine and fancy with me, if that's how one wants to
define it ....
can't prove it, though - and can't disprove it, either !
so it remains an interesting theoretical idea solely
dependant on that person's definition -

Some others claim the constitution can change during life -
fine and fancy with me ...
that is as well solely dependent on the definition -
Again others claim the constitution remains the same
throughout life -
also fine with me ...
as it is also solely dependent on how one defines it ....

If one practitioners terms *any* remedy that is the
similimum at the time to be the 'constitutional' remedy at
that time, then of course we have a different definition
than when a practitioner talks in terms of *one*
constitutional remedy throughout life, but added layers ....
(I'll come to my view on the
'but-we-need-to-agree-on-one-definition' )

The difference is in the intellect/definitions of the
various practitioners ! not necessarily in the actual case !
So both may end up giving the right remedy at the time !

If, instead of calling that remedy 'constitutional' or
anything, we simply and
principally first call it
' the remedy indicated at the time', and if we know we have
determined the remedy based on actual symptoms of disease,
.... then we've got homoeopathy -

If then, *additionally* we wish to impose a terminology onto
that remedy according to some model or some theoretical
definition, it is important to be aware that the former and
the latter are not necessarily equal -

eyes

Here then, some would term that person a
Puls-*type*/'constitution' -

that's what I try to avoid -

Instead, as a good friend of mine has expressed it, we can
recognize that this person, due to un-knowable factors of
inheritance,
birth, and whatever universal life-factors one may wish to
call upon, this person, more so than people of different
factors, has a tendency to develop disease symptoms that
resemble the proving picture of Pulsatilla - thus more often
Puls may be *indicated*
by the totality of symptoms in this person than other
remedies -
yet, in any actual given consultation with this person, I
still do not know which remedy will turn up a similar at
this point in time -
I would not state this person to *be* a
'Pulsatilla-constitution', as that would define the term
into a fixed thing -

Example -
just yesterday had a visit with a client who had her first
visit ten years ago -
Hadn't see her ever since - ten years ago she took
Pulsatilla as decided on by
general 'personality'-picture (healthy and just the way she
is) as well as actual symptoms
presenting -
hallelujah ! (the constitutional' remedy !
all was well -
yesterday, after ten years, she seems quite the Pulsatilla,
still ....
even, on first impression, a good number of symptoms appear
to be covered by Puls -
will I give her Puls ??
I don't know yet !!
I have yet to have a closer look at the case, and do a
repertorization -

Point is, no matter how much I may recognize a picture of a
'constitutional type', it ought not influence my remedy
decision !

Unless, of course, some day we were to have enough hundreds
of years of practice observation and collection of data, to
know with certainty that, for instance, a
'Sanguine-type' will never manifest a Lycopodium-similimum,
or a 'Phosphorus- constitution' will never manifest symptoms
that match Ruta, or whenever a 'constitutional-type' Ars alb
has advanced respiratory-system disease the pattern is that
they always manifest symptoms of only either Bry, Phos, Tub,
Sil, or Aeth, -

We may think to have early hints at such relationships when
we see a
Calc carb baby developing a Bell ear infection ...
or a
Puls child's recurrent acute infections being covered by
chronic Kali sulph
or a
acute Ign grief lingering on into a Nat mur picture ...
etc ...

However, these are not definite and determined relationships
in every case -
or at least we do not yet understand the
relationship-principles, if there are any !

So - finally -
personally, I don't have a definition of 'constitution' that
I would make my own for *homoeopathic* use -
There are so many definitions out there, including those of
different healing-systems, and all of them have some valid
points and arguments for them - fascinating -
Yet, I can live with those various definitions - seeing it
from various points of view is fine -
Any discussion on the topic, of course, then has to be done
in the context and understanding of the definition employed
for that discussion -

I can live with not defining it one-right-way-only -

Actually, unless I am missing something major, I don't
require any one-right-definition of 'constitution' for
practicing *homoeopathy* -

there you have it ...
am I now a 'heretic-of-sorts' ... ?


good wishes
peter quenter

Hi Piet,

I would say that this
is giving Masi's *definition* of the term. So evidently he uses it in the
same sense that Eizayaga does.

And this
is a different definition of "constitution(al remedy)", which is the one
that I first learned and used. I think it was Julian Winston who proposed
the term "chronic remedy" to use instead of "constitutinal" for this
situation? Maybe that change in terminology would avoid some of the
confusions?

Shannon

Piet said:
also include more or less healthy >characteristics, beside the symptoms in
our prescription, which >the person has for a long time.
of course we do no such thing, as has been discussed at length.
Andrew

Shanon wrote:

I would say that this
is giving Masi's *definition* of the term. So evidently he uses it in the

Hello Shanon,

No this is not true, Eizayaga's Constitutional layer refers to the basicly healthy characteristics, mostly genetic and unmoveable. But those are the common basic human features.
Masi describes the 'Ego-organization, the nucleus or spirit of men, that puts a a stamp on other existential parts like the physical, mental and emotional body. A human is a growing, evolving being instead of the product of inhereted constitution.
That's why I don't agree with the model by Eizayaga, which means, you have to bring someone back to the remedy of the past.
But when the constitional change was the result of growth and not pathological, this is not true.
A miasmatic remedy is also a chronic remedy, but it is certainly not the constitutional remedy, this causes more confusion.

Kind regards, Piet
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Piet said:
also include more or less healthy >characteristics, beside the symptoms in
our prescription, which >the person has for a long time.

Andrew:
of course we do no such thing, as has been discussed at length.

Ok my friend,

I have a question for you.
Maybe you know that someones constitutional remedy or 'the Individual Simillimum' is also very usefull in relatively healthy people.
It shapes and strengthens the person and it is the most effective prophylaxis.
Are you able to prescribe such a remedy?
When you are, how you select it for a more or less healthy person?

Kind regards, Piet
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Shannon,

I rarely use the word constitutional mainly because it appears to carry so
much baggage - hence the interesting but confusing discussions so far, which
is a shame because it is a damn fine word to describe someone's basic state
of health.

I always tend to use the word simillimum - this carries no baggage as far as
I am concerned. We take the whole case (going back as far as one needs to),
perceive what needs to be cured (which might have little to do with the
client's presenting complaint), and we attempt to prescribe the simillimum -
in acute or chronic cases.

I prefer to keep it as simple as that - because that is hard enough at
times.

Best wishes, Joy

Thanks Joy,
This makes sense to me!
I'd be inclined to specify a bit more, and say, e.g., "the simillimum to his
present chronic state", because by common usage, you can have a "simillimum"
also of local, acute, etc...

Shannon
on 1/21/03 6:26 AM, Joy Lucas at joy.lucas@ntlworld.com wrote: