Minutus

Dear Atiq

I wonder what other colleagues read in to your response.

You have made a few statements on this Site. In Minutus 1204 you said we owe
a debt to Dr Hahnemann. Indeed we do and we should repay it by adhering to
his teachings until we can show that they no longer work.

He states that you should let the action of a remedy to work through before
repeating the remedy.
Kent also advises strongly that the same potency should not be repeated.
Hahnemann says that the next dose should be slightly strongly - this is
where LMs come in nicely.

So You have repeated a 30C daily - I think you need to explain to others on
this site how you ascertained that the action of the previous dose had ran
its course and necessitated a repeat.

Lastly, I never ask a question without a purpose - I have better things to
do otherwise.

By the way, I asked you other questions which you seem to have also ignored.

I trust you will be kind enough to oblige us with a reply to the questions
set out below.

Rgds
Soroush
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:10:45 +0100
From: "Atiq Ahmad Bhatti"
Subject: RE: Repeating (30C) Daily
If you are genuinely interested I will tell you.

But I do get the feeling that you are only asking me so you can give me an
'organated' response.

Correct me if I am wrong.

OK. Rant time.

Soroush wrote to Atiq:
owe

I think this is the central point really, isn't it?

Soroush, it's *your* choice to adhere closely to Hahnemann's methods. That's
fine and perfectly valid. It's Atiq's choice to expand on Hahnemann's
beginnings. That's also fine and perfectly valid. Both of you no doubt have
your successes and your failures, as do we all, and we can all learn from
discussing that.

However, none of us -- IMO at least -- have the right to insist that others
SHOULD follow the particular path we've chosen, just because we happen to be
labouring under the delusion that it's the only way to cure people. It's not
the only way -- and thank [deity-of-your-choice] for that. The creative
diversity that exists in mankind is one of the glories of life. Personally I
think we gain far more from being open to learning from it than trying to
force everyone else to do it our particular way.

End of rant.

Regards
Wendy
http://www.smeddum.net/

Hi,

IMO true Hahnemannian homeopathy is stepping on the
right path that Hahnemann started; unprejudiced
research, experimenting, clinical experience,... It
doesn't mean to remain at what Hahnemann said and
wrote in his books.

Of course begining of a good research is the review of
previous literature, understanding them carefully and
then go ahead.

What a progress in the basis of chronic miasms,
posology,... was made and how many new versions of
Organon was available if Hahnemann were alive till
now!!!

Kind regards,

Ardavan Shahrdar
--- Wendy Howard
wrote: > OK. Rant time.

=====
"Life is beautiful, if you look at it in a beautiful way."

Dr Ardavan Shahrdar, MD, DIHom
President of Iranian Homeopathic Association
Website: http://www.minutus.org
Email: ashahrdar@yahoo.com
Mailing list: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus

________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk

Dear Wendy

You may of course Rant!

Did I try to impose my way prescribing? No!
What I wanted to know is the basis of Atiq's decision to prescribe 30C
daily.

If he had answered and given a proper reason, then it may have had some
validity.
If he had shown Hn's method had been tried but not worked, then we may
learnt something!

But alas he has decided not to tell us - so we won't learn any thing!

Shame isn't it? But then by definition it is impossible to defend the
indefensible.

We owe it to our patients to practise homoeopathy along easily recognisable
methods.
We should be able to explain our actions and decisions. It is easier to do
so in forums like this than in front of a Judge and Jury who know nothing of
Homoeopathy.

Had Hn been alive today we would probably had other methods of applying
homoeopathy or effecting cures. But what help is that kind of theorising? -
Does it heal patients? - NO! The only thing is to have an open mind about
possibilities and expanding on Hn's work. But that does not mean to go along
any route that presents itself or follow anyone who is able to write a book
and create a band wagon for others to jump on. Not every 'leading light' is
leading us the correct way.

How many band wagons have been found to be empty promises after a while.

If my cases do not improve - by re-applying the principles of homoeopathy, I
find where I have gone wrong.

We are trying to apply the Science of homoeopathy. It is not a hit and miss
affair.

Let me give a hunting example. If you accurately shoot a bird with a bullet,
the bird is killed and there is food for the table (I apologise to the
vegetarian members - I am just trying to illustrate a point). However, if
you use a machine gun, then after a few bullets have hit the bird, not much
of it will remain!

I will never forget the poor woman who had been on Sepia daily dose for a
year.

Regards
Soroush
Message: 17
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 10:13:29 +0100
From: "Wendy Howard"
Subject: Re: RE: Repeating 30C Daily

OK. Rant time.

Soroush wrote to Atiq:
owe

I think this is the central point really, isn't it?

Soroush, it's *your* choice to adhere closely to Hahnemann's methods. That's
fine and perfectly valid. It's Atiq's choice to expand on Hahnemann's
beginnings. That's also fine and perfectly valid. Both of you no doubt have
your successes and your failures, as do we all, and we can all learn from
discussing that.

However, none of us -- IMO at least -- have the right to insist that others
SHOULD follow the particular path we've chosen, just because we happen to be
labouring under the delusion that it's the only way to cure people. It's not
the only way -- and thank [deity-of-your-choice] for that. The creative
diversity that exists in mankind is one of the glories of life. Personally I
think we gain far more from being open to learning from it than trying to
force everyone else to do it our particular way.

End of rant.

Regards
Wendy
http://www.smeddum.net/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Soroush,
You are so full of nonsense sometimes. What is wrong with you?

What a terrible email you have sent. I think they refer to this as
defamation of character!!!

I won't actually go as low as you to reply to your wild accusations.

You have actually shocked me. I didn't think you were so small and
petty, but at least I now know.

Anyhows, can someone on this list please tell me if Soroush is the
president of this group?

I hope no one else will be offended but I would ask you to kindly read
the email sent - below - and ask yorselves whether you would be offended
like I have been.

Soroush wrote:

Hi Soroush

To understand my point, try reading your own post again as if you were
reading a post written by someone coming from a different perspective --
let's say someone defending vaccination (substitute Jenner for Hahnemann).
My point about imposing your perspective might become a little clearer then.
It's not so much what you say as how you say it. And you carry on in exactly
the same vein ...!

Comments like ...
... come across to me as rather narrow-minded and arrogant. In the couple of
hundred years that homeopathy has been around, people have evolved all kinds
of methods of practicing it and handed on the benefit of their experience to
others. If what they did didn't work, then it would hardly be worth
pursuing, let alone teaching to others, now would it? And if it didn't work
for others, they'd pretty soon give up on it too. And if they didn't, their
patients would. The method just wouldn't survive. Surely we need to judge
people's methods on their own merits, not on whether the methodology used
fits our particular model of how it works or not?

Why do you regard Atiq's response as not giving a "proper" reason? If you
start making judgements about what is and isn't admissable as a response,
you are no longer an unprejudiced observer. Why do you judge his method as
indefensible? We follow Hahnemann's methods because they've been tried and
found to work, and those that follow the methods of people who've taken
Hahnemann's work in new directions do so because they've been tried and
found to work. There is no difference there. All have their successes and
all have their failures. ALL groups can rationalise the failures of the
other groups according to the perceived superiority of their own
understandings and methods. It proves nothing, except the extent to which we
can become emotionally attached to one particular way of seeing things.
I know Hahnemann was an exceedingly talented individual, but isn't this
going a bit too far?! You appear to be saying that he's the only person
capable of taking homeopathy further! Well, we've had 200 years of other
talented individuals taking homeopathy further and we DO have other methods
of applying homeopathy and effecting cures! They're all around you. People
like Atiq are using them.

along
book
is

I'd agree with you wholeheartedly there Soroush. Except for one thing ...
your last sentence. There is no one single "correct way". And neither is it
all in the method. As far as I can see every practitioner needs to evolve a
way of practicing that is a perfect marriage of their own talents as an
individual and the methods available to them. It's all about resonance --
not just between patient and remedy, but between practitioner, method,
patient and remedy. When all are in tune then we appear to have good healing
potential. (And I can see why you resonate so well with Hahnemann's methods
because that's the way he felt about them too!)

But that rather gets away from the point of my rant, which was provoked by
what appeared to be the implicit assumption on your part that Atiq's methods
were somehow improper and indefensible and that he should practice according
to Hahnemann's methods, which just happens to be your way of doing it.

At the end of the day "I do it and it works", possibly preceded by "I
learned from someone who did it and it worked", is all any of us have got
... in any form of healing anyhow anywhere. We none of us know how healing
really works, no matter how many nice theories we might have about it, but a
little humility and a little respect go a long way towards helping us find
out.

Regards
Wendy
http://www.smeddum.net/

Hi Soroush,

I too would have been intersted in Atiq's answers, for apparently for
different reasons than you would be. Unfortunatley, the reason he chooses
not to answer is clear in the ways the keep asking your questions, e.g.:

on 10/26/03 5:30 PM, Finrod at finrod@webstar.co.uk wrote:
Ach, come on...
Let the man talk, and let us all learn something, and draw our own
conclusions as to *what* we would have learned. Your words are asking
people (specifically Atiq) to engage in conversation and share their
thinking, but your clearly and strongly conveyed attitude will prevent *any*
differing views, except from those who are specifically looking to make a
point or pick a fight. Which Atiq clearly is not. C'mon, let up!

Hopefully,
Shannon

Information is to share:

If it is useful and if one has prior experience to it working and
working well.

If it will help other individuals with the same goal of serving
humanity.

If others are willing to accept it and understand it.

If those that accept are willing to share something back.

To those that can think outside of a text book and out of the confides
of four walls.

For those that are granted an ability to understand or explore further
and excel.
Information is NOT shared

When others are arrogant and rude.

When one has a closed book response.

When one constantly corrects and picks faults at others.

When it is obvious to the sharer that an individual will never grasp
certain idea's and thoughts of action.

I could not find insulting mail from this guy Soroush. Can you pin point.
Nanga Pir
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears

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

__________________________________________________________________
McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network.
Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today!
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computi ... omo=393397

Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge. Download Now!
http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455