Minutus

Hi colleagues

I am grateful for all the input on this subject.

May I now ask Nader/Andy (in parallel) to kindly sum-up what we should
understand by Hn's concept of Miasm and what is required to call something a
miasm as opposed to 'disease'.

------

Once that is done, I like us as a group to discuss the general traits of the
three primary miasms psora/syc/syph and discuss issues such as the validity
of general thoughts of under-function/over-function/destructive-function
respectively. I would like us to know the signs of these miasms well -
physical features as well as mental emotional ones.

Once we have done that we can then move forward to other 'miasm' issues to
see how it can help us in our practice and prescriptions.

Rgds
Soroush

Finrod wrote:
In the Hahnemannian meaning, Miasm refers to conferred/inherited susceptibility; referred to an *actual* microbial infection or influence in the present life that was suppressed or overwhelmed the organism (never resolved); but especially and *primarily* the transmission of unresolved disease via the immaterial, living, spirit-like field of the gametes--- to the offspring--- propagated over generations through the parents and *ancestors*, including going back far into the history of humanity.

Hahnemann saw that the "vital force" (VF) was"spirit-like". So for him, although he recognized microbes ("animalcules") as the original infectors, transmission of a potent echo of a disease never resolved in a parent or ancestor was effected without the animalcule. This echo of unresolved disease IS susceptibility. It affects the VF of the child during gestation and during life, molding them and setting the stage for susceptibility and suffering. The endogenous diseases which result from miasms resemble but are not exactly like, the infectious disease which was the
precursor in the ancestor or the earlier life of the suffering person--although the sufferer may be more susceptible to reinfection by the actual microbe of the given miasm.
That's my spiel on Hahnemann's view paraphrased, by no means complete. Chris and Nader have more to add if they wish.
Best
Andy