PRescribing On MInd Symptoms ALONE (PROMISALONE) in Homeopathy

REAL CURE. GENTLE CURE.
The guru of prescribing on mind symptoms alone in Homeopathy is without doubt Dr. M. L. Sehgal (he wrote Rediscovery of Homeopathy). he has been derided by many as not really practicing Homeopathy. But he is held in high esteem by many, including Rajan Sankaran.

Hahnemann says that the state of the mind chiefly determines the remedy.

If, in any case, the state of the mind is clear and there are strong, characteristic mind symptoms, you can prescribe on them. The mind is an important pillar on which to base the prescription.

For that go to the delusions in the mind section of repertory. Sankaran says disease is nothing but a delusion. And take a flexible view of the entries in the repertory. For instance Stramonium has a delusion that he is murdered, roasted and eaten. One can interpret that as the state of the mind of a person who has faced grave injustice at the hands of some persons. One may say it might be the feelings of a rape victim.

Also look up the alone symptoms in H.L. Chitkara's Materia Medica of the Mind. These are symptoms, which are found in that remedy only and in no other remedy. These symptoms give a good characteristic picture of that remedy.

Prescribing on mind is fascinating. But do it only if you are sure that you have got a good picture of that remedy by the mind symptoms. Otherwise checking out the generals and keynotes too would be wiser.

Why is homeopathy derided?

REAL CURE. GENTLE CURE.
Just check out the news on the web about homeopathy. Chances are nine out of ten times the report will be adverse. Things like "homeopathy is nothing more than placebo", "homeopathy does not stand up to scientific scrutiny" or more uncharitably, Homeopathy is bull shit!".

I do not understand one thing. The masters of homeopathy never said homeopathy was pure science. Homeopathy is science and art. It is both. It is philosophy. Then why is it being judged on the yardstick of pure science? I would advise the adherents of allopathy to stop attacking. They don't know the abc of homeopathy. Have they read the basic books on homeopathy. No!

Homeopathy was a rage in the United States in the nineteenth century. More and more homeopathic hospitals were being built. The brightest minds were opting for homeopathy as an career. Kent, Von Lippe and H. C. Allen were national figures. The decline of homeopathy began in that country because the homeopathy case-taking (if properly done) takes a long time. A homeopathic physician at best see ten to fifteen patients every day. Allopathy scored over it as a allopathy physician takes at most ten to fifteen minutes per patient. So he can see more patients and earn more money. The general public too was attracted by the quickness. It is another point that allopathy most of the time palliates or suppresses a disease, which emerges in a new form in another part of the body. In contrast homeopathy cures. Most people don't understand this. The homeopathy has no millionaire doctors and multi-billion dollar drug firms to educate the public and publicize it.

The very fact that despite all this it survives today and is increasingly thriving is proof of its utility. It is said when the best doctors give up on a case that the patient goes to a homeopathic doctor as a last desperate attempt to be cured. Homeopathy never fails them. For chronic diseases, there is no other system of medicine but homeopathy.

In India, the government has a separate department of homeopathy and actively encourages its spread. The country's homeopathic colleges give forth thousands of homeopaths every year. Are they all fools. Would all this happen if homeopathy was nothing but placebo? Remember that the Indian culture is one of the oldest in the world. If Indians have embraced homeopathy as its own, there must be much more in it than what some allopathic physicians with narrow intellect and closed mind say it is.

The great Germans Hahnemann (founder of homeopathy) and Count Boeninghausen, great American homeopaths Adolph Lippe, Constantine Hering, Kent, H. C. Allen, English homeopath Clarke. All great homeopaths of the nineteenth century. Were they all quacks? Those who belittle homeopathy; have they heard of them? Have they read their works? I would advise them to do so before they say a word about homeopathy.

The present masters of homeopathy. Flemish Kockelenberg, Dockx, Greek Vithoulkas, American Roger Morrison, Canadian Andre Saine, Dutch Van Zandvoort and Jan Scholten, Indian genius homeopath Rajan Sankaran. Are they all fools? Or quacks? Or tricksters? Mere peddlers of placebo?

Think again ladies and gentlemen, who pass adverse comments on homeopathy. You have a lot to learn.

Related
-- WHO speaks against Homoeopathy: Is it justified?
-- Lovers of Homoeopathy: Now is the time to act
-- WHO advice against Homoeopathy: Another attempt to deride ...
-- IGNORAMUSES AND VESTED INTERESTS IN BRITAIN: STAY OFF HOMOEOPATHY

In chronic diseases theory of miasms is vital. Some books

REAL CURE. GENTLE CURE.
Because of the Theory of Miasms, Homeopathy stands much above other systems of medicine. it is unrivalled in treating chronic cases. By chronic we do not mean diseases which last for a long time. Chronic disease in Homeopathy has nothing to do with time. It has everything to do with miasms. Wherever miasms are present, the case is a chronic one and will not be cured even with the best similinum (matching disease picture with drug picture). Then is Homeopathy is useless, you may say. No way!

Best indicated remedies will not cure in chronic cases unless while prescribing the miasmatic dimension of the case is included. Hahnemann had faced the same problem centuries ago. He found that despite giving the best indicated remedy, the disease did not go away. After the first dose, there was some improvement. But soon there was a relapse. The second and third dose did nothing.

"Is the law of similars useless," Hahnemann had asked himself for a fleeting moment. But so sure was he that Homeopathy could never be wrong that he continued his hard work.

After much trials and tribulations he slowly gave shape to the theory of miasms. Today many Homeopaths still say it is all rubbish (luminaries like Dr. P. Sankaran tops the list). But experience has told me the theory of miasms is the greatest gift to humanity.

Hahnemann said there were only three miasms- psora, sycosis and syphilis. J.H.Allen added one more; tubercular miasm. Rajan Sankaran added six more. But it is widely accepted that these additional miasms are just combinations of the basic three miasms. They are not new.

I will not explain to you what these miasms are. Better and superior minds have given a clear account of them in their books. My advice to you is, read them. Though in the next article I will give you a table of miasms according to Rajan Sankaran. It has been prepared by Roger Morrison.

Essential Reading on Miasms:-

1. Miasmatic Diagnosis by Dr. Subrata Kumar BANERJEA (This can be taken as gospel as far as miasms are concerned. The book also has a table of remedies with corresponding miasms they act on. Invaluable. Read this before you go to Sankaran's interpretation of miasms. You will not get confused. Banerjea gives the pathology of miasms, Sankaran gives the mental states of miasms. Both are indispensable).

2. Predictive Homeopathy part 3. The End of Myasmtion of Miasms-Mathematics of Human Defense against Diseases by Prafull VIJAYAKAR. (He puts it all very succinctly. He derides Sankaran, but remember that Vijaykar is a brilliant Homeopath).

3. The Substance of Homeopathy by Rajan SANKARAN
(Page numbers: 20-24, 29, 30, 31-32, 37-45, 51-57, 72-73, 74-78 )

4. Notes on the Miasms by Proceso Sanchez ORTEGA (He says the color of psora is blue, of sycosis yellow and of syphilis red)

5. Chronic Disease- Its Cause and Cure by N. Ghatak (translated by P.N. BANERJEE)

6. Indications of Miasm by Harimohon CHOUDHURY

7. The new book by Henny Heudens-Mast is being highly praised. I haven't got to read it. Give it a try if you get a chance.

How to choose the right potency in Homeopathy?

REAL CURE. GENTLE CURE.
The potency problem is the one which remains unsolved this day. I mean there is disagreement amongst the different masters of Homeopathy on the issue. Some like Dr. Kent and Dr. Nash were unabashed high potency preachers. On the other hand British homeopaths like Dr. J H Clarke voted for the lower potencies. (I HAVE THE HIGHEST REGARD FOR Dr. Clarke. His works are a treat to read).

My advice is keep a open mind. Decide after observing the case. If the totality of the case matches well with the characteristics of the patient, even high potencies will do good work. But be careful that the patient can take the high potency. If there is continuous aggravation (especially of the mental condition of the patient) antidote it or give the same remedy in low potency. Remember, lower potency of a remedy will antidote the high potency of the same remedy. I recollect I had given Carcinosinum 1 M to a patient. There was frightening aggravation. Now know this well, Carc. has no antidote. I gave Carc. 30 and everything was fine.

Remember, after giving the remedy, monitor the mental state of the patient. If the patient feels better, you have nothing to worry, even if the pathology is worsening. The cure process is under way.

If you are a novice in Homeopathy, start with 6C or 30C. Go after the 200, 1 M and 10 M only after you have read extensively. Ignorance is not bliss in Homeopathy. Read books. Then read more books, is my advise. Don't be lazy. There is no place for laziness in Homeopathy. Use your head. Be original. Always remember what Hahnemann, Boeninghausen, Hering, Kent, Von Lippe, Boger, Nash, Clarke, Bhanja, Grimmer say. They were greats. They knew what they were talking about. Be sceptical about everybody else. But what those greats said; take it as gospel. You will not regret it.

Essential Reading for potency

1. Select Your Dose and Potency by Dr. P.S. RAWAT

2. Introduction to Homeopathic Prescribing by S.M. GUNAVANTE (Lesson 7 - Selection of Potency and Repetition of Dose)

3. The Elements of Homoeopathy (Ch. 16 - The Potency Problem) by P Sankaran.

Principles of Homeopathy. Also about Hahnemann. Some useful sites

REAL CURE. GENTLE CURE.
Now I will give a list of sites which I would like you to go through. The basic principles of Homeopathy are explained much better than I could have done.

The founder of Homeopathy- Samuel Hahnemann

What is Homeopathy?

Principles of Homeopathy

Next I want to give the name of a book, which is a gem for newcomers. It was the first book I read on Homeopathy. It is simply written, but takes you through a pleasurable tour of what is Homeopathy. It is........

Homeopathy for Common Disorders by Dhiren Gala