QUARTERLY HOMOEPATHIC DIGEST Year 2003, Vol.XX
© Centre For Excellence In Homeopathy Page 7 of 220
Materia Medicas not based on Provings, Materia
Medica compiled on the basis of the ‘Signatures’,
‘Periodic Table’, some of the modern provings, the
dream provings, the meditative provings, etc. were
all criticized as un-Homeopathic. In the same
issue there was a book review of Nancy
HERRICK’s book ‘Animal Mind, Human Voices’
which said, in essence, that speculation,
anthropomorphism, have no place in the
Homeopathic Materia Medica. As against these
Roger MORRISON and 21 others sent a strong
reply justifying the ‘new’ teachings. They felt that
these controversies would ‘divide’ the
Homeopathic practitioners and even threatened
resignation from the membership. There were
strong voices from the other side too, mainly from
André SAINE. Quoting copiously from the
‘source’ literature – HAHNEMANN, LIPPE,
WELLS, etc. – he said, rightly, “History teaches
that HAHNEMANN has provided humanity with
the surest compass to guide the sick back to health.
As with other natural sciences, Homeopathy is
based on ‘pure experiment, meticulous observation
and sound experience’, rather than the ‘theoretical
conjecture or specious sophistry’ of speculative
medicine.” He further said that using Homeopathy
as an outlet for creative expression may be very
exciting, but it is definitely not good for the art and
science of Homeopathy when devoid of principles.
A good homoeopath will learn to optimally use his
creative and intuitive skills, but with complete
respect to the fundamental principles of
Homeopathy.” (Homeopathy versus Speculative
Medicine – A call to Action, André SAINE,
Simillimum, XIV, 3/2001). In a further article
titled ‘Drawing a Line in the Sand’ André SAINE
which was in response to Roger MORRISON,
André SAINE said that a time has come when we
have to take a stand in the interest of Homeopathy
and the standards it must adhere to. André SAINE
gave a long list of references with regard to his
stand. In ‘A Final Response’ Roger MORRISON
defended his and the 21 signatories’ stand.
Dr.Richard MOSKOWITZ in his article
‘Innovation and Fundamentalism in Homeopathy’
supports the ‘innovations’, the recent teachings and
disagreements in question are wholly about matters
of technique, which though admittedly important
are hardly a fit subject for war or
excommunication.” Nevertheless, the editors of
‘Simillimum’ – Barbara OSAWA and Peter
WRIGHT – were severely criticized for their stand
against the new trends and both of them resigned
from the editorship and one who allowed
‘innovations’ and new trends came in place. In a
small three sentence reply Rajan SANKARAN said
“……… If what I say is not true, it will fall on its
own. Practice so far has continued to demonstrate
visible and gratifying results using the ideas, and I
have no wish to defend them against even the most
erudite academic arguments.”
Within these who support ‘innovations’, ‘new
trends’ are those who write of ‘meditation
provings’, ‘group provings’ which include those
who were in the group but did not take the proving
medicine, the ‘dream provings’, the ‘signature’
hunters, the ‘periodic table’ technology, the
‘insights’ masters, etc. and those smeared with the
word ‘fundamentalist’ include those who swear by
HAHNEMANN, von BÖNNINGHAUSEN,
HERING, LIPPE, WELLS, KENT, Pierre
SCHMIDT and VITHOULKAS. One has to
carefully weigh whether the new-tends truly come
under basic principles of Homeopathy; whether
these new teachings are comprehensive to all
Homeopaths who still struggle to understand the
Organon and Chronic Diseases (they are already
baffled by the ‘miasms’ – HAHNEMANN has
mentioned only three, whereas the new school
mentions many miasms; they are baffled whether
the new provings Plutonium, Hydrogen, Diamond,
Eagle, Lions milk, Wolf’s milk, Raven’s blood
would really help them in common day-to-day
practice, they do not have access to the data of
‘provings’ in detail. Recently I read of a
homoeopath who felt that the ‘case’ seemed to
match the proving story of ‘ratus’ (rat) – the
signature of the rat seemed to fit the patient – and
lo! a single dose of the 30 potency cured! Is this
an Art or Science or Magic or just a Fairy Tale?
What should or could one learn from these cases?
= KSS.
13. The Simillimum Route
DOMINICI, Gustaon (HL, 14, 2/2001)
The author says that it is necessary for a
homoeopath to undergo meticulous training which
in the first phase, involves an accurate study of his
own symptoms and an evaluation of how they
change in response to the Homeopathic treatment.
At a later stage, the doctor can tackle Homeopathic
provings which he will perfect as he comes to know
about symptoms that are alien to his own nature.
Consequently, provings provide not only a way of
studying new remedies but also the quickest means
of becoming an excellent therapist. The case of an
aspiring prover is shown. The work is intended to
be a testimony that encourages others to explore the
unknown in order to improve themselves and enrich
the Homeopathic community’s knowledge as a
whole.