Monthly Archives: May 2021

Why it all went wrong in the USA.

 

Modern homoeopathy is not the practice of Hahnemann.

 

“………There is no evidence that Hahnemann ever read any of Swedenborg’s writings. This was not the case, however, for Hahnemann’s followers, who not only referenced Swedenborg’s teachings but openly embraced homeopathy as their preferred system of therapeutics. They made the connection by concluding that disease was an aberration of the spirit and that all physical manifestations of disease had their counterpart in a spiritual disorder. Disease derived from intemperance and ungoverned mental passions that ate away at the “interiors” of a person and eventually destroyed a person’s “exteriors.”

The concordance between Swedenborg’s philosophy and homeopathy caused numerous Swedenborgians to become homeopaths. This included Charles J. Hempel, chair of materia medica and therapeutics at the Hahnemann Medical College of Philadelphia, who believed that the material substances that composed the living organism were activated by an immaterial dynamic force. Disease, which represented an abnormal condition in the organism, could be cured by those active substances in medicine that produced a dynamic change in the organism’s vital condition. Every true drug contained a dynamic force or property. In his explanation of the outward resemblance of drug symptoms to the symptoms of disease, Hempel substituted the phrase correspondentia correspondentibus curantur for Hahnemann’s similia similibus curantur—a remarkably clear indication of Swedenborg’s influence.

Oresme_Spheres
Doctrine of degrees: The greater the number of dilutions (in this case, on a scale from 1 to 200), the greater the potency of the homeopathic medicine; likewise, the higher the level of spiritual rarefaction (from the physical world to heaven), the closer one moves to the Lord.

The Englishman James John Garth Wilkinson was a homeopathic physician who edited many of Swedenborg’s treatises and authored a significant early biography of Swedenborg in 1849. He correlated Hahnemann’s infinitesimal medicines, particularly those from the third to the two hundredth dilution, to Swedenborg’s doctrine of degrees. Most homeopathic medicines are manufactured at the sixth dilution, but some of them are so diluted that they lack virtually a single molecule of the original menstruum. This situation appears to be no impediment to the homeopath, however, who insists that something must remain since homeopathy “works.” According to Wilkinson, there was a direct relationship between the higher potency that comes with successive dilutions and different levels of spiritual rarefaction, moving from the various parts of the body to the muscles, nerves, fibers, and membranes and finally to the brain, mind, and soul. He believed that the time was coming when the world of medicine would discover “new insights and capacities” as a result of Swedenborg’s spiritual accomplishments. The challenge was to redeem the medical profession of its materialism, open its mind to a more theological pathology, and use the law of correspondences to understand the condition of the body and the soul. For the New Church physician, the human body became a spiritual organism whose treatment required a carefully constructed correspondence between material science and revelation.

Hempel and Wilkinson were early bridge-builders between homeopathy and Swedenborgianism, but the principal catalyst for this conjoining of ideas was James Tyler Kent, professor of materia medica at Hering Medical College and Hospital in Chicago. He constructed a uniquely Swedenborgian approach to Hahnemannian medicine in his Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy (1900) by providing a full description of Swedenborgian philosophy and spelling out such relevant Swedenborgian ideas as a human being’s interior and external worlds, the influx from the internal to the external, and the dependency of the whole on the Divine.

Each of Kent’s medicines had a “personality” that corresponded to the constitution of the patient. Rather than treat the specific organ or lesion, Kent aimed his medicines at the pattern exuded by the patient’s soul. Kent’s grouping of patients by type was an echo of Swedenborg’s description of the spiritual realms, where he described communities of angels gathering according to their personality and function to form the organs of a vast Universal Human that made up the whole of the heavens. In his writings, Swedenborg characterized spirits as, for example, “angels of the kidneys” or “angels of the lungs,” ascribing these souls of the deceased with characters and functions that corresponded with those organs.

Kentian homeopathy spread abroad, attracting Margaret Tyler and John Weir in Great Britain, Pierre Schmidt in Germany, and Denis Demarque in France. Nevertheless, the Kentian penchant for the constitutional (whole-person) prescribing of word-pictures to characterize medicines became almost a high art form and quickly fell into the hands of lay practitioners who popularized them even more. Today, due in no small measure to Swedenborg’s influence, homeopathy has become a bifurcated healing system with one faction looking wistfully at a more disciplined and reductionist process, seeking to fulfill a complementary role alongside mainstream medicine, and the other, enthralled by a vision that calls attention to the body’s essential harmony with the unseen forces of the universe.

Scholars on Swedenborg: Homeopathy’s Journey into Swedenborgianism

Foundational knowledge is required.

I am always surprised, if not heavily saddened, when a homoeopathic guru presents a ‘new’ idea. Generally, the presented novelty will have been investigated by Hahnemann and rejected and the reason or rationale for the rebuttal will have been stated. This appears to not deter the gurus, and even worse the profession takes it on board quickly and endorses it.

Why?

Because in the main, they have not read Hahnemann or understood the concept and practice method of Homoeopathy. It started in Hahnemann’s day when he criticised ‘the mongrel’ half homoeopaths who use the medicines but did not follow the principles or protocols of application.

jt kentA little later, a spiritual dimension was introduced by the Swedenborg church which sadly has diluted the understanding of Hahnemann’s writings, and superseded by a Kentian approach in case taking.The I.H.M. have taken the approach to teach the practice of homoeopathy from its inception through the past two centuries and examine the continued success due to the adherence to the original principles. Time and world health changes have NOT diluted the efficacy of the Hahnemannian approach or changed the remedy provings. The use of modern vaccines and medicines, I would argue, have complicated treatments and made it a touch more difficult, but has not altered the approach to effecting a cure.

With the Kentian/Swedenborg method,, an almost psychiatric approach has developed that involves the personality of the patient and this is taken as the lead symptoms in direct opposition to Hahnemann’s instructions for case taking. He emphasised looking at what has changed and not the existing personal choices or preferences of the patient.
The I.H.M. teach homoeopathy from the foundation of the therapy and the development through the 6 editions of the Organon. This approach allows the studen/practitioner to have a knowledge base for differentiation between any proposed new methodolgy for practice and what is correct.

The beauty and practical usage of Hahnemann’s method is the knowledge of WHAT is happening in treatment, knowledge of WHEN to re-dose, and knowledge of the TIME to change a remedy and what to look for which would indicate a change is needed.

There are so many Hannemannian directions and pointers that never see the light of day in this 21st century simply because most practitioners are not aware of the depths of Hahnemann’s writings because a lot of modern teachers consider them old fashioned and out of date, and their personal conceptual ideas are more relevant. Most teachers who base their practice on Kentian philoosphy, teach in opposition to the directives of Hahnemann.

We teach only Hahnemannian homoeopathy. Our students and practitioners have the ability to be guided by their training and get the answers directly from the books so as to be sure their approach or question is correct.

In the final stages of completing the HQ property purchase. Soon.

Where is homoeopathy in the 21st century?

I think the answer to this lies both in the history of the therapy and in the understanding of why it came into being at its inception.

allopathyModern medicine as defined, uses its pharmacy to treat disease by suppression or divergence of the expression of disease as exhibited by the patient. For example, a headache is treated by blocking the pain with pain relief medicine without treating the actual problem. Skin problems are treated with suppressive ointments or cortizone etc.

Hahnemann in his studies accepted that working with the patients immune system, and applying medicines that could produce matching symptoms, allowed a guide for the immune response to ‘focus’ on the disease expression, and cure itself.

This fundamental difference in approach, irrespective of the therapy of homoeopathy, is a law of nature and can be applied in a myriad ways. Homoeopathy as practiced the Hahnemannian way is a method to match accurately substances that can produce the symptoms of the disease and thus be applied curatively.

I have a firm grasp on the law of similars as being the method to cure disease. It is at odds with mainstream medicine in the West and as such those of us who feel the same are ridiculed and ostracised.

So for a person wanting to practice homoepathy, there is a need to be convinced that it is the bodys immune system that cures and nothing else.

§ 10 Sixth Edition
The material organism, without the vital force, is capable of no sensation, no function, no self-preservation 1, it derives all sensation and performs all the functions of life solely by means of the immaterial being (the vital principle) which animates the material organism in health and in disease.

§ 11 Sixth Edition
When a person falls ill, it is only this spiritual, self acting (automatic) vital force, everywhere present in his organism, that is primarily deranged by the dynamic 1 influence upon it of a morbific agent inimical to life; it is only the vital force, deranged to such an abnormal state, that can furnish the organism with its disagreeable sensations, and incline it to the irregular processes which we call disease; for, as a power invisible in itself, and only cognizable by its effects on the organism, its morbid derangement only makes itself known by the manifestation of disease in the sensations and functions of those parts of the organism exposed to the senses of the observer and physician, that is, by morbid symptoms, and in no other way can it make itself known. 2
1 Materia peccans!
2  What is dynamic influence, – dynamic power? Our earth, by virtue of a hidden invisible energy, carries the moon around her in twenty-eight days and several hours, and the moon alternately, in definite fixed hours (deducting certain differences which occur with the full and new moon) raises our northern seas to flood tide and again correspondingly lowers them to ebb. Apparently this takes place not through material agencies, not through mechanical contrivances, as are used for products of human labor; and so we see numerous other events about us as results of the action of one substance on another substance without being able to recognize a sensible connection between cause and effect. Only the cultured, practised in comparison and deduction, can form for himself a kind of supra-sensual idea sufficient to keep all that is material or mechanical in his thoughts from such concepts. He calls such effects dynamic, virtual, that is, such as result from absolute, specific, pure energy and action of he one substance upon the other substance.
For instance, the dynamic effect of the sick-making influences upon healthy man, as well as the dynamic energy of the medicines upon the principle of life in the restoration of health is nothing else than infection and so not in any way material, not in any way mechanical. Just as the energy of a magnet attracting a piece of iron or steel is not material, not mechanical. One sees that the piece of iron is attracted by one pole of the magnet, but how it is done is not seen. This invisible energy of the magnet does not require mechanical (material) auxiliary means, hook or lever, to attract the iron. The magnet draws to itself and this acts upon the piece of iron or upon a steel needle by means of a purely immaterial invisible, conceptual, inherent energy, that is, dynamically, and communicates to the steel needle the magnetic energy equally invisibly (dynamically). The steel needle becomes itself magnetic, even at a distance when the magnet does not touch it, and magnetises other steel needles with the same magnetic property (dynamically) with which it had been endowered previously by the magnetic rod, just as a child with small-pox or measles communicates to a near, untouched healthy child in an invisible manner (dynamically) the small-pox or measles, that is, infects it at a distance without anything material from the infective child going or capable of going to the one to be infected. A purely specific conceptual influence communicated to the near child small-pox or measles in the same way as the magnet communicated to the near needle the magnetic property.
In a similar way, the effect of medicines upon living man is to be judged. Substances, which are used as medicines, are medicines only in so far as they possess each its own specific energy to alter the well-being of man through dynamic, conceptual influence, by means of the living sensory fibre, upon the conceptual controlling principle of life. The medicinal property of those material substances which we call medicines proper, relates only to their energy to call out alterations in the well-being of animal life. Only upon this conceptual principle of life, depends their medicinal health-altering, conceptual (dynamic) influence. Just as the nearness of a magnetic pole can communicate only magnetic energy to the steel (namely, by a kind of infection) but cannot communicate other properties (for instance, more hardness or ductility, etc.). And thus every special medicinal substance alters through a kind of infection, that well-being of man in a peculiar manner exclusively its own and not in a manner peculiar to another medicine, as certainly as the nearness of the child ill with small-pox will communicate to a healthy child only small-pox and not measles. These medicines act upon our well-being wholly without communication of material parts of the medicinal substances, thus dynamically, as if through infection. Far more healing energy is expressed in a case in point by the smallest dose of the best dynamized medicines, in which there can be, according to calculation, only so little of material substance that its minuteness cannot be thought and conceived by the best arithmetical mind, than by large doses of the same medicine in substance. That smallest dose can therefore contain almost entirely only the pure, freely-developed, conceptual medicinal energy, and bring about only dynamically such great effects as can never be reached by the crude medicinal substances itself taken in large doses.
It is not in the corporal atoms of these highly dynamized medicines, nor their physical or mathematical surfaces (with which the higher energies of the dynamized medicines are being interpreted but vainly as still sufficiently material) that the medicinal energy is found. More likely, there lies invisible in the moistened globule or in its solution, an unveiled, liberated, specific, medicinal force contained in the medicinal substance which acts dynamically by contact with the living animal fibre upon the whole organism (without communicating to it anything material however highly attenuated) and acts more strongly the more free and more immaterial the energy has become through the dynamization.
Is it then so utterly impossible for our age celebrated for its wealth in clear thinkers to think of dynamic energy as something non-corporeal, since we see daily phenomena which cannot be explained in any other manner? If one looks upon something nauseous and becomes inclined to vomit, did a material emetic come into his stomach which compels him to this anti-peristaltic movement? Was it not solely the dynamic effect of the nauseating aspect upon his imagination? And if one raises his arm, does it occur through a material visible instrument? a lever? Is it not solely the conceptual dynamic energy of his will which raises it?

§ 12 Sixth Edition
It is the morbidly affected vital energy alone that produces disease1, so that the morbid phenomena perceptible to our senses express at the same time all the internal change, that is to say, the whole morbid derangement of the internal dynamis; in a word, they reveal the whole disease; consequently, also, the disappearance under treatment of all the morbid phenomena and of all the morbid alterations that differ from the healthy vital operations, certainly affects and necessarily implies the restoration of the integrity of the vital force and, therefore, the recovered health of the whole organism.
1 How the vital force causes the organism to display morbid phenomena, that is, how it produces disease, it would be of no practical utility to the physician to know, and will forever remain concealed from him; only what it is necessary for him to know of the disease and what is fully sufficient for enabling him to cure it, has the Lord of life revealed to his senses.
§ 13
Therefore disease (that does not come within the province of manual surgery) considered, as it is by the allopathists, as a thing separate from the living whole, from the organism and its animating vital force, and hidden in the interior, be it ever so subtle a character, is an absurdity, that could only be imagined by minds of a materialistic stamp, and has for thousands of years given to the prevailing system of medicine all those pernicious impulses that have made it a truly mischievous [non-healing] art.
§ 14
There is, in the interior of man, nothing morbid that is curable and no invisible morbid alteration that is curable which does not make itself known to the accurately observing physicians by means of morbid signs and symptoms – an arrangement in perfect conformity with the infinite goodness of the all-wise Preserver of human life.  

Contained within the words of Hahnemann above, is the rationale for curative action by the law of similars.

Homoeopathy as a therapy, is not a touchy feely ‘alternative’ support to allopathy. It is a self contained medical practice that utililises a proven method of eliciting a curative response from a living organism be it human or animal. Where the organism is CAPABLE of responding and repairing itself, the effects are wonderful and almost miraculous to observe. If the organism is not capable of repair, sometimes we have to let allopathy take the lead in life preservation.

One of the major stumbling blocks to homoeopathy being accepted, is the scoffing maintained toward the dilutions. However science is slowly proving the power of water to absorb the effects.

The other and far more harmful issue within our therapy, is that a large number of practitioners have not learned real homoeopathy from Hahnemann. As such, individuals who are feted as good homoeopaths are misleading with their lack of knowledge and charisma, and not with accurate directives from Hahnemann.

So, if you are a practitioner, examine what you believe and practice by comparing it with the Organon. You will be surprised……………

The members of the IHM individually and collectively hold to the tenets of Hahnemannian practice and work in accordance to his directives. One of the noted features of our training courses, is that all aspects of the course are based around comprehension of the medical works of Hahnemann and Boenninghausen, usually each aphorism is backed up or explained by other texts so as to facilitate a clear understanding of the sublect under consideration. We teach the relevance of the written directives via cases to demonstrate WHY it has to be a certain way.

For new students of homoeopathy, we ground the individual from day one in understanding the methodology and the rationale, and teach them how to view a case through Hahnemanns perspective. While we encourage experimentation, we have found that going against Hahnemanns tested and tried recommendations, always fails. We do not allow polypharmacy or the use of non homoeopathic treatments like the flower remedies.

A number of use use the LM potencies and can give pointers as to how to use them. I myself have used them more or less exclusively since 1987.

We will announce seminar dates to be held in our Eastbourne East Sussex HQ covering case taking, Materia medica understanding, Rubric understanding of the Therapeutic Pocket book etc. This is dependant on the UK government laws regarding numbers and rules for indoor teaching.

More to come.

Understanding the repertory of Boenninghausen.

I am often asked why I chose the rubrics for a case that I do. When Vladimir and myself spent the time to rewrite each rubric using the German original from the existing Allens Pocket Book and dictionaries of the 1800s to understand the meaning of medical knowledge in that era, we became familiar with the intent of each symptom as related to the Materia Medica. 

clemensmariafranciscusvonbc3b6nninghausenIn the three years it took to refine the work, we saw the errors introduced by Allen due to his lack of language skills in German. In fact, this point alone was one of the driving forces behind our desire to have an accurate overhaul of the Repertory.

I think it worth mentioning that the motivation for rewriting the TPB was solely for use in our private clinics. I had found that using the Allens version had proved to be more beneficial to my patients than any other Repertory to indicate the correct remedy. Originally I had played with the TPB back in 1983, but found it so different to Kent and apparently ‘simplistic’ plus I lacked knowledge regarding the methodology that it was placed on one side.

later, with a little more knowledge regarding its usage, I came to like its accuracy even in my clumsy use of it.

tpbpwA person who uses the TPB is a person who utilises the methology of Hahnemann. Boenninghausen incorporated the thinking and directions of the Master, and as such when used correctly, the remedies suggested are an accurate portrayal of how Hahnemann takes a case, and matches the patients symptoms accurately with the Materia Medica.

One incorrect complaint leveled against the repertory is that it is a ‘generals’ repertory and is not a specific local symptom repertory. We can demonstated how to use properly.

laptop2It was the most used repertory in German English and French from 1846 to late in the century, then due to Swedenborg influence in the USA homoeopathic sector, it stopped being printed.

Kents repertory is an amalgamation of 7 repertories and one or two booklets. The issue with that is that each individual repertory has its own methodology which is lost in the combination. 

Sadly the same problem exists with the Boger Boenninghausen repertory, where everything has been placed together from all the different sources of Boenninghausen. As a book of collated symptoms it is excellent… as a repertory, not so much.

We will do a one or 2 day course at the IHM HQ in Eastbourne when the restricitions are lifted going through the essentials of understanding the TPB for prescribing success.