About Homeopathy- conceptions and missconceptions


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Every since the church of New Age was unofficially and incospicuously inaugurated, many of its followers have discovered this "mystical craft ". Little do they know that Homeopathy which was systematized by german physician Samuel Hahneman at tyhe begining of 19th century. is really an ancient art of healing almost as old as human race.
We dont have any proof which sources Hahneman used when reinventing Homeopathy, Paracelsus being mentioned most often, but then again we also dont know much about Paracelsus' sources either. The chances are both of them had acces to ancient medical manuscripts. Hanuman turned to these ancient practices after years of frustration with futility of allopathic medicine he was practicing. Later on with emergence of Steiner and theozophs we have seen somewhat strange marriage of homeopathy and antropozophy in so called antropozophic medicine.
With New Age philosophy of love and light homeopathy has been brought to the limelight again, but this time also to be abused and manipulated.

Therefore the purpose of this thread is to demistify certain aspects of homeopathy. There are yet many things about homeopathy that we cannot explain with available scientific knowledge, but the same can be said for any other aspect of our lives.
What we do know today is that Homeopathy presents a system of medical treatment based on several fundamental principles:

1.'Similia Similibus Curantur'
Homeopathy is a system of medicine founded on a definite law 'Similia Similibus Curantur' which means 'like cures like'. The word Homeopathy is a Greek derivation where 'homeos' means 'similar and pathos means 'suffering'. So Homeopathy may be defined as the therapeutic method of symptom-similarity. The recognition of this law was there even before Hahnemann. Paracelus, Hippocrates, and ancient ayurvedic texts have on occasions mentioned this law. But it was Hahnemann who recognized the universality of this law and lifted it from oblivion to make it the basis of a complete system of medicine.
According to this system, the choice of the medicine is fundamentally based on the principle that the medicine must have the capability of producing most similar symptoms of the disease to be cured in healthy persons. In aphorism 26 of 'Organon of Medicine', Hahnemann states this law: "A weaker dynamic affection is permanently extinguished in the living organism by a stronger one, if the latter (whilst differing in kind) is very similar to the former in its manifestations."

2. Law of Simplex
The homeopathic remedies were proved singly, and the Materia Medica was built up on the observed effects of drugs given singly, either in planned provings or in accidental provings. Only one remedy can be the most similar at any given time to the condition of any given patient.
If more than one drug is given in one prescription the possibility of synergistic action cannot be ruled out, but it cannot be argued that the effect will be the sum total of the effects of the separate drugs. The ingredient drugs may even result in interactions that may have adverse effects in the body. A mixture of more than one remedy in a single dose would constitute a new remedy which would require to be proved as such for a proper estimate of its probable effects.

3. Law of Minimum

The suitableness of a medicine for any given case does not depend on its accurate homeopathic selection alone, but likewise on the proper size of dose too. Under this principle we give medicine to the patients in very minute doses. The minute dose means that quantity of a medicine which is though smallest in quantity produces the least possible excitation of the vital force and yet sufficient to effect the necessary change in it(§ 246). The quantity is minimum, yet appropriate, for a gentle remedial effect. This concept of minimum dose lead to the discovery of a practical process called potentisation. Administration of the minimum dose has the following advantages:
-To avoid unwanted aggravation
-The specific dynamic action which produces the uncommon, characteristic, distinguished symptoms of the drug, is produced by the minimum quantity of drug.
-The smallness of the dose does not allow the drug to do any organic damage nor there is any risk of drug addiction and drug effects.
-The concept of minimum dose can be verified by Arndt-Schultz law that small doses stimulate, medium doses paralyze and large doses kill. I other words, the action of small and very large doses of the same substance on living matter is opposite.
-The Law of Least Action, formulated by Maupertius, the French mathematician, states : "The quantity of action necessary to affect any change in nature is the least possible, the decisive amount is always a minimum, an infinitesimal."

Health is a matter of perfect equilibrium, perfect balance, trifling circumstances may sway it, and so may it be balanced by the least possible in medication.

4.Doctrine of Drug Proving
In Homeopathy we prescribe only those medicines whose medicinal properties are known through 'drug proving'. Drug proving is a systematic investigation of pathogenic (disease-producing ) power of medicine on healthy human being of different ages, both sexes and of various constitutions. These provings have been recorded systematicaly since Hahneman times and this proces is still ongoing.

5.Miasm Theory
During the early age of homeopathic practice Hahnemann observed that in spite of best homeopathic treatment some cases would return with a recurrence of symptoms at intervals. This failure led him to investigate thoroughly a large number of chronic cases and after 12 years of observations he reached the conclusion that the chronic diseases are caused by chronic miasms. The miasms are Psora, Syphilis and Sycosis.

Psora is the real fundamental cause and producer of innumerable forms of disease. It is the mother of all diseases and at least 7/8th of all the chronic maladies spring from it while the remaining eighth spring from Syphilis and Sycosis. Permanent cure is only possible by proper anti-miasmatic treatment.

6.Theory of Vital Force
It is Homeopathy which stresses the existence and operation of the vital force in a living organism. The human organism is a triune entity consisting of body, mind, and spirit. This spirit which is responsible for different manifestations of life was termed by Dr. Hahnemann as 'Vital Force'. Hahnemann speaks of the vital force in Aphorism 10 of his Organon of Medicine as : "The material organism without the vital force is capable of no sensation, no function, no self preservation; it derives all sensations, and performs all functions of life solely by means of the immaterial being (the vital force) which animates the material organism in health and disease."

In the healthy condition, it is the vital force which maintains normal functions and sensations of the organism. But when the vital force is primarily dynamically deranged by morbific influence, it causes abnormal sensations and functions which are manifested outwardly through the material body as abnormal signs and symptoms, the totality of which constitutes the disease.

Again if a cure is to be established it is the vital force that must arouse itself or be abided to arise for the recovery. If the vital force is too debilitated and exhausted then no medicinal aid is of help.

7.Doctrine of Drug Dynamisation
Homeopathic dynamisation is a process by which the medicinal properties which are latent in natural substances while in their crude state, become awakened and developed into activity to an incredible degree.

According to Dr. Stuart Close, "Homeopathic potentisation is a mathematico-mechanical process for the reduction, according to scale, of crude, inert or poisonous medicinal substances to a state of physical solubility, physiological assimilability and therapeutic activity and harmless, for use as homeopathic healing remedies."

Drugs are potentised by two methods:

Trituration - in case of insoluble substances.
Succussion - in case of soluble substances.
The objectives of potentisation in Homeopathy are:

To reduce the medicinal substance which helps to avoid unwanted medicinal aggravations and side effects.
Homeopathy believes that vital force is dynamic in nature and that is affected by disease, can only be cured by the dynamic power of serviceable medicine, not by its material quantity.
By this process the most virulent and deadly poisons are not only rendered harmless, but are transformed into beneficial healing remedies.
Substances which are medicinally inert in their crude natural state are thus rendered active and effective for healing the sick.
The medicinal qualities of other drugs which are more or less active in their natural state are enhanced and their sphere of action is broadened by this process.
The action of potentised medicines is deeper, longer and more wide-spread.


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
There is some evidence that whole official i.e. western medicine today which is basicaly founded on Pasteurs theories has got it all wrong. They say even Pasteur admitted this on his death bed. There is a whole thread about this here

It also may be very usefull to explain the concept of miasms further as this may serve as an indication if homeopathy is being practiced properly.
If someone tries to treat you homeopatically based solely on one symptom, without taking into account your constitution and the totallity of symptoms that your body presents including the most subtle ones, and especially psychological symptoms then you know that you are dealing with charlatan.

This may be potentially dangerous situation as common missconception is that you cannot do harm with homeopathic remedy. This may be truth when comparing homeopathic with allopathic medicine, but still according to recently established Theory of supression there is ample eveidence that even homeopathic remedies if given inapropriately can do harm by means of supression.

So what does this fancy name Miasms stands for?

The word miasm means a cloud or fog in the being. Its meaning can be expanded and seen as a primary defect; a root cause; a shadow, fragment or internalised relic of an actual disease passed down the genetic line; a vaccine defect; a pre-disposition [dyscrasia] towards a predictable pattern of certain diseases and disorders within a family, race or the human race; and a defect of the vital force.

The theory suggests that if 100% of all disease is miasmatic, then 85% is due to the primary and atavistic miasm Hahnemann called Psora. The remaining 15% of all disease he held to be either syphilitic or sycotic, being derived from suppressed Syphilis or suppressed Gonorrhoea. Hahnemann, unlike Kent later, attached no moral dimension whatsoever to the sexual nature of the two latter miasms. Kent, of course, emphasised this moral aspect a great deal, which might not be that surprising in the somewhat Puritanical atmosphere of nineteenth century small town America.

When Hahnemann announced his miasm theory in 1828 it was greeted with shock, disbelief, uproar and derision by the entire medical world. Even many homeopaths blushed with shame and completely ignored the idea as preposterous. It was hard to see where Hahnemann was coming from. The grand scheme of the miasms, so familiar today, seemed just like words from an alien language. If you start from symptom totality, then you can just about reach the even wider concept of a miasm as a grouped entity deriving from hundreds of cases. But if you start from the familiar allopathic terrain of a 'disease' affecting whole populations, then the idea of miasms as internalised and inherited dyscrasias seems very hard to grasp. The conceptual challenge is simply one of breadth of view. Each individual case, upon which homeopathy is based, was henceforth to be viewed in the light of another totality - the family legacy of Psora, Syphilis and Sycosis.

The theory of miasms originates in Hahnemann's book The Chronic Diseases, [1] published around the same time that he also decided to fix 30c as the standard potency for all homeopaths. He declared that the theory was the result of 12 years of the most painstaking work on difficult cases of a chronic character combined with his own research into the historical diseases of man.

The three miasms given in that work are held to be responsible for all disease of a chronic nature and to form the foundation for all disease in general. This latter aspect was then to receive considerable amplification from Kent. Kent was also able to more clearly identify those remedies that relate to each miasm. Though now generally accepted by most homeopaths without question, at the time, the theory was generally greeted with disbelief and derision from all but the most devoted followers. This can be explained in part by the primitive nature of medical science at that time, which was not really very willing to accommodate any theory for the origin of disease, least of all such a grand and all-embracing one.

Hahnemann also claimed that Psora was the most ancient and insidious miasm, deriving primarily from skin eruptions of various types in the past, such as scabies (Itch), leprosy and psoriasis. These had been supposedly contracted by ancestors or in one's own early childhood. Their subsequent suppression, especially through the use of ointments, he held to be the primary cause of forcing skin conditions inwards to cause the internalised Psora miasm. Psora, he says, "is that most ancient, most universal, most destructive, and yet most misapprehended chronic miasmatic disease which for many thousands of years has disfigured and tortured mankind...and become the mother of all the thousands of incredibly various chronic diseases." [1; 9]

In view of the things that we are studing on this forum I find the following to be very interesting.
Kent, in his Lectures, then greatly enlarged upon the theory, mostly in a moral sense, proposing that Psora was the foundation of all other sickness, without which mankind would be pure and healthy both in mind and body, as in the Garden of Eden. He thus regarded the acquisition of Psora as being equated with the 'Fall of Man' and with original sinfulness. He portrayed Psora in this highly moralistic light as also being the foundation of the sexual miasms that came later.

We can see that Hahnemann must have obtained his original idea of miasms through an extension of the very fruitful threads in his thinking about similars and poisonings, with which he was deeply immersed in the original construction of homeopathy. His mind simply must have been drawn towards seeing the wider patterns in cases. For example, Hahnemann "suggested, in 1789, that Mercury...displaced the syphilitic disease by imposing a similar illness," [2; 3]. He "had taken his time to formulate his first intuitive deduction [similia] in fact seven years...[he] clung obstinately to the everyday world of common sense...and had no use for the theories of pathology then current...[being, in fact] dissociated from theories of physiology and pathology," [2; 4].

The notion of Psora has many facets; for example, "seven-eighths of all the chronic maladies prevalent are ascribed by Hahnemann to Psora..." [3; 1, 142] He did not confine its meaning solely to Scabies; "Psora...was widely known in Hahnemann's time, as the general term for a whole series of skin troubles of the most varied kinds..." [3; 1, 143] Its underlying significance was even broader: "to Hahnemann Psora is a disease or disposition to disease, hereditary from generation to generation for thousands of years and it is the fostering soil for every possible diseased condition." [3; 1, 144] However, the miasm theory should not be viewed too literally as meaning that everyone needs to be dosed up with Psorinum, Syphilinum or Medorrhinum; rather it means that the broad outline of the miasms need to be kept in mind when observing the symptoms of a specific case or family.
For example, in a family with some evidence of alcoholism, deafness, blindness, bone disorders and insanity, one is entitled to believe a syphilitic streak is present. It should not dominate one's view of each case, but it is useful background information. It guides one towards certain remedies, and away from others, but should never wholly dictate practice. Such would be to fall prey to medical speculation, which Hahnemann certainly regarded as "arid and obfuscating scholasticism." [4; 62] and "the elaborate manipulation of hollow symbols." [4; 62]. The dim view he took of medical speculation presumed that that too often it is disengaged from practice, lacking efficacy and encourages harmful practices.

Like the dwellers in Plato's caves [see Plato, The Republic], trying to make sense of shadows moving on a wall, homeopaths have been consistently reluctant to accept the molecular and tangible as the sole cause of itself, but always look deeper for non-molecular and intangible root causes of the events observed at the surface, in the tissues and cells, and in the physiology of organ systems, never accepting solely tissue events as causes of themselves, which is precisely where allopathy draws a halt in its search for causes of disease phenomena, satisfied that there is nothing beyond that. Clearly, the miasm theory follows the same line of thinking.
But, Homeopaths should resist the temptation to allow miasms, like some cuckoo in the nest, to exclusively dominate its conceptual base in the way 'evolution' has come to dogmatically dominate biology, or the way genetics and bacteria have come to totally dominate allopathy. Allowing such 'soiling of its own nest' might be to indulge a delusion, a monistic theory, and to allow the subject to be well and truly hijacked by one idea, or even to comprise a lamentable waste of otherwise objective talent. Kent beseeches us to resist the temptation of allowing excessive dominance to be granted to one idea or theory. Such advice applies equally to the miasm theory, which should be balanced against other homeopathic views.

With so much of their work being grounded solely in the subtle, the holistic and the non-molecular, it is only natural for homeopaths to be suspicious of and unsatisfied with the solely molecular, mechanistic and tangible explanation or technique of crude drugging for specifics [allopathy]. Being daily used to seeing into the realm of the subtle and intangible, with their more subtle form of vision, it is only natural for them to seek out deeper root causes in such a realm that lies behind and beyond the solely molecular realm, which seems so satisfying to allopaths and scientists. By employing intangible and non-molecular remedies and seeing their often spectacular effects in the clinical sphere, it is not so surprising that they have come to develop such deep respect for non-molecular theories of life, disease causation and cure.

and few more words about Essentialism
Essentialism is "the belief in essences independent of the phenomena of appearance," [11; 304-5] and which are conceived as "non-dimensional phenomena," [11; 407]. The idea is common to Pythagoras, Plato and Aristotle and dominated philosophy for centuries, almost into the modern era. Goethe, for example, seems to have achieved a "fusion of Plato's essentialism with aesthetic principles." [11; 457] An appreciation of essentialism involves the belief that objects and living things each contain an underlying and immaterial essence that can only be known through a form of reflection upon the nature of the substance or organism. Natural selection, for example, seems "meaningless to an essentialist, for it can never touch the underlying essence; it can only eliminate deviations from the type," [11; 517] that is operate at the physical level of the organism.

The essentialist position of homeopathy runs through all these ideas like miasms, nosodes and vital force. It runs through the ‘potency energy’ of the drug; it runs through the idea of the nosode as containing some subtle essence of the disease it is made from; the idea runs through the whole concept of miasm as a defect resident in the life force; and it runs through the whole concept of the vital force as a coordinator of whole organism events. In all these senses it can be seen that homeopathy is riddled with essentialism, a belief in subtle essences that lie behind and beyond the visible, physical, tangible or molecular realm of ordinary life. This belief comes very close to the Platonic idea that behind each phenomenon we see lies a discreet and corresponding essence or 'noumenon' that exists in the 'realm of ideas' and from which the physical object flows and with which it corresponds or resonates. The realm of ideas is therefore also, as Kent would say, the realm of causes. It is as if each substance, species, individual, rock, mineral, insect, plant - carries within it an invisible imprint, hidden from view. This idea can also be seen to permeate the 'doctrine of signatures'.


Jedi Master
It's amazing to me that I have not heard of this Miasm Theory you have been posting about. We have been trying to use natural healing for our ailments, and now I wonder how much harm we were doing just out of ignorance. It's definately learning how to heal all over again. I sincerely hope the herb lady I am seeing knows something about this, or is at least interested. Or I have some serious searching to do.

Thanks again Deckard, Tarri


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
and now some homeopathic fun stuff to slightly lighten up this thread :)

From Materia Medica Poetica

Arsenicum Album
Well known`s the story of Lady Macbeth
Who was stricken at night with a horror of death,
And away from her bed she`d totter and stagger
With morbid delusions about a big dagger ;

While her eyes ran with tears which were scalding and hot
And in accents quite hoarse she would cry ` Out damned spot`
And above all, which seemed to distress her the most,
Was the fear of death, which worried her a lot.

She never knew, when she`d be seeing a ghost.
Arsenicum album cures these symptoms most.

(writer unknown)

Carbo vegetabilis
Mournful lassie doesn`t care
What`s on the bill of fare,

All she wants is lots of air.
Her appetite is lacking.
Her hands look puffy, pale and blue,
Her face looks rather pallid too,

And furthermore it seems the Whooping Cough is rather racking.
She`s sitting by the window ledge,

And looks as though she`s on the edge
Of fainting - Fetch some Carbo veg.

She`ll soon be up and cracking.

(writer unknown)

Apis Mellifica
(by K. Samuel)

Jealously like the Queen Bee,
Dreams of flight and work at night,

Desire for cool : the general rule.
Swollen up, with lumps and bumps.

`You mustn`t touch, it hurts too much`.
Stinging pain is his greatest bain....

There`s water where no water ought to be(e).

Apis Mellifica
How doth the little busy bee
Improve each shining hour
By stinging with therapeutic power
To cure rheumatics and the kidneys,
Which function poorly.
This insect`s chief delight is
To cure complaints like fibrositis

And implement the instant quelling
Of each and every painful swelling,
Which feels relief from compress cold.
Its therapeutic power is pure gold.

So if you cry out with a hot painful swelling
And you have headaches and vertigo ; take Apis mel in,
Or if your complaint`s Fibrositis terrifica
Take it as the remedy Apis mellifica.

(writer unknown)


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
this is a great link if someone wishes to learn more about the homeopathic remedies



The Living Force
FOTCM Member
"It is always ours to question why,
and never to just do and die."
This is a twisted version of a rather famous quote.
It is unknown just who twisted it first

And some more facts about Homeopathy in Q and Answer form ( disclaimer -nothing to do with Cassiopean transcripts)

Taken from great web site by Jacob I. Mirman called Demistifying Homeopathy:

Q. What kind of diseases can be treated with homeopathy?
A. Homeopathy can effectively treat those conditions in which there is no irreversible pathology. For example, asthma is an active, inflammatory process and the lungs can heal from its effects once it is cured. Homeopathy can be very effective in treating asthma. Emphysema, on the other hand, is a degenerative process that permanently destroys the lung tissue. Homeopathy can sometimes make an emphysema patient feel a little better, but it can't reverse the effects of emphysema.

Q. What interferes with homeopathic treatment?
A. First and foremost on the list of things that can interfere with a homeopathic remedy's effectiveness are strong suppressive drugs like steroids and immunosuppressants. Since birth control pills suppress the natural cycle, they too can interfere with a remedy. Camphor oil tends to antidote the action of the remedies, as can some types of dental work. Coffee (decaf or regular) may interfere in some cases.

A strong shock, either emotional or physical, such as being injured in a motor vehicle accident or grieving the death of a close relative can interfere with the effectiveness of a homeopathic remedy.

Q. What about all those homeopathic combination remedies widely available today, like "Flu", "Sinus", "Headache", "PMS", etc.?
A. First of all, they are not homeopathic because they are not individually prescribed. A patient with a headache may get one of about a thousand remedies, and it will be different for every headache sufferer. Yes, potentized drugs are used in these combinations, but it does not make them homeopathic.

Next, when numerous potentized drugs are used at one time, the Vital Force gets confused. Keep in mind that each remedy has a certain disease state associated with it. If one presents the Vital Force with several disease states all at the same time, the Vital Force gets mixed messages. If used for any length of time, these combination remedies may confuse the Vital Force to the point of no return. When I get these "confused" cases in my practice it is very hard to find a good remedy for them. Then, when the remedy is found, it takes ten fold more time for the remedy to work. In my opinion, its much healthier to take Tylenol for your headaches, decongestant for your sinuses and antihistamine for your insomnia (all in moderation of course), then to use homeopathic combination remedies.

Q. Do homeopaths use electronic equipment for diagnosis?
A. Some practitioners who call themselves homeopaths do. But to a classical prescriber these practitioners are not, strictly speaking, homeopaths. They use homeopathic remedies in a non-homeopathic way. The same goes for those practitioners who inject the remedies. There may be value in these approaches, but they probably shouldn't be called homeopathy. In classical teaching, a patient should either ingest (eat) or inhale (sniff) the remedy.

Q. Is homeopathy the same as herbal medicine? Is it a combination of herbs, diets, vitamins and counseling?
A. No, though this can be confusing, as some practitioners do get involved in both homeopathy and nutritional counseling. My personal philosophy is that as you improve in your health, your body will desire healthy food. When my patients request assistance with their diets, I refer them to a nutritionist who is properly trained in that specialty.
Regarding herbs, they are, strictly speaking, allopathic drugs. In homeopathy, drugs are chosen according to the principle of similarity (like cures like). In conventional or allopathic medicine, drugs are chosen on the principle of opposite (a drug must have action opposite to that of the disease). For example, a narcotic lessens a patient's sensitivity to pain, so it can be used if a person is experiencing pain. An expectorant makes one's respiratory tract secrete more mucus, so it can be used when cough is too dry. These effects can be achieved by either natural drugs, like herbs, or synthetic drugs, like most conventional medications. Conceptually, there is little difference between the two approaches. One must realize that no chronic condition could be cured by this method. The most one can hope for is palliation, or temporary improvement. However, sometimes this is all that is desired, and if one chooses to use an allopathic approach to treat a condition, a drug that is the most effective and has the least side effects should be chosen, whether herbal or synthetic.
It is possible to use herbs in a homeopathic way as well, but practitioners who do this well are very hard to find, and such a practice is very poorly standardized. Most herbalists are allopathic.

Q. What is the best remedy for hay fever, headache, flu, diarrhea, depression, etc.?
A. There is no such remedy. Homeopathic remedies are not chosen on such indications. They are chosen for a particular person with the condition, so for any of these conditions there could be hundreds of different remedies, just like there are many different types of people with headache, hay fever, etc.

Q. Will I have to be on a homeopathic remedy for the rest of my life?
A. No, you will only be on a remedy until you achieve the desired state of health.

Q. Are all homeopaths medical doctors? How do I find a good homeopath?
A. No. In fact, I would not base my choice of a homeopath on the appearance of MD or DO after their name. My personal homeopath has initials RSHom (Registered with Society of Homeopaths). These initials are certified by the North American Society of Homeopaths exclusively for "non-licensed" practitioners. This title carries a lot of weight. The best way to find a good practitioner is to get referred to one by a happy patient. If you don't know anybody seeing a good homeopath, call the practitioners in the area and inquire if they are classical and how much time they allow for the first visit. If they are combination prescribers (non-classical) or schedule less then one hour I would be skeptical. It is possible for a very advanced practitioner to spend less time on the first interview, but most of us require at least an hour to get a good case history. Personally, I schedule two hours for my new patients. One way to find a good homeopath is by calling a homeopathic study group in your area and asking them. They would be very happy to refer you. A study group in your area can be found in the referral list put out by the National Center for Homeopathy @ (703) 548-7790

Q. What do all those letters mean?
A. Many homeopaths have different initials after their names. These are usually titles awarded by different homeopathic boards and schools. Because homeopathic education and certification in the US have not been standardized yet there are several groups certifying their members. Any certification, of course, speaks only of the particular homeopath's ability to satisfy the particular board's minimum competency requirements and may not reflect the practitioner's true level of mastery.
Here are some of the titles you may find:
DHt (Diplomate of Homeotherapeutics): Given by the American Institute of Homeopathy to medical doctors passing their exam. The AIH is the oldest organization of physicians in the US, predating the AMA. In fact, the AMA was originally founded in response to the threat perceived by the allopathic (conventional) doctors of the time, from homeopaths forming a national organization.
DHANP (Diplomate of Homeopathic Academy of Naturopathic Physicians): As the name implies, this is a title similar to DHt given by the naturopathic board.
DNBHE (Diplomate of National Board of Homeopathic Examiners): This one may sound a bit misleading. It is awarded by a group of chiropractic homeopathic educators to practitioners passing their exam.
MFHom (Member of the Faculty of Homeopathy): Given by the Faculty of Homeopathy, the British equivalent of the AIH, to doctors passing their exam. This title is recognized by medical authorities throughout European Community and other countries having historical ties to the United Kingdom. The Faculty runs a fairly intensive educational program attracting doctors from all over the world.
FFHom (Fellow of the Faculty of Homeopathy): Awarded to doctors holding the title of MFHom and showing certain extra achievement, particularly in the area of homeopathic education.
RSHom(NA) (Registered with Society of Homeopaths (North America)): Given by NASH (North American Society of Homeopaths). NASH accepts only non-licensed practitioners as members and this title signifies the practitioner's passing of membership requirements which include demonstrating proficiency in classical homeopathy. This title was originally modeled on RSHom of Great Britain.
CCH (Certified in Classical Homeopathy): Given by CHC (Council for Homeopathic Certification), a fairly new board trying to unite all these different groups under a common umbrella. This title certifies that the practitioner, regardless of their licensure status, passed a minimum competency exam in classical homeopathy. The interesting new twist added by this board is a medical portion of the exam required for all non-medically licensed applicants. This is the first attempt in modern history of homeopathy in this country to make sure the practitioner possesses a certain minimum of conventional medical knowledge in addition to proficiency in homeopathy.
CTHom (Certified Trained Homeopath): This is a diploma given by ESSH School of Homeopathy in Flagstaff, AZ, to students demonstrating a certain degree of mastery in classical homeopathy. I have a heavy personal bias in favor of this title. I believe its bearers are some of the best homeopaths available. However, this should in no way diminish the importance of other titles mentioned above.
MHom (Master of Homeopathy): This diploma is given by ESSH School of Homeopathy to those mastering Homeopathy on a very high level. This title is given by the teacher when he considers the student qualified. There is no exam of any sort. The only prerequisite is having the previous level diploma (CTHom). In my biased opinion, there is no higher qualification in the world today.
There are other titles given by other groups, some probably very good, but having no personal familiarity with them I will not mention them here.

Q. Will my insurance pay for homeopathy?
A. I have been told that some insurance companies are coming around. However, be sure to call regarding your specific policy before you get treatment to verify coverage. If your homeopath is an MD or DO and your policy allows you to see that doctor, you may be reimbursed according to plan rules.

Q. What are the different kinds of homeopathy?
A. There are two major schools of homeopathy in the world today: classical homeopathy, which I've described here, and pluralist homeopathy. Classical homeopathy is also called Hahnemannian or unicist. Its main principle is to use one remedy at a time to address the whole person. The pluralist approach uses several remedies simultaneously. It is prevalent in France and is used by some practitioners in this country. Pluralist homeopathy is generally frowned upon by classical prescribers who believe that it is difficult enough to find the one right remedy and follow its effect on the patient. Therefore, giving several remedies at once makes it impossible to determine which of them is causing the change in the patient's condition. We are also concerned about the possible deleterious effect on the Vital Force that may be produced by such prescribing, but as I have mentioned elsewhere, the jury is still out on this one.

Q. Has homeopathy been put through scientific testing?
A. When I tell my doctor colleagues about homeopathy, they always want to see some "hard data". In the medical world this usually takes the form of studies. Such studies are carried out in a "double-blind, placebo-controlled" fashion. This means that two groups of people take either an active drug or a sugar pill that looks the same. The pills are administered by a third party and neither the researcher nor the patient know what anybody is taking until the code is broken. The results of these studies really help address the issue of whether the drug is indeed effective or a placebo effect is occurring. The studies I quote in the appendix show that the sub-molecular dilutions used in homeopathy really do produce significant effect on living beings, both humans and animals. Science can't explain homeopathy yet, but it is really immaterial as long as we can demonstrate that it works.

Q. Are homeopathic remedies all natural?
A. If you haven't read the entire book, this answer may not make sense to you. The point is, who cares what the remedies are, if the healing is natural. The remedies don't really have any effect on the body other than to trigger the Vital Force to react. Once it reacts, healing takes place from within, directed by the Vital Force. That is, we heal ourselves, and that is the most natural kind of healing.
If you still insist on the answer, most are indeed, natural. Whether this should prompt you to use homeopathy is another question. You should decide to use it for completely different reasons. Here are some examples of homeopathic remedies:
Mineral Source:
Arsenicum Album (white oxide of arsenic)
Silica (sand)
Graphites (lead from "fine English pencil")
Sulphur (elemental sulphur)
Aurum (gold)
Argentum nitricum (silver nitrate)
Petroleum (petroleum)
Hydrogen (hydrogen gas)
Mercurius vivus (mercury)

Plant Source:
Rhus toxicodendron (poison ivy)
Conium maculatum (poison hemlock)
Chamomilla (daisy)
Thuja occidentalis (arbor vitae)
Carbo vegetabilis (vegetable charcoal)
Phytolacca decandra (poke-root)
Urtica urens (stinging nettle)
Lilium tigrinum (tiger lily)

Animal Source:
Crotalus horridus (venom of rattle snake)
Pyrogenium (rotten meat)
Lac caninum (dogís milk)
Lyssin (saliva of rabid dog)
Tarentula Hispanica (tarantula, tincture of the living spider)
Apis mellifica (honey-bee, tincture of the whole bee)

And then there are other things I don't care to mention as an unaware reader might have an inclination to vomit. Of course, all of these things are natural and therefore good for you, right? Right!, but only if well prescribed and given in the appropriate homeopathic form, and not because they are natural.

Q. Is homeopathy safe in pregnancy?
A. This is a hard one. It probably is, but one has to be very careful. We know that sometimes remedies cause provings (see the chapters on Proving and/or Safety). While we can easily see proving symptoms in an adult, it would be easy to miss those in a fetus. If we cause such a proving and persist too long with the remedy, the proving can turn into grafting, when the remedy characteristics could be permanently attached to the fetus, and persists for a large portion of his life. A hypothetical example would be receiving something like Hyoscyamus while pregnant, followed by the child having an inclination to remove his clothes in the first years of his life because Hyoscyamus has certain exhibitionist tendencies in its picture.

On the other hand, if the mother has a certain clear state that definitely needs treatment, there is a strong chance that she will give this state to the baby, and it may be a good idea to treat them both at the same time and for the price of one, but very carefully, and only when the remedy is very clearly indicated.


Q. Can you treat cancer with Homeopathy?

A. Yes and no. First of all, it is politically very incorrect to advise patients with cancer to forgo conventional therapies in favor of alternative medicine. I have medical licenses in two states and would like to keep them. This is one of the reasons you will not catch me advising you to get rid of your oncologist. The other reason is that I have not researched the multitude of available alternative cancer treatments enough to know which works better for which cancer. If you need information on this topic try this site: http://www.cancerdecisions.com. They seem to be well informed. As far as specifically Homeopathy for cancer, my answer must remain vague. Homeopathic literature is full of anecdotal reports of cancer cures. This means that a number of homeopathic doctors and lay homeopaths have claimed they cured certain patients of their cancers. There is no way to check the claims. Some of my teachers told me of cases they cured, but again, I personally have not seen any hard data. There are no studies that I am aware of to prove that Homeopathy is effective against cancer. I have not cured any cases of cancer personally, as all the patients with cancer I have had received conventional therapy, which means that if they were cured, I can't attribute it to Homeopathy, and if they succumbed to the disease, then Homeopathy obviously did not succeed in curing them, but the failure of Homeopathy could be due in part to poor prescription on my part, or to interference of the conventional treatments with Homeopathy.

What follows is my personal opinion, unsupported by any properly conducted studies. I feel that Homeopathy can in theory cure some cancers. For it to succeed we must have a perfect prescription and a very clean case that is not too advanced. That means that if the patient wants to be cured by Homeopathy the remedy must be right on and the patient must forgo most other treatment approaches as they may interfere with the remedy. Very few patients would be willing to agree to this. I, on the other hand, will never push anybody to refuse conventional therapy for the reasons above. On the other hand, in my practice Homeopathy has proven itself quite useful in alleviating side effects of chemotherapy and radiation, as well as improving the patient's overall state of health which is definitely very helpful in fighting any disease. Therefore, Homeopathy can be used as a helpful adjunct to other therapies.

And then, here is a letter I got from a homeopathic vet:

As a veterinarian practicing homeopathy for ten years, a large number of the animals I see come to me with a diagnosis of cancer. I am constantly surprised at how well they respond to homeopathy. Even in cases where I would have thought there was very little hope their vital force will respond to a carefully selected remedy. A case that comes to mind from my practice early in my career, is of a cat with lung cancer that was 4 pounds and was having fluid drained from it's chest every 3 weeks. The owner's conventional veterinarian finally refused to treat it anymore, saying it was too weak to take the stress of treatment... As the cat lay there a bundle of bones , in severe respiratory distress, I strongly encouraged the owner to euthanize the cat. She insisted that we treat him, saying she wanted to try anything that would help her loved one. Reluctantly I agreed. Much to my surprise and delight, the cat responded quickly and bounced back totally. He never needed his chest drained again, he gained all his weight back and did so well, that the owner even questioned the original diagnosis. I assured her, unfortunately. that the cancer was still there, but the homeopathy was able to maximize the functioning of the body and would slow down the growth of the tumor, but eventually the cat would succumb. The cat had 6 months more of completely symptom free, quality life. This situation has repeated itself over and over again. I would say that generally we get up to 3 years more of virtually pain free quality life for most animals. In generally, the less surgery, chemo and radiation the animals have received the better the response to homeopathy.


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Just stumbled across this:

Karen Nieber, a professor of pharmacology at University of Leipzig , merely wanted to prove that homeopathy doesn't work. She argued that with potencies higher than X 23 not a single molecule of the original tincture could possibly be present, mathematically speaking, and that no pharmacological effect would be possible.

In the search for an experimental setup in which any possible placebo effect can be ruled out, she had a brilliant idea: she put a rat's intestine in a fluid culture medium and used organic threads to fix it to a sensor so that she could measure any shortening of the intestine caused by cramps. Then she added a stimulant (atropine) to the fluid culture medium to produce severe cramps in the rat's intestine. The intestine shrank and the scales showed a strong traction.

When she then added belladonna X 90 to the culture medium, the intestine relaxed and the scales showed less traction. This proved that homeopathy is effective in the absence of any material substances - and in 2003 she won the € 10,000 Hans Heinrich Reckeweg award.


Padawan Learner
Science of Homeopathy by George Vithoulkas

I found that this book was a very good introduction to Homeopathy. It explains things in terms that are understandable. Just thought I would add that for anyone who wanted a book on the subject.


The Living Force
I read a book some time ago by an Indian homeopathic doctor called Rajan Sankaran called "Homeopathy for Today's World: Discovering Your Animal, Mineral or Plant Nature". It was an interesting read though one may not agree with all that is said in it. I referred to this book in the splitting thread. Here are some excerpts.

As a side note homeopathy is still one of the main therapeutic modalities in India where many people rely completely on it for health care. Sankaran has emerged over the years as a physician who has excelled as a healer as well as playing a pioneering role improving the methodology of case taking. Most of his books are for homeopaths - this one has been written for people without much background in homeopathy.

He starts off in his introduction with stress being a major cause of disease.

[quote author=Sankaran]
We are familiar with the ideas that stress comes from incidents like your father having beaten you when you were twelve, from constantly arguing with your wife, from concern that you don’t have enough money, and so on. But while these may be the situations in which you feel stressed, your unique experience of stress arises from something much deeper, which is also expressed in areas of your life that are not considered stressful. It actually underlies your entire experience of life.

In my work as a homeopathic doctor I definitely need to know as much as I can about the inner process of each individual who comes to me for treatment. This has certainly been a strong motivation for my work, but I’ve been equally interested in discovering what lies at the core of my own self. In my practice I repeatedly see people go deeper into the experience of their stress, their disease, their joy, their grief, and each time a characteristic pattern, unique to each person, is revealed. Such a pattern exists in me, in you, in everyone. If you increase your awareness of this pattern, you will experience less stress and more peace.

You can experience the truth of these ideas through a simple process of inquiry. This is not a process of analyzing or classifying, but a process in which you go deeper within and observe your experience in the moment. The depth and totality of this experience is the truth. We go deeper by asking the what of something and not the why of something. When we ask ourselves why something is this way or that, we come up with reasons that may seem like the truth but can always be debated. On the other hand, when we go deeper and deeper asking, “What is?” we uncover the true inner experience where there is no room for interpreting, theorizing, or analyzing. It is a process of pure observation.

The essence of this work lies in the concept that our behavior and feelings stem from something much deeper in our beings. This basic, inexplicable experience, unique to each one of us, is neither emotional nor intellectual; it is a sensation felt in the body and mind simultaneously, one that is constant, one that colors our whole experience of life. This sensation is our constant companion, the “other song” that keeps singing within us. And this song resonates with something in nature, be it an animal, plant, or mineral.

The ideas in the book have had a considerable impact on the homeopathic practice. They are not theories, but observations from daily practice and life confirmed by colleagues all over the world. All case studies in this book have been successfully treated with homeopathy and helped by the interview process. However, the concepts are universal and can be applied in any field of human involvement.

Regarding this other This "other song" idea, the C's had said that "as third density bioengineered beings, you lead the smorgasbord parade of that which surrounds you in the physical realm. "

Sankaran's view of health

[quote author=Sankaran]

Good health allows us to be in the moment and to react appropriately and proportionately to the situations we face. If the situation calls for achievement, we achieve. If it demands that we remain passive, so be it. Neither achievement nor passivity is a condition of good health. Health signifies freedom, spontaneity, and being in the present, so that the spirit within is free to fulfill the requirements of the situation.

Disease is what leads to a false perception of reality. In Sankaran's scheme of things, disease is due to the "non-human song" within the human organism being out of balance with the rational "human song". He does not mention psychopathy but it is logical to think that psychopaths have a dominant reptilian non-human song with little "human" in them. On the other hand, neurotic symptoms often arise when the non-human part is suppressed too much through a rigid externally imposed set of rules. The above is my own musing though.

In homeopathy, the disease is treated through remedies derived from natural sources - minerals, plants and animals.

[quote author=Sankaran]

I started looking at remedies not merely for a collection of symptoms but as embodying the spirit of something in nature, and therefore a part of a system. I realized that the symptoms of a particular remedy that are in the homeopathic materia medica are not just accidents or random effects but represent the source itself. To cite an example: A cuttlefish (Sepia spp.) in its natural environment defends itself from a predator by secreting a dark inky fluid, then hiding behind it to escape by swimming backward. When sepia (the remedy from the cuttlefish) was tested on a healthy person, he had a dream in which he was escaping by running backward. The subject probably knew nothing of what he was taking, and yet it seems as if the animal expressed itself through his dream.

The homeopathic materia medica is the human expression of the source. The remedies from various sources heal humans who have similar states within them. These states, which we call disease, must also be, like the remedies, from one of the three kingdoms. Exploring this led me to the next level of perception—which is sensation—in which I saw that a human being’s deepest issue is a very specific state that is not even human! It is something nonhuman. What is abnormal is to be human and yet have a part within that is a plant, animal, or mineral and be confined within that perception.

It then became my mission to identify ways of discovering the particular state that dominates each person. Consequently I refined my case-taking to reach this level of sensation. For example, a particular patient is asked, in relation to some situation he faces, “So how does that feel?” He replies, “It feels like a captive in a cell.” At that point I ask that one question—in this case, “What is the experience of being a captive?”—that requires going deeper, one more step closer to the sensation. To many readers this question may perhaps sound weird or ridiculous. You must think that it really does not require rocket science to figure out how a captive feels in a cell, but it is amazing to hear how each experience is different from another. For example, for one it could be an experience of, “I am stuck and I can’t move.” This is a sensation expressing sensitivity, so he would require a plant remedy. For another the experience may be like being under some other powerful being, as in being victimized by someone. This is a victim-aggressor issue that would require an animal remedy. And for yet others it could be a sense of incapacity: “I lack a sense of capability of getting out on my own.” What he is saying is that he lacks the structure that is needed. This person would require a mineral remedy.

The above is a simplification. In general terms, the animal kingdom is characterized by the theme of competition, dominance and comparison, the plant kingdom is characterized by the theme of sensitivity and reactivity, and the mineral kingdom is characterized by ability, formation and loss of structure. This also is a simplification and on a practical level, it requires a lot of rigor to correctly identify such kingdoms from a case taking perspective. The kingdoms are divided into sub-kingdoms. Reptiles, birds, spiders etc form animal subkingdoms. Similar classifications exist for the plant kingdom. Mineral classification is done through its position in the periodic table.

[quote author=Sankaran]

I began to see how deeper examination of a delusion reveals an inner sensation that is not human specific. Consequently, my case-taking proceeded in this way: Patients normally began with the “name” or diagnosis of their problem. Then they furnished more details as “facts” of their symptoms, such as what seemed to aggravate or ameliorate their complaint, what kind of pain they experienced locally, and so on. Then they described how their illness made them “feel.” They spoke of emotions such as anger, irritation, and so on. At this point I focused the questions by asking, “How does that feel?” Each one described his own “delusion,” and an experience in this delusion is the person’s “sensation.” And when describing this sensation the person’s use of his hands indicated when he had arrived at the level of “energy.” As I focused on the movement of hands in this process, a different language emerged from within, the voice of something in nature; the whole other song (from a nonhuman kingdom) unfolded itself beautifully.

Sankaran proposes 7 levels of experience.
Level 1 - Name
Level 2 - Facts
Level 3 - Feeling
Level 4 - Delusion or Imagination
Level 5 - Sensation
Level 6 - Energy
Level 7 - Highest level
He illustrates them with an example

[quote author=Sankaran]
This concept of the levels can also be applied to our day-to-day activities, interactions, thought processes, and perceptions. For example, when looking at an object such as a mountain:
One person would want to know the name (Level 1); for example, Mount Everest. Another would want to know facts (Level 2); for example, the mountain’s height. In another person the mountain would evoke emotions (Level 3), such as happiness or joy. Such a person would not be too interested in facts about the mountain. In some, the mountain could stimulate a vivid imagination of flying, or visions of heaven. This is the level of delusion/imagination (Level 4). However, in some persons the experience of the mountain goes far deeper even than imagination. They might experience bodily sensations on looking at the mountain, such as lightness or floating. This is the level of sensation (Level 5). In a very small number, the experience of seeing the mountain goes even deeper than feeling sensations. Here the person feels the energy (Level 6) of the mountain within him and reverberates with it. At this level it is as if the person perceiving the mountain, and the mountain being perceived, are one. A person experiencing at this deep level might simply jump up and down, so basic is the experience.

The fifth and sixth levels are typical of an infant or very small child responding to any external situation. He does not bother to name, feel, or imagine; he just experiences the energy of the moment and flows with it.

Sankaran is known in the homeopathic world for the introduction of the concept of "vital sensation".

[quote author=Sankaran]
As a medical practitioner I have patients coming to me with different illnesses. Their symptoms, their chief complaint, may be primarily in the physical or mental sphere. Whatever their chief complaint, their core sensation will always be clearly and most vividly expressed in these, their main symptoms. The way the patient describes the chief complaint, often physical, is an exact description of the deepest sensation that he experiences all over—in general and in his mind state—from the core of his being. When I explore the mind state of a patient, I find the same sensation expressed there as in the physical symptoms, and vice versa. In this way this core sensation is confirmed at both mental and physical levels. What is much more significant here is that this sensation is a general symptom rather than a local (mental or physical) one. Because the sensation is felt or experienced at both levels, the level of sensation is deeper than that of delusion. This sensation that links the mind and body must exist prior to its appearance in both these localities. It is central, or vital. Hence the term vital sensation.

In health, the sensations come from being in the moment. In an unhealthy state, at the very core of everything that the person does, feels, and experiences is an abnormal energy pattern and an abnormal fixed sensation, and these are found at every point in his life. He is unable to experience anything beyond the abnormal sensation that has become innate to his organism. This abnormal sensation is his vital sensation. If his vital sensation is along the axis of caught and released, news of an unexpected tragedy will trigger the sensation of being caught, and he will experience a pleasant piece of music as a release. Love will be experienced as a release, and the loss of that affection as being caught. Failure is experienced as being caught, and an achievement is experienced as release. This vital sensation and abnormal energy pattern will restrain him from experiencing things in the moment.

It appears that the vital sensation is not specific to human beings but shared with other substances and beings on this earth. Whereas energy is universal, sensation is terrestrial. For example, a person’s experiences may be confined to the vital sensation of pressure, and in nature we see certain elements, such as metals and precious stones, being subject to pressure. Plants and animals, too, can be sensitive to pressure. When a person is in good health he may experience pressure as a result of changes in his physical or emotional environment, but this sensation lasts only as long as there is change, and with a different situation another appropriate sensation arises. But in the case of disease, the pressure sensation that is experienced is similar to the pressure experienced by a mineral, plant, or animal, rather than the transient and appropriate experience of pressure as occurs in a healthy human being. The level of sensation, therefore, connects us to all things on the earth, and at this level the understanding of a human being becomes connected to botany, zoology, chemistry, metallurgy, geology, physics, and various natural sciences.

The idea of sensation is not entirely new to me. At one stage I wanted to experiment with the effects of music on listeners. I played a melody (an Indian raga) to an audience and asked them to make note of the effects of the music on their physical and mental levels. I repeated this process with the same melody on five continents, and some listeners noted emotions, others described vivid pictures, still others experienced sensations, while a few simply described patterns. I understand now that for those who experienced sensations, the music had an effect going beyond the mind or the body; it affected their very inner being, their nerves, and this effect was far more intense than a response on the emotional level.
These abstractions that are inspired by the music are beyond body and mind, beyond emotions, beyond even specifically human experiences and situations. It is as if the music, through the sense of hearing, touches and activates the very core sensations. This made me conclude that music need not always be an emotional experience, but like all other experiences, can be a “vital” one.

The level that is deeper to both mind and body, and therefore common to both, I call the “vital level.” I used to think that the center of the mental (emotional/delusional) state was the deepest point that we could reach, but I realized that the vital (sensation) level is a step deeper than the mental state. For example, when a person describes his emotions or thought processes as jealous or suspicious, we can ask him to describe how he feels when experiencing suspicion. He may answer that when he feels suspicion his inner experience is that of being attacked. In this way a delusional situation is perceived behind the emotion.

Having identified the deeper level of delusion from which the feeling of suspicion arises, it is possible to then go further and ask him how he feels when he experiences that attack. We then go a level deeper still, to the intersection or cross point where the mind and body meet. Here he may have the feeling that something is breaking, burning, or twisting. This is the common point between body and mind (the vital sensation); at this level he will describe his mental and physical phenomena in the same terms. This is a very deep level and if we reach this point, there is a much deeper awareness.

We need to see what it is in the local or emotional symptoms of the person that goes beyond the local or the emotional and is an expression of his whole being. We try to discover what it is in a particular local symptom or expression that surpasses the local and becomes global. That is to say, what is it that transcends that situation and applies to the person as a whole and over time? That is the common part of every aspect of the person—local and general, physical and mental, past and present.

I realized that delusion is not only mental but can exist in the physical sphere, too. In fact, I could see that the mental state is merely one expression of the vital sensation. Once I realized this and started looking for this common sensation or vital symptom in the physical sphere, I saw that this sensation is apparent right from the outset. Every level of perception and experience within the person resonates with this same underlying vital sensation. It is being expressed consistently and continuously throughout the person’s whole being. It is expressed most vividly, and therefore is most easily accessed, in the person’s chief complaint. Each person can identify the symptom pattern, or chief complaint, that troubles him or her the most. This chief complaint is a manifestation of the inner energy disturbance, the inner dissonance, of that person. In effect, the chief complaint is where the other song, the other energy pattern, is singing the loudest and so can be most clearly heard and identified.

The book has some detailed case analyses illustrating these concepts in practical terms. This method has gained popularity among homeopaths in different parts of the world and apparently it produces results. While I could not agree with all that is said, overall I thought it brought up some interesting points.


The Living Force

Something to keep in mind is that the presence of this "other song" belonging to the plant, mineral or animal kingdom is part and parcel of being human and does not constitute a disease state. This non-human part is an inheritance that humans share with 1D and 2D beings. Sickness or disease in Sankaran's scheme arises when there is a fixation in some part of this non-human part and results in a lack of freedom on the part of the individual to choose his response appropriately in accordance with the demands of the situation. When such a fixation arises, then it is as if one uses a lens of a particular color to view the world. In times of crisis, an "animal kingdom lens" would make one view the situation with a deeper sense of a personified external threat affecting survival; a "mineral kingdom lens" would arouse a sense of something lacking (inadequacy) in the fundamental structure of our being ; a "plant kingdom lens" would manifest a sense of great reactivity.

Basic qualities of the plant song

Sankaran goes into a basic description of the plant kingdom which is characterized by a great sensitivity to the environment. He sites the work of Peter Tomkins and Christopher Bird in "The Secret Life of Plants" which has been discussed in the forum before. Plants seem to have the ability to read and react to the intention of humans approaching them before any physical contact has taken place. Plants can also show sensitivity to the condition of a person who cares for them even when such a person is away from them.

[quote author=Sankaran]
These features are also descriptive of a person whose other song (or nonhuman song) is similar to the energy of a plant. He is of a sensitive nature. He is influenced by many things and is continuously adjusting and adapting to them. Emotionally he gets affected very easily, and he is expressive of his state, through both speech and gesture. His hands often move in all directions as he expresses himself.

Frequent expressions he uses are: “I am affected by this,” “I am sensitive to this,” “This hurts me,” “I can’t bear it,” “This touches me.” These expressions show him to be a sensitive and emotional person. His feelings are most important to him, and he has a constant fear of being hurt or offended, or of hurting or offending others. Because he fluctuates so much, he can have abrupt mood changes. The professions he tends to choose are ones that encourage an expression of his deep sensitivity. For instance, he may be a nurse, doctor, or artist. These are only some examples to indicate his type of preference.

There are more specific characteristics to be found in the sub-kingdoms of the plant family. The Cactaceae (cactus) family shows a characteristic of expanding in the presence of water and a similar expanding and contracting sensation is seen in the sensation sphere of some humans affecting both physical and emotional complaints. The yam family (Dioscoreaceae) shows a twisting, turning, stretching pattern which is mirrored in the affectations of patients who find a cure for their complaints from a remedy derived from the same source.

Basic qualities of the animal song

Different animals in nature show different characteristics but in general terms, survival, attracting attention for reasons of procreation, sense of hierarchy and competition are some common factors.

[quote author=Sankaran]
A person whose other song is from the animal world will be sensitive to issues that relate to his own attractiveness, his ability to compete successfully, and the corresponding risk of being victimized if he is perceived as weak. It is interesting to observe that he experiences his physical complaints deeply in these same three areas. He feels that illness either makes him less attractive, less powerful, and less able to compete or that it may result in his being persecuted by others. He feels dominated or almost ruled by his own illness and thus feels victimized.

His personality holds two strongly conflicting traits, which he constantly experiences within himself. On the one hand his victim-aggressor other song causes him to experience and express a nonhuman degree of jealousy, competition, deceit, aggressiveness, and maliciousness. This he expresses fiercely whenever he feels threatened. On the other hand there is a part of him that is particularly and vividly filled with humanity, warmth, caring, playfulness, loyalty, and communication. He suffers as he strives to live and integrate these two warring themes, or sets of impulses, within himself. This inner battle can go to such an extent that the human part within him develops a deep sense of contempt for the nonhuman part (that is, that part of him that is singing the animal song).

This split in his personality is clearly expressed in his statements, such as: “Humans are so cruel,” “I feel split,” “I jump at them,” and “I am not good.” Such statements are indicative of the way he perceives himself. The split is expressed externally as a conflict between self and other, but this external battling is only an expression of the deep split within the self. This split runs through his whole being. He begins to hate himself. It often becomes: “I versus myself,” “I am disgusted with myself,” or “I hate myself.”

His deep need to be attractive has a lot to do with sexuality. Again, the fundamental issue is survival, not just of self but of the group. This issue is fundamental to the whole animal kingdom, and therefore issues of sexual attraction are strong in people whose other song is borrowed from that kingdom.


The snakes within the reptile sub-kingdom have a tendency to hide and strike unexpectedly springing a surprise on the prey. The dual life led by people with serious pathologies - the archetypal "Dr Jekyll- Mr Hyde" syndrome possibly corresponds to such an energy pattern. Some humans resonating with the spider family energy would use traps, tricks and cheating as predominant strategies. Mollusc family sensation patterns tends to contract and pull in into a shell in response to what is perceived as a threat to survival. Bird family sensations can include being trapped and having the wings clipped with the opposite sensation being that of expansion and freedom.

Hand gestures can sometimes bring out the animal nature. As one example, Sankaran sites a case study of a man who used a smashing down type hand gesture and when asked about it mentioned the smash in the game of badminton as well as how cheetahs used it to down preys.

Basic qualities of the mineral song

Minerals or inorganic elements have a predictable structure and organization.

[quote author=Sankaran]
In persons whose other song is derived from the mineral kingdom, the issues of capacity, strength, resistance, stability, solidity, and so on, which are the innate features of minerals, are reflected in human elements such as capability, toughness, performance, and security. The core issue for these people is how much they are developed in their own selves or how to maintain the stability of their structure, be it their health, relationships, family, finances, talents, power, or position in the organization.

We find these features of structure and organization in persons whose other song coincides with the energy of a mineral. The first impression one gets on seeing such a person is that he is very well organized. Even the clothes he wears are characteristic: symmetrical patterns, stripes, checks, or plain. His speech is planned, giving a sense of exactness and precision. His hands tend to be either folded across his chest or resting comfortably without much movement. His voice and tone are quite flat without many fluctuations in the pitch. He presents his story or complaints (at a doctor’s clinic) in a very systematic manner, often beginning with the previous session and then speaking of subsequent events almost chronologically: “I came to you last on . . . for the first six days, the pain in my . . .” I have observed that very often such a patient notes his symptoms in carefully written points and describes each symptom completely (in as much detail as he thinks necessary) before going on to the next symptom.

He perceives, and therefore describes, things in an ordered manner. For instance, once treatment starts, he describes his progress at follow-ups in terms of percentages: “I am 25 percent better.” His handwriting is usually well structured, straight (not rounded), and angled. He speaks precisely and to the point. All these characteristics are due to a certain attitude of the mind and a structured thought process. Consequently, such an individual chooses professions that demand these qualities. He becomes an engineer, accountant, computer consultant, or business manager. He can be a high performer and makes a mark in his chosen field in a steady, stable, and reliable manner. Whatever the chosen role, whether as a parent looking after children and home or manager of a large corporation, these same characteristics of order and efficiency will be apparent. He gives prime importance to structure in all spheres of his life: family, relationships, and profession. His performance in all areas relates to this inner sense of structure, or lack of it. He is concerned about the security (of structure—relationship) that he has and that he can provide.

His main issues are deficiency in, or loss of, structure. A perceived threat to, or failure in structure of any kind could precipitate the problem. For example, a fragile or broken relationship, loss of a job, financial losses, or any failure in performance. He talks of “My home—family—relationship . . . my work efficiency . . . my bank balance . . . my health.” These are the important areas in his life and all his stresses are experienced in these spheres.

His fears, too, are centered on these areas of sensitivity. He is anxious about being unable to perform well and therefore failing in his work. He fears that the relationships he has built up so carefully, and upon which he relies, may break. The thought of losing the possessions or status he has acquired (in response to his inner needs) is a constant worry to him.

All his efforts are channeled toward the building and maintenance of structure. In order to do this he has to be strong, systematic, and calculating. This, in brief, describes his nature. He is not easily changed, being very consistent in his nature and reactions. His reactions are uniform, hardly varying in different situations.

His dreams reflect his fears and mainly revolve around his performance at work, threats to his health, sudden financial losses, relationships falling apart, and domestic losses, such as fights within the family or his house burning down. As these are very definite and fixed areas, his dreams tend to be repetitive.

A person whose other song is from the mineral kingdom talks about his symptoms in terms of structure at the deepest level. He will use words that apply to minerals, such as pressure, density, solid, light, heavy, cold, build, form, dissolve, empty, and so on. In effect, this deep inner sense of structure is his sensation.


FOTCM Member
I thought I'd revive this thread as I've been studying homeopathy for a little over a year now and I think it has the potential to be a real game changer. One thing that draws me to it, as is mentioned above in some of the previous posts, is the fact that the person themselves is actually doing all the healing. The remedies work via hormesis, stimulating the vital force (healing force) with a negative stimulus which the body pushes back against with a healing response. By matching the symptoms as closely as possible to a remedy, the correctly chosen remedy will stimulate the vital force to push its healing response against those exact symptoms, thereby healing the original illness. To me, this seems like the only reliable way to get complete, natural healing, from the inside out.

And because the remedies consist only of information (no physical substance), we give a remedy in a potency slightly stronger than the illness, stimulating the vital force to push a stronger healing reaction, healing both the negative effect of the remedy (which is temporary) and the existing symptoms, without the worry of side effects or damage (as long as they're used correctly). When someone starts taking a remedy and is feeling better, it's not the action of the remedy that's making them heal, it's the body's own healing power reacting to the stimulus of the remedy. I find this truly amazing!

Another thing that really impresses me about homeopathy is that it works on all levels of the organism - physical, mental and emotional (some say spiritual also, but I think that's kind of difficult to define). The remedy symptoms have been catalogued so carefully on all levels that we can, in turn, match the complete picture of the symptoms on all levels. A gloomy and foreboding person prone to skin rashes and asthma, has a fear of being alone, and is paranoid about people plotting against him? There's a remedy for that (possibly Arsenicum album) and, properly administered, it will heal all these symptoms and more.

The one disadvantage is that it is a very complicated system. A novice using it for acute ailments, like headaches, could be simple enough (although there are around a thousand remedies that address headaches, all of them for a particular type of headache which may have minute differences that need to be matched), but finding a remedy capable of healing the whole person requires a fairly deep knowledge of the system. An acute headache may be cured rather easily, but what about chronic returning headaches that always come after breakfast and last until the sun goes down? All this to say, using homeopathy for acute illness (injuries, skin ailments, colds and flus, acute infections) could be done with a little research, but deep, constitutional level healing would need to be done with a trained homeopath.

And that's the other issue. Because the system has been around for around 200 years, there have been a lot of off-shoots and different styles of using the system. There are a lot of different practitioners out there calling themselves homeopaths who aren't, strictly speaking, practicing homeopathy (this isn't a judgement on the effectiveness of what they're practicing, mind you). I think the important thing to keep in mind is that classical homeopathy is a science based on sound principles that have remained mostly unchanged over the course of homeopathy's history. Innovations are often shortcuts, added frills, or speculative methods that aren't based on long-tested practices.

If you were to look for a homeopath to work with, I'd try to make sure they're classically trained in Hahnemann's methods (preferably one who uses the methods of Hahnemann's final 6th edition Organon, but that's a whole other issue I won't get into here). These practitioners only ever give one remedy at a time and generally do a long intake session (1 hour at least) asking a number of questions on physical, mental and emotional symptoms (some of the questions can seem quite bizarre, but they're all important).

I hope this inspires some people to look more into this healing system. Like I said, I find it absolutely fascinating and am really enjoying learning about it!


Jedi Council Member
And because the remedies consist only of information (no physical substance)
I've read that people have even cured themselves, when they didn't have a particular remedy on hand, but just by writing the name of the remedy on a piece of paper, which they would then put underneath a glass of water. The water then became the cure!

the person themselves is actually doing all the healing.
Given the chance, our bodies are made to heal themselves.

The one disadvantage is that it is a very complicated system.
Definitely! But it's to find a cure, not just to suppress a symptom.
I find it absolutely fascinating and am really enjoying learning about it!
So do I. I first started reading about it when my dog was bitten by a snake. It was too late for her, but I have learned a lot since then.


Hello to all of you
A few remarks on homeopathy
I'm not a doctor but an artist/craftsman, so I'm completely off the subject.
But I worked with a homeopathic doctor for a few years.
With him, I learned homeopathy, that is to say, helping the person to find his axis, physical, emotional, mental, whatever you want....
Learning all this has been for me a complete opening to the subtle and concrete meaning of life.
The first thing to do, for me, is to read the life and the book " L'Organon " by Samuel Hahnemann.
The second is to study with a homeopath.

I stay one hour at my homeopath's house
He gives me a remedy to take all at once because it is a "globule dose", as a basic treatment.
For minor ailments, I now know myself quite well at this level and I then take a homeopathic remedy in a granular dose, in CH dilution.
Last week I noticed the first symptoms of the flu
Because of this damn virus, I phoned my doctor directly.
He tested, measured and gave me a K-dilution remedy.
The next evening I had no more symptoms.

The person who wants to learn homeopathy has a long way to go to get to know all its subtleties and it is exciting.
For the doctor I learned from, I studied and did research for him, especially on plants and it is a prodigious field.
A very simple example: for a person who suffers from migraine, there are several plants.....
A plant that lives in clay soil will be for one person and a plant that lives in rocky soil will be for another person who suffers from the same thing.
And this is just a small detail....
Studying (correctly) homeopathy = entering another universe.

Tenderness for everyone

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
Top Bottom