1.- “ Many pathologies are not mentioned in the repertoire”
2.- “ Some parts of the body, such as the prostate, are not in the repertoire”
3.- “ Only 125 remedies come in the repertoire”
From the first two concerns, one can find that they are due to a lack of attention in the reading referring to the case taking and analysis within the Organon. While it is true that we can make a clinical diagnosis within our office, for example, hypertension or diabetes, it is also true that the selection of the remedy should not be based on the name of a disease. Homoeopathic diagnosis has nothing to do with the name of the patient’s nosological diagnosis, but rather with its signs and symptoms.
Detailed reading will lead us to understand that the most important thing is to observe how the disease affects the patient. If we talk about a specific pain, then, the most important thing will be to know where (in what region), what kind of pain, since when, what (causality factors) aggravates it, which improves it, that accompanies it, etc. Individualizing the case according to how the symptoms are observed in the patient is the basis.
The same is true for the prostate when, for example, hypertrophy (enlarges), then causes problems. Here the point will be to know how this affects the patient; What symptoms it produces. It is important to find which symptom the differential can make; and understand that this can come from any collective symptom of the patient, which is even alien to the location of the current condition, but that is similar to the symptomatic totality.
However, something we must remember is that the intention of using the repertoire during our consultation is to GUIDE us towards a remedy very close to the image of the patient’s disease, whose homoeopathic diagnosis will be determined by our final consultation towards pure materia medica. In other words, it is necessary to have in-depth knowledge of MMP in order to properly exercise our profession.
If one achieves reasoning like this and realizes that the repertoire achieves the assembly of a complete picture of a disease from the combination of scattered symptoms, but fully organized in it, then one has already begun to understand the true meaning of the TPB.
With respect to the number of remedies contained in the TPB; 125 remedies appear in the original and for example, some others appear in another Boenninghausen work. I must say that I personally work with about twenty (or more) additional remedies to those listed in the repertoire. I mostly use the remedies available for Bönninghausen in 1864 and a few more proven from 1860 to 1900, with which fast and lasting cures are achieved.
The fact that remedies such as Gelsemium, Phytolacca, Argentum nitricum, and Kali bichromicum do not appear on the TPB is not a failure as such. I am sure that when I have found a peritonsillar abscess with acute pain in the throat radiated to the ears when swallowing saliva pointing towards the symptomatic totality, I have prescribed Phytolacca decandra. Thus, one must understand the “image” of any of these remedies well enough to recognize it when one sees it, as well as other remedies that are not in the book. Knowing our tools is indispensable.
Or as Julian Winston would ask otherwise in his review of The Therapeutic Pocket Book :
“Do we stop using Kent’s repertoire because it doesn’t contain Chocolate, Hydrogen, Germanium, Neon, Bamboo, or Ozone?”
The same question would apply to the Boenninghausen repertoire.
In any case, I would like to comment that in my daily homeopathic medical practice, I find that only about 20-30 standard-use remedies are prescribed frequently, while the remaining others are given sporadically.
There is no reason to become anxious because the repertoire does not contain 1,500 or 2,000 remedies. Once we have investigated the high rates of effectiveness in the cases of Hahnemann and Boenninghausen; We realize that most diseases can be treated with fewer medications, but have been properly tested.
In conclusion; If you have a remedy that has been PROPERLY EXPERIENCED and has been used and verified, and therefore always useful; then it is valid that it is in its additional ones; although in personal opinion, new remedies should not be added arbitrarily to a repertoire, until there is a worldwide consensus of expert scientific homeopaths to establish guidelines for the collection and organization of the characteristic symptoms of provings, verification and the graduation of remedies in an orderly and systematic manner according to the Hahnemann / Boenninghausen criteria.
v. Considering the innumerable surprising cures wrought through Homœopathy, in both acute and chronic diseases, this method of healing would doubtless find many more disciples in the medical world if its practices were not subject to some difficulties far from trifling. It is not only a time-absorbing, but also a troublesome business, to investigate carefully into all the characteristic features and peculiarities, and to gain perfect information concerning the present state of mind of the patient in every individual case of sickness, whether belonging to an epidemic or to the diseases sufficiently designated by name; and then the choice of a suitable remedy, on the principle of similars, according to its pure action, offers again new difficulties, and we are often entangled in such a mass of difficulties that it is not surprising if the less experienced homœopath, not to speak of the beginner in this method of healing, is not able to extricate himself. Without doubt, on this account, and also on account of the unsuitable selection of the remedy which frequently follows therefrom, is to be seen the reason why the latter does not accomplish the desired result. Every beginner will probably at times have seen, what in the case of experienced and observant homœopaths is recurring more and more rarely, that, even with very careful selection and apparent adaptability of the remedies, success does not always come up to the expectations, and at times no action at all or even an aggravation of the patient’s troubles ensues. In such cases we may safely depend upon it, either that the remedy given has been formerly misused in allopathic doses and on that account its symptoms have become habitual and very manifest, or that, on account of the oversight of one or more symptoms of the disease which would contra-indicate the remedy, its choice was a mistake and therefore without effect. In the former case there will be, as a rule, an increase in the patient’s sufferings, in the latter no noticeable
will be observed; in the former case there must then be made an attempt to
destroy the old drug disease by homœopathically selected antidotes, and in the
latter case by a careful examination of the disease image, and by a circumspect
selection of the remedy, the previous mistake should be rectified. It would
betray a great want of logical sequence and would denote a contradiction in
itself if one, from such experiences, were to form conclusions concerning the
unreliability of the homœopathic foundation principle (similia similibus). For
apart from the fact that almost everyone has ultimately had the opportunity to
convince himself of one or the other of the above-named causes, there would still
remain to be explained away the much more frequent cases in which such rapid
and lasting cures are accomplished that they frequently surpass the
expectations even of the physician himself. One would be obliged to set up the
contention that there existed in nature no sound therapeutic principle, a
contention which probably nobody would like to defend.
we would expect that to all physicians, honestly seeking after the truth, every
labour, be it ever so trifling, must be welcome, if it serves to advance this
(as the honorable Hufelandterms it) “solely direct curative
method,” namely, the homœopathic, and assists in the selection of the proper
remedy. The compiler of the following tables has not hesitated therefore to
consent to the many requests of homœopathic physicians, and even the urgent
demand of the worthy founder of this science of cure, to make them known
through the press, after having been kindly revised by Hofrath Hahnemann, and after making some changes
and improvements on the form in which they had already been communicated in
manuscript to the nearest homœopathic friends. Without laying a great value
upon the work, which contains no more than a tabulation of that which is
already known, it is intended to afford an easier comprehensive survey of some
peculiarities of the remedies which have hitherto been proved on healthy
persons, and to facilitate the work of those homœopaths who recognize the great
importance of such a compilation. We need scarcely be
reminded that in several reme-
vii. dies, and especially those only partially and imperfectly proved,
many uncertainties exist, and doubtless mistakes have occurred which only by
further proving can be discovered and corrected. In the meantime only that
could be used which we possessed, for Homœopathy never allows of hypotheses and
suppositions, and never borrows from the realm of opinions, but
understands the art of securing out of the realm of reality the pure truth.
The similarity which must exist between the natural disease
and the pure effects of the homœopathic remedy, in order that the latter may be
able to eradicate the former, must be complete in every respect. It is,
therefore, not sufficient to have found a remedy which is able to excite
similar sufferings to those about which the patient complains, and much less if
this similarity be confined merely to general names (such as headache,
toothache, bowel complaint, cramps and so forth), as some very ignorant persons
indeed are not ashamed to falsely attribute to Homœopathy. If the selected
remedy is to prove reliable and successful, its pure effects must be adapted to
the entire group of symptoms present, the
conception of the totality of the disease symptoms, and, therefore, not
only the sensations and pains, but also the aggravation and amelioration of the
symptoms according to time and circumstances and the mental condition of the
patient must correspond to all these in the remedy with the greatest possible
similarity. Only when the totality of the symptoms has been obtained with
completeness and exactness and when among the proved remedies one is found
which corresponds to the whole in similarity, or at least is in no way
contra-indicated, may we be sure of the desired success, provided that
the remedy has not been already misused in massive doses, and that now only so
much is given, as, according to experience, is sufficient to accomplish the
who are already acquainted with Homœopathy and have seen its wonderful effects
in diseases of the most diverse kind need, in order to appreciate the
preceding, only think of the
of the Küchenschelle (Anemone
pulsatilla) and the Brechnuss (Strychnos
nux vomica), the knowledge of which we must attribute to the immortal founder
of the art. Out of the numerous symptoms of these two excellently proved
polycrests a great number of disease images may be formed, corresponding as
strongly to the one as to the other. Even that which we know as especially
characteristic of both is nowhere so sharply demarcated as to prevent many
symptoms from manifesting quite a similarity or even contradicting each other. If then without reference to the predominating peculiarities
of each remedy a selection is made, it may not infrequently happen that the
improper remedy is chosen, because according to a few fragmentary symptoms it
seems to correspond more nearly to the present case of sickness. The
mistake lies, not in the principle of the homœopathic method nor even in the
manner of selection itself, but in beginning with an insufficient conception of
the totality of the symptoms of the disease and the totality of the symptoms of
the remedy. The Küchenschelle
(Pulsatilla) has not a few symptoms in the morning, in the open air, and
while moving, just as the Krähenaugen (Nuxvom.)
has several in the evening, in the room and during the rest of the body
. If we then confine ourselves, unintentionally, only to these
symptoms, we will find that we have selected an unsuitable remedy and cannot,
therefore, see the hoped-for success. It is
consequently of the utmost importance to become thoroughly acquainted with the
characteristics and peculiarities of every remedy, and especially of the
antipsorics. All of these possess the power to eradicate the sad conseqences of
one and the same miasmatic evil foundation, and have, therefore, for the most
part the same sphere of action, and there is between them a very great
similarity in their effects. Notwithstanding each of them has its own
peculiarities, just as the other medicines have, and never can one be used
instead of another with the same favorable results. In the most surprising
manner was this shown during the present year in the frequent intermittent
fevers, which were for the greatest part apparently of a psoric nature, and could,
therefore, in most cases be permanently and safely cured only by antipsoric
the antipsorics known up to the present time were then used, according to the
similarity of their symptoms, without the possibility of giving a preference to
one over the other, and, when a proper selection was made, especially based
upon the symptoms occurring during the apyrexia, their great curative power
demonstrated itself not only by the rapid disappearance of the fever and other
symptoms of the disease, but also by the fact that every patient was cured, and
of all those homœopathically cured not a single one suffered a relapse, a
condition which most generally prevailed after the allopathic use of Peruvian
Of course to obtain a complete characteristic picture of the
remedies, with the elimination of every uncertainty and half truth among the
pure effects of the same, when it is often so very difficult to distinguish the
primary effects from the after effects, can only be the result of united efforts
and mutual communications, and, without a separate homœopathic hospital under
the protection of the state, in which nothing but true facts may be gleaned and
confirmed, the science can only progress slowly. But
until the time that the young science, which is even now rendering such great
results, will see its most fervent wishes fulfilled, its disciples must not sit
idle, but everyone is under obligation to contribute according to his abilities
to its upbuilding, so that suffering humanity may become a partaker so much the
sooner of the blessings of those discoveries which have already proven curative
in manifold ways, and which promise immensely more.
following three tables contain a comparative survey of the action of all
remedies, up to this time, proved with a certain degree
perfection on healthy persons, according to the time of day, the position and
circumstances and according to the conditions of mind excited by them. In
all three the order of their rank is denoted by the first five letters of the
alphabet, so that the letter a designates the most decided,
predominating and manifest action, having nothing contradicting it; the letter cindicates that the remedy has an equal
action with reversed time or circumstances, and the letter ethe last or most subordinate place. The letters b
and ddenote the intermediate state, so that b
approaches to the highest rank and dto the lowest. When no letter is given, it signifies that nothing has been
found in the pure effects pertaining to that modality. This arrangement of the
different degrees of value appeared to the author the most serviceable and
comprehensive, and the number of the same entirely sufficient to denote the
compilation of the first table, which
contains the aggravation or amelioration of the suflerings according to
the time of day, gave us the most trouble, because the divisions of the day
are not capable of being sharply defined and because there is a want of
expressions in the general usage of language to define the various terms and
limits. Especially is this the case in regard to the morning and the evening,
whose limits are not uncommonly extended unreasonably, and then frequently a
part of the night as well as fore- and afternoon is included in them. Without
doubt, therefore, this table will consequently have to undergo the greatest
number of improvements and corrections.
second table, which contains the
action of the medicines in exciting (and
aggravating) or ameliorating (and
removing) their symptoms according to
circumstances, could in the most of instances easily he arranged according
to sure and clearly defined data. It was found soon after its compilation, that
here, as well as in the first table, not every symptom without distinction
could he taken into consideration, but that a selection had to be made among
them, with the omission of that part of them which would have given incorrect
results. The main rule for this selection was deduced from what the honorable
founder of Homceopathy teaches in that connection in the prefaces to Kriihenaugen (Nux vomica), Ki2chensclzelle
(Pulsatitla), Zaunrebe (Byronia), and Wurzelsumach
(Rh us), compared with the symptoms of the remedies which con-
For this reason only the symptoms of the head, eyes, teeth, respiration and
chest, limbs, and the general sufferings, night sufferings and fevers, were
taken into account in the first two tables, and the other regions were only
considered when, either on account of the small number or on account of a want of
clearness, doubts remained. It is still necessary to note that under the word
“Touch,” the heading of the second column of Table II., are also included scratching, rubbing, pressing, etc , and that
the modality “Agg.” expressesboth
the excitement [initiation] of a symptom and an aggravation, and by “Amel.” a ceasing as well as amelioration of the
sufferings is meant. The rest of these two tables needs no further explanation.
the third table, which contains a
comprehensive view of the various states
of mind produced by the remedies, the first five letters of the alphabet
have the same meaning as in the two preceding tables. In the rubrics the author
has endeavored to observe the most suitable psychological order so as to
facilitate comparison thereby as much as possible.
giving the names of the medicines in alphabetical order the systematic
tabulation of Dr. Rückert, which probably no homœopath is without, is followed,
excepting that the acids are always classified immediately according to their
bases, both to denote their close relationship in therapeutic respects and
because the finding of the former seemed thereby to be facilitated.
view of the use of these tables, it is scarcely necessary to remark that they
are in nowise intended to introduce a generalizing method into homœopathic
treatment. According to the almost unanimous contention of the most
distinguished medical authors and practitioners much mischief has been wrought
in allopathy just in this way, and consequently Homœopathy would have cause
enough to avoid it even if its entire system did not already consist in the
strongest individualization. Therefore, if we wish to proceed conscientiously
these tables should only be consulted after the case of sickness has been
carefully examined, and has been compared with the competing remedies, and then
as it were to solve some still remaining difficulties, or as a test for the
correctness of the choice made. The tables can in nowise
the most suitable remedy, but they will assist in the choice of the same and
prevent the likelihood of an unsuitable remedy being selected.
diligent study of the pure effects of the remedies must ever remain the
principal thing, but, as the beginner especially needs a “guiding string,” we
hope he will not seek it altogether in vain in these tables. One may especially
find in them, the author hopes, an
aid in becoming more familiar with
those medicines which vie with each other for
preference in given cases, and especially the antipsorics, and to
group them according to the
similarity of their effects. …
with the same intense desire after perfection that is everywhere so plainly
seen in all disciples of the homœopathic healing art, it is as much to be
expected as to be hoped for that the
present effort may be closely
examined in its details, be purified of unavoidable mistakes and errors, and thereby acquire the reliability which the
subject itself deserves.
August: We can accommodate your choice of days in August as is the major holiday month in Seville. Normally we are time framed in Thursday to Sunday, however in
August we can have any selection of 4 days. Let us know what days suit you and we will check our calendar.
One of the reasons you have not heard from us for a while is that we have been busy with sorting out our teaching courses.
Seville Spain Seminars with the IHM.
Conducted in English, with Spanish translation if required, we have set aside Thursday to Sunday inclusive every week for a 4 day training Seminar. We offer to medical and non medical practitioners, a stimulating intensive background to Hahnemanns requirements for homoeopathy using the Therapeutic Pocket book to analyse cases quickly adhering to all the protocols to ensure an accurate prescription. The course is arranged so that the learning is incremental from the historical nature of the therapy viewed through many cases, to understanding the correct viewpoint regarding Miasms, potencies, Using the Therapeutic Pocket book and working with LM or Q medicines.
We offer a huge discount on the SYNOPSIS software to students.
The IHM will offer membership of the Register to suitable course attendees subject to approval by the officers of the IHM.
4 days intensive training at our Seville North Clinic.
All refreshments and meals during the day attendance.
Free Book version of the Repertory.
Input from officers of the IHM and Materia Medica discussions with Vera Resnick.
We prefer a minimum of 2 students per seminar.
The cost per student:
Solo student. €1000.
2 Students, €900 each.
3 Students €850 each
4 to 6 €800 each.
7 or more €700 each.
A €120 non returnable deposit will be asked via PAYPAL, and the balance paid in cash at the Seminar.
Our teaching room will hold 10 comfortably, with A/C and heating. Coffee, Tea, soft drinks and snacks available at all times, with our restaurant next door for meals and Spanish Tapas.
Flights from Europe direct to Seville are cheap. International flights go to Madrid, where a direct Madrid-Seville train operates.
We can advise regarding hotels and transport. One hotel is door to door bus service, and the other is a 10 minute walk from the clinic.
Seville is a beautiful city with much to see. Some students arrange a family holiday and come for the seminar and then spend time exploring and visiting other cities in the region.
Contact us at: email@example.com
4 years ago, P & W implemented a polarities feature into the Therapeutic Pocket book for trialing and testing. The results of our findings led us to conclude that the inclusion of the polarities model was detrimental to a homoeopathic prescription.
In the entire writings and case examples of Boenninghausen, NO WHERE do we see the numerical value of a rubric used as an arbiter for prescription.
The grading of the symptom rubric defines the occurrence or reliability or clinical observation of its usefulness for consideration, NOT its intensity or absoluteness in a symptoms presence.
A value of 1 or a value of 4, does not negate a choice of a lesser “value” symptom if the Materia Medica indicates that the remedy with the smaller numerical value is the most similar.
In short, a medical proving of a substance either shows the production of a symptom or it does not. An absence of a symptom is NOT included in a repertorization analysis, and should have no bearing on the choice of medication. Neither should a “lesser value” be taken into consideration as the combination of rubric choices should lead to a study of indicated remedies in the Materia Medica for sole selection of a similar.
The inclusion of the Polarities table, in our researched conclusion, is detrimental to the homoeopathic prescription. It is flawed from the beginning by making the Therapeutic Pocket the instrument of remedy choice rather than using the book as defined by Boenninghausen as a guide to the Materia Medica.
We would encourage every physician to concentrate on accurate case taking and learn to use the T.P.B. as intended for accurate, precise and repeatable good prescribing.
Below is a research trial documented, which concludes that the use of the polarities is efficaceous. We would point you to a single telling insertion in the study, which we believe is the weakness of the whole premise:
The study, being a rigorous clinical test of homeopathy, also unmasked weaknesses of the method. Due to a low percentage of initially correct prescriptions the suspicion arose, that parents do not report symptoms precisely. Analysis of 100 unsuccessful prescriptions in children who finally improved with another homeopathic remedy, enabled identification of misleading symptoms. Frequently these were sensations and mind symptoms, while modalities (especially aggravations) and polar symptoms usually proved to be reliable information for repertorisation. The exclusion of unreliable symptoms led to an improvement of results,but also often resulted in oligosymptomatic cases, i.e., cases with only few usable symptoms. This problem was resolved by an experimental reintroduction of (pathognomonic) perception symptoms into repertorisation, which again improved our positive treatment results significantly.
The prescribers in this single paragraph, indicate a telling lack of knowledge of how to use the T.P.B. There is a singular and collective mixing of unrelated symptoms based on a lack of correct application to the case. The whole reason for initial case failure is contained therein. This is not a criticism of individuals, just a scientific observation of their own findings.
I recently received my copy of P&W’s book version of the Therapeutic Pocketbook. And I must admit, it was love at first sight, and second, and third…
I must own up to being old fashioned. However much computers may have helped us in referencing many books, in finding correct rubrics, in the process of repertorization – it has reduced us to a bunch of small-screen addicts with heavy-duty tunnel vision.
One of the central flaws of science, replicated in the use of a computerized repertory, is that we determine what we’re looking for, and we look for it. Peripheral vision becomes irrelevant. Apart from synonyms, which can sometimes be useful, either what we’re looking for is there – or it isn’t. Anything interesting that may be lurking in the background becomes effectively invisible. Our gaze is honed in to what we’re looking for, what we find, and then to a search for alternative expressions of what we’re looking for.
I invite you now, if you will, to put down the mouse (or take your finger off the touch pad) and pick up the nearest book (no, no, a Kindle absolutely does not count). Flip through the pages without even looking for anything. Do you notice some ideas as you do so, some words that just jump out at you? If you’re doing this with a homoeopathic text, or something that interests you, you may even find yourselves noticing things you want to go back to, look at in more depth. It’s true – this can happen on the computer, but it’s a much easier process when you know what you’re looking for is sitting in your hand within the pages of the book you’re holding, and is not something you’re going to have to hunt through your browsing history to get at.
Tunnel vision is considered a problem because we are hard-wired to give importance to peripheral vision, although as a race we seem hell-bent on destroying any abilities we have in that area. We are programmed to notice something that is moving which should be still, something that has a different colour, a different shape, and our brains process a tremendous amount of information beyond that which lies in our direct focus.
The new P&W book allows us to do both. On the one hand, the book is quite large in terms of page size and lettering, and all sections are very clearly presented. When I’m looking for something specific, it’s very easy to find it. On the other hand – as I leaf through the Cough section looking for sweetish expectoration, I cannot help but notice all the other forms of expectoration appearing on the page. As I take a broader look at the page, I cannot help but notice how frequently Phos and Puls seem to stand out in their four point bold capitals, and notice the incidence of other remedies in these rubrics too. Looking at the page on Leucorrhea, I find myself wondering why I’m seeing much less of the Sepia I expect, and more of Mercury and other remedies to think about.
The point I’m trying to make is that while you can turn every computerized repertory search into a learning experience if you choose to do so, a hard copy book search will bring things to your attention just by looking through the book’s pages.
Another plus of the book is that it brings the Concordances section into focus and allows for clearer study and use of that section in repertorisation and case management.
The editors have kept their intervention to a minimum, and thus I know what I hold in my hands is faithful to Boenninghausen’s 1846 Therapeutic Pocketbook. To quote from the editor’s introduction:
“…We translated from the original German of the published first edition and had use of the handwritten printer’s edition in Boenninghausen’s own hand. We translated each rubric to bring it into modern English but retained the original meaning of each word and sentence…” P&W’s Synopsis program also has the original German edition, so it is possible to check back to the original rubrics as desired…”
Since I wrote most of the above, my software was knocked out by my antivirus gone rogue. Until I worked out the problem, which ultimately was easy to resolve, I was dependent on the book – and extremely relieved that I had it at hand. I think that for those of us who work constantly with computer software, having a hard copy which offers a faithful non-electricity non-computer dependent version is crucial for those days when nothing is working properly.
Now you tell me, which of the following is more interesting:
“Sepia is suited to tall, slim women with narrow pelvis and lax fibers and muscles; such a woman is not well built as a woman… the remedy seems to abolish the ability to feel natural love, to be affectionate… she may even be estranged and turned aside from those she loves. This is on the border land of insanity… (Kent’s lectures)”
Sepia is suited to all men and women who exhibit symptoms pertaining to that remedy, to be determined first with reference to the proving and subsequently to other materia medicas. (VR et al, 2015)
The P&W TPB is primarily an English language facsimili of the original 1846 edition of the aid to Materia medica as designed by Boenninghausen.
Vladimir Polony and Gary Weaver translated the German text into English utilising Medical Dictionaries of the time period. Vladimir, although fluent in German, also was ably helped by NATIVE German speaking colleagues to define language nuances and changes in meaning of words over a 200 year gap. Once the old German was translated into new German, but retaining the meaning of the original intention, we were then able to translate into English. Continue reading →
“If it’s so easy, why isn’t everyone working this way?”
I was asked this question at a seminar I gave several years ago. This is a question that frequently puzzles us at the IHM. Because it is easy.
True, a lot of hard work is needed to get expertise, and then to improve expertise. To read, re-read, and analyze materia medica. To read and discuss cases. To comb the Organon and Hahnemann’s other writings for better understanding of the underpinning of homoeopathy – essential for prescription and case-management; for case-taking clues; for accurate work with remedies.
It’s not always easy to get rid of our preconceptions regarding remedies, to learn to be able to prescribe Pulsatilla on prescribing symptoms whether the patient is a sumo wrestler or a petite, sweet blonde. It’s not always easy to focus on absolute, presenting symptoms when our learned “knowledge” is giving us all kinds of useless hints regarding constitutionals, core delusions, sensations and similar.
Jewish tradition records a story of someone who came to a venerable Rabbi and asked him to explain the entire teachings of the law while standing on one leg.
Well here’s homoeopathy on one leg. Take your case. Take only what has changed and is presenting for prescribing, against the backdrop of the patient’s life and habits. Only use symptoms you could swear to in a court of law. Use symptoms which show the individual expression of illness in your patient. Look for a remedy that can produce similar symptoms in the healthy, and thus create a similar, slightly stronger, artificial state in your patient. Find the core of that information in the proving. Prescribe.
Still standing here…
The thing is, once you drop the theories, the speculations, once you move away from trying to be clever and insightful, you start looking at what is in front of you. You work with the information the patient gives you about his state of illness (morbid state) – not with your speculations about his personality, or information about whether he’s always loved chicken, or whether he played with Barbie dolls as a child. You work with what you can know about remedies – information contained in the provings. You work with some information gleaned from poisoning and clinical work. Some of this information was chosen by Hahnemann for inclusion in his provings. This information should only be taken from the most reliable practitioners (in case you didn’t get it, at the IHM we focus mainly on Hahnemann and Boenninghausen’s work). You put it together and prescribe.
Aphorism 3, my friends. And as the learned Rabbi is reputed to have said, now go and learn the rest…