Homeopathy and beyond

[karen]

Can you give an example of both of them? the 'homeopathic' remedy and the 'polar opposite' remedy?

And how do they differ practically?

Thank you

 

Sure. I apologize in advance, though.. I can't give a short answer that would make any sense . First I have to define some terms. The two principles involved relate to the two types of diseases and the polaric nature of the life force.

 

The homeopathic principle is used to treat "pathic" diseases. ("Disease" here is not the allopathic disease labels, but a particular energetic entity that causes an impingement on the life force). Homeo=similar; pathic=suffering (symptoms), so homeopathy means matching the symptoms of the disease to the symptom picture that the remedy produces in healthy people.

 

But the majority of diseases that modern people present with are qualitatively different, and a different principle needs to be applied. Let me define what tonic and pathic diseases are.

 

Tonic diseases are primary diseases that have no prior cause except a spiritual one. They are constant in nature - they show up the same every time, like measles or chicken pox, or a concussion, a poisoning, an emotional shock, or infectious diseases like tuberculosis, just to name a few. There may be some variability in how it manifests in each person, but relatively little. In each case, you know the cause of the disease, so you can treat it directly with the remedy that has a resonance with that disease (law of similars).

 

Dr. Hahnemann called this the "direct approach," also "homotonic" prescribing for the tonic disease. That's the principle used when you use Arnica for a contusion. You know the cause, you know the diagnosis immediately, and there is a direct resonant relationship between the disease and the remedy, so you use that remedy.

 

Pathic disease, on the other hand, is more variable, and you don't always know the cause, so treating with homeopathy is the "indirect method." Variable diseases manifest differently at different times or in different people, and have no fixed nature, so the treatment has to be individualized based on matching the symptom picture to a remedy - homeopathy.

 

Pathic disease is secondary, generated by a tonic disease as if the tonic disease gave birth to offspring. (The life force is "generative," after all!)

 

For example, a child who has measles can be treated with the remedy for the tonic disease of measles, but then they might still not be well, because another disease might have arisen out of the tonic disease and become independent of it. This secondary, pathic disease might be different in each child - one child might be feverish and restless; another might be lethargic and chilly, for example. We have to use the individual symptom picture according to the homeopathic principle, to find the remedy for the pathic disease.

 

But generally once you treat properly for the primary, tonic disease, it's like you removed a pregnant parent, and the offspring (pathic disease) don't get a chance to develop. So in many cases a practitioner doesn't need to use pathic prescribing very often, only tonic prescribing.

 

Now, if you were treating for the disease of a contusion (injury to tissue), that's a tonic disease, and the remedy for that disease is Arnica. You know the cause, so you can treat tonically - you don't have to do a whole homeopathic workup on all the minute details of the symptoms.

 

BUT - if a practitioner recognizes a pathic disease is there, or if the cause is impossible to know and they just saw the symptoms but didn't know it was an injury, they would treat pathically. They would gather information about the symptoms, like homeopaths do, and match the whole symptom picture to a remedy that has a similar picture. That might end up being Arnica, or another remedy that matches the specific symptoms.

 

So you see, homeopathy is treating pathic disease only. Pathic disease accounts for a very small percentage of diseases we have. Homeopathy works, for pathic disease, but is the wrong principle for treating the majority of conditions which involve many tonic diseases.

 

There is a whole other side to disease and treatment, beyond homeopathy, and once Dr. Hahnemann discovered that, and the Heilkunst researchers in recent years discovered the missing elements that previous translations of his work had missed, this complete system of medicine began to take shape.

 

In practice, any remedy can be used either pathically or tonically, depending on the nature of the disease being treated. So the practitioner has to be grounded in a true system of diagnosis, because the diagnosis tells us what principle of treatment needs to be applied. (And there are often many diseases involved in each chronic condition). It becomes very complex! But the genius of Heilkunst is that it has a key to understanding the complexity without getting mired in complication.

 

There's a lot more that could be said about the principles, and I'm in the habit of writing long essays, but I'll stop here . Hope that answered the question!

 

Also, i think Masuru Emoto's research on the imprinting of water ties in somewhat nicely with "homeopathy", yes?

 

Yes, a carrier substance like water can be "imprinted" with the remedy which is not material substance but information. The Hahnemann Center for Heilkunst is also finding that even a physical carrier isn't really necessary to deliver the remedy. But we're so much living in physical reality, and beliefs about that can limit us in certain ways, so we often do use physical carriers for the remedies - water, lactose powder, rice paper, etc.

 

-Karen