Creating a new theory is not like destroying an old barn and erecting a skyscraper in its place It is rather like climbing a mountain, gaining new and wider views, discovering unexpected connections between our starting points and its rich environment. But the point from which we started out still exists and can be seen, although it appears smaller and forms a tiny part of our broad view gained by the mastery of the obstacles on our adventurous way up.
– Albert Einstein
The question that bothers me is, are there any differences between old classical homoeopathy and modern classical homoeopathy?
Any new discovery in a true science doesn’t completely abolish an old known theory but rather improvises the old, enhancing it in the light of the new polished one. I believe that new is the further extension of the old one. Take for example the laws of physics. When new laws are derived in physics the old ones are not discarded. They still hold equally true. The fact is that the new laws nurture in the light of the old physics laws. This is true for all the universal sciences and so also is true for our homoeopathic science.
The new theories and new methods, discovered in homoeopathy do not throw away the age old theories and methods introduced by our masters. New understanding which rests upon the basic laws of homoeopathy does not negate the old theories but rather enhances it further.
The question that comes to my mind is, what should be the basis of any new discovery in homoeopathy?
We know the three pivotal laws on which homoeopathy rests:
- Law of Similars
Any new scientific discovery in homoeopathy must be based on these 3 laws. These three laws are the pillars on which the entire system of Homoeopathy is based, whether it is understanding the human core, whether it is searching the similimum, whether it is case witnessing, whether it is posology, studying materia medica, repertory or proving, follow up criteria, healing awareness.
Dr. Hahnemann bases the essence of individualization on obtaining the PQRS symptoms; we understand that these PQRS symptoms can be at the local level, general level, and holistic level. The PQRS symptoms at the physical particulars, physical generals, mental general level, as well as the subconscious level i.e. holistic level, all together make up the individualistic holistic expression.
Individualization and holism is the key to everything in homoeopathy. And applying this to the law of Similars, we see that the Similimum is the one where the individualistic holistic expression of the patient matches with the individualistic holistic expression of the remedy.
- In constructing the core of a human being, the Aim of Case Witnessing Process (CWP) should be to bring out Individualistic expression at the holistic level.
- Searching the remedy should be based on individualistic expression at the holistic level.
- Study Materia Medica / Repertory / Proving and understanding the substance should be based on individualistic expression at the holistic level.
- Follow-up Criteria should be based on individualistic expression at the holistic level.
- Healing Awareness should be based on individualistic expression at the holistic level.
Individualization (PQRS) at holistic level is the perennial truth on which Homoeopathy is grounded and this is the level where both OLD CLASSICAL AS WELL AS MODERN CLASSICAL HOMOEOPATHS ARE CONNECTED.
Now the next question is, how should the case witnessing technique be done?
I knew that case witnessing technique should be designed in such a way that it is based on the three basic principles of Homoeopathy. It should be a confluence of individualization, holism, and the law of Similars. Ultimately the entire aim of the case witnessing process should be such that it brings out the individualistic expression at the holistic level.
Be it a follower of any system or any school of Homoeopathy, he or she should be able to apply the case witnessing technique in his clinical practice. Hence it should be ageless, timeless, beyond personality. It should be integrative; hence it would go beyond the confines of any system approach or personality approach. Case witnessing should be systematic, scientific, something that is reproducible by all homoeopaths belonging to different schools of homoeopathic knowledge.
The aim of the CWP should also be that it is simple and easily reproducible, which means that, one should be able to standardize the entire process and apply it with every patient. The entire case witnessing process must be simple yet scientific, every step that goes further in the journey into the human core can be taken scientifically, the questions asked should not be according to the whims and fancies of the physician but rather put forth logically and systematically.
The entire journey of the case witnessing should be human-centric, which means it should be “according to the patient”. The whole process will be scientific and standardized, but in order that the whole journey is smooth and spontaneous, it will be designed according to each individual patient, so that the basic framework remains the same, but yet the process will be individualistic differing from patient to patient.
Hence, the case witnessing process is aimed only at understanding the unique individualistic pattern of the patient. It has to be a scientifically designed, individualistic, human-centric approach.
When the case witnessing process is designed in such a way, the patient experiences a mirror image of his inner being right in front of himself, and this itself acts like a similimum for the patient. So our aim is to develop a CWP which is diagnostic as well as therapeutic to the patient. Also during this journey the physician’s subconscious vibrates along with the patient’s core, and has a healing effect on the healer too!!
Now, why do I use the term “case witnessing” rather than “case receiving” or “case taking” or “case examination”? The answer lies in the meaning of the verb “to witness”. A witness is a close observer, one who gives firsthand account of something seen. In relation to the legal system, a witness is the one who does not add to or subtract any details from what he has seen. A witness just observes and provides information, as it is. Every case that comes to us requires one hundred percent witnessing in order to understand the patient as he is. If we can witness our cases, only then will we refrain from superimposing the colours of our fixed knowledge and ideas on the real holistic understanding of our patients. That is the reason I feel it is important to use the case witnessing process with our patients and not just the case taking process! With the above aims in mind, the next question was how should I design the case witnessing process to fulfil the above aims?
As I was continuing my search subconsciously and consciously towards designing the case witnessing process, I knew that this process had to be a universal phenomenon, so I started observing other universal phenomenon in nature and I came to the conclusion that, be it meditation, be it love making, be it hunting by the bushman tribe in Kalahari desert, or be it the Ashtang yoga (divided into Bahirang yoga, Pratyahara, and Antarang Yoga) all universal phenomenon happen in 3 steps.
The centre is only three step inwards.
Go inwards to the centre
Like an arrow
The three step model of case witnessing process is divided into:
- The Passive Case Witnessing process
- The Active Case Witnessing process
- The Active-Active Case Witnessing process
This notion of the foundation of Three Steps in everything we do, became a strong belief of mine as I saw it reflected in almost everything. It pertained not only to learning how to drive a car but to learning anything, for instance in children learning how to speak a language. Initially, they just babble, this is followed by making efforts towards speaking a few words, then one fine day effortlessly the whole language flows. This is how the whole journey of the case witnessing process goes, it starts from scientific effort and then becomes intuitively effortless.
In the Passive Case Witnessing process we put in scientific effort, and the journey becomes intuitively effortless in the Active-Active case witnessing process. The entire process of case witnessing travels from a divergent approach to a convergent approach.
We understand the meaning of a divergent approach: “It is when you need to explore and find new things, you use divergent approaches. This is a process of looking for options, new ideas and so on. Some people prefer diverging, as it means the potential of a wrong decision is never reached. Also in this approach we are being open: An important first step of divergent thinking is to be open. As a cognitive state, it involves temporarily suspending judgment and deliberately opening yourself up to new thoughts and ideas.” “Convergence is the opposite of divergence. When you are thinking convergently, you are seeking a conclusion, an answer, and closure on the topic in question.”