Regarding the second question: During the history-taking there will always be a story. Nevertheless, we don’t prescribe on the basis of previous circumstances, but rather on the individual’s specific stress RESPONSE (in other words, the specific signs and symptoms of their “mistuned vital force”). In other words, the story sets the “stage”, and the person is the character who uniquely responds to the circumstances on the stage.

The person may talk about the importance of their family, their faith, their community, their love for others, their desire for world peace, etc., but none of these characteristics are necessarily limiting. There are times, of course, when one or more of these characteristics comprise part of the stress response (fear for one’s family breaking apart, anxiety that people of another religion will overtake their own, etc.), but unless there’s a specific stress related to these “positive” qualities, we can consider them secondarily (rather than primarily).

More specifically, we want to discern in the midst of the story (and the person’s intellectual interpretations or judgments about the story) what really needs to be cured–in other words, how are they experiencing distress and limitation, as opposed to being able to “pursue the higher purposes of their existence”? We want to understand HOW and WHAT they’re FEELING and EXPERIENCING, not to ask them WHY they’re having those feelings. Gradually, as we work to be unbiased observers, the limiting physical, mental and emotional symptoms of the mistuned vital force make themselves known, and we’re able to “connect the dots”, with the help of our knowledge of remedies. It is truly amazing how specifically the remedies can match up with the various dilemmas of our earthly sojourn!

“…..Finally, it’s helpful to “separate” all the qualities which are limiting (fears, anxieties, etc.) from those which are not (sympathetic, compassionate, concerned about family, etc.). By first focussing on the total gestalt of limiting beliefs…..” HOW TO DO THAT IN PRACTICE TO BRING TOGETHER ALL GESTALT OF LIMITING BELIEFS? COULD YOU BRING A LIVING EXAMPLE?
THANKS IN ADVANCE, DEAR DAVID

Thank you for the feedback, and I’m glad the article has been helpful to you. I would add that, in my opinion, these remedies do not define us at our core, but rather represent stress response states resulting from the challenges of life. So while any of us can transiently experience various remedy states as a result of life’s challenges, the remedies themselves are helpful when we don’t fully recover after a stress, and our “stuck” survival response becomes a state of “dis-ease”.

Best regards,
Dave J.

I’m sorry for the delay in replying.

Yes, hyoscyamus is definitely useful for acute ptsd, IF the person experiences an extreme sense of abandonment or betrayal of trust, and also experiences conflicts related to intimacy and others’ attention towards them.

The conflicts related to intimacy and “being seen” could be demonstrated through either 1) overt provocative behavior designed to attract immediate attention (at least then one is not ignored!), or 2) possibly an exaggerated sense of embarrassment or shame when one is “observed” too closely.

In either case, true intimacy creates a sense of vulnerability and distress, even if that intimacy is what the person truly seeks. In turn, they can either “act out”, “retreat”, or both.

Although there are many similarities between hyoscyamus and stramonium, in my experience, hyoscyamus has a stronger emphasis on the threat related to intimacy–’my sense of trust and emotional safety has been deeply violated, and in this moment I must protect myself against emotional vulnerability’.

The emphasis in stramonium is more related to immediate physical threat and danger. In other words, the stramonium nervous system is in a reactive state with the feeling: ‘I’m surrounded by wolves, and in this very moment I must instinctively run or fight’.

i found this article very helpful in understanding myself

thank you so much