Dear friends, today we have with us in our Hot-Seat – Dr. Surmeet Singh Mavi – one of the leading proponents of Predictive Homeopathy. A well known homeopath from Jalandhar, Punjab, INDIA, he has dedicated his life for Promoting Hahnemannian Homeopathy by teaching doctors and students in the way shown by Dr. Hahnemann. He met Dr. Prafull Vijayakar in 1998 and joined his school of Predictive Homeopathy. Since then he is teaching Homeopathy as per Dr. Prafull Vijayakar’s ideology.
MB: Dr. Mavi, welcome to the Hpathy Hot Seat! You are the first individual from the school of Predictive Homeopathy in our hot-seat and I look forward to an interesting discussion about Predictive Homeopathy with you.
Tell us something about your early days in homeopathy. What made you a homeopath and what kind of education did you receive as a homeopathic student?
SM: I joined Homeopathic Medical College, Chandigarh in 1976 and remained attached with Dr. J.B.D Castro till 1982. Initially I was not interested in Homeopathy, but my elder sister was a disciple of Dr. Castro and she forced me to join Homeopathy. This system of medicine was not having much reputation at that time. I was somewhat disappointed by the decision of my family. But after I regularly attended Dr. Castro’s clinic, I was influenced by the amazing results brought out by the small sweet pills.
MB: You apprenticed with the renowned Dr. JBD Castro for a long time. What was his approach to homeopathy and how did his proximity affect your homeopathic views and career?
SM: He is a strong classical Homeopath in Northern India, basically following Kent’s method. He has always criticized the use of patents or mixtures, even mother tincture or bio-chemic prescription, by homeopaths. He is a true follower of Dr. Hahnemann. He has a good command over Organon of Medicine and Kent’s repertory.
MB: I know personally that once you met Dr. Vijayakar, your homeopathic life made a huge shift. How did this meeting come about? And what were your initial observations and thoughts about Dr. Vijayakar and his work?
SM: Actually everything happens in one’s life by certain incident. In 1995, I came across a seminar’s brochure, which was being organized in Khanna, Punjab. At the end, there was a line in the brochure, “Stalls of patents and mixtures not allowed at seminar venue“. Only this line created my keen interest in the speaker and organizers and I decided to join the seminar. I had gone to Chandigarh a day before the seminar to meet my sister and next day something happened due to which I failed to attend the seminar. At the time, there was too much echo about Dr. Sehagal’s new mind prescribing theory and as it was my habit to go through every new idea, I decided to understand this new concept. My college friend Dr. Mann from Sangrur, Punjab is a propagator of Sehgal’s school. So I decided to organize his classes in Jalandhar. After two or three classes, a follower of Dr. Vijayakar from Khanna got excited to introduce Dr. Vijayakar’s philosophy to my group (This was very big, at that time also). I arranged his class in Jalandhar. He delivered a lecture on “Theory of Suppression”. I was very impressed by this new discovery which was matching with the Law of Dissimilar, mentioned by Dr. Hahnemann in the Organon of Medicine. Even after attending many classes or seminars of so called rediscovery of Homeopathy by Dr. Sehagal, I was not able to agree with their hypothetical thoughts, as it did not have any place in the Organon of Medicine in totality. They follow only single aphorism 211. After going through all their volumes, I left this idea forever, as Organon was my first faith, and then came anything new. Frankly, I was not satisfied! But after going through Dr. Vijayakar’s book on the theory of suppression, I decided to go to Mumbai to join his seminar which was held in April 1998 along with Dr. Sankaran. You asked me my initial observation about Dr. Vijayakar – after reading a few pages of his book, I was surprised that this man had the guts to accept his mistakes in writing publicly. Most of our homeopaths are big boasters reciting their exploits. I saw truth in his ideas, which were scientific, logical and having no contradiction with Hahnemann’s thought as mentioned in the Organon of Medicine.
MB: You mentioned that the line “Stalls of patents and mixtures not allowed at seminar venue” caught your attention. Were you against their use even before your introduction to Predictive Homeopathy? What was your clinical practice like at that time?
SM: Yes. I have already mentioned that I was attached with Dr. Castro, a known classical homeopath from Chandigarh. My practice was Kentian in style. I joined Pan-African Homeopathic Medical College, Imo State Nigeria in 1983 and there too, I was teaching and practicing Right Homeopathy.
MB: So you first read the book Theory of Suppression and then attended his seminar sometime in 1998. When did your first personal meeting with Dr. Vijayakar take place? Do you remember what you talked about then?
SM: I met Dr.Vijayakar for the first time in 1998. I visited his clinic and requested permission to sit with him but he refused, saying that one doctor was already sitting with him and he has no place for me. Then I sat in his reception room for two hours. Somebody informed him that Sardarji is still sitting outside. He came out and then permitted me to sit with him. I stayed in Mumbai for 7 days at that time.
MB: You mentioned that the seminar you attended in 1988 was also of Dr. Sankaran. What made you choose Dr. Vijayakar’s approach over Dr. Sankaran’s? What are your views about Dr. Sankaran’s work?
SM: Dr. Sankaran presented a case. He took approximately one hour. When he finished the video, he provocatively asked Dr. Vijayakar what remedy he would suggest as per his theory of genetic similimum. Dr. Vijayakar immediately stood up and gave a slip to Dr. Rajan Sankaran. Sankaran read the slip and looked at Vijayakar with a smile and told the audience to give Dr. Vijayakar a big hand. He recommended Theridion from the gestures and physiognomy of the patient, the very same remedy that cured the patient. But the incident gave a negative impression about Dr. Sankaran in my mind. His attitude was to let Dr.Vijayakar down in front of the audience, if he failed to find the right remedy. On the other hand Dr. Vijayakar’s act made me his follower forever, as Organon itself advocated the importance of observation and listening carefully to the patient. Hahnemann advised that the physician should be a keen observer.
MB: You were already trained under a good classical homeopath. Apart from the theory of suppression, what else did you find different in Dr. Vijayakar’s work?
SM: Dr. Vijayakar made a bridge between Homeopathy and allopathy. He emphasized the importance of Genetics related with aphorism 1st, 5th and those aphorisms related with Miasm. He gave importance to physiology and pathology to understand the miasm at the cellular level. Through embryology, he explained Herring’s Law of cure.
MB: How did these early encounters affected your clinical approach? Were the results easy to come by with this new-found understanding, or did it take a lot of time to master the new knowledge?
SM: His teachings helped me and my students to bring so many wonderful cures in advanced pathologies, which we never expected previously.
MB: Can you share with us some early cases which made you a strong proponent of Predictive Homeopathy?
SM: One lady patient came to me on Dr. Vijayakar’s recommendation. She was suffering from blindness with hydrocephalus. As Dr. Vijayakar taught me to understand the constitution, I prescribed her Carcinosin. Within 6 months of the treatment, her eyesight returned and she restarted her English tuition. Today she does not have any pathology. This patient was present in the press conference at New Delhi during Vigyan Bhavan Seminar with Dr. Prafull Vijayakar. Now there are many cases where I got wonderful results after understanding Dr. Vijayakar’s way of practice.
MB: From Predictive Homeopathy, you branched out with ‘Right Homeopathy’. What is ‘Right Homeopathy’? What made you create this new movement? Were you dissatisfied by any aspect of Predictive Homeopathy? What is the aim of ‘Right Homeopathy’?
SM: No, no. Movement of right homeopathy is a process to establish Dr. Hahnemann’s Science, i.e. true or classical or right Homeopathy by following Dr. Vijayakar’s way of understanding Dr. Hahnemann’s thoughts i.e., ‘Predictive homeopathy’. I am using this name “Right Homeopathy” only to convey a message to budding homeopaths that there is also a ‘wrong’ homeopathy. Right Homoeopathy or predictive homeopathy are just synonyms for Dr. Hahnemann’s homeopathy, as mentioned in the Organon in Medicine.
MB: You are today one of the leading teachers of the Predictive Homeopathy school. What is your mission as a teacher and how do you find a balance between extensive traveling for seminars and clinical practice?
SM: My aim is to train large number of youngsters and establishing them as true Hahnemanian practitioners, to create awareness in the general public press, government and judiciary about wrong homeopathy. I will do my best to create an adverse situation against all those elements within homeopathy that directly or indirectly are responsible for distorting Dr. Hahnemann’s teachings. My wife Dr. Ravtej Inderjit Kaur, daughter of a known classical homeopath of Patiala, the late Dr. Jagjit Singh Dhindsa, is also a qualified homeopath. She has made me free from all my family responsibilities and also I have many assistant doctors, who help me professionally. Due to them, I am able to devote my time to propagating Predictive Homeopathy.
MB: Thank you Dr. Mavi for these insights into your life and Predictive Homeopathy. There is much more to discuss about Predictive Homeopathy and I hope to catch up with you and Dr. Vijayakar in the near future for a deeper discussion into the development, philosophy, approach and future of Predictive Homeopathy.
Thanks Dr.Manish Bhatia for publishing good article at your hpathy.com from time to time and interview with the stalwarts of Homoeopathy, who has originally contributed to the science of Homoeopathy in one way or another.
But am astonished to see the above interview of Dr.Mavi at your site and wants to know the original contribution of this person to the profession except doing Chimchagiri to one family,breaking the Predictive group apart and at the same time rebuking and insulting nearly every senior Homoeopath of Punjab through SMS ,mails and even on telephone. To be a good Homoeopath one should be a good humane being too.
Every time any previous member of Predictive team visited northern India to share their experiences with students and Doctors this person who is sitting in the HOT SEAT never forgets to humiliate and sends derogatory SMS and mails to threaten concerned persons from his personnel mobile.
I appreciate the work done by Dr.Prafull Vijayakar and his predictive team and would like to see Dr.Prafull Vijayakar in Hot Seat at your valuable website.
Aap phir keechar mein chale gaye?
Dr.Satish Kumar Rana Ji,
You being a senior Homoeopath of Punjab and an elected member to the Council of Homoeopathic System of Medicine,Punjab and an editor of the previous “The Simlitude”…. I appreciate your comments.
Predictive group has contributed a lot to Homoeopathy.Sir ko bee iss keechar sey bachna chahey thaa.
Han! Mujhe Afsos Hai Ve Bacch Nahin Paaye. Kayee Baar Mrig-Trishna Wali Baat Ho Jaati Hai. Baad Mein Pata Chalta Hai Ke Jis Ko Main Paani Samjha Vo Baalu Ret Nikla.
I feel people are after personal benefits, irrespective of their status and position.
We are not in this race. So we should avoid this time and energy wasting discussion.
The interview you did with Sumeet S. Mavi was empty of what is new in the predictive homeopathy which is not already covered in the Organon. And I was surprised that you didn’t ask him to describe his new method ?
You know if a theory can’t be explained to a small child, it is no theory. It means that a person proposing a theory is not clear about his / her theory. When such theorists are pushed to explain it, they will say that it would take a long time to understand it. It is B.S.
Sorry for being so blunt, because I know that you are gifted intreviewer, but I was disappointed with this interview.
Dr. P. Sain, M.D.
Dear Dr. Sain, your criticism is just. The depth and success of an interview depends a lot on the depth and willingness to share of the person being interviewed and the time frame available. I would have loved to have a more in-depth discussion on the philosophy and the theory of predictive homeopathy but circumstances prevented that in this particular interview. I’ll try to cover such issues in a future interview with Vijayakar himself.
request to publish artcles,take interview, publish cases of dr. Vijaykar.
Dear Dr. Manish ji,
Thanks for publishing the interview of Dr. Sumit Singh Mavi, The Vijaykar of North India and a true follower of Dr. Prafful Vijaykar of Mumbai. Really if anybody want to see the results of Homoeopathy, He/She should follow Dr. Vijaykar and his Predictive Homoeopathy Team. We all the Doctors of Homoeopathy from Yamunanagar from Haryana had followed Dr.Vijaykar after the path shown by Dr. Mavi in in 1999 why we all attended a seminar of Dr.Vijaykar at Jallandhar organised by Dr. Mavi. Thanks to Dr. Mavi to show us the right path to do Justice with our Patients as well as to Homoeopathy.
good intterview.I want to knw mor abt predictive homoeopathy..
I had immensely enjoyed your interviews with Dr. Vithoulkas ealier. This time I was pleasantly surprised to see Dr. Mavi in the hot seat. Well, reading Dr. Ranbir Singh Josan’s vitreous comments about Dr. Mavi, it only smacks of some sort of personal vendetta, leaving that apart, the interview has been quite interesting. As Dr. Ravinder Sharma says above Dr Mavi is truly known as Vijaykar of North India. I live and practice in Mohali which is just an extension of Chandigarh. Dr. Mavi being a product of Chandigarh Homeopathic College, has frequently been visiting this region. I have attended quite a few of his lectures here. He is a speaker and a teacher par excellence. I have seen him lecturing mostly in Punjabi at times in Hindi with all the audio visual aids including computerized presentations. He explains the subject citing daily life examples in a very convincing manner. He is, no doubt the greatest and staunch proponent of Predictive Homeopathy in North India. His belief in classical homeopathy emanates from his Guru Dr. J.B.D.Castro who has taught and headed Chandigarh College. We call Dr. Castro a Hahnemann of North India. I had an opportunity to associate with him briefly when he established his own PG Institute of Homeopathic Reaearch and shifted to Punjab in Mohali I had joined Dr. Castro as a faculty member. He is a classical homeopath to the core and a true Kentian.
We would now look forward to an occasion when you are able rope in Dr. Vijaykar to hot seat. Your efforts to interview eminent homeopaths are commendable and always interesting.
Dr. Kuldip Singh
I respectfully appreciate your interview with dr mavi. I aggree that homeopath should use only one medicine covering all mental and physical syptoms. But it is only possible that patient should cooperate with the dr fully to tell all that which the dr wants to know from him to enable him to find correct remedy. But in practice i have found that patients do not have patience to talk for longer hours with the dr. So there is no harm if we combine or alternate medicines because our aim is to restore him to health in shortest possible time. Even hahneman in last days of practice prescribed more then one me4dicine
i would like to know what you are doing in your practice. I would be grateful to you could tell us from dr p banerji what he is doing. After all we have to find more quicker and accurate methods of treatment in the interest to make homeopathy more popular and compete with other pathies. We are living in the modern world and we must know that patient is a busy man and his pain must be relieved immediately
May I please know from which reference you have quoted that Dr. Hahnemann had prescribed more than one medicine in his last days. Please let the whole profession know this.
I am sure there are no short cuts to be a successful homoeopath.
If patient has to provide every thing to the physician then what is the role of a physician to whom Hahnemann has quoted as Keen observer and Unprejudiced observer?
Dear Dr. Rana,
Hahnemann says in Aph.40 that when you have dissimilar diseases occupying different areas of the same body, you need to alternate remedies to address them.
Thus when you are alternating remedies that obviously means you are giving more than one remedy to a patient. Elain Lewis explains it beautifully. She elaborates, if a patient needs Phosphorus for the diabetes and Rhus tox for the arthritis. Giving Phos. will not help his arthritis pain. Both conditions are active. What are you supposed to do? Give just phos.? That will help partially; but, clearly, the patient also needs Rhus tox. You have to alternate remedies. Hahnemann says specifically in Aph. 40 that when you have dissimilar diseases occupying different areas of the same body, you need to alternate remedies to address them.
Dear Dr. Kuldeep Singh,
Your answer you quoted in the context may be right. But here Dr. Shekhar said “combine or alternate medicines because our aim is to restore him to health in shortest possible time”.
So your answer in this very context is irrelevant.
What Elain Lewis explains is also quackery in the eye of Predictive Homoeopathy. The followers of Predictive Homoeopathy are doing miracles with single dose [most of the times] in patients with multiple pathology diseases.
I have many patients simultaneously suffering from Heart disease, Arthritis, Diabetes and Uric acid diathesis [all dissimilar diseases], if I were to select according to the above Elain Lewis, it must at least need four or five homoeopathic medicines. Then where is the individualization of homoeopathy? Where we left single, simple, minimum and similimum and Where we have lost BASED ON CARDINAL PRINCIPLE OF HOMOEOPATHY?
Therefore, I really mean to say is – if we depart from the cardinal principles of homoeopathy we are surely not doing homoeopathy in its real spirits. Hence we are not giving / imparting cure rather we are acting Lions in the skin of Ass.
Has any where Hahnemann advised or claimed to cure any patient by mixing two drugs? My literature failed me to find even one version in this regard. If any body in the world has it written by Hahnemann or any other stalwart like Kent, Boeninghausen, Herring or else, I shall bow on to his feet.
We are quite clever to conceal our follies by twisting the truth but if the cure do not follows Herring’s Law then what is the use of flattery?
Yours for Homoeopathy,
Dr. Satish Kumar Rana
I think people like kuldeep singhji, are still unaware of idea of health disease and cure as explained by Dr. Hahnemman. if they really wants to know they must read the organon in it whole extent, not only few aphorisms for thier sake.
Dr. Satish Kumar Rana,
I missed to take note of word ‘combine’ in Dr.Shekhar’s remark wherein he said, “there is no harm if we combine or alternate medicines”. I only responded to your querry “from which reference you have quoted that Dr. Hahnemann had prescribed more than one medicine in his last days” Dr. Hahnemann did say in Aphorism 40 that when you have dissimilar diseases occupying different areas of the same body, you need to alternate remedies to address them. Alternating does not of course, mean combining remedies. Elain Lewis, citing examples, only illustrated simultaneous existence of dissimilar diseases in a patient. Thus alternating remedies as per Hahnemannian concept enshrined in Organon cannot by any stretch of imagination be reckoned as quackery.
I have to say nothing against Predictive Homeopathy.
dear kuldip singh
very wrong explanation for alternation of remedies and more sadly that of aphorism 40 as a justification of that. i think u need to go through organon of medicine for 40 more time with a good teacher…..
Dr Surmeet singh Mavi interview is very informative,it guides a Homoeopath to choose his own way
I am personally not in favour of assigning additive nomenclature to Homoeopathy.Homoeo is a derivative from the Greek word homoios meaning like or of the same kind. the sbsidiary word is pathos meaning suffering. This means the remedy for the suffering has to be one that produces the same kind of condition which we call symptoms. So single remedy is the rule of law.
The great thinker,philisopher and doctor,our GRAND SIRE Dr.Hahnemann also enjoins upon the law of similars in Organon. Homoeopathic cure entails three participants.The patient, the doctor and the remedy.The ptient has to be expressive,the doctor a keen and thorough observer and the remedy prepared in strict accord with rules of homoeopathy.The doctor’s role is pivotal. The result depends on his selection of a similimum. So giving names as predictive, inductive or conductive is distorting Homoeopathy. Yes, there are
supplementary and compementary remedies. But the constitutional remedy has to be one.It depends on the judiciousness of the homoeopath when to give a supplement or a complement. Our object is cure within the periphery of homoeopathy. Mixopathy has to be avoided. Let’s not make homoeopathy just a mode of living. Let’s make it a mode of life as our stalwarts did.
thank you for sir for their great contribution & dedication for this great science which can be said as a idial healing science.really most of homoeopaths are not following right homoeopathy as hahnemann sir gives us.so it must to propagate “RIGHT HOMOEOPATHY” …………DR. MAYANK VYAS
A very good article, it’s good to see so many homeopaths are realising the importance of the classical approach to homeopathy. Not just in teaching but more importantly in practice.We need to ensure in our students the art of good case taking and the knowledge to empower them to put their trust in that the selected remedy will work.There may be a place for using tissue salts or other associated prescriptions where certain pathologies are present.But for ordinary prescribing practises it is vital to keep within “Hahnemanian Principles”,regardless of whether you choose to follow the classics such as Kent, Allen,Clarke etc. or favour the more modern leaders of our profession
Oh course this is providing the remedy is the most appropriate covering as much of the individual case as possible.
Dr Mavi has spoken his heart, which touches our heart which do beat for Homoeopathy,
Thanks to dr manish for good article.
Dr. Surmeet Singh Mavi a senior Homoeopath of Punjab in India, i wish him in his long life and good health.
Prof Dr Shaikh Shamsur Rahman.
Abu Dhabi, U A E
Hello sir, I hv gone thru the article thoroly. Dr Mavi is no dought a classical homoeo physician from Punjab,but he is not a gud person as for as i know. To be gud homoeopath one shud be a dilligent person as a whole. He is being braught to this field(Pred Hom) by Dr S S Vithal from Khanna(Pb)whose name he never mentioned in his interview. A selfish sly,very haughty personality is Dr Mavi whose personal contribution to this science is almost nil. He himself is a diabetic patient & his wife is a ch.astmaetic. Why he or his guru cudnot cure them? Yes from seminars & lectures he earns a lot. In clinical practice he is ZERO. I hv seen maximum failures by him.
We are astonished how Dr Vijaykar is bearing this black sheep(shit). One day he will realise him.
In future kindly dont give interview of such contovertial personality like Dr Mavi……
it’s really heart broken , it’s really heart broken . dr.MAVI khud bimaar hai.
Sir, I have gone through the words “Even after attending many classes or seminars of so called rediscovery of Homeopathy by Dr. Sehagal, I was not able to agree with their hypothetical thoughts, as it did not have any place in the Organon of Medicine in totality. They follow only single aphorism 211. After going through all their volumes, I left this idea…..”. If you try to cure some your cases my the method of Dr. Sehagal, you definitely might have wondered about the results gained.
sir, Please try the method first. and comment about it next.
Book reading is my hobby. I am studying homeopathy from last 2 year, Kindly guide me best book of predictive homeopathy and Classic Homeopathy book in punjabi or hindi.
Gd eve sir,firstly thanks to share this wonderful interview to us .u r very talented and brilliant homoeopath.I will ever gratitute to god who give me opportunity to practice homoeopathy,i m intern student so now a days i have joined ma internship,after completing my internship i want to join u for doing better .
Quite informative. He has done a lot of work in the field of homeopathy. We also in the same profession. We are running a homeopathy hospital. We treat patient with latest technology. We have well qualified staff. To know more about us, you can visit our website.
Thank you for the great posting! I just wanted to say I think this is a honest post and thank you for sharing your story. You seem like a very gracious person with a big heart and I am excited to be discovering your blog. We are also same in this business and welcome you to visit our website.
Whatevr DR.MAVI did and is doing for the homoeopathy & budding homoeopaths no-one else can do….bcoz of him thousands of students are having a sound knowledge of homoeopathy & now they r having a good result oriented practices…..just bcoz of predictive homoeopathy we ppl got chances to witness hearings lawin our practices & came to know how hard DR.HAHNEMANN had worked for suffering humanity….i appreciate Dr.Manish’s effort to have such an interview with the missionary man…live long right homoeopathy.
It was an informative post . Homeopathic medicine are natural and good. We are also in the same business. We are running homeopathy hospital. we treat patient with latest technology. We have well qualified staff. To know more about us, you can visit our website.