Homeopath Vatsala Sperling interviews Dr. Dinesh Chauhan

Homeopath Vatsala Sperling interviews Dr. Dinesh Chauhan, about his “Scientifically intuitive case witnessing process: A journey of three steps”.

Dr. Dinesh Chauhan practices Classical homoeopathy in Mumbai, India. He heads the non-profit ABJF foundation with his wife Dr. Urvi Chauhan where Indian Homoeopaths are taught for free. Over a decade of research he developed his unique approach called the “Scientifically intuitive case witnessing process: A journey of three steps”. In this interview, homeopath Vatsala Sperling explores this approach with him.

 Homeopath Vatsala Sperling interviews Dr. Dinesh Chauhanfeb2016

Dr. Dinesh Chauhan and Vatsala Sperling

Learning has been a popular pursuit since the ancient times and today it has become more important than ever if we hope to stay relevant and up to date. It is not surprising that when a capable and wise teacher comes along, we homeopaths gather around him / her and try to learn as much as possible. Much is happening in the forefront of homeopathy and for finding out what exactly it is, there is no better way than to ask a teacher questions that come into our minds. With this view, I met with Dr. Dinesh Chauhan in Hudson, NY, when he visited the town for a four-day teaching seminar during October 2015.


VS: Dr. Dinesh, please describe your work.

DC: My work is known as ‘Scientifically Intuitive Case Witnessing Process: a journey of three steps.’ It is a part of my holistic integrative approach. In 1999, when I started practicing homeopathy, I was exposed to Rajan Sankaran’s Sensation method while writing the book, “Insight into plants”. I was totally convinced that this is THE method. Further down the road, I began observing that no two homeopaths ever came to the same remedy after taking a case. I studied homeopathic philosophy deeply and came to the awareness that homeopathic principles, case taking methodology, remedies, books and follow-up criteria have to be uniform across the board. This quest led me to explore a holistic method that would be based on the law of physics, “What is true for the part must be true for the whole.”

Individualization, holism and simillimum are fundamental and interconnected laws of homeopathy. Individualization done at the whole level is the tool for the search for simillimum. Individual features at the whole level – this is classical homeopathy for me. If it is so, then every aspect of homeopathy should happen at the whole level.

In a holistic integrative method, understanding of the human being, case taking, follow up and also the materia medica – all these have to happen at the whole level. It occurred to me that this holistic approach must be true for all homeopaths – old and new, up to our generation and beyond. Hahnemann’s PQRS, Kent’s totality, Boeninghausen’s grand generals, Vithoulka’s essence, Rajan’s sensation, Vijayakar’s genetic constitution, all these mean the same – find symptoms that are present at the whole level. They just call it by different names.

VS: How is your approach, scientifically intuitive case witnessing process, different from other methods?

DC: My approach to case taking is a timeless, ageless method. It is an integrated approach. It is based on the Organon. It is human-centric and has three distinct steps:

Step one: Passive case witnessing process. It would appear to be scattered, but here the patient is expressing himself.

Step 2: Active case witnessing process. Things begin to connect.

Step 3: Active –Active case witnessing process. Connection appears at the whole level.

Passive case witnessing: At this stage, the patient has total freedom to touch upon any area that is of concern to him. I am totally passive, just taking notes and jotting down facts exactly as expressed by the patient. I note all the verbal and non-verbal expressions that are out of place, out of order, out of proportion, out of my knowledge, out of the patient’s knowledge, and out of a given time zone. I am fully present, but I do not interrupt or ask any questions at all. During this time, I also silently design open ended questions that I would ask later. I note every peculiar expression that the patient uses repeatedly. I note the expressions in which mind and body speak as one. These expressions become a set of peculiar, queer, rare and strange (PQRS) symptoms involving body and mind and these are a collection of verbal and non-verbal PQRS symptoms at the physical particular, physical general and mental levels. The PQRS symptoms that appear at two to three different areas, are not related to each other and are in a different time zone, constitute the focus / anchor or the master key at a holistic level. These symptoms are constant, are expressed via mind and body, and they run through different components of the entire case. I give the patient as much space as he needs and observe whether he is giving symptoms at the facts level, or emotional, mental level, and expressing his thoughts, delusions, fears, phobias and even dreams and imaginations. This first step is a universal step – very relaxing, free-flowing, fluid and healing.

At this Passive step of the scientifically intuitive case witnessing process, the benefit for the practitioner is that he does not have to ask the patient too many questions. There is no probing, no interrogation. The patient feels free and realizes that the practitioner is totally focused on him but is not interfering or interrupting in his narrative. The patient is free to speak about what is important to him, not what is important to the doctor. He is free to choose what, how much and how he wants to speak. In this regard, the method is fully human-centric.

VS: So, the patient’s expressions are in fact the direct expressions of his vital force and that fact is respected.

DC: Exactly. And a further benefit of the Passive step of the case witnessing process for the patient is that he has the freedom to just be and not feel judged, analyzed or interpreted. In this step, a simillimum is spontaneously created between the patient and the healer. The patient feels respected and he gives you permission to explore deeper. When he is ready, he leads the session further. He never experiences the feeling that his answers are not satisfactory to the doctor. So, this passive step is very, very easy on the patient.

Here is an analogy. Imagine a boat in the mid sea. It has no destination, no beginning and no end. A patient comes on board. He decides the beginning and the end. The next patient does the same. Together, the patient and the homeopath enjoy the journey, because, after all, the case witnessing process is not about the beginning or the end, it is about the journey itself, it is a process of exploration.

Tao said, wait, wait and wait till the right action happens. Wait, wait and wait till the mud (conscious brain) settles down and clear water (subconscious brain) appears. Wait, wait and wait till the patient gives clue to the next step.

In this human- centric case witnessing process, out of a sixty minute session, 55 minutes are devoted to Passive state, and five minutes are for Active and Active-Active phase when I ask questions and come to a conclusion about the indicated remedy and potency.

VS: Which aphorisms from the Organon would you quote in support of the scientifically intuitive case witnessing process?

DC: My Scientifically intuitive case witnessing process, a journey of three steps, is based on aphorisms 83 – 103 of the Organon.

Let us now compare this approach to what the aphorisms say: Aph # 83: Individualization of the case is necessary because each case is different. I devote much of my case witnessing time to the Passive step, when the patient is given a totally human-centric space to express himself in any way, manner, depth, and area that is meaningful to him. My method is based on individualization. Aph # 84 says, let the patient talk, observe the patient, write the case accurately, do not interrupt. During the Passive step of the case witnessing process, this is exactly what I do. I write down the symptoms as it is, without analyzing, till sufficient data has been gathered, and the patient has finished speaking. Aph # 85 asks us to start a fresh line for each symptom of circumstance mentioned. Well, the Passive step gives me ample freedom to do that. Aphorism # 86 – 87 – 88 guides us to ask precise information about each symptom, ask open-ended questions, ask general questions about any area not mentioned and avoid asking leading questions. Aphorism # 89 guides us to ask more precise questions only after the patient has freely given his account. The Active as well as Active –Active steps of the case witnessing process are built along these guidelines. All the way up to aphorism # 103, Hahnemann guides us about the intricacies of case taking and these guidelines are fully incorporated into the three steps of this scientifically intuitive case witnessing process

VS: So, this approach to case taking is based on what Hahnemann expects us to do.

About the author

Vatsala Sperling

Vatsala Sperling

Vatsala Sperling, RSHom (NA), CCH, MS, PhD, PDHom was the Chief of Clinical Microbiology services at a children’s hospital in Chennai, India, where she published extensively and conducted research with WHO, Denmark. On moving to the USA to start a family, Vatsala pursued an education in homeopathy in Misha Norland’s school. An author of eight books ( and many essays and articles in the field of homeopathy, spirituality and health, Vatsala continues to study with several teachers as well as Drs. Bhavisha and Sachindra Joshi and practices classical homeopathy in Vermont. She has served on the board of directors of North American Society of Homeopaths and she is currently volunteering in the case review committee of Council for Homeopathy Certification. Vatsala can be reached via her website (

Leave a Comment


  • Thank you for the very intelligent, sensitive interview.
    Our remedies are gentle, and our approach towards the remedy and the client needs to be similarly gentle. Dr. Chauhan offers an inclusive, gently embracing way of matching our approach with each client’s spontaneous energy – and it is firmly rooted in Hahnemann!
    This observation really resonated with me: “We get a little success and try to apply the same method to all our patients. Our method begins to define us and our practice. But life is not static. Pure knowledge has no limits and boundaries…”
    Thank you for enabling those of us lucky enough to attend his seminar in Hudson last October to review this material afresh!