Homeopathy Repertory Organon & Philosophy

The Fundamental Approach to Methodology of Analysis and Evaluation of Symptoms

ramaswami mar s

A useful article about The Fundamental Approach to Methodology of Analysis and Evaluation of Symptoms.Full details about The Fundamental Approach to Methodology of Analysis and Evaluation of Symptoms

Sad to say that even though “Homeopathy” has advanced
tremendously since its discovery, it has still not achieved the
place that it deserves i.e. a better integration with Allopathy
in treating the sick. (The Mainstay of Medical Treatment?)  The
main reason for this would be that it lacks integration, standardization
and clarity which are necessary to impart this Art and Science in
a systematic and organised manner in order to establish itself World
over, for fragments of information are scattered all over. The highly
individualised approaches to finding the Simillimum for Homeopathic
Treatment has denied it a “Scientific Basis” so far. A common Link
has to be established in order to make good sense of it all. Unfortunately
the fragments are held exclusively by people who do not have the
time to devote to present the Bird’s eye view. But it is high-time
such a thing happened. The “Obfuscation” and “Polemics” prevalent
in Homeopathy due to its encompassing different related fields and
its different approaches to treatment, should be sorted out and
a structured Methodology of Analysis and Evaluation of symptoms
be established, bringing in uniformity to a certain extent, leaving
the variables due to individualisation, to be managed by applying
the various principles as well as different approaches to Homeopathic
Cure suitably. This should now be possible based on the clinical
trials that have been successfully conducted so far by Homeopaths
world-over. It is just a matter of co-operation, sharing of knowledge
and the dedication to see Homeopathy evolve to a Higher level in
the larger interests of its Development and Service to Mankind.
Here, I would like to stress on the fact that because Hahnemann’s
Homeopathy was based on Universal Laws and its fundamentals are
so strongly fixed that it has survived all onslaughts for more than
a century and still remains unchanged while new dimensions have
been added to its development.

A Fundamental and structured approach to Methodology of Analysis
and Evaluation of Symptoms in Chronic cases, leading to choosing
a remedy and Potency would involve the following steps:

1. Data Collection which can definitely be standardised

2. Listing of the Common and uncommon Symptoms of Diseases.

3. Looking at different approaches of  evaluating Symptoms:

Boenninghausen’s, Boger’s, Margret Tyler’s eliminating symptoms,
H.A.Roberts’s, Kent’s,George Vithoulkas’s Hierarchy of symptoms, 
Rudi Verspoor & Steve Decker’s approach to Diseases, Rajan Sankaran’s
Miasmatic Classification, Banerjee’s Miasmatic Analysis, Dr. Masi
Elizade’s Miasmatic Dynamism, Grant Bentley’s Facial Analysis  and
many more.

4. Fixing the Levels of cure

5. Classification of Diseases as propounded by Dr. Hahnemann based
on Clinical structure as well as Aetiology. (Classification Table
given below)

6. Finally, Choosing the Remedy according to the following:

a) Level of cure chosen

b) Miasms

c) Approach based on Prominent aspect of a case i.e. Mentals,
Physicals,  Totality, PQRS, Suppression etc

d) Choice of Remedy from Plant, Animal or Mineral Kingdom on
its own or along with Bio chemic salts or The use of  Bio-chemic
salts and Bach Flower Remedies especially in cases of Palliation. 

7. Potency                               

Data Collection for Chronic cases ( for only in chronic cases do
we really need to analyse deeply) can be standardised based on Patient’s
narration of Symptoms, Mental symptoms , Generals,  a Head to Foot
Physicals & Particulars,  History of  Ailments especially  of
venereal origin,  Suppressions, Nature of Ailment i.e. Intermittent,
Alternating etc. and any other relevant particulars. Further, a
detailed form can be standardised for different ailments focussing
on the common and uncommon symptoms of a particular Disease even
though Homeopathy does not recognise Diseases by name, only by symptoms. 
This modification in integrating Allopathy is necessary in order
for Homeopathy to move forward in today’s Medical Environment where
Patients come to a Homeopath with the Diagnosis from an Allopath.
It helps differentiate between common and uncommon symptoms. Hahnemann
himself has said in Aphorism 3 that a Homeopathic Physician has
to have the knowledge of the Disease and in Aphorism 153 that uncommon,
Strange, Peculiar symptoms have be kept in view while selecting
a remedy. With modern tools at our disposal and the advance of Allopathy,
it is a crime not to make use of the Knowledge of Diseases available
to us. Common symptoms help us determine the Diagnosis, prognosis
and selection of cases based on chances of cure and uncommon symptoms
are useful in Disease individualisation. Thus incorporation of Allopathy,
and other approaches mentioned above can be done in a measured way
where necessary in order to get good results but the evaluation
of Symptoms should always be based on the fundamental principles
of Dr. Hahnemann. No single approach is mutually exclusive, all
angles should be looked at for confirmation. Only then will everything
fall into place.

Once the symptoms have been elicited, it is now important to see
which area of the case is prominent and accordingly look at different
approaches and chose the one most suitable to the case as Robin
Murphy says. Once this is done, the levels of cure from Palliation,
symptom relief to cure of Functional Disturbances to Pathological
change to a change in the mental outlook should be looked at. With
all the information and analysis above, a Totality is established
and it becomes easy to classify and fix the Disease homeopathically
as propounded by Dr. Hahnemann which is given below:

The above Classification of Diseases will help in identifying the
nature and cause of Disease and once that is fixed it’s easy to
chart out the prognosis and treatment of the Disease Homeopathically
as laid out by Hahnemann in The Organon as well as the Chronic Diseases
with the help of repertories. Here it is worth mentioning that once
a Disease becomes chronic in nature, it is the Miasm that has to
be treated not the Disease.(Aph 205). Hence identifying and understanding
the Miasms and their Nature-their different stages- Primary, secondary
and Tertiary and connected concepts like for e.g. in the tertiary
stages of Sycosis and syphilis or when they become latent and reappear,
the miasms combine with Psora and either appear as Psora or as a
combination – is of utmost importance and all efforts should
be directed towards this in order to Fix the Miasm of the patient.
In identifying a Miasm, all the different prevalent concepts should
be examined until one or a few prominent aspects come up clearly.
Once this is established it should be easy to find the remedy on
an individual basis. But this is an area which needs to be further
defined .There has been a lot of development in this area. Since
Hahnemann’s Times there have been many Homeopaths like Henry Allen,
H.A Roberts, George Vithoulkas, Banerjea, Masi Elizade, Rajan Sankaran,
Grant Bentley, Jeremy Sherr etc to name a few who have given an
excellent insight into different aspects of Miasms. Dr. Bentley
has rightly said that what Hahnemann has not expressed in detail,
in a systematic manner about Miasms, Henry Allen and H.A. Roberts
have been able to successfully do so which has been subsequently
followed by newer generation of Homeopaths. George Vithoulkas’s
concept of Heirarchy of Symptoms, Rajan Sankaran’s new insights
into Miasms, Masi’s concept, Rudi Vespoor and Steve Decker’s approach
to Diseases and Grant Bentley’s Facial Analysis have analysed different
aspects of Miasms successfully. Dr. Sherr’s portrayal of the Syphilitic
Miasm through remedies is another noteworthy contribution to Miasms.
Again, instead of viewing them as separate fragments, if they are
integrated under concepts of Miasms and a Gist of different concepts
assimilated into a text for the benefit of students to pursue further,
it would definitely be a big step forward in the Development of
Homeopathy. 

The repertories come in very useful as they came into being out
of experience especially when we identify special conditions like
alternating symptoms, peculiar symptoms, suppressions etc. However,
the need of the day would be to discuss Diseases individually Allopathically-
by way of symptom analysis in order to find uncommon symptoms as
well as homeopathically – as to how and why diseases originate,
in what form they exist in each Miasm (This would be a new insight
into looking at Miasms and Diseases!) and their cure. This can now
be analysed based on the Data available from the experience of successful
homeopaths in treating Diseases. This is no ordinary task but if
undertaken it’ll definitely yield beneficial results for when the
clinical results tell us of success stories it is wise to find the
common link and relate it to the fundamental principles rather than
going the other way round. This is one way of establishing the difference
between True Cures and Accidental ones as also making Homeopathic
Treatment more scientific. The possible outcome of this would be
that a group of specific remedies will be found effective for certain
conditions which is something similar along the lines of Genus Epidemicus
Remedies. After all, Hahnemann emphatically came to the conclusion
of usage of Arnica as the foremost remedy in injuries only by experience.

As for the Kingdoms, I would like to say in brief that a person
is suited to resonate to the energy of a remedy from a particular
Kingdom and if used properly will give good results. The same goes
for Potency too. All of these can again be standardised to a certain
extent and the rest is up to the homeopath to manage the variables
due to individuality.

Finally I would like to conclude by saying that Hahnemann has laid
out the Principles and cure in Homeopathy very clearly which we
have failed to look at as a whole, instead fragmenting it and looking
at it as pieces of Jigsaw puzzles to be put together. No wonder,
we are still struggling with it. It is time to think laterally rather
than tangentially!

————————————————–

Born and educated in India, Niranjani Ramaswami,
a Literature student based in Singapore, is a house-wife, happily
married with two children. Having finished her Post-Graduate course
in Homeopathy from The Singapore Faculty of Homeopathy, she has
been practising in the Free Clinics managed by the Singapore Faculty.

About the author

Hpathy

Hpathy

This article and all other content at Hpathy.com is copyright protected by Hpathy.com. Any unauthorized copying to other websites or journals is not permitted. See the full Copyright Notice and Disclaimer at Hpathy.com

Leave a Comment