Hi all,
Interesting discussion. I recently studied Silica in depth and felt that Sankaran is really on target with his core picture. Nevertheless, I don't feel just any one source alone will make up the perfect picture of the remedy. Many sources combined in my studies have helped me to come to better knowledge of the remedy's picture and essence. Personally I find it always dangerous to go either "black - or white" there are different perceptions out there and I imagine that there may be different "kinds" of Silica patients one resembling closer Kent's description and an other one closer Sankaran's - and both will benefit from the same remedy. Does it really matter which is the better book in the end ? Isn't it just more important to find the similimum no matter through which book's help one finds it ? I have yet to find one source of MM which is totally complete, covering EVERY little detail of a remedy ! Let's remember that even the great geniuses of Homeopathy are human beings and not all around perfect and infallible. Discernment on our part is what counts in the end.
Claudia