Can anybody kindly recommend me a good classical homeopath in Delhi for a chronic case. I am desprately looking fora good doctor please help me out!!
Best Regards

there is a Homeopath in Holy Family Hospital, Okhla, New Delhi.
Request her for Classical Homeopathic treatment.

__________________
http://www.homeopathy2health.com

[b]
Note: This was initially attempted in reply to her question of 12th February 2010 here: otherhealth.com - View Profile: Hahnemannian444. It’s meant to answer her second question to me. It didn’t post there, however, because it was too long. I’ve therefore brought it here since it’s fundamentally far more important than a private message nonetheless accessible to all. Others might also act on it, so that likewise speaks to posting it here. She asked this:

[quote=latahoon]
Dear Hahnemannian444,

I was not able to read your reply to me query. Seems to be deleted by moderator. Don't know why. Can you post the same again? Thanks.

Best Regards

[quote/]

-------------------------

No, dear (i.e., assuming you're a woman since you write with female thought patterns, although this could also just as easily be due to a matriarchal attitude and Dionysian worldview common to Indians), that was a mistake by me. I thought I had also posted to that discussion along with two others that day, but I hadn't. They've regrettably taken away my ability to edit my postings, thereby severely hindering and limiting my postings, so I couldn't delete the content and request that the posting be deleted (the latter of which I'll get around to, anyway) or simply post over it -- the preferred path.

As for answering your very profound and important question, I worked on it for more than a month after you asked in a way that deeply touched my heart, dear, and I still have that long response because it has been asked of me hundreds of times for exactly the reasons you stated. Hahnemann called them "beginners, bunglers and aggravators of diseases" on pages 121-22 of THE CHRONIC DISEASES (Google it along with the name “Hahnemann” and I think you’ll get three hits, one of which is the Google Books Online version of the actual book), but none of them realize that they make exactly the two mistakes he stated there; viz., (1) failing to know what uncommon/characteristic symptoms are and how to discern such strange, rare and peculiar ones as well as solely using them to discern the remedy for a person and knowing why only they fulfill the requirements of the Law of Similars, and (2) prescribing from the repertory.

Those are the first two of the 7-8 fundamental mistakes by HPHs, but they nonetheless believe they're classical homeopaths because everyone else in their crowd claims it after the fashion of George Vithoulkas (GVs). Hence, they're all GVs as members of the Vithoulkas school of thought even if they fail to realize it. They all think he’s a master homeopath, but he isn’t even a Hahnemannian. (Make no mistake, I like him and honestly love him, but he misleads lots of people with stuff from high-potency pseudo homeopathy, so it’s a matter of conflicting emotions that he gets most things correct and is always worth reading.) It’s a very serious problem of personality worship from follower mentalities, so we don’t exactly know how to fix it except how we try. How would you attempt to fix something so moronic and heinous of a bozo error whereby everyone in your group constantly goes, “teach tole me”? That’s not good, for they thereby prove that they don’t have the mental freedom homeopathy eventually provides via a person’s simillimum (“thing most similar”). If they don’t have it, how can they produce it in others? Better, why isn’t this obvious to everyone? So, Hahnemannians beat our heads against brick walls and then are amazed when we occasionally find the owners having chipped away at it themselves so that they can finally see over it. After all, it can’t be otherwise done given the fact that they’re the creators of those conditioned-reflex brain reactions to falsehoods (half-truths and lies). They’re indoctrinated to falsehoods, which is called brainwashing in the vernacular. Uh oh.

The problem with deriding them that way and that severely is that they're actually better called quasi homeopaths, for they get cures because they do think homeopathically, just not fully. It's also no small thing that there's nowhere else to go in advancements in medicine than to Hahnemannian status, so we quite love them despite having to correct them per the Golden Rule. I don’t think they realize this, but the question would be: Would we otherwise care?

We don’t care what low-potency pseudo homeopaths (LPHs) and allopaths say because they’re all super-morons and quacks who kill all of their patients. OMG, get the hell away from me! LPHs do nothing but make mistakes, for they’re just allopathic homeopaths, a bigger oxymoron being impossible since those are diametrical opposites. There are lots and lots of LPHs in India, dear.

There are easily 100 times as many LPHs as HPHs (100:1), and HPHs also outnumber Hahnemannians about 100:1. There’s no way to change those outrageous ratios except by attempting to increase the mentation of HPHs so that they transition to Hahnemannian status sooner than later. They foolishly think I beat them over the head with sticks, but that’s not true. I only do that to LPHs and other allopaths. I really quite love HPHs because we all come to legitimate homeopathy that way unless we’re one of the very few born to a Hahnemannian. Restated, it’s a natural progression, but it does nobody any good to believe you’re a classical homeopath and tell people that when Hahnemann said you’re not. Why don’t they know this? We don’t know, but the fact remains that they’ll eventually get where they’re going if they stay with it, and all evidence is that all GVs and HPHs in general have the indispensable physician’s heart. Can you create that? OMG, no way; only God can! You’re born a physician, period. We can only nurture it along and expedite their inevitable transition as obviously intended by divine will or they wouldn’t want to cure. I repeat, they’ll all got it! That’s important, isn’t it?

It's extremely difficult to do the question justice, though, for it's not easily explained what to look for in a homeopath. Hahnemann did it well on page 241 of THE LESSER WRITINGS OF SAMUEL HAHNEMANN (Google that, too), but it’s just one paragraph. It also doesn’t take into consideration the fact that there are also LPHs and HPHs because he didn’t know it at the beginning of homeopathy, that letter being the second writing in homeopathy properly dated to late 1790, juxtaposed in the book out of chronological order because it precedes that wonder case report of an insanity cured, which, BTW, proves that Hahnemann was also the Father of Psychiatry along with heaps, gobs and oodles and caboodles of other firsts in medicine that no one else can even remotely claim.

The biggest problem is explaining what mistakes to look for because that's how you discern Hahnemannians. Again, low-potency pseudo homeopaths make nothing but mistakes because they ignorantly attempt to use our drugs in allopathic ways of a named disease and a remedy for it, so we just ignore those morons and so should everyone else. High-potency pseudo homeopaths don’t get that harsh dismissal because they can cure and do, just not as often as they should and will be able to if they stay with the study of homeopathy. It takes a long time unless you’re fortunate to ask Hahnemannians your questions as a medical student. Why don’t we get paid for this, anyway?

God bless!
[b/]

__________________
Albert, also Hahnemannian444B
www.GiggleBoggleJabbleGooby.com/HaHa