Hans wrote:

>Dear Colleques
>I want to elaborate another bit on this point:
>
>HW:
> >Infection: Partner-partner
> >Inheritance: Mother --child [via milk]
> >Inheritance: Wet-nurse -child [via milk]
>
>DL:
> No, I disagree. Hahnemann wrote that chronic disease caused by miasms can
>be transferred by:
>
>1. Contact with the infected.
>2. Congenital infection through the body fluids of the mother or wet nurses.
>3. By inheritance through family heritage.


Dear Hans et all,

First of all I want to say that I will tell myself the same thing I
told Anna. I SHOULD READ THE ORGANON AGAIN WITH AN OPEN MIND. I want to get
to the truth (as best as possible).

It is my clinical point of view, based on ample case histories of
myself and other homoeopaths, that the inherited affects of infectious
miasms can produce predispositions to chronic diseases states in the
following generations. We are not saying the infectious agent is passed. We
are saying that an infection in an ancestor can produce predispositions to
disease states with symptoms in the offspring family line. What we are
discussing now is whether or not Hahnemann thought that miasms could cause
predispositions to disease by inheritance and heredity.

>By going through Hahnemann's work, I could only identify two passages where
>he uses the word: ERBSCHAFT.
>Both are in the Organon. One is in a footnote to par.: 78, the other is in a
>footnote to par.: 284.
>In both footnotes the term: Erbschaft was used and not the word Vererbung.
>[I will come back to the differentiation of the two terms further down}

>The first inclusion in footnote to paragraph 78 is an insertion into the
>text of the footnote contained in the 5th edition. It is on a separate sheet
>which was not part of the book, and the whole footnote is in handwriting,
>not originating from Hahnemann.

This is not mentioned in Schmidt's standard edition of the Organon der
Heilkunst and I was not aware of the contested nature of the footnote to
aphorism 78. Can you please provide the proof in German from Organon der
Heilkunst / Textkritische Ausgabe der sechsten Auflage, etc.

>The second inclusion in footnote to paragraph 284 is an insertion into the
>text of Org.: 5 as well. The footnote is all in handwriting, and the latter
>part of it is clearly held in Haehl's handwriting. There is some serious
>doubt about the authorship of this footnote. Haehl remarks, that he did so
>on the grounds of a dictation of Hahnemann. This dictation was never found
>in Haehl's papers. To shed more light into that addition, the presence of
>the handwritten copy of the whole text, done during Melanies times would be
>helpful, but it was apparently lost, as it remained in Haehl's office from
>1922 on.

Yes, the footnote to aphorism 284 is in Haehl's handwriting and is
contested by Schmidt in his standard edition. That is why I did not quote
it. I was aware of the changes to 270 and 284 but I was not aware of the
nature of the changes to aphorism 78.

Research contained in The Organon of the Medical Art by O'Reilly, 1996 also
deals with this subject. She also refers to Schmidt's comments. She removed
the above passage because it is contested and written by Haehl. She also
speaks of the 7 different handwritings and says most of these insertions
are minor involving grammatical changes, the addition of a word or two for
the purpose of clarification and grammatical corrections. Schmidt says in
the standard edition some of these to be dictations and carry a few notes
by Hahnemann and appears authentic.

There are major insertions noted by O'Reilly with passages that stand out
as major changes. One of these is in an unidentified person's writing and
the four others are by Haehl. These passages are found in the middle of
aphorism 270 and its footnotes fn270g, fn270f. The others are changes in
the footnote to 265 and the footnote of 284. She took three of these
passages out of her edition of the Organon in English and noted the others
as contested in the appendix. She included the footnote to aphorism 87 and
did not say it was contested.

>Further doubts about the Hahnemann's authorship of this footnote in the
>current form are risen by the use of the term: Psora-THEORY. This is the
>only place in Hahnemann's work, where the word THEORY is used in combination
>with Psora. Furthermore the footnote contains an instruction for the
>PREVENTATIVE use of homeopathic remedies, which is nowhere else noted in
>Hahnemann's works. Haehl made a lot of changes throughout the text, mainly
>in the intend to clarify things and in a few cases replaced whole parts in
>his own handwriting.
>Over and all there are seven different handwritings distinguishable in the
>manuscript.
>There is a real possibility, that some changes were made to the manuscript
>even after Hahnemann's death.

Yes, I was aware that the footnote to 284 was contested and that is why I
did not use it in my post on heredity.

>Back to the terminology:
>There is a general problem in translations on that level, as German
>word-fields are not the same as English. And this is one of them.
>As it was explained to me this morning by a verified translator who is in
>business for more than forty years, the terms Vererbung and Erbschaft are
>not the same.
>Erbschaft is limited to the hand-down of materials and this is regardless
>whether the term Erbschaft is used in a legal, civil or medical context.
>Yet, there are no one-to-one words matching the German word-fields available
>in English.
>The second best what can be done is to describe the differences as good as
>possible in English, but --of course-- the best would be to learn German.

Yes, I am aware of the difference in modern German but I have seen no proof
about their usage in 1840. Usage changes over time. Lamarck's work on
heredity was brand new and the idea of gene transmission was yet to be
formulated. The modern German dictionary definition of Erbschaft, is
"inheritance, heritage". The word *heredity* as in hereditary disposition
contains the same root as the word *heritage*. All these words share the ER
in English and German languages. Anglo Saxon (old English) and German
actually share many derivations. This is because Saxon tribes from Germany
went to England.

Heritage means much more than just "hand me down materials" as in physical
objects. Heritage also relates to the family history, family traditions,
family specialities, titles, class and rank, etc.. The modern dictionary
definition of word Vererbung, is "inheritance, transmission". The word
"transmission" is not directly linked to the derivation of the term
"heritage" or "heredity" although it shares the same ER. It is for reasons
like this I feel more information is needed about the exact roots of these
words and how they were used in early 1800s. I am researching the German
roots and usages in historical dictionaries from the 1800s but it will take
some time.

As to German, I will have to depend on my German colleagues for now
(fortunately I have several working with me). I have learned a few words
but to read a complex text like the Organon demands a expert linguist,
which I am not. It is ironic that the Paris casebooks are in French, which my
wife reads very well. I would say to understand the Paris casebooks and
Hahnemann's final methods, you should learn French, but like me and German,
that is quite a challenge. We will all have to help each other.

>To quote the views of later American homeopaths as a positive indication,
>that Hahnemann must have meant, that Psora was handed down from generation
>to generation, suffers here a serious setback, as there is no mentioning of
>ERBSCHAFT in the 5th Organon in par.: 78 and 284. This fifth Edition was in
>fact the basis for the American homeopaths till in 1922 the first
>translation of the 6th ed. was published.

The idea that Erbschaft is not mentioned in the 5th edition means little.
Each edition of the Organon has changes in aphorism and footnotes.
Hahnemann's thoughts in 1829, 1833 and 1842 were different in many areas.
Nevertheless, the point is taken.

>I want to come back to my above statement, which stands until proven wrong.
>To say that Hahnemann somewhere mentioned somewhat to the contrary remains
>hearsay, till properly referenced and verified. Furthermore, I want to
>remark, that the above three ways of transfer quoted by me are the three
>ways positively described by Hahnemann as his observations. This does not
>exclude other possibilities as such, but we have not found any confirmation
>throughout Hahnemann's work.

OK, I understand your position.

My position includes the following:

I only have Schmidt's standard edition of the Organon der Heilkunst. I do
not have the Organon der Heilkunst / Textkritische Ausgabe der sechsten
Auflage,
Bearbeitet und herausgegeben von Joseph M. Schmidt Haug 1992].

Could you please post the part of Schmidt's list. I especially want to see
the deals with aphorism 78 in German. I would like to see the information
first hand. If and when your details are confirmed I will in the future
consider the footnote to aphorism 87 as *contested as to its authenticity
and change my writings in this regard*.

Now let us look into some other sources of information which may shed some
light on the contested terminology.

Could you please post a German paragraph from the Chronic Diseases (1828)
in German? Then I will consult my German colleagues as well as look at the
words myself. I can get a German copy of the quote but it will take some
days. I will type out the English and tell you where to look in the German
text for the paragraph.

The English starts with the following (The Chronic Diseases, Theoretical
part, page 102, BJain). This passage comes right before Hahnemann gives his
100s of symptom for secondary psora.

"The awakening of the internal Psora which has hitherto slumbered and been
latent, and as it were, kept bound by a good bodily constitution and
favorable external circumstances, as well as it breaking out into more
serious ailments and maladies, is announced by the increase of the symptoms
given above as indicating the slumbering Psora, and also by a numberless
multitude of various other signs and complaints."

Now comes the part for which I would like to see the German.

******"These are varied according to the difference in the bodily
constitution of a man, his *hereditary disposition*, the various errors in
his education and habits, his manner of living and diet, his employment,
his turn of mind, his morality, etc."******

Then the next paragraph discusses the secondary symptoms and begins the
list of secondary symptoms with "Vertigo; reeling while walking" and then
comes 100s of secondary symptoms of psora. This should be easy enough for
you to locate in your Chronic Disease, in the parts explaining the nature
of psora.

The above statement is not about transmitting psora. That is not its point.
It is about how the symptoms of psora are conditioned by bodily
constitution, hereditary disposition, environmental factors, diet, and the
mind, etc. The English translation uses the term *hereditary disposition*.
The German used in this context should provide some insights into the
terminology related to heredity used by Hahnemann 1828.

Sincerely, David


>[all Organon quotes: S. Hahnemann / Organon der Heilkunst / Textkritische
>Ausgabe der sechsten Auflage,
>Bearbeitet und herausgegeben von Joseph M. Schmidt
>Haug 1992]

PS. I am using standard German Organon (Schmidt), Organon of the Medical
Art by Wenda O'Rielly, Birdcage books, 1996, and the Dudgeon 5th edition
and the Boericke 6th edition.


---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

Dear members, dear David little
To whom it may concern:

The textcritical Organon edition is published:

Title: Organon der Heilkunst
Textkritische Ausgabe der von samuel Hahnemann fuer die sechste Auflage vorgesehen Fassung

Bearbeitet, herausgegeben und mit Vorwort versehen von Joseph M. Schmidt
Haug Verlag Heidelberg 1992
ISBN 3-7760-1253-6

the book is currently availabel.

I am not in the position to copy parts of the book and put them up here for prove, as i don't have permission from the publishers to do so.
The entire work is copyright protected.

So much can be said, that photocopies from the original pages concerning par 284 and par.: 270 are included, so that one can convince oneself of the findings.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath
homeopathy study guide: http://www.homeopathyworldcommunity....hy-study-guide

Dear Members
Just to answer the other question from DL.
I have the following copy of which the below chapter is:

Die Chronischen Krankheiten, ihre eigentümliche Natur und Homöopathische Heilung
Von Dr. Samuel Hahnemann
Erster Teil
Zweite, viel vermehrte Auflage.
Dresden und Leipzig, in der Arnoldschen Buchhandlung 1835
Republished as facsimile copy: Haug Ulm/ Donau 1956

You will notice, that the date of the publication was 1835 for the second edition.
As far as I am aware, the English version from Dr. Louis Tafel is based on this second edition.
In my copy, which comes from the B.J. publishers the above quoted chapter starts on page 51 and is identical. So could you check whether the year of 1829 as a publishing date is accurate.

Here is the relating counterpart from the Original:

--verschieden je nach der verschiedenen KÖRPER - KONSTITUTIONEN des Menschen, seiner ERB-ANLAGEN, den verschiedenen Fehlern in seiner Erziehung und seiner Angewohnheiten, seiner Lebensweise und Diät, seiner Beschäftigungen, seiner Geistesrichtungen, seiner Moralität usw. ---

Körper -konstitutionen: bodily constitutions
Erb-anlagen: inherited tendencies

It seems, that for Hahnemann the two above terms do not seem to be the same.

David Little made this point which I don’t want to leave uncommented:

>>It is my clinical point of view, based on ample case histories of
myself and other homoeopaths, that the inherited affects of infectious
miasms can produce predispositions to chronic diseases states in the
following generations. We are not saying the infectious agent is passed. We
are saying that an infection in an ancestor can produce predispositions to
disease states with symptoms in the offspring family line. What we are
discussing now is whether or not Hahnemann thought that miasms could cause
predispositions to disease by inheritance and heredity.<<

Coming from a large clinical background, I can say, that the above relationships are statistically insignificant. In the majority of the cases the remedies necessary for the parental problems have not co-insided with the remedies necessary for the successful treatment of the offsprings.

Furthermore, it should be born in mind, that Psora is an infectious disease, and can be contracted by everyone at every stage of live.

C.M. Boger took up this idea in his article: Finding the similimum [homeopasthic Recorder 45th/ 51st 1924} and encouraged the experimentation with it.

Over and all, the answer to the above question is irrelevant for the successful treatment of Chronic Miasmatic Disease, as the selection of the curative remedy remains [after the discovery of the CMD’s] on the now presented signs and symptoms, expressed by the out of tune dynamis.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath
homeopathy study guide: http://www.homeopathyworldcommunity....hy-study-guide

Dear List Members,

In my post- Constitution and Temperament by David Little 3, [posted 28th Jan - CG] I quoted
the footnote to aphorism 78 in reference to psora being implanted through
"infection or heredity*. It says:

German text:

In den bluehendsten Juenglingsjahren und beim Anfange geregelter
Menstruation, gepaart mit einer fuer Geist, Herz und Körper wohltätigen
Lebensweise bleiben sie oft mehrere jahre unkenntlich; die davon
Ergriffenen scheinen dann in den Augen ihrer Anverwandten und Bekannten,
als wären sie
völlig gesund und als wäre die, ihnen durch ANSTECKUNG oder ERBSCHAFT
eingeprägte Krankheit völlig verschwunden----

English translation:

"These afflicted appear in the eyes of their relatives and acquaintances as
if they were completely healthy and as if the disease, implanted in them
through *infection or heredity*, were completely vanished. However, it
inevitably comes to the fore again in later years and with adverse events
and relationships in life."

Organon of the Medical Art; S. Hahnemann (O'Reilly 6th Edition), footnote,
Aphorism 78.

On 2/3/2004 Hans Weitbrecht wrote the following:

"The first inclusion in footnote to paragraph 78 is an insertion into
the text of the footnote contained in the 5th edition. It is on a separate
sheet which was not part of the book, and the whole footnote is in
handwriting, *not originating from Hahnemann.*" He claimed that Schmidt's
text critical version of the German Organon was his source.

When I ask Mr. Weitbrecht to prove this statement by posting what
Schmidt said in German he refused deferring to copyright infringements yet
he posted other quotes from the German Organon and Chronic Diseases
published by the same company. Then he made statements about Schmidt
printing pictures of handwritings other than Hahnemann in aphorism 270 and
284 while completely ignoring the passage in question, fn-aphorism 78 on
infection and heredity.

I have checked the Organon der Heilkunst Textkritische Ausgabe der von
samuel Hahnemann fuer die sechste Auflage vorgesehen Fassung- Bearbeitet,
herausgegeben und mit Vorwort versehen von Joseph M. Schmidt Haug Verlag
with experienced homeopaths in Germany. We have gone to the text critical
version in German and read EXACTLY what Schmidt wrote about the footnote to
aphorism 78.

The text critical version says that the footnote to aphorism 78 was
written on a separate sheet of paper placed in Hahnemann's Organon but it
DID NOT SAY IT WAS WRITTEN IN A HANDWRITING OTHER THAN HAHNEMANN. The
statement about heredity of psora was written in Hahnemann's handwriting
and added to the text. The footnote to aphorism 78 was NOT CONTESTED FOR
AUTHENTICITY BY SCHMIDT. In fact, in the foreword to the edition, in
footnote 63 (p.XXVII) Schmidt explicitly quotes the footnote to aph. 78 as
CONFIRMING what is written in Haehl's handwriting in the footnote to 284
about heredity through the mother.

In order to prove that Hahnemann wrote the footnote to aphorism 78, we
will now quote exactly what Schmidt wrote in German:

"In § 78, Anm.1 schreibt Hahnemann, daß "chronische Krankheiten" durch
Ansteckung oder Erbschaft eingeprägt werden können."

English translation:

"In § 78, footnote 1, Hahnemann writes, that "chronic diseases" "can
be imprinted through infection or heredity (Erbschaft)".

For this reason, I will reiterate the point that HAHNEMANN WROTE THAT
PSORA CAN BE IMPRINTED BY INFECTION OR HEREDITY. It has now been proven
that these are the authentic teachings of Founder of Homeopathy as
confirmed by Schmidt. Miasms can be acquired in this lifetime or inherited
from one's ancestors.

Mr. Weitbrecht' also implied that the "person other than Hahnemann"
(which was incorrect) did not know German very well so they used the wrong
word for Heredity because the German term, Erbschaft, only means "hand me
down goods". He implied that a person with real knowledge of German would
have used the term, Vererbung. Several German sources have confirmed that
Hahnemann used the word Erbschaft to mean biological inheritance. Let us
see what historical dictionaries say about these two words in the 1830s,
only a few years after Lamarck's finished his work on heredity.

Turner's Dictionary, published in Leipzig, Germany in the 1830's
defines Erbschaft and Vererben in the following manner.

(1). Erbschaft - heritage, inheritance, succession, heirdom.

(2). Vererben (the verb), - to leave, transfer. [Vererbung is the noun].

In 1840 Hahnemann used the word, Erbschft, to mean inheritance in the
sense of biological heredity. At that time, Vererben only meant "to leave
or transfer" and had nothing to do with inheritance. Vererbung is used as a
modern scientific term in 2004 for inheritance in reference to
"transferring" the genetic code. The nature of the DNA was not known in the
days of Lamarck and Hahnemann. I would also like to point out that
Hahnemann used the term "hereditary disposition" (Erb-anlagen) in the
Chronic Diseases when explaining how constitution, temperament, hereditary
predispositions and environment, etc., conditioned the symptoms of psora in
individuals.

"The awakening of the internal Psora which has hitherto slumbered and
been latent, and as it were, kept bound by a good bodily constitution and
favorable external circumstances, as well as it breaking out into more
serious ailments and maladies, is announced by the increase of the symptoms
given above as indicating the slumbering Psora, and also by a numberless
multitude of various other signs and complaints. ******These are varied
according to the difference in the bodily constitution of a man, his
*HEREDITARY DISPOSITION *, the various errors in his education and habits,
his manner of living and diet, his employment, his turn of mind, his
morality, etc.**** (BJain publishing, New Delhi)

Here is the same passage from the German edition of the Chronic Diseases:

- verschieden je nach der verschiednen KÖRPER - KONSTITUTIONEN
Koerper-Konstitution des Menschen, seiner ERB-ANLAGEN, den verschiednen
Fehlern in seiner Erziehung und seiner Angewohnheiten, seiner Lebensweise
und Diaet, seiner Beschaeftigungen, seiner Geistes-Richtung, seiner
Moralitaet u.s.w."

Even Mr. Weitbrechts admits that the following words mean.

Körper -konstitutionen: bodily constitutions
Erb-anlagen: inherited tendencies

Erb-Anlage was translated by a German-English translator I spoke to
as: *hereditary disposition*. which agrees with Tafel's translation. I will
use this translation in my commentary.

(1). First of all, Hahnemann used the term "Koeper-Konsititutionen",
which is based on the Latin root, constituto, which is the same root as the
English word, constitution. This definitely shows that Hahnemann used the
term *physical constitution* in the Chronic Diseases and considered it a
major conditioning factor along with the *hereditary disposition*, mental
character, habits, diet, etc., in the way that psora and other miasms
developed different symptoms in individuals. Once again this shows that a
study of innate constitution and temperament and their relationship to
environment is an important part of homoeopathic medicine.

(2). Secondly, Hahnemann used the term *Erb-anlgen* (Hereditary
disposition) in the Chronic Disease and the term, Erbschaft (Heredity) in
fn 78. Both these words begin with and share the root *Erb* in German,
which is the root for the word inheritance. In Hahnemann's medical usage
Erbschaft and Erb-anlgen do NOT refer to "hand me down goods" as Mr.
Weitbrecht claimed! Erbschaft and Erb-anlgen are terms used by Hahnemann
for hereditary factors. Hahnemann did not use the term, Vererbung, in his
statements on heredity in the Organon or Chronic Diseases because in the
1830s it only meant "to leave, transfer" not inheritance. Even Mr.
Weitbrecht has stated that Erb-anlagen means "inherited tendencies" so why
does he not admit that Erbschaft refers to inheritance and heredity also?
The time has come to do so.

It has now been proven beyond doubt that Hahnemann used the term
Erbschaft for the word, hereditary, in the 6th Organon, and the term
Erb-anlgen for hereditary disposition in the Chronic Diseases. This usage
is reflected by the historical dictionaries of the times. These two
passages confirm each other perfectly. Therefore, I once again state with
full confidence that Hahnemann said that psora could be imparted by
"infection or heredity" and he used the words Erbschaft and Erb-anlgen for
*heredity* and *hereditary predisposition* respectively.

Hans Weitbrecht's statement that Schmidt said, "the whole footnote is in
handwriting, not originating from Hahnemann." has been proven incorrect
and opposite of what Schmidt really wrote in his text critical version of
the Organon. For the sake of proper scholarship this statement should not
be used again. The truth is Hahnemann taught that psora could be imparted
by "INFECTION OR HEREDITY".

For above reasons, I and my colleagues will continue to teach that
Hahnemann knew about "hereditary disposition" (Erb-anlgen) and taught in
the footnote to aphorism 78 psora could be imparted by "infection or
heredity" (Erbschaft). Therefore, I restate the following:

Hahnemann taught that psora (and the miasms) can be imparted in three manners.

1. Direct contact with an infected host.
2. Through infection such as by mother's milk or milk of a wet nurse.
3. By heredity through family lineages (inheritance).

I said I would review the Organon and its statements in fn-78 with an
open mind, and I have done so. Now it is time for the other parties to do
likewise and acknowledge the truth.

Sincerely, David Little

PS, I would like to thank my German colleagues for their interest and
support. Well done!


>--------------------
>Hans Weitbrecht
>Rational Practitioner
>www.Boger-Boenninghausen.com
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>----

---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

Hans wrote 8 Feb:

>Dear Members
>Just to answer the other question from DL.
>I have the following copy of which the below chapter is:
>
>Die Chronischen Krankheiten, ihre eigentümliche Natur und Homöopathische
>Heilung
>Von Dr. Samuel Hahnemann
>Erster Teil
>Zweite, viel vermehrte Auflage.
>Dresden und Leipzig, in der Arnoldschen Buchhandlung 1835
>Republished as facsimile copy: Haug Ulm/ Donau 1956
>
>You will notice, that the date of the publication was 1835 for the second
>edition.
>As far as I am aware, the English version from Dr. Louis Tafel is based on
>this second edition.
>In my copy, which comes from the B.J. publishers the above quoted chapter
>starts on page 51 and is identical. So could you check whether the year of
>1829 as a publishing date is accurate.
>
>Here is the relating counterpart from the Original:
>
>--verschieden je nach der verschiedenen KÖRPER - KONSTITUTIONEN des
>Menschen, seiner ERB-ANLAGEN, den verschiedenen Fehlern in seiner Erziehung
>und seiner Angewohnheiten, seiner Lebensweise und Diät, seiner
>Beschäftigungen, seiner Geistesrichtungen, seiner Moralität usw. ---
>
>Körper -konstitutionen: bodily constitutions
>Erb-anlagen: inherited tendencies
>
>It seems, that for Hahnemann the two above terms do not seem to be the same.


Dear Mr. Weitbrecht and members of the list,

No one is saying that the above two terms are the same???? Hans has
missed the point of the inquiry. The quote in question says the following:

"The awakening of the internal Psora which has hitherto slumbered and
been latent, and as it were, kept bound by a good bodily constitution and
favorable external circumstances, as well as it breaking out into more
serious ailments and maladies, is announced by the increase of the symptoms
given above as indicating the slumbering Psora, and also by a numberless
multitude of various other signs and complaints. ****These are varied
according to the difference in the bodily constitution of a man, his
*hereditary disposition*, the various errors in his education and habits,
his manner of living and diet, his employment, his turn of mind, his
morality, etc."****

We are studying this passage to see what terms Hahnemann used for the
*bodily constitution and inherited tendencies* in German. I was curious
about the root words Hahnemann used for constitution in the Chronic
Diseases and to see the root derivations of the term, hereditary
disposition, in German so we could understand Hahnemann's medical terminology.

(1). First of all, Hahnemann used the term "Koeper-Konsititutionen",
which includes the Latin root, constituto, which is the same root as the
English word, constitution. This definitely shows that Hahnemann used the
term *physical constitution* in the Chronic Diseases and considered it as a
major conditioning factor along with the *hereditary disposition*, mental
character, habits, diet, etc., in the way the symptoms of psora and the
other miasms developed. This quote coincides perfectly with the
instructions on case taking in aphorism 5 of the Organon and once again
shows how important it is to investigate these matters when taking a case
history. The constitution, character, heredity and environmental factors
condition the development of all the signs, befallments and symptoms of the
miasms. That is another reason why it is important to understand
constitution, temperament, hereditary dispositions and environmental
factors in homoeopathy. Drs. Hahnemann, Boenninghausen, Jahr and Hering
understood this very well.

Secondly, Hahnemann used the term *Erb-anlgen* in the Chronic Diseases
to stand for *hereditary disposition*. It has also been proven that
Hahnemann used the word Erbschaft for heredity in the footnote to aphorism
78 in the 6th Organon where he taught that psora can be imparted by
INFECTION OR HEREDITY In his text critical version of the Organon Schmidt
wrote:"In § 78, footnote 1, Hahnemann writes, that "chronic diseases" "can
be imprinted through infection or heredity." (refer Constitution and
Temperament by David Little 6, Hahnemann on Infection and Heredity). Both
these words begin with and share the root *Erb* in German, which refers to
inheritance. In Hahnemann's usage words that begin with Erb like Erbschaft
and Erb-anlgen do NOT only refer to "hand me down goods" as wrongly
claimed. They refer to inheritance in the biological sense!

Inheritance, heritage and heredity are similar words that share a
common root. Hahnemann used the root *Erb* in Erbschaft and Erb-anlgen
refer to *inheritance* in a medical sense to stand for hereditary factors.
All these words share the ER in English and German. The Tuner Dictionary
printed in Leipzig in the 1830s shows that Erbschaft means inheritance, as
in inherited tendencies, and confirms that Hahnemann used this word as
medical term for heredity. Hahnemann did NOT use the word, Vererbung in the
Organon or Chronic Disease because in 1830 the German word, Vererben, only
meant to "to leave or transfer" and had nothing to do with inheritance.
Lamarck's work on heredity was completed in 1822 during Hahnemann's
lifetime and they did not yet know about transferring of the genetic code.
From the above original sources it becomes obvious that Hahnemann knew
about the inheritance (Gr. Erbschaft) of psora and hereditary dispositions
(Gr. Erb-anlgen) and used these words as medical terms in a biological
sense in his writings.

>David Little made this point which I don't want to leave uncommented:
>
> >>It is my clinical point of view, based on ample case histories of
>myself and other homoeopaths, that the inherited affects of infectious
>miasms can produce predispositions to chronic diseases states in the
>following generations. We are not saying the infectious agent is passed. We
>are saying that an infection in an ancestor can produce predispositions to
>disease states with symptoms in the offspring family line. What we are
>discussing now is whether or not Hahnemann thought that miasms could cause
>predispositions to disease by inheritance and heredity.<<
>
>Coming from a large clinical background, I can say, that the above
>relationships are statistically insignificant. In the majority of the cases
>the remedies necessary for the parental problems have not co-insided with
>the remedies necessary for the successful treatment of the offsprings.

Over the last 30 years I have noted in a good number of cases (much more
than what is statistically insignificant.) that inherited predispositions
caused by miasms in the preceding generations produces disease signs and
symptoms to appear in the succeeding generations. We are not speaking about
the same "parental remedies" coinciding with the remedies prescribed in the
"successful treatment in the offspring". Just because a psoric father
needed Lycopodium and does not mean the son with predisposition to
psora-like symptoms needs Lycopodium. Such simplistic notations do not
apply to such a sophisticated clinic system!

The physical constitution, mental character, hereditary disposition,
environment, diet, habits, and lifestyle of the grandparents, parents and
children are the *primary conditioning factors that produce the various
signs, befallments and symptoms in each individual case*. For this reason,
the remedy of the grandparent or parent is almost always different than the
offspring. The psoric, sycotic or syphilitic tendency will be passed on in
the form of unique signs, befallments and symptoms conditioned by the
individual's constitution, temperament, hereditary disposition, habits,
lifestyles, diet, morals, etc. It is the signs, befallments and symptoms of
the individual patient (the offspring) that is analyzed and is the basis
for the selection of the proper anti-miasmatic remedy. Once one understands
the system it works very logically and effectively in resolving many
chronic cases.

>Furthermore, it should be born in mind, that Psora is an infectious disease,
>and can be contracted by everyone at every stage of live.

All the acute, half acute and chronic miasms originate in infectious
diseases. In the footnote to aphorism 78 (which is not contested as to its
authenticity by Schmidt or O'Reilly), Hahnemann stated that psora can be
imparted by "infection or heredity". Therefore, there are three kinds of
diseases caused by miasms, the acquired and congenital infection during
one's lifetime and the inherited miasms that causes hereditary
predisposition toward certain signs, befallments and symptoms. Infections
in the preceding generations produce inherited dispositions with
recognizable patterns of signs, befallments and symptoms in the succeeding
generations. This has been confirmed by generations of homoeopaths.

Those skilled in the method follow such patterns through the history of the
family lineage and investigate how the inherited tendencies produce certain
active signs, befallments and symptoms as modified by the constitution and
temperament of the individuals we are treating. The system is so well
developed that I have been able to predicted the diseases in ancestors from
the signs and symptoms of the patient. I have confirmed this several times
through investigating family medical records.

>C.M. Boger took up this idea in his article: Finding the similimum
>[homeopasthic Recorder 45th/ 51st 1924} and encouraged the experimentation
>with it.
>
>Over and all, the answer to the above question is irrelevant for the
>successful treatment of Chronic Miasmatic Disease, as the selection of the
>curative remedy remains [after the discovery of the CMD's] on the now
>presented signs and symptoms, expressed by the out of tune dynamis.

It is the active signs, befallments and symptoms in the patient who is
suffering from the affects of the inherited miasm that are used to select
the appropriate remedy. One is not treating the symptoms of the dead
ancestors or the living grandparents or parents who are not the patient.
The symptoms produced by the inherited miasm in the offspring are
personalized by the nature of their physical constitution, mental
character, inherited predisposition, habits, lifestyle, diet, and other
environmental factors. It is the active characteristic signs, befallments
and symptoms found in the patient who is being treated that are used to
select an anti-miasmatic remedy that suits the case.

This methodology is based on the teachings of Samuel Hahnemann on the
heredity of chronic miasms (fn-78, 6th Organon) and hereditary dispositions
(Chronic Diseases). In this way, the homeopath can root out inherited
miasms so that they are no longer passed on through the family line. I have
seen this more than once by following families for decades. If one who has
no understanding of Hahnemann's teachings on the inheritance of the miasms
and hereditary dispositions this subject is only "irrelevant" to them. To
those who know how to apply the complete system in the clinic, this
methodology is very valuable, especially to patients.

In the beginning in 1810 homeopathy was the simple matching of symptoms of
disease with the symptoms found in the materia medica. This method,
however, proved to be insufficient for treating acute, half acute, and
chronic miasms as well as the full range of degenerative chronic diseases
found in every clinical practice. For this reason, Samuel Hahnemann was not
satisfied with what he taught in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Organon. It was his
failures (not his successes) that drove him to study Nature and Life even
deeper than he already had. By the publication of the Chronic
Diseases (1828) and the 5th Organon (1833) homeopathy became a complete
medical system with a deep understanding of exciting and fundamental
causes, the acute and chronic miasms, individual and group disorders,
innate constitution and character, hereditary predispositions, and the
affects of lifestyle, habits, personal and social relationships, sexuality,
diet and other environmental factors (Organon, aphorism 5 and the Chronic
Diseases).

On this basis, the homeopath collects all the objective signs, coincidental
befallments, and subjective symptoms of the mistuned vital force and
studies how diseases affects the body and soul (Organon aphorism 6). From
this collection of this data, the most characteristic symptoms are used to
find the most appropriate simillimum to retune the vital force to the state
of health (Organon, aphorism 153). This is the foundation of the
homoeopathic philosophy and vitalist pathology. This solid basis is what
supplies the healing artist with full knowledge of the disease state,
knowledge of similar remedies, and complete knowledge how to apply the
former to the later. This is what makes one a full homoeopathician rather
than a lay prescriber. Reducing homeopathy to a simplistic matching of
symptoms without full knowledge of the causation and the diseases state
does not express the full teachings of the Organon or the Chronic Diseases
and does not supply the necessary case management techniques to safely
treat degenerative chronic patients. It is my recommendation that students
and homeopaths study the complete homoeopathic medical system rather than
just one part or another of Hahnemann's system. This advice comes from the
heart.

My writings are for the silent majority on the WWW. I am not trying to
convert any one person as you can lead a horse to water but you can not
make them drink. I have taken the time to review the subject of
constitution, temperament, inherited miasm and hereditary disposition in
detail and provided proper sources from the German originals and historical
dictionaries for the sake of discovering the truth. I will leave it up to
the reading public to study the relevant homoeopathic texts, test the
expediency of working with inherited miasms and their symptoms in the
clinic, and then make up their own minds by the results of their clinical
studies. This is my last post on this subject as there is no need to
continue to say the same things.

Sincerely, David Little


>--------------------
>Hans Weitbrecht
>Rational Practitioner
>www.Boger-Boenninghausen.com
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>----

---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

Thank god thats all cleared up. There is a question to be asked here though I'm not sure exactly what the question is. Chris or David is saying that the above information..(from han's perspective or david's)doesn't make any difference in prescribing for a patient. Does Hans think this is true as well? And if it does make a difference..then how?

It won't be "cleared up" until there is an admission that an incorrect translation was offered as a factual reference and that the source for this reference was deliberately misquoted.

Re your question Carol: Have a read of Aphorism 5 again. Note that Hahnemann advises looking for the fundamental cause in illness (usually a chronic miasm). Know your miasms and their inherited effects! and treat the *active* symptoms in the patient. David was saying that after treating family members over decades this kind of information gives him a clinical advantage in treating his patients. For example, study the signs and symptoms of the tubercular miasm also, study the anamnesis of sycosis that Boenninghausen expanded after Hahnemann's death. Hahnemann began the foundational research, others have contributed to it.
Chris

Dear D.L

You wrote:
>>Hans Weitbrecht's statement that Schmidt said, "the whole footnote is in
handwriting, not originating from Hahnemann." has been proven incorrect
and opposite of what Schmidt really wrote in his text critical version of
the Organon.<<

You are free to convince yourself in the commentary page: 123 of the accuracy of my earlier posts.

The full footnote is printed in italics, which reflects, that it is held in handwriting other than Samuel Hahnemann’s. Compare here the explanatory part of the book in the introduction page 15 where Schmidt states the above in the third chapter.

Furthermore footnote 600 [page 260], which relates to the footnote to par.: 78 reads:
Eigenes Blatt in Durchschussblatt eingeklebt. [separate sheet stuck onto the empty interleaved page]

Furthermore the word: Erbschaft in the footnote is a later insertion as the text states, which is written above the normal handwritten text.
Reference: page 123 / second chapter / fifth line / last two words.

Again—look at the text yourself and see for yourself.

For me, the truth is not created it is not by what Schmidt’s own view of the things is,-- the truth lies in the un-commentated manuscript.

My earlier elaborations remain true and are by no means proven wrong.

Here is another interesting view of DL.:

>>>>>The physical constitution, mental character, hereditary disposition,
environment, diet, habits, and lifestyle of the grandparents, parents and
children are the *primary conditioning factors that produce the various
signs, befallments and symptoms in each individual case*.<<<<<<

S. Hahnemann would not have agreed with that when he wrote in par.: 12:

It is the morbidly affected vital energy alone that produces diseases so that the morbid phenomena perceptible to our senses express at the same time all the internal change, that is to say, the whole morbid derangement of the internal dynamis; in one word, they reveal the whole disease; also, the disappearance under treatment of all the morbid phenomena and of all the morbid alterations that differ from the healthy vital operations, certainly affects and necessarily implies the restoration of the integrity of the vital force and, therefore, the recovered health of the whole organism.

Furthermore S. Hahnemann elaborates in the footnote to par.: one:

The physicians
high and only mission
is to restore the sick to health,
to cure.
As it is termed.


Footnote:
His mission is not, however,
to construct so-called systems,
by interweaving empty speculations and hypotheses concerning the internal essential nature of the vital processes and mode in which disease originate in the invisible interior of the organism.
[whereon so many physicians have hitherto ambitiously wasted their talents and their time];
nor is it to attempt to give countless explanations
regarding the phenomena in disease
and their proximate cause [which must ever remain concealed],
wrapped in unintelligent words
and an inflated abstract mode of expression,
which should sound very learned in order to astonish the ignorant
—whilst sick humanity sighs in vain for aid.
Of such learned reveries
[to which the name of theoretic medicine is given, and for which special professorships are instituted]
we have had quite enough,

and it is now high time that all who call themselves physicians should at length cease to deceive suffering mankind with mere talk, and begin now, instead, for once to act, that is, really to help and cure.

__________________
Hans Weitbrecht
Consultant Homeopath
homeopathy study guide: http://www.homeopathyworldcommunity....hy-study-guide

Chris..where would I find the tubercular information and in what book is the boenninghausen sycotic description.

http://www.minutus.org/sycosis.htm

For the Boenninghausen essay on Anamnesis of Sycosis. (Boenninghausen's Lesser Writings p 148.)
See how he completes a regional breakdown of signs and symptoms of the major anti-sycotic remedy Thuja, and by analogy expands the list of anti-sycotic remedies.

For tubercular information, most MM's contain information about the tubercular remedies. HC Allen, JH Allen, Clarke, Choudhuri, Gibson, Grimmer, Hering, Kent etc. I was recently lucky to discover an out-of-print early copy of Sheilagh Creasy's "Notes on the Nosodes I.Tuberculinum and Bacillinum" in my local homoeopathy book supplier's shop. This contains a wealth of clinical information by various provers and clinicians. I believe Sheilagh is in the process of completing a more comprehensive book on miasms based on her substantial experience.