After the success of non-classical homeopathic work which was done by Peter. I have decided to come out from classical loop.

Dear Peter Chappell

As I have already mentioned that I acknowledge your non classical approach. Please send some vial on the address written under my signature.

I assure you I will immediately dispatch the cost of the medicine as and when I received the medicine.

Thank you

Well, since this is a forum for classical homeopathy, I guess you won't be posting here anymore.

You'll be missed.

__________________
...and deliverance has many faces<br />but grace<br />is an aquaintance of mine

If this were truly a forum limited to classical homeopathy, we'd have very few posters.

__________________
Shirley Reischman

To all members especially to Pakistanis

Pay great respect to Divina. She is classical homeopaths.

SR,

Madam, Your words are too short...Inspite of the fact that you are a regular reader and lover of classical homeopathy but you did not say anything when these classical lover were supporting non-classical worker.

__________________
Hafeez
Forum Pk

I was not classical homeopath. That is why I left the forum so early. :razz: I just recieved a phone call on which i have been informed that HHBB has been converted into NON CLASSICAL HOMEOPATHIC discussion. :razz: I was requested to join the board.

Honourable Modern Classical Homeopath Peter Chappell! I am interested in your Classical medicines and formulas. Please book these medicine for me as early as possible. I will pay the expenditure which will be come for this shipment.

Sir thank you for bringing new thoughts in modern classical homeopahty... I will remember you for ever. You are doing nice for work for sick humanity. I fully support you and your efforts for ailing humanity.

[ 24. January 2003, 08:59: Message edited by: Homoeo Dr. Mujahid ]

__________________
<b>DR. MUJAHID HUSSAIN, DHMS, DCA (SRILANKA), RHMP<br />TAHIR HOMOEOPATHIC AND ACUPUNCTURE CLINIC, KHAN BAHADUR PLAZA,<br />CIRCULAR ROAD, GUJRAT STATE </b>

Dr. MAS,

I replied on several of the threads regarding my position. I think that classical homeopathy is the preferred choice of treatment. I have seen examples of classical homeopathy work with AIDs patients. In my own work, I use the Kentian approach and if I am not making progress, I will look at more pathological symptoms, but still base the presciption on the totality of the case as I see it (the art is in analysing the case and determining what is to be cured) and prescribing one remedy that I think comes closest to the case.

I also recognize that there are situations where, from a logistical standpoint, classical homeopathy is not only impracticle, but probably impossible. The situation in Africa for the masses of population suffering from AIDs is one of those situations. There are too many people, not enough homeopaths and no money. So if there is something that will help people, we should use it. You can't do classical homeopathy on a dead person! And 8,000 people are dying each day from AIDs in Africa. There are not enough homeopaths in the entire world to treat all of them, or even most of them, with classical homeopathy.

In the meantime, we should do provings on the new remedy and see if we can then use it in a classical manner. If a remedy is proven, whether a single substance, a combination, regardless of how it's manufactured, we then can consider it a homeopathic remedy because it has a symptom picture on which to prescribe. If it's a combination, as long as it is proven as a combination, it then becomes a single remedy based on the results of the proving.

I hope that clarifies my position.

__________________
Shirley Reischman

Dear Divina

you said

Well, congratulation on taking the job of moderator. I guess Jonh is on leave?

__________________
Principal
Prof Dr. Arshad Sheikh, M.Sc, DHMS, RHMP
Government Zamindar Degree Science Collge, G.T Rd
Visiting Prof, Tahir Homeopathic Medical College.

Hello Shirley,

What do you mean by ...."In my own work, I use the Kentian approach and if I am not making progress, I will look at more pathological symptoms,..."

Kent used pathological symptoms all the time. His case examples and lectures are full of pathological symptoms. He only based cases on M/E symptoms when they were, in his view, characteristics, and only if and when they were present in the case. Most of his cases were based on strong physical characteristic symptoms. Look at the examples given in his Lesser Writings. Over 3/4 are based on physical generals.
I feel you are misrepresenting the 'Kentian approach' by making statements like that.

Chris

You're right that Kent used a lot of pathological symptoms, but philosophically he thought of the mental/emotional as the underlying cause of the pathology. I want a remedy that covers the entire case. I will also dig, probably harder than many of the non-Kentians, to find the underlying M/E imbalance in the case. I've found that when the case has mostly physical symptoms, the M/Es are what usually differentiates the remedy and vice versa. In cases where this approach does not work, I will look more at the pathology and remedies that are noted for their afinity to specific organs. I do agree that most people are not aware of the degree to which Kent took the physical symptoms into account. They cannot be ignored. Also regardless of what the core of the case is, unless the remedy addresses the presenting symptom, at whichever level is most debilitating to the patient, he will probably not return.

__________________
Shirley Reischman

Hello Shirley,

Yes Kent may have had a philosophical view that M/E symptoms underlay physical pathology.
But in practice he only used M/E characteristic symptoms when they were strongly featured in the case. Kent based the case according to whichever characteristics that were strongly featured, if they were physical general symptoms - according to his hierarchy - they were chosen. The M/E aspects then confirmed his selection, as they did for Hahnemann.
This is quite different from turning every case into a core psychological essence prescription - which is a NEO-Kentian practice. Just wanted to make that distinction.

Thanks,
Chris