Page 17 - Winter 24-25

should not be taken personally and would disappear again after the proving.
Compare and share Proving results
Of course, it is particularly valuable to compare the results of different Provings of the same remedy, if available and there are personal benefits of a Proving for both the Prover and Supervisor.
An answer can be found as usual in the Organon §141.
The most reliable and best remembered symptoms are those experienced as a Prover or Supervisor and if you want to understand a remedy to which you lack access take it with this in mind.
There is no better way to bring homeopathic knowledge to life and to experience the real power of a homeopathic remedy.
Everyone who takes part in a proving learns much about: the ability to observe them- selves and the patients; understanding that recognising and conveying a symptom with all its modalities is not easy; the tendency of patients to bear things voluntarily and to be more patient with patients.
GET INVOLVED IN PROVINGS
Replying a reply on mis-prescribing
Mark Carpenter on George Vithoulkas’ talk
Dear Mark
Let me first state that I fully agree with you that fear is a bad teacher, not only for homoeopathy. And it’s a real coincidence that in 1995 and 1997 I was in Alonissos too, albeit not together with you from the BAHVS. I was invited twice by George Vithoulkas to an international teacher’s meeting with colleagues from South America, North America, Asia and Europe (among others if I recollect correctly Jayesh Shah, Dario Spinedi, Massimo Mangialavori, Eugenio Candegabe, Vangelis Zafiriou). We there discussed concepts and cases and we often disagreed, disagreed on concepts or interpretations of cases. This shows how difficult homoeopathy can be, if even very experienced teachers didn’t always agree on everything.
But upon several things there was complete unity: Homoeopathy is giving one remedy at a time and then observe and judge. Already back in the 1990’s schools evolved that practiced a polypragmatic approach, gave more then one remedy at a time, didn’t wait long enough to observe or had no clue how to interpret the reaction to a remedy.
New concepts in homoeopathy should not be taught or published too early, before they have been critically reviewed by experts from other schools.
Provings have to be done exactly as stated by Hahnemann.
And yes, there was unity that not adhering to these principles, means not doing proper homoeopathy. The question how harsh one criticizes teachers, schools or even students that don’t adhere to these principles is important. However, let’s not forget how harsh Hahnemann talked and wrote about the (in his words)
bastard homoeopaths. I believe this was at least as discouraging as Vithoulkas’ words.
Yes, we have to encourage young vets to learn and practice homoeopathy. But, at the same time we must ensure that what they practice is homoeopathy and not allopathy with dynamized remedies. Yes, one reason why homoeopathy is on the decline are the attacks against us – but some of these attacks are because we don’t work correct enough and disseminate thoughts which are neither logical nor true. And it is the duty of every teacher to warn students from doctrines that are wrong. Following such doctrines can truly harm patients. Frequent mistakes are for instance not observing that the disease is going into the wrong direction, i.e. centripetal; or not knowing how to differentiate between a palliative and a suppressive reaction to a dose of the remedy.
The latter is one mistake that all of us have done and do. As long as we realize it in a case and take a learning it is ok. But continuing this practice is not state of the art and has to be clearly condemned. And I think this is the job George Vithoulkas is doing. It might be intimidating but at the same time it is important to listen to these words.
In a course of beginners or near beginners it’s the task of the teachers to show the pupils the beauty of homoeopathy, the beauty of solved cases, the beauty of finding a simillimum once per year and the fulfilled life you get as a homoeopathic practitioner. And let me conclude with an observation I made as teacher: those of my pupils that followed the stony way of Hahnemannian homoeopathy are still doing so, whereas many of those that began practicing bastard homoeopathy stopped after a couple of years. Therefore, yes Mark I understand your lines but nevertheless clear words like those of Vithoulkas should not be suppressed but heard even from beginners.
Marc Bär, DVM, Switzerland
15