Cheapest locales for excellent homeopathy? _{Page 3 of 3}

Girilal,

I don't know why other people influence me so much.

I think that my vital force has gradually weakened. For a time, I was compensating, and now I'm decompensated. I feel likely to prove any remedy. (If so, giving me Plutonium Nitricum might not have been a good idea.)

Some explanations I've heard, that I thought rang true a little, were ones from allopathic psychology. They say 'whatever happens to you in childhood and adolescence is more likely to leave lasting impressions.'

A few years ago I tackled (as an academic subject related to public health) the question of why we come to trust some people and not others. Some we trust because they are introduced to us by others we trust. But who did we trust first? Our parents. And why? I think it is because they were there first, and they were good to us, at least a little.

That milk sugar was perhaps the first taste of human kindness. (Carbohydrates are digested in the mouth, proteins in the stomach.)

I even had a cynical idea about Jesus: Perhaps love was not his message, but only the way he got people to listen to him. Love switches people into the mode of infancy, with its implicit trust.

Milk sugar (with kindness) might play a similar role.

I don't know why milk sugar /alone/ could ever prove toxic to some, except for the Arndt-Shulz law.

Dutch homeopath Tinus Smits (he has a website) has written some interesting stuff about 'universal layers' which inspired me to look into Sac-lac as remedy. He talks about 'lac maternum' as a remedy healing one of the 'universal layers' that all people have. These layers can be addressed after outermost, individualized layers are peeled off. This system makes a lot of sense to me. However, maybe since this forum seems more nearly unicist in orientation, this is not the ideal place to discuss it. I would like to move my discussion to a forum that more openly invites thinking in a framework of, for example, homotoxicology. In my case I think it quite possible that nearly everything wrong with me is iatrogenic -- the consequence of allopathic medication and procedures. And since I have a good chronological record of what was done to me, it may be practical to peel off each of those iatrogenic layers until I reach the point of Sac-lac.

Again regarding others' influence on me, a few more ideas:

1. Bodily and mental pain (perhaps some of it from somaticized suppressed emotion) leads me 'out of body' into intellectualizing about topics generalized from myself but becoming less and less related to me.

2. I have been reading voraciously. For each person who influences me a lot, I have read many more authors who did not seem nearly as good. The more bad or incomplete, thinking I read, the more conviction I have that certain authors are worth paying attention to.

3. 'Lac' patients have 'incarnational issues' and these relating to boundaries between self and nonself. I am not fully incarnated. In fact, I remember a day, when I was 10 or 11, that I stated 'I do not want to be awake or asleep, to live or to die; I want simply not to exist.' That was a very interesting statement from a child. Also, I can see that this idea has never really left me. Even now I would prefer to die, except that my death would hurt those who love me (and also, I now also believe, probably I would be reincarnated to suffer all over again).

Helping others with homeopathy would be a satisfying outlet for the altruistic and philosophical urges that drove me to mind-uploading, public health, massage therapy, bioelectronics, and grand unification theories of energy medicine. Becoming a lay homeopath is a good idea to keep in mind for the future, if I survive and can find a way to support myself. However, at present, my material situation has become urgent enough that my interest in helping others has temporarily waned. If your interest in helping me has likewise waned, should I ask for a second opinion from someone else?

Not only am I an absent-minded theorizer of little practical use to myself or others, I have also been arrogant and now even rude. I appreciate your kindness, Kadwa, and Sri Sri, and especially Girilal.

I will watch the forums and see if there is anything I can contribute. I hope that I really can be of some help to someone sometime, and that my collection of ideas -- borrowed from here and there and hoarded up -- will not undermine people's confidence in more 'simple' styles of homeopathy. Meanwhile I -- who lack confidence -- fear that my curse of unconfidence may be as likely to infect patients as to help them. I hope that if I post anything that is false or that undermines confidence, you all will feel free to correct me.

As much as I would love to be regarded as a terrific thinker, and as much as I have tried to be one -- even if it were true, I would not deserve credit for it. As a particularly spoiled rich citizen of the USA -- and as a beneficiary of its rapacious global empire -- I had extra money to spend on books and high-bandwidth Internet access. Among various books, I bought one from Sankaran and several from authors in continental Europe. But if you are having good results with your methods, I would be wise to study them even more carefully. You may be able to treat far more patients than those authors, which would give you even more valuable insights and possibly a better system than any of the above.

I don't think I have given you a link to that forum -- at least, not here. But I have researched him and learned that he is associated with that forum. I had registered there already.

I gather that he advocates a purist 'classical' homeopathy. I am certain that cannot solve all cases. With N different symptoms in our repertory, we may need up to (2 to the power N) different remedies. But we have far fewer remedies in our materia medica.

Are you sending me as a curmudgeon philosopher to spar with a well-known curmudgeon philosopher? :)