Hi Dr Bhatia
I like what you say about the VF in cure and your way of explaining what Hahnemann was getting at. However there are a couple of points I’d like to comment on.
In your piece you mention that we are still a long way from understanding the full dynamics behind the action of homeopathic remedies and so it is fairly pointless to theorise about such things. I believe you are correct in that, but theorising is almost a hobby of mine and so what I am about to say should be taken as just my thoughts – I don’t have any evidence to support them but it’s interesting to explore these issues anyway.
I think we sometimes get sidetracked by this idea of remedy as energy medicine. My current thinking is that we should not attribute any energy qualities to the remedy. If the action of the remedy is due to it’s energy, I’d have thought the level of energy of a persons vital force will be several million times more than that in a remedy so a remedy’s energy would be swamped by that of a (deranged) vital force and therefore be ineffective. I’m thinking that it is not energy that causes a remedy to act but information – as you were hinting at in your points about symptoms as signals.
If we think about DNA a moment, this is actually just packets of genetic coding. Coding is information. In this case it is organic information but nevertheless the important thing is the information it holds, not the energy. Scientists can now take DNA from long dead animals or plants and grow cells from it. It is not the energy that grows the cells, the energy comes from elsewhere, the DNA is the coding that allows the growing thing to take a certain form.
Now consider a virus. Viruses are not alive in the way we commonly understand ‘life’, they are organic packets containing DNA/RNA that need the energy of the host to replicate – they live through the energetic processes of the host. They are in effect little packets of information which once engaged in a cell, cause the cell to become ‘diseased’. The cell is not diseased because of the energy of the virus but because of the information held in it.
This is similar to a computer virus. The thing that causes a computer to become dysfunctional is not an energetic body, it is a chunk of information. The response and cure to a computer virus is to give it some new programming i.e. information, rather than to give it something full of energy to somehow overcome the virus. Electric current is the vital force of the computer but it is information that decides whether it is performing (healthy) or not (diseased).
I think remedies are packets of information that the vital force is able to read. If someone is susceptible to a dis-ease or to a remedy it is because their vital force is able to take the information and deform or reform as a result of it. The energy is in the vital force not in the remedy.
This ties in to another confusion that I have, which is about the idea that the only way to remove the disease is through the removal of symptoms. As you put it – when the signs and symptoms are removed under the action of a suitable homeopathic remedy, the vital force is also corrected and the health is thus restored. I’m a little uncomfortable with the way this suggests that if you get rid of the symptoms you ALSO get rid of the disease. For me there is no way to get rid of the disease until you’ve corrected the vital force. The VF is the thing that produces or cures symptoms. It is the ‘symptom giver’ as one homeopath puts it. So you cant do anything about the symptoms, you can only affect the VF. The reason I mention this is because I see some people talking about curing symptoms or they may see some symptoms and suggest a certain remedy has dealt with those symptoms and another remedy is needed for the other symptoms – reinforcing the idea that remedies work on symptoms, which I think they don’t.
Anyway, those are just some thoughts which I thought I’d share for no reason whatsoever. As I said, generally I like your explanations and agree with what you say.