Question: What advise you will give for younger homoeopathic
generation. As there in different School with different
opinion all over the world like Sankaran, Predictive
Homoeopathy, Vithoulkas, Sehgal group etc.
Answer :
"Schools" are a social phenomenon, not a scientific one.
There is just one science with theories that complement
each other. One can compare it with physics: there is
no school for electricity and another for gravity and
another for quantum physics. It is just all physics. The
same is with homeopathy: a remedy is just the remedy.
One can look at a remedy from different points of view,
but the remedy will stay the same. One can say it also
like "A remedy does not care how it is found" . Or said
more scientifically: the effect of the remedy is
independent on how it was deduced.
But there is a split growing in homeopathy between a
more conservative group and the ones with new
developments. The conservative group calls itself
"Classical", claiming to be the true inheritents of
Hahnemann. They tend to put new developments away
as not real homeopathy, or new schools, or something
for the very advanced, but surely not for beginners.
Unfortunately most teachers at schools tend to be in
the conservative group, learning students only the old
homeopathy. Discussion between the two groups are
not very fruitful, often leading to blaming and slander.
An example can make this more clearer. I had a
discussion with Vithoulkas about the development of
remedy pictures. Vithoulkas stated that they can only be
deduced from provings, and maybe, maybe a little bit
from clinical cases. He evaluated the idea of deducing
pictures from classification as: not homeopathic, not
Hahnemannian, idiotic and egotistical of the developer.
All these four arguments have no scientific value
whatsoever. It is a pity that the discussion could not be
elevated to a scientific level.
Vithoulkas does a similar thing in ridiculing the idea
that remedies form the different kingdoms have special
qualities. But again he does it without any scientific
argument, he just ridicules it. It is a pity that he
promotes those ideas without having any experience
with them. Experience shows that those ideas are valid.
It is a pity that Vithoulkas cannot see those difference
and it is even more a pity for his patients. But the worst
is for the homeopathic community because it leads to
division and confusion.
Much of the argumentation of the "Classical" group is
that it is not what Hahnemann has said. But that is not
a scientific argument. It is more a religious argument,
like people who base themselves on the bible or koran
as definite texts. But scientifically it is of no interest of
who has said what, it is only of interest of what has
been said is true.
-jan scholten
Dr. Pawan S. Chandak:
Whats your opinion on the concept of 'The Unprejudiced
Observer' How do you apply this in your practice or How
do you give direction to your students ?
Jan scholten:
The 'Unprejudiced Observer' is an ideal that does not
exist, but one has to be try to reach it. All the
personalities of the homeopath will hinder to be an
'Unprejudiced Observer'. The personalities bring in their
own stuff. As a homeopath, one gets confronted with
ones own personalities in the therapy of patients. They
will show up as hindrances in helping patients. So the
homeopath can develop himself, becoming more healthy
and more unprejudiced, by looking at his problems in
therapy. That is one of the beauties of being a
homeopath.
.Nowadays many homoeopaths are using Patents,
combination, biochemics, mother tinctures at a time.
What do you think due to such things is there any
chance of Suppression & what's your view towards
concept of suppression as told by
Dr.Hahnemann.?
Suppression can happen always when the correct
remedy is not given. Suppression is a general and
natural development, also without therapy. But therapies
can contribute to that and the more "strong" the
therapies the more they can cause suppression. It is a
question if palliation is possible without suppression.
Can you please tell us about your life from childhood
till now.
There is not much special in my youth. I grew in a small
town in the south of the Netherlands. I went to school
as everyone else. There is a medical tendency in my
family; my father was a veterinary doctor, 2 brothers are
vets and my third brother is also a doctor, a general
physician.
The most peculiar things are more internally. I have
always been wondering about life and people, what
drove them. I have always been in search for the
essence of life . Maybe that is why a test showed that
for me the study of biochemistry was indicated, so I
started studying that. The testers discovered my
interest in science and life and combined the two in
biochemistry.
However it later turned out that for me biochemistry
was too “dead”, it lacked life, the essence of life. So I
went almost to the opposite study: philosophy. But after
a few years I discovered that the professors were more
interested in nice theories than really questioning the
essence of life. So I left.
After that I studied medicine. The theory was nice, but
the practice often did not feel good. I often had the
feeling that patients would have been better of not
being in the hospital. At least, I would not have liked to
be done to me, what was done to patients. This was
especially the case in the cancer clinics. I also asked
several oncologists if they would like to be treated the
same way and mostly said they would not. Maybe I was
too critical, but it was long before I encountered
homeopathy.
After graduating I decided to study as a general
practitioner, as I definitely did not want to work in a
hospital, for the reasons mentioned. During that time I
followed some courses in alternative medicine:
acupuncture, orthomolecular medicine and later
homeopathy. I choose homeopathy as the last because I
had the idea it was too far off. But when I studied it I
discovered that it was real medicine. Stories of patient
feeling young again, feeling their old self coming back:
that is healing.
Since that time I have only worked as a homeopath. In
homeopathy all came together , it was as if coming
home. In homeopathy one can find what moves people,
how a body works and reacts to stress, how it
expresses the problems. Homeopathy is in a way a
combination of medicine, psychology, mythology,
physics, philosophy, sociology. In a way in encompasses
all sciences.
Also tell us any special reason behind Interest &
Conversion in Homoeopathy ?
I was truck by the fact that one can really heal with
homeopathy, that patients felt younger, as they were
before becoming ill. If the stories I was reading were
real that was what I wanted to do. I just wanted to heal
people, really cure them.
Who is the Man Behind you in your Homoeopathic Life. I mean who is your Guru or Teacher or Guide or
Inspiror ?
There is no special guru. Life is a guru, it teaches one
all the essential things. Patients are a guru as they will
show the homeopath if he has seen the correct picture
and thus has given the right remedy. Colleagues are
gurus by showing good cases and telling good ideas.
This article is a copy of an interview that Jan Scholten
has given to Dr. Pawan S. Chandak.
Tue, 18 Aug 2015, 9:09 PM - +91 98843 46007: All schools of methods are like Militry weapon we should know how to use where to use and when to use .
Tue, 18 Aug 2015, 10:03 PM - Charu Dr: Murali sir @want to read the whole article. source link please 👍
Tue, 18 Aug 2015, 10:16 PM - Murali Castro: Interhomeopathy - Interview with Jan Scholten / Dr.Pawan.S.Chandak interviewer - http://www.interhomeopathy.org/fr-interview-with-jan-scholten--drpawanschandak-interviewer
Tue, 18 Aug 2015, 11:08 PM - Murali Castro: How to prepare ourself to become a classical homeopath
Tue, 18 Aug 2015, 11:09 PM - Murali Castro: Read this article, to get the answer. http://www.vithoulkas.com/the-necessity-for-an-inner-preparation-of-the-classical-homeopath
