The Three Miasms.
Study the theoretical part of Hahnemann’s Chronic Diseases.
The three chronic miasms are the next of the ideas we will consider.
In sections 78-80 we find mentioned the three
chronic miasms of Hahnemann. They are Psora, Syphilis and Sycosis.
Here it is stated that if any of these three
miasms is left to itself it will only become extinct with life itself.
Surely with this statement no sane physician would
deny the chronicity of any of these miasms. It is in his Chronic
Diseases that Hahnemann tells us more fully
concerning these miasms.
For eleven years he observed and studied, with the tenacity, concentration
and ability for which his
German habits and great mind so well fitted him, before he brought
forth the theories of the miasms.
While there as been much written against and a great deal of ridicule
cast upon his theory of the psoric miasm,
those who have followed his teachings closely believe in them, and
from the knowledge thus gained have been
able to secure results in chronic work which cannot be matched by
those who do not believe and cast ridicule.
Whether the psoric miasm has been the result of suppressed itch
or not, and be that as it may, do not waste your
time in trying to throw it into disrepute, but when you have a case
that will not react to the apparently
indicated remedy, look well into your case and see if you cannot
discern one of the miasms. Ofttimes you will find
traces and then the administration of the indicated anti-psoric
will cause a reaction which will lead to a cure.
In the dynamic, spirit-like, vital force, we find the three
parallels of Hahnemann. Here we again find that far-reaching clear
sightedness and concise expression of Hahnemann’s logic. Where
have we
since the writing of the Organon found anything which expresses
that condition or being which controls and hold in harmony our life
forces. Many of our physiologists and embryologist have given us
theories concerning this condition but does the phagocyte theory
or the opsonic theory with their variations give
us anything better than Hahnemann’s description?
In Section 11 we find: “This vital force alone animating
the organism in the state of sickness and of health imparts the
faculty of feeling, and controls the function of life.”
Section 12: “Diseases are produced only by the morbidly
disturbed vital force.”
When first trying to master Homoeopathy, after a perverted viewpoint
gained in an old school college, this vital
force was one of the hardest things for me to comprehend. In discussions
raised from my standpoint as a pathologists
and bacteriologist I would always chase my opponents to this stone
wall, vital force, when they would nimbly hop
over and intrench themselves behind this barrier, and I could only
hurl my arguments against this wall and never
dislodge them. In the light of advanced findings of our bacteriological
laboratories I am inclined to believe that
some of us carry this a little too far. While all fair minded physicians
will admit that the predisposing cause of all
diseases is the derangement of the vital force, I do not think we
can deny that it has been proven beyond doubt that
in the exciting cause of diseases, at least, there is a bacteriological
factor, and we must admit that the ground must be
made fallow by this deranged vital force in order for these minute
vegetable organisms to produce their morbific
effect, we must not pass over the fact that with this predisposing
cause present the pathogenic bacteria are the
exciting cause of many diseases.
In Sections 9-22 we find the explanation of the three parallels
of force. These are as follows:
(a) Plane of vital dynamics of organism;
(b) Plane of disease cause;
(c) Plane of medicinal substance.
In section 83 Hahnemann gives us the three requirements or three
qualifications necessary before we can properly
examine a case. These are unbiased judgement and sound sense, attentive
observation and fidelity in noting
down the image of the disease. In the following paragraphs he further
brings out these points by telling us that we
must see, hear and observe.
We must enter upon the work of taking our case with unbiased judgement
and sound sense. This is the hardest
requirement for all of us to follow, and one calling for [most]
rigid self-scrutiny. How often it happens as we are
listening to the symptoms of a case the picture of a remedy comes
to mind, and if we do not use sound sense we are
biased in favor of this remedy, and we do not use sound sense we
are biased in favor of this remedy, and we do not
question further and bring out the whole picture of the diseased
patient.
Then, again, we may maintain unbiased judgement until the case
has been
fully taken and then lose our sound sense of reasoning by saying
such
and such a case was like this and a certain remedy cured, therefore,
“I
will give that remedy without further investigation.” Then,
again, in
younger men comes the desire to produce results quickly. They want
to
make a reputation to give relief from the pain at once, and so they
give
something of an opiate to deaden the pain, or they give some application
to relieve the itching, or to dry up an eruption, although their
sound sense tells them that a cure can never be made
in this manner. And so in many ways we need to resist temptation
and use sound sense and judgement freed from
bias.
|