After almost 40 years of intensively practicing, studying and teaching homeopathy, many questions remain unanswered, much to my frustration, I must admit. It seems that every homeopath has a theory that he or she is at peace with and can work with. I haven’t been able to do this yet; a gnawing unsatisfied feeling makes me investigate further and further. The driving force is the conviction, perhaps falsely, that there must be a unified theory on which the whole edifice of homeopathy can be based, in all its variations and manifestations.
Lynn Mc Taggart has explained homeopathy in her works; she cites the results of laboratory results of both Jacques Benveniste and Luc Montagnier, both scientists of – at least for their claims about homeopathy – name and fame.
Doesn’t the search end here? Not for me. There are too many domains in homeopathy that are not explained by these theories. Benveniste believed that the ‘message’ or pattern of the substance was stored in water (The Memory of Water) and Montagnier showed that a dissolved and filtered substance could be transferred into an unconnected container by means of an electrical circuit. Water plays a crucial role in both researchers. Although I do not doubt the miraculous qualities of water, results with radionic appliances and noetically manufactured remedies show that it is not an indispensable ingredient to make a homeopathic remedy. It cannot therefore be an explanation for the efficacy of homeopathy, but rather a proof of a perhaps hitherto unknown property of water, namely the capacity to be impregnated and to retain that message or pattern for a period of time by means of water clusters.
But that’s just one of the many unanswered questions in my head. The fact that I have the capacity to know someone’s similimum in advance has added questions rather than answered them. Before I discovered that talent in myself, I thought it was about finding the right thing and focusing our efforts on developing better strategies. If we could prescribe the similimum with greater certainty, we would ask questions such as why some patients have miraculous healings – real transformations – while others respond at all, partially or not at all. Then we would see that the similimum is the reason that there are rapid reactions to the intake, while a partially appropriate remedy only brings a slow or partial improvement. While that in itself is quite an achievement in chronic diseases, often proven resistant to other treatments, homeopaths aim higher. The reason is the total transformation that homeopathic remedies can bring about, a potential of homeopathy that keeps every homeopath going.
Because my colleagues have the same number of questions and I can’t find answers for me in them, and with Neal David Walsch’s “Conversations with God” in mind, I came up with the idea to request a conversation with God. It was in utter frustration that I turned to God and asked if I could – for God’s sake – get some clarity in what has driven me for several decades now. I had had enough of being in the dark about what homeopathy actually is, how it works, why the results are so unpredictable, why homeopaths disagree with each other on all points.
Like Neal, my question was answered. And just like Neal, there is the doubt whether I am talking to myself or to God, to which God then responds by asking what the difference is…
So here is the report of that.
