AV: The discovery, or at least the application of the law of similarity, has led to a healing system that seemed promising at first, but in its ultimate consequence is extremely unrealistic. We can partially remedy this through systems of grouping of remedies that allow us to better find one that is close enough to cause resonance.
My question now is: since we don’t know how close or how far the remedy we prescribe is from the similimum, and can only evaluate this afterwards, could this be the reason that there is such a difference in reaction and reaction speed? Some people seem to respond immediately and others only after weeks or months. Is it the closer the faster?
G: To ask the question is to answer it.
AV: Really? So: remedies that seem to be a good fit but still produce a slow, weak, or incomplete response may be too distantly related? Should we be on the lookout for a closer relative?
G: Yes.
AV: That’s a straightforward answer.
G: You can test it in all cases where the response is not there or is unsatisfactory. But a too distant family member is not the only reason. I remind you of the healing setting we talked about: after all, the conditions for the patient are that he must be curable, willing and ready to heal, that is: to give up his disease. There may also be an underlying factor that creates a blockage, which must first be removed. If your patient does not meet the conditions, the homeopath and the remedy, even meeting all the conditions, will not be able to bring about a cure. It takes 3 to tango in homeopathy.
H: Should we also think about vertical relationships?
G: In general, the similimum does the hard work. After a treatment that can last a year or a few years and where it seems as if the similimum has nothing left to offer because coherence is now a fact, other remedies or modalities can still correct beauty flaws or unfinished business. There are homeopaths who use anti-psoric remedies to remove a supposed hereditary layer, there are homeopaths who give everyone a snake remedy or another remedy from the animal kingdom. Sometimes, somewhat by chance, one stumbles upon vertical relationship.
AV: Where can we learn more about that?
G: Google!
AV: So the “close enough to resonate but not close enough to heal quickly” can be replaced either by a closer horizontal relative or a vertical relative. It doesn’t get any easier.
G: I’m sorry. But may I point out that expectations are also high? Total transformation, deliverance from all pain, sorrow and suffering on all levels with a single miracle pill?
AV: It sounds insane, I know. We’ve ended up in this situation because of the success of homeopathy in acute situations: there the remedies work quickly and effectively. One expects an equally lightning-fast result in chronic cases.
G: Chronic, read lifelong.
AV: We consider the ‘condition’ in which the patient finds himself to be congenital, then we indeed speak of a lifelong problem. Many homeopaths argue about whether it is ‘nature’ or ‘nurture’, in other words: did the patient acquire his disease somewhere or was he born with it? To me it is clear that the patient is born with his uniqueness. That is not later carved into it by experience. The individuality is not a consequence of the patient’s context and experiences, although these obviously have an influence on the formation of his personality. But every mother knows: her baby is unique! Not because she shaped him or her that way, but because he or she was born that way, completely different from his brothers and sisters.
Entrainment
AV: Because no one knows exactly how homeopathy works, everyone has their own theory or hypothesis. So do I. In my opinion, the underlying rule is entrainment: a stronger signal (or remedy) that someone receives synchronizes the already present one. I suspect that the remedy, whatever it is ‘made’ of, is a perfect representative of that substance or concept. Since it is similar to the distorted pattern of the patient, the more coherent remedy acts as a perfect example and ‘pulls’ the patient’s condition along with it. In this way, harmony is restored.
G: That’s right.
AV: That’s right? I would have liked a little more explanation.
G: Isn’t it amazing that every time you find an answer, you think there must be a better one.
AV: Now that you mention it…
G: Actually, it’s not that strange, and you’re right: there’s always a greater truth, a broader perspective, and as if with every answer you feel that this is not the definitive one.
AV: I can’t wait to leave behind the transitions and limitations of the 3rd dimension and this body, to know and understand everything. That’s what I’m counting on.
G: Patience is a virtue, my daughter, and you don’t have it. Entrainment is a universal phenomenon: the interconnection of everyone with everything and everyone ensures a continuous exchange of information, with the more coherent frequencies attracting, pulling and making the less coherent ones in the environment more coherent. That’s why you’re actually not treating just one person, but the entire network they come into contact with.
More questions?
Everyone to the homeopath
AV: Of course. I can’t believe that everyone should be treated by a homeopath in order to be a balanced, harmonious and healthy person. Especially considering the complexity of homeopathy, finding the similimum is a bit like a needle in a haystack.
G: We must break the issue down into pieces. Homeopathy is the second most widely used healing method in the world, not an obscure or marginal phenomenon. This means: it’s not that hard to find a homeopath. By the way, didn’t you write a book yourself with the title: ‘Homeopathy is Everywhere’?
AV: I meant the pervasiveness of the principles, rather than the therapists.
G: That was also correct, and we will come back to that. You think it’s weird that everyone should go to a homeopath to get healthy, but no one thinks it’s weird that all of humanity must have access to regular medicine and be able to consult a doctor regularly. On the contrary: it is taken for granted by almost everyone. Although medicine in the West has developed sophisticated treatments, it works largely on the placebo effect because of overwhelming marketing strategies. It has no clarity about the essential mechanisms of disease and health. The influence of the mind on the body is ignored or denied. But when Clemens Kuby makes a full recovery from a spinal cord injury with the strength of his mind, the doctor who gave him a ‘wheelchair for life’ somehow must have a gap in his knowledge. More than one, by the way, because the nocebo effect of medical diagnoses has caused many people to die prematurely. What I mean is that the most widespread healing method ‘offered’ the entire world population is officially the third leading cause of death in the USA. I hope you see the irony of that. And we are not talking about what is so beautifully called ‘iatrogenic diseases’: chronic diseases caused by medical intervention. So to answer your question: should everyone be treated by a doctor to be and stay balanced and healthy? Most people would answer in the affirmative, without finding it strange. Because Western medicine has acquired a quasi-monopoly position, hardly any questions are asked. You go to the bakery for bread, and to the doctor if you have the flu.
AV: Makes sense…
G: It wouldn’t be a problem if different therapies could coexist with similar accessibility and price.
AV: That would be brilliant. The situation of homeopathy differs from country to country: here it is banned, there it is curtailed, almost everywhere it is suspected, ridiculed or labelled as dangerous On top of that it is also disproportionately expensive compared to conventional medicine. With taxpayers’ money, vaccines are provided for free and medication and doctor’s visits are made cheap.
G: It would not only be wonderful if other healing methods were given an equal place alongside regular medicine, with the same status, the same financial arrangements and accessibility, it would be only natural.
AV: Then the issue that everyone must visit a homeopath is actually solved It is simply the social organization that makes this seem a strange or unthinkable concept. In fact, it is no crazier to consult a homeopath than a doctor.
G: The only strange thing is the amazement with which you observe this.
I wanted to add something about “Homeopathy is Everywhere”: what was not so clear from the texts of the booklet was that there is not one but a lot of natural laws at work in homeopathy. And not only in homeopathy but in all therapies and by extension in everything. Natural laws have no exceptions, rules do. If you understand that these laws are all active in homeopathy as well, you will better understand the complexity.
AV: Which discourages me in my pursuit of simplification.
