Hering’s Law and a

Deeper Understanding of Cure
“For truth is of the same eternal origin with the all-wise,
benevolent Deity. Humanity can leave it long unnoticed
until the time ordained by Providence
when its ray shall irresistibly break through the mist of prejudices
as rosy dawn at the break of day,
in order to brightly and inextinguishably
light humankind to its welfare.”
– Hahnemann, 1810

Claude Monet, “Sunrise”, 1872

by Michael McDonald


© 2014 Michael McDonald
All Rights Reserved


The objective of this work is to creatively demonstrate a redirection of
perspective from the material to the spiritual that can disclose the inner
dynamics of the homeopathic cure-process, with the lantern of
Swedenborg’s inspired philosophy focused on Hering’s “Law of
Direction of Cure” as a guide. This redirection of perspective provides
scope to explore some important issues briefly touched on by
Homeopathy’s founder Samuel Hahnemann in his inspired writings, such
as the higher purpose of life, karma and its relation to the actual cause
and cure of disease, the alchemical basis of potentization, the yogic
mechanism of homeopathic cure, and the importance of faith, hope, and
love in the curative process.
The history of Hering’s Law is a significant part of the general history of
homeopathic laws, which are firmly rooted in ancient medical traditions,
including those of Hippocrates and Paracelsus. The latter evidently used a
form of what was later called Hering’s Law, with the most-central heart
designated as the original source of the direction of cure. If we take the
writings of Paracelsus as a starting point of reference, we are led towards
a deeper understanding of what we nowadays call Hering’s Law.
A purely physical understanding of Hering’s Law is demonstrably
inadequate, whereas a spiritual perspective can give depth to in-sight.
Helpful spiritual insights are found in the inspired writings of Emanuel
Swedenborg, whose teachings were incorporated into his homeopathic
philosophy by noted homeopath James T Kent. Swedenborg’s insights
are especially valuable when interpreted in the light of the direct guidance
available in the teachings of contemporary spiritual Masters.

From the spiritual perspective, it can be said that the source of chronic
illness is the endless craving of the separative ego, which creates and
maintains a false dichotomy within the central mind-heart. Transformative cure can be attained with the help of homeopathy through the
progressive annihilation of the central delusion asserting separativeness,
and the subsequent reestablishment of true inner harmony.
“Know Thyself”, the inner-transformative yogic practice that Hahnemann
advocated, is closely related to the basis of his postulated mechanism of
homeopathic action; a leap of faith may be required to recognize this
fully. Yogic practice and homeopathy can work in synergy with the faithenabled loving power of heartful prayer to achieve true healing, which
heals the body, purifies the heart, and brings the individual closer to the
Goal of Life, namely, union with the Infinite Source of Existence.

We render heartful thanks in gratitude to Meher Baba for all and everything; and thanks also to Bhau Kalchuri, Eruch Jessawala, Manija Irani,
Dr Goher Irani, Dr Alu Khambatta, Katie Irani, and my wife Sarah
Schall, for their heart-inspiring guidance and support; and to Dr Trevor
Cook and Dr Vivienne Freeman for their help and encouragement; and to
Gaby Rottler, Chris Ott, Eric Nadel, Stuart Shotwell, Dr Rajan Sankaran,
Dr André Saine, Dr George Guess, Dr Leonard Fox, Dr Michael Carlston,
Dr K-H Gypser, Dr Fernand Debats, and Dr KS Srinivasan for helpful
actions and encouraging words. And there are many spiritually-minded
writers (Jan Scholten, Jayesh Shah and others) newly emerging in
homeopathy and elsewhere, to whom we extend our deep appreciation for
their invaluable ground-breaking explorations in this remarkable field.


Table of Contents




Section I: Hering’s Law
1. Introduction


2. Major Laws of Cure


3. Statement of Hering’s Law


4. Historical Origins of Hering’s Law


5. The Central Heart of the Mind-Heart


6. The Attributed Source for Hering’s Law


7. Hering’s “Law of Order”


8. Hering’s “Three Rules” of Practice


9. The Spatial Direction Rules


10. The Temporal Direction Rule


11. Kent’s Tripartite Formula


12. Swedenborg’s Innermost Supersensible Organs


13. Correspondence of Outermost with Innermost


14. The Viewpoint of “Physiological” Similarities


15. The Viewpoint of “Pathological” Differences


16. Varied Interpretative Perspectives


Section II: A Deeper Understanding of Cure
17. A Higher Spiritual Perspective


18. Spiritual Insight into Homeopathy


19. The Mind-Heart Dichotomy


20. Beyond Dichotomization


21. The Inscrutable Three-in-One Trinity


22. Higher Purposes of our Existence


23. Karmic Balance of Cause-Effect


24. Disease and Cure


25. The Hope of Homeopathic Cure


26. Homeopathic Curative Mechanism


27. Yogic Mechanism Exemplified


28. Bitter-sweet Psoric Temptation


29. Hydra-headed Miasmatic Selfishness


30. Destruction of Egocentric Immaturity


31. “Know Thyself” – the Path to Wisdom


32. Purification of the Heart


33. Faith Enablement of Healing Power


34. The Healing Power of Love


35. Love-opposition and its Sublimation


36. The True Physician


37. Remedy Preparation and Dispensation


38. Conclusion: the Perfect Science


A: Natural, Non-natural, Unnatural Impressions
B: The Trigunas and Liberation


References Cited


1. Introduction
Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843), the founder of Homeopathy, expressed
the concepts embodied in his medical writings in the language of his day.
His audience consisted mainly of would-be doctors, and in order to
propound and promulgate his new homeopathic art of healing he was
obliged to communicate with them in their own language, utilizing the
conceptual framework of their largely materialistic perspective.


Unfortunately, the materialistic perspective is unable to comprehend the
causes of things not externally perceptible, because its focus is outward,
through the physical senses. And laws in homeopathy are popularly held
to be derivable by simple extrapolation from the known scientific laws of
the external material world. However, Hahnemann spoke of diseases as
most generally having a non-material basis (44h): “The material
substances of which the human organism is composed… are regulated by
the laws peculiar to vitality alone… in the condition of sensibility and
activity necessary to the preservation of the living whole, a condition
almost spiritually dynamic… Hence it is obvious that the diseases excited
by the dynamic and special influence of morbific and injurious agents can
be originally only dynamical (caused almost solely by a spiritual process)
derangements of the vital character of our organism.”
Christopher Ott sums up the poverty of externally focused materialistic
thinking (105): “Matter by itself simply is not sufficient to explain all
perceived phenomena.” The redirection of focus away from the limiting
materialistic perspective, toward the spiritual dynamic of disease and cure
that is expressed and implied in Hering’s Law, is the subject of this paper.
Hahnemann penned encouragement to the quest of truth (6), “I know well
how much self-denial it requires to leave the old train of ideas, to
suppress it, and to wipe out, so to say, from the whole memory all the
apparatus of ideas required by study, in order to give ingress, free ingress,
on the soil thus laboriously cleared to the truth.”
James T Kent (1849-1916), probably the most renowned homeopath of
the last century, connected Swedenborg and his remarkable doctrine of
correspondences with Hering’s Law (74d): “Through familiarity with
Swedenborg, I have found the correspondences wrought out from the

Word of God harmonious with all I have learned in the past thirty years.
Familiarity with them aids in determining the effect of prescriptions.”
Kent early on declared (74a), “I take it for granted that every physician in
his heart is searching for truth.” But, as we find stated in Meher Baba’s
God Speaks (88), “The question of details is all the more important when
a subject is beyond ordinary human experience… In the absence of
underlying experience, descriptions of the same one thing often sound
contradictory. But in the light of relative experiences or the final
realization of Truth, the very contradictions prove to be complementary
expressions about the same one Truth.”
The following intellectually groping explorations of Hering’s Law and
related matters may seem to be filled with obscurities and contradictions.
Yet the very contradictions that challenge acceptance of the truth of
Hering’s Law may actually be instrumental in helping us to find a
suitable working formulation that is more accurate in the light of a higher
Truth. And Hahnemann declared that there is indeed a higher Truth, in
his Introduction to the Organon (41): “For truth is of the same eternal
origin with the all-wise, benevolent Deity. Humanity can leave it long
unnoticed until the time ordained by Providence when its ray shall
irresistibly break through the mist of prejudices as rosy dawn at the break
of day, in order to brightly and inextinguishably light humankind to its
The long-awaited breakthrough is joyfully heralded (6) in his quotation of
Gellert’s poem on the title page of Organon (1st edition, pub. in 1810):
"The truth we mortals need / Us blest to make and keep,
The All-wise slightly covered o'er, / But did not bury deep."

2. Major Laws of Cure
There are two major laws of cure generally recognized in homeopathy.
The first is the Law of Similars, rediscovered and revitalized by Samuel
Hahnemann in 1796 (44a): “We should imitate nature, which sometimes
cures a chronic disease by super-adding another, and employ in the
(especially chronic) disease we wish to cure, that medicine which is able
to produce another very similar artificial disease, and the former will be
cured: similia similibus—likes [will be cured] with likes.”
Later in 1810, in his Introduction to the Organon of the Medical Art (41),
Hahnemann verbalized the healing strategy of this new art and science of
homeopathy: similia similibus curentur, “let likes be cured with likes.”
He expressed this concept in action: in symptom compilation, similimum
selection and dispensation, etc. The Law of Similars, previously stated in
the medical writings of Hippocrates, Paracelsus and others, was thus rediscovered and implemented by Hahnemann, by “observation, cogitation
and experience,” and its value actively demonstrated in his daily practice.
Hippocrates (460-377 BC) is quoted in the Introduction to Hahnemann’s
Organon (41) as stating, in Greek, “Through the like, disease is produced,
and through the application of the like, it is cured.” But Hahnemann
added that its wider application was a new development: “Hitherto no one
has ever taught this homoeopathic mode of cure, no one has carried it out
in practice.” Hahnemann further attributed this new development to our
Creator: “It was high time that He allowed homoeopathy to be found.”
Paracelsus (1493-1541) not only stated (12) similia similibus curantur
(“likes are cured by likes”) almost three centuries earlier; he also stated

the reversed declaration (25): contraria non curantur contrariis (“unlikes are not cured by un-likes”), thereby declaring the Law of Similars to
be a bona fide Law. According to Weitbrecht (166c), a law (or “fixed
principle”) is held to be true “if the reverse is valid as well”; but this is
not requisite for a rule. This logic applicable to the Law of Similars has
also been applied to the Law of Direction of Cure, as we shall see later.
Kent stressed the vital importance of obedience to the healing law (74e):
“Obedience demonstrates that homoeopathy rests upon fixed principles—
a law—and is not a mere rule of practice to be changed for something
better.” The complaint of homeopathic physicians that the Law of
Similars doesn’t always work has been addressed by Jonathan Shore
(139): “Faced with the fact that the similar remedy will invariably cure,
we have no choice but to turn towards ourselves and the level of our
skills, when, as so often happens, our remedies do not act as we
anticipate.” Before blaming or belittling our Laws, we should strive to
perfect our own individual skill level.
The second major known homeopathic law, the Law of Direction of Cure,
was disclosed by Constantine Hering (1800-80) and later promulgated by
Kent and his school as “Hering’s Law”. This so-called “law” has been the
subject of endless dispute since it was first announced to the world as
such by Kent. It’s the same argument, as cogently expressed by André
Saine (126): “A law, if it is to be called a law, must explain all observable
phenomena. It is unacceptable to use limited or even selected clinical
phenomena to confirm a supposed law.” And he gave some instances in
which the law as commonly formulated doesn’t seem to work.


However, as George Vithoulkas (164) pointed out, “The fact that most
cases do not [clearly demonstrate Hering’s Law] is not a reflection upon
the prescribing ability of the homeopath but rather upon the severe nature
of the cases which end up consulting a homeopath in the first place.” Still
yet, in spite of the many attempts to make Hering’s Law work “as-is,” it
seems possible that the commonly employed formulation may actually
have been misapprehended, and is accordingly often misapplied (80,126).
Thomas Troward recommends further investigation (149): “When we
first observe the working of the Law under conditions spontaneously
provided by Nature, it appears to limit us; but by seeking the reason of
the action exhibited under these conditions, we discover the principle and
true nature of the law in question, and we then learn from the law itself,
what conditions to supply in order to give it more extended scope, and to
direct its energy to the accomplishment of definite purposes.”
It may be that misapprehension of the actual law or laws underlying
Hering’s Law is the cause of the problem of its seeming unreliability, and
the ultimate solution may be sought through a redirection of focus, from
effect to cause, from the materialistic perspective to the spiritual.

3. Statement of Hering’s Law
Hering never claimed a “Hering’s Law” as such, but he did posit a “law
of order,” as we shall see. What is commonly called “Hering’s Law” of
direction of cure was proclaimed as such by Kent in 1911, and later in
1938 expressed by Kent’s former student and colleague Arthur Grimmer
(1874-1967), as follows (38): “Hahnemann states that under the action of
the homoeopathic remedy symptoms disappear in the inverse order of

their coming, that is the last to come are the first to go. And Hering added
to the above another observation concerning the order in which
symptoms leave the patient when under the influence of the
homoeopathic remedy, it is as follows: Symptoms, pains and disease
processes leave the patient from above downward and from within
outward, or from center to circumference.” The core direction “from
center to circumference” is equivalent to the combination of “from above
downward” and “from within outward”; these observations coupled with
Hahnemann’s rule of sequence comprise what is called “Hering’s Law”.
Hering’s Law is often used in clinical practice as a “rule of thumb” to
distinguish between actual cure and palliation or suppression, and thus to
determine prognosis and the direction that the case is moving, for better
or for worse. Nilmani Ghatak (1872-1940) gave an example (33): “I have
never cured a case of heart disease without appearance of some rheumatic
or skin troubles, and whenever such rheumatic or skin troubles have
appeared the patients have always felt better in their hearts
proportionately to the skin and rheumatic affections that have appeared. If
you remember that the process of cure is always like this—from the
centre to the circumference, from the more internal to the external, and if
you find that exactly the same thing is happening in your patient’s case
you will be able to make sure that it is true cure that is coming.”
Kent gave a similar example to demonstrate his application of Hering’s
Law in the situation when a positive prognosis is contraindicated (74d):
“If you have a heart affection improving on your prescription and a desire
to destroy life follows, you must antidote the prescription: the symptoms
are taking the wrong direction. When rheumatic affections disappear
from the extremities and go to the heart, and later the patient wants to

destroy his life, the course is from without in.”
Although what is called Hering’s Law has often been stated as a law of
nature, it is scientifically unproven, and perhaps not rigorously provable,
since how can we be “scientifically” certain with our ordinary perceptivity, that a given case of so-called cure was not really one of palliation
or suppression? For example, Hahnemann wrote in Chronic Diseases
(43) on the three original chronic miasms generative of human illness
(psora, sycosis, and syphilis), that the most-original miasm psora may be
latently present unbeknownst to all, “so that anyone, who does not know
the signs of its latent presence, would suppose and declare such persons
to be healthy and free from any internal malady.” One’s true state of
health cannot be reliably evaluated by the superficial observer, and
consequently Hering’s Law may be in effect “scientifically unprovable.”

4. Historical Origins of Hering’s Law
What we call Hering’s Law (and/or its various “rules”) has been known
to perceptive physicians since ancient times. George Vithoulkas quotes
(163) several examples of Hippocrates’ practical application of its core
“center to circumference” rule: “One of those who have most clearly
described the direction followed, if a cure is to take place, is Hippocrates
himself. In the 49th of his aphorisms he writes: ‘In a person suffering
from angina pectoris, the appearance of swelling and erythema on the
chest is a good sign, for it shows that the disease is moving towards the
Hippocrates is not recorded as having propounded a “Law” as such, but
he did simply and insightfully demonstrate by example the prognostic

value of the direction of cure. Hahnemann exclaimed of Hippocrates’
wisdom (44b): “How near was this great man to the philosopher’s stone
of physicians – simplicity! …It was owing to the simplicity of his
treatment of diseases alone, that he saw all that he did see, and whereat
we marvel.” Thus Hahnemann extolled the naturally intuitive simplicity
of Hippocrates (105), as one’s guiding light for ascertaining Truth.
Hahnemann’s high appraisal of Hippocrates might equally be applicable
to Paracelsus, whose work, however, he disacknowledged as a source of
his inspiration (100). Hering (who corresponded with Hahnemann) was
“deeply interested” in the life and works of Paracelsus (78); yet
Hahnemann, who also had access to and must have seen the works of
Paracelsus (100), never acknowledged any kind of indebtedness.
According to Robert Dudgeon (25), “It is impossible at this moment to
say if Hahnemann was acquainted with Paracelsus’ writings... The
resemblance of some passages in the Organon and in the minor writings
of Hahnemann, to some parts of Paracelsus’ works is so very striking,
that it is difficult to believe that Hahnemann did not take them from
Paracelsus; and yet had he done so, would he not have acknowledged the
fact?” But Hahnemann’s remarkably persistent lack of awareness of the
teachings of Paracelsus may in itself amount to tacit acknowledgment.
Hahnemann’s biographer Thomas Bradford (6) asserts that if Hahnemann
borrowed his doctrines from Paracelsus, “he himself did not think he
did.” Nevertheless, the remarkable parallels between the temperaments
and medical teachings of Paracelsus and Hahnemann (25) are so striking
as to make one seriously wonder whether the spirit of Paracelsus himself


had not actually been brought back into the world by God, in the person
of Hahnemann, in order to further his selfless work for humanity.
Goethe may have referred to Hahnemann (100) as a “new Theophrastus
Paracelsus” for good reason. Is it purely circumstantial that the two Godinspired physicians so closely resembled each other in so many respects?
In any case, the study of Hahnemann’s writings would certainly benefit
from cross-comparison with the medical writings of Paracelsus.
Take for example, Hahnemann’s quintamillesimal potentizations which
he described in Organon §270 (41): “By means of this mechanical
processing… a given medicinal substance which, in its crude state, is
only matter (in some cases, unmedicinal matter), is subtilized and
transformed by these higher and higher dynamizations to become a spiritlike medicinal power.” Compare with this Paracelsus’ description of his
spagyric “quintessence” (110): “The quinta essentia is that which is
extracted from a substance… then freed of all impurities and all perishable parts, refined into highest purity and separated from all elements… It
is endowed with extraordinary powers and perfections, and in it is found
a great purity, through which it effects an alteration or cleansing in the
St. Exupéry wrote (128): “What is essential is invisible to the eye.” It
certainly seems plausible that these preparation processes might be
essentially equivalent. The processes of succussion and trituration could
in essence generate increments of “subtle energy” from the fiery creative
potential of the loving will-power, this duly imparted to the homeopathic
remedy during successive potentization steps thereby raising it into the


“radiant” state of insubstantiality (73). Thus the effectiveness of this
empowerment process may depend on a kind of “alchemy” (116).
The great mystic saint Hazrat Inayat Khan (1882-1927) described the
probably alchemical basis of potentization (77d): “The qualities of all
things are to be found in their spirit rather than in the things themselves.
Ancient physicians, knowing this, tried to extract the essence from certain
things by grinding, by burning, or by washing them a great number of
times. By doing this they were able to bring out the spirit of the object,
and that spirit became a thousand times more powerful then the object
itself. Those who are acquainted with alchemy know how to bring out the
living part hidden within every substance, every object and even to some
extent their essence; and when this essence is extracted, then all the
benefit that can be derived from that object is derived.”
Paracelsus wrote (110): “What is accomplished by fire is alchemy… The
same is true of medicine. It too was created by God, but not in its finished
state, but still concealed in dross. To release the remedy from the dross is
the task of Vulcan.” The homeopath is a modern apothecary or Vulcan.
The sense of “fire” intended by Paracelsus may actually not be that of
physical fire, but of Vedic Agni (35), the “inner Flame” corresponding to
love-in-action (64), the “will in the heart” to with a loving effort of Godmindful will-power, prepare a subtle but curatively effective medicine.
Aurobindo described the will-force empowering potentization (35): “That
flame of Agni is the seven-tongued power of the Will, a Force of God
instinct with knowledge. This conscious and forceful will is the immortal
guest in our mortality, a pure priest and a divine worker, the mediator


between earth and heaven. It carries what we offer to the higher Powers
and brings back in return their force and light and joy into our humanity.”
Das Gupta wrote (22) of the “close analogy of methods in the process of
preparations of homeopathic and ayurvedic medicines—the same
techniques of triturations [or succussions] with patience and will. You
know that Hahnemann advises the physician to prepare his own medicine
with his own hands and that with a will.” Indeed, the Paracelsian spagyric
“quintessences” are often potentized as the intuitively guided last stage of
preparation for their effective dispensation (37).
Paracelsus not only stated what we call the Law of Similars; he may also
have stated the inner essence of what we call the Law of Direction of
Cure. For instance, Paracelsus wrote of the inward direction of allopathic
suppression, stating that (50) “violent drugs administered by the modern
practitioner usually serve only to drive away effects by shifting the seat
of the disease to a still more interior and more dangerous place.”
The “heart” is the most-interior place, as he elsewhere emphatically
stated of the direction of cure (110): “The art of medicine is rooted in the
heart,” and: “Every cure should proceed from the power of the heart; for
only thereby can all diseases be expelled. Therefore, and take good note
of this, it is particularly absurd to act in opposition to the heart. The heart
wants to dispel the diseases, then why do you drive them toward the
heart? ... After all, the curative power must come from the heart, and the
disease must be driven into the remotest corner ... Every medicine should
act outward from the heart, and not in the direction of the heart. It starts
from the heart and is made to work by the heart’s own power.”


We will take this latter statement of Paracelsus as a guiding precept of
our investigation of the essence of Hering’s Law. But the question needs
answering: what did Paracelsus mean by his use of the word “heart”?

5. The Central Heart of the Mind-Heart
In English, the word “heart” has several different but substantially interrelated meanings. Joan Ford summarized (31): “The heart of a matter is
that which is central to its significance.” If we take it that the abovequoted statements of Paracelsus disclose the essence of Hering’s Law, we
are taking the so-called “heart” of the matter to be the central directionsource, the source of healing from which the cure proceeds.
In an old commentary on the ancient Sanskrit Ayurvedic text Charaka
Samhita, the heart is central-most in its significance (10): “The soul
represents not the universal self but the animated self who enjoys
happiness and misery. This soul together with consciousness and mind
cannot but be located in the heart. That is why consciousness, happiness
and misery are felt only in the heart. One actually feels pain in the cardiac
region and nowhere else while he is in the pensive or unhappy mood…
Thus, all that is felt and also the very act of feeling are dependent on the
heart… if the heart is affected, all the normal bodily and mental activities
are paralyzed. It is not so with other parts of the body.”
The central-most heart may be viewed from three different perspectives:
physical, energetic, and mental. Homeopath Edwin Hale pointed out the
use of applying multiple perspectives (46): “It is my conviction that but
few physicians have realized the importance of the subtle relations of the
brain or mind with the heart; or appreciate the connection between the

soul and that centre of physical life. We might go so far as to assert that
there is a physical heart, which is the life-giving centre of the body, so
there must be a spiritual heart, which is the centre of soul-life.”
The heart may be regarded as a dynamic pivot of vital functions,
energetically balancing the functioning of mind and body. Ralph
Twentyman wrote (150): “Taking a physiognomic look at man, where the
heart rises to its highest perfection, becoming even the organ for love and
conscience, we find the heart occupying a central position... between the
upper and lower poles of man... In the rhythm of systole and diastole the
heart holds the balance between these upper and lower forces... Only
when things are thrown out of balance by disease or unaccustomed
exertion does the heart labour.”
The Sufi mystic Hazrat Inayat Khan voiced a high perspective (77b):
“For a materialist the heart is the piece of flesh hidden in the breast, but
for the mystic the heart is the center of the person round which the
personality is formed…” Elsewhere he stated (77c): “There is a nerve
center in the breast of man which is so sensitive to our feelings that it is
always regarded as the heart… But a mystic's conception is that the heart,
which is the beginning of form, is also the beginning of the spirit that
makes man an individual. The depth of that spirit is, in reality, what we
call the heart. Through this, we understand that there is such a thing as a
heart, which is the deepest depth of man's being.”
From the highest perspective, the heart and the intellect or ego-mind may
be understood to be opposite aspects of the greater “mind-heart” (94) or
mental body. Meher Baba wrote (87): “The soul, which in reality is one
and undifferentiated, is apparently individualized through the limitations

of the mental body, which is the seat of the ego-mind. The ego-mind is
formed by the accumulated impressions of past experiences and actions.”
Meher Baba described the functioning of the mental body (119): “The
mind has a dual function… The first function is that of thinking. The
impressions that lie dormant have to be worked out, and so they appear as
thoughts. This thinking function of mind is known to the Vedantists as
manas. The second function of mind includes all feelings and emotions.
This is called antahkarana. That means the heart. So what is known as
the heart is actually the second functioning of the mind itself.”
The interwoven terminologies of mind and heart, used to describe the
mental body and its mind-heart subdivisions, are too complex to deal
with here, but the nonmaterial heart may be taken as an energetic nexus
mediating the “mind-body” dichotomy, together forming the “spirit, heart
and body” triad alluded to by Hahnemann in Organon §78 footnote (41).
The nexus (mind-body linkage) concept is found in a variety of sources.
According to Childre & Martin (11), “In traditional Chinese medicine,
the heart is seen as the seat of connection between the mind and the body,
forming a bridge between the two.” And Paracelsus seems to have
depicted a spiritually energetic circulation through this heart nexus in
these words (50): “the human blood contains an airy, fiery spirit, and this
spirit has its centre in the heart, where it is most condensed, and from
which it radiates, and the radiating rays return to the heart.”
Cyrus Boger (1861-1935) wrote (4c): ““Energy, as we understand it, is of
a three-fold form, spiritual, dynamic, and physical… In the human body
we have present all three forms of energy, the physical in the tissues, the
dynamic in the brain and nervous system, and the spiritual in the mind.”

Thus the nervous system may be considered to accommodate a second
energetic nexus bridging mind and body.
Pierre Schmidt (1894-1987) described it thusly (132): “The neurovegetative system is the structural bond between the psychic and the
somatic spheres; its paths and centres are graduated from the cortex to the
major diencephalic cross-roads, to the bulb or to the spinal cord, and their
ramifications extend to the vascular extremities and into the depths of the
tissues.” And Ralph Twentyman (1914-2010) described (153) the polar
processes mediated through these nexuses: “Within the complex
processes or functions which constitute the human organism two polar
processes stand in extreme contrast to each other. On the one hand there
are those processes related to the nervous and sensory organs and
functions and on the other those related to the blood.
“Reality is already mediated to us in analysed form through the
sensory organization… and this process of analysis is prolonged into the
nerves and brain… this nerve tissue or process tends to freeze, fix,
separate and finally atomize experience. Within the living organism,
however, this tendency is countered by the circulating blood process
whose inherent tendency is to unify and bring back into wholeness any
process or tissue which is separating itself out of the whole. We are all
inclined to wholeness through our blood and it would be well to
acknowledge that a balance between these polar processes, between
analysis and synthesis, is what we should be aiming at in healing.”
These matters may be thoroughly explored by future investigators. But
for now, we propose for our purpose here that the subtle or energetic
heart referred to by Paracelsus as the actual Direction of Cure may be
representable as an energetic nexus between mind and body comprising

the feeling aspect of the supersensible mind-heart. The mind-heart nexus
is thrown out of balance in disease, and restored by cure. With this in
mind, perhaps a clearer understanding of the nature of the actual law of
disease and cure underlying what is known as Hering’s Law may be
attainable. This understanding should be compatible with the writings of
Hahnemann, the source attributed by Hering to his Law.

6. The Attributed Source for Hering’s Law
Constantine Hering first described a “law of order” in his preface to
Hahnemann’s Chronic Diseases, and he attributed the source of this
concept to Hahnemann. Here are some points relevant to what is now
called Hering’s Law, which were extracted by André Saine from
Hahnemann’s Chronic Diseases (126), with an addition in brackets:
“All diseases, acute and chronic of non-venereal origin, come from the
original malady called psora... A skin eruption is the first manifestation of
psora. The skin eruption acts as a substitute for the internal psora... and
prevents the breaking out of the internal disease... The more the skin
eruption spreads the more it keeps the internal manifestations of psora
latent... But when the skin eruption is suppressed with an external
application or other influences the latent psora goes unnoticed and its
internal manifestation increases [its symptoms become gradually more
troublesome, or develop in more important parts of the organism]. Then it
originates a legion of chronic diseases…”
“During the treatment of chronic diseases of non-venereal origin
with antipsoric remedies, the last symptoms are always the first to disappear, but the oldest ailments and those which have been most constant
and unchanged, among which are the local ailments, are the last to give

way... If old symptoms return during an antipsoric treatment, it means
that the remedy is affecting psora at its roots and will do much for its
thorough cure... If a skin eruption appears during the treatment while all
other symptoms have so far improved the end of the treatment is close.”
The bracketed addition provides Hahnemann’s hierarchy of importance,
the logical source of Hering’s sub-directions. We will see in the next
section Hering’s “law of order,” probably based on some such compilation of the statements of Hahnemann. They represent the most-essential
concepts from which Hering distilled the law which he presented in his
preface to the American edition of Hahnemann’s Chronic Diseases.

7. Hering’s “Law of Order”
In Chronic Diseases (43), Hahnemann addressed the differentiation of
true cure and homeopathic palliation, which is “a kind of a cure which
brought back the manifest [original cause of disease] psora into a latent
condition and thus produced a kind of healthy condition, especially with
young, vigorous persons, such as would appear as real health to every
observer who did not examine accurately.”
It may have been simply to provide the homeopathic practitioner with a
working tool to make this practical differentiation that Hering in his
preface to Chronic Diseases extracted his prognostic “law” from
Hahnemann’s work. Hering stated (78) that “All of what Hahnemann had
left undetermined, or vaguely said, I ground to a finer edge, or made
more pointed.” And so from Hahnemann’s vague “direction of cure” indications in Chronic Diseases, Hering extracted a definite “law of order”.


In his introductory preface to the 2nd edition of Hahnemann’s Chronic
Diseases (Hempel’s American translation) published in 1845 (57), Hering
inserted the following pertinent extract from an otherwise unpublished
essay, entitled “Guide to the Progressive Development of Homoeopathy”:
“As acute diseases terminate in an eruption upon the skin, which divides,
dries up, and then passes off, so it is with many chronic diseases. All
diseases diminish in intensity, improve, and are cured by the internal
organism freeing itself from them little by little; the internal disease
approaches more and more to the external tissues, until it finally arrives at
the skin.”
“Every homoeopathic physician must have observed that the
improvement in pain takes place from above downward; and in diseases,
from within outward. This is the reason why chronic diseases, if they are
thoroughly cured, always terminate in some cutaneous eruption...”
“The thorough cure for a widely ramified chronic disease in the
organism is indicated by the most important organs being first relieved.
The affection passes off in the order in which the organs had been
affected, the more important being relieved first, the next important next,
and the skin last. Even the superficial observer will not fail in recognising
this law of order. An improvement which takes place in a different order
can never be relied upon… The disease may take a different turn, it may
change its form and, in this new form, it may be less troublesome; but the
general state of the organism will suffer in consequence of this
transformation.” (italics added)
“Hence it is that Hahnemann inculcates with so much care the
important rule to attend to the moral symptoms, and to judge of the
degree of homoeopathic adaptation existing between the remedy and the

disease, by the improvement which takes place in the moral condition,
and the general well-being of the patient…”
By “moral”, Hering probably meant “mental/emotional” (159), i.e.,
characterizing the “psychological” heart-center of the human being.
Hering essentially seems to have boiled down the theoretical part of
Hahnemann’s Chronic Diseases, and began his introductory preface by
stating his core direction concept based on Hahnemann: that during the
cure of chronic disease the illness shifts its manifestation in the body,
from center to periphery, terminating in a skin eruption. Then he
introduced the up-down and in-out sub-directions, which add observer
perspective relativity to the center to periphery core direction concept.
The core direction conforms to the hierarchy of importance. Verspoor &
Decker (159) wrote that “Hering (as Hahnemann) had a qualitative
understanding, which was hierarchical in nature, linked to the idea of
‘nobility’ [i.e., intrinsic importance]. This, of course, requires a deeper
understanding of the qualitative ranking of the different organs…” The
qualitative ranking is thus paramount. The innermost psychological state
of the patient, the “most important in terms of nobility,” is to be cured
first, proceeding thenceforward in the order of importance. This is the
center to circumference rule of Hering’s original Law, which has been
commonly considered to describe the spatiotemporal movements of the
cure through the organs of the body. Not only did Hering call it a “law of
order,” but he also stated that a different order “can never be relied
upon,” thus implying that the reverse may be valid – i.e., he considers
that it may be truly called a Law, and not just a useful rule of practice.


8. Hering’s “Three Rules” of Practice
Twenty years later Hering wrote a second article on the same subject
(55), “Hahnemann’s Three Rules Concerning the Rank of Symptoms.”
This article, published three times before 1900 (1865, 1878, and 1888),
was certainly seen by JT Kent, who in turn gave his own version of these
ideas wide dissemination. In it, Hering stated the following “rules”:
“RULE 1-- The characteristics of the case must be similar to the
characteristics of the drug (Organon, par. 153 et al.)…”
“RULE 2-- Hahnemann has given us a second rule in his Chronic
Diseases... The quintessence of his doctrine is to give, in all chronic
diseases, (diseases which progress from without inwardly, from the less
essential parts of the body to the more essential, from the periphery to the
central organs, generally from below upwards), drugs which act from
within outward, from above downward, from the most to the less
essential organs, from the brain and the nerves outward and down to the
most outward and the lowest of all organs, the skin...”
“RULE 3-- Hahnemann gives us a third rule… in his Chronic
Diseases: Symptoms recently developed are the first to yield. Oldest
symptoms disappear last. Here we have one of Hahnemann’s general
observations which, like all of them, is of endless value, a plain, practical
rule of immense importance… It was never observed before Hahnemann,
nor was it ever stated as a rule…”
“The second rule of Hahnemann… is also of great influence when
one arranges the symptoms of the sick. All symptoms of inward
affections, all the symptoms of the mind or other inward actions, are,
according to it, of much higher value than the most molesting or destructive symptoms on the surface of the body. A decrease or an amelioration

of outward symptoms, with an increase of inward complaints, even if the
latter apparently are of little importance, will be an indication that the
patient is getting worse, and one must try to find among the symptoms
those indicating another medicine which will act curatively.”
“Very frequently one will see ineffectual attempts of the inward
actions to throw out and bring to the surface that which attacks the center
of life. The physician must try to assist such attempts… he must inquire
principally for the hidden inward symptoms, and study them with the
utmost care to find medicines which correspond exactly to the subjective
or inward symptoms.”
In this second article, Hering presented three “rules” (n.b: a rule can be a
law) to be obeyed in homeopathic practice. Rule 1 is the well-established
Law of Similars, and Rules 2 & 3 comprise Hering’s “law of order.” The
parallel statements in Rule 2 (“from within out, from above down, from
most to least essential organs”) suggest a dynamic correlation between
the quality of essentiality and the “direction” sub-rules (the hierarchy of
importance). The up-down correlation may be considered tangibly
demonstrable through the hierarchical organization of the central nervous
system, with the brain topmost, and the in-out correlation more subtly,
with the qualitatively most-important “heart” in the center, and the leastimportant skin layer at the outermost periphery.
But while the two directions physically seem to be centrally offset from
each other, Hering may have actually envisaged a most perfect
correlation between them, manifesting from the central mind-heart nexus,
which would accommodate all three aspects of a single unified rule 2.
Thereby united in spatiotemporal functional combination with rule 3, the
three rules would form a unified law of direction of cure.

Kent later regarded Hering’s spatial sub-directions to form (combined
with the temporal direction) a unified whole in essence, stating that (75f):
“Higher means interior in quality.” Vithoulkas explains the concept of
unification (164): “It is not that there are merely four specific directions
of cure; there is in reality only one direction of cure which language can
only describe clearly in terms of four specific observations.”
So now we will look at the spatial and temporal direction rules of Hering
and their reformulation by Kent, and consider how they might all be seen
to function together within the unified law of direction of cure.

9. The Spatial Direction Rules
Recall Boger’s assertion (4c) that energy is “of a three-fold form,
spiritual, dynamic, and physical.” At the lowest physical level, the subdirections of energy flow may be treated as orthogonal (at right angles)
vector components of the center-periphery core direction, as may have
been intimated by Pierre Schmidt (134): “These two actions: from within
out and from above downwards, in accordance with the Law of Hering,
are two indications which express the centrifugal evolution given to the
morbid processes when a true cure is taking place. The interdependence
of the actions which take place in accordance with the Law of Hering,
and their common character which is the centrifugal direction of cure,
accounts for the fact that they are so often intricated.” Thus a spiral-like
centrifugal (“center-fleeing”) flow of energy might have a physical basis
as Hering seems to have speculated by implication in his “Rule of Sides”
(56); the spiral-like basis might be dynamic and/or spiritual (144d,158).


It has been stated that Hering’s physical sub-directions do not perfectly
correlate with each other in clinical practice (126). Perhaps this is due to
the imperfect nature of such a purely physical interpretation. A dynamic
interpretation expressing a higher perspective would probably make more
sense. Weitbrecht (166a) wrote that “[Hering’s] law only makes sense, if
we assume a hierarchic structure being the basis of man.”
The sub-directions may thus be considered as relating to complementary
dynamic aspects of the biological hierarchy described by Hahnemann
(44h): “The exciting causes of disease rather act by means of their special
properties on the state of our life (on our health), only in a dynamic
manner, very similar to a spiritual manner, and inasmuch as they first
derange the organs of the higher rank and of the vital force, there occurs
from this state of derangement... the inevitable consequence of the altered
vital character, which now differs from the healthy state.”
The concept of “higher rank” thereby introduces the up-down subdirection as an aspect of the biological hierarchy. And the in-out subdirection may be the quintessential complementary aspect of this
hierarchy. Vithoulkas wrote (164): “The idea of hierarchy is actually the
idea of the Oneness from which all else has been created. All entities and
all levels are connected throughout the universe by this concept, therefore
it can be considered a universal law.”
The biological hierarchy may thus be considered to have two distinct
aspects, logically depicted as orthogonal to each other: one separative and
the other wholistic or unitive. The up-down separative aspect asserts
discrete levels of functional dominance and subordination (i.e., relative

importance). The in-out unitive aspect ties everything together into a
functional whole with a common purpose: “all for one, & one for all.”
The dynamic hierarchy concept may be more conceptually consistent
than the usual spatial concepts, but the pragmatic value of this is not yet
clear. Hans Weitbrecht pointed out (166d) that the spatial sub-directions
were not stated in so many words in Hahnemann’s Chronic Diseases:
“There is no mentioning in Hahnemann’s works [as] regards direction
from inside out or from top to bottom. These directions are found in
Swedenborg’s spiritualistic teachings (Heaven & Hell, 1758).” A “very
similar” spiritual interpretation based on Swedenborg’s teaching might
make the dynamic hierarchy concept more pragmatically applicable.
Both Hering and Kent were members of the spiritualistic New Church of
Swedenborg (148). Hering is considered to have kept homeopathy and
Swedenborgianism “quite separate” (169), never directly alluding to
Swedenborg in his medical writings. Indeed, he considered direct allusion
unnecessary (114), and declared pragmatically: “While there is good
reason why Swedenborgians might prefer homeopathic treatment, there is
none at all that all homeopaths be Swedenborgians.” However, Kent went
on to openly adopt Swedenborg’s philosophy in his own medical practice
(73): “All my teaching is founded on that of Hahnemann and of
Swedenborg; their teachings correspond perfectly.”
Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772), a scientist turned mystical visionary,
had used the terms “higher” and “lower” in his writings to referentially
denote the “inward” spiritual realm intergrading with the “outward”
material realm (158). We find in Swedenborg’s Heaven and Hell (144a):
“We use the words ‘higher’ and ‘lower’ as a way of referring to more

inward things and more outward things.” The relevance to Hering’s Law
is implicated by Swedenborg’s Paracelsian teaching (142) of the
correspondence of microcosm and macrocosm, namely (144a): “Within
the human individual, the inner person is structured in the likeness of
heaven and the outer in the likeness of earth.” Swedenborg’s teachings
are indeed worthy of study, and can be illuminative in the context of a
deeper spiritual understanding.
According to Swedenborgian philosopher José Pacheco (108), Swedenborg’s directions maintain perfect correspondence with each other:
“Swedenborg divides reality, in a universal and hierarchical way,
into three great areas (the degrees) that act analogically (in correspondence) in all the orders of reality…”
“Swedenborg divided the series of degrees into two classes:
degrees of height and degrees of width. The degrees of height are
successive and discrete (that is, separate); they go from the greatest to the
least, if you start from the top, and from the least to the greatest, if you
start from the bottom. The degrees of width are simultaneous and
continuous, and go from the innermost to the exterior…”
“There exists a correspondence between the higher and the
innermost, between the middle and the interior, and between the lower
and the exterior. All of reality that one finds in a degree of height
participates at the same time in a specified degree of width.”
Swedenborg thus asserts perfect correspondence between the directions
in his interpretative framework. Swedenborg stated that all things
manifest will & understanding (love & wisdom) in degrees of “width and
height” (144b). The degrees of width are interrelated continuously, as in
the jugglery of diametrically opposing states of good & bad qualities,

etc.; the degrees of height discretely, as in the stepwise-pacing
progression of cause & effect (144b). Spiritual insights borrowed from
Swedenborg’s teachings are thus of value in implementing the so-called
spatial rules of Hering’s Law. It may be that the spatial sub-directions
will be seen to emerge in a twisting spiral of quality and pace (129) from
the central heart-focus, as depicted symbolically in the mystical Dance of
Shiva (17), and schematically in the dynamic interplay around the miasmatic triangle of Gurdjieff’s “enneagram of perpetual motion” (47, 107).

10. The Temporal Direction Rule
But how can there be any kind of “space” in this relativistic universe
without “time”? Motion & position are relative. The temporal direction
rule addresses the sequence of the emerging spatial disease/cure signs &
symptoms, and the associated processes (metaschematisms) manifesting
them. Sequence is a temporal function which uniquely interconnects the
inner and outer perceptual realms, covering the full range of cause &
effect accordingly recorded in the memory aspect of the mind.
Temporal functions excepting sequence seem conceptually inexplicable.
“What then is time?” queried St. Augustine (354-430 AD), as quoted by
Paschero (111f): “I know what it is if no one asks me what it is; but if I
want to explain it to someone who has asked me, I find that I do not
know.” Thus he voiced the outward indefinability of the inner dynamic.
The 20th century Russian physicist Kozyrev affirmed (80), “Time is the
most important and most enigmatic property of nature. The concept of
time surpasses our imagination.” He continued (80), “In reality, the exact


sciences negate the existence in time of any other qualities other than the
simplest quality of ‘duration’ or time intervals, the measurement of which
is realized in hours. This quality of time is similar to the spatial interval.”
But Einstein jocularly demonstrated the elusive relativity of subtle
duration perception (29): “When a man sits with a pretty girl for an hour,
it seems like a minute. But let him sit on a hot stove for a minute and it's
longer than any hour. That's relativity.” And he concluded, “The state of
mind of the observer plays a crucial role in the perception of time.”
Perception of duration is thus a relative function of the psychospiritual
state. As Swedenborg wrote (144b), “A pleasant state makes time seem
brief, and and an unpleasant one makes it seem long. We can therefore
see that time in the spiritual world is simply an attribute of state.”
Duration, though not directly addressable as such by Hering’s Law, is
referenced indirectly in terms of serial sequences of events (26), a
sequence being a continuity of the unbroken flow of instants, the ultimate
particles of time (84). The events themselves are strictly determined.
Meher Baba wrote (87): “Time in the semisubtle world [of inner
perception] is not the same as time in the gross world due to the increased
subjectivity of the states of consciousness. Though time in the semisubtle
world is thus incommensurable with time in the gross world, it is strictly
determined by the impressions accumulated in the gross world.”
Kozyrev observed (80), “causality comprises the most important quality
of the real world.” Biological events thus occur in strictly determined
sequences of cause and effect: cause-effect relationships thereby manifest
the existential purpose sustaining the biological hierarchy. True cure has
obviously the same directionality as the life force: according to Kent (73),

“if the patient is cured from cause to effect he must remain cured.” Thus
he emphasized the importance of recording the cause-effect sequence of
disease signs & symptoms for prognostic evaluation of cure.
“Metaschematism” was Hahnemann’s term in the Organon (41) for the
underlying “changes of form” of a disease, the cause-effect sequences of
abnormal alterations of structure and function expressed as spatiotemporal transformations. Recall Hering’s statement (57): “The disease
may take a different turn, it may change its form and, in this new form, it
may be less troublesome; but the general state of the organism will suffer
in consequence of this transformation.” But disease metaschematisms
evaluated for the sake of prognosis are not restricted to negative changes
resulting from symptom-suppression; they can be either progressive or
retrogressive, as in the orderly recurrence of previously experienced
symptoms during the course of a cure (1, 132).
For implementing his working rules of Direction of Cure, Hering stressed
the importance of documenting disease metaschematisms by recording
the exact order of the presenting symptoms. As late as 1875 he wrote that
(54) “because the cure has to aim at curing the entire person, this only can
be achieved from inside out, or from top to bottom. Likewise the
physician has to find out the exact order of the symptoms [as] they came
about. This is also one of the great laws Hahnemann found: that in each
patient the different complaints which arrived one after another always
have to [be] removed in reverse order of their occurrence, therefore the
most recent first and the oldest ones last, and it cannot be changed; if the
physician and patient don’t work in that way, the cure then will not come
about, and the patient will either not recover, or not for a long time.”


The concept of metaschematism was reviewed by Fernand Debats (23),
who concluded: “Diseases should no longer be formulated in terms of
states, but the only correct way is to define them in terms of processes
that occur in time. This time dimension in disease can be much better
understood when we apply the concept of morbid substitution and
syndrome shift.”
Space and time are inseparably interconnected. Hahnemann’s original
concept of metaschematism provides an impetus towards the formulation
of a fully integrated expression of the Law of Direction of Cure capable
of accommodating all of the spatiotemporal phenomena of disease and
cure. For this purpose we will explore Kent’s version of the Law of
Direction of Cure which he coined as “Hering’s Law,” and see how it
complements and expands the implications of Hering’s version.

11. Kent’s Tripartite Formula
Hering’s Law of Direction of Cure was picked up and promulgated by JT
Kent and his school shortly after his death. But Kent did not actually start
calling it “Hering’s Law” in print until 1911 (74d). Was there some
specific impetus that led him to start calling it that: for example, Hering’s
reference to a “law of order” in his preface to the Hempel translation of
Hahnemann’s Chronic Diseases? But according to Pierre Schmidt (133),
Kent may not even have known of Hering’s early preface.
However, the preface was cited by Kent’s colleague JH Allen in Chronic
Miasms in 1904 (1). Kent only began to refer to the Law of Direction of
Cure as Hering’s Law in his homeopathic philosophy classes at some


point shortly prior to 1911 (74d). He may have learned of Hering’s
preface directly from Allen’s work, and his discovery of Hering’s
reference to a “law of order” in this early preface may thus in turn have
led him to attribute the “Law of Direction of Cure” to Hering in 1911.
Kent’s succinct tripartite formula version of Hering’s Law is reproduced
in his student Robert Gibson-Miller’s booklet (revised by Kent and
published at his request in 1909), Synopsis of Homoeopathic Philosophy
(36), as follows: “Direction of Symptoms during Cure. 1. From within
out. 2. Usually from above downwards. 3. In the reverse order to that in
which they appeared. This process goes on until the primary
manifestations of the disease appear, whether it be the chancre of
syphilis, the gonorrhoea of sycosis, or the eruption of psora.” The Law of
Direction of Cure (not yet called Hering’s Law) was thus expressed by
Kent as a tripartite formulation of spatiotemporal direction rules, and
extended to include all of the three chronic miasms. Kent would
elsewhere use the core “center to circumference” direction as a short form
to refer to this tripartite formulation (73).
Kent’s first recorded mention of the Law of Direction of Cure occurs in
an article published in 1885, five years after Hering’s death (74b): “It
must be understood first of all that all diseases when leaving the body—
when cured or self-cured do so under unvarying rules or laws… Nature
operates under fixed principles. Now it must be known first of all that
diseases recover from above downward from within outward and in the
reverse order of their coming. When the phenomena of disease do not
follow this circumscribed limit of directions the disease is growing worse
or at least progressing.” From the beginning Kent thus declared that the
three rules have to be taken together (circumscribed) in a law of cure.

In Kent’s Lectures on Homoeopathic Philosophy first published in 1900
from lectures given as early as 1896 (73), he is more expansively
explanatory: “You would naturally expect, if it is the interior of man that
is disordered in sickness, and not his tissues primarily, that the interior
must first be turned into order and the exterior last. The first of man is his
voluntary and the second of man is his understanding, the last of man is
his outermost; from his center to his circumference, to his organs, his
skin, hair, nails, etc.”
“This being true, the cure must proceed from center to
circumference. From center to circumference is from above downward,
from within outwards, from more important to less important organs,
from the head to the hands and feet. Every homoeopathic practitioner
who understands the art of healing knows that symptoms which go off in
these directions remain away permanently. Moreover, he knows that
symptoms which disappear in the reverse order of their coming are
removed permanently. It is thus he knows that the patient did not merely
get well in spite of the treatment, but that he was cured by the action of
the remedy.”
Hands and feet are basically equivalent in the phrase “from the head to
the hands and feet,” which Kent used to exemplify the preceding phrase
in the hierarchical relation of more-important head to less-important
extremities. And Kent put the mind, conventionally situated in the “little
grey cells” of the brain, whilst actively emanating from the feeling heartsource (121), at the top-center of his hierarchy of importance.
Kent explained it in this way in Lectures on Philosophy (73): “A man has
within him by endowment of the Divine a supreme centre of government

which is in the grey matter of the cerebrum, and in the highest portion of
the grey matter. Everything in man, and everything that takes place in
man, is presided over primarily by this centre, from centre to
circumference… Considered more internally, we have the will and
understanding forming a unit making the interior man; the vital force or
vice-regent of the soul… which is immaterial; and then the body which is
Modern Homeopath Tomás Paschero (1904-86) wrote (111a), “Soul is
not separate from body. The soul gives meaning to the body and the body
is the vehicle through which the soul expresses itself.” The soul, seated in
the immaterial heart, presides over the supersensible will and
understanding which together with memory form the unit of mind, served
by the brain and so on, in hierarchical order of descent. The will and
understanding are aspects of the innermost supersensible higher mind or
mind-heart, which are expressed as feeling and thinking.
Gautama Buddha (563-460 BC) stated of the memory aspect (123) that
(in paraphrase) “the mind of each human being is centered in the heart
and… extends into every live cell and molecule in his or her body.” An
all-pervasive cellular mind could conjecturally form the third “mind-body
nexus” mediating between the other two nexuses; and memories would
be accessed through the form of the imprints recorded in the cellular
tissues of what has been experienced in this life, comprising the memory
aspect of the super-sensible higher mind.
Swedenborg said that memories are inscribed in mind and body
accordingly as they take form (144a). The three aspects of Kent’s
tripartite formula directly relate to the three supersensible aspects/organs

of the mind. Kent considered disharmony between these organs to be the
ultimate cause of chronic disease.

12. Swedenborg’s Innermost Supersensible Organs
The voluntary will and understanding intellect are located in the supersensible abode of the “innermost”. Hahnemann wrote of supersensibility
in a footnote to Organon §11 (41): “Only someone who is cultivated and
therefore exercised in comparison and abstraction can form a kind of
supersensible idea, …keeping far from his thoughts all that is material or
mechanical.” Thus by supersensible Hahnemann meant non-material or
“spiritual”, which is innermost according to Swedenborg (108).
The supersensible aspects/organs should function together in health, in a
balanced and harmonious way. According to the ancient Ayurvedic text
Charaka Samhita (157): “Whatever act is done by one who is deranged
of understanding, will or memory is to be regarded as a volitional
transgression (prajnaparadha). It is the inducer of all pathological
conditions.” Prajnaparadha (literally, “crime against wisdom,” or “sin”
in theological terminology) thus comes from wrong thinking resulting in
inharmonious functioning & immoderate behavior, and is in correspondence the ultimate cause of chronic disease (cf. Swedenborg, 144c).
Again according to the Charaka Samhita (10): “Desire is the root-cause
of all miseries.” Meher Baba wrote (65): “People suffer because they are
not satisfied. They want more and more. Ignorance gives rise to greed
and vanity. If you want nothing, would you then suffer? But you do
want.” And desire produces volitional transgressions with all of their dire
consequences, as listed in the ancient Hindu text The Bhagavad Gita

(143): “When a man dwells on the objects of sense, he creates an
attraction for them; attraction develops into desire, and desire breeds
anger. Anger induces delusion; delusion, loss of memory; through loss of
memory, reason is shattered; and loss of reason leads to destruction.”
The wrong thinking “central delusion” induced by the anger resulting
from frustrated desire (130) splits the originally undivided mind-heart,
and creates disorderly, unbalanced functioning. Kent said (72), “Health is
the result of harmony between the will and understanding. Disease is the
result of disorder between the will and understanding.”
The optimal harmony between will and understanding is described in the
teachings of Meher Baba (92): “When the intellect discards the dictates of
conscience, or when the heart does not respond to what the intellect says,
there is disharmony. So discretion and emotion must go hand in hand …
If discretion (head) and emotion (heart) act together, it is better. But if
preference is to be given spiritually, it is first to the conscience. If your
heart says it is right to love God in everyday life, and your intellect says it
is not wrong, you are to decide immediately to act in preference to your
heart. Real happiness is within.” Hahnemann gave the same value to the
dictates of (40) the mind-heart harmonizing and integrating conscience,
when he characterized it as being “the sole arbiter of real worth.”

13. Correspondence of Outermost with Innermost
The will and understanding functions of the heart and mind are in the
supersensible innermost of man. The correspondences linking innermost
with outermost organs were explored by Kent in a remarkable contribution towards the implementation of what he coined as Hering’s Law.

Kent’s original attribution of the Law of Direction of Cure as “Hering’s
Law” occurs in his paper first published in 1911, “Correspondence of
Organs, and Direction of Cure,” later published posthumously in his
Lesser Writings in 1926 (74d). Kent’s paper begins with the statement:
“Hering first introduced the law of direction of symptoms: from within
out, from above downwards, in reverse order of their appearance. It does
not occur in Hahnemann’s writings. It is spoken of as Hering’s law.
There is scarcely anything of this law in the literature of homoeopathy,
except the observation of symptoms going from above to the extremities,
eruptions appearing on the skin and discharges from mucous membranes
or ulcers appearing upon the legs as internal symptoms disappear. There
is no specific assertion in literature except as given in the lectures on
philosophy at the Post-Graduate School.”
Kent thus wrote of what he thenceforth designated as “Hering’s Law”,
declaring that Hering’s specific formulation “does not occur” as such in
Hahnemann’s writings. Then he went to work on the underlying basis of
the in-out sub-rule, proposing so-called physiological correspondences
based on the teachings of Swedenborg, linking the innermost and the
outermost organs of the body: “The innermost of man consists of will,
understanding, memory, and these are extended outward through the
general physical symptoms. This idea belongs here in considering the
direction of symptoms—from innermost to outermost.”
Here is one example of the correspondences which Kent proposed in
accordance with Swedenborg’s teachings (74d): “The physical organs
correspond to internal man: to the will and understanding. The

intellectual faculties consider a proposition presented, weighing it in the
light of things learned to determine whether it be false or true, partly false
or partly true. The memory holds it while it is examined and considered,
and the intellectual faculties digest what is received, separating truth from
false, and appropriating the truth and rejecting the false. The stomach
receives food; it and the small intestines digest and assimilate that which
is good for the body, and cast off that which is not suitable, that which is
indigestible, false. These correspond to the intellectual part of man, doing
for the body what the intellectual faculties do for man…”
“At first you may not perceive any relation in these things, but long
observation and examination of these reveals much. When you are
treating a patient insane in the intellectual faculties, stomach disorders or
intestinal disorders appear as the patient improves, cramps and diarrhoea
occur, the disorder extending through the intestinal canal… Then it goes
through the series of organs; as the stomach improves, catarrh or
eruptions appear. That patient will remain well.”
The abbreviated series of organs referred to in Kent’s example comprises
supersensible mental organs in the innermost, gastrointestinal organs in
the midmost, and epithelial organs in the outermost. Other series of correspondences between innermost, midmost and outermost organs were
compiled in accordance with his viewpoint of physiological similarities.

14. The Viewpoint of “Physiological” Similarities
The viewpoint of “physiological” similarities which Kent proposed is
based on the innermost heart perspective, the in-out sub-direction of
Hering’s Law. This has most direct relevance to cure, in its focus on the
underlying psychospiritual cause of the disorder. In the next section, we

will examine the contrary viewpoint of “pathological” differences, which
is based on an externalizing mental perspective, the up-down subdirection of Hering’s Law. Kent termed the knowledge of order
“physiology”, in contrast to disorder, which he termed “pathology” (73).
Near the end of Kent’s paper (74d), he wrote (as quoted previously):
“Through familiarity with Swedenborg, I have found the correspondences
wrought out from the Word of God harmonious with all I have learned in
the past thirty years. Familiarity with them aids in determining the effect
of prescriptions.” The psychosomatic correspondences which were
revealed by Swedenborg, compiled from his works by Worcester in 1889
(171), and propounded by Kent, are inner linkages based on what Kent
saw as similarities between the physiological functioning of innermost
and outermost organs, utilizable in his implemention of Hering’s Law.
According to Saine (127), the above-related correspondences alluded to
by Kent are “not observed,” possibly because they’re not actively sought.
Henry Corbin described the doctrine of correspondences as the primordial
“science of sciences” (19). But it seems that Kent was unable to provide
his correspondences with the scientific justification he felt to be needed
for their homeopathic utilization, because of the prevalent scientific
incomprehension of their ultimate psychosomatic origination. And so it
seems correspondences are largely unrecognized in homeopathic practice.
Alfred Ziegler (172) wrote of psychosomatic disorders that “A continual
process of somatization takes place just below the surface of our
consciousness, taking forms which at first are not readily recognizable for
what they are.” And Paschero gave examples (111a): “Depth psychology
is familiar with the correlation between the emotions and the organs

through which they seek expression. Thus, anguish expresses itself
through the heart and the lungs, fear through the thyroid glands, disgust
through the bile, anger through the encephalic arteries, avarice through
the intestines, greed through the stomach, sexuality through the genital
organs and the heart, and so on. Kent maintained that these correspondences have pragmatic value within the law of similars.”
Their “pragmatic value,” based on the hermetic Paracelsian doctrine “As
above, so below,” can aid prognosis as well as the psychospiritually
directed curative process itself. Elinore Peebles wrote of Kent’s
correspondences (114): “Falsities which interfere with harmonious influx
are shown in the physical organism by their natural correspondences, and
these are the symptoms which tell us which medicine will remove them
and permit the immaterial vital force which permeates all parts of the
body to be receptive again to heavenly influences.”
The imaginatively inspired direct curative utilization of inner correspondences was described by Aurobindo’s “Mother” (101): “Each spot of
the body is symbolical of an inner movement; there is there a world of
subtle correspondences… The particular place in the body affected by an
illness is an index to the nature of the inner disharmony that has taken
place. It points to the origin, it is a sign of the cause of the ailment… It
indicates the treatment and the cure. If one could perfectly understand
where the mistake is, find out what has been unreceptive, [imaginatively]
open that part and put the force and the light there, it would be possible to
reestablish in a moment the harmony that had been disturbed and the
illness would immediately go.”
Diseases are the somatization of our unconscious conflicts (111, 173).

Edward Bach, (1886-1936) homeopath and originator of the Bach flower
remedies, gave examples of specific correspondences which he had
personally observed (3): “To the understanding physician, the disease
itself points out the nature of the conflict. Perhaps this is best illustrated
by giving you examples to bring home to you that no matter from what
disease you may suffer, it is because there is disharmony between
yourself and the Divinity within you, and that you are committing some
fault, some error, which your Higher Self is attempting to correct.”
“Pain is the result of cruelty which causes pain to others, and may
be mental or physical; but be sure that if you suffer pain, if you will but
search yourselves you will find that some hard action or hard thought is
present in your nature; remove this, and your pain will cease. If you
suffer from stiffness of joint or limb, you can be equally certain that there
is stiffness in your mind; that you are rigidly holding on to some idea,
some principle, some convention may be, which you should not have…
“Even the part of the body affected indicates the nature of the fault.
The hand, failure or wrong in action; the foot, failure to assist others; the
brain, lack of control; the heart, deficiency or excess, or wrong doing in
the aspect of love; the eye, failure to see aright and comprehend the truth
when placed before you. And so, exactly, may be worked out the reason
and nature of an infirmity; the lesson required of the patient; and the
necessary correction to be made.”
His listing of physiological correspondences was designated as “metaphysical causations,” and significantly expanded by Louise Hay (51).
According to her teaching, the heart represents the “center of love and
security.” This is the Paracelsian center from which the cure proceeds.
Kent expressed the spiritual significance of the heart-correspondence
(74d): “Where love of God is referred to, we find the word heart in the

Scriptures.” And homeopath Edwin Hale (46) explicitly referred to the
“correspondence between the feelings and passions of the soul, and the
physical heart, based upon a correspondence between the heart, which is
the central life of the body, and love, which is the central life of the soul.”

15. The Viewpoint of “Pathological” Differences
The viewpoint which emphasizes “pathological” differences gives
predominant importance to the externally focused evaluation of clinical
progress or regress, and can be a useful complement to the inner heartperspective (“head” differences versus “heart” similarities).
George Vithoulkas assessed the various organ systems according to
scientifically justified differences in embryological origin and relative
importance, to chart a pathological hierarchy for the outward application
of Hering’s Law (164): “It is clear that different organs and systems have
a specific affinity for each other due to their common origin in one of the
three primordial tissue layers. These affinities may eventually be found to
be important factors governing the predictable direction of symptoms into
ever deeper regions of the body as health degenerates.”
And Vithoulkas has listed (164) these organ systems according to
their scientifically justified probable order of importance to the organism:
1. nervous system, 2. circulatory system, 3. endocrine system, 4. digestive
system, 5. respiratory system, 6. excretory system, 7. reproductive
system, 8. skeletal system, 9. muscular system. The epithelial system
might be added as number 10 to complete the listing.
Prafull Vijayakar, elaborating on Vithoulkas’ concepts, charted pathways


of sequential pathological metaschematism according to these scientific
embryological principles (161): “disease shall appear in a being in the
following order. (a) Outside – inwards, i.e. from ectodermal skin to
endodermal membranes of respiratory, genito-urinary and gastrointestinal tracts; (b) Skin to deeper systems, indicated from less important
to more important organs; (c) Disto-proximally from periphery to centre;
(d) Caudo-cranially from downwards to upwards.”
From this he worked out (162) “miasmatic charts” for the application of
Hering’s Law. Such well worked-out charts can be of practical value to
the physician, to evaluate the patient’s curative progress scientifically in
terms of syndrome shift, and assess the relative changes in varied levels
of functional aberration and/or tissue pathology. Kent wrote (76): “In
many instances such cure of pathology has occurred as a delightful
surprise to the physician, who realizes in this evidence the accuracy of the
prescription, which not only restored the functional activities but altered
the nutrition to the extent of removing the products of disorder.”
Removal of disease products is termed “toxic elimination.” A properly
implemented regard for detoxification has undoubted psychospiritual
value: negative emotions create a toxemia, which has to be cleared (147).
As Tomás Paschero pointed out (111d), “The homoeopathic concept of
disease as a vital defensive reaction supports Hering’s dynamic law of
cure, from the vital centres of the individual to the excretory periphery.
However, it must be noted that this law not only concerns the centrifugal
path through which toxins are eliminated, but more importantly that it
also controls the evolution of the subject towards psychological health.”


The need for detoxification can be alloted its due importance without
compromising our quest of the deep underlying mechanism of cure and
its spiritual dynamic. Hahnemann wrote in Organon Introduction (41)
that the advocates of the “doctrine of assumed disease matter…
misjudged the spiritual nature of our life and the spiritual dynamic power
of disease-arousing causes.” Detoxification indeed has therapeutic value,
but that’s not what we are seeking here. Conflicts between multiple
direction sub-rules interpreted by a semi-materialistic viewpoint which
discounts the predominant importance of the psychospiritual state will
still require resolution from the deeper spiritual perspective.
Hahnemann stated in his Organon §253 (41): “The patient’s emotional
state and entire behavior are the surest and most enlightening of the signs
showing a small beginning (not visible to everyone) of amelioration or
aggravation.” Saine states (126) that this observation of Hahnemann's is
“the source of the last three rules.”
Thus the “emotional state and entire behavior,” the psychospiritual state
of the patient issuing from the heart-center, represents the inmost cause of
the disorder and ultimate source of the curative movement, and should
have predominant importance in a unified reformulation of Hering’s Law.

16. Varied Interpretative Perspectives
Over the years following Kent’s proclamations of the Law of Direction of
Cure, it has been increasingly encountered in the homeopathic literature.
But as Saine has stated (126), “The law that we suspect still needs to be
rightly formulated.” If we want a viable reformulation of the suspected
law, we should first examine the varied and diverse interpretations of its

current formulation. We will here summarize some fairly well-regarded
interpretative perspectives in their own words.
CM Boger in 1916 (4b) presented a synoptic overview of the entire
curative process: “If we wish to cure safely, effectually and permanently
we must be able to grasp… the law which says that all cures proceed
from within outwardly, from above downward and in the reverse order of
the coming of the symptoms. In other words all cures proceed from the
soul through the spiritual body and finally manifest themselves in the
physical body. It cannot be, therefore is not otherwise.”
Stuart Close in 1924 (13) elaborated on the postulated dynamics of the
curative process: “Life is a centrifugal force, radiating, externalizing,







downward’… Power resides at the center, and from the center of power
force flows... Cure of disease… likewise begins at the center and spreads
outwardly… The progression of all chronic diseases is from the surface
toward the center; from less important to more important organs—from
below upward. Curative medicines reinforce the life force, reverse the
morbid process and annihilate the disease. Symptoms disappear from
above downward, from within outward and in the reverse order of their
Nilmani Ghatak in 1931 (33) depicted the metaphysical (spiritual) nature
of the curative process: “It is the mind that represents the man. The body
is only a reflection of the mind; disease begins in the mind, and is then
reflected in the body… The origin of disease is in the mind, and as such,
its process is from the centre to the circumference; but when once the
disease has been expressed in the body (having originated from the

mind), the process of this concrete manifestation is from the body to the
mind, i.e., from the circumference to the centre… If you remember that
the process of cure is always like this—from the centre to the
circumference, from the more internal to the external, and if you find that
exactly the same thing is happening in your patient’s case you will be
able to make sure that it is true cure that is coming...”
Herbert Roberts in 1935 (124) listed the currently known laws of
homeopathy, stating that after the discovery of the law of similars, “As
observation became focused upon the unfolding of the law of cure, other
regularities in reaction were discovered, and a second law of cure, this
time pertaining to the direction of cure, was formulated. This was: Cure
takes place from above downward, from within outward, from an
important organ to a less important organ: symptoms disappear in the
reverse order of their appearance, the first to appear being the last to
disappear. Simple disappearance of symptoms is by no means cure;
symptoms often have periods of recurrence, but no true cure has ever
been observed that did not follow the law of direction.” Thus he
emphatically declared it to be a bonafide Law (and not just a rule).
Of historical interest is Roger Schmidt’s article (136), declaring the
prognostic value of Hering’s Law as found in the writings of Kent and
Close, which he wrote in 1929 before ever hearing of Hering’s original
articles. Whereupon Benjamin Woodbury countered with an article (170)
describing the original Hering “Three Rules” article, and quoting from it.
And in 1967, Roger’s brother Pierre Schmidt wrote an article (133),
announcing (in French) his rediscovery of Hering’s preface to Chronic
Diseases: “I will communicate to you what Kent did not seem to have


known and which I had the privilege to be able to discover, because I saw
it quoted so far neither by any colleague nor in any publication.”
Homeopathic laws have much broader applicability than these perspectives may commonly be taken to imply. Dellmour has pointed out the
universal applicability of the Law of Similars (24), stating that “the
similia principle, which is the mechanism of effect of homeopathy, is not
limited to potentized remedies.” This would follow from Hahnemann’s
assertion that all true cure is essentially homeopathic (41): “In all ages,
the patients who were effectively, rapidly, permanently and visibly cured
by a medicine… have been cured (although without the cognizance of the
physician) solely through a homeopathic medication, that is, a medication
which had the power, of itself, to generate a similar disease state.”
Kasiviswanathan (70) wrote similarly of Hering’s Law: “The beauty of
Hering’s Law of Cure is that it is applicable to all diseases and all
therapies.” The stated universality of these two laws bespeaks an allembracing perspective in which both laws coexist in perfect harmony.
This unifying perspective should be accessible, though “slightly covered
over” by the All-wise, and it should become possible, with the help of
Providence, to regain that simple clarity which has been veiled from us.

17. A Higher Spiritual Perspective
The above-quoted perspectives certainly help to round out Kent’s work
insofar as it goes, but without a well-elaborated spiritual outlook they
can’t add much further to what has thus far been elicited from Kent’s
blend of the teachings of Hahnemann and Swedenborg. Even Ghatak,
despite his espousing the teachings of the well known spiritual Master Sri

Ramakrishna (34), is nevertheless not credited with having contributed
anything substantial to Kent’s spiritual legacy (103). Ralph Twentyman
in his review of the prevailing state of affairs (152) wrote, “Kentianism is
not thinkable without the Swedenborgian soil in which it grew to
maturity. Nor has it seemed able to grow and develop any further since it
largely lost contact with this nutrient and sustaining environment.”
Therefore, a broad Swedenborg-compatible spiritual outlook is needed to
reestablish this contact and thereby develop a significantly deeper
understanding of the matters of disease & cure. Inspiration is needed such
as Hering observed (58): “One might think Hahnemann must have been
inspired when one reflects and considers the many details upon which he
built his new doctrine; the particulars being as astounding as the whole.”
What is inspiration? Anne Clover wrote (14) of Hahnemann’s insistence
that “true therapy is to be based on principles deduced from precise
observation of physical effects of even the most subtle influences. In
describing how such principles are deduced, Hahnemann distinguishes
between ‘unaided reason’ tied to personal subjective experience and the
‘reason-gifted higher mind’ able to become aware of true subtle determinants.” And she wrote of unaided reason that, “In the language of modern
psychological thought it would be described as the limited concepts of the
empirical ego,” which “goes no further than what a person assumes they
know for themselves through their personal gross experience.”
If we think of the ego-mind as our “unaided reason”, then the undivided
mind-heart might be considered as “reason-gifted” by virtue of inspired
revelation from the all-wise Omniscient. Hahnemann called homeopathy
(6) “the beneficent art, which I can truly say was revealed to me by God,

and I can acknowledge it with emotion and thankfulness.” It seems that
divine inspiration was the source of the revelations that Hahnemann
disclosed, and Hering distilled into his Law.
Emanuel Swedenborg was considered by many homeopaths including
Kent to have equally been divinely inspired (148). Swedenborg spoke
thus of his “God-gifted” reason (145): “When I think of what I am about
to write, and while I am in the act of writing, I enjoy a complete
inspiration, for otherwise it would be my own; but now I know for certain
that what I write is God's living truth.”
He further described (144a) our ordinary “unaided reason” as a form of
ignorance: “By false intelligence and wisdom we mean any intelligence
and wisdom that is devoid of acknowledgment of the Divine. In fact,
people who do not acknowledge the Divine Being but put nature in place
of the Divine all think on the basis of their physical bodies. They are
merely sense-centered, no matter how scholarly and learned they are
considered in this world. Their learning, though, does not rise any higher
than the things in front of their eyes in this world, things that they keep in
their memory.”
In “Musings on Kent and Swedenborgianism,” Michael Carlston asserts
the close compatibility of Swedenborg’s inspired philosophy with the
equally inspired writings of Hahnemann (8): “As a homeopath who first
developed an interest in Swedenborgian thought after learning of Kent's
enthusiasm for the philosophy, I must report that it has been difficult to
determine the boundaries between the homeopathic philosophy of my
training and Swedenborg's philosophy. Certainly there are differences,
but those differences are principally a matter of focus rather than

underlying point of view… Actually, in many ways, love is the whole of
Swedenborg's philosophy. He saw love as the essence of human beings.
Love is what we are and the basis of our existence. Love is life.”
This expresses the spiritual perspective in essence. Meher Baba expressed
this same perspective utterly simply (95): “God is love, and love must
love.” God is the source of the flow of love. A most-important unifying
concept which Swedenborg presented from his inspired perspective is of
Influx: that the human being is the fully-evolved embodiment of the
Influx or “inflow” of the Infinite God into the finitude of His Creation
through a series of stages. He stated (144a): “The inflow comes through
the inner person into the outer, or through the spirit into the body, and not
the other way around, because our spirit is in the spiritual world and our
body in the natural world.” Recall Boger’s assertion (4b) that “all cures
proceed from the soul through the spiritual body and finally manifest
themselves in the physical body. It cannot be, therefore is not otherwise.”
Hering’s Law is based on this same original influx of God as Love.
Meher Baba stated (87): “Love is the reflection of God’s unity in the
world of duality. It constitutes the entire significance of creation.” The
most-significant purpose of our being manifests from a central point at
the summit of the biological hierarchy; Swedenborg’s Influx describes
the flow of love through the manifestation point. Kent said (72): “Influx
is in the direction of the least resistance and therefore in the direction of
man’s love and the results flow in the same way.” Meher Baba wrote
similarly of the flow of the divine love-stream (92): “The breaking down
of the walls of separation opens the way for the influx of divine love.”


The channels of the love-flow are hierarchically interconnected in man.
According to Emiel Van Galen (158), “Swedenborg differentiated three
hierarchical structures in man, which were spirally connected. At the top
was the Soul, with the Will as an incentive, as feeling… The middle level
is Reason, with intellect and intention… The lower level carries
imagination, memory and desire, and influences the bodily functions at a
lower level. This part of Swedenborg’s doctrine can be found repeatedly
in Kentian homeopathy.”
Kent has been criticized for advocating “Swedenborgianism” (148), but
his application of Swedenborg’s inspired revelations invoke a higher
spiritual perspective which undoubtedly had great value when suitably
applied to the deeper understanding of homeopathy (158). Accordingly,
we will explore the spiritual perspective further, and demonstrate its
befitting relevance to our topic.

18. Spiritual Insight into Homeopathy
Hahnemann stated in Organon §2 (41): “The highest ideal of cure is the
rapid, gentle and permanent restoration of health; that is the lifting and
annihilation of the disease in its entire extent in the shortest, most
reliable, and least disadvantageous way, according to clearly in-seeable
principles.” It is of this clear, spiritual in-sight that Kent wrote (75b),
“That man may enter and look from within upon all things in the physical
world is possible. He can then account for laws and perceive the
operation of laws.”
Hahnemann’s insight was hard-earned through spiritual striving. Writing
to Stapf in 1816 (16), Hahnemann described his inner life: “In these hours

I have always vowed to cultivate simplicity, honesty and truth, and to
find contentment and happiness in the eyes of the Great Father of all life,
on the one hand by perfecting the innermost growth of the soul, and on
the other hand, by making those around me happy… In this way I have
created for myself, during these heart-rending hours, an inner life, such as
we need for eternal survival, …and to enter calmly and cheerfully into the
reign of the All-Loving, the reign of truth, vision and peace.” An inner
communion with God the Creator, prompted by outer adversity, seems to
have been most likely responsible for Hahnemann’s inspired revelations.
The study of Swedenborg has undoubted value, and comparison with
other authentic contemporary spiritual writings will help to develop the
broad spiritual overview required for deeper study. Instead of claiming
unearned channels of inspiration, we locate suitably contemporary
source-materials as our guide to discern an authentically true spiritual
perspective applicable to the mechanism of homeopathy.
In our opinion, the most-truing most contemporary overview of all
aspects of spirituality available is provided in the teachings of Meher
Baba, widely proclaimed the Avatar of the Age (1894-1969). Scattered
throughout Meher Baba’s dictated writings we find answers to many of
the problems for which we seek solutions. Meher Baba wrote of
spirituality (87): “Nature is much greater than what a person can perceive
through the ordinary senses of his physical body. The hidden aspects of
nature consist of finer matter and forces. There is no unbridgeable gulf
separating the finer aspects of nature from its gross aspect. They all
interpenetrate one another and exist together. The finer aspects of nature
are not perceptible to the ordinary individual, but they are nevertheless
continuous with the gross aspect which is perceptible to him.”

Hahnemann wrote (44f): “Medicine is a science of experience… This art,
so indispensable to suffering humanity, cannot therefore remain
concealed in the unfathomable depths of obscure speculation, or be
diffused throughout the boundless void of conjecture; it must be
accessible, readily accessible to us, within the sphere of vision of our
external and internal [both together] perceptive faculties.” The inner spiritual and the outer material coexist together. According to Meher Baba
(94), “The spiritual and the material aspects of life are widely separated
from each other. They ought to be inseparably united with each other.
There is no fundamental opposition between spirit and matter or between
life and form. The apparent opposition is due to wrong thinking.”

19. The Mind-Heart Dichotomy
Wrong thinking resulting from desire creates a false sense of separation
between the innermost will and understanding, the “heart” feeling and
“mind” thinking aspects of the divided mind-heart. Separative conflicts
maintain a false sense of dichotomy within the mind-heart. It is said that
“Mind creates divisions.” Meher Baba wrote (94) that “It is the overpowered and deluded mind which… creates divisions where there are no
divisions in reality.” Thus concludes Hering’s preface to the American
translation of Chronic Diseases (57): “It is the spirit of Truth that tries to
unite us all; but the father of Lies keeps us separate and divided.”
There is something higher than false dichotomization. Mind and heart can
truly function harmoniously. According to Meher Baba (87), “Spiritual
understanding is born of harmony between mind and heart. This harmony
of mind and heart does not require the mixing up of their functions. It
does not imply cross-functioning but cooperative functioning. Their

functions are neither identical nor coordinate. Mind and heart must of
course be balanced, but this balance cannot be secured by pitting the
mind against the heart or by pitting the heart against the mind… Mind
and heart may be said to be balanced when they serve their proper
purpose and when they perform their respective functions without erring
this way or that. It is only when they are so balanced that there can be
true harmony between them.”
How can seemingly contrarily directed functions coexist harmoniously?
The Sufi mystic Hazrat Inayat Khan (77a) expressed it thus, “The
difference between mind and heart is that the mind is the surface of the
heart, and the heart the depth of the mind: they are two different aspects
of one and the same thing. The mind thinks, the heart feels. What the
heart feels the mind wants to interpret in thought; what the mind thinks,
the heart assimilates expressing it in feeling. Neither is the mind the
brain, nor is the heart a piece of flesh hidden under the breast.”
The sub-directions of Hering’s Law express both aspects of this interrelationship: the in-out direction plumbs the heart-depth, and the up-down
direction spans the mind-surface. This differentiation between the subdirections in terms of mind and heart functions of thinking and feeling is
corroborated in the psychological healing work of Gilberto Vieira (160):
“The first principle of the Laws of Cure states that results happen from
top to bottom. The patient connects again with the most elevated of
himself, his life, his personal goals, and what was unhealthy goes to a
second plan, as if inferior. The second principle established the direction
from within outwards (or from the deepest to the surface). The patient
quickly leaves the reiteration of his defense mechanisms and starts to
make contact with his deeper feelings.”

The first-quoted rule or principle addresses separative thinking issues, the
second unitive feeling issues. We “speculate” with the thinking aspect of
our mind-heart, but directly “see” with the feeling aspect, whether the
patient is getting better or worse. Begabati Lennihan wrote (85): “When
we look at outer, material reality and try to understand it with our minds,
we ‘see’ the ways in which we are all different – because it is the nature
of the mind to break reality into discrete particles, then compare and
contrast, analyze, organize, and scrutinize. But when we ‘see’ the
invisible world of energy with our hearts… we perceive our
interconnectedness.” This latter assessment is a form of the direct
cognition which Hahnemann recommended in Organon §253 (41): “the
patient’s emotional state and entire behavior are the surest and most
enlightening of the signs showing a small beginning (not visible to
everyone) of amelioration or aggravation.”
Both thinking & feeling aspects of evaluation are applied according to the
needs of the situation. As Gandalf the Wizard in Tolkien’s allegorical
Hobbit (1937) explained when he was asked where did he go when he
seemingly abandoned the exploration party: “To look ahead.” And what
brought him back in time to save them all from the 3 giants? “Looking
behind.” The “pushmi-pullyou” contrary tendencies of the prospective
heart and the retrospective mind need to act together harmoniously.

20. Beyond Dichotomization
Dichotomies seem to be built into the structure of the body. Swedenborg
over 200 years ago described a functional dichotomy between the two
halves of the brain (see Worcester, 184): “It was given me to perceive the
general operations of heaven as manifestly as any object is perceived by

any of the senses… the left part of the brain corresponds to things rational
or intellectual, but the right to affections or things voluntary.”
Neurologist Jill Taylor affirms (146): “Some of us distinguish between
what we think (left hemisphere) and what we feel (right hemisphere).”
But as Hering remarked (78), “Do you call a man double because he has a
right side and a left side?” A functional dichotomy is indeed
accommodated in the structure of the brain, but there is something much
higher even than structural dichotomies from the spiritual perspective.
Meher Baba (119) has stated: “The soul is not the brain. It functions the
brain. The brain is its instrument.” The indivisible soul and undivided
mind-heart must finally transcend every implementation of dichotomy.
Meher Baba (65) discussed the over-dichotomistic “split” personality:
“We have heard about split personality. We hear it is quite common. One
day a person may be happy and in a buoyant mood, and the next day or
next moment, he may feel dejected and depressed. One day, he does good
actions and the next, he may do actions which are undesirable. Compared
to split personality, split ego or split ‘I’ is something new.”
Meher Baba went on to expound the concept of the split ego and its
termination: “In the reality of God, there is only one Real ‘I’. This Real
‘I’ is so uncompromisingly one and indivisible that it knows not any
separate existence… Then, how is it that we see forms here? From where
has this division come? If this separation were not there, then no one
would have found that there is only one indivisible Real ‘I’. The ‘I’ is
real; but the split ego – that is, the separative ‘I’ – is unreal, and yet we
see all this division. This one Real ‘I’ is apparently split into innumerable
false ‘I’s. What can we expect from this false ‘I’? The false ‘I’, being
false, represents everything false. The Real ‘I’ in me sees the One without

a second, and the Real ‘I’ in you has apparently split into the false ‘I’
which sees divisions everywhere…”
“As soon as the Real ‘I’ stops playing the part of the false ‘I’, it
becomes conscious of its original pristine state. This Consciousness is
eternal. And it also realizes that, being eternally happy, its experience of
being fed up was sheer, nonsensical ignorance.”
Thus even though there appear to be dichotomies built into the body,
there is a higher reality which is unitive and undivided. The concepts of
split personality and the split ego and/or separative “I” acknowledge
falsity as the basis of the ordinary dichotomistic understanding of reality.

21. The Inscrutable Three-in-One Trinity
The concept of “split ego” may be crystal-clear to the unitive perception
of an inspired poet or mystic, but nonetheless it appears obscure to most
people who have to live out their lives in an ordinary world. The apparent
obscurity of this most profound Truth can be credited to our shared
inheritance of “sheer, nonsensical ignorance” as much as to any scheme
to deliberately withhold or hide the Truth from our gaze. Hahnemann
himself threw off what he called the “infection” of deliberate obscurantism (44b): “Why should we complain that our science is obscure and
intricate, when we ourselves are the producers of this obscurity and
intricacy? Formerly I was infected with this fever; the schools had
infected me. The virus clung more obstinately to me before it came to a
critical expulsion, than ever did the virus of any other mental disease.”
Besides objecting to deliberate obscurantism (100), Hahnemann likewise
deprecated “mystical speculations” (44g) effectively incomprehensible to

the target audience addressed. The writings of Swedenborg can appear
obscure to our ordinary conceptual processes, and Elinore Peebles stated
(114): “Nowhere in Hahnemann’s voluminous writings… does he
mention Swedenborg or make any direct reference to his writings.”
It may indeed be that Hahnemann had never heard of Swedenborg (148),
and the main outward connection if any between his inspiration and that
of Swedenborg is to be found in the writings of Paracelsus, to which
Swedenborg had only made passing reference (168) and to which
Hahnemann had only referred disparagingly. But Hahnemann’s labeling
of Paracelsus’ writings as “incomprehensible gibberish” (6) may simply
indicate his humorously ironic assessment of the conceptual limitations of
the semi-materialistic mindset of his homeopathic colleagues.
Hahnemann felt that God must necessarily somehow communicate the
needful (44f): “As the wise and beneficent Creator has permitted these
innumerable states of the human body differing from health, which we
term diseases, he must at the same time have revealed to us a distinct
mode whereby we may obtain a knowledge of diseases, that shall suffice
to enable us to employ the remedies capable of subduing them.” And
Hahnemann referred to what he called the “impossible knowledge” of the
proximate causes and a priori nature of diseases, observing (44f) that
“the great Spirit of the Universe, the most consistent of all beings, has
made that only possible which is necessary.”
The external world is the product of “necessary existence” (88). Necessity is the mother of invention, but the misguided inventiveness of sham
spiritualism can obstruct true understanding. Hahnemann exemplified the
uselessness of defectively comprehended occult lore (44g): “At one time,

men… flattered themselves they had discovered [that] the human body, in
agreement with the old mystic number three, developed itself in triplicity,
presented a miniature of the universe (microcosm, macrocosm), and thus,
by means of our knowledge of the great whole, miserably defective as it
is, was to be explained to a hair’s-breadth.” Hahnemann’s above-quoted
critique of misapplied occultism is considered by Peter Morrell (100) to
be “a clear reference to his deeper knowledge of Paracelsus.”
But Hahnemann’s homeopathic colleagues with whom he corresponded
were apparently unprepared to investigate any of his subtle hints of the
existence of a true “knowledge of the great whole,” i.e., the true spiritual
overview, whether labeled Paracelsian, Swedenborgian, or whatever.
Even Hering said (78), “My faith in the Trinity has been wanting all my
life.” Perhaps it had been poorly explained; even now the three-in-one
trinity concept may seem unfounded, so we quote from an exposition of
the Law of Three by Ouspensky from the teachings of Gurdjieff (107):
“We must examine the fundamental law that creates all phenomena...
This is the ‘Law of Three’ or the law of the three principles or the three
forces. It consists of the fact that every phenomenon, on whatever scale
and in whatever world it may take place, from molecular to cosmic
phenomena, is the result of the combination or the meeting of three
different and opposing forces…”
In esoteric Hinduism they are called Brahma the Creator, Shiva the
Destroyer, and Vishnu the Preserver (88). Gurdjieff explained (107):
“The teaching of the three forces is at the root of all ancient systems. The
first force may be called active or positive; the second, passive or
negative; the third, neutralizing. But these are merely names, for in reality

all three forces are equally active and appear as active, passive, and
neutralizing, only at their meeting points, that is to say, only in relation to
one another at a given moment.”
“The first two forces are more or less comprehensible to man and
the third may sometimes be discovered either at the point of application
of the forces, or in the ‘medium’, or in the ‘result’. But, speaking in
general, the third force is not easily accessible to direct observation and
understanding. The reason for this is to be found in the functional
limitations of man’s ordinary psychological activity and in the functional
categories of our perception of the phenomenal world, that is, in our
sensation of space and time resulting from these limitations...”
He concluded: “Returning to the world in which we live we may
now say that in the Absolute, as well as in everything else, three forces
are active: the active, the passive, and the neutralizing [mediating]. But
since by its very nature everything in the Absolute constitutes one whole
the three forces also constitute one whole.”
Twentyman remarked (151a): “Wholeness in its full manifestation is
threefold. One cannot express it otherwise.” There are many significant
examples of this law of three in homeopathy. And indeed, it may even be
discerned in Kent’s tripartite version of Hering’s Law, which may be
considered as having positive, negative and mediating aspects. Only the
ordinary human functional limitations mentioned by Gurdjieff can still
prevent us from comprehending Hering’s Law as a unified whole.
Hahnemann definitely made use of the “mystic number three,” whether
expressed or implied. He commonly designated three bodies or aspects of
human being, using triads suitably chosen according to his context. His
terminology in Organon §9 (41) for the three bodies of man includes the

“organism” (the gross physical body), the “rational spirit” (the mental
body), and the “spirit-like life force” (the mediating subtle energy body).
Meher Baba wrote authoritatively on this subject (88): “In man, the mind
is the seat of desires and thoughts, energy is the seat of force and vigour,
and the body, typifying happiness, is the seat of happiness and misery.
Hence these desires and thoughts, force and vigour, happiness and misery
are respectively the finite aspects of the limited mind, energy and body of
man. Although these aspects of the finite basis of the triple nature of
man—the mind, the energy and the body (typifying happiness)— are
finite, … yet these finite aspects of mind, energy and body demonstrate
their capabilities ad infinitum. This is because each of these finite bases
of the triple nature of man—the energy, the mind and the body (typifying
happiness)— is closely linked with and upheld by each of the three
infinite bases of the trio-nature of God (sat-chit-anand), infinite power,
infinite knowledge and infinite bliss.”
Meher Baba wrote (95): “The three aspects of God are interlinked; Bliss
depends on Power and Power depends on Knowledge. Similarly, the
three aspects of man are interlinked; matter depends on energy and
energy depends on mind. As a human being you are one homogeneous
entity of these three finite aspects (mind-energy-matter), which are but
the shadows of the three Infinite aspects of God (Knowledge-PowerBliss).” The three finite aspects can be represented to form a hierarchy,
with mind at the top, energy in the middle, and matter at the bottom. The
mind-heart is the source. Meher Baba wrote (91): “Mind begets energy
and matter. Without mind there can be neither energy nor matter. Energy
is derived from mind and is continually sustained by it; it cannot subsist
without mind, latent or manifest. Matter depends upon energy and cannot

remain matter without energy, latent or manifest.”
The threefoldness of our being does not belie its biological wholeness.
Pierre Schmidt pointed out (132) that, “This biological whole has already
been evoked by Hahnemann in 1813, in his famous essay entitled: ‘Spirit
of the Homeopathic Doctrine of Medicine’ where he speaks of the living
individual unity of the organism.” Hering said (78), “Man is a whole; an
entirety.” This intrinsic biological three-in-one wholeness is upheld by
that Absolute Existence which is the source of all Life in Creation.

22. The “Higher Purposes” of our Existence
Wholism is an integral part of the spiritual perspective. Stuart Close
contended (13) that Hahnemann didn’t mean “spiritual” but “spirit-like”
in Organon §9, that is, something subtle or intangible. But the two need
not be mutually exclusive. The hypothesized “radiant state” of homeopathic potencies has been called (32) the “limit where matter and force
seem to shade off into each other.” Recall what Meher Baba said (87):
“There is no unbridgeable gulf separating the finer aspects of nature from
its gross aspect. They all interpenetrate one another and exist together.”
So it is not impertinent to ask what Hahnemann might actually have
meant when he wrote in Organon §9 (40): “In the healthy condition of
man, the spiritual Vital Force… retains all the parts of the organism in
admirable, harmonious, vital operation, as regards both sensations and
functions, so that our indwelling, reason-gifted mind can freely employ
this living healthy instrument for the higher purposes of our existence.”


What are the “higher purposes” of our existence? Meher Baba provides
the answer (95): “Reality is Existence infinite and eternal. Existence has
no purpose by virtue of its being real, infinite and eternal. Existence
exists. Being Existence it has to exist. Hence Existence, the Reality,
cannot have any purpose. It just is. It is self-existing. Everything—the
things and the beings—in Existence has a purpose. All things and beings
have a purpose and must have a purpose, or else they cannot be in
existence as what they are. Their very being in existence proves their
purpose; and their sole purpose in existing is to become shed of purpose,
i.e., to become purposeless… Love alone is devoid of all purpose and a
spark of Divine Love sets fire to all purposes. The Goal of Life in
Creation is to arrive at purposelessness, which is the state of Reality.”
Meher Baba has indicated how we can all actualize our unique “higher
purpose” in our daily lives (93): “The purpose of life is to realize God
within ourselves. This can be done even whilst attending to our worldly
duties. In the everyday walks of life and amidst our activities, feel
detached and dedicate your doings to our beloved God.” This statement
of our individual purpose and goal is nowise conceptually incompatible
with what Hahnemann wrote (44e): “Art thou not destined to approach by
the ladder of hallowed impressions, ennobling deeds, all-penetrating
knowledge, even towards the great Spirit whom all the inhabitants of the
universe worship?”

23. Karmic Balance of Cause-Effect
Hahnemann’s above-quoted reference to Jacob’s ladder (Gen. 28:12) of
good thoughts, words, and deeds is a metaphor for the karmic path of


compensatory cause & effect, whereby the fortunate Soul is destined to
attain the “higher purpose” of existence, i.e., the Goal of Life. Karmic
compensation in different forms may thus be found expressed or implied
throughout Hahnemann’s writings.
Hahnemann has stated that the actual “proximate causes” of disease are
inaccesssible to the ordinary unaided reason (44f); and so we seek to
understand illness cause & cure with the help of the well-established
concept of karma (compensatory “action & reaction”), the subtle law of
cause and effect. This has also been called the law of “reciprocal action”
by Stuart Close (13): “Its [Mind’s] working principle is the universal Law
of Reciprocal Action, otherwise known as the law of balance,
compensation, … or action and reaction, all of which signify a principle
operative alike in the physical, mental and spiritual realms.”
Reciprocal action or what we call karmic compensation was apparently
self-evident to Hahnemann, who in Chronic Diseases (43) based an
argument for the existence of chronic miasms on his presumption of a
law governing subtle cause and effect: “If the cause must at all times be
proportionate to its effect and consequence, as is the case in nature, no
one can see how, after the removal of the causes assailing her health, the
resulting ailments could not only continue, but even increase from year to
year, if their cause were not in something else…” Thus he asserted a
subtle cause of illness persisting when physical causes are removed.
Paracelsus wrote of disease causation by past-life karma (48): “Nothing
in the world happens without a cause. That which cannot be explained in
reference to a present lifetime, must be referable to some antecedent
causation.” Nilmani Ghatak gave an example of this (34): “Suppose a

father contracts syphilis and begets a son. The son must have
tuberculosis, though without any the least fault of his own. The father
commits the sin, but the son suffers. How is it? The universal [karmic]
Law dictates that he who sins must suffer. But here the son commits no
sin. He suffers for the sin of his father, —and this is quite unnatural and
unreasonable too. Where is the true solution? —one might ask.”
“The solution is this. The son must have committed sins so as to
deserve these sufferings, and his taking birth from the sinning father is
only necessary, so that the son may have the fit field and proper occasion
for the suffering he richly deserves… So the son suffers, not for the sin of
the father, but for the sin committed by his own self in his past life; the
father only fulfills the occasion and opportunity and that is all.”
If this argument is taken seriously, it disarms the embittered skeptic and
offers the lifelong sufferer the sweet hope of true cure. So-called “sins”
are understood as willful transgressions of the law of love which all can
commit (Mark 12:30-1), acting in haste and repenting at leisure. And the
inexorability of karmic law guarantees the repentant “sinner” the hope of
his final & complete redemption in accordance with Divine Will.
Paracelsus remarked on karmic inexorability (48), that “the presence of a
good physician is a miraculous indication of divine intercession; whereas
the presence of a bad physician indicates that the patient does not deserve
to recover.” In the poetry of Coleridge’s Rime of the Ancient Mariner
(1798): “The man hath penance done, and penance more will do.”
Non-recovery is not conversely the indicator of a bad physician: the
underlying disease may be essentially “incurable”, at least in the ordinary
course of events. Kent wrote (74b), “I have many times heard the law

[Law of Similars] condemned for not curing an incurable sickness.” But
as Paracelsus emphasized (109): “All our diseases ought to be cured in
their own time and not according to our desire and will. That is to say, no
physician can know the period of our recovery, for God holds that in his
hand… God created medicine to combat disease, and also the physician,
but he denies them both to the patient, until the hour has come when
nature and art can take their course.”
Meher Baba has clearly explained the necessity of karmic law (87): “The
law of karma, in the world of values, can be compared to the law of cause
and effect that operates in the physical world. If there were no law of
cause and effect in the physical world, there would be chaos; and people
would not know what to expect. In the same way, if there were no law of
karma in the world of values, there would be an utter uncertainty of the
results that people cherish; and they would not know whether to expect
good or bad from their actions.”
“In the world of physical events there is a law of conservation of
energy, according to which no energy is ever lost. In the world of values
there is a law that once karma comes into existence, it does not
mysteriously flitter away without leading to its natural results but persists
until it bears its own fruit or is undone through counteracting karma.
Good actions lead to good results, and bad actions lead to bad results.”
Hering spoke of karmic retribution (79): “If a wrong is done, either from
malice or from ignorance, Nemesis is sure to follow. This would appear
to be a law of nature.” But karmic law may also be regarded in a positive
light, as part and parcel of a higher learning and harmonizing process,
which is sustained by love. Stuart Close wrote of the essence of karmic


compensation (13), that “In its outworking it is essentially the Law of
Love, for it is always beneficent, always creative, always harmonizing.”
Meher Baba stated (87): “Proper understanding and use of the law of
karma enables man to become master of his own destiny through
intelligent and wise action.” In a letter to Stapf in 1829, Hahnemann
conveyed his wise understanding of the true value of karmic trials &
tribulations (6): “It is a trial sent from above by the all-wise and all good
Ruler, who guides everything for the best if we knew how to regard it as
a good lesson, and to regulate our future course by it.”
In the Bhagavad Gita (143), wise action, heart-directed and naturally
mindful that “you reap what you sow” (Gal. 6:7), is called “right action”
or Karma Yoga. The wise karma yogi will not deliberately accumulate
illness-generating impressions obstructing the purpose of his life, and will
cheerfully submit to the healing processes of karmic compensation.

24. Disease and Cure
Disease and cure are natural expressions of the purpose of life, in that
they are necessary concomitants of the karmic compensation process
implementing the Divine Plan. Manija Irani wrote that according to
Meher Baba’s teachings (61), “It’s far from the Divine Plan to have no
illness of the body – after all it is one of the main mediums of
experiencing pain which is the opposite of pleasure. Duality (however
illusory) expresses itself in dual experiences, and misery is as much in the
Divine Plan as is so-called happiness. They are both experiences the soul
must go through some time or another.”


The great Hindu sage Upasni Maharaj (1870-1941), who worked in close
collaboration with Avatar Meher Baba, stated (156b): “One suffers from
different afflictions in relation to his karma; if the end comes during that
affliction, they get into a suitable ensuing state.” And he states that
spiritually healing afflictions can result as reward for a preponderance of
“good karma,” as well as from “bad karma” from sinful actions. “In short,
the forms of various afflictions are in an invisible state and that is why
they are not commonly seen; they should, however, be taken as agents of
God meant for liquidating the sins; and for that purpose only they
associate with the external gross physical body and the inner sukshma
[subtle] body of an individual.”
We can learn from our illnesses, if we so choose. Edward Bach (3) said:
“Disease is the result of wrong activity. It is the natural consequence of
disharmony between our bodies and our Souls: it is ‘like curing like’
because it is the very disease itself which hinders and prevents our
carrying our wrong actions too far, and at the same time, is a lesson to
teach us to correct our ways, and harmonise our lives with the dictates of
our Soul. Disease is the result of wrong thinking and wrong doing, and
ceases when the act and thought are put in order. When the lesson of pain
and suffering and distress is learnt, there is no further purpose in its
presence, and it automatically disappears.”
When asked, “What is disease?” (68), Meher Baba’s close disciple VS
Kalchuri responded that according to the Master’s teachings there are two
types of disease (natural and unnatural): “Everyone is suffering from
disease, and nobody knows how to get rid of this disease. No, everyone is
sick, and that sickness, it is because of illusion, because of the [false
binding] impressions we have.”

“Now, I have told you that there are three types of impressions:
one, natural; another, non-natural; and unnatural. What are natural
impressions? Natural impressions are those impressions which help you
for the progress of consciousness, and to achieve Godhood: those are the
natural impressions. Ultimately those impressions are also wiped out, but
they are necessary so that in this illusory journey, consciousness should
make progress—they are called natural impressions.”
“Non-natural impressions are those impressions which we collect
from the atmosphere. Atmosphere—of course, there is nothing [there],
but you will find sanskaras, impressions—they are there. Just as we are
sitting here, the exchange is going on. So this exchange—of course we
don’t know, so many impressions we catch every second, every moment
so many millions—we collect but we know not. But these impressions,
because we don’t [deliberately] collect them through this, they can be
rooted out easily—that’s nothing. But unnatural impressions are those
impressions which are very difficult to wipe out. And what are those
unnatural impressions?”
“You know, this evolution of consciousness, it is there from stone
[on up to human being], …then it is complete. When complete, then why
should we just take birth after birth? What is the need for that? The
evolution of consciousness is complete, so our consciousness should
involve [towards God-consciousness], and because it does not involve
and we just go on taking birth after birth, that means the process becomes
unnatural. So during that time, those impressions which we collect, they
are called unnatural impressions, which are not necessary for the progress
of consciousness.”
“So they are unnatural impressions, and these impressions, of
course, should all be wiped out. At least the grossness of these
impressions should be wiped out so that the consciousness should

involve. As long as this process goes on after completion of evolution, we
collect unnatural impressions which are not necessary. So these unnatural
impressions which we collect, and go on collecting, that is the disease—
and that is also unnatural disease. Through natural impressions, disease is
there, but that is natural disease. Through unnatural impressions, we have
this unnatural disease, and how should we get rid of that? There is one
solution, and that is at His [God the Creator’s] feet. Just to catch hold of
His feet, just to remember Him, just to dedicate our life to Him, and He is
there to look after us. It is His duty, it is His responsibility.”
It may be that what Hahnemann called chronic (non-resolving) disease is
caused by “unnatural” impressions, and acute (self-resolving) disease by
“natural” impressions. Non-natural impressions collected automatically
from the atmosphere are described in Appendix A (67). Hahnemann may
have depicted “non-natural” impressions (44h): “A multitude of diseaseexciting causes act daily and hourly upon us, but they are incapable of
deranging the equilibrium of the health, or of making the healthy sick.”

25. The Hope of Homeopathic Cure
Impressional bindings (sanskaras) which persistently obstruct the
individual from achieving his higher purpose are causative of chronic
disease. The most directly-curative action might be the simple submission
of our errant self-will to the Will of the Creator (“just to catch hold of His
feet”). But Ghatak (34) wrote that for most people, “No sort of expiation
has the power of cleansing the sinning soul, except suffering, —mental
and physical. Repentance only puts him in the line of correction and that
is all. Of course, in case he can completely dedicate himself, and


everything concerning himself, at the feet of the Creator, he escapes all
sufferings; but, for a sinner it is an impossible feat to perform.”
Nevertheless, for the majority of us who can’t submit and thereby
renounce their hopelessly errant self-will in this fashion, it might still be
possible to hope for and obtain homeopathic comfort and/or cure. Kent
(74f) wrote: “The law of similars will direct to curative remedies for all
that are curable and comfort such as are incurable, if we can keep our
selfish ends in subjection.” And so approaching the homeopath to cure
his chronic complaints, the patient will hopefully receive appropriate
advice and medications, and with ever-increasing faith in God’s help, will
be set on the path towards the divinely ordained loving alleviation and/or
cure of physically reversible complaints.
A positive, hopeful attitude is required. Paschero wrote (111e): “It is the
power of health—it is our life. What acts is the natural will, redirecting
the vital force towards a positive, life-affirming dynamic, and away from
a negative, self-destructive dynamic.” Hahnemann wrote of chronic
negativity obstructing the cure (43), “By far the most frequent excitement
of the slumbering Psora into chronic disease, and the most frequent
aggravation of chronic ailments already existing, are caused by grief and
vexation. Uninterrupted grief and vexation very soon increase even the
smallest traces of a slumbering psora into more severe symptoms, and
they then develop these into an outbreak of all imaginable chronic
sufferings more certainly and more frequently than all other injurious
influences operating on the human organism in an average human life.”
A sincere effort on the part of the patient to adopt and cultivate a positive,
hopeful attitude towards life may be prerequisite to overcoming these

obstacles. Hahnemann stated further (43), “But if the relations of the
patient cannot be improved in this respect, and if he has not sufficient
philosophy, religion and power over himself to bear patiently and with
equanimity all the sufferings and afflictions for which he is not to blame,
and which it is not in his power to change; if grief and vexation
continually beat in upon him, and it is out of the power of the physician
to effect a lasting removal of these most active destroyers of life, he had
better give up the treatment and leave the patient to his fate.”
Hahnemann in turn added that boredom can obstruct the cure with its
inherent negativity (43): “As the good physician will be pleased when he
can [positively] enliven and keep from ennui the mind of a patient, in
order to advance a cure which is not encumbered with such obstructions,
he will in such a case feel more than ever the duty incumbent upon him to
do all within the power of his influence on the patient and on his relatives
and surroundings, in order to relieve him of grief and vexation. This will
and must be a chief end of his care and neighborly love.”
Ennui or boredom, according to Aurobindo’s Mother (101), is “the most
common malady humanity suffers from.” Boredom, defined by Schopenhauer as “tame longing without any particular object” (141), that is, an
internal itch of ego-centric craving, provokes volitional transgressions
with their karmic consequences. The Early Fathers of the Christian
Church judged acedia (sloth), the monastic precursor of our modern
boredom (141), to be “the worst sin, since all other sins derived from it.”
Worry (anxiety) is characteristic of psoric boredom (151b). Meher Baba
said (87): “Worry is the product of feverish imagination working under
the stimulus of desires… Worry has never done anyone any good.” Thus

the physician should encourage the patient to cultivate a positively
hopeful attitude, and alleviate boredom and worry, making use of Meher
Baba’s healing anodyne, “Don’t worry, be happy” (122), to participate
with faith in God’s curative process. The greatest alleviator of boredom
and worry is “positive thinking”: the Jacob’s ladder of “good thoughts,
words and deeds.” Paracelsus wrote (48), “Good thoughts, good words
and good deeds help to maintain health or restore it if it has been lost.”
And conversely, bad habits of thought, word, and deed (chronic
negativity) are productive of chronic illness, and should be carefully
eschewed in order to make lasting cure possible. Eric Powell (118) wrote:
“You will find that in cases where a patient is lustful after sensationalism,
alcohol, smoking and the sensual appetites, that individual’s progress will
be hampered and his recovery will be considerably slower than that of the
wise and cooperative patient.” Hahnemann said (43), “Moderation in all
things, even in harmless ones, is the chief duty of chronic patients.”
When suitable medications and advice are taken, the beginning of the
curative outcome may become visible to the discerning physician, as
previously quoted in Organon §253 (41): “In all diseases, especially the
rapidly arising… ones, the patient’s emotional state and entire behavior
are the surest and most enlightening of the signs showing a small
beginning (not visible to everyone) of amelioration or aggravation. When
there is an ever-so-slight beginning of improvement, the patient will
demonstrate a greater degree of comfort, increasing composure, freedom
of spirit, increased courage—a kind of returning naturalness.”
The “returning naturalness” which Hahnemann alluded to results from the
annihilation of unnatural mental and emotional impressions, the

egotistic thoughts, feelings and desires which were the cause of the
patient’s immoderate behavior and chronic physical complaints. If
psychological impressions are indeed most central (or highest in the
cause-effect hierarchy), Hering’s Law would require that they be
annihilated first, for the lasting cure of chronic complaints. But then how
may psychological impressions be annihilated without creating further
binding impressions?
Hahnemann wrote in Organon §17 footnote (132), that “Merely by the
use of imagination, it is possible to produce a derangement of the vital
principle which, if it is sufficiently marked, can give rise to the severest
illness; nevertheless, this also can be cured by a similar contrasuggestion.” The imagination is positively redirected by an effort of will.
Louise Hay (51) demonstrated self-healing with appropriately chosen
counter-suggestions or “positive thinking”: “Both the good in our lives
and the dis-ease are the results of mental thought patterns which form our
experiences… Therefore by changing our thinking patterns, we can
change our experiences.” This is heart-directed karma yogic self-healing.
Does ordinary homeopathic cure also have a yogic mechanism?

26. Homeopathic Curative Mechanism
The great yogi Aurobindo Ghose (1872-1950) remarked (21) that
“Homeopathy is nearer to Yoga. Allopathy is more mechanical… the
action of homeopathy is more subtle and dynamic.” To understand how
homeopathy cures, we might look at the subtle and dynamic mechanisms
of yoga. These are found detailed in the writings of Meher Baba.
In Infinite Intelligence (89), Meher Baba has uniquely described the

mechanisms of the four major yogic paths in annihilating the impressions
which bind our consciousness to a world of illusion. We will see that one
of these, dnyan yoga, is essentially equivalent to Hahnemann’s repeatedly
postulated mechanism of the curative principle of homeopathy, described
below. Hering distrusted Hahnemann’s theorizing (78): “Hahnemann
always thought to try to explain the Why of things. Here he was in the
wrong.” And so we even find, in Kent’s Philosophy, that Hahnemann’s
description of the mechanism of cure in Organon §29 was simply glossed
over (73): “You are not in any way bound to consider it, and it is usually
omitted in this course.” It seems that even in Kent’s day the time was not
ripe for the true understanding of how homeopathy is able to cure. The
following is Hahnemann’s oft-reiterated and probably divinely-inspired
presumptive explanation of the mechanism of homeopathic cure (41):
“§§28-29. This natural law of cure has authenticated itself to the world in
all pure experiments and all genuine experiences; therefore it exists as
fact. Scientific explanations for how it takes place do not matter very
much and I do not attach much importance to attempts made to explain it.
The following view, however, is verifiably the most probable since it is
based on nothing but empirical premises:
“Any [natural] disease… consists solely of a specific dynamic
disease mistunement of our life force in our feelings and functions. The
life force, which has been dynamically mistuned by the natural disease, is
seized, during homeopathic cure, by the similar yet somewhat stronger
artificial disease affection which results from the application of the
medicinal potence, selected exactly according to symptom similarity. The
feeling of the natural dynamic disease-affection is extinguished and
disappears for the life-force and, from then on, no longer exists for the
life force which is occupied solely by the stronger artificial disease79

affection. The artificial disease-affection soon plays itself out, leaving the
patient free and recuperated. The life force, thus freed, can now continue
life again in health.”
The negative impressions of the natural disease-affection are effectively
neutralized by the positive impressions of the similar but stronger
artificial disease-affection. Meher Baba wrote of the balancing of positive
and negative impressions within the psyche (88): “The consciousness…
resembles the indicator at the fulcrum of a perfect balance, and the two
pans of the balance are filled with the unequal weights of opposites of
impressions such as virtue and vice, etc. In this way consciousness, acting
like the indicator at the fulcrum, tries to gain equilibrium…” Meher Baba
wrote (87) that the momentum of opposite impressions, for example, “the
sanskaras of bad thoughts, words, and deeds and their opposites,” called
prarabdha sanskaras, determine “the destiny of the soul,” in effect
whether one will experience disease and/or cure.
The mechanism of disease-annihilation, as postulated by Hahnemann,
involves the curative replacement of negative mistunement-generating
impressions by dynamically similar, but actively positive impressions,
divested of the subtle dynamic potentiality of gross disease-manifestation.
This appears to be essentially equivalent to the sanskaric mechanism of
dnyan yoga described in detail by Meher Baba (66):
“That which is essential to transcend the mind and go beyond good and
bad, pleasure and pain, is that while experiencing sanskaras [binding
impressions] mentally (as thought seeds), or subtly (as desires), or grossly
(as acts), there should be no thought of misery or happiness. This is not
possible for ordinary human beings. The remedy therefore is that while

experiencing sanskaras mentally and experiencing happiness or misery
subtly (that is, in the form of desire for such a state) there should be no
gross experience thereof. This means only one thing: the thoughts, the
desires should not be put into action.”
Desires and aversions give impetus to the creation of impressions which
bind us to illusory existence (66), and reactively ultimate in illness (73).
The result of the subtle-experiencing of craving-impressions coupled with
renunciation of their gross-experiencing is the gradual annihilation of
binding impressions, thereby freeing the soul from its impressional
sanskaric bondage to falsity. This unique mechanism of impression annihilation without karmic repercussion was thus elucidated by Meher Baba
(89): “But if, on the other hand, the mind impelled purely by the desire to
become free from sanskaras [binding impressions], kills these sanskaras
by refraining from experiencing them grossly, then such a desire on the
mind’s part cannot be regarded as either subtle or gross, hence this desire
does not need to be experienced subtly and grossly. The reason is that this
particular desire—the desire to become devoid of sanskaras—gets
fructified of its own accord, automatically, without being experienced.”

27. Yogic Mechanism Exemplified
What does this mean in ordinary terms? Let’s say hypothetically that we
have a scabies infection, which began with a feeling-state of deficiency,
of something positively lacking, of bored frustration in its expression
externalizing varied objects of desire, “a sort of internal itch” manifesting
an external itchiness with strong cravings to take correspondingly direct
action and scratch it. The itch-scratch cycle produces eruptions with
exacerbation of a “peculiar, characteristic” voluptuous itching sensation

(43) at the eruption sites, and burning pain after scratching. According to
the ancient doctrine of Hermes Trismegistus (“Thrice-Greatest Hermes”),
expounded by Paracelsus, Swedenborg, et al., “As above, so below” (141,
168), the external itchiness has a qualitative “correspondence” with its
originating internal itch. Meher Baba wrote to the same effect (88), “As
the impressions are, so are the experiences of impressions and so must be
the media to experience the impressions.”
Itching is a form of somatic discomfort, neurologically intermediate
between tickling and pain. The three are distinguished by degrees of
externality; according to Mintz (99), “a tickle is ‘outside’, an itch ‘on’,
and pain ‘inside’.” The most-original psoric “tickle” of cravingindulgence quickly becomes an intolerable “itch”, and in response to
outer suppression it further transforms into a “pain” (42): “after scratching the part becomes painful.” The self-indulgent ego tries to eliminate
the itch-discomfort by suppressive scratching & scratching, and more
progressive means of gaining control, with untoward effect (43).
Alfred Ziegler wrote (172): “Itching is the somatic form of a number of
erotic, hostile, even spiritual affects occurring particularly when we
imagine that we have such affects under control and especially when this
illusion of control is interrupted by a sudden and unexpected state of
isolation.” He added (172) that the “degree of acuteness” of pruritis
“seems to be directly correlated with the extent to which a kind of
isolation capacity interrupts an openness to one’s environment.” We
would tend to identify this so-called “isolation capacity” as egotistic
separativeness. All things considered, we take pruritis to be an irritated
ego-response to the thwarted desires of the mental itch, aggravated into
outer manifestation via inner correspondence by egocentrically askewed

separativeness. Pruritis or itch is said to be pathognomonic of psora (1).
Louise Hay (51) wrote that itchiness is characterized by “Desires that go
against the grain; unsatisfied; remorse…” (vicious-cycles of craving and
indulgence, and their psychic repercussions). False feelings of separation
aggravate itchiness and consequent desire-gratification behavior, as may
be seen in the case of leprosy, which according to Hahnemann is a gross
variant of psora (43). This is described by Dominique Lapierre (82):
“Leprosy, particularly in its advanced stages, exacerbates sexuality
…Knowing that in any case they are cursed by God and excluded from
the rest of the human race, lepers feel they have no taboos to respect.”
But Meher Baba called lepers “beautiful souls in ugly cages” (106), and
wrote (65), “God loves most those who suffer most. Uninvited suffering
is a blessing in disguise, for both pleasure and pain ultimately end in the
Nothing [i.e., God]. Lepers must not become despondent and curse their
fate, but should consider their affliction as a God-given chance of coming
nearer to Him. Compared with the few suffering with physical leprosy,
many in the world today suffer from leprosy of the mind.”
That which distinguishes the most-similar but curative “artificial disease”
from the “natural disease” is the positive healing influence of love in its
most-similar medicinal medium. If we want to throw off our itch
infection directly without outer intermediation, we follow a suitable yogic
practice, avoiding boredom, grief and vexation: we focus our imagination
on the innermost force of God as Infinite Love, and experience separative
cravings subtly without putting them into action; and the temporizing
delusion of separation eventually exhausts its karmic impetus and
dwindles away. When the subtle cravings are experienced with unyield83

ing determination to not give in to their gross expression, the subtle
experience of such disease-neutral cravings gradually displaces that of
disease-engendering cravings, and the infection is gradually thrown off.
Subtle cravings (66), likened to the daily crop of potentially catastrophic
“baobab sprouts” depicted in imprudently unchecked overgrowth in St.
Exupéry’s remarkably wise children’s story The Little Prince (128), have
to be progressively rooted out by complete, deliberate non-expression. “It
is a question of discipline,” said the Prince. And in time, the original
mental seeds from which the subtle craving-impressions would continue
to sprout are themselves annihilated.
One can scratch the eruption whilst refraining from indulging the internal
itch which caused it (i.e., do it without creating subtle thoughts of misery
or happiness), which requires remarkable mental control. Or one can try
to refrain from suppressing or scratching the eruption. But this may be
equally difficult, because according to Hahnemann (43), the “unbearably
agreeable” itching “compels the patient so irresistibly to rub and to
scratch.” Self-restraint is the key to the practice of this yoga. The almost
incredibly difficult feat of self-restraint, without giving in to some form
of external suppression, is a (hypothetical) example of dnyan yoga.
Few patients are accomplished yogis or mystics; they rarely recover from
chronic disease without homeopathic treatment of some sort, but they can
still cooperate wholeheartedly with the physician, to help the remedies to
accomplish their fullest results. Kent said (73): “When a patient would
exert her will, but is unable on account of the physical encumbrance, then
the homoeopathic remedy will restore order.” How do we postulate that
homeopathic medicines act to assist the physiological healing process?

Let’s return to our hypothetical example. In our case the feeling-state
associated with the scabies itch seems most-similar to the state of a
prover of Sulphur recorded in Hahnemann’s Materia Medica Pura (42):
“intolerable voluptuous tickling itching,” with burning pain after
scratching. So to eradicate our scabies infection we take the most-similar
medicine, most likely a potency of Sulphur, alone or in alternation with
various suitably chosen acute remedies. Hahnemann’s intercurrent use of
Sulphur is well documented (49), whenever subtle cravings to suppress
the pruritis start to become irresistible, whereupon we experience the
inner impressions characteristic of the “artificial Sulphur disease” of this
remedy subtly. These externally non-reactive “medicinal disease” impressions displace the most-similar subtle itch-craving impressions with their
resultant gross expressions of pruritis, until the weaker diseaseengendering impressions cease to exist for us, and the external itch
infection itself becomes eradicated: thus the result of these new sanskaras
“weakens the old sanskaras or effaces them from the mental body” (66).
We have record of a saintly person who was cured of Psora at the age of
seven. He was given a dose of Sulphur to cure an intense headache. The
headache went away immediately, and was replaced within a few days by
a huge crop of boils. No further homeopathic medication was indicated;
he was isolated, and the boils drained & healed. We believe that the boils
were psoric, and the cure of Psora was mediated by Sulphur in potency.

28. Bitter-sweet Psoric Temptation
In order to achieve a lasting curative result, we must simultaneously
strive to overcome the psoric temptations, the internal itchiness which


otherwise continues to sustain the external itch from within. Voluptuousness was stated by Hahnemann to be characteristic of the scabies itch
(43): “The ancients also mention the peculiar, characteristic voluptuous
itching which attended itch then as now, while after the scratching a
painful burning follows; among others Plato, who calls itch glykypikron
[bitter-sweet], while Cicero marks the dulcedo [sweetness] of scabies.”
The word “bitter-sweet” in its amalgamation of opposite states conveys
the essentially disunitive quality of voluptuous feelings & sensations.
Anne Carson wrote of the early usage of this word (9): “Sappho who first
called eros ‘bittersweet’… is not recording the history of a love affair but
the instant of desire. One moment staggers under pressure of eros; one
mental state splits. A simultaneity of pleasure and pain is at issue.”
Compulsive demands for pleasurable gratification as reward for painful
deprivation maintain the bitter-sweet cycle of craving and indulgence,
and the disease states resulting therefrom.
Hahnemann said of the interplay of bitter & sweet (44d): “In the healthy
natural states of the human being, left to themselves, disagreeable
sensations must alternate with agreeable sensations; this is the wise
arrangement of our nature.” Upasni Maharaj (the great “sage of Sakori”)
further elucidated (156c): “Everything has two aspects. Night is opposed
to day, and both these opposite states together constitute a whole day.
No-one can change it. In the same way, pleasure is always associated
with pain. If you want pleasure, you are bound to have pain as well. If
you accept pain with pleasure, it always leads you to that infinite, Godly
happiness [i.e., the Goal of life].”
Saint Francis (1182-1226) said basically the same thing: he called 100%

cheerfulness in the face of all life-circumstances good and bad, “perfect
joy” (154). Meher Baba called it “enjoyment of suffering,” and gave a
pertinent analogy (65): “It is similar to when one suffering from an itch
feels pain while scratching, and yet this painful scratching gives a
pleasurable sensation. This is an example to give you an idea of what I
mean by the enjoyment of suffering.” Thus he relates the voluptuous
quality of the itch to “taking the bitter with the sweet,” without reactive
thoughts of misery/happiness, directly annihilating future-binding (66).
Firm renunciation of indulging the seemingly never-ending psoric itch of
bored dissatisfaction with its inherent negativity is an integral part of
personality-transformative “positive thinking” (113). Negativity seems
almost universal nowadays. As Kent wrote (73): “The human race today
walking the face of the earth is but little better than a moral leper. Such is
the state of the human mind at the present day. To put it another way,
everyone is psoric… The itch is looked upon as a disgraceful affair; so is
everything that has a similar correspondence; because the itch in itself has
a correspondence with adultery, only one is adultery as to internals and
the other to externals, one succeeds the other.”
Araujo & Pagliaro (2) comment on Kent’s just quoted statement, “The
word adultery here is not in relation to human laws but to Divine Laws.”
For an understanding of Kent’s intention in respect to his usage of the
term “adultery”, we might compare Matthew 5:28: “Whosoever regards a
woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”
But Kent may have actually intended to convey, in a still broader sense,
the “adulteration” of the purity of one’s originally pristine interior state.
He wrote elsewhere of this “self-adulteration” (75a): “Now in proportion

as a man falsifies truth or mixes or perverts truth; in proportion as he
mixes willing well with willing evil, so does he adulterate his interiors
until that state is present.”
Meher Baba wrote of the purest form of non-adulterated love (65):
“Thought of self is always absent in the different acts of loving connected
with the various stages of pure, real love; a single thought of self would
be love adulterated.” Thus yielding to temptations to selfishly disregard
the still, small voice of one’s heart-knowing conscience, and selfishly
think and act out “what one should not,” has far-reaching consequences;
for it is said that “As a man thinks in his heart, so is he” (Proverbs 23:7).
Compare Gautama Buddha’s words in the Dhammapada (27):
“Our life is shaped by our mind; we become what we think. Suffering follows an evil thought as the wheels of a cart follow the oxen that draw it.”
“Our life is shaped by our mind; we become what we think. Joy follows a

pure thought like a shadow that never leaves.”
And Norman Vincent Peale (113) wrote of “positive thinking,” that the
resultant “joy itself possesses healing power.” Thus one should strive to
practice “good thoughts, words and deeds” and thereby obtain the full
experience and healing power of a heart become joyful (Prov. 17:22).

29. Hydra-headed Miasmatic Selfishness
Kent stated similarly (75a), “Thinking, willing, and doing [what one
shouldn’t] are the three things in life from which finally proceed the


chronic miasms.” Thus he held these three aspects of chronic negativity
to form the basis of Hahnemann’s three chronic disease-generative
miasms. Ortega stated that (103) “no one has only one miasm, but we are
all influenced by all three.” The predominant miasm can be distinguished
by the reactive effect of its quality on the ego-mind of the patient. And he
described (103) the negative qualities which are seen to predominate with
each of the chronic miasms: “A slow, sluggish or depressed mind will be
psoric. A hyperactive, hurried psyche with a changing unstable nature
will make evident the ‘hypertrophy of the ego’ in the sycotic individual.
The degenerative deprivation that clouds the spirit with its tendency
towards destruction and death will constitute the syphilitic position.”
Ortega wrote (104): “Miasm ought not to be understood… as a dynamic
external to the individual but really as an implicit deformation of the first
form of expression of man’s Being generally.” This innermost Being he
distinguished from the reactively externalizing “personality”, preoccupied
with the outward show of appearances. And he considered that (102)
“Evil, in the medical context, is sickness, the starting-point of our
destruction, the cause of suffering… This source or germ of suffering and
death is positive, demonstrable, and perfectly recognizable. He
[Hahnemann] called it the MIASM.”
Meher Baba has said (86) that evil is not an “irreducible active force by
itself,” but a perception relative to a concrete context. The qualities of the
chronic miasms are not “evil”, and in fact most probably derive from the
interaction of the three gunas or qualities of consciousness sattva, rajas,
and tamas (purity, passion, and ignorance) described in The Bhagavad
Gita and its commentaries (143). As one commentator has stated (84),
“Though distinct, these gunas mutually affect each other. They change,

they have the properties of conjunction and disjunction, they assume
forms created by their mutual cooperation… When one is predominant,
the presence of the others is inferred as existing within the predominant
one from the very fact of its operation as a guna.”
Purest sattva is an ideal state, characterized by clarity and contentment
(156a); the negative characteristics stigmatized as “miasmatic” are traits
which emerge upon its adulterating admixture with rajas (craving) and
tamas (attachment). Shankaracharya (138) depicts mixed sattva: “Pure
sattva is like water, yet in conjunction with rajas and tamas, it makes for
transmigration [worldly life]. The reality of the Atman [Soul] becomes
reflected in sattva and like the sun reveals the entire world of matter. The
positive traits of mixed sattva are an utter absence of pride [egoism], etc,
…as well as faith, devotion, yearning for liberation, the divine tendencies
and turning away from the unreal.” When positive traits predominate
through spiritual striving they would most presumably tend to overshadow their negative miasmatic counterparts.
He continues (138): “The traits of pure sattva are cheerfulness, the
Realization of one’s own Self, supreme peace, contentment, bliss, and
steady devotion to the Atman [Soul], by which the aspirant enjoys bliss
everlasting.” Upasni Maharaj describes the three gunas in Appendix B.
The mixed gunas manifest predominantly negative traits in the miasms;
their purification with the restoration of sattvic purity can still overcome
tri-miasmatic adulteration, because “Purity engenders wisdom” (143).
A psychospiritual view of miasmatic self-delusion has been expounded
by PS Ortega (102): “The miasms are the cause of human unhappiness, of
wars, and of all the far-reaching errors of the human species… Man
generates them in his understanding through erroneous ideas, and his

mistaken understanding motivates him to sinful conduct, makes him
selfish and destructive, and deflects him from the universal view which
he should adopt.” We would say that the delusion of separativeness is the
“evil” seed of psora, the root of the three miasms. Meher Baba said (94):
“The root of all sufferings, individual or social, is self-interest. Eliminate
self-interest and you will solve all problems and difficulties.”
Twentyman hypothesized that psora is characterized by anxiety (151b),
sycosis by shame, and syphilis by fear. In a sense, psora can be said to
represent the original dis-ease of the falsely separative and selfish egomind, its so-called “original sin” (57). Kent said (75a): “In proportion as
man thinks against everything—his country, his God, his neighbor—he
wills in favor of himself... In proportion as he does this he becomes a
form of hatred, or a form of self-love; he is that. Allow this to proceed
and ultimates are inevitable… Psora is the evolution of the state of man's
will, the ultimate of his sin.”
Hahnemann in Chronic Diseases used the term “hydra-headed” to
describe (43) psora: “the oldest and most hydra-headed of all the chronic
miasmatic diseases.” Pemberton Dudley stated in his editor’s preface (43)
that Hahnemann would use “qualifying words and phrases in certain
peculiar and unusual connections, likely to escape the notice of the casual
or careless reader but evidently intended by the author to be taken at their
full significance and to constitute an essential element of the discussion.”
And thus it may be a significant fortuity that Meher Baba (87) chose the
same term to describe the separative ego: “The ego is hydra-headed and
expresses itself in numberless ways. It lives upon any type of ignorance.
Pride is the specific feeling through which egoism manifests.” The killing
of the hydra was one of the mythical labors of Hercules, which have

psycho-spiritual import (140): whenever one head of the ego-centrically
“perverted human will” is destroyed, another crops up in its place.
Meher Baba wrote (87): “Since the nature of the ego is very complicated,
an equally complicated treatment is needed to get rid of it. As the ego has
almost infinite possibilities for making its existence secure and creating
self-delusion, the [spiritual] aspirant finds it impossible to cope with the
endless cropping up of fresh forms of the ego.” It requires total egoannihilation to fully actualize “Know Thyself.” Meher Baba explained
the Christian adage (Matthew 10:39, et al.), “Unless you lose yourself,
you cannot find yourself.” He said (65), “It means three things in one:
first, love God so much that you forget yourself; second, sacrifice your
carnal desires for the soul; and third, complete resignation to God's will.”
Psora has often been equated with “scabies”, the external itch disease, but
Hahnemann called it (43) “the internal itch disease with or without its
attendant eruption on the skin.” Ghatak chronicled the hypothetical origin
of internal psora (34): “In the dawn of creation and for some time after,
there was a perfect order and harmony within the human system, because
the people used to have been quite satisfied with their own lot, and used
all the time to live a life of love. Love is the Law of Life,— and they all
lived in accordance with this principle. In course of time, people began to
entertain hatred and envy, and thus broke the natural Law and subjected
themselves to Psora, which is only a product of wrong thinking and
wrong intending against others.”
He continued elsewhere (33): “So long as man lived according to the
laws of God, i.e., without exercising or rather abusing the power of free
will, there was no trouble... But as soon as he exercised the power of free

will with which he was endowed, and willed against the laws of God, the
trouble began... Now passive thinking is harmless, because in it the
element of endeavor to do is wanting, but active thinking, in which there
is this element of ‘doing’ according to the ‘thinking’, is the beginning of
harm. This active thinking, this mental endeavor of doing [thinking “I do
this, I do that” etc], is a kind of mental itching, and this is Psora.”
According to The Bhagavad Gita (143), “It is only the ignorant man who,
misled by personal egotism, says: ‘I am the doer.’” If we substitute selfcentered egotism for “psora” in Hahnemann’s Chronic Diseases, the
result is very illuminating. It seems most likely that they are one and the
same thing viewed from different angles. The hydra-headed separative
ego is thus seen to be the “central delusion” of psora, the assertion of
egocentric separateness underlying so-called ordinary existence. Rajan
Sankaran wrote (130): “We have seen then, that disease is a delusion, but
there is a bigger delusion than this and that delusion is ego.” Meher Baba
said (87): “It is of the essence of the ego that it should feel separate from
the rest of life by contrasting itself from other forms of life… This
division in the totality of life cannot but have its reverberations in the
inner individual life over which the ego presides as a guiding genius.”
Paschero wrote (112): “Hahnemann considered that the suppression of
the itch produced internal psora which acquired the characteristics of a
many-headed hydra capable of a violent eruption when faced with an
infectious aggression as when it is faced with ‘a favorite of the prince was
overthrown’ or ‘a romantic girl fell into deep melancholy due to a
scorned love’ with which the dyscrasia acquired the characteristics of real
moral psora.” These were instances given by Hahnemann in Chronic
Diseases (43) of emotional reverberations triggered by egocentric feel93

ings of separation from the totality of life awakening slumbering psora.

30. Destruction of Egocentric Immaturity
We have seen what psora is, now how are we to deal with it? Meher Baba
has written (65): “Love for God is self-denial, mental control and ego
annihilation.” Direct methods of ego-annihilation (87) should be of the
greatest value in the struggle against psora. Indeed, they can lead one to
the alchemical philosopher’s stone, the summit of self-knowledge alluded
to by Hahnemann (44a): “The first way, to remove or destroy the
fundamental cause of the disease, was the most elevated it [the healing
art] could follow. All the imaginings and aspirations of the best
physicians in all ages were directed to this object, the most worthy of the
dignity of our art. But… the great philosopher's stone, the knowledge of
the fundamental cause of all diseases, they never attained to. And as
regards most diseases, it will remain forever concealed from human
weakness.” The weak and spiritually immature ego-mind cannot even
begin to truly discern such lofty wisdom, without help from a genuine
source of spiritual guidance.
Meher Baba wrote (92): “In the process, man will discover that his
liberation from the overlordship of the ego is in fact not possible without
its complete annihilation; for as long as there is even the feeblest breath
of life left in the hydra-headed ego, it has the toughness to resuscitate
itself and the resources to reestablish its hegemony… The only road to
true integration and fulfillment of life is over the dead body of the ego.”
Spiritual maturity arises from the ashes of the falsely separative ego.


Hering’s Law thus delineates the spiritual maturation process in general.
According to Tomás Paschero (111b): “The law of cure… traces the path
of vital energy from the centre to the periphery, from the mind to the
organs, from vital organs to less vital organs, from the upper part of the
body to the lower part, and fulfills itself in the individual’s progression
towards full maturity—the aspiration of every human being… when we
transcend the self-centred phase—where we try to manipulate people and
events according to our own self-interest—into an altruistic, objective
stage in which we acknowledge the reality and needs of others as much as
our own, realizing that we are not single units separated from the rest of
life.” The law of cure redirects the individual out of his immaturely
separative ego-centeredness towards full maturity as a human being.
Meher Baba (90) illustrated the mechanism of dnyan yoga in the
destruction of immaturity, in the metaphor of a baby who desires milk
(the false separative ego, craving to experience its sanskaric impressions
of falsity), and the substitution of poison (restraint from putting cravings
into action) to kill the baby-like immaturity obstructing Truth-realization
(the goal of yogic practice): “Now the wantings of the baby (i.e. the
desire which is due to past sanskaras) is for milk, which causes the baby
to survive. But if poison is given to it instead, then the act of giving is
done, which means that the karma or action is done, but the doing is
reverse… to the baby's wanting, i.e. it is… reverse action or karma. The
result is that the baby (which here means the past sanskaras) dies.”
There was a homeopath amongst Meher Baba’s close followers in 1925
when this was written (65); the allusion to the “poison” of dnyan yoga
might have been a cryptic reference to the similar mechanism of homeopathic cure. Paracelsus said (110): “Is not a mystery of nature concealed

even in poison? … What has God created that He did not bless with some
great gift for the benefit of man? Why then should poison be rejected and
despised, if we consider not the poison but its curative virtue?”
Hahnemann wrote on the subject of poisons in 1806 (59): “Where the
public sees only objects of abhorrence, the wise man beholds objects
worthy of the deepest veneration and avails himself of them, whilst
adoring the eternal Source of Love. Sapere aude!” This Latin phrase,
“Dare to be wise!” was the motto of the Organon from the 2nd edition
onward (53). This phrase has aptly been linked with the cryptic “Know
Thyself!” adjuring the reader to tread the path leading to wisdom (131).

31. “Know Thyself” – the Path to Wisdom
Dnyan (cognate with “gnosis”) yoga is a name for the path to wisdom, a
spiritual practice which GS Hehr contends (53) that Hahnemann was
advocating in an obscure footnote to §141 of Organon, describing the
value of oneself doing provings: “Among other things he mentions: ‘…by
such noteworthy observations on himself he—the physician—will be
brought to understand his own sensations, his mode of thinking and his
disposition (the foundation of all true wisdom: know thyself)’… It is not
certain when Hahnemann came to know about nosce te ipsum, Latin for
know yourself, or the formula of Thales (know thyself). Probably he
realized its full significance after he studied and followed Confucius and
practiced the technique.”
“In 1826 he wrote to Stapf: ‘The translation from the Chinese into
German of Confucius’ works by Schott is very desirable… It conveys to
the reader Divine Wisdom… Confucius showed us the straight path to
wisdom.’ According to Ezra Pound, Confucius’ straight path to wisdom
is ‘looking straight into one’s heart.’ …The technique: it is rather simple,

so simple that one is tempted not to follow it. All that one has to do is to
watch one’s own sensations, inclinations, thoughts, emotions and desires
—without taking any action, even a mental one [egocentrically asserting
that “I am doing this/that” etc.], —just observation and nothing more!”
Hahnemann elsewhere recommends this self-observation to be done “as if
under the eye of the all-seeing God” (44j), i.e., without ego-centricity,
and it may be freely practiced in one’s everyday life. To quote Confucius
(117): “The great learning takes root in clarifying the way wherein the
intelligence increases through the process of looking straight into one’s
own heart and acting on the results; it is rooted in watching with affection
the way people grow; it is rooted in coming to rest, being at ease in
perfect equity.”
Variations of the practice of “Know Thyself” are found amongst the
spiritual practices of the great religions of the world, though different
paths of approach have different names. Ramana Maharshi (1879-1950)
called his gnostic path “Self-Enquiry” (121); the Buddhists call theirs
Vipassana (in-sight) meditation (7). According to Irene Conybeare (15),
“When Jesus referred to the Kingdom of Heaven being within us, he
stated: ‘And whoever knoweth Himself shall find it.’ To KNOW
THYSELF has ever been the teaching of all ages, for such knowledge is
self-realisation. In the [Bhagavad] Gita, Krishna explains: ‘There is true
Knowledge, Learn thou, Arjuna, this— To see One Changeless Life in all
that lives, And in all that separate seems— The One Inseparable Self.’”
Kent stated (73) that Hahnemann had “a wonderful knowledge of the
human heart” from his gnostic practice, which is “largely to examine into
oneself.” This “side-effect” of doing homeopathic provings is also an

integral part of the wisdom tradition of Freemasonry (167). Hahnemann
according to Peter Morrell first joined the Freemasons in 1777 (100), and
was “a lifelong Freemason and an active member of a Masonic lodge in
every town wherever he lived.” He might even have become a Master
Mason, a man who truly “knows himself” (167): “The full Master Mason
—the just man made perfect who has actually and not merely ceremonially traveled the entire path, endured all its tests and ordeals, and become
raised into conscious union with the Author and Giver of Life and able to
mediate and impart that life to others— is at all times hard to find.”
In a letter written in 1830 (6), Hahnemann called Confucius’ golden
mean (moderation in all things) “one of the most important rules for
getting well,” and added: “Nothing is of more importance than to watch
and restrain our physical inclinations, those of the imagination included.
The animal part of us requires to be constantly supervised and to be
unindulgently kept within bounds as much as our reason will allow; our
constant victory in this direction can alone make us happy by an elevating
consciousness of having done our duty; we then feel that we rest in the
friendship of the Only One. Would you like any other religion? There is
no other.”
The golden mean was described by Confucius (551-479 BC) in “Doctrine
of the Mean” (83): “While there are no stirrings of pleasure, anger,
sorrow, or joy, the mind may be said to be in the state of Equilibrium.
When those feelings have been stirred, and they act in their due degree,
there ensues what may be called the state of Harmony. This Equilibrium
is the great root from which grow all the human actings in the world, and
this Harmony is the universal path which they all should pursue.”


Prophet Muhammad (570-632) said (62) that “Harmony is the imprint of
Oneness upon multiplicity.” This is the pure state of mankind before its
corruption by self-interest. Kent wrote (73): “As long as man continued
to think that which was true and held that which was good to the
neighbor, that which was uprightness and justice, so long man remained
upon the earth free from the susceptibility to disease, because that was the
state in which he was created.” Confucius stated the “golden rule” of selfeffacing harmony (83): “What you do not want done to yourself, do not
do to others” (compare Luke 6:31, “Do to others as you would have them
do to you”). Harmony with one and all radiates from purified hearts.

32. Purification of the Heart
The practice of the golden mean and its attendant golden rule purifies the
heart. “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God” (Matthew
5:8). This is the basis for the gnostic practice which Hahnemann
recommended to achieve health and happiness, and realize the higher
purpose of life. Meher Baba stated (64): “The abode of God is the heart
of each human being and God manifests himself only after the heart is
purified. Every individual limited human mind has two sections – one is
of thoughts and the other is of feelings. The thought-section of the mind
is where the process of thinking occurs, and the feeling section is called
the heart, or the seat of mind, where the process of thinking slows to the
pure state of feeling. The process of purification is necessary, for unless
the heart is free from desires and attachments, God cannot manifest
himself in the heart, though he is always there.”
And elsewhere he explained how it may be achieved (119): “The whole
of creation is a play of thoughts: the outcome of the mind. It is your mind

that binds you; it is also the mind that is the means of your freedom…
The best way to cleanse the heart and to prepare for the stilling of the
mind is to lead a normal life in the world. Living in the midst of your
day-to-day duties, responsibilities, likes and dislikes becomes the very
means for the purification of your heart. For the purification of your heart
leave your thoughts alone but maintain constant vigil over your actions.
Let thoughts come and go without putting them into action.”
This is the same practice as advocated by Hahnemann, and variously
approached by different pathways in many spiritual disciplines, including
broad Buddhism (123), Hindu vedantism (121), and Christian mysticism
(115). We find the spiritual struggle which is invariably required depicted
in the Christian Orthodox Philokalia (63): “If you wish …to gain victory
over passions, abide within yourself by prayer and with God’s help, and
descending into the very depths of your heart discover there these three
strong giants: forgetfulness, laziness and ignorance.”
“These act as supports to intruders in the mind, who bring back other
evil passions to act, live and grow strong in the souls of lovers of lust. But
you, having found all these unknown evil giants, by strict attention and
exertion of the mind, together with help from above, will find it easy later
to get rid of them, again through prayer and attention. Then your zeal for
true knowledge, for remembering the word of God and for harmonizing
your will and your life therewith, together with your attention constantly
standing on guard in the heart, carefully protected by the active power of
grace, will destroy and wipe out the last traces of forgetfulness, ignorance
and laziness.”
Potentially gigantic aberrations of memory, understanding, and will are
thus nurtured by giving in to lower desires, by willful transgression, by

scratching the mental itch from which all of the evil passions grow. Their
yogic annihilation is accomplished through complete inner renunciation,
with the help of God’s grace and the “theological virtues” of hope, faith,
and love (115). The question is whether a yogic method for annihilating
mental impressions such as “Know Thyself,” which Hahnemann himself
recommended, can bear any relation to Hahnemann’s method for
annihilating disease through the Law of Similars. They may seem to
operate in different realms, but the Law of Similars is likewise found to
be applicable in the realm of psycho-spirituality.
Dellmour wrote (24): “Aristotle (384-322 BC) mentioned on the example
of the Greek tragedies, that ‘Catharsis’ may cause mental healing,
because they cause fear and compassion [i.e., pity] which may purify the
mind from the same mental conditions.” Wm Gutman (39) claimed that
psychotherapy has a curative basis in the Law of Similars (the confrontation of soul and Over-soul); but it requires the help of God to provide
the real curative impetus, to “make life worth living” (87). Asked “If our
emotional and mental troubles are only karma, then… is [psycho]therapy
useful at all for assisting people with their troubles?” Meher Baba’s close
disciple V.S. Kalchuri responded (69): “Yes, it is useful. …But don’t
become just [fully dependent] …upon therapy. Depend upon God.”
In 1797 (44b), Hahnemann wrote: “The human mind is incapable of
grasping more than one subject at a time.” This fact later formed the basis
of his elucidation of the yogic mechanism of homeopathic cure (44h):
“And as it is here in psychical life, so it is in the former case in organic
life. The unity of our life cannot occupy itself with, and take in, two
general dynamic affections of the same kind at once; for if the second be
a similar one, the first is displaced by it, whenever the organism is more

affected by the last.” So the mechanism of homeopathic cure may be said
to be functionally analogous to the mechanism of the yogic practice of
internal renunciation (of the expression of gross desires) that Hahnemann
would advocate to correspondents for achieving the purpose of life.
According to Meher Baba, both dnyan yoga and bhakti yoga (the yogic
path of love) take one towards the goal of life, but pure dnyan is overly
difficult for most of us to maintain with sufficient intensity to obtain the
full results thereof (87): “Wanting is a state of disturbed equilibrium of
mind and non-wanting is a state of stable poise. The poise of non-wanting
can only be maintained by an unceasing disentanglement from all stimuli,
whether pleasant or painful, agreeable or disagreeable… This attitude
consists in the application of the principle of neti neti (not-this, not-this).
It implies constant effort to maintain watchful detachment in relation to
the alluring opposites of limited experience.”
Dnyan is an invaluable spiritual practice, but as Sri Ramakrishna (183386) said (120), it is “exceedingly difficult” to reach the goal of life with
dnyan yoga alone. And Ramakrishna said (120): “Is it possible to realize
God unless one’s passions have already been controlled? In a sense not.
But that is true only of Jnana [dnyan] Yoga, the path of Knowledge…
There is, however, another path leading to God—the path of devotion
(Bhakti Yoga). If once man gains love of God… what effort is needed for
the control of passions afterwards? The control comes of itself.”
Renunciation is a natural by-product of the path of love. And Meher Baba
said that love is universal (87): “Only the way of love is the best and
easiest path.” Self-sacrifice is requisite. Meher Baba said that the bhakti
yogi sacrifices false impressions of ego-separation in the path of love

(95): “The Way of Love is a continual sacrifice, and what gets sacrificed
are the lover’s thoughts of ‘I’ …Unwavering loyalty to the Way is the
real remedy for the sickness of impressioned consciousness.” It is said
that: “When there is a Will, there is a Way.” And indeed, bhakti yoga
(heartful prayer) is ever-ready and available to give a powerfully
synergistic impetus to the mechanism of dnyan yoga operative in
homeopathy, enabling and enhancing its curative effectiveness thereby.

33. Faith Enablement of Healing Power
The practice of loving remembrance of our Creator called bhakti yoga
(the Prayer of the Heart) can evoke a deep healing power. Hahnemann
himself seems to have optimally combined bhakti with his habitual
dnyan, practicing a kind of continual prayer, a “prayer without ceasing.”
He wrote (6): “In the moments that we can spare from our busy lives we
should unceasingly thank the great Spirit from whom all blessings flow,
with our whole heart and all our undertakings worthy of Him, though in
all eternity we can never thank Him too much for His goodness.”
In the inspiring words of Frances Havergal (1874): “Take my moments
and my days, Let them flow in ceaseless praise.” Meher Baba wrote of
sincerely fervent prayer (65): “God does not listen to the language of the
tongue, or of the mind, but He responds to the language of the heart…
This means while doing all duties, doing all deeds, while thinking all
thoughts and speaking all words, we have always to have His
remembrance, remembering Him as the background to everyone and
everything. This means in every little thing, good or bad both, we should
remember Him and then all responsibility rests with Him.”


Paracelsus wrote (110): “Pray, seek, knock at the gates in the name of
God, then everything you need will be given you in excess, for in His
name and through Him all things happen.” And Ghatak testified that (34),
“For myself I know, when everything fails, prayer, if sincere, must
succeed.” Meher Baba stated the remarkable effect of this practice (86):
“Through repeated sincere prayers it is possible to effect an exit from the
otherwise inexorable working out of the law of karma. The forgiveness
asked from God evokes from Him His inscrutable grace, which alone can
give new direction to the inexorable karmic determination.”
Sincere prayer (the prayer of the heart) is enabled with unwavering faith
and enhanced with unflagging hope. Paracelsus stated that one of the first
factors in the restoration of health is faith (48), that “faith was a real and
vital aid to health… faith-healing was as scientific as any other form of
therapy... Prayer is a positive and objective statement of conviction, and
is naturally associated with a strong and sufficient faith.”
Mary Baker Eddy (1821-1910), the founder of Christian Science, was an
erstwhile homeopath who shifted the focus of her curative practice to one
of direct and sole reliance upon the curative power of God (28), declaring
that “Homoeopathy furnishes the evidence to the senses, that symptoms,
which might be produced by a certain drug, are removed by using the
same drug which might cause the symptoms. This confirms my theory
that faith in the drug is the sole factor in the cure. The effect, which
mortal mind produces through one belief, it removes through an opposite
belief, but it uses the same medicine in both cases.” But Kent (74f) felt
that she had unaccountably “departed from the law and order methods of
practice” when she advocated putting one’s complete faith in God,
disregardful of the value of homeopathic assistance. She wrote (28): “If

you do believe in God, why do you substitute drugs for the Almighty’s
power, and employ means which lead only into material ways of
obtaining help, instead of turning in time of need to God, divine Love,
who is an ever-present help?... Exceptions only confirm this rule, proving
that failure is occasioned by a too feeble faith.”
Paracelsus said that strong faith is curative for all diseases (50): “If we
cannot cure a disease by faith, it is because our faith is too weak; but our
faith is weak on account of our want of knowledge; if we were conscious
of the power of God in ourselves, we could never fail.” But, as Meher
Baba wrote (87): “Cravings have a tendency to pervert the functioning of
critical reasoning. An unwavering faith grounded in pure intuition can
come only to a mind that is free from the pressure of diverse wants.” And
when faith wavers under inescapable psychic pressures, faith-cure loses
its efficacy. Hence homeopathic assistance is needed: even Mary Baker
Eddy would often consult a homeopath throughout her life (155).
Paracelsus said that (50) “the curative power of medicines often consists,
not so much in the spirit that is hidden in them, as in the spirit in which
they are taken. Faith will make them efficacious; doubt will destroy their
virtues.” Robert Cooper affirmed (18): “The proverbial idea is that a
patient must have faith; in a sense it is quite true, but equally certain is it
that the physician ought to prescribe a remedy such as will give this
desirable faith to the patient.” The physician himself requires a medicinal
medium (the suitable similimum) to put his own faith into, whereupon, as
Paracelsus said (109): “The physician accomplishes that which God
would have done miraculously had there been faith in the sick man.”
Homeopathy should best be given with full faith (62). Meher Baba said of

one instance (65), if there were “the slightest doubt, the faintest speck of
wavering about it, it would not have worked, and no one would have
recovered.” Unwavering faith and unflagging hope (mind serving heart)
greatly empower the homeopathic potencies, according to Aurobindo
(21): “The mind and the vital [force] can influence the body— in this
action of mind and vital on the body faith and hope have an immense
importance. I do not at all mean that they are omnipotent or infallibly
effective—that is not so. But they assist the action of any force that can
be applied, even of an apparently material force like medicine.”

34. The Healing Power of Love
It is said that love is the greatest of the theological virtues of faith, hope,
and love (1 Corinthians 13:13). Paracelsus wrote (110): “The highest and
most effective medicine is love,” and so “No one requires greater love of
the heart than the physician.” Meher Baba wrote (96): “Of all the forces
that can best overcome all difficulties, the greatest is the force of love,
because the greatest Law of God is Love, which holds the key to all
problems.” CM Boger wrote (4a) that homeopaths should learn “that the
law of similia is the master-key of the universe, …and that above all it is
a constituent part of the still greater law of divine love.”
Homeopathy is based on love. Hahnemann wrote (44c) that a “God of
love invented this blessed and most wondrous of arts… Away, then, with
all groveling passions…” Meher Baba wrote of low desires (87), “These
lower forms of love obstruct the release of pure love. The stream of love
can never become clear and steady until it is disentangled from these
limiting and perverting forms of lower love. The lower forms are the


enemy of the higher… Thus the lower forms of love continue to interfere
with the development of the higher form and have to be given up in order
to allow for the untrammeled appearance of the higher form of love.”
Paracelsus wrote of the necessity of the withdrawal of opposition to the
love of God (110), “The seat and home of the soul is in the heart, in the
centre of the man; it is the heart that nourishes the spirits which know of
good and evil… but if the whole heart is to be filled with love of God, all
opposition must withdraw from the soul, and that which is not divine
must go, to the end that it may be all pure, untainted by any other thing,
separated from all the rest, perfectly clean and pure itself.”

35. Love-opposition and its Sublimation
Hahnemann expressed the opposition between lust and love (44i): “As
long as the notable difference of both sexes shall be viewed merely as an
object of sensuality, and nothing more dignified is seen in a union with
the opposite sex than a mere animal copulation, and not a mutual
communication and fusion of the excellencies of both to constitute a more
noble whole, so long will the all-powerful and sexual passion thus
unnaturally separated from moral duty seek its gratification in the arms of
common prostitution.”
Meher Baba explained (87): “When a sexual relationship is accompanied
by a sense of responsibility, love, and spiritual idealism, conditions for
the sublimation of sex are much more favorable than when it is cheap and
promiscuous.” And he clarified the difference between lust and love (87):
“Love is also different from lust. In lust there is reliance upon a sensual
object and consequent spiritual subordination of oneself to it, whereas

love puts one into direct and coordinate relation with the reality behind
the form… Thus, in lust there is the accentuation of separateness and
suffering, while in love there is the feeling of unity and joy.”
Meher Baba gives a broader definition to lust than that which is
commonly limited in its application to mere sexual gratification (65): “In
real love there is no desire for satisfaction – only for satisfying!
Nowadays even lust is taken for love. The subtle difference is missed.
There is a very subtle difference between love and lust, but it is quite
clear. They are two different things. You love rice and curry—this is lust.
You love a cigar—lust again. You love curry and eat it, but do not give
anything by the act. You finish the beloved [i.e., true love].”
Harry Kenmore explained (71): “Now lust does not have the connotation
that most people think of it as having… Meher Baba says that lust is
simply anything from which you derive a feeling of [selfish] satisfaction.
That’s lust. If you get a feeling of satisfaction from food, you have a lust.
If you have a feeling of satisfaction from sex, lust is present… In love
you must sacrifice; in love you must bear pain; in love you must deny
yourself. You must see to it that others are happy at the expense of your
Lust is psycho-physically prominent amongst the major trio of passions
asserting egotistic separativeness: namely, lust, greed, and anger. Meher
Baba said of lust (65), “all other vices are on account of it.” Lust, greed
and anger are the Creator, Preserver & Destroyer of the externalized
universe. Meher Baba wrote (87): “Infatuation, lust and greed might be
looked upon as perverted and lower forms of love… Of these three forms
of lower love, greed has a tendency to extend from the original object to

the means of obtaining it… Anger and jealousy come into existence when
these lower forms of love are thwarted or threatened to be thwarted.” The
7 major desires form inner and outer dynamics amongst the ego trinity:
lust, greed, anger, hatred, jealousy, pride; and central selfishness (66).
Their ego-assertive mental correlates are the 7 currents of mind (123).
Meher Baba wrote (87), “The chief forms in which the frustrated ego
finds expression are lust, greed, and anger… Lust, greed, and anger
respectively have body, heart, and mind as their vehicles of expression…
Selfishness, which is the common basis of these three ingredient vices …
inevitably leads to dissatisfaction and disappointment because desires are
endless… The dawn of love facilitates the death of selfishness.”
Meher Baba wrote of sublimation (87), which helps to clear the way for
the dawn of love: “The process of replacing lower values by higher
values is the process of sublimation, which consists in diverting the
mental energy locked up in the old sanskaras [impressions] toward
creative and spiritual ends. When this energy locked up in the sanskaras
is thus diverted, they get dispersed and exhausted.” The great worth of
sublimating one’s “groveling passions” is emphasized by Das Gupta (22),
commenting on Hahnemann’s footnote to §288 of Organon: “A homeopathic physician too, endowed with ‘Brahmacharya’ [sexual abstinence],
can very easily diagnose his medicine and give it to his patient with a
determination that it must act curatively, which it undoubtedly does. The
will force of the [abstinent] ‘Brahmachari’ must act upon the patient.”
Hahnemann referred to healing power in the Organon, §288 footnote
(40), as being directly transmissible by “one of those men (of whom there
are few in humanity) who, along with great good nature and full-blown
bodily powers, possess very little or even no drive for coition, which he

can completely suppress with easy effort.” The last phrase was apparently
deleted by Hahnemann in the 6th edition (125), perhaps because such
heroic attempts at total suppression may cause dangerous psychological
represssions when unachievable easily or effortlessly (45).
Aurobindo’s Mother wrote that transformation happens effortlessly when
one is ready (101): “All radical and durable transformation proceeds from
within outwards, so that the external transformation is the normal, almost
inevitable result of the process.” And Meher Baba concludes (92):
“Renunciation should be mental. One should live in the world, perform
all legitimate duties, and yet feel mentally detached from everything; one
should be in the world but not of the world.”
36. The True Physician
The physician should strive to be a suitable mediator for the transformative alchemy of healing. For this, personal integrity is prime requisite.
Hahnemann wrote Hering (6), “it is impossible without virtue to be a true
physician, a godlike helper of his fellow creatures in their distress.” Eric
Powell wrote pragmatically (118), “The healer who is well-balanced will
be a far better physician. His very presence will be balm to the troubled
mind and even his medication will have an extra quality.”

Meher Baba remarked of Hahnemann’s own greatness (31): “More
interesting is the life of the discoverer of Homeopathy. He was so
opposed, so insulted, starved – but he got it.” Called a “demi-mystic” by
Aurobindo Ghose (21), Hahnemann was a servant of humanity, a true
renunciant by inclination and undoubtedly an adept practitioner of “Know
Thyself”. He wrote (6), "I myself was never psoric, and hence, by

comparing myself with psoric persons, could best demonstrate the
difference. I ought to have done this in my book [Chronic Diseases], but,
alas! I either forgot to do so, or probably did not do it because I did not
like to talk about myself.” This is self-effacement. Ortega proclaimed the
greatness of the self-effacing non-psoric state (103): “Only the concept of
a spiritually and physically perfect human being could lead us to imagine
the existence of someone free from miasmatic tendencies.”
Martin Miles wrote (98): “Homeopathy as a tool has infinite possibilities
beyond curing physical disease… Practitioners need to develop themselves along more spiritually orientated lines.” Spiritual transformation
through love is the inner actuality of true homeopathic cure. Bernardo
Merizalde wrote (97) that “this method of treatment is very suitable not
only in the process of restoration of health but also in the pursuit of a
spiritual quest.” The healing process and spiritual endeavor are
inseparable—they tend to complement each other, and both can often be
assisted by homeopathy (135, 137).
Hahnemann in 1805 wrote (44f): “His [the Creator’s] design was that we
should bring to unlimited perfection our whole being, as also our
corporeal frame and the cure of its diseases.” And thus Tomás Paschero
wrote (111c): “To cure is to help a fellow human being harmoniously to
integrate their personality in a unit of thought and will, purpose and
action, which will in turn lead to psychological maturity—that is, to the
development of their spiritual potential for freedom and transcendence.”
Christmas Humphries described an Exemplar of selfless healing (60):
“Love is a force that operates on all planes, and the Master… is able to
diagnose at sight the needs of the visitor-patient, for all who come are

patients in his eyes, and his only thought is how he can help them to
achieve the unceasing vision of Enlightenment in which he passes his
days.” Meher Baba wrote of this healing (65): “Real healing is spiritual
healing, whereby the soul, becoming free from desires, doubts and
hallucinations, enjoys the eternal bliss of God… If borne willingly,
physical and mental suffering can make one worthy of receiving spiritual
healing. Consider mental and physical suffering as gifts from God, which,
if accepted gracefully, lead to everlasting happiness.”
The dynamic depiction of this universal healing process, which actualizes
the spiritually transformative Dance of Shiva in our newly awakening
consciousness (17), is found described in Hering’s Law.

37. Remedy Preparation and Dispensation
Meher Baba said (52) that “Feelings and emotions are the energy of the
mind, and love the energy of the soul.” Homeopathic remedies should be
energetically prepared and dispensed “with a will,” with selfless-serving,
God-abiding thoughts and feelings active in one’s mind-heart (22, 63),
the quintessence of true Alchemy. Jenichen prepared his most remarkable
high potencies with loving hands and heart (78), and wrote to Boenninghausen (165), “I do not therefore deserve any particular praise for I do
nothing but my duty.” Ahmed Currim wrote of Dora Schmidt-Nagel, the
pharmacist wife of Pierre Schmidt (20): “Madame Schmidt prepared
almost all her remedies from scratch, strictly following the method of
Hahnemann... Her thoughts always were god-like and she inspired always
to cure, and with these thoughts she made her remedies. The result:
Remedies of incomparable reliability.”


The physician is the mediator or go-between, but the actual cure comes
from God, through the healing power of higher love. Kent pointed out
(75c) that “Hahnemann was always in a state of humility: he never
attributed anything to himself.” Bradford (6) quoted a patient regarding
his loving self-effacement: “He was a good man undoubtedly, and I was
informed that he often when he gave his medicine said to his patients that
he was but the instrument, that he did the best he could and then they
must look to God for the blessing.”

38. Conclusion: the Perfect Science
Kent wrote (73): “While homoeopathy itself is a perfect science, its truth
is only partially known. The truth itself relates to the Divine, the
knowledge relates to man. It will require a long time before physicians
become genuine masters in this truth.” And Meher Baba stated (65),
“Homeopathic medicine is the perfect medicine—but to administer it
properly needs a perfect man.” It is commonly said that “no-one is
perfect,” but we can still do our best, keeping in mind Hering’s response
to praise for a miraculous cure (78), “I am nothing, God is great!”
Hering’s Law may be restated in the light of spirituality: Under the action
of the healing force, symptoms tend to depart in the reverse order of their
coming. The healing force of love cures from heart-center to circumference, through innermost soul-energy radiating outward into bodily form,
reducing separative thinking and feeling, and balancing and reintegrating
mind and heart. Signs and symptoms of obstruction of the love-flow are
thereby cured from top to bottom in the hierarchy of importance, whilst
we actualize the higher purpose of our life in harmony with God’s Will.

In the words of Francis Brabazon (5): “The Creation is energy working
through forms in order to realize its own potential. Order is our method.
We unlock reservoirs of eye and ear: Before our approach the horizons of
established thought and habit recede, and awareness becomes newly
aware of limitless Being. Up to now our research has been preliminary—
concerned with externals; now our work is being directed inwardly to
heart itself, actual seat of energy, place of accommodation of Spirit itself,
to which energy is servant and means of realization. This is a job which
requires impeccable workmanship throughout. Absolute honesty.”

Appendix A: Natural, Non-natural, Unnatural Impressions
Bhau Kalchuri, from an interview in Glow International, Aug. 2004 (67).

Baba had written in his 1925 book about unnatural sanskaras…. He has
said that in one second you collect one million [non-natural] impressions
from the atmosphere. These sanskaras are not collected through deeds,
thoughts or speech but automatically from the atmosphere. So they can
easily be wiped out. There are sanskaras from the atmosphere which
create viral or other [communicable] diseases. They can be treated
medically and wiped out. There is a world of difference between natural
and unnatural impressions. Natural impressions, which we create through
deeds, thoughts and speech, are in response to the Whim, “Who am I?”
Those impressions that are not in response to the Whim and become
obstructions to the progress of the evolution of consciousness (that is,
undesirable thoughts, undesirable deeds and undesirable speech) create
unnatural impressions. Natural impressions continue to be there up until
the sixth plane [of evolution towards God-consciousness], because they
are necessary for the progress of the evolution of consciousness. But unnatural impressions are difficult to wipe out. They become a hindrance in
the progress of the evolution of consciousness; they should be wiped out.

Appendix B: The Trigunas and Liberation
Upasni Maharaj: The Talks of Sadguru Upasani-Baba Maharaj (156a).

(Shri Baba looked at a man and said - "You look like God to me." On this
ensued the following dialogue which went on for some time.)
Gentleman - How so?
Shri Baba - Because you show the qualities of Sattva-guna.
G. - What are the signs of Sattva-guna?
B. - A person, who is indifferent to all worldly pleasures, indifferent to all
desires, their objects and their attainment, indifferent towards the affairs
of the world, who does not like to act for anything in particular, who is
content with whatever comes to him, who is unconcerned about the
pleasures and pain affecting him, who always remains in the state of 'Be
as it may', is a person who has Sattva-guna in him. A person with these
qualities is like God. You are showing some of these qualities and so I
said that you look like God. …
G. - What are the signs of Rajas-guna and Tamas-guna?
B. - A person, who desires to increase his field of activity, who desires
for various worldly pleasures, who undertakes to do many a thing to
satisfy his desires - from eating something that he likes to the attainment
of a Kingdom, who does some things and persists in doing them even if
he does not meet with much of success, who forms Prarabdha to last for
births on end by committing all sorts of deeds [Meher Baba’s Discourses
(87): “From the very beginning till the very end, the soul is subject to the
momentum of impressions, which constitute the destiny of the soul.
These impressions are called prarabdha sanskaras.”], who always
engages himself in some work or tries repeatedly to attain various things,
who coaches others in behaving like himself, who is acutely affected by
the feelings like insult, who is very careful about and desirous of

increasing his personal honour and prestige, who loves to have a large
family depending on him, who is proud, discontented, tough, envious and
a sinner, who loves to study the Asat [illusory matters], and so on, is the
person who is full of Rajas-guna. Such men ultimately suffer for long for
years - or for lives to come. Most persons in the world are like that.
A person, who does not know good from bad, who does what he
likes without any consideration as to how that action would affect others
or affect himself - if it will be advantageous to him or not, who never
listens to anything good or to anybody, who is always doubtful, who is
always suspicious about others and about whatever they tell him, who
always puts everything to improper use, who is full of vices, loves
vicious company, and spends all in satisfying his vices, who is very
impulsive, who gets angry quickly for nothing, and so on, is a person full
of Tamas-guna.
G. - Is it such persons alone with Rajas and Tamas that are unable to
know the state of God? Are they completely void of Sattva-guna?
B. - Every such person does possess Sattva-guna. But if a person begins
to increase his activities without controlling himself, the Rajas and Tamas
increase; all such actions, in course of time, completely cover - suppress
the Sattva-guna. Such men full of Rajas-guna and Tamas-guna are unable
to know the state of God. If the activities are controlled and decreased bit
by bit, then the influence of Rajas and Tamas decreases causing the
spread of Sattva. In other words, the decrease in activities decreases the
influence of Rajas and Tamas, and in course of time the behaviour of the
man changes into the Sattvic one.
G. - What time does it take for the influence of Rajas and Tamas to
disappear? What are the methods to decrease them?
B. - There are two methods to decrease the influence of Rajas and Tamas.
It disappears very quickly if one associates with a saint and behaves in

accordance with his instructions. The other way is a very long one.
Sufferings and pain, life after life, makes him tired of his sufferings, tired
of his activities; his spirits go down - die down; he simply comes to
terms. Slowly then, his activities go down; he now begins to feel that he
may not have this or that. As his sufferings absolve him from his
Prarabdha, his Rajas and Tamas go down and the Sattva begins to rise to
the surface. Very soon then the Sattva virtually replaces others, and he
comes in a position to know the state of God, or a saint. …
I would request you people to ruminate over these things, and try
bit by bit to get beyond the influence of Rajas-guna and Tamas-guna and
increase the Sattvic state. If you do like that, in course of time, you will
be able to know who are like God, and ultimately you yourself will attain
that state of God.

References Cited
1. Allen, John Henry: The Chronic Miasms: Vol. 1, Psora and Pseudo-psora, and Vol. 2,
Sycosis. Chicago: Author, 1904; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 1983 (2 vols. in 1).
2. Araujo, Claudio C & Graciela Pagliaro, “Swedenborg’s Influence on Kent’s ‘Lecture on
Homoeopathic Philosophy’,” Advent of Homoeopathy, 3:3-4, July/Sept & Oct/Dec, 1986.
3. Bach, Edward: Ye Suffer From Yourselves. Saffron Walden, UK: CW Daniel Co, 1931;
4. Boger, Cyrus M: C. M. Boger Collected Writings (Robert Bannan, ed.). Edinburgh:
Churchill Livingstone, 1994; www.link3.com.
a. “What Does Homoeopathy Stand For?” 1915.
b. “The Law of Cure,” 1917.
c. “Vital Energy,” 1931.
5. Brabazon, Francis: “Song for Lab Assistants” in Proletarians – Transition. Beacon Hill:
Beacon Hill Pub Co, 1954; copies available from State Library of Victoria (Australia).
6. Bradford, Thomas L: The Life and Letters of Dr. Samuel Hahnemann. Philadelphia:
Boericke and Tafel, 1895; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 1999; www.homeoint.org.
7. Buddhaghosa: The Path of Purification (transl. Bhikku Nanamoli). Sri Lanka: Buddhist
Pub. Society, 1956; www.scribd.com/doc/30119169/Buddhaghosa-Bhikkhu-Nanamoli-trPath-of-Purification-Visuddhimagga.


8. Carlston, Michael, “Musings on Kent and Swedenborgianism”, The American Homeopath,
vol. 2, 1995; www.carlstonmd.com.
9. Carson, Anne: Eros the Bittersweet. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986.
10. Charaka Samhita, with commentary based on Chakrapani Datta’s Ayurved Dipika (transl.
RK Sharma). Varanasi: Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office, 1981, 4 vols. Acharya
Charaka’s redaction was done in 8th Cent. BC, C Datta’s commentary in 11th Cent. AD.
11. Childre, Doc & Howard Martin: The HeartMath Solution. San Francisco: HarperCollins
Pub, 1999.
12. Clarke, John H: Hahnemann and Paracelsus. London: Homoeopathic Publishing Co,
1923; www.homeoint.org.
13. Close, Stuart: The Genius of Homoeopathy. Philadelphia: Boericke & Tafel, 1924 (orig.
pub. Hom. Recorder, 1911-13); reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 2002; www.homeoint.org.
14. Clover, Anne, “Hahnemann’s Theory of Conceptual Essences,” British Hom. Journal,
73:2, April 1984.
15. Conybeare, Irene H: Civilisation or Chaos? A Study of the Present World Crisis in the
Light of Eastern Metaphysics. London: Markham House, 1955;
16. Cook, Trevor: Samuel Hahnemann, His Life & Times. Wellingsborough: Thorsons, 1981.
17. Coomaraswamy, Ananda: The Dance of Siva, Fourteen Indian Essays. NY: The Sunwise
Turn, Inc. 1918; www.archive.org/details/danceofsivafourt01coomuoft.
18. Cooper, Robert T: Cancer and Cancer Symptoms. London: C. Marten, 1899; reprint
Delhi: Jain Pub, 1990.
19. Corbin, Henry: Swedenborg & Esoteric Islam (transl. L Fox). Swedenborg Foundation,
1995; www.scribd.com/doc/32973654/Swedenborg-Esoteric-Islam-by-Henry-Corbin.
20. Currim, Ahmed, “Obituary: Dora Schmidt-Nagel, 1898-1986,” Journal Am. Inst. Hom,
80:2, June 1987.
21. Das, Eswara, “Sri Aurobindo on Homoeopathy,” Hom. Heritage, 28:8, Aug 2003. See
also NAMAH (Journal of New Approaches to Medicine and Health), 20:2, July 2012.
22. Das Gupta, Haraprasanna: Efficacy of the Invisible, My Practical Experience with
Homeopathic Remedies and Allied Matters. Calcutta: Author, 1949 (out-of-print); extract in
23. Debats, Fernand, “Syndrome Shift, or the Morbid Substitution as a Leading Principle in
Homoeopathy,” Homoeopathic Links, 5:1, 1992.
24. Dellmour, Friedrich, “The Similia Principle – its Historical & Scientific Roots,” Liga
Medicorum Homoeopathica Internationalis, Romania, 2001; www.grundlagenpraxis.de/debatte/englisch/dell_sim.pdf.
25. Dudgeon, Robert E: Lectures on the Theory and Practice of Homoeopathy. London:


Henry Turner, 1853; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 2002.
26. Dunne, John William: The Serial Universe. London: Faber & Faber, 1934.
27. Easwaran, Eknath (transl.): Dhammapada (attributed to Gautama Buddha). Tomales:
Nilgiri Press, 1985; www.spiritsite.com/writing/ekneas/part3.shtml.
28. Eddy, Mary Baker: Science & Health with a Key to the Scriptures. Boston: First Church
of Christ, Scientist, 1910; www.mbeinstitute.org/SAH/SAH.htm.
29. Einstein, Albert, “On the Effects of External Sensory Input on Time Dilation,” Journal of
Exothermic Science and Technology, JEST, 1:9, 1938, reprinted in: Steve Mirsky, “Einstein’s
Hot Time,” Scientific American Magazine, Sept 2002.
30. Fenster, David: Mehera-Meher: a Divine Romance. Ahmednagar: Meher Nazar Pub, 2003
31. Ford, Joan M, “The Heart of the Matter,” British Hom Journal, 66:2, April 1977.
32. Gallavardin, Jean Pierre: The Homeopathic Treatment of Alcoholism (transl. Irenieus
Foulon), Philadelphia: Hahnemann Pub. House, 1890; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 2006.
33. Ghatak, Nilmani: Chronic Disease, Its Cause and Cure (transl. PN Banerjee). Bengal:
Banerjee & Co, 1950 (1st ed. 1931); reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 1993.
34. Ghatak, Nilmani: Lectures on Tuberculosis. Calcutta: Hahnemann Hom. Pharmacy, 1936;
xerox copies from SM Bhattacharya, BC – 111, Salt Lake, Kolkata, India 700064.
35. Ghose, Sri Aurobindo: Hymns to the Mystic Fire. Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram,
1946; www.scribd.com/doc/3206145/hymns-to-the-mystic-fire.
36. Gibson-Miller, Robert: A Synopsis of Homoeopathic Philosophy (revised and enlarged by
Kent), Glasgow: Author, 1909; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 2001.
37. Goodrick-Clarke, Clare: Alchemical Medicine for the 21st Century. Rochester, VT:
Healing Arts Press, 2010.
38. Grimmer, Arthur H, “Essentials of Homoeopathic Philosophy”, Hom. Recorder, 53: 4,
April, 1938; reprinted in Journal Am. Inst. Hom., 72:2, June 1979.
39. Gutman, William: Homoeopathy: The Fundamentals of Its Philosophy, the Essence of Its
Remedies. Bombay: Homoeopathic Medical Publishers, 1978.
40. Hahnemann, Samuel C: Organon of Medicine (Wm Boericke & Robert Dudgeon, transl.),
6th ed. (1st German ed. 1810). Phila: Boericke & Tafel, 1916; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 1991.
41. Hahnemann, Samuel C: Organon of the Medical Art (transl. Steven R Decker, ed. Wenda
B O’Reilly), 6th edition. Redmond: Birdcage Books, 1996; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 2010.
42. Hahnemann, Samuel C: Materia Medica Pura (transl. Robert Dudgeon). London:
Hahnemann Publishing Society, 1881; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 1984.
43. Hahnemann, Samuel C: The Chronic Diseases, their Peculiar Nature and their
Homoeopathic Cure (transl. Louis H Tafel from 2nd German ed. 1835 (ed. Pemberton
Dudley). Phila., PA: Boericke & Tafel, 1896; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 1972.


44. Hahnemann, Samuel C: The Lesser Writings of Samuel Hahnemann (transl. Robert
Dudgeon). New York: William Radde, 1852; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 2004
a. “Essay on a New Principle for Ascertaining the Curative Powers of Drugs,” 1796.
b. “Are the Obstacles to Certainty & Simplicity in Practical Medicine Insurmountable?” 1797.
c. ”View of Professional Liberality at the Commencement of the Nineteenth Century,” 1801.
d. “On the Effects of Coffee,” 1803.
e. “Aesculapius in the Balance,” 1805.
f. “The Medicine of Experience,” 1805.
g. “On the Value of the Speculative Systems of Medicine,” 1808.
h. “Spirit of the Homoeopathic Doctrine of Medicine,” 1813.
i. “On the Venereal Disease & its Ordinary Improper Treatment,” 1817.
j. “The Medical Observer,” 1825.
45. Haich, Elizabeth & Selvarajan Yesudian: Sexual Energy and Yoga. London: George Allen
and Unwin, 1972.
46. Hale, Edwin M: Lectures on Diseases of the Heart with a Materia Medica of the New
Heart Remedies. Phila., PA: Boericke & Tafel, 1875; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 1986.
47. Hall, Dave, “Locating the Core Emotion of the Heart Types,” Nine Points Bulletin, Nov
2009; www.thewinged heart.net/enneagram_articles.html.
48. Hall, Manly Palmer: The Mystical and Medical Philosophy of Paracelsus. Los Angeles:
Philosophical Research Soc., 1964.
49. Handley, Rima: In Search of the Later Hahnemann. Beacon: Beaconsfield Pub, 1997.
50. Hartmann, Franz: The Life of Philippus Theophrastus Bombast of Hohenheim, Known by
the Name of Paracelsus, and the Substance of His Teachings, 2nd ed., London: Kegan Paul,
Trench, Trubner & Co, 1896; www.archive.org/details/paracelsusandthe017572mbp.
51. Hay, Louise L: Heal Your Body, Metaphysical Causations for Physical Illness, Santa
Monica, CA: Hay House, 1988, revised ed.; reprinted Hom. Heritage, 31:2-8, Feb-Aug 2006.
52. Haynes, Jane (ed.): Letters of Love for Meher Baba, the Ancient One. Myrtle Beach, SC:
Sheriar Books, 1997.
53. Hehr, GS, “Self-awareness and Homoeopathy”, British Hom. Journal, 72:2, April 1983;
reprinted Am J Hom Medicine, 95:1, Spring 2002.
54. Hering, Constantine. Der Homöopathischer Hausarzt, (transl. by Hans Weitbrecht of an
extract from Hering’s 14th (last) German ed. of Hom. Domestic Physician, cit. 166b), 1875.
55. Hering, Constantine, “Hahnemann's Three Rules Concerning the Rank of Symptoms.”
The Hahnemannian Monthly 1865; 1:1. Reprinted in Amer. Hom. Review, Vol. 2, 1878, and
The Medical Advance, Jan 1888. Later reprinted in Homeotherapy, 8:3, 1982 and Homoeopathica 21:1, 2001 et al; www.homeopathy.ac.nz/homoeopathica-journal/full-text-articles.
56. Hering, Constantine, “The Rule of Sides”, The Hahnemannian Monthly, 1:2, Sept 1865;
57. Hering, Constantine, “Preface” to Hahnemann’s Chronic Diseases, Vol. 1, Theoretical
part (transl. and ed., CJ Hempel). New York: Wm Radde, 1845. Reprinted in Homoeopathica
21:1 (2001), et al; www.homeoint.org.


58. Hering, Constantine, “What is Similar?”, Stapf’s Archives, vol. 22, 1845; printed in
Homoeopathic Recorder, 47:1, Jan 1932; www.scribd.com/doc/39412410.
59. Hobhouse, Rosa: Life of Christian Samuel Hahnemann. London: CW Daniel, 1933;
reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 2001.
60. Humphries, Christmas, “The Man of Love”, Buddhism in England (the journal of The
Buddhist Society, later renamed: The Middle Way), 1941.
61. Irani, Manija S: letter, in Letters from the Mandali of Avatar Meher Baba (edited by Jim
Mistry). Myrtle Beach: Sheriar Press, 1981.
62. Jessawala, Eruch: Determined To Be His. Ahmednagar: Meher Nazar Books, 1987; see
the story of “Baidul, the Doctor”: http://mymeherbaba.com/pipermail/quotes/2005December/000795.html. The Muhammad quote by Eruch possibly from Lings, Martin:
Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources. NY: Allen & Unwin, 1983.
63. Kadloubovsky (Kadleigh), Eugénie & Gerald E Palmer (transl.): Writings from the
“Philokalia” on Prayer of the Heart. New York: Faber & Faber, 1951.
64. Kalchuri, V.S. “Bhau”: Avatar of the Age Meher Baba Manifesting. North Myrtle Beach:
Manifestation, Inc, 1985.
65. Kalchuri, V.S. “Bhau”: Meher Prabhu, Lord Meher, The Biography of the Avatar of the
Age, Meher Baba (20 vols.). N Myrtle Beach: Manifestation, Inc, 1986; www.lordmeher.org.
66. Kalchuri, V.S. “Bhau”: The Nothing and the Everything. North Myrtle Beach:
Manifestation Inc, 1981; www.ambppct.org/library.php.
67. Kalchuri, V.S. “Bhau”, “Preserving Meher Baba’s Words” (interview by Naosherwan
Anzar), published in Glow International, August, 2004.
68. Kalchuri, V.S. “Bhau”, answer to question: “What is disease?” 15 Jan, 1986. Typed
transcription from a tape-recording, copyright AMBPPCT, Ahmednagar.
69. Kalchuri, V.S. “Bhau”, answer to question: “Is (psycho)therapy useful at all for assisting
people with their troubles?” 12 Dec, 2010. Typed transcription from a talk, copyright
AMBPPCT, Ahmednagar.
70. Kasiviswanathan, TK, “Hering’s Laws of Cure – the Controversy”, Nat. Journal
Homoeopathy, July-Aug 8:4, 2006.
71. Kenmore, Harry, “Love is Living Feeling – Myrtle Beach Talk,” Avatar Meher Baba –
the Way and the Goal, 2:1, Jan 25, 1971; http://ambppct.org/library.php.
72. Kent, James T. Unpublished Lectures (notes from Kent’s philosophy course in Oct. 1895),
Homoeopathic Prestige, vol. 9, Feb - Dec, 1993.
73. Kent, James T: Lectures on Homoeopathic Philosophy (1st ed., from Postgrad, lectures
probably between 1896-99, Lancaster, PA: Examiner Printing House, 1900), Memorial
edition. Chicago: Ehrhart & Karl, 1917; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 1990; www.homeoint.org.
74. Kent, James T: New Remedies, Clinical Cases, Lesser Writings, Aphorisms and Precepts
(ed. WW Sherwood). Chicago: Ehrhart & Karl, 1926; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 1984;


a. “The Simillimum,” 1884.
b. “What Shall We Do When the Law Fails?” 1885.
c. “Homoeopathy: its Fundamental Principles Outlined,” 1886.
d. “Correspondence of Organs, and Direction of Cure,” 1911.
e. “Address Preliminary to the Study of Homoeopathics,” 1911.
f. “Landmarks of Homoeopathy,” 1912.
75. Kent, James T: Aphorisms and Precepts from Extemporaneous Lectures, Arcana Books
(ed. Leonard Fox), 2002, orig. pub. cit. 74. a) #123-32; b) #129-32; c) #231; e) #355; f) #447.
76. Kent, James T, “Remedies Related to Pathological Tissue Changes,” The Homoeopathist,
Aug 1912; reprinted in The Homoeopath, vol. 63 Autumn (1 Nov) 1996; www.homeoint.org.
77. Khan, Inayat: The Sufi Message of Hazrat Inayat Khan, 12 vols. (talks between 1914-26).
London: Barrie & Jenkins, 1973; www.wahiduddin.net. Vols: a) vol. 8; b) vol. 8a; c) vol. 10;
d) vol. 11.
78. Knerr, Calvin: Life of Hering. New York: Magee Press, 1940; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub,
1992; www.homeoint.org.
79. Knerr, Calvin, “Some Unknown Facets and Writings of Constantine Hering”,
Homoeopathy, 1938; reprint Hom. Heritage 8:3, March 1983; www.homeoint.org.
80. Koppikar, SP, “Editorial: Patient’s Progress,” Hom. Heritage, 12:3, March 1987.
81. Kozyrev, Nikolay A, “On the Possibility of Experimental Investigation of the Properties
of Time” (transl.). Prague, 1971; www.univer.omsk.su/omsk/Sci/Kozyrev/paper1a.txt.
82. Lapierre, Dominique: City of Joy. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co, 1985.
83. Legge, James (transl.): Confucian Analects, The Great Learning, and The Doctrine of the
Mean. NY: Dover Books, 1971 (Oxford UP, 1893); www.sacred-texts.com/cfu/conf1-3.htm.
84. Leggett, Trevor (transl.): Shankara on the Yoga Sutras: a Full Translation of the Newly
Discovered Text. Delhi, Motilal Banarsidaass, 1992.
85. Lennihan, Begabati, “Homeopathy from the Heart: Homeopathy and Spirituality”, Hpathy
Ezine, April, 2009; www.greenhealing.org/docs/4_spiritual.pdf.
86. Meher Baba: Beams from Meher Baba on the Spiritual Panorama. New York: Peter
Pauper Press, 1958; www.ambppct.org/library.php
87. Meher Baba: Discourses (ed. CD Deshmukh) Myrtle Beach: Sheriar Press, 1987 (7th
edition; orig. pub. 1939-43); www.ambppct.org/library.php
88. Meher Baba: God Speaks, the Theme of Creation and Its Purpose. NY: Dodd Mead, 1973
(2nd ed; orig. pub. 1955); www.ambppct.org/library.php
89. Meher Baba: Infinite Intelligence. N Myrtle Beach: Sheriar Foundation, 2005.
90. Meher Baba: Intelligence Notebooks (probably dictated in 1925-26, later published as
Infinite Intelligence, op. cit. 89) www.ambppct.org/library.php
91. Meher Baba: Life at its Best. NY: Peter Pauper Pr., 1957; www.ambppct.org/library.php


92. Meher Baba: Silent Teachings of Meher Baba, Discourses & Conversations (versions by
Alexander Markey, ed. Naosherwan Anzar). East Windsor: Beloved Archives, Inc, 2001.
93. Meher Baba: Sparks from Meher Baba. Myrtle Beach: Sheriar Foundation, 1962;
94. Meher Baba: Sparks of the Truth from Dissertations of Meher Baba (ed. CD Deshmukh).
Myrtle Beach: Sheriar Pr., 1971(2nd ed); www.ambppct.org/library.php.
95. Meher Baba: The Everything and the Nothing. Beacon Hill, Australia: Meher House Pub,
1963; www.ambppct.org/library.php.
96. Meher Baba: The Path of Love, Meher Baba (Filis Frederick, ed). New York: Samuel
Weiser, 1976, www.ambppct.org/library.php
97. Merizalde, Bernardo A, “Homeopathy, Alchemy and the Process of Transformation”,
Proc. of the 52nd Congress of Liga Medicorum Homeopathica Internationalis. Seattle, 1997.
98. Miles, Martin: Homoeopathy and Human Evolution. London: Winter Press, 1992.
99. Mintz, Thomas, “Tickle—the Itch that Moves: a Psychophysiological Hypothesis,”
Psychosomatic Medicine, 29:6, Nov 1967,
100. Morrell, Peter, “The Secretive Hahnemann and the Esoteric Roots of Homeopathy,”
2001. In: Hahnemann & Homoeopathy, Delhi: Jain Pub, 2003; www.homeoint.org.
101. Mother (Mira Alfassa): Health and Healing in Yoga. Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo
Ashram, 1979.
102. Ortega, Proceso Sanchez: Notes on the Miasms or Hahnemann’s Chronic Diseases
(transl. Harris Coulter), Delhi: National Homoeopathic Pharmacy, 1980 (orig. 1944).
103. Ortega, Proceso Sanchez, “Chronic Miasms”, British Hom. Journal, 72:1, Jan. 1983.
104. Ortega, Proceso Sanchez, “Personality and Individuality”, Zeitschrift für Klassische
Homoeopathe und Arzneipotenzierung, Band 30, Heft 2/86. Translation by KS Srinivasan,
printed in Quarterly Homoeopathic Digest, vol. 5, March, 1988; www.simimonomini.com.
105. Ott, Christopher J: The Evolution of Perception & the Cosmology of Substance: a
simpler theory of everything. Lincoln: iUniverse, Inc, 2004.
106. Ott, Lyn & Phyllis (compilers & editors): Beautiful Souls in Ugly Cages. Virginia Beach,
VA: R. Grant Narelle,1983.
107. Ouspensky, Petyr D: In Search of the Miraculous: Fragments of an Unknown Teaching.
New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1949; www.gurdjieff.am/in-search/index.pdf.
108. Pacheco, José Antonio, “Philosophy and Homeopathy: the Influence of Swedenborg”,
Arcana 6:1, 2001 (also published in cit. 75).
109. Paracelsus, Theophrastus: Essential Readings (Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, transl.),
Berkeley: North Atlantic Books, 1999.


110. Paracelsus, Theophrastus: Selected Writings (Jolande Jacobi, ed.), Bollingen Series
XXVII, Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1958.
111. Paschero, Tomás P: Homoeopathy (ed. Patricia Haas; transl. Katherine Massís).
Beaconsfield: Beaconsfield Publishers, 2000 (orig. pub. 1983). Article (f) contains a
Saint Augustine quote from: Confessions, Book 11 (transl. Albert Outler). Phila., PA:
Westminster Press, 1955; www.ccel.org/ccel/augustine/confessions.txt.
a. “Mental Symptoms in Homoeopathy,” 1953.
b. “Fundamental Principles,” 1955.
c. “What to Cure in Each Patient,” 1958.
d. “Unicism and Pluralism,” 1959.
e. “Selecting the Homoeopathic Remedy,” 1960.
f. “Child Psychology in Homoeopathy,” 1963.
112. Paschero, Tomás P, “Psora, Idiosyncrasy Fundamental of Pathology”, reprinted in
Kailash N Mathur: Principles of Prescribing, Delhi: Jain Pub, 1975.
113. Peale, Norman Vincent: The Power of Positive Thinking. NY: Prentice-Hall, 1952.
114. Peebles, Elinore, “Homeopathy and the New Church”, Arcana, 6:1, 2001.
115. Peers, E Allison (transl.), The Ascent of Mount Carmel (by St. John of the Cross).
Garden City: Doubleday, 1962 (2nd ed); www.ccel.org/ccel/john_cross/ascent.i.html
116. Perry, Whitall N, “The Alchemy in Homeopathy”, Studies in Comparative Religion,
16:1-2, Winter-Spring 1984; www.studiesincomparativereligion.com.
117. Pound, Ezra (transl.): Confucius: The Great Digest and Unwobbling Pivot. London:
Peter Owen, 1947. Reprint: NY: New Directions, 1951.
118. Powell, Eric: A Course in the Theory and Practice of Homoeopathy, 6 vols. Sussex:
Academic Publications, 1970.
119. Purdom, Charles: The God-Man: The Life, Journeys and Work of Meher Baba with an
Interpretation of His Silence & Spiritual Teaching. London: Allen & Unwin, 1962;
120. Ramakrishna: Sayings of Sri Ramakrishna, the Most Exhaustive Collection of Them,
Their Number Being 1120. Madras: Sri Ramakrishna Math, 1943.
121. Ramana Maharshi, “Self-Enquiry”, (1901), in: Collected Works of Ramana Maharshi.
Tiruvannamalai: Sri Ramanasramam, 1996; http://bhagavan-ramana.org/ramana_maharshi.
122. Reichenberg-Ullman, Judyth, “Don’t Worry. Be Happy!”, What Doctors Don’t Tell
You, 1996; www.healthy.net/Health/Article/Dont_Worry_Be_Happy/594.
123. Reiter, Lawrence (ed.): Lord Buddha’s Explanation of the Universe, an Interpretation of
the Abhidharma. N Myrtle Beach: Manifestation, Inc., 2004. Adapted from Ranasinghe, CP:
The Buddha's Explanation of the Universe. Colombo: Lanka Bauddha Mandalaya Fund, 1957
124. Roberts, Herbert A, “Homoeopathy and the Fundamental Laws,” Hom. Recorder, v. 50,
1935. Reproduced in Roberts: The Principles and Art of Cure by Homoeopathy: a Modern
Textbook, London: Hom. Pub. Co, 1936; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 1984; www.homeoint.org.


125. Rottler, Gaby, Personal communication, Dec 2007.
126. Saine, André, “Hering’s Law: Law, Rule or Dogma?” Simillimum, 6:4, Winter 1993;
127. Saine, André: Teachings: Psychiatric Patients, Pure Classical Homeopathy. Delhi: Jain
Pub, 2004.
128. Saint Exupéry, Antoine de: The Little Prince (tr. K Woods). NY: Harcourt, Brace, 1943;
www.cs.swan.ac.uk/~cswill/The_little_prince.pdf; gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0300771h.html
129. Sankaran, Rajan: The Soul of Remedies, Mumbai: Homoeopathic Medical Publishers,
1997. A valuable source-book for exploring these new concepts.
130. Sankaran, Rajan: The Spirit of Homoeopathy. Mumbai: Homoeopathic Medical
Publishers, 1999 (3rd edition).
131. Schall, Sarah, “Hahnemann’s Heavenly Rose,” Interhomeopathy, Dec 2012;
132. Schmidt, Pierre, “Homoeopathy and Psychosomatic Disorders,” Brit. Hom. Journal,
55:1, Jan 1966.
133. Schmidt, Pierre, “La loi de guérison ou loi de Hering”, Cahiers Hahnemanniens de
Groupement de Lyon, 4: 32-43, 1967, www.homeoint.org.
134. Schmidt, Pierre, “Hering’s Law of Cure with Practical Illustrations”, Trans. Inter. Hom.
Congress, 1967. Reprinted in K.N. Mathur: Principles of Prescribing. Delhi: Jain Pub, 1975.
135. Schmidt, Pierre: The Privilege of Liberation Through Homoeopathy. Vienna: Martin and
Ternet, 1929 (2nd edition).
136. Schmidt, Roger, “Hering’s Law of Cure”, Homoeopathic Recorder, 44:2, Feb 1929;
reprinted Hom. Heritage 8:5, May 1983; www.homeoint.org.
137. Scholten, Jan: Secret Lanthanides: Road to Independence, Delhi: Jain Pub., 2005.
138. Shankaracharya, Adi: Vivekachudamani (transl. Swami Madhavananda), Kolkatta:
Advaita Ashrama, 1921; www.estudantedavedanta.net/Vivekashudamani.pdf.
139. Shore, Jonathan, quoted comments following an article by R Neustaedter, “Interstitial
Cystitis: a Problem”, Journal Amer. Inst. Hom., 81:1, March 1988.
140. Shrine of Wisdom: Sacred Mythoi of Demigods and Heroes: Prometheus, Perseus,
Hercules. Brook near Godalming: Fintry Trust, 1999; www.shrineofwisdom.org.uk.
141. Svendsen, Lars: A Philosophy of Boredom. London: Reaktion Books, 2005;
142. Swainson, William P: Theophrastus Paracelsus: Mediaeval Alchemist. London: Wm
Rider & Son, 1919; reprinted Kessinger Pub, 2003.
143. Swami, Shri Purohit (transl.): The Geeta: the Gospel of the Lord Shri Krishna Put into
English from the Original Sanskrit. NY: Faber & Faber, 1935; same version published with
annotations by Kendra Burroughs: Bhagavad Gita: Annotated and Explained. Woodstock:


Skylight Paths Pub., 2001; www.thebigview.com/download/bhagavad-gita.pdf.
144. Swedenborg, Emanuel: The Works of Emanuel Swedenborg. West Chester, PA:
Swedenborg Foundation Press; www.swedenborg.com.
a. Heaven & its Wonders and Hell from Things Heard & Seen, 1758 (transl. G Dole).
b. Divine Love and Wisdom, 1763 (transl. George Dole).
c. Arcana Coelestia 5711ff, 1749-56 (transl. John Clowes).
d. True Christianity, 578, 1771 (transl. Jonathan Rose).
145. Tafel, RL (ed.): Documents Concerning the Life & Character of Emanuel Swedenborg,
Vol. 2, Pt 1. Lon: Swedenborg Society, 1890, Doc. 251:7; reprint NY: Adamant Media, 2005.
146. Taylor, Jill Bolte: My Stroke of Insight, a Brain Scientist’s Personal Journey. New York:
Penguin, 2008.
147. Tilden, JH: Toxemia Explained; the True Interpretation of the Cause of Disease. Denver:
World Press, 1926; www.chrisbeatcancer.com.
148. Treuherz, Francis, “The Origins of Kent’s Homoeopathy: the Influence of Swedenborg,”
Journal Amer. Inst. Hom., 77:4, Dec 1984.
149. Troward, Thomas: The Law & the Word. NY: Robert McBride & Co, 1917.
150. Twentyman, Lewellyn Ralph, “Golden Apollo & the Heart”, Brit. Hom. Journal, 74:2,
April 1985.
151. Twentyman, Lewellyn R: The Science & Art of Healing. Edinburgh: Floris Books, 1988.
See page: (a) 49; (b) 257.
152. Twentyman, Lewellyn R, “Editorial: The History of Homeopathy,” Brit. Hom. Journal,
67:1, Jan 1978.
153. Twentyman, Lewellyn R, “Neuro-sensory Aspects of Malignant Disease”, Brit. Hom.
Journal, 67:3, July 1978.
154. Ugolino (Ugolino Brunforte): The Little Flowers of Saint Francis of Assisi. New York:
Heritage Press, 1965; www.ccel.org/ccel/ugolino/flowers.txt.
155. Ullman, Dana: The Homeopathic Revolution: Why Famous People and Cultural Heroes
Choose Homeopathy. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books, 2007.
156. Upasni Maharaj: The Talks of Sadguru Upasani-Baba Maharaja. Sakori: Shri Upasni
Kanyakumari Sthan, 1957; reprinted 1978. Dates of talks: a) 28 Dec 1923; b) 18 June 1924;
c) 8 July 1924; available online from: http://avatarmeherbaba-israel.com.
157. Van Alphen, Jan & Anthony Aris (eds): Oriental Medicine: an Illustrated Guide to the
Asian Arts of Healing. London: Serindia Pub, 1995 (quote from Charaka Samhita by Robert
Svoboda, in his essay, “Theory and Practice of Ayurvedic Medicine”, page 81).
158. Van Galen, Emiel, “Kent's Hidden Links: The Influence of Emanuel Swedenborg on the
Homeopathic Philosophy of James Tyler Kent”, Homoeopathic Links, vol. 7:3, Fall 1994.


159. Verspoor, Rudi & Steven Decker, “Selected Topics in Homeopathy: New Look at Old
Issues.” Manotick: Hahnemann Center for Heilkunst, 2003;
160. Vieira, Gilberto R, “Laws of Cure on the Mental Level,” Homeopathic Links, 17:4,
Winter 2004.
161. Vijayakar, Prafull, “Hering’s Law: Its Importance in Clinical Practice”, Homeopathic
Links, 14:1, Spring 2001.
162. Vijayakar, Prafull: Predictive Homoeopathy, Volume 1, Theory of Suppression. Mumbai:
Preeti Vijayakar, 2002.
163. Vithoulkas, George: Homeopathy: Medicine of the New Man. New York: Arco Press,
1979; reprint Delhi: Jain Pub, 1987.
164. Vithoulkas, George: The Science of Homeopathy. New York: Grove Press, 1980, reprint
Delhi: Jain Pub, 1986.
165. Von Boenninghausen, Clemens Maria Franz: The Lesser Writings of C.M.F. von
Boenninghausen (ed. TL Bradford). Philadelphia: Boericke & Tafel, 1908; reprint Delhi: Jain
Pub, 2002.
166. Weitbrecht, Hans, “Hering’s Law”, www.otherhealth.com: quote dates a) 12 Nov
2001; b) 17 Dec 2004; c) 18 Dec 2004; d) 15 Oct 2005.
167. Wilmshurst, Walter L: The Meaning of Masonry. London: W Rider & Son, 1922;
168. Wilson, James, “Swedenborg, Paracelsus, and the Dilute Traces”, The New Philosophy
Online, July-Dec 2011; http://swedenborg-philosophy.org/journal.
169. Winston, Julian, “Kent and Swedenborg”, Hpathy Ezine, June 2004; www.hpathy.com.
Also read Shirley’s reply: Reischman, Shirley, “Kent and Swedenborg: Shirley Reischman in
Reply to Julian Winston’s Critique”, Hpathy Ezine, June, 2004, www.hpathy.com.
170. Woodbury, Benjamin C, “The Direction of Symptoms in the Progress of Cure”, Hom.
Recorder, 44:4, April 1929; reprinted Hom. Heritage 8:5, May 1983; www.homeoint.org.
171. Worcester, John: Physiological Correspondences. Boston: Mass. New-Church Union,
1889; www.theisticscience.org/books/worcester/index.htm
172. Ziegler, Alfred J: Archetypal Medicine (transl. Gary Hartman). Dallas: Spring Pub, 1983.