APHORISM 7
BY PAUL BOOYSE
with commentary from Gaby Rottler, Deborah and Eileen
Copyright ©2007 Paul Booyse
All Rights Reserved
PART 1: Aphorism 7 by Paul Booyse
(Taken from Organon 5th edition by Dudgeon and 6th additions by Boericke, available in book form or as a text file on the internet).
§ 7
Now, as in a disease, from which no manifest exciting or
maintaining cause (causa occasionalis) has to be removed1, we can perceive nothing but the
morbid symptoms, it must (regard being had to the possibility of a miasm, and attention
paid to the accessory circumstances, § 5) be the symptoms alone by which the disease
demands and points to the remedy suited to relieve it - and, moreover, the totality of
these its symptoms, of this outwardly reflected picture of the internal essence of the
disease, that is, of the affection of the vital force, must be the principal, or the sole
means, whereby the disease can make known what remedy it requires - the only thing that
can determine the choice of the most appropriate remedy - and thus, in a word, the
totality2 of the symptoms must be the principal, indeed the only thing the physician has
to take note of in every case of disease and to remove by means of his art, in order that
it shall be cured and transformed into health.
*******************
"UNDERSTAND THE INTERNAL ESSENCE BY RECOGNISING THE IMAGE CREATED BY THE KEY SYMPTOMS."
Keywords: Maintaining cause; Miasm; Totality; Symptom; Art;
(§ 7 has several parts. First there is a provision about causative agents, second there is a reminder to read § 5 regarding miasms and accessory circumstances, and then the main essence of § 7, which goes into the relationship between disease and totality of symptoms, and the appropriate remedy. Along the way we have 2 footnotes)
Let us discuss the main part first, then we can come back to the beginning. We need to understand exactly what he meant by "totality" and what he meant by "symptom". Then we can better understand how this reflects outwardly, the inner disease process - the affection of the vital force (vital principle).
The totality is the summation of what the vital force has created. We found already in the preface that Hahnemann says the disease starts internally, on a dynamic level, and the vital force, now in disarray has to compensate and so pathology is created at the least severe level, where it can be most easily tolerated. (e.g. the skin is a large organ and is superficial, so that could be a chosen spot - the chosen area depends on the characteristic of the disease state plus the susceptibility of the patient. Some people develop eczema, some develop a wart and others develop a sinus or haemorrhoid etc.) The symptoms can be on a physical, emotional and even mental level, or combinations thereof, such as a sense of fatigue or even a Schizophrenia. By matching our remedy to as many of these symptoms as possible we create a mirror image of the expression of disease state by the vital force. (Not the disease - the disease STATE.) (Note:- If we have chosen our symptoms well then the remedy will also have inherent in it the essence of the internal disease state, expressed in the delusions, dreams or other fundamental regions- this is the true simillimum). This internal disease state will result in the vital force producing a pattern of symptoms which is also dependant on constitution, susceptibility and miasmatic influence. That is why the symptoms must be matched to a remedy producing similar symptoms in a healthy person. Each prover would have shown a similar but unique pattern of symptoms.
So now let's look at the meaning of the word "symptom". In fact, in homoeopathy single symptoms such as "headache" or "diarrhoea" are of no use to us. We need to qualify our symptom and so there are certain parameters which we would consider important.
If we consider a pain or sensation then we must ask:
1.) Locality - where is it. Left/right; moving; from sternum through to between the shoulder blades?
2.) Extension - does it radiate away, does it start on one side and then move to the other? e.g. Always starts on the right and then moves to the left.
3.) Intensity - what pace does it have? Does it come quickly, or does it build gradually? Then how does it go away - slowly or fast or in stages etc.? e.g. sudden increase in fever at 3:00am.
4.) Modality - what makes it better or worse e.g. pressure, temperature, disturbance, motion, eating, sleeping etc. e.g. better with warmth and pressure; worse with light touch; worse from motion.
5.) Time of occurrence. Only at midday or 3:00am or between 4:00pm to 8:00 pm.
6.) Concomitant symptoms - e.g. shoulder pain always with a nauseous feeling in the pit of the stomach.
7.) Onset - what caused this symptom - (if known). e.g. an old head injury, or overexertion. Fever after exposure to rain.
8.) Character of the symptom. e.g. burning or stitching or throbbing etc. Coldness of the part, sense of being separated, sensation as if ….
And so we will find our symptoms changing from ones represented by 50 to 100 or more remedies to a qualified symptom represented by fewer remedies, perhaps 10 or 15 but perhaps even by 1 or 2 or a few. Now we are approaching the unique nature of the disease state.
Once we have more meaningful symptoms we can look at them in totality and see the common thread that is characterising the particular disease state in this individual. The qualified symptom (also known as a rubric) needs to be taken in context with other rubrics. Kent amongst others has given us some ideas as to the hierarchy of symptoms. Each symptom can be analysed as to its importance relative to the others.
Is Hahnemann not telling us to take every possible symptom we find (- the totality), and put them all together? As we read the Organon we see that in fact this is not so. Hahnemann advises us to take the characteristic symptoms, using the symptoms that specifically mark and distinguish the case (the strange, rare and peculiar) - see §. 104. He also states (§ 211) that very often the mental disposition helps us in choosing the right remedy.
Now having achieved this we can now look at the remedy which seems to cover the case. In particular, there should be a remedy which has through homoeopathic proving been found to produce a certain state in a healthy individual which matches this current state of the patient. This is the method (and Hahnemann stipulates only method) which the Homoeopath needs to apply in each case in order to remove them in order that a cure is achieved and total health restored.
This bringing together of the symptoms to understand the bigger picture is the creative part of homoeopathy, much like an artist and a canvas. Several nice colours on the palette but unless they are utilised in a correct manner, there will not be a masterpiece. Learning the materia medica and studying the Organon form the basis of the Science of Homoeopathy, while applying this knowledge in a true understanding of what represents the internal disturbance, is the Art of Homoeopathy, hence his usage of the word in the last sentence. No use in being a learned Professor if you cannot conclude the correct totality of symptoms and find the matching remedy.
(Despite our doing all of this we may still not arrive at the true simillimum. Hahnemann had a few hundred remedies in his day and nowadays we have +/- 2500, which is still just the tip of the iceberg. So either for lack of known remedy or for lack of symptoms observed, or our ineptitude, we may prescribe a remedy that is a best shot but not a bulls-eye. To find out more refer to §. 162 & 163.)
He also mentions "we can perceive ….". This will vary from one practitioner to another. He trusts that we will make use of our usual "information gathering" organs, namely our senses.. So we use sight, hearing, touch, smell and taste (not advisable - get other peoples opinion on the taste.) We are implored in several aphorisms to use our senses. This is to "best perceive". Now we know that our senses gather information and our mind then interprets that information (and here the problem of prejudice may step in). Consider the extreme example of a blind homoeopath. He or she will obviously not be able to rely on sight, however we often find that the other senses are heightened. Hearing can be more acute, but more importantly the interpretation of what they hear is also more acute. They can pick up nuances in the persons speech and perhaps if someone on the list knows more about this please share your knowledge with us. Homoeopaths will have their own particular individuality with some being more sensitive than others. Intuition can also help a lot to not only pick up feeling but also to probe the case when insufficient symptoms are given or clarification on a point is necessary. Later we will be dealing with case taking and we rely the patients statements, our unprejudiced observations, as well on information from people close to the person.
FIRST FOOTNOTE:
1 It is not necessary to say that every intelligent physician
would first remove this where it exists; the indisposition thereupon generally ceases
spontaneously. He will remove from the room strong-smelling flowers, which have a tendency
to cause syncope and hysterical sufferings; extract from the cornea the foreign body that
excites inflammation of the eye; loosen the over-tight bandage on a wounded limb that
threatens to cause mortification, and apply a more suitable one; lay bare and put ligature
on the wounded artery that produces fainting; endeavour to promote the expulsion by
vomiting of belladonna berries etc., that may have been swallowed; extract foreign
substances that may have got into the orifices of the body (the nose, gullet, ears,
urethra, rectum, vagina); crush the vesical calculus; open the imperforate anus of the
new-born infant, etc.
THE SECOND FOOTNOTE:
2 In all times, the old school physicians, not knowing how
else to give relief, have sought to combat and if possible to suppress by medicines, here
and there, a single symptom from among a number in diseases - a one-sided procedure,
which, under the name of symptomatic treatment, has justly excited universal contempt,
because by it, not only was nothing gained, but much harm was inflicted. A single one of
the symptoms present is no more the disease itself than a foot is the man himself. This
procedure was so much the more reprehensible, that such a single symptom was only treated
by an antagonistic remedy (therefore only in an enantiopathic and palliative manner),
whereby, after a slight alleviation, it was subsequently only rendered all the worse.
APHORISM 7 BY GABY ROTTLER:
****************************************
Organon der Heilkunst, § 7
Da man nun an einer Krankheit, von welcher keine sie offenbar
veranlassende oder unterhaltende Ursache (causa occasionalis) zu entfernen ist (1) sonst
nichts wahrnehmen kann, als die Krankheits-Zeichen, so muessen, unter Mithinsicht auf
etwaniges Miasm und unter Beachtung der Nebenumstaende (§ 5.), es auch einzig die
Symptome sein, durch welche die Krankheit die, zu ihrer Huelfe geeignete Arznei fordert
und auf dieselbe hinweisen kann - so muss die Gesammtheit dieser ihrer Symptome, dieses
nach aussen reflectirende Bild des innern Wesens der Krankheit, d.i. des Leidens der
Lebenskraft, das Hauptsaechlichste oder Einzige sein, wodurch die Krankheit zu erkennen
geben kann, welches Heilmittel sie beduerfe, - das Einzige, was die Wahl des
angemessensten Hilfsmittels bestimmen kann - so muss, mit einem Worte, die Gesammtheit (2)
der Symptome für den Heilkuenstler das Hauptsaechlichste, ja Einzige sein, was er an
jedem Krankheitsfalle zu erkennen und durch seine Kunst hinwegzunehmen hat, damit die
Krankheit geheilt und in Gesundheit verwandelt werde.
1) Dass jeder verstaendige Arzt diese zuerst hinwegraeumen wird, versteht sich; dann laesst das Uebelbefinden gewoehnlich von selbst nach. Er wird die, Ohnmacht und hysterische Zustande erregenden, stark duftenden Blumen aus dem Zimmer entfernen, den Augen-Entzuendung erregenden Splitter aus der Hornhaut ziehen, den Brand drohenden, allzufesten Verband eines verwundeten Gliedes loesen und passender anlegen, die Ohnmacht herbeifuehrende, verletzte Arterie blosslegen und unterbinden, verschluckte Belladonne-Beeren u.s .w. durch Erbrechen fortzuschaffen suchen, die in Oeffnungen des Koerpers (Nase, Schlund, Ohren, Harnroehre, Mastdarm, Scham) gerathenen fremden Substanzen ausziehen, den Blasenstein zermalmen, den verwachsenen After des neugebornen Kindes oeffnen u.s.w.
2) Von jeher suchte die alte Schule, da man sich oft nicht
anders zu helfen wusste, in Krankheiten ein einzelnes der mehrern Symptome durch Arzneien
zu bekaempfen und wo moeglich zu unterdruecken - eine Einseitigkeit, welche, unter dem
Namen: Symptomatische Curart, mit Recht allgemeine Verachtung erregt hat, weil durch sie
nicht nur nichts gewonnen, sondern auch viel verdorben wird. Ein einzelnes der
gegenwaertigen Symptome ist so wenig die Krankheit selbst, als ein einzelner Fuss der
Mensch selbst ist. Dieses Verfahren war um desto verwerflicher da man ein solches
einzelnes Symptom nur durch ein entgegengesetztes Mittel (also bloss enantiopathisch und
palliativ) behandelte, wodurch es nach kurz dauernder Linderung sich nachgaengig nur um
desto mehr verschlimmert.
*****************************************
COMMENTS BY GABY
Different translations in [ ]
Aph. 7:
Now, as in a disease, from which no manifest exciting or maintaining cause (causa
occasionalis) has to be removed1, we can perceive nothing but the morbid symptoms [signs
of disease , GR] , it must (regard being had to the possibility of a miasm, and attention
paid to the accessory circumstances, § 5) be the symptoms alone by which the
disease demands and points to the remedy suited to relieve [help , GR] it - and,
moreover, the totality of these its symptoms, of this outwardly reflected picture of the
internal essence of the disease, that is, of the affection of the vital force, must be the
principal, or the sole means, whereby the disease can make known what remedy it requires -
[- therefore the totality of these symptoms, this outwardly reflecting image of the internal essence of the disease, i.e. the suffering of the vital force, must be the principal or the unique means whereby the the disease can make known what remedy it requires - GR]
the only thing that can determine the choice of the most appropriate remedy [the most appropriate aid, GR] - and thus, in a word, the totality2 of the symptoms must be the principal, indeed the only thing the physician [artist of healing or master of healing art , GR] has to take note of [perceive , GR] in every case of disease and to remove by means of his art, in order that it [the disease, GR] shall be cured and transformed into health.
FIRST FOOTNOTE:
1 It is not necessary to say that every intelligent physician would first remove
this where it exists [where it exists is not in the original text; GR]; the indisposition
thereupon generally ceases spontaneously. He will remove from the room strong-smelling
flowers, which have a tendency to cause syncope and hysterical sufferings [which
cause fainting and hysterical fits , GR]; extract from the cornea the foreign body that
excites inflammation of the eye; loosen the over-tight bandage on a wounded limb that
threatens to cause mortification, and apply a more suitable one; lay bare and put
ligature on the wounded artery that produces fainting; endeavour to promote the expulsion
by vomiting of belladonna berries etc., that may have been swallowed; extract foreign
substances that may have got into the orifices of the body (the nose, gullet, ears,
urethra, rectum, vagina [vulva , GR]); crush the vesical calculus; open the imperforate
anus of the new-born infant, etc.
THE SECOND FOOTNOTE:
2 In all times, the old school physicians , not knowing how else to give relief,
have sought to combat and if possible to suppress by medicines, here and there, a single
symptom from among a number in diseases -
[In all times, the old school, often being at its wits' end , tried to combat and if possible to suppress in diseases one single symptom out of several with the help of medicines - GR] a one-sided procedure [one-sidedness, GR], which, under the name of symptomatic treatment, has justly excited universal contempt, because by it, not only was nothing gained, but much harm was inflicted. A single one of the symptoms present is no more the disease itself than a foot is the man himself. This procedure was so much the more reprehensible, that such a single symptom was only treated by an antagonistic remedy (therefore only in an enantiopathic and palliative manner), whereby, after a slight alleviation, it was subsequently only rendered all the worse.