|
First
comments On the Vital Force, Primary and Secondary Actions
by David Little
Hello all,
Just thought I would add a few words to some threads that
have been going on. During Hahnemann's time the allopathic
physicians based their medical philosophy on the teaching
of Galen combined with contemporary mechanistic concepts.
They constantly talked imitating Nature (Physis) while indulging
in radical intervention and invasive treatments. They taught
that to heal one should imitate the activities Physis during
crisis and use medicines by the rule "Opposite to cure
Opposites". For example, if plethoric high blood pressure
causes bleeding during crisis the physician should imitate
nature by bleeding patients in such conditions. If a person
suffers from heat they often seek cold so they figured if
the organism suffers from cold symptoms, they should be
given hot medicines. Such actions were suppose to be following
how Nature cured.
Like Paracelsus, Hahnemann rejected the teachings of Galen
and the Roman school and preferred the teachings of Hippocrates
and the Greeks. Hahnemann pointed out that Hippocrates used
similars as well as the single remedy and was a true student
of Nature. Samuel was deeply critical of the allopathic
so-called ministers of Nature as they were following the
instinctive struggle of the vital force during crisis rather
than developing a medical system that was truly based on
how Nature cures disease. The Founder taught that healers
should develop a healing art that followed awareness and
reason not blind instinct. This was one of the reason why
Hahnemann was critical of the self aid of the vital force
in one place, while pointing out in another, the important
role of the vital force in homeopathic healing.
Hahnemann wrote that susceptibly is condition (Organon,
aph. 31). One will only suffer those diseases to which one
is susceptible. Once a disease establishes itself it has
overcome one's susceptibility. Now the disease process begins.
Hahnemann wrote that the vital force could help in "neutralizing"
moderate acute diseases and quietly conclude them when their
natural course comes to the end. In more serious acute diseases
the vital force responds by producing a crisis involving
the destruction of tissues and sacrifice of humours but
it may save the organism. This instinctual response will
sacrifice a part to save the whole in order to survive.
After such a crisis, however, the organism only recovers
slowly and imperfectly over time.
In true chronic diseases (which Hahnemann defined as caused
by the affects of infectious miasms) the vital force cannot
cure the disorder through crisis and its associated sacrifices
and diversionary methods. The idea of not being curable
without medicine is ingrained in Samuel's definition of
"chronic disease". At the same time, Hahnemann
wrote that "Homoeopathy is aware that the cure can
only succeed through the counter-action of the vital force
against the correctly taken medicine. There stronger the
life force that still prevails in the patient, the more
certain and faster the cure that takes place (Preface, 6th
Organon, 184-)". Some have trouble reconciling these
two facets of Hahnemann's vitalist philosophy.
In this statement Hahnemann reminds us that even though
the vital force can not cure serious acute disorders and
chronic diseases - the vital force plays an essential role
during homeopathic treatment through the curative action.
He even equates the amount of vitality that remains in the
patient directly to the time of cure. When Hahnemann spoke
of primary and secondary actions in relationship to healing
he was speaking of the primary effect of the a homoeopathic
remedy and the secondary curative action of the vital force.
He also spoke of the primary and secondary actions of certain
remedies (Ignatia, etc) which have strong alternating actions
within their symptoms. This is a different subject that
deals with the primary and secondary actions within a medicinal
substance.
Hahnemann mentions seven aspects of healing in the introduction
to the Organon. Below is my recapitulation of those areas
with added information from other sections of Samuel's writings.
1. The vital force can only act through instinct and crisis,
which is only relatively effective in moderate acute diseases.
In severe acute and chronic disorders these attempts at
self healing are ineffectual and come with a price. The
development of a true healing art takes awareness, reason
and the higher human spirit so that medicines that are safe
and gentle can be discovered. This takes the knowledge of
disease, knowledge of remedies, and knowledge of how to
apply the remedies to diseases. This requires a philosophy
that is harmonious with Nature and the proving of medicines
as well as the development of the repertory and materia
medica, etc..
2. In order to cure the healing artist must develop a safe
way to alter the "automatic and energetic life force
when it has been mistuned through disease". As disease
is dynamic mistuning of the vital force - cure must also
be dynamic and retune the vital force to the state of health.
3. To do this the healer administers a homoeopathic remedy
that tunes the life force to a similar affection. This is
the basis of the principle "Similars cure Similars".
The vital force is hypersensitive and susceptible to a similar
remedy in a small dose of a potency. This is why the Simillimum
has great powers!
4. The primary action of the homoeopathic remedy replaces
the natural disease with a stronger but temporary medicinal
disorder. A homoeopathic potency is subtle yet so powerful
it can delusively replace the sensation of the natural disease
with its own similar medicine power. At the same time, a
homeopathic "disease" is dependant of the duration
of the remedy actions, which unlike chronic disease, is
only temporary. In this way a temporary medicinal disease
can remove a permanent chronic disease.
5. At this time, Hahnemann wrote that the secondary curative
action of the vital force "directs its whole energy"
against the remedy-disease "which it soon overcomes".
The combination of the secondary action of the vital force
to the medicinal disease and the transient nature of homeopathic
remedy lead to cessation of remedy induced illness. The
vital force only uses as much action as necessary remove
the remedy-disease from without while returning to the state
of health within without any noticeable crisis or over-reactions
6. When the vital force gains ascendency over the medical
disease, and the remedy duration ceases, the organism becomes
completely free of the medicinal disorder and returns to
the sate of full health with renewed vitality. This then
completes the cure.
7. The vital force can do this without any painful sacrifices
if the case is manage properly. If the size of the dose,
the potency and the administration of the remedy are correct
- this entire process can take place without any over reactions
of the organism. If the size of the dose is too large, the
potency is too high or the remedy is given too many times
- there may be aggravations that delay the cure. If the
over medication is serous there may be antagonistic secondary
actions by the vital force. For this reason, the case management
and posology must be carefully applied.
The counter actions of the life force to allopathic stimulation
is quite different than the counter actions to a homoeopathic
remedy. If one has diarrhea and takes an opiate the primary
action of the opium produces constipation, and as soon as
the duration of the remedy ceases, the secondary action
of the vital force will try to produce more diarrhea. If
the opium is given in larger and larger doses the counter
action may be suppressed so the negative derangement is
diverted to a new channel causing new more serious symptoms
like the irritable bowel syndrome or ulcer, etc.
Hahnemann defined disease as a derangement of the vital
force by a negative influence, which means the life force
itself does most of the damage. This has been confirmed
by modern science which shows that the organism's own pro
and anti-inflammatory hormones and deranged immune proteins
are chief pathogenic factors in disease. The confused vital
force can not tell "self from other" and will
attack its own tissues with stress chemicals and auto-immune
factors as well as fall into immuno-deficiency. In this
sense disease most certainly is a derangement of the vital
force.
In homeopathic cures a temporarily stronger remedy-disease
replaces the weaker natural disease and the vital force
seeks to remove the remedy-disease from without while re-establishing
homeostasis within with restored vitality. In the Preface
to the fourth edition of the Chronic Diseases Hahnemann
wrote that if the image of the disease foe could be "magnified
to the apprehension of the vital force by a homeopathic
remedy" that delusively simulates the original illness,
it could cause the vital force "to increase its energies
by degrees" until it was more powerful than the original
disorder.
Is the homoeopathic remedy an information package that replaces
the confused impression of the natural disease with a clear
image of the homoeopathic remedy-disease? Does the secondary
curative action of the vital force then seek to differentiate
itself from the former confusion caused by the natural disease
and remove the remedy-disease moving the organism in the
direction of health? During this process one does witnesses
an increase in vitality and strength with added vigor. How
does this all take place? What do you think?
During the homeopathic healing process the vital force only
produces as much curative secondary action as necessary
to bring on the state of health and complete the cure. If
the posology and case management has been correct the entire
process can be carried out without any noticeable over reactions
of the vital force. It is really quite amazing how gentle
the process of cure is under the influence of a correctly
applied homoeopathic remedy. If the remedy is applied incorrectly
the process can produce much discomfort through aggravations,
accessory symptoms and antagonistic secondary actions of
the vital force. Hahnemann alludes to something like this
in aphorism 64 part 2 and 68 which deals with primary and
secondary actions to homeopathic remedies as well as other
places in his writings. Homeopathic cure takes place through
the interplay of the remedy and vital force in a manner
that is most amazing,
Sincerely, David Little.
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because
a dead man needs no more medicines."
Samuel Hahnemann
Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace
Homoeopathic Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000
-------------------
and a response
from John Lunstroth on homeopathy@homeolist.com
We speak ex cathedra
because we have studied the texts closely and are
independent thinkers. The lesson is a close reading of Hahnemann
must be
undertaken, but this is no easy task. Only then can one
evaluate the
contradictions that permeate HM from his first writings
on homeopathy in
1796. A close reading of HM requires, in my opinion, being
intimately
familiar (not just having read them) with the following
books at a minimum:
Three translations of Organon into English (with some knowledge
of their
problems - why one cannot depend on any one of them exclusively)
and some
contact with the original German.
The 8 iterations of the Organon, and the essays in the Lesser
Writings of
HM.
Haehl's Biography of HM.
HM's introductions and other writings that appear in the
MMP and CD.
Dudgeon's lectures.
Harris Coulter's first 2 volumes (the 3rd and 4th are 19th
and 20th century
history) - source (but imo Coulter misunderstands HM and
the VF, but Haehl
is sensitive to the issue)
Other historical works, such as Foucault "Birth of
the Clinic"
Hippocrates was not one author, and the Hippocratic Corpus
represents many
points of view, not only cure by similars and individualization
of the
disease/patient. Galen was also a vitalist, whose ideas
about contraries are
grounded in Aristotle, who said a thing cannot both be and
not be at the
same time. Aristotle was the first vitalist to set forth
a theory of
vitalism, and all medical thought, vitalist and non-vitalist,
was influenced
by Aristotle - lasting into the 1930s. An accessible book,
the statement of
vitalistic theory, is Aristotle, De Anima: On the Soul,
(Tr,
Lawson-Tancred). Thomas Aquinas made some adjustments to
orient Aristotle to
Christian doctrine, but basically Aristotle's ideas are
still robust for the
vitalist (such as myself).
Best to read closely, ask questions, and form your own opinions
about the
contradictions that permeate HM; or, at least, be aware
that HM's position
with regards to the healing power of the VF is something
reasonable people
can disagree on.
Best
John
--------------
and a response
from J VENKATA SUBRAMANIAN
In response to David
Little's posting;
taking a look at this posting, there seems to be a too
generalised view
as far as the term "vital force" is concerned.
Hahnemann mentions three different things: vital
principle, vital force
and vital energy.( org. sixth edition). They are
DIFFERENT and not
to be studied together under a vague single term
"vital force".
Aph 9:"In the healthy condition of man, the spiritual
VITAL FORCE
( autocracy),the dynamis that animates the material
body (organism),rules
with unbounded sway, and retains all the parts of the
organism in
admirable, 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."
In the 10 th aphorism,we see
" The material organism without the VITAL FORCE is
capable of no
sensation, no function, no self preservation; it
derives all
sensations and performs all the functions of life
solely by
means of the immaterial being( the VITAL PRINCIPLE)
which
animates the material organism in health and disease.
Again, the 12 th aph: " It is the morbidly affected
VITAL ENERGY
alone that produces diseases, so that the morbid
phenomena
perceptible to our senses express at the same time all
the
internal dynamis; in a word, they reveal the whole
disease;
consequently, also,the disappearance under treatment
of all
the morbid phenomena and of all the morbid alterations
that
differ from the healthy vital operations, certainly
affects
and necessarily implies the restoration of the
integrity
of the vital force and, therefore, the recovered
health of the
whole organism.
The VITAL ENERGY is the limited power of the
individual
to exist. As the physical being is drained, the energy
is also drained.This is non renewable.
The VITAL FORCE is that which does all functions of
the
individual. In pure terms of physics, force is just a
scalar quantity and subject to exist only with respect
to a source of energy which can produce it.
The VITAL PRINCIPLE is life itself,or the spirit.It
leaves
the physical being when the vital energy is exhausted.
Then the body will not be capable of any functions
(which
are the domain of the vital force).
The vital force fights with diseases drawing from the
Vital energy.
The vital energy and vital force can exist only when
the
vital principle is present. But the existence of the
vital principle is not subject to the existence of the
VE and the Vf.The VE and VE are relative and the Vital
Principle is the absolute. But that would be branching
out into the other domain of Philosophy.
This is my understanding.I think I have made myself
clear.
Regards
venkat
|
