Exploring relationship of remedies by Boenninghausen– The Principles for prescription

Dr Apoorva Sishtla V N

ABSTRACT: The new chapter added into the Repertorial field, namely Relationship of remedies which was added by Boenninghausen, which leads to a unique and important way of finding the sequel of first prescription. The relationship of remedies helps us find the remedy in terms of inimical, complementary, antidotes etc. Co-relative study of books published in 1836 and 1846 will provide a better insight on the workings and usage of ‘Concordances’ and how it is different from relationship of remedies given by other authors.

KEYWORDS: Boenninghausen, Relationship of Remedies, Relative Kinship of Homoeopathic remedies, Concordances, Concomitant, Complementary, Inimical, Antidote

INTRODUCTION: The principles and understanding written in the book of ‘Relative Kinship of remedies’ – 1836 and ‘Therapeutic pocket book’ – 1846 have interlinked topics and information, which is necessary to understand the evolution of concordances. The methods and techniques to use the chapter to relationship of remedies are well written and explained in the book published in 1836.

Today’s modern-day homoeopaths need better understanding on concordances to use it the way it was intended to use by Dr. Boenninghausen.

ABOUT DR. BOENNINGHAUSEN

Dr. Clemens Maria Franz Baron von Boenninghausen was from Overyssel in Netherlands. He was born on 12th March 1785. He was a lawyer in supreme court in Verenter, Commissioner for registration of land later Director of Botanical Garden of Munster.

In 1827, he was diagnosed to have pulmonary tuberculosis and declared to be incurable in 1828. But his botanical friend A Weine (M.D.), who was a Homoeopathic physician in the province of Rhineland and Wesphilia prescribed him Pulsatilla which cured him of his diseases completely. He thus became a firm believer in Homoeopathy and converted to a Homoeopathic physician.

He was a self-made Homoeopathic physician and was a respectable learner with Hahnemann.

BOENNINGHAUSEN’s THERAPUETIC POCKET BOOK.

The principle of repertorisation on Boenninghausen’s Therapeutic pocket book is based on

 inductive reasoning. The essence of reportorial preparation is a generalization or proceeding from  particulars to generals.

Boenninghausen’s attempt was to complete the symptom but in practice he found it difficult to do so. Thus, he evolved the concept that what is true to the part is also true to the whole person. The following fundamental concepts forms the bedrock of Therapeutic pocket book as

• Doctrine of analogy
• Doctrine of concomitants
• Evaluation of remedies
• Concordances

The repertory has been divided into 7 parts .i.e.-

1. MIND OF INTELLECT
2. PARTS OF THE BODY AND ORGANS
3. SENSATIONS AND COMPLAINTS
4. SLEEP AND DREAMS
5. FEVER
6. ALTERATIONS OF THE STATE OF HEALTH
7. RELATIONSHIP OF REMEDIES (Concordance)

CONCORDANCE

Boenninghausen in Therapeutic Pocket Book wrote about the relationship of remedies, which he called as ‘Concordances’.

The word CONCORDANCE MEANS –THE INHERITANCE BY TWO RELATED INDIVIDUALS (ESPECIALLY TWINS) OF THE SAME GENETIC CHARACTERISTIC, SUCH AS SUSCEPTIBILITY TO A DISEASE.

Later when Allen edited Therapeutic Pocket Book he changed the title from “Concordances” to “Relationship of remedies”.

• As Dr H A Robert says, “To the majority of Homoeopathic physicians the last chapter in the Pocket book, Relationships, has been a complete mystery.”

Remedy relationship is commonly understood as by, etc. relations between remedies in the form of complementary, antidote, inimical, follows well. This account is available in the works of Dr Hering, Knerr, Clarke and Boericke. The remedy relationships tables in their works have been used as references, mostly for second prescription, to antidote. and to avoid inimical reactions. However, Boenninghausen’s work on Remedy Relationships is elaborate and has a wide range of application.

EVOLUTION OF CONCORDANCES
At the time of Boenninghausen, observation from Hahnemann were available as, Sulph>>  Calc ( Calc works well if given after Sulph), Sep >>Caust, Sep >>Lyc, Calc>> Nit Ac, Kali –c >> Nit Ac. Boenninghausen talks how these sequels work very well after one other.

Dr Jahr listed this experience also some other experiences in his handbook. Boenninghausen feared it may lead to routinism and direct application without considering similia.

• To understand the chapter of Relationship of remedies, it is very important to understand the book written prior to it.

THE RELATIVE KINSHIP OF HOMOEOPATHIC MEDICINES 1836

However, it was Boenninghausen who wanted the remedy Relationships to be more elaborate and flexible for its wider use. He wrote…“I feel that something had to be done in a more serious way, than done before.”

So, he started a serious work on relationship of remedies in 1836 and refined it further in 1846 through the BTPB Repertory. Boeninnghuasen took 10 years to refine the concept of concordances

RELATIVE KINSHIP ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIPS OF HOMEOPATHIC MEDICINES, TOGETHER WITH AN ABBREVIATED OVERVIEW OF THEIR CHARACTERISTICS AND MAIN EFFECTS,       EDITED BY DR. C.V. BÖNNINGHAUSEN (1836)

IMPORTANT POINTERS BY BOENINNGHAUSEN ABOUT REMEDY RELATIONSHIP

1. The related remedies are antidotes to each other

• Medicines that are related to each other can counteract their effects because they share similar symptoms. This means that a different but somewhat similar medicine can effectively treat the symptoms caused by another medicine. Each medicine not only produces obvious symptoms but also subtle changes in health. Using a related medicine can help address these overall changes. However, not every related medicine can completely eliminate all symptoms caused by the previous one. Each medicine has its own healing abilities within its specific range of action.

2. Related remedies, given one after another act by far more curative

• Through experience, it has been observed that using related remedies, one after the other, tends to have a stronger healing effect than using unrelated ones. However, it’s crucial to always prioritize choosing a remedy based on the principle of similarity. In cases of complicated chronic ailments, when considering multiple remedies, it’s common to find that some are not suitable for the specific situation. In complex chronic cases where there are multiple remedies to choose from, it’s common to find that one of them belongs to the group of related remedies. In such cases, if there are no specific reasons to avoid it, it’s generally advisable to prioritize this related remedy over the others.

3. The one-sided diseases give an excellent opportunity for the use of the remedy relationships.

• In cases where diseases present with one-sided symptoms, it can be challenging to find a suitable remedy due to a lack of distinct characteristic indicators. However, this situation offers an excellent opportunity to utilize medicinal affinities. Even if a medicine is only partially suitable, it can often bring about significant improvements in the overall condition and trigger several characteristic symptoms. This makes it easier to identify a remedy that precisely matches the symptoms.
• For instance, consider the example of Nux vomica being reputed to cure intermittent fever transitioning to Ipecacuanha or Cina transitioning to Capsicum. In these cases, although the initial medicine might not perfectly match the symptoms, it prepares the body in a way that enhances the effectiveness of the subsequent remedy.

4. The advantage of the exact knowledge is even more prominent in the treatment of chronic disease.

Chronic diseases demand for their cure almost always different remedies given in succession.

• In chronic diseases, which often require multiple medicines administered sequentially for a cure, a deep understanding of the relationships between these medicines is crucial. It’s found that the most significant benefit arises when, after the effects of one carefully chosen medicine have subsided, the next one, closely related to the previous, is administered. This sequential approach tends to surpass expectations when the subsequent medicine is accurately chosen based on homeopathic principles.

5. More than once it occurred, that two related remedies were so close in a disease

• Sometimes, two related medicines may both seem suitable for treating an illness, making the choice difficult. Each medicine may cover some symptoms that the other misses. In such cases, alternating between the two medicines at regular intervals can yield the best results. Giving one medicine before the effects of the other have completely worn off allows for continuous improvement. Over time, the initial effect weakens, but the overall progress in improvement becomes more significant. In many cases, complete recovery can be achieved without the need for any additional medication.

6. After an apparently suitable remedy the symptoms increase in intensity

• Sometimes, after giving a seemingly suitable remedy, symptoms worsen without any improvement, resembling a strong initial reaction. This isn’t always due to misuse of the given medicine. Sometimes, the cause of such reactions is unclear. In these cases, administering a related medicine that matches the symptoms can be effective. Instead of waiting for the after-effects for too long, I promptly apply the next closest possible remedy. This approach often leads to noticeable improvements and sometimes even regressions, especially when higher potencies are used.

RELATIONSHIP OF REMEDIES

• Number of remedies – 142
• Originally titled as concordances, but later Allen changed it into relationships of remedies
• Remedies are arranged alphabetically. Each remedy has 12 headings/rubrics, which correspond to the arrangement of the chapters in “Therapeutic pocket book” , with additions of last three headings

Headings/Rubrics Under The Remedy Relationship Chapters

1. Mind
2. Localities
3. Sensations
4. Glands
5. Bones
6. Skin
7. Sleep and dreams
8. Blood, circulation and fever
9. Aggravation – time and circumstances
10. Other remedies
11. Antidotes
12. Injurious

• Other remedies – are those remedies, which have general relationship to the remedy under consideration and not to specific subsection. These mostly belong to polychrest remedies
• Antidotes – are those similar remedies, which counteract the excess action of the drug. This can be obtained from the clinical experience. For eg: hepar sulph and merc sol, they have a lot of similarity, hence antidote each other.
• Injurious remedies – those which are incompatible or inimical with the remedy under consideration. These are developed from the clinical experience. These drugs have will have similarity at the peripheral level but not at the deep acting level. For eg: Apis and rhus tox.

This means, that while specific symptoms grouped under a general schematic section such as mind, localities etc., are given in their respective relationship to the remedy under consideration, there are some symptoms that do not fall entirely within this section-grouping, and this rubric, other remedies, covers all those symptoms which do not fall into such regular groups. The rank of remedies in this rubric represents a general relationship of these remedies in the unclassified symptom groups, to the remedy under consideration.

Some remedies are in harmony with others some neutral some inimical the most similar ones. As a rule are complementary, they antidote Each Other Side Effects, follow each other well and often make up for the deficiencies of others. Others with a lesser degree of similarity, may be used at a greater interval of time and finish up the work stated by the other remedy in other words they have much lower ratio of similarity.

How To Use RELATIONSHIP OF REMEDIES Chapter

• We may use illustration of concentric circles of similarity of suggested by JOSLIN.
• The nearer the centre, the smaller the circle And Higher the ratio of similarity.
• As a circle widens the complimentary qualities of the remedies occupying the outward curves lesson until that similarity to the similimum, or their complementary relationship to the Similimum is very slight. Every mineral or chemical element is group closely about it in a little circle of closely related vegetable remedies which are complements of each other.
• If we now refer to a remedy represented in the concordance and the various rubrics and the remedies represented with their marks in each of the rubrics, then the remedies which score the maximum marks are those which are closest to the main remedy that is being referred. Those remedies which score lesser and lesser marks move out to the periphery. This creates a kind of concentric circle. This idea is suggested by Joslin and recommended by Roberts and Dhawale.

REFERENCES

1. Boenninghausen: Edited by Allen T.F. Boenninghausen’s Therapeutic pocket book for homoeopathic physicians to use at the bedside and in the study of materia medica. Reprint edition. New Delhi: B. Jain Publishers; 1999.
2. Tiwari S. Essentials of Repertorisation. 5th ed. New Delhi: B. Jain; 2012.
3. Hahnemann S. Organon of Medicine. 5th ed. Kothen: B Jain Publisher; 1833.
4. Attempt at showing relative kinshipof homoeopathic medicines, Boenninghausen (1836)

Dr. Apoorva Sishtla V.N (BHMS, DNHE)
MD Scholar,Department of Repertory
UGO of Dr. Sujit Pal,
Guru Mishri Homeopathic Medical College and hospital