DISEASE - CURE (Cure Your Self - 8)

Medicine: A New Meaning !

(Excerpts from book “Cure Yourself”, author Swami Vijnananand, S.V.)

Under the pressure of anomalous exigencies Recipropathy approves or rather ignores having recourse to medicine. Contingencies in which so-called medicine can be accepted as a first aid, is detailed elsewhere. Here we may analyze its principles slightly in a different perspective.

1.  Recipropathy assumes that my "disease" is "exact measure of my wish for ease". Hence, in eradicating a malady at a given moment, modus operandi beneficial is to apportion or scatter disease in other suitable organs of body. No type of infirmity can be got rid of, unconditionally.

1A)  Make out an overall picture: We have six emotions, craving for ease. What are the external instruments for satisfaction of these cravings?

Five sense-organs of ours: Eyes, tongue, skin, ears, nose, which respectively see (colors), taste, touch, hear (sound), smell.

Emotions number about six, while each of the sense-organs distinguishes equal number of varieties or grades. Colors are about six, six are main taste varieties, and so on. In between the six major emotions as well as expressions, uncountable shades and grades are manifested.

1B)  On the strength of these fundamental observations we can construe that each emotion is linked to all the sense-organs as its visible or expressible counterpart. In other words, at the assumption of life every emotional personality collects such "matter" suitable to its ends. Consequently, when "greed" about food, say of sweet variety, is incorporated in my emotional personality, I construct my tongue with the help of "matter", that conveys sweet sensation more readily. In short, the emotion of greed in terms of sense-organ, may, in hypothetical case, choose to like sweet for taste, yellow for color, low pitch for sound, smooth touch and a mild scent. Intermingling six emotions with each of likes and dislikes expressed by respective sense organ, a total set of likes and dislikes (which we call expression of a given personality) comes into existence. Consequently, if I detest a certain color, taste, smell, touch and sound, the set of these dislikes certainly represents a significant facet of my inner personality.

1C)  This set or list both of my acceptances and aversions, likes and dislikes is a measure of my disturbed emotions. If I can slowly adjust myself and win over these weak points of mine, assuredly the safest prophylactic (preventive) method is being implemented. In the process of winning the sense-organs, mastering my dis-approbations (disapproval), my mind is purified in due course and purpose of "disease" is defeated.  One way traffic between emotion and sense-organ must be counteracted by nullifying the emotions, effecting purification of inner personality.

1D) There can be shown a link in our logic in a hypothetically isolated case. Why am I infuriated with anger? Because, a green color pen which I do not like has been purchased for me. Obviously, green color in a given case becomes an observable measure of my rage. It can be defeated only by persuading myself to fancy the green color.

1E) we hesitate to learn this correlation till the onset of diseases. We are obliged to learn it when disease invades the body. Cure in real sense can hardly be affected by what is palatable, but by what is not. Rebelling tastes of medicines and punches of injections substantiate the premise.

1F)  in practice you would ask me, how much quantity of salt need be consumed to get cured, if salt is not palatable to a given constitution. I would leave it to that individuality. Cure code will be: Go to a point each day beyond normal till 'you' feel uneasy. Continue the practice till you experience that salt is not your enemy. Incidentally, remember that problem of salt i.e. taste is not an isolated enigma. It is in conjunction with taste, smell, sound etc. For instance, a good dish is less enjoyable when served on a dining table surrounded by an aggressive, un-agreeable odor. In conclusion, "Cure" in a given case may be conventionally restricted to salt. It however must be unmistakably remembered that salt is only one of your remedies.

2.   An inquisitive reader may intervene, "I do not like salt as salt upsets my system. Why should I not suppose that it is but a chemical action?" Let us chase out explanation of this "chemical action" to its rational end.

My body-bricks may have enough salt, in the first place. So I reject it. Or, my ingredients cannot tolerate salt.

Both 'A' and 'B' have the true ring. But the moment the question of 'toleration' comes in, it ceases to be purely a chemical action. The 'mind' indispensably ushers in the argument.

2A)  White does not tolerate black spot. But white and black produce a nice picture. Truly, there is no antipathy between white and black. It is our misconception that a black spot may spoil a clean white. A pot of salt-water may refuse to dissolve more salt, saturation point being reached. Still, ignoring the saturation point you may add more salt to the pot, no question of the bowl 'liking' the salt will ever crop up.

2B) It is a different story when the salt has to deal with mind instead of an earthen jug, jar or pot. Curiously enough, when it comes to 'mind', 'liking' and quantity consumable have no relation to each other. A wealthy owner of a flower garden may not reject either more of flowers or more of money.

2C) This is exactly where 'mind' steps in. One 'mind' may accept 'more' roses, another mind may not. A greedy capitalist may or may not set aside a fortune. A sex-dominated man married to a beautiful wife may or may not be faithful to her.

2D) Thus and therefore the inference; when the 'human mind' comes into play, alternative '2B' stands valid, which points out that ingredients of my structure cannot tolerate salt irrespective of quantity, because my mind has aversion for salt. When the sun 'strikes' on darkness, none can presume that darkness dislikes the sun. With man, sun-rays may please his constitution or may not. Sun-rays falling on a slice of butter may cause action without question of 'likes'. Obviously, in all the three cases, to avow that night, man or butter dislike sun, having in their ingredients enough of sun, is absurd. The distinction between likes and dislikes assumes significance exclusively when mind is on the scene. We must say that when man dislikes salt his mind has aversion for salt, and so he has fabricated his body-structure with the material that rejects salt, irrespective of quantity of such material used.

3. And for this same reason homeopathy misses the mark again. To neutralize salt or anger in me, how can I put in salt and anger in me, how can I add salt and anger and get the desired result?

4.  For diagnosis of a cause, the faultless option open is to take symptoms as equal and opposite of cause.

How to measure the symptoms and their cause?

4A) The measure of symptoms can doubtlessly be indicated by our sense-organs. Our 'feeling of disease' is sensed strictly at the level of sense-organs. So choose such medicine as is disagreeable to the sense-organs.

4B)  Are we not guilty of a gross contradiction when, refuting homeopathy, we ourselves recommend 'dislike' as a drug? Furthermore, our attentive reader may protest here and say that a patient detests pungent taste but it need not be his medicine since he may also like sweet and the two quit leaving untoward action.

The fallacy crops up in as much as no patient mixes pungent and sweet dishes together before they are consumed. Subjectively for patient, relishing dish produces action. Laws of motion have no concern with the taste of the dish - sweet or pungent - but with the action produced in the subject. View it from the other side. The subject likes the sweet but not the bitter taste. Pleasure of chewing a chocolate and a quinine tab MAY produce same effect in metabolism in terms of pure 'action'.

It is not the case that Recipropathy takes 'dislikes' to task and leaves 'like' scotfree. On the other hand 'likes' are fiercely assaulted by this theory. It is a negative yet more meaningful aspect. The positive way is to win the dislikes. It is a two pronged attack.

Homeopathy fails to take these aspects into consideration. It is inadequate to bear in mind that 'dislike' acts as my remedy. Its full implication is: Removal of dislike may work as elixir, subject to main tenets of Recipropathy, since the dislikes serve as a combined, expressible, though, general measure of the 'equal and opposite' initiating cause in body i.e. emotional personality.

In conclusion, the nearest flawless approach for defeating disease is to win our emotional dislikes, the way they are totally and cumulatively manifested in our modes and habits. At the level of sense-organs, therefore, an action ought to be initiated that conveys unfavorable sensation to mind - mind, where the disease originates, dwells, and develops.

5.  In effect allopathy employs the parallel method. Application of iodine to a cut on the arm is a significant illustration. An already ailing patient is subjected to pain (injection, operation etc.) Bitter doses are administered to patient who has spoilt his stomach by too much of sweets. In sickness doctors serve notice against using emotional properties. Bans, ordinances, restrictions rule. No spicy food. No talk, no listening too. Sex relations remain out of question in serious cases. Apparent similarity between Allopathy and Recipropathy ends at this stage. Allopathy bears no lasting result. One of the basic reasons for this fundamental lack is: modern medicine fails to furnish to patient's logical background of his ailment. At no stage the poor sufferer is helped to realize the correlation between his actions and disease.

6.  Our shrill cry of pain as sequel to pain, in reality, has its origin specifically in accumulated 'action'. We heave a sigh grumbling against headache. More hammering in the part of the brain, more action. Originally was there no action in the cerebrum at all? That was not the plight. Pulsation accelerates owing to accumulated action i.e. stored up action or in other words - potential energy. Quick relief from pangs, is a mirage. The only scientific cure is to produce still more pain to patient in the same or other part of the body. Repudiating this course under the guise of impracticability leaves us to try distribution of disease in other sense-organs and to get acclimatized to it. The latter recourse may be termed as Disease Distribution method. Decidedly, this latter available medium of relief, will not be fit to hold a candle to, nevertheless, its dependability excels any media of redress. To counter frequent headache, overcome your dislike for a color, taste, smell and sound.

Hundreds of patients have experienced a surprising solace. Superficially, an added peril to a patient and a relief therefrom, may be felt a psychological absurdity. This feeling is a fantasy. Science, mathematics and logic entertain no fanciful unsubstantiated imagination. The more a patient accepts discomfort, with reasoning behind it - mark the words 'accepts with reasoning behind it' - the more will he experience a definite, slow, natural amelioration. Many a time the soothing effect is sudden, governed by the principle of 'coincidence cure'.

7.  The process is reversible, subject to adviser's discretion. A Recipropath is at liberty to resume treatment first with 'Disease Distribution' method. Subsequently, the patient may go through the literature or attend the seminar. The exact step in each case depends on the judgement of the authority advising the patient and results follow strictly in obedience to the rules governed by the principles of Recipropathy.

8. Patient plays a pertinent role in selection of color, taste etc. Assert from him the list of his dis-approbations. Prescribe accordingly in addition to what is suggested in the list 'substitute for medicine'.

(To be continued)

Vijay R. Joshi