Kritik am Sankarans Methode


[Chandran Nambiar]

Corner stone of ‘Sankaran Method’ is classifying drugs into ‘animal’, ‘plant’, and ‘mineral’ kingdoms. Then each kingdom, according Sankaran, is related with particular group of ‘vital sensations’. Plant remedies are used for individuals having ‘vital sensations’ belonging to the group of ‘sensitivity’, animal remedies are used for those having ‘viatal sensations’ belonging to the class of ‘survival instincts’, and mineral remedies for ‘structural consciousness’.

First, we have to analyze the concept of ‘remedy kingdoms’. Medicinal properties of any remedy is determined by the chemical structure and properties of the individual chemical molecules they contain. Because, it is individual drug molecules that act upon biological molecules, produce inhibitions, molecular pathology and associated symptoms. During potentization, it is the individual drug molecules that undergo molecular imprinting, and as such, it is the individual molecular imprints that act as therapeutic agents. In the absence of this molecular perspective of our medicinal substances, we fall prey to all sorts of unscientific theories that misguide us gravely.

Let us consider a particular remedy belonging to plant kingdom. The molecular composition as well as chemical and medicinal properties of the particular drug sample will be decided by various factors. It will contain kingdom-specific, family-specific, species-specific, variety specific, plant-specific and environmental-specific chemical molecules. Part of plant from which the drug substance is extracted is also a decisive factor.

Nux-v. tinctures prepared from seeds, fruits, flowers, leaves, bark or root of Nux-v. plant will have different molecular composition and medicinal properties.

Some molecules will be common to all samples from a particular plant.

Certain other molecules will be common to all samples from a particular species. There will be some molecules common to family, as well as some common to plant kingdom as a whole.  Plants belonging to same family will have some common genes, which would produce some similar proteins and enzymes, that would lead to similar molecular processes and synthesis of similar molecules. There would be kingdom-specific, family specific, species specific, variety specific and individual specific and tissue specific chemicals in a plant drug.

As per this perspective, medicinal properties of a given drug substance of ‘plant kingdom’ will be decided by the collective properties of organ specific, plant specific, variety specific, species specific, family specific and kingdom specific chemical molecules contained in them. It is obvious that it is wrong to think that medicinal properties of a drug substance could be assumed by the ‘kingdom’ to which it belongs.

This is applicable to all drugs belonging to mineral as well as animal kingdoms.

When animal or plant substances are disintegrated or divided into individual molecules, they become similar to mineral drugs at molecular level. There are many drugs which could not be included in any particular kingdom. Petroleum is a mineral, but it is the product of disintegration of animal and vegetable matter under ocean beds. Acetic acid is a mineral, but it is prepared from vegetable products. How can we say lactic acid, prepared from milk is plant remedy or mineral remedy? All of us consider calc carb as mineral drug, but exactly it is the ‘middle layer of oyster shells’, and as such, is an animal drug. Kreasote is combination of phenols prepared from wood, and how can we say it is ‘plant’ or ‘mineral’?

At molecular level, the dividing line between ‘plant, animal and mineral’ kingdoms is irrelevant. It is the molecular structure and chemical properties that decide the medicinal properties. To be more specific, it is the functional groups or moieties that act as decisive factor. Classifying drugs on the basis of ‘kingdoms’ and assigning certain ‘mental level sensations’ to them is totally unscientific and illogical. It illustrates the pathetic level of scientific awareness that rules the propagators of ‘sankaran method’.

Rajan Sankaran’s ‘sensation’ method is based on the concepts of ‘deeper level vital sensations’ and corresponding ‘remedy kingdoms’. This method has nothing in common with classical homeopathy, where symptoms belonging to mentals, physical generals and particulars, with their qualifications such as causations, sensations, locations, modalities and concomitants decide the selection of similimum.

According to this theory, ‘structure’ is the basic sensation of ‘minerals’, ‘sensitivity’ is the basic sensation of ‘plants’ ‘survival’ is the basic sensation of ‘animals’.

According to this methods, case taking involves an inquiry into ‘deeper levels of consciousness’, by prompting the patient to introspect from ‘symptoms’ into ‘deeper, deeper and still deeper’ levels so that his basic ‘vital sensation’ is explored. Then this ‘vital sensation’ is used to decide the ‘kingdom’ to which the patient belong. Remedies are selected from these ‘remedy kingdoms’.

The most dogmatic part of this theory is the relating of ‘vital sensation’ with ‘remedy kingdoms’. On what basis sankaran says ‘sensitivity’ is the ‘vital sensation’ of ‘plants’? Any logical or scientific explanation for this relationship? If we go through materia medica of various drugs, we can see many ‘animal’ and ‘minerals drugs’ having sensitivity of high order. How can anybody claiming to be a homeopath ignore the whole drug provings and materia medica to declare that ‘sensitivity’ is the ‘vital sensation’ of ‘plants’ only?

When a homeopath says ‘sensitivity’ is the ‘vital sensation of plants, it means all plant remedies have produced such a characteristic sensation in healthy individuals during drug proving. To say ‘animal drugs’ have ‘vital sensation’ of ‘survival instinct’, a homeopath should be capable of showing examples from materia medica to justify that statement. Same with ‘vital sensations’ of mineral drugs. Our materia medica does not show that only ‘plant drugs’ produced ‘sensitivity’ in provers.  We can see many ‘animal’ and ‘mineral’ drugs with high order of ‘sensitivity’.  If not from materia medica, where from Dr Sankaran ‘invented’ that ‘vital sensation’ of ‘sensitivity’ is the basic characteristic of ‘plant kingdom’?


See the rubric ‘sensitive’ in ‘mind’ of Kent repertory:


Mind : SENSITIVE, oversensitive: Acon. Aesc. Aeth. Alum. Am-c. Anac. Ang. Ant-c. Apis. Arg-n. Arn. Ars. Ars-i. Asaf. Asar. Aur. Bar-c. Bell. Bor. Bov. Bry. Calc. Calc-p. Calc-s. Camph.

Cann-s. Canth. Carb-an. Carbn-s. Carb-v. Cast. Caust. Cham. Chin. Chin-a. Chin-s. Cic. Cina. Clem. Cocc. Coff. Colch. Coloc. Con. Crot-h. Cupr. Daph. Dig. Dros. Ferr. Ferr-ar. Ferr-p. Fl-ac.

Gels. Gran. Hep. Hyos. Ign. Iod. Kali-ar. Kali-c. Kali-i. Kali-n. Kali-p. Kali-s. Kreos. Lac-c. Lach. Laur. Lyc. Lyss. Mag-m. Med. Meph. Merc. Mez. Mosch. Nat-a. Nat-c. Nat-m. Nat-p. Nat-s.

Nit-ac. Nux-v. Ph-ac. Phos. Plat. Plb. Psor. Puls. Ran-b. Sabad. Sabin. Samb. Sanic. Sars. Seneg. Sep. Sil. Spig. Stann. Staph. Sulph. Tab. Teucr. Ther. Thuj. Valer. Verat. Viol-t. Zinc-met.

46 remedies belong to ‘mineral kingdom’: alum. Am-c. Ant-c. Arg-n. Ars. Ars-i. Aur. Bar-c. Borx. Calc. Calc-p. Calc-s. Carbn-s. Caus. Cupr-met. Ferr-ars. Ferr-p. Fl-ac. Hep. Iod. Kaliums. Mag-m. Merc. Natriums. Nit-ac. Ph-ac. Phos. Plat. Plb-met. Sanic. Sil. Stann-met. Sulph. Zinc-met.

12 remedies from ‘animal kingdom’: Apis. Canth. Carb-an. Crot-h. Lac-c. Lach. Med. Mosch. Psor. Sep. Ther.

Remaining 56 remedies are of ‘plant kingdom’.

On what basis sankaran says ‘sensitivity’ is the ‘vital sensation’ of plant kingdom? How can anybody say persons who are ‘sensitive’ at the deeper’ level need ‘plant remedies only? How can this theory be called homeopathy?

Similarly, if we examine various rubrics belonging to ‘survival’ instinct, or ‘structural’ sensations, we can see they are not limited to animal or mineral remedies only. Many ‘plant remedies’ have such symptoms.


According to Rajan Sankaran, FEAR is the indication of VITAL SENSATION of ‘survival instincts’ which need an ANIMAL KINGDOM drug. Based on which materia medica rajan sankaran says ‘vital sensation’ of ‘fear’ indicates only ‘animal kingdom remedy’?

Please see the MIND rubric FEAR in Kent Repertory:

[Kent] Mind: FEAR:- Absin. Acet-ac. Acon. Aeth. Agar. Agn. Aloe. Alum. Am-c. Anac. Ang. Ant-c. Ant-t. Arg-n. Ars. Ars-i. Asaf. Aur. Bapt. Bar-c. Bar-m. Bell. Bor. Bry. Bufo. Cact. Calad. Calc. Calc-p. Calc-s. Camph. Cann-i. Cann-s. Caps. Carb-an. Carb-s. Carb-v. Cast. Caust. Cham. Chin. Chin-a. Chlor. Cic. Cimic. Coca. Coc-c. Cocc. Coff. Coloc. Con. Croc. Crot-h. Cupr. Daph. Dig. Dros. Dulc. Echi. Elaps. Eupho. Ferr. Ferr-ar. Ferr-p. Form. Gels. Gent-c. Glon. Graph. Hell. Hep. Hydr-ac. Hyos. Hyper. Ign. Iod. Ip. Kali-ar. Kali-br. Kali-c. Kali-i. Kali-n. Kali-p. Kali-s. Lach. Lil-t. Lob. Lyc. Lyss. Mag-c. Mag-m. Manc. Meli. Merc. Merc-i-r. Mez. Mosch. Mur-ac. Murx. Nat-a. Nat-c. Nat-m. Nat-p. Nat-s. Nicc-met. Nit-ac. Nux-v. Onos. Op. Petr. Phos. Phyt. Pip-m. Plat. Psor. Puls. Ran-b. Raph. Rheum. Rhod. Rhus-t. Rhus-v. Ruta. Sec. Sep. Sil. Spig. Spong. Squil. Stann. Staph. Stram. Stront. Stry. Sul-ac. Sulph. Tab. Tarent. Thuj. Til. Valer. Verat. Zinc.

See. 75 drugs belong to PLANT KINGDOM! 54 are MINERAL drugs! Only 9 ANIMAL drugs! How Rajan Sankaran say only ANIMAL drugs are indicated for ‘vital sensation’ of ‘survival instincts’? By this approach, the practitioner who looks only ‘animal’ drugs is actually deprived of a large number of drugs belonging to other ‘kingdoms’, one of which may be the real similimum.

There may be many patients ‘sensitive at deeper levels’ who may require ‘animal’ or ‘mineral’ drugs if we select drugs using homeopathic method of totality of symptoms. Limiting all ‘sensitive’ patients to ‘plant kingdom’ remedies may be detrimental in such cases.

Rajan Sankaran says FEAR is the expression if ‘vital sensation of survival instincts’ which the ‘theme’ or quality of ‘animals’. As such, sankaran method uses only ‘animal remedies’ for people exhibiting ‘deep seated’ fear. Homeopathic understanding of medicinal properties of drug substances are based on symptoms produced in healthy individuals during drug provings. Those symptoms are listed in our materia medica and repertories.

We similimum by comparing symptoms of patients with symptoms of drugs, which is the basis of our therapeutic principle ‘similia similibus curentur’.


Please go to KENT REPERTORY: MIND - FEAR: Acon. Arg-n. Aur-met. Bell. Borx. Calc-p. Calc. Carbn-s. Cic. Dig. Graph. Ign. Kali-ars. Lyc. Lyss. Nat-c. Phos. Plat. Psor. Sep. and Stram. are the drugs listed with THREE MARKS under FEAR.

As per homeopathic method of similimum being selected on the basis of our materia medica, these are the prominent drugs to be considered in patients with characteristic sensation of FEAR.

But, according to sankaran, FEAR indicates ‘vital sensation’ of ‘survival instincts’, which needs ‘animal remedies’ only. Only animal remeies found in above list are Lyssin, Psorinum and Sepia. Homeopaths practicing sankaran method will obviously ignore all other drugs in this list, since they are not ‘animal remedies’. Does this approach strengthen homeopaths, or debilitate them?

I want to know, from where sankaran got the idea that only ‘plant remedies’ have ‘fear’ and ‘survival instincts’? Which drug proving? Which materia medica? A person cannot claim to be homeopath by ignoring all available homeopathic literature on materia medica, and producing materia medica and symptoms from his fancies.

Some people claim, sankaran’s concepts are based on his ‘observations’. Did he conducted drug provings of all drugs and ‘observe’ their symptoms? Did he prove the symptoms given in our materia medica are not reliable?

Which proving showed him sepia, lyssin and psorinum has more ‘fear’ than Phos. Bell. Stram. or Arg-n?

Would Sankaran say a homeopath cannot cure a patient having ‘survival insticts’ and ‘fear’ using phosporous or stramonium, if they turn out to be similimum on the basis of totality of symptoms. Should we avoid Phos, since it is not an ‘animal drug’?


Please see following rubrics:

[Kent] Mind: FIGHT, wants to: Bell. Bov. Hipp. Hyos. Merc. Sec.

[Kent] Mind: QUARRELSOME: Acon. Agar. Alum. Ambr. Am-c. Anac. Anan. Ant-t. Arn. Ars. Aster. Aur. Bar-c. Bell. Bor. Bov. Brom. Bry. Calc. Calc-s. Camph. Canth. Caps. Caust. Cench. Cham. Chel. Chin. Con. Cor-r. Croc. Crot-h. Cupr. Dig. Dulc. Elaps. Ferr-met. Ferr-ar. Fl-ac. Hipp. Hyos. Ign. Ip. Kali-ar. Kali-c. Kali-i. Lach. Lepi. Lyc. Lyss. Merc. Merl. Mez. Mosch. Nat-a.

Nat-c. Nat-m. Nat-s. Nicc-met. Nit-ac. Nux-v. Olnd. Pall. Petr. Ph-ac. Phos. Plat. Plb-met. Psor. Ran-b. Rat. Rheum. Ruta. Seneg. Sep. Spong. Stann. Staph. Stram. Stront. Sul-ac. Sulph. Tarent. Thea. Thuj. Til. Verat. Verat-v.

Viol-t. Zinc-met.

According to Sankaran, ‘quareling’ and ‘fighting’ indicates ‘survival instincts’, which require ‘animal remedies’.

Under the rubric “Mind: FIGHT, wants to”, not a single ‘animal remedy’ is seen, except Hipp.

Under ‘quarrelsome’, Ambra. Asterias. Cantharis. Cenchris. Corralium. Crotalus. Elaps. Hipp. Lach. Lyss. Psor. Sep. Spong. Tarent. are the animal remedies.

Would you say, all remedies other than these ‘animal remedies’ should be eliminated while selecting a similimum for this patient?


According to sankaran, JEALOUSY is a ‘vital sensation’ of ‘ANIMAL KINGDOM’.

The rubric:


Mind: JEALOUSY: Anan. Apis. Calc-p. Calc-s. Camph. Cench. Coff. Gall-ac. Hyos. Ign. Lach. Nux-v. Op. Ph-ac. Puls. Raph. Staph. Stram.

LACHESIS and HYOS are 3 marks drugs for this symptom. Only APIS. CENCH. and LACH. are ‘animal’ drugs’.

Anan. Camph. Coff. Hyos. Ign. Nux-v. Op. Puls. Raph. Staph. and Stram. are ‘plant remedies’.

Calc-p. Calc-s. Gall-ac. and Ph-ac. are mineral drugs.

We will have to eliminate HYOS. when searching a similimum for a person with jealousy as a prominent symptom, if we follow sankaran method!

Homeopathic materia medica or repertory does not support sankaran’s theory that persons with ‘vital sensation’ of ‘jealousy’ would require ‘animal drugs’ only.


Sankaran says LACK OF SELF CONFIDENCE indicates a vital sensation of ‘structural consciousness’, which is a MINERAL quality. Only ‘mineral drugs’ have to be considered for patients exhibiting ‘vital sensation of


See this rubric in Kent repertory:

[Kent] Mind: CONFIDENCE, want of self: Agn. Alum. Anac. Anan. Ang. Arg-n. Aur. Bar-c. Bell. Bry. Calc. Canth. Carb-an. Carb-v. Caust. Chin. Chlor. Dros. Gels. Hyos. Ign. Iod. Kali-c. Kali-n. Kali-s. Lac-c. Lach. Lyc. Merc. Mur-ac. Nat-c. Nat-m. Nit-ac. Nux-v. Olnd. Op. Pall-met. Phos. Plb. Puls. Ran-b. Rhus-t. Ruta. Sil. Stram. Sul-ac. Sulph. Tab. Ther. Verb. Viol-t. Zinc-met.

Only ANAC. is 3 marks drug for this symptom. It is a PLANT REMEDY!

24 drugs Agn. Anac. Anan. Ang. Bell. Bry. Carb-v. Chin. Dros. Gels. Hyos. Ign. Lyc. Nux-v. Olnd. Op. Puls. Ran-b. Rhus-t. Ruta. Stram. Tab. Verb. Viol-t. are PLANT REMEDIES.

5 drugs Canth. Carb-an. Lac-c. Lach. Ther. are ANIMAL DRUGS.

23 drugs Alum. Arg-n. Aur. Bar-c. Calc. Caus. Chlor. Iod. Kali-c. Kali-n. Kali-s. Merc. Mur-ac. Nat-c. Nat-m. Nit-ac. Pall. Phos. Plb-met. Sil. Sul-ac. Sulph. Zinc-met. are MINERAL DRUGS.

Materia medica or repertories no way justify sankaran’s theory that LACK OF SELF CONFIDENCE would require only MINERAL REMEDIES. How can a person claiming to be homeopath make a theory and method of

practice totally ignoring our whole materia medica and drug proving?


Sankaran’s reputation, experience or vast followings should not prevent us from asking genuine questions. We need answers for these questions, since Sankaran claims to be a homeopath.

Sankaran’s method will result in gravely disabled in incapacitated homeopathic practice, preventing homeopaths from utilizing the unlimited potentials of our materia medica.

Obviously, the basic dogma of ‘sensations-kingdom’ relationship on which ‘sankaran method’ is built up, lacks the support of logic or materia medica.

Anybody can make any theories. But it is wrong to say it is homeopathy.

Rajan Sankaran gives a case of ‘tumor in eye ball’ cured by ‘Arg-n.’ as an example of successful employment of his ‘sensation method’:

“I had a case of a man with a tumor in his eyeball, and he described it thus; that this tumour caused a certain “imbalance” in his eyes. Then he described this imbalance as a sense of inco-ordination, and further, how co-ordination was the most important thing in his life; how everything needed to be co-ordinated. Going further along this line, he said it’s the kind of co-ordination that a pilot needs when piloting his plane, or a rocket scientist needs when he makes a rocket. It’s the kind of co-ordination that an actor needs when he is performing live on stage, and several such examples”.

“At some point, he described a situation where his mother-in-law did something behind his back, and when I asked him what he had felt about it, he replied that he felt very disappointed, and betrayed. Now, these emotions of disappointment and betrayal are present in his case, and one might be tempted to use rubrics like “ailments from disappointment, or betrayal”. But if you ask further, “Describe the disappointment”, then you bring out the true individuality of the person in the circumstance. When somebody does something behind your back, which is not expected, the feeling of disappointment is common, not individual. Hahnemann always emphasized the individualizing phenomena, the characteristic symptoms”.

“Here, when we look at disappointment, it’s not individual enough, not characteristic enough. Go further. When I asked him, “Describe the disappointment”, he said, “It’s as if somebody had punched me in my stomach”.

This now gets more characteristic. Take it one step further. I asked him, “Describe the experience of being punched” and he said, “I feel completely suffocated.” “Describe suffocation.” And it opens out and you find that there

is the suffocation sensation in many areas in his life, like when swimming, or in claustrophobic situations, etc. That suffocation sensation, along with the sense of importance of co-ordination and control, like a stage artist, or a plane pilot, gives us the remedy Arg-n., which has the control, co-ordination as well as the suffocation. That remedy cured the tumour in his eye.”

“So the “ailments from disappointment” or “delusion that somebody had punched his stomach”, is a more superficial expression. The deeper expression is the tremendous sense of suffocation that he felt, not only in the situation with his mother-in-law, but in every area of his life. A sensation that is so individual, and so completely unconnected with the external reality that it becomes the most individualizing symptom of the person, both physical and mental. It is at the Sensation level.”



When we analyze, this case, we would realize that sankaran did not utilize his ‘kingdom approach’ in this case. He does not say ‘Arg-n.’ was selected as a ‘mineral drug’, as he normally does.

Instead, he says “suffocation sensation, along with the sense of importance of co-ordination and control, like a stage artist, or a plane pilot, gives us the remedy Arg-n., which has the control,

co-ordination as well as the suffocation.

That remedy cured the tumour in his eye.

Rajan Sankaran, being a very experienced physician having mastered the materia medica and successfully treated thousands of cases in his practice, could rightly select ‘Arg nit’ as the correct similimum from symptoms such as ‘general sensation of suffocation’, ‘sensation of incordination’, and of course, from other numerous symptoms and observations he would have collected during case taking but opted to give in his case report.

Can any less experienced follower of sanakaran, with lesser materia medica knowledge, ever select ‘arg nit’ as the similimum of this patient, on the basis of ‘suffocation’ and ‘incoordination’ only, and a knowledge that patient needs a ‘mineral drug’ as per Sankaran’s theory? Please note, Sankaran does not mention ‘kingdom’ while explaining this case.

Any homeopath who knows how to take case, repertorize and decide a similimum using materia medica, could have very easily selected ‘arg nit’ in this case by classical method in a very simple way.

Since the patient is coming with ‘tumor in eye’, an ordinary homeopath would start case taking by collecting symptoms with ‘eye’ and ‘vision’, trying to collect all modalities, sensations and concomitants associated with ‘eye’ and ‘vision’.

The ‘incoordination’ in eyes sankaran talks about will have to be probed in detail, to know whether it is problems of accommodation(accommodation defective), dimness of vision, diplopia, moving vision, alternate vanishing of vision or anything like that. Remember, all these problems of vision could be seen in materia medica of ‘Arg-n.’ in high order. Observe whether there is any chemosis, echymosis, lachrymation, pain, swelling, or any other peculiar sensations in eyes, with their modalities. Sensation of fullness in eyes, strbismus, cold-heat modalities also have to be ascertained. Itching, discoloration, frequent wiping, and many such features could be observed.

After completing ‘particulars’, physician would inquire mentals and physical generals. What Sankaran interprets as ‘suffocation’ would be described by the patient as aggravation in closed room, desire for open air, aggravation in crowded rooms, general physical anxiety, sensation of balls internally, intolerance of clothing, sensation of being constricted by a band around body, and such symptoms. See, most of these symptoms strongly indicate Arg-n.

Regarding his mentals, from what Sankaran explained, we can understand there would be symptoms such as persistent anxiety, despair, feeling of betrayed, sadness, anticipations, confusion of mind, being repudiated by relatives, dwelling on past bad experiences, delusions of getting punched, forsaken feelings, mortification and many such symptoms, most of which obviously points to Arg-n.

For an experienced homeopath like sankaran, arg nit is the obvious prescription for this case without any special methods and techniques or even repertorization. Any homeopath who could collect these symptoms would reach Arg-n. through simple repertorization. As for me, I would have reached arg nit by the time I complete my case taking.

Why should Rajan sankaran pretend to be finding similimum in this type of obvious cases through his ‘sensation-kingdom’ method, only to confuse youg homeopaths?

That is the game plan of all modern gurus and masters. They would prescribe correctly using their materia medica knowledge and, make results. Then they would pretend the made this miraculous results using their ‘special methods’ they are marketing! Innocent follower is betrayed, and his carrier doomed to be spoiled, by keeing on trying the ‘methods’ the guru taught them.

As part of my mission to evolve and promote scientific homeopathy, I will have to discuss and analyse various existing theories about homeopathy. I will have to point out things I think are not agreeing with modern scientific knowledge system. Such criticisms and discussions are part of work I am engaged in. It is nothing personal. I have no any personal agenda here. I analyse and expose each and every ideas, concepts and methods in homeopathy that hinder scientific transformation of homeopathy.

Earlier, once I took up discussing Dr Vijaykar’s theories, ‘cubs’ and ‘lions’ of that group threatened me for my life. They told me ‘you will have no place to run’. Next came the attacks from marketers of ‘hair transmissions’. Promoters of ‘energy medicine’ theories also did the same. Homeopathic World Community removed all my articles from their pages, since they could not tolerate my exposures of ‘international masters’ who promote homeopathy as ‘energy medicine’ and practice homeopathy as part of their CAM ‘healing arts’. I had to relinquish my HWC membership on that issue.

Now is the turn of disciples of Rajan Sankaran and Jan Scholten. Once I just took up discussing ‘sensation method’, ‘kingdom method’ and ‘periodical table method’, a whole hornet’s nest is infuriated and out for me. I wanted to discuss their theories due to my conviction that scientific homeopathy cannot advance without exposing these highly influential but unscientific theories. My message box is daily full of messages warning me of ‘dire consequences’. Instead of discussing or explaining the points I raised, I am abused, threatened and asked to ‘stay away from our master’. I am accused of being jealous, arrogant, insane and working with hidden personal agendas. They diagnosed my problem as ‘severe skepticemia’!

I just don’t care. I will go on with my mission of evolving homeopathy into a full-fledged medical science. I know I will have to pay a price, perhaps with my life itself. But I am not bothered. Let the dogs bark, caravan will move on!

Without criticizing and exposing wrong ideas and wrong practices, we cannot evolve and promote right ideas and right practices in homeopathy.

I am asked to ‘read all books of Sankaran, and apply it myself’ to confirm, before commenting on his theories. I agree that we have to study before commenting or criticizing anything. But, we need not ‘apply’ everything ourselves to ‘confirm’. If that were so, nobody will have the right to comment on homeopathy without practicing it. We cannot criticize allopathy without practicing it ourselves! To criticize astrology,

I will have to practice astrology.

To say robbery is wrong, I will have do robbery myself! To criticize corruption, I have to be corrupt? To comment on a theory, we have to ‘study’ it well, that is all.


I have commented on Sankaran’s theories after studying it well. I need not practice it for that.

When anybody say only ‘animal drugs’ have to be used in people characterized by ‘vital level sensation of survival instincts’, I can comment on it on the basis of my knowledge of materia medica and drug proving.

I need not ‘apply’ that method. I know many homeopathic drugs belonging to plant or mineral kingdoms having that characteristics. I have applied those drugs in my homeopathic practice very successfully. Any homeopath, who has studied and applied materia medica knows that Sankaran is wrong on this point.

Some friends have expressed their apprehension that criticizing wrong theories and practices happening in homeopathy in public will harm the good will and reputation of our community and our therapeutic system.

I do not subscribe to that view. All these ‘wrong things’ in homeopathy are done and promoted by their propagators in public, with out any concern about the harm they are doing, through articles, books, interviews and seminars all over the world, making homeopathy a topic of unending mockery before the scientific community. All these things are already known to general public better than homeopaths themselves.

These people have already done enough damage to homeopathy through their unscientific theories and nonsense practices. They supply arms and ammunition to skeptics to attack homeopathy. There is no meaning

in covering up this dirt. Public dirt should be washed in public, to get the lost reputation and credibility of homeopathy back.


If homeopathic community continue let these people go like this, we cannot even dream about making homeopathy a scientific medical system, and get it recognized as such even in a far distant future.

In his Homeopathic Links interview, Vithoulkas says: “Sankaran alone has done more harm to homeopathy than all the enemies of homeopathy together.”

Andre Saine writes on his website: “Sankaran demonstrated several basic errors of methodology and reasoning in his example of how he ‘discovers’ a remedy”

How would the followers of Sankaran respond to these statements?

Collect all mentals, physical generals and particular symptoms of your patient, with all qualifications such as causations, sensations, locations, modalities and concomitants. Then grade the symptoms into uncommon, common, mental, physical general and particulars. Then repertorize. Compare the materia medica of drugs coming top in repertorization, and decide a similimum. That is the simple way of homeopathic practice- and the most successful way.

If a drug is similimum according to totality of symptoms, it does not matter whether that drug belongs to animal, mineral or plant kingdoms. It does not matter to which ‘sub kingdom’ or ‘family’ the drug belongs. Such a knowledge does not make any difference in your similimum.

Selecting similimum is most important in homeopathy. Similarity of symptoms is our guide in selecting similimum. All these talk about ‘kingdoms’, sub kingdoms, families and such things only contribute in making homeopathy complex, and confuse the young homeopaths. It may help in creating an aura around the teacher, which would attract people to seminars. That is not a silly thing, where money matters above homeopathy!



Vorwort/Suchen                                Zeichen/Abkürzungen                                   Impressums