The miasma from R. Sankaran

The clinical and practical progress made by Dr. RajanSankaran of Mumbai (formerly Bombay) with the notion of miasma seems particularly interesting to me.

Unfortunately, it is heavily tainted with a formulation that makes it totally impossible to state outside the homeopathic world.

Worse, this formulation impedes the hope of making this great advance in the knowledge of human beings understandable to non-homeopaths.

I am not sure that Dr. Rakan Sankaran, because of this vague and confused formulation, has taken full measure of what he has discovered, which is very regrettable. Indeed, a discipline that does not have an "exportable" vocabulary is doomed to remain, in the strict sense, an "esoteric" discipline, that is to say, reserved and only accessible to "insiders".

To put it simply, RJ designates a set of manifestations to certain psychological profiles. These manifestations include the rate of evolution of the pathology (acute, intermittent, more or less chronic), the degree of hope or desperation, and the degree of destructive tendency of the pathology.

I will briefly describe four "profiles" of miasmas, from the ten described by RJ.

Acute miasma: the patient experiences each situation as if he were suffering from an acute, serious and threatening short-term illness. Because of this, he is very afraid and feels a strong threat. However, the illness being acute, it can also resolve quickly. Despair is intense but acute. The pathology is experienced as dangerous in the short term, but can heal quickly.

Malaria miasma: the patient alternates between periods of relative calm and acute attacks. He thus ends up living feeling "more or less" persecuted, fearing the return of acute attacks. The pathology does not really threaten the physical integrity but it leaves only a few tranquil phases to the patient.

Sycotic miasma: the patient knows that he is chronically affected and that he is unlikely to get rid of his troubles. But the pathology is not experienced as having great gravity. The patient seeks, therefore, to adapt to the situation, to "cope with it", especially if he manages to hide it from others.

Syphilitic miasma: the pathology here is destructive; the patient knows it and he himself behaves in a destructive way. The morale is very low; the patient is more or less desperate.

This "miasmatic" description has found its field of discovery and maximum application and clinical utility in the register of homeopathic plant remedies. Here, indeed, in the RJ system, the junction of sensation and miasma leads "mechanically" to the intimate experience of the patient and therefore to the indicated remedy.

On the other hand, in my opinion, for animal and mineral remedies, this miasmatic dimension plays little or no real role. In the case of animal remedies, to access the most intimate experience of the patient, the key is to identify the animal family involved and, within that family, to be guided by the patient to the particular specimen. He will express this unconsciously, describing the instinctive vital behaviour of the animal concerned.

But to do this, RaJan himself does not use the junction between animal family and miasma as he does for plants; the miasm is much less taken into account.

In mineral remedies, it is the identification of the particular lack, the type of relational difficulty, the question of identity in question, etc. which is paramount, in line with Jan Scholten's approach, from which Sankaran has clearly borrowed a great deal. Here too, the notion of miasma is of little clinical interest.

Admittedly, Rajan has classified the animal and mineral remedies in miasms, but this mainly serves to consolidate the coherence of his system and to show that what RJ calls "miasma" has a universal value.

What Rajan has described is, in fact, a vital provision, a fundamental provision that each of us has. That is, a certain "way of being", a "mental inclination, spirit or character". It is a tendency to understand what is happening to us, with more or less confidence or fear, and to consider it more or less dangerous for us.

This vital disposition is thus a dimension of our personality which is, to a certain extent, singular and characterises us but is, at the same time, shared by millions of other humans.

To what can this vital disposition correspond, from the scientific point of view?

This question is essential. But it has been, until now, completely left out. However, it is obvious that this vital disposition of the subject can only be the result of a large bundle of genetic, biological, emotional and psychic underpinnings as well as all that the parents and guardians of the patient have instilled in him, "invigorating" or "mortifying" in the course of time.

This vital disposition thus expresses an ability to struggle, an appetite for life, a particular optimism or pessimism and also a tendency to experience things as more or less destructive. It is especially interesting to reflect on RJ's judicious link between this vital disposition and the emblematic diseases in the history of the human species.

One wonders if Rajan has not put his finger here on a particularly interesting element from a scientific and biological view point, namely the inclusion in our biological and psychic "repertory" of basic vital provisions, inherited from evolution.

The ten Sankaranian miasmas therefore constitute, perhaps, ten fundamental vital dispositions describing ten fundamental modalities to face the vicissitudes of life inherited from the evolution of the human species which, for survival, were needed in order to face plagues such as malaria, typhoid, syphilis, tuberculosis, et cetera.

It seems that we have retained within us the tendency to experience each difficulty and illness as if we were confronted with the diseases that threatened our ancestors on a daily basis.

We could, therefore, from the scientific point of view, use the periphrase "vital disposition" of the "leprous", the "syphilitic" type, of a "seriously and suddenly sick", "tuberculous", etc. subject. It should be stressed that the patient experiences almost all situations in the same way as those who are struck by these diseases.

This homeopathic clinical advance, discovered by our colleague Rajan Sankaran, is therefore a particularly interesting observation element from a medical and biological point of view. Everyone will understand, though, that it has no chance to be taken seriously by the scientific, biological and medical communities as long as it remains formulated as "typhoid miasma" or "syphilitic miasma", etc.

Would not talking about the basic living arrangements of these types give us infinitely more chance to be heard?