Jayesh :an interview with Jayesh Shah
- Jayesh :an interview with Jayesh Shah (Susie and J. Baker)
Jayesh Shah is the gregarious member of the circle of homeopaths from Bombay that includes Rajan Sankaran, Divya Chabra, Nandita Shah, Suniel Anand, and Sujit Chatterjee. His collection of cured-cases, on video, are simply stunning. Jayesh and Rajan are like brothers, coming to homeopathy at the same time and sharing in each others brilliance, Their circle of influence has taken our art and science forward in leaps and bounds.
AH: Tell us something about how you were raised.
Jayesh: How I was raised? Ok, as far as I know I was raised, as far as the family goes, as a very, very loved and very special child of the family. As far as society and the surrounding world go, I was raised in a very ordinary situation -in the heart of the Bombay city. Nothing very special. I would play on the streets, would play on the staircases, terraces. Would mix around with anybody -no reservation about rich, poor, this, that.
AH: Do you see any connection between how you were raised and how you have become?
Jayesh: Yes, there could be some connection because my father is a homeopath, and my father had somehow a very big expectation -I can't say expectation, but he knew what he wanted for me. He was very fond of teaching me. He used to take my lessons and he had big expectations, and he was quite sure that I would make it to be a medical doctor and then a homeopath. So his influence is very strong. Not in a dictatorial way, but in some ways.
AH: Can you say more about that influence?
Jayesh: Only thing I remember is that I was the only child whose lessons he used to take personally. He would teach me and I would always come home with good grades when he taught me.
AH: Can you remember any single instance of his teaching you and what it felt like?
Jayesh: Not anything.
AH: Nothing remarkable?
Jayesh: That he would take great pride in my marks and the grades I got and things like that.
AH: How do you feel it influenced you growing up in the house where your father was a homeopath?
Jayesh: I think one of the biggest effects that came on me was the confidence. The confidence in the system and the confidence in what we are doing. And creating the confidence in the patient that you will be able to handle his problem. Because I've seen my father tell patients many times -as a child, I remember -"You'll be OK tomorrow." And, really, the patient would be 50% better by the time he walked out of the room. So I think that confidence, the authority and the confidence that the authority has -this was there somewhere in me from him. So I was not hesitant right from the day one. I was quite sure that we can do it. And most of my patients feel very confident about me. That gives you a little edge into it.
AH: When did you know you were going to pursue homeopathy?
Jayesh: That was when you pass out of the 12th class and you go to choose whether you go for general medicine or go for homeopathy. I think then, at that time, I was quite sure: even if I went for modern medicine, I would ultimately practice homeopathy.
AH: How did you and Rajan get connected?
Jayesh: Rajan and I were classmates at the college, and we spent some years at the college and had some contact, but not any big contact at that time. As students, he was a more studious kind, more introverted. I was more extroverted, less studious, yet very much interested in studying. I was more a socializing kind, and he was more an introvert. And just at the time when we had to start learning something new, it happened that we got together.
AH: And what happened?
Jayesh: You want to know the story?
AH: Sure.
Jayesh: OK, it was this way. Right after all the exams are over, the college gets empty; there's nobody there. And three or four days pass after exams -you are just easy. And then you go to the college just to linger around and see what's going on and when the results are going to be out, and just see if you can meet some people. Just easy, nothing to do, so what to do? Just go there to see what's happening.
AH: "Easy" means relaxed?
Jayesh: Relaxed. Because there is a big tension about the exams, which go on for 20 days.
So I went to the college and I was reading one day the notices that were put on the boards. Rajan also came and then we were alone in the lobby. So we said, "Hi, hello, and what are you doing?" And I said, "I want to learn about skin -I don't know much about skin diseases. I'm going to a big general hospital to learn some skin diseases, and I hope to see a lot of skin pathologies." He said, "That's a very good idea. Would you mind if I come?" "OK, I will ask the MD who is going to teach me at the hospital whether he would mind if you come."
Next day I told him, "OK, we can go." And he said, "Why don't we learn some skin?" So we started reading "Skin" from the Harrison's Textbook of Medicine. What is a macule, what is a papule, what is a pustula -all these things. So we were quite prepared when we reached there. Then we started meeting regularly to read together, study together. Then, I think, it clicked.
AH: What were the Monday night sessions like?
Jayesh: They were initially our problems, successes and failures, because I was at that time treating some patients and not getting anywhere, and I had some brilliant cases cured that were doing well, and I didn't have anybody to share that with. And I think Rajan was also undergoing a very similar experience. So when we started meeting we could share our difficult cases and we could learn from our successes.
There were hardly any classical homeopaths in the city of Bombay. Some of them who were there were too much senior to us and not so easily approachable. They were difficult people -very difficult teachers. So the only way left for us was to learn by ourselves, and then I think we started meeting every Monday night to study cases: materia medica, medicine, so many things -psychology, psychotherapy. All kinds of things we were reading on Monday night.
AH: And you'd go all night?
Jayesh: Yes. It would start around 9:30 and go on until 3 or 4 in the morning. Initially it was that we had an idea that we would make a group and all grow together. But it was difficult to find anybody else to join us. So we went alone for quite some time that way. Then gradually the movement picked up. We started teaching at some of the places, and the others joined us in the Monday meetings. Then it became Friday meetings. Then more people joined the movement.
AH: How large were the gatherings?
Jayesh: The gatherings would go to around fifty people.
AH: Big gatherings!
Jayesh: Big gatherings.
AH: How would that work?
Jayesh: Someone would get some interesting cases, and all of us would try and guess the remedy. That went on for a year or two.
AH: Well, how did it come that you collaborated towards what ultimately led to Spirit of Homeopathy?
Jayesh: I think it was all these days that we studied together and shared the successes, the failures, the meetings, the articles -small articles which we wrote, small cases that were presented. Then the big thing was when Rajan was invited to England for 1 - 2 seminars and then the Spirit of Homeopathy was . . . each time before he went for a seminar I remember we were sitting intensely preparing these seminars, trying to work it out. When Rajan got new ideas he would pass them on to me, and I would sort of play with it and see whether it worked in practice.
AH: Can you give an illustration?
Jayesh: An illustration was when he shared his component idea -breaking the whole thing into components. I found the idea so fascinating that the very next day I could use it in the Tarentula case that I showed you in the seminar; it's there in the Spirit of Homeopathy, too. And then he said in his mind it was still an idea, but the next day, hearing about the case from me would get him excited, too. And it would go one step further." Yes, this is working. It's good."
AH: What does the "spirit of homeopathy" mean?
Jayesh: I think it means (pausing and then emphasizing) spirit of homeopathy. I think it just means that there was a time in practice when we felt that we got the actual spirit of homeopathy. We felt there was a time when we were making prescriptions but they didn't make much sense, except that some got well and some didn't get well. But somewhere you got in touch with the spirit of homeopathy. I feel that's how it makes a very good title for that book, because it meant that we got in touch with the spirit of homeopathy.
AH: What is your practice like?
Jayesh: My practice is like doing 2 or 3 new cases a day and spending an hour or two with the new patients, and doing around 100 - 150 follow-ups in a day, 5 days a week. One morning a week we have our study meetings.
AH: I think it would be interesting for our American colleagues to get the inner workings in a busy afternoon follow-up clinic. Is it by appointment? How are prescriptions filled? What is the basic organization?
Jayesh: This follow-up is something you have to see to believe. It goes really fast and in my practice, mostly I would have one member of the family -usually it is the mother -who comes to the clinic. She shares about what's going on with the family: the husband and what happened after the remedy, the child and what happened after the remedy, the other child and what happened after the remedy. One lady inside does the follow-up of her immediate family members and collects the medicine. Most of the patients are given placebo, too. There's a remedy dose given and then placebo to be taken every day. That makes things easier for me since we have a lot of acutes come up. In our practice, the evening practice becomes like the general medicine practice -it's like the General Practitioner. You are in charge for every health problem that the patient gets. It's a family practice.
So you get a lot of phone calls, and once you've given placebo, then you can say, "Repeat the dosage more often," or, "Put it in water and take it," and you can buy your time that way and your patient doesn't leave you. See, in India, or anywhere -even here -you find that the patients leave you and go away. They don't come for follow-ups. They don't report. After you've done a beautiful case you find he doesn't come for a follow-up. The reason that, I feel, it doesn't happen so often to me is because I give placebos. That gives the contact with the patient, you know. He has to come to collect the medicine in 3 weeks time again.
AH: How long will that go on?
Jayesh: That can go on until I feel I can now let him go, he's doing a little better. I can wait and watch without seeing him too often. But meeting the patient once in 3 weeks, I feel, helps me and the patient to keep in touch. They don't just drop out. They stick on. They feel something is being done about their problem; even if they meet me for 5 minutes, they feel, "It's OK."
We are trained to evaluate the progress: what has happened in a very short time; because that is the way we've always practiced. So what we do is: we've done a very thorough new case, then we try to just look into the main aspects, for example the dreams or the main feeling. "How is it going with your father now? How is it going with your wife now? You had problems last time? How are the dreams that used to come. Tell one of the dreams." So you'll know whether your remedy was correct if the dream is in the same tone as you perceived the first time, the whole state is in the same tune or it's something else and you made some mistake in the first prescription.
So many things we can evaluate faster because we get to the main point straight away.
AH: What about the pathological symptomatology? Is that something you'd evaluate as one of the main points?
Jayesh: No. I don't think so. I think we try to concentrate on seeing whether the state is better or not. And in the bargain the pathological symptom is also one of the factors. The patient says, "I'm much better." In what way are you? "My headaches are better, this is better, that is better. My fear is better." It's all the same. It's the main complaint, also, and the state also. If the main complaint is better, than your idea is to see whether he needs a repetition or he needs to be still, so I wait and watch. If the main complaint is not better, then I examine whether the remedy was correct, or he's still in the same state and needs the repetition -what's going on in him.
AH: When I was observing in India, one thing that was very impressive to me was that you all take very deep cases, and nearly always there's some kind of physical pathological complaint that brings the patient in. But ultimately your prescription is based on the deeper state of the individual. On follow-up, often it seemed as if the patient was in a much better condition, regarding the pathological state, and there was very little energy, actually, that would be put into looking at the deeper state.
Jayesh: We do look at the deeper state but the time comes, if the patient has come after two weeks, I don't want to him to think just now anything -it's too early. I know I have to evaluate my next step after another 2, 3 or 4 weeks. So at that time I just want to collect whatever he says-"OK, this has happened. My main complaint is better." I'll give him medicine-"See me after 3 weeks."
I just collect. "Any dreams?" Whatever few questions I feel, I'll keep some data. I know I have to wait and I don't need to do anything today -whatever he says. Whether he's better or a lot better, this is not the time to act. I just have to collect some information, do a short follow-up and go.
There may be cases where I'll need to evaluate now as the next step, then I'll ask more.
AH: I think I heard you say in India that you never feel compelled to make a prescription. Can you say more about this?
Jayesh: I feel it's not necessary in India. When you develop the understanding and the temperament of a good homeopath, one of the things that should be in the temperament of a good homeopath is not to fall into this tension and pressure of finding one prescription at the end of an hour. When you let go of that and just have a feeling of, "OK, I have to do a good job. I have to understand this person who is sitting here and see what is happening in his life and his state." Perceive his state. After perceiving his state you may find that it doesn't make meaning to you at this moment. We don't feel so much pressure to give the prescription. We may give a placebo and think, "Next time."
In so many cases, the light comes after 6 or 7 months.
AH: Will you wait 6 - 7 months just continuing to give placebo?
Jayesh: In a few cases. In a very few cases. But we'll continue our work of thinking and studying. It is better not to give a prescription than to give a half-hearted prescription. It saves you and the patient a lot of trouble. If you have not made the first prescription, then surely the next time he comes you will be more pressured to make a prescription.
AH: When you mention placebo -I don't think that's something we can just put in the article, that you give placebo. Do you feel comfortable saying that when they come, you give one remedy and then placebo?
Jayesh: I have no problem about that. This is going to be read by homeopaths.
AH: Actually, this brings up an interesting question. When I was in India, knowing that there were so many homeopaths in India and it is common practice to give placebo, I always wondered, "Surely, the cat will get out of the bag. Surely it's going to become common knowledge that homeopaths are giving placebos, and then what will they do?"
No other secret is this well kept. There are compounders -there are people who move in and out. You'd think somebody would get some bad feeling and leave their job and then maybe spread the word.
Jayesh: I think this is an imaginary fear. Because in reality such a thing hasn't happened in 50 years or more. So this fear is an imaginary one. But this idea of giving placebo is a very old one in India. In Bombay, most people used to repeat remedies before we started. We are the ones giving single doses and waiting. Before we started, people used to give remedies everyday. But in Calcutta this placebo was very, very common, because they were the ones who, when we started out, were more classical than we were. They would usually give one dose and wait. And I know they'd have different names for placebos because I know of practitioners in Calcutta who don't have their own dispensing units. They write a prescription and the patient is to go to the pharmacy to get it. And they would write like, "Gelsemium 200, 1 dose. Nihilinum 200, 2 times a day for one month." And the patient goes to the pharmacist and gives this prescription and he makes the medicine for him.
So this placebo will have many names. Nihilinum, Anphitum, things like this.
AH: We use the same remedy, but numbered.
Jayesh: Yes, same remedy, number. Many times we put a stroke and write "0. " Each one has his way of writing, but this is quite common in India, and I think it works well for our culture and mentality and for our problems -the way we think, for our patients and how we relate to them. I think it works very well. I feel it's not the logic that counts, but the efficacy of the system that counts. I feel it is very effective -very, very effective in our culture and setup. I don't know how it would be abroad, but I think it's very good for our set-up. I think it should be good anywhere, but in our set-up, it's really good.
AH: One distinct difference that I noticed is that Indian homeopaths don't try to educate their patients about homeopathy, nor do they feel the need to as we do, and the patients seem just to have more faith in the system. They just put themselves into your hands and they say, "Cure me with homeopathy, or forget it." And we don't have that experience so much. Ours are more skeptical patients who require more information about it. So we're in a bit of a different situation.
Jayesh: It's possible. There are cultural differences, educational differences, the way people look at problems and maybe handle problems. These things will always be there.
AH: Even though your patients are, by and large, very well educated, this is curious and interesting. How would you instruct a practitioner about learning to practice the spirit of homeopathy?
Jayesh: I feel I can just advise one thing. This advice is out of my own personal experience of my growth and development as a homeopath. My maturity as a homeopath has grown because of my association and study with my near and dear colleagues. I feel my meeting them often, having the study groups and sitting down together studying a difficult case, or seeing a difficult case cured -all these produce tremendous inspiration, inside knowledge and enthusiasm in me to work and to progress, myself, as a homeopath. So I owe a great deal to my colleagues in my development, because it's meeting together, meeting and being with good homeopaths, attending good seminars -these are the things that have always inspired me.
If I see one good case treated by anybody, or one good remedy -if I see it or read it -I think it inspires me to do good work the next day. You must feel a bit more enthusiasm in seeing the cases.
We are fortunate to have some good colleagues with whom we are able to share our difficult and cured cases.
AH: In a time when so many homeopaths see computers as a boon to studying remedies and prescribing, give us your feelings on this.
Jayesh: It is difficult for me to give my feelings on the computer because I have only one side of the story: I never, ever used the computer. So I can't give you the other side of the story, how useful it is or how useful it could be. I never used a computer. I'm quite happy with the books.
I feel the essence of homeopathy is to perceive what is the problem and to perceive what is the state and what is the most peculiar aspect through which you can get into the state. What is the essence of the state? What is the state? And once you've perceived what is the main problem, then the idea of whether to go and search for what you are looking for in the computer or book to me means the same thing. You may do it a little faster than me, or slower than me, using the computer. But the logic -it is not the computer that helps you, I am sure about that. I feel what is important is a homeopath who has understood the logic of each repertory -the Kent's Repertory, the Boger-Boeninghausen Repertory, the Phatak's Repertory, the Boger Synoptic Key. If you know what has been the logic of each of the authors, then once you have used the repertory often you will immediately know where to look for such a symptom. Otherwise you cannot find out what you are looking for.
Once you know the logic of the repertory you will know where you are to look . You will know this is not in Kent, or in the Synthetic, this will be given in Phatak. Of course the additions to the repertory are good, but what is important is that when the things are added into one repertory from different sources, somewhere the person who is adding it is doing it more or less mechanically. He's just putting in the material or the information. But the context of the information is very important.
You learn that you are to refer to this or that book for such a symptom. As I told you -the case where "half asleep aggravates"-then I would look in Phatak. You know when to refer to which repertory, and then whether you like to use the computer and look at the screen for what's coming up, or if you like to refer to the book -it depends. A computer, I feel, would be very, very useful in studying as such. It is not necessarily studying a case, but studying homeopathy, or your cases or whatever. If you want to see what Kent says about children you put in, "Children," and you get everything and everywhere Kent writes about children. That would be very interesting study. I'm sure computers have a role to play in homeopathy.
AH: What do you mean by logic, or how do you find the logic of each of the authors?
Jayesh: If you read the preface of each of them, if you use them, if you understood the author exactly, then you know. For example, if you want to look for a remedy Angustura and want to know what family it belongs to; you want to know a little bit about the plant, when was it used, who used it, who else was using it, in what other forms it was used. Then I'm sure you're not going to open Phatak or open Roger Morrison or open Franz Mueller. You're going to open Clarke, because there he writes that this belongs to this family, these are the other members of this family and writes a short description of it. You know the author. And that is his speciality -that first lecture of Clarke. And when you want that kind of information you're going to open that book first.
One first has to understand what is the logic of each book. Then, once you know your resources well, you will know which one to use, and when. What is unfortunate today is that nobody teaches the use of these tools, like, "What was the logic of Kent's * Repertory, Boeninghausen, Phatak, Complete, Synthesis?" These are newer books and we need to understand them a little bit. Once we've used them again and again, then you'll know where will be what in the Synthesis or in the Complete. So if a beginner starts straight away with the Synthesis or the Complete Repertory, he feels lost: where will he find the material he's looking for? So the first step is to understand the basic logic of each repertory, and one has to take lessons on them. It's very important that one understands each repertory and what is the logic. Once you are in tune with the authors, thinking is very easy.
AH: I want to know a little about what your practice is like. I know that your wife, Rajul, who also is a doctor, practices in your clinic along side of you. Tell us about this set-up.
Jayesh: Our practice set-up is usually two: one is studying the cases, understanding the new cases that come to us, spending lots of time with them and discussing amongst ourselves again and again the case after the patient leaves. We discuss the case. One person starts the discussion, "This was there, this was there." Usually we are two, myself, Rajul and one more assistant so we have three of us who sit down and study these cases. Then we discuss them all thoroughly, bringing out what they see, what I saw, what I'm saying, how they can contradict it, what they are saying that I feel is wrong. We tend to make it into an interesting discussion, each case that comes to us.
And the second part is, of course, the management of the large practice that comes in the evening. They help me in attending the phones or taking the follow-ups. Things like that.
AH: So the 100 - 150 patients each evening -you don't personally need to see all of them?
Jayesh: I see all of them!
AH: I know it's a whirlwind, at least from my perspective as an American homeopath who had the opportunity to sit in on those sessions. And your compounder is a vital cog in the wheel. Can you say a little about what the compounder does?
Jayesh: The compounder that I have has been with us for over 10 years now. I am quite fortunate to have him, he knows his job well.
AH: What are his responsibilities?
Jayesh: He's all packed into one: a receptionist, the appointment maker, the assistant, the compounder...
AH: Compounder means?
Jayesh: He makes up the medicines, he purchases the medicines from the pharmacy when the stocks are out; he keeps a list of all the medicines; he prepares the doses; instructs the patients how to take them; answers the queries of the patients on the telephone and when they come if they don't understand how to take the medicine. He attends many of my phone calls; he goes and gets the medicines; he does the typing work -he's all in one. He's kind of the heart and soul of the clinic.
AH: Who treats you?
Jayesh: Who treats me? I feel it is a very, very difficult job to treat yourself or your very near family members. It gets sometimes difficult when it's a very acute situation. Chronic doesn't matter -you have some time to wait to ask and consult, but in acutes, it gets sometimes difficult. There are two persons on whom I rely if I fall sick. One is Rajan and the other is my father. So somehow, I feel, they have been able to get me out of whatever crisis I've had so far.
AH: I know an interesting thing about your father. He has never taken any money for all the homeopathy he has done for however many years he has been in practice. Quite amazing for us to know.
Jayesh: Yes, that's true. He has always taken up medicine as a service to mankind. And he enjoys it more than anything else in his life.
AH: Since in India homeopathic doctors are not limited as to the types of cases and disease they can treat, how do you deal with life-threatening illnesses -typhoid fever, cholera, cancer, etc.?
Jayesh: I think we treat all these conditions you have mentioned. All these patients come to us. And by and large we are able to handle them with homeopathy. If we need the help of the other system of medicine, or if we feel we have not been able to understand the remedy for this patient, then we refer it to our colleagues and sit down together and do the serious cases. Also, take the opinion of the allopathic system of medicine. Whatever extra treatment we need to do, like give the IV fluids or give the oxygen, whatever. We are not usually hesitant to do all that. And in most cases we are able to do without giving them antibiotics. Of course we do have our own failures, too.
AH: So when you get a life-threatening case, a very severe case which in our country or part of the world one couldn't even legally treat, it's just another case for you.
Jayesh: Yes. It's like in our country one fortunate thing is that the homeopathic system of medicine is put as an equivalent system to the modern medicine. The whole training program that they have is also based on the modern medicine lines. They are given training in everything -medicine, surgery, gynecology, emergencies, ear, nose, this, that. Everything is taught. We go to the allopathic hospitals for training. Plus the homeopathic philosophy and the homeopathic part and the homeopathic hospital. So it's like a complete package and at the end you are examined by allopaths, as well as homeopaths.
AH: Do you admit patients to the homeopathic hospital?
Jayesh: Yes, I do, but I don't go myself. I refer it to either Sunil or Rajan, who go to the homeopathic hospitals. It's too far a distance for me to handle hospital cases. But many times we have some collaboration with the allopathic doctors who are favorable to homeopathy. Then we can admit them in general hospitals -allopathic hospitals -investigate them, give all the other care and give homeopathic remedies. Most of the times without the allopathic drug, or sometimes side by side along with it.
AH: What, to your understanding, would be the ideal educational process for becoming a homeopath?
Jayesh: I think the ideal process would be first to be trained in homeopathy. Any course, any college, any system, any educational format that you make has to first give the student the necessary exposure and confidence in the homeopathic system of medicine. First, he has to see good teachers take cases, good teachers prescribe medicines, good teachers follow up the cases, show the results and how the theoretical part of homeopathy -the Organon, the philosophy, the Materia Medica -can be brought to life. So to blend the theoretical part of homeopathy and the practical part of homeopathy and to show that what is in theory is the same in practice -they are not two different things. When a student is able to see not a very big difference between what's written in the Organon and what he's doing, or what's written in the Materia Medica and what he's perceiving, then I think he makes a good homeopath. For beginners this is very important.
And, of course, the other part of it, the training of homeopathy, should be such that it brings dependability and respectability among the masses so they can depend on this system of medicine and feel secure with it if you are trained as a medical doctor. If you are able to diagnose in terms of modern medicine, know the general prognosis, manage cases so that you don't end up doing things which are not normally expected, like missing a tumor or not examining a patient or some things like this.
So you make yourself into a good doctor first, and then you specialize into a good homeopath. I think that would make it a complete training.
Susie Baker, RSHom (NA), and Jeff Baker, ND, Direct the Maui Academy of Homeopathy, in Hawaii.
AH: Tell us something about how you were raised.
Jayesh: How I was raised? Ok, as far as I know I was raised, as far as the family goes, as a very, very loved and very special child of the family. As far as society and the surrounding world go, I was raised in a very ordinary situation -in the heart of the Bombay city. Nothing very special. I would play on the streets, would play on the staircases, terraces. Would mix around with anybody -no reservation about rich, poor, this, that.
AH: Do you see any connection between how you were raised and how you have become?
Jayesh: Yes, there could be some connection because my father is a homeopath, and my father had somehow a very big expectation -I can't say expectation, but he knew what he wanted for me. He was very fond of teaching me. He used to take my lessons and he had big expectations, and he was quite sure that I would make it to be a medical doctor and then a homeopath. So his influence is very strong. Not in a dictatorial way, but in some ways.
AH: Can you say more about that influence?
Jayesh: Only thing I remember is that I was the only child whose lessons he used to take personally. He would teach me and I would always come home with good grades when he taught me.
AH: Can you remember any single instance of his teaching you and what it felt like?
Jayesh: Not anything.
AH: Nothing remarkable?
Jayesh: That he would take great pride in my marks and the grades I got and things like that.
AH: How do you feel it influenced you growing up in the house where your father was a homeopath?
Jayesh: I think one of the biggest effects that came on me was the confidence. The confidence in the system and the confidence in what we are doing. And creating the confidence in the patient that you will be able to handle his problem. Because I've seen my father tell patients many times -as a child, I remember -"You'll be OK tomorrow." And, really, the patient would be 50% better by the time he walked out of the room. So I think that confidence, the authority and the confidence that the authority has -this was there somewhere in me from him. So I was not hesitant right from the day one. I was quite sure that we can do it. And most of my patients feel very confident about me. That gives you a little edge into it.
AH: When did you know you were going to pursue homeopathy?
Jayesh: That was when you pass out of the 12th class and you go to choose whether you go for general medicine or go for homeopathy. I think then, at that time, I was quite sure: even if I went for modern medicine, I would ultimately practice homeopathy.
AH: How did you and Rajan get connected?
Jayesh: Rajan and I were classmates at the college, and we spent some years at the college and had some contact, but not any big contact at that time. As students, he was a more studious kind, more introverted. I was more extroverted, less studious, yet very much interested in studying. I was more a socializing kind, and he was more an introvert. And just at the time when we had to start learning something new, it happened that we got together.
AH: And what happened?
Jayesh: You want to know the story?
AH: Sure.
Jayesh: OK, it was this way. Right after all the exams are over, the college gets empty; there's nobody there. And three or four days pass after exams -you are just easy. And then you go to the college just to linger around and see what's going on and when the results are going to be out, and just see if you can meet some people. Just easy, nothing to do, so what to do? Just go there to see what's happening.
AH: "Easy" means relaxed?
Jayesh: Relaxed. Because there is a big tension about the exams, which go on for 20 days.
So I went to the college and I was reading one day the notices that were put on the boards. Rajan also came and then we were alone in the lobby. So we said, "Hi, hello, and what are you doing?" And I said, "I want to learn about skin -I don't know much about skin diseases. I'm going to a big general hospital to learn some skin diseases, and I hope to see a lot of skin pathologies." He said, "That's a very good idea. Would you mind if I come?" "OK, I will ask the MD who is going to teach me at the hospital whether he would mind if you come."
Next day I told him, "OK, we can go." And he said, "Why don't we learn some skin?" So we started reading "Skin" from the Harrison's Textbook of Medicine. What is a macule, what is a papule, what is a pustula -all these things. So we were quite prepared when we reached there. Then we started meeting regularly to read together, study together. Then, I think, it clicked.
AH: What were the Monday night sessions like?
Jayesh: They were initially our problems, successes and failures, because I was at that time treating some patients and not getting anywhere, and I had some brilliant cases cured that were doing well, and I didn't have anybody to share that with. And I think Rajan was also undergoing a very similar experience. So when we started meeting we could share our difficult cases and we could learn from our successes.
There were hardly any classical homeopaths in the city of Bombay. Some of them who were there were too much senior to us and not so easily approachable. They were difficult people -very difficult teachers. So the only way left for us was to learn by ourselves, and then I think we started meeting every Monday night to study cases: materia medica, medicine, so many things -psychology, psychotherapy. All kinds of things we were reading on Monday night.
AH: And you'd go all night?
Jayesh: Yes. It would start around 9:30 and go on until 3 or 4 in the morning. Initially it was that we had an idea that we would make a group and all grow together. But it was difficult to find anybody else to join us. So we went alone for quite some time that way. Then gradually the movement picked up. We started teaching at some of the places, and the others joined us in the Monday meetings. Then it became Friday meetings. Then more people joined the movement.
AH: How large were the gatherings?
Jayesh: The gatherings would go to around fifty people.
AH: Big gatherings!
Jayesh: Big gatherings.
AH: How would that work?
Jayesh: Someone would get some interesting cases, and all of us would try and guess the remedy. That went on for a year or two.
AH: Well, how did it come that you collaborated towards what ultimately led to Spirit of Homeopathy?
Jayesh: I think it was all these days that we studied together and shared the successes, the failures, the meetings, the articles -small articles which we wrote, small cases that were presented. Then the big thing was when Rajan was invited to England for 1 - 2 seminars and then the Spirit of Homeopathy was . . . each time before he went for a seminar I remember we were sitting intensely preparing these seminars, trying to work it out. When Rajan got new ideas he would pass them on to me, and I would sort of play with it and see whether it worked in practice.
AH: Can you give an illustration?
Jayesh: An illustration was when he shared his component idea -breaking the whole thing into components. I found the idea so fascinating that the very next day I could use it in the Tarentula case that I showed you in the seminar; it's there in the Spirit of Homeopathy, too. And then he said in his mind it was still an idea, but the next day, hearing about the case from me would get him excited, too. And it would go one step further." Yes, this is working. It's good."
AH: What does the "spirit of homeopathy" mean?
Jayesh: I think it means (pausing and then emphasizing) spirit of homeopathy. I think it just means that there was a time in practice when we felt that we got the actual spirit of homeopathy. We felt there was a time when we were making prescriptions but they didn't make much sense, except that some got well and some didn't get well. But somewhere you got in touch with the spirit of homeopathy. I feel that's how it makes a very good title for that book, because it meant that we got in touch with the spirit of homeopathy.
AH: What is your practice like?
Jayesh: My practice is like doing 2 or 3 new cases a day and spending an hour or two with the new patients, and doing around 100 - 150 follow-ups in a day, 5 days a week. One morning a week we have our study meetings.
AH: I think it would be interesting for our American colleagues to get the inner workings in a busy afternoon follow-up clinic. Is it by appointment? How are prescriptions filled? What is the basic organization?
Jayesh: This follow-up is something you have to see to believe. It goes really fast and in my practice, mostly I would have one member of the family -usually it is the mother -who comes to the clinic. She shares about what's going on with the family: the husband and what happened after the remedy, the child and what happened after the remedy, the other child and what happened after the remedy. One lady inside does the follow-up of her immediate family members and collects the medicine. Most of the patients are given placebo, too. There's a remedy dose given and then placebo to be taken every day. That makes things easier for me since we have a lot of acutes come up. In our practice, the evening practice becomes like the general medicine practice -it's like the General Practitioner. You are in charge for every health problem that the patient gets. It's a family practice.
So you get a lot of phone calls, and once you've given placebo, then you can say, "Repeat the dosage more often," or, "Put it in water and take it," and you can buy your time that way and your patient doesn't leave you. See, in India, or anywhere -even here -you find that the patients leave you and go away. They don't come for follow-ups. They don't report. After you've done a beautiful case you find he doesn't come for a follow-up. The reason that, I feel, it doesn't happen so often to me is because I give placebos. That gives the contact with the patient, you know. He has to come to collect the medicine in 3 weeks time again.
AH: How long will that go on?
Jayesh: That can go on until I feel I can now let him go, he's doing a little better. I can wait and watch without seeing him too often. But meeting the patient once in 3 weeks, I feel, helps me and the patient to keep in touch. They don't just drop out. They stick on. They feel something is being done about their problem; even if they meet me for 5 minutes, they feel, "It's OK."
We are trained to evaluate the progress: what has happened in a very short time; because that is the way we've always practiced. So what we do is: we've done a very thorough new case, then we try to just look into the main aspects, for example the dreams or the main feeling. "How is it going with your father now? How is it going with your wife now? You had problems last time? How are the dreams that used to come. Tell one of the dreams." So you'll know whether your remedy was correct if the dream is in the same tone as you perceived the first time, the whole state is in the same tune or it's something else and you made some mistake in the first prescription.
So many things we can evaluate faster because we get to the main point straight away.
AH: What about the pathological symptomatology? Is that something you'd evaluate as one of the main points?
Jayesh: No. I don't think so. I think we try to concentrate on seeing whether the state is better or not. And in the bargain the pathological symptom is also one of the factors. The patient says, "I'm much better." In what way are you? "My headaches are better, this is better, that is better. My fear is better." It's all the same. It's the main complaint, also, and the state also. If the main complaint is better, than your idea is to see whether he needs a repetition or he needs to be still, so I wait and watch. If the main complaint is not better, then I examine whether the remedy was correct, or he's still in the same state and needs the repetition -what's going on in him.
AH: When I was observing in India, one thing that was very impressive to me was that you all take very deep cases, and nearly always there's some kind of physical pathological complaint that brings the patient in. But ultimately your prescription is based on the deeper state of the individual. On follow-up, often it seemed as if the patient was in a much better condition, regarding the pathological state, and there was very little energy, actually, that would be put into looking at the deeper state.
Jayesh: We do look at the deeper state but the time comes, if the patient has come after two weeks, I don't want to him to think just now anything -it's too early. I know I have to evaluate my next step after another 2, 3 or 4 weeks. So at that time I just want to collect whatever he says-"OK, this has happened. My main complaint is better." I'll give him medicine-"See me after 3 weeks."
I just collect. "Any dreams?" Whatever few questions I feel, I'll keep some data. I know I have to wait and I don't need to do anything today -whatever he says. Whether he's better or a lot better, this is not the time to act. I just have to collect some information, do a short follow-up and go.
There may be cases where I'll need to evaluate now as the next step, then I'll ask more.
AH: I think I heard you say in India that you never feel compelled to make a prescription. Can you say more about this?
Jayesh: I feel it's not necessary in India. When you develop the understanding and the temperament of a good homeopath, one of the things that should be in the temperament of a good homeopath is not to fall into this tension and pressure of finding one prescription at the end of an hour. When you let go of that and just have a feeling of, "OK, I have to do a good job. I have to understand this person who is sitting here and see what is happening in his life and his state." Perceive his state. After perceiving his state you may find that it doesn't make meaning to you at this moment. We don't feel so much pressure to give the prescription. We may give a placebo and think, "Next time."
In so many cases, the light comes after 6 or 7 months.
AH: Will you wait 6 - 7 months just continuing to give placebo?
Jayesh: In a few cases. In a very few cases. But we'll continue our work of thinking and studying. It is better not to give a prescription than to give a half-hearted prescription. It saves you and the patient a lot of trouble. If you have not made the first prescription, then surely the next time he comes you will be more pressured to make a prescription.
AH: When you mention placebo -I don't think that's something we can just put in the article, that you give placebo. Do you feel comfortable saying that when they come, you give one remedy and then placebo?
Jayesh: I have no problem about that. This is going to be read by homeopaths.
AH: Actually, this brings up an interesting question. When I was in India, knowing that there were so many homeopaths in India and it is common practice to give placebo, I always wondered, "Surely, the cat will get out of the bag. Surely it's going to become common knowledge that homeopaths are giving placebos, and then what will they do?"
No other secret is this well kept. There are compounders -there are people who move in and out. You'd think somebody would get some bad feeling and leave their job and then maybe spread the word.
Jayesh: I think this is an imaginary fear. Because in reality such a thing hasn't happened in 50 years or more. So this fear is an imaginary one. But this idea of giving placebo is a very old one in India. In Bombay, most people used to repeat remedies before we started. We are the ones giving single doses and waiting. Before we started, people used to give remedies everyday. But in Calcutta this placebo was very, very common, because they were the ones who, when we started out, were more classical than we were. They would usually give one dose and wait. And I know they'd have different names for placebos because I know of practitioners in Calcutta who don't have their own dispensing units. They write a prescription and the patient is to go to the pharmacy to get it. And they would write like, "Gelsemium 200, 1 dose. Nihilinum 200, 2 times a day for one month." And the patient goes to the pharmacist and gives this prescription and he makes the medicine for him.
So this placebo will have many names. Nihilinum, Anphitum, things like this.
AH: We use the same remedy, but numbered.
Jayesh: Yes, same remedy, number. Many times we put a stroke and write "0. " Each one has his way of writing, but this is quite common in India, and I think it works well for our culture and mentality and for our problems -the way we think, for our patients and how we relate to them. I think it works very well. I feel it's not the logic that counts, but the efficacy of the system that counts. I feel it is very effective -very, very effective in our culture and setup. I don't know how it would be abroad, but I think it's very good for our set-up. I think it should be good anywhere, but in our set-up, it's really good.
AH: One distinct difference that I noticed is that Indian homeopaths don't try to educate their patients about homeopathy, nor do they feel the need to as we do, and the patients seem just to have more faith in the system. They just put themselves into your hands and they say, "Cure me with homeopathy, or forget it." And we don't have that experience so much. Ours are more skeptical patients who require more information about it. So we're in a bit of a different situation.
Jayesh: It's possible. There are cultural differences, educational differences, the way people look at problems and maybe handle problems. These things will always be there.
AH: Even though your patients are, by and large, very well educated, this is curious and interesting. How would you instruct a practitioner about learning to practice the spirit of homeopathy?
Jayesh: I feel I can just advise one thing. This advice is out of my own personal experience of my growth and development as a homeopath. My maturity as a homeopath has grown because of my association and study with my near and dear colleagues. I feel my meeting them often, having the study groups and sitting down together studying a difficult case, or seeing a difficult case cured -all these produce tremendous inspiration, inside knowledge and enthusiasm in me to work and to progress, myself, as a homeopath. So I owe a great deal to my colleagues in my development, because it's meeting together, meeting and being with good homeopaths, attending good seminars -these are the things that have always inspired me.
If I see one good case treated by anybody, or one good remedy -if I see it or read it -I think it inspires me to do good work the next day. You must feel a bit more enthusiasm in seeing the cases.
We are fortunate to have some good colleagues with whom we are able to share our difficult and cured cases.
AH: In a time when so many homeopaths see computers as a boon to studying remedies and prescribing, give us your feelings on this.
Jayesh: It is difficult for me to give my feelings on the computer because I have only one side of the story: I never, ever used the computer. So I can't give you the other side of the story, how useful it is or how useful it could be. I never used a computer. I'm quite happy with the books.
I feel the essence of homeopathy is to perceive what is the problem and to perceive what is the state and what is the most peculiar aspect through which you can get into the state. What is the essence of the state? What is the state? And once you've perceived what is the main problem, then the idea of whether to go and search for what you are looking for in the computer or book to me means the same thing. You may do it a little faster than me, or slower than me, using the computer. But the logic -it is not the computer that helps you, I am sure about that. I feel what is important is a homeopath who has understood the logic of each repertory -the Kent's Repertory, the Boger-Boeninghausen Repertory, the Phatak's Repertory, the Boger Synoptic Key. If you know what has been the logic of each of the authors, then once you have used the repertory often you will immediately know where to look for such a symptom. Otherwise you cannot find out what you are looking for.
Once you know the logic of the repertory you will know where you are to look . You will know this is not in Kent, or in the Synthetic, this will be given in Phatak. Of course the additions to the repertory are good, but what is important is that when the things are added into one repertory from different sources, somewhere the person who is adding it is doing it more or less mechanically. He's just putting in the material or the information. But the context of the information is very important.
You learn that you are to refer to this or that book for such a symptom. As I told you -the case where "half asleep aggravates"-then I would look in Phatak. You know when to refer to which repertory, and then whether you like to use the computer and look at the screen for what's coming up, or if you like to refer to the book -it depends. A computer, I feel, would be very, very useful in studying as such. It is not necessarily studying a case, but studying homeopathy, or your cases or whatever. If you want to see what Kent says about children you put in, "Children," and you get everything and everywhere Kent writes about children. That would be very interesting study. I'm sure computers have a role to play in homeopathy.
AH: What do you mean by logic, or how do you find the logic of each of the authors?
Jayesh: If you read the preface of each of them, if you use them, if you understood the author exactly, then you know. For example, if you want to look for a remedy Angustura and want to know what family it belongs to; you want to know a little bit about the plant, when was it used, who used it, who else was using it, in what other forms it was used. Then I'm sure you're not going to open Phatak or open Roger Morrison or open Franz Mueller. You're going to open Clarke, because there he writes that this belongs to this family, these are the other members of this family and writes a short description of it. You know the author. And that is his speciality -that first lecture of Clarke. And when you want that kind of information you're going to open that book first.
One first has to understand what is the logic of each book. Then, once you know your resources well, you will know which one to use, and when. What is unfortunate today is that nobody teaches the use of these tools, like, "What was the logic of Kent's * Repertory, Boeninghausen, Phatak, Complete, Synthesis?" These are newer books and we need to understand them a little bit. Once we've used them again and again, then you'll know where will be what in the Synthesis or in the Complete. So if a beginner starts straight away with the Synthesis or the Complete Repertory, he feels lost: where will he find the material he's looking for? So the first step is to understand the basic logic of each repertory, and one has to take lessons on them. It's very important that one understands each repertory and what is the logic. Once you are in tune with the authors, thinking is very easy.
AH: I want to know a little about what your practice is like. I know that your wife, Rajul, who also is a doctor, practices in your clinic along side of you. Tell us about this set-up.
Jayesh: Our practice set-up is usually two: one is studying the cases, understanding the new cases that come to us, spending lots of time with them and discussing amongst ourselves again and again the case after the patient leaves. We discuss the case. One person starts the discussion, "This was there, this was there." Usually we are two, myself, Rajul and one more assistant so we have three of us who sit down and study these cases. Then we discuss them all thoroughly, bringing out what they see, what I saw, what I'm saying, how they can contradict it, what they are saying that I feel is wrong. We tend to make it into an interesting discussion, each case that comes to us.
And the second part is, of course, the management of the large practice that comes in the evening. They help me in attending the phones or taking the follow-ups. Things like that.
AH: So the 100 - 150 patients each evening -you don't personally need to see all of them?
Jayesh: I see all of them!
AH: I know it's a whirlwind, at least from my perspective as an American homeopath who had the opportunity to sit in on those sessions. And your compounder is a vital cog in the wheel. Can you say a little about what the compounder does?
Jayesh: The compounder that I have has been with us for over 10 years now. I am quite fortunate to have him, he knows his job well.
AH: What are his responsibilities?
Jayesh: He's all packed into one: a receptionist, the appointment maker, the assistant, the compounder...
AH: Compounder means?
Jayesh: He makes up the medicines, he purchases the medicines from the pharmacy when the stocks are out; he keeps a list of all the medicines; he prepares the doses; instructs the patients how to take them; answers the queries of the patients on the telephone and when they come if they don't understand how to take the medicine. He attends many of my phone calls; he goes and gets the medicines; he does the typing work -he's all in one. He's kind of the heart and soul of the clinic.
AH: Who treats you?
Jayesh: Who treats me? I feel it is a very, very difficult job to treat yourself or your very near family members. It gets sometimes difficult when it's a very acute situation. Chronic doesn't matter -you have some time to wait to ask and consult, but in acutes, it gets sometimes difficult. There are two persons on whom I rely if I fall sick. One is Rajan and the other is my father. So somehow, I feel, they have been able to get me out of whatever crisis I've had so far.
AH: I know an interesting thing about your father. He has never taken any money for all the homeopathy he has done for however many years he has been in practice. Quite amazing for us to know.
Jayesh: Yes, that's true. He has always taken up medicine as a service to mankind. And he enjoys it more than anything else in his life.
AH: Since in India homeopathic doctors are not limited as to the types of cases and disease they can treat, how do you deal with life-threatening illnesses -typhoid fever, cholera, cancer, etc.?
Jayesh: I think we treat all these conditions you have mentioned. All these patients come to us. And by and large we are able to handle them with homeopathy. If we need the help of the other system of medicine, or if we feel we have not been able to understand the remedy for this patient, then we refer it to our colleagues and sit down together and do the serious cases. Also, take the opinion of the allopathic system of medicine. Whatever extra treatment we need to do, like give the IV fluids or give the oxygen, whatever. We are not usually hesitant to do all that. And in most cases we are able to do without giving them antibiotics. Of course we do have our own failures, too.
AH: So when you get a life-threatening case, a very severe case which in our country or part of the world one couldn't even legally treat, it's just another case for you.
Jayesh: Yes. It's like in our country one fortunate thing is that the homeopathic system of medicine is put as an equivalent system to the modern medicine. The whole training program that they have is also based on the modern medicine lines. They are given training in everything -medicine, surgery, gynecology, emergencies, ear, nose, this, that. Everything is taught. We go to the allopathic hospitals for training. Plus the homeopathic philosophy and the homeopathic part and the homeopathic hospital. So it's like a complete package and at the end you are examined by allopaths, as well as homeopaths.
AH: Do you admit patients to the homeopathic hospital?
Jayesh: Yes, I do, but I don't go myself. I refer it to either Sunil or Rajan, who go to the homeopathic hospitals. It's too far a distance for me to handle hospital cases. But many times we have some collaboration with the allopathic doctors who are favorable to homeopathy. Then we can admit them in general hospitals -allopathic hospitals -investigate them, give all the other care and give homeopathic remedies. Most of the times without the allopathic drug, or sometimes side by side along with it.
AH: What, to your understanding, would be the ideal educational process for becoming a homeopath?
Jayesh: I think the ideal process would be first to be trained in homeopathy. Any course, any college, any system, any educational format that you make has to first give the student the necessary exposure and confidence in the homeopathic system of medicine. First, he has to see good teachers take cases, good teachers prescribe medicines, good teachers follow up the cases, show the results and how the theoretical part of homeopathy -the Organon, the philosophy, the Materia Medica -can be brought to life. So to blend the theoretical part of homeopathy and the practical part of homeopathy and to show that what is in theory is the same in practice -they are not two different things. When a student is able to see not a very big difference between what's written in the Organon and what he's doing, or what's written in the Materia Medica and what he's perceiving, then I think he makes a good homeopath. For beginners this is very important.
And, of course, the other part of it, the training of homeopathy, should be such that it brings dependability and respectability among the masses so they can depend on this system of medicine and feel secure with it if you are trained as a medical doctor. If you are able to diagnose in terms of modern medicine, know the general prognosis, manage cases so that you don't end up doing things which are not normally expected, like missing a tumor or not examining a patient or some things like this.
So you make yourself into a good doctor first, and then you specialize into a good homeopath. I think that would make it a complete training.
Susie Baker, RSHom (NA), and Jeff Baker, ND, Direct the Maui Academy of Homeopathy, in Hawaii.
Comments
Post a Comment
PLEASE WRITE YOUR SYMPTOMS HERE TO GET SUGGESTION.