anyone up for a homeopathy/flower essence thread? - Page 51

[Panserbjorne]

Originally Posted by aweynsayl 

funny. i had been wondering if anyone made orchid essences. it bugs me, though, and i wonder how others feel about it, that they're made in a green house, and the flowers are not actually put in the water.....obviously, bach would not have approved, but that's not to say there's nothing to it. i just cant personally see wanting to take it. i'd want wild orchid growing on the side of the cliff near the waterfall.... *that* i can see a doc of sigs for.... kwim? 

anyone know if there's vanilla FE? i would be so curious about that one....... 

check out pegasus products for the vanilla.  I'm almost certain they carry it.  I think it might be in the master's range too...but not 100% sure.

[Panserbjorne]

Originally Posted by _ktg_ 

Question - so the protection concept, is because an individual would be feeling so vulnerable, sensative and aware of these energies, they would just feel overwhelmed?

pretty much.  again, flowers generally do not produce aggravations (what they do is different) but I've found over the last decade or so that just about every person that needs aspen as a type remedy especially does much better when you give them some protection so that they feel safe when they're making the shift.  Comfort, for me, is key.  Similarly to giving cherry plum when someone is in an absolute rage (which is more holly.)  But when they initially take it and start to shift you want to make certain they feel in control of their feelings/actions.

[mommamanjari]

Forgive me if these questions have been asked already, but I just looked at this thread & there's no way I can catch up with 51 pages!

My DH has had a constant headache for several years & the doctors can't find any reason for it. Some days it's really, really bad. Any suggestions on which would be a good FE to try?

Also, anything for ringing ears? I really hate the high pitched sound.

Thanks.

[_ktg_]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aweynsayl 

as in, i'm protecting myself by giving myself migraines and bellyaches? 

 I think so! 
 

Originally Posted by Panserbjorne 

pretty much.  again, flowers generally do not produce aggravations (what they do is different) but I've found over the last decade or so that just about every person that needs aspen as a type remedy especially does much better when you give them some protection so that they feel safe when they're making the shift.  Comfort, for me, is key.  Similarly to giving cherry plum when someone is in an absolute rage (which is more holly.)  But when they initially take it and start to shift you want to make certain they feel in control of their feelings/actions.

Last night - this stuck with me and since I'm a rather visual person, the following imagery came to me which I think helps me understand what you are saying. 

For example - with the bellyaches & migranes & fear - its like standing outside in the rain with some poorly fitting clothes or raingear. It provides some protection against the rain, but not much for example - you know you are in the rain or you are getting wet slightly or you are aware of the rain. The protection also feels uncomefortable like too small of shoes that may look cute but are a bit of pain. 

In taking FEs like Aspen & Mimulus you start to shed those ill-fitting clothes and end up naked - in the rain.  So taking walnut or star is like giving someone an umbrella to stay comfy while standing in the rain.  The letting go of those "fears" let's us pick out better fitting items which work with us vs. against us or make us look fat (if I use the clothes analogy.)

[aweynsayl]

awesome! well, i did an experiment, and treated an approaching headache with aspen..... and it worked.... we shall see what i learn! 

fwiw, my "feared event" has commenced, and i'm feeling.... rather free and excited. very odd. 

so, "comfort" wise, star b is a good one, yes? i feel like i wrote a note somewhere about that... for feeling comforted, protected? walnut too, of course..... but, question about star b. if you knew that a young child had some fairly serious trauma in their past, and was having fears (maybe because of it, maybe not....they're too young to say for sure) that you felt were aspen-fears, rather than mimulus fears.... would there be anything *not* good about giving star b (because of the link to a trauma) in addition to the aspen? or would you be better off trying mimulus? (or doing aspen with walnut)? it's like a logic game...... if x then y.... if x and z then b..........

manjari~ i dont know about FEs for those, but cell salts would be awesome, imo. 

ok..... off to tackle aubergine's reply...... 

[aweynsayl]

i've gone back and forth about how best to reply.... let's see how this goes..... (i've had a full coffee this morning, so maybe i'll make more sense, lol)
 

Originally Posted by Aubergine68 

You are right - I wrote hastily and didn't say exactly what I'd understood.  What I understood is, wild plants are by far the best, a garden plant in the perfect circumstances is second best but still acceptable, never use plants growing near a highway because of toxins.  I can't find the exact quote quickly but that is the sense of what I read.

so, just so i'm clear-- do you disagree with that? i dont want to confuse things, but i dont want to misunderstand either.... i feel like you're saying you dont agree that garden would be "second best" and wilder "preferable." 

One of my apple trees is pretty crabapple-y. ...... The genetics are the same, but the signature maybe a little different?

ok, to my mind, and i've not read all there is to read, for certain, and "form and function" really resonated with me, so i may be biased, BUT....

*from the doc of sigs, a certain plant FE is going to have xy&z effects (multitudes, not just three, but ykwim).

*various things affect the "gesture"of the plant (which demonstrates its signature, yes? i *think* that's correct, please, if it's not, panserbjorn, clarify?)... including its location, for various reasons. barnard mentions this-- the character of agrimony is different if it's in chalky soil, or some other kind....

*these differences in "gesture" will have some impact on the ... specific qualities/effects (xyz, etc) of the FE made from the plant.

*that's not, imo, to say one would be better than the other, just different. barnard is vague on it. he says just to be mindful of it, that it will be different. i'd be interested to know how MUCH the changes in gesture of the plant would change the character of the FE..... i guess the wild rose is a good example.

I feel in reading about how to make essences a hint of the thought that there is a Platonic ideal of each plant that is the only right plant to take an essence from, and I resist that implication. Maybe I'm resisting it because the English landscape and even the Californian one are so inaccessible to me.

i'm not sure i'm understanding this.... when you say the landscapes are inaccessible, are you implying that your lack of connection to the location would inhibit your ability to use the essence? or.... again, your local rose would be somehow more likely to help you?

what i was trying to get at before, with my "personal associations" comment was asking if you were thinking that your connection to a plant, regardless of the "gesture" of the plant (and therefore the xyz qualities of the essence) would have abc effects on *you*. does that make sense? if fred feels joy when he's around a pansy, because he used to plant them with his grandmother before his birthday parties, which made him happy..... pansy FE is not going to make him feel joyful unless that happens to be part of the gesture of the plant........... that's what i was trying to get at. mind you-- i'm not saying that's true, just my sense from what i've read. 

 Is the essence of the orchid that grows in a hothouse *really* different/inferior to the essence of the orchid that grows on the side of a waterfall? I can understand why you would prefer the latter, but if you didn't know which flower the essence was made from, would it make a difference in its efficacy? 

well, this may be the heart of it. i'm a contextualist, so i absolutely believe that it would. not "inferior" but different. and maybe not even "efficacy" per say, but... "flavor" of effect, if you will. as above, what barnard said. it's a different setting, it's going to have an impact on the gesture of the plant (imo, and, i believe his as well-- again, if i'm wrong, please correct me.). 

I was actually reading from the only book my library has on essences, Chancellor's Illustrated Handbook of the Bach Flower Remedies.  A chapter on each essence, but the rose one did not inspire me, no.  

So where do you find good discussions of the FES remedies, beyond the online blurbs?

honestly, i havent read much that inspires. (barnard's "Form and Function" i loved, obviously) there isnt much on the FES "north american" FEs (i'm assuming that's what you mean when you say "the FES remedies"). on the FES site there are some "case studies" and some articles, and there are some nice in depth things about *some* of the NAs, but not much. 

Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems I've read that the essences are vibrational....if that is so, would there really be a difference?  Wouldn't the attitude, memories and intention of the maker of the essences affect the product?  ....  I've read of procedures like this in harvesting wild herbs for tinctures and teas, too - you have to have the right frame of mind to harvest them or you won't get all the virtue of the plants.

 

this goes back to what i was saying above.... of course the energy of the person making it will impact, bach is very clear on the maker not allowing his mood to alter the process. but i was getting the sense that you were thinking that by making an essence from a plant you love you would transfer something to the FE that is not demonstrated in the gesture of the plant.... that's what i'm questioning. i am not saying it's not possible, i'm just questioning if that's what you mean. i'd be curious to know how those who have made essences feel about that.

[Aubergine68]

Ok, I have to post this and come back.  Hope it is clear!

Originally Posted by aweynsayl 

i've gone back and forth about how best to reply.... let's see how this goes..... (i've had a full coffee this morning, so maybe i'll make more sense, lol)
 

Originally Posted by Aubergine68 

You are right - I wrote hastily and didn't say exactly what I'd understood.  What I understood is, wild plants are by far the best, a garden plant in the perfect circumstances is second best but still acceptable, never use plants growing near a highway because of toxins.  I can't find the exact quote quickly but that is the sense of what I read.

so, just so i'm clear-- do you disagree with that? i dont want to confuse things, but i dont want to misunderstand either.... i feel like you're saying you dont agree that garden would be "second best" and wilder "preferable." 

I agree that wild is great, but I am a little irritated by  the concept of the `perfect' garden. There are such a range of gardens from houseplants to acres in the country.  I refuse to agonize over whether my yard is far enough away from the highway or to believe that I can never make my own essences because oh, maybe even if I grow the plants, my yard is just not England and only flowers grown in English gardens can give the results of Bach.  (There is also a huge history of Anglo-Canadian inferiority complex to the Mother Country that is strong in me, shall we say, to make a very long story short. I used to study aspects of this in relation to literature. And a personal history of the perfect being the enemy of good enough in my life that I am speaking from.)  

I think that essences made by me from flowers grown in my garden by me ( all to the best of my abilities) is going to be as good for my own use and my family's use as essences made from flowers grown in the perfect garden or maybe even as good as essences made from wild plants by an unknown but probably-well-intentioned person.

There is also a purely practical aspect to my feelings here. The FEs are quite expensive here - !'d pay about $15 for the smallest bottle.  I'm really intrigued by them, but honestly cannot see myself investing heavily in them unless I can make many.

 

I feel in reading about how to make essences a hint of the thought that there is a Platonic ideal of each plant that is the only right plant to take an essence from, and I resist that implication. Maybe I'm resisting it because the English landscape and even the Californian one are so inaccessible to me.

i'm not sure i'm understanding this.... when you say the landscapes are inaccessible, are you implying that your lack of connection to the location would inhibit your ability to use the essence? or.... again, your local rose would be somehow more likely to help you?  

Simpler than that, maybe.  Because I cannot easily grow the plants in the appropriate climate or soil or wildcraft them in their native habitat, I can therefore never make my own essences from a plant that is as close as possible to the ideal, so  I resist the idea that the ideal might be so very important.  Maybe the local rose would be more helpful than a distant one - I'm willing to hypothesize this, but I couldn't say for sure without testing it..

Your comment that essences from flowers you do not love for themselves have done wonderful things for you does weigh with me.   I'll have to see where experimentation and further reading take me.

what i was trying to get at before, with my "personal associations" comment was asking if you were thinking that your connection to a plant, regardless of the "gesture" of the plant (and therefore the xyz qualities of the essence) would have abc effects on *you*. does that make sense? if fred feels joy when he's around a pansy, because he used to plant them with his grandmother before his birthday parties, which made him happy..... pansy FE is not going to make him feel joyful unless that happens to be part of the gesture of the plant........... that's what i was trying to get at. mind you-- i'm not saying that's true, just my sense from what i've read. 

...

this goes back to what i was saying above.... of course the energy of the person making it will impact, bach is very clear on the maker not allowing his mood to alter the process. but i was getting the sense that you were thinking that by making an essence from a plant you love you would transfer something to the FE that is not demonstrated in the gesture of the plant.... that's what i'm questioning. i am not saying it's not possible, i'm just questioning if that's what you mean. i'd be curious to know how those who have made essences feel about that.

Hmmn.  Well, I do think that the intention of the maker is always important, in pretty much anything.

To go back to the example of the oak growing in my yard... I don't really imagine that things like the affection I have for it, or the protectiveness I feel for it, or the pride I feel, or the fact that my children play in and under  it would transfer to an essence, though my belief that these elements make this tree special might empower the role my own intention has in making the essence.  Or this belief might enhance the operation of the essence on my own body through something like the placebo effect. (I'm sure there is a better word for the aspect of the mind-body connection this would represent)

I *do* imagine that because my oak is growing in a colder climate than one would expect and not in the English soil its ancestors grew in, an essence made from it might have an additional flavor of (confidence in) survival against odds/far from home and supports layered over the conventional oak essence virtues.  Maybe it would be easier for an Oak person taking this essence to let go of having to strive for reasons linked to tradition and heritage and the past than for an Oak person taking a conventional English-grown-and-made oak essence?  

[bluets]

Aubergine wrote: There is also a purely practical aspect to my feelings here. The FEs are quite expensive here - !'d pay about $15 for the smallest bottle.  I'm really intrigued by them, but honestly cannot see myself investing heavily in them unless I can make many.

So, why not just start talking to the plants and making your own essences?  (And I'm not kidding about talking to the plants)  Or do what we're doing and using the tinctures (yes, the herbal tinctures), only diluted substantially in brandy and water?  like Matthew Wood has written about doing.

Someone else wrote (Eliot Cowan? Barnard? Bach himself? I'm blanking here) that you had to study, even draw, the plants before one could really know them, know how/when to use them...  I don't see how one can become *really* in tune with flowers/plants unless they are growing around you, be it in your garden or in your house in a pot.

On a practical level, *this* is my problem with homeopathy.  There are just so many remedies out there.  How does one possibly get to know them all... have access to them all... afford them all (in order to get to know them)?  whereas with the things (plants, rocks, critters) in one's backyard (one can define backyard to be anything, but it should be someplace one knows well or well enough)... they would be able to speak to you and they'd be immediately available in some form.

I don't have the post immediately handy but I think it was aweyn who pointed out something Bach wrote about cactus not working as an essence.  I would agree that there are some things that just don't resonate (vibrate) well enough to sustain the dilution required.  Consider parsley.  Great as an herb in a cooking dish.  Great as a green drink.  Have you ever found it in an herbal tincture?  Have you ever seen it in a homeopathic materia medica?  As a flower essence?  I think part of it has to do with toxicity - many herbs we cook with lack toxicity so they don't have a homeopathic effect (the homeopathic effect, in part, comes from the toxic aspect of the plant - something that many herbalists either ignore or don't understand).  Without that depth of action, it just fizzles out in its utility as it becomes diluted.

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by bluets 

I don't have the post immediately handy but I think it was aweyn who pointed out something Bach wrote about cactus not working as an essence.  I would agree that there are some things that just don't resonate (vibrate) well enough to sustain the dilution required.  

Not true about cactus.

Consider parsley.  Great as an herb in a cooking dish.  Great as a green drink.  Have you ever found it in an herbal tincture?  Have you ever seen it in a homeopathic materia medica?  As a flower essence?  I think part of it has to do with toxicity - many herbs we cook with lack toxicity so they don't have a homeopathic effect (the homeopathic effect, in part, comes from the toxic aspect of the plant - something that many herbalists either ignore or don't understand).  Without that depth of action, it just fizzles out in its utility as it becomes diluted.

Parsley is available as a flower essence.

Parsley (Petroselinum crispum) – Meridians Balanced
Parsley has a variety of interesting aspects that can be powerful cleansing at almost every level, clearing out a variety of physical substances and working through the entire meridian structures. There are two areas that are particularly energized, those associated with the top of the head and the base of the spine, the two ends of the governing vessel meridian. These move into a state of a sort of resonance with an energy moving up and down between them. To have the visualization of these as powerful points of white light or an energy moving up and down between them can be useful when talking the flower essence. This enhances the effect and allows the energies an easier time as they move up and down the body. When this occurs there is naturally a balancing aspect to all the meridians, and many ways in which those energies become better received elsewhere in the body. Parsley has interesting capability of allowing a sense of deeper connection to the higher chakras, those above the head, the energies of chakras eight, nine, and ten are particularly strengthened. This has a bleed over effect working its way very much into the physical, especially in its connection to chakras three, four, and five. These energies as they move can coordinate nicely with the sense of the energy moving up and down the spine or up and down through governing vessel meridian. A sense of these energies as they work with the individual will often give them an awareness of areas in their life, things that they must do, that need attention for cleansing, for clearing, for taking stuff that really doesn’t belong there out and in some way letting it go completely. Parsley has unique ability during the capacity of one clearing out to bring a sense of peace, lightness, stillness, even sweetness, as if one is able to make these changes or shifts without effort, that it comes naturally and easily.

San Pedro Cactus (Echinopsis) - Individual Awareness

The beautiful flower of this cactus has a fascinating property, bringing a sense of possibility to the individual that is very focused on individuality, an aspect of your own uniqueness. Oftentimes this can be a very powerful solution when people are seeking a answer to this simple question: what is my purpose? Many times that question must relate in some way to a doingness: the job I am going to take, the relationship I am going to have, the way I am going to connect to other people, etc, etc.

Yet this is usually felt for most individuals to be unsatisfying, not producing for them that sense of something unique about themselves. Oftentimes when they are asking this question, what is my purpose, what they really mean is 'Why have I come to this body? Why have I incarnated? What is there unique about me in this incarnation?' Hence tuning into the soul energy, as is assisted by a variety of vibrational approaches, is also to some extent less than satisfying because it is that which gives you a much larger perspective, and which connects to other people and to your own highest self, and to soul energies that might have otherwise been unavailable to you. This cactus has this wonderful capability, tuning into your own individuality, specifically though, answering this question, why you are here, and why the soul has chosen this approach, why it is coming into this body, this time, this place.

And that why-ness not as a specific answer that relates to doing, but a viewing, a sense of your own incarnation, your own willingness to love and be loved, to be here and connect to others, and so on. This individuality does at times seem to create a band of energy between the head and the heart, oftentimes extending out the top of the head from the seventh chakra directly into the heart without going through the rest of the physical body.

[Panserbjorne]

yes, there are many cacti that are FE's!

The thing about Bach is he was a revolutionary.  Someone I greatly respect who was bringing FE's to the masses from a MEDICAL perspective.    They'd been used in other parts of the world for centuries, so he was just sort of elevating them to present them to the collective.  The cool thing was that as a doctor AND a mystic he was somewhat more of a credible source for their "debut" even though he'd left medicine to pursue this particular quest.

Anyway, my point is that he started the work.  He did was he was meant to do in his lifetime.  That doesn't mean that there isn't more work to be done!  It means that in his short life he finished his body of work and turned it over to be studied more.

He did have specifications and requirements, but he didn't even stick to them 100% if he saw something that made sense.  You can make a case for why that might be, but the fact is when it was necessary to deviate slightly he did.

The beauty of this modality is that it gets us back to basics, with a connection to the plant world where we are required to learn from them.  Humans have become fairly arrogant in general thinking that they can do what they want to the land/environment without any repercussions.  To humble ourselves and learn from the landscape is a fairly big deal.  But, as with any great work, there will be purists that will stick 100% to Bach's teachings, and revolutionaries that will use it as a stepping stone.  I think it's a good idea to embrace aspects of both.  I know that many won't agree here, but to me learning Bach's teachings are like learning scales.  They're a foundation.  The reason for this is that there is such a large body of work out there on them.  You can really gain a depth of understanding on the written works and case studies more than you can any other range to date.  It's not because they're the "original" and I'm a purist.  It's just hard to learn the depth and breadth of their action when you start with other ranges because of the limited material.  Once you understand what essences can really do, you can extrapolate that and apply it to other ranges.

Bluets, I agree about homeopathy.  I was lucky enough to find a teacher who advocated learning the rep, unlike all the others that say learn the MM.  His point was that you could never truly know the remedies, and when you have a skewed vision or pigeon hole one of them you can easily miss the prescription.  I was wary (we all have MM drilled into us!) but quickly saw he was right.  The most freeing thing I ever did was going to straight up repping, and my positive outcomes skyrocketed since I wasn't talking myself out of arsenicum because the person wasn't anxious.  But, from another perspective also, homeopathy is so stodgy, dry and intellectual in direct opposition to flowers.  Since I tend to live in my head, flowers resonate much more.  Because of what they are they allow me to come more from a heart centered place.  They are much more balancing to me and far more beautiful.  But of course, that's just me!

[redveg]

Morning:)  Picked up another book yesterday but have such a busy weekend I am not sure if I will get to it until Monday.  I too have issues with the availability and cost of the FE's. 

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by redveg 

Morning:)  Picked up another book yesterday but have such a busy weekend I am not sure if I will get to it until Monday.  I too have issues with the availability and cost of the FE's. 

I am sorry but I don't get the griping about cost of FEs. $15 (my DH's start at $12.95) is incredibly cheap given what they can do. Most people are willing to pay much more for bio-unavailable supplements that do squat, not to mention the amount of money people spend on medical doctors, even with insurance, and get nowhere close to healing. I too wish high quality, true FEs were more readily available. But the push has to come from the people wanting and using them before you are going to find them in abundance in stores. There are many, many forces fighting against vibrational healing both physical and non-physical.

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by Panserbjorne 

yes, there are many cacti that are FE's!

Indeed there are, I gave just one example

The beauty of this modality is that it gets us back to basics, with a connection to the plant world where we are required to learn from them.  Humans have become fairly arrogant in general thinking that they can do what they want to the land/environment without any repercussions.  To humble ourselves and learn from the landscape is a fairly big deal.  But, as with any great work, there will be purists that will stick 100% to Bach's teachings, and revolutionaries that will use it as a stepping stone.  I think it's a good idea to embrace aspects of both.  I know that many won't agree here, but to me learning Bach's teachings are like learning scales.  They're a foundation.  The reason for this is that there is such a large body of work out there on them.  You can really gain a depth of understanding on the written works and case studies more than you can any other range to date.  It's not because they're the "original" and I'm a purist.  It's just hard to learn the depth and breadth of their action when you start with other ranges because of the limited material.  Once you understand what essences can really do, you can extrapolate that and apply it to other ranges.

PB, I totally agree. We really shouldn't get caught up in Bach dogma, if he were alive today, you can be sure he would have evolved his thinking. We are not at the same level of consciousness that the people of the plantet were during his time, we have grown in awareness immensely . Edward Bach was the pioneer of re-discovering flower essences, they are not new and were used extensively by very, very ancient civilizations. If you really want to explore the healing power of flowers, and vibrational healing modalities open your wings and fly beyond Bach, there is so much more out there. Bach is just your platform from which you leap into the limitless consciousness of flower (and other) essences.  While books are nice, you don't need them, you have all the knowledge you need here and now to heal. Be your own pioneer, seek truth from within.

[Panserbjorne]

Originally Posted by Mirzam 

 While books are nice, you don't need them, you have all the knowledge you need here and now to heal. Be your own pioneer, seek truth from within.

I have chills.  totally, totally true.  I think the books were so helpful to me because I tend to be more cerebral.  However, the fact is that we do all have this wisdom, if we allow ourselves to access it.

(and I'm giggling because *of COURSE* you know there are more cactus essences!  LOL! )

[Panserbjorne]

Originally Posted by bluets 
many herbs we cook with lack toxicity so they don't have a homeopathic effect (the homeopathic effect, in part, comes from the toxic aspect of the plant - something that many herbalists either ignore or don't understand). 

yes, what Hahnemann et al thought was that the best poisons make the best medicine, but it's also what Bach railed against.  He wanted to seek out medicines that could bring no harm in any form.  And though it's one of Hahnemann's main beliefs it doesn't play out well in the MM as there are many many remedies that are in use both in herbalism/homeopathy and flowers.  Many if not most of the big polycrests, yes, but certainly not all of them!  It's a whole new world!
 

[Aubergine68]

Barnard's Form and Function came in via ILL for me yesterday (along with a book on the medicinal properties of local mushrooms, but Barnard looks more fun right now).  Hopefully I'll get through it this weekend!  I can see already why some of you like his writing style.  Also reading McCabe 's Homeopathic Bouquet.
 

 

Originally Posted by bluets 

Aubergine wrote: There is also a purely practical aspect to my feelings here. The FEs are quite expensive here - !'d pay about $15 for the smallest bottle.  I'm really intrigued by them, but honestly cannot see myself investing heavily in them unless I can make many.

So, why not just start talking to the plants and making your own essences?  (And I'm not kidding about talking to the plants)  Or do what we're doing and using the tinctures (yes, the herbal tinctures), only diluted substantially in brandy and water?  like Matthew Wood has written about doing.

Someone else wrote (Eliot Cowan? Barnard? Bach himself? I'm blanking here) that you had to study, even draw, the plants before one could really know them, know how/when to use them...  I don't see how one can become *really* in tune with flowers/plants unless they are growing around you, be it in your garden or in your house in a pot.

On a practical level, *this* is my problem with homeopathy.  There are just so many remedies out there.  How does one possibly get to know them all... have access to them all... afford them all (in order to get to know them)?  whereas with the things (plants, rocks, critters) in one's backyard (one can define backyard to be anything, but it should be someplace one knows well or well enough)... they would be able to speak to you and they'd be immediately available in some form.

And making my own tinctures is exactly what I'm looking at doing!  And I do talk to plants all the time.  

Yeah, though, between herbs, cell salts, essences and the actual homeopathic remedies, it seriously adds up to get started. And I think it is important to actually use them to get to know them.  My backyard sounds like a good starting point. 

Originally Posted by Panserbjorne 

yes, there are many cacti that are FE's!

The thing about Bach is he was a revolutionary.  Someone I greatly respect who was bringing FE's to the masses from a MEDICAL perspective.    They'd been used in other parts of the world for centuries, so he was just sort of elevating them to present them to the collective.  The cool thing was that as a doctor AND a mystic he was somewhat more of a credible source for their "debut" even though he'd left medicine to pursue this particular quest.

Anyway, my point is that he started the work.  He did was he was meant to do in his lifetime.  That doesn't mean that there isn't more work to be done!  It means that in his short life he finished his body of work and turned it over to be studied more.

He did have specifications and requirements, but he didn't even stick to them 100% if he saw something that made sense.  You can make a case for why that might be, but the fact is when it was necessary to deviate slightly he did.

The beauty of this modality is that it gets us back to basics, with a connection to the plant world where we are required to learn from them.  Humans have become fairly arrogant in general thinking that they can do what they want to the land/environment without any repercussions.  To humble ourselves and learn from the landscape is a fairly big deal.  But, as with any great work, there will be purists that will stick 100% to Bach's teachings, and revolutionaries that will use it as a stepping stone.  I think it's a good idea to embrace aspects of both.  I know that many won't agree here, but to me learning Bach's teachings are like learning scales.  They're a foundation.  The reason for this is that there is such a large body of work out there on them.  You can really gain a depth of understanding on the written works and case studies more than you can any other range to date.  It's not because they're the "original" and I'm a purist.  It's just hard to learn the depth and breadth of their action when you start with other ranges because of the limited material.  Once you understand what essences can really do, you can extrapolate that and apply it to other ranges.

Bluets, I agree about homeopathy.  I was lucky enough to find a teacher who advocated learning the rep, unlike all the others that say learn the MM.  

I can see that, too, about Bach and learning scales.  Since Bach remedies have so much more info out there about their use, it totally makes sense to start with them.  BTW, Panserbjorne,  I did not thank you earlier for your responses to my post before last - they really helped my thinking!
 

Originally Posted by Mirzam 

I am sorry but I don't get the griping about cost of FEs. $15 (my DH's start at $12.95) is incredibly cheap given what they can do. Most people are willing to pay much more for bio-unavailable supplements that do squat, not to mention the amount of money people spend on medical doctors, even with insurance, and get nowhere close to healing. I too wish high quality, true FEs were more readily available. But the push has to come from the people wanting and using them before you are going to find them in abundance in stores. There are many, many forces fighting against vibrational healing both physical and non-physical.

Respectfully - and I understand you are really talking about *people" in general rather than a particular person or two -- you don't know my financial situation (or redveg's) or why finding money to invest in  getting started with learning FEs might be a barrier to me (or her).

I actually do not pay out of pocket for health care and almost nothing for medical prescriptions, btw - I'm Canadian, and my family gets low-income subsidies that cover things like prescriptions and those bio-unavailable supplements.  We don't tend to think about paying for medical care the way you all have to, so walking into a hfs or ordering online and dropping three digits on a bunch of remedies, salts and flowers, etc. without knowing *for sure* that they are going to work when the family budget is already well into the red for this month and my children need shoes and coats for spring? It is daunting and hard to justify for myself in this particular moment, as interesting to me as FEs are becoming.
 

ETA: also, at this point, my interest in FEs is more about their spiritual implications and effects then the medicinal ones.  I am open to and hopeful about them becoming a healing tool for me and my family, but I can't say I'd put them in the category of "medical spending", not quite yet.  I'm getting started.  This is a hobby on the scale of financial priorities, not a necessity at this point.

Edited by Aubergine68 - 3/25/11 at 8:41am

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by Aubergine68 

Respectfully - and I understand you are really talking about *people" in general rather than a particular person or two -- you don't know my financial situation (or redveg's) or why finding money to invest in  getting started with learning FEs might be a barrier to me (or her).

I actually do not pay out of pocket for health care and almost nothing for medical prescriptions, btw - I'm Canadian, and my family gets low-income subsidies that cover things like prescriptions and those bio-unavailable supplements.  We don't tend to think about paying for medical care the way you all have to, so walking into a hfs or ordering online and dropping three digits on a bunch of remedies, salts and flowers, etc. without knowing *for sure* that they are going to work when the family budget is already well into the red for this month and my children need shoes and coats for spring? It is daunting and hard to justify for myself in this particular moment, as interesting to me as FEs are becoming.
 

You don't need a whole collection of FEs. A medicine cabinet full of essences of course is wonderful, but just one remedy can change your life and you may never feel the need to take another ever. I don't know how to stress this enough, FEs (or vibrational remedies as a whole) are soul medicines, they do not and work in the same way as pharmaceuticals, supplements, herb or even homeopathics. You also don't need to find the right essence, when it comes to vibrational healing there is no such thing a taking the wrong remedy, there are no mistakes here, the same can't be said for pharmaceuticals, supplements or herbals. I have access to over 1500 remedies, but honestly rarely take even one.
 

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by Aubergine68 

ETA: also, at this point, my interest in FEs is more about their spiritual implications and effects then the medicinal ones.  I am open to and hopeful about them becoming a healing tool for me and my family, but I can't say I'd put them in the category of "medical spending", not quite yet.  I'm getting started.  This is a hobby on the scale of financial priorities, not a necessity at this point.

I just saw your addendum. Physical healing is not distinct from spiritual healing. We are all on a journey to clarification. Ill health is all part of our journey, and we need to embrace the time when our bodies need to regenerate and not see it as a battle, but an experience from which we can learn. This is where vibrational remedies can be so helpful to us. There is nothing inherently wrong with choosing to go with current medical thinking on health and healing, if that is what our soul requires of us in order to experience what we need to experience in our life on Earth at this time. I have reached a point in my understanding where almost all orthodox medicine and alternative medicine is no longer a consideration for me.

[aweynsayl]

just wanted to clarify that i never said there were not cactus essences. i think i even mentioned i've taken some! i was merely stating what bach had said about his feeling certain plants not being appropriate for FEs.

i think what is beautiful about FEs is that each individual can use them as fits her as she follows her own path. and each beautiful individual can learn as resonates with her, and follow her own heart. 

this girl's heart is firmly in LURVE with bach and barnard and the lovely lovely english FEs as made by barnard in my beloved england and wales, and she's really delighted to have lovely ladies to chat harmoniously with along the way.... as i sit in my garden, and you in yours.

i have more to say, but will come back later.... 

[Panserbjorne]

Originally Posted by aweynsayl 

just wanted to clarify that i never said there were not cactus essences. i think i even mentioned i've taken some! i was merely stating what bach had said about his feeling certain plants not being appropriate for FEs.

i think what is beautiful about FEs is that each individual can use them as fits her as she follows her own path. and each beautiful individual can learn as resonates with her, and follow her own heart. 

this girl's heart is firmly in LURVE with bach and barnard and the lovely lovely english FEs as made by barnard in my beloved england and wales, and she's really delighted to have lovely ladies to chat harmoniously with along the way.... as i sit in my garden, and you in yours.

i have more to say, but will come back later.... 

I don't think anyone thought you did!  I know I was more just stating why (IMHO) there are so many other flowers and why people have deviated from his system.  You know that I am madly in love with the english flowers as well (and am most at home in england/ireland and scotland.)  SO it's fairly fitting!