This article re-examines the concept of miasma, one of the most controversial yet fruitful ideas in the history of homeopathy, from both a historical and contemporary scientific perspective. It traces its development from Hahnemann’s original theory to later psychological, spiritual, and clinical reinterpretations by Kent, Ortega, Sankaran, Close, and Vithoulkas.
Although historically controversial, miasma foreshadowed the modern understanding of predisposition and chronic disease. Contemporary science – genetics, epigenetics, trauma, psychoneuroimmunology, perinatal influences, and microbiome research – confirms that hereditary vulnerability and transgenerational imprints shape health across generations.
Miasma, reinterpreted as a susceptibility involving multiple biological, psychological, cultural, and ecological dimensions, remains a relevant practical tool in 21st-century homeopathy, providing guidance for recognizing deeper patterns in patients and tailoring treatment to the individual.
—————————————
- Introduction
1.1 Introduction to the introduction
Homeopathy is real to me. This has been confirmed by my own experiences, those of my clients, and my studies. I did not understand why we were lagging behind in understanding how homeopathy works. A few years ago, I began to systematically review the biological, physiological, philosophical, and broader scientific literature to see what had emerged over the past 100 years, and especially in recent decades.
I realized that Hahnemann had done his job very well. He created a closed, consistent, and in many ways still alternative approach. However, this and his seemingly anti-science stance make it difficult to understand the science behind homeopathy.
Whether we try to understand the principle of dilution, vital force, miasma, or like cures like separately, we immediately encounter the unsolved problems of the other. In addition, it has since been discovered that homeopathy works not only on humans, but also on animals and even plants. This means that any description of how it works must be very general, going down to the level of biological fundamentals. Conventional medicine does not face such a task.
However, the new interpretation of vital force based on homeostasis regulation (1) threw a big stone into this stagnant water and opened a gate. Entering through this gate opens up the possibility of redefining the homeopathic interpretation of disease.
Before I get into that, I thought it necessary to take a closer look at the concept of miasma in the light of current scientific theories. Epigenetic research and PTSD experiments suggested early on that there was something to be found in this area. Let’s see what I came up with.
1.2 The real introduction
Few concepts in the history of homeopathy have generated as much controversy, misunderstanding, and reinterpretation as miasma. The word itself – which meant “contaminating vapor” in Greek – originated in ancient medicine and medieval epidemic theories as the invisible cause of disease.
From Hippocrates to the early modern period, people believed that epidemics were caused by foul vapors, or “bad air,” circulating in the air. This explanation seems simplistic from today’s perspective, but at the time it was one of the most consistent attempts to understand the spread of disease.
During the Enlightenment and the rise of experimental medicine, the miasma theory was increasingly replaced by the pathogen theory based on the discovery of bacteria. However, it was during this period that Samuel Hahnemann appeared, giving the concept a whole new meaning.
He was not satisfied with the explanation that chronic diseases were merely the result of poor lifestyle choices, inherited weakness, or simple infection. Based on his experience, he saw that diseases had a deeper, more lasting layer – something that went beyond individual acute illnesses and accompanied people throughout their lives like a shadow.
For Hahnemann, miasma was not a toxic vapor spreading through the air, but a kind of dynamic force that permanently corrupts the vital force. With this shift, he introduced one of the most controversial but also most productive theoretical innovations in contemporary medicine.
His concept of miasma was both linked to tradition – since it preserved the idea of invisible, hidden diseases – and a radical innovation, because Hahnemann integrated the phenomenon into the entire approach of homeopathy.
- Hahnemann’s concept of miasma
In his influential work Chronic Diseases (1828), Hahnemann explained that most chronic diseases cannot be understood solely on the basis of external factors such as lifestyle, environment, and infection. He believed that deep down there was an imprint of a previous, often forgotten infection, often originating from previous generations, which had dampened the vital force and left a predisposition for the rest of a person’s life. He called this invisible legacy miasma.
Hahnemann distinguished three main miasms:
- Psora – the oldest and most widespread miasm, which he associated with itchy skin diseases. However, he believed that it not only appeared on the surface of the skin, but also carried a deep disharmony throughout the entire body, and was even the basis of most chronic diseases.
- Sycosis – a miasm developed as a result of gonorrhea, characterized by excessive growths, warts, and chronic inflammation. According to Hahnemann, this excessive, overgrowth tendency left a lasting mark on the vital force.
- Syphilis – a miasm resulting from congenital or acquired syphilis, which could lead to the destruction of bones and tissues. It was a lasting memory of a destructive, devastating force in the body.
For him, these three miasms were not merely the remnants of historical diseases, but basic patterns that determine a person’s predispositions, illnesses, and entire life course. The homeopath’s task was not only to treat the superficial symptoms, but also to recognize which miasm the patient belonged to and to choose the remedy accordingly.
Hahnemann emphasized that miasms are not material particles or pathogens in the modern sense of the word, but dynamic imprints. They are the vibrations of a previous infection that corrupts the vital force and lives on in the body as an invisible but real predisposition. This concept also represented a new understanding of chronic diseases: they are not simply a series of symptoms, but a deep, inherited or acquired predisposition to which all diseases can be traced back.
It is important to emphasize that Hahnemann was not merely speculating. His observations led him to conclude that his patients often recovered from an acute illness only to return later with new, different but similarly chronic complaints. The concept of miasma provided him with an appropriate interpretative framework for this phenomenon.
In this sense, miasma is a special intermediate category: it is not simply a disease, nor is it merely a predisposition, but rather a lasting imprint that can be present in both individual and family histories. This dual nature – individual and transgenerational – explains why the concept became so fertile in later homeopathic thinking and why it was able to inspire new interpretations. But this approach was completely foreign not only to its time, but also to general medical thinking for many decades.
(Given that I will be touching on several scientific fields in the next part of this article, a glossary of terms can be found at the end of the article.)
- Kent and the spiritual interpretation
If it was Hahnemann who reinterpreted the concept of miasma and elevated it to the basic structure of homeopathy, it was James Tyler Kent who gave it a whole new dimension. Kent was a leading figure in American homeopathy at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, and his lectures and writings remain authoritative references within the profession today. For him, miasms are not merely infectious memory traces, but also expressions of inner turmoil, i.e., spiritual and moral categories.
Kent’s thinking was strongly influenced by the Christian spiritual background rooted in American religious culture. He himself was a deeply religious man, and for him, illness was not merely a physical disorder, but a breakdown of the deeper harmony of human existence. Accordingly, he also saw miasms as moral and spiritual distortions that manifest themselves on both the physical and spiritual levels.
3.1 Disease as internal disharmony
For Kent, disease was not limited to cells, tissues, or organs. Behind the symptoms, he always sought the person who carried the symptoms. For him, the concept of the inner person meant that all physical phenomena stemmed from a deeper spiritual and moral state. So when someone was struggling with a chronic illness, Kent saw not only that they carried traces of infection, but also that their inner harmony had been disrupted.
Thus, for him, miasma is a predisposition in which physical, spiritual, and moral distortions are simultaneously present. Psora, for example, is not just the legacy of an itchy skin disease, but a kind of anxiety, dissatisfaction, and sense of lack that eats away at a person from within. Sycosis can manifest itself in proliferation, excess, excessive possession, and attachment. Syphilis is not only bone destruction, but also an expression of destructive, self-destructive tendencies.
3.2 The spiritual dimension of miasma
In his own time, Kent linked disease to the spiritual-theological dimension in a way that was shocking to many. For him, miasma was not simply a biological or psychological condition, but the consequence of a deeper fall: man’s departure from the divine order.
This idea naturally provoked opposition in many people, even among homeopaths. At the same time, its impact was enormous, because Kent opened up homeopathy in a direction where healing was no longer just physical restoration, but also spiritual reordering.
It is no coincidence that many of his students and followers saw homeopathy as a way of healing the soul. In this approach, miasma is not just a medical category, but a kind of spiritual imprint of destiny that can be dissolved with the help of the appropriate remedy.
3.3 Impact on 20th-century homeopathy
Kent’s interpretation fundamentally shaped 20th-century homeopathy. While Hahnemann treated miasma as a relatively “earthbound” concept – a dynamic infectious imprint – Kent elevated it to the psychological and spiritual realm. This approach became particularly attractive to homeopaths who took a holistic approach to the human being: they were not satisfied with treating physical symptoms but sought the underlying psychological and moral fractures.
This shift in Kent’s thinking paved the way for the later interpretations of Ortega and Sankaran. They no longer saw miasms simply in spiritual terms, but in psychological and existential archetypes. However, the root can be found in Kent’s view that miasms were not merely diseases, but distortions affecting the whole person.
3.4 Kent’s legacy
It is debatable to what extent it was justified to interpret the concept of miasma on a moral-spiritual level. However, there is little dispute that without Kent, homeopathy today would have a much narrower perspective. His legacy made it possible for homeopathic thinking to integrate psychological, spiritual, and philosophical dimensions.
Thus, for Kent, miasma is not simply a theory of disease, but also a metaphor for the “inner man”: a symbol of the fact that man is a physical, spiritual, and moral unity, and that healing is only complete when harmony is restored on all three levels.
- Ortega and Sankaran: the psychodynamic shift
By the middle of the 20th century, two main schools of thought had emerged in homeopathy regarding the interpretation of miasms. One was the Hahnemannian-classical line, which continued to view miasms as infectious memory traces and inherited predispositions.
The other, following Kent, increasingly emphasized the psychological and spiritual dimensions. Two great thinkers played a key role in this second line of thought: Juan Manuel Ortega and Rajan Sankaran. They were the ones who transformed the concept of miasms into existential and psychodynamic archetypes.
4.1 Ortega: miasms as life strategies
In the 1960s, Argentine homeopath Juan Manuel Ortega published his work Notes on the Miasms, which brought a new perspective to the world of homeopathy. Ortega broke with the idea that miasms were merely the imprint of an old infection. He viewed miasms as life strategies that determine how people relate to the world, to lack, to fulfilment, or even to the threat of destruction.
This shift was of enormous significance: miasms were no longer traces of past infections, but present modes of existence. According to Ortega, these patterns are at work in every human being, in varying proportions and combinations.
Psora, for example, is not just itchy skin and a feeling of lack, but the deep inner experience that “something is missing from my life.” Sycosis is not just warts and growths, but excessive attachment, possession, and the pursuit of abundance. Syphilis is not merely destruction of the body, but the inner experience of decay and disintegration.
Ortega thus elevated the concept of miasma to a psychological and existential level. This brought it closer to the categories of modern psychology and even made it comparable to certain basic experiences of existential philosophy. It is no coincidence that his ideas had a great influence on later homeopaths, especially Sankaran.
4.2 Sankaran: miasma as a life experience
Rajan Sankaran, an Indian physician and homeopath, opened up a new dimension in the interpretation of miasms at the end of the 20th century. He saw miasms as a deep life experience (vital sensation): a fundamental drama that determines how a person experiences threats, survival, shame, or destruction.
Sankaran did not stop at the classic three miasms. Based on his clinical experience, he introduced additional categories – acute, malaria, typhoid, tuberculotic, ringworm, leprosy, carcinotic – each of which embodies a specific life sensation, a pattern of survival. This made the system of miasms much more differentiated and closer to how patients actually experience their inner world.
The acute miasm, for example, carries the experience of a life-and-death struggle: “I must escape now, or I will perish.”
Malaria miasm represents the experience of a recurring threat: “I seem to have escaped, but I know it will come back.”
Carcinotic miasm is a pattern of compulsive conformity, internal pressure, and extreme control.
4.3 The archetypal approach
Sankaran thus described miasms as a series of archetypal dramas. Each miasm is associated with a basic experience and a typical reaction pattern. In this way, the homeopath not only examines the surface of the symptoms but also attempts to map the deep structure of the patient’s life experience. This approach is close to psychodynamics and Jung’s archetype theory and has opened up new perspectives in homeopathic practice.
4.4 The significance of the psychodynamic shift
The work of Ortega and Sankaran together brought about the psychodynamic shift in the history of miasms. While Hahnemann saw miasms mainly as infectious memory traces and Kent as moral-spiritual distortions, they spoke of existential and psychological archetypes. This approach was liberating for many homeopaths because it allowed them to understand miasms not merely as remnants of historical infections, but as deep human patterns present in every patient and every life situation.
- Close and Vithoulkas: the classical tradition
While many homeopaths in the 20th century – Kent, Ortega, Sankaran – expanded the concept of miasms to include psychological, spiritual, and existential dimensions, there were also authors who remained faithful to Hahnemann’s original idea. They did not see miasms primarily as life experiences or moral distortions, but as deep, inherited or acquired predispositions operating within the organism. Two names stand out among them: Stuart Close and George Vithoulkas.
5.1 Stuart Close: emphasis on dynamis
Stuart Close was one of the greatest figures in American homeopathy at the beginning of the 20th century. His most important work, The Genius of Homeopathy Lectures and Essays on Homeopathic Philosophy, is still considered a fundamental work today. For Close, miasma meant a permanent distortion of the life force. He believed that miasms were either contracted through a past infection or inherited through generations, but in any case left a lasting imprint on the organism.
Close was one of those who, a few years after the first publication of the sixth edition of the Organon in 1921, appreciated and emphasized the importance of the concept of vital force, or dynamis, in the entire homeopathic system and thus in the theory of miasms.
Dynamis – that is, the dynamic functioning of the vital force – is the subtle, invisible force that regulates the organism. When miasms corrupt this dynamis, the organism begins to carry chronic predispositions. Homeopathic medicine therefore does not target the symptoms directly but addresses the disturbance of the dynamis: it restores the harmony of the vital force.
Close thus preserved the most important core of Hahnemann’s concept: miasma is not only a disease, but a basic disposition that permeates a person’s entire life. This approach remained much more physiological and philosophical in nature and less open to psychological and spiritual interpretations. This physiological focus is one of the important aspects of the 6th edition of the Organon, which was overlooked at the time and later on.
5.2 George Vithoulkas: the modern classic
In the second half of the 20th century, it was George Vithoulkas who represented the Hahnemannian tradition with new vigour and credibility. Of Greek origin but an internationally influential teacher, he became one of the best-known figures in homeopathy, thanks in particular to his wide-ranging teaching and his books.
Vithoulkas interpreted miasms as inherited and acquired disease predispositions. For him, miasms were not spiritual sins (as in Kent) or psychodynamic archetypal experiences (as in Sankara), but clinically observable predispositions. He believed that the diseases of previous generations – such as syphilis, gonorrhea, or tuberculosis – leave their mark on their descendants, not necessarily in the form of identical symptoms, but in a general tendency toward weakness.
The essence of Vithoulkas’ teaching is that miasma is not a one-time infection, but a permanent, deeply rooted predisposition that is passed down through generations. Chronic diseases are therefore always caused by a miasmatic predisposition. The homeopath’s task is to find the right remedy that resonates with the patient’s deepest constitutional disposition.
5.3 Vithoulkas’s latest article on miasms
The 2022 study by George Vithoulkas and Dmitry Chabanov (The Evolution of Miasm Theory and Its Relevance to Homeopathic Prescribing) reviews the history of miasm theory from Hahnemann through his 19th- and 20th-century followers to the current debates. The authors point out that the concept of miasms has given rise to misunderstandings and contradictions both within and outside homeopathy, often leading to incorrect drug selection.
An interesting point in the study is that it proposes a new, modern definition of miasma: a trace of an acute disease of infectious origin which, if suppressed or not treated properly, creates a permanent chronic predisposition and can even be passed on to subsequent generations. At the same time, environmental hazards (toxins, drug side effects, stress) cannot be considered miasms in the strict sense, although they can create similar predispositions.
The authors emphasize Hahnemann’s original statement: “All chronic diseases originate from external infection: that is, they are the result of an untreated or suppressed acute disease. ”
In my opinion, this statement is debatable from today’s scientific perspective, as the causes of chronic diseases are much more complex (genetic, environmental, psychological factors). The merit of the article is that it highlights this contradiction and attempts to redefine the concept so that it is closer to the understanding of modern diseases, such as cancer and autoimmune disorders.
However, such a strong emphasis on the infectious origin of miasms, and the narrowing of the concept to this, is sure to generate much debate, despite the classical approach, but we will see its true value once the mechanism of action of homeopathy has been explored.
5.4 Preserving the classical tradition
Close and Vithoulkas are similar in that neither of them approached the subject from a psychological or spiritual perspective but rather focused on physiological and clinical experience. For them, miasma remained primarily a medical, physiological category: a permanent distortion of the vital force that is inherited or contracted and determines susceptibility to chronic disease.
This approach provided reassurance to many in the second half of the 20th century, when homeopathy was often accused of mystical exaggeration. Vithoulkas played a particularly important role in preserving the clinical seriousness of homeopathy: he always emphasized to his students that the concept of miasma is only useful if it is closely linked to the physiological and medical history of the patient.
The work of Close and Vithoulkas highlights the fact that the two main strands of miasma theory continue to coexist today. One is the psychodynamic and spiritual interpretation, which focuses on the patient’s inner world and life experiences. The other is the classical physiological approach, which is based more on disturbances in the life force and inherited predispositions. The history of homeopathy consists of a constant dialogue between these two approaches, and it is perhaps this diversity that gives the concept of miasma its richness.
6.Scientific developments in the 20th century
When Hahnemann introduced the concept of miasms, he was actually giving a completely new meaning to an old idea: within the scientific framework of his time, this was the only way to express that the causes of chronic diseases were not to be found purely in chance or in environmental and constitutional humoral degradation.
At that time, medicine was not yet familiar with the concepts and world of genetics, psychology, or microbiology. The concept of an “invisible force” was the only way to describe the predisposition to chronic diseases. In the 20th century, however, a series of scientific discoveries confirmed, albeit in different terms, that predisposition, imprinting, and transgenerational effects are real phenomena.
6.1 Genetics
Mendel’s experiments and the development of genetics showed that biological traits are passed on according to regular patterns. Genetics described the laws of individual variation and disease predisposition. Although miasma is not the same as a gene, both are factors that determine how an organism responds to disease.
6.2 Epigenetics
Complementing genetics, epigenetics has discovered that environmental influences can permanently affect gene function. Stress, nutrition, infections, or toxic effects can leave traces in cellular memory, and these epigenetic changes can even be inherited. This idea is eerily similar to one element of Hahnemann’s miasma concept: not only can the symptoms themselves be inherited, but also the traces of Lamarckian environmental influences.
6.3 PTSD and trauma
In the 20th century, psychology discovered that trauma transforms the psyche and the body in the long term. PTSD is not a fleeting memory, but a lasting vulnerability that lives on in recurring symptoms. This corresponds to another element of miasma: an imprint of a past event that detunes and distorts the entire vital force.
6.4 Intergenerational research
Studies conducted on the descendants of Holocaust survivors and other major trauma survivors have shown that the traces of trauma can be inherited both biologically and psychologically. The anxiety, hormonal changes, and psychological vulnerabilities of subsequent generations clearly indicate that the wounds of the past rewrite the future. Hahnemann also claimed that miasms span several generations.
6.5 Psychoneuroimmunology
Research has proven that there is a direct link between psychological state, stress, and the immune system. Prolonged psychological stress weakens the body’s defenses and paves the way for chronic diseases. This is very close to Hahnemann’s idea: the emergence of miasms is facilitated not only by physical infection, but also by constant mental stress, which disrupts the balance of the entire body.
6.6 Perinatal effects
Maternal stress, infection, or nutritional deficiencies experienced during fetal life can leave a lasting mark on a child’s health. According to Barker’s famous “fetal origins” hypothesis, the intrauterine environment preprograms the risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or psychological disorders later in life. This means that the predisposition is already present at birth, just as Hahnemann claimed about miasms.
6.7 Mihály Bálint and the concept of “basic disease”
The Hungarian physician and psychoanalyst Mihály Bálint used the concept of “basic disease” to describe how there is always a deeper, personality-embedded, basic condition originating in early childhood behind diseases. This basic disease determines the symptoms in which the disorder manifests itself. This concept is almost a direct extension of another element of Hahnemann’s miasm theory: it is not the symptom that is the disease, but the deeper disposition.
6.8 Cognitive and cultural transmission
Family stories, beliefs, fears, and habits can be passed down transgenerationally. A family’s attitude toward illness, loss, or healing sets a pattern for the next generation. This element, which can also be called psychosocial miasm, is transmitted not biologically but culturally, yet it determines predisposition in a similar way to biological factors.
6.9 Downward causation
According to Denis Noble’s theory, higher-level systems (cells, organs, organisms) have an effect on lower levels (genes, molecules), ensuring the stability, flexibility, and adaptability of the organism. This means that lifestyle choices can leave a biological mark on the organism and can even be inherited. In this context, the concept of miasma can be interpreted as the functioning of higher levels leaving a mark on genetics, which was previously considered unimaginable.
6.10 Microbiome
The revolution in modern microbiology has shown that the human body is not independent, but an ecosystem that coexists with billions of microorganisms. The state of the microbiome fundamentally determines health, and its disharmony (dysbiosis) predisposes to chronic diseases. Moreover, the mother’s microbiome directly influences her child. This ecological imprint is another factor of miasma: a condition that is persistent, invisible, and spans generations.
- What could miasma be in light of scientific developments?
Scientific advances in the 20th century—genetics, epigenetics, trauma, microbiome, and other research—provide a new language for understanding what Hahnemann intuitively perceived. In light of this, miasma is no longer just a historical concept, but a complex predisposition that is formed through many different channels and determines human tendencies across generations.
Genetic and epigenetic predisposition
Genetics and epigenetics clearly show that certain sensitivities are inherited, while others are imprinted by the environment and can even be passed on. These form the basis of Hahnemann’s concept of miasms. The only difference is that today we talk about genes, DNA, and epigenetic markers, while Hahnemann described the same thing as disturbances in the dynamis.
Trauma and intergenerational imprints
Research in psychology and psychiatry clearly confirms that trauma does not end in the life of an individual but becomes embedded in family history and can even leave biological traces in offspring. Based on this, we can say that miasms are wounds of life that continue to pulsate through generations.
Psychological and physiological unity
Psychoneuroimmunology highlights that the psyche, the nervous system, and the immune system are inextricably intertwined. Miasma, therefore, does not separate the “physical” and ” psychological” levels, but affects the whole person. This is in line with Hahnemann’s insight that disease is always a disturbance of the entire life force.
Predetermination before birth
Perinatal research shows that the condition of the mother in the womb has a fundamental influence on the health of the child. Hahnemann also sensed that miasms can be present even before birth. Science today refers to this as the programming effect of the fetal environment—but the essence is the same: predisposition is already present at the beginning.
Deeper psychological and cultural levels
Mihály Bálint’s concept of “basic disease” and research on cognitive and cultural transmission show that it is not only biological imprints that are inherited, but also beliefs, fears, and family histories. This is the psychosocial element of miasma, which determines how people respond to disease in the same way as genetic factors.
The impact of higher levels
In a broader sense, the theory of downward causation provides a framework for how the psyche, society, and culture can be inscribed into the body through changes in the functioning of cells and organs, and from there be passed on to future generations. This approach brings the idea of miasma closer to modern science: there is not a one-way relationship, but a reciprocal one between the body and the soul, the individual and society.
The ecological dimension
The theory of the microbiome takes the concept of miasma to a new level. The human organism is not isolated, but an ecological community. Chronic disease susceptibility stems not only from the body, but also from the world of microorganisms that live with us. Miasma can thus be extended to the entire ecosystem: it is rooted not only in the individual, but also in their environment.
In summary, it can perhaps be said that miasma is a complex predisposition.
If we look at all this together, miasma can be described from a 21st-century perspective as follows:
- biological predisposition (genetic, epigenetic, immunological imprint),
- psychological vulnerability (trauma, underlying disease, cultural patterns),
- ecological embeddedness (microbiome, environment).
Miasma is therefore a complex susceptibility formula that determines a person’s basic character, the course of their acute illnesses, and especially the types of chronic diseases they develop. It cannot be captured in a single factor, but rather in the combined effect of many layers: genetic, psychological, cultural, and ecological levels simultaneously.
In this sense, Hahnemann’s theory – although formulated in the language of his time – predicted what modern science has now revealed in detail: chronic diseases are always based on a deeper predisposition that can only be treated by taking into account the complete, multi-layered reality and uniqueness of the individual.
As with any complex system, the success of the development and practice of concrete interpretations will reveal the category system and agents that can be used to treat, shape, and heal this predisposition. Homeopathy offers a wide range of options in this regard as well.
- The current role of homeopathy in relation to miasms
The miasm theory is still alive after two hundred years, but today we must ask different questions about it than in Hahnemann’s time. The important thing is not how it fits into genetic or psychological models, but how homeopaths can use it in their daily practice today.
In the histories of today’s patients, miasms appear not only as traces of disease, but as imprints of their life stories. Chronic predispositions are not just diagnoses, but recurring patterns in the patient’s own world: fears, deficiencies, excesses, destructive tendencies, blockages. It is the homeopath’s task to hear this pattern – not only from the symptoms, but also from the stories, the rhythm of the words, and the gestures.
In practice, miasms are therefore a kind of compass: they help to recognize where the deeper drama of the patient’s life is heading and in what forces it is moving. This recognition is not a theoretical luxury, but the key to selecting the right remedy. Those who see that a patient’s life revolves around “the experience of lack of psora,” “the excess of sycosis,” or “the destruction of syphilis” will find it easier to find a resonating remedy.
But the task does not stop there. Understanding miasma can also be a gateway to a broader interpretation of healing: how can we help the patient break out of the cycle that has been going on for generations? How can we not only treat chronic tendencies, but also write a new pattern into the family history?
In the homeopathy of the future, miasma is therefore not just an old concept, but a living practical tool: a creative space where classical observations, psychological depths, and modern scientific parallels all work together. Today, homeopaths use miasms well when they do not seek to prove, but rather to ask, search, and listen – and through this, open a new path to the patient’s healing.
————————————
Glossary of terms
Archetype / Jungian archetype theory: Ancient, collective psychological patterns that are present in all humans and determine experiences and susceptibility to illness.
Basic illness concept: A psychoanalytic approach developed by Mihály Bálint, according to which every symptom has a deeper, personality-embedded underlying condition.
Downward causation: A concept developed by Denis Noble, according to which higher-level systems (cells, organs, organisms) exert a feedback effect on lower levels (genes, molecules), ensuring the stability, flexibility, and adaptability of the organism.
Existential patterns: A term coined by Juan Manuel Ortega to describe psychodynamic patterns that determine a person’s relationship to scarcity or destruction as a life strategy.
Fetal origins hypothesis: A concept developed by David Barker, according to which the intrauterine environment (stress, nutrition, infection) determines a child’s susceptibility to disease later in life.
Intergenerational research: Studies showing that trauma and susceptibility to disease can be inherited across generations.
Cognitive and cultural transmission: The transmission of family beliefs, fears, and stories across generations, which influences susceptibility to disease.
Microbiome/dysbiosis: The totality of microorganisms living with humans; an imbalance (dysbiosis) predisposes individuals to chronic diseases.
Perinatal effects: Maternal influences during fetal life (stress, infection, nutrition) that have a lasting effect on the health of the child.
Predisposition: An inherited or acquired tendency that determines susceptibility to disease.
Psychoneuroimmunology: A field of science that studies the relationship between mental state, nervous system, and immune system.
Psychosocial miasm: An imprint of cultural and social patterns that is passed on as a predisposing factor for disease.
PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder): Persistent physical and psychological vulnerability resulting from trauma.
Vital sensation: A concept developed by Rajan Sankaran, referring to a fundamental, deep life experience that determines how a patient experiences their illnesses and survival strategies.
Literature
Homeopathy and miasma theory
Hahnemann, S. (1819–1824, 4–5 editions; 1921 posthumous, 6th edition). Organon of Medicine. Dresden / Leipzig. [Translations: Organon of Medicine].
Hahnemann, S. (1828–1830). Die Chronischen Krankheiten, ihre eigenthümliche Natur und homöopathische Heilung. Dresden & Leipzig. [English translation: The Chronic Diseases: Their Peculiar Nature and Their Homoeopathic Cure].
Close, S. (1901). Lectures on Homeopathy: Philosophy, Principles, and Practice. Boericke & Tafel, Philadelphia.
Close, S. (1924). The Genius of Homeopathy: Lectures and Essays on Homeopathic Philosophy. Boericke & Tafel, Philadelphia.
Kent, J.T. (1900). Lectures on Homoeopathic Philosophy. Ehrhart & Karl, Chicago. (New editions: “Memorial Edition,” 1919).
Kent, J.T. (1897). Repertory of the Homoeopathic Materia Medica. Ehrhart & Karl, Chicago.
Sánchez Ortega, P. (1980). Notes on the Miasms, Heredity and Nosodes. B. Jain Publishers, New Delhi.
Sankaran, R. (1991). The Spirit of Homoeopathy. Homeopathic Medical Publishers, Mumbai.
Sankaran, R. (1994). Miasms: A Comparative Study. Homeopathic Medical Publishers, Mumbai.
Vithoulkas, G. (1980). The Science of Homeopathy. Grove Press, New York.
Watson, I. (1991). The Homeopathic Miasms: A Modern View. Cutting Edge Publications, Stroud.
Genetics, epigenetics, and heredity
Mendel, G. (1866). “Experiments on Plant Hybrids.” Proceedings of the Natural Science Society in Brno, 4, 3–47.
Griffiths, A.J.F., Wessler, S.R., Carroll, S.B., & Doebley, J. (2015). Introduction to Genetic Analysis (11th ed.). W.H. Freeman/Macmillan.
Bird, A. (2007). “Perceptions of epigenetics.” Nature, 447, 396–398. doi:10.1038/nature05913
Jablonka, E., & Lamb, M.J. (2005). Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life. MIT Press.
Jablonka, E., & Lamb, M.J. (2014). Evolution in Four Dimensions (2nd ed.). MIT Press.
PTSD, trauma, and transgenerational effects
Yehuda, R., Engel, S.M., Brand, S.R., Seckl, J., Marcus, S.M., & Berkowitz, G.S. (2010). “Transgenerational effects of trauma and PTSD: evidence from epigenetics.” European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 1(1), 1–12.
Bremner, J.D. (2006). Trauma and Memory. Harvard University Press.
Danieli, Y. (Ed.) (1998). International Handbook of Multigenerational Legacies of Trauma. Springer/Plenum Press.
Kellermann, N.P.F. (2001). “Transmission of Holocaust trauma – An integrative view.” Psychiatry, 64(3), 256–267.
Psychoneuroimmunology
Ader, R., Felten, D., & Cohen, N. (1995). Psychoneuroimmunology. Academic Press.
Kiecolt-Glaser, J.K., McGuire, L., Robles, T.F., & Glaser, R. (2002). “Psychoneuroimmunology: psychological influences on immune function and health.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70(3), 537–547.
Perinatal effects and maternal stress
Barker, D.J.P. (1995). “Fetal origins of coronary heart disease.” BMJ, 311, 171–174.
Sandman, C.A., & Davis, E.P. (2012). “Neurobehavioral consequences of fetal exposure to stress hormones.” Birth Defects Research Part C: Embryo Today, 96(4), 273–288.
Bálint Mihály and the concept of “basic illness”
Bálint, M. (1957). The Doctor, His Patient and the Illness. Pitman Medical, London.
Bálint, M. (1968). The Basic Fault: Therapeutic Aspects of Regression. Tavistock, London.
Mark, M. (2013). Bálint Mihály’s work in psychosomatics. (In Hungarian) Magyar Pszichoszomatikus Társaság.
Cognitive and cultural transfer
Hirst, W., & Echterhoff, G. (2012). “Remembering in conversations: The social sharing and reshaping of memories.” Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 55–79.
Kirmayer, L.J., & Ramstead, M.J.D. (2017). “Embodiment and enactment in cultural psychiatry: the case of trauma.” Transcultural Psychiatry, 54(3), 383–405.
Downward causation and biological relativity
Noble, D. (2006). The Music of Life: Biology Beyond the Genome. Oxford University Press.
Noble, D. (2012). “A theory of biological relativity: no privileged level of causation.” Interface Focus, 2(1), 55–64.
Noble, D. (2017). Dance to the Tune of Life: Biological Relativity. Cambridge University Press.
Microbiome theory and hygiene hypothesis
Turnbaugh, P.J., et al. (2007). “The human microbiome project.” Nature, 449, 804–810.
Rook, G.A.W. (2012). “Hygiene hypothesis and autoimmune diseases.” Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology, 42(1), 5–15.
