PAUL'S COMMENT:
So important "If the physician clearly perceives what has to be cured in disease" - So we must have an understanding of what disease is. Not just the external eczema or single swollen joint. At the same time we need to know the full potential of our healing medicines. So not just studying Jouanny's clinical. We must understand the remedy on all levels and with the same understanding of hierarchy of effects that applies to hierarchy of symptoms in the patient. To understand the individual patient we must also understand the individual remedy.

Aph 118 ; 119 and even 120 talk about the uniqueness of each medicine and that one medicine will not substitute for another:

(footnotes omitted - perhaps these could be linked instead of fully quoted in the official posting ?)

§ 118
Every medicine exhibits peculiar actions on the human frame, which are not produced in exactly the same manner by any other medicinal substance of a different kind.1

§ 119
As certainly as every species of plant differs in its external form, mode of life and growth, in its taste and smell from every other species and genus of plant, as certainly as every mineral and salt differs from all others, in its external as well as its internal physical and chemical properties (which alone should have sufficed to prevent any confounding of one with another), so certainly do they all differ and diverge among themselves in their pathogenetic - consequently also in their therapeutic -   effects.1 Each of these substances produces alterations in the health of human beings in a peculiar, different, yet determinate manner, so as to preclude the possibility of confounding one with another.2

PAUL'S COMMENT:
The importance of understanding the relationship between potency and vital force. Just as we must give the remedy which is the simillimum we must also give a potency and frequency which is a simillimum.

PAUL'S COMMENT:
Then you have made the grade - you are a Homoeopath - JEDI MASTER LEVEL !!

COMMENTS Eileen Nauman, DHM (UK):
There's lots to be covered individually in this aphorism. Hahnemann is laying out the basic foundation of homeopathy here without getting into the details--this is a broad, though specific look at the foundation blocks that make up homeopathy:

1. He's saying that we should take or 'adapt' (utilize) what is curative in medicines (plants, flowers, trees, bushes, etc, ect) to what is diseased in the patient. Here he's telling us to use some part or action of the plant, tree bark, etc., that can cure a sick person. I believe he's "hinting" here about provings, which will be covered in later aphorisms.

PAUL'S COMMENT:
Not just some part - we must understand the remedy as deeply as we must understand the disease/patient.

CONTINUING ON WITH EILEEN' S COMMENTS:
2. The homeopath needs to 'adapt' (use) the most appropriate medicine (remedy) according to its mode of action (symptoms gotten/derived from provings or from observation), to the case/patient. Again, he's foreshadowing his discoveries of homeopathy by hinting at them obliquely here without getting into the details--which are detailed in later aphorisms.

3. The homeopath needs to prepare the medicine (remedy) EXACTLY as required. Hahnemann has an 'exact' method of preparation of a homeopathic remedy--this will be covered later--but this is what he is referring to here in his foreshadowing of information to come in later aphorisms.

4. The homeopath needs to give the medicine in the EXACT amount or the right dose. Again, foreshadowing his observations via provings and use of potency/dose on his patients--all covered in aphorisms to come.

5. The homeopath needs to properly time the repetition (repeating) of doses. Again, more of the tenets of aphorisms to come that explain this in detail.

6. The homeopath must observe/discover obstacles to recovery in each case. This is the "obstacles to cure". The homeopath should not only recognize what they are, but be able to give the patient feed-back on how to remove them. If the patient will do this, then her/his health will be restored. If the obstacles to cure are not removed voluntarily by the patient, then health and cure will not be achieved.

EXAMPLE: A woman who is in an abusive marriage. Her husband beats on her regularly. She goes to a homeopath with complaints of stomach pain. During the course of taking the case, the homeopath learns about the abuse/beatings. S/he will then, as part of the education of the patient, tell her that if she does not remove the "obstacle to cure" her stomach pains will not go away. The real reason for the stomach pains is her abusive husband beating the hell out of her. If she cannot leave the marriage or get to a safe-house, then her symptoms will come back no matter what the homeopath tries to do for this woman.

It is not the homeopath's job to make a patient do anything. It is their job to observe and inform and offer solutions, if there are any. Ultimately, its up to the patient as to whether or not they get out of a rotten, abusive marriage, out of a job that is stressing them to the max, or whatever the 'obstacle to cure' is.

PAUL'S COMMENTS:
I wonder sometimes to what extent one should get involved in even suggesting where the problem might be. The situation between two people involves a chemistry between the two. The husband may be abusive. let's look at it non-judgementally. Let's say he is an alcoholic as well and that part of the reason he drinks is the unhappiness he has in the marriage because of the personality interaction between the two of them - His wife openly makes advances to other men.

So now we see the situation is a bit deeper. At no stage can we make a judgement call because we are only getting one side of the story. From the outside we say - abusive relationship - don't expect healing if you stay.  But perhaps by leaving, the wife takes with her the potential to still cause problems in her next relationship. The situation she is in must also be for a reason and unless she experiences inner growth, there will not be healing by leaving. She may save her life. That is a bit like emergency surgery - remove the marriage. When hearing one side of the story, I always wonder what the other side's version will be. (now I am not condoning family violence.)

Now if we perceive that there is a remedy needed, let us say Staphysagria.  We give the remedy and then all hell breaks loose and there may very well be a divorce, but there is also inner healing on the part of the wife.  There is less chance of being the "victim" in the next relationship. There is also the possibility that if the husband perceives the change, that he may agree to come in for treament. Let us say he is Anacardium. If there is a spark of wanting to save the marriage, there is a possibility he will come for treatment. So maybe without us saying a word the marriage could go forward. Good counselling etc and who knows what can happen. Or else she has the strength to leave and takes her bags. perhaps she has left before, but always returned because of the victim situation. Now there is a difference. She can move on.

COMMENT BY EILEEN--CONTINUED:
Finally, Hahnemann, in this aphorism says that if the homeopath does all the above, then we are practicing the medical art. We understand how to act quickly and thoroughly in a case for the patient. This, to him, was the ultimate that any physician could become. Only then did Hahnemann recognize her or him of being a genuine practitioner of the medical arts.

COMMENT BY DEBRA:
The third aphorism, in my understanding is the basis if the "Trinity of Homeopathy". That is knowledge of the disease, knowledge of the medicine and knowledge of the application of the remedy to the disease. It is of the utmost importance to get this right if we are ever to treat a case effectively, gently and curatively.

COMMENTS GABY ROTTLER:
_______________________________________________

Aph. 3
Sieht der Arzt deutlich ein, was an Krankheiten, das ist, was an jedem einzelnen Krankheitsfalle insbesondere zu heilen ist (Krankheits-Erkenntniss, Indication), sieht er deutlich ein, was an den Arzneien, das ist, an jeder Arznei insbesondere, das Heilende ist (Kenntniss der Arzneikraefte), und weiß er nach deutlichen Gruenden das Heilende der Arzneien dem was er an dem Kranken unbezweifelt Krankhaftes erkannt hat, so anzupassen, dass Genesung erfolgen muss, anzupassen sowohl in Hinsicht der Angemessenheit der fuer den Fall nach ihrer Wirkungsart geeignetsten Arznei (Wahl des Heilmittels, Indicat), als auch in Hinsicht der genau erforderlichen Zubereitung und Menge derselben (rechte Gabe) und der gehoerigen Wiederholungszeit der Gabe: - kennt er endlich die Hindernisse der Genesung in jedem Falle und weiss sie hinwegzuraeumen, damit die Herstellung von Dauer sei: so versteht er zweckmaessig und gruendlich zu handeln und ist ein aechter Heilkuenstler.

_________________________________________________

If the physician clearly perceives what has to be cured in disease, i.e., in each individual case of disease (knowledge of the disease), if he clearly perceives what it is in medicines which heals, i.e., in each individual medicine (knowledge of medicinal powers),

[TRANSLATION GR:]
...perceives which diseases, that is, what in every single case of disease has to be cured (Knowledge of disease, Indication)...]

if he applies in accordance with well-defined principles what is curative in medicines to what he has clearly recognized to be pathological in the patient, so that cure follows,

[ ...if he knows to adjust according to clear principles what is curative in remedies to what he has perceived as without doubt being morbid in the patient, so that cure must follow...GR]

i.e., if he knows in each particular case how to apply the remedy most appropriate by its character (selection of the remedy), prepare it exactly as required and give it in the right amount (the correct dose), and repeat the dose exactly when required, and, lastly, if in each case he knows the obstacles to cure and how to remove them, so that recovery is permanent, then he knows how to treat thoroughly and efficaciously, and is a true physician.

[...(if he knows) to adjust concerning both the adequacy of the remedy that is most appropriate for this case (selection of remedy, Indicat) and the exact necessary preparation and amount of it (correct dose) and the adequate time of repetition of the dose : - does he finally know the obstacles to cure in every case and knows how to remove them, so that recovery is permanent: then he knows to act expedient and thoroughly and is a true master of healing. GR]

COMMENT BY JOYCE:
Subject: Re: APHORISM 3

Looking at the very first part of aph 3:
"If the physician clearly perceives what has to be cured in disease, i.e., in each individual case of disease (knowledge of the disease)

and Gaby's translation:
[TRANSLATION GR:]...perceives which diseases, that is, what in every single case of disease>has to be cured (Knowledge of disease, Indication)...]

and O'Reilly translation:

clearly realize what is to be cured in diseases, that is, in each single case of disease (discernment of the disease, indicator)

Firstly, I feel Hahnemann is also highlighting for us that the patient may be coming to us with more than one disease, and we as practioners of the healing art need to be able to
1) separate out each disease
2) determine what in each disease is to be cured
3) and then decide how to proceed to cure each disease/if it can be cured.

An example:
a patient made an appointment 3 months ago to see you for muscular dystrophy. But a week before her appointment, she came down with acute bronchitis and is still hacking and coughing. Two days ago, she had a powerful mystical experience that totally overwhelmed her and caused a great deal of anxiety. She ate out last night, and was up all night vomiting from food poisoning; her stomach is still a little queesy. Today she comes to your office in the freezing rain, she slips on your steps and sprains her ankle in the fall. Is this 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 diseases? Most likely 2, 3 or 4.

So, a physician practicing the healing arts needs alot of knowledge in order to be able to make these discernments. Andre Saine mentions 3 things that are necessary to gain this knowledge:

a) a vast knowledge of human nature:

We need to study all the parts of the human being from the psyche to the gene, from the cell to the soul and beyond, the microbiology that lives within (apparently we carry 10x more microbes than cells.....] and around us. We need to know what factors (inner and outer) can affect each "part" that makes up the whole. This will help us determine whether a disease is dynamic, "fixed genetic", a disease of the soul/spirit, due to upbringing/school/cultural beliefs, nutritional imbalance, etc. A disease may be a combination of any of the above. Debra covered alot of these in her comments on Aphorism 4.

b) an understanding of the phenomena of the vital force. How does the vital force related to all the "parts" of the organism described in (a)? Much of this is obscure, and comes with observation and reflection as one practices.

c) an understanding of what is health/homeostasis. How to differentiate disease from the normal process of aging.

--------

And at the end of the aphorism (from the O'Reilly edition):

"[If the physician has this insight, discernment, knowledge and awareness*] then he understands how to act expediently and thoroughly,  and he is a genuine practitioner of the medical art."

* "Throughout the Organon, Hahnemann uses various terms to refer to different modes of knowledge, understanding and perception. These include references to intellectual knowledge as well as knowledge based upon participative experience. See knowledge and realize in the glossary."

A quick summary of what is expanded on beautifully in the O'Reilly glossary:

wissen:

to be aware; knowledge gained from books, lectures or scientific study

kennen:

to know; to have deep personal knowledge based on life experience hard to teach

einsehen:

to realize; see into the true nature of something

Joyce Laidlaw