Construction of Boenninghausen TPB and conversion of grades into KR1, 2, 3
NATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOMOEOPATHY 2003 Nov / Dec VOL V NO 6.
Dr Ramanlal P Patel
Dr Jawaharlal R Patel & Dr (Miss) K H Matani.
In constructing his Therapeutic Pocket Book, Boennighausen
based his grouping of symptoms on Hahnemann’s teaching that it is imperative
that the Homoeopathic physician prescribe on the totality of the case. He
proceeded on the hypothesis that this totality was not only the sum total of the
symptoms but was in itself one grand symptom, the symptom of the patient.
Boennighausen evaluated the drugs by introducing variation in sizes of types,
signifying the varying importance of the symptom-rubric to the various drugs
listed. We find the following five grades of evaluation against Dr Kent’s,
three;
| 1] CAPITALS | 5 Marks |
| 2] Bold face or type | 4 " |
| 3] Italics | 3 " |
| 4] Roman | 2 " |
| 5] (Roman in parenthesis) | 1 Mark |
- CAPITALS-A symptom recorded in many provers and it is very prominent and verified.
- Bold face or type-A symptom appeared in several provers and confirmed in reproving and verified on the sick.
- Italics-A symptom appeared in a few provers and verified occasionally on the sick.
- Roman-A symptom brought out by only a few provers but not confirmed or verified on the sick.
- (Roman in parenthesis)-Doubtful remedies which require critical study.
1) First Grade Symptom
A symptom caused in the ‘majority’ of provers; also obtained by reprovings and clinically verified extensively can be up-graded to CAPITAL or Boldface type (3 marks) or
A symptom recorded in the majority of provings, or brought out in every prover, confirmed by several reprovings and verified upon the sick, (7, P213); is related to the FIRST GRADE. It is printed in Kent’s Repertory in CAPITAL or Boldface (8, P63).
2) Second Grade Symptom
A symptom caused in few provers; also obtained by reprovings and has been confirmed and occasionally verified clinically can be upgraded to italics (2 marks) (7, P214) or
A symptom brought out in a few provings, confirmed by reproving and occasionally verified upon the sick is classified under second grade. It is printed in Kent’s Repertory in italics. (8, P63).
3) Third Grade Symptom
A symptom caused now and then in a few provers, and not yet obtained by reprovings; but standing pretty strong or having been confirmed clinically can be up-graded or inserted in ordinary or roman type (1 mark), (7, P214). Also a clinical symptom can be inserted or added in ordinary or roman type (1 mark) or
A symptom brought out by a few provers, not confirmed by reproving or verified by curing a patient but standing out very prominently, is being classified as third grade symptom. It is printed in Kent’s Repertory in ordinary or roman type.
Certain symptoms that are not in the proving but yielding to a particular remedy and confirmed again and again by others in clinical experience and admitted as clinical symptoms, are admitted to the third grade symptoms (8. P63). It is said that "Only a minority of the symptoms listed in Kent can be traced to provings....."(Editorial, Br. Hom J April 1993, 82, P 81). I disagree according to my experiences for the above statement in the editorial of the Journal.
"The fifth place, the last of all, contains the doubtful remedies which require critical study and which occur most seldom" (Boennighausen)4 . In other words, these are remedies that have been found to have that symptom but rarely, or to have had it verified in clinical work only. The fifth evaluation Boennighausen has used mostly in the chapter on relationship. When you compare both Repertories, you will find that in Kent’s Repertory drugs which are graded highest ie BOLD or CAPITAL (3), You will find the same drug graded highest ie CAPITAL (5) in Boenninghausen’s Therapeutic Pocket Book, with a few exceptions. Similarly drugs in Italics (2) in Kent’s Repertory are found graded as Bold face (4) in Therapeutic Pocket Book are found in Roman type (1) in Kent’s Repertory, also with a few exceptions. Dr M L Dhawale6 of Bombay recommended the following table for conversion of evaluation (grades) of drugs in a rubric from Boenninghausen to Kent, which in practice is found quite dependable.
| Boenninghausen | Kent |
| 5 | 3 |
| 4 and 3 | 2 |
| 2 and 1 | 1 |
NB: Kent uses three grades, Boenninghausen has four, but his fourth grade is included in those of the third (1) under Kent’s classification (Bidwell)5 .
Kent’s Repertory1, 2, 3 has a list of 657 medicines3 while Boenninghausen Therapeutic Pocket Book has only 346 [Original 126 + 220 (Allen)]4 . And so the final selection of the medicine will be more or less the same.
References:
1) Dr Kent, J T: Repertory of Homoeopathic Materia Medica, 6th Edition 1957,Ehrhart and Karl, USA.
2) Dr Kent J T: Repertory of Homoeopathic Materia Medica, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 editions, Ehrhart and Karl, USA.
3) Dr R P Patel: Repertory of Homoeopathic Materia Medica, by Dr J T Kent 6th Edition corrected, revised and improved by R P Patel Institute fo Homoeopathy, 2nd edition, 2003.
4) Dr Boenninghausen: Therapeutic Pocket Book, 5th American Edition, 1931, Boericke and Tafel 1935.
5) Dr Bidwel GI: How to use Repertory?
6) Dr Dhawale M L: Principle and Practice of Homoeopathy.
7) Dr Kent J T: Lectures on Homoeopathic Philosophy.
8) Dr R P Patel: The art of case taking and practical Repertorization in Homoeopathy, 6th edition (Reprint).
9) American Institute of Homoeopathy: the Homoeopathic Pharmacopeia of the United States, Volume 1, 1979.
