> the Kolisko's. This research has laid the groundwork for modern
agricultural
> homoeopathy.
> I believe that one of the major problems faced by the Kolisko's within the
> Anthroposophical movement lay in the fact that this research was competing
> with secular interests who were promoting the legacy of Rudolph Steiner.
> There was no recognition by their peers of the value of this research.
> To get the theory of homoeopathic dose accepted in agriculture,
particularly
> in high potency, there had to be a development of an appropriate
technology
> to potentise large quantities of material. This was not available at that
> time.
> What was the value of minimal dose when the basis of RS's Agriculture
course
> was cow manure which was in plentiful supply.
> Steiner's indications were being interpreted by materialists who were
trying
> to come to grips with a spiritual aspect promoted by a man who was so far
> ahead of his time. The time was not right for a discussion of spiritual
> aspects of agriculture.
The time may have now arrived for European biodynamic practioners to revisit
the art of homoeopathy in agriculture in response to the extreme difficulty
or even imposibility of makeing most of the preparations or remedies. this
may have to tide them through until the regulations can be changed again.
Peter.
