Oaths, Codes and Coincidence – Puzzle of Life


I was wondering and pondering, haven’t yet gone as deep as I would like to in to this material, but want to share with you this. Most probably you have already dived to these questions many times, especially during the latest years.

I attended a seminar this weekend, which was very inspiring and gave HOPE. The lectures were doctors, lawyer, journalists and some who has experienced vax-injuries, and effects of shedding.

MOST IMPORTANTLY all were proclaiming that they haven’t CHOSEN this path they are walking now, but were led into it.

However what ever is their line of work now, requires all the experiences they have had during their life path. All of them followed INTUITION, what ever spiritual background they had or didnt have.

Yes, this confirms again, what I have a longtime experienced that It is a puzzle, this life. We collect the pieces without knowing how the end images will look like.

ALL OF THE LECTURES had gone through tough times and have been experiencing active opposition to their attempts to make sense based on COMMON SENSE and their knowledge.

All of them also ended their presentation holding their hand on their HEART and proclaiming the deeper reason for all of this.

They were very humble, yet knowledgeable.

I ended up to attend this seminar following “Coincidence”.

It was a relief to come together with 100 of us all having same understanding, what ever background we came from. Not all exchange was done through words or the program; there were many “meetings” with eyes, confirming “I know you” and “We are the Same”. I also met some new friends which maybe part of the next face of my Life Path. Following up…

I had my own role to play in this gathering, part of the learning / teaching & teaching / learning mission. And my commitment to embody The Kryst where ever I am led to.

Double Rainbow was shining in the sky.

I am thankful, and HOPEFUL.

This seminar led me to study about Hippocratic Oath.


“nil nocere”—do no harm.

It is often said that the exact phrase “First do no harm” (Latin: Primum non nocere) is a part of the original Hippocratic oath. Although the phrase does not appear in the AD 245 version of the oath, similar intentions are vowed by,

“I will abstain from all intentional wrong-doing and harm”.

The phrase primum non nocere is believed to date from the 17th century.

Earliest surviving copy

A fragment of the oath on the 3rd-century Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 2547.(Image).

The oldest partial fragments of the oath date to circa AD 275. The oldest extant version dates to roughly the 10th–11th century, held in the Vatican Library.

A commonly cited version, dated to 1595, appears in Koine Greek with a Latin translation.

AD 43 (the earliest surviving reference to the oath)


One of the most significant revisions was first drafted in 1948 by the World Medical Association (WMA), called the Declaration of Geneva.


I swear by Apollo Healer, by Asclepius, by Hygieia, by Panacea, and by all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will carry out, according to my ability and judgment, this oath and this indenture.

To hold my teacher in this art equal to my own parents; to make him partner in my livelihood; when he is in need of money to share mine with him; to consider his family as my own brothers, and to teach them this art, if they want to learn it, without fee or indenture; to impart precept, oral instruction, and all other instruction to my own sons, the sons of my teacher, and to indentured pupils who have taken the Healer’s oath, but to nobody else.

I will use those dietary regimens which will benefit my patients according to my greatest ability and judgment, and I will do no harm or injustice to them.[6] Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course. Similarly I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause abortion. But I will keep pure and holy both my life and my art. I will not use the knife, not even, verily, on sufferers from stone, but I will give place to such as are craftsmen therein.

Into whatsoever houses I enter, I will enter to help the sick, and I will abstain from all intentional wrong-doing and harm, especially from abusing the bodies of man or woman, bond or free. And whatsoever I shall see or hear in the course of my profession, as well as outside my profession in my intercourse with men, if it be what should not be published abroad, I will never divulge, holding such things to be holy secrets.

Now if I carry out this oath, and break it not, may I gain for ever reputation among all men for my life and for my art; but if I break it and forswear myself, may the opposite befall me.[5] – Translation by W.H.S. Jones.

The oath was written over 2500 years ago. Although the oath bears the name of Hippocrates, there is no evidence that he wrote it. It is claimed that it was written 100 years after his death. No one knows who wrote it.[7]

In 1500, a German medical school (University of Wittenberg) incorporated taking the oath for its graduating medical students. However, it was not until the 1700s, when the document was translated into English that Western medical schools began regularly incorporating the oath in convocations.

“During the post World War II and immediately after its foundation, the WMA showed concern over the state of medical ethics in general and over the world. The WMA took up the responsibility for setting ethical guidelines for the world’s physicians.

It noted that in those years the custom of medical schools to administer an oath to its doctors upon graduation or receiving a license to practice medicine had fallen into disuse or become a mere formality”.

In Nazi Germany, medical students did not take the Hippocratic Oath, although they knew the ethic of “nil nocere”—do no harm.

The oath stands out among comparable ancient texts on medical ethics and professionalism through its heavily religious tone, a factor which makes attributing its authorship to Hippocrates particularly difficult.

Phrases such as ‘but I will keep pure and holy both my life and my art’ suggest a deep, almost monastic devotion to the art of medicine. He who keeps to the oath is promised ‘reputation among all men for my life and for my art’. This contrasts heavily with Galenic writings on professional ethics, which employ a far more pragmatic approach, where good practice is defined as effective practice, without reference to deities.

In the 1960s, the Hippocratic Oath was changed to require “utmost respect for human life from its beginning”, making it a more secular obligation, not to be taken in the presence of any gods, but before only other people. When the oath was rewritten in 1964 by Louis Lasagna, Academic Dean of the School of Medicine at Tufts University, the prayer was omitted, and that version has been widely accepted and is still in use today by many US medical schools:

I swear to fulfil, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon’s knife or the chemist’s drug.

I will not be ashamed to say “I know not”, nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient’s recovery.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person’s family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.

As of 2018 all US medical school graduates made some form of public oath but none used the original Hippocratic Oath.

A modified form or an oath unique to that school is often used. A review of 18 of these oaths was criticized for their wide variability: “Consistency would help society see that physicians are members of a profession that’s committed to a shared set of essential ethical values.

In France, it is common for new medical graduates to sign a written oath.

In 2022, a college in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu saw a batch of medical students undertaking a Sanskrit Oath by the name of ancient sage physician Maharishi Charak instead of the Hippocratic oath. The state government subsequently dismissed the Dean of the Madurai medical college for this act.


The Nightingale Pledge is a statement of the ethics and principles of the nursing profession in the United States, and it is not used outside the US. It included a vow to “abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous” and to “zealously seek to nurse those who are ill wherever they may be and whenever they are in need.”

In a 1935 revision to the pledge, Gretter widened the role of the nurse by including an oath to become a “missioner of health” dedicated to the advancement of “human welfare”—an expansion of nurses’ bedside focus to an approach that encompassed public health.

US nurses have recited the pledge at pinning ceremonies for decades. In recent years, many US nursing schools have made changes to the original or 1935 versions, often removing the “loyalty to physicians” phrasing to promote a more independent nursing profession, with its own particular ethical standards


I solemnly pledge myself before God and in the presence of this assembly to pass my life in purity and to practise my profession faithfully.

I shall abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous, and shall not take or knowingly administer any harmful drug.

I shall do all in my power to maintain and elevate the standard of my profession and will hold in confidence all personal matters committed to my keeping and all family affairs coming to my knowledge in the practice of my calling.

I shall be loyal to my work and devoted towards the welfare of those committed to my care.


Before God and those assembled here, I solemnly pledge;

To adhere to the code of ethics of the nursing profession;

To co-operate faithfully with the other members of the nursing team and to carry out faithfully and to the best of my ability the instructions of the physician or the nurse who may be assigned to supervise my work;

I will not do anything evil or malicious and I will not knowingly give any harmful drug or assist in malpractice.

I will not reveal any confidential information that may come to my knowledge in the course of my work.

And I pledge myself to do all in my power to raise the standards and prestige of the practical nursing;

May my life be devoted to service and to the high ideals of the nursing profession.


A Hippocratic Oath for scientists is an oath similar to the Hippocratic Oath for medical professionals, adapted for scientists. Multiple varieties of such an oath have been proposed. Joseph Rotblat has suggested that an oath would help make new scientists aware of their social and moral responsibilities;[1] opponents, however, have pointed to the “very serious risks for the scientific community” posed by an oath, particularly the possibility that it might be used to shut down certain avenues of research, such as stem cells.


The Nuremberg Code (German: Nürnberger Kodex) is a set of ethical research principles for human experimentation created by the court in U.S. v Brandt, one of the Subsequent Nuremberg trials that were held after the Second World War.

Though it was articulated as part of the court’s verdict in the trial, the Code would later become significant beyond its original context; in a review written on the 50th anniversary of the Brandt verdict, Jay Katz writes that “a careful reading of the judgment suggests that [the authors] wrote the Code for the practice of human experimentation whenever it is being conducted.”

Source: Wikipedia



The notion of informed consent is relatively recent.

Traditionally, the doctor–patient relationship has always been paternalistic, that is, the physician believes that he/she has the knowledge and expertise to understand the patient’s condition and therefore only he/she knows what is good or best for the patient. To achieve a cure, it was widely felt that authority must be coupled with obedience.

Traditionally, doctors have been under the impression that the patient does not understand very well his/her disease or his/her physical condition. Thus, it was deemed necessary that physicians make decisions for patients. This has been the old-style thinking in medicine, but this concept has changed with the advent of informed consent.

Physicians felt that any disclosure of possible difficulties might erode patient trust. However, physicians are now required to disclose to the patient what the risks and adverse effects of a contemplated procedure or treatment plan.

An informed consent has seven features:

• Affirming the patient’s role in the decision-making process

• Describing the clinical issue and suggested treatment

• Stating alternatives to the suggested treatment (including the option of no treatment)

• Stating risks and benefits of the suggested treatment (and comparing them to the risks and benefits of alternatives)

• Stating related uncertainties

• Assessing the patient’s understanding of the information provided

• Eliciting the patient’s preference (and thereby consent).

• Not every detail needs to be discussed, but all details needed for a “reasonable person” to make a decision must be provided.

• Therefore, all risks of serious complications, even if they occur very rarely, need to be stated. Less serious risks need to be specified if they occur more commonly.

Source: National Library of Medicine

Informed consent was first used in court by the late attorney Paul G. Gebhard in a 1957 medical malpractice suit, Salgo v Leland Jr. University Board of Trustees[5] (Stanford University, California, USA). This case involved a patient named Martin Salgo who awoke paralyzed after aortography, having never been informed that such a risk existed. The defense argued that the doctor had been negligent in not warning Salgo that there was a risk of paralysis.

The court ruled that “failure to disclose risks and alternatives was cause for legal action on its own.” This case helped to shape the patient–doctor relationship. It enabled patients to participate in their health care. In addition, the court stipulated that “the physician must seek and secure his patient’s consent before commencing an operation or other course of treatment.

Respect for the patient’s right of self-determination on a particular therapy demands a standard set by law for physicians rather than one which physicians may or may not impose upon themselves.”

Source: Wikipedia


The Muslim physician cannot swear allegiance to the original Hippocratic Oath because of its invocation to various Gods. In Islam, the first source of Islamic law is the Qur’an, which contains the rules of conduct that a person or group hold as reliable in differentiating right from wrong.

Therefore, as Muslims grow up, they are guided by the Qur’an and the Sunna, hence the Muslim physician will possess the necessary character traits of a decent and noble physician.

Consequently, a good Muslim physician has no need to pledge loyalty to an Oath. Islam sets the foundations for behaving well and possessing the requisite character traits to become a fine person and by extension, a physician with good moral fiber.

Source: National Library of Medicine

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s