Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Reiki & Energy Healing' started by lena, May 14, 2007.
If Reiki is so good why can't it realign a broken bone?.
Well, let's be realistic. Reiki assists the body to naturally heal, it's not going to physically move and adjust things beyond what the body would naturally achieve. If that were the case, then Reiki could become a new form of martial arts, with the ability to cast attackers aside with our thoughts and energy... kind of like Yellow Bamboo (Bambu Kuning)... https://www.yellowbamboo.net/?page_id=11 [something I had a go at once and found it ... interesting]
I may be wrong but as I understand it the body already has the blueprint for perfection and will realign itself naturally if we do not obstruct the process. Reiki, if it is a "spiritual" energy should, I would have thought be compatible with this and support that blueprint irrespective of how its presentation appears.
Since when is Reiki a "spiritual" energy?
People have mis-translated Reiki to mean "Spiritual Energy", but that is a Western translation and interpretation of the Kanji. Reiki more closely translates as Unseen (Rei) Universal Energy (Ki) i.e. the energy that is of everything.
Are you suggesting that if I break my bones, my body has the ability to automatically re-align those bones without intervention from a medical practitioner? That's a very dangerous assumption to be making.
I don't know about the others but when I refer to spiritual energy I do mean Universal energy. IE Divine energy. To me they are the same.
As far as the body's ability to repair itself. I believe that the body is just the outward presentation of Divine energy, which by definition is perfect, so yes the capability is there.
That does not mean that it is bound to happen, many things can interfere and prevent it happening, not least is the human belief itself..
The mind is the most powerful thing in existence but it can also be the most destructive.
If the mind says that something won't happen then it will not.
So, if someone came to you for healing with a broken bone, would you tell them they shouldn't visit a medical practitioner to have the bone set correctly in place, but instead they should just believe that it will correct itself?
Absolutely not. That would be extremely irresponsible, if not criminal.
However if some one came to me and said that the medical profession could not help them and that they had been told that they were going to die then I would try to explain to them that it would be in their interest to seek "alternative" treatment.
In my mind there is no illness or disease that can't be cured by the correct understanding. Applying that understanding is the problem.
And there is one of the main problems. People referring to our therapies as "Alternative" rather than "Complementary" are what puts the distrust and scepticism in those bodies that regulate the legalities of what we do; and makes scientific research in to such things immediately discredit it as 'quackery'.
The problem is, if one is going to accept that Reiki (or any other energy) is "universal energy" then one has to accept that it is the energy of creation itself.
That being said it can't be limited to "complementary". Complementary to what?, are there two universal energies ?. Are there two types of oxygen's or two types of hydrogen's?.
As far as so called scientific research goes I have never seen one dis-accreditation to energy healing that actually holds up. Most "scientific research" appear as articles created (in my opinion) by biased individuals who seem to have very little understanding, if any of the subject themselves.
If the truth is known, Universal energy is the prime and mankind is the alternate. Complementary should not even come into it.
In my opinion the distrust comes because the Reiki practitioner himself/herself does not trust the power.
Referring to it as "Divine" and "Energy of Creation" implies that there is some religious beliefs behind it. If you want to believe the energy to be coming from some divine source or God or whatever, that's fine, but that's not Reiki, which isn't based on any specific religious beliefs.
The practice is "complementary" because it complements traditional orthodox medicine/treatments; it's not an alternative to them. All Reiki practitioners should understand that.
It's true that much of the scientific "research" is biased, but that bias is not going to go away when practitioners start referring to the energy as having it's origins with God, or that it's an alternative to orthodox treatments. All that does is compound the issue.
Reiki practitioners are all to do with being complementary therapists; anybody saying they are an "alternative" therapist is damaging the reputation of the whole field.
I'm not sure how you have come to that conclusion. You seem to be suggesting that Reiki is passive and will just do what is needed. In that case, what is the point of people being therapists, as surely people will just heal because Reiki is divinely guided and has the power to heal without the needs of a practitioner. That's completely illogical and doesn't fit with the teachings of Reiki.
To be honest I don't associate "energy" as belonging to any Religious belief, just as I don't associate oxygen, which is a life energy in itself as belonging to any religious belief. Religious beliefs are man made.
I do feel that energy has been greatly underestimated. To me its like saying that an aeroplane is just for taxing around the ground with without realising that it has the power to fly.
The placebo effect is a prime example. Many people seem to categorise it as just a wacky phenomena, yet surgeons are actually carrying out placebo operations, and experiencing similar success rates as conventional surgery,
Once you start working with energy in my opinion the sky's the limit, irrespective of what classification you decide to put it in..