“Everything in nature has a capacity to heal itself. If by some means, this self-healing capacity can be geared into full force, there will be hundreds of situations in which we can avoid swallowing tablets.”
~ Healing Through Reiki
by Dr. Beena Rani Goel (MDS) and Ashwita Goel
I’ve recently come across this comprehensive guide on Reiki.
It discusses the history, philosophy and methods of practicing Reiki to heal
yourself and others. According to the author, she first heard about Reiki while
watching a documentary on alternative therapies. “It was the philosophy and
simplicity that appealed to me,” she said, “and I decided to learn it.” It’s
the same philosophy and especially the ‘simplicity’ that inspired me to start my
own research on the viability of Reiki as a method of healing. Those who have
googled ‘Reiki’ probably know, the internet is full of praises about it. This
article will deal with the subject in a different light.
Let me begin with the fact that the Mikao Usui, the founder
of Reiki, was not a doctor. One of his brothers was a doctor. Usui himself is
claimed to have earned a degree in theology from the University of Chicago,
which is probably false. Research says, he never even attended the University
of Chicago, let alone earning a degree from there. It is, however believed,
that he had traveled far and wide and was an ardent student of medicine,
theology, and psychology.
“When in the nineteenth century Mikao Usui sought the origin of Jesus’ and Buddha’s method of healing, he found them in the ancient remnants of Shiva’s culture, in the ancient esoteric teachings of India.”
It was necessary to crosscheck that. Many Indian babas and
even politicians claim that everything (from ballistic missiles to plastic
surgery) had their root in ancient India, without even bothering to provide
evidence. No sources that I went through suggested that Reiki had actually
originated from Shaivism. In fact, in his original manuscript, Usui mentioned
Buddhism as the origin. But, since Buddhism itself had materialized as a
dissent of Brahmanism, I think the author might have inferred it from there.
According to Healing Through Reiki by Dr. Beena Rani Goel, the
idea of Reiki, came to Usui in an enlightenment. This information is available
in the internet as well. According to translator Hyakuten Inamoto, Usui did go
to Mount Kurama to meditate for twenty-one days. On twenty first day, he saw the light. But doesn’t that make Mikao
Usui more sort of a prophet, like Moses who had his revelation at Sinai? And,
doesn’t that make Reiki more like a faith and it’s healing, faith healing?
I wasn’t sure, till I stumbled on the following passage,
“While hurrying down the mountain he stubbed his toe and instinctively put his hands on it. His hands became hot and the torn toe was healed.”
The book describes it as one of the five miracles that took place that day.
In Healing Through Reiki by Dr. Beena Rani Goel (MDS) and
Ashwita Goel, attempts were made, on more than one ocassions, to associate
Reiki with the biblical healing done by Jesus. It’s a shame that the Catholic
Church wasn’t as keen to acknowledge Reiki as a legitimate healing practice. The
following lines are from Wikipedia, where Reiki is often described as a
pseudoscience,
In March 2009, the Committee on Doctrine of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops issued the document Guidelines for Evaluating Reiki as an Alternative Therapy, in which they declared that the practice of reiki was based on superstition, being neither truly faith healing nor science-based medicine. The guideline concluded that "since reiki therapy is not compatible with either Christian teaching or scientific evidence, it would be inappropriate for Catholic institutions, such as Catholic health care facilities and retreat centers, or persons representing the Church, such as Catholic chaplains, to promote or to provide support for reiki therapy."
Reiki can neither be taught nor administered for free. That
was the instruction by Mikao Usui who had taught over 2000 students in his
lifetime (he lived 60 years and died of a stroke in 1926). Which makes it all the more necessary that we
investigate before we invest.
Like many other faith-healing practices Reiki is said to
work when the patient believes it’ll work.
...you have to start with the hypothesis that Reiki is going to heal you.
which means there
were instances where it didn’t work.
Why does it work for some while not so for others? The book
explains, for
...a person who has been leading a very worldly life, never devoting time to spiritual and philosophical aspects...
The effect of Reiki may be slow, limited or even none. This
is similar to the claims often made by many Indian godmen. When something good
happens it proves the effectiveness of the treatment. But if something bad
happens, only the irreligiosity of the subject are to be blamed. To me that
sounds more like quackery.
Be grateful to God. The author says it’s a prerequisite for Reiki? What happens if an atheist undergoes a Reiki? That part is never explained.
What is the rationale behind choosing 21 days as the duration of a Reiki treatment?
Is it just because Usui had his revelation on the 21st day, or does
it have a strong scientific reason other than that? Assuming there are both
positive and negative energy present in a body, how come during Reiki only
positive energy flows? What happens to the negative energy that is loosened by
vibrations created at the time of attunement? Is it absorbed by the surroundings,
including the body of the master? What is the evidence that the seven chakras
exist in human body? Do chakras exist in plants and animals too? How many? All such
explanations are skipped.
Another problem with Reiki is lack of empirical evidence in
its favor. There are testimonies made by five people at the end of this book.
We don’t know if they are real people. Even if they are, the sample size is too
small to prove anything at all. Reiki can treat plants and animals. I wish they
could be included as samples. The book claims that rechargeable cells can be energized by Reiki. I haven’t had
opportunity to verify that. I wonder how many chakras a rechargeable cell might
have.
When you Google with Reiki, thousands of articles come up.
Except for two-three sites, all are ecstatic about its potential as a healing
agent. Some even claim it can cure Cancer. But if you dig in bit deeper, you’ll
find that most of the authors either practice Reiki themselves or are
associated with alternative healing or faith healing practices that have little
or no scientific backing. There is no evidence that the ‘energy field’ that
Reiki is based on, actually exists. But these things, one may not find in a
regular Google search, because these articles are buried under thousands of other
articles that had reviewed Reiki positively. So here are a few links for you to
find out the alternative facts about this alternative healing.
Before ending my article, I’d like to add a few lines as my
own conclusion. When it comes to something as important as saving a human life,
we need to look beyond ‘philosophy’ and ‘simplicity’. Just because a tradition
is old, doesn’t mean it’s still viable today. There may be many wise things
written in our scriptures, but if not backed by hard and proper evidence, they
probably mean nothing. Health care doesn’t come for free. Directly or
indirectly, you pay for it. You have every right to investigate.
Back to Book Categories
