Actually they are quite pretty pictures, and I am not being condescending. Kirlian photography is not proof. I did try to find some real studies of Reiki in a lab setting but could not find anything but woo pages with some dodgy experiments. In one they let the subjects go home and brought them back in later to see how some wound healed (they were not specific on what it was). Who is to say that the subject didn't use peroxide or neosporin on the wound. Also the subjects could have participated in sports or other strenuous activities to re-open the wounds.
I am still trying to find a good scientific study.
If you look at the second finger on the first two photos of a 'Reiki Master' before and after giving healing, they are the same as the following two photos of someone before and after receiving reiki treatment.
We could say from Julias link that the photos of the fingers possibly show an increased moisture, if indeed they were taken how we are led to believe they were.
Very aggressive nature of the postings from some quarters. I do hope this forum isn't inhabited by too many "negative" sceptics. Michael Shermer from www.skeptic .com tries to distant himself from such self-important petty naysayers who try everyone’s patience.
Actually it was a genuine response. They are very pretty. Why does it speak volumes?
Is there any proof that what is shown is the effect of Reiki?
'All through this short life we give of ourselves, giving and giving and slowly diminishing. Leaving a mark that will gradually fade, ash in the breeze, snowballs in negative.'
'All through this short life we give of ourselves, giving and giving and slowly diminishing. Leaving a mark that will gradually fade, ash in the breeze, snowballs in negative.'
Reiki has nothing to do with spirit healing and these people saying this are just kidding people....
Its a "spiritual healing", because of the inate belief in the energy being channeled through the "master" from a "higher power".
]Reiki system originated in Tibet 2500 years ago, but was said to be lost knowlage until re-discovered by Dr.Mikao Usui who open a practise im Tokyo in 1921.
No, it really didnt. Mikao Usui is credited with inventing this practise, but the legend is utterly fabricated to build acceptance and credence for its followers. It is an adaptation of the "knowlege of the ancients" or more properly Argumentum ad antiquitatem and Argumentum ad Verecundiam. The belief that something is ancient and therefore it must have some element of truth to it, because the idea has persisted. Need I remind you that the ancient were also fond of making people fight wild animals in arenas for sport, and had medicines that contained arsenics and lead etc.
In brief their were writing of Buddhism that told of techniques which can heal body and soul and he spent seven years searching knmwolage of the writing and the symbols.
No, really he didnt.
He didnt have the power to heal although he has the knowlage, so he went to Mount Kuri Yama to meditate for for 3 weeks.
It is said that one day he saw a light from the sky coming towards him after that he felt empowered etc etc....
Now where have I seen that before? Oh wait:
Matthew 4:1-11
Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. The tempter came to him and said, "If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread." Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God."
Btw, Usui was a Christian minister in Japan and would be very familiar with the Jesus spiritual trial myth.
At no point is spirits, angels, religon. god. ghost or and other woo ever mentioned.
It is inferred the power comes from God (the higher power part)
I still belive Reiki can be tested sceinfically as its a natual energy not a spiritual or reglious thing.....
Sorry rant over but those people are telling pork pies !!
Well unless they can generate some unknown exotic energy we have yet to identify I seriously doubt this would be possible.
Kirlian photography refers to a form of photogram made with a high voltage. It is named after Semyon Kirlian, who in 1939 accidentally discovered that if an object on a photographic plate is connected to a source of high voltage, small corona discharges (created by the strong electric field at the edges of the object) create an image on the photographic plate
The "energy" you see in Kirlian photography is simply coronal discharge from the photographic plate (which is pumped full of high voltage obviously) It is simply "electricity", no mystery "energy". It is also generated by the equipment, and not the person using it, or the person being photographed by it.
I had a photo taken of me using a kirlian camera once (well twice really) they did it once to show how I was at that time, and the second time was supposed to show I was giving off a different energy. All it did to me was make me think it is just totally random - but I havent ever studied it in depth.
If you try you may fail, if you don't try you can never succeed
I am a Reiki Master- and I read this thread with fascination.
Beacuse I too have reservations about some of the claims people make regarding what Reiki is supposed to be able to do!
I didn't learn Reiki quickly. I took each level 6 months apart, and found it helpful, on a meditative level. I was also surprised at how effective it has been in reducing spasticity in a friend with Cerebral Palsy, and how useful it has been with children with behavioural problems.
I can completely understand the attitudes expressed throughout this thread, as it's a difficult pill to swallow, believing in energy that you can't see, nor prove exists, and then believing that this energy can have positive benefits.
But I think if you focus on the lack of scientific 'proof', and ignore the actual benefits that can be derived from regular practice, then you've kind of missed the point of Reiki altogether.
I don't see it as some sort of money making excerise. It is a way of life, without the dogma that is attached to so many other ways of life otherwise described as religions.
If you regularly practise Reiki, there ARE health benefits. But then, there are health benefits with other regular practices such as meditation, yoga etc. Reiki is not alone in practices that can benefit a person during it's practice.
Those who believe there's no positive effects, might actually try it out! It doesn't cost anything to learn the hand positions (look them up online), and then take an hour out of your schedule to perform the positions on yourself. If you don't feel more relaxed afterwards, then I'd be extremely surprised!
I am a Reiki Master- and I read this thread with fascination.
How do you become a "master" of that which does not exist? [/confucius]
Beacuse I too have reservations about some of the claims people make regarding what Reiki is supposed to be able to do!
Some of the claims?
I didn't learn Reiki quickly. I took each level 6 months apart, and found it helpful, on a meditative level. I was also surprised at how effective it has been in reducing spasticity in a friend with Cerebral Palsy, and how useful it has been with children with behavioural problems.
Did anyone get the number of that anecdote?
I can completely understand the attitudes expressed throughout this thread, as it's a difficult pill to swallow, believing in energy that you can't see, nor prove exists, and then believing that this energy can have positive benefits.
Yes, it requires an irrational faith for it to "work".
But I think if you focus on the lack of scientific 'proof', and ignore the actual benefits that can be derived from regular practice, then you've kind of missed the point of Reiki altogether.
Can you list a series of non imaginary benefits?
I don't see it as some sort of money making excerise. It is a way of life, without the dogma that is attached to so many other ways of life otherwise described as religions.
It has its own mythical origins like all other religions, it is no different.
If you regularly practise Reiki, there ARE health benefits. But then, there are health benefits with other regular practices such as meditation, yoga etc. Reiki is not alone in practices that can benefit a person during it's practice.
What benefits are attributed to reiki?
Those who believe there's no positive effects, might actually try it out! It doesn't cost anything to learn the hand positions (look them up online), and then take an hour out of your schedule to perform the positions on yourself. If you don't feel more relaxed afterwards, then I'd be extremely surprised!
People very well may feel "relaxed" after a reiki session, but that has nothing to do with "mystical energies" or "unknown powers". It is because the client feels they are actively doing something to help themselves. There is also the added bonus of the "pampering" factor.
Firstly, you can argue about Reiki's effectiveness all day long if it makes you feel good, but you can't argue whether it exists- as a system/methodology, it does exist. So I'm not clear on whether quoting Confucius is just an attempt at appearing well-read or educated, or if you have a serious point to make!
It's pretty easy to prove the validity of my anecdotal evidence. It is straighforward testimony from a qualified accountant who experienced significant benefits in relation to muscular spacsticity, after receiving reiki, so much so that he learnt the technique himself. And treatements provided to him were given as one friend gives time to another, not for financial gain. But I didn't place my post on here to pursuade anyone of how Reiki can help them- I have no vested interest whatsoever in doing so, I just put my point of view on the board alongside others, because I thought it was an interesting discussion.
In my opinion, Reiki helped my friend without him specifically having any faith in it at all, we spent time together to see if it 'could' help him in any way, and it most certainly did. And there's nothing irrational about a person doing something from which they have derived a benefit. It's totally irrational to completely ignore something from which you derive benefit, because you don't understand why it works!
In respect of mythical origins, I didn't make any reference to mythical origins, it's irrelevant to my point, the simple fact that there is no specific dogma attached to the practice of Reiki, as you might find if you attempted to follow some religious path reliant on spiritual texts for your life lessons.
And since we all agree that evidence for claims made is important, what evidence do you have that the reason individiuals feel relaxed after performing Reiki are the reasons you've given? Absolutely none, I suspect. Seems like they're just assumptions based on a pre-conception.
The tone of the boards in here now I've had a good look around is really quite aggressive. I didn't realise how militant some members seem to be! I can't imagine how depressing a life must be if lived without faith in anything that can't be proven scientifically, today! What a vacuous life it would be, never seeking answers beyond that which has already been proven!
The tone of the boards in here now I've had a good look around is really quite aggressive. I didn't realise how militant some members seem to be!
Sorry if it seems that way, members here are very passionate I find and in their posts it may come across as aggressive as it's very hard to be emotive in type. Most of the long term members have seen and heard the arguments for spiritually based ideas and have found nothing to show them any proof of validity. Why not stay and debate with people your belief in Reiki?
I can't imagine how depressing a life must be if lived without faith in anything that can't be proven scientifically, today! What a vacuous life it would be, never seeking answers beyond that which has already been proven!
Actually life isn't depressing relying on scientific fact and far from never seeking answers, science is always seeking for the unknown that's why we have moved on from the days when people thought an earthquake was God's anger. We can't have all the answers today but when answers are found it will always be someone's today
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Christopher Hitchens
Hi Amaris, I don't know how to copy the previous quote in the way that you guys have done- you can tell me how if you feel inclined!
"Most of the long term members have seen and heard the arguments for spiritually based ideas and have found nothing to show them any proof of validity. Why not stay and debate with people your belief in Reiki?"
I kind of wandered into the board out of curiousity, hoping that the level of debate might produce something I haven't already heard a million times before- I suspect your long-term members feel similarly- they must hear the same arguments over again just as I suspect I'm going to!
I don't have a 'belief' in Reiki- the question that contains the phrase is leading. I don't 'believe' in Reiki in the same way I might 'believe' in God. I am actually, a pragmatist. I test things out cautiously, see if there's anything to be gained from something, for me or someone I care about, and then go with it, without constantly seeking validation from the scientific process. I actually look beyond the surface, and seek the substance underneath.
Actually life isn't depressing relying on scientific fact and far from never seeking answers, science is always seeking for the unknown that's why we have moved on from the days when people thought an earthquake was God's anger. We can't have all the answers today but when answers are found it will always be someone's today
I also rely on science to make informed choices in my life. Having learnt about Reiki doesn't preclude me from respecting science. But equally, I do not discount something when I have evidence of my own, showing me clearly, that some benefit can be derived from something, regardless of it having not yet been tested scientfically.
I hope tests are carried out on whether Reiki can benefit people with muscular spacticity. Because I'm quite sure if my friend's experience is typical, that they'll find it extremely beneficial.
If militant members are genuinely interested in protecting the public, then perhaps they should consider a more pragmatic, less dogmatic approach. I often find, that people who are intent on proving that something doesn't work, end up wasting a lot of their time repeating themselves, that could have far better spent finding things in life that do work, and telling others about it!
Or if the negative approach is addictive in itself, has the owners/administrators of the board, ever considered turning their skeptical militant eye, onto something more significantly damaging in today's society? Why is there no baddoctors.co.uk or badlawyers.co.uk or even badpoliticians.co.uk? I suspect more damage is done to people's lives in the form of bad professional conduct that never gets proven, and systematic flaws in the systems of medical treatment, political process etc. that never gets reported, than will ever be done by a bad psychic or a bad Reiki practitioner.
You guys could really be changing the world, if you concentrated on something more significant with your energies.
But that is of course, just my view. I consider myself very much an outsider here, and distance myself from the generally negative tone of these boards, while hopefully being permitted to contribute alongside everyone else on them, in the future, and perhaps provide a more pragmatic view than I've found here, so far...
has anyone who would normally evangelise about the scientific process, and also maybe the medical profession, ever spent any time actually investigating the weaknesses in medical diagnoses by inexperienced doctors, and the FAITH the medical profession place in Medical Corporations when they prescribe medications which later prove to be damaging to a person's health?
And how about flaws in the reporting process of the side effects of some medications that reduce the level of reporting such that people might not know the full consequences of the pills they pop?
And the blind faith many people seem to have in doctors and the medical profession in general? Don't we have to have some level of FAITH in the treatment a doctor prescribes, before we take it? We can't know for sure that as an individual, we won't experience any side effects that the producers of medicines might rather we weren't aware of?
I just don't understand how someone can hold the views they do about things like Reiki, if they're not willing to take a closer look at the things they do have faith in, with just as strongly a critical and dogmatic approach...
To be fair, I was prescribed by a gp some pills which were known to exasperate a condition I had and they very nearly killed me, so I check all the facts nowadays before taking anything and don't have much faith in gps anymore.
I kind of wandered into the board out of curiousity, hoping that the level of debate might produce something I haven't already heard a million times before- I suspect your long-term members feel similarly- they must hear the same arguments over again just as I suspect I'm going to!
Maybe you can give us a new outlook then?
I don't have a 'belief' in Reiki- the question that contains the phrase is leading. I don't 'believe' in Reiki in the same way I might 'believe' in God.
But you believe it works therefore you have a belief in it
I also rely on science to make informed choices in my life. Having learnt about Reiki doesn't preclude me from respecting science. But equally, I do not discount something when I have evidence of my own, showing me clearly, that some benefit can be derived from something, regardless of it having not yet been tested scientfically.
Unfortunately psychics and mediums profess the same and use that premise to take money from the vulnerable, now I'm not saying that's what you do but I'm saying it can be used as an excuse to obtain money deceptively and that's why scientific facts are important ... in my opinion.
I hope tests are carried out on whether Reiki can benefit people with muscular spacticity. Because I'm quite sure if my friend's experience is typical, that they'll find it extremely beneficial.
I haven't actually looked into this but I would imagine some kind of testing would have been done and if proven beneficial would be in general usage today?
If militant members are genuinely interested in protecting the public, then perhaps they should consider a more pragmatic, less dogmatic approach. I often find, that people who are intent on proving that something doesn't work, end up wasting a lot of their time repeating themselves, that could have far better spent finding things in life that do work, and telling others about it!
I think you'll find we at BP would be the first to shout from the rooftops if anything spiritually/supernaturally based could be proven. We have a lot of visitors to the site proclaiming gifts of all kinds but their claims are either disproven by logic and science and none will allow themselves to be tested or give readings to Admin here.
Or if the negative approach is addictive in itself, has the owners/administrators of the board, ever considered turning their skeptical militant eye, onto something more significantly damaging in today's society? Why is there no baddoctors.co.uk or badlawyers.co.uk or even badpoliticians.co.uk? I suspect more damage is done to people's lives in the form of bad professional conduct that never gets proven, and systematic flaws in the systems of medical treatment, political process etc. that never gets reported, than will ever be done by a bad psychic or a bad Reiki practitioner.
It's not negativity, it's looking at claims made in a logical and scientific way and as I've said this site would be overjoyed to find truth in these things. The reason this site exists is because the owner saw that the vulnerable were being taken for a ride by people who claim to speak to the dead and wanted to inform people of the tricks they use to do this, over time we have come across things such as crystal healing, divination, tarot etc and none have been proven to work as they stand, without tricks or illusion or using psychology to play to the vulnerability of people.
But that is of course, just my view. I consider myself very much an outsider here, and distance myself from the generally negative tone of these boards, while hopefully being permitted to contribute alongside everyone else on them, in the future, and perhaps provide a more pragmatic view than I've found here, so far...
Everyone is entitled to their views and opinions and yours will be welcomed as well
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Christopher Hitchens
Firstly, you can argue about Reiki's effectiveness all day long if it makes you feel good, but you can't argue whether it exists- as a system/methodology, it does exist. So I'm not clear on whether quoting Confucius is just an attempt at appearing well-read or educated, or if you have a serious point to make!
I am sure Bob will be back along shortly to give his answers, but I wanted to say something. Yes the idea of Reiki exists. The real question is whether or not ki, or chi, exists. If it does exist it doesn't like to show itself or be measured by any scientific experiment.
It's pretty easy to prove the validity of my anecdotal evidence. It is straighforward testimony from a qualified accountant who experienced significant benefits in relation to muscular spacsticity, after receiving reiki, so much so that he learnt the technique himself. And treatements provided to him were given as one friend gives time to another, not for financial gain. But I didn't place my post on here to pursuade anyone of how Reiki can help them- I have no vested interest whatsoever in doing so, I just put my point of view on the board alongside others, because I thought it was an interesting discussion.
It is still anecdotal. What needs to be done is a double blind scientific test with controls. So that you can prove it is not just the placebo effect. If you are not familiar with it here is a good definition - www.skepdic.com/placebo.html
In my opinion, Reiki helped my friend without him specifically having any faith in it at all, we spent time together to see if it 'could' help him in any way, and it most certainly did. And there's nothing irrational about a person doing something from which they have derived a benefit. It's totally irrational to completely ignore something from which you derive benefit, because you don't understand why it works!
Your opinion is nice and I am glad your friend feels it helped him. Again learn about the placebo effect.
In respect of mythical origins, I didn't make any reference to mythical origins, it's irrelevant to my point, the simple fact that there is no specific dogma attached to the practice of Reiki, as you might find if you attempted to follow some religious path reliant on spiritual texts for your life lessons.
No one said there was a dogma. They were just pointing out that the origins were as silly as any religion.
And since we all agree that evidence for claims made is important, what evidence do you have that the reason individiuals feel relaxed after performing Reiki are the reasons you've given? Absolutely none, I suspect. Seems like they're just assumptions based on a pre-conception.
I guess laying down and being told to relax has nothing to do with relaxing? Relaxing is also not healing, which is what reiki claims to do.
The tone of the boards in here now I've had a good look around is really quite aggressive. I didn't realise how militant some members seem to be! I can't imagine how depressing a life must be if lived without faith in anything that can't be proven scientifically, today! What a vacuous life it would be, never seeking answers beyond that which has already been proven!
Amaris summed up this paragraph nicely, so I default to her post.
Edit: to fix my quote things, oh and Oliphont to quote a post just click on the little quote button at the top of the post.
I still don't know how to quote you so neatly, but here goes anyway:
"Quote: Or if the negative approach is addictive in itself, has the owners/administrators of the board, ever considered turning their skeptical militant eye, onto something more significantly damaging in today's society? Why is there no baddoctors.co.uk or badlawyers.co.uk or even badpoliticians.co.uk? I suspect more damage is done to people's lives in the form of bad professional conduct that never gets proven, and systematic flaws in the systems of medical treatment, political process etc. that never gets reported, than will ever be done by a bad psychic or a bad Reiki practitioner.
It's not negativity, it's looking at claims made in a logical and scientific way and as I've said this site would be overjoyed to find truth in these things. The reason this site exists is because the owner saw that the vulnerable were being taken for a ride by people who claim to speak to the dead and wanted to inform people of the tricks they use to do this, over time we have come across things such as crystal healing, divination, tarot etc and none have been proven to work as they stand, without tricks or illusion or using psychology to play to the vulnerability of people."
I do get what you're trying to achieve, I think! But it's not really the 'end' that I distance myself from, it's the means. The willingness of many posters (I'm not directing my comment specifically at the owners or admins of the boards) to attack almost on instinct, anyone who expresses any interest or belief that any of what you yourself have listed out above, might have some positive benefit to anyone is just so 'over the top'. It looks very much like you are using the same 'can't be scientifically proven' argument to broadly attack anything that hasn't yet or can't be scientifically proven, as necessarily invalid, because it hasn't been.
And I maintain, that that is a narrow-minded dogmatic approach which doesn't leave much room for debate of any real kind. And I do think that it is 'negative' to approach an issue in that way. It's negative because it negates proper debate. If the only criteria by which anything can ever be assessed is 'science', then really, GOD HELP US!
Shall I tell you what 'science' and the medical profession used to do to people with cerebral palsy? As a child, they would be put in metal contraptions that would force and stretch bone and muscle to grow in ways that were excrutiatingly painful, and of little use or help to the patient.
Babies would be written off as useless, and parents told to just try again for another baby, and maybe next time they'll get a proper one!
They would prescribe strong sedatives and tranquilisers to a patient if they kicked up a fuss about the pain they were in! I speak again from anecdotal evidence that can be substantiated, but cannot say that it was standard practice, though my understanding is, that it probably was. We're going back only 40-50 years.
Blind faith in science, which let's face it, is the single argument that almost every board on here falls back on, is the very thing that has never helped my friend with his condition. But you and those adopting your position, would pursuade someone in his position to leave Reiki well alone, believing you were doing him a favour, when in fact, you were depriving him of something genuinely useful and helpful to him.
That's what worries me most about this blind faith in science and blind anti-faith in anything metaphysical that is spouted throughout these boards. You've all made up your minds, and nothing on Earth is going to change your minds about any aspect of anything that (yawn) hasn't been scientifically proven!
Anyway, I'm pleased all views are welcome. Thank God for that!
Just out of interest, what would be taken as prove of a paranormal or metaphysical phenomenon to those people who would shout from the rooftops if they got it? Obvously RANDI has put up his money, but what exactly would constitute proof of say, the existence of ghosts?