No Desire, No Purpose

[Ruth]

Ruth, it seems as if your approach to Reiki is a sacred cow that needs to be put out to pasture.

FWIW

Umm, not much, I'm afraid, seeing as my sacred cow resides on a completely different property. :(

BTW, what is your interest/ideas/experience, with and about Reiki?

 

[anart]

Speaking of concepts, this is most likely a problem for ALL chanelled infromation! Therefore, it would probably be best if a person was to attempt to find the least corrupted source (which we should all be trying to do and encouraging others to do as a matter of course)

That is and has been the standard operating procedure of this forum. It seems that after all the time you have spent here, that would have sunk in by now.

, rather than assuming that everything chanelled on a certain subject is or has been corrupted beyond helpfullness as this would most likely depend on the source anyway. The difficult task is to look for the most uncorrupted source there is, and not just for information or a source that one 'likes'.... or approves of whatever that is and whereever it comes from.

Who are you accusing of doing such a thing? This is a suggestive comment, Ruth. It would be greatly appreciated if you would refrain from suggesting things about the people here and just come right on out and say what you mean - clearly.

Speaking of chanelled infromation, it seems odd some people are 'bagging' reiki, but not Gurdjieff.

More suggestion. Who is 'bagging'? Just because it has been pointed out that your newage reiki interpretation is the kind of thing this forum works so hard to expose and avoid, does not mean that all reiki has been 'bagged'.

Where did he get his information, if it wasn't passed on to him and ultimately chanelled information anyway?

What does Gurdjieff have to do with this and why would you assume anything was channeled?

I too would like to appologise to The Spoon for the thread 'hyjack'. Funny how these things happen and I often wonder why.

Considering your role in this occasion of hijacking - what conclusion has your 'wondering why' produced?

Ruth, I have learned to avoid addressing your behavior directly, due to your evidenced ability to ignore that which you do not like and just address that which you want to address, pushing forward no matter what is said to you. Your suggestive statements and general evidenced resentment of the information that is presented on this forum have also been displayed consistently enough to prove that the time and energy spent trying to address these things with you is generally wasted, but at this point - I mean, really - enough is enough.

 

[anart]

Ruth, it seems as if your approach to Reiki is a sacred cow that needs to be put out to pasture.

FWIW

Umm, not much, I'm afraid, seeing as my sacred cow resides on a completely different property. :(

This response indicates that you cannot see yourself clearly at all.

BTW, what is your interest/ideas/experience, with and about Reiki?

And this comment is baiting, Ruth - not very helpful and not appreciated.

 

[Mountain Crown]

[quote author=Ruth]Speaking of chanelled infromation, it seems odd some people are 'bagging' reiki, but not Gurdjieff. Where did he get his information, if it wasn't passed on to him and ultimately chanelled information anyway? Does this mean he is a 'purer' source and is less corrupted? Does this mean that there aren't versions of his teachings which haven't been corrupted?[/quote]

This is too close to trolling for comfort. Would you please provide examples where Reiki was 'bagged'?

Also, would you please explain how channeling was addressed in Buddy's post?

Umm, not much, I'm afraid, seeing as my sacred cow resides on a completely different property

This makes no sense, and comes across as using some kind of wit to avoid the mirror.

 

[Ruth]

I hate to hijack this thread for my question (I'm very sorry The Spoon ), but I've been reading this thread with some interest and a question came up: is there a difference in Reiki and the laying on hands ?

Well, in the Reiki I have been taught, a person 'laying on hands' has not been 'tuned' as a reiki chanel - therefore they are transmitting their own energy from their own body and are much more likely to end up being drained. How accurate is this? Well, I don't know, but it does make me wonder.

It would seem to me potentially likely that there are some people who can quite naturally heal with their hands and take energy from some sort of 'higher source' replacing what they chanel to others without being 'tuned' in the practice of reiki. There are historical reports of this occuring. Especially if we are talking about some sort of energy transference that is a natural, but variable human ability.

Also, I have discovered that there are some people who are supposedly 'tuned' in Reiki who have said to me that they no longer do it because they feel drained! Kind of makes you wonder what sort of 'tuning' process went on in their experience of Reiki! Scary. These types of people tend not to want to go off and find a reason for this, or even look at an alternative Reiki teacher or even be 'tuned' again. They are just disappointed. I mean, its just a little like 'buyer beware' to me. If you're not satisfied with a 'product', they really need to find a better Reiki Master who can 'tune' them properly.

And then, of course there's all the New Agey approaches from people you meet whilst doing Reiki classes. But each to their own. Its not my job to change them.

 

[anart]

And then, of course there's all the New Agey approaches from people you meet whilst doing Reiki classes. But each to their own. Its not my job to change them.

Yes, 'those people' with the new agey approaches...

I have been told that reiki works regardless of who or what a person is - it works for 'the higher good'.
....
Most people (and things) are connected in some way to a higher source.
...
How much of them is "present" there and manifests in their higher self may vary.
...
But, when doing reiki, I assume that it is there, and that it can answer me when I ask permission. That's why we have the 'calling up' process in place. If it wasn't there, we could just discard it and violate free will.

At this point it's becoming difficult to tell whether or not you're joking, considering how extremely newage your approach is.

As I mentioned earlier, it has been evidenced time and again that attempting to explain such things to you about your behavior on this forum is time and energy wasted, so perhaps it really is time for you to move along to another forum where you can discuss your newage reiki, and the many other things you disagree with about this forum, in peace - and leave us in peace to carry on with what we do? It certainly seems as if that would be a positive solution for all concerned.

Or, perhaps, you'll just continue to ignore the input given to you by several people in this thread (and others) relating directly to the above and continue to post as if none of it was ever written... as usual, we'll see.

 

[Snow]

is there a difference in Reiki and the laying on hands?

Good question actually. First I would have said yes, if by laying on hands you mean in the evangelical sense, because Reiki involves a type of "tuning" of the student by the master. But then I remembered these passages from the transcripts:

Q: Does Reverend R*** know that she is a fraud?
A: No. She believes her.
Q: Is there any psychic activity that occurs when this woman
works on one?
A: Yes.
Q: What is the nature of it?
A: Transference of energy.
Q: What is the source or root of this energy?
A: Intense concentration of psychic thought power.
Q: She is not influenced by any negatives such as the Lizzies
or anything like that?
A: Some, for confusion purposes.
Q: So C*** works with the Lizzie energy?
A: Somewhat.
Q: What is the force or background of R***, G***, J***, et
al.
A: Bogus but some sincere healing does occur as a result of
faith.

Not exactly in an evangelical sense, at least not with its religious coloring. I used to lay on hands / heal people (direct family members), but there was no religion involved, (nor any reiki-ish processes). But it is clear to me now that there is a difference, thanks :)

and related:

Q: (L) Last week, the remark was made, regarding spirit
release and exorcism, that if it is done properly, by the right
person, that there is no side effects or eventualities that would
bring detrimental conditions to the individuals and location
involved. What was meant by "done correctly?" What is the
correct format or mode for exorcism?
A: Correct manner involves honesty and understanding that
one has complete faith and awareness of the activities
pursued. In other words, when one performs an act which
they proclaim to be having a desired result, and they do not
have faith in their own actions as, in fact, producing the
desired result, then the effort will collapse because of their
lack of faith. Whereas when one has complete faith and
multidensity understanding, their activities are indeed truth and
useful as prescribed and this is the correct way to pursue
them.

Yes, I did have faith (and still do, although I do not actively heal ppl anymore) and was honest in my intent and knowledgeable of what I was doing. I didn't do any activities in regards to spirit release and exorcism...