"JAPANESE" REIKI: PURER / CLOSER TO THE SOURCE THAN "WESTERN" REIKI....?
Copyright © 2011 James Deacon

It is interesting, I feel, how what we term: "Japanese" Reiki is widely considered to be 'purer' or 'closer to the source' than socalled "Western Reiki".

Yet if we look at the various primary "Japanese" expressions of the art :
Vortex Reiki, Reido Reiki, Gendai Reiki Ho, Komyo Reiki Kai, Jikiden Reiki, etc.

we cannot help but see that while originally stemming from the same source, these "Japanese" styles - just as is the case with "Western" Reiki - have, over time, evolved and grown in different ways:

They have often been subject to various external influences,
in several cases, adopting-in practices from non-Reiki sources;
evolving different understandings concerning the primary underlying purpose of Reiki practice;
modifying the form of the symbols,
evolving different versions of symbol names and/or jumon,
adding new symbols,
in some cases, changing the level at which symbols are introduced;
blending in elements from different pre-existing Reiki styles;
evolving different versions of the attunement or reiju process,
in some cases having several different versions of the process for different purposes;
evolving different understandings concerning the purpose and use of specific symbols;
changing the number of levels within the training format,
and also the content of training at each level,
as well as modifying the teaching format
– the list goes on and on...


So what is it that causes the seemingly widespread tendency within the Reiki Community to be more accepting of the changes and evolutions which have taken place in “Japanese” Reiki, while decrying similar changes and evolutions which have occurred in “Western” Reiki.

Could it be simply a case of having been dazzled by the hype...