Milarepa wrote:

MattiT wrote: Although I belong to the notorious "original" camp and would therefore prefer to talk about Usui Reiki Ryoho, I believe any differences between the two are so small that practically anything said about one also applies to the other.

Usui Shiki Ryoho is an original style.

I know that.

I've just noticed that there seems to be some air of distrust between Takata lineage followers and those who describe their style as "original."

Rlei_ki wrote:"A thousand Zen Buddhist monks in a Monastery - a thousand different religions in the Monastery".

I think the same sentiment can apply in Reiki

Thanks James, i thought of the same but could not remember the source...

MattiT wrote:

Milarepa wrote:

MattiT wrote: Although I belong to the notorious "original" camp and would therefore prefer to talk about Usui Reiki Ryoho, I believe any differences between the two are so small that practically anything said about one also applies to the other.

Usui Shiki Ryoho is an original style.

I know that.

I've just noticed that there seems to be some air of distrust between Takata lineage followers and those who describe their style as "original."

it's actually the oppostie. i've been explaining ot Frnak in my onw topic bout this. The folks who stay true to the original teachings within Usui Shiki Ryoho never feel the need to openely speak about another style. they'll categorically never speak negatively in this way. they also don't feel the need to stand up for themselves, or to defend the many wrong things said. often, they also don't care for forums.

i guess they're quite quietly confident in the knowledge they know exactly where they come from, what they're practising. I guarantee that never would we hear a practitioner of certain lineage in Usui Shiki Ryoho ever speak bad about any other style or practitioner.

I know i myself suspect lots of these original styles. I'd bad experience personally also. though it's not without some measure of evidence that i've got my own personal opinion. And lets be honest, these original styles are modern styles, no matter what they say, they are all modern versions of something assumed to be 100 years ago. they're at best 20 years old styles, based on at times some very dubious research. what happens is, folks do research, maybe write a book, and then folks see it in print and accept it without question. if folks look into things (such as has been transpiring in my Takata topic), they'd see what is accepted is actually far from fact.

warmest wishes
Wayne