‘Healing - History and Future’
Doctor-Healer Network lecture - February 6th 2011 by Allan J Sweeney
At University of London, Commonwealth Hall, London
Lecture notes, including introductory lecture to a new history book,
‘Usui’s Teacher’
Allan J Sweeney opened his lecture by saying the intention was not to dictate history of reiki or spiritual healing, but to debate, and open minds to consider potentially new ideas. The following article attempts to describe slides, or groups of slides, presented.
Sweeney’s personal history was mentioned, including when he was registered as being 80% disabled, having 2 years to live with a different condition, but being cured by two healers. He then studied healing, eventually running a Harley Street and 10-bed residential clinics, taught about 1,000s of students, and conducted research into ADHD, deafness, tinnitus, back pain etc.
The question was posed, ‘What is History?’ because opinions on history exist in all fields. E.g. Nazis v Jews and Taiwan v China. Varied reiki and spiritual systems e.g. William Rand v Harry Edwards offer conflicting opinions. With such diverse opinion what can be learned from history?
A theme of the lecture asked ‘Which was the best healing system in history?’ For example, the founder of Reiki, Dr Usui, his student Dr Hayashi, and his student Mrs Takata all taught differently. As examples, Usui had many levels of teaching, taught much healing, psychic and spiritual knowledge, had techniques for illnesses, and gave no attunements; Takata taught three levels, little knowledge, no techniques, and four attunements. Which system was best?
Morihei Tanaka had identical stories to Reiki’s Dr Usui – but pre-Usui and pre-Reiki
References were made to pages 175-184, 222, 227 of ‘Usui’s Teacher’ and a Japanese article c1908 that describes Tanaka’s experiences that were perhaps mistakenly attributed to Dr Usui and Reiki history in the 1920s, including fasting, enlightenment and discovery of therapy on a mountain, healing a young girl’s headache, diseases like congestion of the brain, hysteria, ears, spleen, wounds, eyes, bladder, cancer of the tongue, and so on. Even language in Usui’s Hikkei and Tanaka’s Taireido writings, and their therapies were similar – Usui’s ‘Pressing with Hands’, ‘Tapping Therapy’, and ‘Stroking Therapy’; and Tanaka’s ‘Pressure Process’, ‘Strained Finger’, and ‘Massage Process’. It seems Tanaka was Usui’s teacher? If so, where does that leave Reiki practitioners who honored Usui as the originator of Reiki? Who was right? Who was best?
From what we now know of Tanaka and Usui’s teaching, Tanaka taught more knowledge? ‘Usui’s Teacher’ shows Tanaka taught more than Dr Usui, at least what is known. Extra Tanaka knowledge taught includes Mental and physical training P149, 155, 161; Mental preparations before treatment 48-53; Physical preparations before treatment 54-55; Treatment of disease 57-66; The Creed 69; Science of Reishi 77-79; Action of Reishi 81-83; How to command external Reishi action 85-88; Acquiring Reishi by standing method 89-96, Records of Reishi actions 97-98. Much of this seems needed by some Reiki lineages now? Who was right? Which was best?
So who taught Tanaka?
Sweeney suggestedTanaka’s ideas came via Madame Blavatsky’s Theosophy. Theosophists visited Japan in early 1900s; Tanaka’s English books were found in cities frequented by prominent theosophists; and psychic techniques in ‘Usui’s Teacher’ are similar to psychic development boards of Blavatsky and theosophists. Again, who was right, who was best?
History of healing
Sweeney suggested healing systems may be cyclical. 5000 years ago Indian Prana taught yoga, meditation, and Chinese Ch’I balanced yin and yang for health; 2500 years ago Greek Pythagorus said Light cures illness, Jewish Kabbalah taught astral light energies, Aesclepius and Hippocrates spread healing in Greece; 2,000 years ago saw Druids and Code of Hammurabi; 1,500 years ago St Augustine’s Christian healing and Ebers Papyrus; 1000 years ago French Boirac said humans distantly interact, the Normans and the Yellow Emperor spread spirituality; 500 years ago French Mesmer said bodies can be energy charged, as did witches, Confucianism and Paracelsus. There are regular upsurges in healing systems. Over thousands of years there have been thousands of systems and millions of teachers; but few (if any) exist today! Which was right? Which was best?
After 1,000s of systems over 1,000s of years, why is healing not part of orthodox medicine?
Possible answers that were up for debate by open minds included:
1. Healers still debate who is right and which system is best. Unlike orthodox medicine there is little agreed standardised delivery of intervention for different illnesses and conditions
2. Healing is offered for every illness any person could ever have – whereas orthodox medicine treats specific illnesses with a variety of targeted and proven interventions.
3. Healers often use ‘intuition’ and do not accept their intuition can be wrong, which it can be. So, unlike tried and tested drugs, healers may not achieve similar results to each other.
4. Many healers say, ‘It’s not me doing the healing’, or ‘I’m only a channel, and have no control over outcome’. Medical doctors may prefer therapists to be accountable for their actions, not to say the outcome has nothing to do with them.
The way forward
Sweeneyquestioned again why so many healing systems had been lost over so many years? He questioned if the current upsurge in healing may also be lost one day?
To attempt to counteract any downturn in acceptance of healing, Sweeney showed a variety of research-based strategies that may help healing integrate with orthodox medicine permanently.
1. Sweeney showed graphs of his research into ADHD, deafness, tinnitus, and back pain, demonstrating that different healing therapies e.g. spiritual or Reiki seem to gain different results.
2. Healing could become more like pharmaceutical industry’s research. The suggestion is to choose an illness/condition/symptom that is not significantly helped by orthodox medicine, find the most effective healing method (e.g. spiritual healing, or reiki healing), ensure results are repeatable, find cost benefits, and then market the results.
3. Research evidence to show healing success includes alleviation or fix of symptoms, improved quality of life, savings on fewer prescriptions, savings on less visits to GP or therapist, less referrals to outside bodies, a return to work to support the economy instead of draining it on benefits, and happiness at home and work. He suggested a study is needed for each condition to discover which healing system gains best outcomes for which health problem.
The lecture finished with a slide urging the audience to reflect on history to improve our future.
Contact details
Email: [email protected]
Websites:
www.allansweeney.com
www.reiki-healing.com
www.usuisteacher.com
Doctor-Healer Network lecture - February 6th 2011 by Allan J Sweeney
At University of London, Commonwealth Hall, London
Lecture notes, including introductory lecture to a new history book,
‘Usui’s Teacher’
Allan J Sweeney opened his lecture by saying the intention was not to dictate history of reiki or spiritual healing, but to debate, and open minds to consider potentially new ideas. The following article attempts to describe slides, or groups of slides, presented.
Sweeney’s personal history was mentioned, including when he was registered as being 80% disabled, having 2 years to live with a different condition, but being cured by two healers. He then studied healing, eventually running a Harley Street and 10-bed residential clinics, taught about 1,000s of students, and conducted research into ADHD, deafness, tinnitus, back pain etc.
The question was posed, ‘What is History?’ because opinions on history exist in all fields. E.g. Nazis v Jews and Taiwan v China. Varied reiki and spiritual systems e.g. William Rand v Harry Edwards offer conflicting opinions. With such diverse opinion what can be learned from history?
A theme of the lecture asked ‘Which was the best healing system in history?’ For example, the founder of Reiki, Dr Usui, his student Dr Hayashi, and his student Mrs Takata all taught differently. As examples, Usui had many levels of teaching, taught much healing, psychic and spiritual knowledge, had techniques for illnesses, and gave no attunements; Takata taught three levels, little knowledge, no techniques, and four attunements. Which system was best?
Morihei Tanaka had identical stories to Reiki’s Dr Usui – but pre-Usui and pre-Reiki
References were made to pages 175-184, 222, 227 of ‘Usui’s Teacher’ and a Japanese article c1908 that describes Tanaka’s experiences that were perhaps mistakenly attributed to Dr Usui and Reiki history in the 1920s, including fasting, enlightenment and discovery of therapy on a mountain, healing a young girl’s headache, diseases like congestion of the brain, hysteria, ears, spleen, wounds, eyes, bladder, cancer of the tongue, and so on. Even language in Usui’s Hikkei and Tanaka’s Taireido writings, and their therapies were similar – Usui’s ‘Pressing with Hands’, ‘Tapping Therapy’, and ‘Stroking Therapy’; and Tanaka’s ‘Pressure Process’, ‘Strained Finger’, and ‘Massage Process’. It seems Tanaka was Usui’s teacher? If so, where does that leave Reiki practitioners who honored Usui as the originator of Reiki? Who was right? Who was best?
From what we now know of Tanaka and Usui’s teaching, Tanaka taught more knowledge? ‘Usui’s Teacher’ shows Tanaka taught more than Dr Usui, at least what is known. Extra Tanaka knowledge taught includes Mental and physical training P149, 155, 161; Mental preparations before treatment 48-53; Physical preparations before treatment 54-55; Treatment of disease 57-66; The Creed 69; Science of Reishi 77-79; Action of Reishi 81-83; How to command external Reishi action 85-88; Acquiring Reishi by standing method 89-96, Records of Reishi actions 97-98. Much of this seems needed by some Reiki lineages now? Who was right? Which was best?
So who taught Tanaka?
Sweeney suggestedTanaka’s ideas came via Madame Blavatsky’s Theosophy. Theosophists visited Japan in early 1900s; Tanaka’s English books were found in cities frequented by prominent theosophists; and psychic techniques in ‘Usui’s Teacher’ are similar to psychic development boards of Blavatsky and theosophists. Again, who was right, who was best?
History of healing
Sweeney suggested healing systems may be cyclical. 5000 years ago Indian Prana taught yoga, meditation, and Chinese Ch’I balanced yin and yang for health; 2500 years ago Greek Pythagorus said Light cures illness, Jewish Kabbalah taught astral light energies, Aesclepius and Hippocrates spread healing in Greece; 2,000 years ago saw Druids and Code of Hammurabi; 1,500 years ago St Augustine’s Christian healing and Ebers Papyrus; 1000 years ago French Boirac said humans distantly interact, the Normans and the Yellow Emperor spread spirituality; 500 years ago French Mesmer said bodies can be energy charged, as did witches, Confucianism and Paracelsus. There are regular upsurges in healing systems. Over thousands of years there have been thousands of systems and millions of teachers; but few (if any) exist today! Which was right? Which was best?
After 1,000s of systems over 1,000s of years, why is healing not part of orthodox medicine?
Possible answers that were up for debate by open minds included:
1. Healers still debate who is right and which system is best. Unlike orthodox medicine there is little agreed standardised delivery of intervention for different illnesses and conditions
2. Healing is offered for every illness any person could ever have – whereas orthodox medicine treats specific illnesses with a variety of targeted and proven interventions.
3. Healers often use ‘intuition’ and do not accept their intuition can be wrong, which it can be. So, unlike tried and tested drugs, healers may not achieve similar results to each other.
4. Many healers say, ‘It’s not me doing the healing’, or ‘I’m only a channel, and have no control over outcome’. Medical doctors may prefer therapists to be accountable for their actions, not to say the outcome has nothing to do with them.
The way forward
Sweeneyquestioned again why so many healing systems had been lost over so many years? He questioned if the current upsurge in healing may also be lost one day?
To attempt to counteract any downturn in acceptance of healing, Sweeney showed a variety of research-based strategies that may help healing integrate with orthodox medicine permanently.
1. Sweeney showed graphs of his research into ADHD, deafness, tinnitus, and back pain, demonstrating that different healing therapies e.g. spiritual or Reiki seem to gain different results.
2. Healing could become more like pharmaceutical industry’s research. The suggestion is to choose an illness/condition/symptom that is not significantly helped by orthodox medicine, find the most effective healing method (e.g. spiritual healing, or reiki healing), ensure results are repeatable, find cost benefits, and then market the results.
3. Research evidence to show healing success includes alleviation or fix of symptoms, improved quality of life, savings on fewer prescriptions, savings on less visits to GP or therapist, less referrals to outside bodies, a return to work to support the economy instead of draining it on benefits, and happiness at home and work. He suggested a study is needed for each condition to discover which healing system gains best outcomes for which health problem.
The lecture finished with a slide urging the audience to reflect on history to improve our future.
Contact details
Email: [email protected]
Websites:
www.allansweeney.com
www.reiki-healing.com
www.usuisteacher.com
