As more and more people become interested in learning the healing art of Reiki, the variety of Reiki courses being offered becomes greater to the point of being confusing. Reiki was an energy healing system that originated in Japan through it's founder, Dr. Mikao Usui. It was taught in the context of Japanese culture and outlook, with a great respect for tradition and simplicity.

As Reiki has exploded in the West, it has blossomed into dozens of different variations and offshoots of Reiki, including such schools as Karuna Reiki, Lightarian Reiki, and many many more. Some of these include additional Reiki symbols and additional techniques - some borrowed from other New Age healing systems such as crystal therapy or angel therapy.

While some traditionalists find this proliferation upsetting, I personally feel that on the whole, it is a positive. Many clients can benefit from a wider range of healing "helps" such as sound, aroma and crystals. Do people really need to go see separate practitioners for crystal therapy, angel therapy, aromatherapy and Reiki, when a single well-trained therapist can draw from the entire repertoire to suit their needs? Do we need to pretend that only one way works, when the energies of all these healing modalities are obviously similar?

I have talked to a number of Reiki students trained in various types of Reiki. Some of them were attuned in person by a master; others were attuned by "distance attunement", and some practiced "self attunement". I can detect no serious difference in the healing abilities or the subjective feeling of "being attuned" between any of these students. I have to conclude that the distance or self attunements that self-study courses provide are just as satisfactory in transmitting Reiki.

So I guess this puts me in the more "liberal" camp of Reiki masters. I believe that any good Reiki course with enough content and training and a dedicated master can transmit the Reiki attunements. Go where you are led and keep a charitable heart toward those on other paths.