I am often asked about the quality and effectiveness of Reiki teachers and practitioners. While there is no doubt that all properly trained and attuned Reiki practitioners and teachers possess and adequate level of skills and understanding of energywork and healing, it has always been clear to me that there were obvious differences in competency and effectiveness. It is against the "political correctness" of Reiki to admit to such differences. Nevertheless, I have to admit that I have always known of these differences, and recently I have begun to quantify and describe them.

My own perceptions so far are that, at the Reiki Master level, the length of the lineage does seem to be a factor. Those with a lineage shorter than ten RMs away from Usui often show more skill and adequacy as healers that those with a lineage of twenty or more. [My own lineage is short - 7 away from Usui]. In addition, those who learned in a large class, or who progressed through the levels of Reiki rapidly are less likely to show great skill. Perhaps this is related to the increasing popularity of Reiki which may bring hasty and unskilled teaching by some newer teachers. Great proficiency as a healer is not always related to the length of lineage or size of class, but seems also to be related to any innate skills which the student brought with them to Reiki [either inherited or by prior energywork training]. Those students and RMs who have studied various forms of energywork before or after learning Reiki are also seemingly more proficient than those who only studied Reiki. [Reiki, after all, is a method of delivering healing - there are other methods of healing of varying efficiency]. There are also noticeable differences between students and their capabilities.

An analogy to music would be helpful in understanding this. One can teach classical pipe organ to a number of students. With good teachers, these students will become quite proficient, yet only the artists among them will truly move us; the others remain expert technicians. An exceptional student will benefit from "master classes", taught one on one. There is such a parallel in Reiki. A practitioner is the "instrument" on which Reiki is "played", and through which Reiki is delivered to the client. Most of us will have learned the "musical theory" and have done "hours of practice" on the "instrument". There will be differences among us as practitioners. If we let our own innate skills have expression through Reiki we will produce the most healing.

Obviously, I am convinced that Reiki is a very effective method of healing [there are other methods which are very effective, but not suited to the vast majority of practitioners and clients]. In my own practice, therefore, I have chosen to usually train my students one at a time, especially at the RM level. I encourage my RM students to become familiar with other methods of healing so that they can understand more of healing and the underlying subtle universal life energy which is being used. I urge students to remain at each level of Reiki for an adequate amount of time and to study healing methods during this time. Students are encouraged to let their own innate skills guide them within the confines of Reiki. To the extent that each student is willing to maintain their "instrument", they will be effective as healers. I accept that I will know students of different levels of skill and inspiration. Each student will bring different backgrounds and experience to the study of Reiki. Each level of skill and experience is important to me, and each will receive the training appropriate to the enthusiasm and curiosity of the particular student. All will learn to master Reiki.