International Viewpoints (IVy), Issue 33 - August 1997
<Technical Essay # 87 -- 11 May 1992.>
By Flemming Funch, USA
Most repetitive processes work by repeatedly putting attention on a certain subject or activity, noticing the restimulated phenomena that happen as a result, and continuing the repetitive activity until no more phenomena appear. That will usually correspond with a realization of increased perceptions or ability in the area.
The repetitive process focuses on a very specific area and stays with it until the available restimulation is taken out of it. That accomplishes something that would be difficult to do out in the noise of everyday life. It takes a safe space, a limited focus, and the intention to carry through with it.
The repetitive activity can be any of a number of different types. These are some of the things that can be repeated as a process:
A physical activity (objectives)
A question (grade processes)
A desirable activity (TRs)
A desirable thought (affirmation)
Any kind of thought or attention (meditation)
See, there are many more possible processes than what we have traditionally regarded as repetitive processes.
Solo or audited
Repetitive processes are by their nature essentially solo processes. The person needs to repeat the same action
and notice the feedback from his mind until he has gotten as far as he can get with it and there is no new feedback
to inspect. There is not much need for an experienced practitioner to analyze the situation and take decisions
about what to do. Some experience and analysis might be useful in picking the right process to start with, but
otherwise the only decision to take is really when to end the process.
Other reasons for needing a practitioner to run repetitive processes might be that the person lacks the discipline to finish a simple action, or that he is unable to perceive that things are going on in his mind. That is a pretty common state of humanity, so that can be expected. But, shouldn't a skilled practitioner be able to address these inabilities more directly in an interactive manner? We could work intensively on locating the charge that keeps somebody from doing something consistently until they are done. And we could coach them into noticing that responses happen in their mind.
In other words, I don't think repetitive processes are the best prescription for getting somebody to continue cycles of action and to notice what happens. Objectives would do that to a certain degree, but in a very brute force exhaustive manner. I think repetitive processes would be much more pleasant and productive if those matters were dealt with directly first.
Noticing the restimulated phenomena would have to be something the client does himself, nobody can really do it for him. The practitioner could help him to get started. That is for example what happens on objectives where the client would have some kind of physical change, and the practitioner would ask "What happened?". However, it could probably be done a lot more directly than that. Otherwise there are a lot of responses that some people never learn to recognize.
What gets turned on
The responses might be physical feelings, pictures, thoughts, etc. There are a lot of possible distinctions
in these. Temperature, pressure, movement, vibration, sounds, colors, etc. The ability to recognize these can be
brought up with the help of a practitioner who will insist that there is something more to perceive, and who will
insist on getting a description of what is there.
Those responses are the kind of stuff that comes up if you sit down to do TR0. Thoughts, discomforts, change in eye sight, etc. Any repetitive process produces such responses if one will just notice them. The more phenomena one goes through, probably the greater the benefit from the process. If one just ignores it or gets rid of it without noticing, it isn't very beneficial.
Most people would focus almost exclusively on the verbal responses when running a repetitive question process. Practitioner asks a question, client gets an answer from the bank, and states the answer. However, that is only a small aspect of the whole picture, and the verbal stuff isn't particularly the most important. Of course the client does other things to bring forward an answer. He might look at pictures, notice feelings he has, and so forth. But people have a very varying awareness of these things, and therefore different people can get widely different things out of the same repetitive process.
By an increased emphasis on what repetitive processes really do and who does it, it should be possible to increase their benefits and general usefulness.
As I said, if a person has the discipline and perceptions to run repetitive processes well, then he could probably do just as well on his own. If people can do processes in their own time, it avoids a lot of logistical and monetary problems.
What to repeat
The activity done in a repetitive process doesn't have to be a question. It could for example be a desirable
thought. Since thoughts have the power to shape your reality, i.e. postulating, you might want to pick something
you would like to think and run it as a repetitive process.
We could take a typical affirmation as "I deserve to be prosperous and wealthy". That would be kind of nice to firmly believe to the point where the universe will oblige you. However, if you think that statement, and whatever it implies, you will probably notice some kind of mental feedback. The file clerk mechanism will tend to come up with all the counter examples to it and the reasons and feelings why not. Particularly if you think it again, as a repetitive process, you will quickly notice that it brings about some sort of restimulation. If you continue it, and you notice what is happening along the way, the responses will probably gradually change to positive responses, and your "file clerk" will supply you with supporting information for what you are claiming. Eventually it will go flat and you will just feel good about it, an EP in other words.
The statement given is just an example. Any kind of desired positive thought that one would like to have right now can be used. How about "I have full exterior perception", or "I am an all-knowing being", that would probably work.
You could run a given affirmative process beyond a mere "feeling good" EP to the point of having something happen in the physical universe. Similar phenomenon as the Suppressed Person RD, if you continue until something actually happens, it will.
A process like that can be run as several flows, and it might also work well to throw in your name in it. Such
1. "I, your name, deserve to be prosperous and wealthy."
2. "You, your name, deserve to be prosperous and wealthy."
3. "your name deserves to be prosperous and wealthy."
That is a standard tech for doing affirmations, I didn't invent it. However, if you can set aside any fundamentalist biases you might have, you will realize that this kind of thing follows the basic principles of processing. And it is very safe to do on one's own. Of course, the many people who do affirmations don't necessarily know about the technical basics we might apply to it, and they might well Q&A and not run things to EP. However, processing still works even when imperfectly done.
There are a million other things one could do repetitively that would bring about some phenomena of restimulation, that one could work through as a process. For example, along the lines of TR0, instead of being there while putting attention on another person, one could put attention somewhere else. You can probably build up exterior perception by putting your attention in different places in the environment and keeping it there regardless of what happens, until the phenomena stabilize.
There is no reason to let repetitive processing be something proprietary and exclusive that you can only do if you pay a lot of money to a highly trained and carefully supervised practitioner. Repetitive processing is fairly harmless. It can certainly be done wrong, but that doesn't make it dangerous.
Repetitive processing is a simple method or spiritual improvement that almost anybody can do almost anywhere with minimal instruction.