On a few of the email lists I belong to of late, there has been some discussion of the nature of hypnosis and whether or not trance or critical factor bypass are the same or different monkeys. One part of the thread has been regarding hyperempiria which gets discussed quite a bit here on the technique exchange. A disagreement has come up as to whether hyperempiria is indeed a different state than hypnosis, a specific form of experiential hypnosis but hypnosis nonetheless.
The following is an extension of my line of thought that incorporates and expands upon a few of my posts within the discussion thread.
If it makes it easier to digest . . . preface all of my responses below with "in my opinion based upon my experience and understanding" . . . those who wish to disagree are free to do so. This is my response to the topic based upon my understanding from direct experience and study. Take it or leave it.
I'm of the hyperempiria is a form of experiential hypnosis ilk . . . it's merely directing the suggestions toward awareness rather than relaxation . . . at least that's the original intention of the hyperempiric inductions. The model of doing hypnosis this way and of using a different term than hypnosis is useful to distinguish the effects from those achieved in the progressive relaxation set, but the utility and effect is not substantially different from straightforward somnambulism-based "experiential" hypnosis as has been discussed here.
One advantage of using a different vocabulary is to avoid the baggage associated with "hypnosis" in much the same way the term "hypnotism" was coined to be more descriptive of the state (albeit, Braid regretted the term later and belatedly wished to change it to monoideism which is certainly more descriptive as hypnosis had NOTHING whatsoever to do with genuine hypnos, sleep) and to avoid the negative baggage and sloppy thinking that had grown up around "animal magnetism" and "Mesmerism." Certainly, in recent years, a great deal of negative baggage and sloppy thinking has become associated with hypnosis so hyperempiria becomes a term that both is descriptive of the desired outcome state as well as one that has no negative associations attached to it. Some folks who might object to undergoing hypnosis will be perfectly happy to enjoy or undertake a hyperempiric experience. I will use "focused trance" with folks for much the same reasons (descriptive, associative, and legal - focused trance, like hyperempiria, is currently not regulated in most locales while hypnosis is).
When Dr. Don Gibbons started doing hyperempiric inductions (he's the gentleman who coined the phrase and you can find his academic and practical books online . . . it never ceases to amaze me when I come across so many folks who bandy about the term hyperempiria who have never read or even given credit to the good doctor who is the originating pioneer of the techniques others are teaching . . . one woman I came across was claiming hyperempiria was some sort of access system to one's higher self and a means for humans to communicate with spiritual beings having been given to humans via mediumship . . . uh, not really on the same page there). Go to the source and read these books: Beyond Hypnosis: Explorations in Hyperempiria, Applied Hypnosis and Hyperempiria, and Experience As An Art Form: Hypnosis, Hyperempiria, and the Best Me Technique. You will also find that Dr. Gibbons has kindly put an electronic copy of the original edition of his book on hyperempiria for sexuality (therapeutic and consenting adult recreational purposes, which he is currently editing for a new, much more powerful, edition) in the files section of the hypnosis technique exchange which is one of the email discussion lists I moderate . . . btw, for those unfamiliar with the term, it was Dr. Gibbons who first encouraged me to start an association for experiential hypnosis as he has followed my work as I have followed his . . . his positive opinion means a great deal to me), it was specifically to work with folks who found classic "relaxation" inductions unsettling. I respect Don a great deal for what he has done and his innovation within a community that is resistant to the idea that hypnosis does not require relaxation (he was doing a great deal of his work within a community, academic and otherwise, where progressive relaxation was considered the standard and requirement for induction), but basically the effective processes are the same except that the hyperempiric induction focuses on alertness and awareness with full sensory association into the imagery. When one reads the classic inductions for hyperempiria, they read much the same as classic hypnosis inductions with the exception that they focus on alertness and sensory experience rather than relaxation and dilution of experience. They are two aspects of the same quality . . . engaged imagination, suggestion, and compliance . . . within intensified imaginative involvement to bypass the critical factor of the conscious mind in order to establish desirable selective thinking. They are both forms of focused trance and hypnosis. Of course, it is unfair to look at someone's work and point at flaws if that is an ongoing work . . . a life's work still in process . . . Dr. Gibbons is continually updating his ideas and theories so it is important not to take the older pieces out of context but to see them as part of a continuing chain of progress and improvement (I've seen some of his more recent essays and he continues to be innovative and contributes much to the field).
I have found that the same results that can be had through hyperempiria can be achieved through experiential hypnosis with the suggestions for full-on sensory association (which is how I get the same effects). The hyperempiric inductions or processes are not innovative as a new state but as an original route of achieving state to increase sensory affect. They are indeed very innovative, but they provide a new construct for achieving certain effects, not a new state in and of itself.
Obviously, if you consider hypnosis to rely upon relaxation with decreased physical sensation and the like - lethargy and dullness of thought or consciousness - then hyperempiria must be something other than hypnosis in that it relies upon alertness and focus as well increased sensation . . . full-on sensory experience . . . or, as Dr. Gibbons described my take on using hypnosis to accelerate and build intense sensory affect related to imagery and the like . . . experiential hypnosis.
Of course, some folks make the erroneous assumption that hyperempiria is the same as the various higher-self or ultra-height processes or that somehow these are co-dependant . . . they are not. Certainly, they can be used in conjunction with one another, but neigher depends upon the other and can be used independantly (and usually are as the originators of both streams had very different and specific intentions for the processes). Any effect you can achieve in one form of hypnosis can be achieved in others . . . eyes open, waking state, eyes closed, relaxation, hyperempiric, whatever . . . because those are induction contexts . . . the key is the engagement of the imagination to bypass the critical factor and then start running your compliance patterns for suggestions, building and compounding within context to create an environment in which the desired results are achieved. It is still critical factor bypass, intensity of the imaginative involvement, and establishment of the appropriate selective thinking. It is a form of hypnosis, but different in a way that eyes-open hypnosis or waking hypnosis or relaxation hypnosis are different but they all share in the quality of being a form of trance-based critical factor bypass. Once you've got the compliance pattern, you can also pop a person back and forth through any of these so-called different forms as the critical factor bypass and engagement and intensification of the involvement of the imagination is maintained. So, I can use my modified Elman induction and guide a person into somnambulism, compound the compliance and affective responses, then go directly into the various hyperempiric suggestions and achieve the same results. The uniqueness of hyperempiria is not in the sense of being different from hypnosis in terms of critical factor bypass but in that it is hypnosis associated with sensory phenomena and the induction set, hyperempiria is a subset of hypnosis rather than being completely unique. In my opinion. Albeit, I do agree that some forms of trance may not be "hypnosis" . . . but . . . hyperempiria is not one of those forms. At least, in my opinion.
In response to my view, some have said that they believe hypnosis includes somnambulism in its definition and that as fellow Neo-Elmanian hypnotists (a label that fits a great deal of my own hypnobias), we are constantly testing for somnambulism rather than critical factor bypass. As some folks take the root parts of the word somnambulism to be literally walking while one sleeps, they miss the historical context for why the word has been misapplied and is now generally accepted to mean something the roots have nothing to do with. I have been asked if I also test for somnambulism when inducing hyperempiria and the answer is, yes. Somnambulism is hypnosis is engagement of and intensification of imaginative involvement, critical factor bypass, and establishment of desirable selective thinking to a degree that appropriate signs are present and one has automatic compliance to suggestion.
Somnambulism has nothing to do with sleep or wakefulness. It is merely critical factor bypass and desired suggestion compliance through imaginative involvement with appropriate signs.
In my opinion, critical factor bypass is the key between trance and forms of hypnosis. In my opinion, that's it. Yes, when I induce hyperempiria, or rather, induce hyperempiric phenomena through a form of hypnosis . . . or, rather, when I do ANY form of hypnosis . . . I test for somnambulism . . . that's pretty much my standard "working state" for trancework . . . I may not do the same tests as in the Elman induction or elsewhere, but I test and make sure I have "state" . . . whatever that may mean.
Rather than believing, as some do, that somnambulism distinguishes hypnosis from hyperempiria, I believe somnambulism is the same for either as hyperempiria should display the same compliance set . . . albeit, the tests will be different (rather than lethargic catalepsy, one might test for the other bits) . . . the signs of hypnosis are all present in hyperempiria . . . or, at least, they should be if one is having full effect.
At least one person in the discussion characterized somnambulism as the state everyone naturally goes through between being awake and asleep and back and that as hypnotists we guide folks through and into that state. For these folks, hyperempiria must be different from hypnosis because of the lack of sleeplike state. When Dr. Gibbons first began working with hypermpiric inductions and when he coined the term, he also characterized hypnosis as a sleeplike state that included drowsiness and relaxation rather than alert or full sensory experience. This is a fallacy that has deep historical basis but is not based upon what's actually going on – albeit, there are practical reasons to hang on to a new term to describe the hyperempiric experience and differentiate it from other forms of hypnosis or experiential hypnosis.
In any case, regardless, somnambulism as the term is used to describe certain hypnotic stages (deep trance), has nothing to do with sleep or wakefulness. One does not have to be guided into wakefulness from sleep or sleep from wakefulness to get it. The state between sleep and wakefulness is the hypnoidal state which actually has very little or nothing to do with hypnosis. It is merely the twilight state. It is a time when folks can be roused into hypnosis because of some increased susceptibility to suggestion, but it is not hypnosis in and of itself.
At least that is MY UNDERSTANDING of and my BELIEF regarding hypnosis, experiential hypnosis, hyperempiria, and somnambulism. Those who are interested in experiential hypnosis and how to do it well, do it right, and do it in any context . . . the full deal . . . should take the upcoming course at http://www.briandavidphillips.com . . . sign up now!
All the best,
Brian
Another variation of the process, is a simple one card draw (either random or selected - some folks will start with the Fool and then go through the entire deck (either in order of the Major Arcana first or through random draws) in a way so that they eventually create a personal connection and understanding of every card in the deck at the intuitive level. Basically, one enters trance and then imagines the borders of the card becoming a portal and then steps through the gates into the world beyond the border of the cards and then interacts with the characters that can be seen and that are hidden beyond the card's border, in essence allowing the unconscious to create a narrative or experience that enhances one's intuitive understanding of the card. Obviously, with deep trance, the experience can be much more powerful than simple relaxation or light trance.
Recent Comments