I’m not sure that I’d say EFT and PSYCH-K are comparable, really. They can get similar results, but not necessarily via the same route.

I am a huge fan of EFT, I think it has contributed enormously to the raising of planetary consciousness we’ve been experiencing for the last fifteen years or so- as is PSYCH-K. Rob Williams does keep PSYCH-K tightly licensed and requires signatures etc to keep the process intact. EFT has evolved enormously because Gary Craig has not required this, though I think that is changing because many people have moved right away from the original EFT – more to come on that as Gary unveils his plans over the next few weeks.

However, back to the EFT vs PK question. I also studied ACT and found useful parts of it, but did not move from EFT because what I have found is that EFT drills down into the subconscious mind in a way that nothing else I’ve ever studied, is able to do; and when the subconscious is made conscious, transformation is possible. Nonetheless, the ego, the wonderful protector that it is, does often stand in the way of that transformation as it protects from pain. And often it takes a *lot* of work to get around those layers of protection. That’s when I find PK is so useful – the body knows if the belief underpinning a difficulty is present, or not present, and completely bypasses the ego.

The real strength of PK I think, lies in the asking of permission to make the change. The language is “it is safe and appropriate to balance for this goal now” and the body/superconscious agrees or does not. It is a fully conscious process though it does that magical ego-bypass. That said, I use EFT about 50% of the time, and PK the other 50%.

I think it’s a great shame that PK pracs are not permitted to run themed courses, for example, using PK to clear abundance blocks, and so on – that would I think take the work much wider.

Something else you maybe interested in looking into is ETHOS, a fantastic mover-and-shaker, and I do use that for a few minutes most sessions. So I guess my 50-50 figure above is not strictly accurate

Feel free to ask more…

Thanks for posting

Sandy

Hi Sandra,

I have a question…

In your experience, do you think Psych-K is truly comparable to EFT? The reason I’m questioning this is twofold:

First, although I’m curious and would like to learn Psych-K, it’s clearly a lot more costly to learn than EFT, (two classes, both costing over $300 U.S. while the EFT process is virtually free if one is willing to do a little web searching and research.) Gary Craig’s website has extensive information regarding the EFT process. Rob Williams website is an ad for Psych-K, needless to say the process is kept quite secret to the public. I suppose the reasoning behind this would make sense in that, if a person were to pay that much to learn the Psych-K process than why on earth would they share that information for free when there is profit to be made, right? Yet Gary Craig has allowed EFT to be available to all just for the asking. I guess I’m somewhat skeptical and bothered that Rob Williams seems to place a lot more emphasis on profit regarding the Psych-K modality, while Gary Craig has allowed the EFT process to be publicized for the good of all who wish to learn. Please understand, I whole-heartedly belief that facilitators of both modalities have every right to make a living, and I personally have paid several EFT practitioners for their support and wisdom, nevertheless the basics of EFT are available for free to ALL who are interested in learning this valuable energy process, while Psych-K is not.

Secondly, I might even consider “biting the bullet” and paying for the Psych-K classes but I seem to detect a counterintuitive belief with regard to acceptance and Psych-K. Allow me to explain… For the past several years I have learned that change only comes when I embrace the “acceptance” concept in all it’s forms, as with EFT. I actually opened to the concept of “acceptance” 27 years ago with a 12-step recovery group (the entire 12-step premise is based on acceptance and letting go…) Recently I have been learning many Eastern and Buddhist teachings which also promote the importance of “accepting what is”. I have further studied a process entitled “Acceptance and Commitment Therapy” (ACT) and also learned two levels of “Focusing” which is a process initiated by Prof. Eugene Gendlin. All of these modalities support the importance of accepting (vs. rejecting) what is, with regard to change. My point is, (and I may be wrong) but it seems Psych-K is more about changing “what is” (in the subconscious) than accepting “what is” For example, in EFT we tap and say “even though….I love and accept myself… We recognize the problem and then we essentially embrace ourselves just the way we are by stating that we ‘love and accept” ourselves. There is no rejection, re-writing or erasing what is in the subconscious. Perhaps that IS exactly what happens with EFT, but the actual process we do involves loving and accepting ourselves exactly the way we presently are, then the shift happens… Seems to me the impetus for change comes with acceptance of what is and not re-writing or correcting anything. Psych-K (or what little I know about it) seems to imply that we need to change and re-write our unconscious beliefs before we transcend to healthier behavior. With EFT there is no judgement, no part of us that is bad, wrong or inappropriate. We accept what is, and things begin to shift. I hope I’m making sense… Is there conflict in these two modalities or am I not seeing accurately?

I am open to any and all comments. Thank you for reading my lengthy comments, your time is greatly appreciated.

Regards,
Donna Grale
Seattle, Wa.