Repetition occupies a contested and generative position across the depth-psychology corpus, functioning simultaneously as symptom, structure, and sacred principle. Freud inaugurated the modern psychological interrogation of the term, discerning in it a double face: repetition as a defensive flight from remembering traumatic material, and repetition as an autonomous, quasi-biological imperative embedded in the organism itself — what Conforti later elaborates through field theory and morphogenetic models drawn from Sheldrake, Goodwin, and Waddington. For Conforti, repetition is not reducible to ego-defense but constitutes an informationally rich archetypal signal, coded into the Self and enacted in therapeutic relationship as resonance between container and contained. Eliade displaces the term entirely from the clinical register into the cosmological: eternal return, the ritual repetition of archetypal gestures, abolishes profane time and returns humanity to the primordial moment of creation. Hillman rehabilitates repetition phenomenologically, reading it as the joy of the groove, a satisfaction of the imagination’s longing for sameness and an index of oral tradition’s life-sustaining function. Jung’s word-association studies, meanwhile, track repetition as a psychophysical indicator of complex-activation and perseveration — a diagnostic marker rather than a hermeneutic principle. The term thus ranges from neurological trace to cosmogonic ceremony, with the central tension falling between repetition as pathology and repetition as nature’s deepest intelligence.