Has anybody on this forum read up on Seth (of Jane Roberts fame)?

reply to post by Aleister


I think I was being polite because of the fact that we're getting a lot of traffic from close minded people on this thread. It might be wrong, but experience has taught me that you have to keep it real breezy around them. And then they might except your viewpoint. LOL.

Aleister
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

Thanks for the boring video, I've never seen her be Seth before. I'm surprised her husband didn't divorce or walk out on her. He had to put up with transcribing that from the tapes or whatever? Poor guy. But this Seth knew what he was doing (it's part of her oversoul by he way, and every once in awhile Super Seth or whatever who is Seth's oversoul takes over) 'cause when you string all the words together into a book it works very well.

I was actually going to mention that but, keeping it breezy. It must've been really difficult for him. I saw that video a long time ago, and I wondered the same thing.

reply to post by thedoctorswife


Wow, you're a strong reader. It's a mind blower isn't it? I've said it before, and I'll say it again, it'll change your life.

reply to post by thedoctorswife


I agree, I downloaded them all too. I have some books somewhere in the house, probably in boxes somewhere still.
Can't wait to read them all.

Yes watching her on video and reading the books is most definitely not the same. I would recommend those who have watched these videos to sit down and actually read Seth Speaks before going any further with just simply discounting her off as a fraud.

Trying to compare the books to the videos is like trying to describe colors to a blind person. Read the books.

Also I believe Jane Roberts had severe Rheumatoid Arthritis and that may have been one of the causes for her binge drinking.

kauskau
one of the best sources humanity ever had. sadly people were not ready for it. and when even the people on ats dont see that there is still not much hope

Weren't the SETH books biiiiiiig back then and actually one major driving force for the "NewAge" generation...and still a ton (almost any!) "new" book on spirituality etc. somehow echos the SETH books. So you might actually underestimate the impact the books really had (and still have). Just my $0.02

reply to post by brazenalderpadrescorpio


S@F from me, I used to love reading the Seth books. Do not remember a whole lot but sense something about the books as I was thinking about Seth the other day!

brazenalderpadrescorpio
I was curious if anybody who regularly posts on this forum has ever heard about Seth -- the entity channeled by Jane Roberts. The real reason I'm asking is because these threads here (on Philosophy and Metaphysics) seem kind of gimmicky and smack of pop Metaphysics ideas that are usually tossed around.

Please let me know if you've heard of Seth, or someone or something that you feel is just as good or better.

I'm not trying to necessarily test out ATS or even this forum, necessarily. I'm trying to get a feel for what people in general know about heady metaphysical concepts. At least metaphysical concepts that are, for the most part, geared towards the new age style of thinking.

Let me know! Thanks.

You want to see something legit, see the link in y signature, or the link below:

Enlightenment in 15-30 days, an EXTREMELY fast method. Mahasi Style Noting
Link to Thread

This is the end of all paths, seeking, window shopping...

reply to post by antar


This is not just a happy coincidence then! Seth would most definitely be telling you that, it must be time for you dust off a Seth book and reawaken something you've forgotten!

reply to post by Octave


Watching the videos is not the same at all. As mentioned before, her husband Robert Butts made it easier for us. I'm glad I created this thread, because, strangely, it's helping me realize it at a more profound level.

reply to post by NoRulesAllowed


Some say that she was the most influential medium in recent times. Even Deepak Chopra is a fan of hers.

reply to post by dominicus


Mmm... that doesn't seem as legit as Seth. I'll pass to be honest with you. No offense. I think everyone has a deep yearning for Seth right now.

reply to post by Octave


It's time to get Sethed out.

reply to post by brazenalderpadrescorpio

Here is a very important passage from Jane Roberts (Seth) "The Nature of the Psyche" (1976) about love and why there is so little of it to go around:

"Love is a biological necessity, a force operating to one degree or another in all biological life. Without love there is no physical commitment to life—no psychic hold.

"Love exists whether or not it is sexually expressed, though it is natural for love to seek expression. Love implies loyalty. It implies commitment. This applies to lesbian and homosexual relationships as well as to heterosexual ones. In your society, however, identity is so related to sexual stereotypes that few people know themselves well enough to understand the nature of love, and to make any such commitments.

"A transitory period is currently taking place, in which women seem to seek the promiscuous sexual freedom more generally granted to men. It is believed that males are naturally promiscuous, aroused by sexual stimuli almost completely divorced from any complementary “deeper” response. The male, then, is thought to want sex whether or not he has any love response to the woman in question—or sometimes to desire her precisely because he does not love her. In such cases, sex becomes not an expression of love, but an expression of derision or scorn.
So women, accepting these ideas often, seek for a situation in which they too can feel free to express their sexual desires openly, whether or not any love is involved. Yet loyalty is love’s partner, and the primates display such evidence in varying degrees. The male in particular has been taught to separate love and sex, so that a schizophrenic condition results that tears apart his psyche—in operational terms—as he lives his life.

"The expression of sexuality is considered male, while the expression of love is not considered manly. To some extent or another, then, the male feels forced to divide the expression of his love from the expression of his sexuality. It would be disastrous for women to follow the same course.

"This great division has led to your major wars. This does not mean that men were alone responsible for wars. It does mean that the male so divorced himself from the common fountain of love and sex that the repressed energy came forth in those aggressive acts of cultural rape and death, instead of birth.

"When you look at the animal kingdom, you suppose that the male chooses blindly, led by “dumb” instinct, so that in overall terms one female will do as well as any other. When you discover that a certain chemical or scent will attract a certain male insect, for example, you take it for granted that that element is alone responsible for drawing the male to the female. You take it for granted, in other words, that individual differences do not apply in such cases so remote from your own reality.

"You simply are not able to understand the nature of such consciousnesses, and so you interpret their behavior according to your beliefs. This would sad enough if you did not often use such distorted data to further define the nature of male and female behavior.

"In so distorting your ideas of sex, you further limit the great capacities of human loyalty, which is always connected with love and love’s expression. Lesbian and homosexual relationships then are at best tenuous, overwrought with confused emotions, very seldom able to maintain a stability that allows for individual growth. Heterosexual relationships also break down, for the identity of each partner becomes based upon sexual roles that may or may not apply to the individuals involved.

"Since you feel that sex is the only proper method of love’s expression, and yet also believe that sex and love are divided, you are in a quandary. These sexual beliefs are also far more important in national relationships than you realize, for you attempt to take what you think of as a masculine stance as a nation. So, for example, does Russia. India takes a feminine stance—in terms of your beliefs."

reply to post by johnquindell


I'm actually reading that book, now! I really do love that. I took an on/off sabbatical from reading it, but I got past that point. I thought that was a very revolutionary statement. I even think that this statement is ahead of our time. I say that because there is still an emphasis that we have to be of one sexual orientation. I feel that even I have been indoctrinated this way, because I am so very heterosexual and not really bisexual. I very much do like the women. Haha.

Great excerpt! Thanks.

reply to post by brazenalderpadrescorpio


Well, last night I read this thread and went to Amazon and bought Seth Speaks. I read the reviews there too, and they seemed to jive with what ATSers are saying so...

WISH ME LUCK PLEASE!

reply to post by brazenalderpadrescorpio


This is proving a very helpful thread - much appreciated.

I hadn't seen Jane in action before -- I would have been put right off.

The readings on Youtube I find interesting only because they are familiar.
No -- for me it's definitely the book.

I don't read it, that's for shopping lists and menus, it's more complicated than that.
I'll read a sentence, and realise when reaching the end, that I've skimmed over something, like when you're walking, and have to go back a few paces to look again at something half-seen.
Going back, I find more than I bargained for, and have to reappraise the sentence in the light of the preceding paragraph.
The further I look, the deeper it goes.
And six months later, the same passage will reveal something different, and usually very topical.
The only other writer to do this for me was Osho, aka Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh.

I would freely admit that Seth is hard work, and many will find it too demanding. I suspect that what we get from the book depends a lot on what we bring to it.
Fortunately the enjoyment creates an energy which fuels continued effort, and I'm sure you'll have introduced some people to the journey of a lifetime, and reminded others to go back and take another look.

mistersmith.

PS. And let's hear it for Robert Butts, without whom we'd be lost for words.

reply to post by brazenalderpadrescorpio



you will love him without a doubt and it will turn your life around if seth already hasn´t.

The concepts are the same as seth but much more "simple" and "precise" and the good thing is: its more the energy that he gives you while listening to him. He has a certain frequency pattern in his voice that lets you grasp complex concepts intuitivly (still learning english..dont know how i can say that better).

Bashar is an extra terrestrial being from a parrallel universe..

I give you one example of how he talks about simple topics in a real direct maner.

start here with hits core concepts at 11 minutes (its 30 years old, he is still channeling and there are a lot of videos on youtube..but this is a good start)

i love how bashar talks about simple things in a real precise way..

for example: here he talks about mariuhana...i just love his intelligence.. Seth was more complex but with bashar one understands much more in my opinion

reply to post by brazenalderpadrescorpio


I talked to Jane on the phone once (a friend knew her and gave me her number). I had a spiritual experience that was difficult to process and she was quite helpful and very kind. I read some of her stuff.