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

reply to post by kauskau


I really enjoyed that video. It does seem to go in accord with what Seth says.

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.

I read one of the Seth books years ago, "The Nature of Personal Reality." I did not like the book. For some strange reason I could never really get into the book, despite the fact that the general topic is fascinating to me.

I remember reading an angry article written by a close friend of Jane Roberts. She was angry because she watched Jane Roberts suffer terribly from cancer and there was no apparent help from the spirit world in easing her pain. Jane Roberts died in 1984 at age 55.

"Seth" may have only been a disincarnate on the Lower Astral, and even though "it" could talk a good game, had no real powers of intervention. "Seth" could not save Jane Roberts or even ease her pain.

Obviously, I'm not a fan of the Seth material.

reply to post by brazenalderpadrescorpio


Something you have achieved here, is a clear demonstration of Seth's popularity and pre-eminence in his field, and an introduction to other minds of similar quality. Also a bonding of like-minded souls as we compare
notes on our journey so far, and discover new sources of information.

Another is the demonstration (thanks Elysiumfire) that when scepticism encounters understanding, BOTH are reinforced. Surely there's a lesson there to help us all avoid silly arguments (mea culpa!). I try to remember the maxim that when the wise man meets the fool, it's the wise man who learns something. (I'm not pointing fingers, that's a generalisation).

Personally I attach great importance to a sense of humour. Anyone who delights in life will have a good one.
Although Seth obviously enjoys himself with gusto, I think Osho's jokes on the human condition are unparalleled.
When our politicians and priests seek to exercise power over us, our resistance will only strengthen them, whereas laughter will weaken them and reveal their true nature.

The Dalai Llama is a jolly old soul, I've enjoyed his writing too.

mistersmith.

mistersmith

...Although Seth obviously enjoys himself with gusto, I think Osho's jokes on the human condition are unparalleled.
When our politicians and priests seek to exercise power over us, our resistance will only strengthen them, whereas laughter will weaken them and reveal their true nature.

The Dalai Llama is a jolly old soul, I've enjoyed his writing too.

mistersmith.

Mistersmith, are you a follower of Osho (aka Rajneesh)?

reply to post by johnquindell


Having looked briefly at the Ra material, I certainly found it interesting.
To express it as well as I can, I liked some of the words, but not the tune.
The sample I saw had no feeling of compassion, humour or gentleness.
For me, there was a feeling I was being lectured by a Dalek ...
So, right or wrong, it's not my style -- though there may be interesting information within.

I'm looking for another copy of Mitch Albom's The Five People You Meet in Heaven. Now there's a lovely read ....

mistersmith.

reply to post by midnightstars

Am I a follower of Osho ?
I owe a great deal to Osho, and just thinking of him fills me with gratitude.

On a semantic point, he said not to "follow" him, as he was not going anywhere -- but your meaning is clear, and yes, he was and is a tremendous inspiration and comfort through his writing.

I know he is criticised on many counts, but I sincerely hope that such material does not sully this delightful thread.

I'm sorry that your empathy with Jane proves to be a barrier, through the books I've come to see that in a wider context.
I see pain and illness as part of the journey, and Seth's role to help us through, not enable us to avoid it.
I sense a resentment against Seth which you could drop if you chose, without any unfairness towards Jane. She would want you to read the books.

With sincere best wishes,
mistersmith.

brazenalderpadrescorpio:

You're very welcome to your opinion. Obviously most people here would not agree with you.

Yes, many would disagree with me, they prefer fantasy rather than stark reality, but it doesn't change a damn thing. Self-delusions all.

So now you're calling someone who has had nothing but good to contribute to this thread a liar. I think that you should assume honesty and start from there.

I see, you're not allowed to challenge and critique now, eh? That a person's contribution is 'good' is another matter of opinion. I don't assume honesty because most people are not honest. Everybody, without exception, lies to somebody else, we deceive others for advantage and for effect. It's a natural sentient trait humans possess.

thebtheb:

Saying, "I don't care what you think happened" really essentially means absolutely nothing and doesn't for an instant prove your point.

Of course it doesn't, it's the stance I take. Yet, you yourself have proven nothing of what you claim. I say what you claim is an impossibility, and logic will bear this out, but of course, it won't prove it beyond doubt, because you cannot prove a negative...that which you claim.

Personally I see a lot more evidence for consciousness surviving death than I do for the opposite.

No. There is no evidence, none at all. There are no witness statements, no scientific back up or support, just hearsay stories repeated 'ad nauseum'.

I'll be the judge of my experience.

Indeed you will, and should, but what you need to get right is 'interpretation', and that is where you are misleading yourself, equally for others whom make the same claims as you. You are all misinterpreting your experience.

When someone floats up above their body...

This is the point isn't it? You are claiming something that is an utter impossibility. No one, throughout our species' history has ever left their physical body, gone wandering around all consciously disembodied and returned to their body to report the fantastical event. It just doesn't happen.

'm getting that you are emotionally invested, strongly invested in not believing in life after death.

Not in the slightest way am I emotionally invested in my acceptance that there is no afterlife. Death is truly the end, that's it. The event of death is nothing more than the 2nd law of thermodynamics, entropy, and it cannot be circumnavigated. Ask yourself a question, and be truly honest with yourself, what would be required for the human entity to consciously survive the utter dissolution of its physical body? What energies and what mechanisms would be involved?

These extremely essential questions cannot be ignored. All claims for conscious survival after physical death have to be able to answer them. Until they are answered, all claims are fables, lies, confabulations, dishonesty, delusions.

Aleister
reply to post by kauskau

 

K, I hope you read the pages as well as post on them, so as long as you are getting an Okay reception here (even though it disrupts the topic)

hm ok if it really disrupts it from your perspecitve let me know . Because for me there is no real difference between seth and bashar. They both describe the way reality functions/works from a higher standpoint (above human perception). And the fundamentals they descibre are universal. The only difference i see is that seth uses the concept of "camouflage" much more often and therefore tries to explain to us his view from his "not so much filtered" standpoint while bashar always tries to talk from a standpoint that is easy for us to grasp.
as a comment on youtube puts it precise: he has the most clearest in down to earth form with elaborate comparisons and analogy for illustration...

Seth is much more hard to understand for me as his way of speeking uses no analogies... and the problem with seth for me was always that "my mind" works more than my heart...Bashar taught me that multidimensional concepts can be understood by intuition....

"can you please put in one post a concise explanation of what your friend Basher can accomplish and what the core message of the data is - and also explain, if you would, the overlap on the Seth material which is, seriously, hard to match up to. I don't know if your guy does or not, does he?"

ok i ll trie even my english is not enough for that.i can better understand it than talk it..but do me favour ..dont take my word for it.. Bashar works the best when you listen to him....because his energy does also a lot of work in your system because of the speech patterns. Reading his words will not have as much power as hearing him "flow". Because his flow has a certain frequency..you will notice that when you listen to him for longer that it "lifts your spirit" and "you can easilsy understand complex concepts"..



Core message of the data which go hand in hand with seth teachings (but are in my view explained in a way that you can really USE these concepts) :

-Just as water and steam and ice are all the same thing vibrating at different frequencies, likewise, matter and energy are the same substance vibrating at different frequencies
-we are not existing in the world, the world exists in us
-every being is a holographic representation of the Infinite Creation and therefore there is not "one reality"...every being creates its own universe..so when you meet someone..you are just meeting your own "versioN" of him or her in your own distinct universe
-time is an illusion -> in reality there is only now from different points of view and there is an infitinte number of parallel universes...there is an infinite number of parallel "persons" that you think you are right now...
-movement is an illusion-> in reality you as what you are dont move. What moves "reality"..is your focus..("A radio does not have to create the program it wishes to hear. It merely needs to receive an already-existing program. And it makes itself an effective receiver by matching frequencies, synchronizing frequencies - creating a similarity of vibrations - with the program it wishes to receive". )

-Reality in itself is neutral. It has no meaning. So everything you perceive you can only perceive because you define it ..
-> -"Each belief gets you vibrating at a unique set of frequencies.
These frequencies then attract, by sympathetic resonance, those holograms vibrating
on the same frequencies."

-definiton is key for the reality you create.
-You are always a perfect manifestor of creation through different tools (intent, focus, definition, letting go)-> First, you have to be that vibration. Then, you automatically receive that reality ( believing is seeing, not the other way around as we were taught)

-you will never be a better creator then now...the reason why some people think they are not good creators is because they believe in definitions of lack..therefore the universe presents an abundance of lack
->>>you are unconditional supported by the universe in that way-> no matter what your beliefsystem is

-> you (as your focus which is your vehicle to perceive reality) shift throug billions of parallel universes billions of times per seconed
- the illusion of continuity is created by shifting through universes that are slightly different
-in reality: linearity and "progress" is only a concept..an agreement... Time can be very slippery when you allow it to be


i could go on for ever..but ..bashar can explain it better than any human i ever met. (i listened to about 300 hours of bashar..if not more..and there is no topic he is not a master....today i heart how he talked about gravity and "e=mc2"...it was really intense.. Sadly its not on youtube... I am glad that you are open for bashar..this will help you a great deal.

reply to post by Aleister


bashar is an extraterrestrial being from a parallel universe channeled by darryl anka. Darryl anka also channels other beings sometimes..

Bashar is in a way a "combination" of Zeta r. (the greys ) and humans..he is the product of the abductions that went on here on earth some time ago (i think 10 to 40 years ago)..

I know how crazy that sounds

lol

i was a sceptic ...until i listened to him for more than 5 hours 4 years ago...slowly i knew: this is the real deal. And now there is no doubt at all.

I am glad that you all here dont find it offensive that i post somethin about him here on a "seth topic"..
but as i said: they are both wanting the same! To show people who are ready for it how reality works.. And that really changes everything for our shared reality.. (or my believe in mass consciousness ..lol)

reply to post by kauskau


Thank you for the long description, and yes, Bashar seems very interesting and enjoyable. At least in the video you posted before and in your description.

All the data about creating our own reality, how things actually are, etc., seems to relate to the fact that we are putting together our entire picture of the world right in our brains and than "something" looks at it and works within it, and that something is ourselves. I don't know about the channeling bit and, like Seth, Bashar is likely just the fellow's oversoul or super-consciousness let free to express the information it perceives. We select from the sense overload that pours in on us every nanosecond a world we are familiar with - and then the "facts" of that world are proven over and over again to fit our notion of it. Thus is the way of the universe. I mentioned Edgar Cayce earlier, and am very lucky I studied his readings enough, and read a great deal about him, to believe that maybe at least one out-of-body piece of information was accurate, and at that point ones worldview takes on the dimension of "if that's possible, then what are we really?" and the game unfolds from there (the old saying "If you take one step towards Goddess she'll take a thousand steps towards you" relates to that unfolding).

Thanks again for your joy and enthusiasm about Bashar, and for getting my interest up enough to take a look at him.

elysiumfire
brazenalderpadrescorpio:

You're very welcome to your opinion. Obviously most people here would not agree with you.

Yes, many would disagree with me, they prefer fantasy rather than stark reality, but it doesn't change a damn thing. Self-delusions all.

So now you're calling someone who has had nothing but good to contribute to this thread a liar. I think that you should assume honesty and start from there.

I see, you're not allowed to challenge and critique now, eh? That a person's contribution is 'good' is another matter of opinion. I don't assume honesty because most people are not honest. Everybody, without exception, lies to somebody else, we deceive others for advantage and for effect. It's a natural sentient trait humans possess.

thebtheb:

Saying, "I don't care what you think happened" really essentially means absolutely nothing and doesn't for an instant prove your point.

Of course it doesn't, it's the stance I take. Yet, you yourself have proven nothing of what you claim. I say what you claim is an impossibility, and logic will bear this out, but of course, it won't prove it beyond doubt, because you cannot prove a negative...that which you claim.

Personally I see a lot more evidence for consciousness surviving death than I do for the opposite.

No. There is no evidence, none at all. There are no witness statements, no scientific back up or support, just hearsay stories repeated 'ad nauseum'.

I'll be the judge of my experience.

Indeed you will, and should, but what you need to get right is 'interpretation', and that is where you are misleading yourself, equally for others whom make the same claims as you. You are all misinterpreting your experience.

When someone floats up above their body...

This is the point isn't it? You are claiming something that is an utter impossibility. No one, throughout our species' history has ever left their physical body, gone wandering around all consciously disembodied and returned to their body to report the fantastical event. It just doesn't happen.

'm getting that you are emotionally invested, strongly invested in not believing in life after death.

Not in the slightest way am I emotionally invested in my acceptance that there is no afterlife. Death is truly the end, that's it. The event of death is nothing more than the 2nd law of thermodynamics, entropy, and it cannot be circumnavigated. Ask yourself a question, and be truly honest with yourself, what would be required for the human entity to consciously survive the utter dissolution of its physical body? What energies and what mechanisms would be involved?

These extremely essential questions cannot be ignored. All claims for conscious survival after physical death have to be able to answer them. Until they are answered, all claims are fables, lies, confabulations, dishonesty, delusions.

I've offered more proof than you have. My spider example is "light" compared to some of the VERIFIED things that have happened, in controlled circumstances, such as Robert Monroe's books and research. He did several experiments where he left his body, went halfway around the world, viewed his friend's apartment at a specific time, came back, wrote down what he saw her doing and wearing, and what her apartment looked like - and he was verified to be right. He did this several times. Could someone make this up? Of course they could? But to believe each and every one who has ever had these experiences made it up or is lying is to me, desperation on the part of skeptics trying to debunk it. Why do I believe Robert Monroe? One reason is before he had these experiences, he believed nothing of the sort, and even after having them, tried to figure out what they were in conventional terms through doctors and psychologists. This is why he DID these experiments, to see if what he thought seemed to be going through, really was what it seemed to be. And I'd say lying in bed physically in one country, leaving your body and verifying things you could not possibly know on the other side of the world is a great way of showing that something unexplainable in conventional terms is going on. In that example, there is no room for hallucination, no room for fantasy, no room for chasing rainbows. And there are so very many experiences similar to that, that honestly, if we look like idiots to you for believing this, trust me, I view skeptics very much the same way.

As for your last point, prove to me that you love anyone. Can't see love, so it must not exist.

In fact, I'm not even sure why you think it's so impossible that consciousness could exist outside of the physical. There are enough physicists prepared to say they're not sure, and are studying it. So why should I believe you?

kauskau
reply to post by Aleister

 

bashar is an extraterrestrial being from a parallel universe channeled by darryl anka. Darryl anka also channels other beings sometimes..

Bashar is in a way a "combination" of Zeta r. (the greys ) and humans..he is the product of the abductions that went on here on earth some time ago (i think 10 to 40 years ago)..

I know how crazy that sounds

lol

i was a sceptic ...until i listened to him for more than 5 hours 4 years ago...slowly i knew: this is the real deal. And now there is no doubt at all.

I am glad that you all here dont find it offensive that i post somethin about him here on a "seth topic"..
but as i said: they are both wanting the same! To show people who are ready for it how reality works.. And that really changes everything for our shared reality.. (or my believe in mass consciousness ..lol)

edit on 28-10-2013 by kauskau because: (no reason given)

Yeah, the Bashar material is great. From another time, fine. ET from Zeta reticulli? Even I kind of thought what the hell? But it's good material.

reply to post by midnightstars


One of her last books explains why Seth couldn't or chose not to actively intervene in her illness. I could do it myself, but the book would explain it much better.

reply to post by mistersmith


Thanks for your comment. I feel that this is a very successful (to co-opt an artistic term) thread myself.

brazenalderpadrescorpio
reply to post by midnightstars

 

One of her last books explains why Seth couldn't or chose not to actively intervene in her illness. I could do it myself, but the book would explain it much better.

can you tell me where? because often people tell me exactly that: "why couldnt she use what she learned from seth"..

its the same with the husband of esther hicks..

reply to post by elysiumfire


To be honest with you, I think it's pointless to argue with you. You believe what you believe, and we believe what we believe. Thanks for your opinion. And thanks for gracing us with your presence on this thread.

reply to post by kauskau


I'm going to try to do this from memory without having the materials in front of me. Jane was a very psychologically traumatized individual. The reason she fell ill, and subsequently died, was the result of that. I think that it was thebtheb who correctly said that Seth was not going to solve her problems for her that it was her responsibility to solve (I'm using my own words). Think of it this way. Let's say that somebody when they are young starts hanging out with a bunch of bad kids. That person gets introduced to alcohol, gets hooked to harder drugs, and eventually overdoses. Would it be fair for that person to badger his parents and ask them why they didn't do anything to stop him from going down a wrong path?

According to Seth we all choose our general life-challenges. So therefore Jane chose the basic challenges and circumstances in that life. Also, those challenges were chosen for her to learn from. Seth believed that as human beings we misunderstand the nature of disease, but that even disease itself has a purpose. It would be absolutely foolish for Seth to toy around with something that Jane chose in her prior existence. It would help her in the short-term, but not in the long run.

I hope that this makes more sense.

Edit: I want to add that Seth explained most of this well before her illness and death.

reply to post by brazenalderpadrescorpio


Yep - spent a long time reading them books, probably because I was reading them in bed. Honestly though I would read the same paragraph twenty times trying to squeeze understanding from them. (They are a heavy read) Had someone channel Seth as well. This was all in the late 70's, and early 80's - still would consider them well worth the effort of the read.

reply to post by Peter Brake


Thanks for your contribution. I didn't understand your third sentence, you heard someone else channel Seth?

brazenalderpadrescorpio
reply to post by Peter Brake

 

Thanks for your contribution. I didn't understand your third sentence, you heard someone else channel Seth?

I remember someone claiming to channel Seth as well, and they were giving public appearances and selling tapes. I paid it no mind, and wrote the person off as a hustler (kind of like the Elvis imitators who tried to set up a mystery so older women thought it was Elvis - I remember this one guy in a mask who actually cut albums and made public appearances).