has anyone read the Seth Books by Jane Roberts? I think the quality of the material is some of the best I have ever seen.. just curious to see what others think of them and what they have done for them?

Thank you for this particular suggestion. I've began to listen to some of Jane Roberts writings through youtube and much of what Seth books say deeply resonates with my personal experiences. Given the timeframe in which these books were written this is especially impressive.

If anybody else would like to give it a try, "Seth Speaks" is a good start.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdTk3WoEK0M

That is very interesting! Thank you for sharing.

this is indeed very interesting. thanks for sharing that link John; it has some profound insights in there

The core is "The Nature of Personal Reality". The depth of the material within is profound, to say the least. And it's written in the most magnificent prose, flawless and precise, a usage of English demonstrating a skill and command of the language you will not find elsewhere. It is very easy to get lost in it.

H.

I read a couple of the Seth books like 15 years ago. Still have them, but have not looked at them for several years.

I also liked another book called Bridging Science and Spirit: Common Elements in David Bohm's Physics, the Perenial Philosophy and Seth, by Norman Friedman.

Elphologist

Wow, yes it is! Thank you boosie for sharing this, and thanks John Smith for the link

I had never heard of the Seth Books before but after beginning to listen to Seth Speaks through youtube, I will definitely track them down.

im glad everyone agrees, its the kind of work that could save this world..

thanks for reminding me how great this material is. i haven't heard the words from Seth in quite sometime and ive been listening to the link for a few days now. its really fascinating. much love.

The power and ability of human personality...

"The personality can dwell, and does dwell, in many worlds at once."
Session 180, Page 212

"The human personality has no limitations except those which it accepts. There are no limits to its development or growth, if it will accept no limits. There are no boundaries to the self except those boundaries which the self arbitrarily creates and perpetuates. There is no veil through which human perception cannot see, except the veil of ignorance which is pulled down by the materialistic ego.

"That which appears empty, such as your space, is empty only for those who do not perceive, who are blind because they fear to perceive that which the ego cannot understand. The ego, however, is also capable of greater knowledge and potentiality and scope. It dwells in the physical universe, but it can indeed also perceive and appreciate other realities. The ego is part of the personality and as such it can partake of sturdier, heartier, more vivid realities. The personality can dwell and does dwell in many worlds at once.

"The inquiring intuitions and the searching self, like summer winds, can travel in small and large spaces, can know of actualities that are more minute than pinheads and more massive than galaxies. The power and ability of the human personality, in a most practical manner, can be
seen as unlimited."

"The objective world is the end result of inner action. You can indeed manipulate the objective world from within, for this is the means and definition of true manipulation...

Thoughts and images are formed into physical reality and become physical fact. They are propelled chemically. A thought IS energy. It begins to produce itself physically at the moment of its conception.

Mental enzymes are connected with the pineal gland. As you know them, body chemicals are physical, but they are the propellants of this thought-energy, containing all the codified data necessary for translating any thought or image into physical actuality. They cause the body to reproduce the inner image. They are sparks, so to speak, initiating the transformation.

Chemicals are released through the skin and pore systems, in an invisible but definite pseudophysical formation. The intensity of a thought or image largely determines the immediacy of its physical materialization. There is no object about you that you have not created. There is nothing about your own physical image that you have not made.

The initial thought or image exists within the mental enclosure [as explained in earlier sessions]. It is not yet physical. Then it is sparked into physical materialization by the mental enzymes.

This is the general procedure. All such images and thoughts are not completely materialized in your terms, however. The intensity may be too weak. The chemical reaction sparks certain electrical charges, some within the layers of the skin. There are radiations then through the skin to the exterior world, containing highly codified instructions and information.

The physical environment is as much a part of you, then, as your body. Your control over it is quite effective, for you create it as you create your fingertip... Objects are composed of the same pseudo-material that radiates outward from your own physical image, only the higher intensity mass is different. When it is built up enough, you recognize it as an object. At low intensity mass it is not apparent to you.

Every nerve and fiber within the body has an inner purpose that is not seen, and that serves to connect the inner self with physical reality, that allows the inner self to create physical reality. In one respect, the body and physical objects go flying out in all directions from the inner core of the whole self.

Nerve impulses travel outward from the body, invisibly along these nerve pathways in much the same manner that they travel within the body. The pathways are carriers of telepathic thoughts, impulses, and desires that travel outward from any given self, altering seemingly objective events.

In a very real manner, events or objects are actually focal points where highly charged psychic impulses are transformed into something that can be physically perceived; a breakthrough into matter. When such highly charged impulses intersect or coincide, matter is formed. The reality behind such an explosion into matter is independent of the matter itself. An identical or nearly identical pattern may reemerge "at any time" again and again, if the proper coordinates exist for activation.

In your system of reality you are learning what mental energy is, and how to use it. You do this by constantly transforming your thoughts and emotions into physical form. You are supposed to get a clear picture of your inner development by perceiving the exterior environment. What seems to be a perception, an objective concrete event independent from you, is instead the materialization of your own inner emotions, energy, and mental environment."

So I take it these Seth Books are a collection of channelings?

I only listened to the first 2 of 13 videos of "Seth speaks", and maybe it gets more original in later videos, but no new real thought I heard that has not been espoused and elaborated in countless religions and spiritual traditions, only with a bit of scientific lingo thrown in.

And since the impetus for all these ideas was a ouija board session, it is important to note that Harry Houdini debunked the ouija board countless times as part of his act in the early 20th century. Here's Penn and Teller with a modern version (apologies for the parody if it offends - their show, not mine ) :

OUIJA DEBUNKED

Cheers,

JBArk

The ouija board was only used in the very first channelings, and never again once Jane learned to channel. She sat in a room while her husband took dictation.

Whether or not you think these ideas are original is completely irrelevant. The interesting thing, I think, is that these were all channeled in the 1970's and early 1980's. This info was pretty new and original when compared to what others were doing at the time.

As far as Houdini "debunking" the ouija board, come on, dude. He went in with the idea that it was all fake, and so his results matched his expectations. Do you think Houdini also "debunked" the existence of the afterlife since he said if there was one, he would make contact? I didn't check out the penn and teller thing, I don't really care what professional skeptics are paid to say, anymore than I care what professional "psychics" like Sylvia Brown has to say.

I understood that. But it does put a dent in the credibility of all else that follows, if you agree that it has been debunked, which I understand you do not.

"As far as Houdini "debunking" the ouija board, come on, dude. He went in with the idea that it was all fake, and so his results matched his expectations. Do you think Houdini also "debunked" the existence of the afterlife since he said if there was one, he would make contact? I didn't check out the penn and teller thing, I don't really care what professional skeptics are paid to say, anymore than I care what professional "psychics" like Sylvia Brown has to say."

Well, like any good sceptic, I respect your scepticism - try the experiment yourself then. Place a few friends all the way around a table and use a ouija board according to the instructions. Then blindfold them. Still works, as your participants have a memory of where things are placed on the board (see Penn and Teller video). Then without telling them, turn the ouija board any way you like, but at least 90 degrees, so that it is in a different position. Have your friends try it again. Their hands will guide the indicator to the place the "yes" or "no" or appropriate letter USED to be, and where the participants remember them to have been. And it's not the case of spirits not being able to read UPSIDE DOWN or SIDEWAYS, because there are people all around the board, so for some of them what was upside down for the first 2 iterations is now right side up. If this does not convince you, I don't know what will!

Incidentally, I am not saying spirits, from the afterlife or other, don't exist. What I believe , or you or anyone else believes, has no relevance. All I am saying is that this does not prove they do and that it is false to claim that ouija boards allow communication with spirits.

And I repeat that I understand this has little bearing on what the videos expound, except that their credibility has been indelibly stained when what follows is the result of a session with a ouija board!

It's healthy to ask questions and challenge the claims and ideas of others. This is how we learn and progress.

Cheers,

JBArk

Personally, it doesn't matter to me one bit if Jane Roberts channeled an actual entity or made it all up; it's what's conveyed in the books that matter. Just like the Bashar videos: doesn't matter if it's an actual channeling or not; the words resonate with me.

I have no interest in ouija boards, so I will not be conducting any tests. Appreciate the suggestion, though.

Though, I will say, what does it matter where inspiration comes from? If one feels their creative juices flow by using a ouija board and pretending it's all spirit communication, no big deal. It's not much different than writing a novel: you sit at the ouija board that is your keyboard, stare at a blank page, and eventually the words begin to flow. I am writing a novel now, so I can speak on this: the idea for the novel was given to me in one flash of insight during pharma, beginning middle and end, all at once: was the idea given to me by the DMT realm? Or was the idea always in my head, just waiting for the right chemical mix in my brain to shake it loose? It feels like I am channeling my novel, but I would never make the claim that that is what is happening. Discernment is required when reading anything.

I think it does matter to many where the words are coming from. I remember reading the Law of One, and I would personally be delighted to find out that much of it was fabricated because not everything that comes out of channelings is all sunshine and daisies.

Yeah, I suppose most people do care where the words come from, I'm just not one of them. Again, it's all a matter of personal discernment and a faith in your inner compass. As the photo below shows, I read a lot of this kind of stuff, and I find truth in all these books, but also contradictions. I think the enormity and complex nature of the universe cannot be distilled into any one channel or author; each offers pieces of the multi dimensional puzzle, the Game of Existence, and it is up to each of us to find our own truth. And to be prepared to drop our "truth" once more pieces of the Puzzle present themselves and our personal universe expands to fit the new, ever changing and shifting image of the ever expanding Moment of Now.

Just curious, does that mean that you lend credibility to some of David Icke's ideas even though he also believes "that human beings originated in a breeding program run by a race of reptilians called Anunnaki from the Draco constellation..."?

Or what about some of the more palatable ideas that come out of Scientology?

Personally I am unable to parse potentially good ideas from their association with tenuous or ludicrous ones, but that may just be a weakness on my part.

JBArk

I have a David Icke book, and I find some his ideas interesting (the book pictured is worth having for the artwork inside, if nothing else). Why does having a wide choice in books make me a "believer in ludicrous ideas"? I am a curious monkey, I want to know everyone's view point.

But, no, I don't have any L. Ron books because he was a terrible writer and I don't believe in any religion at all, much less one a science fiction writer invented.