Seth material thumbnail to the OBUUC ROMEOs

 From: <m.mk@...>

To: jerryhershberger@...

Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:04:08 -0500

Subject: John Stuller's mention of consciousness has "set me off" (!)

 

Dear ROMEO's:

 

My thoughts in connection:

 

I suppose I fall under the large umbrella of "New Age" -- which has many "features" I don't agree with (such as astrology, numerology, etc.*).

 

The only channeling I can fully embrace (and embrace it I do) is by the late Jane Roberts who spoke for a "Seth" resulting in well over a score of books.

 

(Her Seth books' heyday was the 1970's. Richard Bach, who wrote Jonathan Livingston Seagull, was a big fan, and his mentions of Jane in interviews, including in Time magazine, ca. 1972, helped to promote the books. I learned of the books in a radio interview with singer Phoebe Snow in 1976 who brought them up. Supposedly Jim Henson was a fan. To the extent any celebrities/famous people might be into the books, they are pretty quiet about it, unlike Bach and Snow. But, of course, the average famous person is not necessarily any more enlightened than anyone else.

 

(Jane died in 1984 and her books, while still in print, are now largely forgotten.)

 

Seth asserted that all religions are distortive and for that matter so is much of science since, for one thing, it has such a materialist basis or bias.

 

Seth says consciousness gives rise to matter, not the other way around.

 

To wit: According to Seth, the ultimate building blocks are units of consciousness.

 

He says many millions of these make up one atom.

 

This might serve to explain the endless subnuclear zoo.

 

(At the other, macro end, he says what we see through our telescopes is effectively a distortion leading us to conclude that other galaxies are receding from us at terrific speeds making us hypothesize dark matter and energy to make it all "add up" with more dark matter in the universe than regular matter. The distortion we see is not the same principle as when one is driving on a hot summer's day and it looks like there is water in the road up ahead, but I bring this up as an analogy: what looks like, but isn't.)

 

He calls God All That Is and takes a panentheistic view describing God as a "primary pyramidal energy gestalt." (Say that rapidly a bunch of times! The typical God concept is puny, unimaginative, and very limited, take the Old Testament Yahweh, for instance. No wonder many people reject such and become atheists!)

 

He says the deepest truths can never be physically proven.

 

He points out that we currently have two warring fundamentalisms which culturally interact in an unhealthy "symbiosis"**:

 

Faith without reason (religious fundamentalism) and reason without faith (a science fundamentalism).

 

He advocates seeking to marry intuition with the intellect. An effective "marriage" he calls the high intellect.

 

(I view his material as such an effective marriage.)

 

If consciousness is independent of matter, then out-of-body experiences, an afterlife and even reincarnation (which he asserts as real) become possible.

 

(Note that people who experience a near-death experience lose their fear of death. If their experiences are merely hallucination, they have been utterly convinced of the reality of their hallucinations such that they have very notably lost their fear of death. These people don't equivocate at what they take as very real. They don't say, "Well, I could be wrong" and...***)

 

He says that everything happens for a reason, the universe is not random, that, in greater terms, accidents do not exist.

 

Medical matters:

 

He says the natural state of the body is one of health. The idea that a condition will only get worse and worse is a limiting belief.

 

Medical miracles are merely nature unhampered, unhampered by limiting beliefs of what is possible.

 

Medicines including vaccines actually work by belief in them.

 

(The placebo effect is something not to be ignored.)

 

He asserts one always has deadly viruses in one's body, but they are in equilibrium and are actually health-promoting when in equilibrium.

 

He maintains that symptoms are symbolic of inner issues.

 

An example:

 

"The heart is often described as a pump. With the latest developments in medical technology, there are all kinds of heart operations that can be performed, even the use of heart transplants. In many cases, even when hearts are repaired through medical technology, the same trouble reoccurs at a later date, or the patient recovers only to fall prey to a different, nearly fatal or fatal, disease. This is not always the case, by any means, but when such a person does recover fully, and maintains good health, it is because beliefs, attitudes, and feelings have changed for the better, and because the person 'has a heart' again, in other words, because the patient himself has regained the will to live.

 

"Many people who have heart trouble feel that they have 'lost the heart' for life. They may feel broken-hearted for any of many reasons. They may feel heartless, or imagine themselves to be so cold-hearted that they punish themselves literally by trying to lose their heart.

 

"With many people having such difficulties, the addition of love in the environment may work far better than any heart operation. A new pet given to a bereaved individual has saved more people from needing heart operations than any physician. In other words, 'a love transplant' in the environment may work far better overall than a heart-transplant operation, or a bypass, or whatever; in such ways the heart is allowed to heal itself."

 

—Seth/Jane Roberts, The Way Toward Health, Chapter 4, Session of March 23, 1984

 

The true cause of an epidemic, per Seth, is, in a nutshell, mass despair.

 

In "opposition": "Once again, then, ideas of the most optimistic nature are the biologically pertinent ones."

--Seth, Session 06\27/84 for The Way Toward Health

 

There is power to positive and negative thinking. He says the universe responds more readily to the positive, is "reluctant" to manifest one's negative thoughts.

 

In terms connected to mental health, he says to count one's accomplishments as diligently as one might count one's failures.

 

Related to an individual's life purpose, he encourages one to follow one's impulses which amount to directives from the soul.

 

"Ideally, by following your impulses you would feel the shape, the impulsive shape of your life. You would not spend time wondering what your purpose was, for it would make itself known to you, as you perceived the direction in which your natural impulses led, and felt yourself exert power in the world through such actions."

 

--Seth/Jane Roberts, The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events, Session 857, May 30, 1979

Murderous or harming impulses, by the way, arise when many previous impulses were denied. A large "debt" of previous, unfollowed impulses has built up, extremely distorting things. No, he doesn't recommend you follow murderous or harming impulses!

 

Again, there are well more than a score of books of his arguing his case(s). I am here reducing them to a what amounts to as a thumbnail.

 

One can get "tastes" with this search engine:

 

https://findingseth.com/

 

A best "starter book" for anyone possibly interested is Seth Speaks.

 

So if much of the above seems crazy, well, any religion, for instance, has at least some crazy aspects. Adam and Eve, the caste system, and so forth. And science has brought us wonderful gadgets and the Internet as well as horrific ones such as the atom bomb, nuclear waste, many past egregious mistakes such as eugenics, Nazi doctors (whose work "continues" to this day by experiments on animals -- if you wouldn't do it to your own pet, then... -- i.e., the ends do not justify the means).

 

Plenty of craziness to go around, so it looks like I am "in good company." Yardstick?: As long as the craziness is harmless...

 

Speaking of crazy:

 

"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The
question which divides us is whether it is crazy
enough to have a chance of being correct. My own
feeling is that it is not crazy enough."

 

--Niels Bohr

 

And in contrast to William of Occam, my admittedly very subjective razor is that between two competing theories, the more astonishing one is to be preferred.

 

If you actually read this far, thanks for "listening." Apologies to John!

 

--Mark

 

*"Now in our sessions I must unfortunately try to explain the greater aspects of reality in terms of a Framework 1 culture [our usual world which he says arises out of a "greater world" or universe or reality which he calls Framework 2].... I must go against the authority, not only of the so-called straight system, but against the authority of the conventionalized occult in its multitudinous variations."

—Seth/Jane Roberts, The Personal Sessions, Vol. 4, Deleted Session, August 28, 1978

"Forget the occult nonsense that you have learned, and look at your present with the wondering eyes of a new self."

 

--Seth/Jane Roberts, Conversations with Seth, Vol II, end of Chapter 20

 

**"Now some peoples would not fit into that mold. They would take what they could from your technology, but in conscious and spontaneous ways they retaliated — and still do — by exaggerating all of those human tendencies that your society has held down so well. If you can have reason without faith, then indeed, for example, you will see that there can be faith without reason. When human experience becomes shrunken in such a fashion — compressed — then in a fashion it also explodes at both ends, you might say....

 

"Even your poor misguided moral/religious organization is saying in its fashion to the scientifically-oriented society: 'How is faith not real, then?
We'll change your laws with it. We'll turn it into power -- political power. What will you say then? We have been laughed at for so long. We will see who laughs now.'

"Fanaticism abounds, of course, because the human tendencies and experiences that have been denied by the mainline society erupt with explosive force,
where the tendencies themselves must be accepted as characteristics of human experience."

 

—Seth, The Magical Approach, Session Fourteen, September 29, 1980

 

***"Your particular society has set up such an artificial division between intuitional and intellectual knowledge that only the intellectually apparent is given credence. With all of their dire faults and distortions, religions have at least kept alive the idea of unseen, valid worlds [distorted, for instance, as heavens and hells]..."

—Seth, Jane Roberts, The "Unknown" Reality, Vol. 1, Session 691, March 25, 1974

 

"Unfortunately, with the development of the scientific era, a development occurred that need not have happened. As I have mentioned before, science's
determination to be objective almost immediately brought about a certain artificial shrinking of psychological reality. What could not be proven in the laboratory was presumed not to exist at all.

"Anyone who 'experienced something that could not exist' [such as a near-death experiencer] was therefore to some extent or another deluded or deranged...."

—Seth, The Magical Approach, Session Fourteen, September 29, 1980

 

This woman had a near-death experience, not due to, say, a car accident, but due to late-stage cancer.

 

In her death state, she experienced many "Seth ideas." Her rapid recovery, a nature-unhampered medical miracle. Where there is life, there is hope!

 

Dying To Be Me: My Journey from Cancer, to Near Death, to True Healing

by Anita Moorjani

 

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/dying-to-be-me-anita-moorjani/1104266044?ean=9781401937539

 

People who argue that people who died and came back didn't really die have a point up to a point. But do you have to fully enter a room and touch the opposite wall to see that a room is before you? Isn't it apparent that the room is there and real by looking into it, particularly if you see, say, a cat in there looking back at you and flicking its tail or whatever?

 

"Common sense is esoteric!" --Seth/Jane Roberts, Conversations with Seth, Vol. 1