Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Most Anything > Books

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 16-03-2018, 07:21 PM
Dee47 Dee47 is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 428
 
Are the Seth Books Dated?

A friend of mine told me that the Seth books are out-of-date and that if I read them, I should realize that while some stuff is still useful, other stuff is out-of-date. This friend is really smart. It is she who led me onto the spiritual path where I am now.

But I am having a heck of a time with the datedness idea. I am reading lots of the Seth material and just loving it. There are things in it I don't understand, as there were last time I read it, but dated?

One of the books I'm reading is The Nature of Personal Reality, which was published in 1974. Yes, that was nearing 50 years ago, but isn't the material still relevant?

This friend suggested Gregg Braden, and so I am reading The Spontaneous Healing of Belief. I can see some value in it, but it is not nearly as dense as the Seth materials, and I find myself impatient as I read whole pages without getting the kind of substance I get from Seth.

What are your thoughts on the Seth materials, especially in terms of datedness.

Here's a sentence in The Nature of Personal Reality that I'd love comments on: "The conscious mind directs unconscious activity and has at its command all of the powers of the inner self."
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 17-03-2018, 12:09 AM
Dee47 Dee47 is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 428
 
Are people allowed to post opinions about whether or not they think the Seth books are dated? Is such content against the rules of the forum?


As far as:
"The conscious mind directs unconscious activity and has at its command all of the powers of the inner self."

I read something a few pages after that quote that leads me to think that that the conscious mind there is NOT the ego. In that case, the quote is less bothersome to me.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 17-03-2018, 12:26 AM
inavalan inavalan is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 5,089
 
I think that the Seth-Roberts books are the best in the field, and they aren't and can't be dated.

Seth teaches that there is no time, except as a camouflage in our physical reality. If there is no time, then Seth's teachings can't be dated.

On the other hand, it is true that channels, like Jane Roberts, inherently translate the blocks of information they get through their beliefs. This explains why honest channels, mediums, and other psychics, come with sometimes widely different messages.

I'm not familiar Gregg Braden. Could you write in a few words, if, and why, his book is worth reading? I just found a free pdf copy:
http://www.healingthroughself.co.uk/..._of_Belief.pdf

What is the source of Braden's beliefs? From the amazon's reviews it seems that he compiled info from various sources. I didn't get anything about he directly accessing himself a source of knowledge.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 17-03-2018, 01:51 AM
Dee47 Dee47 is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 428
 
The Braden material isn't channeled. He says it's not peer reviewed but it IS "well-researched and well-documented." I'm only on page 17...so I've gotta give it more of a chance. Honestly, I'd rather be reading Seth right now. And I probably will. But I think Braden says somewhere that he has a science background. I wish I remembered for sure.

I think I agree with you, inavalin. I find myself questioning how the Seth books could be dated. I do think there are errors in them (though I haven't found any) because Seth speaks of distortions. Being channeled through Jane could cause some of those distortions, as you suggest when you talk about the material being colored by belief.

Seth also talks about having to build up concepts for us if we don't have them yet. I suppose there is some oversimplification in those cases. And since the world HAS changed in the last 50 years, some of us have a broader understanding that wasn't as available back when the books were written. So today we are prepared for more complex ideas. So maybe the books could be dated in the sense that they don't take into account our CURRENT understanding of the world. Still, I think that what they say, mostly, almost entirely, is valid.

But I don't see how the Seth material could be out and out wrong, as for example, the belief that the world is flat.

Is Seth infallible? He is on a higher plane than we are, but there are even higher planes where he has not been.

Thanks for commenting, inavalin.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 17-03-2018, 02:14 AM
inavalan inavalan is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 5,089
 
I looked up Gregg Braden on youtube, and watched a short clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rvKjwEJK1M

First impressions:
- first vibe: he isn't a credible source
- the idea promoted I his clip seems wrong; I'm pretty sure that Seth-Roberts wrote somewhere that you can't contradict reality in wishing to create something
- I may give the book a browse, but I don't think he is the genuine thing
- he has an engineering background, which isn't much of a recommendation
- he seems to base his (multiple) books and presentation on his deductions (which is a no-no in the field of altered states of consciousness).

Please provide further comments about the book, in time, if you have any. Thanks. :)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 17-03-2018, 04:04 AM
Dee47 Dee47 is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 428
 
I just listened to the youtube video you posted. Thanks. I actually like it!

I've heard that idea before: that you should believe or act as if whatever you want has already happened. That didn't make sense to me in the past, because it seemed, as you said, like it conflicts with reality. But yesterday I tried that method (not from reading Braden) and it seemed to make sense while I was doing it. I actually felt the feeling of the reality I wanted. Then today, when I was meditating and praying, I didn't know what to do. I wanted to say, "thank you for [such and such]", but it felt wrong, because it was in conflict with reality. After just watching the video that you posted, I realized that what I need to do is not pray and ask, but meditate and see (reality as I want it to be). So in other words, I need to strongly imagine what I want so that it feels as if it is real. That's how it felt yesterday. Anyway, thank you for posting that link because it really helped me.

Because of posting here earlier, I went back and read more in the Braden book and I am liking it much more. I'm still not very far into it, but it seems it's getting a little meatier.

I just want to clarify something. Braten ISN'T trying to say that what he's sharing is from channeled material. He's not presenting his books as altered states of consciousness. I can see why you might have thought I was suggesting he is: because of the way I pitted him against Seth/Roberts. I only did that because my friend said to read him because he is up to date. In other words, my friend said that Seth/Roberts is dated and Braden is not. She doesn't believe that because the Seth material is channeled that it must be timeless and completely correct.

I've been thinking about why my friend might have trouble with the Seth material, and I have a possible theory. I think Seth says that once you start the cycle of reincarnation, you have to continue it until you've completed it. My friend has decided that when she dies this time she will not reincarnate. She says she has read (?) that you don't always have to finish the cycle. There are ways around it.

I don't want to reincarnate after this life, either. If indeed Seth says that the reincarnation cycle must be completed, he might have said it meaning "usually." What I'm trying to say is that he may not always go into all the exceptions of whatever he talks about. I will keep an eye out for what he says about reincarnation as i read to try to determine how much wiggle room there might be.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 17-03-2018, 04:49 AM
inavalan inavalan is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 5,089
 
Regarding the video clip:

Thought materialization happens both in the physical, and in the non-physical. The difference is that the space-time "camouflage" makes this materialization slow in the physical, while in the non-physical is instantaneous. The main reason for incarnating in the physical is to practice and improve the control of your thoughts in light of this materialization process.

When you have an out of body experience you experience the same instantaneous materialization. Everybody who had such experiences learned that you wish it, and it happens. The important words here are "you wish it". You don't think / say "it's raining", you think / say "I want to start raining". Sure, for this to happen you have to trust that this will happen. But this trust is different than forcing yourself to think that's already happening.

In physical, you can use imagination to give more intensity to your intention; intensity of the intention is what gives stability to thought forms, and not how long you have wished it. But this is different than thinking / saying "it's raining now". You can't lie to yourself; the subconscious will take the negative command.

Materialization responds to all your thoughts and beliefs, not only when you make the affirmation, or when you purposefully imagine whatever you want, but to all your thoughts and beliefs, all the time.

You get such information directly in altered state of consciousness, and from what I believe I remember Seth, and Abraham, teach the same.

Regarding the reincarnation:

When we die it's like waking up from a dream. You realize that you're much more than the one from the life that just ended. You see things from a completely different perspective. This is what I experienced during past life, and life between lives regressions. So, it doesn't matter what / if during this life you want / decide about your future reincarnations.

Most people don't want to reincarnate, or have aberant wishes about wealth and power. But most of them return to ordinary lives, as most of us experience.

Excepting the few of us who get enlightened, (not those who claim or believe to be enlightened), people don't know what'll follow. And this not because some external setup forbids it, or hides it. It is because we severed our communication link to our inner / higher selves. Restoring this link is the true enlightenment.


Obviously, this is what I believe.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 17-03-2018, 01:40 PM
Dee47 Dee47 is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 428
 
I don't know what I believe, actually, but your comments have helped me to think through this more critically. Thank you! I am thinking that channeled information might be more trustworthy than deductions, as long as we trust the channeler. And I DO trust Seth. While ideas that come from deduction may be right, they may be wrong--as in, hey guys, the world is flat!

So one is "gospel" in a way. What I mean is that one comes from a source that's higher than we are in our ordinary lives.

And the other is a human attempt to make sense of the world.

I've been accepting them both, just like my friend, without evaluating the differences.

I was going to say that if trusting human deduction works, why not use it?

Then I thought of some material I was reading last night in The Biology of Belief. Operating out of our misunderstandings can cause serious problems. Lipton explains how drugs work in the body and what "side effects" are. He explains side effects in a way I've never thought of before. Basically a drug works by targeting something particular, say indigestion. But because the body's system is so much more complex than we thought (meaning not linear), when we throw in something that operates on indigestion, we may also be affecting the biological system, say, of maintaining bone density. Rather than something we might minimize by saying it's a "side-effect," we may actually be making our health worse by interfering with something that was just fine until we started messing with it. So, in other words, our digestion might be better, but suddenly our bones are so fragile we break them by just sitting down.

So, we might THINK something works, when, looking at the bigger picture, that something is making a mess.

Even so, I do love to try to figure out the world. It's fascinating to me to see how we thought of the world before (linearly--a then b then c) and how we're starting to see it now (quantumly--a affects b and c; b affects a and d, etc). We needed to think linearly, I think, before we could think quantumly. But maybe quantumly still isn't quite all there is. If we trust our human, ordinary understanding, how can we know?

Just asking for channeled information doesn't seem to me the best way to live our lives, however. I love the interaction of doing the best we can with the world. We learn that way, if only because we're learning from our mistakes.

That seems to me a weak argument, however, for doing things without help from a higher source. It's like burning our hand on a stove because we didn't realize it was hot until we experienced the heat ourselves by our own experiments.

Yet, just drinking in knowledge from a higher source seems a bit too passive to be feasible.

Thanks for your comments. I love hearing what others think.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 17-03-2018, 10:24 PM
inavalan inavalan is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 5,089
 
This seems a good compilation of quotes and exercises from Seth - Roberts:

https://www.gurusfeet.com/files/Jane...Excercises.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 17-03-2018, 11:38 PM
Dee47 Dee47 is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 428
 
Thanks inavalan.

I "paged" through the material in the link and discovered a quote that said something to the effect that when we try to do something, we try to do it all, from beginning to end. And Seth basically said we can't do that because there is no beginning and no end. (Hope I'm getting the idea down right.)

Anyway, that was particularly useful because I have been mulling over chapter 1 of The Nature of Personal Reality and am stuck on figuring out the difference between the ego and the conscious mind. But I had determined that I really didn't need to know that. The essential message in that chapter, for me, is that we need use "joy and vigor" to manifest, and we might manifest by "clearing [our] conscious mind" in order to allow "the deeper knowledge of [our] greater identity" to work. Seth doesn't say manifest; he says "form the reality that you know." I think he's basically saying that we need to meditate if we want to manifest in ways that will please us. Meditation allows us to clear our "conscious minds." Then the good stuff can rise up from within us. Seth doesn't say "meditate" either.

The quote I read in the link you gave me helped me to let go of something I really don't need to know at this point. So thanks.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums