Is channelling real?

Originally Posted by Ladofthelight

I hope I am not interrupting something here? :-)

Channeling is a very broad and ambiguous topic.

I certainly "believe" in its existence. I have received personal channelings that cut directly to the core of my being. The "channeler" had no way of knowing the things she said to me.

In my scientific mind, I view channelings as broadcasts. I believe channelers can "tune in" to the frequency and translate into a format that others can understand.

There may be a "broadcast" that gets sent out to the collective consciousness, and some are able to tune into it.

I think we are all capable of "channeling" to a certain degree... Oftentimes I will find myself "automatically" writing or speaking about something. It is coming from somewhere. The inner/higher self? Somewhere else? I do not know, but I do know how accurate it can be when it is geared towards a specific person with a specific question or problem.

Though, the importance of authenticity is of varying degree from person to person. Some channeled messages speak of using discernment. Some messages resonate with me and others do not.

At the end of the day there is no 100% way to "prove" any of it, thus a little bit of faith/belief will enter into the realm.

We're into semantics now. You say "I have received personal channelings that cut directly to the core of my being. The "channeler" had no way of knowing the things she said to me." and I say such information sounds like auric/psychic reading by a psychic.

So, to reiterate, what is channelling? As you described the communication you had as "personal" then the details woudn't have come from "broadcasts" that were tuned into - always assuming that such 'broadcasts' actually exist....I certainly haven't heard any 'channeller' describe matters that way.

The so-called New Age seems to have its own new language for widely recognised old attributes. Channellers now do what psychics or mediums have done for decades.... So-called Ascended Master and Guides are the individuals who elsewhere are teachers and guides.

Any and all words, ideas or guidance from these individuals should be tested in just the same manner that guides of old counselled we should always 'test the spirit' and accept only that which does not offend our reason....

As for 'proof' well that's another discussion topic.

Originally Posted by Neville

Channeling is real to those that believe in it and complete and utter hogwash to those that do not.

That's about the size of it really.

And how do you define 'real'?

Without first having a definition of 'channelling' how could it be 'real' or 'not real'?

Mac,

You know as well as I do that semantics are all there is...
The woman I saw could be called a "medium", as she "channeled" my guides.

So use whatever word you want.

In fact, I will call it "zoorbiting"...

If I rely solely on what I can "prove" I won't get very far. Though, "proof" itself has different degrees based on the individual.

All I was saying is that I have found much comfort from "mediumship" and "channeling/zoorbiting"...

I have read "channeled" books and also found solace in them.

As far as I am concerned, in my "reality", it is real.

Originally Posted by Ladofthelight

Mac,

You know as well as I do that semantics are all there is...
The woman I saw could be called a "medium", as she "channeled" my guides.

So use whatever word you want.

In fact, I will call it "zoorbiting"...

If I rely solely on what I can "prove" I won't get very far. Though, "proof" itself has different degrees based on the individual.

All I was saying is that I have found much comfort from "mediumship" and "channeling/zoorbiting"...

I have read "channeled" books and also found solace in them.

As far as I am concerned, in my "reality", it is real.

As with so many readers, you may be misjudging me on what I say...

You joined in with a general discussion about channelling and I suggested what might have been your personal situation based on what you wrote. I sought to take nothing from you, only to illustrate....

I mentioned 'proof' but it's a word you'll only hear me saying when it's to illustrate how evidence and proof can coincide under certain circumstances. Here I only hinted to see what reactions there would be.

My background, my persuasion is nothing secret. I am deeply influenced by the ideas and guidance of spiritually evolved teachers and guides. I am also deeply moved by certain channelled words and ideas which added to that fundamental appreciation.

I have no 'down' on the channelling of guidance for all - in reality that channelling is the one I find authentic - but not necessarily that of a personal nature as I can not test what is given....

When I say is it 'real' it's not because I have any scrap of doubt. It is in the hope I will encourage others to question for themselves, to probe and challenge - and they are welcome to do that to me also should they wish.

In this format it is difficult to get a "read" of what anyone is saying. I try to limit my contribution as it often times is misunderstood. Occasionally I get pulled into a discussion of "duality" and thus I learn from the experience.

It would appear we see things in a similar way.

Originally Posted by Ladofthelight

In this format it is difficult to get a "read" of what anyone is saying. I try to limit my contribution as it often times is misunderstood. Occasionally I get pulled into a discussion of "duality" and thus I learn from the experience.

It would appear we see things in a similar way.

I can't understand the "duality" point you made.

Maybe what we should take from discussion forum work is the extreme difficulty we have in communicating effectively with one another within the same dimension - from that we might then go on to become cautious of ANYTHING claimed to be communicated in any way from any other dimension?

Don't you think?

"Duality" to me is 3D. More semantics.

I prefer not to assume anything, and only speak form my perspective.

Some will resonate with what I say, type, feel, others will not.

I get the feeling that many on this site are trying to justify their spirituality to themselves, and thus end up discussing "words" and labels. That is only the feeling I get, not an assumption. I am open to be proven wrong.

How does one convey, with words, an emotional feeling?

Personally I rather communicate through other mediums.

Originally Posted by Ladofthelight

"Duality" to me is 3D. More semantics.

I prefer not to assume anything, and only speak form my perspective.

Some will resonate with what I say, type, feel, others will not.

I get the feeling that many on this site are trying to justify their spirituality to themselves, and thus end up discussing "words" and labels. That is only the feeling I get, not an assumption. I am open to be proven wrong.

How does one convey, with words, an emotional feeling?

Personally I rather communicate through other mediums.

I still can't figure why you introduced the duality vs. 3D issue into channelling? That's what I didn't follow.

I use whatever means are appropriate for communication - doesn't have to be a personal perspective. Some things will 'resonate' for others, some things won't....surely that's the same for everyone?

Your 'feeling' about others and their labels is not something that gives me concern. What does give me concern, however, is that when labels or descriptors are used then why not try to use accurate ones? Surely it's more important to understand what someone meant rather than interpreting it in a personal way?

Do you mean you can't convey emotion with words? Isn't that more down to the individual rather than any implied inadequacy of words?

As for alternative media, well we use what works best for us individually but on discussion forums the written word is all we have....

[Favourite Son]

Perhaps my opening question was a little ambiguous.
When I am asking about channelling, I am referring to those who claim to be receiving messages of great importance of a world about to change etc. You know, the " I know something noone else does and you should believe me" channeler. Basically trying to form their own religion or cult if you will.
There have been many of these over the years, I am wondering how many have evr been proven accurate?

I was not referring to personal messages we may get during the day or from a psychic medium. That is a different topic to what I am asking.

Originally Posted by Favourite Son

Perhaps my opening question was a little ambiguous.
When I am asking about channelling, I am referring to those who claim to be receiving messages of great importance of a world about to change etc. You know, the " I know something noone else does and you should believe me" channeler. Basically trying to form their own religion or cult if you will.
There have been many of these over the years, I am wondering how many have evr been proven accurate?

I was not referring to personal messages we may get during the day or from a psychic medium. That is a different topic to what I am asking.

Yes it was an ambiguous original question but I suspect you already know the answer anyway.

The very aspect of claimed, personal, exclusive knowledge is immediately suspect. You already know that, don't you?

I suspect also that you already know that there has never been a single revelation of the sort you've asked about. How could there be? Would an evolved spirit entity communicate information of world importance through an individual of the sort you're suggesting, enabling them to claim exclusivity to the revelations?

I don't think I have anything more.