Phil (Macavity) told me that it's all right to post off-topic threads on the forum, as long as they aren't posted in the wrong forum. Since I am a believer in the readings of an American psychic named Jane Roberts (who died in 1984), and since a lot of the ideas in my poems stem from the Seth Material (the name given to the readings), I'm going to talk about the Material in this thread.
The readings occurred from December, 1963 (a month after Kennedy was assassinated) to Sptember, 1984, when Roberts died (with a one-year hiatus during her final illness). The story of how the readings started is interesting. Roberts, who was a writer of fiction and poetry, got the idea to write a book about ESP. So she borrowed a Ouija board. Ouija boards require two people to operate, so her husband, Robert Butts, used it with her. For the first couple days, nothing coherent came off the board, but then they started to get coherent messages. Butts, being a very meticulous man, wrote down every word. Days later -- not sure how long -- Roberts started to hear the words in her head as they came off the board. This alarmed her, as you would expect. Soon after, she started to speak the words spontaneously, and the Ouija board was eventually abandoned.
(Roberts was in her early thirties when the sessions began, and Butts was at least ten years older, if not fifteen years older.)
There was then a period in which Roberts would go into trance and speak as Seth, but she would remain conscious. She would pace back and forth during those early sessions, resisting the impulse to lose consciousness. Eventually, she started to sit in a rocking chair for the sessions, and she did lose consciousness during them. She often said that she didn't entirely like being a mouthpiece for a "ghost", but she eventually accepted it.
There are a lot of reasons I believe in the Seth Material. First, Roberts and Butts were intelligent people, but they didn't have a lot of what you would call guile. They lived in a second-floor apartment in a house (as I do now). They had a lot of friends, but they didn't have a telephone (which wasn't a given in 1963). If a friend wanted to see them, the friend would just drop by. Friends who dropped by during a session were welcomed to witness it. (If they were doing something fraudulent, I doubt they would have been happy to have so many guests witness the sessions.)
The main reason I believe in the Seth Material is that the level of intelligence and wisdom in the sessions is totally off the scale. There are portions of the Seth Material that rise to a very high level of insight and complexity. Also, there is not even the slightest hint of fakery or artifice in the readings. The picture of the universe that Seth set forth is complex yet plausible. Also, many of the ideas he set forth are consistent with quantum theory, although neither Roberts nor Butts (to the best of my knowledge) knew much about it. Many new and novel ideas also originated with Seth, and have since become a standard part of "New Age" philosophy.
Also, the character of Roberts' own writing (as herself) was significantly different from how Seth sounded, who came across as a wise professor more than anything else.
Least but not last, Roberts considered herself an atheist before the sessions started.
(One interesting note: Seth said towards the end of Roberts' life that he originally appeared as a male because Roberts would have assumed that he represented her subconscious if he had some across as a female. Also, Roberts had more respect for men than women when it came to intellectual matters.)
So who was Seth? Well, he said that he had completed his earthly incarnations. He said that he had a connection with Roberts because they had, at one time, been part of the same soul. Seth had broken off and established his own soul, but the connection to the original soul remained. (I may address this issue in later posts.) Seth said that he had moved on to a plane of existence populated mainly by educators. He also said that the information he was sharing is given to every generation of humanity.
(More to come.)
The Seth Material
-
CalebPerry
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:26 am
Signature info:
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
-
MilesTRanter
- Prolific Poster
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2022 4:20 pm
I am reading excerpts from "Look inside" (this book) on Amazon kindle. I have so far read parts of the intro and now reading the author's (Roberts's) intro.
I'm trying to get a copy of The Seth Material from my local library (whose main branch will, unfortunately, be closed for a long time due to ongoing repairs because a water pipe broke). But the smaller branches are looking to see if there's a copy I could borrow from somewhere in my area.
I'm trying to get a copy of The Seth Material from my local library (whose main branch will, unfortunately, be closed for a long time due to ongoing repairs because a water pipe broke). But the smaller branches are looking to see if there's a copy I could borrow from somewhere in my area.
-
CalebPerry
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:26 am
Later this evening, I'll start sharing some of the things that Seth said.
Signature info:
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
-
MilesTRanter
- Prolific Poster
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2022 4:20 pm
Being naturally curious, I Googled “How Does a Ouija board work?” and found this article.
https://sciencenordic.com/behaviour-den ... rk/1457820
How Ouija boards really work
“Impressive” study reveals what is actually happening when a supposed spirit communicates via a Ouija board.
Thomas Hoffmann journalist
saturday 04. August 2018 - 06:25
“How did you die?”
You have probably either tried it yourself or have heard of others who have: The Ouija Board.
One or more participants sit across from each other with their fingers on a glass. Around the glass are numbers and letters. A spirit is summoned, you ask questions, and the glass begins to move from one letter to the next to spell out the response:
“K-N-I-F-E”
Eye-tracking reveals where the participants expect the planchette to move to. (Photo: Cecilie Cedergren/Marc Andersen)
Perhaps you were absolutely certain that it was not you who moved the glass, and everyone else had the same feeling. So who did? A ghost?
Alright, so here comes the breaking news: No, it was not a spirit. It was you! Or rather, it was you and your friends that unconsciously collaborated to select the letters.
In a new study, scientists from Aarhus University, in Denmark, the University of Southern Denmark, and Bielefeld University in Germany have identified precisely what happens when the glass moves.
Study conducted at a Ouija board conference
Lead-author on the new study, Marc Andersen, a postdoc from the Interactive Minds Centre at Aarhus University, had long wondered:
How can a group of people, each with a finger on the glass, spell out a meaningful word and still be convinced that they didn’t do it?
Players become better at predicting the direction the planchette will travel with each letter that is spelled out. (Photo: Cecilie Cedergren/Marc Andersen)
In 2015, he packed his bag with a notebook, video camera, and eye-tracking equipment, and set off for Baltimore in the US with a research assistant.
They were headed to a conference for people that communicate with the dead via Ouija boards. Instead of a glass, they use a triangular piece of plastic, called a planchette, which moves around the board and points to letters, numbers, and individual words such as yes or no.
Andersen recruited 40 participants who wore eye-tracking equipment, which followed the participants’ eye movements as they navigated the board. The séance was also recorded. The results are published in the scientific journal Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences.
The big reveal
Participants sat in pairs, and were instructed to do two things:
1 To spell the word “Baltimore.”
2 To conduct a Ouija board session as usual.
As you might expect, when the participants spelled out Baltimore, they looked at the next letter ahead of time before moving the planchette to that letter. In other words, they could easily predict where the planchette would end up.
But when they moved on to the second task (to conduct a Ouija board session as usual), it was much more difficult for the individual participants to predict where the planchette would move.
And here is the paradox: How can the participants be unable to predict the word that will be spelled out (hence the belief that a spirit did it) when more than 100 years of research shows that the participants are clearly moving the glass themselves?
Andersen explains they figured out what was happening, not by looking at each individual’s eye movements, but by looking at the combined eye movements of each pair of players.
Tracking the combined eye movements of two players turned out to be as good a predictor of where the planchette would end up as tracking just one player’s eye movement when they are purposely spelling out a known word, as in the Baltimore exercise.
So, while an individual player cannot predict where the planchette will move, the combined eye movement of the pair of players reveals what the “spirit” will write, especially after the first few letters, which seem to occur at random.
“What is so fascinating about this phenomenon is that individual participants exhibit great difficulties in predicting what the “spirit” is trying to tell them, but as soon as we look at the participants as a collective entity, we see how meaningful responses are still able to emerge out of their interaction with each other,” says Andersen.
“Our study solves the apparent paradox that participants on the one hand are producing the Ouija responses themselves, while they on the other hand are unable to predict those very same responses at an individual level. In that sense, you could say that the “spirit” is actually a representation of the collective ‘we’,” he says.
“Imaginative and effective use” of eye tracking technology
Professor James Todd from Eastern Michigan University, USA, is impressed with the study. He was not involved with it, but has 25 years of experience researching how we communicate via others or using objects.
“I was impressed by their imaginative and effective use of [eye tracking software]. In other words, Andersen’s work is quite valuable in that it gives us a relatively easy way to detect and measure mistaken attributions of action under reasonably ordinary conditions in ordinary people,” he writes in an email to our sister site, Videnskab.dk.
“The fact that Andersen and his colleagues were able to get these results outside of the laboratory probably strengthens the outcome. The effects were strong enough to detect under reasonably ordinary conditions,” he writes.
If you believe in the mystical, then you will experience it
The Baltimore experiment also shows that people, who believe that the Ouija board can be used to contact the dead, are also more likely to believe that the planchette moves itself, compared to those who are more sceptical.
This pattern fits Andersen’s previous experimental research, using virtual reality. In this study, as participants walked through a virtual reality forest, those who expected to encounter something supernatural were more likely to report experiencing it afterwards.
This is thought to be due to the effects of expectations on our conscious experience of the world around us.
https://sciencenordic.com/behaviour-den ... rk/1457820
How Ouija boards really work
“Impressive” study reveals what is actually happening when a supposed spirit communicates via a Ouija board.
Thomas Hoffmann journalist
saturday 04. August 2018 - 06:25
“How did you die?”
You have probably either tried it yourself or have heard of others who have: The Ouija Board.
One or more participants sit across from each other with their fingers on a glass. Around the glass are numbers and letters. A spirit is summoned, you ask questions, and the glass begins to move from one letter to the next to spell out the response:
“K-N-I-F-E”
Eye-tracking reveals where the participants expect the planchette to move to. (Photo: Cecilie Cedergren/Marc Andersen)
Perhaps you were absolutely certain that it was not you who moved the glass, and everyone else had the same feeling. So who did? A ghost?
Alright, so here comes the breaking news: No, it was not a spirit. It was you! Or rather, it was you and your friends that unconsciously collaborated to select the letters.
In a new study, scientists from Aarhus University, in Denmark, the University of Southern Denmark, and Bielefeld University in Germany have identified precisely what happens when the glass moves.
Study conducted at a Ouija board conference
Lead-author on the new study, Marc Andersen, a postdoc from the Interactive Minds Centre at Aarhus University, had long wondered:
How can a group of people, each with a finger on the glass, spell out a meaningful word and still be convinced that they didn’t do it?
Players become better at predicting the direction the planchette will travel with each letter that is spelled out. (Photo: Cecilie Cedergren/Marc Andersen)
In 2015, he packed his bag with a notebook, video camera, and eye-tracking equipment, and set off for Baltimore in the US with a research assistant.
They were headed to a conference for people that communicate with the dead via Ouija boards. Instead of a glass, they use a triangular piece of plastic, called a planchette, which moves around the board and points to letters, numbers, and individual words such as yes or no.
Andersen recruited 40 participants who wore eye-tracking equipment, which followed the participants’ eye movements as they navigated the board. The séance was also recorded. The results are published in the scientific journal Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences.
The big reveal
Participants sat in pairs, and were instructed to do two things:
1 To spell the word “Baltimore.”
2 To conduct a Ouija board session as usual.
As you might expect, when the participants spelled out Baltimore, they looked at the next letter ahead of time before moving the planchette to that letter. In other words, they could easily predict where the planchette would end up.
But when they moved on to the second task (to conduct a Ouija board session as usual), it was much more difficult for the individual participants to predict where the planchette would move.
And here is the paradox: How can the participants be unable to predict the word that will be spelled out (hence the belief that a spirit did it) when more than 100 years of research shows that the participants are clearly moving the glass themselves?
Andersen explains they figured out what was happening, not by looking at each individual’s eye movements, but by looking at the combined eye movements of each pair of players.
Tracking the combined eye movements of two players turned out to be as good a predictor of where the planchette would end up as tracking just one player’s eye movement when they are purposely spelling out a known word, as in the Baltimore exercise.
So, while an individual player cannot predict where the planchette will move, the combined eye movement of the pair of players reveals what the “spirit” will write, especially after the first few letters, which seem to occur at random.
“What is so fascinating about this phenomenon is that individual participants exhibit great difficulties in predicting what the “spirit” is trying to tell them, but as soon as we look at the participants as a collective entity, we see how meaningful responses are still able to emerge out of their interaction with each other,” says Andersen.
“Our study solves the apparent paradox that participants on the one hand are producing the Ouija responses themselves, while they on the other hand are unable to predict those very same responses at an individual level. In that sense, you could say that the “spirit” is actually a representation of the collective ‘we’,” he says.
“Imaginative and effective use” of eye tracking technology
Professor James Todd from Eastern Michigan University, USA, is impressed with the study. He was not involved with it, but has 25 years of experience researching how we communicate via others or using objects.
“I was impressed by their imaginative and effective use of [eye tracking software]. In other words, Andersen’s work is quite valuable in that it gives us a relatively easy way to detect and measure mistaken attributions of action under reasonably ordinary conditions in ordinary people,” he writes in an email to our sister site, Videnskab.dk.
“The fact that Andersen and his colleagues were able to get these results outside of the laboratory probably strengthens the outcome. The effects were strong enough to detect under reasonably ordinary conditions,” he writes.
If you believe in the mystical, then you will experience it
The Baltimore experiment also shows that people, who believe that the Ouija board can be used to contact the dead, are also more likely to believe that the planchette moves itself, compared to those who are more sceptical.
This pattern fits Andersen’s previous experimental research, using virtual reality. In this study, as participants walked through a virtual reality forest, those who expected to encounter something supernatural were more likely to report experiencing it afterwards.
This is thought to be due to the effects of expectations on our conscious experience of the world around us.
-
CalebPerry
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:26 am
I'm sorry, Miles. Throwing up one study after another to debunk what I believe won't have any effect. There are legions of atheists in the world who love to do nothing more than whack down other people's beliefs.
I have faith that the Seth material is real. It has been my guiding light for forty years. Your arguments won't change that. As I said above, the main reason I believe it is because the Material itself is absolutely brilliant -- deep, insightful, highly original, complex yet simple, and consistent in its message over the twenty years that the psychic was giving the readings. Your attempt to debunk the Ouija board with a shaky theory doesn't change my feelings.
I started this thread because I thought you had a genuine interest in hearing about my beliefs, but I now doubt that you do. Nonetheless, I have started the thread, so I will gradually complete it.
I have often felt frustrated when dealing with Christians who hold closely to ancient religious ideas that obviously cannot be true. They hold to their beliefs because their religion provides an important function in their lives. The difference between the Seth Material and Christianity, is that the Material is ALL GOOD in its message (no judgement, no damnation, no pettiness). It is also modern in its sophistication and its consistency with science.
So let me start talking about what Seth actually said.
=======================
I am going to start at the beginning, with the story of God. The Material is the only scriptural body of work that says anything about who and what God is. (I call it scripture because the Material is mostly about our metaphysical place in the universe, but Seth didn't use that term.) Understanding God is central to understanding the entire philosophy. Please keep in mind that I am paraphrasing. I am not consulting the books as I write this, and I am writing from memory. I am also going to refer to God as "he" and "him". Otherwise, I have to refer to him and "it", and that feels unnatural
According to Seth, God doesn't know what he arose from. I have theorized two possibilities: that there is a race of gods, and that God was "seeded" somehow by another god. God knows of no other like himself, so if there is a race of gods, it would seem they are inward-looking creatures who are aware only of themselves. But Seth said nothing about such a possibility.
Another possibility is that the mental energy that forms God (more about that later) is a naturally occurring thing that arises from the "void", meaning that there is more to the "void" than we know. But again, Seth said nothing about that.
The fact that God doesn't know why he exists is what gives existence its meaning. I don't have the exact quote from the Material to give you, but Seth said something like this: Every action taken by anyone in the universe is an affirmation of life against the nothingness that might have been. In other words, existence provides it own meaning
God has had more than one form. Seth didn't use this term, but it seems that God had an infancy.
God's original form was simply MIND in its purest state -- no body, no environment. It would seem that in a void, a mind formed. (Now, I just used the word "void". By that I don't mean "space", since "space" is a definable thing. I just mean "nothingness".) So, according to the readings, God started out as a mind (i.e., thoughts) in a void with nothing else in it.
I assume that God's early thoughts were probably chaotic, as one would expect from a newly formed life. But Seth didn't say anything about that.
So the young God had nothing to occupy him except his thoughts (Seth used the word "dreams"). As time passed (and I use that term loosely because Seth said that there is no time), God's thoughts became more organized. What started to evolve in God's mind was a framework for existence. ...
[more to come]
I have faith that the Seth material is real. It has been my guiding light for forty years. Your arguments won't change that. As I said above, the main reason I believe it is because the Material itself is absolutely brilliant -- deep, insightful, highly original, complex yet simple, and consistent in its message over the twenty years that the psychic was giving the readings. Your attempt to debunk the Ouija board with a shaky theory doesn't change my feelings.
I started this thread because I thought you had a genuine interest in hearing about my beliefs, but I now doubt that you do. Nonetheless, I have started the thread, so I will gradually complete it.
I have often felt frustrated when dealing with Christians who hold closely to ancient religious ideas that obviously cannot be true. They hold to their beliefs because their religion provides an important function in their lives. The difference between the Seth Material and Christianity, is that the Material is ALL GOOD in its message (no judgement, no damnation, no pettiness). It is also modern in its sophistication and its consistency with science.
So let me start talking about what Seth actually said.
=======================
I am going to start at the beginning, with the story of God. The Material is the only scriptural body of work that says anything about who and what God is. (I call it scripture because the Material is mostly about our metaphysical place in the universe, but Seth didn't use that term.) Understanding God is central to understanding the entire philosophy. Please keep in mind that I am paraphrasing. I am not consulting the books as I write this, and I am writing from memory. I am also going to refer to God as "he" and "him". Otherwise, I have to refer to him and "it", and that feels unnatural
According to Seth, God doesn't know what he arose from. I have theorized two possibilities: that there is a race of gods, and that God was "seeded" somehow by another god. God knows of no other like himself, so if there is a race of gods, it would seem they are inward-looking creatures who are aware only of themselves. But Seth said nothing about such a possibility.
Another possibility is that the mental energy that forms God (more about that later) is a naturally occurring thing that arises from the "void", meaning that there is more to the "void" than we know. But again, Seth said nothing about that.
The fact that God doesn't know why he exists is what gives existence its meaning. I don't have the exact quote from the Material to give you, but Seth said something like this: Every action taken by anyone in the universe is an affirmation of life against the nothingness that might have been. In other words, existence provides it own meaning
God has had more than one form. Seth didn't use this term, but it seems that God had an infancy.
God's original form was simply MIND in its purest state -- no body, no environment. It would seem that in a void, a mind formed. (Now, I just used the word "void". By that I don't mean "space", since "space" is a definable thing. I just mean "nothingness".) So, according to the readings, God started out as a mind (i.e., thoughts) in a void with nothing else in it.
I assume that God's early thoughts were probably chaotic, as one would expect from a newly formed life. But Seth didn't say anything about that.
So the young God had nothing to occupy him except his thoughts (Seth used the word "dreams"). As time passed (and I use that term loosely because Seth said that there is no time), God's thoughts became more organized. What started to evolve in God's mind was a framework for existence. ...
[more to come]
Signature info:
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
-
MilesTRanter
- Prolific Poster
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2022 4:20 pm
Caleb, I'm waiting for my library to find a copy of The Seth Material so I can read it. Considering how many people it has influenced, and all the languages it has been translated into tells me that Jane Roberts's writing's are obviously extremely interesting. I've so far read a lot of the "look inside the book" at Amazon and also much of the Wikipedia article on The Seth Material as well as about Roberts.
I have nothing against anybody for believing whatever they happen to believe in. It's their choice. What I'm most interested in is how The Material has influenced and inspired you, your life, and your poetry.
Added in: Here’s an excerpt I found interesting. Perhaps you may also.
I have nothing against anybody for believing whatever they happen to believe in. It's their choice. What I'm most interested in is how The Material has influenced and inspired you, your life, and your poetry.
Added in: Here’s an excerpt I found interesting. Perhaps you may also.
Speaking for herself. Jane is able to introspectively differentiate between processes used during the production of her own books and those processes used during the production of Seth's books. Comparing her awareness of the creative process involved in writing her own poetry and in dictating Seth's first book, for example, Jane remarked:
If both are coming from the same unconscious, then why the subjective differences in my feelings? These differences were obvious from the first. When I'm caught up in inspiration, writing a poem, then I'm 'turned on,' excited, filled with a sense of urgency, and discovery. Just before this happens, however, an idea comes out of nowhere, it seems. It is 'given.' It simply appears, and from it new creative connections spring. . . I'm alert, yet open and receptive -- suspended in a strange psychic elasticity between poised attention and passivity. . . . The highly personal involvement, the work and play involved in helping the idea 'out,' all make the poem mine. . . . I am not connected in this way with Seth's book [Seth Speaks], and had no awareness of the creative processes involved. I went into trance as I do for our regular sessions. Seth dictated the book through me, speaking through my lips. The creative work was so distant from me, that in this respect I could not call the product my own. I've found that only my own writing gives me the particular kind of creative satisfaction that I need, however -- the conscious involvement with unconscious material, the 'excitement of the chase. . . . I can only state my own feelings and emphasize that Seth's book [Seth Speaks], and the whole six thousand-page manuscript of Seth Material, doesn't take care of my own creative expression or responsibility. If both came from the same unconscious source, it seems that there would be no slack (Roberts, 1972, pp. xvi-xvii).
https://www2.rivier.edu/faculty/pcunnin ... Origin.pdf
Last edited by MilesTRanter on Fri Apr 14, 2023 2:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
CalebPerry
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:26 am
As I said in the last post, God's existence can be divided up into two periods, the early period and the later period. Between those two periods, God experienced a transformation.
In God's early existence he essentially was pure mind. Seth said that during this period, God spent his time "dreaming" (the word that Seth used). Since God didn't sleep in the same way that we do, I think it's probably more accurate to say that God "daydreamed". Over time (and again, I use that word loosely) the structure of reality began to evolved in God's dreams, with universes and individuals populating those universes. In other words, what we know as reality existed first in God's mind.
Eventually, however, the dreams became overwhelming in their size and complexity. Furthermore, the occupants of the dreams sought to be made real, but the means to make his dreams real didn't come to God immediately. Seth describes it as an urgent situation, saying that God experienced "agony" during this period. If God hadn't found the means to divest himself of his dreams and make them real, he faced the possibility of becoming insane. The problem was that God was the source of life in the universe. God needed to find a way to project his dreams into reality while still being the source of energy for the new reality.
(I'm paraphrasing during this portion, as I remember little of Seth's actually words -- except that he described all this more dramatically than I am.)
What happened next is what I call the "creation". I have lifted that word from Christianity, although Seth never used it.
Basically, God found a way to make his dreams "real". Seth said that the moment God realized the means, the transformation took place. The reality that had been "thought" by God as part of his dreams, now became independent and self-determining -- although God remained intimately connected to it. The way I like to say it is that, before the creation, God "thought" the universe; after the creation, the universe began to "think" itself. However, God's mental energy still forms everything in the universe, and God still has a role in determining what you might call the psychological environment or "atmosphere" of the universe (a word Seth didn't use either). After the creation, God lost his ability to control the way and manner in which events unfold.
Thus, the gift of the "creation" is that God gave us freedom, self-determination and independence. However, God remains the life force of the universe.
Another way of describing this is to say that God turned himself inside out during the creation. Before the creation, "reality" as we know it had existed as dreams within the parameters of God's mind. After the creation, "reality" exists independently with God remaining as the driving energy of the universe. Reality now has the freedom to determine its own evolution, while God's consciousness permeates everything.
Seth called this transformed God a "gestalt" of everything in existence. The main difference is that God, while still the "creator", is no longer the "controller". We have true independence and freedom to create reality as we see fit.
The situation that exists now is that God's consciousness permeates everything. God knows himself as me and you and everyone else in the universe, and also as all matter and energy, but also knows himself as himself -- meaning, that portion which is the "gestalt". (A gestalt is a whole which is greater than the sum of its parts.)
So, we still exist within God, except that it is not in God's dreams, and God no longer controls us. However, the good things about God still benefit us. For example, there is no death in the universe. God, like nature, is always growing and expanding, and no portion of him ever dies. Since we are part of God, we never die either (though our immortality has a lot to do with time, which I'll get to later).
Now, here in the sub-universe that we know as reality, there is nothing BUT death. But that's an illusion. As I think I have said already, within God there is a "multiverse", and each sub-universe within the multiverse has its own natural laws. In our sub-universe, death is necessary. Generally speaking, physicality (materiality) is also an illusion, as is time. Physical space is also an illusion, as God is a spiritual creature (composed, as I said, of mental energy) who has no use for physical space.
When a biological creature dies, its physical body remains alive at a level which we aren't able to perceive. If it is cremated, then the life in the body is transformed into energy, which is also alive. The thing that we identify as ourselves (which we call our soul) continues on. It exists in a post-death environment and then reincarnates, or it moves on to another plane of existence or another sub-universe. I should say that most sub-universes within the multiverse are not physical in the way that ours is.
If I haven't made it clear: So, life isn't something that sprang up in some primordial swamp; life has existed since the beginning. The idea that only biological life is alive, is just a conceit on the part of humans.
[more to come]
In God's early existence he essentially was pure mind. Seth said that during this period, God spent his time "dreaming" (the word that Seth used). Since God didn't sleep in the same way that we do, I think it's probably more accurate to say that God "daydreamed". Over time (and again, I use that word loosely) the structure of reality began to evolved in God's dreams, with universes and individuals populating those universes. In other words, what we know as reality existed first in God's mind.
Eventually, however, the dreams became overwhelming in their size and complexity. Furthermore, the occupants of the dreams sought to be made real, but the means to make his dreams real didn't come to God immediately. Seth describes it as an urgent situation, saying that God experienced "agony" during this period. If God hadn't found the means to divest himself of his dreams and make them real, he faced the possibility of becoming insane. The problem was that God was the source of life in the universe. God needed to find a way to project his dreams into reality while still being the source of energy for the new reality.
(I'm paraphrasing during this portion, as I remember little of Seth's actually words -- except that he described all this more dramatically than I am.)
What happened next is what I call the "creation". I have lifted that word from Christianity, although Seth never used it.
Basically, God found a way to make his dreams "real". Seth said that the moment God realized the means, the transformation took place. The reality that had been "thought" by God as part of his dreams, now became independent and self-determining -- although God remained intimately connected to it. The way I like to say it is that, before the creation, God "thought" the universe; after the creation, the universe began to "think" itself. However, God's mental energy still forms everything in the universe, and God still has a role in determining what you might call the psychological environment or "atmosphere" of the universe (a word Seth didn't use either). After the creation, God lost his ability to control the way and manner in which events unfold.
Thus, the gift of the "creation" is that God gave us freedom, self-determination and independence. However, God remains the life force of the universe.
Another way of describing this is to say that God turned himself inside out during the creation. Before the creation, "reality" as we know it had existed as dreams within the parameters of God's mind. After the creation, "reality" exists independently with God remaining as the driving energy of the universe. Reality now has the freedom to determine its own evolution, while God's consciousness permeates everything.
Seth called this transformed God a "gestalt" of everything in existence. The main difference is that God, while still the "creator", is no longer the "controller". We have true independence and freedom to create reality as we see fit.
The situation that exists now is that God's consciousness permeates everything. God knows himself as me and you and everyone else in the universe, and also as all matter and energy, but also knows himself as himself -- meaning, that portion which is the "gestalt". (A gestalt is a whole which is greater than the sum of its parts.)
So, we still exist within God, except that it is not in God's dreams, and God no longer controls us. However, the good things about God still benefit us. For example, there is no death in the universe. God, like nature, is always growing and expanding, and no portion of him ever dies. Since we are part of God, we never die either (though our immortality has a lot to do with time, which I'll get to later).
Now, here in the sub-universe that we know as reality, there is nothing BUT death. But that's an illusion. As I think I have said already, within God there is a "multiverse", and each sub-universe within the multiverse has its own natural laws. In our sub-universe, death is necessary. Generally speaking, physicality (materiality) is also an illusion, as is time. Physical space is also an illusion, as God is a spiritual creature (composed, as I said, of mental energy) who has no use for physical space.
When a biological creature dies, its physical body remains alive at a level which we aren't able to perceive. If it is cremated, then the life in the body is transformed into energy, which is also alive. The thing that we identify as ourselves (which we call our soul) continues on. It exists in a post-death environment and then reincarnates, or it moves on to another plane of existence or another sub-universe. I should say that most sub-universes within the multiverse are not physical in the way that ours is.
If I haven't made it clear: So, life isn't something that sprang up in some primordial swamp; life has existed since the beginning. The idea that only biological life is alive, is just a conceit on the part of humans.
[more to come]
Last edited by CalebPerry on Sat Apr 15, 2023 6:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Signature info:
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
-
MilesTRanter
- Prolific Poster
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2022 4:20 pm
There is no death in the universe.
That reminds me of the law of conservation of energy: energy can neither be created nor destroyed.
Also, in the quantum world, the conservation of quantum information means that information cannot be created nor destroyed.
My feeling so far is that The Seth Material is (at least in part) an extremely elaborate 20th century creation myth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_creation_myths
That reminds me of the law of conservation of energy: energy can neither be created nor destroyed.
Also, in the quantum world, the conservation of quantum information means that information cannot be created nor destroyed.
My feeling so far is that The Seth Material is (at least in part) an extremely elaborate 20th century creation myth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_creation_myths
-
CalebPerry
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:26 am
It's hard to know where to go next, since there is so much to say.
Let me talk about where consciousness comes from. This part is very interesting, especially given how much debate there has been about the source of consciousness.
Now, I said that God was and is composed of mental energy -- and since God is now (after the creation) a gestalt of everything in the universe, then that means the universe must be composed of the same mental energy. Before I explain how mental energy can become a rock, let me talk about the mental energy itself, which Seth described in detail.
It is, first of all, particulate, meaning that it occurs in the form of particles (as opposed to, say, waves). The particles of this energy are, as you would expect, the finest particles in existence, since they form everything. Human science cannot, and probably will never be able to, isolate one, since they are finer than any instrument can see. Seth said that it takes millions of these particles to form a single atom, although he didn't say what kind of atom. Thus, the particles are many times smaller than an electron. (Based on what he said, I suspect it takes hundreds of thousands of the particles to form an electron.)
Now, the energy is always moving. In a universe like ours, which is populated by "things", the particles forming any "thing" change several times a second. What makes that "thing" a "thing" is not so much the energy that composes it (at any given moment), but the form or pattern of the "thing". In that regard, our physical sub-universe is very much like a holodeck on Star Trek. Space is formed as needed, the pattern for something is projected into the space, and the particles swim through it, keeping it real and whole for as long as it needs to be real and whole. (More about all this later.)
Now, here's the interesting part: This energy is alive. What makes it alive, as you might expect, is its mental component. Each particle of energy has consciousness or awareness (of an extremely limited scope, as you might imagine). Each particle of energy can be seen as an individual, since no two are identical (according to Seth).
So -- and this is the important point -- consciousness arises from the very energy that composes everything. Also, the particles can see, although they don't have eyes. It would seem that seeing is also a fundamental aspect of everything in existence (along with consciousness).
The energy has a desire or wont or instinct to combine with other particles to form things. In other words, the nature of the energy is cooperative. If the energy didn't have this cooperative energy, the universe might consist of nothing more than a soup of energy, instead of being filled with individual things and life forms.
As the energy comes together in larger and more complex forms, the consciousness of the particles is additive, and the larger form thus grows in intelligence. In other words, the consciousness of the particles is cumulative.
Mental energy has no mass or weight. It reproduces spontaneously as more is needed. (The particles reproduce by division. When a particle divides, the resulting particles will be the same size.) Indeed, all of existence is awash with these particles. Every time any action is taken, no matter how small the action, large numbers of these particles are created.
The particles never die. When two particles intersect, they simply go through each other. It is because the basic "stuff" of the universe does not die and cannot be destroyed that there is no death or destruction within God or the "multiverse" (which basically are the same thing). The death and destruction we see in this universe is essentially an illusion.
As I said, most sub-universes in the multiverse are not physical, but spiritual -- meaning, they are environments of energy. Indeed, our basic form (our souls) is energy. We human beings will eventually move on to universes which are NOT physical.
But, how does mental energy form a physical object? First, Seth said that these particles of mental energy group together in units of three. They then come together to form the components of atoms -- protons, neutrons, electrons. It is really the atomic form, with its electromagnetism, that allows physical objects to exist. As I said, the particles of mental energy have no mass or weight.
Are you all aware that matter is mostly empty space? Indeed, atoms are mostly empty space. Even the heaviest elements, like lead, are mostly empty space. It is the electromagnetism of the atoms that prevents objects from simply passing through each other. The solidity of our physical universe is something of an illusion.
As to who created our universe and our world, that is another discussion.
I guess that's enough for now. I suspect only Miles is reading this thread (and only to debunk it). So be it.
[more to come]
Let me talk about where consciousness comes from. This part is very interesting, especially given how much debate there has been about the source of consciousness.
Now, I said that God was and is composed of mental energy -- and since God is now (after the creation) a gestalt of everything in the universe, then that means the universe must be composed of the same mental energy. Before I explain how mental energy can become a rock, let me talk about the mental energy itself, which Seth described in detail.
It is, first of all, particulate, meaning that it occurs in the form of particles (as opposed to, say, waves). The particles of this energy are, as you would expect, the finest particles in existence, since they form everything. Human science cannot, and probably will never be able to, isolate one, since they are finer than any instrument can see. Seth said that it takes millions of these particles to form a single atom, although he didn't say what kind of atom. Thus, the particles are many times smaller than an electron. (Based on what he said, I suspect it takes hundreds of thousands of the particles to form an electron.)
Now, the energy is always moving. In a universe like ours, which is populated by "things", the particles forming any "thing" change several times a second. What makes that "thing" a "thing" is not so much the energy that composes it (at any given moment), but the form or pattern of the "thing". In that regard, our physical sub-universe is very much like a holodeck on Star Trek. Space is formed as needed, the pattern for something is projected into the space, and the particles swim through it, keeping it real and whole for as long as it needs to be real and whole. (More about all this later.)
Now, here's the interesting part: This energy is alive. What makes it alive, as you might expect, is its mental component. Each particle of energy has consciousness or awareness (of an extremely limited scope, as you might imagine). Each particle of energy can be seen as an individual, since no two are identical (according to Seth).
So -- and this is the important point -- consciousness arises from the very energy that composes everything. Also, the particles can see, although they don't have eyes. It would seem that seeing is also a fundamental aspect of everything in existence (along with consciousness).
The energy has a desire or wont or instinct to combine with other particles to form things. In other words, the nature of the energy is cooperative. If the energy didn't have this cooperative energy, the universe might consist of nothing more than a soup of energy, instead of being filled with individual things and life forms.
As the energy comes together in larger and more complex forms, the consciousness of the particles is additive, and the larger form thus grows in intelligence. In other words, the consciousness of the particles is cumulative.
Mental energy has no mass or weight. It reproduces spontaneously as more is needed. (The particles reproduce by division. When a particle divides, the resulting particles will be the same size.) Indeed, all of existence is awash with these particles. Every time any action is taken, no matter how small the action, large numbers of these particles are created.
The particles never die. When two particles intersect, they simply go through each other. It is because the basic "stuff" of the universe does not die and cannot be destroyed that there is no death or destruction within God or the "multiverse" (which basically are the same thing). The death and destruction we see in this universe is essentially an illusion.
As I said, most sub-universes in the multiverse are not physical, but spiritual -- meaning, they are environments of energy. Indeed, our basic form (our souls) is energy. We human beings will eventually move on to universes which are NOT physical.
But, how does mental energy form a physical object? First, Seth said that these particles of mental energy group together in units of three. They then come together to form the components of atoms -- protons, neutrons, electrons. It is really the atomic form, with its electromagnetism, that allows physical objects to exist. As I said, the particles of mental energy have no mass or weight.
Are you all aware that matter is mostly empty space? Indeed, atoms are mostly empty space. Even the heaviest elements, like lead, are mostly empty space. It is the electromagnetism of the atoms that prevents objects from simply passing through each other. The solidity of our physical universe is something of an illusion.
As to who created our universe and our world, that is another discussion.
I guess that's enough for now. I suspect only Miles is reading this thread (and only to debunk it). So be it.
[more to come]
Signature info:
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
-
MilesTRanter
- Prolific Poster
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2022 4:20 pm
Caleb, I haven't read Jane Roberts' books yet, so I am in no position to critique them. I've been reading your posts, however, and doing my own research. All I have to say for now is (to quote Carl Sagan): Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Hopefully, more folks will come and participate in this discussion.
Hopefully, more folks will come and participate in this discussion.
-
CalebPerry
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:26 am
I have no evidence to offer you, Miles. I believe in the Seth Material because of the open and intelligent way the psychic and her husband acquired the Material, and because the Material itself strikes me as believable and brilliant. I can't give you evidence of any of it.
I'll type the next installment soon.
I'll type the next installment soon.
Signature info:
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
-
MilesTRanter
- Prolific Poster
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2022 4:20 pm
Speaking of consciousness, here's something you may be interested in, Caleb. It's not directly related to The Seth Material, but it is, nevertheless, quite thought-provoking.
The Politics of Consciousness | video lecture with Yuval Noah Harari
The Politics of Consciousness | video lecture with Yuval Noah Harari
-
MilesTRanter
- Prolific Poster
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2022 4:20 pm
Hi, Caleb (and anybody else who may be interested in this topic). Here’s a short video I just saw. It’s extremely informative.
What happened before the Big Bang?
“It’s not a sin to not know something. It’s only a sin to think you do when you clearly don’t.” —Dr. Don Lincoln
What happened before the Big Bang?
Imagine if Seth and Dr. Don Lincoln sat down together for tea. I wonder what they would talk about. Or Seth and Albert Einstein (even better!).Understanding how the universe began has been a goal for scientists, philosophers, and theologians for millennia. In this video, Fermilab’s Dr. Don Lincoln describes the scientific view on this topic. He covers what we know, what we think, and what we may forever never know.
“It’s not a sin to not know something. It’s only a sin to think you do when you clearly don’t.” —Dr. Don Lincoln
-
MilesTRanter
- Prolific Poster
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2022 4:20 pm
Donald Hoffman's ideas have some similarities in to Seth's, although Hoffman is extremely rigorous in his mathematics.
Why Reality, Space & Time Is An ILLUSION! - Evidence We're Living In A SIMULATION
Why Reality, Space & Time Is An ILLUSION! - Evidence We're Living In A SIMULATION
On Today's Episode:
Donald Hoffman, Cognitive Psychologist and Science Author, has proposed a theory of consciousness that challenges your everyday assumptions about what reality is. His argument is that our perceptions of cause and effect and what we experience in the physical world isn’t as real as you’d like to think.
The metaphor of the virtual headset he uses in these conversations with Tom explains why our experiences are limited and there are things like freewill that we never truly experience. If that’s not heavy enough for you, Hoffman brings mathematical equations into the picture to explain that all consciousness is mathematically structured.
This episode is a complete crash course into the world of Donald Hoffman and the illusion of space, time and reality. Some areas you’ll hear explored in this episode include:
Is Cause and effect real?
The God hypothesis and consciousness
Why your reality isn’t real
The Truth behind consciousness
How evolution hides the matrix (and what’s the red pill)
Testing reality & spacetime
Can you actually escape the matrix?
Do you think it’s possible life is a simulation and we’re in some version of a virtual reality headset?
QUOTES:
“Everything that I believe about me is very different than I believed when I was five, and so over the years and decades of my life, I’ve put together this story of myself, [...] a self is a story that we weave, it’s a narrative that we give.”
“That’s something about a really good scientific theory, once you write it down you become a student of your theory.”
“The equations become smarter than the genius who wrote them down.”
“You can’t directly experience your own free choices. You can experience that you chose, but you can never actually experience yourself choosing.”
“Mathematics is like the bones of the living conscious experience, they can’t be divorced from each other. There’s more to experience than just math, but there’s not less than math.”
“At the foundation of every scientific theory there’s this moment of humility, explanation stops here.”
“We’re creating reality as we render it.”
“When we have babies, in a way that we don’t understand, we’re opening new portals into the realm of consciousness.”
“If I’m going to go beyond the interface then I’ve got to let go of the interface entirely. Any concept, any thought that I have is by definition still in the language of the interface that I’ve got.”
“There are no security blankets when you let go of all thoughts.”
-
CalebPerry
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:26 am
Miles, I'm sorry that I haven't posted another installment. I have been busy re-applying for a government benefit that I get every year, and until that process is over, I don't have time to update this thread.
However, I will say that the Seth Material essentially says that we are living in a spiritual projection. Our reality is a sandwich of three realities: a physical universe, a mental universe, and an anti-matter universe (of which Seth said little). Physical space is created as needed, and our reality is projected as patterns into that physical space. The space is then made real (filled with matter) as it is needed. The shared reality that we experience is agreed upon and then projected from the mental universe. Our inner selves, which exist outside this universe or sub-universe, are actively involved in the projections. Our bodies are also projections of our inner selves, which are nonphysical.
Seth also said that time and space do not actually exist, but rather are illusions. As I said before, each "sub-universe" within the Whole has its own natural laws. Any natural law which exists within a sub-universe but not outside of the sub-universes is essentially an illusion, and that applies to both physical space and time. Physicality itself is something of an illusion since it is created by energy and is mostly empty space.
You may be tempted to see what I'm saying as kooky, especially since this fellow (Donald Hoffman) may come across as a bit of a kook. But keep in mind that the Seth Material originated in the 1960's, when people like Hoffman didn't exist and the internet also didn't exist. Hoffman may indeed have gotten his ideas from the Seth Material, but that doesn't make them invalid.
I should say that the Edgar Cayce readings, which came before the Seth Material, said similar things. That is, in fact, one of the reasons I accept these ideas, that they came from two reliable sources. Indeed, an interesting thing happened when Jane Roberts, the medium who spoke for Seth, published her first book around 1969: The people who owned the Cayce readings looked into them and saw that Cayce had said similar things, and they then published what Cayce said on the matter. Cayce also promoted the idea of reincarnation, as did Seth.
In the "New Age" community, a metaphysical vision of reality has been emerging in the last century. The Seth Material is one of the major cornerstones of this vision. Since that emerging vision is based on sources which generally confirm each other, it is likely to be more correct than any of the ancient religions. If this emerging vision of reality is correct, then we are beings of energy which are immortal, we live in a multiverse, and we live for a period in one sub-universe, and then move on to other sub-universes as our spiritual growth requires. What makes us immortal is not that some deity has ordained that we are immortal, but that all of reality (past, present and future) exists simultaneously in what Seth called the "spacious present". Thus, if we exist anywhere in the spacious present, we exist forever since the spacious present, although constantly in a state of change and flux, never ceases to exist -- and because no part of reality is ever destroyed, or ever can be destroyed.
Okay, since I have broached that subject, let me go into it a little deeper.
Let's say that you come into existence in sub-universe A. Once your spiritual growth has gotten all it can get from sub-universe A, you move on to sub-universe B, and then on to sub-universe C. Each sub-universe exists simultaneously; they are not strung together in time. (It is helpful to see each sub-universe [or plane of existence] as a geographical place than as a period in time.) Other individuals may occupy those same sub-universes, but occupy them in different order -- say, C, then A, then B (as their spiritual growth requires).
The next question is: Do we ever get tired of being immortal? The answer is "no", and I will address that issue in the next post.
However, I will say that the Seth Material essentially says that we are living in a spiritual projection. Our reality is a sandwich of three realities: a physical universe, a mental universe, and an anti-matter universe (of which Seth said little). Physical space is created as needed, and our reality is projected as patterns into that physical space. The space is then made real (filled with matter) as it is needed. The shared reality that we experience is agreed upon and then projected from the mental universe. Our inner selves, which exist outside this universe or sub-universe, are actively involved in the projections. Our bodies are also projections of our inner selves, which are nonphysical.
Seth also said that time and space do not actually exist, but rather are illusions. As I said before, each "sub-universe" within the Whole has its own natural laws. Any natural law which exists within a sub-universe but not outside of the sub-universes is essentially an illusion, and that applies to both physical space and time. Physicality itself is something of an illusion since it is created by energy and is mostly empty space.
You may be tempted to see what I'm saying as kooky, especially since this fellow (Donald Hoffman) may come across as a bit of a kook. But keep in mind that the Seth Material originated in the 1960's, when people like Hoffman didn't exist and the internet also didn't exist. Hoffman may indeed have gotten his ideas from the Seth Material, but that doesn't make them invalid.
I should say that the Edgar Cayce readings, which came before the Seth Material, said similar things. That is, in fact, one of the reasons I accept these ideas, that they came from two reliable sources. Indeed, an interesting thing happened when Jane Roberts, the medium who spoke for Seth, published her first book around 1969: The people who owned the Cayce readings looked into them and saw that Cayce had said similar things, and they then published what Cayce said on the matter. Cayce also promoted the idea of reincarnation, as did Seth.
In the "New Age" community, a metaphysical vision of reality has been emerging in the last century. The Seth Material is one of the major cornerstones of this vision. Since that emerging vision is based on sources which generally confirm each other, it is likely to be more correct than any of the ancient religions. If this emerging vision of reality is correct, then we are beings of energy which are immortal, we live in a multiverse, and we live for a period in one sub-universe, and then move on to other sub-universes as our spiritual growth requires. What makes us immortal is not that some deity has ordained that we are immortal, but that all of reality (past, present and future) exists simultaneously in what Seth called the "spacious present". Thus, if we exist anywhere in the spacious present, we exist forever since the spacious present, although constantly in a state of change and flux, never ceases to exist -- and because no part of reality is ever destroyed, or ever can be destroyed.
Okay, since I have broached that subject, let me go into it a little deeper.
Let's say that you come into existence in sub-universe A. Once your spiritual growth has gotten all it can get from sub-universe A, you move on to sub-universe B, and then on to sub-universe C. Each sub-universe exists simultaneously; they are not strung together in time. (It is helpful to see each sub-universe [or plane of existence] as a geographical place than as a period in time.) Other individuals may occupy those same sub-universes, but occupy them in different order -- say, C, then A, then B (as their spiritual growth requires).
The next question is: Do we ever get tired of being immortal? The answer is "no", and I will address that issue in the next post.
Signature info:
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
-
MilesTRanter
- Prolific Poster
- Posts: 335
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2022 4:20 pm
Here's a short interview I just chanced upon. The person being interviewed is also named Seth, but obviously no relation to the one that was a product of Jane Roberts's amazing imagination.
Anil Seth, neuroscientist: ‘The notion of the soul may already have outlived its usefulness’
https://english.elpais.com/science-tech ... lness.html
Anil Seth, neuroscientist: ‘The notion of the soul may already have outlived its usefulness’
https://english.elpais.com/science-tech ... lness.html
-
CalebPerry
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:26 am
Miles, I stopped posting, first because I was busy, second because I'm not feeling well, but also because it seemed that no one was interested. I just mailed the papers off to the housing authority, and I'll post on this thread again soon.
Anyone who says "The notion of the soul may already have outlived its usefulness" isn't someone whose opinion I want to hear. That's what egotistical people say who think they know more than they actually do.
Anyone who says "The notion of the soul may already have outlived its usefulness" isn't someone whose opinion I want to hear. That's what egotistical people say who think they know more than they actually do.
Signature info:
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
Hi Caleb and Miles,
I've just got caught up with this thread and indeed, the Seth ideas are eye-catching, for me at least: I was struck in particular by the ideas of God growing and changing, of God not knowing why 'he' exists, of inverting 'himself' to create a multiverse he no longer controls (free will). Those are radical thoughts and seem to me quite new in the history of religions, making Jane Roberts's story a very interesting one. I don't tend to read much metaphysics, but I'm glad to have encountered these theories. Perhaps I'm odd in not really needing to know whether Seth exists or Roberts came up with these ideas independently, consciously or unconsciously. I think they contribute to thought.
Cheers,
John
I've just got caught up with this thread and indeed, the Seth ideas are eye-catching, for me at least: I was struck in particular by the ideas of God growing and changing, of God not knowing why 'he' exists, of inverting 'himself' to create a multiverse he no longer controls (free will). Those are radical thoughts and seem to me quite new in the history of religions, making Jane Roberts's story a very interesting one. I don't tend to read much metaphysics, but I'm glad to have encountered these theories. Perhaps I'm odd in not really needing to know whether Seth exists or Roberts came up with these ideas independently, consciously or unconsciously. I think they contribute to thought.
Cheers,
John
-
CalebPerry
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:26 am
Thank you, John. It's nice to know that someone (anyone!) has found what I'm saying about Seth interesting. I've been talking about the Seth Material for years (because I believe it to be the truth), but 99% of everyone seems to have their minds already fixed on these issues. Either they are atheists or agnostics or they simply accept the religion they grew up in.
One of the reasons I believe in the Seth Material is that Seth introduced so many new ideas to the discussion about religion. The Seth readings are the only "scripture" (Seth would never have called the readings that) which gives a description of God and God's evolution. Another thing that sold me on the Seth Material is that there are stretches of the Material which deal with such complex ideas that I can barely comprehend them, and I don't consider myself to be stupid. In the early sessions (before Seth started to dictate his own books), Seth gave a long explanation of how a new personality can develop from the basic mental energy that forms God (whose boundaries compose the larger universe). Mental energy forms a new consciousness, which immediately establishes an identity for itself. Next in the evolution comes consciousness of self. Then comes ego consciousness. In that passage, which is very involved, you can see Seth choosing his words very carefully to convey his exact meanings. The language is highly creative.
================
One of the most interesting things Seth said is the explanation as to why we are all immortal. Seth said that time and physical space are, essentially, illusions. They exist in some planes of existence (what I've been calling subuniverses) within the Whole, but not in all of them. If something exists within a specific plane (or planes) of existence, but not throughout the entirety of existence (the entirety of existence being God), then those things are essentially illusions.
What exists in the universe is what you might call mental space, since the universe is composed of mental energy. If physical space is needed in a particular plane of existence, then it is created as needed.
As for time, Seth said that past, present and future exist simultaneously in what Seth called a "spacious present". He also made it clear that this concept is not something we can be expected to understand, since our minds (in THIS universe) are designed to process experience moment-by-moment within the context of time. To understand the "spacious present", it helps to compare it to geography. Thus, you may have come into existence in Land A, then graduated to Land B (where you are now), and expect to proceed to Land C. (For another individual, they may experience these areas of reality in different order.) Now, having graduated to Land B, where you are now, if you have the ability you may be able to look back into Land A and see yourself living there, and you may be able to look ahead to Land C, and see yourself living there in the "future". But Land C isn't the future, of course; it is just a part of reality you expect to experience but haven't experienced yet. So as you graduate from one "time" to another "time" (represented here by various lands), you leave yourself behind. Your self also proceeds you into the future. So the past, present and future you all exist simultaneously.
That doesn't mean, however, that everything is predestined. Let's say that you can look forward to Land N (in the far distant "future"), you will see yourself living there. But once you actually arrive in Land N, you may be a different person altogether. That's because "probabilities" rule the universe. If you are looking ahead to Land N from Land B, you are seeing your probable future self. But once you get there, your actual self may be different.
Seth said that past, present and future (i.e., all parts of existence) are in a state of flux or change. That doesn't mean that any part of you may cease to exist, however. Once you exist in various parts of the spacious present, you never stop existing. And since the mental energy that forms the universe is non-destructive to itself, nothing is ever destroyed. Rather, the volume of reality just keeps expanding.
To sum it up, once you exist in any part of reality, you simply exist. There is no such thing as time causing you to pass out of existence. The subject as to whether or not you WANT to be immortal is a separate one, and I'll address that next.
(In jumping into the issues of space and time, I think I may have bypassed some important parts of the early development of God. I'll review my earlier posts and try to insert that information.)
One of the reasons I believe in the Seth Material is that Seth introduced so many new ideas to the discussion about religion. The Seth readings are the only "scripture" (Seth would never have called the readings that) which gives a description of God and God's evolution. Another thing that sold me on the Seth Material is that there are stretches of the Material which deal with such complex ideas that I can barely comprehend them, and I don't consider myself to be stupid. In the early sessions (before Seth started to dictate his own books), Seth gave a long explanation of how a new personality can develop from the basic mental energy that forms God (whose boundaries compose the larger universe). Mental energy forms a new consciousness, which immediately establishes an identity for itself. Next in the evolution comes consciousness of self. Then comes ego consciousness. In that passage, which is very involved, you can see Seth choosing his words very carefully to convey his exact meanings. The language is highly creative.
================
One of the most interesting things Seth said is the explanation as to why we are all immortal. Seth said that time and physical space are, essentially, illusions. They exist in some planes of existence (what I've been calling subuniverses) within the Whole, but not in all of them. If something exists within a specific plane (or planes) of existence, but not throughout the entirety of existence (the entirety of existence being God), then those things are essentially illusions.
What exists in the universe is what you might call mental space, since the universe is composed of mental energy. If physical space is needed in a particular plane of existence, then it is created as needed.
As for time, Seth said that past, present and future exist simultaneously in what Seth called a "spacious present". He also made it clear that this concept is not something we can be expected to understand, since our minds (in THIS universe) are designed to process experience moment-by-moment within the context of time. To understand the "spacious present", it helps to compare it to geography. Thus, you may have come into existence in Land A, then graduated to Land B (where you are now), and expect to proceed to Land C. (For another individual, they may experience these areas of reality in different order.) Now, having graduated to Land B, where you are now, if you have the ability you may be able to look back into Land A and see yourself living there, and you may be able to look ahead to Land C, and see yourself living there in the "future". But Land C isn't the future, of course; it is just a part of reality you expect to experience but haven't experienced yet. So as you graduate from one "time" to another "time" (represented here by various lands), you leave yourself behind. Your self also proceeds you into the future. So the past, present and future you all exist simultaneously.
That doesn't mean, however, that everything is predestined. Let's say that you can look forward to Land N (in the far distant "future"), you will see yourself living there. But once you actually arrive in Land N, you may be a different person altogether. That's because "probabilities" rule the universe. If you are looking ahead to Land N from Land B, you are seeing your probable future self. But once you get there, your actual self may be different.
Seth said that past, present and future (i.e., all parts of existence) are in a state of flux or change. That doesn't mean that any part of you may cease to exist, however. Once you exist in various parts of the spacious present, you never stop existing. And since the mental energy that forms the universe is non-destructive to itself, nothing is ever destroyed. Rather, the volume of reality just keeps expanding.
To sum it up, once you exist in any part of reality, you simply exist. There is no such thing as time causing you to pass out of existence. The subject as to whether or not you WANT to be immortal is a separate one, and I'll address that next.
(In jumping into the issues of space and time, I think I may have bypassed some important parts of the early development of God. I'll review my earlier posts and try to insert that information.)
Signature info:
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
That seems like a good definition of illusion - it's a little different, I think, from Hindu and Buddhist thought on the topic, though there is resemblance - and I like the term "Spacious present." Scanning quickly because i have work to do at the BnF in about an hour! I'm glad you have a system that has coherence and meaning for you, and a sort of serenity, I would think.
Cheers,
John
Cheers,
John
-
CalebPerry
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:26 am
I haven't written an "installment" here in a while. Previously I explained that "time" only exists in some of the universes within the multiverse. That is also true for physicality/materiality. In the majority of universes, most occupants exist in a spiritual form. That's a good thing when you consider the deterioration our bodies go through.
As I explained, there is no time in the greater universe. Past, present and future exist simultaneously, and can be likened to geographic locations. If you exist at any point in the "spacious present", you exist forever because no part of the spacious present ever ceases to exist. If it seems impossible to you that the "you" that existed a day ago is still there experiencing that day, it helps to consider that time-based universes like this one are designed in such a way that existing within a progression of moments makes perfect sense. Before I continue, let me also relay that Seth said that the "spacious present" is always in state of change and flux, but that change is not destructive in any way, so no one dies from the change. Somehow, and I couldn't tell you how, the past we knew is there to return to (if we wish). The psychic Edgar Cayce spoke of the "Akashic records" -- perhaps they have something to do with this.
The question arises, do we get tired of immortality? When human beings imagine immortality, we imagine an infinity of human lives, and that can seem very daunting. I certainly don't want to be a human being 10,000 times. Seth made it clear, though, that this plane of existence is a difficult one. (I think of it as "boot camp" for the spirit, although I don't think Seth ever called it that.) We human beings have a built-in clock in our heads, so we feel the passage of time as it occurs. Human life is also more stressful than spiritual existence (according to Seth), so the stresses we experience as biological beings are absent in our spiritual form. Since spiritual existence (which is more the norm within the multiverse) is so much less stressful than what we are accustomed to, we never reach a point of wanting to die. In contrast, most human beings are suicidal at some point.
During a discussion with a visitor, which was not part of the routine sessions, Seth commented that most people reincarnate around ten times on average, not the thousands of incarnations that the Buddhists imagine. However, when you consider that we (meaning our inner spirits) are simultaneously incarnated on other, similar planes of existence at the same time that we are here, the total number of lives is obviously more than just ten. (Seth spoke at length of "probable" lives, but I don't want to go into that here, partly because I'm a little hazy on that part of the Material.) Let me add that the Buddhist idea that a soul must attain enlightenment in order to stop the reincarnational process is not true, according to Seth.
In summary, given that (1) our normal existence in spiritual form is not very stressful, and that (2) in our spiritual form we do not notice the passage of time, we never get to a point where we feel like we can't continue; we never arrive at that suicidal point where we feel, "I can't do this any more". Yes, we get to that place as human beings before we die, but according to Seth, we spend most of our existence in non-physical environments.
I'd like to tie what I've been saying into what we know about near-death experiences. I have spoken to two people who have had near-death experiences, and both of them said that the physical stress they were feeling was immediately over the moment they left their bodies. I'm mentioning that because it provides a little bit of confirmation for the idea that physical existence is stressful in and of itself. The books about near-death experiences confirm that everyone reports feeling peaceful and whole in the non-physical states they experienced.
So, if we exist forever, where do we end up? Clearly, we don't always end up in the same place (nor is there any actual "end" for us). Seth said that our physical world is a plane of symbols (each object is a symbol), and that we learn and grow spiritually via the manipulation of those symbols. Seth did speak of highly evolved life forms which had outgrown the need for symbols. Indeed, he periodically invited into the sessions his future self, which he called Seth 2. Seth 2 spoke in a higher, more ethereal voice, and clearly lived a very different existence from the ones that we do. Seth 2 lived in a more pure state without the symbols we are accustomed to. I'm not going to say much more about Seth 2 because Seth 2 did not talk much about its environment, except that it had the same lofty goals that the human beings have (sharing love and knowledge, giving help one to the other, etc.). Seth did describe a universe in which the occupants existed as geometric shapes, and simply enjoyed the fundamental pleasures of that existence.
As for Seth himself (I may have already said this in a previous post), he said that he had lived lives on the Earth and had moved on to a plane of existence occupied by teachers or educators. Because he had a spiritual connection to the medium (Jane Roberts), he was able to speak through her and do his teaching in that way. His focus was on mankind because he had recently experienced being human.
I guess that's it for now.
As I explained, there is no time in the greater universe. Past, present and future exist simultaneously, and can be likened to geographic locations. If you exist at any point in the "spacious present", you exist forever because no part of the spacious present ever ceases to exist. If it seems impossible to you that the "you" that existed a day ago is still there experiencing that day, it helps to consider that time-based universes like this one are designed in such a way that existing within a progression of moments makes perfect sense. Before I continue, let me also relay that Seth said that the "spacious present" is always in state of change and flux, but that change is not destructive in any way, so no one dies from the change. Somehow, and I couldn't tell you how, the past we knew is there to return to (if we wish). The psychic Edgar Cayce spoke of the "Akashic records" -- perhaps they have something to do with this.
The question arises, do we get tired of immortality? When human beings imagine immortality, we imagine an infinity of human lives, and that can seem very daunting. I certainly don't want to be a human being 10,000 times. Seth made it clear, though, that this plane of existence is a difficult one. (I think of it as "boot camp" for the spirit, although I don't think Seth ever called it that.) We human beings have a built-in clock in our heads, so we feel the passage of time as it occurs. Human life is also more stressful than spiritual existence (according to Seth), so the stresses we experience as biological beings are absent in our spiritual form. Since spiritual existence (which is more the norm within the multiverse) is so much less stressful than what we are accustomed to, we never reach a point of wanting to die. In contrast, most human beings are suicidal at some point.
During a discussion with a visitor, which was not part of the routine sessions, Seth commented that most people reincarnate around ten times on average, not the thousands of incarnations that the Buddhists imagine. However, when you consider that we (meaning our inner spirits) are simultaneously incarnated on other, similar planes of existence at the same time that we are here, the total number of lives is obviously more than just ten. (Seth spoke at length of "probable" lives, but I don't want to go into that here, partly because I'm a little hazy on that part of the Material.) Let me add that the Buddhist idea that a soul must attain enlightenment in order to stop the reincarnational process is not true, according to Seth.
In summary, given that (1) our normal existence in spiritual form is not very stressful, and that (2) in our spiritual form we do not notice the passage of time, we never get to a point where we feel like we can't continue; we never arrive at that suicidal point where we feel, "I can't do this any more". Yes, we get to that place as human beings before we die, but according to Seth, we spend most of our existence in non-physical environments.
I'd like to tie what I've been saying into what we know about near-death experiences. I have spoken to two people who have had near-death experiences, and both of them said that the physical stress they were feeling was immediately over the moment they left their bodies. I'm mentioning that because it provides a little bit of confirmation for the idea that physical existence is stressful in and of itself. The books about near-death experiences confirm that everyone reports feeling peaceful and whole in the non-physical states they experienced.
So, if we exist forever, where do we end up? Clearly, we don't always end up in the same place (nor is there any actual "end" for us). Seth said that our physical world is a plane of symbols (each object is a symbol), and that we learn and grow spiritually via the manipulation of those symbols. Seth did speak of highly evolved life forms which had outgrown the need for symbols. Indeed, he periodically invited into the sessions his future self, which he called Seth 2. Seth 2 spoke in a higher, more ethereal voice, and clearly lived a very different existence from the ones that we do. Seth 2 lived in a more pure state without the symbols we are accustomed to. I'm not going to say much more about Seth 2 because Seth 2 did not talk much about its environment, except that it had the same lofty goals that the human beings have (sharing love and knowledge, giving help one to the other, etc.). Seth did describe a universe in which the occupants existed as geometric shapes, and simply enjoyed the fundamental pleasures of that existence.
As for Seth himself (I may have already said this in a previous post), he said that he had lived lives on the Earth and had moved on to a plane of existence occupied by teachers or educators. Because he had a spiritual connection to the medium (Jane Roberts), he was able to speak through her and do his teaching in that way. His focus was on mankind because he had recently experienced being human.
I guess that's it for now.
Signature info:
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.
If you don't like the black theme, it is easy to switch to a lighter color. Just ask me how.
If I don't critique your poem, it is probably because I don't understand it.