|
|
Post by zin on Sept 27, 2017 17:36:23 GMT -5
Ha ha.. sometimes it makes things too much clear though..  "my, what pretty legs you have"   hey, no legs in the menu!  |
|
|
|
Post by zin on Sept 27, 2017 17:39:48 GMT -5
I recently finished the book the Nature of Personal Reality. For me it served as a help for some kind of integration. Here I can't talk like "the person who does not exist" because I did not 'realize' such a thing. So I just say it helped to feel some connection between 'sleep and waking states', different parts of self/personality, and man and nature (man is not separate from nature but in the book the behaviour of their pets were explained in interesting ways).
These subjects caused a natural concentration on myself. I saw a few interesting (nice) dreams, and in daily life it felt like everything I needed was already there (here). The main message of the book is, examine your beliefs. It sounds like a much heard advice but I think when we hear the word belief it is usually thought as beliefs about other people, world, this and that.. Usually it hadn't meant beliefs *about myself* to me, that was a big change.
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 28, 2017 13:51:38 GMT -5
"my, what pretty legs you have" hey, no legs in the menu! Sharks are notorious for ordering off the menu.  |
|
|
|
Post by zin on Sept 30, 2017 20:44:31 GMT -5
The true unconscious is not truly unconscious. Instead, it is so profoundly and unutterably conscious that it bubbles over. The life that you know is simply one of the many areas in which it is unconscious. In each facet of its consciousness, literally tremendous power and and balance must be maintained to hold aloft this particular consciousness-experience from all others.
Your reality exists in a particular area of activity in which aggressive qualities, thru sting-outward characteristics, are supremely necessary to prevent a falling back into the infinite possibilities from which you have only lately emerged. Yet from this unconscious bed of possibilities you derive your strength, your creativity, and the fragile yet powerful kind of individual consciousness that is your own.
The two-sex division was adopted, separating and balancing these most necessary but seemingly opposing tendencies. Only beginning consciousness needs these kind of controls. The anima and the animus, therefore, are embedded deeply with their necessary complementary but apparently opposed tendencies, and they are highly important in maintaining the very nature of your human consciousness.
(from 'Seth Speaks')
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 17, 2017 10:07:53 GMT -5
The psychedelic experience vs. mystic experience (4)
Seth: The psychedelic experience is primarily the expansion of consciousness. Little attention has been given to the pathways opened, even in the physical brain, as the result of psychedelic experiences. Those portions of the brain, seemingly unused, deal with these other dimensions, and physically, you begin to use these portions, though minutely, for the first time, under psychedelic situations.
Once these physical pathways are opened, the way becomes easier. The pineal, pituitary, and thalamus are important here. The salt mentioned earlier has a connection with the thyroid. The physical brains alone, the unused portions, have it within their ability, for example, to hear color, to smell sound; in other words, these portions contain among other things functions, unused mainly, that would allow you to perceive physical reality in various other fashions. These undifferentiated areas existed first before the specialized sense apparatus was uniformly adopted.
As a species you could just as easily have smelled color rather than viewed it, you see. These portions of the brain, once activated, then allow you to switch sense impressions from one sense mechanism to another, you see.
It is like your stereophonic reality from many levels. You are operating on mono, you see, as a rule. There is no doubt that this sort of experience is new to the ego, which is used to interpreting sense data in highly rigid and specialized terms.
(Session 308)
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 19, 2017 10:32:34 GMT -5
The psychedelic experience vs. mystic experience (5)
Seth: On other terms psychedelic experience, with or without drugs of course, enlarges the range of electromagnetic realities that you perceive. Barriers are cut away, and once you become used to receiving within a larger range you will be able to do so in your future. These ranges, once opened up, then do not entirely close up to you. It becomes easier for you in your future to receive within them.
A disciplined but intuitive ego then becomes a necessity in order that such new experience may be brought under useful control, in your terms. The ego becomes more necessary you see, not less, for it must learn to synthesize the gained experience in recognizable terms within your system. Otherwise if the ego is pushed aside it will rise up in arms and in opposition, and can be highly dangerous.
It goes without saying that in our methods the ego is changed rather completely but gradually in many cases, and only through its own willingness to do so. It recognizes its identity as a part of the inner self. Therefore basically it has no need to fight the inner self, since it knows its survival is dependent upon this inner framework.
The ego to some large extent, you see, has extended its functions and performance. Since our sessions began, for example, it has expanded in both of your cases. It has expanded not because it has grown more egotistic but because it has accepted as a part of itself, intuitional realizations and inner psychic responsibilities in a way that it did not consider before.
In other words, portions of the inner self have joined the strictly egotistical functions. The ego in such cases is so attuned that it becomes almost something else. We are coming here toward a definition of illumination in psychic terms. The ego is not banished. It joins with portions of the inner self previously unconscious, and illuminates the whole personality. It is no longer primarily physically oriented. Therefore it is no longer an ego in the terms usually meant.
(Session 308)
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 20, 2017 0:56:14 GMT -5
The psychedelic experience vs. mystic experience (5)
Seth: On other terms psychedelic experience, with or without drugs of course, enlarges the range of electromagnetic realities that you perceive. Barriers are cut away, and once you become used to receiving within a larger range you will be able to do so in your future. These ranges, once opened up, then do not entirely close up to you. It becomes easier for you in your future to receive within them. A disciplined but intuitive ego then becomes a necessity in order that such new experience may be brought under useful control, in your terms. The ego becomes more necessary you see, not less, for it must learn to synthesize the gained experience in recognizable terms within your system. Otherwise if the ego is pushed aside it will rise up in arms and in opposition, and can be highly dangerous. It goes without saying that in our methods the ego is changed rather completely but gradually in many cases, and only through its own willingness to do so. It recognizes its identity as a part of the inner self. Therefore basically it has no need to fight the inner self, since it knows its survival is dependent upon this inner framework. The ego to some large extent, you see, has extended its functions and performance. Since our sessions began, for example, it has expanded in both of your cases. It has expanded not because it has grown more egotistic but because it has accepted as a part of itself, intuitional realizations and inner psychic responsibilities in a way that it did not consider before. In other words, portions of the inner self have joined the strictly egotistical functions. The ego in such cases is so attuned that it becomes almost something else. We are coming here toward a definition of illumination in psychic terms. The ego is not banished. It joins with portions of the inner self previously unconscious, and illuminates the whole personality. It is no longer primarily physically oriented. Therefore it is no longer an ego in the terms usually meant. (Session 308) Oh my, how very third-mountain of her.  This means to me self-honesty and taking responsibility for our internal state, even after the illusion of inner and outer is long gone, and not in some sense of a buttoned-up and repressed personal self-control for the sake of social nicety and material coping. It's that same movement toward sincerity that puts the people-peeps head in the tiger's mouth. It just plays out and means something entirely different ... afterward. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 26, 2017 8:09:35 GMT -5
The psychedelic experience vs. mystic experience (5)
Seth: On other terms psychedelic experience, with or without drugs of course, enlarges the range of electromagnetic realities that you perceive. Barriers are cut away, and once you become used to receiving within a larger range you will be able to do so in your future. These ranges, once opened up, then do not entirely close up to you. It becomes easier for you in your future to receive within them. A disciplined but intuitive ego then becomes a necessity in order that such new experience may be brought under useful control, in your terms. The ego becomes more necessary you see, not less, for it must learn to synthesize the gained experience in recognizable terms within your system. Otherwise if the ego is pushed aside it will rise up in arms and in opposition, and can be highly dangerous. It goes without saying that in our methods the ego is changed rather completely but gradually in many cases, and only through its own willingness to do so. It recognizes its identity as a part of the inner self. Therefore basically it has no need to fight the inner self, since it knows its survival is dependent upon this inner framework. The ego to some large extent, you see, has extended its functions and performance. Since our sessions began, for example, it has expanded in both of your cases. It has expanded not because it has grown more egotistic but because it has accepted as a part of itself, intuitional realizations and inner psychic responsibilities in a way that it did not consider before. In other words, portions of the inner self have joined the strictly egotistical functions. The ego in such cases is so attuned that it becomes almost something else. We are coming here toward a definition of illumination in psychic terms. The ego is not banished. It joins with portions of the inner self previously unconscious, and illuminates the whole personality. It is no longer primarily physically oriented. Therefore it is no longer an ego in the terms usually meant. (Session 308) Oh my, how very third-mountain of her. This means to me self-honesty and taking responsibility for our internal state, even after the illusion of inner and outer is long gone, and not in some sense of a buttoned-up and repressed personal self-control for the sake of social nicety and material coping. It's that same movement toward sincerity that puts the people-peeps head in the tiger's mouth. It just plays out and means something entirely different ... afterward. In terms of spirituality, Jane/Rubert had a rather no-nonsense approach. Here's an interesting interview: |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 26, 2017 8:17:46 GMT -5
All-That-Is - creativity and expansion
Seth: There is always a creative strain, in which consciousness attempts to express itself, and this has been explained earlier. The fact remains that All That Is is ever straining to be more. In all universes that we know, creativity and expansion are the rules.
All That Is is itself evolving. It is not aware of all of its own purposes, for some of these are ever new. As far as your own system is concerned, I have told you that the past ever changes, and here we enter the realm of probabilities; for at any point in any man's life, where a decision was made, the other probable alternative actions were also taken.
There is in all of this an order. It is an order that the inner self is to learn. It is intuitively known, but it must be realized.
(Session 425)
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 27, 2017 10:50:56 GMT -5
Oh my, how very third-mountain of her. This means to me self-honesty and taking responsibility for our internal state, even after the illusion of inner and outer is long gone, and not in some sense of a buttoned-up and repressed personal self-control for the sake of social nicety and material coping. It's that same movement toward sincerity that puts the people-peeps head in the tiger's mouth. It just plays out and means something entirely different ... afterward. In terms of spirituality, Jane/Rubert had a rather no-nonsense approach. Here's an interesting interview: This caught my attention in particular: @ 16:20: "now I don't call Seth a spirit guide either, uh .. I find myself in a peculiar position .. in that uh .. I don't particularly accept -- I do want to watch my words (** chuckle **) -- the dogma of any particular group, organization .. it -- this was my experience I wasn't about to have it interpreted .. uh .. for me by others. I never thought of Seth as some white-cloaked spirit who was just floating around. Uh, part of my life's work certainly is to try to understand the nature of our personalities -- you know of our personalities: what abilities we've got, what happens so that we can get this kind of information. And uhm, one of the things I really hoped is that people would begin to trust their .. ah .. revelatory experience and not automatically cloak it in whatever dogma they believe in." Notice how the interviewer is almost impatient with her on that point? I understand their wanting to interpret the material in it's own light, singularly, as independent of past culture as possible, and they were in a unique position and in particularly favorable time and place to do that. That comes through all the more clearly in the story they tell here. If I could have met them I would have asked them to reconsider even using the word "reincarnation", and would have suggested that perhaps there was an even bigger picture with respect to personality that the material might be missing. Now, of course, I hasten to add, the quality of the content in the material is even why we're discussing it at all. It interests me just how forcefully she dismisses the idea of her subconscious as the source of that material. This dismissal is certainly in line with the rejection of dogma, and on that point, it would be Western psychological dogma. What did she study at Skidmore I wonder? And if one can look past the negative and admittedly past oppressive cultural effects of that dogma, one might find some interesting similarity between Jane's Seth trances and what the Christians advise about some forms of prayer, or the Zen culture's ideas about meditating on koans. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 31, 2017 10:05:07 GMT -5
This caught my attention in particular: @ 16:20: "now I don't call Seth a spirit guide either, uh .. I find myself in a peculiar position .. in that uh .. I don't particularly accept -- I do want to watch my words (** chuckle **) -- the dogma of any particular group, organization .. it -- this was my experience I wasn't about to have it interpreted .. uh .. for me by others. I never thought of Seth as some white-cloaked spirit who was just floating around. Uh, part of my life's work certainly is to try to understand the nature of our personalities -- you know of our personalities: what abilities we've got, what happens so that we can get this kind of information. And uhm, one of the things I really hoped is that people would begin to trust their .. ah .. revelatory experience and not automatically cloak it in whatever dogma they believe in." Notice how the interviewer is almost impatient with her on that point? I understand their wanting to interpret the material in it's own light, singularly, as independent of past culture as possible, and they were in a unique position and in particularly favorable time and place to do that. That comes through all the more clearly in the story they tell here. If I could have met them I would have asked them to reconsider even using the word "reincarnation", and would have suggested that perhaps there was an even bigger picture with respect to personality that the material might be missing. Now, of course, I hasten to add, the quality of the content in the material is even why we're discussing it at all. It interests me just how forcefully she dismisses the idea of her subconscious as the source of that material. This dismissal is certainly in line with the rejection of dogma, and on that point, it would be Western psychological dogma. What did she study at Skidmore I wonder? And if one can look past the negative and admittedly past oppressive cultural effects of that dogma, one might find some interesting similarity between Jane's Seth trances and what the Christians advise about some forms of prayer, or the Zen culture's ideas about meditating on koans. I think she studied poetry at Skidmore. She had a scholarship. Her aversion to any kind of dogma comes from her early religious upbringing (catholic). She broke free from it with her poetry. Seth later helped her to deprogram herself further (in the personal sessions). Seth told her that her subconscious is not the source of the material, it's just some kind of twilight zone between Seth's world and Jane's world, it's their meeting 'place' so to speak. In order to channel Seth 2 she had to go even beyond the personal subconscious level. That's when Seth suddenly switches personal pronouns form "I" to "We" in the Seth material, similar to when Esther channels Abraham. Seth called Seth 2 his big brother, hehe. The Seth 2 material is also basically identical with the Abraham material in terms of style, perspective and focus. Esther also studied the Seth material. So there seems to be some continuation. I think the year Jane died and stopped channeling Seth was also the year when Esther started channeling Abraham. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 31, 2017 10:12:38 GMT -5
Reflections
Seth: When you look into a mirror you see your reflection, but it does not talk back to you. In the dream state you are looking into the mirror of the psyche, so to speak, and seeing the reflections of your own thoughts, fears, and desires. Here, however, the 'reflections' do indeed speak, and take their own form. In a certain sense they are freewheeling, in that they have their own kind of reality. In the dream state your joys and fears talk back to you, perform, and act out the role in which you have cast them.
(Session 721)
|
|
|
|
Post by zin on Nov 1, 2017 3:16:00 GMT -5
Event formation 1
When you grow from a baby to an adult you do not just grow tall: You grow all about yourself, adding weight and thickness as well. To some extent events 'grow' in the same fashion, and from the inside out, as you do. In a dream you are closer to those stages in which events are born. In your terms they emerge from the future and form the past, and are given vitality because of creative tension that exists between what you think of as your birth and your death.
You make your sentences out of the alphabet of your language. You speak these or write them, and use them to communicate. Events can be considered in the same fashion, as psychological sentences put together from the alphabet of the senses – experienced sentences that are lived instead of written, formed into perceived history instead of just being penned, for example, into a book about history.
I said that your language to some extent programs your experience. There is a language of the senses, however, that gives you biological perception, experience, and communication. It forms the nature of the events that you can perceive. It puts experience together so that it is physically felt. All of your written or verbal languages have to be based upon this biological 'alphabet'.
(session 783)
|
|
|
|
Post by zin on Nov 1, 2017 3:18:26 GMT -5
Event formation 2
Information flows through the universe at such a rate and in such quantities that you could not possibly process any but a small portion of it.
Your physical senses, again, act almost like a biological alphabet, allowing you to organize and perceive certain kinds of information from which you form the events of your world and the contours of your reality.
Your conscious knowledge rests upon an invisible, unspoken, psychological and physical language that provides the inner support for the communications and recognized happenings of conscious life. These inner languages are built up as cordellas, and cordellas are psychic organizational units from which, then, all alphabets are born. (…)
In a way events are like the spoken components of language, yet voiced in a living form – and not for example only sounded. These are based upon the sensual alphabet, which itself emerges from nonsensual cordellas. A sentence is built up as words, parts of speech, verbs, and adjectives, subjects and predicates, vowels and syllables, and underneath there is the entire structure that allows you to speak or read to begin with. To some extent, events are built up in the same fashion. You form and organize sentences, yet you speak on faith, without actually knowing the methods involved in your speaking. So you only recognize the surface of that activity.
In the same way you form events, often without being aware that you do so. It seems that events happen as it seems words are spoken. You were taught how to construct sentences in school, and you learned how to speak from your elders. You were involved with event-making before the time your of your birth, however. The psyche forms events in the same way that the ocean forms waves – except that the ocean’s waves are confined to its surface or to its basin, while the psyche’s events are instantly translated, and splash out into mass psychological reality. In waking life you meet the completed event, so to speak. You encounter events in the arena of waking consciousness. In the dream state, and at other levels of consciousness, you deal more directly with the formation of events. You are usually as unaware of this process as you are in normal practice of the ways in which you form your sentences, which seem to flow from you so automatically.
The psyche, as it is turned toward physical reality, is a creator of events, and through them it experiences its own reality as through your own speech you hear your voice.
In dreams, then, you are involved in the inner process by which physical events are formed. You deal with the psychological components of actions which you will, awake, form into the consecutive corporal ‘language’ that results in the action of your days.
(session 784)
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 2, 2017 9:34:42 GMT -5
Body consciousness and sleepwalkers
Seth: The body consciousness is equipped, as an animal is, to perform beautifully in its environment. You would call it mindless, since it would seem not to reason. For the purpose of this discussion alone, imagine a body with a fully operating body consciousness, not diseased for any reason or defective by birth, but one without the overriding ego-directed consciousness that you have. There have been species of such a nature. In your terms they would seem to be like sleepwalkers, yet their physical abilities surpassed yours. They were indeed as agile as animals — nor were they unconscious. They simply dealt with a different kind of awareness.
In your terms they did not have [an overall] purpose, yet their purpose was simply to be. Their main points of consciousness were elsewhere, in another kind of reality, while their physical manifestations were separate. Their primary focuses of consciousness were scarcely aware of the bodies they had created. Yet even those bodies learned "through experience" and began to "awaken" to become aware of themselves, to discover time, or to create it.
(Session 708)
|
|
hey, no legs in the menu! 
This means to me self-honesty and taking responsibility for our internal state, even after the illusion of inner and outer is long gone, and not in some sense of a buttoned-up and repressed personal self-control for the sake of social nicety and material coping. It's that same movement toward sincerity that puts the people-peeps head in the tiger's mouth. It just plays out and means something entirely different ... afterward.