|
|
Post by inavalan on Jun 19, 2021 16:04:26 GMT -5
A great quote from: The Personal Sessions, book 1, Session 380, November 15, 1967
"Now. You must understand, in our discussions of late, we have been dealing with your current problems, and treating them in those terms for your convenience.
We have been dealing with the condition of the immediate self in its response to environment and situations. This immediate self is not isolated however from other portions of the entire personality. The very fact that you have ME here is the result of past experience and development
On the one hand all of your questions have their answers. The inner self knows, but the immediate self does not recognize their answers. The degree of your understanding and development is the result of past endeavors in other lives. The degree represents your practical ability to use inner knowledge to solve problems.
On the one hand, again, you know the answers. On the other hand you must learn to recognize them and apply them. Each succeeding reincarnation finds you in a better position to do so. The inner self must therefore be recognized by all levels of the personality.
The inner self must BECOME the immediate self, you see. This unity then puts you in a position to begin a truly fulfilling existence in other realities after physical death. You are solving many problems therefore now, since this is to be your last reincarnation in physical terms.
You must know enough to speak NEARLY as an equal with your inner self in order to do this. The process had finally to become conscious in your terms, with the ego highly involved. The intuitive portions of the personality had to have the full cooperation of the intellectual and conscious self at this point in your development and I am speaking of you both here.
The conscious had to appreciate in quite real terms its dependence upon intuitional wisdom. There had to be agreement and unity. The conscious self was not to be left by the wayside, wondering while the intuitional abilities led to fulfillment. The conscious intellectual faculties had to realize what was operating in order that they themselves be fulfilled.
True questioning and true use of the critical faculties will always lead Ruburt, to intuitional truths, so there is no reason to fear them. Those who do not understand their abilities intellectually must one day be led to question them. The intuitions and the intellect are meant to challenge and develop each other, and intuitional knowledge and intellectual knowledge will ultimately lead to the same answers.
It is only when you do not carry through in either that there appears to be contradiction."
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jul 17, 2021 15:36:25 GMT -5
Epidemics, inoculations, effects ...CHAPTER 1THE NATURAL BODY AND ITS DEFENSES SESSION 801, APRIL 18,19779:31 P.M. MONDAY An epidemic, for example, serves the purposes of each individual who is involved, while it also serves its own functions in the greater species framework. When you consider epidemics to be the result of viruses, and emphasize their biological stances, then it seems that the solutions are very obvious: You learn the nature of each virus and develop an inoculation, giving [each member of] the populace a small dose of the disease so that a man’s own body will combat it, and he will become immune. The shortsightedness of such procedures is generally overlooked because of the definite short-term advantages. As a rule, for example, people inoculated against polio do not develop that disease. Using such procedures, tuberculosis has been largely conquered. There are great insidious variables operating, however, and these are caused precisely by the small framework in which such mass epidemics are considered. In the first place, the causes are not biological. Biology is simply the carrier of a “deadly intent.” In the second place, there is a difference between a virus produced in the laboratory and that inhabiting the body — a difference recognized by the body but not by your laboratory instruments. Give us a moment … In a way the body produces antibodies, and sets up natural immunization as a result of, say, inoculation. But the body’s chemistry is also confused, for it “knows” it is reacting to a disease that is not “a true disease,” but a biologically counterfeit intrusion. To that extent — and I do not mean to overstate the case — the body’s biological integrity is contaminated. It may at the same time produce antibodies also, for example, to other “similar” diseases, and so overextend its defenses that the individual later comes down with another disease. (10:19.) Now, no person becomes ill unless that illness serves a psychic or psychological reason, so many people escape such complications. In the meantime, however, scientists and medical men find more and more viruses against which the population “must” be inoculated. Each one is considered singly. There is a rush to develop a new inoculation against the newest virus. Much of this is on a predictive basis: The scientists "predict" how many people might be “attacked” by, say, a virus that has caused a given number of deaths. Then as a preventative measure the populace is invited to the new inoculation. (Emphatically:) Many people who would not get the disease in any case are then religiously inoculated with it. The body is exerted to use its immune system to the utmost, and sometimes, according to the inoculation, overextended [under such] conditions. Those individuals who have psychologically decided upon death will die in any case, of that disease or another, or of the side effects of the inoculation. Give us a moment . . . Inner reality and private experience give birth to all mass events. Man cannot disentangle himself from the natural context of his physical life. His culture, his religion, his psychologies, and his psychological nature together form the context within which both private and mass events occur. (Loudly, then whispering so softly that I could barely hear:) This book will, then, be devoted to the nature of the great sweeping emotional, religious, or biological events that often seem to engulf the individual, or to lift him or her willy-nilly in their power. What is the relationship between the individual and the gigantic mass motions of nature, of government, or even of religion? What about mass conversions? Mass hysteria? Mass healings, mass murder, and the individual? Those are the questions we will devote ourselves to in this book. It will be called: “ The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events.”
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jul 19, 2021 1:00:11 GMT -5
SESSION 805, MAY 16,1977
9:28 P.M. MONDAY
from “The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events”
In the overall, then, violent shows provide a service, in that they usually promote the sense of a man's or a woman's individual power over a given set of circumstances. At best the [medical] public service announcements introduce the doctor as mediator: You are supposed to take your body to a doctor as you take your car to a garage, to have its parts serviced. Your body is seen as a vehicle out of control, that needs constant scrutiny.
The doctor is like a biological mechanic, who knows your body far better than you. Now these medical beliefs are intertwined with your economic and cultural structures, so you cannot lay the blame upon medical men or their profession alone. Your economic well-being is also a part of your personal reality. Many dedicated doctors use medical technology with spiritual understanding, and they are themselves the victims of the beliefs they hold.
If you do not buy headache potions, your uncle or your neighbor may be out of business and not able to support his family, and therefore lack the means to buy your wares. You cannot disconnect one area of life from another. En masse, your private beliefs form your cultural reality. Your society is not a thing in itself apart from you, but the result of the individual beliefs of each person in it. There is no stratum of society that you do not in one way or another affect. Your religions stress sin. Your medical profession stresses disease. Your orderly sciences stress the chaotic and accidental theories of creation. Your psychologies stress men as victims of their backgrounds. Your most advanced thinkers emphasize man's rape of the planet, or focus upon the future disaster that will overtake the world, or see men once again as victims of the stars.
Many of your resurrected occult schools speak of a recommended death of desire, the annihilation of the ego, for the transmutation of physical elements to finer levels. In all such cases the clear spiritual and biological integrity of the individual suffers, and the precious immediacy of your moments is largely lost.
Earth life is seen as murky, a dim translation of greater existence, rather than portrayed as the unique, creative, living experience that it should be. The body becomes disoriented, sabotaged. The clear lines of communication between spirit and body become cluttered. Individually and en masse, diseases and conditions result that are meant to lead you into other realizations.
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jul 22, 2021 1:39:16 GMT -5
SESSION 835, FEBRUARY 7, 1979
9:11 P.M. WEDNESDAY
from “The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events”
There is an enchanting suggestion, solemnly repeated many times, particularly after the turn of the century: "Every day, in every way, I am getting better and better."
This might sound like a bit of overly optimistic, though maybe delightful, nonsense. To a degree, however, that suggestion worked for millions of people. It was not a cure-all. It did not help those who believed in the basic untrustworthiness of their own natures. The suggestion was far from a bit of fluff, however, for it could serve — and it did — as a framework about which new beliefs could rally.
We often have in your society the opposite suggestion, however, given quite regularly: "Every day, in every way, I am growing worse, and so is the world." You have meditations for disaster, beliefs that invite private and mass tragedies. They are usually masked by the polite clothing of conventional acceptance. (Pause.) Many thousands may die in a particular battle or war, for example. The deaths are accepted almost as a matter of course. These are victims of war, without question. It seldom occurs to anyone that these are victims of beliefs (emphatically) — since the guns are quite real, and the bombs and the combat.
The enemy is obvious. His intentions are evil. Wars are basically examples of mass suicide — embarked upon, however, with all of the battle's paraphernalia, carried out through mass suggestion, and through the nation's greatest resources, by men who are convinced that the universe is unsafe, that the self cannot be trusted, and that strangers are always hostile. You take it for granted that the species is aggressively combative. You must out-think the enemy nation before you yourself are destroyed. These paranoiac tendencies are largely hidden beneath man's nationalistic banners.
"The end justifies the means." This is another belief, most damaging. Religious wars always have paranoiac tendencies, for the fanatic always fears conflicting beliefs, and systems that embrace them.
(Pause.) You have occasional epidemics that flare up, with victims left dead. Partially, these are also victims of beliefs, for you believe that the natural body is the natural prey of viruses and diseases over which you have no personal control, except as it is medically provided. In the medical profession, the overall suggestion that operates is one that emphasizes and exaggerates the body's vulnerability, and plays down its natural healing abilities. People die when they are ready to die, for reasons that are their own. No person dies without a reason. You are not taught that, however, so people do not recognize their own reasons for dying, and they are not taught to recognize their own reasons for living — because you are told that life itself is an accident in a cosmic game of chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jul 22, 2021 14:29:43 GMT -5
SESSION 840, MARCH 12,1979
9:28 P.M. MONDAY
from “The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events”
You could not live without viruses, nor could your biological reality as you know it now exist.
(Pause.) Viruses appear to be "the bad guys," and as a rule you think of them separately, as for example the smallpox virus. There are overall affiliations in which viruses take part, however, in which delicate balances are maintained biologically. Each body contains countless viruses that could be deadly at any given time and under certain conditions. These — and I am putting it as simply as possible — take turns being active or inactive within the body, in accordance with the body's overall condition. Viruses that are "deadly" in certain stages are not in others, and in those later stages they react biologically in quite beneficial ways, adding to the body's stability by bringing about necessary changes, say, in cellular activities that are helpful at given rates of action. These in turn trigger other cellular changes, again of a beneficial nature.
As an example from another field, consider poisons. Belladonna can be quite deadly, yet small doses of it were known to aid the body in disease conditions.
(9:38.) Give us a moment . . . The viruses in the body have a social, cooperative existence. Their effects become deadly only under certain conditions. The viruses must be triggered into destructive activity, and this happens only at a certain point, when the individual involved is actively seeking either death or a crisis situation biologically.
The initial contagion in such cases is always emotional and mental. Social conditions are usually involved, so that an individual is, say, at the lower end of a poor social environment (pause), a seeming victim of it, or in a situation where his individual value as a social member is severely weakened.
Now: In the same way that a member of such a society can go [askew], blow his stack, go overboard, commit antisocial acts, so in the same fashion such a person can instead trigger the viruses, wreck their biological social order, so that some of them suddenly become deadly, or run [amok]. So of course the resulting diseases are infectious. To that degree they are social diseases. It is not so much that a virus, say, suddenly turns destructive — though it does — as it is that the entire cooperative structure within which all the viruses are involved becomes insecure and threatened.
I told you (in the private 836th session) that viruses mutate. Such is often the case. It seems quite scientific to believe in inoculations against such dangerous diseases — and certainly, scientifically, inoculations seem to work: People in your time right now are not plagued by smallpox, for example. Some cultures have believed that illnesses were caused by demons. Medicine men, through certain ceremonies, would try to rid the body of the demons — and those methods worked also. The belief system was tight and accepted, and it only began to fail when those societies encountered "civilized views."
If you call the demons "negative beliefs," however, then you have, taken strides forward. People continue to die of diseases. Many of your scientific procedures, including inoculations, of themselves "cause" new diseases. It does not help a patient inoculated against smallpox and polio if [eventually] he dies of cancer as a result of his negative beliefs.
(9:55.) Give us a moment . . . What I have said about viruses applies to all biological life. Viruses are "highly intelligent" — meaning that they react quickly to stimuli. They are responsive to emotional states. They are social. Their scale of life varies considerably, and some can be inactive for centuries, and revive. They have extensive memory patterns, biologically imprinted. Some can multiply in the tens of thousands within seconds. They are in many ways the basis of biological life, but you are aware of them only when they show "a deadly face."
You are not aware of the inner army of viruses within the body that protect it constantly. Host and virus both need each other, and both are part of the same life cycle.
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jul 23, 2021 0:08:36 GMT -5
SESSION 845, APRIL 2,1979
9:25 P.M. MONDAY
from “The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events”
Do you have questions?
("I haven't had too much time to think of questions, but today we were talking about the relationships between Jonestown and Three Mile Island — how those two events stand for the extremes of religion and science. "
You are indeed correct, of course, and you are also dealing with the behavior of cults in both circumstances, each concerned with a closed system of belief, rigid attitudes, intense emotionally-charged states, and also with what amounts to compulsive behavior.
The Jonestown people thought that the world was against them, particularly the etablishment, and the government of the country. They displayed paranoiac tendencies. The same applies to the scientists, who now believe the cultural climate is turning against them, that people no longer trust them, so that they fear they will be pulled from high estate.
To some extent (underlined) — a qualified statement, now — the scientists have become somewhat contemptuous of all who do not understand their language: the non-elite. They resent having to get money from the government, from men who are not scientists, and they build up a false sense of comparative omnipotence in response — and that makes them less careful than they should be. They feel misunderstood by the public now.
None of them want any disaster, and yet some of them think it would serve the people right — for then the people might realize that politicians do not understand science, and that the scientists should after all be put in control: "We must have enough money, or who knows what can go wrong?"
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 3, 2021 23:16:33 GMT -5
All, I've merged the Seth quotes thread with the Seth discussion thread and updated the OP accordingly. Which means this thread is for both quotes and discussion now. R |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 3, 2021 23:26:59 GMT -5
SESSION 805, MAY 16,1977 9:28 P.M. MONDAY from “ The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events” This is actually one of my favorite Seth books. Since you've been posting this, I started reading it again and noticed how vibrationally accurate and consistent Seth's perspective actually is and how current world events can work as perfect examples of what Seth is trying to teach us there. So I think I'll do a detailed book discussion in a separate thread because Seth does point out a lot of flawful logic and loserthink re: health topics and our role in society that a lot of people who are confused about current events may find useful or even soothing. It is an excellent book about LOA and co-creation (even though Seth doesn't use these words, hehe). |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Aug 4, 2021 0:04:00 GMT -5
SESSION 805, MAY 16,1977 9:28 P.M. MONDAY from “ The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events” This is actually one of my favorite Seth books. Since you've been posting this, I started reading it again and noticed how vibrationally accurate and consistent Seth's perspective actually is and how current world events can work as perfect examples of what Seth is trying to teach us there. So I think I'll do a detailed book discussion in a separate thread because Seth does point out a lot of flawful logic and loserthink re: health topics and our role in society that a lot of people who are confused about current events may find useful or even soothing. It is an excellent book about LOA and co-creation (even though Seth doesn't use these words, hehe). I'm interested in your take on Seth. Actually looking for a Seth quote I found this forum. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Aug 5, 2021 14:36:58 GMT -5
from "The Way Toward Health - A Seth Book"
MARCH 15, 1984 4:06 P.M. THURSDAY
People “come down” with colds, or the flu, or some other social disease that is supposed to be passed from one individual to another — yet overall these may be very healthy individuals. The body has its own self-regulating system. This is often called the immune system.
If people become ill, it is quite fashionable to say that the immunity system (Seth’s pronunciation) has temporarily failed — yet the body itself knows that certain “dis-eases” are healthy reactions. The body does not regard diseases as diseases, in usually understood terms. It regards all activity as experience, as a momentary condition of life (pause), as a balancing situation. But it possesses a sense of wholeness and of overall integrity, for it knows that it continues to exist, though under different conditions, and it realizes that this change is as natural and necessary as the change of seasons if each individual is to continue to exist, while the earth itself possesses the nutriments necessary to the survival of physical life.
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Aug 5, 2021 14:45:43 GMT -5
from "The Way Toward Health - A Seth Book"
MARCH 16, 1984 3:58 P.M. FRIDAY
Before we can really study the nature of health or illness, we must first understand human consciousness and its relationship with the body.
You know that you have a conscious mind, of course. You also possess what is often called the subconscious, and this merely consists of feelings, thoughts or experiences that are connected to your conscious mind, but would be considered excess baggage if you had to be aware of them all of the time. Otherwise they would vie for your attention, and interfere with the present decisions that are so important. Period.
If you tried to hold all of those subconscious memories uppermost in your mind all of the time, then you would literally be unable to think or act in the present moment at all. You do more or less have a certain access to your own subconscious mind, however. It is perhaps easier to imagine a continuum of consciousness, for you have a body consciousness also, and that body consciousness is itself made up of the individual consciousness of each molecule that forms all parts of the body itself.
It is sometimes fashionable to say that men and women have conscious minds, subconscious minds, and unconscious minds — but there is no such thing as an unconscious mind. The body consciousness is highly conscious (underlined). You are simply not usually conscious of it. (Long pause.) Reasoning takes time. It deals with problem-solving — it forms an hypothesis, and then seeks to prove it by trial and error.
If you had to use that kind of process before you could move a muscle, you would get nowhere at all, of course. The other portions of your consciousness, then, deal with a kind of automatic thinking, and operate with a kind of knowledge that takes no time in your terms.
You might say that the varying portions of your own consciousness operate at several different speeds. Translations between one portion of consciousness and another goes on constantly, so that information is translated from one “speed” to another. Perhaps you can begin to understand, then, that the whole picture of health or illness must be considered from many more viewpoints than you might earlier have supposed. Many of you have been saturated by conventional, distorted ideas concerning health and illness in general. You might think, for example, of the body being invaded by viruses, or attacked by a particular disease, and these ideas, then, may make you question. You might well wonder why the body consciousness does not simply rise up and cast off any threatening diseases: why would the body allow certain cells to go berserk, or outgrow themselves? The very concept of the immunity system suggests, at least, the disease invader against which the body’s immunity system must or should surely defend itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Aug 5, 2021 14:53:51 GMT -5
from "The Way Toward Health - A Seth Book"
MARCH 18, 1984 4:19 P.M. SUNDAY
You usually think of your conscious mind as your ego. It is directed toward action in physical life. Many schools of thought (long pause) seem to have the curious ideas that the ego is inferior to other portions of the self, or “selfish,” and imagine it to be definitely of a lower quality than the inner self, or the soul.
In the first place, it is really impossible to separate portions of the self, and we make such distinctions only in an effort to explain the many facets of the personality. It is generally understood, then, that you do have an ego, directed toward exterior activity, and in those terms (underlined) you also have an inner ego. It is also conscious, and is the director of all automatic interior activity (emphatically).
Most people do not realize that they can indeed have access to this inner awareness. This inner ego or inner self should not be thought of as superior to your ordinary mind. It should not be thought of, really, as something separate from your ordinary mind. Your ego and your ordinary consciousness bring into focus all of your physical experiences, and make possible the brilliant preciseness of physical experience.
It is true that physical life represents only one condition of being. You have other kinds of existence, then. The conscious mind is one brilliant segment of your larger consciousness, but it is composed of the same universal energy and vitality that composes all consciousness.
There are ways of communicating with the inner ego or inner self, however, and we will discuss some of these very shortly. It is important, again, to remember that this inner ego or inner self uses a process that is far swifter than reasoning.
When such communications are made, therefore, they often consist of inspiration, intuition, impulses, and deal with feeling far more than with usual logical thinking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2021 0:46:54 GMT -5
Seems to me that our twin-brains be the mystery behind duality, each Brain trying to out do the other in the hope that it be top-dog this time around.
This then leads to arguments with other-imposters, the most fierce arguments occurring when one personality confronts the so called-‘other’ seated in the opposite hemisphere.
Did the original creator of Seth ever integrate 2 back to 1?
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 8, 2021 8:20:24 GMT -5
Seems to me that our twin-brains be the mystery behind duality, each Brain trying to out do the other in the hope that it be top-dog this time around. This then leads to arguments with other-imposters, the most fierce arguments occurring when one personality confronts the so called-‘other’ seated in the opposite hemisphere. Did the original creator of Seth ever integrate 2 back to 1? In My Stroke of Insight I think Jill Bolte Taylor made pretty clear the two hemisphere's of the brain are man's way to function in the ordinary world of time and space and things, the left brain; and Wholeness/unity/ND, the right brain. If you haven't seen her TED talk, one of the first and one of the most popular still, it's exceptionally interesting. (She also has a new book just out). As far as Seth 1 and 2, this is tricky from our perspective. From Seth 2's perspective, yes, there is integration. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2021 2:50:32 GMT -5
|
|
