Finding Purpose and Limitations of creation

[northern beaches]

Hi there,

I am a Seth newbie of only 4 weeks and have read a few of the books now as well as most of this forum. My question is how do I find out what my purpose in life is to learn and what limitations I have.

The part that I have had the most difficulty with working out is connecting with my inner self as I am extremely logical and analytical so I never use impulses and after many years I do not seem to get any.

Any suggestions or guidance would be most appreciated.

Thanks
Alan

[Deb]

Hi Alan, welcome!

Sorry, I tend to be the queen of Seth quotes, because he said it best and I don't want to taint anything due to my own interpretations or paraphrasing. Quotes are at the end.

You've only been reading the Seth books for a month, and you've already read several? Wow, you must have inhaled them. Which books have you read?

What I've read from Seth over and over is overly simple and basic: we are the purpose of each of our individual lives, to simply be ourselves as best we can be, using our intuitions, spontaneity, skills and personal feelings of positive feedback to guide us on our path. I feel like our purpose changes too as our roles in life change, meaning I don't think we're here for only one specific purpose, unlike we have been told by others.

The thing about connecting with our inner selves and paying attention to intuition is that it has been trained out of us. Or at the least I could say not taught to us. We are taught in school that being analytical is mature, intelligent, superior. As I've gotten older I've gotten better at following my 'hunches' and I have to say whenever I allow myself to be spontaneous or follow a hunch, things work out better. It takes a conscious effort to take a mental step back several times a day and scan for feelings, hunches, urges. Make a note of them. Follow hunches or not follow them and pay attention to the results. It's data, will get easier with time.

Limitation is another topic that I have planned to start soon, because while we are told we are unlimited beings, there are some 'constraints' apparently because there are certain root agreements in this physical reality. In addition, there are the intentions of the entity/higher self that play a part.

You might enjoy searching on certain phrases at the Seth search engine here: http://search.sethtalks.com. It's a great tool because you can pull together Seth quotes on specific key words or phrases from almost all of the books.

There's also a compilation of Seth's suggested exercises here.

"Many people ask, for example: "What is the purpose of my life?" Meaning: "What am I meant to do?" but the purpose of your life, and each life, is in its being (intently). That being may include certain actions, but the acts themselves are only important in that they spring out of the essence of your life, which simply by being is bound to fulfill its purposes."
—DEaVF1 Chapter 5: Session 899, February 6, 1980

"You think that your purpose in life must be to be something else, or someone else, than you are. In such a situation many people seek out causes, and hope to merge the purposes of the cause with their own unrecognized one."
—NoME Chapter 6: Session 835, February 7, 1979

"You must always remember that the self is not static, but a living gestalt of experience. It is best not to say, for example, "I have always been thus-and-so," or whatever, and still better not to identify yourself with any characteristics that you deplore. Your purpose is in what you are, and when you do not approve of what you are, you cannot see it."
—TPS5 Deleted Session January 8, 1979

[northern beaches]

Hi Deb,

Thanks for the reply. I have read Seth Speaks, The Seth Material, The Nature of Personal reality. I had started using the search engine as well and then bought book 8 of The Early Sessions which I have also started reading as that is where the idea of the Traffic Tickets got brought up when he noted that the person was trying to do something that was against the limiting agreements that were in place for that person.

Most confusing as most of his other materials essentially says there are no limits, then in personal sessions he says there can be very significant limits from what I can gather. There is not much point in trying to accumulate money for example if one of the pre agreed limitations is to be in poverty. Life would be a constant struggle with no reward.

As I am a computer veteran I can easily buy into we are in a simulation paradigm, that was what attracted me to the work in the first place as I thought there was a 50/50 likelihood we were in a simulation. Seths work essentially says this is exactly what we are in. This would also be consistent with why there are limiting agreements so that we are here to learn and grow in specific areas. Hence why I am trying to ascertain the reason I am here and also what limiting agreements are in place.

[Sena]

I had started using the search engine as well and then bought book 8 of The Early Sessions which I have also started reading as that is where the idea of the Traffic Tickets got brought up when he noted that the person was trying to do something that was against the limiting agreements that were in place for that person.

Hi Alan, welcome to the forum.
I don't have a copy of Book 8 of the Early Sessions, so I got this from the search engine:

"You cannot drive through physical life in the same way that you drive your car down the highway. You shall indeed, get traffic tickets and of a different kind, only you yourself give yourself tickets. You cannot force reality to give you what you want. You cannot manipulate events for egotistical purposes. You can manipulate events and you can manipulate them for your own egotistical purposes; but when you do so, you give yourself a traffic ticket. You must want what is best for your own development and the development of others rather than specifically determining what you think consciously is better for you and then trying to force or coerce fate to get this for you. If you want what is best for your own development and what is best for the development of others, then you shall attain it. It shall come to you effortlessly."
—TES8 Session 403 March 16, 1968

Applying this to my own case, my wife and I are retired and have small pensions which are adequate for our needs. It would be silly for me to buy lottery tickets with the hope of winning a large sum of money. Having a lot more money would not help my own development or the development of others.
Something that my wife and I do want is to be in a reasonable state of health, and this is where the Seth teachings are useful. Yesterday we were in a private hospital where my wife had an essential medical procedure done. While in the waiting area I watched a presentation which was aimed at getting us to buy an expensive "advanced heart check-up". I did not think this would be a good idea according to the Seth teachings, because if I start investigating my heart I would be working on the assumption that I might have such a problem.

[northern beaches]

Thanks for the reply. I understand the basics of what Seth teaches which is essentially everything comes back to our own beliefs, so in the example you gave by doing the test you would essentially create a belief that would then potentially attract other similar beliefs and potentially become self fulfilling. FYI I have no health insurance and I am in good health, even before Seth I worked out that doctors and medicine were not the answer..

So to me the issue is what developmental purpose am I here for. If it was just to improve my creation skills then there would be no reason to place limits, in fact it would be counter productive. If limits were placed on everyone it was for a reason which means there is also an objective/purpose. Understanding the limits should also reveal the purpose.

[Sena]

So to me the issue is what developmental purpose am I here for. If it was just to improve my creation skills then there would be no reason to place limits, in fact it would be counter productive. If limits were placed on everyone it was for a reason which means there is also an objective/purpose. Understanding the limits should also reveal the purpose.

I don't have a very precise answer to your question, but Seth did say a lot about "value fulfillment". For instance:

"Each person seeks value fulfillment, and that means that they choose various lives in such a fashion that all of their abilities and capacities can be best developed, and in such a way that their world is also enriched. Some people will choose "defective" bodies purposely in order to focus more intensely in other areas. They want a different kind of focus. (Long pause.) They want to sift their characteristics through a certain cast. Such a choice demands an intensification. It is made on the part of the individual and on the parts of the parents as well, so that a certain group of people will relate to the world in a highly characteristic way. In almost all such cases (pause), such people will be embarked upon subjective issues and questions also that might not be considered otherwise. They will ask questions on their own parts that need to be raised, not only for themselves but for the society at large." (from "Dreams, "Evolution," and Value Fulfillment, Volume Two (A Seth Book)" by Jane Roberts, Robert F. Butts)

The quote is from the Kindle version of the book which you can browse here: http://amzn.eu/bGjxJBc

I find this quote relevant to myself because I am aware that my body is defective in certain minor ways.

[northern beaches]

Thanks for the reply. I have bought both books to see whether it expands it further there.

[LenKop]

Welcome to the forum NB.

Maybe you're here just for a holiday. A nice little break and you seem to have been caught up in a belief about greater purposes. Maybe enjoying the moment is developing you more than you know.

Len

[northern beaches]

Thanks for the welcome.

The main issues I have found is around getting to a point where I can prove that the reality creation part works so that I can get better at manipulating it. The main thesis is all around controlling your beliefs and emotions which are what is being used to translate reality according to Seth. At present I have not been able to consistently get anything created. Does anyone know a good simple starter exercise that can be used to prove the system to myself.

Seth says we are here to learn to manipulate reality to a point where we are very good at it, however he gave very few clues as to teh best ways to start building the techniques. I am now reading the book Psych Cybernetics that Jane read and Seth said was very consistent with his principles for growth, that book is helpful interestingly.

If anyone on the forum has some good starter exercises it would be good to hear them.

Thanks
NB

[LenKop]

Before you start exercising your creative abilities consciously, you may want to investigate your beliefs around the word 'proof'.

If you can discover what lies behind this burden, perhaps the creative journey will be made easier.

Len

[Deb]

Nice Len, you and Sena have a way of getting down to the heart of things.

Proof is tricky, because for the natural skeptic nothing is more meaningful than personal experience. And then when something resembling proof comes around, there is self doubt. Did that really happen? Did I just imagine that? Is that proof or just another coincidence? An instance of something is just that. A coincidence captures the imagination, but in a small way because it's easy to write off as—just a coincidence. But if I look back over the past several years and see all the coincidences in my life, the whole is greater than... sorry... an overused adage. But true. That is where I find my proof: looking back over a collection of events that tell me that while I'm not the best at recognizing how I create my reality, in retrospect the evidence is there. I can share some personal examples if you want. One in particular involves my inheriting a collection of original (but valueless) paintings by Jean Magnin, the wife of Grover Magnin of iMagnin fame—and I am not a relative. I just loved her paintings. Jean was a lover of Impressionist art, collector of several priceless paintings from the Impressionist and Post-Impressionat Ages (I did not inherit those ). Not one day goes by where I don't marvel over Jean's paintings that now hang on my walls.

It comes down to what you are willing to accept as proof.

BTW there's a list of Seth's recommended exercises, you can find the download links here. https://speakingofseth.com/index.php?topic=80 I've never actually had the time to read the entire thing, there may be an exercise that relates to what you want.

Lynda Dahl also has a worksheet for examining beliefs that I can share with you.