DID

[jbseth]

Hi All,

As some of you may know, I've been reading the book "Channeling: Investigations on Receiving Information from Paranormal Sources", by Jon Klimo. This has turned out to be a very interesting book.
After I finish reading it, I plan to write some more about it, but in the meantime, I'm presently reading a chapter in this book on how channeling is, in some ways, similar to other issues discussed in both psychology and psychiatry.

One of these other issues is called DID, Dissociative Identity Disorder. This is the modern term for what was once called "Multiple Personality Disorder"; which is the disorder that was covered in the books and movies "Sybil" and "The Three Faces of Eve".

Seth talks about this issue in TES6 Sessions 255 & 256 and in "The Seth Material", Chapter 12.


In regards to this disorder, there are some things that take place that really make you question, what is the ego, what is the personality and what and where are their boundaries?


Attached is a video I found on youtube today. This is a 1 hour video that consists of an interview of a woman who has this disorder. Some of the things that this woman has to say are really fascinating.



Warning:

This may not be a video for everyone. 

Many people who have DID, were abused when they were young.

While there is no actual violence or abuse discussed in this video, some people may be sensitive to this subject and may want to pass on watching this video.


Here's the link to this video.





jbseth

[Sena]

Many people who have DID, were abused when they were young.

jbseth,
As you are aware, Jane was physically and emotionally abused by her mother, and sexually abused by a Catholic priest. Paranormal phenomena are more common in those who have been abused as children.

https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1094&context=ijts-transpersonalstudies

The questions we face are (a) Was Seth a genuine discarnate entity? (b) Is there value in Seth's teaching?
I am sure that most of us answer these questions in the affirmative. The whole body of Seth's teaching gives us confidence in its genuineness, although you are aware that there are a few items I don't agree with.

[jbseth]

Hi Sena,

Thanks for your reply and the interesting link on mental health and the paranormal.

The author of the book I'm reading on channeling, Jon Klimo, does talk about the relationship that seems to exist between people who perform channeling and people with "unhappy childhoods".


I would definitely say that Encina, the woman in the video I posted, had a traumatic childhood and she's definitely had some interesting "paranormal" experiences.   


Some of the things that Encina talks about in this video, such as: 1) her description of being co-conscious when one of her "Alters" like Minnie are out, and talking to others, and Encina can see what's going on kind of like watching a movie, and 2) her claim that these "Alters" have entire worlds going on inside of her mind, make me think that if this is, in fact, true, then it seems entirely plausible to me that Seth may have actually been an energy essence personality that was completely separate from Jane.

jbseth

[Deb]

OK, I broke down and ordered the Channeling book. You've sold me on it. Considering I'm getting rid of 75% of my old books, and my promise I would think twice about buying another print book (unless they are Seth books), I couldn't resist. It's a used one, almost free.

Very interesting topic. I watched most of the video. It was also interesting to me on a personal level, since I have a friend/acquaintance/client who says she has DID. She says she has 19 personalities and wrote a book about it a few years ago that's available on Amazon. She says in the book she was sexually, physically and mentally abused by her brother, her mother was abusive, her father too I think, in their own ways. She was my neighbor in 1986, used to babysit my son when he was very young in the late 90s. I had no idea she had DID until a few years ago when she asked me for help updating her book. In all the time I'd spent in her company, there was no indication that anything was amiss. She was always the same consistent person, which I can't say about everyone.

As fas as the relationship of Seth to Jane: In the beginning I was skeptical about channeling, but rationalized it as a person tapping into their inner wisdom who invented a male 'voice' to have the materials be more acceptable at the time. Jane was examined by at least a couple of psychiatrists or psychologists because of her own self-doubts in the beginning, and for other circumstances, and they didn't find anything wrong with her as far as I know. I've read things from people that diagnose her as schizophrenic, multiple personality, hard core alcoholic, delusional, but unless they are doctors and examined her face-to-face (they would not have access to other doctors' notes), then I dismiss them as opinions.

Then there's Seth saying that they all came from the same oversoul and through the ages Seth was Jane and Jane was Seth, which tells me she was basically channeling herself, her own inner well of wisdom. Or was tapping into the wisdom and information out in the "cosmos" that's available to anyone.

At one point I stopped questioning their relationship because the information resonates with me, makes a lot of sense at my core, and at this point I don't care much whether it came through Jane as herself, Seth as part of Jane's inner self, or a talking dog. 

I still need to read the pdf on the relationship between abuse and paranormal experiences. Kinda reminds me of poltergeist activity in homes of disturbed adolescents -- their brain activity could be distorted in some way by hormonal changes or anxiety and creating outward havoc.

I also had another thought, based on my own personal experiences, in that people that grow up in abusive households can be very sensitive, out of necessity, to self-protect and avoid conflict. The "antennas" are always up and the sensitivity becomes engrained. Sensing mood shifts, body language, the eyes, personal space, awareness of surroundings are constant data input—reading many things that other people don't even notice. I just realized that could be why sensitive people need alone time—sensory overload.

I would guess that a high percentage of people growing up in these households are "HSP" -- highly sensitive persons that experience and react to life in a way different from the majority of the population. It seems like DID would be an extreme reaction to abuse, but if the abuse begins at a very early age a very young child would have no other coping mechanism than to dissociate from the body and circumstances.

[jbseth]

Hi Deb, Hi All,

I hope you enjoy the channeling book.  I think the author has done a fantastic job of covering this topic from many different and interesting perspectives.


I like your idea of HSP's Highly Sensitive Persons. I think that there's definitely something to this, in regards to people who are psychic.

In my case, my 2 older brothers and 2 older sisters and I grew up with a very verbally and physically abusive father.  In dealing with this situation at a young age, I learned that I could escape from a lot of the family drama and trauma by hiding out under a bed. Out of sight, out of mind.

Often I'd go and hide under a bed and sometimes, when I was down there, I'd play with my toys or I'd daydream or use my imagination to fantasize about a lot of different things. This would often seem to make the time go by quickly, kind of like with psychological time.

As I reflect back on this as an adult, I think that this early strategy of daydreaming and using my imagination to fantasize about a lot of different things, contributed to me being open to many ideas such as psychic phenomenon.   


In my specific case, I'd say that my desire for "alone time" isn't always or even mostly driven by the need to escape sensory overload or to avoid stress. Many times, my desire for alone time, just comes from the fact that sometimes I just really enjoy alone time.  It's kind of like sometimes, my wife and I go to the beach when there is a lot of stress in our lives because, in our case, spending a day at the beach is a great way to relieve stress. On the other hand, sometimes, we just go to the beach, because we just love being at the beach.

jbseth

[LenKop]

I watched the movie 'Split' the other day. An M.Night Shyamalan movie (of 'Sixth Sense' fame), where the main character exhibits DID.

The plot aside, one interesting thing they touched upon was how different personalities affect the body chemistry differently.

For example, one personality needed insulin injections while the others didn't.

The debate in the movie, as is often in life, is within the medical (scientific) establishment.

I suppose the debate within us is 'is this true?'. Do we really create our own reality? Only we can answer that for ourselves and any proof is subjective.

I get a little concerned with some of the psychological 'benefits' of dealing with the past. I wonder if the techniques used for dealing with the past are often only continually recreating the past and therefore simply living in the past, and not healing anything.

Even the term 'healing' has bothered me for some time now. My belief around the word must have changed along the way somewhere.

Len

[Sena]

I get a little concerned with some of the psychological 'benefits' of dealing with the past. I wonder if the techniques used for dealing with the past are often only continually recreating the past and therefore simply living in the past, and not healing anything.

Even the term 'healing' has bothered me for some time now. My belief around the word must have changed along the way somewhere.

LenKop, I share your scepticism about psychoanalysis as a therapy. I see several of Woody Allen's films as satires on psychoanalysis. I do think psychoanalysis is useful as a research tool, as exemplified by Jung's discovery of the collective unconscious.
It is not clear to me why the term 'healing' has bothered you.

Seth's comment here is rather profound, but I don't fully understand it:

"Your Freud and Jung have probed into the outer, personal subconscious. Jung saw glimpses of other depths, but that is all. There are rather unfortunate distortions occurring in Jung's writings, as well as in Freud's, since they did not understand the primary, cooperative nature of the libido. We will involve ourselves in a much more thorough study along these lines, as we come to another body of subject material."
—The Early Sessions, vol.2 Session 83 August 31, 1964

These are Rob's comments on Seth:

"In Seth Speaks, Seth developed Jung's ideas about the anima and the animus by stating that such other-sex qualities or personifications within each of us actually represent memories of past lives. (Jung himself thought the questions of reincarnation, and of karma [or, roughly, destiny or fate], to be "obscure" — he couldn't be sure of the existence of such phenomena.) From Session 555 for October 21, 1970: "The anima and the animus ... are highly charged psychically, and also appear in the dream state. They operate as compensations and reminders to prevent you from overidentifying yourself with your present physical body." And from Session 556: "The reality of the anima and the animus is far deeper than Jung supposed."
—The Unknown Reality Vol.2 Appendix 18: (For Session 711)

Seth on the collective unconscious:

"Jung's collective unconscious was an attempt to give your world its psychological roots, but Jung1 could not perceive the clarity, organization, and deeper context in which that collective unconscious has its own existence. Reality as Framework 2 is organized in a different fashion than it is in the Framework 1 world, and the processes of reasoning are far quicker. In Framework 1 the reasoning processes work largely by deduction, and they must constantly check their own results against the seemingly concrete experience of physical events. The reasoning of the inner ego is involved with the creative invention of those experiences. It is involved with events in a context of a different kind, for it deals intimately with probabilities."
—The Nature of Mass Events Chapter 3: Session 823, February 27, 1978

Seth seems to be saying that Framework 2 corresponds to the collective unconscious, but Jung's understanding of it was inadequate.

"Jung was correct in postulating a collective unconscious. But with his limited knowledge he did not see that this unconscious would exist outside of your three-dimensional system entirely, holding future as well as past, nor that it has such a cohesive effect upon humanity as a whole. It is the one self with its origins within your system, but its existence outside."
—The Early Sessions vol.8 Session 341 May 15, 1967

[LenKop]

Thanks for the excellent reply Sena.

'he did not see that this unconscious would exist outside of your three-dimensional system entirely, holding future as well as past'

This quote might encapsulate the reason I struggle with 'healing' per se. Like many subjects studied through linear lenses, creativity is quite often misunderstood from a multi dimensional level (I am by no means saying i understand it completely). If i am creating my own reality, and we are doing the same together, then the only drama that I am aware of might not be the whole picture. This is what Seth tells us.

Healing, as a creative necessity, I can somewhat comprehend. The role between the therapist and patient is a similar dynamic as are all the relationships that play out between people all over the world on a daily basis. On a grander scale, all time exists at once, so the cause and effect that our definitions of 'healing' require seem to me more damaging than healing. The psychoanalytical approach seems to keep us focused on the issues of the past, presuming by facing those past 'demons' we can move 'forward'.

It's a question of semantics at the end of the day. If you need to heal yourself, then you are under the impression, by definition, that there is an illness, or something 'wrong' with you. How can you heal yourself if the idea that gives birth to healing is illness? Modern medicine is still looking for the magical panacea.

Seth: "Now: it may seem to most people that an exuberant, always-vital, energetic, healthy body would indeed be one of the greatest gifts of all--a body that never worried or showed signs of any disorder, a body that went ahead on its own, so to speak, propelled by feelings of strength and vigor. This certainly sounds like a fine ideal. Yet I tell you that in such a body you would finally feel like a prisoner, for your moods and reflections, your feelings and your thoughts, would find no responsive mirror in your flesh.

"You would wear a constant smile, and your blooming cheeks would often deny the heart's hard-earned knowledge.

"It is natural and HEALTHY to yearn for a comfortable body if you are in health difficulties. The body, however, is NOT an assumed facade, but the physical materialization in your world of your inner being. All of nature is responsive, pliant, changing, each part connected with each other part. It is quite natural, then, that during a lifetime you experience various assorted periods of temporary illness.

"These will be caused by your beliefs and your feelings, but they will not be necessarily negative at all, but a demonstration of the body's responsiveness. It is not realistic to expect a life of unending, exuberant health, with no momentary lapses of any kind.

"Such momentary lapses follow personal and cultural patterns. Some generations fall heir to certain fashionable diseases, for example. The body copes with inner and exterior reality, and performs a marvelous job of maintaining multitudinous balances.

"Ideally, the body would always right itself after such lapses from exuberant health--but even those lapses often exercise that resiliency. Maintaining that resiliency, then, is the important issue. Many such lapses are exaggerated because of your beliefs, so that they are experienced in a more drastic form than necessary. GENERALLY drugs impede that resiliency.'
Deleted Session of 03/02/76, Personal/Deleted Sessions, Book 3 - by Jane Roberts © L. Davies Butts via Rachel Enevoldsen on FB Fans of Seth Material.

Although the above quote focuses on physical health, the psychoanalytical field follows similar beliefs as methods need to be 'proven' via statistics and experimentation. I am becoming more and more aware of the procedures as my wife is studying for a degree in psychology.

Using deduction to try to solve a non-linear problem, might be a bigger problem in and of itself. The challenge of DID hopefully leads to the greatest portal of understanding about our psyche and human potential. In Australia, mental health awareness has exploded over the past ten years. From famous sport stars talking about it, to advertising on the side of a bus, the government is funding the push to take mental difficulties seriously. I think it is a great thing and I believe it shows the movement of the collective consciousness toward broader beliefs regarding humanity and the depths of our psyches that are yet to be fully explored. Hopefully breakthroughs within DID can help with awareness toward material that has been channeled.

Len

[Sena]

Healing, as a creative necessity, I can somewhat comprehend. The role between the therapist and patient is a similar dynamic as are all the relationships that play out between people all over the world on a daily basis. On a grander scale, all time exists at once, so the cause and effect that our definitions of 'healing' require seem to me more damaging than healing. The psychoanalytical approach seems to keep us focused on the issues of the past, presuming by facing those past 'demons' we can move 'forward'.

Lenkop, I see your point about healing. I too am a little suspicious about "healers", those people with charismatic personalities. The best kind of healing is self-healing, and prevention is better than cure.

Although the above quote focuses on physical health, the psychoanalytical field follows similar beliefs as methods need to be 'proven' via statistics and experimentation. I am becoming more and more aware of the procedures as my wife is studying for a degree in psychology.

I am sure your wife is familiar with Cognitive Therapy, which is rather Sethian in that it focuses on changing beliefs.

[Deb]

It's a question of semantics at the end of the day. If you need to heal yourself, then you are under the impression, by definition, that there is an illness, or something 'wrong' with you. How can you heal yourself if the idea that gives birth to healing is illness? Modern medicine is still looking for the magical panacea.

I get that. We've also been taught that we can't heal without the help of something outside of ourself—a doctor, hospital or prescription.

I think labeling is a problem, but that's how we need to operate at this time. Such as, with something like alcoholism: a person is told by a professional that they have a disease and they will never truly recover. This takes the power and responsibility away from the person to recover not only on their own, but at all.

Sorry this is post so long, but I found it to be interesting timing. I just got a book yesterday by Tam Mossman. He was the Prentice-Hall assistant editor back in 1968, when he became involved in producing Jane's ESP book. He was also there for The Seth Material and Seth Speaks. In 1975 he started getting his own channeled information. I'm only getting started on the book, but I thought this was interesting timing and something I'd never considered: Similarities between DID, possession and even viruses. Excuse any typos please. It's a long quote so I've underlined just a couple of the parts I thought were interesting comparing "possession" with DID.

Does possession as depicted in The Exorcist really occur? What allows it to happen? And what do you recommend to prevent it?

Possession as depicted in that movie does in fact occur. But the real cause is not the devil or outside entities, as you may have been led to believe, and the preventive treatment is not primarily religious in nature.

In many non-technological societies, simple illness—"simple" according to your present-day definition—is seen as the work of evil spirits. The swelling of an infection, fever, depression, and mental illnesses are all seen as afflictions alien to the sufferer, arising from one sort of possession or another.

And in essence, such an interpretation is strictly accurate, because illness, of whatever variety, is the product of unbalanced development of the host personality. One part of the body, or one of its systems, seeks to grow—or not grow—at another's expense. As a result, the organism is weakened in specific areas, literally inviting a specific disease—whether manifested by the body's own cells or by the sudden unrestrained growth of a virus or bacterium. In short, the physical illness is allowed to manifest a repressed or "minority" thought in fleshy form. But the same impulses and energy could be more healthily manifested through coherent, balanced change and outward action.

As with physical illness, so with imbalances of the mind—for after all, the latter cause the former! Certain metabolic diseases, including the one manifested most commonly as warts, result in bizarre growths that seem relatively independent of the body on which they occur.

But hasn't it been proven that warts are caused by a virus?

Indeed it has. But what do you suppose activates the virus in the fist place? I suggest the basic cause of warts is a metabolic disorder that lets small deposits of unexcreted substance lodge in the skin—small, but sufficient to act as a catalyst or "fertilizer" for viral particles. It is a disorder similar to, but infinitely less sever than, gout. A test of the blood of wart sufferers will someday reveal its presence.

Now, a wart assumes more or less the same shape, regardless of the body part on which it occurs; even though its component cells are, in fact, those of the body. With that preamble in mind, you are in a better position to comprehend so-called possession.

As I said, the psyche is constantly budding off and seeding new parts of itself, joyously and adventurously, into new realities, including—and this is important to remember—into its perceived present. The mind's main focus is forward, into the immediate future it has selected for itself, just as an animal racing across the ground is most attentive to the turf directly before it.

If the immediate future appears blocked—not dangerous, because danger is usually perceived as challenge on the deepest level of the psyche—but blocked, then the psyche endeavors to flow around the present obstacle, much as an amoeba would attempt to do so. And if the psyche produces too many "arms," it can, in a sense, lose track of them. Multi-focus consciousness is natural and easy at the Oversoul level, but it is not always possible for a single human psyche—much less a relatively childish, immature one—to hold its various extensions in simultaneous focus. Thus, you get cases of split personality as well as possession. In the former instances, semi-independent personalities manifest themselves as human, as in the case of Sybil. In the latter, they take on the guise of demons, as depicted in The Exorcist.

I invite you to view the parallels and similarities. Your experts agree that clinical split personality is almost always sparked by the core personality having suffered child abuse at a young age. Similarly, possession often afflicts the young and supposedly innocent—children, women, would-be saints, and others who have considered themselves "molested" by a hostile, or at best indifferent, universe. If the hostility of a parent can snap a young mind into defensive fragments that seek to scurry and hide, how much more of a fragmenting blow can be dealt by the horrendous concept of a malevolent universe—or a Hell that seeks to punish transient sins with punishment everlasting? The more you believe in torments reserved for the damned, the more you must believe in the depths of evil that would merit such a fate.

Recall that in practically every case of possession, the devils or demons act subhuman or, at best, less than adult. They swear, make noises, play pranks, and hardly comport themselves as what they are alleged to be—fallen angels, higher than Man in the order of creation. I can assure you that no self-aware discarnate of my level ever debases itself! Any entity manifesting such coarse selfishness and vulgarity is on its way up, not down.

Now, every so often, the exorcising priest meets with with a Lucifer or Beelzebub who carries himself with dignity and speaks fine Latin, and any number of languages. But so it is with split personalities—usually there is a core entity, wiser and more mature than the rest, who acts as the ringleader and manifests admirable abilities that, essentially, compensate for the feeling of powerlessness experienced by the originating psyche.

Another parallel your parapsychologists have overlooked is that possession is often associated with poltergeist activity. Is it not conceivable, then, that the "demons" are merely poltergeists manifesting within the body and nervous system—just as a virus, unimpeded, swiftly takes on a life of its own within the tissues? I remind you that the youthful fragments of the psyche are natural chameleons, innate actors. To insure their survival, they do not just blend in with their surroundings, but assume the appearance and behavior of more highly developed entities—ideally, coming across as authority figures with whom you would not care to mess. And so, the most junior of your psychic fragments (and everyone, healthy or not, has them to one degree or another) will typically announce themselves through the Ouija board as Alexander the Great or Louis XIV. Or, through the entranced mouth of a troubled youngster, they may style themselves the Hound of Hell, Ashtoreth, or Moloch—and take understandable delight in the alacrity with which they are believed.

One further fact that your professionals have failed to notice: A "possessing spirit" usually obeys, and very strictly indeed,, the tenets of whatever religious creed its core personality was brought up in. Thus, you have Buddhist demons, Catholic demons, Protestant Episcopalian demons, even Hindu and Shinto demons—each of which is sent fleeing by a ritual of the appropriate sect. Now, if you suppose that each subspecies of demon must be quelled by a different religious antibiotic, you are postulating a most complex universe indeed!

I would suggest a simpler explanation, by way of an observation self-evident to any minister: Pure, unswerving, unquestionable faith in organized religion is most prevalent in those who perceive themselves as powerless. Is it a coincidence that these candidates for orthodoxy are often the "victims" of entities who obey their religious world-view right down to the letter? Such following-the-dots with consistency and precision is one of the typical ways in which an insecure being seeks approval and a sense of identity.

With these theorems in mind, I believe you can work out the remainder of the equation for yourself.

Excerpt from Chapter 1, The Channeling Implosion—You Are a Part of Whatever you Contact from
Answers from a Grander Self, Tam Mossman, self-published 1993

[jbseth]

Hi Deb,

Thanks for sharing. I purchased and read the "Gander Self" book some time ago and really like it.
I think that "James" teachings are very similar to Seth's and yet James does have his very own unique point of view.

I'm often amazed how wisdom seems to show up in many different ways, different forms and different voices.

-jbseth

[Deb]

I totally agree about bits of wisdom showing up. I started this book with the same skeptical eye I have for any non-Seth book these days, but have already come across some morsels of eye-openers (pun intended). I'm also enjoying the questions about anything and everything, such as Nasca lines, Shakespeare, Aztec human sacrifice, AIDS, reincarnation, channeling, that are explained with easy analogies and a lot of present-day scenarios, such as the sacrifices issue:

"Beneath such an "explanation," however, lurks an even more barbaric misconception that persists into your present day: the belief that certain forces are out to get you, and you must appease them by some kind of sacrifice. The hefty insurance premiums many of your cities pay out are just such a sacrifice, intended to keep lawsuits at bay. In a strange and amusing way, the very abundance of insurance money has brought about increasingly generous jury awards in damage-claim cases."  Too true!

Quite different than the Seth Materials as far as content and presentation, but yes, the "information" is compatible with Seth.

I'll end this with another quote — I love stuff that makes me think and question myself and my "observation" of reality. This is in regards to wealth and why some people struggle, others flourish (spoiler: beliefs!). I find it especially pertinent with the Democratic Socialism trend running through politics and the media these days:

"Quite literally, most of what you enjoy—the home in which you live, the clothes you wear, the food upon your table—was made available to you by the affluent. A poverty-stricken grocer would have very disagreeable stock indeed! A builder forced to cut corners could not create dwellings in which you would care to live." Socialism in America: Do we really think our government is competent to control and dole out everything in our lives, especially in light the freak show that's been going on over the past few years? OK, I've said enough. I hate politics.

It brings up images of Socialism/Communism, Soviet Russia, food lines, empty grocery stores. Many of life's necessities, in our current culture, do come from affluent or thriving businesses. They thrive because they provide a service that is of value to many, yet there are those that resent "the hand that feeds them." Ohhhh, I'm having flashbacks to reading Atlas Shrugged. The book that changed my view of "reality" when I was in my 20s.

Sorry, I digressed. Do you know if Tam every published his follow-up book? I'm also looking forward to what the Klimo book says about Tam and James.

[jbseth]

Hi Deb,

To the best of my knowledge, I don't believe that Tam ever published anything else about the metapsychological or channeling line. I've looked for it several times, even most recently on Amazon.

This doesn't mean he didn't publish it via some unknown publishing company.

-jbseth

[LarryH]

When I was first dating my now former wife, she met and had lunch with Tam. He later sent her a channeled message regarding our pending marriage. I don't remember much about the message. I think it suggested that if certain things (which I don't remember) were kept in mind, it would be successful. Maybe she can fill in the blanks if she runs across this thread.

I had a subscription to Tam's excellent magazine focused on channeled materials. I still have most of them. I also read a fiction book that he had written under a pseudonym, called 666. I don't recommend it - the only reason I read it was that he had written it. But he also had suggested that the reader look at the first letter of each chapter. Those letters spelled out something like, "Tam Mossman wrote this book."

Last week, I listened to a guy who claims to channel Mary. There was nothing that he said that could not be acquired from reading certain trendy books by Dan Brown or similarly themed historical research-oriented books. Today, I asked him some questions, and he started sharing stuff that I was not asking about, including that he is taking medication for schizophrenia. He also shared that another medium while "channeling" the archangel Auran told him that he is more powerful than the archangels, and that he has the power to create worlds. That was when I ended the discussion.

[healingartdoctor]

OK...I was just thinking about that lunch with Tam recently. He actually went into a light trance and did give me some things to keep in mind... as I recall now, there was value in what he suggested. I remember that I sent him a children's book to thank him...I can see it in my mind's eye...will have to see if I can find it somewhere...do you remember? And, he definitely did publish other work. I don't recall what or through which company, but he did publish other work.

[jbseth]

Hi LarryH,

Yeah, the guy who claimed to channel Mary.
I also would question who or what it was that he was actually channeling?

- jbseth

[Deb]

he is taking medication for schizophrenia. He also shared that another medium while "channeling" the archangel Auran told him that he is more powerful than the archangels, and that he has the power to create worlds. That was when I ended the discussion.

That's pretty scary in itself.

So Tam did write a couple of other books, but not related to James. That's really interesting that the two of you had lunch with Tam. Some day hopefully you'll share how that came about.

Does anyone know if he's still alive? I wonder if he still channels. Maybe he'll get that second book out one of these days.

[healingartdoctor]

I think it was just me who had lunch with Tam (Deborah) and I wrote to him via the publishing company and simply inquired if it would be possible to meet for lunch when I would be in Philadelphia, where I understood that the company was and we arranged the get-together from there. I believe that Tam has passed on, but am not certain. And he was an editor, so he worked on lots of books as I understand it. I very much enjoyed the conversation at lunch and had a strong sense of his compassion and kindness.

[chasman]

I googled and found these about Tam. it says he died in 2014.

https://www.greatwesternpublishing.org/learned-seth-jane-roberts-john-cali-spirit/

https://www.greatwesternpublishing.org/seth-jane-roberts-john-cali-spirit/

[jbseth]

Hi Chasman,

Thanks for sharing that information.

I just did a quick look on Google to see if I could find anything else regarding Tam Mossman's transition but I didn't find anything else on this topic.

-jbseth

[chasman]

hi jbseth,
  you're very welcome.
thank you for all the excellent interesting posts you make.
Charlie

[Deb]

I googled and found these about Tam. it says he died in 2014.

Sorry for the delay, but thanks for the links and info on Tam. Darn, 2014. I did follow the links and I'm going to be saving both of John Cali's blog posts as PDFs so I can store them somewhere here. Websites disappear from time to time, so I like to preserve interesting articles about Seth and Jane when possible.

[chasman]

thank you Deb!!   

[Deb]

I just made a topic for Tam Mossman's book here: https://speakingofseth.com/index.php?topic=1703 if anyone is interested. First post was copied/quoted from this topic, the second has a few examples of things I found especially interesting in the book.