Edgar Cayce is mentioned once by Seth. I want opinions of what he meant .

[pyromancy]

https://afutureghost.blogspot.com/2017/11/brief-mention-of-edgar-cayce-in-seth.html


I say this out of no misguided egotism, but because the essence of personality is the only meaningful basis behind idea. Any other approach would rob the material of rich dimensions, for I am the proof in my own pudding, you seem. This is not the Cayce material, with information seemingly coming from some vast storehouse of knowledge. In those terms no such storehouse exists.
Knowledge does not exist independently of the one who knows. Someone gave Cayce the material. It did not come out of thin air. It came from an excellent source, a pyramid gestalt personality, with definite characteristics, but the alien nature of the personality was too startling to Cayce, and he could not perceive it. (Pause.) I am giving you the material through a personality that you can understand; one that is mine, one of my favorite selves. (Smile.) In this way the point is made so that it is clear.

A pyramid gestalt personality?

I  definitely think the birth of Edgar Cayce means something significant in this context.

8th density as Moon [8x8=64]. Go to google images search "egyptian pyramid brain"
7th density portrays ROGYBIV entering the human brain. [7x7] 49th octave of electromagnetic spectrum

Look





He also lived 67 years. 6X64=384 a lunar year 384 [lunar years]x 64[#hexagrams/#codons of DNA = 67years (365 day) # of solar years derived from the I ching/DNA calendar
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575644/
Born around the time Edison invented the light bulb, died in 1945 several months before the end of WWII and dropping of the atom bombs. A 67 year epoch.
https://bring4th.org/forums/showthread.php?tid=18240

Edgar Cayce is mentioned in the Ra material.
He made channeling much more popular/worth attention in the eyes American society.
There are many suggestions indicating he was an Egyptian lord named Ra-Ta in a previous aeon.

[Deb]

Hi pyromancy, welcome to the forum.

I read a book about Cayce many years ago, and don't recall where he felt his information was coming from. By this quote you've provided, it sounds like Cayce thought he was getting material from something like the Akashic records, which I think Seth indicated does not exist. The records would suggest that information/reality is static, which I don't think fits in with the flexibility of simultaneous time, probabilities and free will.

Wiki: "In theosophy and anthroposophy, the Akashic Chronicle is a compendium of all human events, thoughts, words, emotions, and intent ever to have occurred in the past, present, or future. They are believed by theosophists to be encoded in a non-physical plane of existence known as the mental plane."

My take on what Seth said about Cayce is that the channeled material came from his higher intelligence or his entity ("Knowledge does not exist independently of the one who knows"), but he could not understand that because it came from a source that did not fit in with his deep religious beliefs.

"What you prefer to think of as God is basically and above all, indeed as I have said, an infinite energy gestalt: or pyramid consciousness. It is aware of itself as being, for example, you, Joseph. It is aware of itself as what seems to you as your own future and past selves."
—TES7 Session 311 January 11,1967

Here's a clue from an unpublished (744) session:

"So in your time Christian fundamentalists militantly bear the swords of many extremist doctrines not accepted any more by the general Christian community. They arouse old fears and superstitions, on the other hand the religious concepts that point toward your future also exist in the same underground of the culture, yet often couched in conventional Christian terms.

So Edgar Cayce interpreted his revelations so as to make them fit in with his conventional Christian beliefs."

As far as the Ra material or Cayce being a former Egyptian lord, I'm not familiar with that.

Here are a few more mentions of Cayce from the Seth material: https://findingseth.com/q/Cayce/

[LarryH]

By this quote you've provided, it sounds like Cayce thought he was getting material from something like the Akashic records, which I think Seth indicated does not exist.

If Seth said the Akashic records did not exist, my interpretation of that is that they would not exist as separate from everything else. In a holographic universe, all information is embedded in everything. Cayce accessed (mostly) legitimate information and called that source the Akashic records. Call it anything you want, the records exist - or they could not be accessed.

[Deb]

The original quote in the first post of this topic is from TES8 Session 417.

This next quote is what I was thinking about when I said I thought Seth said the ARs don't exist (or as he said above, "in those terms no such storehouse exists"). Rob referred to it as "the concept of living information" in Note 1, Session 697, in UR1. It reminds me of Seth's explanation of how Jane tapped into the "world views."

Now here are some near-verbatim quotes from the information Seth gave [Richard] Bach and company on the evening of September 27, 1972:

Information does not exist by itself. Connected with it is the consciousness of all those who understand it, perceive it or originate it. So there are not records in terms of objective, forever-available banks of information into which you tune. Instead, the consciousness that held, or holds, or will hold the information attracts it like a magnet . . . The information itself wants to move toward consciousness. It is not dead or inert. It is not something you grab for, it is also something that wants to be grabbed, and so it gravitates to those who seek it.

Your consciousness attracts the consciousness that is already connected with the material. That is one of my goodies for the evening! Information, then, becomes new and is reborn as it is interpreted through a new consciousness, as Seagull was.

The inner portion of your being, using those abilities that have always been yours, interpreted the information through the kaleidoscope of your own being, using the best portions of yourself—producing, then, a brilliant truth in new clothes — but in clothes that no one could have given it but yourself. Now I will tell you: If you assign the authorship of Seagull to another, then you deny the uniqueness of your own inner self.

The truth came to you and was given to you, but the originality and uniqueness was provided by your own inner being, which may now be so separated from your conscious self that it seems to be apart from it.

So other things were also involved — not only the birth of a book, but the emergence of the inner self, through art, into the physical universe. Now part of the focus and the strength comes from those two births, and the intensity behind them is also the reason why the book's nativity strikes the world as strongly as it does. The two are merged in the book. You are looking for the author of Seagull, and I tell you I am looking at him. He may not have the face that you see when you look in the mirror, simply because you cannot see your true identity in a mirror. But I am looking at all that is visible of the author of Seagull, and you should know him best of all. And I will tell you through the years how to become acquainted with him, and more on speaking terms.

Ruburt already has a head start on this, so I am not spoiling his fun. There are indeed 'aspects' of your own consciousness that operate in completely different environments. Environments, far example, that are not physical. There are aspects of you, therefore, that know many other kinds of information than those available to you at the conscious level now ...

[pyromancy]

This seems like something I'm going to need more time to read and reflect upon, but I will say one thing.

Cayce was a Christian in waking life but in his trance under self-hypnosis he claimed that he was not aware of what he said during it. He was a different person after he woke from the trance. He claimed to not remember anything he said.

The reason why a lot of his readings go along the lines of something like "The Entity realized that rubies are useful for channeling infinite intelligence and purifying light." is because the term "Entity" is referring to the body of Cayce. The intelligence making the words he is speaking are something like infinite intelligence. Not the Christian Kentuckian personality of Edgar. It's a pretty paradoxical idea. He never said a spirit was speaking through him. The voice is just intelligence from some higher source it doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't him, however it was something not ordinary among humans.

This isn't Cayce material here but it offers some perspective and the Law of One has much to say about the pyramids. I'm trying to determine if the Law of One, Cayce readings, and Seth material fit together to see if they are valid because they all inspired each other, along with the factt that they mention both the Egyptian pyramids and Sumeria as something like psychic societies with people that reincarnate today holding on to their original forms that stemmed from those domains and a prior Atlantean one. Seth says that it was a pyramid gestalt. Seth does not say his source of information was non-existent. Seth says that Edgar Cayce couldn't comprehend it when he first encountered it in his previous lifetime.


https://www.lawofone.info/results.php?q=edgar+cayce
"14.32 Questioner: Where did the information come from that Edgar Cayce channeled?

Ra: I am Ra. We have explained before that the intelligent infinity is brought into intelligent energy from eighth density or the octave. The one vibratory sound complex called Edgar used this gateway to view the present, which is not the continuum you experience but the potential social memory complex of this planetary sphere. The term your peoples have used for this is the "Akashic Record" or the "Hall of Records." This is the last question which you may now ask."

[Deb]

Cayce was a Christian in waking life but in his trance under self-hypnosis he claimed that he was not aware of what he said during it. He was a different person after he woke from the trance. He claimed to not remember anything he said.

Jane was the same way. If you've ever heard her in an interview, her entire demeanor and way of expressing herself was totally unSeth-like. She would have the session and Rob or the class would tell her what was said afterwards. Even when she did automatic writing, such as her first experience with The Universe as Idea Construction, she "missed" the entire episode and "lost time" as we know it. I've been reading Psychic Politics and Jane mentions "focus personality" a lot. In my mind, it's because we here are all SO focused in this reality that makes it so hard to receive, accept or even acknowledge any input other than what our five senses tell us. I think that's why people need to be in an altered state of consciousness to be able to tap into information that's coming from another level—it blocks the sensory overload from our senses.

The intelligence making the words he is speaking are something like infinite intelligence. Not the Christian Kentuckian personality of Edgar. It's a pretty paradoxical idea. He never said a spirit was speaking through him. The voice is just intelligence from some higher source it doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't him, however it was something not ordinary among humans.

Yes, I feel that does fit with what Seth was saying. Seth was just saying the Akashic Records do not exist as "objective, forever-available banks of information into which you tune," the way some people envision them. Seth says (my interpretations) that it's not an impersonal repository of information (such as a database or super-computer), but rather tied to consciousness, a collective higher source as you say.

The Akashic Records, also known as "The Book of Life" or "God's Book of Remembrance," can be equated to the universe's super-computer system--or perhaps what today would be called cloud computing. They are the central storehouse of all information for every individual who has ever lived upon the earth. These records contain our every thought, deed, word, feeling, and intent. They have a tremendous influence on our everyday lives, our relationships, our feelings, our belief systems, and the potential realities we draw toward us.

The term your peoples have used for this is the "Akashic Record" or the "Hall of Records."

Paraphrasing Larry, it doesn't matter what you call it, the information is coming from somewhere higher. So slightly different concept, same end result.

BTW Seth's use of "entity" is different than how Cayce used the word. I think a lot of what we're discussing here is wrapped up in semantics. It seems to me that Cayce, Seth and Ra are talking about the same things and just using different words, or our definitions of words.

[pyromancy]

I agree.

What a soul means to one person means something different to the next

I think your soul is everything and your soul is the universe, but I've read some thing where Seth says there can't be one universe and I can't help but think maybe his idea and my idea of what the universe is must differ. "Uni" [one] verse etymologically means everything that is, if there are more universes I suppose the same concept would apply in my view...I guess I'd just have to rename it the overuniverse like the oversoul in order for it to be compatible with his idea. Ha.

I'm also really critical of any sort of faith. I don't feel that. Call it something else and maybe I'd agree. It's just how like I think the world love is a bit of an inappropriate term for the all pervading divine radiance. Calling it that in English means so many different things, that you'd be hard pressed to get millions of people saying that they love everyone. You could get everyone to agree that that they wish a divine beneficial energy towards everyone regardless of their sins, but grown men are going to roll their eyes at the thought of "loving" everyone.

The Hindu term param Chaitanya [all pervading/supreme truth(param)-(Chaitanya- vibration] is very appropriate and doesn't carry the same idea of being romantically close to someone. It's a term I wish to popularize because even English speakers have this concept in some subcultures but outside of Sahaja Yoga I've never heard anyone mention it.