What about people who don't have any beliefs?

[pyromancy]

I have heard the word "belief(s)" so many times in reading Seth books so far that it conflicts with my attitudes..

Here's the thing..I have no beliefs. A belief in my view is you think that something in true no matter what. I'm reading the nature of personal reality and finally it seems that he means also ideas that you have confidence in, but I think this is a topic worth bringing up.

I have thought recently that maybe I'm unlike a lot of people who are religious/mystic or highly confident in scientific understanding of their surroundings, and I don't think I'm special but I think I have a lot more patience to meditate for hours than most people and have been reading about supernatural/mystical topics ever since I learned how to read. I don't think it's magic. It's all information.

The form of meditation I practice is Sahaja meditation and the goal is to achieve mental silence. The best way to do this in meditation is to give up on your desires. Give up your bias, your mental projections. Completely giving up conscious control of your mental direction is how you make progress. This isn't to say you keep this attitude permanently. This is to say it's how you quiet your mind and don't stick to any particular idea for a set length of time almost every day.

I think one of the most interesting things Seth had to say in Seth Speaks was how women are submissive because they have more of an innate desire to be swept up by divine energy than men. I notice in spiritually focused gatherings that the women often outnumber the men on a noticeable level. Men don't value things like meditation or astrology/tarot nearly as frequently as females. There are studies I've read where 65% of meditation practitioners in some groups are female and 35% are male.

Maybe the simple fact that words like faith and belief are just annoyances in my view. Faith is superstition. There's a philosophical notion that the only thing you can infallibly prove to yourself is that you exist or that there is some sort of existence. Anything else could be a program. You could just be hooked up to a very sophisticated virtual reality without ever knowing, and Seth 2's comments indicate that entities designed/gave us our reality and the patterns embedded in it. I haven't gotten around to the part how Seth indicates why artificial intelligence can never be real consciousness but my mind goes back to an old videogame named Beachhead where you'd could put on a helmet in a 90s arcade and just imagining how if the graphics were hyperrealistic and your nerves were somehow hooked up to electrodes, a person could have their experience in a virtual reality some day with the right technology and could potentially never have a clue of it from start to finish. Everything can be fake.

You know that something exists. It'd be a paradox for it to not be true. Anything else could be a lie.

For this reason I just don't have strong opinions on mostly anything. Semantics are a big issue. An idea I had the other day was in all the discussion about Atlantis, and how some people think it was real and many don't the thing is that you must be a person that lives in some sort of society with a decent level of technology to even have the idea of it because anyone born in the remote jungle or some third world place full of starving people that don't speak language where the concept of Atlantis is generally known and shared amongst people, it might as well only exist to people that incarnate in a modern society. The point I'm getting at is that Atlantis is a good example of semantics and how this huge idea of a psychic civilization that means nothing to many yet carries a lot of energy to others doesn't even exist at all to most people and would have no comprehensive reaction to hearing the word Atlantis.

So as much as I think I have a soul I'm still not a believer. Thinking something is true is not the same as being a believer. I think it's true but having a soul to me means you have a psyche it's how the words are etymologically related. Yet who is going to say they don't have a psyche? It's different interpretations of consciousness and I think lately it is making more sense to me what Seth is saying by noting that there are presences of consciousnesses, but they aren't like pawns on a chess board they're more like the pawn but also the potential squares that the pawns or any of the pieces could move to and impact. Probabilities. And there are groups of consciousnesses like the pawns would be the pawn consciousness and the horse pieces would have another.

[Deb]

I have heard the word "belief(s)" so many times in reading Seth books so far that it conflicts with my attitudes..

Here's the thing..I have no beliefs. A belief in my view is you think that something in true no matter what. I'm reading the nature of personal reality and finally it seems that he means also ideas that you have confidence in, but I think this is a topic worth bringing up.

I have to say this is a really great topic, thanks! I'm a little late here, still catching up from being out of town. Also, sometimes topics get a slow start because not everyone goes to Recent Posts to catch up, or if they do, a current popular topic can take over the Recent Posts for a while and so some new topics get "buried." I have the advantage of getting notices of just about everything that goes on here, unless my email fails, which does happen.

Anyway, I love things that make me think, especially in a different way, and this is a topic that will do that. Actually, putting my partially formed thoughts into written words is often very illuminating for me. As the saying goes, "You never really know something until you teach it to someone else." I'm not a teacher, but maybe I can learn something about myself that will touch others. That probably doesn't make sense to anyone but me.

Let me preface what I'm going to say with, if your life is completely satisfactory for you and you don't want to change anything, then you are good and your beliefs are working for you. Nothing needs to be changed.

I can say I have beliefs. For instance, I believe I live in my house in Colorado in the United States on planet Earth. I look in a mirror and believe I'm looking at my reflection and therefore that's what I look like. I believe I'm a female human, and I grew up in and lived the events and circumstances that I now remember as my history. I believe I am sitting in my office right now and looking at my computer screen, typing away. I believe my desk has a solid formica top that things are sitting on, and yet physics and Seth say nothing is truly solid. I can consider that as being a fact, but I really don't know one way or another because all I experience is a solid desktop and what I see. I have a lot of beliefs that are what I would consider like these—minor and matter of fact, everyday stuff. What I would consider "soft" beliefs for lack of a better term. These are not the strong "hard" convictions of someone with say religious fervor that can affect their life. I'm just saying these are things I accept in my daily life, without questioning or examining them.

As far as religion, I don't like it or have religious beliefs, but feel (believe?) that others are entitled to believe what they want. As far as science, physics, medicine... I read and listen to what we are told, but have been around long enough to know they are always saying, "believe this, this is the truth," and then later, "well that was wrong, now believe this...." So I take most of it with consideration and a salt lick.

Even with the Seth materials. As much as I love them, do I believe everything in the books is absolutely true? While I'm very open to what I read, and it has resonated with me and does make a lot of sense, I still take everything under consideration because for the most part it's easier for me to accept and believe what I personally experience. With my senses. Those lovely liars. Growing up with the choice of two main lines of "truth," religion and science, it is so refreshing for Seth to offer an alternative. And science and physics coming out with statements over the years that validate what Seth said 40+ years ago is a real treat for me.

I do also think semantics is a big issue, in that we have the dictionary meanings of words but then we also have our own internal associations with some words that others don't share. A-Hicks says a belief is a thought that you think over and over again. How separate are "I think" and "I feel" from belief? Such as, a petty example, I love the music of a specific music artist and I think/I feel they are talented and their music is exquisite. Is THAT a belief?

I *think* what Seth means when he talks about beliefs shaping our lives is more than the surface (soft) beliefs about preferences. It goes deeper into beliefs that affect our actions and decisions.

Before Seth, I listened to Abraham Hicks for a few years and was exposed to the concept of the power of beliefs. Then I somehow came across Joe Dispenza and Bruce Lipton, who approached the mechanics and effects of beliefs on our lives from a scientific approach. I.e., Bruce says 95% of our personal belief system was indoctrinated before the age of 12 (when our brain wave activity reaches beta), and so 95% of our reactions and decision making is not based on our own beliefs, but those of others (such as parents, teachers and society).

If you ever want to read a real eye-opener on beliefs and how they affect us, I'd recommend Dispenza's book You Are the Placebo: Making Your Mind Matter. I've been to several of his workshops and have SEEN people change their minds and in the process, change their lives. For me, the placebo effect is the epitome of proof of the power of belief.

If you're interested in hearing what Joe has to say, there are many YouTube videos, long and short. As well as Bruce Lipton, (The Biology of Belief). 

I've shared this here before, but I have to add it again just for fun. The image below is a mock-product I designed after a 5 hour Dr. Joe meditation at my last workshop with him in Tacoma a few years ago. The meditation flew by. My bladder would contest that statement.

In conclusion, I do believe beliefs are important.

[pyromancy]

I see what you are saying.

I think that at the end of the day the majority of people do believe in things. Not being a believer makes you the outlier but it could also be the key to evolving at a greater pace by accepting that reality is ever-shifting and alive. I have met plenty of people who did not like overly-philosophical discussions because they would rather just feel comfortable in what they consider to be reality. "I just don't want to lose my reality" I once heard someone say.

I think the majority don't want to lose their reality, and to other people who do indeed want to lose their reality they think that "Those people must be sheep" but I have a bit of empathy in understanding that people with families for example don't have any reason to explore ideas that would make them think that their life is simply a false illusion. That point often isn't brought up.

[Sena]

Here's the thing..I have no beliefs.

pysromancy, do you believe that the sun will rise tomorrow morning?

[pyromancy]

I think it will but if I also think it could possibly explode at any moment. If it doesn't come up I wouldn't be shocked. It takes a lot to shock or surprise me.

Belief might have just been a better word for him to use than "think" or to think strongly so his communication would flow better.

I wonder what Seth thought of people who for example were seriously schizophrenic with beliefs that were incompatible with everyone else's. Like to what extent do those people shape our physical universe? Maybe people with more healthy or more 'psychic' minds have a more valid and constructive energy than people who are schizophrenic who distort our reality but their energy of physical construction is overwhelmed by the valid minds.

It seems there is a lot written in the books about schizophrenia. This is part of why I enjoy the discussions here, it makes me think of new terms to put in to the search engine and oftentimes things appear that I probably would not have thought of on my own.

https://findingseth.com/q/schizophrenia/

https://findingseth.com/q/schizophrenic/

It's important to note that we have actually discovered the cause of schizophrenia in the past dozen years. It used to be a mystery but it is a result of errors in proteins in the brain and how it causes a sort of traffic jam in the brain. I'm sort of tired to try and read through all of it, but I wonder how true this all holds up to what Seth describes. I am highly skeptical of people tossing diagnoses around for people like "obsessive compulsive" or "autistic" because in my honest experience a lot of problematic people would not have these "personality disorders" if they just had enough money to live on their own and weren't driven nuts by family members or roommates. I know that's how its been for me in the past. In my opinion if you can not find an actual physical problem with a persons brain or chemistry it's meaningless to assume they're defective. Yet schizophrenia is an exception because there is actually something going wrong that has been demonstrated.

You can find articles about this by searching on any web engine "cause of schizophrenia found traffic jam." I don't like linking to sites I can't guarantee are free of spyware/malware so read through the sources on your own. But for example this was not known in Jane/Seth's time:

"How traffic jam in brain leads to schizophrenia Washington: Researchers from Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine have found that low levels of protein required for maintaining constant contact between brain neurons might cause schizophrenia."

[LarryH]

In my opinion...

Isn't an opinion a belief?

It's not that you don't have beliefs, it's that you believe you don't have beliefs.

[Sena]

You can find articles about this by searching on any web engine "cause of schizophrenia found traffic jam."

pyromancy, may I ask what is the relevance of schizophrenia to our discussion about beliefs? One of the criteria for diagnosing schizophrenia is if the person has delusional beliefs. Delusional meaning a belief that is NOT held by many people. If somebody believes in God, that would not be a delusion, because there are still many people who believe in God. If a person believes that HE himself is God, that would probably be a delusion.

[pyromancy]

Well the point is that a schizophrenic might believe things are real very wholeheartedly and they might not be thinking they're suffering delusions at all. There are billions of muslims and Christians and they aren't ill but certainly are believers. It gets sort of convoluted saying that physical reality is shaped by beliefs when a lot of beliefs are not based on any proof but blind faith yet billions of people are religious.

I think the majority of people have false beliefs and their ideas just because they outnumber the small percentage of more rationally minded people doesn't mean that their reality is more authentic. People who think Seths ideas are completely legitimate are probably only in the thousands.

I mean this conversation right here is showing semantics because I don't think delusional means that they don't have beliefs that are shared by many people, I think delusional just means that they think something that isn't true.

I'm going to do some more reading of the Early Sessions books today to get a better understanding.

In my view a person has mental projections which is what an ego is, and there is a lot of focus on minimizing or melting the ego in a lot of spiritual systems but to say that people are completely physically constructed on what an individual believes they are only makes sense on a subjective level. It all is in your head I suppose.

Finding an answer to my question is something I only expect someone who has read all the books would have a complete answer to and it seems like very very few people have done that.

[pyromancy]

In my opinion...

Isn't an opinion a belief?

It's not that you don't have beliefs, it's that you believe you don't have beliefs.

I think it was towards the latter half of Seth Speaks that it is mentioned he means ideas/opinions that you strongly hold.

You are correct in that I strongly think that I DON'T have strongly held ideas. That is funny to me. I don't think I'm special or anything but maybe it's just a part of why I'm so drawn to this whole series of books. People I've encountered throughout my life generally just don't share the same attitude.

[Sena]

I'm going to do some more reading of the Early Sessions books today to get a better understanding.

pyromancy, I look forward to reading the results of your research.

[jbseth]

I mean this conversation right here is showing semantics because I don't think delusional means that they don't have beliefs that are shared by many people, I think delusional just means that they think something that isn't true.

Hi Pyromancy, Hi All,

Seth talks about this issue in his book, "The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events", (NOME for short), in Chapter 6, Session 812.

Sorry but you must log in to view spoiler contents.

-jbseth

[jbseth]

Hi Pyromancy, Hi All,

This is an interesting topic.

In your first post, you say, "I have no beliefs".

Then, 2 paragraphs down, you say the following.

"The form of meditation I practice is Sahaja meditation and the goal is to achieve mental silence. The best way to do this in meditation is to give up on your desires."


To me, the fact that you chose to use the word "best" in that statement, and not for example, "A way to meditate", or "One way to meditate" is a statement of belief or strong opinion that there is no other better way to meditate.


I guess I could say that, it is my belief, that your belief, that you have no beliefs, is maybe not a valid belief.   


-jbseth

[LarryH]

We all have beliefs. I think a characteristic that sets a serious Seth reader apart from most others is a recognition of beliefs for what they are - not necessarily hard, undeniable facts, but stepping stones hopefully in the direction of a more accurate perception of reality. Rigid believers are confident that they can answer the questions. Many Seth readers are more inclined to question the answers. 

[jbseth]

In my view a person has mental projections which is what an ego is, and there is a lot of focus on minimizing or melting the ego in a lot of spiritual systems but to say that people are completely physically constructed on what an individual believes they are only makes sense on a subjective level.

Hi Pyromancy, Hi All,

Yes, I agree.  In a lot of Eastern traditions, there is a lot of focus on minimizing or melting the ego.


In several different places across the Seth information, Seth talks about this and typically recommends against it. Paraphrasing, he typically says that we are here for a purpose. That is, we do have a purpose for coming here and part of this purpose is to experience life. We aren't working towards this when we are trying to deny ourself.


The strongest example of why we probably shouldn't do this, was given with the experience of Dr. Eugene Bernard.

In November 1966, Dr. Eugene Bernard and his wife Sarah visited Jane and Rob. During this visit, Eugene and Seth had quite a discussion about eastern religion philosophy and Seth's concepts. It's a pretty interesting discussion. Much of it can be found in TES7, S303, and some of it can also be found in Chapter 9 of "The Seth Material".


Apparently, some months after this meeting, as a result of his personal eastern based beliefs, Dr. Bernard did something and attempted to eliminate his ego.  This ended up causing him some severe problems. I'm not sure but he may have ended up in a mental hospital or psych ward for a time. 

Later on, Seth came through in part of a session about this, for his wife Sarah. This information can be found in TES8, S362.  Later on, in later sessions, Seth mentioned Dr. Bernard again in regards to Jane and Rob publishing a book, and it does appear that he had recovered from his issues. I have no idea however, how much his personality may have been affected by this situation.

If anyone is interested in what Seth had to say in this session, S362 let me know.

-jbseth

[pyromancy]

I am reading what you're all saying and I think it is insightful. I'll have to contemplate what your comments mean a bit more and will post again later but for now I'll share something also interesting about what it said about paranoid/schizophrenic people

""The connections between schizophrenia in the young, and senility. The child tries to project inner reality outward, and finds outside structures too small."
—UR1 Appendix 7: (For Session 689)"

One of the most mysterious things about schizophrenia is that it is unlikely there will be a young person with extreme paranoia/schizophrenia but even seemingly ordinary people can develop it when they become older in their later teens/20s. I'd like to see the greater context of this excerpt but it appears to suggest that schizophrenia may be a symptom of a person having a very vast sense of inner reality incompatible with outside structures. Like imagine mental projections that are like furniture that can not fit through a doorway and so problems begin to develop in the mind physically and mentally like a traffic jam.

As for comments about meditation I think it's easy to say "you must be a believer in Sahaja meditation" but to counter that I could just as easily say "I think that meditating with your palms facing upward is the ideal method" and that takes the seemingly spiritual bias out of the comment. To me it's about as much as a belief as saying it's ideal to meditate with your spine upright rather than laying on your side or at an uncomfortable tilt. Semantics. I've made this point many times with people about meditation and semantics because sahaja meditation and "meditating with palms facing upward" are essentially the same thing just with different names but these different phrases give people different biases. I have tried other methods. To me it's like saying I'm a believer in the idea that it's best to pour water in a cup vertically rather than sideways.

If belief is really simply meant as strongly held opinions then for the most part the question is answered. An example of a belief by that definition that everyone must have is that they themselves or a universe must exist because otherwise would simply be impossible.

I have a copy of The Early Sessions Book 8 if someone has questions about it. It does not appear to have a lot visible online that isn't behind a paywall.

[Sena]

I'd like to see the greater context of this excerpt but it appears to suggest that schizophrenia may be a symptom of a person having a very vast sense of inner reality incompatible with outside structures.

pyromancy, I think you are correct. The scientific view that the mind or consciousness is a "product" of the brain is wrong. It is more likely that the brain is a "filter" which filters out the vast reality of Framework 2. People who take drugs like LSD sometimes become psychotic. This may be because the drug breaks down the brain filter, and the mind is confronted by a vast reality it cannot cope with.

[zoonie29]

Pyromancy

Sorry I'm late to the discussion and others gave many sources and information for you. Some of the most interesting things I read in Seth material is about mental health such as schizophrenia. Also his information on eastern religion. Seth talks about schizophrenia in a few books, especially in The Way Toward Health. He explains in detail why it happens and how to resolve it. His discussion on eastern philosophy really made an impact on me because he said it defeats the purpose of why we're here. Obliterating the ego actually sets you back. The entire purpose of this life is to experience the personality and physical body. That's why the 3D exists. We wanted this, now we need to experience it. Denying it, only denies the point of being here. All that is wanted the break offs, wanted to experience itself in other forms, personalities, and the physical. Seth explains it as AYI has an over powering need to create and experience itself in this way. Trying to destroy the ego and return to source as nothing but unformed consciousness goes back on what source wanted. We need to expand, create, and learn.

Hiding in mountains, denying the flesh, and seeking "enlightenment" may let you see the world without its camouflage but you lose sight of the purpose of why you're here. He said that at least with Christian beliefs you keep the ego. This really surprised me because I figured eastern philosophy was on the right track to a certain extent then realized it's just another belief that can lead you places but not completely in the right way. It made me realize enlightenment, which is nothing more than seeing through the camouflage, really isn't as important as experiencing ourselves in 3D, finding joy, learning lessons, experimenting with scenarios, experiencing life as different sexes, and our sexuality. After reading that it really changed how I think about myself and what my goals were. Seth discusses this issue a few times in the books. I've read all of them. I'm now finishing up with the Early sessions books but everything you are discussing, Seth covers.

[pyromancy]

I do understand what you mean about Eastern religions. I think Buddhism is a bit overrated to tell you the truth. It isn't really compatible with most modern cities anymore. People won't take laziness seriously, and what the majority thinks shouldn't matter so much but if you want to share knowledge it has to people practical in order for people to pay attention.

People take eliminating the ego too far to the point where it's nonsense. I've seen people try and belittle each other so many times saying "your ego is so big" and it's obnoxious. I don't take people like that seriously. That's a lame attempt to disempower and dominate someone else's attitude with THEIR own ego.

The part of the Seth readings where he describes how you can try and eliminate the ego only for it to return makes me think of a garden and a lawnmower.

In Mesoamerican mythology the being Quetzalcoatl/Kukulkan has a very deep meaning which is a lot more literal than people interpret it as, and most people often lack interest in learning the stories because they're so blinded by how small segments of those societies were excessively violent. Quetzalcoatl is the kundalini in a human. Xolotl is the Xoloitzcuintli dog. The story of Quetzalcoatl entering Mictlan [land of the dead] domains of Mictlantecuhtli is literal. Quetzacoatl the human guarded by the spirit hound Xoloitzcuintli is meant literally. Places of death, and the spirit of peace/light...entering these forsaken places to banish the darkness/restless spirits that reside in such places where people died without finding peace. Think of the most violent place on Earth, and a holy man entering to cleanse the evil/chaos.

There are a lot of other deities in this legend, but it offers a very direct guide to a person who practices meditations. Eastern religions as far as I can tell don't offer such straightforward directions on what a persons mission is.

This isn't common knowledge. People are too intimidated by, and unfamiliar with the icons. Quetzalcoatl is the equivalent of the Eastern dragon.