The Inner Ego

[jbseth]

Hi All,

Seth sure has some interesting things to say about the inner ego in TES6, S270.

Check it out.


TES6, S270:

[... 6 paragraphs ...]

My dear Joseph, there are indeed balances that operate. You need not fear that subconsciously you are going to invite hordes into your home, nor that Ruburt will subconsciously do so.

There is also something you forget. You are your subconscious self, and oftentimes what makes no sense to the ego makes good sense to the overall personality. Still, there are psychological balances that always operate when the overall personality gestalt is operating effectively, as it is in both of your cases.

The overall needs of the personality are always taken into consideration by what I have called in the past the inner ego. Now this portion of the self is indeed self-conscious in the highest meaning of the term—aware of the subconscious portion of the personality, aware of the primary conscious framework that you call your ego, and constantly directs the overall activities. This portion is aware of the complicated workings of the nervous system and all bodily functions. It is the overseer. It knows when to allow subconscious needs and wishes their fulfillment. It knows when to put fulfillment off for a time. It is this part of the personality that is in charge of overall stability.

Now. This inner ego can also operate within the dream state, and in certain awake-seeming dreams it is the portion that realizes that the personality is not in its normal waking condition. It is this portion of the self that is with you in the most excellent projections. The inner ego is the part of the personality that contains the highest aspirations and capabilities. It has been called by psychologists the subliminal self.

When in such dreams your perceptions seem exceedingly clear, you can be certain that the inner ego is operating. Now all portions of the personality, of the present personality, belong to this inner ego. It functions constantly, and yet it is always in a state of becoming. It is more than what you are at any given moment in your time. It contains, and is, the psychological blueprint containing the full potential of the present personality within any given incarnation.

It is the director of all the subsidiary psychological subpersonalities that form the acting-present primary personality. It gives and takes. It prevents unconstructed aspects from gaining control, unless of course there are strong reasons why such control is necessary in the long run.

It dabbles in both your future and your past, speaking now in your terms. As you create a painting, and the painting is still an aspect of yourself, so it creates the whole personality, which is an aspect of itself. It operates in both the waking and the dream state. It often forms the content of each. It is more knowledgeable than any one aspect of the personality. It is more knowledgeable than all other aspects of the personality, for it forms them together into a cohesive whole.

It is therefore the director of all activities, both in the waking and dream condition. It is the inner ego from whom you receive your inspiration, and it is the inner ego which gives consent to our meetings.

I told you from the beginning that the inner ego is aware of data that is received through the inner senses as well as data from the outer senses.

It is the prime identity of the whole present personality. In many cases it is the I of your dreams. It is definitely the I of your creative activity. It is the I, you see, which survives physical existence, and the physical, physically-oriented ego is only a part of it.

[...] You take it for granted that the physically-oriented ego represents your own psychological identity, you see, and this is an illusion. [...]

[...]



-jbseth

[Sena]

It (Inner Ego) dabbles in both your future and your past,

jbseth, thanks for highlighting these important paragraphs.

The psychoanalyst Car Jung appears to have been able to communicate with his Inner Ego, whom he named Philemon. The following is an extract from Jung's autobiography:

"Philemon represented a force which was not myself. In my fantasies I held conversations with
him, and he said things which I had not consciously thought. For I observed clearly that it was he
who spoke, not I. He said I treated thoughts as if I generated them myself, but in his view thoughts
were like animals in the forest, or people in a room, or birds in the air, and added, "If you should
see people in a room, you would not think that you had made those people, or that you were
responsible for them." It was he who taught me psychic objectivity, the reality of the psyche.
Through him the distinction was clarified between myself and the object of my thought. He
confronted me in an objective manner, and I understood that there is something in me which can say
things that I do not know and do not intend, things which may even be directed against me.
Psychologically, Philemon represented superior insight. He was a mysterious figure to me.
At times he seemed to me quite real, as if he were a living personality"

[jbseth]

Hi All,

Lately I've been thinking about Seth and his statement, "you create your reality".  Recently I've been noticing that whenever Seth talks about the inner self or the inner ego, he seems to be saying that it is our ego (or outer ego) that experiences physical reality and it is our inner ego that creates this physical reality.

In other places, he seems to tell us that not only are we our physical body and our outer ego, but we are also our sub-consciousness and our inner self.

Apparently, the issue here is this. Our ego (our outer ego) focuses so intently upon the outer physical world, that it isn't aware of the fact that we are also our sub-consciousness and are our inner self.

All of this has made me wonder about the following. When Seth tells us that "we create our reality" has this always been the point that he was trying to make?  That is, whenever he has said this, was he always just referring to the fact that we, our inner self, is the part of us that creates the physical reality, that we our outer ego and physical body then physically experiences?

In other words, is it possible that he has never actually meant to imply that we, our outer ego self, actually has some capability or ability, perhaps some limited ability, to create or somehow changer or modify its physical reality.



After digging around in my Seth books, recently, I'm happy to report that no, I don't think that this is what Seth was trying to say.

It does appear to me that Seth has been telling us that our inner self does create our physical world reality. However, it also appears to me that Seth was also trying to tell us that our outer ego also has a hand to play in all of this. Much of this comes from what he says in NOPR.

In NOPR, Chapter 3, S616, in talking about the ego (outer ego) Seth says:

"It is the most physically oriented portion of your inner self; but it is not, however, apart from your inner self. It sits on the window sill, so to speak, between you and the exterior world. (Voice stronger for emphasis:) It can also look in both directions. It makes judgments about the nature of reality in relationship to its and your needs. It accepts or does not accept beliefs. It cannot shut out information from your conscious mind, however — but it can refuse to pay attention to it."

In this session, Seth appears to be telling us that our beliefs and ideas have an effect upon the physical reality that we experience. For example, he says:

"Limiting ideas therefore predispose you to accept others of a similar nature. Exuberant ideas of freedom, spontaneity and joy automatically collect others of their kind also. There is a constant interplay between yourself and others in the exchange of ideas, both telepathically and on a conscious level."

He also tells us that.   

"The seemingly invisible ideas that cause your difficulties have quite obvious visible physical effects"


He also gives us a great example of how our beliefs can impact our lives.

[...] If, for example, you have scarcely enough money on which to live, and you examine your thoughts, you may find yourself constantly thinking, "I can never pay this bill, I never have any luck, I'll always be poor." Or you will find yourself envying those who have more, degrading the value of money perhaps, and saying that those who have it are unhappy, or at best spiritually poor.

(11:10.) When you find these thoughts in yourself you may say, and rather indignantly: "But those things are all true. I am poor. I cannot meet my bills," and so forth. In so doing, you see, you accept your belief about reality as a characteristic of reality itself, and so the belief is transparent or invisible to you. But it causes your physical experience.

You must change the belief. [...]

Again, what does Seth tell us here? He tells us that our belief causes our physical experience. Along with this, he also tells us that we must change our beliefs in order to change our physical experiences.

How do we do this?  We can change our beliefs by first examining them and figuring out which ones seem to be causing our physical world difficulties. Then once we've uncovered these beliefs, we can take steps to change them. Here's the thing, all of this work, of both examining our beliefs and changing them, can and is done by the ego (outer ego).

In short, Seth is telling us here that yes we can change our reality at an outer ego level. Furthermore, he also appears to be telling us that by changing our beliefs, we can change our physical world reality.

Later on, in Chapter 13 of NOPR, Seth tells us about personal and mass beliefs and how they can affect us. Following this, in Chapter 18 he talks briefly about Mass Events and the flood that Rob and Jane were involved in.  Following this, in NOME, what Seth says in this book indicates that there's quite a bit more to grasp and understand in regards to mass events and how they affect us. In all of this however, your beliefs seem to play a significant role in the reality that you experience.  In NOME, Chapter 5, S830, he says the following:

As long as you believe that either good events or bad ones are meted out by a personified God as the reward or punishment for your actions, or on the other hand that events are largely meaningless, chaotic, subjective knots in the tangled web of an accidental Darwinian world, then you cannot consciously understand your own creativity, or play the role in the universe that you are capable of playing as individuals or as a species. You will instead live in a world where events happen to you, in which you must do sacrifice to the gods of one kind or another, or see yourselves as victims of an uncaring nature.

-jbseth

[jbseth]

The psychoanalyst Car Jung appears to have been able to communicate with his Inner Ego, whom he named Philemon. The following is an extract from Jung's autobiography:

Hi Sena, Hi All,

Over the years, it appears that many different "beings" and types of "beings" spoke to and through through Jane. There was Frank Watts, Seth, and Seth Two. She also found herself speaking as "Ruburt", her whole self, in an ESP class. At one point, a survival personality, by the name of "Billie" as I recall, came through and spoke through her. In "Adventures in Consciousness" she tells us about how apparently "Nebene" possessed her briefly and as I recall spoke through her.  She also tells us about channelling "Sumari" and she tells us about her dialogues with "Oversoul Seven". 

I'm curious, with all of these different and different types of beings that spoke to or through Jane, what is it that makes you think that the being who that communicated with Dr. Jung, was necessarily his inner self.

-jbseth

[Sena]

I'm curious, with all of these different and different types of beings that spoke to or through Jane, what is it that makes you think that the being who that communicated with Dr. Jung, was necessarily his inner self.

jbseth, I can't be sure, but there is no record of Jung going into a trance and speaking with Philemon's voice as Jane did with Seth and the other beings.

[usmaak]

Over the years, it appears that many different "beings" and types of "beings" spoke to and through through Jane. There was Frank Watts, Seth, and Seth Two. She also found herself speaking as "Ruburt", her whole self, in an ESP class. At one point, a survival personality, by the name of "Billie" as I recall, came through and spoke through her. In "Adventures in Consciousness" she tells us about how apparently "Nebene" possessed her briefly and as I recall spoke through her.  She also tells us about channelling "Sumari" and she tells us about her dialogues with "Oversoul Seven". 

Jane must have had a very strong sense of self and sanity.  If that had happened to me, I'd have checked myself into a psych ward and thrown away the key.

[Sena]

Over the years, it appears that many different "beings" and types of "beings" spoke to and through through Jane. There was Frank Watts, Seth, and Seth Two. She also found herself speaking as "Ruburt", her whole self, in an ESP class. At one point, a survival personality, by the name of "Billie" as I recall, came through and spoke through her. In "Adventures in Consciousness" she tells us about how apparently "Nebene" possessed her briefly and as I recall spoke through her.  She also tells us about channelling "Sumari" and she tells us about her dialogues with "Oversoul Seven".

Jane must have had a very strong sense of self and sanity.  If that had happened to me, I'd have checked myself into a psych ward and thrown away the key.

It is fairly clear that Jane's abilities were supernatural. In the natural course of events, considering the abuse she suffered in childhood, one would have expected her to be a nervous wreck.

[jbseth]

jbseth, I can't be sure, but there is no record of Jung going into a trance and speaking with Philemon's voice as Jane did with Seth and the other beings.

Hi Sena, Hi All,

The reason for my question was because I was wondering if perhaps your comment was based upon something that Dr. Jung himself had actually said about Philemon. Such as maybe Dr. Jung, in one of his writings said that "he" believed that Philemon, represented his "Higher Self" or his "Inner Self".


What I'm hearing from you about this is that your comment may not be based upon something that Dr. Jung himself actually said.

For me personally, I'm open to the possibility that Philemon may have been Dr. Jung's higher self or his inner self. However, I also haven't closed the door on this idea. That is, I'm also open to the possibility that "Philemon" may have been some other kind of psychic type of "personality" like perhaps "Oversoul Seven".

Jane reports that "Oversoul Seven" would often just mentally download to her the various chapters of the "Oversoul Seven" book. She also tells us that on occasion, she would ask OS7 questions about her personal life and OS7 would respond.   I don't know that these communications between her and OS7 were necessarily verbal.

In the attached article it says that, Philemon first appeared to Dr. Jung in a dream. Along with this it also says, "In his memoirs, Jung reported that he would often converse with Philemon as he strolled in the garden of his lakeside home in Küsnacht, Switzerland."

It sounds to me like some of the communication that took place between Dr. Jung and Philemon during these strolls, may have been quite a bit like the communication that occasionally took place between Jane and OS7 and as far as I can tell, neither Jane nor Seth thought that OS7 was Jane's inner self.

Thus, it seems to me that it is possible for a person like Jane or Dr. Jung to have a communication with some sort of psychic personality, where this psychic personality isn't necessarily the persons inner self.

https://philemonfoundation.org/about-philemon/who-is-philemon/


-jbseth

[Sena]

The reason for my question was because I was wondering if perhaps your comment was based upon something that Dr. Jung himself had actually said about Philemon. Such as maybe Dr. Jung, in one of his writings said that "he" believed that Philemon, represented his "Higher Self" or his "Inner Self".

jbseth, Jung did not use the phrases "higher self" or "inner self" in his autobiography. The main description of Philemon is in the quote I placed in my my first post.

https://philemonfoundation.org/about-philemon/who-is-philemon/

Thanks for finding the link.

I found another article here:

https://www.baconsocietyinc.org/baconiana/baconiana1/Taylor.htm

"Jung identified a duality in all people, a duality of personality that is ever present, but which the individual is usually not conscious of. The Number 1 personality is you, the conscious ego, with memory of your actions this lifetime. The Number 1 personality is your face to the world.

The Number 2 Personality, in contrast, is the immortal inner Self the soul if you will. The Number 2 Personality can make its appearance in dreams and waking fantasies, but most people spend their lives ignoring their inner Self, partly from their belief that it simply does not exist. The Christian will readily say that we all HAVE souls, but it is more accurate to state that we ARE Soul, the Being, whose quality is manifested in the Number 2 Personality.

In the context of Jungs life, the Number 1 Personality is Carl Jung the psychologist. The Number 2 Personality is Jungs immortal soul, his inner Self."

"Jung claimed Philemon was an entity outside his conscious control, in other words outside the control of his Number 1 Personality. It had a life of its own, and spoke of things that Jung did not consciously know about."

[jbseth]

Jane must have had a very strong sense of self and sanity.  If that had happened to me, I'd have checked myself into a psych ward and thrown away the key

Hi usmaak, Hi All,

Fortunately, for Jane, all of this didn't just occur all at once. Over the years, she seems to have experienced more and more psychic capabilities as time went on.

And yes, there was a lot of time, especially in the early days, beginning with channelling Seth, that Jane was in fact quite concerned about her sanity. This comes through quite a bit in the TES books.

In one of the earliest sessions, Rob makes a comment to Seth about Jane's concern for her sanity, especially in regards to her ability to pick up what Seth is saying via the ouija board, before he actually said it.   As I recall, Seth said something like this back to Rob. "Reading the letters that come up on a ouija board is one thing, but picking up what it's going to say beforehand is something else. You too would be very concerned about your sanity, if this suddenly started happening to you.

Jane and Rob did talk to several pyschologists and parapychologists especially in the first few years. It seems to me that over time, Jane seemed to become more comfortable with Seth given the quality of the information that he was sharing with them.  However, in TES8, Jane starts to channel Seth Two, and it seems to me that it was this experience that finally convinced her that Seth himself, wasn't just some secondary part of her personality that was speaking to her. When she started to channel Seth Two, it was like she suddenly realized that there was no way that Seth Two was her.

I think that this was finally the thing that convinced her, that Seth was independent of her and it was at this time, that she really started to open up and blossom to many more types of psychic experiences like "Oversoul Seven", "Sumari" and "Helper" for example.


I personally wouldn't say that Jane's abilities were supernatural, any more than I'd say that Albert Einstein's insights were supernatural or that Michael Phelps (the Olympic Champion Swimmer) swimming ability was supernatural. Instead, I'd say that these people show us what is possible and what is within the range of human potential.

I think that Jane was rare in that she had both an incredible ability and willingness to explore many creative and psychic ideas and phenomenon. Along with this, being both a poet and a great writer, this helped her communicate these ideas and experiences with others. 

-jbseth

[jbseth]

I found another article here:

https://www.baconsocietyinc.org/baconiana/baconiana1/Taylor.htm

Hi Sena, Hi All,

Hey Sena. Thanks for both the link and the comments.

It sounds to me that while maybe Jung never used the term "inner Self", he did seem to indirectly refer to this idea in regards to his Number 2 Personality, which this link says was the immortal inner self or Soul.

In addition to this, it also sounds like Philemon was an "archetype" and this archetype was thought to be a symbol of Jung's "inner self".




Now, along with this, I've noticed that there are some significant differences between Jung's ideas and Seth's ideas.


In some places in SS, Seth refers to the Soul as the "Entity".  The Entity is the being/self that contains many reincarnational selves. Jung doesn't seem to have a counterpart to Seth's Entity concept.


For Jung, the Inner Self and the Soul are one and the same. For Seth they aren't.
For Seth the "Inner Self" is part of the soul or entity but it is not the soul or entity.

Thus, I wouldn't say that Jung's "Inner Self" is directly comparable to Seth's "Inner Self".


-jbseth

[Sena]

For Jung, the Inner Self and the Soul are one and the same. For Seth they aren't.
For Seth the "Inner Self" is part of the soul or entity but it is not the soul or entity.

jbseth, that is exactly correct. Seth's teaching on the Entity is very original, and Jung had no inkling of it.

[jbseth]

Hi Sena, Hi All,

In regards to moving psychology in a direction towards a better understanding of the nature of the inner universe, I think that Jung pushed the bar a whole lot further along that Freud did.  However, in a similar fashion, I also think that Seth pushed the bar even further along than Jung did.

In a way, Seth had a lot of advantages that Jung, Freud and many others psychologists like William James, didn't and don't have.

Seth didn't have to worry about his ideas not being in step with the existing and in some cases limiting beliefs of the psychologists during their lifetimes. He, didn't have to concern himself with the fact that some of his ideas may have deemed "too close" to some religions. Nor did he have to concern himself with the fact that they weren't scientifically provable.

Without these human limitations to hold him back, Seth was able to move the bar quite far.

He was able to present his concepts about the ego self, the subconscious self, the inner self, the whole self, and the entity.  Furthermore, in describing the entity as he did, he was able to relate and connect the idea of reincarnation with the idea of the soul.

Today, there are some hypnotherapists who seem to suggest that embedded within the human mind, there is some evidence of past life existences. There are also some therapists, who, in working with people who have DID (Multiple Personalities) who seem to suggest that there's some validity to some of Seth's concepts. There are also many people who commonly report NDE's and some people report OBE's today. Most of these things were not reported upon during Jungs time, or at least not to the level that they are today.

I'm not sure that Jung was aware of any of Seth's ideas during his lifetime, at least partly because he died in 1961, two and a half years before Jane first started to channel Seth. Thus, I really wouldn't necessarily expect him to have any sort of thoughts, ideas or even inklings about many of Seth's concepts.


-jbseth

[Sena]

When in such dreams your perceptions seem exceedingly clear, you can be certain that the inner ego is operating. Now all portions of the personality, of the present personality, belong to this inner ego. It functions constantly, and yet it is always in a state of becoming. It is more than what you are at any given moment in your time. It contains, and is, the psychological blueprint containing the full potential of the present personality within any given incarnation.

It is the director of all the subsidiary psychological subpersonalities that form the acting-present primary personality. It gives and takes. It prevents unconstructed aspects from gaining control, unless of course there are strong reasons why such control is necessary in the long run.

It dabbles in both your future and your past, speaking now in your terms.

Hi jbseth or whoever is visiting the forum these days,

I am reading a book by Anthony Peake which is about the "Daemon". This is NOT demon. It seems to me that Peake's Daemon and Seth's Inner Self are one and the same. Two quotes from Peake's book:

"From moment to moment your life has consisted of decisions, millions upon millions of them, and each one has changed your future. Every second you decide to do one thing or another – to cross or not cross a road, to speak to somebody or ignore him or her, to watch one television channel rather than another. And within each one of these decisions lie the seeds of a different life, a different course of events. Like snooker balls they bounce and ricochet off in a multiplicity of directions. Every small decision made with no conscious thought changes the future, brings a possible future into an actual event. Some of those decisions you were very happy with. They were, from your present viewpoint, the 'right' thing to do. But from the moment that you set the train of events into motion you knew that others were wrong. You watched as the cause and effect process rippled out to affect life after life. 'No man is an island', wrote John Donne, and as regards how we interact with others no truer words have ever been written. This book will present evidence that your decisions, although made by you, have been guided by another being, a higher intelligence that shares your thoughts, your dreams and the good times and the bad." (from "The Daemon: A Guide to Your Extraordinary Secret Self" by Anthony Peake)

https://amzn.eu/0UDrdo6

"I suggest that consciousness itself splits into two loci of awareness. These I term the Daemon and the Eidolon. The dying person starts their life again, the Eidolon re-living every experience as if it was the first time. However, this is not so for the Daemon. The Daemon remembers exactly who it was in the previous life." (from "The Daemon: A Guide to Your Extraordinary Secret Self" by Anthony Peake)

Anthony Peake's website:

https://www.anthonypeake.com/about/

[Deb]

Thank you for this Sena. It sure does sound like his Daemon describes the inner or higher self. Or would you say, from his description, possibly the entity? That would make our current selves the Eidolon, living life unaware of any other life, while the Daemon has that awareness and gives guidance when we stray off the path.

I thought Daemon was a poor word choice but when I looked it up, I got: "Daemon (in ancient Greek belief) a divinity or supernatural being of a nature between gods and humans." Perfect.

The book sounds very interesting. I read Peake's bio and he certainly has a lot of interests and education: quantum physics, neurology, ancient myths, altered-states of consciousness and the mystery of death. Just what would be needed to write credible books about such things as life after death and split consciousness location. I'm tempted to get his first book, "Is There Life After Death – The Extraordinary Science of What Happens When We Die" What catches my attention is the word "science." I also read a few of the Top Reviews (60% are 5 stars).

This stood out to me:

The eternal return that Peake contends we experience is not simply a Nietzche "Groundhog Day" of undergoing the exact same life, but a slightly repeated journey in which we have the capacity to change the same events the next life over. During our life journey, Peake contends that we are guided by a wiser, higher or transcendental aspect of ourselves that he calls 'the Daemon.' The Daemon, Peake suggests, is our consciousness, which presumably has lived before, a kind of ethereal soul that accompanies each of us in our journey through life. The theory is certainly grand and kind of nice and comforting, but does Peake make a strong argument to support it? Overall, I think he does. Sure, the theory inhabits a strange area of thinking since Peake uses a lot of ideas from sciences, such as ideas from neuroscience and physics to justify his reasoning and yet ultimately his theory is more metaphysical speculation than hardball science. Nonetheless, as a reader I felt comfortable to go along with the theory.

@chasman , you may also want to look at this book, I know you're interested in this topic too. I'm thinking of getting the audio version.

Peake also has a YouTube channel, with a series called the Anthony Peake Consciousness hour. I see he has a YT with one of the members of the Scole Experiment, which was one of the most interesting books I've read. I'll be listening to that one for sure.

[chasman]

thank you Deb.
looks fascinating.   

[Sena]

The eternal return that Peake contends we experience is not simply a Nietzche "Groundhog Day" of undergoing the exact same life, but a slightly repeated journey in which we have the capacity to change the same events the next life over.

Deb, thanks for finding this intelligent review of Peake's other book. I bought both books some time ago as they were available for a reasonable price on Amazon UK. Peake also wrote a biography of Philip K. Dick - I have only read parts of it.

I certainly reject the Nietzschean Groundhog Day, but repetition with slight variations makes sense, and could fit with Seth's probable realities. Maybe next time round Nietzsche will not see the horse being whipped:

https://www.thevintagenews.com/2017/02/05/friedrich-nietzsche-went-mad-after-allegedly-seeing-a-horse-being-whipped-in-the-italian-city-of-turin/

I know that @leidl is interested in philosophers; I hope she is still visiting the forum.

[Deb]

I certainly reject the Nietzschean Groundhog Day, but repetition with slight variations makes sense, and could fit with Seth's probable realities. Maybe next time round Nietzsche will not see the horse being whipped:

Or not contract syphilis, or whatever was really wrong with him. Jeez what a horrible ending for someone... 10 years in a vegetative state. Coincidentally , the most recent YT by Peake is with author Maggie La Tourelle about her book "The Gift of Alzheimer's: New Insights into the Potential of Alzheimer's and Its Care" which I consider provocative.

"What is dementia? Does it have a deeper meaning? As a loved-one slips away for us, is she or he entering a higher plane?

"In her groundbreaking book, The Gift of Alzheimer's, Maggie chronicles her beautiful journey with her late mother who suffered from Alzheimer's. Miraculously, instead of destroying the lives of her family, the disease strengthened their bonds and revealed something incredible—the ability of Alzheimer's to connect those it touches with another world. Including the latest research into neuroscience and altered states of consciousness, the book offers hope and a way forward for those affected by this devastating disease. "

[Sena]

Coincidentally , the most recent YT by Peake is with author Maggie La Tourelle about her book "The Gift of Alzheimer's: New Insights into the Potential of Alzheimer's and Its Care" which I consider provocative.

Deb, yes, one of Peake's themes is that organic brain disease may bring the Daemon (?Inner Self) to the surface. The following is a lengthy quote which Peake has borrowed from Oliver Sacks' book, "The Man who Mistook his Wife for a Hat". I am not keen on reading Oliver Sacks because I understand he is a materialist and atheist.

"Bhagawhandi was dying. That was obvious to all who knew her. The doctors had diagnosed a malignant brain tumour, an astrocytoma, which was impossible to remove. She was only 19 years old. What surprised everybody was how remarkably cheerful she was, accepting totally that she had but a short time to live. The tumour was growing larger day by day and was inching forward towards her temporal lobe. Up until this stage she had suffered occasional seizures but nothing particularly debilitating. However, as soon as pressure was placed upon her temporal lobe, her seizures became more frequent – and stranger. In the early stages of her illness the seizures had been grand mal convulsions, but her new ones were altogether of a different nature. She would not lose consciousness, but would drift into an epileptic-like dream-state. However, this dream-state soon developed into something far stronger. Bhagawhandi began to have very realistic hallucinations about being back in India and not just India but the India of her childhood. In these semi-waking states she actually found herself back on the dusty streets of her old village, interacting with people and circumstances that had long disappeared into the mists of time. She would find herself listening to a speech being made in the village square. On one occasion she was in a church, on another in a graveyard. She claimed that she was actually reliving these memories as actual events. As Bhagawhandi's present life began to ebb away she began to live more and more in her new world created from her own past. The visions ceased being occasional and began to take up most of her waking hours. She lay with her young face rapt in attention to a world inside her own mind, a faint, mysterious smile on her face. What was happening had a profound effect upon the nursing staff around her. All accepted that something very strange, but very wonderful, was taking place. Nobody disturbed her, allowing her her dreams. The psychiatrist responsible for her was also fascinated. He felt awkward but was keen to know exactly what was taking place. He asked her quietly. 'Bhagawhandi, what is happening?' 'I am dying,' she answered. 'I am going home. I am going back where I came from – you might call it my return.' During the next week she disappeared totally into the world of her memories. She ceased responding to all external stimuli but lay with the same faint smile on her face. Three days later she quietly slipped away, returning permanently to her own past. And in this way she died, as the psychiatrist poetically described it 'or should we say, arrived, having completed her passage to India.'" (from "The Daemon: A Guide to Your Extraordinary Secret Self" by Anthony Peake)

Kindle edition:  https://amzn.eu/2NAS1qY

P.S. It just occurred to me that if Nietzsche spent the last 10 years of his life with brain syphilis, he may have during this time enjoyed the revelations of his Inner Self, thus getting rid of his probably mistaken philosophical ideas!!!

P.P.S. It may be that Nietzsche suffered from a brain tumor (just like Bhagawandhi), not syphilis:

Prideaux casts even more doubt on the cause usually attributed to this insanity: syphilis. Popularised by Thomas Mann's novel Doctor Faustus, which has a Nietzsche-like character contract syphilis in a brothel, the evidence simply doesn't stack up. Although diagnosed as such when admitted to the asylum in Basle, Nietzsche showed none of symptoms now associated with it: no tremor, faceless expression or slurred speech. If he was at an advanced stage of dementia caused by syphilis, Nietzsche should have died within the next two years; five max. He lived for another 11. The two infections he told the doctors about were for gonorrhoea, contracted when he was a medical orderly during the Franco-Prussian War.

Instead Prideaux puts forward the – correct – view that Nietzsche probably died of a brain tumour, the same "softening of the brain" that had taken away his father, a rural pastor, when Nietzsche was a boy.

https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/i-am-dynamite-a-life-of-friedrich-nietzsche-review-a-gripping-read-1.3675846#:~:text=to%20activate%20them.-,I%20Am%20Dynamite!,Nietzsche%20review%3A%20A%20gripping%20read

[Kyle]

I am reading a book by Anthony Peake which is about the "Daemon". This is NOT demon. It seems to me that Peake's Daemon and Seth's Inner Self are one and the same.

Sena, this guy is a good find, thank you. I watched a video on Peake's channel and he's enjoyable to watch, both thoughtful and energetic.

I'm still trying to understand how to compare his daemon with Seth's inner self and also with depth psychologists' writings about the daemon. It sounds like Peake is saying that your daemon knows your future because it has already lived your life. I believe Seth/Jane would say that your inner self knows your "possible futures" because it is not a temporal being at all; it exists in a timeless realm.  Peake described it as a memory of the same "present" with the same surroundings and the same events. He tells the story of one man's precognitive trance experience of a bombing in London. The actual bombing happened five days after that spontaneous trance experience. So how could he be reliving that experience, unless everyone else was doing the same thing? Otherwise, he'd be living on his own isolated timeline... and then it just gets too confusing to even think about! So, that's something I don't get yet, but I'm interested enough to pursue it further.

[Sena]

I'm still trying to understand how to compare his daemon with Seth's inner self and also with depth psychologists' writings about the daemon. It sounds like Peake is saying that your daemon knows your future because it has already lived your life. I believe Seth/Jane would say that your inner self knows your "possible futures" because it is not a temporal being at all; it exists in a timeless realm.

Kyle, thanks for your interesting observations. I have not finished reading the Peake book, but I agree that his statement that "the Daemon knows the future" is problematic. Does he mean that the Daemon knows "everything" about the future? That would mean that the future is "fixed", implying determinism. I would certainly reject determinism.

If on the other hand, we say that the Daemon knows "something" about the future, that there are many alternative "probable" futures, and that the Eidolon is able to choose between some alternative futures, that would be consistent with Seth teachings and I would accept that.

The following extract, about the composer Gluck, indicates that Peake is aware of the concept of probable realities, which he intereprets in terms of the Everett multiverse:

"A very similar event took place in 1749 and was experienced by another German, the composer Christoph Gluck. Gluck had been visiting friends in the Flemish city of Ghent. After a hearty meal he decided to bid his friends goodnight and walk from the tavern to his lodgings a short distance away. As he made his way through the streets he noticed a figure walking ahead of him. He was surprised to observe that the figure seemed to be following exactly the route that he was following but always a few seconds ahead. Gluck also felt that there was something about the figure that was strangely familiar. On catching another glimpse of his mysterious companion he was disturbed to notice that not only was the person the same height and build as himself, but he was also wearing exactly the same clothes. His ill-at-ease feeling turned to fear as he saw the figure approach the front door of his lodging house, produce a key, enter and close the door. This was simply too much for Gluck. He turned around and ran back to te tavern. His friends were still there and were surprised to see him back. Gluck explained what had happened and begged to stay the night with one of them. The next day Gluck and his friends made their way back to the lodgings. As they entered the house they were aware of a commotion inside. A group of people were looking into the open door of Gluck's room. As he looked past them he saw a huge roof beam lying across a smashed and broken bed. Up above was a massive hole in the ceiling. During the night the roof beam had come crashing down on the bed in which Gluck would have been sleeping. It was clear that if he had been asleep he would most certainly have been killed."

"A second, more intriguing, explanation is that what Gluck actually saw was his own future self existing a few seconds ahead of time. In the case cited earlier, when Goethe saw his own future self, the time distance between the perceiver and the perceived was many years. However should this be possible then the amount of time between the two events need not be years and could, indeed, be only a few seconds. As such Gluck perceived his own future self as he would be very soon. But this idea is even more interesting in that I suggest that the 'future' Gluck existed in an alternative 'Everett Multiverse' – a universe in which he died as the beam crashed on to his bed. In other words, it was some form of weird trans-dimensional timeslip in which an alternative future was presented back in time in order to bring about a change in the past." (from "The Daemon: A Guide to Your Extraordinary Secret Self" by Anthony Peake)

Kindle edition:  https://amzn.eu/hQSwuDf

[Sena]

Here is another remarkable instance, from Peake's book, of how the Inner Self (Daemon) may operate. Peake got the information from a medical journal (see attached pdf for the full story).
The following extract describes the first part of the story:

"The woman had settled down to a quiet evening in, curled up with a book. She was engrossed in the story and at first was not sure what she had heard. It then repeated itself. It was a voice that was somehow inside her head and yet not part of her thought processes. The voice was absolutely insistent. It had arrived from nowhere and was quite clear about its purpose. It told her that she had a medical problem but that she was not to worry because it was there 'to help her'. After a few weeks of these strange communications, some of which were precognitive, the woman, known as AB, decided that her only course of action was to go and see her doctor. The local doctor simply could not understand what was happening but assumed that the problem was psychological and referred her to Dr Ikechukwu Azuonye of the Mental Health Unit at London's Royal Free Hospital. In the winter of 1984 Dr Azuonye diagnosed a straightforward case of hallucinatory psychosis. He prescribed a course of the antipsychotic drug thioridazine and expected that would be the end of it. How wrong he was. Initially the thioridazine seemed to work. Thinking that the voice was simply a peculiar psychological interlude, AB and her husband went off on holiday. However, while out of the country the voice had found its way through the drug barrier and was more insistent than before. It pleaded with her to return to England as soon as possible, saying that she needed urgent medical treatment. Indeed, it even told her an address that she should go to for help." (from "The Daemon: A Guide to Your Extraordinary Secret Self" by Anthony Peake)

Kindle edition: https://amzn.eu/1wtZngK

[Kyle]

Here is another remarkable instance, from Peake's book, of how the Inner Self (Daemon) may operate. Peake got the information from a medical journal (see attached pdf for the full story).

Sena, thanks, that is a great story. Peake has lots of them, also in his book "The Labyrinth of Time" which I am reading. I can't follow all of his speculations with confidence that they are more than speculations, but he doesn't ask for more than to open my mind to these possibilities. I do enjoy his writing and I hope to share more thoughts about this.

[Sena]

Peake has lots of them, also in his book "The Labyrinth of Time" which I am reading.

Kyle, I was tempted to buy this book, but I thought Peake might be repeating what is in the previous books. If you share some of the insights from this book, it could help me make up my mind.

[Kyle]

Sena, I suggest that you read the free sample, and I think that will be all you need. It sold me.

And if you don't like it, you can return your Kindle book very easily for a refund. I'm not much of a book reviewer.

[Deb]

I have to say this topic has become really interesting since the introduction of Peake. I've looked at his books on Amazon, and they all have high percentage of very favorable and intelligent reviews. That says a lot to me. I've added his books to my Wish List. It seems he is the scientist, of sorts, that has taken on the challenge of proving Seth's claims to be true. I don't have the impression that he was a Seth/Jane reader at this point, which means even more to me.

I just need to decide where to start with his books. Maybe the beginning is the logical place. 

[Kyle]

Peake has lots of them, also in his book "The Labyrinth of Time" which I am reading.

Kyle, I was tempted to buy this book, but I thought Peake might be repeating what is in the previous books. If you share some of the insights from this book, it could help me make up my mind.

Sena, I saw only one place where he tells a story from another book, and he makes note of that. He seems quite thorough in his research and mentions brilliant but obscure people who had theories about time. He even has his own theory, which I don't quite understand, but for instance:

"We all experience what I term 'The Virgin Life'. This is the first life, the one in which we experience our life for the first time. This life is differentiated from all others in that it is free of any déjà vu sensations and lacks an inner guiding force – the being I call 'The Daemon'. This is why on average only 30 per cent of people surveyed claim never to have had a déjà experience whereas 70 per cent say they have experienced at least one. This is because the 30 per cent who do not report such experiences are living their life for the first time."

Peake, Anthony. The Labyrinth of Time: The Illusion of Past, Present and Future . Arcturus Publishing. Kindle Edition.

This is probably the most outrageous statement in the entire book. Wildly speculative but he states it as a matter of fact. So I'm saying, he's got a great imagination but I don't have to go everywhere he goes to enjoy his ideas.

[Sena]

This is why on average only 30 per cent of people surveyed claim never to have had a déjà experience whereas 70 per cent say they have experienced at least one. This is because the 30 per cent who do not report such experiences are living their life for the first time."

Kyle, thanks for the quote. I don't quite agree with Peake on this. I have NOT had a déjà vu experience, but I have had a dream and related experiences which indicate that I have had a previous life. I paid for two sessions of hypnotherapy to investigate previous lives, but they were unsuccessful.

[LarryH]

So here's a question: does Seth talk anywhere about how many earthly incarnations most humans go through? I almost remember coming across something like that, but it escapes me.

I have wondered about this. It seems that Seth told someone that they had only had 4 or 5 other lives. He also said that Jane and Rob were in their "last" incarnation. Others talk about having hundreds or even thousands of "past" lives. Slow learners?

[usmaak]

So here's a question: does Seth talk anywhere about how many earthly incarnations most humans go through? I almost remember coming across something like that, but it escapes me.

I have wondered about this. It seems that Seth told someone that they had only had 4 or 5 other lives. He also said that Jane and Rob were in their "last" incarnation. Others talk about having hundreds or even thousands of "past" lives. Slow learners?

Or maybe they like Earth. 

[Deb]

I occasionally have a déjà vu experience in a dream, where the surroundings seem familiar, and I feel as if I've certainly been in this place before. I've had a couple of waking precognition experiences that I hope to write about later, even though they aren't as interesting as Peake's stories. I feel there's a bit of distortion when Peake uses déjà vu as his criterion for whether I am in a "Virgin Life" or not.

I've had déjà vu, but rationalized it as there being a similar person, place or situation I'd already experienced. I had it today—I was dreaming about going up a concrete staircase this morning, and then later "recognized" it as I climbed steps later today at Mote Marine. They were much easier to navigate than the ones in my dream, which had steps as tall as those at Chichén Itzá. But concrete staircases are pretty common. I've also had a couple of precognitive dreams, but that was a long time ago.

I have wondered about this. It seems that Seth told someone that they had only had 4 or 5 other lives. He also said that Jane and Rob were in their "last" incarnation. Others talk about having hundreds or even thousands of "past" lives. Slow learners?

Good question. Seth had a lot to say about "reincarnational cycles," and some of it's pretty wild. Such as:

"There is also a probable system, of course, in which no reincarnational cycles exist, and a cycle of reincarnations in which no probabilities exist."
—SS Chapter 11: Session 541, July 13, 1970

Yikes! The only thing that comes close to a "rule" is this:

"This cannot be done, however, until the reincarnational cycle, once chosen, is completed,"
—SS Chapter 11: Session 540, July 6, 1970

I suppose reincarnation is like anything else in this particular system— everything is flexible and varies according to our/our entity's goals, free will, and yes, either slow learners or people who like it here. I think Seth said he'd reincarnated an embarrassing number of times.

Maybe we need to make a new topic for reincarnational cycles, something to explore.

And off-topic, although maybe not entirely so, I came across this article today. It's about a new book, "The Next 500 years: Engineering Life to Reach New Worlds," where the author says Earth is doomed and he proposes genetically engineering humans to hold up to life on Mars. He needs to hook up with Musk. So WE can become the alien life forms. BTW I don't plan to be around long enough to see this, it's too negative and creepy for me.

[Sena]

"There is also a probable system, of course, in which no reincarnational cycles exist, and a cycle of reincarnations in which no probabilities exist."
—SS Chapter 11: Session 541, July 13, 1970

Deb, thanks for drawing our attention to Chapter 11 of Seth Speaks. I continued on to Chapter 12 "Reincarnational Relationships":

"Now all of this can be applied to your relationships in your reincarnational existences, and of course it also is highly pertinent to your current daily experience. If you hate another person, that hate may bind you to him through as many lives as you allow the hate to consume you. You draw to yourself in this existence and in all others those qualities upon which you concentrate your attention." (from "Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul (A Seth Book)" by Jane Roberts)

https://amzn.eu/2Fd64PJ

[Tob]

So here's a question: does Seth talk anywhere about how many earthly incarnations most humans go through? I almost remember coming across something like that, but it escapes me.

I have wondered about this. It seems that Seth told someone that they had only had 4 or 5 other lives. He also said that Jane and Rob were in their "last" incarnation. Others talk about having hundreds or even thousands of "past" lives. Slow learners?

According to Seth three incarnations are the minimum that is required: male, female, child. It looks that Jane and Robert had indeed just a handful of incarnations. For Robert Butts some alternative lives have been mentioned: a child and a pilot in WWII. Both of them died.

In Bashar's latest session on 'Reincarnation', questions were asked regarding the number of reincarnations in specific cases. His answer was: 'Between 80 and 80 000. Depending on the theme you are exploring and your current situation. Thus, the link to 80 'reincarnations' may be sufficient. One moment later it may be more.

I understand both of them, Seth and Bashar, that there is no real reincarnation, as these lives are 'all going on' at the same time. Leaves the question: who is living the reincarnational life, if You are 'here and now'? The answer is: another part of the entity/oversoul. (Solves the question what happens to your current identity when it comes to the 'next' incarnation as a toddler.)

The reincarnation issue can be compared to what is called Indra's net (you can google it). A system of pearls where each one is reflecting all the other pearls. And when you add a black spot to one of the pearls, the black spot is reflected immediately by all the other pearls as well. And vice versa. Actually this is an ancient description or model of what is today called a hologram.

Apart from that it looks that Seth is occasionally using the term reincarnational 'cycle'. I still do not know whether this is just a single life or rather a complex structure of 10, 100, or 1000 reincarnations. (In principle, a reincarnation is one life and not a reincarnational cycle).

I did read some Seth books over the years, but it is just now that I am reading the early sessions. It looks that his cosmology has been carefully established during those sessions, depending on the specific vernacular Jane Roberts and Ruburt Butts managed to build up in parallel by studying a variety of scientific books dealing with astrophysics etc.

It is clear that distortions did occur, but - according to Seth - his key messages laying the foundation for the structure of his cosmology were received without major errors (books one and two). No such information can be transmitted without any distortions, especially at the beginning and towards the end of such a session (Seth). But it looks that the basics of the 'physics of his cosmology' have been conveyed successfully. Seth was very proud (end of book two).

[Sena]

I understand both of them, Seth and Bashar, that there is no real reincarnation, as these lives are 'all going on' at the same time.

Tob, yes Seth does say that, but it is problematic, and I don't accept it. What is the point of reincarnation? It is to learn lessons. If all lives are simultaneous, how can we learn lessons?

[Kyle]

I understand both of them, Seth and Bashar, that there is no real reincarnation, as these lives are 'all going on' at the same time.

Tob, yes Seth does say that, but it is problematic, and I don't accept it. What is the point of reincarnation? It is to learn lessons. If all lives are simultaneous, how can we learn lessons?

Sena, if we (each life) are learning lessons specific to that life, then there is no dependence on previous lives, and so it doesn't matter what order they are lived in. It can still be that we belong to an oversoul or entity that is "eternal" from our point of view. But I am also willing to consider that the order of lives does matter in some way. Regardless, Seth rejects the concept of karma, though, doesn't he?

[usmaak]

Through reading TES1 and the part of TES2 that I've made it through, I've noticed that Seth spends a lot of time discussing how various people in Jane and Rob's story were working out issues from a previous life in their current life.  Seth talks a lot about how there is no time, yet will readily fall back on it when he needs to.

[Tob]

Through reading TES1 and the part of TES2 that I've made it through, I've noticed that Seth spends a lot of time discussing how various people in Jane and Rob's story were working out issues from a previous life in their current life.  Seth talks a lot about how there is no time, yet will readily fall back on it when he needs to.

This is not clear to me either. Occasionally, it looks that he seemed to 'admit' that there is an aspect of time passing at his environment as well, in particular when and as long he was communicating with Jane. In any case he did clearly state that he does not know everything. According to him the universe (the camouflage reality plane we are on) has been created by the entities together. At least by all of those entities, who were, are, or will be in the process of sending personalities (fragments) into a specific 3D life in 'our' reality. Even the future one's (entities) 'have been' involved in the 'creation' of our universe.

In UR 1 or 2 he is comparing the reincarnations with islands, at first discovering the existence of other islands looking entirely different, then weighing the pros and cons of the respective other styles of 'existence' (living) prevailing on the other islands, to finally reach a stage of systematic cross-fertilisation.

In concrete terms, he is then describing the life of a man who is married but who has a girlfriend, and this kind of social construct causes him problems. In another life he is a soccer player, successful, not knowing anything of the problems of the first one. At the moment the soccer player is in a match and it looks that his team is going to lose. But suddenly he is getting a chance to turn around the game. And while he is thinking "I will use this chance no matter what, I will not give up...we will not lose this game...' the man with the wife and the girlfriend in another reality is becoming optimistic again, thinking that in the end it may be possible to develop a good solution to his complicated situation. Similar to the islands: cross-fertilisation (ideas and motivation) across universes.

[LarryH]

This discussion brings up something that I have been wondering about. There are numerous people practicing hypnotic regression leading clients to past-life experiences that seem to be the origin of some problem or characteristic that the client has now, and the re-experience is often therapeutic, making a physical condition go away or whatever. There are also those who do hypnotic progression to future lives. However, I have never heard of anyone tracing a current issue to a future life. For instance, nobody discovers that the birth mark on their forehead is related to that future life in which the client will be shot in the forehead with a phaser.

[Sena]

However, I have never heard of anyone tracing a current issue to a future life. For instance, nobody discovers that the birth mark on their forehead is related to that future life in which the client will be shot in the forehead with a phaser.

Larry, it does appear that for us in physical reality, there is a clear difference between past and future. It appears that Seth is in a different reality where time does not exist.

P.S. Knowledge of the future is in the realm of science fiction:

"This book has two authors, one contemporary with its readers, the other an inhabitant of an age which they would call the distant future. The brain that conceives and writes these sentences lives in the time of Einstein. Yet I, the true inspirer of this book, I who have begotten it upon that brain, I who influence that primitive being's conception, inhabit an age which, for Einstein, lies in the very remote future. The actual writer thinks he is merely contriving a work of fiction. Though he seeks to tell a plausible story, he neither believes it himself, nor expects others to believe it. Yet the story is true. A being whom you would call a future man has seized the docile but scarcely adequate brain of your contemporary, and is trying to direct its familiar processes for an alien purpose. Thus a future epoch makes contact with your age. Listen patiently; for we who are the Last Men earnestly desire to communicate with you, who are members of the First Human Species. We can help you, and we need your help." (from "Last and First Men: A Story of the Near and Far Future (Sci-Fi Classic)" by Olaf Stapledon)

Kindle ediion: https://amzn.eu/ifeZwX9

(I have just started reading this book)

[LarryH]

Larry, it does appear that for us in physical reality, there is a clear difference between past and future. It appears that Seth is in a different reality where time does not exist.

Hypnotic regression puts us in touch with that different reality, and there should be no barrier to hypnotic progression to a future probable incarnation. There are those who claim to do it, though that doesn't prove anything.

P.S. Knowledge of the future is in the realm of science fiction

I don't think quoting a fictional book is evidence of that.

Anecdote: Early in my career, I took a friend to consult with a psychic who lived over 100 miles away from us. She paid for the consultation. After they were finished, the psychic looked at me and said (unsolicited), "When you get back to work, there will be a pile of rolled up blueprints on your desk. Someone has given up on a project, and it will be re-assigned to you." This psychic knew only that I was an industrial designer and did not know anyone that I worked with. When I arrived at work, there was a new pile of rolled up blueprints on my desk. I was told that a co-worker had been so frustrated with his project that he requested that someone else take it over. It was assigned to me.

[Kyle]

Hypnotic regression puts us in touch with that different reality, and there should be no barrier to hypnotic progression to a future probable incarnation. There are those who claim to do it, though that doesn't prove anything.

LarryH, that's a great story about the psychic! I had a few hypnotic regressions with a therapist, many years ago. Bottom line, I was not impressed with the findings, but I've read about people who had more meaningful experiences.

So, I have to wonder, does hypnotic regression "put us in touch with that different reality"? When my unconstrained imagination is given a blank slate on which to play, it seems like simply an exercise in divination; no telling what might come up. I just don't have that much confidence in past life regression.

Has anyone seen more impressive results from regressions? Have others experienced it differently?

[usmaak]

When I was a kid, my mother went to a "tea leaf reader."  I guess that is supposed to be a psychic who determines the future based on the patterns that tea leaves take on the bottom of a cup.  It sounds absolutely ridiculous to me and even as a kid, it sounded ridiculous.

According to the tea leaf reader, by the time her son (aka me) reached 27 years old, he would be wildly successful.  Mom was thrilled that her son would be successful.  I have it on good authority that at 27, her son was about to be kicked from university because of poor grades and that he had no idea what he wanted to do with his life.  So, kind of the opposite of what the psychic tea leaf reader said.

I've always thought that the idea of psychics was silly.  Perhaps that's because in all of the TV shows and movies that I've seen, it is silly.  I've struggled with the concept of things like this actually existing.  One of the basic tenants of the Seth material is that telepathy exists and that it continually occurs around us. That's how we all see the same thing, even though we've all created our own universe.  It's why sometimes I just shake my head at the Seth material.

Still, that story about the blueprints.  That is some compelling evidence for sure.

[Kyle]

I've always thought that the idea of psychics was silly.  Perhaps that's because in all of the TV shows and movies that I've seen, it is silly.  I've struggled with the concept of things like this actually existing.  One of the basic tenants of the Seth material is that telepathy exists and that it continually occurs around us. That's how we all see the same thing, even though we've all created our own universe.  It's why sometimes I just shake my head at the Seth material.

I think telepathy is so far from my "normal" awareness, and yet I still have indirect evidence of it because it affects me. It's easy to say that we don't see it and so who cares if it exists, but that only works if you ignore the more subtle patterns of your experience. Or not so subtle -- some people have wild stories that I mostly believe, and other stories just seem ridiculous, like you say.

Also, I make a distinction between the abilities of a well-respected professional psychic vs. my own (hypnotized or otherwise) psychic abilities. I would speculate that people (including me) typically have way too much "static in their signals" to pick up anything on their own.

[Sena]

P.S. Knowledge of the future is in the realm of science fiction
I don't think quoting a fictional book is evidence of that.

It is not evidence, but the writer of fiction might be a psychic who sees something of the future.

[Sena]

According to the tea leaf reader, by the time her son (aka me) reached 27 years old, he would be wildly successful.  Mom was thrilled that her son would be successful.  I have it on good authority that at 27, her son was about to be kicked from university because of poor grades and that he had no idea what he wanted to do with his life.  So, kind of the opposite of what the psychic tea leaf reader said.

usmaak, thanks for sharing your story. If you had been wildly successful you may not have been interested in Seth. Your Inner Self would have had reasons for taking you in a particular direction.

[usmaak]

According to the tea leaf reader, by the time her son (aka me) reached 27 years old, he would be wildly successful.  Mom was thrilled that her son would be successful.  I have it on good authority that at 27, her son was about to be kicked from university because of poor grades and that he had no idea what he wanted to do with his life.  So, kind of the opposite of what the psychic tea leaf reader said.

usmaak, thanks for sharing your story. If you had been wildly successful you may not have been interested in Seth. Your Inner Self would have had reasons for taking you in a particular direction.

I don't know.  I've always been very introspective.  I can't imagine that basic part of who I am would be any different.  In fact, it might have led to my being modestly successful in spite of everything that tried to keep me from where I am.

[Sena]

I can't imagine that basic part of who I am would be any different. 

usmaak, if Anthony Peake's book is correct (which I think it is), your Inner Self is likely to be very different from your Outer Self.

[usmaak]

I can't imagine that basic part of who I am would be any different.

usmaak, if Anthony Peake's book is correct (which I think it is), your Inner Self is likely to be very different from your Outer Self.

A basic part of who I am in this lifetime.  I am not sure what you're saying here.  I have always been introspective.  Seth doesn't say to ignore the outer self for the inner self, even if my inner self is radically different.  My outer self is the self that maneuvers through this physical life.  It's all the package of me.

[dougdi]

I've lost touch with a woman who was a fantastic psychic/advisor. She was a friend of my mom and never accepted cash from us. Her future predictions were not very good, but she could tell you what's going on in your life that you're not aware of and she was usually dead on in that respect. And I had the same thing with another, more known, psychic. So I optimized my sessions by not dwelling on the future. I can't find the first woman anymore, I assume that means she was there when I needed her and that lesson is done.

[Sena]

I've lost touch with a woman who was a fantastic psychic/advisor. She was a friend of my mom and never accepted cash from us. Her future predictions were not very good, but she could tell you what's going on in your life that you're not aware of and she was usually dead on in that respect. And I had the same thing with another, more known, psychic. So I optimized my sessions by not dwelling on the future. I can't find the first woman anymore, I assume that means she was there when I needed her and that lesson is done.

dougdi, thanks for sharing your experience.