A writer who claims to have channelled Jane Roberts

[Sena]

The book is "Afterlives: Firsthand Accounts of Twenty Notable People" by Joanne Helfrich. I thought she might be related to Paul Helfrich, but her website does not say so. I was intrigued by the fact that one of the chapters is on Jane Roberts; so I bought the book. I found that there was nothing very original. Jane Roberts appears to have said nothing about her Entity. So far I have only dipped into the book, but I am NOT recommending it.

[Deb]

I do believe Joanne is Paul's wife. It always sets off a red flag for me when someone says they channel either Jane or Seth. So far, as far as I can tell, no one claims to have channeled Rob, lol.

[inavalan]

I do believe Joanne is Paul's wife. It always sets off a red flag for me when someone says they channel either Jane or Seth. So far, as far as I can tell, no one claims to have channeled Rob, lol.

Channeling Jane would be less informative than channeling Ruburt. If Ruburt (not Jane) or Joseph (not Rob) were teaching entities, as Seth is, it would be more useful  to contact them than if they were focused on other activities.

On the other hand, everybody has an inner-guide that watches and tries to help them all their life long, as Jane had Seth, even if they aren't aware of that, and much of that guidance passes by unheeded, or only eventually heeded.

People's beliefs shape their realities. They should be aware of that, and make an effort to put aside their beliefs and expectations when they tap into the inner-reality. Otherwise distortions will get out of control, and they'll get confirmation of their inacurate beliefs and expectations.

If we compare what various legitimate dogmas and gurus describe, we can see that they are different interpretations of the same inner-reality, just each one of them distorted it differently.

Most of the time we don't have first hand access to the original channel's descriptions, so we are exposed to even more distorted versions. But, with some practice, in a light trance and with you inner-guide's help, you can quite well interpret a dogma or a guru's description, and extract more accurate (less distorted and truncated) information that fits your own level of evolvement and needs at the moment. Most everything contains multi-level symbolism, as the Seth material does too, and everybody can get from it what they are ready for. As an individual progresses, they can get a different, deeper interpretation than before, from the same text, phrase, image.

[Sena]

Channeling Jane would be less informative than channeling Ruburt.

inavalan, that is an interesting point. I looked at Joanne Helfrich's book more closely, and find that it has an introduction purpotedly by Jane Roberts! Helfrich's book was published in November 2021, and we know that Jane died in 1984!

Jane's introduction does refer to Ruburt:

"What you might think of as my oversoul—Ruburt—was involved with the transmission, too. The expertise from many lifetimes also fed the work through the experiences of both Seth and Ruburt. This was not something I took lightly. This required a great deal of energy and focus. With the help of my Robbie, I was able to tell the world about the afterlife, about consciousness, about so many things. However, it was not necessarily mine to tell. I was the receiver and writer who had to affix my name to the books. This was very similar to this situation in which Joanne hears my thoughts then transcribes them, all the while being helped by her own oversoul—or essence as we call it—and Rose, the sort of energy personality essence like Seth who serves as the overseer in the sense that I described earlier. The way I think about this role that Joanne and I found ourselves in is as an "author of authors" who has the ability to discern what's required to make something like this happen, then does so." (from "Afterlives: Firsthand Accounts of Twenty Notable People" by Joanne Helfrich)

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

[inavalan]

Channeling Jane would be less informative than channeling Ruburt.

inavalan, that is an interesting point. I looked at Joanne Helfrich's book more closely, and find that it has an introduction purpotedly by Jane Roberts! Helfrich's book was published in November 2021, and we know that Jane died in 1984!

Jane's introduction does refer to Ruburt:

"What you might think of as my oversoul—Ruburt—was involved with the transmission, too. The expertise from many lifetimes also fed the work through the experiences of both Seth and Ruburt. This was not something I took lightly. This required a great deal of energy and focus. With the help of my Robbie, I was able to tell the world about the afterlife, about consciousness, about so many things. However, it was not necessarily mine to tell. I was the receiver and writer who had to affix my name to the books. This was very similar to this situation in which Joanne hears my thoughts then transcribes them, all the while being helped by her own oversoul—or essence as we call it—and Rose, the sort of energy personality essence like Seth who serves as the overseer in the sense that I described earlier. The way I think about this role that Joanne and I found ourselves in is as an "author of authors" who has the ability to discern what's required to make something like this happen, then does so." (from "Afterlives: Firsthand Accounts of Twenty Notable People" by Joanne Helfrich)

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

I tried to find a video to see and hear Joanne Helfrich talking, to form an opinion about her and her claims, but couldn't find anything.

Reading that introduction, do you recognize Jane's style? She purportedly says there: "Joanne hears my thoughts then transcribes them" ...

By the way, what is "oversoul"? I am not familiar with the term. I haven't read any other of Jane's books except some of those channeled. I haven't read even "The Seth Material".

[inavalan]

Channeling Jane would be less informative than channeling Ruburt.

inavalan, that is an interesting point. I looked at Joanne Helfrich's book more closely, and find that it has an introduction purpotedly by Jane Roberts! Helfrich's book was published in November 2021, and we know that Jane died in 1984!

Jane's introduction does refer to Ruburt:

"What you might think of as my oversoul—Ruburt—was involved with the transmission, too. The expertise from many lifetimes also fed the work through the experiences of both Seth and Ruburt. This was not something I took lightly. This required a great deal of energy and focus. With the help of my Robbie, I was able to tell the world about the afterlife, about consciousness, about so many things. However, it was not necessarily mine to tell. I was the receiver and writer who had to affix my name to the books. This was very similar to this situation in which Joanne hears my thoughts then transcribes them, all the while being helped by her own oversoul—or essence as we call it—and Rose, the sort of energy personality essence like Seth who serves as the overseer in the sense that I described earlier. The way I think about this role that Joanne and I found ourselves in is as an "author of authors" who has the ability to discern what's required to make something like this happen, then does so." (from "Afterlives: Firsthand Accounts of Twenty Notable People" by Joanne Helfrich)

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

I tried to find a video to see and hear Joanne Helfrich talking, to form an opinion about her and her claims, but couldn't find anything.

Reading that introduction, do you recognize Jane's style? She purportedly says there: "Joanne hears my thoughts then transcribes them" ...

By the way, what is "oversoul"? I am not familiar with the term. I haven't read any other of Jane's books except some of those channeled. I haven't read even "The Seth Material".

I wrote a short post that I somehow lost ...

The only meaningful reference Seth made about "oversoul" was in the beginning of the session 638, to clarify his comparison from 637 about our whole body in relation to our cells, being like our entity to us. The oversoul would correspond to an organ in our body, obviously made of multiple cells, which are reincarnations (this is about the same identity, not about different individuals). The oversoul would be whatever reincarnates, being an intermediary level between our personality and the entity that it is part of. All this seems to be a fractal structure in consciousness.

[inavalan]

Unrelated, in session 637 I found the following remark:

In other terms and on other levels, this was represented in that "moment of reflection" that took place as man's consciousness emerged from that of animals.  (Note:  I did not say that man emerged from the animals.)

This suggests that consciousness, in its quest for value fulfilment, passes through various forms, corresponding to various biological kingdoms. This is an "evolution", but that isn't about the evolution at physical level between biological kingdoms.

He made a point that he didn't say that man emerged from animals. I find it to be an important remark.

[Sena]

I tried to find a video to see and hear Joanne Helfrich talking, to form an opinion about her and her claims, but couldn't find anything.

Reading that introduction, do you recognize Jane's style? She purportedly says there: "Joanne hears my thoughts then transcribes them" ...

By the way, what is "oversoul"? I am not familiar with the term. I haven't read any other of Jane's books except some of those channeled. I haven't read even "The Seth Material".

inavalan, you asked 3 questions.

(1) I found this video:



It is a long video and I have only glanced at it. Incidentally, I found the video on Paul Helfrich's website, and this confirms Deb's thought that they are husband and wife:

https://www.paulhelfrich.com/integral-psychology/presentations/essence-of-rose/

The woman in the video is Joanne, NOT Rose. Rose is a personality channelled by Joanne.

(2) I cannot really comment on whether Joanne's writing style matches Jane's style.

(3) "Oversoul" is a synonym for entity. I personally think oversoul is a better word.

[inavalan]

I tried to find a video to see and hear Joanne Helfrich talking, to form an opinion about her and her claims, but couldn't find anything.

Reading that introduction, do you recognize Jane's style? She purportedly says there: "Joanne hears my thoughts then transcribes them" ...

By the way, what is "oversoul"? I am not familiar with the term. I haven't read any other of Jane's books except some of those channeled. I haven't read even "The Seth Material".

inavalan, you asked 3 questions.

(1) I found this video:

https:// youtu.be/ rSQRo1cGkxE

It is a long video and I have only glanced at it. Incidentally, I found the video on Paul Helfrich's website, and this confirms Deb's thought that they are husband and wife:

https://www.paulhelfrich.com/integral-psychology/presentations/essence-of-rose/

The woman in the video is Joanne, NOT Rose. Rose is a personality channelled by Joanne.

(2) I cannot really comment on whether Joanne's writing style matches Jane's style.

(3) "Oversoul" is a synonym for entity. I personally think oversoul is a better word.

Thank you

[strangerthings]

I tried to find a video to see and hear Joanne Helfrich talking, to form an opinion about her and her claims, but couldn't find anything.

Reading that introduction, do you recognize Jane's style? She purportedly says there: "Joanne hears my thoughts then transcribes them" ...

By the way, what is "oversoul"? I am not familiar with the term. I haven't read any other of Jane's books except some of those channeled. I haven't read even "The Seth Material".

inavalan, you asked 3 questions.

(1) I found this video:



It is a long video and I have only glanced at it. Incidentally, I found the video on Paul Helfrich's website, and this confirms Deb's thought that they are husband and wife:

https://www.paulhelfrich.com/integral-psychology/presentations/essence-of-rose/

The woman in the video is Joanne, NOT Rose. Rose is a personality channelled by Joanne.

(2) I cannot really comment on whether Joanne's writing style matches Jane's style.

(3) "Oversoul" is a synonym for entity. I personally think oversoul is a better word.

I dont buy it (the video).

Nothing changes and thats just not right. She still talks as herself which I dont think is something one would do. The energy coming through would be her own voice?? Pfft ok
And it bugs me her eyes are always closed and I'm not feeling the energy!!!! Its just some woman talking.

She might be a wonderful woman but this is.... ugh

I would like to hear people she doesnt know talking to her and her dishing out some personal scoops like Seth does.

Until then nups!

[inavalan]

Based on what Joanne is selling on her website, I was reluctant to watch that video, but I gave it a try, and went through the first 45 minutes; I plan to keep watching. It is kind of what I expected, a little too New Agey. Still, I agree with a couple of things that Paul mentioned about the accuracy of channeling. The Helfrichs fall in the category of physical-reality-centered wider-reality believers, which is surprising about Paul who seemed to be a thorough Seth researcher. He tries too hard to bring science into the understanding of the wider reality.

[strangerthings]

Based on what Joanne is selling on her website, I was reluctant to watch that video, but I gave it a try, and went through the first 45 minutes; I plan to keep watching. It is kind of what I expected, a little too New Agey. Still, I agree with a couple of things that Paul mentioned about the accuracy of channeling. The Helfrichs fall in the category of physical-reality-centered wider-reality believers, which is surprising about Paul who seemed to be a thorough Seth researcher. He tries too hard to bring science into the understanding of the wider reality.

I didnt expound on her "message" bc why bother. But! "Be good people", reciprocity, and other stuff she says is just an eye roller for me.

A big fat red flag!

[inavalan]

Based on what Joanne is selling on her website, I was reluctant to watch that video, but I gave it a try, and went through the first 45 minutes; I plan to keep watching. It is kind of what I expected, a little too New Agey. Still, I agree with a couple of things that Paul mentioned about the accuracy of channeling. The Helfrichs fall in the category of physical-reality-centered wider-reality believers, which is surprising about Paul who seemed to be a thorough Seth researcher. He tries too hard to bring science into the understanding of the wider reality.

I didnt expound on her "message" bc why bother. But! "Be good people", reciprocity, and other stuff she says is just an eye roller for me.

A big fat red flag!

I just finished watching the video. I don't really consider a waste of my time, although I didn't get anything from it. This channeling session was more of a rambling, without substance in my opinion, and it didn't seem in line with the Seth material, as I understand it.

I do my own personal "channeling", but not being for an audience I don't have to "perform". Joanne's channeling is obviously more in line with Bruce Moen's approach that started with a rambling, and eventually transitioned to some degree in true contact.

In this session, Rose says that Joanne is only 20% of the message, which is likely incorrect.