Borderline between Seth's ideas and mental illness

[Sena]

If I believe that my mind can control the weather, am I mentally ill?

But the Galvins never were an ordinary family. In the years when Donald was the first, most conspicuous case, five other Galvin brothers were quietly breaking down.

There was Peter, the youngest boy and the family rebel, who was manic and violent, and who for years refused all help.

And Matthew, a talented ceramic artist, who, when he wasn't convinced that he was Paul McCartney, believed that his moods controlled the weather.

And Joseph, the most mild-mannered and poignantly self-aware of the sick boys, who heard voices, as real to him as life itself, from a different time and place.

The above quote is from this book: "Hidden Valley Road: Inside the Mind of an American Family"

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/50088631-hidden-valley-road

This is Seth on the weather:

"There are all levels of codified information, then—molecular, electromagnetic, chemical—and these are all interrelated. The natural world as you think of it depends upon these interactions. Your weathercasters try to predict the weather. They usually fail to a large degree. They deal with exterior patterns that, on that level, can be charted. The weather, however, is the result of the world's natural moods, and intuitive predictions would be far more predictable, for they would deal with those variables that cannot appear, or be predicted, at the exterior level.

In the past, farmers used dreams to plant their crops, and weather dreams were very popular—that is, people actually dreamed about the weather in the past because of their concern and their more intimate relationship with the natural environment. Times of famine were indeed predicted in dreams and guarded against. Kings and courts, chieftains, needed their soothsayers. Even though, now, you rely upon physical communication, portions of the species are still connected through those ancient means—though there is not the same need to become consciously aware of the information."

—TPS3 Deleted Session July 4, 1977

Does "creating one's own reality" include or exclude the weather?

[LarryH]

Does "creating one's own reality" include or exclude the weather?

If someone who is not Paul McCartney believes that he is Paul McCartney and also believes that he controls the weather, I think the former belief is the greater indication of mental illness. Weather is a mass event, so we participate in that en masse. The indigenous peoples who perform rain dances, whether or not the dances work to create rain, are likely not mentally ill, but have a strong cultural belief in creating weather. 

[Kyle]

If I believe that my mind can control the weather, am I mentally ill?

Hi Sena,

I knew a guy, maybe 40 years ago, who was convinced he could make clouds come together or disperse, which would be a limited kind of weather control. I never asked him to demonstrate this power. I guess it would qualify as mildly delusional thinking, but these days, when we are encountering new levels of aggressively toxic and deadly delusional thinking on a regular basis, and on such a large scale... what can we say? "Mentally ill" seems like the wrong term. But forgive me, that's getting off-topic.

Lately, I've been reading some of Neville Goddard's books (thank you St! :-), and I'm impressed with his way of communicating. He says that it is necessary to hold to your "feeling of the wish fulfilled" regardless of what the objective world is telling you, that it's crazy. Seth never goes quite that far, maybe, but they are both saying similar things about the power of imagination: If you listen to what the world at large is telling you, instead of what your inner senses tell you, what you hope for will not materialize.

So, I think the question of mental illness is a hard one because it depends on who you believe. If you diverge from reality far enough to endanger yourself or others, that is more clear-cut. Or at least it used to be, but I believe it will be true again someday soon.

In the past, farmers used dreams to plant their crops, and weather dreams were very popular—that is, people actually dreamed about the weather in the past because of their concern and their more intimate relationship with the natural environment.

This isn't hard for me to imagine, within a different world that existed long ago. But the thing that bothers me about so much of the Seth material is that he speaks so much of other times and other dimensions that we have no direct access to. My brain hurts from trying to imagine what he calls counterparts in any literal way — especially since the only counterparts we will ever have Seth's statements about are the ones already named by Seth.

This is a good example of something that we can only ever have a vague hunch about, with no possibility of a clearer picture. At least this is what I understand, maybe I'm missing something. I feel that Seth often overestimates the capacities of his audience (us).

[Sena]

He says that it is necessary to hold to your "feeling of the wish fulfilled" regardless of what the objective world is telling you, that it's crazy. Seth never goes quite that far, maybe, but they are both saying similar things about the power of imagination: I

Kyle, yes, I have used Neville Goddard's formula with some success. No I did not try to control the weather! What Goddard is saying is that it is the feeling, the emotion, that is important. Goddard did not say that you could control the weather just for fun, but if I have been looking forward to an outdoor event and I really like to have a bit of sunshine, I may be able to get that.

[strangerthings]

Ahhhh weather the storms ❤️
Wheth'er or not weat'her

Who is her where is at and we and me O my ether

To psyche with love
I expect from above
To be being my within
Already happened we win!

(I guess I along with plentiful others are "crazy"  ....😻

@Sena : "include"

[strangerthings]

@KylePierce
Have you ever really wanted to know about counterparts? Ask for a true dream about counterparts from the gates of horn...

[Bora137]

As we are not able to experience his reality I'd say it would be difficult judge if he is mad. Seth says madness is just brought about by beliefs about the self or reality that cannot be reconciled with each other or the ego. He may experience daily evidence that tells him he is controlling the weather and that he is Paul M. He could be another incarnation of the Paul M soul, there could be a lot of bleed through of consciousness from one to the other. Certainly by the conventional beliefs of our society he is mad. In some other society he could be regarded as quite sane.

However his ego might need to believe he is Paul M because he might need the 'power' of the Paul M image in order to be able to deal with some negative belief about himself or the world. I think in this second case he could be regarded as mad but again he would only be mad because he has adopted negative beliefs and needs a counter positive belief in order to prevent himself from going mad lol

I've struggled to find a definition of word madness on the internet - other than 'a state of being mad'. If we try to categorise this man's madness we might say he is 'delusional'  - he holds beliefs about his power and actual self that are not corroborated by objective observation. However beliefs are forming his reality. Then we arrive at the question is reality something that exists beyond our beliefs. Seth says no. However he also says we can hold false beliefs. This is a real rabbit hole...

[strangerthings]

@Sena you want cooler weather? More sunshine for your event?
Whatever it is ... feel the mud under feet, rain on your face, smell the rain, ye shall have rain

Feel the cool breeze as you drive to the bbq... relaxing wind cooling ad it blows through the windows of the car.... hand riding the cool breeze up and down

You absolutely nailed it

Feel. It. Real.

The other part is to let it go. 
If spontaneity compells you to smell the rain by all means smell it.
Smell the fresh clean sunshine warming your arms and face

Yes whatever it is

You can even make it freeze and burst glass 🤣

You are center of your world.
Seth made it very clear that others can only affect you if you think they can.

Everywhere your thoughts go you are the center of your world.

"My universe is intrinsically safe."
"I live in a safe universe"
Seth says dont say ... the universe is safe because it will enrage you ...
I suspect that is because you remove yourself from its center wording it that way! 💪🏻

[Deb]

If I believe that my mind can control the weather, am I mentally ill?

Does "creating one's own reality" include or exclude the weather?

Good questions. While I'm willing to consider I have a hand in my weather, I also feel weather is a mass event. To someone not familiar with the Seth materials, you would be considered a bit kooky. The same as if you'd tell someone they make their own reality on any level.

I did a quick Seth search engine search on the word "weather" and came up with 133 instances. Of course not all of them pertain to weather creation, but I thought these two were good in showing that while we do have some effect, it's not that simple. The weather does sometimes affect my mood, and since reading Seth I step back and examine whether it's the opposite. There were times where I'd changed my mood, and sure enough the weather changed. BUT, I'm living in Colorado, where the weather is no where near typical compared to what I'd grown up with in NJ. For instance, there can be a day where it's sunny, then rainy, snow, hot and cold (as much as 50° change in temp), hail, wind... or snowing in my front yard but not in the back. Which is not unusual. So hard to gauge what's really going on.

"There is a constant give and take between psychic and chemical components which actually cause your daily weather, your weather cycles, seasons, droughts and storms. This physical weather then in its turn affects and changes the psychic atmosphere of each individual. The force that causes your weather can be thought of as self-generating."
—TES5 Session 228 January 31, 1966

"As far as the effect of weather upon the moods of individuals, we do have something else. For the weather is created by you, on a subconscious level. The weather, at any given time, is a direct physical interpretation of the inner mass mind."
—TES8 Session 336 April 19, 1967

If I saw someone standing outside in a thunder storm yelling, "I MADE THIS!" I would think they were a little delusional. If they said they were Elvis Presley, I would definitely think they were delusional.

I knew a guy, maybe 40 years ago, who was convinced he could make clouds come together or disperse, which would be a limited kind of weather control.

Did he also stare at goats, lol?

I'd listened to Neville a few years ago, and I found the old timey sound of the recordings too distracting. If you have any specific recommendations for reading, I'm all ears.

[Kyle]

I'd listened to Neville a few years ago, and I found the old timey sound of the recordings too distracting. If you have any specific recommendations for reading, I'm all ears.

Here's a link to several workbooks which are based on his lectures on various topics: https://archive.org/details/NevilleGoddardWorkbooks

The ones I've found most interesting are three works from 1952 and 1954 on Awareness and Imagination.

I've listened to one lecture but I'd rather read it. The recordings have poor sound quality.

It got me wondering,  what are Neville's most common themes with Seth? Or maybe more interesting, what are the biggest contrasts between these two? First, I'd say Neville presents himself as a mystic and a self-help guru, while Seth treats mystical topics almost as a science writer, in my imagination at least. He is also a messenger, as is Neville. They both have created exercises for the reader, and are concerned with teaching paths of self-knowledge and inner growth through both ideas and practices. So, other people may have observations on what is similar and what is different.

[Kyle]

@KylePierce
Have you ever really wanted to know about counterparts? Ask for a true dream about counterparts from the gates of horn...

Thank you, @strangerthings. I do indeed want to know, but I haven't tried that, not yet at least. I imagine we agree that counterparts are imaginal and that they somehow parallel or mirror each other. This makes rich soil for growing wild metaphors.
So, great material for poetic improv!

[usmaak]

I was a weather forecaster in the USAF for a while.  Well, trained by USAF, in National Guard.  There are a lot of jokes out there about weather forecasters.  Hell, I even make some here and there because I live in a very difficult to forecast area.

Weather forecasting is not guess work.  It is science and a lot goes into it.  When I was doing it, we would get printed charts with pressures and temperatures at different altitudes.  We'd draw contours on them and use them to determine where low and high pressure areas were.  We'd use our understanding of fluid dynamics and physics to assist us in determining where things were moving.  There were hundreds of different tricks and tools for determining what was going to happen.

Weather forecasters don't guess.  They use science to predict.  As many ways as there are to accurately predict something, there are ways for it to get messed up and for busted forecasts.  Busted forecasts got forecast reviews with the intention of figuring out where the forecaster went wrong.  Learning experience.

Weather forecasting has gotten better.  I'm from New England originally and I remember so many winter storm misses when I was a kid.  They are much more accurate now.  Perhaps it's because computers are much more involved and because there are more forecast models.  I don't know how many forecasters still hand draw charts.  I'm guessing not many.

Do I believe that an individual can influence the weather?  Nope.  Not even a little, except perhaps on a mass events scale.  I think that people can perhaps perceive the weather differently.  But weather can change at a moment's notice, regardless of predictions.

[Sena]

While I'm willing to consider I have a hand in my weather, I also feel weather is a mass event.

Deb, that is an important point. Seth does actually talk bout mental illness in "The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events":

Paranoia is extremely interesting because it shows the ways in which private beliefs can distort events that connect the individual with other people. The events are "distorted," yet while the paranoid is convinced that those events are valid, this does not change other people's perception of the same happenings. . . .

What I want to emphasize here is the paranoid's misinterpretation of innocuous personal or mass events, and to stress the ways in which physical events can be put together symbolically, so that from them a reality can be created that is almost part physical and part dream.

You must of course interpret events in a personal manner. You create them. Yet there is also a meeting ground of more or less shared physical encounters, a sense plateau that offers firm-enough footing for the agreement of a mass-shared world. With most mental aberrations, you are dealing with people whose private symbols are so heavily thrust over prime sense data that even those data sometimes become almost invisible. These individuals often use the physical world in the way that most people use the dream world, so that for them it is difficult to distinguish between a private and a publicly-shared reality.

Many such people are highly creative and imaginative. Often, however, they have less of a solid foundation than others in dealing with a mass-shared reality, and so they attempt to impose their own private symbols upon the world, or to form a completely private world. I am speaking in general terms now, and in those terms such people are leery of human relationships. Each person forms his or her own reality, and yet that personal reality must also be shared with others, and must be affected by the reality of others . . ..

Now give us a moment ... As creatures dwelling in time and space, your senses provide you with highly specific data, and with a cohesive-enough physical reality. Each person may react to the seasons in a very personalized manner, and yet you all share those natural events. They provide a framework for experience. It is up to the conscious mind to interpret sense events as clearly and concisely as possible. This allows for the necessary freedom of action for psychological and physical mobility. You are an imaginative species, and so the physical world is colored, charged, by your own imaginative projections, and powered by the great sweep of the emotions. But when you are confused or upset, it is an excellent idea to return your attention to the natural world as it appears at any given moment — to sense its effect upon you as separate from your own projections.

You form your own reality. Yet if you are in the Northeast in the wintertime, you had better be experiencing a physical winter (humorously), or you are far divorced from primary sense data.

[Sena]

First, I'd say Neville presents himself as a mystic and a self-help guru, while Seth treats mystical topics almost as a science writer, in my imagination at least

Kyle, I agree with you on that. I find the Seth quote in my post above very scientific and philosophically correct. Neville was different, but his writings have their own merits.

[strangerthings]

Finding the similiar teachings between Seth and Neville must be experienced before a fully formed understanding can even begin. Otherwise it is merely talking points.

Neville would never in a million years consider himself a "guru" ever ever ever.

Nor would Seth or Jane or Rob or anyone of us from my perception.

"There are no ascended masters. Banish this superstition. Your belief in a master is the confession of your slavery. Only slaves have masters. (Neville)

"The gods do not come kneeling." (Seth)


If you remove all the labels in the bible and replaced every name and city and allegory with states of mind... states of consciousness.... and story telling for learning ... that would be your "difference"

Seth teachings are our own and Seth had always said this. "My blessings are your blessings."

It doesnt take Neville's teachings for the story of your Inner Self to unfold within.

It doesnt take Seth and Jane and Rob either.

Their passed on oral traditions.

It takes you to realize you are the creator of your world. And when you graduate from reincarnation school or the earth school or whatever name someone refers to it as, for the classes you enrolled in to be complete, then that has to happen minus victimhood. 

We chose to be here. So we chose ourself and are chosen. The sender and the sent.

The story of Inner Man is divine, individuated and unique to each person.

"My god is not your god and my god is not from your world "

My Entity is not of this world. My father is not of this world. My Inner Self is not of this world. My Soul is not of this world.

But a portion of my consciousness is directly focused here now. By choice.

My Center is not your center.

"I and the father are one."

Multidimensional Being

Being Multidimensional.



How big ... IS...."All That IS" if everyone has their own?

How many mansions do you really have?

ALL OF THEM

You are the center of your universe.

The 12 aspects of the mind, parts of self orbiting the inner self, the states of mind, the twelve around the one, the 13...

All One

You can always rewrite your story and your choice to fully believe your new story.

Seth and Neville both say this.

"You can make blocks to block your view." (Seth)

Christ is the Inner Self.

Chi rise T

"Lift up the burdens of man and the cross you bare and set them free so you are free"

If you have your world (and each person has this unlimited abundance) and all held facts were lifted to a divine state of being..by you, what would happen?

Mass consciousness... is......?

Do you merely want power? You already have that. Be as wise as a serpent and as gentle as a dove. This to me means forgive and free. The way I do this is by investigating my interpretations. Im holding all the keys and cards. To my life.

Mental Illness and creating weather are two different things. I have to ask firstly how many drugs is that person taking by his persciptors, 😁, how long had the belief been this that or the other..... I have too much missing information about mental "illness" for my input to even make a valuable enough contribution. But!!! Weather is fun and thunder talks back.❤️

Forgive yourself for ye know not what ye were doing at the time.

Forgiveness to me, is really taking your power back. ❤️❤️💃

All the unteachers are sayin the same thing anyway.
If they are not leading you back to ...you are creator of your world ..."run as fast as you can away from it"

I also am applying that to the news 🤣 they lead me down ... mud that doesnt stick to anything it is just a goo mess. And I have to clean it 🤣

You know what I mean? We can find devils anywhere if thats what we are lookin for. 🤠

Seth to me talks about science and fine details I in particular love to know. Creations with love for self and others would be sustainable energy etc.

But all we have to do is ask in our dreams why a peanut plant was made. And all shall be revealed if your desire is true .....and......if one has those eyes to see .....and those ears that hear ...one will see and hear in another dimension mansion how this plant is what it is ....teehee


If thine heart be true ask and ye shall receive
Feel it real requires thine heart to be with want not need.

What is it that Seth says? Something like ....You will never leave this place if you believe you are a victim......

Gurus requires mental slavery in adoration in belief you are higher than student or others
Slaves are victims.

❤️💪🏻

There isnt much difference between the two unteachers other than method of delivery.
They both teach all the answers are within you and where and how to do this.
Seth says your Inner Self is Christ. So does Neville lol
🤷🏼‍♀️❤️😂

Seth even mentions "your eternal child" in the 43rd cd ❤️
Finally!

If I only knew then what I know now 😆😆😆🤠
Talk about a mental uneasy belief structure ... say this " I am Jesus and the father and my Inner Self my inner man my inner being is Christ" to yourself .

They are only words. We put the belief structure on them listening to the news of others lol
Now say your own name - its the same thing lol
Say your own name feel it real that you are one with your intuition, imagination, spontaneity, and you are god of your world a divine multidimensional beingness being 🤣❤️

Just keep tappin that lol

"What is coming at you is coming from within you" ( Seth)

As always ... all of that 👆🏻 Is merely my interpretation atm

[Kyle]

Forgive yourself for ye know not what ye were doing at the time.

Like some people say about the 1970s 'cause they just can't remember.

Forgiveness to me, is really taking your power back. ❤️❤️💃

This is a really good thought to keep in mind.

When I try to imagine you, I can't help but see electric blue hair.
That is, in a good and poetic way, ya know? Electric Uranian blue with sparks flying off like a Tesla coil.
Did you know that Uranus' magnetic field blinks on and off forever, and it rolls around its orbit on its equatorial belly?

I looked for another term instead of 'self-help guru' for Neville and I am fine with 'spiritual teacher' or something like that, not 'holy man' but certainly a spiritual teacher.

[Deb]

Here's a link to several workbooks which are based on his lectures on various topics: https://archive.org/details/NevilleGoddardWorkbooks

Thank you!

First, I'd say Neville presents himself as a mystic and a self-help guru, while Seth treats mystical topics almost as a science writer, in my imagination at least.

I'm also curious about the commonalities and differences, although St and Sena did a good job covering that. If Seth and Neville are both Speakers, then the information would be pretty much the same, just presented differently. Seth does seem to present mystical topics almost like a science writer, but he often can do so in the most poetic and profound way.

Yet there is also a meeting ground of more or less shared physical encounters, a sense plateau that offers firm-enough footing for the agreement of a mass-shared world. With most mental aberrations, you are dealing with people whose private symbols are so heavily thrust over prime sense data that even those data sometimes become almost invisible. These individuals often use the physical world in the way that most people use the dream world, so that for them it is difficult to distinguish between a private and a publicly-shared reality.

That's a timely chunk of information for me. Recently I've been interacting with someone who is paranoid schizophrenic. As a Seth fan, I've been wondering if the person's interpretations of their own personal reality were just delusions, or if somehow they were actually creating that reality for themself. That entire quote from Mass Events explained it for me. Thanks Sena!

As always ... all of that 👆🏻 Is merely my interpretation atm

Amen, lol. You've outdone yourself, I loved all of what you said! And yes, I also loved the line about forgiveness is taking your power back. That's huge. Forgiveness of self, and of others. Letting go.

[Sena]

Christ is the Inner Self.

St, this is Neville's view, which makes sense to me. Seth talked about Christ "coming back" in 2080 or thereabouts, which does NOT make sense to me.

[Sena]

Recently I've been interacting with someone who is paranoid schizophrenic. As a Seth fan, I've been wondering if the person's interpretations of their own personal reality were just delusions, or if somehow they were actually creating that reality for themself. That entire quote from Mass Events explained it for me. Thanks Sena!

Deb, thanks for sharing your experience. Schizophrenia is one of the last great mysteries. Psychiatrists don't really understand it. I read that pharmaceutical companies have almost given up investing money in research on drugs for schizophrenia, as they prefer more profitable areas.

P.S., I accidentally clicked on Report to Moderator!

[usmaak]

Christ is the Inner Self.

St, this is Neville's view, which makes sense to me. Seth talked about Christ "coming back" in 2080 or thereabouts, which does NOT make sense to me.

Of all of the stuff in Seth that I've struggled with (and there's quite a bit), his stuff on Christ and religion is way up there.  Any time Seth has given a date for something, he's been completely wrong.  At least as far as I can tell.  As a prognosticator, he's pretty poor.

That and I don't believe that a Christ ever existed, except maybe as a dude in history that perhaps had some insight into how to live a good life.  The bible is a storybook for teaching people not to be sh1tbags that somehow turned into a bunch of religions that largely teach people to be sh1tbags.

I struggle with absolutes when it comes to the Seth material.  In my mind, something is either correct, or it proves itself wrong by being wrong about things.  This is probably not the best way to approach life, but...

[Sena]

Of all of the stuff in Seth that I've struggled with (and there's quite a bit), his stuff on Christ and religion is way up there. 

usmaak, it may be worth having a look at Neville Goddard. strangerthings has posted links to free downloads. He does talk a lot about Christ, but not the usual religious stuff.

[Kyle]

Of all of the stuff in Seth that I've struggled with (and there's quite a bit), his stuff on Christ and religion is way up there.

usmaak, it may be worth having a look at Neville Goddard. strangerthings has posted links to free downloads. He does talk a lot about Christ, but not the usual religious stuff.

I wonder how much of Seth's focus on Christ is related to Jane's Catholic upbringing. Did she outgrow that, or was it always part of her baggage?

[Deb]

P.S., I accidentally clicked on Report to Moderator!

Ha ha, I don't think it went through, at least not as far as I can tell. Maybe because it was my post and I'm the moderator.

I wonder how much of Seth's focus on Christ is related to Jane's Catholic upbringing. Did she outgrow that, or was it always part of her baggage?

My personal feeling is that was the main reason Seth talked so much about Christ. I don't think Jane ever got over her upbringing, and didn't like the information on Christ. She often blocked information about religion. Rob's childhood was not steeped in religion like Jane's, and to me seemed to be the one who was curious and asking all the questions. I think he was Protestant, but don't quote me on that. Jane's childhood was horrible, worse than we've been told. To think the church and Catholic orphanage were a shelter in the storm of her home life is pretty dismal to me, but they gave some order to her life compared to the chaos at home. I find it amazing that she was as functional and productive as she was. I think Rob was her anchor and a father figure. He was about 10 years older than her, and I recently found out that her first husband, Walter Zeh, was about 2 years older than Rob. Jane had her baggage for sure, but she turned out vivacious and scrappy, her will was not broken by her past.

Here's a recent Facebook post from Ron Card, quoting from The Way Toward Health. We've probably all read that book, but for me it was long ago and some of the things in it didn't mean enough to me at the time for it to stick. The parts about Seth being omnipotent (down by the envelope tests in the quote) and Jane's fear of starting a new religion, are pretty telling. I'll put the quote in a spoiler box so it's not so overwhelming.

Sorry but you must log in to view spoiler contents.

[Kyle]

My personal feeling is that was the main reason Seth talked so much about Christ. I don't think Jane ever got over her upbringing, and didn't like the information on Christ. She often blocked information about religion. Rob's childhood was not steeped in religion like Jane's, and to me seemed to be the one who was curious and asking all the questions. I think he was Protestant, but don't quote me on that. Jane's childhood was horrible, worse than we've been told. To think the church and Catholic orphanage were a shelter in the storm of her home life is pretty dismal to me, but they gave some order to her life compared to the chaos at home. I find it amazing that she was as functional and productive as she was.

This brings up an odd thought for me (well, for me it's par for the course :-)... If Jane reacted as many children react to chaos and abuse,  it might involve the formation of a secondary personality. I imagine others have brought up this possibility but I can't identify any. But rather than asking, is Seth a secondary personality, I want to ask if Ruburt is! In that case, Jane-as-Ruburt is the channel. Okay, that makes it more complicated, maybe... but then Ruburt gains more than just a name. And since Ruburt is Jane's larger entity then this makes good sense, that Ruburt is the bridge between Jane and Seth.

Just ask yourself: have we ever seen Jane and Ruburt together in the same room? I daresay we haven't. 

Yes, this may be an obscure question, but that never stopped me before.

[usmaak]

I want to know if there's ever been any serious discussion about whether Seth is real or just something invented by Jane.  I'm not saying that she did it as a fraud or anything.  And I know from reading the first couple of TES books that it was a serious concern of hers.

[Deb]

If Jane reacted as many children react to chaos and abuse,  it might involve the formation of a secondary personality. I imagine others have brought up this possibility but I can't identify any.

Well that's the million dollar question for us inquiring minds. I had a lousy and somewhat abusive childhood, do not have any secondary personalities. When my first marriage was on the rocks, I went to a marriage counselor and was told I was amazingly balanced despite my childhood experiences.

Jane questioned herself and Seth, Seth commented on that too (he said no), and Jane was examined by several psychiatrists and psychologists who all decided she was okay. To say that everyone who had a crappy childhood is automatically permanently damaged is generalizing.

I had trouble in the beginning accepting the whole channeling concept. What I ended up with was that regardless of where the Seth information came from, it resonated with me and felt right. We will probably never have solid answers as to whether Seth was real or invented by Jane. And that would be a great new topic. Maybe we can figure it out.

[Sena]

I want to know if there's ever been any serious discussion about whether Seth is real or just something invented by Jane.  I'm not saying that she did it as a fraud or anything.  And I know from reading the first couple of TES books that it was a serious concern of hers.

usmaak, yes, there has been a serious academic study of this question, by Paul Cunningham. The pdf can be downloaded here:

https://www2.rivier.edu/faculty/pcunningham/Research/Problem_of_Seths_Origin.pdf

This is the conclusion of the study, which you may or may not agree with:

Either Seth is or is not a production of Jane Roberts' psyche. In either case, there are important
implications for understanding the nature of human personality, the multidimensional nature of reality,
and the characteristics of consciousness. If Jane Roberts is an hysteric, it is a pity that there is not a
formula describing the way by which such hysteria may be induced or learned by others so that they too
could develop such powers and abilities. If she is insane, it is an insanity which gave her ability, without
instruction, to produce a philosophy, psychology, and ethical system of a high order. If she is possessed,
then it is a "divine-possession" that has come to express a way by which we may learn to re-possess
ourselves. Let us hope that Seth is a psychological breakthrough of Jane Roberts at the very least. The
"dreaded" alternative is that we have witnessed a power outside of the psyche which requires our giving
attention to a theory of supernormal causation.

It is interesting that Cunningham puts the word "dreaded" within inverted commas. I think what he means is that scientists would dread that conclusion because they will have to question their materialistic assumptions.

Cunningham is a Professor of Psychology:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paul-Cunningham-14

[usmaak]

Either Seth is or is not a production of Jane Roberts' psyche.

Waffle words.  But interesting.  Thanks for the link.

[Kyle]

Well that's the million dollar question for us inquiring minds. I had a lousy and somewhat abusive childhood, do not have any secondary personalities. When my first marriage was on the rocks, I went to a marriage counselor and was told I was amazingly balanced despite my childhood experiences.

Deb, that's such a good point. It would be more accurate to say a small number of children, since this disorder is quite unusual, I think.

[Deb]

Either Seth is or is not a production of Jane Roberts' psyche.

Waffle words.  But interesting.  Thanks for the link.

One of the things I love about this forum is finding out how differently people interpret things. To me it was not Paul waffling, but instead thinking in terms of black and white—Seth is either real or not; pick one. Which now makes me wonder, since reality is really shades of grey (oh gawd, The Monkees...), if there are other possibilities. I'll have to think about that some more. Paul really does believe Seth was real. I had some correspondence with him a few months ago and he sent me his original Jane/Rob letters etc. His reason for writing that paper was to get psychologists and/or parapsychologists interested in Jane/Seth to do a formal study. Jane and Rob said no thanks, and the groups he approached to publish his paper and set up a study had not heard about Jane or Seth and didn't really care. Too bad (sincerity there). Wondering, with all the channelers that have been, has anyone really done a serious study on any of them?

Well that's the million dollar question for us inquiring minds. I had a lousy and somewhat abusive childhood, do not have any secondary personalities. When my first marriage was on the rocks, I went to a marriage counselor and was told I was amazingly balanced despite my childhood experiences.

Deb, that's such a good point. It would be more accurate to say a small number of children, since this disorder is quite unusual, I think.

Well after I wrote what I wrote, I started to wonder about all of the other channelers... who is real, who is not; if the honest ones all have secondary personalities (I was thinking specifically of Cayce and Goddard), what their childhoods were like, and if channeling is really just another mental disorder.

There have been other academic papers written about Jane and Seth, I just need to pull together what I've collected and put them up here somewhere.

BTW I'll be sharing something fun here soon, maybe tomorrow. I came across a recording in Mary's stuff, of Richard Bach talking about his one and only OBE that Seth helped him achieve. He also was a believer, but declined being interviewed by Mary because at some point he wanted to detach himself from Jane/Seth, considered them too controversial and no longer wanted to be associated. I spent a couple of hours typing up a transcript of his story (it's really only about 8 minutes, but the sound was so incredibly bad that I had to dink around with it a lot).

[Kyle]

Well after I wrote what I wrote, I started to wonder about all of the other channelers... who is real, who is not; if the honest ones all have secondary personalities (I was thinking specifically of Cayce and Goddard), what their childhoods were like, and if channeling is really just another mental disorder.

My take on this is not that a secondary personality (or a hysteric) would be a fake or invalid channel. When I suggested that Ruburt might be a sub-personality of Jane's, I still find it easy to believe that Ruburt is a true conduit who connected Jane with Seth. And that Seth is just who he says he is. So I hope that's clear to anyone who might have wondered what I meant.

[Sena]

My take on this is not that a secondary personality (or a hysteric) would be a fake or invalid channel. When I suggested that Ruburt might be a sub-personality of Jane's, I still find it easy to believe that Ruburt is a true conduit who connected Jane with Seth. And that Seth is just who he says he is. So I hope that's clear to anyone who might have wondered what I meant.

Kyle, it is the billion-dollar question. If I believe that Seth is the voice of a person who had previously lived and died, that means I believe in life after death. Seth complicates matters by saying that there is no "previously" and no "after".

Another interesting side issue is that a true Buddhist would not believe in Seth because Buddhists deny the existence of a "soul".

[LarryH]

If I believe that Seth is the voice of a person who had previously lived and died, that means I believe in life after death. Seth complicates matters by saying that there is no "previously" and no "after".

Sena, in my view, Seth has many personalities living in simultaneous time, which from our perspective are at various points in our timeline. So only from his perspective, there is no before or after, but from our physical context, "life after death" is a valid concept. To take the question of time out of the equation, we may have multiple lives, period.

[Kyle]

Another interesting side issue is that a true Buddhist would not believe in Seth because Buddhists deny the existence of a "soul".

Sena, I have to ask, what do you think the Buddhist doctrine of reincarnation means? What is it that reincarnates, if not a soul?

[Deb]

Hey guys, Sena started a new topic today that I feel relates well with where we're going with this one.

"Jane Roberts, Seth and the matrix (not the movie)"

https://speakingofseth.com/index.php?topic=2435.msg19943#msg19943

[Sena]

Sena, I have to ask, what do you think the Buddhist doctrine of reincarnation means? What is it that reincarnates, if not a soul?

Kyle, this is the essential illogicality about the Buddhist doctrine. Keith Hill's matrix theory (see the other thread) may provide the answer. As I understand the matrix theory, there are no discrete souls.

I found this article which may be relevant, but I haven't read it yet:

https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/85282/7/64.4.burley.pdf

[Kyle]

Sena, I have to ask, what do you think the Buddhist doctrine of reincarnation means? What is it that reincarnates, if not a soul?

Kyle, this is the essential illogicality about the Buddhist doctrine. Keith Hill's matrix theory (see the other thread) may provide the answer. As I understand the matrix theory, there are no discrete souls.

Sena, I can hardly imagine that Keith Hill has resolved the issues debated by Buddhist lamas over many centuries. Matrices, topologies, and other mathematical objects are just that: mathematical objects that can make you feel as if something has been resolved. Actually, I believe, it is an analogy that allows interesting parallels, but that's about all.

[Sena]

Sena, I can hardly imagine that Keith Hill has resolved the issues debated by Buddhist lamas over many centuries.

Kyle, not Keith Hill on his own, but Seth as interpreted by him. I realize that the matrix is an analogy or illustration. It seems to me preferable to visualizing the "soul" as a blob floating in space. It is probably the blob version of the soul that Buddhism rejects.

[Kyle]

Sena, I can hardly imagine that Keith Hill has resolved the issues debated by Buddhist lamas over many centuries.

Kyle, not Keith Hill on his own, but Seth as interpreted by him. I realize that the matrix is an analogy or illustration. It seems to me preferable to visualizing the "soul" as a blob floating in space. It is probably the blob version of the soul that Buddhism rejects.

Sena, this is suddenly a bit comical to me. If you ever read Carlos Castaneda's books, you may have encountered Don Juan's description of how an initiate sees the human soul/body. Sort of like a glowing "egg" which is a lot like a blob but with a nice shell.

[strangerthings]

Christ is the Inner Self.

St, this is Neville's view, which makes sense to me. Seth talked about Christ "coming back" in 2080 or thereabouts, which does NOT make sense to me.

I think he says it wonderfully here in the pics :
 https://speakingofseth.com/index.php?msg=12884

O, Divine Inner Fire
 

[strangerthings]

Just ask yourself: have we ever seen Jane and Ruburt together in the same room? I daresay we haven't. 

If you want your Entity name like Ruburt, ask for it.
It will not be given if you NEED it.
A joyous desire....

Jane is the flesh part (my interpretation)

It is in the Seth books I am sure someone has a quoted text somewhere about the classes getting their names.
Some were already given by Inner Self to the members of the class and some were asked. Some were denied because of their "need".

Joseph and Ruburt