~Speaking of Seth~

Quote from: Deb on January 14, 2024, 08:50:37 AM

Quote from: Cosmic on January 12, 2024, 11:50:30 PMDoes anyone else share this sentiment?

I understand what he was saying about mass events, such as pandemics and other manifestations and that makes sense to me. I don't see a connection with the second coming though, but have not really gotten that into that due to my lack of interest in religion. Sorry. 

That's understandable, thank you for engaging nevertheless. I'm not religious but I am fascinated by Seth's interpretations of religion.

Seth spoke about the changes inspired by the "second coming" would be in place by the year 2075 (approx).

Considering Seth said that dramatic change of societal structures usually take place after a pandemic, as a response to the biological protest, I can see how something like this would be needed in order to shake the status quo and move society's structure into one a little more embracing of conscious metaphysical thought.

Seth mentioned that the "second coming"

-"set up a new system of thought"

-" He will undermine religious organizations – not unite them"

-" His message will be that of the individual in relation to All That Is. He will clearly state methods by which each individual can attain a state of intimate contact with his own entity; the entity to some extent being man's mediator with All That Is"


Which would lead to a collective "remembering" of reincarnational dramas and generally a more metaphysically integrated society.

This would be hard to achieve in a society that is quite satisfied and set in its ways.

That's where I see the link; a pandemic shaking up belief systems enough to collectively embrace new concepts.

That's true, I misunderstood your post. Very sorry for that.

Yes maybe you are right, maybe I'm trying too much to understand the material intellectually.

Ideally, one should have an experience akin to an awakening or an out-of-body experience to truly advance in understanding, but in the absence of this (for me), I only have my intuition and reason to figure out the meaning and try to connect Seth concepts.
But perhaps I am not aware of certain things, and I would be sincerely curious to know more about your approach if you wish to share it.

Concerning the beliefs and expectations, yes one should leave them aside as much as possible but that's not so easy for example concerning the concept of time. For me I cannot imagine reality without time. The same with causality... 

You, likely, misunderstood my post ... There is a series of books "For Dummies", that attempts to present a subject in a simpler form, for those who might find it difficult to understand. It isn't about the readers being "dummies"; it isn't an insult. My suggestion wasn't meant as an assessment of the book you brought to attention, nor of you.

I looked on Amazon at the preview of that book, and it isn't something that I intend to give more consideration to. This is mainly because of the way I approach learning about reality, about myself, about what I should do. I look at others' opinions only as possible sources to be interpreted by myself using my inner guidance. Although everything can be symbolically interpreted, I prefer to select the sources that seem richer. I look even at the Seth Material as a source for interpretation, not as something to be intellectually approached.

When doing such interpretations, the first step is to leave aside all your beliefs and expectations in order to reduce the distortions they inherently induce.

For me this book is a little bit like Christie's cliff (downloaded from this forum) notes that I like to browse from time to time. It's a practical way to revisit Seth concepts, hoping to deepen one's understanding.
Also, it is maybe a good place to start for someone new to Seth in order to have a first idea. That's why I shared about it in the forum.

H. Wadi 

Quote from: wadihicham on January 14, 2024, 08:33:37 AMMaybe "Seth for the Bitter" would suit you better.

Uncalled for.

Hi @Cosmic, welcome to the forum. Yes, you did everything fine. 

I always thought The Birth of All That Is (BTW nice YT link, I'd not seen that one before) was incredibly clear and it is internally visual for me. I can just about see this consciousness slowly waking and becoming aware, like an eye opening for the first time. It's more believable to me than science and religious explanations of the "beginning."

Quote from: Cosmic on January 12, 2024, 11:50:30 PMDoes anyone else share this sentiment?

I understand what he was saying about mass events, such as pandemics and other manifestations and that makes sense to me. I don't see a connection with the second coming though, but have not really gotten that into that due to my lack of interest in religion. Sorry. 

Maybe "Seth for the Bitter" would suit you better.

Machine translation of a portion of

SESSION 778, 31 MAY 1976, 9:30 PM, MONDAY

Diagnostic tools such as x-rays sometimes work exactly as expected. However, there are complicated aspects. A patient who is afraid of a particular illness and preoccupied with the likely ailment can mentally influence the film by making it show conditions that are not present in the body. Confronted with the results of the X-ray, the patient can accept or reject the probable disease. The shock of the x-ray image creates a psychological charge which, in such cases, can immediately spread the condition to organs that were not previously affected.

I say "not affected" -- and these organs were, let's say, shadowed on a different level of activity.

(Long pause at 9:50 p.m.) I don't want to scare people, because in your system, x-rays serve a purpose -- and yet they are destructive to tissue. As a diagnostic tool, x-rays are often predictive in nature because the method itself is harmful and would ultimately lead to disease if used in healthy tissue.

Apparently, sick people are X-rayed most often. They are therefore the ones who suffer most from the instrument, and they are also the ones who, for whatever reason, have attracted likely patterns of illness. Your stressed emotional state has the most noticeable impact on the diagnostic tool itself.

Furthermore, such instruments are usually only used when there is already a suspicion of illness, and such scientific instruments have a high hypnotic authority. The patient tends to expect the worst.

In his condition, he can influence the film to capture an image of the most feared probability -- which may or may not correspond to the condition of the patient's tissue. If he accepts the image in view of the feared result, then his charged fear influences the tissue in such a way that the internal image of the body reflects the meaning of the x-ray.

 Under the same circumstances, the patient may, in the face of the so-called evidence, reject this probability, and the surgeon will be rather astonished, thinking that perhaps the patient's radiographs have been confused with those of another. In such cases, the patient still makes his own decision -- whether he wants to accept the respective illness or not. The doctor's authority is no longer just personal, but is to a certain extent underpinned by science and technology. Of course you don't go to the doctor because you're healthy. Few physicians focus on the healthy aspects of a patient's condition. Illness is a form of coping. The doctor's job is to find out what's wrong with the patient, and by that he usually means what's wrong physically. The diagnostic instruments often only provide fixed patterns into which mental or psychological problems can be translated. If there were no stigma surrounding so-called mental illnesses and personal eccentricities, then there would be fewer physical illnesses, because then the problems would be viewed as primarily mental or psychological, and there would be no need to project them into physical illnesses instead.


This does not mean that one would not die of natural old age, but rather that the body would age naturally. Above all, it means that chronic illnesses would not become a way of life -- and in the animal kingdom they are not a way of life.

(10:12 p.m.) Give us a moment... Even though x-ray images, for example, show "psychological" rather than physical images, they serve to give the patient an image of a condition, a probability, and to give him a point of reference so that he can can accept or reject the disease. However, if he rejects it, he has to assert himself against scientific evidence because he assumes that the film shows the actual condition of his body. He has no idea that he himself "manipulated" the film.

In addition, the X-rays cannot really take a so-called objective picture of the inside of the body because they influence the body during the recording. This effect alone can trigger reactions lots that previously only existed as probable events. What I mean to say is that the physical effects of X-rays, as you understand them, can be the overflowing factor. when it comes to a specific tissue. But that's not always the case.

This gave me an idea: if I could reach Seth with a suggestion, that would be for him to have dictated through Jane, or another, a "Seth for Dummies" book. Maybe he did it in another version of physical reality (?) Maybe there is one already, by another author, but that it isn't recognized as such?