~Speaking of Seth~

I am listening to The Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle on Audible.

I really like some of it alot!!

does anyone please have any comments or thoughts about it?   

Charlie

Hi Charlie, Hi All,

I should start out by saying that, for me personally, I think that Seth comes the closest to anyone I've ever found, in regards to describing almost everything that I've come to believe.  This doesn't mean that Seth is necessarily right, or that he's right for everyone.  However, some of Eckhart Tolle's ideas are not in alignment with Seth's, and so I find that I don't necessarily agree with some of the things that Eckhart Tolle has to say.


I've never read the book you're talking about but some years ago, I read his book, "The New Earth".

While reading this book, I found that I was continuously distracted by wondering about who he was, what was his background, and where did his ideas come from.  Was he, for example, just another person expounding or rehashing his personal religious beliefs? Did this information come from a channeling or an automatic writing? Did this come from his personal intuitive insights? Did this information come from some combination of all of the above?

My issue here has to do with the possibility that his information is nothing more than perhaps a rehash of one or more of the ideas expressed by some of the world's major religions. I'm very skeptical of many of the ideas that are expressed by all of the world's major religions.  It seems to me that every one of them are based upon at least some ideas that are erroneous; some more than others.


I don't believe that I ever found an answer to the questions I had about Eckhart Tolle. However, the Wikipedia site below, may provide us with some of these answers.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eckhart_Tolle


I will say this, based upon what they say about him in this Wikipedia article, he definitely appears to be well-read.


-jbseth

thank you for your excellent thoughtful reply jbseth.

I am only a few chapters into The Power of Now.

my opinions, so far:
he has a lot to say.
I think some of it is utterly superb.
very much in agreement with Seth.

some of it is not in agreement with Seth.
I'd love to hear Eckhart say what he thinks about Seth, and talk about things that they differ on.

anyway, I am trying to be open minded, and take the good ideas to heart.
I am finding some of Eckharts ideas to be extremely helpful.

I highly recommend for you to check it out.

a super cool thing is that with Audible, we hear him read his own book.
this is excellent. we hear him read his writing, putting emphasis on the words, the way he means it.

when you READ a book, you have to guess sometimes about that.
(same as when you read posts on forums on the internet.)   

I would love to hear your thoughts about this specific book.
I think you are very bright and wise.

Hi Chasman.

Well, you've got me curious and so I went ahead and placed a hold on this book from our local library. It may be a while before I get it but at least, I will eventually get this book.



In his book, "The New Earth", in the first chapter, under the sub-heading, "Spirituality and Religion" Eckhart Tolle, says the following:

"But the ego is destined to dissolve, and all of its ossified structures, whether they be religious or other institutions, corporations, or governments, will disintegrate from within, no matter how deeply entrenched they appear to be."

This concept, this idea of dissolving the ego, so that you can become aware of a higher state of awareness or a higher state of consciousness, is fairly typical of some Eastern philosophies (Hinduism and Buddhism).




Seth however, has a very different take on this.  Seth actually warns against trying to dissolve your ego. He talks about this in some of the later TES books, since a person that Jane and Rob knew, a Dr. Eugene Bernard, apparently attempted to just this, dissolve his ego.



Seth says that we have an outer self (an outer ego) and an inner self (an inner ego). In addition to this, Seth also says that just below the outer ego self, we also have a group of other selves (our reincarnational selves) and these other selves are waiting in the background to step up and take over as the ego, if needed.

According to Seth our outer ego self is here, on purpose, to experience this 3D reality. That is, we and our outer ego have a purpose for being here.

Seth says that the outer ego, focuses upon the things that it wants, needs, or desires. The inner ego then creates those things in your reality. If you focus on good things, your inner self creates those good things. If you focus on bad things, the inner self creates those bad things. Your inner self creates those things that you focus on.

A persons "beliefs" also play heavily into this. If you want something but don't believe that you deserve it, then your inner self will follow your beliefs and it won't create it for you in your reality.

Seth also tells us that the inner self constantly communicates with the outer ego. It does this primarily via intuitive thoughts and impulses. The outer ego however, is not always aware of this and sometimes as a result of beliefs, the outer ego is closed off and not receptive to this type of information and so our outer ego doesn't always receive these communications.




Here's the thing, according to Seth, if you attempt to dissolve your ego, as some Eastern philosophies suggest, then one of your other selves, will step forward and take the place of the outer ego that you just dissolved.  As a result of this, the person that you were, will change and you will be a different person.

If you dissolve your outer ego, your inner self will not come forward and take over as your outer ego, because that is not its purpose. Its purpose is to create your reality, the reality of your outer ego.





Interestingly enough, I think that this type of thing may very well have occurred to Eckhart Tolle himself.  I went to Amazon.com and did a "Look Inside" at the book, The Power of Now".   In the Introduction of this book, he talks about a powerful experience that he had, not long after his 29th Birthday.  During this crisis point experience, he says the following:

"I cannot live with myself any longer." This was the thought that kept repeating itself in my mind. Then suddenly I became aware of what a peculiar thought it was. Am I one or two? If I cannot live with myself, there must be two of me: the "I" and the "Self" that "I" cannot live with. "Maybe," I thought, "only one of them is real."

In response to this crisis point, I think that one of his other personalities stepped up and took over his outer ego.


In the book, "The Nature of Personal Reality", Chapter 6, Sessions 628 and 629, Seth talks about a person who visited Jane and Rob. Seth identifies this person as "Augustus".  In this book Seth tells us quite a bit about this person Augustus. Seth says that he had two major personalities, Augustus One, who was rather meek and mild, and Augustus Two, who was rather forceful and aggressive. Seth talks about these two selves rather extensively here. Then, in several other places in the TES books, Seth talks about some of our other selves, including those of people who have multiple personalities.

It seems to me that sometime after his 29 birthday, Eckhart Tolle, had some sort of crisis point and after this crisis point, another personality stepped forward and took over for him.  I'm sure that some of Eckhart Tolle's insights come from this experience of his and from the new personality that he now seems to be.


Seth's ability to talk about these types of subjects, and the fact that much of what he says seems entirely plausible, and is often consistent with much of the other things that he talks about, is one of the reasons why I find much value in what he has to say.

- jbseth

Hi Chasman, Hi All,

Given the way that some people write or express themselves, sometimes it becomes necessary to accept, overlook, or ignore, some of the things that they say, along the way, when they are in the process of making a point of some specific issue.

In the process of doing this, sometimes we forget to go back and take a look at some of the things that they said along the way.

Sometimes when we forget to go back, we fall prey to accepting or believing some idea(s) that we otherwise might not accept or believe (and visa versa).

The issue here is that sometimes, when we go back and take a look at some of these things that were said along the way, we discover that we don't necessarily agree with them.  This then, will sometimes also impact our other beliefs about the point that this person was trying to make.



For me, this is an issue that I have with "some" of Eckhart Tolle's writings. Here's an example of what I'm talking about.





In his book, "A New Earth", in Chapter One, Eckhart Tolle, talks about the fact that if we look into humanities religious and spiritual traditions there are two core insights. The first one being, "the realization that the "normal" state of mind of most human beings contain a strong element of what we might call dysfunction or even madness."

He then goes on to tell us that in Hinduism, they call this "maya" or the veil of delusion. In Buddhism, it is recognized as "suffering" and in Christianity, it is referred to as "original sin."

Then, as he leads us up to his second insight, some pages later, he finally tells us that this second insight, contains the good news of the possibility of a radical transformation of human consciousness.

Then he says that in Hinduism, this is "enlightenment", in the teachings of Jesus it is "salvation" and in Buddhism, it is "the end of suffering".






Here, I completely agree with him that this first core insight does seem to exist in many of the world's religions. 

However, I personally don't believe that it's "normal" for people to contain a strong element of dysfunction or madness. I do agree with him that some people do contain a strong element of dysfunction or madness. However, I don't accept his belief that this is "normal" for people.

I do think that many people probably do have this belief, but I also think that they have it because of religion.  That is, many people believe in some religion and many of the world's religions do express this concept.

However, my personal issue here is that this isn't "normal" for humans. We aren't born this way, it comes largely from religion instead.



Here's my issue with this. There was no discussion about this issue in his book.

It seems to me that this is one of those ideas that it became necessary to accept, overlook, or ignore, while he was leading us to his main point, which was concept the concept that this second insight, contains the good news of the possibility of a radical transformation of human consciousness.



Does this make sense?



-jbseth

thank you jbseth for all you wrote.

everything you said makes sense.
and is valuable.
I appreciate all of it.

I will do my best to make an intelligent reply.
I do not speak authoritatively on Tolle or Seth.
you have an amazing grasp of the Seth material.
and your thoughts about Tolle are excellent.

I hear you about the differences between the Tolle way of knowledge and the Seth way, about the ego (outer).

I super love a lot of what Tolle is saying though. and it is stuff that is in agreement with Seth.

we are not our thoughts and beliefs and feelings.
we are the self who has them.

do not identify with your thoughts and beliefs and feelings.
(in addition to this, of course Seth says that we can choose and change them if we want to. I haven't heard Tolle talk about this yet, but I'm only part way into this book.)

they both say the point of power is in the present.
and suggest strongly to be in the present.
as much as possible.


I'm guessing here, that the Seth material is much more comprehensive, and in depth.

and here's a kind of wild guess,
on the points where Seth and Tolle differ, Seth is right.

its just that I like some of the stuff that Tolle says in The Power of Now so much, that I really wish you could hear it, and tell me what you think.

maybe get a free trial of Audible and get that book and listen to it?

I think my approach with this book, is going to be, take what I like and leave the rest.

thanks a lot again jbseth.   

Quote from: jbseth
"But the ego is destined to dissolve, and all of its ossified structures, whether they be religious or other institutions, corporations, or governments, will disintegrate from within, no matter how deeply entrenched they appear to be."

This concept, this idea of dissolving the ego, so that you can become aware of a higher state of awareness or a higher state of consciousness, is fairly typical of some Eastern philosophies (Hinduism and Buddhism).

jbseth, it seems to me that this is "nihilistic". Eckhart seems to go further than the Eastern religions. Buddhism says that the ego does not exist but the "dharma" (the teaching) will last forever. Seth's teaching makes more sense to me.

Hi Chasman, Hi All,

Chasman, your words carry much wisdom and your messages are always so positive and upbeat, I appreciate your comments.

You seem to be very open-minded and I think that you're absolutely doing the right thing; as you say, "Take what you like and leave the rest". That's always a great way to approach these various subjects.

While I'm a huge fan of "Seth's" and I have read quite a bit of his material, I don't agree with him on some of the things that he's said. It is definitely, OK to also keep an open-mind, while reading Seth as well. Again, following your advice, take what works and leave the rest. 

Seth does talk to and about his idea that, "The Point of Power" is in the Present" in his book, "The Nature of Personal Reality".



I just checked our library system and my requested "Power of Now" book by Eckhart Tolle, is presently being transported between one of the 7 or so local libraries. Typically, this only takes a day or two.  I somewhat expect to get notified in a few days, that this book will be ready for me to pick it up. Perhaps in a week or so, (I'll need a couple of days to read it) I'll have some thoughts to share with you on this book. 

- jbseth

awesome, thank you very much jbseth!!   

you are very kind.

I super look forward to your thoughts and comments after reading it.

and thank you for your post Sena.

Hi Sena, Hi All,

Sena, I thought that I'd check the word, "nihilism" just to make sure that I wasn't misinterpreting it.  It was my understanding that it means something like, "life is meaningless".


On Google, it says the following:

nihilism: the rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless.



While I did understand the word to mean "life is meaningless", I didn't pick up on the concept of the rejection of moral principles.  I'm assuming that when you used the word "nihilistic" here, you were referring to this "life is meaningless" concept and if so, in regards to that, I completely agree with you.

This also reminds me of the atheistic scientists who say that after you die, your consciousness leaves your body and then there's nothing. While I can understand why they believe this, given the state of the various scientific reductionist theories (consciousness is nothing more than an electro-chemical reaction in the brain), I definitely don't agree with them here.   



My mother had a NDE, during a surgery when I was maybe 2 years old. I can remember talking to her about this when I was a teenager, several years before Raymond Moody published his books on this topic. It's one thing to hear or read about NDE's from strangers. However, it's quite a bit more impactful, when it comes from someone you know, love and trust.

She told me that her experience was absolutely wonderful. While she didn't go through a "tunnel" or see any other family members or friends, she told me that she felt surrounded by the most wonderful loving feeling that she's ever had. It was so incredible that she didn't want to leave it and didn't want to return to earth. But for some reason she did.

My Mom was not only "not" afraid of dying, but she was looking forward to it, when her time came. She wasn't suicidal, she just didn't have any fear of death, after having had this experience.



Seth talks about the after death experience in "Seth Speaks" and given what my Mom and others have to say about NDE's and what others have to say about OBE's, I think that what Seth says here makes a lot of sense to me than that of either: 1) the atheistic scientists or 2) the followers of all the major religions.


- jbseth

Quote from: jbseth
On Google, it says the following:

nihilism: the rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless.



While I did understand the word to mean "life is meaningless", I didn't pick up on the concept of the rejection of moral principles.

jbseth, I am not saying that Eckhart Tolle is rejecting moral principles. How I see it is that anyone who advocates the dissolving of the ego is a nihilist, because without the ego we are "nothing". In Latin, "nihilo" means "nothing". Seth is clearly not a nihilist.

https://www.latin-is-simple.com/en/vocabulary/phrase/595/

Hi Sena, Hi Chasman, Hi All,

I was curious and so I thought that I'd take a look at Huston Smith's book, "The World's Religions", Chapter 1, which is on Hinduism.  In this chapter Huston Smith says that in regards to the question, "What is a human being?" he says that Hinduism says, besides a body and a mind, the following:

"Underlying the human self and animating it is the reservoir of being that never dies, is never exhausted, and is unrestricted in consciousness and bliss. This infinite center of every life, the hidden self, or Atman, is no less than Brahman, the Godhead. Body, personality and Atman-Brahman – a human self is not completely accounted for until all three are noted."


Given this then, I'm thinking that Hindu's who practice dissolving the ego aren't necessarily nihilistic. They may, in fact, believe that life has a meaning, if nothing more than perhaps to achieve, Samadhi.  However, this idea of attaining this Atman-Brahman realization by dissolving the ego may be erroneous. 

Seth says we have an outer ego, and inner ego and an entity. He also indicates that humans won't get to some Atman-Brahman realization by dissolving their egos.  If what Seth says here is correct, then this idea of attaining this Atman-Brahman realization by dissolving the ego is erroneous. 


-jbseth

thank you again jbseth and Sena.
I appreciate your thoughts very much,
they are very helpful.

Seth says this is a school for us.
we are learning to handle energy in constructive ways.
we are here for an education.

our outer egos are here to learn, not be dissolved.

thank you both for pointing out this major difference between Seth and Mister T (Tolle).

I'll say again, I hear Mister T say a lot things that I really like a super lot.
(not I pity the fool though.)   

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._T

and it is easy for me to get caught up in the momentum of liking what he's saying,
and forgetting what Seth says.
and given a clearer head, I'm most likely going to agree with Seth.

Quote from: jbseth
Given this then, I'm thinking that Hindu's who practice dissolving the ego aren't necessarily nihilistic

jbseth, I prefer Seth's view of the ego:

"You usually think of your conscious mind as your ego. It is directed toward action in physical life. Many schools of thought (long pause) seem to have the curious ideas that the ego is inferior to other portions of the self, or "selfish," and imagine it to be definitely of a lower quality than the inner self, or the soul.

In the first place, it is really impossible to separate portions of the self, and we make such distinctions only in an effort to explain the many facets of the personality. (Long pause.) It is generally understood, then, that you do have an ego, directed toward exterior activity, and in those terms (underlined) you also have an inner ego. It is also conscious, and is the director of all automatic interior activity (emphatically).

Most people do not realize that they can indeed have access to this inner awareness. This inner ego or inner self should not be thought of as superior to your ordinary mind. It should not be thought of, really, as something separate from your ordinary mind. Your ego and your ordinary consciousness bring into focus all of your physical experiences, and make possible the brilliant preciseness of physical experience."

—Way to Health Chapter 3: March 18, 1984

"A confident ego is indeed a prerequisite for psychic venturing, for it is only the confident ego which ultimately feels secure enough to give leeway to the inner self in the long run.

[... 2 paragraphs ...]

For safety's sake a firm relationship between the ego and its environment should be considered a prerequisite for serious or extensive psychic investigation. The ego must have something to come back to. This is extremely important."

—TES3 Session 90 September 21, 1964

"The "outer ego" and the inner ego operate together, the one to enable you to manipulate in the world that you know, the other to bring you those delicate inner perceptions without which physical existence could not be maintained. There is however a portion of you, the deeper identity who forms both the inner ego and the outer ego, who decided that you would be a physical being in this place and in this time. This is the core of your identity, the psychic seed from which you sprang, the multidimensional personality of which you are part." (from "Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul (A Seth Book)" by Jane Roberts)

https://amzn.eu/7mFtRNw

Quote from: chasman
our outer egos are here to learn, not be dissolved.

thank you both for pointing out this major difference between Seth and Mister T (Tolle).

Charlie, thanks for starting this useful discussion.

Quote from: chasman
I'll say again, I hear Mister T say a lot things that I really like a super lot.(not I pity the fool though.)   

Hi Chasman,

I love your sense of humor.  "I pity the fool" - Mr. T.

I just caught that one. 



This makes me think of Hannibal Smith.

I think this is a great conversation that we're all having here and "I love it when a plan comes together."

-jbseth

Hi Sena, Hi Chasman, Hi All,

In his book, "The Nature of Personality", in Session 647, Seth talks about the issues involved with those religions that preach a "denial of the flesh" philosophy.

I've captured some of what he says here in the spoiler below. While this is somewhat long, about 10 paragraphs, I think that what he has to say here is really enlightening.






- jbseth

wow, awesome posts Sena and jbseth.

thank you both for the kind words.

you are both brilliant and wise.

and that quote from NOPR is soooo good jbseth.

Quote from: jbseth
The concept of nirvana (see the 637th session in Chapter Nine) and the idea of heaven are two versions of the same picture, the former being one in which individuality is lost in the bliss of undifferentiated consciousness, and the latter one in which still-conscious individuals perform mindless adoration.

jbseth, thanks for the quote. I certainly don't want to go to the Christian heaven because it will be so boring.

Quote from: chasman
and that quote from NOPR is soooo good jbseth.

Hi Chasman, Hi All,

Yes, I absolutely agree.



Before I discovered Seth, I became somewhat aware of some of the worlds other religions. I came across a book by Huston Smith on the religions of man and really delved into it.  I found that for myself, Taoism, Buddhism and Hinduism all really caught my eye, partly because they were so much different than Christianity. 

I was really fond of the way that Taoism seemed to relate to nature. I found that its concepts like, "the Way", "the flow of life", and "bending like a reed in the wind", really seemed to speak to my spiritual side.  I also really liked the way that Hinduism thought about the Atman, the Brahman, the Godhead that exists inside of each of us. Then along with this, I also felt that there was some ancient wisdom in Buddhism.


To be honest, at that time in my life, I was so impressed with these Eastern religions that doubt that I ever would have contemplated what Seth says in this session in NOPR.

Seth really was an awesome "Speaker".


-jbseth

awesome jbseth.

in my youth, I was especially very attracted to Taoism. and Buddhism too.

amazing that a certain energy essence personality who frequented Elmira, NY
put me on a quite different, religion free path.

Hi Chasman, Hi All,

Yesterday I got the Eckhart Tolle book, "The Power of Now" from our local library and so far I've read both the Introduction and Chapter 1. I've also taken some time and looked throughout this book, here and there, just to get an idea of some of the topics that he discusses and what he says about them.


I do agree with some of what he says about "Now". In NOPR, Seth stresses that "the Point of Power is in the Present". However, some of my ideas, from Seth, about the present, the past and the future appear to be much different than those of Mr. T.


I've noticed that Mr. T uses some of the exact same words and phrases that Seth used, like "psychological time" but their definitions are very different. Thus if we end up talking about any of these words, we'll have to stay on top of who's definition we're talking about.


I've noticed that he and I have very different ideas about many of the topics that he talks about in this book. Here I'm talking about such ideas as the mind, who we are, "Chi", the "Unmanifest", the true nature of Space and Time and "Conscious Death" for example. I wouldn't say that we are polar opposites, but we come from very different places. Many of my takes on these ideas come directly from Seth's teachings.  It seems to me that many of Mr. T's ideas come more or less from Eastern (Hindu, Buddhist) thought. As a result of this, I suspect that he and I may not agree on many of the things that he says.


In the introduction, Mr. T talks about how, up until almost his thirtieth year, he lived in a state of almost continuous anxiety interspersed with suicidal depression. Wow. That must have been horrible. Then he talks about how, one night, he said that he couldn't live with himself any longer. Next, the thought occurred to him; am I, this "I" or am "I" the self that "I" can't live with any longer? Following this he says that he was drawn into what seemed like a vortex of energy and then he says he has no recollection of what happened after that.  The next day, when he was awakened, his life (his personality?) completely changed.

Wow, what a powerful story.

It seems to me that he experienced a major personality change after this event.




Given the nature of his horrible previous life experiences, I can see how these horrible experiences may have heavily influenced his thinking about:

1) how life is filled with pain and suffering. This may be why he's attracted to Buddhist thought. I believe that the concept that life is suffering is the first "Noble Truth" of Buddhist thought and Buddhists teachings.

2) how pain and suffering is a major focus of life.

3) Having a rather pessimistic overview of life (where the proverbial glass of water is viewed as being half empty and not half full.)

4) having, "little use for the past". No doubt this probably influences his thinking about "the past" as a topic in general as well.


Along these same lines, I can also see how his amazing, life changing, experience could also have very well influenced him in such a way that he firmly believes in the truth of the Hindu concepts that, below the conscious mind, there exists an Atman, an Brahman, a connection with the higher self or the God Head.



I can see how, given the nature of his life experiences, he may be a person who strongly believes in many of the Eastern based (Hinduism, Buddhism) philosophies. As a result of this, much of what he writes about throughout his books is in alignment with these Eastern based philosophies.





Chasman, have you finished this book yet? What do you think so far?



-jbseth

thank you for your excellent thoughts so far jbseth.

I have not finished it yet.
and would like to not say any more, until you finish, so as not to influence you.

Hi Chasman, Hi All,

I just finished reading the book, "The Power of Now", by Eckhart Tolle.



I find that a whole lot of what he talks about and how he sees the world and reality is very different from the way that I see these things given my Seth based point of view. There are very many differences here between our two separate points of view, on very many different things. 

I've noticed that he seems to have a very Eastern (Hinduism / Buddhism) point of view in regards to many of his ideas. This accounts for a lot of this difference between us.

I also noticed that he never seems to talk about "beliefs" (unless I missed something). Seth talks about these quite extensively in NOPR.



There are some things that he talks about, that I do agree with. One of these is his understanding of the present, the "Now", which is an important point. Seth says that the point of power is in the present.

In Chapter 5, "The State of Presence," he says, "Everything that exists, has Being, has God-essence, has some degree of consciousness." I also agree with him here.

Along with this, I also kind of get what he's saying about his concept of "Presence". Whenever I meditate, I often I get to a point where I seem to be in a place that is completely devoid of my ego exterior world environment. It's a point where there's peace and quiet and it seems that neither space nor time exist.



In regards to his beliefs and mine, we are so much different in so many areas that I don't believe that I could talk about all of these without writing about them for perhaps 2 months and I'm not planning on doing that.

However, if there's some interesting point or points that he made that you'd like to explore, I'm game.


- jbseth

you're awesome jbseth. thank you so extra very much for all of that.

I super like some of what he says.
and I try to interpret and frame some of what he says in Sethian ways.

I think Seth and Mr. T diverge hugely on some important things.

from what I've heard so far, Mr. T isn't very big on educating the ego.
he's much more into kissing it goodbye.
watching and observing it.

Seth is more into educating it.
and if you want to, change it.

huge huge different approach to life.

that said, some of the things that Mr T says, I love so much.

I'm just repeating myself from above, but I think he says
that we just create these egos. its all made up.
and our minds thrive on trouble.
making trouble and suffering.

but I like the Seth views about most things better.

Thomas Jefferson went through the Bible and cut out the stuff he thought was bullschtein.

that might be interesting to do with the Power of Now.

peace, and thanks again so very much.
I super appreciate all you said.
its very much helping me to clarify, and see clearer.

Hi Chasman, Hi All,

In his first chapter, which is titled, "You are not your Mind". Mr. T. talks about this subject quite a bit.  I get one of the points that he's trying to make. You are "being".

That is, you are the essence that can sometimes be experienced while in meditation where all thoughts come to a stop and where you reach a point where you are no longer focused upon 3D reality. This is a point where there's this place of no space and no time (one example of the "Now" point) where "beingness" (or "Presence") can be experienced. I've experienced this many times while meditating and it's a wonderful experience. Very refreshing.

I do agree with him, yes, we are that. We are "beingness".

However, I also think that the "self" that we are, is also many other things as well. Or you could say, that "we" are or have many other selves, as well, only one of which is the self who is experienced as this "being" self that he talks about.

(I think that a good example of this many "selves" concept was experienced by Mr. T. himself, in his thirtieth year when he had that incredible experience where he asked the following question. "Am "I" one or two? If I cannot live with myself, there must be two of me: the "I" and the 'self' that 'I' cannot live with.")

I'd say that we are also a self who has a physical body in a 3D reality, a self who also has a mind and who also "is" a soul. In Seth Speaks, Seth says that we don't "have" a soul, we "are" a soul, or something like that, and I agree with him on this; we are a soul.

Now, this self, that is a soul, that has a 3D physical body and a mind, also has thoughts. It has thoughts, desires, beliefs and feelings (emotions). 

So here's another thing. This same self that has a 3D body and a mind, also has a "purpose" and a "reason" for being here. Otherwise we never would have been born.



Near the end of Chapter 1, Mr. T writes the following:

"The Buddha says that pain or suffering arises through desire or craving and that to be free of pain we need to cut the bonds of desire."

"All cravings are the mind seeking salvation or fulfillment in external things and in the future as the substitute for the joy of Being. As long as I am my mind, I am those cravings, those needs, wants, attachments, and aversions, and apart from them there is no "I" except a mere possibility, an unfulfilled potential, a seed that has not been sprouted."



This type of philosophy, that Mr. T. espouses, completely denies the concept that we are a self who was born into 3D reality with a "purpose" and a "reason".

Furthermore, it also denies that it is often our desires and wishes that move us in the direction of working on those activities that help us to accomplish our purpose, our reason for being here.


I don't agree with him that all desire is the mind seeking fulfillment in external things as the substitute for the joy of Being.  Desire is the motivating force that moves us to accomplish our purpose in being here. It is not a substitute for the joy of Being, although I will admit, it could be used for this purpose as well. 

I also don't agree with him that as long as I am my mind, I am those wants and needs and apart from them there is no "I".  The self, the "I", that experiences these desires, is the self who was born into this 3D reality.  This self, this "I" is different than this other "being" self. But it is just a valid and just as important as this other "being" self.


Much of Mr. T's philosophies are based upon these concepts that deny this self. Many of his concepts come with this issue already embedded into them and some of these are difficult to recognize.

Some of the things that he says in this book, that I find that I don't agree with, have to do with concepts that are based upon this issue.



- jbseth

Quote from: chasman
Thomas Jefferson went through the Bible and cut out the stuff he thought was bullschtein.that might be interesting to do with the Power of Now.

Hi Chasman, Hi All,

I have a copy of "The Jefferson Bible". I bought it more out of curiosity than anything else. I think I would have sliced and diced the Bible, much more than he did.

In regards to, "The Power of Now" book, if I were to slice and dice it, it would be interesting to see what the finished book would look like.

-jbseth

jbseth,
   
   thank you so very much.

you are so brilliant, so wise and so good.

I have many thoughts.

some of the stuff that mr t says, I emphatically superlatively love and adore.

and some or much of this is very Sethian.

other stuff is in complete disagreement with Seth.

I thank you again so very super much for pointing this out to me.

you are far wiser than I.

all of that said, the sum total of all of my thoughts and experiences,
puts me in this place:

I don't know for sure.

I don't know for a sure about a lot of the big questions.
I want to believe Seth that we have immortal souls.
I super want to.
but I don't know it for certain.

I try to be open minded.
and maybe someday I will feel more certain.

perhaps I will have some experience or read something,
and I will be sure.

as for now, I continue to read and think
and try to connect with my inner self.

I am so grateful to you for all that you write.

same thing for other people here, Deb and Sena.

as for mr t, it is an interesting thing, how much I like some of what he says,
and then don't agree so strongly with other stuff,
mostly because of my strong affection for the Seth material.

peace jbseth,
Charlie

Hi Chasman,

OK. Here we go. The wisdom of the ages - according to jbseth. 


Regarding what is true in our search for truth, life and meaning such as in regard to issues like, do we have a "soul", there are 2 quotes that I think really speak to me about this issue. One of these comes from Seth and one doesn't, but basically they both remind me about something that I believe is very significant and true.


Quote 1: (from Soren Kierkegaard)

"There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true."


Quote 2: (from Seth, "Seth Speaks", Appendix, Session 596)

[...] Those who persist, therefore, in shielding their truths from questions threaten to destroy the validity of their knowledge.

Again, those who are so certain of their answers will lack that need to know that can lead them into still greater dimensions of understanding.




For many questions like, do we have a soul, I don't know the actual answer. What I do is look into what people have to say on the topic from all different kinds of viewpoints. I also remind myself of the 2 quotes above understanding that I could be wrong either way.  Then, I ask myself, if I was a betting man (which I'm not) and I had to make a significant financial bet on the correct answer to some question like, do we have a soul, one way or the other, knowing that somehow the correct answer to the question did exist and could be divulged, which way would I bet.

And then, understanding the implications of these 2 quotes that I could be wrong either ways I looked at it, based upon my knowledge and life experience, I would answer this question to what I believe is most likely to be true.

In this process, however, I remind myself about these two quotations. In addition to this, I also constantly remind myself, that nobody else, regardless of what they say, can actually answer this question, for me. I've learned that while some people, are absolutely convinced that they know the answer to some question, sometimes, these people are so convinced that they are right, that they don't see the truth of what Seth says in the second sentence of his quote above.


I've also learned that just because some answer seems right to me, this doesn't mean that it's right for someone else, and visa versa, nor does it mean that it's actually right.


Because of this, please don't change any of your answers to what you get from Mr. T and his book, just because I may see things differently than you. You have to follow what is true for you.

While it may appear that perhaps I'm trying to influence you to see things the way I do, I'm really not doing that. Instead, I'm testing what I think, against the things you say, to see if what I think is really valid.

Thanks for your willingness to participate in this dialogue.



-jbseth

jbseth,

         I thank you from my depths of my being.
I am going to read your post later with supreme joy.
(I'm saving it for later when I can give it my full attention.
and for the purpose of giving me something to super look forward to doing.)

also, here is a video I hope you enjoy.
the song I have loved since I was young.
I very much admired and was inspired by this man's spiritual nature and searching for truth and light and all that  jazz.
the video has an interesting story too.
from the comments:

"The female dancer in George Harrison's "What is Life" music video is Emma Rubinowitz a member of the San Francisco Ballet, and Esteban Hernandez.

In 2016, George Harrison's widow Olivia and son Dhani held a worldwide contest through A global video production platform to determine what filmmaker from anywhere would provide the video for Harrison's 1971 song What is Life.

The winner was Brandon Moore from the United States."
>>I found Brandon online and thanked him for this video."

Hi Chasman, Hi All,

Hey, I think that you've tapped into some inner truth here that perhaps exists between us. I've always been a huge Beatles and George Harrison fan.

That was an awesome video. Thank you for sharing that. 



I like all of George Harrison's songs.  As I understand it, the Beatles became followers of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. I think that this association probably influenced George's thinking in terms of spiritual ideas. Nothing wrong with that. I think that George was probably the most spiritually minded member of the group.

One of my favorite George Harrison songs is "My Sweet Lord". They had some interesting things to say about this song (some things that I didn't know) in the wikipedia site below.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Sweet_Lord



While I rag on these eastern philosophies regarding this denial of the flesh idea, there is actually a whole lot about Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism that I really relate to.

I think that one of the most amazing books that I've ever read is "Autobiography of a Yogi", by Paramahansa Yogananda. There were so many incredible story's in his book about various yogi's and what they did (and even in one case some stories about a Christian nun - Therese Neumann) that it really opened my mind to life's possibilities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therese_Neumann


Then there's the Dalai Lama. He's such an awesome and peaceful human being. My wife and I went to see him, maybe 10 years ago, when he gave a talk in Portland, Oregon.

In Huston Smiths book, "The World's Religions", under the chapter on Buddhism, he writes about the Dalai Lama. Here, in talking about how the function of the Dalai Lama is not accurately likened to the Pope, he says, "That function is to incarnate on earth the celestial principle of which compassion or mercy is the defining feature." How awesome is that?

I think that the Dalai Lama comes very close to expressing that principle.

What a concept for a religion to have. One of their leaders is a person who role models, compassion or mercy. Wow, that's powerful.

Along with this, I also really like the writings and wisdom of Thich Nhat Hanh, another Buddhist.

This is the reason why, I keep trying to say that while I don't align with many of Mr. T's ideas, I also don't want you to change whatever thoughts you may have about them.

While I align with many of Seth's teachings, I've been deeply moved by many of the spiritual ideas of these eastern philosophies.


-jbseth

Quote from: jbseth
Hi Chasman,

OK. Here we go. The wisdom of the ages - according to jbseth. 


Regarding what is true in our search for truth, life and meaning such as in regard to issues like, do we have a "soul", there are 2 quotes that I think really speak to me about this issue. One of these comes from Seth and one doesn't, but basically they both remind me about something that I believe is very significant and true.


Quote 1: (from Soren Kierkegaard)

"There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true."


Quote 2: (from Seth, "Seth Speaks", Appendix, Session 596)

[...] Those who persist, therefore, in shielding their truths from questions threaten to destroy the validity of their knowledge.

Again, those who are so certain of their answers will lack that need to know that can lead them into still greater dimensions of understanding.




For many questions like, do we have a soul, I don't know the actual answer. What I do is look into what people have to say on the topic from all different kinds of viewpoints. I also remind myself of the 2 quotes above understanding that I could be wrong either way.  Then, I ask myself, if I was a betting man (which I'm not) and I had to make a significant financial bet on the correct answer to some question like, do we have a soul, one way or the other, knowing that somehow the correct answer to the question did exist and could be divulged, which way would I bet.

And then, understanding the implications of these 2 quotes that I could be wrong either ways I looked at it, based upon my knowledge and life experience, I would answer this question to what I believe is most likely to be true.

In this process, however, I remind myself about these two quotations. In addition to this, I also constantly remind myself, that nobody else, regardless of what they say, can actually answer this question, for me. I've learned that while some people, are absolutely convinced that they know the answer to some question, sometimes, these people are so convinced that they are right, that they don't see the truth of what Seth says in the second sentence of his quote above.


I've also learned that just because some answer seems right to me, this doesn't mean that it's right for someone else, and visa versa, nor does it mean that it's actually right.


Because of this, please don't change any of your answers to what you get from Mr. T and his book, just because I may see things differently than you. You have to follow what is true for you.

While it may appear that perhaps I'm trying to influence you to see things the way I do, I'm really not doing that. Instead, I'm testing what I think, against the things you say, to see if what I think is really valid.

Thanks for your willingness to participate in this dialogue.



-jbseth

thank you for all you wrote in this post jbseth.
its all awesome excellent and good.
more in my next post.

Quote from: jbseth
Hi Chasman, Hi All,

Hey, I think that you've tapped into some inner truth here that perhaps exists between us. I've always been a huge Beatles and George Harrison fan.

That was an awesome video. Thank you for sharing that.

super excellent jbseth.  glad you liked the video.
and I am honored at the thought of having an inner truth connection with you.

Quote from: jbseth
I like all of George Harrison's songs.  As I understand it, the Beatles became followers of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. I think that this association probably influenced George's thinking in terms of spiritual ideas. Nothing wrong with that. I think that George was probably the most spiritually minded member of the group.

One of my favorite George Harrison songs is "My Sweet Lord". They had some interesting things to say about this song (some things that I didn't know) in the wikipedia site below.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Sweet_Lord

as a young man, I was quite in love with this song.

Quote from: jbseth
While I rag on these eastern philosophies regarding this denial of the flesh idea, there is actually a whole lot about Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism that I really relate to.

I think that one of the most amazing books that I've ever read is "Autobiography of a Yogi", by Paramahansa Yogananda. There were so many incredible story's in his book about various yogi's and what they did (and even in one case some stories about a Christian nun - Therese Neumann) that it really opened my mind to life's possibilities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therese_Neumann

I remember seeing the yogi book, when I was young and seeking. and being intrigued by it.
and was very taken with Eastern religions, and then I met the Seth material. 
I'm not familiar with Therese Neumann.
(to me, Neumann means super expensive vintage holy grail microphones, that Sinatra and many others recorded songs with.)

also, I have long been a fan of the legendary NY Yankee yogi, Yogi Berra.
I love yogi-isms.
in fact, if there were no Seth, I would seriously consider starting a religion, with Yogi as our spiritual leader.
as he is no longer with us, perhaps I could figure out a way to channel him, and get him to dictate a few books.
just a thought.   

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogi_Berra#%22Yogi-isms%22

Quote from: jbseth
Then there's the Dalai Lama. He's such an awesome and peaceful human being. My wife and I went to see him, maybe 10 years ago, when he gave a talk in Portland, Oregon.

In Huston Smiths book, "The World's Religions", under the chapter on Buddhism, he writes about the Dalai Lama. Here, in talking about how the function of the Dalai Lama is not accurately likened to the Pope, he says, "That function is to incarnate on earth the celestial principle of which compassion or mercy is the defining feature." How awesome is that?

thats about as awesome as it gets.
the very pinnacle of awesomeness.
awesomeness beyond description. beyond words.
I love the Dalai Lama.
I babysat for my sister when he spoke here in 2006.

also (trying to make you laugh now),
did you know that the musical Hello Dolly,
was originally about the Dalai Lama?
it was originally titled Hello Dalai, Hello Lama.
oh well Hello Dalai, yes hello Lama
(ok, if you even smiled the tiniest bit, it was worth it for me, to type this.)   

Quote from: jbseth
I think that the Dalai Lama comes very close to expressing that principle.

What a concept for a religion to have. One of their leaders is a person who role models, compassion or mercy. Wow, that's powerful.

yes to this. extra mega giga tera yes!!
lets imagine right now, a new world.
one in which all political leaders have precisely this mindset.
and then all people in management positions in the work world.

Quote from: jbseth
Along with this, I also really like the writings and wisdom of Thich Nhat Hanh, another Buddhist.

very good, I talked to my brother about him a bit a few months ago.
he's a high school history teacher and has some Asian students. they like that man.

Quote from: jbseth
This is the reason why, I keep trying to say that while I don't align with many of Mr. T's ideas, I also don't want you to change whatever thoughts you may have about them.

While I align with many of Seth's teachings, I've been deeply moved by many of the spiritual ideas of these eastern philosophies.

thank you jbseth.
again thank you from the bottom of my heart.
you are very wise, kind and good.

Hi Chasman, Hi All,


Microphones:

Wow. Neumann microphones. I've never heard of them. This doesn't really surprise me though, there's a whole lot of equipment that has been and is used in the audio / acoustic world.  Some of the newer digital / software based items are really amazing.

When I was younger, in my teens and early 20's, I was somewhat into the "audio" stuff; stereos, speakers, tuners, amplifiers, power amplifiers, THD, that kind of thing. 

Then, years later, as an engineer at Intel, I ran an "acoustics" lab. We measured PC's, Servers, laptops, fans, and other types of hardware, not for audio performance but rather for noise and annoyance issues. This is a completely different way of using microphones and related equipment, often used in the audio world.

If a computer or server makes too much "noise" that's not a good thing. We made acoustic sound pressure measurements and using 10 microphones in a very specific hemispheric dome arrangement, we also made acoustic sound power measurements using ½" Bruel & Kjaer microphones. 




Yogi Berra

I really like his "Yogi-isms". So he was the one who said:

"It ain't over till it's over." (well duh!   )

"90 percent of baseball is mental; the other half is physical."  (that's that new math     )




He reminds me of several other witty and clever people that I like, such as Samuel Clemens (or Mark Twain) and Will Rogers.

Will Rogers said:

"I am not a member of an organized political party. I am a Democrat."

And He also said:

"When I die, my epitaph or whatever you call those signs on gravestones, is going to read: "I joked about every prominent man of my time, but I never met a man I dident like." I am so proud of that, I can hardly wait to die so it can be carved."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Rogers



Your "Hello Dalai" got both a smile and a chuckle out of me. That was a good one Charlie.


- jbseth

thanks jbseth.

I've been working on an arrangement of What Is Life all day.

here's an ebay listing for a Neumann mic.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Neumann-U47-Dual-Pattern-Tube-Microphone-2099-Vintage/333696151394?hash=item4db1d72f62:g:sH8AAOSwgVZfQEol

awesome all you wrote. fascinating about your acoustics lab work.

I wonder what/if Yogi Berra had any thoughts about Seth?

and I wonder if George Harrison had any thoughts about Seth.

and the Dalai Lama.

and I would guess that Seth would have had nice things to say about all of them. 

and I enjoyed your quotes.

how about this one?

Things are more like they are now than they ever were before."
— Dwight D. Eisenhower

think of how to integrate that with Sethian time, and the Spacious present.   

Quote from: chasman
also, I have long been a fan of the legendary NY Yankee yogi, Yogi Berra.
I love yogi-isms.
in fact, if there were no Seth, I would seriously consider starting a religion, with Yogi as our spiritual leader.
as he is no longer with us, perhaps I could figure out a way to channel him, and get him to dictate a few books.
just a thought.   

My sweet lord! (Sorry I couldn't stop myself). I never knew Yogi Berra was so clever, he could have been a standup comic. "It's déjà vu all over again." That's priceless. He reminds me a little of Emo Phillips, who'll start saying something and then finish up with something totally twisted and surprising. Wiki: A paraprosdokian is a figure of speech in which the latter part of a sentence, phrase, or larger discourse is surprising or unexpected in a way that causes the reader or listener to reframe or reinterpret the first part.

Yogi: "Always go to other people's funerals; otherwise they won't go to yours."

Emo: "At my lemonade stand I used to give the first glass away free and charge five dollars for the second glass. The refill contained the antidote."

Did you see that when Yogi died, the news accidentally reported that Yogi Bear had died? Poor kids, lol.

Sorry for hijacking the post, I really enjoyed the info on George Harrison and the background on My Sweet Lord. I don't remember hearing about the lawsuit. What a shame, I wonder if that would have gone through these days, it's so easy to get around copyrights and trademarks by changing enough components. It was an accident. It's sometimes hard to tell the difference between divine inspiration and stored knowledge.

The whole Beatle phenomena is amazing when I look back at the history—how they started, how they evolved, each had their own careers, John being shot, etc. I just saw Paul in concert a few years ago, a life long desire, and was able to take my son. He's totally into music, was self-teaching guitar at the time and used to play Blackbird a lot. To hear Paul sing and play that live on stage, and be able share that with my son, and sing along, was a thrill I can't even describe. So amazing that I could share something so special from my teen years with my own teen, and the fact that he actually knew who the Beatles were. It had the feel of simultaneous time, it was surreal.

I read The Power of Now maybe 20 years ago and I do remember liking the book, but I don't remember that much about it. I also read A New Earth. The ideas presented in the books were new to me at the time, so I guess you could say he prepared me for Seth. I moved from Tolle to Abraham Hicks, which was like a springboard to Seth for me and I never looked back. But it would be interesting to re-read some of Tolle now that I have so much Seth under my belt.

That Eisenhower quote sounded like something Yogi would say. I had to read that one a few times.

BTW it seems some quote tags went awol on Reply #32. Want me to fix those? It would just take me a few seconds. Or not... it's easy enough to figure out who said what in the post. Let me know.

awesome, all you wrote Deb. 

and yes, please do fix reply #32.

it shows my ineptness at multi-quoting.

how do you do that?

do you highlight some text and click Quote entire post (or highlight.......)

and then do it again and again?

so awesome about your son and seeing Paul.

cool about your reading Tolle.
I'm listening to the Power of Now on Audible, he narrates it.

love your yogi and emo quotes.
and yes the eisenhower quote is a doozy.

Quote from: chasman
how do you do that?

Normally I compose my longer posts off line and those with a lot of quotes.  I'm on a Mac so use Text Edit. If the topic is one visible to the public, you won't even need to log in to harvest the quotes.

Usually, I'll highlight the first bit of text that I want to quote, click the Quote button at the top of the post and it puts it in the Quick Reply box below. Then do it again for the next quote, and next quote, and so on. Then I copy and paste all of that into Text Edit (or you could use Word), and type my responses below each quote. Doing it that way, the quote open and close tags are already there so I don't have to worry about missing any. Then when done, I copy the content of the Text Edit document and paste it into a message on the forum. I've done a screen capture of a part of #32, I colored the tags yellow so you can see how that works. All the text formatting on the forum uses these open & close tags. It's called Bulletin Board Code.

Once in a while I'll do it the way you said—quote the whole post, then I copy & paste the tags where needed and delete the text I don't want to quote. In fixing #32, I just copied & pasted the open quote info you had at the beginning of the post and then hand-typed the close quote tags.

Either way, I click Preview so I can see and fix any tags that were misplaced or missed. But sometimes even then I'll miss one, so go back in and edit (Modify) my post.

Hi Deb, Hi Chasman, Hi All,

Thanks for sharing that information with us Deb. 


I use to know how to do this, but more recently, I forgot as well.  While I remembered how to copy one whole quote, I forgot how to break it apart.


Thanks for asking the question Chasman. 


-jbseth

thanks Deb.

I will give all of that a try.  superb explanation.   

and thank you jbseth.

Quote from: Deb
Normally I compose my longer posts off line and those with a lot of quotes.  I'm on a Mac so use Text Edit. If the topic is one visible to the public, you won't even need to log in to harvest the quotes.

ok so far so good.

Quote from: Deb
Usually, I'll highlight the first bit of text that I want to quote, click the Quote button at the top of the post and it puts it in the Quick Reply box below. Then do it again for the next quote, and next quote, and so on.

yippee, I think its working.   

Quote from: Deb
I've done a screen capture of a part of #32, I colored the tags yellow so you can see how that works. All the text formatting on the forum uses these open & close tags.

by Jove, I think I've got it!!     

thanks again Deb!!