~Speaking of Seth~

A new book by John Friedlander is coming out in February. He was an ESP class member 1973/1974. He's been educated and makes a living in metaphysics, has written several books on psychic development. http://psychicpsychology.org/authors

An excerpt from one of his books, The Practical Psychic, is available to read or download on my Dropbox. https://www.dropbox.com/s/8gekemz6uw9cbvh/KnowingJaneSeth.pdf?dl=0. This excerpt, Knowing Seth and Jane, appeared in "Reality Change magazine, a magazine for people who want to change their lives," Jan/Feb 1992, Vol. 9, No.1. I've included an ad for his Practical Psychic book in the file, which was in the same issue of Reality Change. He had a nice endorsement from Rob, but Rob tended to do that for new authors, especially if they were class members.

Mary's notes say that he claimed at one time to channel Seth, but then stopped saying that. I got in trouble for mentioning that on FB.   But you'll see in his Amazon book excerpt that he pretty much says that in a couple of different ways. That always makes me leery, but I did like his writing in Reality Change.

The new book is Recentering Seth: Teachings from a Multidimensional Entity on Living Gracefully and Skillfully in a World You Create But Do Not Control Available in Kindle or print.

From Amazon:

• Reframes Jane Roberts's Seth teachings, recentering them in the awareness that all consciousness expands in all directions

• Examines how we create our reality through our conscious beliefs but how no one controls spontaneous reality so you cannot simply will your desires into being

• Synthesizes Sethian teachings with an eclectic variety of concepts, schools, and influences, from aura reading and interpersonal engagement to Buddhism and Theosophy to nondual awareness, multipersonhood, and communication theory

See more on Amazon, plus there's a long excerpt from Chapter 1 under Editorial Reviews.

Feelings or opinions anyone?

Quote from: Deb on October 07, 2021, 05:13:31 PMMary's notes say that he claimed at one time to channel Seth, but then stopped saying that. I got in trouble for mentioning that on FB.   But you'll see in his Amazon book excerpt that he pretty much says that in a couple of different ways. That always makes me leery

**Seth will always and only come from Jane Roberts (period)



Seth (Session 510): "...my communications will come exclusively through
(Jane) at all times, to protect the integrity of the material...
--DEaVF1 Essay 5: Sunday, April 18, 1982

(Session 463): It is quite natural that others...who are experimenting
should go through a stage in which it seems to them they are receiving
information from me.

--The Early Sessions Book 9



There was a lady laying on a sofa channeling Seth on youtube. lol
The comments are disabled...
I really try my best to avoid them all.

It is quite a thing to say "I channel Seth" and something wholly different to say "I channeled energy what is it who is it but here this is what I channeled."

Quote from: Deb on October 07, 2021, 05:13:31 PMFrom Amazon:

• Reframes Jane Roberts's Seth teachings, recentering them in the awareness that all consciousness expands in all directions

• Examines how we create our reality through our conscious beliefs but how no one controls spontaneous reality so you cannot simply will your desires into being

• Synthesizes Sethian teachings with an eclectic variety of concepts, schools, and influences, from aura reading and interpersonal engagement to Buddhism and Theosophy to nondual awareness, multipersonhood, and communication theory

See more on Amazon, plus there's a long excerpt from Chapter 1 under Editorial Reviews.

---

How do you "reframe" the Seth material?!

Just buy the Seth books and Cds - I really enjoy the way Linda Dahl and Rick Stack discusses Seth teachings. No name calling etc

Find what works for you and in small ways improve when you can or not. Just reading it to absorb it seems to be enough, especially at first.

(Yes I have edited this because I was off balance and I am not longer fussy and projecty I am allowing the world to be. Everyone has their ways of doing things. )

Quote from: strangerthings on October 07, 2021, 05:57:14 PMSeth will always and only come from Jane Roberts (period)

Yes Seth would only come through Jane, that's what I've always read. But there are others who argue the point (even Tam Mossman) that Seth came through Jane as Seth, but left the door open that he would speak in other ways through others under another guise. So I leave that door open a bit and go on my merry way.

As far as getting in trouble on FB, Barrie Gellis, who is the biggest defender of "Seth would only speak through Jane," got on my case when I said Mary's notes said this guy told people he was channeling Seth. He was not the only one. Of all people to challenge me! But at the time I'd said that, Friedlander did not have his Chapter 1 excerpt up on Amazon and they thought I was making it up.

As far as reframing the Seth material, I have no idea about how he "does" that. Did you read Rob's endorsement? Baffling. But yet Lynda Dahl does a great job of presenting Seth's concepts in a way that almost anyone can understand, so that could be interpreted as reframing.

I'm glad you find me entertaining. Personally, I'm happy with the Seth materials. I have more than enough to read to keep me busy the rest of my life.

Quote from: Deb on October 07, 2021, 09:41:39 PMSo I leave that door open a bit

I do too but not about Seth. There are so many people channeling now it is dumbfounding.

Quote from: Deb on October 07, 2021, 09:41:39 PMI'm glad you find me entertaining. Personally, I'm happy with the Seth materials. I have more than enough to read to keep me busy the rest of my life.

You are entertaining    In a most delightful way! Sometimes your insightfulness is so spot on and I enjoy reading your posts! But that is not where my posting is directed. I have seen and experienced way too many hidden lures for my taste. I see stuff like that and I guess there is a part of me that wants to sound off the warnings. When I see or hear words like "re-centering" and "reframing" my spidey senses tingle. I am well pleased with the Seth material and I too have enough to read plus this forum keeps adding more to my list   

I am so opposed to more "Seth returning" channeling because.... when Seth says and Jane says, he is not coming back and they had a contract to protect the integrity of the work..... I believe them. If Seth really did return, the integrity would be shaken to its core IMO. I personally think Seth knew this.

Jane's feelings about a (paraphrasing here) cult-ish mentality ... to me.. was for a "good" reason. Some folks want a savior. She did not want to be one of those. That how I take all that anyway. I really respected that!! It couldn't have been an easy tackle in my eyes. Within. I think anyone with integrity and respect for the work would feel this and struggle with their ego.

For example: When Neville talks they way he does - it will certainly do this in a way - at least for me.

Another thing I do not understand about the ones claiming to channel Seth is: why people do it when they claim  to love the work so much and know this work needs to hold its integrity. Maybe they do not understand this? I honestly do not know! Seth clearly states it would seem to them that they are. He also states that this knowledge is our knowledge. Seth is not the only be all end all in personality essences! The world is unlimited. Our individual power within is so vast! Our Entities are so ... massive! Why does it have to be "Seth" ? I am sticking with my belief in that it only seems as though they are.

And prissy (his words) is not a word I would use on me to say I do not like others claiming they are channeling Seth. Seth is Seth. I dont know who those others are.

And no I did not see the forward Rob did! I missed that I will take another look. Thanks for pointing that out. That is baffling. I read your dropbox file, and the amzn stuff ?


Here is a bizarre thought..... what if.... everyone began channeling? What would life look like then ?
They can not all be Seth lol

Quote from: strangerthings on October 08, 2021, 03:22:23 AMAnd no I did not see the forward Rob did! I missed that I will take another look. Thanks for pointing that out. That is baffling. I read your dropbox file, and the amzn stuff ?

OK, this is interesting (well maybe only for me, I'm into details. Maybe one of the reasons I ended up with Mary's stuff, lol). It's actually an endorsement Rob gave (it's on the last page of the dropbox PDF: "How fascinating this book is—such a practical approach to the study of our nature that one wonders why no one has thought of doing it just this way before!" Rick Stack wrote something too. But I thought his use of 'study of our nature' and 'why no one has thought of doing it just this way' seemed odd in light of Jane and Seth. Maybe I'm just misreading it.

So you wrote the word "forward." The way I found the magazine article is because Mary said Rob had written the forward for Friedlander's Psychic book. I thought that was unusual and wanted to see it. I've found no evidence of that, even looked at the free preview of the book on Amazon. But then I came across the Reality Change ad and saw Rob's endorsement. So I figured Mary was just mistaken, but it's an interesting coincidence that you chose the same word.

As far as the new book, I didn't even like the excerpt from Chapter 1. Even the title rubs me the wrong way. I agree that his use of the word "prissy" was an odd choice. I wonder why, if he thinks he's channeling Seth, he would wait almost 50 years since the classes to come out of the closet? Either he needs the money, or he really believes it. Maybe he's getting a little eccentric in his old age. Of all the third party books there are about Jane and Seth (and there are quite a few), they are all about explaining the Seth materials and not one of the claims to channel Seth.

Ever see Roxanne (transvestite) "channeling" Jane on YouTube? I'd like to see him channeling Jane channeling Seth. Now THAT'S entertainment. 

I just had a thought occur to me..... What if.... These people will lead people to the Seth material and the works of Jane Roberts?

That is a huge plus.

Ok Im shuttin up now. lol

Quote from: strangerthings on October 09, 2021, 02:03:53 AMI just had a thought occur to me..... What if.... These people will lead people to the Seth material and the works of Jane Roberts?

A very good point, they probably do. I found Seth through the Abraham Hicks books and never looked back.

Now I'm curious about Friedland's book, just what he's saying Seth says to or through him. I'd just hate to help fill his piggy bank. Maybe I should invite him to the forum.    Kidding. I was kidding.

Quote from: strangerthings on October 09, 2021, 08:08:28 PMIt may appear they are channeling Seth but they are not. Why can that not be good enough? Why do they want to FIX something that is NOT BROKEN ?

Right? They want a piece of the pie, whether it's money or attention. Or they are simply delusional.

But I also feel that anyone who has read the Seth materials and understands them, is not going to switch over to some fake Seth channeler. They will recognize it for what it is. There are more than enough Seth books to keep anyone busy for a lifetime. For me, adding Mary's stuff, to infinity and beyond.

People who get the Seth materials are what I consider savvy insiders. The others... it's not the end of the world if they don't get it and not my job to fix that. It's all good. I wish them luck, and let go. I saw people getting excited on FB about this new book, and I felt it my duty to share what I'd heard. When I was accused of being a trouble maker, I just backed off figuring I'd done my job. And then the Chapter 1 excerpt magically appeared on Amazon, lol.

Who is the Seth returns guy?

Quote from: Deb on October 09, 2021, 08:50:43 PMWho is the Seth returns guy?

sethreturnsdotcom

---

And if you are going to be an unteacher.... you do not call people prissy all while peddling your wares

I still am finding that hilarious truly!

I asked my loved one today..is prissy a word you would use to describe me ever at any point?
I got an emphatic NO with a laugh and was asked who called me prissy! lol
I guess I just wanted more laughs!

Quote from: strangerthings on October 09, 2021, 09:26:53 PMsethreturnsdotcom

Nice discovery. Whether it is good or bad, I shall have to see.

P.S. "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"

Okidoki

I have read all of the posts here and sure I was so curious I wanted to know more about Seths return.
I missed anything mentioning all the books from Jane. That's funny. Bc everyone would Google Seth in the first place and would know instantly about the Seth material.
But it was an offer that made me laugh : contact Seth by telephone. Seriously???
And when I scrolled everything through on this page, there was a quote I recently listened to (audiobook I think from Seth speaks) which came to my mind, it was like there is no way out for the lazy, you have to do the work (I can't remember the exact words). Yeah, and these offers seems to me (only my opinion) a lazy opportunity. Buy it, listen to it, connect with Seth via phone, do what is told you to do, the end.
But hey we are all individuals and every one can choose a path.
Maybe 7 years ago I would have taken all I could find bc I was desperate.
I feel good though that it was Esther and Jerry Hicks I found and gradually crawled my way back to - whatever.
I guess I wouldn't have understood a lot in that time from the Seth books anyway. I remember buying 2 books from the Seth material 5 years ago only to place them on the bookshelf again. Only recently, well, 2 months ago, I found the teachings again. And here I am....

So let's hope people will be able to get on the right path 😊💫

I remember reading that Jane and Rob were not happy about people even in those days claiming to channel Seth. Then after Jane died people were saying they were channeling Jane too. As Linda Ronstadt sang, "everybody loves a winner." And there are those who will try to make money on the backs of those who are successful.

With the multitude of Seth and Jane books that are available, enough to last anyone a lifetime, I too hope people will go straight to the source and ignore those trying to make easy money. Plus... the Seth materials are still as valid and  timely now as they were 40-something years ago.

Quote from: Deb on April 20, 2022, 07:45:14 PMI remember reading that Jane and Rob were not happy about people even in those days claiming to channel Seth. Then after Jane died people were saying they were channeling Jane too. As Linda Ronstadt sang, "everybody loves a winner." And there are those who will try to make money on the backs of those who are successful.

With the multitude of Seth and Jane books that are available, enough to last anyone a lifetime, I too hope people will go straight to the source and ignore those trying to make easy money. Plus... the Seth materials are still as valid and  timely now as they were 40-something years ago.

I was just searching the forum for something else, and I discovered your post/thread:

• https://speakingofseth.com/index.php/topic,1352.msg10848.html#msg10848

which is quite informative.

On the subject of others' channeling Seth, and/or Jane ... Discarding the dishonest ones, I'm sure that there are people who unconsciously fabricate experiences to match their expectations and wishes.

In channeling, if you don't pay attention, you get the answers you are looking for.

This same situation happens when people are regressed, and unintentionally the hypnotist influences the subject's experience. That's why those who adhere to Weiss' beliefs will have their subjects channel the same kind of information, while those who believe in aliens that interfere with humanity will have their subjects experience that narrative (it is the same thing with people watching the news, hypnotized by their favorite talking heads).

On the other hand, everybody can access their own inner-guidance, and it isn't beyond the realm of possibility to contact the same entity as Jane contacted. As far as I know, Seth was a teacher-entity, that was his job there, and as every teacher he had / has / will have innumerable pupils to guide.

I recommend everybody to do it themselves, obviously making sure that they always leave at the door ALL their beliefs and expectations about what'll happen.

This may sound like blasphemy (no offense intended), but there are more and less experienced teacher-entities, and we don't even know what level Seth was when he interacted with Jane, nor how much of what we read was distorted in that process.

Wow thanks for the throwback, I completely forgot about that post. Sometimes I read my older stuff and surprise myself.    And there are often posts here that fly under the radar. That was 4+ years ago and not one reply!

Yep there's nothing better for us than our own inner guidance. People searching for the truth often don't know that is possible and so they look to others as authorities. I really love that Seth was always quick to point out that we have our own guidance system and don't need some outsider telling us what to do.

I really don't believe others channel Seth, he made that pretty clear. There are those who maybe know the Seth materials, tap into their inner guidance and think it's coming from Seth for some reason. And then there are those who deliberately want to mislead people—for the own purposes. Fame or fortune. Or both.

And yes, no telling how much of the materials are distorted, but Seth did say that with Jane they were as minimal as possible. The materials resonate with us at a deeper level, so for me they are good as is. If something doesn't jive with me, I make a mental note of that. Sometimes, I later see them in a different light and think the mistake was my own misinterpretation. Sometimes.

The way I think about this ...

Seth said that he was a teacher, that he didn't teach anybody before Jane, and that he wouldn't teach anybody else in the "future" ... Then, what kind of teacher was / would he be?

To me the claim that Seth "won't" teach anybody else in the "future" doesn't make sense, be it Seth's future, or physical time future.

On the other hand, it doesn't matter.

Quote from: inavalan on April 21, 2022, 08:53:35 PMSeth said that he was a teacher, that he didn't teach anybody before Jane, and that he wouldn't teach anybody else in the "future" ... Then, what kind of teacher was / would he be?

Can you tell me where you read that? My memory (as faulty as it can be) is different. I thought Seth said he was always a speaker. I don't recall any limitations regarding Jane other than he would not speak through anyone else. But as I've said before, I haven't read every book. And we could have different realities.

I'm looking forward to reading all of the books in my retirement.

Quote from: Deb on April 21, 2022, 09:12:40 PM

Quote from: inavalan on April 21, 2022, 08:53:35 PMSeth said that he was a teacher, that he didn't teach anybody before Jane, and that he wouldn't teach anybody else in the "future" ... Then, what kind of teacher was / would he be?

Can you tell me where you read that? My memory (as faulty as it can be) is different. I thought Seth said he was always a speaker. I don't recall any limitations regarding Jane other than he would not speak through anyone else. But as I've said before, I haven't read every book. And we could have different realities.

I'm looking forward to reading all of the books in my retirement.

It is my recollection that Seth said he was a teacher, and that he was discussing teaching with other teachers over there. I use "teacher" with the meaning of guide who helps the incarnated personalities with their learning. This being a school, there are entities specialized in teaching, and assisting.

The other two claims ... I read them being repeatedly discussed and quoted. I think I might've read them in the material myself, but can't pin point where.

Not sure about "speakers" ... It is one of the concepts I didn't care about, so I can't really comment on that.

EDIT: a quick search for "teacher": https://nowdictation.com/q/book:ss+teacher/

"Now, in my work as a teacher I travel into many dimensions of existence, even as a traveling professor might give lectures in various states or countries. Here, however, the resemblance ends, largely, since before I can begin to work I must set up preliminary psychological structures and learn to know my pupils before teaching can even begin."
—SS Part One: Chapter 3: Session 518, March 18, 1970

"We do not know death in your terms. Our existence takes us into many other environments, and we blend (gesture) into these. We follow what rules of form exist within these environments. All of us here are teachers, and we therefore adapt our methods, also, so that they will make sense to personalities with varying ideas of reality."
—SS Part One: Chapter 2: Session 514, February 9, 1970

Quote from: Deb on October 07, 2021, 05:13:31 PMRecentering Seth: Teachings from a Multidimensional Entity on Living Gracefully and Skillfully in a World You Create But Do Not Control

Deb, thanks for recommending this book. Friedlander's emphasis on the idea that we cannot control the outcome of anything seems to me quite important:

QuoteWell, you create your own reality, but you don't create it unilaterally because there's no such thing as a separate you. You're interdependent, but I think it's really more accurate to say that you become conscious co-creators not just with God, but with everything and everyone.

We are all co-creating this world; so, one half of Jane's statement, "not for me," utterly misunderstands how interdependent we are. Because of interdependence, we cannot control the outcome of anything—we co-create. That distinction is kind of subtle because, nevertheless, we do entirely create our own reality. It's just that reality has an intrinsic creative vitality to it that gives us back more than we put in. If we could control it, it would give us back exactly what we put in and there would be no reason to do it.

It seems to me that perhaps creating reality often needs to be combined with telepathic communication to ensure the co-operation of other people.

There is a phrase in the above quote - "Jane's statement, "not for me," which needs explanation. Here is another quote from the book:

QuoteI asked Jane in class one night whether there would be a recession that year, and this story is told in more detail later in this book. In short, she responded, "Not for me," to the laughter and approval of the class. But there was a recession that year and while Jane did prosper, I didn't. Years later, I came to understand and feel my hard times from 1974 to 1977 were, in the long run, one of the great gifts of my life. Those hard times fostered a radical change in attitude and direction when I was forced to engage life as I found it and created it. I and so many others had thought Seth's promise that we could create any reality just by working on our beliefs meant we could substitute a lucidity of mind for the give-and-take of life experience. Even Jane tried to deal with her rheumatoid arthritis without ever practicing yoga or tai-chi or modifying her diet.

Friedlander's criticizing Jane - for not practicing yoga or tai-chi or modifying her diet - is quite unpleasant.

QuoteI asked Jane in class one night whether there would be a recession that year, and this story is told in more detail later in this book. In short, she responded, "Not for me," to the laughter and approval of the class. But there was a recession that year and while Jane did prosper, I didn't. ...

He was afraid of recession, so he experienced one.

Jane was confident she won't experience a recession, so she didn't experience one.

This example contradicts that author's point about the existence of a consensus, and not being able to control the outcome (a.k.a. creating your reality).

As expected, Jane couldn't help him, he couldn't hurt her.

Quote...  Even Jane tried to deal with her rheumatoid arthritis without ever practicing yoga or tai-chi or modifying her diet.

He didn't get that either ... Even if Jane did those things, she wouldn't have changed the outcome, which had different causes, rooted in Jane's beliefs, not in her actions. Man ...

I also remember that he said his method was not preferred and the other teachers did not approve or like (or something like that) what he was doing lol

Thankfully he followed SETH's inner wisdom and not another's.

Quote from: inavalan on April 22, 2022, 01:54:03 AMHe was afraid of recession, so he experienced one.

Jane was confident she won't experience a recession, so she didn't experience one.

Yes, Friedlander's understanding of the Seth teachings seems to be rather limited.

Quote from: Sena on April 22, 2022, 09:40:45 AM

Quote from: inavalan on April 22, 2022, 01:54:03 AMHe was afraid of recession, so he experienced one.

Jane was confident she won't experience a recession, so she didn't experience one.

Yes, Friedlander's understanding of the Seth teachings seems to be rather limited.

On the other hand, he and his book are good examples that readers could (and should) interpret and benefit from the multi-layered guidance that is beyond the message a book or a guru intend to convey.

There's no need to read a book about the Seth Material when you can read the Seth Material. 

Quote from: Dreamer on June 15, 2022, 12:31:05 PMThere's no need to read a book about the Seth Material when you can read the Seth Material.

Seth said that his Material includes multi-level symbolism so everybody gets from it whatever befits their level of evolvement (I paraphrased).

So, most likely, one's most befitting and useful interpretation is different from another's.

This also applies to dream interpretation, and to everyday-life symbolism interpretation. Nobody can interpret them for you.

Quote from: inavalan on June 15, 2022, 04:57:53 PMThis also applies to dream interpretation, and to everyday-life symbolism interpretation. Nobody can interpret them for you.

Before I seriously studied the Seth readings I've tried to analyze my dreams with conventional methods (books about dream symbols). A big mistake. Interpreting your symbols that way can distract you like nothing else. What about Tarot, I Ching, even Astrology? I don't think this things can replace your personal interpretation of your 'symbolic world'.     

Thats why I dont generally like giving interpretations of dreams unless I feel compelled.

No one could possibly know what my symbols mean lol how could I possibly know theirs?

Best I can do is interpret another angle they may not have thought of which hopefully leads them to their own understandings from another angle they find their own self.

Once I figure something out in my dreams even more bubbles up. Its like a fountain!

Quote from: Dreamer on June 16, 2022, 03:54:02 AM

Quote from: inavalan on June 15, 2022, 04:57:53 PMThis also applies to dream interpretation, and to everyday-life symbolism interpretation. Nobody can interpret them for you.

Before I seriously studied the Seth readings I've tried to analyze my dreams with conventional methods (books about dream symbols). A big mistake. Interpreting your symbols that way can distract you like nothing else. What about Tarot, I Ching, even Astrology? I don't think this things can replace your personal interpretation of your 'symbolic world'.   

They and others (meditation, prayer, tea leaves, ...) are conduits for information: inner knowledge and guidance. It only matters what you make of them.

Quote from: Deb on April 21, 2022, 09:12:40 PM

QuoteSeth said that he was a teacher, that he didn't teach anybody before Jane, and that he wouldn't teach anybody else in the "future" ... Then, what kind of teacher was / would he be?

Can you tell me where you read that? My memory (as faulty as it can be) is different. I thought Seth said he was always a speaker. I don't recall any limitations regarding Jane other than he would not speak through anyone else. But as I've said before, I haven't read every book. And we could have different realities.

Seth also had this to say about the sessions with Jane and Rob:

"This is my first lesson class. At one time or another all of us on my plane give such lessons, but psychic bonds between teacher and pupils are necessary, which means that we must wait until personalities on your plane have progressed sufficiently for lessons to begin. To explain more clearly, lessons are conducted with those who are psychically bound to us... what you call emotion or feeling is the connective between us, and it is the connective that most clearly represents the life force on any plane and under any circumstances." - Session 12, ES1

So for anyone to channel Seth, they would first have to have a psychic bond with Seth, which would certainly narrow the field tremendously.

It's interesting that Seth says "this is my first lesson class," given that he also talks about travelling into other dimensions as a teacher. I wonder what he meant. Maybe he just meant it's the first time he's spoken through a living human like Jane.

Seth has been involved in seances too, presumably before beginning the sessions with Jane.

From session 20:

"So-called seances, when they are legitimate, are simply exercises in the use of the inner senses.
The cults that have built up around such happenings are ludicrous, and in some cases unforgivable demonstrations of stupidity by well-meaning but imbecilic personalities. I dislike being so harsh and vindictive. However on a few occasions I have been involved, to my utter horror, on the other end of such performances."