Spirit board - Ouija Video

[Pierre]

It seems many people do not choose(consciously) to channel their higher selves but are rather thrust into contact.
This is what he says about Jane Roberts.

Apparently many entities can be channeled. So the main question might not be "how can I channel entities ?" but "what entity am I really channeling ?"

The example your shared raises some similar questions : "what data can prove that Roberts was indeed channeling her higher self ?", "if Roberts didn't choose (at least consciously) this channeling is there a breach of free will ?", "if there's a free will breach isn't it likely that the channeled entities are STS ?"

 

[PepperFritz]

What data can prove that Roberts was indeed channeling her higher self?

Actually, the entity that Roberts channeled (Seth) claimed to be her "Future Self", a more evolved version of herself in the future. Just as the C's claim to be "us" in the future. The same question can be applied to Laura and the C's: What data can prove they are indeed "us" in the future? Like Laura, Roberts was highly skeptical of the material she "channeled" and constantly subjected it to rigorous testing and examination, and until her death considered the nature and origin of the material to be an open-ended question.

If Roberts didn't choose (at least consciously) this channeling is there a breach of free will.

No one familiar with Roberts' work (and the personality of Roberts herself) would view her contact with Seth as being something she did not choose, a "breach of free will". Like Laura, she was in the process of exploring esoteric ideas and was on a passionate, unrelenting quest for knowledge and truth. Like the C's were to Laura, Seth was to Roberts an "answer" to her "asking". It is clear from Roberts' books that she and her husband freely chose to continue the contact. Apart from the original "breakthrough" communication, Roberts was always "in control" of subsequent sessions, and was not simply subject to being "taken over" without her consent.

 

[Pierre]

Actually, the entity that Roberts channeled (Seth) claimed to be her "Future Self", a more evolved version of herself in the future.

Thank you for this information, I didn't know that Roberts was the channel of Seth.

By the way Seth was mentioned in the transcripts :

Q: (L) Who was Seth, channeled by Jane Roberts?
A: Higher plane earth spirit.
Q: (L) Were the teachings in the Seth material accurate and
was that a good source?
A: Yes but rapidly becoming obsolete as you move toward
new reality.

 

[Beorn]

Sorry I did not mean to imply it was a breach of free will. I'm sure she was open to the process. It's just the unexpectedness of it and the thought that one may be an aspect of the higher self suddenly became more real.

Jeff.

 

[PepperFritz]

Sorry I did not mean to imply it was a breach of free will.

No problem. It provides an opportunity to think a little differently about the "consent" issue. While an initial contact may happen "unexpectedly", or in a manner not anticipated, consent to open the conduit of communication for a very specific purpose may have been given in a larger, big-picture sense. On the other hand, issuing an open invitation without a clear purpose in mind -- simply for the "experience" of it -- strikes me as extremely dangerous, tantamount to signing a blank cheque. It underlines the importance of knowing yourself and your own goals and motivations before undertaking something like channeling.

Just my own observations, I am hardly an expert on the subject.

 

[Kesdjan]

We do not really know what is the real mechanism of this "communication". It is a working hypothesis that it may have to do with "extra dimensions". This working hypothesis is based on the studies of similar phenomena that are being described in the scientific literature concerning telepathy, remote viewing etc.

Hi Ark,
Could you elaborate on the specific data in the Cassiopaean experiment that caused you to reject the standard hypothesis (i.e. the ideomotor effect)?

 

[ark]

We do not really know what is the real mechanism of this "communication". It is a working hypothesis that it may have to do with "extra dimensions". This working hypothesis is based on the studies of similar phenomena that are being described in the scientific literature concerning telepathy, remote viewing etc.

Hi Ark,
Could you elaborate on the specific data in the Cassiopaean experiment that caused you to reject the standard hypothesis (i.e. the ideomotor effect)?

I am not rejecting the ideomotor effect as a part of the mechanism. What I say is that ideomotor effect in itself does not explain the results. It is similar to why for instance friction does not explain why the car is running. Of course friction is necessary for the car to run the way it runs. But it is not sufficient. The real question is where the subconscious mind is getting the information from? And the next question is what is this subconscious? What is mind? Where it gets its ideas from? An interesting theory has been developed by A. I. Veynik in his monograph "Thermodynamics of real processes", where he developed concepts similar to those of "densities". He has a whole chapter in his monograph devoted to the phenomena like Poltergeist, UFOs etc (it is in Russian). I think Poltergeist type phenomena are well documented, they also have to do with mind but they are not explained by mind alone. A good deal on this subject has been written by Andreas Resch, psychologist and teologist who was lecturing about UFOs etc at the Vatican Academy.

 

[Kesdjan]

Sorry, I was not being completely clear. My question wasn't so much about the possible mechanism, but why you are proposing that mechanism in the first place.
In the Cassiopaean Experiment the data would be the answers from the C's.
Some answer must have made you take the C's seriously, so my question is what specific answer from C's made you think, "Wow. The ideomotor effect cannot explain this- we need some new physics"?

 

[ark]

What specific answers? All.
You see, nothing should be analyzed in separation from the rest of the knowledge that we have. And we do have knowledge of the paranormal - there are tons to read - I mean for those who have their minds open and who want to read and to learn.

The crucial thing about these phenomena is that they can not be proven. Therefore, if you want to prove anything, then you should stay within mathematics, but even there the ground is somewhat shaky, because there are things in arithmetics that can be true and yet cannot be proven.

But alright, you want an example of one particular statement, right? I will give you one particular statement. But because my experience is different from your experience this statement will probably mean nothing to you, and yet it means something to me. I am aware of this fact. It is much like showing someone who does not know the Chinese a statement written in this language. For such a person it will be just ink on the paper - meaningless or meaning something completely different than for a person who knows the language. Is it easy to learn Chinese? Certainly not. And why should one waste his time on such a silly thing anyway, right? There are more important things to do.

So the particular statements are described in "The Exorcist in Love" article. Of course for Tom French they do not prove anything. And they do not prove anything for most of the people. But do we have the proof that anything exists at all? Perhaps all of the reality is someone's (perhaps computer's) dream? Philosophers know quite well that solipcism cannot be refuted by logical arguments.

The Exorcist in Love

 

[syldan]

My intuition tells me, that all channeled material that was brought forth with clean intent, has, does, will, contain elements of truth for everyone who so chooses to read or access it. Having said that, truth to me, is as fluid as lifeforce, thus we can expect for certain truths to be more solid at certain juncture points, and less at others. That is also partly why predictions and prophecies are so fluid. The same way, a particular statement, even a completely false one(at that given juncture), may have the effect of an absolute truth, to a person well versed in analyzing with a non-linear frame of mind.

The analogy I will use here concerns me personally as a unit of the collective thought form, throughout my life I have delved deeply in matters of what was considered the occult, studying magickal systems, the whole nine yards, only to come to the understanding that my intuition was steering me right and that it was mostly wishful thinking and serious disinformation. But this knowledge that I acquired has given me wonderful insight as to what not to look for when searching for ''my'' truth! This realization can be seen as a waste of my time, or as having led me on the right path, for my incarnation in these wonderful times, at least I feel so... Thus no regrets, and to a certain extent no pain, no gain... ( And this last statement is true in my case only because I used to be convinced that it had to be hard (ie.programming).
dg

 

[Pierre]

My intuition tells me, that all channeled material that was brought forth with clean intent, has, does, will, contain elements of truth for everyone who so chooses to read or access it.

Hi Daniel,

You certainly know Bernard de Clairvaux quote : "Hell is paved with good intentions". So clean intent might not be enough to channel Truth. I guess other qualities like crossreferencing, non anticipation, etc. are also necessary ?

This being said, any channeled material probably contains some truth. But what is the value of a material where truth is only a mean to make us swallow lies ?

Having said that, truth to me, is as fluid as lifeforce, thus we can expect for certain truths to be more solid at certain juncture points, and less at others. That is also partly why predictions and prophecies are so fluid.

Maybe that another reason for "fluid" prophecies is free-will respect. If a source discloses you destiny, your decisions with exact timing, are you still free ?

 

[syldan]

Thank you for the precisions : Belibaste ;
You certainly know Bernard de Clairvaux quote : "Hell is paved with good intentions". So clean intent might not be enough to channel Truth. I guess other qualities like crossreferencing, non anticipation, etc. are also necessary ?
This being said, any channeled material probably contains some truth. But what is the value of a material where truth is only a mean to make us swallow lies ?


I should have used the words with ''no intent''... Starting off with ''a clean slate''! But of course even that, presupposes certain predispositions, as research, networking, and worki worki!!!

Your words sum it up very well... Start with no intentions and cross-reference all results!...
As to this quote:
But what is the value of a material where truth is only a mean to make us swallow lies ?

I think the crux of the matter is to be aware that most if not nearly all of it could be lies made too easily be swallowed, if it looks to easy there's something amidst, if it looks too good to be true : IT IS!

dg

SESSION 981003

Q: (L) So, a highly advanced civilization could be not as highly evolved, spiritually speaking, as a less advanced civilization in terms of spirit?
A: No matter what, it is still "evolution."
Q: (L) Does it have to do with the fact that time is variable and selective, and all actually exists simultaneously?
A: Somewhat.
Q: (L) So, it is just cycles?
A: No, you are missing the point. There is no such thing as devolvement. All experiences are rich with lessons. Many in your realm need to move beyond this superiority/ inferiority kick.
Q: (L) Anyway, speaking of these ancient civilizations, he says: 'Yet they all met the same decisive end. They failed to graduate. Cataclysms overtook them all...'
A: Who says they failed to graduate? This gentleman proposes to know what constitutes graduation?!? How does he know this?
Q: (L) I guess it is an assumption that the state of the material civilization, or what happens to it, is a measure of the possible/probable graduation of the members of that civilization in whole or part. He says that we must 'rediscover what was known before. I personally believe that it was a failure to prepare for the transition to 4th density.' He says: 'The 4th density, as I understand it, is one where the thoughts of the heart can actually generate external reality almost instantaneously. Can you imagine the devastation if one is not prepared for that. Preparation, it seems to me, would consist of honestly coming to grips with those demons within us and purging them through a variety of means until the water of Spirit runs clear from our intentions.
A: Preparation consists of merely being there!

 

[Saman]

Thank you for the precisions : Belibaste ;
You certainly know Bernard de Clairvaux quote : "Hell is paved with good intentions". So clean intent might not be enough to channel Truth. I guess other qualities like crossreferencing, non anticipation, etc. are also necessary ?
This being said, any channeled material probably contains some truth. But what is the value of a material where truth is only a mean to make us swallow lies ?


I should have used the words with ''no intent''... Starting off with ''a clean slate''! But of course even that, presupposes certain predispositions, as research, networking, and worki worki!!!

FWIW, I was just thinking that it is much 'better' for the 'Good' to have the intent to find the Objective Truth about ourselves and the world we live in, rather then have no intent or "aim" at all.

Your words sum it up very well... Start with no intentions and cross-reference all results!...

I think a 'better' way to put it would be to be start by striving to leave all prejudices at the door. In other words, try to be open but critical to all new data and ideas and yet not anticipate outcomes while cross referencing the information. So again I think it is 'better', that is 'better' being essential/subjective to whether one is a seeker of Truth or not, to have the intention to find the Objective Truth in relevance to the context of a situation. That is, to get as close as possible or probable in forming a working hypotheses that gets to the crux of a matter, subject, or situation.

As to this quote:
But what is the value of a material where truth is only a mean to make us swallow lies ?

I think the crux of the is to be aware that most if not nearly all of it could be lies made too easily be swallowed, if it looks to easy there's something amidst, if it looks too good to be true : IT IS!

dg

Well I think the value of such material all depends on the context of the current lesson profile of the individual and also the chosen "aim" of the said individual.

Moreover, in relation to the session excerpt that you quoted below where the C's said "No, you are missing the point. There is no such thing as devolvement. All experiences are rich with lessons. Many in your realm need to move beyond this superiority/ inferiority kick":

SESSION 981003

Q: (L) So, a highly advanced civilization could be not as highly evolved, spiritually speaking, as a less advanced civilization in terms of spirit?
A: No matter what, it is still "evolution."
Q: (L) Does it have to do with the fact that time is variable and selective, and all actually exists simultaneously?
A: Somewhat.
Q: (L) So, it is just cycles?
A: No, you are missing the point. There is no such thing as devolvement. All experiences are rich with lessons. Many in your realm need to move beyond this superiority/ inferiority kick.
Q: (L) Anyway, speaking of these ancient civilizations, he says: 'Yet they all met the same decisive end. They failed to graduate. Cataclysms overtook them all...'
A: Who says they failed to graduate? This gentleman proposes to know what constitutes graduation?!? How does he know this?
Q: (L) I guess it is an assumption that the state of the material civilization, or what happens to it, is a measure of the possible/probable graduation of the members of that civilization in whole or part. He says that we must 'rediscover what was known before. I personally believe that it was a failure to prepare for the transition to 4th density.' He says: 'The 4th density, as I understand it, is one where the thoughts of the heart can actually generate external reality almost instantaneously. Can you imagine the devastation if one is not prepared for that. Preparation, it seems to me, would consist of honestly coming to grips with those demons within us and purging them through a variety of means until the water of Spirit runs clear from our intentions.
A: Preparation consists of merely being there!

The C's have also said the following:

Q: (TK) Is what I was saying close to the truth?
A: Yes. Total truth is elusive.
Q: (TK) So, what I said was the gist of what is going on here. So, we have to figure out what we are supposed to do so that the earth can be maintained...
A: You will do what you will do.
Q: (TK) This is true.
A: Do you, in general, control 2nd density beings on earth?
Q: (L) Yes.
A: So, what is "fair" about that?
Q: (L) Nothing.
A: Okay, so what is the difference?!?!???
Q: (TK) So, basically, we control 2nd density, and 4th density controls us. There are the good guys and bad guys. (L) And we will do what we will do. Either we choose to align ourselves with the good guys, or with the bad guys.
A: It's up to you.
Q: (TK) However, if too many people align themselves with the bad guys, then the balance tips in their favor, and there is no more advancement, so there has to be education so that
people will know...
A: T***, you are close, but you are missing the point.
Q: (L) What is the point?
A: The point is, there "has to be" nothing. You will do what you will do. You choose. We have told you this repeatedly, but you still suffer from self-centered perspective.
Q: (TK) Everybody is worried about themselves. They all want to be saved and not worry about others.
A: More to the point, everybody in an STS realm views themselves as somehow "special, chosen, or protected." This is simply not so!!
Q: (TK) What is going to happen, is going to happen. The people...
A: The body does not matter. It is the soul that either progresses or digresses, just ask S****!
Q: (L) Did S***** progress or digress?
A: Open.
Q: (L) So, in other words, we could just sit around and live our lives and have a good time and not worry about a damn thing. Is that the point?
A: No.
Q: (L) It's our choices?
A: Yes.
Q: (TK) The point is it's going to happen...
A: But, nobody is there to intervene on your behalf as many would like to believe.
Q: (L) So, we are here on this planet, and we will either make it or we won't, just like Dorothy and Toto in Oz, based on our own ability to figure it out, to overcome the odds, the witch, monkeys and soldiers... (TK) Maybe what they are trying to do is give people the information, or make the information available so that people can make the choice, do they want to stay...
A: We are not "trying" to do anything. We are here to answer questions if asked. We cannot interfere.
Q: (TK) Yes, the non-interference idea is pretty clear and understandable. So, they cannot interfere...
A: And, even when we answer, you may not believe, it is up to you!
Q: (L) So, we are really on our own!
A: You always have been, and so have we, and all others, too!!
Q: (TK) I guess then, it is a matter of asking the right questions so that you will know what course of action to take. I mean, do you want to advance? Do you want to go to 4th density? Or do you want to go higher? Or do you want to stay here? How can you make an informed choice if you don't know the true conditions and what your options are? (L) Is it that the religions that have been generated and foisted on the human race, have been designed to give people a feeling of complacency or faith in something outside themselves, and that this prevents them from seeking knowledge, opening their eyes, facing the facts of their existence, and therefore keeps them in bondage?
A: Its just obstacles, as always. You employ those too, for your 2nd density friends!!

Hmm, I wonder what it means for the soul to "progress" or to "digress", and how this might relate to the notions of "aim", intent, anticipation, "evolution", unification, and choice?

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Hmm, I wonder what it means for the soul to "progress" or to "digress", and how this might relate to the notions of "aim", intent, anticipation, "evolution", unification, and choice?

One possibility is whether soul goes towards consciousness/creation/objectivity or entropy/destruction/subjectivity. And Laura basically explored how all of these relate in the Wave series. Also remember what the C's said that "intellectual capacity" is different from STO/STS, which is an "emotional pathway". So perhaps you can "evolve" by being very smart and even going to 4th density, but you could still be "digressing" if you're becoming more and more mired in STS/entropy and perhaps eventually lead to your own dissolution.

 

[Saman]

Hmm, I wonder what it means for the soul to "progress" or to "digress", and how this might relate to the notions of "aim", intent, anticipation, "evolution", unification, and choice?

One possibility is whether soul goes towards consciousness/creation/objectivity or entropy/destruction/subjectivity. And Laura basically explored how all of these relate in the Wave series. Also remember what the C's said that "intellectual capacity" is different from STO/STS, which is an "emotional pathway".

Perhaps I am misunderstanding due to my own lack of intellectual capacity, or because I am not currently aware of further data from the "future", but according to the what the C's said in the following excerpt, I currently don't see how they said that "intellectual capacity" is different from STO/STS, which is an "emotional pathway":

[snipped in edit]

Edit: Never mind. I understand what you mean now by stating that the "C's said that the "intellectual capacity" is different from STO/STS, which is an "emotional pathway". You are basically saying the same thing. Before I thought you were saying that the "intellectual capacity" is different for STO or STS, which is not what you are saying. Oh the examplary irony of my own recent misunderstanding! ;)