again and again its the biblical admonition whether we like it or not!
we experience both sexes when we re incarnate –
For the people that enjoy reading my daily letters, many of them from sources I “believe in”; sources particularly emenating from a none hun human category, –
Hi, MauriceLet’s clarify:1) The idea that there may be different levels of consciousness does not disturb me.2) To grow in spirituality, one must first develop consciousness.3) Where does the concept of Ego come from and why does it exist? The concept itselfdid not exist prior to the 19th-20th Century.4) In the physical world, is the Ego instrumental in forging people into consciousnessso that they can have epiphanies?5) “MIXING APPLES WITH ORANGES, means that what works for us in the physicaldimension does NOT work on the higher dimensions.” Isn’t everything that existsconnected and vibrating in unison? If so, how could we, human beings, be able todifferentiate Ego from Soul given the parameters of our limited physical dimension?6) If Seth states that “everybody creates his/her own reality”, wouldn’t it be in the realmof possibility that Jane Roberts did just that to comply with Seth’ dictum?7) I’m not insisting that Seth’s body of work is contradictory. I do agree with a lot of it.However, I gave you a specific example of a contradiction within it. Can there be more?I don’t know. Have not read the whole book.8) …”our idea of what reality is all about is FALSE!”. According to Seth’ main message,everybody has the potential and ability to create his/her own reality. Is this an inconsistencyor a contradiction?9) We do agree wholly that people espouse different belief systems. That would be a consequenceof the different cultures and lifestyles that abound on Earth.10) It’s as much a person’s responsibility to understand Seth’s message as it is Seth’s responsibilityto offer it in a clear and easily understood manner. After all, he is the one ‘in the highest level ofconsciousness’. And, yes, your blog is very helpful.11) Teaching/learning is the only path to the ultimate achievement and evolution of humanity, both physicaland spiritual. All the psychic sages you quote teach to their student/followers to understand their spiritualsystems and achieve transcendence.12) Anyone can have an epiphany but that usually comes after much learning and life-experience, and ‘the innateability to connect the dots’, which in the physical world is called ‘critical thinking’. Self reflection/meditation is the path.13) One source of knowledge alone cannot replace the whole spectrum of eons of human evolution and humanspirituality. That’s why a seek knowledge and understanding from as many sources I can find, for ‘absolute truth’ isas illusive as the shifting desert sands.And finally, we have exchange correspondence on these topics before, which simply means that I seek and you mayhave found your level of consciousness.Jose Luis—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-Hi Jose,There is no short cut to “spirituality”what says that better than any other spiritual “system’ is the Kabbala Tree of Life.a person could ask, where am I “stuck on the Tree of Life” – if there was a simple way to the top, everyone would take it, but there is not, any short cuts to truth!and truth as understood by people who have “not” reached the top of the tree, is “different than the truth of those “whose consciousness thru perhaps thousands of incarnations” have “developed to this point”and Seth talks about it, not particularly using the Tree of Life – as its example.again that points the finger on just one word, the word that started our conversation lately –consciousness is perhaps the hardest thing for people who “strive togrow spiritually.the idea that there are “levels of consciousness” disturbs people like yourself who believe otherwise; that everyone should be “equal” when it comes togrowing not so in consciousness, but growth in spirituality which you seem to be interested in.people in general dont like the “idea” that some people “have it” and others do not have it” they want true democracy where everyone is equal; and you said that many times recently.according to Seth, all of this is “arrange on the higher dimensions certainly not on the ego dimension.so the problem is a very old problem,it is a known fact without any dispute, that our time/space/world =physical dimension is a satanic system, certainly not a spiritual system, and the word that describes it is the word ego.once we know that we are controlled by this satanic power/egocentricity, which of course means that –our idea of what reality is all about is FALSE! the beliefs of people engraind, entrenched in our egocentirc dimension are also FALSE!MIXING APPLES WITH ORANGES, means that what works for us in the physical dimension does NOT work on the higher dimensions.and it appears to me that the socalled dispute we have with each other; is your insistance that Seth’s teachings are contradictory; which I of course disagree vigorously with you , and also the teachings of Dr. Hawkins which I also disagree with the comments of the people you use, also for muscle testing which I also disagree with.SO IT APPEARS THAT I DONT AGREE WITH THE COMMENTS OF THE RECENT LETTERS YOU SENT ME.I also disagree when you say that Jane Roberts invented Seth – that for me is “way off base” way way off base.your mind-set/ego in my opinion of course – which “demands reasons, and socalled “no contradictions” – has nothing “in common” with who I am , and what I pesonally believe!so the bottom line is just one word – BELIEFS vs. BELIEFS –people reading my blogs would NOT be the same people with beliefs that question the authenticity of what Seth is talking about!the ego of course does not allow “their victims” to embrace anything that cuts out their power – the ego sets the rules, and determines what is “truth and what is “not truth” i.e. as you say contradictions.would a person who has attained a high spiritual state, call Seth’s work contradictory?I SAY NO! vehemently NO! just because a person cannot “fathom” what Seth is saying, does not mean that Seth is dishonest, etc.your letters whether you “realize it or not” implies all of the above. Give it to anyone who is “not discriminating” and I believe that if they have the “ability” to understand what Seth is saying, would without a doubt say that:SETH IS NOT CONTRADICTORY; ITS NOT HIM; ITS THE ABILITY OF THE READER TO KNOW WHAT HE IS SAYING!the reason why only two percent of the world’s people are “qualified ” to know what Seth is saying; the reason for my blog of course!I did not make up that percentage; its an agreed % by people involved with consciousness.consciousness CANNOT BE TAUGHTperhaps meditation would do it! it has nothing to do with “learning which we all have been taught to believe is responsible for growth in consciousness.again, consciousness cannot equate with the world of learning. When people experience epithamies as Dr. Hawkins experienced, changed his reality (consciousness).your friend, always,maurice
Hi, MauriceYou know I consider you a friend whose psychic consciousness and channeling come from the heart,based on passion, honesty and the conviction of a life-long belief. You do not aspire to make millionsfrom your estorerism, unlike others. Rather you place all of your energy to teach the uninitiated. I havethe utmost respect for that and take your blogs seriously. That’s the reason I read them and commenton them.Your comments place me in a most difficult position because you appear to question my integrity. Youdismiss my belief system but you must know by now that my belief system is premised on transcendentalphilosophy, not on mundane materialism and the acquisition of fame and riches. That’s very much antitheticalto my life goal, which is the pursuit of knowledge from every source available to me in order to expand myconsciousness.Re Seth. Actually I set out optimistically to find out what this book was all about. Mostly because you areconstantly making references to it and had at one time recommended its reading. Thus, my criticism of Seth(Jane Roberts) was not preconceived or planned. I just happened to read it and concluded that most of Seth hasgreat offerings but is also constrained by some confusing language and contradictions, which is to be expectedif the ‘medium’ was a human being, Jane Roberts. Please, note that I’ve read enough psychic literature andwatched esoteric documentaries with an open mind to have some understanding of it and be able to pick thecorn the chaff.If Seth appears to mix apples and oranges is because ‘in the reality he creates for himself’, he does. I havedelved long and hard upon the contradictions I presented to you, and I almost did not send them to youbecause I did not want you to think I was being dismissive.As to Dr. Hawkins, he is too much into money and fame to articulate a cohesive transcendental message.Besides, he does not believe in ‘channeling’.To admonish someone is a negative and demeaning undertaking. My comments to you are directed only andexclusively to help you with your blog so it can be a success. Perhaps your experiences through your blog castme no different than those who would attack it on principle or simply wish to discredit you. That’s the farthest thingfrom my mind, as I try to assist you with your language expression the best I can. From our long correspondence,I would think that you would know me better and place me in a different light.BTW, “complex material” can be made simple if the individual transmitting it has a deep and exact understandingof it. That’s why some so-called experts have a limited following. You are much better at it than most of the ‘esotericsages’ you quote because your language can and does reach the average uninitiated, and that’s why it will stand thetest of time.Jose Luis——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————Hi again,rereading your letters, you seem to put blame on the “messanger, Jane Roberts why?she has nothoing to do with Seth’s writing she is simply a conduit!when I channel, I have no recall whatsoever of what I channeled, and this goes for all channels –you seem to have a preimposed “idea” of how things should be, and when you have trouble with some of Seth’s premises because they dont fit “propery” in your preimposed idea, or ideas, you cry “foul”I see no contradictions at all with what Seth is writing – I am sure there are others like yourself that see “loads of contradictions”the question is why?the simple answer of course is their “presupposed “ideas” of what they should be – already formed beliefs of what the socalled answers should be, and if it doesnt fit, is thrown into the garbage as false teachings.that is why “consciousness” is vital – consciousness is the “only” way that a person can “discern the differences”“to make a difference, one must KNOW the difference” and only consciousness can do that!one fits all, does not work, but that is what you and perhaps others want, “make it easy to understand” that’s fine but the right equipment called “higher consciousness” makes this possible.IT CANT BE DONE ANY OTHER WAY!wisdom is not given to everyone – and wisdom deals “exclusively with consciousness” – has no connection whatsoever with the 98% out there since the 98% out there wouldnt “KNOW’ what to do about IT!the Cabala Tree of Life depicts “exactly” what I am saying.you and the people who reject in this particular case Dr. Hawkings, want nothing to do with the “tree of life” which as said depicts clearly thatwhat you are asking for, making it easy for people to “understand what my channel, and Seth, is writing about!that takes a “growth in consciousness that Dr.Hawkings, myself, Seth along with Hermes, Swedenborg and a host of other “realized souls” have preached during their period on earth.make it easy! make it easy! make it easy!again, if Seth appears to mix apples with oranges and this confuses the reader, what he/she must do is go into a kind of “meditation” that switches the person”s mind-set that I call “consciousness” enabling the person to “go beyond their limitations”according to your admonition – make it easy to understand – I do my best when I write my blog – but know of course, that there will be many that wont understand one word of what I write –it is no easy task to make something “simple out of complex material”anyone can do that is truly a genius.that is what you want but resist when it bucks up against what you believe, which is to be expected!in regard to my blog – its apparent to me that the shakeup will come, those that KNOW will carry on after I am gone!just like the society I formed – only less than one percent of the people in my society “knew what I was trying to accomplish”as for my site, years later, the same thing!that is why only less than 2% of the worlds people- KNOW that they know that they know THAT THEY KNOW, they know!others despite their PHd’s – continue on their merry way being superficial !your friend, always,mauriceHi jose,just re read your august 3rd letter wherein you show discrepancies in Seth’s teachings.I dont see any discrepencies, while you do – and its beholden on both of us to find out why!as I read this letter – what he is “basically saying is “that we create our own realities”how we “interpret what “these realities are ; their foundations” is left up to us, not up to Jane Roberts who has nothing to do with the process being only the “medium” – and – Seth this mystical identity outthere somewhere.as I reread what you write – I see no contradiction in what Seth is saying, none whatsoever – you do of course – so their is a clash involved somehow.what are the contradictions what you list are not contradictions for my mind-set!our beliefs, bottom line, materialize themselves, and that is the “bottom line” our “expectations also materialize themselves” that also is the bottom line!do we “blame the trumpet or the trumpet player?do we blame the message or the messenger?do we blame the “channeler, Jane Roberts, or Seth?unfortunately that is the socalled “sticking points”in our culture which is the ego world; the beliefs(culture) weaccording to your use of the words, eliminates the responsibilityof the human being, puts it somewhere else called “culture”beliefs can be “culture” but at the same time does NOT have to manculture since with every incarnation culture changes appropriately!also when we put the “onus on culture” we take it off the onus of the what Seth is talking about.He is not talking about culture as I understand it, he is talking about the individual, they are not the same, since with every incarnation that changesonly in a hologram, the part and the whole work together –the part and the whole know themselves.obviously that is not so under the aegis of “beliefs” which cancontinue on for hundreds,thousands of incarnations.your friend, always,mauricePS. clearing the air without “malice” as said is “honorable”!!!!!
Creativity, Natures creativity in particular, storms etc.serve a good purpose and should “not” be considered otherwise!