pjrv : Messages : 1?6?-1?6? of 4038
Date: Wed Nov 13, ?00? 10:07 pm
Subject: Channeling dennanm
Responding to other posts but this is a more apropo title.
Channeling is like the bastard child of psi in our culture. Although
a few channelers, such as Alice Bailey and Jane Roberts, can easily
on their own redeem an entire field of weirdness and nonsense, that
doesn't keep the rest of the field from getting an interesting
reputation, even though much is undeserved.
Just like RV gets a reputation thanks to 1001 bozos and a few in the
media, despite that some people are astonishing with it and many
people are sincere and working to obtain legitimate skill, channeling
also has a lot of very serious and practical people practicing it for
their own development. Aliens, gods and demons are nowhere to be
found -- like RV, that is mostly the crap the public hears.
A lot of people think channeling is possession, because they believe
in a great deal of "separation" between them and the universe -- and
there is some if separation is translated to "difference". E.g., if
one channels some insightful piece of information, some assume that
the often "spontaneous flow" of it, and the "difference" between the
tone/personality of it from their normal conscious self, means it
is "some other entity" possessing them. Others feel it is their
subconscious. Others feel (as I do? ) it is "an aspect of self". I
imagine the list of options goes on.
I think the possession theory involves a lot of philosophical
assumptions. Since the days when Eye of Newt was the medicinal
wisdom, the fear-of-other-ness has reigned when any kind
of "information from beyond the ordinary scope of the conscious mind"
There is an 'aspect of me' I call "The Narrator." A friend once not-
very-jokingly corrected me that it is really "The Dictator," from his
own experience with it. Everybody has it. It's a part of the large
conglomerate that humans are. When I read Casteneda's "The Art of
Dreaming", I was amazed to see him talking about this exact thing.
Many people who don't channel will often encounter this aspect in
dreams where literally often things are being explained or as I put
I believe that at many times in the past, I have so-called
channeled 'The Narrator'. I believe this is an "Aspect" of
my 'larger self', so to speak. I never really felt "separated" from
him but I did feel that this was "a different" part of me. He sounds
vaguely like Seth, but without the depth of personality Seth had
(Seth was exceptional, to understate it? ). The channeling in my case
was never really a formal attempt. I simply would begin focusing on
something, and the information "was there" for me.
He phrases incredibly well in English, although in reality, it is ME
who is phrasing -- it is a joined, merged effort, where my conscious
mind is usually part of it. My vocabularly and mental concepts seem
to be the "tools" that are being worked with; though the result
sounds unlike me, it is a both of us which is a singular identity at
There is often a combined sense of "the feel of the shape of the
sound" -- as if sound made geometric shapes, and these geometries
were the root of "meaning", and English really sucks for matching
sound-shape-meaning to word-surface-meaning, so often there is two
paragraphs of text to say something that could probably be said in
one sentence... but there is a feeling that I/he are "searching for
the shapes" to combine to have an energetically-accurate
When I feel "in the center" and "in the spirit" this is natural.
This is just "me when I am inspired", although I recognize it
as "him" simply because it's not my daily personality so the
difference is apparent.
About the only side effect I notice, is (a? ) I love the process the
same way I love the RV process, as if it is touching an intimate
inner part of me I don't normally encounter; and (b? ) I often don't
remember, after speaking or writing "in the flow", what transpired in
detail... the more in the flow I am the less recall I have. In that
case it's usually as the information comes through, I'm having all
sorts of amazing insights and connections (which I may or may not
recall later :-? )? ).
There are a lot of misunderstandings about channeling, and a lot of
simplistic or polarized perceptions of it which, like remote viewing,
when the subject is explored, one comes to realize are not what it's
about when pursued by people a lot like "we" are. I used to have
I consider channeling to be just as legitimate a form of "divination"
as anything else. For those who think Ouija and channeling only tend
to inspire jokers like -- as I commented in Bewilderness -- those who
will tell people to dig up their kitchen linoleum for buried
treasure, try to recall the number of remote viewers who are getting
data just about as intelligent and accurate as that in their
sessions. :-? )
Dowsing, scrying, and channeling, are almost as interesting to me as
remote viewing -- to me, this is really all part of a "spectrum of
Being-ness" and of exploring ourselves... our inner, outer, other-
pjrv : Messages : 1?71-1?71 of 4038
#1?71 From: greenmn900...
Date: Wed Nov 13, ?00? 6:06 pm
Subject: Re: Channeling greenmn900...
You keep up this "all is part of us" stuff and I'm going to start calling you
PJ Boehm, or maybe Holographic -Theory PJ! LOL!
I liked the Seth stuff alot. I know towards the end of her life she came to
believe that Seth was an aspect of herself. I met a guy in Florida who was
friends with her and had sat in on a lot of the early Seth sessions. The
stuff he had to say was pretty interesting. I guess she did some amazing
psychic demonstrations, a lot of precog stuff.
I tend to feel that a lot channeling IS posession, albeit temporary, simply
because the channelers themselves describe it as that. But then again, Jane
changed her mind as time went on..
But one big difference between RV, scrying, etc. and channeling and the Ouija
board is that I've never heard of anyone being told in an RV session stuff
like they should sell their home, move to another location, and do
unreasonable and drastic things like that. Oh, I forgot about Dames and
Courtney Brown. Okay, forget I said that, lol! Seriously, I don't know of
anyone operating under protocols that ever gets that kind of stuff.
Moderator's note: You gotta back up and think about the question before you use
the answer as evidence, though. People in RV working in protocol are generally
describing, as factually as possible, the qualities of something they assume to
be, in general, person-place-thing with maybe some concepts. People are not
using RV to ask things like, "Should I move? Where should I move to? Is the
President a Replacement? Is my next door neighbor an alien?" And you find when
people doing alleged-RV *do* ask those kinds of questions as a session, they
*do* get the same of BS! So is it the difference between a dowsing pendulum, a
sheet a paper with pen, and a ouija board? Or is the difference in the person
doing the session? PJ