Casual chat & getting to know each other

Wasn’t it the Lumerians that were confusing aggression with violence/evil rather than associating it with the connotation of ‘assertion’? (No, not a seth quote, just my understanding of this material, as I have mentally experienced relearning/believing that particular realignment of definition myself.) They were the ones whose last numbers went underground ,through fear, for protection, I believe. Weren’t the Lumerians also the civilization that developed extremely advanced technology using sound? Didn’t they use this technology in transportation, for example? I think this material was the same that mentioned that there were truly a civilization of Giants (a relative term) around about the same time as Lumerians.

Seth Speaks and Seth Material are the only books I have read, in their entirety, though I have ‘hopped around’ through several others. Seems like I found this material on line and I think it was Seth, but I may have found references in other sources (also). (I read a lot of material from Michael/Chelsea Yarbrough years ago.)It was when I first started my refamiliarization with Seth over the last few years via on line material and discussion and then FB.

NOTE: [ BTW…I am enjoying this experience of recalling that I do remember more than I realized in what I have read in seth books (which is only small portion) but would have never mentioned if it were not reading posts of others by which we each add what we remember and we come up with a good bit of relevant material and form new connections with it in our everyday thoughts and conversations which are now possible in MUCH MORE DATAIL than on FB. I know I may be mistaken in some of my recalled accounts and in no way feel whatever I recall should not be corrected. I am feeling spontaneous joy when I catch the synchronicity of others’ understandings (in this post, a reply to @chris 's comments) and want to respond and keep ‘talking’. I apologize in advance if I wander off topic and would ask that someone simply move my comments to any subtopic they see fit. Being a very hyper, inquisitive, and even impatient personality, I OFTEN ‘get off track’.]

The civilization was called Lumania, (spelled out), and the name itself went down in legend and was used again at a later time.

Session 562, Chapter 15, Seth Speaks

Yes those were them.

1 Like

Yes, I have read some of the same/similar material to which you are referring in current medical thought, but have never knew specifically what Seth has had to say about it. I thank you very much! Thought before physical definitely has always rang true to me, but in addition to existing as memory, I suspect this belief firmly established itself when I first read Seth, psychology, etc. decades ago.

When I was researching ADHD, it was Gabor Mate, M.D., in Scattered, that put forth his belief that it is both our experiences and our individual reactions to these experiences that create or affect our neurotransmitter levels and interactions. Yes, these prescription treatments can help IF we continue to do the work by exploring and revising our thoughts. In practice this is not being done, and a psychiatrist, Peter Breggin (?) relates this to the psychotic behavior witnessed more and more by those on anti-depressants. His name/existence was brought to our attention by a member of the FB forums. It was yet another ‘aha’ moment in which my intuitional gut belief was reinforced in physical experience in print. It was exciting, as medicine has many insights that have not been revealed or explored, nor accepted in allopathic medical practice. So these first doctor ‘authorities’ coming out and confirming our unproven (in this personality’s ‘lifetime’) intuition is an exciting manifestation. I was already familiar with my layman’s understanding of quantum physics and the wave/particle duality theory, observation and perspective, when I first read Seth info. on still to come scientific discoveries at the time in that area, and that was also JOYOUS to experience. This type of joy, excitement and spontaneity resurfacing for me has been very much noticed and appreciated, as I realize this is what I was looking for and had lost through the linear time illusion of my experiences.

You have introduced an order/structure to my thinking through your contrasts of Seth terminology such as ‘root assumptions’ and ‘beliefs’. I am able to assimilate utilize new material in a much more efficient manner, IMO. This is what I have been needing, in addition to the original material. (Many in my life have found my constant mental dissection and analysis way of ‘thinking’ quite boring (I find to be a basic part of my personality). I have found others more amenable/patient with this in these discussion groups on FB and now FINALLY HERE. Please keep talking and sharing!

That goes for everyone else as, well!


Lynda, you must read “The Nature of Personal Reality”. It is the cornerstone of all of the Material and is Seth’s self-help book to us regarding practical spiritual approaches to problem-solving common difficulties. I’ve probably read it at least 7 times. And counting. After that, I consider “The Magical Approach” to be NPR, Part 2, in effect.

I’m excited about this group, of late. The meatier replies are filling. On Facebook, I take time to write something and the response I get, inter-personally, is a bunch of Facebook “like” notifications. Feels so empty and unfulfilling…to use a word that Seth used a lot.

We now seem firmly beyond the subject of this thread. I’m enjoying the general chit-chat, though. Isn’t there a general chit-chat thread? We can continue this, there. :slight_smile: I do like to hear how others are doing. And what. :slight_smile:


thank you for your recognition, affirmations and interaction. i am reading NOPR right now. many of my books were borrowed and i need to re=up my library. i was starting Nature of the Psyche and realized i needed to back up. i have the second vol of Unknown Reality. just getting back out into physical world beyond home after 5 years. i realize that none of this may be on topic or appropriate, but this is how i tick. you are much better organized than i, in many ways! if i am offensive, obtrusive, in your way, irrelevant…PLS work with @Christopher to extract my posts to another topic or delete altogether. I am simply interacting in this attempt to discuss, learn and share to the best of my abilities at this time.

a recent (for me) finding on sugar and the physical aging connection in modern medicine: large amounts of sugar ‘has been correlated’ with shortened (and i most likely have this chemistry term wrong) telemers. i am talking about the structures that exist at the end of genetic strands (DNA, Chromosomes/genes ) that serves as protective ends. being shorter in length was connected to the strands fraying and sustaining damage translated into physical aging!

thank you for the proper name, Lumanians, and validation of my understanding.
i appreciate your response and interest.

Okay there we go! I had left Lynda’s two most recent posts behind on accident.

To all: ideally try and edit your existing post rather than posting a few times in a row. :wink: (I think doing that actually triggers a helpful little pop-up which requests this… at least it did for me when I was doing it, lol.)

The edit icon is a little pencil by your post.

Now we have a place where we can get to know each other, talk about what we’ve learned recently, etc. :wink:

1 Like

Agreed, its definitely a key text. You can say there are around 30-40 Seth material related books if you count all the main line books that were originally published, the Early Sessions, Personal Sessions, the class books (both Sue Watkins’ books and the published class sessions), Jane’s books and the ‘world view’ books. I’ve read every one except for the original ‘How to Develop your ESP Power’ and the books of Jane’s poetry. I say this not to brag but just to emphasise that you’ve barely scratched the surface @Lynda! . Took me a couple of years in all!

I read Seth Speaks first but it didn’t have a great impact on me. I found it robust enough to give Personal Reality a try afterwards. When I put that book down, I wasn’t the same person who had picked it up. I wish I’d been able to use it to solve more of my problems thus far, though - my fault, not the book’s!


By the way, Chris, this site creation of yours is working fab. Meatier discussions with the fluidity of conversation. Your ongoing admin. help of moving conversations that go off-topic is superb. It allows future readers to read more of a thread–if there are lots of large gaps, folks will be less inclined to read through innumerable posts to continue reading the subject they are interested in.

Also, kudos on your creating a better body! I lost a belly since last year. Still improving. :slight_smile:


Lynda, about 3 years ago I quite all refined sugars, and went 98% gluten-free (I do not have that disease)and lost 50 pounds and feel much better with much more energy. White sugar is impacting people’s health…ron


this was addressed to @Christopher post on his experimenting with the effect of refined sugars on the physical body and the storing of fat, a nutrition topic which has been acknowledged by some allopathic practicing physicians for some time now.

I know ALL metabolic chemical processes in the physical body release toxins, which is why we eliminate. but, yes, refined sugar intake is extremely toxic to the body, as I was responding earlier to another’s post about the effects of sugar. It robs the body of its vitamin B spectrum vitamins (not including beliefs power here) as first comes to mind, but yeah, a lot more is in play. recent articles in headlines reflect this as a major subject in mainstream right now. it also reflects many things we all discuss everyday and is fascinating to watch things play out. I am waiting on the synthetic proteins to come out (. that will be a major gain in the world of nutrition.

Hi anon38262219, It took me a while to accept that whereas my personality glowed when it encountered in-depth discussion on a topic that simply was not the norm, nor were online space designed for it. Then there was the sheer volume of the Seth material and my realisation that while ‘hard core’ sethies were in the minority in the new age community, within that community those who had read beyond 2 books in any depth were in short supply, so discussions went as far as they could for another reason. The last frustrating for me experience was mixing and matching sources of material- that may have been the final straw. Intellectually I realised I was not suited and maybe really did not want to discuss any other source of channelled material. I would prefer fewer relies of a thought out quality not the quotation from Seth as a reply.

However, I also feel that the capacity to think for one self and even to question and hold the focus of a line of enquiry is both a skill and a development of consciousness, maybe even a specialism of it and not necessary for all, but crucial for some.

1 Like

I think people are tired of thumb-typing.

In the not-so-distant past, discussion was more robust. The Fans of the Seth Material Facebook group has 1,797 members although one gets the sense, from the number of posters, that only about 1% participate.

Of late, I find it increasingly frustrating that I will write a post that takes a half an hour and the bulk of interaction I get are Facebook notifications that “x” amount of people “like” my post. If someone writes something that truly affects me, I think I can take the time to write out “thanks” and a few words.

How propitious that Chris created this group where folks are interested in more substantive discussion. And I’m really glad that this site doesn’t have a “like” button.


Sorry to burst your bubble slightly @anon38262219, but it does, at the bottom of every post. And I just liked yours :see_no_evil:

I definitely like the way Seth Talks is encouraging some more thoughtful responses though. A like doesn’t mean a whole lot, but it gives a little boost in that I know someone read what I wrote and found it useful, even if they don’t give a detailed reply. I read a lot of stuff I don’t reply to, so I like to like sometimes…


like ;D like, I’m a liker;
& a bit of a people pleaser too, so I don’t like people not liking that I like their posts!
sometimes it takes me almost an hour to write in English what I mean to say; & in the end I find that what I have to contribute isn’t all that new / worthwhile … so I delete :confused: (or often don’t even start in the first place)

1 Like

I agree with the sentiment, though the Like button actually serves a very useful purpose. It eliminates posts that only read “thank you”, and this greatly contributes to the signal to noise ratio. It eliminates clutter, essentially. Which you can imagine would get particularly bad when there are dozens of folks thanking a poster in a much larger forum, and of course without a like button the alternative in that situation would be to simply give no positive feedback at all - which actually would be largely the case anyway without a like button, rather than people writing out “thank you”.

The gap between something requiring virtually no effort and just a tiny bit of effort is actually huge, user interface studies show that largely people just can’t be assed, lol.

Brings to my mind perceptions of time, how with slow computers, things could take a long time to load, now if they take a second longer than usual it feels like an eternity. Some people look at this pessimistically, that it’s some sort of fault with the latest generation, but I think they’re very much mistaken. Essentially because: expectation for constant improvement rather than stagnation is wonderful, and more importantly the relative difference between small numbers is greater than with large numbers, which is to say, if a web page takes 30.25 seconds to load back in 1995, compared to it taking 30 seconds to load, no one gave a damn, that’s only 0.8% slower, whereas now if a web page takes 0.5 seconds to load, rather than 0.25 seconds, that’s indeed twice as slow or 50% the speed. Given the relativistic viewpoint that I believe all of humanity shares, i.e. we measure things in how they were to how they are, because there can be no “absolute” sense of if something is good or bad without anything to compare it to, then indeed the latter scenario taking 0.25 seconds longer to load is more egregious than a site taking 0.25 seconds longer to load in 1995 and the expectation for something better is perfectly justifiable. :wink: I think this is the same mechanic operating when it comes to the ease of clicking a button vs. leaving no feedback. The user wants to leave feedback, but if it isn’t beyond-belief-stupid-easy, then it’s hard to blame them.


I mean, I get what you’re saying, but I think the “like” buttons (on facebook, but especially on here) are pretty useful… It gives a way for people who don’t have anything super meaningful to contribute to participate.
I barely ever post on here, but I read every post and “like” a lot of them. People wouldn’t know that I found their post informative, or useful, or entertaining without a like button because it would be just plain silly for me to say “Thank you, I found this interesting/useful/etc.” on every post. It would derail the topic, and create a lot of clutter.
Even on facebook, it’s a legit way for me to say “Hey, I think this is cool” without me having to actually say “Hey, I think this is cool”. It shows someone that I read their post and liked it, without me having to go somewhat off topic and actually say that.


some would-be-contributors might even feel inadequate or question their ability to be significant through words. they may question themselves in posting. I know I begin a post more often than you’d think; I usually decide not to say anything and erase my incomplete post, trying to maintain strictly on topic and other ‘excuses’. some wandering input is very stimulating and can form offshoots.