----BEGIN PART ONE OF TWO----
As I said, Story Waters is one of these people. He posted comments about Seth on one of his pages. I treated his comments as a post and responded to them as such. Below is my responses to Story–which he refuses to even look at. He refuses to communicate with me and seems to not want to be questioned. Instead he (and Frost and others) make their declarations about channeling Seth with no one to challenge those claims. Instead, they make up and answer to weak challenges they create for themselves to answer–ignoring the real challenges.
Please note that I am not attempting to judge or assess the quality of Story’s work. It matters not if it is the best material ever possible in this universe, or the worst…they both EQUALLY would contaminate the integrity and authenticity of the Seth material.
Now, for Story’s story and my responses (CAPS are for emphasis only; not yelling). I am responding to the following webpage that Story created for “fans of Seth and Jane Roberts to decide if they may be interested in Seth channeled by myself. As well as my answer to the question of ‘Are they the same Seth?’” (grammatical/punctuation errors verbatim from original text). This is the site: http://limitlessness.org/Seth/
Story Writes: Welcome! I have created this page to allow fans of Seth and Jane Roberts to decide if they may be interested in Seth channeled by myself. As well as my answer to the question of ‘Are they the same Seth?’ just below, you will also find over five hours of key Seth-Jane recordings to allow you to experience their energies such that you can feel if you resonate with these new materials on their own merits, free of charge. If you don’t know who Seth and Jane Roberts are then just enjoy the free materials and meeting these spectacular energies!
Barrie Responds: If they are different “Seths”—then find another name to use and not “steal” all the hard work than Jane put into her material. Resonating with the “new” material is no validation or explanation concerning if it is actually Seth or not. IF is not Seth, don’t use the name “Seth.” If it IS Seth, then don’t say it is not.
Website Question: Story, is the Seth you channel the same as the one channeled by Jane Roberts?
Story Continues: Short Answer: No, please reference the materials produced by Jane Roberts for that experience of Seth. My work stands alone as it is founded on the specific idea that we are all One Consciousness. I do not therefore present my work as being a continuation of Jane’s work. I wish to state clearly that the Seth I channel is unique to me in just the same way that it was unique to Jane.
Barrie Responds: This “Short Answer” is simply a declaration—couched in platitudes. It is still using the name “Seth” and saying it is a different Seth. I would suggest then NOT to use the name Seth if you wanted to avoid confusion and not piggyback on Jane’s work. It is the USE of the name Seth that is the problem. Once you have a number of Seth’s running around, leaving quotes and books behind—the actual Seth of Jane—gets lost in the mix and over time—all the “Seth” quotes get mixed together and the integrity of Seth’s material with Jane gets lost. It doesn’t even matter if this “Seth” is totally not related to Jane at all. The use of the name contaminates Jane’s Seth’s work and rides its coattails. This “short answer” is simply a meaningless “no” – with no validation, proof or anything. Stop using the name.
Story Continues: Long Answer: As with all channels, the Seth presented through Jane Roberts is a union of consciousness that produces something unique. The Seth that I present, though having similarities of personality and the message that you create your reality, sounds different and talks with a different focus and intention. I do not present my work in any way as a continuation of the work Jane produced. The content I am producing with my experience of Seth (and Jane) stands alone.
Barrie Responds: Who cares if you claim to be continuing her work or not. You are USING THE NAME—which contaminates Jane’s work with Seth. Do you think Seth would just start speaking thru you—being so different—as you say—and still use the name Seth—just to confuse everyone and contaminate his own work with Jane? Please. So…a similar message, sounds different, talks with a different focus and intention—then MAYBE you should drop the name of Seth. If something walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it may be a duck. BUT if something does not walk like a duck or talk like a duck, then don’t call it a duck.
Story Continues: Despite my personal belief that I am communicating with the vast state of consciousness I first experienced through Jane’s books (which I also refer to as The Universal Teacher), I do not make any such claim because the message in my heart does not require this association and is in fact muddied by debate over it. I wish to state clearly that the Seth I channel is unique to me in just the same way as it was unique to Jane.
Barrie Responds: I have to say this now…I’ve been trying to avoid the term…but this is really such bullshit. I’m not saying whatever Story channels is bullshit or not—but this reasoning is really pathetic, in my opinion. He is so clearly doing what do many have done before him—using Seth’s name as a symbol for his own inner communications. He is using Seth’s name to symbolize his “Universal Teacher.” Jane’s Seth addressed this:
Jane’s Seth (Session 463): “It is quite natural that others in (Jane’s) acquaintanceship (like reading the books) who are experimenting should go through a stage in which it seems to them they are receiving information from me. Suggestion operates, and any trance deeper than ordinary for them can be interpreted in these terms. He should understand this, and explain it simply to his students.”
Barrie Comments: This is what Story is doing. It is also what Mark Frost is doing. And others. Seth said he would not communicate thru anyone else but Jane in order to keep his work authentic and to maintain it’s integrity…So, what do you think? He would just forsake that idea after she dies and speak thru 3, 4,6, 10 other people?
Seth (Session 876): ‘Now, I did not communicate with those women – but their belief in me helped each of them use certain abilities.’
Barrie Comments: This, too, explains what is happening with Story. He was a Seth reader and his appreciation of Seth helped him to use his abilities and so he used the name “Seth” as a symbol for “The Universal Teacher” – which is probably what Story believed of Seth.
I believe that Story is disingenuous when he says, in effect, “This is not Seth…but just listen to me and I’ll tell you what Seth now says…”
Story Had Said: I wish to state clearly that the Seth I channel is unique to me in just the same way as it was unique to Jane.
Barrie Comments: So what? He is USING THE NAME…cashing in on Jane’s work—by declaring it is a different Seth—but it is Seth saying this and Seth saying that and come to my Seth conference, etc. This doesn’t mean it actually IS Seth…unique to you or not? What do you think Seth was? A God? The Universal Teacher? Well, a universal teacher could go by ANY name? Why use Seth which cashes in on Jane’s work and contaminates it–and confuses the issue.
Every person who claims to communicate for Seth firmly believes it. Either they are correct and Seth is a fool for stating he would or only communicate thru Jane; OR he changed his mind and no longer cares about its authenticity and integrity; OR they are mistaken and it isn’t Seth—as Seth has repeated each and every time. It seems obvious that they are mistaken…as Seth has explained:
Seth (Session 876, from God of Jane): "A woman wrote that she was involved with. . . correspondences in which I was communicating with her, and she was certain that this would prove beyond a doubt my own independent nature, since I [would have given] messages to another medium besides Ruburt. The woman was quite convinced of that.
"Other people have written that I have given them such messages. Another woman dreamed of me, and had an experience in which a child was definitely healed. Now, I did not communicate with those women—but their belief in me helped each of them use certain abilities. One woman has done some writing—not very good—but still, those abilities came to the fore. The other woman was able to use her own healing abilities.
And, of course, there is the issue of maintaining the integrity and authenticity of the work.
In short, IF I stole Story’s identify, or anyone else’s reading this—I don’t think you would accept my explanation that it was OK because it was a YOU that was unique to me. What actual IS unique to Story, is that it IS actually his OWN inner voice, which IS unique to him.
Story Continues: Only if you are intrigued by a channeler who sees Seth and Jane as his teachers and whose work is in alignment with theirs, should you look at my work.
Barrie Responds: Again, you are connecting your work to Seth and Jane, while claiming it is your version of Seth—implying no connection to the Seth of Jane. This just seems so insincere to me. In any case, remember that this is not about you, Story, it is about using the name SETH. It doesn’t matter what your reasoning is, your explanations or your excuses are, the very USE of the name “Seth” is what cashes in on Jane’s work while contaminating it and ruining its integrity. Don’t you think a “Universal Teacher” could easily have gone by another name? But that wouldn’t suit you purposes—perhaps you subconscious purposes—but nevertheless—it wouldn’t have served them—because you then could not tie the work into Seth and Jane.
Story Continues: Further down this page I offer extensive samples of Seth through myself freely so you can decide for yourself if you are interested in my work purely on its own merits as I in no way wish to profit by using the name Seth.
Barrie Responds: Story, IF you really don’t wish to profit by using the name “Seth” – then DO NOT USE IT. Again, it is not a question about IF people like your work or not—it IS a question of using the name “Seth” which was a well-known legendary name you ARE profiting from. Switch to another name—and then you would cease stealing that name for yourself—either accidentally or otherwise. The issue would be gone.
I do find it disingenuous again, that you claim to want people to be interested in your “work purely on its own merits” – and yet you persist on using such a well-known legend-in-the-business as “Seth” – which will attract and draw many, many more people in precisely because of the name. Stand on your own two metaphorical feet, please.
Story Continues: I use the name purely because it is my personal truth and I am not going be pressured into not speaking my truth by the religious fundamentalism of those that claim to be the most devout Seth followers.
Barrie Responds: That is no excuse or justification at all…because it is your personal truth. People MURDER because of their personal truths—it doesn’t justify their murder, either…and acting on your “personal truth” doesn’t make it TRUE—nor is it proof or validation that is IS true. If it was my personal truth that I am Stephen King, it would not justify me writing stories or getting a credit card in his name.
The terrorists’ “personal truth” is that they will go to Heaven or whatever if they die killing the infidels. People who rob banks do so because THEIR personal truth tells them it is OK to do so; and on and on.
What people who are sincerely trying to be honest do—is to EXAMINE their personal truths and see if they HOLD UP after an examination. They don’t just say, “This is my personal truth and therefore it is my personal truth and that is why it is correct and why I do it.”
Story Continues: I am very proud of the heart, clarity and power of my work and for myself it is the evolution, not replication, of what I learnt through Jane.
Barrie Responds: Now, this is very important here. You have your pride and ego tied up in your work—and so if I say that it is not actually Seth—you feel attacked in some way—or threatened—as if I am challenging you, your pride, your worthiness, your ego—or the quality of your work. I am NOT DOING THAT. That is not in my heart to do. I wish for you to be proud, happy and continue your inner quests and teachings, if that is what you want. ALL I am saying and/or trying to discuss—all I am challenging is your use of the name, Seth. I am not challenging your pride, your worthiness, or the QUALITY of your work. Just the use of the name, Seth.
Story Continues: With the concept that there is only one consciousness in existence, The One Self Teachings see through the illusion of separation and make the question of ‘Which Seth is this?’ entirely redundant. Through all that I learnt through Jane and her Seth, my message is a shining example of the impact of Jane’s life upon this world and I will continue to seek to share that gift.
Barrie Responds: Man, Story, are you mixing all things up. Let’s take this one statement at a time:
Story Said: With the concept that there is only one consciousness in existence, The One Self Teachings see through the illusion of separation and make the question of ‘Which Seth is this?’ entirely redundant.
Barrie Responds: What does this have to do with using Seth’s name? We are One and we are Separate—even tho we are One and connected. We are still individuals giving our unique and individual perspective back to the Oneness so IT can learn and grow.
That said, the question, “Which Seth is this?” – is NOT about any oneness…it is about ruining the integrity of the Seth Material thru Jane—because all the different “Seth” quotes and books—over time—will all blend together…and the contradictions and weaknesses and conflicting differences—will contaminate the material and make a murky mess—that has no more consistency or authenticity. THIS is what Jane and Seth wanted to prevent.
Even tho you are not trying to make this next argument, all you say can be used by an actual person who steals someone else’s identify. Isn’t the question, “Which Joe is this?” entirely redundant.
It makes a HUGE difference to Joe, I assume, IF someone steals his identify even tho from one of the more expansive perspectives “We Are One.”
Story Continues: Through all that I learnt through Jane and her Seth, my message is a shining example of the impact of Jane’s life upon this world and I will continue to seek to share that gift.
Barrie Responds: Yes, this I agree with. YOUR message may be a shining example, of Jane’s work—but that impact is for people to explore inside and find their OWN voice—and not mistake it for Seth’s voice. Keep exploring, JUST DON’T STEAL THE NAME “SETH.” Call who you speak for UT, or Universal Teacher, and THEN credit Seth and Jane for inspiring you. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. But that is not what you are doing. You are USING the name Seth—which IS stealing it from Jane.
Seth wanted to inspire people in that manner:
Seth (ESP Class, 4-17-73): “If you are quick, and if you are intuitive, and if you are courageous, and if some evening you listen to my voice in the proper mood, then you can follow yourself to the heart of yourself, using the voice as a road or vehicle.”
Story Continues: Further Context: For those not understanding the cause of this debate, here is a little context. Jane Roberts channeled Seth from the mid-sixties to mid-eighties and was a complete pioneer in the field. Her books are incredible and highly revered. I was given my first Seth book by someone who recognized that I was beginning to channel in my early twenties and it changed my life.
Barrie Responds: It sure did.
Story Continues: There is always debate over the authenticity of channels, but this is heightened with Seth as he said in Seth Speaks “I will never speak through anyone other than Ruburt (Jane), simply because there must never be any doubt of the origin of the Seth material.”
Barrie Responds: NO, Story. No, no, no. He did NOT just say it there. He said it all over the place, thru-out the lifespan of the material—and it was also reiterated by Jane and Rob. It is NOT just this ONE THING that Seth said in Seth Speaks. BUT you seem unwilling or unable to accept this, see this, or whatever this. It is NOT primarily this one statement that causes the debate. By keeping your focus always on this one quote…I’m not sure if you are being fully dishonest or just ignorant concerning what Seth actually said.
Story Continues: It is primarily because of this statement that I receive hate-mail from people with the exact same energy as people who quote the bible as law.
Barrie Responds: Again, it is NOT “primarily because of this statement.” As an aside, I don’t support anyone sending hate mail. And these comments, and my posts to you which you blocked, likewise were not “hate posts” or “hate mail” – altho it is frustrating sometimes to try to discuss something with someone who refuses to address the real issues—like you do. I can’t speak for others who write to you, and I can’t know for sure what they said or what their energy is. Obviously, you speak of your interpretation of that energy and of their words. But in any case, I speak for myself—with my evidence and explanations. All you have done so far, or people who control your pages, have blocked me from discussing it or contacting you to discuss it.
Do you notice how you throw in your insult there, characterizing people as if they are defending some religion and not giving much thought? Is that YOUR hate? Perhaps you are projecting your own hate onto everyone who challenges you?
Let me just clarify and speak for myself: I believe everyone is free to and should disagree with Seth whenever they do. They should always trust themselves over Seth, me…or you.
As you may know, I attended Seth class. I saw Seth speak thru Jane. That does NOT deify Seth & his words in my mind–it HUMANIZES Seth & his words. I never thought of Seth as a God when he sat in the chair & talked.
If anyone knows the humanness of Seth/Jane–it is someone who attended class. Maybe reading his words a person can drift into deification, but you can’t unpickle a cubumber. Once you see Seth/Jane speak, you cannot think of Seth/Jane as a God or as speaking gospel.
Seth (ESP Class, 12-19-72): “Seth Speaks should be called You Speak and You Speak and You Speak. So listen to yourselves.
Barrie Comments: And, Seth has often said, that the vitality and energy of his voice is but a dim echo of the vitality & energy of our own selves & voices. And, when you ask a question it means that you already have the answers somewhere inside you–so go find it.
These words and concepts do not induce someone to look at Seth as a God or his material as the Bible. Just the opposite. They inspire people to look within and find and listen to their own voice.
Have you ever considered that the people who challenge you ARE listening to their own voice, and perhaps YOU have created the religion and quote yourself and your “Seth” as the Bible—with no other proof, EVER, than your own say-so?
----END PART ONE OF TWO----
