1 result for (book:ss AND session:568 AND stemmed:probabl)
7/55 (13%)
Speakers
devil
evil
soul
religions
PROBABILITIES, THE NATURE OF GOOD AND
EVIL, AND RELIGIOUS SYMBOLISM
[... 5 paragraphs ...]
The chapter heading: “Probabilities, the Nature of Good and Evil, and Religious Symbolism.”
[... 3 paragraphs ...]
Instead, the soul stands at the center of itself, exploring, extending its capacities in all directions at once, involved in issues of creativity, each one highly legitimate. The probable system of reality opens up the nature of the soul to you. It should change current religion’s ideas considerably. For this reason, the nature of good and evil is a highly important point.
[... 1 paragraph ...]
We go back to our fundamentals: You create reality through your feelings, thoughts, and mental actions. Some of these are physically materialized, others are actualized in probable systems. You are presented with an endless series of choices, it seems, at any point, some more or less favorable than others.
[... 12 paragraphs ...]
(10:13.) Many probable systems have perceptive mechanisms far different from your own. In fact, some are based upon gestalts of awareness completely alien to you. Quite without realizing it, your ego is a result of group consciousness, for example; the one consciousness that most directly faces the exterior world, is dependent upon the minute consciousness that resides within each living cell of your body; and as a rule you are only aware of one ego — at least at a time.
[... 1 paragraph ...]
(10:21.) In any of these worlds, the Christ drama could never appear as it appeared within your own. Now the same thing applies to each of your great religions, though as I have said in the past, the Buddhists come closer, generally speaking, to a description of the nature of reality. They have not understood the eternal validity of the soul, however, in terms of its exquisite invulnerability, nor been able to hold a feeling for its unique character. But Buddha, like Christ, interpreted what he almost knew in terms of your own reality. Not only of your own physical reality, but your own probable physical reality.
[... 25 paragraphs ...]
(After the session I wondered if the Seth material itself could be a distorted version of the Speakers’ messages. Jane said it might be possible. Actually, she felt, the Speakers’ material was “probably more poetical.”)
