Last Updated on August 5, 2015
This is Part Two of a dialogue I had with various people about channelling. Click here if you have not already read Part One.
In Part Two we begin with a comment from a friend who joined the conversation:
“This channelling couple, Esther and Jerry Hicks, seem to be doing well. I just like the material that comes forth from her lips. Great for insightful aligning of beliefs or releasing them”
Yet, as far as I know (and I don’t claim to know too much about them or their activity in the world), Ester and Jerry teach mostly on the law of attraction, and they make the bulk of their money from that. On the surface, at least, something about this brings to mind people like Robert Kiyosaki who wrote Rich Dad Poor Dad and a vast array of other books and workshops and products that lead on from the success of that. As you may know, he teaches on how to make it big on investments, particularly property investments, and yet from what I understand the bulk of his wealth did not come from investments but from selling books and workshops on the subject. What also comes to mind is the people who sell “get rich on the net” books and programs, and who earn most of their money from selling such info. What sort of role model are they for their audience? What is the deeper message that comes across? For me, when I am exposed to the teachings of such people I get a very similar feeling to the one I have had since I was a child when I watch the news or read the newspaper. This uneasy feeling that someone is trying to deceive me, or is not in a place of integrity.
I listened to an intro CD of Ester and Jerry Hicks in my friends car in Berkeley a few months ago, when I was using his car. It was the first time I had really listened to them and their work, etc. It was certainly interesting material. There were things that gave me some insights. For sure. Yet I would not look at it as a complete picture or teaching suitable for people to evolve spiritually in the long run. What many of these more popular channels have to say is bound to be interesting and insightful… otherwise they wouldn’t be popular. But I can’t help but dig below the surface of things. And below the surface of channelling, in my observation, is something that is not about spiritual freedom. It is not a Path of Freedom. Also the information they come forth with is seldom, if ever, new to me. If it at first appears to be NEW I usually find it is only because it has no basis in reality. It was made up from a bunch of popular new age ideas / concepts, but without much substance in REALITY.
If what they are sharing is just a nicely packaged rehash of knowledge that is already out there, why do they waste their time and energy co-operating with an entity (that is not yet evolved enough to incarnate into the world as Man) in order to find it out?
The other issue for me is this. YES these channels often do have interesting and insightful things to say… even truths, that are based in reality. BUT we can pretty much guarantee if they need to channel then they have some serious limitations / issues / spiritual blank spots… and this will invariably come through in their work one way or another. So the fact some of what they say is accurate and REAL makes it all the more dangerous or dodgy. Because people resonate with the bits that are real, but typically lack the discernment to filter out the other trash that comes with it. So people often end up subscribing to a bunch a new age mush because it came wrapped up in some basic truths. If it was total mush through and through many of the listeners would just walk away at first contact. Yet when some of it is truthful/reality-based they feel that and come in for more. The nature of the wounded ego is such that it will tend towards ignoring or turning a blind eye to the mush because the rest sounds so good and is what “I know to be true in my heart”. Over time, however, I think the mush typically turns the ground on which the REAL stuff was based, into quicksand, and people eventually sink or scram…
Of course, the same applies to most gurus and spiritual teachers I see people following. Same issue, just in a different form. They speak for themselves (as opposed to channelling someone else), but again they have limitations, and this will permeate what they teach. The same goes for me. I don’t want people to follow me or to take anything I say as truth. It is important people think and feel for themselves, and if something I say doesn’t weigh up for them, I invite them to come and talk to me about it, so that we can explore further into our possible limitations and emerge more fully into Being.
There is nothing “wrong” with this situation of channels and gurus giving out half-truths. It is all part of the perfection, within limitation. We have to experience these limitations, feel the discomfort or pain of them, and move on… expansively. it doesn’t have to be painful, although most people are so numbed out these days that pain is all they respond to.
This is why on A Path Of Freedom I do not generally recommend investing yourself into the teachings of anyone, unless those teachings ultimately are about returning you to your own essence. Rather than taking you outside yourself, they must take you into your self and seat your attention there. The communion is then between you and the Divine Mother, as opposed to some external agent.
People have within them the seed of their own I AM Presence, which is an extension of what some call God.
This topics also begs the question of whether or not channelling has a detrimental effect on the channeller?
I shall add the following which was shared with me by a dare friend who entered the conversation. He quotes the following from Dr David Frawley (an American expert on Ayurveda and Yoga)
Just had a look in Dr David Frawley’s book “Ayurvedic Healing”. He says about channelling: we have to die a little to weaken the hold on our own life-force to let another being work through us. We tend to lose control of our emotional energy. It aggravates vata and can lead to arthritis, insomnia, epilepsy, paralysis and premature aging.
He also says “many mediums and channels are possessed by gods (lesser deities of the midastral world) and find the experience exhilarating.” They may provide knowledge and inspiration without harming them directly, but over time it aggravates vata. Then he says, any form of possession is dangerous and weakens the connection with our own soul.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks