Is the Seth Material a Religion?

By Editor |

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

I recently received a note from a reader of the Seth material who scolded me in no uncertain terms for promoting the Material as a religion.  And since this blog has the Seth material as its central subject, it seems to me that I should address that issue in an article.

Seth made it clear in the Material that it should not be turned into a religion, but I believe that he took that position because all religions, to some extent, degenerate into ritual and dogma.  Take, for example, Buddhism.  Buddism is, without a doubt, the least dogmatic of all the religions; but even so, it has its share of nonsense.  The Buddha was not a god; he was an ordinary human being who (he said) achieved enlightenment, and who proposed a system of ideas and habits by which to live one's life.  Yet statues of the Buddha exist all over the world which make him appear god-like.  Just as Christianity has its churches, Buddhism has its temples, and the temples have clergy (monks), and the monks practice rituals.  Instead of endeavoring to appear like ordinary people, the monks set themselves apart by shaving their heads and wearing bright orange and yellow robes.  In some countries, a ritual is practiced in which sacred texts are placed in what appears to be a cylindrical rattle, and then twirled around and around -- the idea being that twirling the sacred text will somehow cause its wisdom to seep into your head.

Despite the fact that most religions have lost touch with their roots and are polluted by ritual, dogma and ambition (among other things), "Religion" is not a dirty word to me.  I was reared in a non-religious household, so I don't carry any religious baggage.  The central question is, what is a religion?  A religion is nothing more than a system of beliefs about metaphysical subjects, such as the existence of God, the nature of the soul (if we have one), the survival of the soul after death, and the nature of the universe.  The Seth material addresses all of those subjects.

If most religions also have organizational structures, houses of worship, and clergy, that doesn't mean that all religions must have them.  Perhaps it is because I never belonged to any religion, never went to any churches, and never dealt with any clergy that those things are irrelevant to me.  To me, churches and synagogues and mosques are just beautiful buildings.  In contemplating the various religions, I have always gone straight to their underlying philosophies and tenets.  However, I can certainly sympathize with people who had bad experiences with religion and don't want the Seth material classified as one.

When I started reading the Material in 1984, it was immediately apparent to me that Seth was setting forth a theology.  He not only described God, he gave us information about God's early existence, and he said that there was a creation event.  He spoke about the nature of the soul, our relationship to God, survival after death, and reincarnation.  He explained how the universe is constructed and organized.  Seth not only talked about all the same subjects that religions do, but he addressed those topics in greater detail and with greater specificity than any of the religions do.  So not only does the Seth material outline a theology, it does so more convincingly than any other religion.

I'm not proposing that the Seth material become mired in ritual and dogma, and I'm not proposing that we build Seth temples and populate them with Seth monks (wearing, perhaps, blue and green robes?).  I'm not suggesting that we build statues of Jane Roberts sitting in her rocking chair channelling Seth, or that we render Robert Butts' painting of Seth in stained-glass windows.  And I'm certainly not suggesting that we pray to Seth.  (If Seth were able to hear our prayers, I think he would just be bothered by them -- and certainly, he is helpless to intervene on our behalf.)

What I am saying is that the information in the Seth material provides a rational alternative to the ancient religions that have served mankind so poorly.  All that the Material needs is some publicizing.  I prefer to use the word "religion" because much of the public has already dismissed spirituality as being kooky and stupid.  In other words, I have been calling the Seth material a "religion" because I think it will be taken more seriously that way.  And since it does set forth a comprehensive theology, I see no reason not to do that.

The woman who scolded me sent me a follow-up note in which she said that to her, "religion" implies worship.  To me, "religion" just means a system of beliefs.  Seth made it clear that God (or All That Is, as he called God) does not want to be worshipped, but to be loved.  In suggesting that the Material be viewed as a religion, I certainly don't mean that anyone should worship Seth or Jane Roberts or even God.  Our relationship with God is a symbiotic one (interdependent); we are part of the gestalt that is God, and God provides us with life and a universe in which to live.  Seth was a teacher, not a messiah.  But then, I suspect that all the other religious figures viewed themselves as teachers also.

So what would a Seth religion look like?  Well, it would be the same as it is now.  People would read the books and practice the exercises that Seth suggested.  They might also get together and talk about the tenets of the Material and how it informs the way we live.  The only difference, I imagine, is that more would be written about the Material than we are seeing now.  Hopefully, the Material would transform people's lives, making them more loving and tolerant, and more successful in every way (and less fearful of death!).  I don't imagine any churches or temples, or any religious officials, or that the books be regarded as scriptures, or anything like that.

You have to understand that I'm not proposing that the Seth material become a religion; I am saying that it already is a religion.  It is certainly my religion.  In deciding what to believe, I have taken some stuff from the Edgar Cayce readings, but most of what I believe comes straight from Seth.  However, to satisfy those people who object to the term "religion", I have added some disclaimers to my other articles.