Essence of Rose: Introduction and Overview

by Joanne K. Helfrich, Paul M. Helfrich, Ph.D.

 

Who Is Rose?

What is Rose’s agenda?

How does Rose present this information?

How did these sessions begin?

Why does Rose sometimes talk funny?

Why does Rose make up words?

What are some other terms Rose regularly uses?

Why does Rose describe herself as a nun?

Why does Rose ask us to be discerning?

What is the Seth, Elias, and Kris connection?

Is this the same Rose that Elias talks about?

What is the Ken Wilber and integral connection?

What is the Rose phenomenon really about?

What does channeling have to do with a global shift in consciousness?

Is channeling old or new?

Is channeling different than mediumship?

How do scholars define channeling?

So what!?

Endnotes

 

“Now that your rose is in bloom,

“A light hits the gloom on the grey.” - Seal

 

Who Is Rose?

Rose describes herself as a nonphysically focused “energy personality essence,” or what has been commonly termed “spirit,” “soul,” or “source.” She serves as a kind of progenitor for many, many essences and has never directly experienced physical lifetimes.

We are an energy personality essence and therefore we are aware that you may not be familiar with our kind, so to speak. We are nonphysical in terms that we do not incorporate physical bodies in the sense that we are alive in the world, but we are connected to many focuses [lifetimes] in many realities, from which we engage and determine our information that we provide to you…. [Session 49, May 17, 2007]

Since each essence experiences many, many lifetimes, Rose is very familiar with our physical reality. Rose chooses to focus her awareness in nonphysical areas of consciousness in which she holds the intent of teaching, or more specifically, of offering information within the least amount of distortion.

What is Rose’s agenda?

Rose’s intent, in her interaction with us, is to provide information to help us communicate directly with essence given that we live in a time of unprecedented change on a global scale.

This is the agenda of Rose: to be communicating directly to you in ways that help you to entreat your essence to speak to you directly. We want you to beautifully speak to essence in your own ways, not through us. We will be helping you to do so through our lessons and expressions, so be aware that we are always here to help. This is our agenda: to serve in ways that allow you to be aware of your beautiful creations of essence, and this energy exchange will allow beautiful lessons in doing so. [Session 45, May 14, 2007]

Rose also reflects a resurgence of the Divine Feminine principle – a casualty of the last two thousand years in the West, a time dominated by patriarchal values, institutions, and God concepts. So Rose’s intent is to help balance both Divine Feminine and Masculine aspects by integrating deep intuitions, emotions, and community along with intellect, reason, and autonomy. The idea isn’t to create a homogenous fe/male human or a new matriarchy that turns the tables, but to honor and reintegrate feminine and masculine aspects already within the collective psyche.

How does Rose present this information?

Rose engages people in private and public sessions, her website, and forthcoming books that cover a wide variety of topics.

Rose engages what she terms an “energy exchange” with a woman named Joanne Helfrich who lives with her husband Paul in northern Los Angeles County. This exchange is similar to what many call “channeling,” but these two actions are somewhat different. Channeling involves an interaction with aspects of one’s own essence, and an energy exchange involves a mergence and an exchange with another essence.

Joanne’s experience within this exchange continues to evolve. As of this writing there have been over 230 sessions recorded—well over 1,000 pages—through autotyping and voice transmission.

How did these sessions begin?

Joanne and Paul have read the Seth books by Jane Roberts since the mid-1970s. In late 1997 they bought a home in Castaic, CA to study and help publish the information offered by Elias and Mary Ennis, an authentic expansion of The Seth Material. In 2003, they met Serge Grandbois, who engages an energy exchange with Kris in Toronto, Ontario. Along with Mark Bukator, they began to help publish the Kris Chronicles, another expansion and continuation of The Seth Material. Paul also began an in-depth study of contemporary philosopher and psychologist Ken Wilber in 2000 and earned an Integral Certificate from Integral Institute in 2007 where he applied Wilber’s AQAL-5 metatheory to the channeling phenomenon.

All of which set the stage for the end of March, 2007, when Joanne returned from an Integral Leadership Conference with the feeling that she was at a personal tipping point. Integral Institute provides a brilliant “theory of everything,” but many of the individuals at the conference seemed unsure about what they wanted to do with this knowledge. When she asked, “Where are the tools for discovering personal intent?” No one had an answer. It seemed they could benefit from Seth and Elias’ information on intention (called families of consciousness[1]), but this typology was clearly unexplored territory.

Conversely, it had always been clear to Joanne and Paul that those who studied channeled information would benefit from Integral Institute’s information (which is why they invented Integral Conscious Creation[2]). The conference confirmed this, as the Big Mind and other shadow exercises they participated in pushed Joanne towards new realizations in how the Integral framework complements channeled teachings.

So Joanne’s “mission” coming back from the Integral conference was to amend her unused Ouija board with colored dots representing families of consciousness, Elias’ orientations,[3] and other typology tools. She wanted to provide readings to friends and family to help them discover their life’s intent and purpose.

On March 26, Joanne started practicing her Ouija board for about an hour a day. In less than two weeks she was getting accurate readings, and decided to try some letters. On April 5, she asked who she was speaking to and got “Rose” or “Rosalie,” the lack of clarity due to her own uncertainty on the board. Then on April 17, Joanne decided to leave herself open and not ask questions. The board said, “YOURWONDERFUL… pause… TRUST… pause….”

She wondered if this meant trust self, trust everything, then thought about asking the name of the personality again… “ROSE….”

Was this in response to her question, or did it mean trust Rose? The board spelled out: “QUOTE TRUST ROSE ENDQUOTE.” Ten days later, Joanne began to autotype, then “airtype” (communicate without a keyboard through her fingers), and then voice channel.

What’s unusual about this energy exchange is that, unlike trance channelers Jane Roberts, Mary Ennis, Serge Grandbois, and many others, Joanne is able to speak to Rose directly in a light-trance state. This is not to say one is better than the other, as each modality has its own pluses and minuses. But the strength of this kind of energy exchange is that Joanne has direct access to an “invisible friend,” sort of like the classic Jimmy Stuart movie Harvey, only Rose is inside Joanne’s psyche not projected outside. Needless to say, this new ability took some getting used to for both of them! Like having a new partner in their marriage, the transition has been challenging, yet rewarding.

Why does Rose sometimes talk funny?

Rose uses a distinct type of language to help force us out of habitual linguistic patterns that reinforce linear, secular thinking and help us open to the Divine within. Her intent is:

… to strike a chord in the readers that would be resonant with their sense of the spiritual. The language is meant to give you a sense of sacred connectedness with the proud heritage that is yours in the way of Spirit, which has always been communicated with you in sacred ways rather than secular. The language is representative of the ancient ways we have always communicated with you, but becomes misconstrued. Therefore, the way of Spirit will interest those who have been longing for the wisdom of the ancients to awaken their deepest, eternal selves, while providing the most modern updates of the teachings in terms that you will find useful. ~ The Way of Spirit for Young Adults, pp. 2-3.

Rose also speaks on different levels simultaneously. The first is directly to you and your questions. Additionally, she speaks to the collective, to everyone who will come across the information.

Rose’s vocal syntax continues to evolve, and it helps to relax the analytical intellect by inducing a kind of light trance in its listeners over time. In this way, more subjective information is able to be transmitted and assimilated.

Why does Rose make up words?

It is difficult to squeeze metaphysical concepts into any language that is based on linear time and cause-and-effect thinking. So Rose occasionally creates new words to present concepts that help us break out of conventional thoughts and behaviors. For example:

Feal – a mergence of feel and real. To feel in real ways, trusting our Divine selves and incorporating them into our lives.

Geanius – a combination of gene and genius. It describes the realization of wisdom, which is provided in the genetic codes in our bodies, as well as the functions of our minds.

Personal God – essence as a direct mediator to our Divine Source. A variation of Jane Roberts’s “God of Jane,” It is an innate, inviolate, and inalienable Aspect that fuels all sentient beings.

Senxuality – a mergence of sensuality and sexuality – a deep sensation or feeling-tone of the Divine.

Sontering – the “breathing in” of, or communion, with essence.

Treantea – a way to realize more choices by engaging our imaginations and intuitions.

Weany Girl/Boy – loving terms used to describe Joanne and Paul, who are weaning themselves of fear, guilt, and doubt.

What are some other terms Rose regularly uses?

All-That-Is – a term used originally by Seth to represent God, Source, Great Chain of Being, Allah, Brahman, Tao, Shunyata, etc., as the Primal Cause of all processes and perspectives in physical reality.

Essence – also called the soul, inner self, or entity. It is a “source self” for all physical lifetimes, as such, it is a large multidimensional personality structure.

Focus Personality – a term used originally by Jane Roberts (also referred to as focus) to describe a single physical lifetime. In larger terms, essence actually consists of multiple simultaneous focus personalities. Jane used this term in her theory called Aspect Psychology.

Aspects – coined by Jane Roberts to describe our various functions of our true multidimensional being. Essences and focuses are all considered Aspects of All-That-Is. Ultimately there is only One within the Many, so Aspects represent the multitudinous forms taken by The Many.

Energy Exchange – similar to what many call “channeling.” Channeling involves an interaction with Aspects of one’s own essence, and an energy exchange involves a mergence and an exchange with Aspects of another essence.

Essence Name – a name that represents our vast multidimensional heritage and the sum total of all our lifetimes in physical reality. Essence leans in the direction of favoring masculine or feminine expressions, so an essence name often reflects that.

Families of Consciousness – pools of innate intention that exist “before the beginning” and seed all physical realities. In our physical reality, there are nine main forms of complementary intention that produce tremendous diversity. There are also “sub-families” that allow for variation and hybrids of the main nine. Families form a typology of intention and purpose that is present in all stages of development.

Orientations – a concept introduced by Seth and developed by Elias and Rose. There are three innate “languages” of perception that serve as a framework for all physical lifetimes: common, intermediate, and soft. Each essence will experience a minimum of three lifetimes, each based on one of the orientations, when engaging a cycle of manifestation in our reality. Orientations form a typology of perception that is present in all stages of development.

Why does Rose describe herself as a nun?

Rose started from Day 1 to use this metaphor from Joanne’s Catholic background. However, Rose redefined it to align with the contemplative traditions of women mystics to express the rising Divine Feminine principle at the leading edge of evolution. Also, Rose’s definition is not limited to females, as she considers Paul a “nun,” much to their amusement. So it is a much broader, symbolic definition of a deep inner energy seeking to rebalance the world.

This term, nun-selves, is used to denote the manner in which we, Rose, will engage you. We mean by this that nuns are contrary by nature, and in the same sense, they are Zen masters in their own right. We are not saying that all nuns are Zen masters, but the feminine traditions that created the nuns that we “enjoy” today are ones of great spiritual lineages that have suffered over the past few millennia in ways that our nun-selves will be resurrecting, so to speak. The lineage includes Hildegard von Bingen, Teresa of Avila, St. Francis of Assisi, and others who are both men and women. This is not to say that many nuns don't hold lineages of merit, but these are few and they mostly concern themselves with the feeding of the poor, the curing of the sick, and the ministering to the patriarchy in ways that are unhealthy, which we will provide more information about at a later time. So the nun’s ways that we have begun discussing in our previous communication will begin a new dissertation of sorts in order to provide information on the specifics of our nunly aspects, and manners in which we trust in ourselves to hold the spiritual traditions and create great works in order to serve others. [Session 45, May 10, 2008]

As you might imagine, this took Joanne and Paul a while to get used to, as they initially resisted the authoritative connotations of the term, until they realized that Rose used the metaphor to point out certain belief systems and behaviors that no longer suit them. For example, there is a well documented tendency for aging Boomers, the Me Generation, to get lost in extreme forms of moral relativism, narcissism, solipsism, nihilism, and endless contradictions. So the nun metaphor is also intended help identify and address to the hypocrisy of the extreme forms of these belief systems.

Why does Rose ask us to be discerning?

There are two main areas of distortion inherent in every energy exchange. First is the exchange itself, which is a translation of inner knowledge into physical language, symbols, and meaningful contexts. Second, once information is translated into the molds of language, it has to be interpreted by individuals and a community who exist simultaneously in various stages of development. So even if an energy exchange presents information with “least” or low distortion, people will color their interpretations accordingly.

In this context, it’s very important to learn to discern the subtext or meaning beneath Rose’s words. Rose says up front that they are not to be considered infallible or Absolute Universal Truths. This is also why she uses “tests” to keep us on our discerning toes, questioning everything, and taking nothing at face value as Absolutely True because “Rose said so.”

Rose’s tests are a time-honored teaching technique used most notably by Zen teachers who use contradiction and paradox to point out transrational abilities beyond our intellects and emotions. Tests, while challenging, enhance the process of widening our awareness to show that all our beliefs about reality may not necessarily be true. As such, we begin to discern the limits and purpose of our rational minds.

Another intended outcome of Rose’s tests is learning to address to what Jane Roberts called our “prejudiced perception.”[4] Jane learned through her own experiences that while we do create our realities, we construct them through our belief systems, which are subject to change. As such, they color or prejudice our perception of what’s real and possible, and what’s not. Therefore, Rose’s tests are designed to challenge, illuminate, and help us address to core beliefs that may limit what we believe is possible in terms of our health, abundance, fulfillment, or creativity.

What’s the Seth, Elias, and Kris connection?

Rose promotes the work of Jane Roberts and Seth[5], Mary Ennis and Elias[6], and Serge Grandbois and Kris/Brahm[7], which Joanne and Paul have studied intensively for over thirty years. There is also a very interesting connection between them. As they jokingly say, they are “in cahoots,” which means that they are aware of each other in a cooperative fashion that is also called a “lineage mind.” This means that there is a larger spiritual movement afoot, and Rose is just that latest flower to blossom in a lineage that began back in late 1963 with Jane Roberts, Rob Butts, and Seth in Elmira, NY, USA. They published over forty books of poetry, fiction, a children’s book, and The Seth Material from 1966 until 2006. Elias continued to expand on foundational concepts found in The Seth Material.[8] The Elias forum consists of many volunteers, including Joanne and Paul, who have published his information since 1995, well over 15,000 pages and 2,400 sessions as of this writing.

ELIAS: I have said to you, a time ago, that in my interaction with you I am continuing in delivering information and helpfulness, …as I have been instructed and have expressed a desire to do so, continuing with masters, as you would call them, such as Seth. I use this essence as an example that you may identify with, this being one in which I continue information, in connecting with you. In this, I will express that I also will emphasize, repeatedly until it is first nature to you, that you create your reality, and this is quite influenced by your belief systems. [Session 32, August 23, 1995]

Further, Serge Grandbois and Mark Bukator began to publish the Kris Chronicles in 2004 and provide thousands of new pages of transcripts that also expand central concepts in The Seth Material.[9] Joanne asked Kris about his connection with Elias in 2004, and Kris responded with his typical sense of humor.

JOANNE: It's safe to say that the two of you are in cahoots. Correct?

KRIS: You were not supposed to let that out of the bag. If we were Scottish we would have to beat you with the haggis now.

JOANNE: (Laughing) So you two are obviously in communication.

KRIS: We know of each other. In your terms you could even say once in awhile we talk about you. After all, all is fair in war and love.

JOANNE: In war and love. That's right. Thank you. [Practice of Perspectives, November 15, 2004] 

Joanne also asked Elias what his relationship with other channeled sources including Rose was in 2007.

JO: (Chuckling) And Elias, you know I’m pretty well versed in your teachings so I guess it’s no accident that Rose is very consonant with your teachings to a large degree, for example, with the families of consciousness. She’s also going to be using the orientations, pointing to your teachings and so on. And I guess … she will be helping to reach people in simpler language.

But some of the things, too, that she said differ a little bit from what you’re teaching. So I imagine that some people may see these things as contradictory but they really aren’t. I’m reminded of some of the information that was slightly different between you and Kris, and so I sense that you are both, well, all you dead guys and gals are in cahoots, and I just wanted to know if you would comment on that.

ELIAS: I would quite agree, and let me express to you what may SEEM to be contradictory is not necessarily. And in this, I would express that different essences choose to engage language differently. Therefore, WORDS can be viewed quite literally and they may not necessarily be.

PAUL: Right.

ELIAS: Many words can be incorporated to express one meaning. Therefore, they may not necessarily be contradictory. They may SEEM to be, superficially, but in actuality I would agree that, in your terms, we are all in cahoots (laughs).

BOTH: (Laugh)

ELIAS: As we are all in similar direction and may choose to incorporate different words, but generally speaking I would express that essences are not paradoxical, or in disagreement, or that we are engaging different directions. We are merely expressing them in different manners. [Session 2358, October 01, 2007]

Seen in this bigger picture, Rose continues to deliver information related to Seth, Elias, and Kris, but through her own unique purpose and intention, which includes a strong emphasis on the emerging Divine Feminine – something desperately needed to bring balance, health, and harmony to the world. Thus, she is one of the first maternal channeled sources to appear after a long string of paternal sources that appealed to our sense of masculine authority. Still, they all complement each other and work together to provide a postmodern map of essential spirituality. Ultimately, it’s up to each of us to discern what may or may not be useful in any given set of circumstances.

Is this the same Rose that Elias talks about?

Yes and no. All-That-Is is a vast, multidimensional personality structure. Seth, Elias, and Kris have pointed out vast “clouds” of essences they respectively call “pyramid gestalts,” “pools of consciousness,” or “clusters of consciousness.” In this larger context, Rose is a progenitor essence involved in the gestalt that seeded our physical universe.[10] As such, when a human being like Joanne engages an energy exchange, there are multiple layers of consciousness involved, including Joanne’s essence (Tyl) and Joanne herself.

Therefore, the “Rose of Joanne” is a mergence of Rose–Tyl–Joanne. If we apply the same ontology to Elias, then the “Rose of Mary” is expressed as Rose–Elias–Michael(Mary’s essence)–Mary. Through this process, we get a different tone or flavor in the translation of Rose energies by Mary and Joanne.

JO: Just as someone else could provide an energy exchange with, say, Elias, and that Elias would be THEIR Elias, one dimension removed from that, Rose would operate in the same way.

ROSE: Your Rose is Elias’ Rose, but when she comes your way, she is not Elias’ anymore in a simplistic sense. She will be Elias’ Rose only as long as she doesn’t exchange energetically with anyone else but Mary. We will be saying more, as we suggest this sounds impossible in some ways to understand.

The Rose you have is Elias’ Rose only in your implicit ways, indeed not in explicit ways. Explicitly, only Mary can channel her Rose, which you would say would be Elias’ Rose. So you were incorrect in your way of saying you would not be channeling Elias’ Rose, you are, but in expression it wouldn’t be Elias’ Rose anymore.

JO: I get that. Rose is a kind of well that gets colored when exchanges happen, and is colored by intent.

ROSE: Yes, that is a very good example. You would consider your Rose also as a well you can drink from at anytime, and your words would be colored by your engagement of your Rose selves. So you can think of Rose as being a great big well of fundamental energies that expresses herself in ways that enrich individuals in many ways, that would be interested in ways they would best put their energies to use.

The Rose self is indeed an energetic field, not an individual, so your Rose will come through in a variety of ways: energetically, creatively, artistically, in ways you can imply would be innumerable. So you can say she is a big body of water, an ocean to drink from that will be as valued, as we suggest your water in your wells would be. We suggest she is so vast to imply your infinity, for she is Rose of your way of spirit, as well as sometimes infinite numbers of individuals in your world. For she is indeed earthbound in our terms, so she indeed allows interest in your physical dimensions in ways she cannot possibly describe. [Session 137, September 17, 2007]

Joanne makes no proprietary claim to be the only channeler of Rose. Seth, Elias, and Kris all say that “there are no closed systems” and as such, anyone can learn to tap directly into the essence of Rose, or any other essence in theory. Of course, all energy exchanges are dependent on many factors, including the intent and overall stage of development the channeler for their depth, practical application, and least distortion.

What is the Ken Wilber and integral connection?

Joanne and Paul have studied Ken’s work for over ten years. He provides an integral approach that he calls AQAL (pronounced “ah-qwul”).[11] It is a comprehensive postmodern map of human consciousness that provides a set of checks and balances to make sure we are inclusive, and not marginalizing or fragmented. As he likes to say, “Everyone is true but partial,” which encourages us to hold as many different perspectives as possible and seek the unity inherent within diversity. As such, the AQAL map doesn’t tell us what or how to think, but is a means to ballpark all human knowledge and seek more true and less partial, less fragmented approaches to the many current challenges we face.

More importantly, Ken’s integral map allows us to better understand the channeling phenomenon and see how it relates to other human intelligences and abilities. Paul has authored a way to use Ken’s integral scientific method to do a ten year study of channeling, the goal: to better understand channeling as a natural intelligence innate within all human beings, one that develops in state-stages and structure-stages. This requires continued research to determine the specifics, as well as significant funding.[12]

In the mean time, the Integral Map helps us understand that all channeled material is “true but partial” and, as such, can serve to better connect the dots between surface level and semantic differences than any other current map. It shows how words always hint at deeper, metaphysical realities that have been written about for thousands of years, but can never be fully expressed by words alone. For that, we need to rely on the direct experience through some kind of practice or yoga designed to test out the metaphysical waters.

Thus, Ken’s Integral Map also provides an elegant framework in which to organize all the practices found in The Seth Material, Elias forum, Kris Chronicles, and Teachings of Rose, along with the world’s spiritual traditions. This is no small achievement, but a ground-breaking effort that’s only become available in the past five years. In a nutshell, Integral Practice promotes a kind of cross-training within physical, mental, and spiritual domains to enhance personal growth and realize our deepest potentials.[13] Rose fully supports this approach, and continues to deliver new practices that can be tailored to individual regimens and suggestions for the refinement of the model.

What is the Rose phenomenon really about?

We really don’t have a scientific or religious framework to fully understand what Rose is or isn’t ... yet! The existing model of the human mind promoted by contemporary cognitive sciences is a very narrow, ego-bound view. Modern worldviews consider dissociative trance states and secondary personalities to be a form of pathology. They believe that we’re only supposed to have a single, primary egoic sense of self, and anything else is considered something to be treated with mental or pharmaceutical therapia.

On the other hand, most religious institutions have driven channeling underground in order to control direct access to the Divine, and serve as professional mediators to their followers. While there are accepted forms of dissociation – glossolalia or speaking in tongues – that are accepted in some religious communities, they are mostly clothed in the old skins of premodern, mythic value systems and Scripture-As-Absolute-Truth. While they do provide “true but partial” glimpses of the Divine, new channeled sources often conflict with established religious dogmas and, as such, are labeled heresy or otherwise marginalized.

Mainstream Western science still has its head stuck in the ground of the five physical and rational senses. According to psychologist Charles Tart, research in the area of parapsychology has already offered rigorous, laboratory proof of the existence of what is termed “psi” phenomena: telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, and psychokinesis.[14] But these results are still not accepted in the mainstream. Why? Because even though science’s goal is to provide answers to the unknown, they often reject phenomena that can’t be perceived or verified by the five senses.

What does channeling have to do with a global shift in consciousness?

The notion that “you create your reality” is a central theme throughout the information offered by Rose. It’s a far cry from the modern Newtonian notion that reality is an externalized, separated machine made of parts that can be broken down and built back up again. This Newtonian model has evolved into the quantum model used by physicists for over one hundred years! Yet many scientists and physicians – unschooled in quantum theory – still hold this antiquated belief that the universe and human mind are machines. On the other hand, religions teach us that the “Whole is greater than the sum of its parts,” and "there is no separation within consciousness." Talk about holding conflicting belief systems and still having an incomplete picture of how reality works!

If you ask the quantum physicists, they’ll tell you that as they probe deeper into matter with the five senses, matter behaves in chaotic and unpredictable ways. Also, it takes an observer to create a measurement of any quantum state. Until that action occurs, there are an infinite number of probable or potential outcomes in the observer’s perception. Further, developmental psychologists now better understand how we construct our perception of the world through the brain (objective) and mind (subjective) perspectives. As such, there is no pregiven world “out there” to be discovered and analyzed. Philosophers call this error the “myth of the given.”

Instead, we co-create and co-construct collective versions of reality. As such, we can no longer separate our subjective perception from the objective world. They are two sides of the same process of reality creation. Further, Wilber’s Integral Psychology (2000) provided the most thorough map to date of the “you” who creates all its reality. His review of decades of research shows convincingly that this “you” is not limited to what Seth calls the outer ego, but includes a multidimensional personality structure that includes essence and pyramid gestalts.[15] Seen in this light, postmodern sciences have begun to recognize that we do create our realities through multitudinous perspectives, and the implications have profound consequences for the postmodern era, because they demand that subjective and objective perceptions be considered equally valid.

Willis Harman – philosopher, scientist, futurist, and former president of The Institute of Noetic Sciences – offered deep insights into the issues affecting the continued separation of religion, which emphasizes subjective perception, and science, which emphasizes objective perception. He said that, “there appears to be no conflict between a mature science and a mature religion. Indeed, we must seriously question whether we have a mature science as long as such conflict appears to exist.”[16]

Researchers in the emerging fields of Transpersonal and Integral Psychology have begun to call for the use of what Rose terms “inner senses” or deep intuitions in their research. In other words, their methodology is evolving beyond the limits of the five physical and rational senses. This also means they are widening their belief systems to include subjective perception. This is a revolutionary development and part of what the Rose phenomenon is all about: offering helpful information to promote a less distorted view of how reality works – a view that integrates our physical, rational, and deep intuitive perceptions. The horizons that now approach us make the Century of Change – the twentieth century – look like the calm before the storm.

Peter Russell, a physicist trained in the art of transcendental meditation, wrote about the accelerating rate of change that our species is experiencing as we begin the new millennium. He observed the historical development of philosophy, religion, the arts, and sciences during the past three thousand years and notes how, in the past century alone, we have experienced just as much growth in terms of our knowledge base – new concepts, paradigms, and discoveries. It is now believed that our knowledge base is doubling every eighteen months! That means our cumulative knowledge is now increasing exponentially – two, four, eight, sixteen, thirty-two, etc. times every eighteen months. If you were to draw a graph to represent this rate of change the line would presently be rising up off the scale toward potential evolutionary changes of unimagined magnitude.

If we are to successfully navigate our way through these changes, Russell says that,

…This will entail a fundamental shift in thinking and perception – a shift in consciousness more profound and far-reaching than any in our history. It will mean awakening to the wisdom that lies within us all, of which the great sages have always spoken. This is our next step in evolution – not an outer step, but an inner step.[17]

Could it be that channeling is an innate intelligence within all human beings intended to help human evolution shift into increasingly complex social, economic, political, educational, artistic, etc. capacities? Is channeling’s systemic function meant to provide helpful information intended to reduce the probabilities that we destroy ourselves and our planet in the process? Let’s take a brief look through history.

Is channeling old or new?

The channeling phenomenon can be found in some form in every culture with a recorded history. Arthur Hastings, former president of the California Institute of Transpersonal Psychology, traces it back to a Babylonian oracle of the goddess Astarte in the eleventh century BCE.[18] He notes that ancient channels who,

…Spoke in trances and ecstasy and were considered prophets or oracles for the gods. Even now, in various mainstream and minority religions, within many cultures, possession by the Holy Spirit, speaking in ecstasy, or possession by spirits is considered a sign of spiritual development, and is often encouraged and facilitated by ceremony and ritual. Channeling may be the current equivalent of ancient prophecy, bringing spiritual guidance and teachings for this time.[19]

We should note that Hastings’ definition of prophecy isn’t limited to predicting the future, but includes “speaking under the inspiration of the god or interpreting the will of god.”[20] To be clear, no one is suggesting that Rose is "the voice of God," because mystics repeatedly claim that God is not comprehensible or translatable through words alone. But it’s important to situate the channeling phenomenon in a historical continuum: a religious era that reaches back over the past six thousand years. Its dominance began to erode only recently – less than five hundred years ago – with the rise of modern science and the Enlightenment in the West.

So, we have tradition of people speaking in an “inspired” state, delivering helpful information geared toward the cultural milieu of the locals documented over three thousand years ago! And it’s likely that it extends even further back if we account for the Jewish prophets in the Old Testament who “spoke to God” back to the time of Abraham. Sometimes the information pushes and pulls at the officially accepted, consensus reality of the times, helping to facilitate change from calcified dogmas that the collective consciousness has outgrown. Other times the information helped to avert catastrophe, reduce warfare, and promote peace and cooperation between disparate tribes. In this light, the channeling phenomenon has always been part of grass roots or populist movements.

Psychologist Jon Klimo, one of the world’s leading researchers on channeling, stated that “since 1986, channeling has reached into the grassroots. It has entered the popular vocabulary as channeling now is part of current mainstream consensus reality.”[21] A good example is the imagery that graced the cover of the March 26, 2000 Los Angeles Times Calendar Magazine, reporting on the local entertainment scene. It pictured comedian Billy Crystal, sitting barefoot and cross-legged, eyes closed in deep concentration, surrounded by icons of the year’s best movies nominated for the upcoming Academy Awards T.V. show. The headline simply read, “Channeling Oscar.”

Is channeling different than mediumship?

Since the mid-19th century Spiritualist movement in the West, the most prevalent form of channeling has occurred under the name of mediumship – when a diseased person communicates through a medium in an altered state. They were studied by such notable modern psychologists as F.W.H. Meyers (1843-1901) and William James (1842-1910), among others. While they debunked many mediums as frauds, there were still a small number of authentic cases that eluded clear scientific explanation (e.g., Leonora Piper, Violet Parent). However, today we make an important distinction between mediumship and channeling – channeling deals with communication from wider spiritual Aspects within All-That-Is, from within what psychologist Carl Jung (1875-1961) called the collective unconscious. Thus, a key emphasis of modern channeling is the transmission of teachings meant to enhance personal and collective fulfillment.

Mediumship remains alive and well, as seen from the successful careers of John Edward, Sylvia Browne, James Van Praagh, and others. But with the success of Jane Roberts (1929-1984) who channeled Seth from 1963 until her death, the modern channeling movement exploded. Arthur Hastings cited Jane Roberts’s work as marking “the dividing point between classical mediums, who called up spirits of the dead, and contemporary channeling, with its teachers, sages, and guides.”[22] Jon Klimo cited Roberts’s work as defining “the modern era of channeling.”[23] Still, channeling can be traced in the United States back to Helen Shucman (1909-1981) and The Course in Miracles, Alice Bailey (1880-1949), Edgar Cayce (1877-1945), Helen Blavatsky (1831-1891), and others.

The lines between mediumship and channeling may sometimes blur. There are examples of channelers going into a trance state and speaking as a deceased person, sometimes taking on vocal, facial, and bodily gestures of the deceased personality through a kind of deep empathic mergence. On the other hand, mediums like Edward, Brown, and Praagh communicate their impressions from the dead without changing personality traits. Though Jane Roberts engaged deep empathic mergence with deceased individuals several times, she chose not to pursue that direction. Instead, she focused on the Seth persona who claimed to be an “energy personality essence” that transcended yet included his many physical lives. All of which suggests that what we call channeling today is really a spectrum of abilities.

How do scholars define channeling?

Jane Roberts and husband Rob Butts didn’t like the term channeling. They found it too narrow a term to describe the rich complexities between Jane and Seth. And yet the term persists, because it is derived from two ubiquitous twentieth century technologies: radio and television. It’s easy to imagine tuning into one channel after another and picking up a different program, or in this case, a different personality essence.

So the term remains, though as scholars continue their research they have begun to greatly expand our understanding. A good example is Ken Wilber’s Integral Map that includes states and stages of development, as well as multiple intelligences. Jon Klimo offers a useful working definition for channeling as “the communication of information to or through a physically embodied human being from a source that is said to exist on some other level or dimension of reality than the physical as we know it, and that is not from the normal mind (or self) of the channel.”[24] Additionally, we can glean deeper understanding from the names and social roles channelers play in various cultures. According to Klimo:

Throughout history and among various peoples, channels have been named according to what they do. Besides the term ‘medium’ and the more recent ‘channel,’ other names have included shaman, witch doctor, healer, and medicine man in native cultures. They have also been called fortune-tellers, oracles, seers, soothsayers, savants, and visionaries. In religious contexts, they have been known as priests, gurus, prophets, saints, mystics, and holy ones. And in the esoteric schools they are called light workers, initiates, teachers, adepts, or masters. The majority of mainstream psychologists and psychiatrists would probably regard the channels as hallucinating, delusional, suffering from dissociative identity disorder (once called multiple personality disorder), schizophrenic, or simply as persons with runaway imaginations, or even as downright frauds.[25]

The latter thoughts reflect the narrow, incomplete view of human personality found in contemporary cognitive sciences more than anything else. While acknowledging that people make fraudulent claims in every discipline, ultimately each individual must make their own assessment regarding the utility of the information delivered by any source, be it a channeler, scientist, minister, philosopher, politician, or whomever.

Sociologist Michael Brown defined channeling as “…the use of altered states of consciousness to contact spirits—or, as many of its practitioners say, to experience spiritual energy captured from other times and dimensions.”[26] Arthur Hastings defined channeling as “…a process in which a person transmits information or artistic expression that he or she receives mentally or physically and which appears to come from a personality source outside the conscious mind. The message is directed toward an audience and is purposeful.”[27]

Again, while there are many different definitions of channeling, the term has become part of mainstream, consensus reality. So we'll continue to use the term "channeling" as a broad category in which to explore the above definitions. With this in mind, let's briefly explore Jon Klimo's robust taxonomy of channeling phenomena that now include a much wider spectrum of abilities than acknowledged by previous scientific or New Age sources[28]:

- Spontaneous and intentional volition.
- Mental (guidance, growth) and physical (communication, healing, painting, music).
- Entity (strong dissociation, secondary proximate self) and open (mild dissociation, enhanced creativity).

Types of Channeling:

- Conscious (intuitive, telepathy, clairaudience, clairvoyance, clairsentience).
- Unconscious full-trance, possession.
- Sleep and dream.
- Automism (a variant of conscious, but includes kinesthetic expressions of automatic writing, Ouija board movement, pendulum movement).

Types of Sources (secondary persona):

- Discarnate spirits of “deceased” human beings (the largest category).
- Past-lifetimes.
- Advanced human beings (e.g., highly evolved spiritual teachers).
- Non-humans (e.g., “aliens,” spirit beings, angels, gods, archetypal energies, akashic, higher self).

Types of Channeled Content:

- General intuitive feelings of loving presence and support.
- Personal messages and guidance.
- Detailed descriptions of an “afterlife.”
- Information about the past and future.
- Artistic material (e.g., literature, painting, music performance and composition).
- Healing and medical material (e.g., Edgar Cayce).
- Scientific or technical nature.

Klimo's taxonomy is now over twenty years old, and reflects an important trend for contemporary scholars: they no longer define channeling singularly as a phenomenon, but, more aptly, as a spectrum of related phenomena.[29] There is still much to learn about what causes these abilities to manifest, and further, how they develop over time, possibly like other multiple intelligences as researched by Harvard psychologist Howard Gardner (e.g., language, mathematics, music, kinesthetic, emotional, morals, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and so on). The good news is that we now stand on the horizons of ever greater scientific understanding, but there remains more research to be done. The above refinements provide new ways to better understand how the Rose phenomenon fits into the larger tapestry of channelers since the time of Jane Roberts.

So what!?

Rose defines channeling in very broad terms, and as such it is something innate within all of us.

The phenomenon that the world calls channeling is in many ways not a phenomenon at all. Channeling is occurring in your world all the time, but you have blocked your view of channeling because of your religious, scientific, and political views, that will always tell you that the experience of channeling is unnatural. We suggest that channeling is perhaps the most natural thing that a person could do. We are aware that you may feel otherwise, so allow us to explain.

Channeling has been around since the beginning of mankind, ...for channeling is nothing more than the accurate translation of inner experience to outer experience.

The channeling state can, in your terms, be considered a “higher state,” but in our terms would only be a more inner state that would be freer of internal pain and strife. For this reason, your state of consciousness would be more intuitive, for your intuition is indeed your trusty tool that allows you to connect with your Divine Source, which is most allowing of your bliss. ~ [Session 93, July 14, 2007]

Moreover, channeling is one aspect of an even larger spectrum of altered states of consciousness that connect us with our own inner knowing (e.g., peak experiences, meditative, lucid dreaming, out-of-body projections, shamanic-drug induced, etc.). These states have been consistently experienced throughout recorded history. While not new to the species, they’re still excluded from mainstream Western scientific understanding. Still, mystical experience via altered states seems to be a natural part of humanity’s evolutionary trajectory.

The words that describe an individual’s mystical experience, in themselves, hold incomplete and symbolic meanings. But the concepts hinted at, as well as the more recent channeled bodies of information, serve as a trigger for our own inner knowing. In other words, this knowing is latent within each of us and doesn’t exist “out there.” Altered states serve to open the doors of perception to further exploration and self-realization. Thus, Rose focuses on the importance of our own direct experience, not the spoken languages that describe those experiences.

It is only through our own personal experience that we identify the many belief systems we hold. Through learning how our perception – desire, intent, imagination, expectation, thoughts, and emotions, filtered through our belief systems – influences our everyday creations, we begin to come to terms with the many ways we create our own reality. Like any body of spiritual knowledge, the information that Rose offers has its own learning curve. It is not intended to be embraced by all people or solve all the world’s problems. It concentrates on the individual’s right to decide what is fulfilling for him or herself. It does not claim to be Universal Truth, but to offer a view on understanding Universal “Truths” filtered through our current, cultural belief systems.

Rose’s information, regardless of its source, can be extremely useful in the process of noticing, identifying, and addressing to the belief systems involved in reality creation. In this way, the Rose phenomenon can be considered a legitimate reminder from our inner selves that we are all conscious creators. Therefore, we each hold the responsibility to pursue an open-minded inquiry – combining the rational (skeptical) and the intuitive (imaginative) – in the search for personal and collective truths. So pour a hot or cold one, put your feet up, and enjoy!