Is Esther Hicks Faking?
Abraham-Hicks: Faked or Just Shallow, Cold and Not Very Bright?
Is Esther Hicks putting one over on us with Abraham or is she really interpreting infinite wisdom deposited in her mind in "blocks of thought," messages from 100 "nonphysical teachers," all intimately connect to God or "Source" as she contends?
One of the group, she tells us, is Jesus. Alternatively, she has also said, via her Abraham persona, that she is "what Jesus was."
Judging by countless contractions, gross errors in fact and the way her stage appearance and style of performance has been altered, former followers now believe Esther Hicks fakes the channeling of Abraham, at least some of the time.
Some believe she always did or just exaggerated what her own intuition, conditioned by the late Jerry Hicks instruction, was giving her.
Esther Hicks in Her Restrained Persona
"What Jesus Was, Esther Is." Really?
One member of the Abraham group, Esther claims, is Jesus.
She also, speaking as "Abraham." said that "What Jesus was, Esther is," before going on to say she speaks for Buddha too. That was cracked enough for me, but there's more.
Although followers have dropped off in significant numbers since the illness and death of Esther's husband and business partner, Jerry Hicks, many still turn to her for inspiration.
But an erosion of trust has been eating away at this once upbeat, charismatic and reliable source of guidance and insight, accusing Esther and Abraham-Hicks of being frauds and seeding a cult.
Her message has changed in ways that throw into question everything about Esther Hicks' two decades long presentation of Abraham.
Any objective observer has to wonder - Is Abraham-Hicks real?
Put another way, is Esther Hicks making it up as she goes along,channeling an increasingly shallow, cold and even mean-spirited Abraham?
An Objective Review of Abraham-Hicks
What are the Abraham-Hicks' Teachings, really? Do they make sense? Did Jerry Hicks die? If so, when and where? And what about the birth of Abraham - how did that happen? Click here for answers.
You've Got Choices - Alternatives for Spiritual Inspiration.
I've read a lot on the fascinating subject of spiritual inspiration and awakening. Here are some of the best.
The teachings may be ancient, but they are inspiring and practical right now. I loved the simple honesty of this book.
Dr. Dyer's dynamic, new spiritual autobiography takes you through his lifetime of stories, builds on them and adds more. His best book.
This Just In - Proof That They Lie
Jerry Hicks died in 2011, didn't he?
If Esther Hicks' signing off her email spam with Jerry's name, right there with hers and Abraham's, as if there are three "entities," a closer look at the Abraham-Hicks website promotes more fiction.
On this page, they claim that Esther and Jerry live "a fairy-tale life."
Not only are they zigzagging across the country in their monster bus, but they are breathing "huge lungfuls of joy" while they're at it, not an easy thing to do when you've been dead a few years.
According to the same Abraham-Hicks web page, Jerry Hicks is really not dead. In fact, he's "an adult who enjoys almost perfect health and vitality."
Yes, A-H says, the spring in his step "rivals men half his age."
Let's see now. Half his age would be 42, and it isn't changing.
I'm open to any suggestions about why Abraham-Hicks knowingly publishes false information on their website. I can't think of a good one myself.
Read It For Yourself - The First Big Hit
Although Jerry and Esther Hicks published a series of less successful Abraham books before it, Ask and It Is Given was the one they have lead followers to believe came first.
In this book, Esther and Jerry (who claim the book was dictated to Esther exactly as is) lay out the philosophy they have stuck with.
They claim we live in a "Law of Attraction" universe where everything is controlled by vibrations or thoughts, depending on the chapter. Although they preach a theology of vibrations, the key phrase is "You get what you think about."
See what you think.
Abraham-Hicks For Beginners
I'm completely comfortable with the idea of life after death and with communications between the living and the dead, that is, between what Abraham-Hicks would call physical and nonphysical.
But does it really make sense to just take the Abraham-Hicks team's word for what is taking place? Especially with the rabid focus on product sales and marketing, who can say what's true with them anymore?
For example, just taking on the basics, is it true that Esther says she receives nonverbal blocks of thought, which she interprets, when she has already told the story of being lead to a typewriter when Abraham took control of her hands to type out a book announcement?
What about when her partner and marketing director, Jerry Hicks, announces that "Abraham smiled," in support of a sales pitch? How does a nonphysical entity smile?
Or, when, according to Jerry, these spiritual guides had nothing better to do than hawk guided meditations that he was peddling for wildly exorbitant prices?
"These will get you in the vortex," he claims to have heard from Abraham.
Going back to my childhood when I found myself doubting the religious doctrines being taught (the Noah and the Ark thing stands out as an early red flag), I see a long string of questions popping up in my mind.
Question Authority! was a popular phrase that appealed to me and still does.
When I got caught up in the Law of Attraction fever that quickly became so popular, I found my skepticism rising. The Teachings of Abraham, as promoted by Esther and Jerry Hicks, checked out surprisingly well.
Oh, there were a couple of things that didn't add up, but over all, I liked its veracity and consistency.
I believe there was a lot credibility in the beginning, maybe from wisdom learned elsewhere or even from a true channeling. Teaching matters.
But there are so many errors today, poorly conceived ideas and staging for marketing efforts, the message has been lost. Commitment and passion seem to be taking a backseat to a shallow narcissism that sells to a market looking for an easy, lottery-like solution and instant self-gratification.
That doesn't mean the original teachings were untrue, but it makes you wonder why they've been set aside in favor of all this marketing, if Esther and Jerry Hicks genuinely believed them to be true in the first place.
Abraham Hicks on Aging, Medicine and Sickness
In her own words.
"Death is an inevitable cycle. But sickness before death is a symptom of resistance. Most people think they've got to get sick to die. But, you could be like the cat who chooses to get run over. Or, you could just lie down in your bed happily one night, so content and thoughtless, wanting nothing in this physical world; and just reemerge into Pure Positive Energy... You can play it out any way you choose."
--- AbrahamExcerpted from the workshop in Sedona, AZ on Saturday, August 27th, 2005
"The very best approach to medicine is,"Well, I see your physical body is sick, what's been bothering you? What are you worried about? What are you angry about? What are you frustrated about?" Because that is what is at the root of all of this. And then say, 'Let it go, let it go, let it go.' That's the message, and if they could hear you and do that, then they would all be well right away."
--- AbrahamExcerpted from the workshop in Ashland, OR, on , May 16th, 2000And death itself:
"'...death' is a matter of closing one's eyes in this dimension and literally opening one's eyes in the other dimension. And that, truly, is how all death is, no matter how it looks, up to that point.. The re-emergence into Source Energy is always a delightful thing."
--- AbrahamExcerpted from the workshop in Buffalo, NY on Tuesday, September 25th, 2001
Note: This claim, that death is always "delightful" was dished out two weeks after the World Trade Center Disaster. For pregnant women jumping to their deaths from eighty floors in the sky, for professionals supporting families, for the captured passengers on commercial flights, a few with infants in their laps, death was a "delightful" experience, according to Esther Hicks.
Laws Are Responsible for Criminals
Teachings of Abraham, April 25, 1999
"It is your rules that make unlawful beings. You would get along better if you would just trust each other to treat each other appropriately, but you don't. So you keep making laws -- until you make criminals of everyone."
This is like saying we turned this poor lion into a man-eater because we're so tasty. We're at fault. Lie down, and let yourself be eviscerated.
I suppose ideas like this one appeal to hopeful idealists who believe that rules don't matter and leaders are obstructionists. We should all do our thing, and not only that, we should just trust others to do theirs. We would "get along better" that way.
So, we created "unlawful beings" by creating rules.
The only way to read this whacky claim is that we should have no rules about anything because the rules themselves create the danger. In other words, whatever anyone else does, we should regard it as okay.
If it's not or we think some guidelines need to be made to protect ourselves, we are at fault for not trusting.This has a sort of lame, idealist's appeal, but from a group of approximately one-hundred nonphysical teachers, you'd expect something a little better worked out.
The romantic inferences about the divinity in all of us is well-intended, probably, but shallow and juvenile.
Abraham-Hicks and Sex
You know, I wanted to look at what Abraham had to say about sex.
It's certainly on our minds often enough, but unlike "death," a search for "sex" on the Abraham-Hicks website turns up only a single entry in all they have indexed.
At that, it's "sexuality" that comes up, not sex.
Try it yourself. Search "death." Then, search "sex." The contrast is striking.
Where's the love?
Not where you might think it is sometimes, that's for sure.
If Abraham exists and feeds blocks of thought to Esther to interpret, I've gradually become puzzled at their lack of physical awareness. More about that later, but for now, let's consider the absence of sex in their lives or non-lives, as the case may be.
In twenty-five years of seminars, wouldn't it have come up more than, say, once? Wouldn't Abraham, who claims to know everything, including what we are thinking, have made at least a witty comment or two?
More than the Absence of Physical Awareness
There's more to the absence of physical awareness, a lack of empathy, for example. But to me, this seems more like the preoccupations of an elderly, sexless couple than of an ageless wise one.
Makes you wonder about the audience too? What makes them so comfortable in sex free environments?
There's a kind of neo-Puritanism threading through much of the New Age community, and maybe that accounts for some of Esther's appeal.
Grandmotherly sweetness and charm. No sex.
Flimsy Temporary You
You Ain't Nothin' Until You Die, Kid
"... this flimsy temporary you-in-this-physical-body-personality that you know as you..."
That's how Esther dismisses the physical beings that we are.
The nonphysical part of you, whatever that is, is the part of you that knows your power, knows your worthiness. This is the part of you that is eager about life. This is the life part of you. This is the Source part of you. This is the God part of you.
She goes on to add, Law of Attraction is powerfully responding to THIS you.
Forget the obvious contradiction... Didn't see it?
Law of Attraction is supposed to respond to everything, but now she claims it responds only to the nonphysical you, the part that isn't the you know who...
Well, untangle her logic at your leisure, if you're still willing.
Back the other implication - that is, our physical selves are flimsy, not important, flabby and dull.
They used to say we were spiritual beings here to have physical experience.
Apparently, apart from raking in cash and adulation, there isn't much else.
This begs the question of course that, if our nonphysical selves are so superior and powerful, why would we bother with that flimsy physical one?
When I was twenty, I wrote this verse: "I will have more fun with my body than you will with yours because I am not looking for God with it."
I'm stickin' with that.
The Wisdom of Eric Idle
This is the reverse of what Esther teaches through the guise of Abraham.
In Eric's view, life is the whole tamale. In hers, it's an interlude in which we miss out on the real joys of existence.
Here is how she describes it:
"...'death' is a matter of closing one's eyes in this dimension and literally opening one's eyes in the other dimension. And that, truly, is how all death is, no matter how it looks, up to that point. The re-emergence into Source Energy is always a delightful thing."
As Abraham-Hicks followers know, another teaching is that everyone goes voluntarily, as a choice, a virtual suicide. This is probably the most painful assertion thrown at the faithful.
They are told to believe that their loved ones left willingly and were delighted at doing so.
Esther even makes a practice of calling death "croaking" and giggles about being "so disrespectful, because there is no death."
My cousin, Johnny, was hit by a car when he was only seven years old, barely kicking into first gear. No point in the grisly details, but the fact is that he was excited about his mom being home from a time away, went to tell a friend, riding a bike with controls he'd never used and coasted straight in front of a driver that never saw him coming.
Johnny was probably dead before the ambulance came.
Now, Esther wants us to believe that seven-year-old Johnny made a decision to die, disregarding what that means to a family that loved him.
And my aunt, Johnny's mother - she should understand that it was delightful to be ripped out of his human shell and into a divine afterlife.
Sorrow and grief are to be mocked in the world of Abraham Hicks.
It just shows that you have not gotten over the death thing.
Your life is flimsy to start with. You aren't losing anything much.
Cheer up, you old bugger!
Esther Hicks Couldn't Be Faking Abraham Hicks. - Or could she?
A recent online commentator said that, if Esther was faking, she should win the Academy Award.
Another wanted to nominate her for "the Nobel Prize."
While not specific on which Nobel Prize, the commentator added: "I'm not kidding."
What's your opinion? Is she faking?
Do laws create criminals as Esther Hicks claims or were there dangers present before the laws were passed to protect us?
© 2010 David Stone