“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Priestley’s concept here becomes more limiting than he realized. At this point Dunne overtakes him precisely where he and Dunne disagree. For once having hypothesized times one, two and three, Dunne continues onward as is the case, and Priestley simply stops here in this particular respect.

Having read Priestley’s ideas about Dunne, Ruburt now wonders if I am not a future self of his own, according to Dunne’s ideas; that is, if I am not one of those future selves of which Dunne speaks, or if I am not consciousness number two, or three even, of Priestley’s concept.

Ruburt has not been reading Dunne, incidentally, but Priestley’s interpretation of Dunne, which is something else again, but fairly accurate.

[...] Our friend Dunne was quite correct here.

[...] Some will not, and this is where, again, our friends Priestley and Dunne fall short.

[...] These probabilities do occur somewhere, but they will occur to a self that Priestley nor Dunne ever imagined—a self who exists simultaneously with any given individual, and who is a part of him; but a self that he will never know while he is within your particular system.

[...] However, these selves are not limited as is the ego to one main field of perception only, in the manner which Dunne believes. Dunne does leave intervening areas between dimensions which may be perceived by an observer from a neighboring dimension, but all in all his serial selves are to some large degree prisoners of those dimensions in which they exist.

My greeting to Marleno, and my sympathy to Ruburt as he struggles to plow through his Dunne.

[...] Jane has obtained three of Dunne’s book through the state library at Albany, and we are in the midst of reading them.)

[...] The inner self exists in quite a different fashion than that seen by Dunne. [...]

[...] We are not using Dunne’s terms here, in other words.