“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

The accident involving Tam’s Eve would take place, if it does, on a day with a five in it. The 5th, 15th, or 25th. It would be a minor accident, but in the Bill Macdonnel accident someone, not Bill, was severely injured.

At one time he did correctly perceive an accident having to do with that Nina’s mother, and recorded it. (Perhaps two years ago.) Hence the name, popping up the other evening. It served as a transition: an accident in which Mark, Bill Macdonnel, was involved, though I do not believe he directly participated. I am not sure, for he was not driving.

Two accidents were involved then, hence the confusion. The bridge for these was an accident in the past involving Nina’s mother. This served as a connection to Bill Macdonnel. The affair in which Bill is involved has already taken place also, the night of Ruburt’s experience. (Which would be September 11.

Another accident, a probability, is a future one, involving Tam Mossman’s Eve. Because of the similarity of names Ruburt fused the two accidents into one in his perceptive experience.

The two lads involved may very well cause an accident in any case, unless actions of their own alter their reactions. There is no connection between them and your friends however, a priori, and there are other elements that could interfere, preventing even an accident to them. [...]

[...] They were difficult to put into words, but involved an accident, she thought, and a hospital emergency room.

[...] An accident near a crossroads. [...]

[...] Jane was much relieved after talking to Peg, saying that before the call she had been “very uptight” over any probabilities involving accidents and the Gallaghers.

[...] For my part, although I believe Seth’s contention that there are basically no accidents, I was still torn between understanding of that premise, and outrage that a young drunk could wreak such havoc on a seemingly innocent family of seven people. [...] In short, I thought it grossly unfair that the cause of the accident was still alive—although hospitalized —while two “innocent” victims were dead, with a whole family damaged beyond repair, for life. [...]

[...] It pretends that accidents are possible, that death is an end, and it tries to ignore all of the great threads of feeling and intent that do not fit into that picture. It is a game of hide and seek, for emotionally all of the participants in that “accident” were aware of the approaching event, and at the last moment it could have been avoided.

[...] The insights that could result, Jane and I agreed, could have excellent psychological and social implications toward understanding of such seemingly senseless accidents. I think that Seth’s insights into the accident discussed this evening are a good capsule case in point, and much more penetrating than could be arrived at in usual terms.

Now: there are no accidents.

In nature there are no accidents. [...] You need not take mine but listen to it, and there are no accidents. Now, if you accept, my dear Lady of Florence, the possibility of the slightest, smallest, most insignificant accident then, indeed, you open Pandora’s box. For logically there cannot be simply one small accident, but a universe in which accidents are not the exception but the rule. [...]

Whenever you think that you have a headache simply because you have a headache; or you bump into a door simply because you bump into a door; or you have an accident simply because you happen to be in a particular place at a particular time; whenever you feel yourself powerless, then you think that accidents happen and that you have no control over them. [...]

(Florence had been discussing the accident in East Pakistan [Bangladesh].)

Once you accept, you see, that idea then you must, if you follow your thought completely through, accept the idea of a random accidental universe in which you are at the mercy of any accident; in which mind or purpose have little meaning; in which you are at the mercy of all random happenings; in which 300,000 human beings can be swept off the face of the planet without reason, without cause, simply at the whim of an accidental happening. [...]

(On Friday, July 18, Bill Gallagher tells us he had a cluster of fairly close near-accident situations since Monday—one involving two boys on bicycles—he stopped about 20 yards from them—but he was going 55 at the foot of Mount Zoar Hill on Holden Road.

(But July 17, Thursday, he was with an associate who did have an accident. [...]

1. The accident issue itself.

[...] This was after she had gone through an auto accident; Seth has told us this accident is in reality two accidents, one involving B. Macdonnel in California, the other a future possible event involving Tam’s girl Eve, in or near New York City. In the seance Jane was not Eve, but the driver of the car in the accident; she was a woman, with Eve a passenger beside her.

(In the 436th session Seth advised caution on Eve’s part in order to forestall or change the probabilities re this future accident. Seth described an older woman, about 35, with whom Eve rides, as possibly being involved in the accident as driver, and named certain days the accident was more likely to take place on. [...]

[...] Saw riding accident by an academy when you were about 14...You were held up, crippled in some way, for a couple of years... You had a brother and the brother was with you at the time of the accident.

[...] related to the accident mentioned before.

Fourteenth-Century France—riding academy—saw riding accident by an academy when you were about 14—you were held up, crippled in some way, for a couple of years—you had a brother and the brother was with you at the time of the accident. [...]

I saw a brick structure—don’t know whether or not it was a riding academy—had a very wide entrance—related to the accident mentioned before. [...]

Your child, in a past life, this child was an uncle and in an accident you killed him. [...]

[...] Your uncle did not blame you for the accident at the time. [...]

[...] (Humorously:) There were two accidents, then.

Even the first had its psychological applications, for the uncle at that time was dissatisfied with existence and with his accomplishments, and the carelessness that helped result in his accident was also partially his own. [...]

[...] When I said that—I don’t see anything—but I got the feeling of a car accident... [...] not sure if he, Bill, was in an accident with a girl named Maisie.”

[...] She was in the car with me before the accident. [...]

(Jane didn’t see any buildings in the accident location, no lighted windows at night. [...]

[...] Jane talked to this Evelyn twice in the afternoon by phone, but on neither occasion did EG mention anything about an auto accident, etc.

[...] A car would be somehow involved, and a probable accident with another driver. This seems to be the season for accidents, according to our sessions.

[...] When at last she began to talk she said she was “not really here, but not out of my body either,” while giving this automobile-accident probability data.

[...] The auto accident data was quite unasked for and unexpected. [...]

An indication here of the possibility of an automobile accident for one of the men within a six-month period. [...] The accident possibility not applying to Dr. Instream.

It is not a fatal accident, for the man involved, in any case. [...]

The light-haired man is the one with which I feel the accident connection, and if it occurs it will be a direct result of his reaction to a letter.

[...] Lesser accidents, or “events,” as they are called within the nuclear-power industry, have continued to happen within the context of that primary accident at TMI—the loss of coolant for the nuclear reactor of Unit No. 2. I call the whole series of accidents “events of consciousness,” and think of them as unfolding in an orderly way from that initial large-scale event of consciousness, which took place on March 28, 1979. [...]

Yet from the very day of the accident, this question has existed along with each step of the cleanup process, and will continue to do so: What to do with Three Mile Island, that enormously complicated human creation that now has its own consciousness, and that has in its own way exerted the force of that consciousness throughout our civilized world? [...] I repeat, however, that in this country no public citizen has been either seriously injured or killed in an accident at a commercial nuclear facility (as have a few workers).

[...] 1 at TMI is undamaged; it had been shut down for maintenance and refueling at the time of the accident to its twin, nearly three years ago, and a series of delays has kept it idle ever since. [...]

Company projections are that the entire cleanup at TMI won’t be completed until the end of 1988—more than nine years after the accident took place. [...]

Your child, in a past life, this child was an uncle, and in an accident you killed him. [...]

[...] Your uncle did not blame you for the accident at the time. [...]

[...] (Humorously:) There were two accidents, then.

Even the first had its psychological implications, for the uncle at that time was dissatisfied with existence, and with his accomplishments, and the carelessness that helped result in his accident was also partially his own. [...]

Now return in your mind to the situation of the near accident. [...]

[...] You will physically respond to and recognize some of this alteration, as in the example of the near accident. [...]

[...] The near-accident mentioned was a physical event but it was initially a mental one. [...]

[...] I was terrified — certain that an accident would result. [...]

[...] Yet, miraculously enough, there was no accident. [...]

[...] The near-accident happened about three blocks away from the Water and Walnut dream location. [...]

[...] In the course of conversation, my father-in-law told us that on July 3, from his window, he had watched a near-accident involving a motorcycle. [...]

As it progressed, the radio announcements continued also, and Ruburt learned that another very severe accident had occurred. [...]

[...] A subsequent note: The driver involved in this accident died a little over a month later.)

[...] The same applies to seeming tragedies such as accidents, or severe illnesses that come at any time.

[...] Last March, a year after the accident, Pennsylvania’s governor asked a respected scientific organization to propose alternatives to the krypton-venting plan. [...]

Following the accident at TMI, and aside from the great fears “generated” by it, a host of problems began accumulating for the nuclear power industry—involving everything from poor plant design (as Seth commented in the 914th session for Chapter 7 of Dreams), to enormous cost overruns and the fear of default on bond issues, shoddy construction and quality control, human and mechanical error, the disposal of radioactive waste, conflicts with antinuclear and environmental groups, arguments over evacuation plans at various nuclear-plant sites, a greatly expanded list of steps (numbering in the thousands) that the NRC is compiling for utilities to take in order to increase the safety of their plants, and even governmental concern over the possible manipulation and falsification of plant safety records. [...]

[...] What haunts many people, especially those living downwind from nuclear facilities, are the horrifying consequences that could result from an accident that released unchecked radioactivity into the environment. [...]

There’s plenty of action outside the Three Mile Island, however, with all of the investigations into the accident underway or planned. Scary stories abound about our nuclear dilemmas, ranging from tales of poorly designed plants, control rooms, and instruments, to the failure to promptly report potentially serious accidents, to the fact that in 1978 every one of the country’s more than 70 nuclear power plants had at least one unexpected shutdown because of procedural errors, mechanical failures, or both. [...] There’s debate about who’s to pay for expensive nuclear accidents. [...]

(Actually my concern was over some kind of accident to Armstrong after he & Aldrin had left the lunar module or landing craft—this I believe is scheduled for 2:17 AM Monday, according to [this morning’s] Sunday paper.