“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

SESSION 884, OCTOBER 3, 1979
9:13 P.M. WEDNESDAY

I finished typing last Monday night’s session a few minutes before we sat for this one, and Jane just had time to read it before she felt Seth around: “Okay, I’m ready….”)

(10:19.) Give us a moment…. Remind me, for our next session, to wind in a discussion of those subjective entities as they learned how to translate themselves into physical individuals.

(Heartily:) End of dictation, end of session, a fond good evening—

(10:23 P.M. “I don’t know whether it’s going to last or not,” Jane said, “but I’m enjoying this book more than any. I get into a certain state that’s really nice. It’s very rich and deep. Like I know the session wasn’t too long, but I had that sense of completion when he went back incredibly far. It’s satisfying as all shit.”

I laughed. It was easy to tell that Jane was happy working on Seth’s latest. I gladly told her the session was just as good, just as inspiring, as her last one—the 883rd: Once again her delivery had been intent, often impassioned, given with many gestures. She’s been picking up from Seth on Dreams quite often. Sometimes she tells me as soon as she’s done this. At other times she may forget to mention it for a while, or the session material itself may remind her that she already knew what Seth was going to talk about.)

NOTES: SESSION 884

1. In Volume 1 of “Unknown” Reality, I wrote in Note 7 for Session 681 that atoms are “processes” rather than things. The classical conception of the typical atom as being composed of a neat nucleus of indivisible protons and neutrons circled by electrons is largely passé, although for convenience’s sake we may still describe the atom that way. (In those terms, the one exception is the hydrogen atom, which evidently consists of but one proton and one electron cloud, or “smear.”) For the simple purposes of this note, then, I’m leaving out considerations involving quantum mechanics, which concept repudiates the idea of “particles” to begin with. (And surely that notion involves more than a little of the psychic, or “irrational.” What a heretical thought from the scientific viewpoint!) But each atom of whatever element is an amazingly complicated, finely balanced assemblage of forces and particles woven together in exquisite detail—one of the more basic examples of the unending and stupendous creativity, order, and design of nature, or consciousness, or All That Is.

Through their work with particle accelerators, or “atom smashers,” physicists have discovered that protons and neutrons themselves are composed of forces and particles that in turn are almost certainly composed of forces and particles, and so on, in an ever-descending scale of smaller and smaller entities and concepts. Over 100 subatomic particles have been identified so far, and no one doubts now that many more will be found. The existence of a number of still-undiscovered specific particles has been predicted. All of which reminds me that almost 16 years ago, in only the 19th session he’d given us (on January 27, 1964), Seth remarked:

At this point in my speculations I’m usually led back to Seth’s EE (or electromagnetic energy) units, and his CU’s (or units of consciousness). These nonphysical entities—and many others of a like nature—are emanations of consciousness, or All That Is, and in “size” rank far below the tiniest particles ever observed in an atom smasher. According to Seth, each unit of consciousness “contains within itself innately infinite properties of expansion, development and organization; yet within itself always maintains the kernel of its own individuality…. It is aware energy … not ‘personified’ but awareized.” See Session 682 for Volume 1 of “Unknown” Reality.

Seth came through with that session on February 13, 1974. Now let me close this note with an excerpt from a private session he gave on July 3, 1978:

3. Now what, I wondered, as I typed this session from my notes, does Seth mean here, and in the paragraph above? Sometimes it’s difficult to pinpoint just what he’s saying. His material usually generates more questions than answers, but this time he’d outdone himself. I try to avoid reading too much into such brief passages, but I felt that if Seth answered all of the questions I could ask based upon this session, a book would result. Was he referring to another big-bang type of “momentous explosion”? I doubted it. Without going into a lot of speculative detail, such an event would imply the obliteration of our probable physical universe as we know it. Instead, I thought, by “another form” he may mean an explosion of ideas or knowledge in our reality, with the tremendous objective results that would follow. Such results would stem even from “just” a spiritual explosion. (I could also see correlations here between Seth’s ideas about the primary nature of All That Is and the inflationary model of the universe. See Note 2 for Session 883.)