“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Now: I call the building blocks of matter CU’s—units of consciousness. They form physical matter as it exists in your understanding and experience. Units of consciousness also form other kinds of matter that you do not perceive.¹

(Pause at 9:04, one of many.) Each “particleized” unit, however, rides the continual thrust set up by fields of consciousness, in which wave and particle both belong. Each particleized unit of consciousness contains within it inherently the knowledge of all other such particles—for at other levels, again, the units are operating as waves. Basically the units move faster than light,² slowing down, in your terms, to form matter. (Pause.) These units can be considered, again, as entities or as forces, and they can operate as either. Metaphysically, they can be thought of as the point at which All That Is acts to form [your] world—the immediate contact of a never-ending creative inspiration, coming into mental focus, the metamorphosis of certainly divine origin that brings the physical world into existence from the greater reality of divine fact. Scientifically, again, the units can be thought of as building blocks of matter. Ethically, the CU’s represent the spectacular foundations of the world in value fulfillment, for each unit of consciousness is related to each other, a part of the other, each participating in the entire gestalt of mortal experience. And we will see how this applies to your attitudes toward specieshood, and man’s relationship with other conscious entities and the planet he shares with them.

In the beginning, then, these units operated both as identities or particles, and as waves. The main concentration was not yet physical in your terms. What you now think of as the dream state was the waking one, for it was still the recognized form of purposeful activity, creativity, and power. The dream state continues to be a connective between the two realities, and as a species you literally learned to walk by first being sleepwalkers. You walked in your sleep. You dreamed your languages. You spoke in your dreams and later wrote down the alphabets—and your knowledge and your intellect have always been fired, sharpened, propelled by the great inner reality from which your minds emerged.

Physical matter by itself could never produce consciousness.

One mind alone could not come into being from chance alone; one thought could not leap from an infinite number of nerve ends, if matter itself was not initially alive with consciousness, packed with the intent to be. A man who believes life has little meaning quickly leaves life—and a meaningless existence could never produce life (intently). Nor was the universe created for one species alone, by a God who is simply a supervision of the same species—as willful and destructive as man at his worst.

The perspective from which you watch world events is vital, and it is true that communication now brings to the conscious mind a far greater barrage than before. But it is also a barrage that makes man see his own activities, and even with the growth of the new nationalism in the Third World, those nations begin from a new perspective, in which the eyes of the world are indeed upon them.

1. Later, I asked Seth to comment upon his most intriguing statement. His answer was brief, for insertion here, and as much as I wanted to I didn’t ask him to enlarge upon it. However, I’m sure that the subject of “other kinds of matter” is one with almost endless ramifications. Seth:

3. Earlier this evening I’d wondered to Jane why we keep dosing ourselves with the endless barrage of bad news the TV networks offer us as we eat supper each day. The hostage crisis in Iran is a case in point. I remarked that most of our world’s problems seem to result from Framework-1 thinking, that our species is so steeped in such conscious-mind behavior—locally, nationally, and worldwide—that there seems little chance of our ever breaking out of that iron pattern. I further told Jane that our history reflects our stubborn refusal to modify to any significant degree our great reliance upon Framework-1 manipulations, even though I grant that there are many complicated reasons for such long-term mass behavior.

I also felt that my question grew out of Jane’s and my own recent efforts to improve our habitual thinking patterns, to draw from Framework 2 more of those elements that will help us create the daily results we really want. As an aid, I use a set of resolutions Seth gave us last January 1—although, oddly, Jane doesn’t pay that much attention to them. However, both of us have noticed definite improvements lately in attitude and peace of mind.