2 results for (book:nome AND session:823 AND stemmed:close)
[... 1 paragraph ...]
(Not long ago I reached an impasse with both the Introductory Notes and the Epilogue for Volume 2, as I tried to give order to the mass of notes, excerpts, and jotted-down ideas that I’ve assembled for them since finishing work on Volume 1 in September 1976. That was some 18 months ago, but actually to one degree or another I’ve been involved with “Unknown” Reality for four years now; I think that temporarily I’ve simply grown tired and overly concerned about the whole project, even while I still have a considerable way to go to finish certain notes and appendixes for Volume 2. Not that I haven’t worked on a number of other things at the same time, of course — but my labors on those two books represent the prolonged, intense focus I always search for in my creative life, and without which I feel incomplete. Jane knows all too well what I mean, for her own attitudes here follow mine very closely.
[... 4 paragraphs ...]
This is the myth of the exteriorized consciousness — a consciousness that you are told is open-ended only so far as objective reality is concerned. It seems to be closed “at the other end,” which in those terms would represent your birth.
The consciousness of that myth can indeed have no origin, for the myth precludes anything but a physically-oriented and physically-mechanized consciousness. Not only could that consciousness have no existence before or after death, but obviously it could have no access to knowledge that was not physically acquired. It is this myth that hampers your understanding most of all, and that closes you off from the greater nature of those events with which you are most intimately concerned. That myth also makes your own involvement with mass events sometimes appear incomprehensible.
[... 18 paragraphs ...]
[... 18 paragraphs ...]
I doubt if physicists in the 1920s were concerned about the psychological activity of atoms, molecules, or particles, although it seems that Heisenberg came close to Seth’s idea when he considered the free behavior of an electron emitted by a light ray. Albert Einstein, whose own work was rooted in strict causality, found a notion like the free will of an electron untenable, even though much earlier (in 1905) he had laid the foundation for quantum mechanics in his special theory of relativity.
[... 1 paragraph ...]