“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Dictation. (With many pauses:) The main myth through which you interpret your experiences, however, is the one that tells you that all perception and knowledge must come to you through the physical senses.

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.

If you think of your world with all of its great natural splendors as coming about initially through the auspices of chance — through an accident of cosmic proportions — then it certainly often seems that such a world can have no greater meaning. Its animation is seen as having no source outside itself. The myth of the great CHANCE ENCOUNTER, in caps, that is supposed to have brought forth life on your planet then presupposes, of course, an individual consciousness that is, in certain terms, alive by chance alone.

It is somewhat humorous that such a vital consciousness could even suppose itself to be the end product of inert elements that were themselves lifeless, but somehow managed to combine in such a way that your species attained fantasy, logic, vast organizational power, technologies, and civilizations. Your myths tell you that nature itself has no intent except survival. It cares little for the individual — only insofar as the individual helps the species to endure. In its workings, nature then appears to be impersonal, even though it so consists of individuals that it cannot be regarded otherwise.