“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(As the three of us sat at the table sipping wine and discussing Seth, Jane began to get nudges from Seth every so often. It will be remembered that during the 21st session Seth had wanted John to stay as a witness. But tonight, since it was getting late and I had doubts about my ability to keep up with the dictation, I thought it better that we pass up the chance. I also thought Jane would be overly tired. John offered to leave, but I said aloud that we’d rather wait for our regular session time.

(Through this session Jane’s voice was rather stronger and a bit deeper than usual. Her eyes darkened as usual, her pacing was slow. She later told me that at the beginning she was very nervous, since this was her first time before a witness. In addition we had more lights on than usual, and this bothered her at first. But the feeling soon left.)

Self-consciousness entered in very shortly after, but not what you are pleased to call human self-consciousness. I certainly do not like to wound your egos in this manner. However the fact remains, and I can hear you all yell foul, that there is no actual differentiation between the various types of self-consciousness.

The beginnings of human consciousness, on the other hand, began as soon as multicellular groupings began to form in field patterns of a certain complexity. While there was no specific point of entry as far as human consciousness was concerned, there was a point before which human consciousness as such did not exist. Self-consciousness did exist. The consciousness of being human in your terms was fully developed in the caveman, but—and I cannot emphasize this enough—the human conception was alive in the fish.

All this involved an idea of, and I hesitate to say advancement, but an idea of change along certain lines. We have spoken of mental genes. These are more or less psychic blueprints for physical matter, and in these mental genes existed the pattern for your human type of self-consciousness. It did not appear constructed, that is in constructed form, for a long period of physical time however, and we have discussed psychological time as being part of what I will call for now an inner time sense.

I always delight, if you will forgive me, in astounding the present personalities of acquaintances by letting them know that I have known them before. It is a failing of mine but I enjoy it. And you, Philip, were twice a woman and once a Moor of some considerable stature, as well as the personality in Boston which I have already related.

I wanted to make one point, but first, there is nothing like a witness to convince my darling nervous Ruburt that I am I, and not her, meaning Jane; like a good evidence of telepathy, as in John’s case this evening.

There is no way of measuring the inner experience, or the psychological experience rather, of someone who has lost a friend in death, but you do not deny that such an experience exists. Yet if two people see, in your terms see, the same apparition, then instantly we must speak in terms of the weight of the apparition seen, the color of the eyes. For any so-called extrasensory perceptions you insist upon twice the evidence, and under circumstances when the evidence is vivid in its own terms and must be translated first, before you will accept it, into the alien outside senses, which simply are not equipped to receive it. This is for Philip’s edification, I hope.

I am not saying that you should not believe the evidence of your senses; I am waiting for you to say that. We know that our so-called tables are not solid. Even your science knows this now, and yet your eyes see the table as solid. Face up to it, my dear lovelies: Your senses lie. The table is a conglomeration of quickly-moving atoms and molecules but you see it as a table, and you see it as solid. Your senses, and again this is to bring John-Philip up to date, your senses are perceptors of a camouflage physical world which is created by the inner self through the use of mental enzymes in a pattern set by the mental genes.

John-Philip is correct, and our schedule should be maintained. Personally I have no objections to an extra session for Ruburt’s publisher, but I will not condone less than two regular sessions a week, except for circumstances beyond your control.

I suppose we judge those we love most in a harsher manner, but I should have known better and for once you have my apology. I think very much of you. I do not mean to push you too hard, and I certainly do not mean to make you feel inadequate in any manner. Your performance is actually very near excellent.