“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

I knew of this, of course, at the time. However it does not serve any good purpose for me to knock Ruburt’s knuckles when an error of this kind is made. For one thing such errors are not numerous, nor really were these particular errors harmful. They were strong positive suggestions and as such they do sometimes serve a good purpose. In some cases they could actually bring such occurrences into reality through suggestion only.

When I speak of the terms electronically and chemically I do so for simplification, since electronics and chemicals are two facets of the same thing, merely manifestations of something else as heat and cold or fire and ice are manifestations of something else. I can exist electronically or I can exist chemically, and there is no contradiction or distortion in this statement. Many such apparent effects on your plane are also but manifestations.

Rarely. There are just too many interconnections. This will have to wait for later sessions. On your plane mental enzymes cause many chemical reactions. On some other planes the mental enzymes are unnecessary, since the personality on a conscious level can work such transformations; and here again we run into an apparent contradiction, because while these transformations occur consciously on certain levels it is also true that the personalities concerned do not have to be conscious of the transformations. But they can be if they prefer.

Imagine looking at a scene outside your window as Ruburt now allows me to do. From Ruburt’s viewpoint he receives the visual image with auditory effects. A slightly cold draft of air leaks in through the window. He does not smell anything from the outside. With use of the complete set of inner senses the experience would be to you astonishingly more rich, varied, direct, and instantly instructive.

This last is extraordinarily important and I shall return to it shortly. Through the inner senses, and using a very simple analogy, you would not only see the street as you do or hear the few sounds that drift to your ears. You would actually experience directly the essence of everything within a certain range. This experience would be instantaneous and would, using the analogy, include more than the usual data that you would receive from the outer senses. That is, not only would you be able to feel the air though you were not out in it, not only would you pick up the odors, though ordinarily you cannot do this while you look out through closed windows, but you would literally feel the unitary essences of the trees and branches and hidden birds and insects. You would experience directly the personalities of the inhabitants of the automobiles—the vitality even of the components of the automobiles’ molecules, and “see” (in quotes) the future and the past experience of everything within that particular range of focus. And the range itself would be much larger.

I do not recall saying that.

The word fluent is the word that bothers me, and I do not know to what you refer. I am not sure of your meaning of the word fluent in that particular context.

—and this time we have no distortion but a simple mistake I believe in notes. I certainly did not say what I have just seen through Ruburt’s eyes. The error is in one word; not fluent but “inner.” The outer senses are not as fluent as the inner. For some reason the word was either mistaken or transposed, I do not know. The outer senses dealing with rigid camouflage patterns could not be as fluent as the inner senses.

Do you have any questions, Joseph?

Your particular conscious and subconscious viewpoints are fluent enough so that they do not hamper the basic material or cover it with the rock of dogmatism so that it becomes impossible to find.

(“What are you going to do when you leave us?”)

I know. This is as I have said the beginning of a continuing experience. I am pleased that you are contacting others, but do not become impatient or discouraged.

(“Well, you don’t have to wait as long as we do.”)