1 result for (book:tes2 AND session:54 AND stemmed:entiti)
[... 14 paragraphs ...]
There is no invasion involved in these sessions, as I have told you often. I have promised to give you more material dealing with the psychic construction of the entity, and its relationship to its fragments. I could not tell you in the beginning in so many words that Ruburt is myself, because you would have leaped to the conclusion that I was Ruburt’s subconscious mind, and this is not so.
When you understand the construction of entities, then you will understand how this can be so. Ruburt is not myself now, in his present life; he is nevertheless an extension and materialization of the Seth that I was at one time.
Nothing remains unchanging, personalities and entities least of all. You are still thinking in terms of concrete things. You cannot stop an entity or a personality in time, as you would like to do. I am Seth today. I keep my continuity but nevertheless I change, and offshoots like currents explode into being.
As an idea changes, so do entities change while still retaining individuality and durability. But you cannot set up imaginary barriers, and stop or freeze my identity, nor for that matter your own.
[... 1 paragraph ...]
I have mentioned to you that endless personalities, in terms of value fulfillment, exist inherent in each of your physical atoms, molecules and smaller particles. So, also, each entity contains within itself almost endless possibilities in terms of value fulfillment.
As the physical atoms and molecules combine to form cells, and the cells to form physical organs, and as they do not lose their individuality in so doing, and as the atoms and molecules themselves actually gain and share in higher perceptions because of this gestalt, so do the basic components or fragments of an entity constantly form new and varied personalities; and these in turn form entities of their own.
[... 1 paragraph ...]
Ruburt has changed since then, and so have I. And yet we are bound together, and no invasion occurs because in one way of speaking our psychic territory is the same. I will go into the construction of entities later. My own emotional feeling, you see, goes outward, which is away from Ruburt often, since basically we are tempted to think of ourselves as one, though actually our roots are merely the same.
[... 2 paragraphs ...]
There is indeed no contradiction, though it may appear so, in the fact that all entities existed before your planet was formed, and the fact that fragments form new entities. I have told you that your conception of cause and effect is faulty and antiquated, and I have said that the cause and effect theory is logical only as a result of your theory of time and continuity. If time as you think of it does not exist, and it does not, then the cause and effect theory does not follow.
I have told you that all consciousnesses exist in the spacious present, which is spontaneous while also durable. Then it is no contradiction to say that entities existed before the birth of your planet, though in your time it seems that new ones are being brought to consciousness.
In their materialization upon your plane, and as seen from your own camouflage perspective, you seem to be aware of new entities, but this is because of your own limited viewpoint. In your time scheme entities have had time to produce more fragmentary personalities, but in truth from your viewpoint these personalities can be seen to have changed long ago.
[... 3 paragraphs ...]
And in each of these planes of existence there is a reflection of the basic laws of the spacious present itself, which I am in the process of giving you. Therefore there is no need, really, to think of a given group of entities before the birth of your planet. I have said that all the entities who would ever dwell upon your plane did exist, and actually have a hand in on the creation of your planet, that would ever dwell upon it.
I also said that new entities were being formed, but in the framework of the spacious present all this is spontaneous. The contradiction seems a contradiction only on your terms. On my terms there is none. For practical purposes you may say, in truth on your own terms, that entities simply have had time to develop further personalities. But I want it understood that this is true only within your own time framework.
[... 3 paragraphs ...]
An entity can indeed in some ways be compared to a tree that brings forth many seeds, the seeds being individuals in themselves, with all the potentialities to become themselves full entities.
Many, as I have said, do. That is, many fragment personalities do become entities. We are dealing here with a psychic tree however, and the seeds or personalities that do not develop into entities, do not because they do not choose to do so.
[... 1 paragraph ...]
This applies to the seeds of any flower or tree or person. I have told you that consciousness is in all things, and the power behind all things. The entity itself constantly changes, and an entity can indeed choose to disintegrate.
[... 6 paragraphs ...]
I will have more to say, per usual. I suggest your break, and keep in mind that I will speak more on the construction of the entity, the tree analogy being a good one, because all of our imaginary seeds do not develop into trees. This does not necessarily mean, either, that there is a deficiency; merely that the consciousness involved does not choose for one reason or another to materialize fully in a particular form, or to develop any given abilities along certain lines. This may also represent a needed resting point.
[... 4 paragraphs ...]
You have read of so-called mediums—and I detest the term—speaking gibberish, the explanation being given that the so-called spirit could not come through. Nevertheless so-called gibberish in such an instance merely represents, when it is legitimate, the fact that no new comprehensions or knowledge can be so transmitted entirely by the means of an entity speaking from another plane.
[... 17 paragraphs ...]
(It will be remembered that Philip is the name given by Seth as John Bradley’s entity. John had not mentioned to us that he felt changes were imminent in his company, Searle Drug, but after the session he noted that such might well be the case. Searle was facing stiff competition in a market that now favored the buyer, John said, and new methods and perhaps new personnel were called for to meet the problem.
[... 26 paragraphs ...]