“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Identities may be termed action which is conscious of itself. For the purposes of our discussion, the terms action and identity must be separated. However basically no such separation exists, for an identity is also a dimension of existence, action within action, an unfolding of action upon itself; and through this interweaving of action with itself, through this reaction, an identity is formed.

Action is therefore a part of all structure. Here again is an apparent dilemma, an exquisite imbalance whose result is consciousness and existence. For consciousness and existence do not exist because of delicate balances, so much as they are made possible by lacks of balances, so richly creative there would be no reality as it is understood to be, if balance were ever maintained.

(Jane said some subjective feelings are difficult to put into words. While talking about action and identity, she had an inner perception of a whole concept, of some kind of inside visual sense of action without seeing any object. She said this description is as direct as she can make it. While experiencing such a thing, Jane said she is not conscious of being apart from the experience. Rather, she seems to be part of it.

It is this dilemma, precisely between identity’s constant attempts to maintain stability, and action’s inherent drive for change, that results in the imbalance, the exquisite creative by-product that is consciousness of self. We have a series of creative strains. Identity must seek stability while action must seek change, yet identity could not exist without change, without action, for it is the result of action, and not apart from it but a part of it.

Identities are never constant, as you yourselves are not the same consciously or unconsciously from one moment to another. Every action is a termination, as we discussed earlier. And yet without the termination, identity would cease to exist, for consciousness without action would cease to be conscious.

Consciousness therefore is not a thing in itself. It is a dimension of action. It is an almost miraculous state, made possible by what I choose to call a series of creative dilemmas.

It should be fairly easy to understand now how the second dilemma evolved from the first. I have said that the second dilemma resulted in, and constantly results in, consciousness of self. Now. Consciousness of self is not the same thing as consciousness of ego self. Consciousness of self is still consciousness directly connected with action.

Ego consciousness is the result of our third dilemma.

(Groping for words, Jane explained that she feels as though she is “wresting” material [not implying a struggle however] from Seth or some other source with a deep part of her consciousness that is below her ego consciousness. She feels that just recently she has in some manner begun to experience concepts in a more involved, different dimension of consciousness. It is a state of perception she hadn’t attained before, perhaps until as recently as the last session and this one.

(Indeed, Jane said, although she now thinks she was aware of this grasping of concepts in the last session, she did not mention it because her conscious awareness of it was so fleeting. Even now, she cannot say how long during the session itself she is involved in this manner. It is a very rich experience. Jane also believes the quiet back room we now use for the sessions is very helpful.

The ego is a state resulting from the third creative dilemma, which happens when consciousness of self attempts to separate itself from action.

Since this is obviously impossible, since no consciousness or identity can exist without action, because they are inseparable, we have our third dilemma.

A note of further explanation here. The difference between consciousness of self as a result of our second dilemma, and ego consciousness as a result of our third dilemma, should be made very clear.

Consciousness of self involves a consciousness of self within, amid, and as a part of action. Ego consciousness, on the other hand, involves a state in which consciousness of self attempts to divorce itself from action, an attempt on the part of consciousness to perceive action as an object. Here we see that ego consciousness, in this attempt, strives to perceive action not only as separate, but to perceive it in such a fashion that it appears to ego that action is not only separate from itself, that is separate from the ego, but that action is initiated by the ego, and a result rather than a cause of ego’s own existence.

I have spoken often of consciousness also as being merely the direction of focus. Action implies infinite possibilities of focus. Action never happens along a straight line, although at times you may perceive it in such a fashion.

(Seth-Jane had some material on consciousness and the direction of focus in the 94th session, among others.)

To some degree he becomes action. Like every other consciousness he is always action, but this evening he experienced to some degree action directly, without the usual attempt of the self to separate from action.

(Jane thinks that tonight her ego didn’t experience anything, although some part of her did. She thinks her ego gave at least tacit consent. And yet her ego assimilated the experience. She feels that this evening’s session was good because of her experience with past sessions. She felt light at times during the session. At times she was not conscious of being in her body; yet neither was she conscious of being anyplace else.