“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(Neither Jane or I felt well, but we also didn’t want to dispense with the session unless we had to, or Seth decided to.

It is also true however that this lack of boundary allows for possibilities of development and expansion that would be impossible with a limited self. The self is not nebulous. Action changes itself, as we have described. Any self, therefore, is never the same self, but action contains within itself its own comprehension.

It acts upon itself, being action. The inner self also changes, but it is also that which changes itself. We come now close to a definition finally for the entity, which cannot really be defined, because in your terms it escapes definition. However, the entity can be partially defined as the sum of all the selves within a given range of action, the simultaneous totality which on the one hand then cannot yet exist, since action can never complete itself, yet representing that impetus forever frustrated on the part of action for complete materialization.

The inner self would be then any given outthrust of original action outward, as explained earlier. This outthrust would, because of its nature, instantly send further outthrusts in as many directions as possible for it. And because it is action, and because no action can complete itself, and no action can completely materialize, then each outthrust or materialization would result in an in-thrust; not into the original action from which it came, but into itself.

But action must attempt to materialize itself and fulfill itself completely. It cannot do so, and the result is the formation of many selves, that are a part of action, and formed from action; and therefore each self must continue in the creation of other selves.

You understand that when I speak I am not saying that continuity, in terms of past and present, exists. I am using these terms merely for your convenience. An action can never negate itself. There may be counteraction, but no action can be wiped out.

The ego is indeed a necessity within the physical field at this point of man’s development. The ego is in a state of becoming, however. The ego is not what it was centuries ago, and it will not be the same centuries from now. It, the ego, will not admit the change, but its refusal to admit change in no way stops change.

Efficient manipulation within the physical field will soon require that other portions of the self be utilized and recognized. In a manner of speaking, the ego can be compared to the nationalistic state of nations, necessary indeed for man’s development, but already growing passé, and perhaps even mitigating against the survival of the species, where once it aided that survival.

The worldwide view of man as a species, worldwide brotherhood, in no way hampers or endangers the individual man, and in no way endangers nations, but will represent one of the main hopes of mankind, without which no nations will endure.

In like manner, when the ego concept is discarded as a concept, as the concept of nationalism will be discarded, so the individual self will not lose but gain. The individual self will expand, as the individual man will be capable of expanding when the old idea of nationalism is finally overthrown, and he can be benefited through learning of, and cooperation with, other men as brothers upon your planet.

But as it is not wise to dispense with the idea of nationalism without gradual growths of understanding and preparation, and while the idea of nationalism cannot suddenly be dispensed with, so also the ego cannot be, and will not be, overthrown overnight; and even when it is finally left behind, it will still be used as a handy reference point; and through all this the self will not lose but gain, for all expansion outward, and expansion inward is a gain, and all boundaries, whether inward or outward, are hampering and limiting. Basically, the self is not limited. The self does not need imaginary fences to protect its privacy, or its safety or its solitude. Only the ego is afraid of challenge, and therefore speaks of such limiting safety.

If the self were the ego then indeed such precepts would be necessary, but the ego is a small part of the self. Necessary indeed, still, but less necessary than it once was.