“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

The individual involved is aware of very little as far as physical objects are concerned. There is, for example, a table in front of him. The table is real, it is physical. Under ordinary circumstances it could be seen and touched. Objects could be placed upon it; and yet, Doctor Instream, our entranced individual is not conscious of that table. In his state he is concentrating upon some object which we cannot see. Now, consider: we will attempt to prove the existence of this material table to this individual who is not aware of it. How, therefore, could we prove to him that this table exists, when he is not aware of it in any manner whatsoever? His attentions are focused elsewhere. For him the table does not exist. We have indeed a rather delightful dilemma; and yet, is this not what you require of me? I speak of “you” simply because I have come in contact with you. I recognize only too well your sympathy and your understanding. Nevertheless the situation in which you put me is exactly like the situation which I have only now described.

Though objects upon the table be dearly familiar to him, in his trance state he will not recall them. Any sentiment involved with the objects on the table, such sentiment will disappear and have no meaning. The ordinary state of consciousness is no different from that trance state. You have merely turned the focus of your attention into different realities. My attention, and my reality, is mainly focused in another direction.

Adequate scientific proofs, such as science so surely needs, requires the enlargement of consciousness; not, my dear doctor, on my part, but on the part of science. There are some things that I can indeed do, and I will do what I can. Nevertheless the fact remains that I am indeed extending myself, and my dear doctor it is science which is not extending itself, and it is science that will not meet reality halfway.

I am as I told you an educator, and as such my main concern is with education, is with ideas. I want to tell you exactly what you want to know, and if you will hear me then to a large measure you will have to accept some of my terms, for I am quite willing to accept some of yours. Much of this has to do with your idea of the theory of suggestion. If you would read some of our material, it would then become obvious to you that mental suggestion is indeed the basis upon which all reality is founded.

I shall of course take advantage of the opportunity, but then you will have time to speak to me at your leisure. There are many points to be considered, and these matters certainly cannot be covered in one evening such as this. I hinted at our last discussion that it is indeed within the ability of the human personality to become aware of other realities while still keeping contact with physical reality. Manipulation in the physical universe is of course a necessity, but there are ways by which the human individual can become aware of other quite valid realities, and still maintain balance and control within his own more usual field of activity.

Now. In the dream state it would be impossible for the dreamer to prove the existence of the familiar street outside of his familiar door. His attention is momentarily directed toward a different sort of reality. The ordinary trees outside of his window do not exist for him. It would be highly difficult to ask a man while he dreamed to prove the physical reality of the bed in which he slept, or the bedside table which was at his head, or to prove the existence of the wooden floor upon which the bed rested. Highly difficult indeed, for such objects do not exist for our dreamer.

There is indeed no reason for you, in your position, to jump in with both feet and wild erratic enthusiasm. Nor, my dear doctor, is there any reason at this point why I should leap in with both feet, and with wild unrestrained enthusiasm. I am working through and with Ruburt. Ruburt is a writer by profession and I am, again, a rather sly individual, for Ruburt will express my views for me, and this is what I am interested in.

I realize only too well that reincarnation is a shady subject by far, most unpopular. I assure you however that in any discussion with your psychologists on this matter, I shall hold my own. Again, the attention, the energy of all human personalities, as a rule, are severely focused in one scope of reality only. They are indeed in a trance.

This is necessary. I have no qualms with this, but it is possible, and in this stage of your evolution it is necessary, that the human personality learn to become flexible, to change the focus of awareness so that other realities can be perceived. There are indeed as I have said, effects that I can show you, and I will. Effects that will at least be of some import; but you must remember the table in our analogy of the man in the trance state.

I can indeed give you, and quite easily, evidence of clairvoyance, and I will in future sessions. But my dear Doctor Instream, what will this prove? It will not prove my existence to those who will not accept it. It will simply be said that Ruburt is clairvoyant.

I will, and can, give you evidence of telepathy, and what will this prove? It will not prove my existence, not to those who will not accept it. They will say merely that Ruburt is clairvoyant, and Ruburt has telepathic powers. If I materialized in full sight of twenty good and weighty witnesses, what indeed would this prove to those who would not accept the proof?

Therefore what proofs can you require? And in all honesty’s sake, what proofs do you think that they will require? What good will it do if through Ruburt I literally shout from the rooftops, and raise my voice, and shout that I am indeed who and what I say I am. What will this prove?

You are not so gullible, nor am I, to suppose that those who do not want to accept evidence will ever accept the strongest evidence imaginable. Those who will not see, will not see. And those who will not listen, they will not listen. You wanted a voice display, and so indeed shall you have it. And what indeed will such a display show? That Ruburt has lungs?

Again, if I stood clear as day in the middle of a meeting room, with twenty fine and sturdy, respectable fuddy-duddies, what would this prove? They would swear that they were under the effects of suggestion. I will, I will for my own amusement, give you in the future many—not one but many—clairvoyant effects. Again, for my own amusement.

Now. I trust your integrity, and I am quite certain of my own. Between us, what do you think we can accomplish? We can accomplish much despite my sarcastic remarks, but it will not be easy and it will not be quick. You will indeed live many years yet, before we meet face to face. And when we do meet face to face then indeed, if you will most respectfully forgive me, there will be hell to pay.

For though we do have the same interests there are many areas in which we do not now agree. But I will see if I cannot bring you around; and if you will forgive me my dear doctor, this humility of yours is indeed overdone. There is nothing of what I have said that you do not understand, your comments to the contrary. You pretend with yourself. If you will forgive me, for I am speaking to you as one old crony to another, you are too sly to stand up straight and say who you are, and what you are, and accept the responsibility for your own abilities. You do not want the world mad at you.

What you have needed, and if you have the sense to perceive it, and I think you have, was a situation where both logic and intuitions were allowed full play. We will have much to do with each other, my dear doctor, and you know already that this case is one for which you have long waited.

You will not have the framework within which I exist. My existence is not dependent upon your recognition of it, any more than your existence is dependent upon my recognition of you. You will exist whether or not I admit that you are real. And so my dear friend, I shall exist whether or not you accept my reality.

If I speak to you personally in what may seem to you a frivolous manner, it is because I am concerned with the personal contact between us this evening; for the personal contact between us will insure that you read what I have said, and I will indeed get my way.

I do not imagine that this information will save the world. It will take more than myself and twenty gods beside to handle that problem. I do however insist that in my not too humble way, I can do something to set you right. And by right and by you I do not refer to you, Doctor Instream, but to humanity at large. I do not pretend, either, to know definitely what is right and what is wrong for your universe.

I may not know what is right for it, but I certainly know what is wrong. What is wrong is your limited perception. What is wrong are the arbitrary limitations which you have set upon reality; and these limitations, while set by you, nevertheless operate as if they were absolute. I say again, if any small and simple treats of voice (louder again) will serve to make supposedly sane men stand up and listen (louder, strong, very strong; Jane’s head was thrown back as though to let the great voice out unimpeded) then so I will speak out in loud and hearty tones. (If possible, even stronger here. Then the voice began to soften. Jane displayed no strain or fatigue.)

Your terms mean nothing. If I sound aggressive, you must indeed read between the lines. I have said often that I am not humble, in your terms. Yet in many ways I recognize only too well the limits of my own knowledge and potentialities. You know what I mean, my dear Dr. Instream, when I say that this case will give you what you want.

Again, I apologize if this session embarrasses you, if I am too personal. But regardless of our scopes of activity we are not young men. We know what we want. You have more time than you suppose, not only in your present life but in others.

Now. Quite practically your personal and practical interest in immortality will give the impetus, the emotional impetus that will indeed allow me to deliver what you want. This is perhaps one of the most important statements of this evening’s session. Emotions are more important than you suppose. There is no fraud in me. There is no fraud in Ruburt or Joseph. They are not stupid and they are not gullible. You are not stupid nor gullible. They are not caught up in pseudoreligious nonsense. This will serve us well.

It would be unfair of me to back upon an elderly gentleman’s desire for immortality, and I would never stoop to such a practice. I was myself an elderly gentleman, and I understand too well the soul-searching aspects of such a reality. You may therefore be assured that I will not play on such human limitations. I will under all circumstances never take advantage in any such manner.

I am no secondary personality. There is no case of multiple personality here. What you have if you take advantage of it, is Ruburt’s personality, which with Joseph’s help is capable and willing to perceive more than one reality at once. You will not, my dear doctor, get a second chance in this endeavor.

([BG:] “This is Bill Gallagher. I want to verify the fact that the 170th Seth session was held in my home on Holden Road, where it was witnessed by my wife and myself on July 19,1965, from 8:57 to 11:45. What you hear on these tapes has in fact occurred, and Jane was within view at all times; and I don’t know what else I can add, other than the fact that it was a very astounding presentation.”

(Although Seth said to forget about notes, I found myself making a few after a few minutes, out of habit. Peggy also made some, and what follows is taken from these two sources; nothing is included here that is not touched upon in the notes. Seth talked at a normal rate, and neither Peggy nor I made a serious effort to get it all down. Some of the material was a repeat, in a more informal way, of what Seth had said during the session itself. During this exchange it was obvious that Seth was enjoying himself immensely. More than once he referred to Bill Gallagher as his favorite Jesuit, and this is getting to be something of a standing joke between Bill and Seth.

(Seth said again that he considered such effects childish, but that it would be a small sacrifice to make if it helped to get the material across. Again he dwelt upon the difficulty of proving immortality. No matter what he did, people would say it was trickery. He still maintained that he could offer proof that would be sufficient, in time. He repeated again that he could not play on Dr. Instream’s desire for immortality in order to arouse his interest in the material.

(What I think could be a very important point now came up when Peggy asked Seth about the question of proofs. Seth said that proofs she would accept would not be accepted by science. One proof to come, he said, would involve very strong facial changes in Jane during sessions. When I asked if these could be photographed he said yes.

(Referring again to the question of immortality, Seth said that all of us in the room knew what it was like to be old men, and that some of us had also been old women. He did not get more specific on this last point.