“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Priestley does not go far enough with his time one, time two and time three, but he is fairly correct up to that point. In a different way he says many of the things that I am saying. I have told you that upon physical death the ego becomes the subconscious in the next existence, and that its conscious knowledge is retained electromagnetically.

Now. Priestley puts it somewhat differently but the results are the same. According to him the consciousness, the individual consciousness of time one, becomes something else at physical death, and the consciousness that is part of time two in physical life becomes dominant in the next existence. There is one large difference here between us however, and I believe an important one. Priestley’s individual, after death, with his dominant time two consciousness, has available to him what was time one during physical life.

(Break at 9:26. Jane was dissociated as usual, she said. Her eyes had opened narrowly frequently. She said that consciously, at the moment, she could not explain what she had just said. Her pace had been fast, and my writing hand was aware of this.

It is true that Priestley speaks in terms of consciousness being retained at this stage, but a consciousness devoid of personality is an odd bird indeed. The personality structure changes, it is true, but consciousness of overall identities within any given unit of consciousness is always retained. There is no blending or merging, willy-nilly, into a gigantic ever-rushing-on spirit of life. And the spirit of life in these terms cannot be considered as something apart and separate from, and outside of, those consciousnesses which illuminate it, and through which they are illuminated. And here is our second difficulty with Priestley.

That is, the life force is constantly renewed by those consciousnesses of which it is formed. The consciousnesses therefore are not simply filled up by a life force which then deserts them to go on its way, for these consciousnesses are themselves portions of the life force, and form its shape, if you will, and continuing existence.

Having read Priestley’s ideas about Dunne, Ruburt now wonders if I am not a future self of his own, according to Dunne’s ideas; that is, if I am not one of those future selves of which Dunne speaks, or if I am not consciousness number two, or three even, of Priestley’s concept.

Now. While Dunne and Priestley and myself used different terms often to express the same concept, we also differ in many respects as far as these theories are concerned. My third undifferentiated layer, you see, would correspond to the consciousness of Priestley’s third time, which is why I can tell you that at that point individuality is indeed maintained, and personality continues.

Otherwise I should be all life force and no self. Now, I communicate through this level of Ruburt’s consciousness. It is subconscious to him or to his ego, but it is not without consciousness by any means. And again, I communicate through that level. At my own level this is not in itself difficult.

At this point I am at the level, again, that could be compared to Dunne’s number six self, as myself. I communicate through the third undifferentiated layer, that could be compared to Priestley’s consciousness at number three time.

The number one time cannot contain other times but the consciousness, with help, can to some extent perceive these other times. And this perception then allows consciousness to escape some of the confinements of that one time. Our spacious present of which I have spoken contains all times, but it is not a thing apart from them, nor precisely their sum. It is ever unfolding and mobile, and changing itself.

(In the 44th session, Seth began a list of qualities and attributes which are included in the spacious present. To date there are eleven of these: Value climate of psychological reality; energy transformation; spontaneity; durability; creation; consciousness; capacity for infinite mobility; law of infinite changeability and transmutation; cooperation; arrival and departure, meaning physical birth and death; and quality depth, the perspective in which an idea can expand, replacing our time and space.)

(Again on page 13, it is noted that Jane and I had not met the bride and groom. Later we found out that we had met them once, briefly, while they were engaged. Neither of us are acquainted with the other members of Peggy’s family, however, and at the time the 200th session was held neither Jane or I were consciously aware we had indeed met Peggy’s sister and her fiancé.)