“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(Jane now smiled as Seth began to consider the theories of both men. Before the session she had hoped Seth would discuss them. As it developed, the session proved to be an unusual one.)

Now. Priestley is indeed the priestly fellow, and Dunne is far from done, If you will forgive my jest. Portions of both of their theories are correct. Sometimes one of them is accurate on one point, and the other one completely off, and sometimes they are both wrong.

In concept, again on this particular point, Dunne went further. But in doing so he ended up in a frenzy, losing sight of where he was. And no wonder. It is simply because I am outside of these times that I can see through them more clearly, and there is no particular reason why I should be considered wiser in this respect than they. I am simply in a better position to observe. If Dunne were able to write another book now, on his time theories, he would be able to correct several of his well-intentioned errors.

Priestley cannot help himself here, for it is not possible entirely for him to escape from his own time system, with the best of intentions. And in many respects his theories come very close to explaining the way things are. The idea of reoccurring time is simply off base, practically speaking.

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.

Priestley’s theories, although he would not use them in this way, could be used to give some insight along these directions. But because Priestley stopped with time three, you would have to pick up Dunne’s, until Dunne himself finally goes wrong.

Now I would be number six self, so to speak, according to Dunne. According to Priestley however, at this point in his theory, I would simply be that life force, or part of it, with no individuality. Priestley is more correct in depth however, though Dunne goes further, only to peter out. Nevertheless I would be a number six self. Using the same terms, however, I will make some distinctions. For as a number six self I have complete knowledge of all the other selves.

Reincarnation, considered in this light however, is much more logical indeed than a reoccurring time. And incidentally it is also much more logically a part of these theories, although both Priestley and Dunne would be unable I believe to admit this.