“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Creation is constant. Due to the nature of action creation cannot be anything but simultaneous. Each act of creation brings forth another, and opens up further dimensions of activity. Within your own system, thought becomes materialized, and there is literally no end to the activity of thoughts. Thoughts however are connected with language and with highly organized ego development. They are translations and symbols for inner activity. As a rule they are highly physically oriented, their function being to acquaint the physically adapted ego with some inner data.

The thoughts may rather faithfully, though never completely, translate such data, or they may considerably distort it. Behind thoughts are images, which are more basic but still physically oriented. Because they are more basic, they have a stronger effect. They are more emotionally charged, more concise than thoughts, and they are directly connected with the mechanics involved in translating inner data to physical reality.

All of these procedures are unnecessary to consciousness itself, however. They are necessary to develop communication between nonphysical consciousness and the physical form which it has adopted. Consciousness, in forming an image, or creating it, then responds to it creatively, setting up frameworks for further creative actions. Consciousness experiences reality directly, but having formed physical matter into a personal image, it must then creatively translate data to that physical brain. It must keep it informed.

The actions result in concrete physical materializations. These are all highly colored and charged, however, and the stuff of physical materialization is in itself conscious and alive. There are hidden but very definite connections between the self and the objects of which it has created in its environment. The environment is simply an extension of the self, and those objects within it are a part of the physical or the physically materialized personality. Hence your ideas of ownership.

Objects carry a strong emotional and psychic charge. The personality exists inward in ways that are not at once apparent, but it also exists outward in ways that you do not see. There are, of course, mergings where selves quite literally merge with other selves, forming a corporate self. But the unit selves retain their identity, as in a nation the citizens retain theirs, even though the nation at times may act as a unit, and share particular mass characteristic drives and desires, and work toward various goals.

All it involves constant creativity, not only maintenance but entirely original and new creation.

The physical self extends outward, literally, to the ends of your universe, but the physical brain could not handle this amount of manipulation, and it has become subconscious. Early man recognized his relationships more clearly. Specialized man, physically, cannot afford to.

Physically you are a part of your environment, and you form it as you form your image. There is much more to be said here, and we shall go into it more deeply soon. For this is not a symbolic relationship but a practical one.

Jung was correct in postulating a collective unconscious. But with his limited knowledge he did not see that this unconscious would exist outside of your three-dimensional system entirely, holding future as well as past, nor that it has such a cohesive effect upon humanity as a whole. It is the one self with its origins within your system, but its existence outside.

(A letter Jane received Tuesday, May 16, may or may not be referred to in the above last session paragraph. The letter is from her correspondent in West Brookfield, Massachusetts, the Reverend James C. Crosson. Reverend Crosson did not refer to the WELM program, of course, but in his letter offers Jane an opportunity to lecture to a group on ESP in Massachusetts, which is the same type of activity. It develops he also writes book reviews for the Garrett publication, Parapsychology, which recently carried a review of Jane’s book. Jane feels Crosson would have given the book a better review, and an entirely legitimate one, than it did receive. Then she added: