“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(Tonight Seth came through with excellent material on my probability dream question, and on reincarnation. The material really belongs in a regular session. To avoid its getting lost or forgotten, I plan to insert a note calling attention to it in the next regular session we have, which would be a book session on mass reality. It doesn’t seem tonight’s material would fit in here either

(It may develop that I can quote a bit of the reincarnation information in Volume 2 of “Unknown” Reality, also.)

Now. Root assumptions are extremely important, for they outline the extent of your reality. They define it, and confine it to certain focuses.

The idea of future lives brings into consideration certain emotions—man’s fear of the future, for he is often afraid of what tomorrow will bring. Again, a future life presupposes death in the present one. That idea of death usually serves as an effective block against such future explorations.

(9:54.) When I use the word “equal,” however, I am not speaking of superiority or inferiority at all. In basic terms, however, you cannot equate one self with another self—or for that matter one life with another life, for the subjective realities of people involve dimensions that do not show physically.

Most people could not handle a knowledge of future lives in the present. They would always be looking for greener pastures, so to speak, and life would lose that necessary clear focus. You can try to contact future selves, however, simply by trying to do so. It is better to concentrate on the subjective reality involved—that is easier, for if successful you will automatically tune into the future self that “emerged” from your present reality. You can receive quite beneficial advice in such a manner.

(10:06.) Give us a moment.... You are dealing with your father, for example, from one probability only—the one in which you knew him. As I told you once before, his “main life” was not here, in your terms. (See Volume 1 of “Unknown” Reality.) In the realities in which you saw him in the dream state, he was a wanderer—lonely, from your viewpoint, not his. The dreams represented your symbolic understanding that he was “a loner” in the probability in which you knew him—and in that guise you saw your father.

You did not see his reality as a personality apart from the fact of his being your father. You did make contact, however. He could not break through your own symbols. Some of the dreams did involve other probabilities, however, in which members of your family died at different times than in your world, as with the dream involving Loren (my younger brother).

Now: when you are painting a picture and you have a good start, you do not think to yourself “I have a good start, but I will most likely ruin what I have begun.” When Ruburt is writing, and has a good page, he does not think “This is fine and good, but the next page will likely be lousy, and I will never have a book.”

In the face of the belief that the painting or the book would be miserable if produced, each good sentence or artistic stroke would be the opportunity not for rejoicing but for dismay: “Aha, what a fine stroke to be wasted, for the painting will surely go astray.” Or “What a great line thrown away, for surely no others will follow.”

When either of you do good work you compliment each other. You do not say “But will that be followed up tomorrow by work as good or better?” You do not say “That is fine, but most likely tomorrow you will ruin what you did today.” Yet such uncreative attitudes have often, now, hampered you in that direction of Ruburt’s condition, so that you programmed yourselves to expect disappointment.

(10:50.) When I constantly say the same things, they are important. Therefore, whenever Ruburt is upset, I want him to return to the present natural data. This particularly applies to times when he is worrying about what might happen, or how he might perform in the future.