“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(We had two questions for Seth, since we’re trying to get into the habit of writing such down as they occur to us: 1. Jane wanted Seth to comment on why he’ll take off on something she’s read, and reinterpret it his own way, or carry it further; her question came up because he did this Monday while she’s reading Fred Hoyle’s book, Ten Faces of The Universe; 2. Jane wanted Seth to give information on her “significant” dream of last Saturday morning, July 1. She couldn’t remember any details from it, but has talked about it often; she thinks it had something to do with health.)

(10:l4.) The benefits of such distractions do indeed, I admit, seem quite invisible to you, and in your joint experiences they often appear simply as nuisances. Therefore, you are hardly ever able to follow them through so that you can connect any particular insight or auspicious event with the “originating” distraction. I can quite honestly compare such distractions with, say, the distracting thought that might take you from a familiar train of thought into another new mental territory. The distracting elements are exaggerated, however, because of your joint misunderstandings on the subject. The visitors, for example, are not numerous. In many cases, however, the contact alone opens up different aspects of your own consciousness in response. It is almost as if you were able to look at our material from your own viewpoint, and yet at other levels to perceive it from your visitors’ viewpoints. That adds to the richness of the material, for you bring to the sessions not only your own experience, but the sensed experience of others.

Give us a moment.... The simple event of Ruburt reading Hoyle’s book: Ruburt began reading certain ideas with which he is not yet consciously familiar. Some of those ideas, however, were picked up in California. My last session was in a way—in a way—the result of Ruburt’s begrudging decision to “take time out to read the book.” It got his attention. I am aware of his emotional ideas, of course, and to an important degree I am free of his prejudices, but more than that, in certain terms, my consciousness is not limited, so that I can take from Ruburt’s understanding his good comprehension of where science is, and then tell you where an enlightened science might go.

More important, I can tell you that atoms, for example, are primarily consciousness. Objects are the result of a specialized perception. I can perceive your objects as objects, or not—but the true nature of reality must come from a study of consciousness.