“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

You have a true or false world in that regard, and a relatively very flat psychological view of identity. Within that framework, however, you do have the creative abilities, and these stand out in their own fashions, since they “play with the facts.” They often do not honor conceptual conventions. They do not fit the true-or-false category. The imagination can of course conceive of many events, whether or not those events actually exist.

This applies not only to seemingly “pure” objective events, but to the more complicated event of an individual psychological being. Indeed, the entirety of your own identities does not usually appear to you in your lifetimes, because that reality is too complicated, too multidimensional, to fit into your accepted picture of personhood. In that regard the larger facts would not show themselves. There would be no way for you to perceive them from within (underlined) your system of reality.

(9:01.) When you are dealing with that kind of philosophical investigation, you are more or less forced to look for other definitions. (The noise from the fireplace was now quite loud.) Your very ideas of the nature of reality change. You are still to some extent forced to recognize conventional structures and organizations, including psychological ones. At the same time you search for greater evidence of a vastly different kind of reality. (Long pause.) The larger facts about psychological reality, for example, cannot be fitted to the world’s definitions. You can only get versions and interpretations. Translations and dramatizations that serve to give you glimpses of psychological structures whose very natures do not fit the facts of the world (all intently.

Those structures include the unexperienced portions of your own identities. All of your concepts of gods and goddesses are basically creative attempts to portray psychological dramatizations of other portions of the psyche that do not appear in the flesh. To hint of other abilities and dimensions of being that cannot of themselves be squeezed into your own smaller definitions. So when Ruburt asks such questions from the framework of old beliefs, with their old meanings, then he can find no adequate answers.

(9:14.) The yes-or-no, true-or-false categories simply do not work when you are dealing with such issues. (Long pause.) In that regard it is important that he realize this. The entire concept of the Sinful Self can only exist at certain levels of experience. It can only seem to make sense in a very limited context. (Pause.) The creative abilities most often serve as psychological bridges, enabling man to conceive of the existence of realities outside of his own particular point of reference. They can hint at the greater diversity of being, the larger dimension of events. They can present dramatizations. They can serve as thresholds (long pause), but they cannot contain direct experience themselves with events that are intrinsically beyond those reaches.

(Long pause.) Basic reality deals with far more than any true or false category, and the deeper dimensions of actuality contain the source material from which, indeed, your true or false world emerges—so it does Ruburt no particular good to overconcern himself. Our material is the best approximation, the best approximate model you can perceive of a vaster psychological field of existence.

(9:34.) The same kind of recognizable standards that are normally applied to the true-or-false category do not work for such knowledge, since that knowledge is basically, automatically large enough to contain the entire true-or-false realm itself—that is, revelatory information puts true and false designations side by side, and ends up with a system large enough to contain both, in which each are seen as valid constructs that are only part of a larger view of psychological events.