“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Obviously I’ve avoided calling Seth a spirit and leaving it at that. I don’t like the phrase for one thing, and for another, I think that this is too easy an answer. In accepting one solution, we may be closing our minds to others that lie beneath. I am not saying that Seth is just a psychological structure allowing me to tune into revelational knowledge, nor denying that he has an independent existence. I do think that some kind of blending must take place in sessions between his personality and mine, and that this “psychological bridge”’ itself is a legitimate structure that must take place in any such communication. Seth is at his end, I am at mine. I agree with Seth here. I don’t think it is a relatively simple matter of a medium just blacking out and acting like a telephone connection. I do think that Seth is part of another entity, and that he is something quite different from, say, a friend who has “survived” death.

I don’t find these ideas contradictory. Seth could still be a part of an ancient entity, and Seth Two another portion more evolved in our terms. If physical life evolves, why not consciousness itself? I don’t find it difficult to accept the possibility that we might be independent fragments of such entities or clumps of consciousness. And granting this, some kind of communication between us would be possible. We would be all formed from the same “mental stuff,” whatever that stuff is. To us, however, such experiences would seem supranormal.

He went on to say that vocal communication is not the rule. It is not used by more advanced entities nor by less developed ones than ourselves. In order to make sense to our three-dimensional selves, information must be “squeezed” through—and this in itself causes some distortion.