“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Organized religion professes to hold the opposite idea, that man’s identity is independent of physical matter—after death. It often looks askance, however, at any investigations that might show man taking advantage of that independence now. While it preaches the survival of the soul, it is suspiciously uninterested in studying cases in which there seems to be communication between the quick and the “dead.”

These experiences have taught me this: We are multidimensional personalities now—you and I and everyone else. I think that consciousness congregates just as atoms and molecules do; that there are clumps of consciousness just as there are clumps of matter; and that we are a part of these clumps, whether we know it or not. We know little about our own psychology and less about the nature of consciousness. To learn more we must be willing to examine our own consciousness, individually. In doing so, I’m convinced that we will discover a greater individuality, uniqueness, and sense of identity. In sticking so close to the confines of egotistical physically oriented awareness, we may be closing ourselves off from answers to our deepest questions, knowledge that can help us deal more intelligently with physical life.

The matter of Seth’s sex also arises here. To me at least, the intuitive portions of most personalities seem to have a feminine rather than masculine cast. If Seth were just my higher intuitive self, I would expect him to be feminine or to be the pseudomasculine type of male character so frequently created by women writers. Usually males instantly recognize characters drawn in this manner as overly romantic. While Seth is not “blatantly” male, in his actions and speech he is more a man’s man than the woman’s man type. Men like him. While he is a teacher, he is not basically the stereotyped “spiritual guide” either. He is simply himself—which may, after all, be the badge of his own independent existence.

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.

“When you leave the physical system after reincarnations, you have learned the lessons—and you are literally no longer a member of the human race, for you elect to leave it. Only the conscious self dwells within it in any case, and other portions of your identity dwell simultaneously within other training systems. In more advanced systems, thoughts and emotions are automatically and immediately translated into action, into whatever approximation of matter there exists. Therefore, the lessons must be taught and learned well.