“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Are we biologically unable to perceive any of these events, or do we have psychological blind spots as defense mechanisms to prevent our being overwhelmed by reality as it actually is? Our nervous systems allow us to perceive only so much; true, but beyond this limitation, my guess is that some psychological element causes us to block out much information that we could otherwise perceive.

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.

As to who or what Seth is, his term “energy essence personality” seems as close to the answer as anyone can get. I don’t believe he is a part of my subconscious, as that term is used by psychologists, or a secondary personality. I do think that we have a supraconscious that is as far “above” the normal self as the subconscious is “below” it, though Seth maintains there are no real levels to the self—the terms just make things simpler. I ascribe ESP abilities to this supraconscious and think that it has access to information regarding the nature of reality not normally available to the egotistical portions of the personality. It may be that Seth is the psychological personification of that supraconscious extension of my normal self.

If so, how independent would he be? The question can’t be answered easily. Certainly he wouldn’t be present within my personality structure as I know it. I don’t believe, for example, that his presence would be disclosed by any psychological testing of my own personality. The inherent relationship would snap into focus during a session, however, when the supraconscious identity would take over.

Rob asked Seth once if he was always available to us for a session, and Seth’s answer shows clearly that we have more than a simple one-to-one relationship. I trust the answers that we received and think that they are honest statements about a very complicated psychological connection.

“In ways, Ruburt is turned into a vitalized telegram. When you send a communication or telegram, you merely send words. I send portions of myself. My entire essence need not always be involved. I need not be entirely focused within your dimension, in other words, but I am sufficiently focused to meet our appointments. The psychological bridge of which I have spoken serves us well, however, and this exists on Ruburt’s part as well as my own.

“It is as if there were two portions of a bridge, like a drawbridge, and these two portions must meet. [Earlier Seth had explained that this “psychological bridge” was constructed by both of us.] When you wish to contact me at other than [the] usual appointed times, I may or may not be easily available. Your own emotional need would be known to me, however. If that need was strong, I would of course answer it, even as you would not disregard the need of a friend. I am not automatically available, however, any more than you are.”

“I am, however, automatically a part of the message that I bring to you. At times I am ‘here’ more completely than in other sessions. These reasons often have to do with circumstances usually beyond normal control: electromagnetic conditions, psychological circumstances. These could be considered as atmospheric conditions through which I must travel.

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.

“Such a book would also include my methods of entry into your system and the sort of psychological bridge personality that results. Again: what you have in sessions is not my complete identity. There must be some sort of psychological structure present for me to use during my communications. At times, however, my identity comes through clearly enough so that, comparatively speaking, I can exist independently, as myself, without Ruburt’s assistance.