“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

We would exist in this other dimension of time whether we knew it or not, of course, just as our cat exists in my four o’clock in the afternoon, without ever understanding what a clock is. In a way, the cat is more nearly right than I am, because clock-time is an artificial device, and he’ll have nothing to do with it. Suppose, as Seth maintains, that past, present, and future are also artificial devices, divisions superimposed over a spacious moment in which all action is simultaneous.

Physically we can only handle so much data at once, since we are dependent in that respect upon our neurological structure. Each sensation we have received since our birth is still intact in the subconscious. We push such details “back” so that we can handle the present. We focus our attention upon a certain group of events—the “present” ones—and then drop them into the subconscious where they seem to fall away and become distant. If we could keep our attention on these past events and still concentrate on the present ones simultaneously, then our sense of present time would be immeasurably enlarged.

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.

My own work is such an investigation. I consider my psychic experiences, the Seth sessions, and my entire relationship with Seth as a learning adventure—a continuing one. I think that the Seth Material contains insights and information concerning the nature of reality that are sorely needed. The theories expand the meaning of individuality and challenge us to accept the larger self that both science and religion at various times have taught us to deny.

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.

“As I have told you, projection is involved to some extent, both on my part and Ruburt’s. Your [Rob’s] own presence is also important, whether or not you are present at any given session. … Now when you watch, say, educational television, you see the teacher, and he speaks. He may or may not actually be speaking at that time, for you may be watching a film. But the teacher exists whether or not he is speaking at that time, and his message is legitimate. So now see Ruburt as my television screen. … It makes no difference whether or not I am myself speaking within Ruburt now … or whether I did this last night in his sleep, and tonight is a film or playback.

“Again: the medium is the message in the Spacious Present,” Seth said, smiling, “and whenever the time for the program arrives, I am here in your present, regardless of where I am in what you would term my present. … I may prepare my film in advance when Ruburt is not consciously aware of it. This does not imply that such a session is less legitimate.”

“The teacher is within the tape; the personality is condensed. Your question stems from the feeling that if I am here, I cannot be someplace else at the same time, or that all of my energies must be focused here if I am here. There are aspects of my identity with which you are not acquainted … though at a ‘later’ time you may be.

“All the channels are not yet working on this set, you see,” Seth said humorously. “You know all of me that you are able to know at any given time in your terms. It would be relatively impossible for me to make my full reality clear to you, for your understanding would not contain it. Now, take a rest period. We would not want to blow a tube. …”

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.

Naturally I do not claim that the material represents pure, undistorted knowledge. This question of distortion came up for perhaps the fiftieth time in the 463rd session. After I signed the contract for this book, our friend Peg Gallagher was doing a story about Seth for the local paper, and she attended a session to get material. After several joking remarks to Peg (“Someday I will interview you”), Seth began speaking about distortions.

Besides this, there are other variables. Seth is not static; he does not just methodically deliver the material as if we were recorders. He responds to questions, so that to some extent the questions put to him must, at times, cause him to change the particular way he discusses a particular subject.

With all Seth has told us about man’s potentials, I must admit that we’ve wondered at times why the race isn’t more developed morally and spiritually.

“You are dealing with the transformation of emotional energy into action and form. You then manipulate within the system which you have yourselves created, and by its effects learn where you have succeeded and failed. The system includes some fragment personalities who are entering for the ‘first’ time, as well as those in later reincarnations.