“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

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.

We identify with our bodies, as indeed the psychologists tell us that we must. But this identification is based upon the idea that without a body there is no self. It also supposes that all knowledge comes to us through the physical senses. Obviously, according to this idea, we couldn’t perceive anything if we were out of our bodies. In fact, there would be no self to get out to begin with, since our consciousness would be the result of our body mechanisms. This is the orthodox view of many scientists and psychologists.

The facts of my experience—and that of others—are these. We are, to some extent, free of our physical bodies. We can see and feel and learn while our consciousness is separated from the physical form. We can perceive portions of the future. We do have access to information that does not come through the physical senses. If it wants to, science can take a hundred years to accept these ideas. In the meantime they are still facts. Hallucination is not involved, unless I am hallucinating now as I write this page, sip my coffee, and feel honest indignation that some of us would limit our abilities to protect limited concepts. Why should we take it for granted that concepts are right, if they contradict our experience?

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.

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.

Since he is responsive, he must be affected by his relationship to us (though perhaps not to the extent that we are affected by him!). There is no doubt that my own personality has grown as it accommodated itself to the Seth experience. I had to learn to handle more stimuli than ever before, and to maintain overall stability as I learned to develop latent abilities. This certainly involved strains and stresses as well as rewards: but none that couldn’t be resolved with a sense of humor and some common sense. When I feel I need a rest, I take a break, which Seth respects with good grace.

One night before our regular Wednesday session Rob and I were pretty upset over the state of the world in general. We sat talking and Rob wondered aloud why we behaved as we did. “What real sense or purpose is behind it all?” he said. “Granted some part of us knows what we’re doing, still we seem hell-bent on destroying the planet, if not through war, then through pollution.”