“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.

If we could remove these blind spots and enlarge the focus of our attention, I think that we would become aware of these other events, and that telepathy, precognition, and clairvoyance would be normal, practical methods of obtaining information. In other words, I think that ESP abilities are natural ones that we have denied because they seem to contradict our ideas of reality.

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?

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.

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.

“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.”

“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.”

“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. …”

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.

Seth Two said that certain portions of my personality acted as transparent windows into these other realities and consciousnesses. If so, many such “windows” must exist. Seth Two may have evolved almost beyond our understanding. The “distance” alone would make communication difficult, and a series of translators may be necessary—Seth may be one of them.

“The book would involve a study of mediumship, not from the viewpoint of the medium, but from the viewpoint of the personality for whom she speaks. It would involve an examination of your system of reality as it appears to me. …

“I would make clear the nature and conditions in which I now have my existence, and explain some of the reasons for the often contradictory statements made concerning life after death—statements received by various mediums in which quite different pictures of afterlife reality are received.

“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.

“Such a book would have nothing to do with Ruburt’s own writing, which would progress at its own rate. … The book would bear my name, but I would dedicate it to the both of you,” he said with a broad smile.

“The training will serve you for existence in a variety of interrelated systems. If the sorrows and agonies within your system were not felt as real, the lessons would not be learned. The teachers within your system are those who are in their last reincarnation, and other personalities who have left the system but have been assigned to help those still within it. …