“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Let us start with Jung. He presumes that consciousness must be organized about an ego structure. And what he calls the unconscious, not so egotistically organized, he, therefore, considers without consciousness—without consciousness of self. He makes a good point, saying that the normal ego cannot know unconscious material directly. He does not realize, however, nor do your other psychologists, what I have told you often—that there is an inner ego; and it is this inner ego that organizes what Jung would call unconscious material.

Again: when you are in a state that is not the usual waking one, when you have forsaken this daily self, you are, nevertheless, conscious and alert. You merely block out the memory from the waking ego. So when the attributes of consciousness are given, creativity is largely ignored. It is assigned, instead, primarily to the unconscious. My point is that the unconscious is conscious. Creativity is one of the most important attributes of consciousness, then. We will differentiate between normal ego consciousness and consciousness that only appears unconscious to that ego.

Now: the inner ego is the organizer of experience that Jung would call unconscious. The inner ego is another term for what we call the inner self. As the outer ego manipulates within the physical environment, so the inner ego or self organizes and manipulates with an inner reality. The inner ego creates that physical reality with which the outer ego then deals.

All the richly creative original work that is done by this inner self is not unconscious. It is purposeful, highly discriminating, performed by the inner conscious ego of which the exterior ego is but a shadow—and not, you see, the other way around. Jung’s dark side of the self is the ego, not the unconscious. The complicated, infinitely varied, unbelievably rich tapestry of Jung’s “unconscious” could hardly be unconscious. It is the product of an inner consciousness with far more sense of identity and purpose than the daily ego. It is the daily ego’s ignorance and limited focus that makes it view so-called unconscious activity as chaotic.

The conscious ego rises, indeed, out of the “unconscious,” but the unconscious, being the creator of the ego, is necessarily far more conscious than its offspring. The ego is simply not conscious enough to be able to contain the vast knowledge that belongs to the inner conscious self from which it springs.

Now: it is not true—and I emphasize this strongly—that so-called unconscious material, given any freedom, will draw energy away from the egotistically organized self in a normal personality. Quite the contrary, the ego is replenished and rather directly. It is the fear that the “unconscious” is chaotic that causes psychologists to make such statements. There is also something in the nature of those who practice psychology: a fascination, in many cases, already predisposed to fear the “unconscious” in direct proportion to its attraction for them.

The ego maintains its stability, its seeming stability, and its health, from the constant subconscious and unconscious nourishment which it receives. Too much nourishment will not kill it. Do you follow me here?

Only when such nourishment is for some reason cut off to a considerable degree is the ego threatened by starvation. We will have more to say concerning the ego’s relationship with the “unconscious.” In a healthy personality, the inner self easily projects all experience into EE units, where they are translated into actuality. Physical matter, therefore, acts as a feedback. Now we will end our session, unless you have questions.