“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

As in Seth Speaks and Personal Reality, the usual notes are presented at break times, but I’ve indicated the points of origin of what would ordinarily be footnotes by using consecutive (superscription) numbers within the text of each session; then I’ve grouped the actual notes at the end of the session for quick reference. For consistency’s sake, these notes are printed in the same smaller type throughout both volumes. Footnotes will be found “in place” only when they refer to a specific appendix in the same book. So for the most part, these approaches keep the body of each session free of interruptions between breaks.

We want those references to help the reader place each one in a time sequence, regardless of when any particular book might have been first published. For the more time passes, the less important the date of publication becomes. When I note, for example, that Psychic Politics “is to be published this Fall (in 1976),” I know, of course, that by the time the first volume of Seth’s work is in print in the spring of 1977, Politics will actually have been on sale for several months. Yet, as I see it, that’s the most accurate way to present that bit of information in this Volume 1.

One can have a lot of fun with numbers. They can, for instance, be used to explore different perspectives of the same subject — in this case, time, the quality that’s just been under discussion. The two volumes of “Unknown” Reality contain 65 sessions. Jane delivered these for Seth over a period of a little more than 14½ months. This elapsed time includes more than a few weeks during which she gave no book dictation at all, of course, but I was curious to get an approximate idea of the number of hours she actually spent in producing the entire work.

Do I think that Jane, in trance, could actually deliver a complete, book-length manuscript in just 45 hours? The question must be hypothetical, but I’m sure she could as far as having Seth’s material available is concerned; she’d need only the necessary physical strength. Even now, while speaking for Seth she can easily outtalk my writing capacity by many hours. The information from Seth would be there. The work produced would be different from the “same” work delivered over a longer time. Seth wouldn’t have our current daily activities to draw upon for some of his analogies, for instance, but in such cases I think he’d either call upon similar episodes from our pasts, or cast his material in different ways — which would yield the same results.

The first Seth excerpt is in keeping with the idea of creating bridges between the two volumes of “Unknown” Reality by lifting something out of one for inclusion in the other. Once more from the 743rd session in Volume 2: “No book entitled The “Unknown” Reality can hope to make that reality entirely known. It remains nebulous because it is consciously unrealized. The best I can do is to point out areas that have been relatively invisible, to help you explore, actually, different facets of your own consciousness … I am well aware that the book raises many more questions than it presents answers for, and this has been my intent….”

Here’s Seth from the 750th session, held on June 25, 1975, two months after he finished Volume 2. In it he not only sums up his motives in producing “Unknown” Reality, but comments on another one of his basic ideas that I think it important to stress every so often; this time, perception is involved. “The ‘Unknown’ Reality was written to give … individuals glimpses into alternate patterns of reality. It was meant to serve as a map that would lead, not into another objectified universe per se, but into inner roads of consciousness. These inner roads or strands of consciousness bring elements into play so that it becomes possible to realize that the content of a given objectified universe may actually be perceived quite differently. You are part of what you perceive. When you alter the focus of your perception you automatically change the objectified world. It is not simply that you perceive it differently while it remains the same, regardless of your experience. The act of perception itself helps form the perceived event and is a part of it.”