“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Seth began dictating The “Unknown” Reality: A Seth Book, in the 679th session for February 4, 1974, and finished it with the 744th session for April 23, 1975. In the beginning we anticipated another intriguing Seth book, the successor to Seth Speaks and The Nature of Personal Reality. We thought the new work would probably be a long one, but we hardly expected that it would require publication in two volumes.

Seth himself said nothing about publishing “Unknown” Reality in one volume, two volumes, or even more, while he was producing it. He referred to it as one unit until the very last session, the 744th, when he said in answer to a question I asked “The Seth material is endless. I organize it for your benefit. If you want to divide it into two volumes, that is fine. You will find several points where this can be done …” In our final view, however, the obvious point of division is also the best one: three sections in each volume. I’ll note a little more about this natural point of separation in the Epilogue of this book.

As “Unknown” Reality progresses into Volume 2, it’s natural that I use notes more and more often to call attention to earlier sessions. When those sessions are in Volume 1, think of that book as a separate entity used for reference in the same way that Seth Speaks, Adventures in Consciousness, or any of Jane’s other books are. At the same time, in an effort to build some mental bridges between the two parts of “Unknown” Reality, I’ve made it a point occasionally to lift something out of one volume for inclusion in the other, or at least to include that kind of reference.

And Jane’s intent and mine, too. Jane’s books are records of her use of certain abilities that we think are very creative; the questions she raises present us with larger fields to investigate. Ordinarily we don’t think of those questions — and challenges — as being mystical in origin, not from our Western social viewpoint. Seth discusses Jane’s early religious background, her “deeply mystical nature,” in the first session of this volume (the 679th), and I add some material on mysticism in an appendix to that session. That information is related to these introductory notes, yet it should be separate.

In the Seth books we’ve deliberately refrained from commenting upon the similarities that exist between Seth’s ideas and those of various religious, philosophical, and mystical doctrines from the Near, Middle, or Far East. This approach fits our natures, of course. Jane and I know that such correlations exist — indeed, we’d only be surprised if they didn’t. Others have often mentioned them to us, and we’ve done a little reading on Buddhism, Hinduism, Zen, and Taoism, for example, not to mention subjects like shamanism, voodooism, and obeah. It’s obvious, we think, that a book could be written comparing the Seth material with other systems of thought, whether religious or not, but Jane and I, being individualists, have chosen not to concentrate upon those areas. Nor is what I’m writing here meant to be taken as an attempt to put down other approaches to “basic” reality.

Although there are similarities, then, in our view there are vital differences, too, between Seth’s philosophy and that of many other organized systems. Jane and I prefer to think about the unities we find in our world as including religions, not being defined by them, and we think Seth stresses this. We go along in our own stubborn ways, knowing that our outlooks are rooted in the Western traditions of the world, but also knowing that there exist all about us these numerous other philosophies or systems, some of them many centuries old, that the human race has created to help it explain reality. Yet we feel no compulsion to intimately know the details of, say, Sufism or Brahmanism. (A simile I often think of here compares Eastern and Western life and thought with the right and left hemispheres of the brain; they’re separate, yet united; each half performs functions that complement and to some extent overlap those of the other, and together they operate as a whole.) But we dislike the idea of nirvana in Buddhism and Hinduism, which calls for the extinction or blowing out of individual consciousness, and its absorption into a supreme spirit, usually after a series of lives. And we object to the notion that “nature,” in those terms of linear time, has so arranged things that the individual has to pay a karmic debt in one life as the result of actions in a previous one. Why should nature punish anyone if it doesn’t punish anything? The realities of nirvana and karma are not ones that Jane and I want to create.

We prefer instead Seth’s — as well as our own — concepts of the inviolate nature of the individual consciousness, before, during, and after physical existence, in ordinary terms, and whether or not any theory of reincarnation is involved. It may be natural enough for us in the West not to enjoy the idea of surrendering our individual natures upon physical death, even if intellectually we can understand, for instance, the Buddhist teaching that “perfect” joy can be found in the eventual, blissful surrender of the self to a supreme spirit — although I note with some humor that personally I’ve yet to determine how the self who surrenders knows it’s done so if it’s been so thoroughly absorbed.

I’m more inclined to agree with what Seth told us in the 590th session in Chapter 22 of Seth Speaks: “You are not fated to dissolve into All That Is. The aspects of your personality as you presently understand them will be retained. All That Is is the creator of individuality, not the means of its destruction.” And whenever I read about conventional Eastern conceptions of a supreme spirit, I remember what Seth had to say in the 596th session in the Appendix of Seth Speaks: “I have used the term ‘expansion of consciousness’ here rather than the more frequently used ‘cosmic consciousness’ because the latter implies an experience of proportions not available to mankind at this time. Intense expansions of consciousness by contrast to your normal state may appear to be cosmic in nature, but they barely hint at those possibilities of consciousness that are available to you now, much less begin to approach a true cosmic awareness.”

“Such sessions never wear me out. Instead, I’m often more refreshed than I was earlier. Usually I have little idea of time. As Seth I may speak for an hour, but when I ‘snap back’ I’ll look at the clock in surprise, thinking that perhaps 15 minutes have passed at most. The trance is not static, though. It has gradations and characteristics. These are almost impossible to explain, but the state isn’t always the same — it has peaks and valleys, psychological colorations and intensities that mark its nature.

“I appear to be more than ordinarily opaque, as if a part of me refuses any conscious consideration with my trance manuscripts; perhaps so as not to confuse myself. For one thing, I like to keep the boundaries of my subjective states separate; it seems like an economical and practical way to handle exotic conditions as naturally and easily as possible. The Seth state remains inviolate in its fashion. So does the Jane state.

“In many ways, we’re a lonely species. We seem to be forever prowling around the confines of our own nature. Maybe our idea of identity is like a magic circle we’ve drawn around our minds, so that everything outside seems dark and alien, unselflike. There may be other psychic fires lighting up that inner landscape with a far greater light than ours; other aspects of consciousness to which we’re connected as surely as we’re connected also to the animals in a chain of being we barely comprehend.