“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

We must unfortunately often deal with analogies, because they can form bridgeworks between concepts. There are units of consciousness,³ then, as there are units of matter. I do not want you to think of these units as particles. There is a basic unit of consciousness that, expressed, will not be broken down, as once it was thought that an atom was the smallest unit and could not be broken down. The basic unit of consciousness obviously is not physical. It contains within itself innately infinite properties of expansion, development, and organization; yet within itself always maintains the kernel of its own individuality. Despite whatever organizations it becomes part of, or how it mixes with other such basic units, its own identity is not annihilated.

(9:47.) That leads to the old inevitable questions: Do animals have souls — or do trees, or rocks? In line with the usual definition then, in your terms, this smallest unit would be “soul stuff.” That viewpoint however is highly limited, for “above you,” using that scale, there are other more developed organizations of these units; and so from that “more exalted viewpoint,” you would seem to be junior souls indeed.

There are systems in which a moment,⁵ from your standpoint, is made to endure for the life of a universe. I do not mean that a moment is simply stretched, or that time is slowed down alone, but that all the experiences possible within a moment become realities within that framework. Such systems have little to do with you in any practical manner, nor is such information given to dwarf your idea of what your own consciousness is. It is important, however, that you realize the fact that there is more creativity and variety in an inner reality than you ever physically perceive.

(10:06.) These units of consciousness do not have human characteristics, of course. They do, however, possess their own “inclinations,” leanings, propensities — and perhaps “propensities” comes closest to the term I want. I do not want you to think of them as miniature people. Nevertheless, neither are they clumps of “idle” energy. They are vitalized, aware, charged, with all the qualifications of being.

(Long pause, one of many.) I do not want to ruin your idea of stability, and I do not want to confuse you. The fact remains that in speaking of probabilities thus far, I have simplified the issues considerably. (To me:) I said, for example, that you died as a child in one probability, and again in the (military) service, and I gave you a small sample of your parents’ probable history. (See the last two sessions.) In doing so I used ideas and terms quite easily grasped. The larger picture is somewhat more difficult — by far — to express.

(10:55. Jane was quickly out of another good trance; once again it had been a long one. Her delivery had been fast at times. “I knew what I was saying when I said it, but I’ve forgotten it all now …” She paused, then continued in a way I thought somewhat unusual for her: “We’re doing the best we can with what abilities we’ve got. You wonder what this material’s application is — what good does it do to know it?”

(With gestures, emphatically) That selfhood jumps in leapfrog fashion over events that it does not want to actualize (pause), and does not admit such experience into its selfhood. Other portions of your greater identity, however, do accept those same events rejected by you, and form their own selfhoods.

(Long pause at 11:29.) While words are difficult to use here, again, what I am saying applies, in different ways perhaps, to the behavior of worlds, atoms, and psychological structures. Give us a moment … In the life that you know, as given in Personal Reality, your beliefs act to specify the particular probable events that will become “real.”¹⁰ Because you are a probable self, an understanding of your own nature will show you some of the abilities, not used here, but present, that you can indeed choose to actualize. You can draw then from your own bank of probable abilities, for there will be traces of them in you. They are being developed in another reality; therefore in this one they can be utilized far easier than you might suppose. When you exercise your right arm, your left arm benefits. When you develop abilities in one system, to some extent they are easier to develop in another. (To me:) In deciding to do some writing (for the Seth books, as an example), you are also drawing upon abilities that you have worked on in another system, and through your intent you are to a certain extent blending probabilities.¹¹

11. Seth’s description of how I’m blending two probable selves reminded me of his material on the way Jane is doing the same thing. See the 680th session at 11:02. It can hardly be coincidental that Jane and I are using our individual writing abilities as the cohesive — the “glue” — to unite our respective sets of probable selves.