“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(This will be the first time Seth has appeared on television since we did some promotional work for The Seth Material after its publication in 1970. At that time Jane spoke for Seth on two occasions from cities in the East. Reactions were excellent; she still receives an occasional call or letter about one of those shows in particular. I might add that since Seth launched “Unknown” Reality in February of this year, Jane and I have fulfilled another television commitment, and that she was the subject of a lengthy radio interview. But the pressures of work, plus our own conservative attitudes about personal publicity, have led us to pass by other such opportunities.

They help you interpret the universe in horizontal terms, so to speak. In studying the deeper realities within and “behind” that universe, the instruments are not only useless but misleading. I am not suggesting that their use is futile, however — merely pointing out the limitations inherently involved.

I am not making a prediction here. I am simply pointing out one probability that exists. There have indeed been civilizations upon your planet³ that understood as well as you, and without your kind of technology, the workings of the planets, the positioning of stars — people who even foresaw “later” global changes. They used a mental physics. There were men before you who journeyed to the moon, and who brought back data quite as “scientific” and pertinent. There were those who understood the “origin” of your solar system far better than you. Some of these civilizations did not need spaceships.⁴ Instead, highly trained men combining the abilities of dream-art scientists and mental physicists cooperated in journeys not only through time but through space. There are ancient maps drawn from a 200-mile-or-more vantage point — these meticulously completed on return from such journeys.

(10:20. “I don’t know what he said about electrons and things like that,” Jane told me as soon as she was out of her hour-long trance state, “but all of this is general and it’s leading up to something more. I carried it as far as I could. Maybe we’ll get more on it after break …”

(I thought it very interesting that Seth had talked about subatomic waves and particles in the last paragraph of his delivery tonight. Such ideas involve the physicists’ ongoing conception of the duality of nature. For instance: Is light made up of waves or particles? A contemporary accommodation, called complementarity, leads experimenters to accept results that show either aspect to be true. As noted in the last session, Jane had attempted to read Einstein’s book on his theories of relativity earlier that day. We had briefly discussed Einstein’s work and some allied subjects before tonight’s session, but I hadn’t asked her to give material on physics through Seth.⁵ In her own way, Jane is quite interested in the field, however, and has done a little work in it with scientists. We may have more to say about those efforts later in “Unknown” Reality.

(10:36. “I heard the phone, and tried to hold the trance through it,” Jane said. “But I don’t know about this book, and ordinary people reading it. I’m just letting it all come out … It’s great fun, though. I feel like I’m in the heart of things. It’s only a little after ten-thirty, but I feel that I’ve really traveled a long way since the session started …”

1. Once again (as in Note 7 for the last session), I quote Seth from the 45th session: “Any investigation of the basic inner universe, which is the only real universe, must be done as much as possible from a point outside your own distortions … To get outside your own universe, you must travel inward … Your so-called scientific, so-called objective experiments can continue for an eternity, but they will only probe further and further with camouflage [physical] instruments into a camouflage universe … The subconscious, it is true, has elements of its own distortions, but these are easier to escape than the tons of distortive camouflage atmosphere that weigh your scientific experiments down.”

2. Seth’s material about technology and science leading to inner realities reminds me of two related examples that I’ve become aware of recently through my own reading. The first one involves a more intimate inner reality than the second, yet both pose interesting questions. Each reader can probably give similar illustrations. (However, as I wrote in Appendix 1, “I’m not interested in knocking our technology, but in pointing out coexisting inner factors that I’m sure are just as important.”)

My first example concerns the development of biofeedback machines in the 1960’s. With one of these devices the individual was to learn to control, when necessary, his or her own blood pressure, or any of certain other involuntary body functions. Doubtlessly such self monitoring is an example of the “loving technology” that Seth mentioned in his final delivery for the last Session; yet we now understand that the early claims for biofeedback were considerably exaggerated. Within a more reasonable context the technique will take its place in our medical systems, but in each case what we learn will surely point up the need to understand our individual inner realities; i.e., what caused the high blood pressure, or whatever, in the first place?

Strange but inevitable, I think, how the conscious mind, developing such disciplines as biofeedback and astronomy (to use the examples considered here), finds itself led back to its own inner sources.

From the 742nd session in Section 6: “Atlantis is a land that you want to inhabit, appearing in your literature, your dreams, and your fantasies, serving as an impetus for development … It carries also, however, the imprint of your fears, for the tales say that Atlantis was destroyed. You place it in your past while it exists in your future. Not the destruction alone, but the entire pattern seen through the framework of your beliefs. Beside this, however, many civilizations have come and gone in somewhat the same manner, and the “myth” [of Atlantis] is based somewhat then on physical fact in your terms.”

“It is very possible that you might end up in what you intend as a space venture only to discover that you have ‘traveled’ to another plane [probability]. But at first you will not know the difference.”

Physicists began talking about the spin of electrons in 1925; shortly afterward they began to consider the spin of the components of the nucleus itself. This spin isn’t the orbital motion of the electron around a nucleus, however, but (very briefly) is actually more a measure of the electron’s magnetic field.

Time reversal or particle symmetry, the equivalence of space and time, is a tenet of relativistic physics and quantum theory. In the material I have on file on electron spin itself, though, I haven’t found any discussion of Seth’s ideas of: (a) a reversed electron spin and a consequent time reversal, or (b) electrons spinning in many directions at once (even if we could grasp such a situation). Such concepts in association with electron spin may be dealt with in the literature of physics, but are unfamiliar to me or outside my limited understanding. I’m sure also that in ordinary terms Jane knows nothing of them.