“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(In this case, though, too much time passed between sessions. The regularly scheduled session for last Wednesday night wasn’t held while we made ready for several approaching events, and as the days went by Jane [and I] simply forgot about what was coming up in “Unknown” Reality. I read her the heading for Section 4 now, while we waited for Seth to come through “I haven’t the vaguest idea, even, of what all that means,” she said. Usually a certain kind of serene existence makes the best kind of day-by-day framework for these sessions and our other creative work, even while those days may contain within them points of unusual interest or excitement [such as Jane’s weekly ESP class]. But given that right kind of equanimity, time — our ordinary time — slides by; then, looking back periodically, we discover that we’ve accomplished at least something of what we wanted to do.

(One of the events we’ve been preparing for is the visit tomorrow of Tam Mossman, Jane’s editor at Prentice-Hall, Inc. He plans to attend ESP class tomorrow night, then stay over Wednesday to read and discuss the two works Jane has in progress, Adventures in Consciousness: An Introduction to Aspect Psychology, and “Unknown” Reality. Tam will also look at my first rough sketches for Jane’s book of poetry, Dialogues of the Soul and Mortal Self in Time.¹ Then on Wednesday night he’ll witness the scheduled 706th session. If Seth comes through with material for “Unknown” Reality, Tam will be the first “outsider” to sit in on a session for this work. Almost always Jane dictates book material without witnesses other than myself and uses the framework of ESP class for emotional interactions involving herself, Seth, and others. That rather formal division in her trance activities suits us well; we enjoy doing most of our work by ourselves, no matter what kind it may be.

For now think of it as you usually do, in a time context. It has been fashionable in the past to believe that each species was oriented selfishly toward its own survival. Period. Each was seen in competition with all other species. In that framework cooperation was simply a by-product of a primary drive toward survival. One species might use another, for instance. Species were thought to change, and “mutants” form, because of a previous alteration in the environment, to which any given species had to adjust or disappear. The motivating power was always projected outside* (underlined).

(9:38.) To return to our main subject of the moment: The fact is that the so-called process of evolution is highly dependent upon the cooperative tendencies inherent in all properties of life and in all species. There is no transmigration of souls, in which the entire personality of a person “comes back” as an animal. Yet in the physical framework there is a constant intermixing, so that the cells of a man or a woman may become the cells of a plant or an animal,⁴ and of course vice versa. The cells that have been a part of a human brain know this in their way. Those cells that now compose your own bodies have combined and discombined many times to form other portions of the natural environment.

[...] Durability within the framework of the spacious present would not exist were it not for the laws of value fulfillment and energy transformation. [...]

At certain levels both cat and mouse understand the nature of the life-energy they share, and are not — in those terms — jealous for their own individuality … Man, pursuing his own way, chose to step outside of that framework — on a conscious level….

(Within that temporal framework investigators have recently discovered great biochemical differences among human beings at the molecular level: The genetic structures of numerous proteins [see Note 5] have been shown to be much more varied than was suspected. [...]

(Within such a gloomy framework, then, I think it legitimate to ask how the species can consciously stress its accidental presence in the cosmos, yet demand that its members be the most “moral” of creatures. [...]