“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(I began this short appendix a couple of weeks after the 732nd session was held, but didn’t finish certain parts of it until some time later. Seth’s naming a good number of class members as counterparts came as no great surprise to Jane and me — but it did make us more than a little suspicious at first. We’ve been thinking about counterpart ideas since Seth introduced the concept two months ago; see the opening notes for the 721st session. Then, in the 726th session, Seth named Jane and me as counterparts of each other. Although we keep the power of suggestion in mind, on one level we found Seth’s associations quite pleasant for the most part, and, once given, somewhat as we might have expected them to be. Yet I felt no strong surge of emotion, for instance, to learn that Norma Pryor [whom I’ve met but a few times], Peter Smith, and Jack Pierce are counterparts of mine — nor did they when I read Seth’s material to them during ESP class six nights later. Jane’s feelings were pretty similar to mine, when Seth named three students as her counterparts: Sue Watkins, Zelda, and “the young man from Maryland….”

“We’re so used to thinking that our encounters with others are caused by chance — except for those we purposely bring about through choice, such as marriage partners — that Seth’s comments about my students seem a bit outrageous at first: So many counterparts in one room?

(Student Bill Herriman is a professional pilot who flies a considerable distance to Elmira for class; his counterpart in class, Carl Jones, lives in Elmira each summer while giving instructions in sailplane flying, the third member of the counterpart trio, Bill Granger, is not a member of class, lives in Elmira, has always had a deep interest in aircraft, and is now learning to pilot sailplanes. Carl Jones knows Bill Herriman and Bill Granger well — but Bill Herriman and Bill Granger have never met; all three are obviously males; all bear a general physical resemblance; all fall within a certain rather broad age bracket. The close observer could, I think, find among the three men more physical and psychological correlations [some having to do with illness], as well as meaningful opposing features, so that in this instance the counterpart relationships can be seen as quite apropos.

(But individual reactions to a given idea or event can vary tremendously, from the most withdrawn behavior to the most explosive. Jane and I saw Norma socially one evening, along with a few other students as well as some people who were not class members. Psychic matters weren’t stressed, and counterpart ideas weren’t even mentioned. That is, I made no effort to bring up the subject, nor did Norma as I waited somewhat curiously through the evening. Still, it’s worth noting that being in the presence of a relative stranger who may also be one’s counterpart does make some sort of interior difference in response or attention. I wondered about the countless times counterparts had unwittingly gathered on similar occasions, and what sort of numberless exchanges had taken place on unconscious levels between those who were psychically related in some fashion.

[...] Now: I have spoken about counterparts in Ruburt’s class.¹ Many of the students became deadly serious as they tried to understand the concept.

[...] One student (Fred), a contractor, said little. [...]

[...] Some of Ruburt’s students are counterparts of each other. [...]

[...] During break Jane came through with additional psychic affiliations among her students, but it isn’t necessary to discuss them here. [...]