“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

The psyche as you know it, then, is composed of a mixture of these families of consciousness. One is not superior to the others. They are just different, and they represent various ways of looking at physical life. (Pause.) A book would be needed to explain the dimensions of the psyche in relation to the different families of consciousness. Here, in this manuscript, I merely want to make the reader aware of the existence of these psychic groupings. I am alert to the fact that I am using many terms, and that it may seem difficult to understand the differences between probable and reincarnational selves, counterparts and families of consciousness. At times contradictions may seem to exist. You may wonder how you are you in the midst of such multitudinous psychic “variations.”

The inside dimensions of consciousness cannot be so easily described, however. If you ask: “How can I have reincarnational and probable selves at once?”, you are asking a question comparable to the one mentioned earlier, colon: “How can an apple have color and be round at the same time?”

When I speak in terms of counterparts, then, or of reincarnational selves and probable selves, I am saying that in the true symphony of your being you are violins, oboes, cymbals, harps — in other words, you are a living instrument through which you play yourself. You are not an instrument upon which you are played. You are the composer and the symphony. You play ballads, classical pieces, lyrics, operas. One creative performance does not contradict the others.

To some degree you feel the same way when you encounter the concept of probable selves, or of counterparts. It is as though you had an unlimited bank of abilities and characteristics from which to draw, and yet were afraid of doing so — fearing that any addition could make you less instead of more. If all of this goes on personally, as you choose one melody and call it yourself, then perhaps you can begin to see the mass creative aspects in terms of civilizations that seem to rise and fall.

In the last few sentences there is an intuitive “definition” of probable and reincarnational selves, and counterparts, in relationship to the self that you know. In your case, however, you can change your own pacing, add variations, or even begin an entirely new composition if you choose to. Now many people have done this in very simple, mundane ways by suddenly deciding to use abilities they had earlier ignored. A man of letters, for instance, at the age of 40 suddenly remembers his old love of carpentry, reads do-it-yourself manuals, and begins his own home repairs. After disdaining such activities as beneath him for years, he suddenly discovers an intimate relationship with earth and its goods, and this appreciation adds to words that before may have been as dry as ash.

7. In Volume 1, see Appendix 2 for Seth’s discussion of the conflicts I felt between my artistic, writing, and sportsman selves. I spent a number of years working to resolve those feelings. From the private session for January 30, 1974, which I quoted in Appendix 2: “Your father’s creativity … had its side of secrecy, privacy and aloneness … you identified creatively with his private nature. The writing self became latent as the sportsman did, yet the writing self and the artist were closely bound. You felt conflicts at time. It never occurred to you that the two aspects could release one another — one illuminating the other — and both be fulfilled. Instead you saw them as basically conflicting. You believed the painting self had to be protected … as you felt that your father had to protect his creative self in the household….”