“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

[...] The three-into-one has one inherent weakness, and strong organization would be needed or the venture could be severely weakened. The weakening element would be largely concentrated in the choice of one individual within the organization as a focal point.

[...] There is one man important in the three-in-one merger, and the best man has not yet been found.

[...] One element therefore would be dropped, and it would prove in the overall not as effective as it would seem—one could be a liability, and might need to be discarded even if at first included. [...]

[...] This second possibility therefore is a good one and would work highly to your advantage. The third is a one- man show. [...]

[...] Their effects may have surrounded you, or you may have switched beliefs in one particular area of your life; but each can be changed if you utilize the power of action in the present. I am not saying that every one of you must or should be healthy, wealthy and wise. [...] In one manner of speaking, then, the suggestions you give yourselves constantly operate overall as beliefs that are reflected in your experience.

[...] In that context corporeal life is an entranced one, with the focus of attention largely concentrated through the senses’ belief in the reality of their sensations. Yet that experience is the image that reality takes for you now, and so in other terms earthly life is one version of reality — not reality in its entirety, but a part of it. [...]

[...] Many who make a practice of “denying” negative suggestions from others, asserting positive affirmations instead, actually do so because they are so fully convinced that the power of negative beliefs is stronger than that of beneficial ones.

[...] During that period concentrate your attention as vividly as possible upon one simple statement. [...]

[...] I will work on one book one night and another one the next, if you prefer, or discuss private material or other questions of a general nature, or work twice a week on our present material—whatever suits your fine fancies (with much humor). [...]

But your beliefs do not stop there; because of both scientific and religious ones you believe in western civilization that there are threats from within also. [...] People respond with illnesses of one kind or another, or through exaggerated behavior.

[...] He knows when he has poor habits in that regard, but have him work with one, say, just one a week, rather than take on several at a time. [...]

[...] I didn’t remember her volunteering three private, or book sessions a week except when I’d occasionally ask her for material for one of us. [...]

You will keep one later. One will be made by you, and one by a man higher in the company. This one will be kept later, not at the original specified time. One will be deliberately not attended, though circumstances will make this absence understandable. There will be a reason, in other words, and an acceptable one. [...]

The impression now of two men, one tall and bony, with sandy hair and ill-fitting clothes. One shorter with dark hair back from the forehead, and a round face from the front. [...]

A small boy connected with one of your children should be avoided: an unhealthy influence here. [...]

(Concerning the new product mentioned; John said that fellow workers recently visited the laboratories in Chicago and told him about one scientist in particular who was testing, or wanted to test, or experiment for problems of the central nervous system, but the budget insistence made this difficult. [...]

It seems to you that you have only one form, the physical one that you perceive, and no other. It also seems that your form can only be in one place at one time. [...]

[...] Even this is highly complicated, however, for there is not just one past. [...] You choose one particular group of these, and latch upon this group of events as the only ones possible, not realizing that you have selected from an infinite variety of past events.

[...] Now for an analogy, imagine if you can that behind the table is another just like it, but not quite as physical, and behind that one another, and another behind that — each one more difficult to perceive, fading into invisibility. [...]

While you continue to exist and develop as an individual, your whole self, or soul, has such vast potential, that it can never be expressed fully through one personality, as somewhat explained in one previous chapter.

(9:35.) You are as actively and vividly concerned in these realities as you are in the one in which your main attention is now focused. [...] The body, in other words, is simply one manifestation of what you are in one reality, but in these other realities you have other forms.

Any creative work involves you in a cooperative process in which you learn to dip into these other streams of consciousness, and come up with a perception that has far more dimensions than one arising from the one narrow, usual stream of consciousness that you know. [...] Its origin is not from one reality, but from many, and it is tinged with the multiplicity of that origin.

The so-called stream of consciousness is simply that — one small stream of thoughts, images, and impressions — that is part of a much deeper river of consciousness that represents your own far greater existence and experience. You spend all your time examining this one small stream, so that you become hypnotized by its flow, and entranced by its motion. [...]

Not only are you part of other independent selves, each one focused in its own reality, but there is a sympathetic relationship that exists. [...]

[...] Now you are not actively to seek out negative thoughts, but to find positive ones. Otherwise you concentrate upon the feared result rather than the desired one.

Give me a moment. (Pause.) The idea of the ad (to sell paintings) is a good one. [...] For one thing, remembering what you are reading, there are several attitudes that you should change, for while you believe them you work against your desire. [...]

The negative thoughts can and should be recognized and plucked up as they are encountered, but you do not need a shovel to pluck up one weed at a time, nor hit yourself over the head with a sledgehammer for finding a weed in your garden. [...]

[...] Your job now is simply to remove them, and as you remove each one, easily, to drop in a seed of positive thought to replace it.

It is almost impossible to begin with concepts of one isolated universe, one self at the mercy of its past, one time sequence, and end up with any acceptable theory of a multidimensional soul or godhead that is anything else but a glorified personified concept of what you think man is.⁶

[...] Although the body appears permanent and in existence from one moment to the next, basically it constantly rises out of the bed of probabilities, hovering at your now-point of perception and experience, and its apparent stability is dependent upon the knowledge of “future” probabilities as well as “past” ones.

(11:11.) In terms of history as you understand it, man felt safe and secure as a prime species under one sun, imagining that all else revolved about his being. [...] So he must now come to realize that he himself chooses from a myriad of probabilities the one that he now encounters.

[...] Do you think there is but one kind of consciousness?

The picture is a relatively simple one, all in all — one in which each consciousness is assumed to be directed toward a particular focus, is ensconced in one body, with its existence bounded by birth at one end and by death at the other. (Pause.) Unfortunately, that picture is as limited as any one of your photographs. [...] You form it through information and through energy that on the one hand has its source outside this system, and that on the other constantly flows into this system — and so in that respect the systems are united.

In a way, one remembered dream can be compared to a psychological photograph, one picture that is not physically materialized, not frozen motion, not framed by either space or time; therefore many of those ingredients appear that are necessarily left out of any given moment of waking conscious activity.

[...] It was taken in the summer of 1932, when Jane was 3 years old, and as far as we know it’s the only one of the Roberts family in existence. [...] In that session, Seth told us that the 12 year old Jane in the photo under discussion was to become probable to the one I eventually met and married.] Beside whatever Seth could tell us about her parents, I was curious to know whether the Jane who was shown at the age of 3 might be — or was destined to become — another probable Jane.⁶)

[...] You always examine your dreams then from an “alien” standpoint, one prejudiced in favor of the ordinary waking state. [...]

[...] Maybe one of the kid’s relatives, or one of the kids.” [...] But I have a picture of a ring, something like the one you wear. [...]

[...] Before, I said one or two. One between 16 and 18, the other between 18 and 24.

(At 9:15: “I hear the tune of One is the Loneliest Number, a currently popular song.

[...] A one-syllable name, man’s, beginning with J. Joe. [...]

[...] It is as if you used only one finger of one hand, and then said: “This is the proper expression of my personhood.” [...] You have one brain, it is true, but you allow it to use only one station, or to identify itself with only one mind of many.

It seems evident to you that one person has one mind. [...] Each one can organize reality in a different fashion. Each one deals with its own kind of knowledge.

It is not a matter, either, of there simply being one other category of knowledge, for there are numerous other such categories, many of them biologically within your reach. [...]

One level of dream life deals particularly with the biological condition of the body, giving you not just hints of health difficulties, but the reasons for them and the ways to circumvent them. [...]

You perceive however but one flicker, one small dimension of any given action as a rule. [...]

At one time the personality was involved with very early paper manufacturing, in I believe Belgium. [...] The personality has always been involved with communication in one form or another in various lives.

[...] In one action, basically, we can see all actions, and through one action we can reach the reality of all actions.

[...] Now this relationship is one that irons out old difficulties. [...] Is it any wonder that the conscious mind does not retain in one life memory of its other existences?

[...] What you think of as 1940 is but one season on that ledge, the season that you recognize. Flowers from the spring of one year “do not see” or mix with the flowers of the following spring, or with those of the spring before. In the same way, those born in 1940 “at one season” do not, in a greater context, mix with those born in the same year either.

[...] The stars and planets simply are in more than one place at one time. [...]

[...] But as Jane has said, things are “calmer” psychically when we’re by ourselves: In trance or out, she can concentrate upon the work at hand, free of the presence of a third individual — one who is bound to radiate his or her own psychic characteristics. [...]

[...] You think of being one self after another, each identity being neatly separated from the others by a passage of years, an obvious death and an obvious birth.

I do not want to get involved in a discussion of “levels,” in which progression is supposed to occur from one to the other. All such discussions are based upon your idea of one-personhood, consecutive time, and limited versions of the soul. [...] One is not more progressed than the others, but each is different.

[...] You view the fantastic variety of physical life — its animals, insects, birds, fish, man and all his works — with hardly a qualm; yet you must understand that the nature of consciousness itself is far more varied, and you must learn to think of an inner reality that is as infinite as the exterior one. [...] You exist as one person, simultaneously. [...]

Your idea of one soul, one self, forms a significance and a selectivity that blinds you to these other realities that are as much “here and now” as your present self. [...]

(Actually, Jane continued, she found the material on probabilities intellectually stimulating, while wondering about its emotional connotations — the inferences that she was but one of countless billions of creatures, “blinking on and off like lights in all of those probable worlds …” What value was there to the tiny individual? [...]

[...] You have various gradations of intellectuals; you have various gradations of those who are willing to express some emotions; you have some of those who are willing to disappear at the drop of a hat, and I am looking at no one in particular. I am the only one who expresses any emotions and I am supposed to be dead. [...]

They are highly connected in that they are all one. The energy is one. [...]

Well, we are starting a new one, and you had better get used to it. [...]

[...] Some one percent more. [...]

[...] The creative explosions begun with these books still erupt, for “Unknown” Reality does seem to have a life of its own, one that defies definition, and that even now serves as a springboard for new psychic and creative experience. [...] Sometimes I feel like saying: “One reality at a time, please.”

“One late-afternoon gaggle reached nearly from horizon to horizon, in three long and very noisy V-formations. And always, one bird led each V, with the two sides of the bird ‘lettering’ trailing back quite unevenly — wobbling, flexing, shifting. [...]

(In the 82nd session, which was held on the evening of August 27, 1964, Seth said: “When man realizes that he, himself, creates his personal and universal environment in concrete terms, then he can begin to create a private and universal environment much superior to the [present] one, that is the result of haphazard and unenlightened constructions.

In one way or another all of Seth’s books are elaborations of that basic message, stated nine months after his sessions with us began in December 1963. [...]

Could one return to that 12th-century life, even as an observer, what would the traveler find? An individual—and one not about to surrender his or her identity to anyone, or have it thought of simply as a manifestation of some “future” self! [...] The traveler could hardly move in on one of his or her own personalities! Interesting question: How would our 20th-century individual react when told by a visitor from the year 2355 (for example) that he or she represented one of our futurian’s “past” lives?

[...] This would be the case even when the subject is very unhappy with present challenges, and is trying to assign their origin to events in one or more former existences. All well and good to announce that one was a serf some 900 years ago—but one is much more likely to be either tuning into minute signals surrounding the actual physical and mental reality of the serf (poor fellow), or to be picking up on elements of that individual’s personality as they’re associated with the serf’s whole self or entity. Either possibility makes it much safer—and much more entertaining—to proclaim one’s serfdom.

My main point is that I also feel, without having asked Seth, that the farther one travels ahead in time the greater the play of probable realities and probable lives he or she encounters. To venture into such a skein requires that one constantly picks and chooses among them—for each move, each thought, even, can launch the traveler into a different probability. [...] (What if one doesn’t want a probable reality they choose? But that must happen all of the time!) The uncertainty perceived here by the conscious self, however, can act as a great restraint toward knowing a future life or lives—just as much as might the fear of tuning into one’s physical death ahead of time in this life. [...]

[...] Surely one’s death to come is a much more personal and penetrating prospect—a much more frightening one—than “facing” any past-life deaths one may encounter: Those deaths have already happened! [...]

[...] The idea is an old one; it is based upon the reality of counterparts, and presents another version of the theory. [...] They spend time searching for their soul mates — but the search involves them in a pilgrimage for a kind of impossible communication with another, in which all division is lost, with the two then trying to join in a cementing oneness, suffocating all sense of play or creativity. You are not one part, or one half, of another soul,⁴ searching through the annals of time for your partner, undone until you are completed by your soul mate.

[...] With one exception — that of Sue Watkins — all the names given by Seth, involving counterpart relationships, have been changed. Most of the people are members of Jane’s class; some have met certain of their counterparts, but not others; Jane, Sue, and I are the only ones who know everyone Seth named. [...]

[...] To use the members of ESP class as a general example, Jane and I have often noted the variety of feelings, ranging from the most positive to the most negative, that her students exhibit toward one another. The interesting thing about Seth’s statement is that with counterpart theory in mind one can gain a fresh appreciation of how underlying emotions and motives flow among certain individuals, sometimes surfacing in feelings of dislike, for instance, to whatever degree. [...]

[...] So, theoretically, you could get all the Henry people together now, have them alter their consciousnesses to a certain degree, and compile from them an amazing multilevel, multifaceted portrait of Henry VIII — assuming, of course, that one would be willing to accept such subjective experiences as valid. What a wonderful, weird view of ‘history’ — and probably a truer one than we’re used to….”

The multiplicitude of your own system is but one small example of the infinite realities that exist outside it. [...] There are gradations in matter as there are gradations in your color, realities that blend one into the other, and probable systems in which various representations, reflections, shadows and echoes, all probable creations of any given self, mature.

[...] If these universes were not interwoven then we would have no communication, but each has a mirror in each, and one reaches out to all the others, and I speak a million words to you for each one you hear.

You could not consciously handle these existences with one mind, as you think of mind, segmented. Your self exists in various compartments, and while all are one, you could not now bear an opening of the doors between.

[...] Seth’s entity hasn’t spoken many times; the 464th session and earlier ones contain detailed notes as to the manner of speaking used by the entity, etc.

I want you, therefore, one by one, to open the inner senses and to direct them along these lines. [...] And so one by one, the inner senses can begin to operate so that what you see can become clear, and what you hear can become vocal and clear and strong. [...]

[...] That means I am aware of your identities as they are, and I am not limited by the one person you think you are at this time. So I can look at you, for example, knowing your reincarnational existences, and I am not limited to communicating to the one self you think yourself to be. [...]

There was such a relationship, and our friend took very sadly to a menial position for it followed one in which he was a great leader. And in the second one he tried to teach himself humility. [...]

[...] In Alpha I you are used to one short adjacent step away from what you call your consciousness. [...]