“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

It is really a building up of idea into a whole pattern that can be perceived by the camouflage senses. Any reality therefore will be variously perceived, and the nature of the reality will necessarily be distorted in the very attempt to perceive it. Here again we have our creative tension, whereby a new reality is formed as a result of the distortion itself. Within your system colors may be perceived as sound. Their connections with human moods is only too apparent.

The sight of our imaginary automobile, therefore, is perceived by you as a visual stimulus, because you are conditioned to perceiving it in such a fashion. But it is also possible to perceive our automobile in entirely different fashions within different realities, and from various perspectives.

Within your field the automobile is perceived mainly as a physical object. Within some systems the same automobile would appear to be no more than a shadow. Within some systems the automobile would not be perceived at all, unless it were in motion. In other systems it would not be perceived at all, unless it were not in motion.

It is even possible for the physical individual to train himself to change the nature of his own perception of such objects. It is not a question of the car having certain properties, being real to one perceptive view and therefore necessarily unreal to another. To a very large degree, the portion of any reality that you can perceive is determined largely not by the given, so-called real object itself, but from the perspective, and because of, the senses with which you perceive it.

The medium perceives so clearly the reality of the surviving personality that the medium to some extent directly perceives that reality. [...] To experience the reality of another does not necessarily mean that the medium negates her own personality—only that momentarily she allows it to perceive as directly as possible the experience of what it is to be the other. [...]

[...] You are supposed to get a clear picture of your inner development by perceiving the exterior environment. What seems to be a perception, an objective concrete event, independent and apart from you the perceiver, is instead the physical materialization of the perceiver’s own inner emotions, energy and mental environment.

(Pause.) True and basic perception is a highly complicated phenomena, in which the line between perceiver and perceived vanishes. [...]

As long as scientists insist upon considering the perceiver and the perceived event as entirely separate, then the true nature of perception will not be understood.

It seems to you that you have only one form, the physical one that you perceive, and no other. [...] You have indeed other forms that you do not perceive, and you also create various kinds of forms for various purposes, although you do not perceive these physically either.

Though this thought-image usually is not seen by others, it is quite possible that in the future scientific instruments may perceive it. As it is, such an image may be perceived by those who have developed use of the inner senses. [...]

[...] It is physical, solid, and you perceive it easily. 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. [...]

Now anything that appears in physical terms also exists in other terms that you do not perceive. You only perceive realities when they achieve a certain “pitch,” when they seem to coalesce into matter. [...]

(Seth II:) Fantasies are the realities your intellect does not perceive in other fantasies, therefore, those others who watch you and who watch without any awareness of the intellect as you understand it. They and we perceive you then in our place. [...] Our perception allows us to tune into the particular fantasies that you perceive as one indivisible reality. We can perceive it, but we cannot participate, only observe that which, in your terms... [...] The small portion that you perceive is but one letter on a page. [...] At this stage you are only perceiving a portion of your own becoming. We perceive your present room, understanding that you consider it this indivisible reality and yet our presence was sensed. [...]

[...] You are to forget the idea that what you see physically is the only reality, and that what only one perceived must be an hallucination if it is not perceived by the others. A reality is a reality regardless of how many perceive it. It is only at your present point of comprehension that you judge reality according to the number of people who perceive the same thing. [...]

(Seth:) ...this was in your inner senses and perceiving a different kind of reality in the same way that you formed what you saw on an unconscious basis, in your terms, so you form the physical matter that forms the room on an unconscious basis. [...]

Now you can close your minds to such possibilities, or you can open your imagination and inner perceptions and try to perceive them. [...]

All systems of reality are created, or constructed, by those who perceive the system. Those who do not construct a system cannot perceive it. [...] However there are certain conditions necessary before precognitions can arise to conscious levels, and there are definite conditions that must exist before what you call apparitions can be perceived.

[...] Many of these apparitions exist in their own system whether or not you perceive them. Some apparitions are constructed by the perceiver and are basically caused by a telepathic communication. [...] All apparitions however, to appear as or within the physical system, must be constructed by the perceiver in the same manner that all physical objects are constructed.

This does not mean that apparitions are only the result of such construction on the part of the perceiver. The perceiver constructs the pseudomaterial apparition as he constructs the physical image of his contemporaries, but in, or rather and in line with telepathic data that is received by or from the consciousness whose material image is being constructed.

Sense images are built up, you see, in the same manner whether or not you are trying to perceive an apple, a star, or a human being. They are built up in the same manner whether or not you want to perceive a thought that must be made physical, or the image of a consciousness that must be made physical.

Visual data as you perceive them amount to visual language; the images perceived are like visual words. An object is presented to your visual perception so that you can safely perceive it from the outside. [...]

Whatever your language, you perceive trees, mountains, people, oceans. [...] Visually, early man did not perceive the physical world in the way that seems natural to you.

(10:41.) Those consciousnesses then merge to perceive the world in a fashion you call your own. Through your eyes the beasts, vegetables, birds, and dust perceive the dawn and sunlight as you do — as you, and yet on the other hand your experience is your own.

[...] It seems to you that visually, for example, the natural world must be put together or perceived in a certain fashion.

Since any materialization is in effect a mediation between what we may call an ideal which is, by nature, of itself not materialized, and a practical working perceivable symbol of the ideal, each materialization must be composed of some camouflage elements. Within the physical field these perceivable symbols are composed of matter, which is a conglomeration of atoms and molecules. [...]

He sees or perceives only his own construction. [...] The chair created then by any given individual, and perceived by him, is an identity in that it exists at any given time, without any exact duplication. [...]

[...] Action itself cannot be directly (underlined) perceived for this reason. But is effects upon camouflage can often be perceived.

[...] You may, however, only perceive parts of action in your time breakdown. Ideally, psychological time experiences will allow you to perceive action more clearly and directly. [...]

[...] There is a field that combines both perceiver and perceived event, a communication and a system of similarities set up between them. [...] The field reaches out from you, say, as a self, to all the things that you perceive —and physical time does not enter in.

[...] There is, then, a constant interaction between the perceiver and the perceived event.

This highly intricate web or field obviously reaches out from you as a self to all the persons you perceive, and you also participate in the same sort of web, projecting outward from the other individuals. [...] They act like infinite pathways, and have a definite construction, though you do not perceive this.

In a very real manner events or objects are actually focal points where highly charged psychic impulses are transformed into something that can be physically perceived, a breakthrough into matter. [...]

[...] Now as you know, you do not perceive the atoms and molecules that swim about the room nor the atoms and molecules that fill this space between our friends, nor the forces—the field forces—that exist. [...] Do you all know—emptiness that you perceive as solidity. Now, without your particular physical perfection you would not perceive the couch as solid. [...] You make the organization your thoughts perceive as organization. [...]

[...] If you were able to focus your attention upon the dissimilarities, merely those that you can perceive but do not, then you would be amazed that mankind could form any idea of an organized reality. [...] You merely perceive it as vacant because you do not perceive what is there. [...]

[...] You do not perceive the same couch. You only perceive your own idea constructions. You cannot perceive those of another. [...]

[...] But you do not perceive it. [...] The vastness that you do not perceive does not bother you at all and you do not ask questions about it because it does not concern you. [...]

You understood, when we were done, that you perceive but a very brief glimpse of a small part of action as it exists. On a conscious level you perceive less than this.

[...] Action is perceived within your system electromagnetically, in terms of intensities. The personality as you know it is merely the result of action as you perceive it in certain groupings at any given time.

When you perceive merely the present personality, you are simply perceiving a small portion of action.

[...] Other portions of the personality however perceive, or attempt to perceive, the whole self from their own starting point. [...]

[...] Now any act of perception changes the perceiver, and so the soul, considered as a perceiver, must also change. There are no real divisions between the perceiver and the thing seemingly perceived. In many ways the thing perceived is an extension of the perceiver. [...] Then the creator of the thought perceives the object, and he does not understand the connection between him and this seemingly separate thing.

(9:25.) Even the mortal self, you see, is far more miraculous and wondrous than you perceive, and possesses far more abilities than you ascribe to it. [...] For the soul, above all, perceives and creates. [...] The soul within you, therefore, is now perceiving. [...]

[...] The physical senses actually can be said to create the physical world, in that they force you to perceive an available field of energy in physical terms, and impose a highly specialized pattern upon this field of reality. Using the physical senses, you can perceive reality in no other way.

[...] If you catch yourself perceiving information through other than your physical senses, then you must accept the fact that this is the way perception works.

This event X becomes real then, in your terms, only when it is experienced or perceived by our conscious self. [...] The only difference between them and event X is that event X was perceived and experienced by our conscious individual. In other words, were it not for this perception of the event X, it would still be as valid, or as invalid, as real or as unreal, as all the other probable events that were not perceived.

[...] It does not take you time to perceive them one by one. You perceive them in their completed fashion. Now this other portion of the self experiences these probable events, consciously, with as much rapidity as you subconsciously perceive the million small actions that make up the handshake.

This leads us then to an obvious conclusion: if event X were not perceived it would still be a probability only. By the same token, if our individual chose to perceive and experience, say, event Y, then event Y would be the reality, and event X would still be unreal.

This is not as far-fetched as it might seem, for again, you perceive now more than you realize; although you may not be consciously aware of this, it still falls within the framework of your associated experience. The mere shaking of a hand may be perceived by you as a simple action. [...]

It is quite true that your physical senses create the reality that they perceive. [...] You perceive its reality through one set of highly specialized senses. This does not mean that its reality exists in that form in any more basic way than it exists in the form perceived by the microbe, insect, or bird. You cannot perceive the quite valid reality of that tree in any context but your own. [...]

[...] Objects from past and present could be perceived at once, their presence justified through associative connections. [...] If your perceptive mechanisms were primarily set up as a result of intuitive association rather than time sequence, then you would perceive all of these chairs at one time; or seeing one, you would be aware of the others. [...]

Now: The senses that you use, in a very real manner, create the environment that you perceive. [...]

[...] If you were to do so, then you would perceive the same kind of environment in which I have my existence. [...]

The thoughts would not be perceived if they were present, you see. If a certain intensity is reached here however, a peak of intensity, then you could perceive the spacious present as it exists within your native system. You could, from this peak, theoretically look into the other system, but you would not understand what you perceived. [...]

[...] All of the experience an artist has gained is in any given painting, not physically perceived, but strongly perceived by the inner senses.

Later you may not recall it, but you have a more direct connection with reality in the dream state, and the intensity of the dream experience is more completely perceived. [...]

[...] Without the camouflage, you see, you would perceive nothing using the physical senses.

(Pause at 10:23.) In periods of conscious “blank spots” or certain fluctuations, these memory systems are often perceived. [...] It is able to perceive, little by little, some of the content before closed to it. It need no longer perceive the momentary “blank spots” fearfully, as evidence of nonexistence.

Alternate focus is merely a state in which you turn your consciousness in other than its habitual direction, in order to perceive quite legitimate realities that exist simultaneously with your own. You must alter your perception to perceive any reality that is not geared practically toward material form. [...]

Using alternate focus, with practice it is possible to perceive the different physical formations that have filled any given area of space, or that will fill it in your terms. In some dream states you may visit a particular location and then perceive the location as it was, say, three centuries ago and five years hence, and never understand what the dream meant. [...]

Instead you only perceive in this fashion. [...] At other levels it enjoys playing with such concepts and perceiving great unity from events that occur outside of a time context — mixing, for example, events from various centuries, finding harmony and points of contact by examining both historical and private environments, plucking them out of the time framework.

Now I tell you that while the perceiver is changed by what he perceives, he also changes that which is perceived. Perceiver and perception, in a basic manner, are one and the same. [...]

Any perception of any kind instantly alters the electromagnetic and neurological systems of the perceiver. [...] The perceiving mechanisms themselves change and are changed by that which they perceive, and I am speaking now of your physical system, and the physical nature of any perception.

[...] There is not therefore any particular event, say an automobile accident, that exists independently of the consciousnesses of those involved in it, for a given perceiver to perceive.

It is literally impossible for you, and it is a logistic contradiction to imagine, with your physical structures, that any perception can be received unless the perceiver’s own inner situation is altered. [...]

In terms of probabilities, therefore, you choose certain acts, unconsciously transform these into physical events or objects, and then perceive them. [...] Their activity is perceived only during the range of particular vibratory rhythms. [...]

[...] You perceive it at a certain “stage.” [...]

[...] You are used to thinking in single-line thoughts, so you think of events that you know as complete things or actions, not realizing that what you perceive is but a fraction of their entire multidimensional existence.

[...] The mind, which is the inner counterpart of the brain, can at times perceive the far greater dimensions of any given event through a burst of sudden intuition or comprehension that cannot be adequately described on a verbal level.

[...] ‘This cannot be a legitimate projection.’ Yet you may be perceiving the street and the field that existed ‘before’ it, and the images may be transposed one upon the other. [...] As mentioned earlier, you may also perceive a building that will never exist in physical reality. [...]

If another individual under the same circumstances comes across the same ‘potential’ object, he can also perceive it as you did. He may, however, because of his own make-up, perceive and translate another portion of allied pattern. [...]

To a large extent in the physical system, your habit of perceiving time as a sequence forms the type of experience and also limits it. [...] You are not forced to perceive action as a series of moments within inner reality, therefore.

[...] Your physical mechanisms are equipped to function in such a way that reality is perceived through the lens of particular root assumptions, then. Using the physical senses, it is almost impossible for you to perceive reality in any other way.

[...] If another individual under the same circumstances comes across the same potential object, he can also perceive it as you did. He may however, because of his own makeup, perceive and translate another portion of allied pattern. [...] (Pause.) To a large extent your habit of perceiving time as a sequence forms the type of experience, and also limits the experience that you will have in physical reality.

Yet you may be straddling time in such an instance, perceiving, say, the room as it existed in the 1700’s, and the street as it exists in your present. [...] Yet you may be suddenly perceiving the street, and the field that existed before it, and the images may be transposed one upon the other.

Objects—this is four—are blocks of energy perceived in a highly specialized manner.

[...] You may, as I mentioned earlier, perceive the form of a building that never did exist physically, and never will in your universe. [...]

Now: As you know, you do not perceive the atoms and molecules that swim about the room, nor those that fill the space between our two friends, nor the forces — the field forces — that exist. [...] Emptiness that you perceive as solidity.

Now without your particular physical senses you would not perceive the couch as solid. [...] Your thoughts perceive an organization. [...]

[...] You do not perceive the same couch. You only perceive your own idea constructions. [...]

[...] The vastness that you do not perceive does not bother you at all, and you do not ask questions about it. [...]