THE PRIVATE PROBABLE MAN, THE PRIVATE PROBABLE WOMAN, THE SPECIES IN PROBABILITIES, AND BLUEPRINTS FOR REALITIES

— to be called (pause): “The Private Probable Man, the Private Probable Woman, the Species in Probabilities, and Blueprints for Realities.”

[...] There are probable family trees, then. [...]

(To me:) Since your birth a probability has occurred that you could have followed, in which your wars did not happen. There is another probability in which the Second World War ended in nuclear destruction, and you did not enter that one either. You chose “this” probable reality in order to ask certain questions about the nature of man — seeing him where he wavered equally between creativity and destruction, knowledge and ignorance; but a point that contained potentials for the most auspicious kinds of development, in your eyes. [...]

You each also became involved in this probability precisely to use it as a creative stimulus that would make you seek for a certain kind of understanding. [...] To some extent or another each of those involved in this probability chose it for their own reasons. Saying this, however, I also say that many leave this probability for another when they have learned and contributed.

In a way, man is trans-species at this point in probability. It is a time and a probability in which every bit of help is needed, and your talents, abilities, and prejudices made you both uniquely fitted for such a drama. [...]

[...] You are changing probabilities for the better, and in the same fashion do the generations pick and choose their probabilities, so that from any given century uncountable probabilities form. [...]

Personally, you are now in a period where you are changing probabilities at a swift rate—as indeed your world is. In a democracy, the period of elections and the contemplation of candidates always sets strong probabilities into motion. [...]

[...] As soon as Seth began talking about probabilities, I knew he was extending his material that he began in the session for December 21, in which he stated that unchosen probabilities may be quite changed by those chosen for activation. [...]

(9:30.) In greater terms, it is impossible to separate one physical event from the probable events, for these are all dimensions of one action. It is basically impossible to separate the “you” that you know from the probable you’s of which you are unaware, for the same reasons. There are always inner pathways, however, leading between probable events; since all of them are manifestations of an act in its becoming, then the dimensions between these are illusions.

Now the consciousness of such beings would also contain the consciousness of large numbers of probable selves and systems, experienced quite vividly and clearly as multiple presents. These multiple presents can be altered at any of an actual number of infinite points; infinity not existing in terms of one indefinite line, but in terms of numberless probabilities and possible combinations growing out of each act of consciousness.

In terms of probabilities, therefore, you choose certain acts, unconsciously transform these into physical events or objects, and then perceive them. [...]

[...] Wait — just now as I wrote this I picked up something [from a part of my consciousness other than Ruburt or Seth], to the effect that the projection environment is as focused as mine is, really, but that it’s a probability of mine. [...] He mentioned probable kinds of consciousness in that session, too. [...]

Give us a moment … In some adventures you do visit other probable realities in which you have a body structure quite as real as “your own.” Your own psychological makeup, for that matter, achieves its marvelous complexity because it draws from the rich bank of your greater probable existences. [...]

(A one-minute pause at 10:25.) The self that you know and recognize carries within it hints and traces of all of your probable characteristics that can be actualized within your system of reality. [...] Yet within the psychological and biological structure of your species, the roads of probabilities have more intersections than you know.

As a rule you have enough difficulty dealing with the day’s occurrences, much less next week’s, and so in the sequence of events the reality of probable actions is usually hidden from your view. [...] In each of your “reincarnational” existences you are faced with the same relationship with probabilities. [...]

[...] In the same way, following your own “trace” experiences and characteristics, you can discover those “probable” abilities that are yours, and uncover to some degree the nature of probable actions open to you for physical materialization.

(Slowly at 10:03:) Each part is vital, and in one way or another there is instant communication between the smallest and the largest, the cobweb and the spider, the man, the entity, and the star — and each spins its own web of probabilities from which other universes continually spring.

Christian theology sees the end of the world in certain terms, with a grand God coming to reward the good and to punish the wicked.⁶ That system of belief allows for no other probability. [...] Others see periods of peace and advance — and each probability will happen “somewhere.” [...]

In this probability of which I speak, the species will begin to encounter the great challenge inherent in fulfilling the vast untouched (forcefully) — underlined — potential of the human body and mind. (Long pause.) In that probable reality, to which each of you can belong to some extent, each person will recognize his or her inherent power of action and decision, and feel an individual sense of belonging with the physical world that springs up in response to individual desire and belief.⁷

[...] Seth’s theory of simultaneous time, which can encompass the notion of future probabilities projected backward into an apparent past, for instance, leaves great leeway for the interpretation of events or questions, however, and makes the idea of contradiction posed by an Atlantis in the past and one in the future too simple as an explanation. At any given “time,” depending on whatever information he’s given previously, Jane could just as easily quote Seth as placing Atlantis in our historic past, or in a probable past, present, or future — or all four “places” at once, for that matter. [...]

To any of them, the others would seem to exist in a probable universe. [...] All of you did not have the same parents, for example, and these are portions of probable situations existing in your own parents’ separate lives, as you think of their lives.

In some probable systems, you and your mother would both exist, do both exist, but as complete strangers, you see. [...] This self that you know has also set up and initiated probable realities of its own. [...]

Each probable self you see also has future selves. [...] The term includes the whole self as it consists of the self that you know, probable selves, reincarnated selves, and selves more highly developed than the self that you know.

“These ‘past’ probabilities are not fleshed out in our terms, but they’re brilliantly focused in their own life. In the Saratoga experience¹ I felt ghostly because there I was a future probability … At certain levels of consciousness, through bypassing direct neurological activity and impact, you can then glimpse other portions of your own probable experience — both in the future and the past.

“Usual memory is as much a sifting process as it is anything else, in which experience’s intensity varies — sometimes ‘alive’ neurologically and sometimes not — just to focus our consciousness in one probable action or series. (As I type I add: We forget anything not pertinent to our selected series of probable actions. [...]

[...] Past motion and acts still go on, not recurring — it’s hard to explain — but those past actions are still exploring other probabilities, while our nervous structure focuses us in the one (physical) probable reality we’ve chosen. [...]

And I know I am only going to confuse you but if you have probable selves then you know there are probable universes and probable earths and probable histories of your earth and you see what this is going to do to your concept of reincarnation as you now hold it. So within the system that you know, you also have probable reincarnational selves within those probable historical earths. [...]

Now, briefly last evening, in a chapter of my own book, we were discussing probabilities and I want you to understand a few points along these lines. [...] But I also want you to know that your present thoughts, feelings and emotions not only affect you but affect your probable selves and yet .... [...]

You are presently within one system of reality, one probable reality, the reality that you now know and form physically. [...] All probable systems do not have reincarnational existences. [...]

Yet the units of consciousness, being independent of space and time, form your cellular structure, and that structure deals in a most basic manner with the nature of probabilities. 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.

[...] Neither statement would be precisely correct in any case, because your present is a poised balance affected as much by the probable future as the probable past.

(Long pause.) The precious privacy of your existence, and indeed of your universe, is all the more miraculous, so to speak, precisely because its probable reality emerges from an infinite field of probabilities, each forever inviolate. [...]

Now, you move through probabilities in much the same way that you navigate in space. As you do not consciously bother with all of the calculations necessary in the process of walking down the street, so you also ignore the mechanisms that involve motion through probable realities. You manipulate through probabilities so smoothly, in fact, and with such finesse, that you seldom catch yourself in the act of changing your course from one probability to another.

There is something highly important here concerning your technological civilization: As your world becomes more complicated, in those terms, you increase the number of probable actions practically available. [...] As space becomes “smaller,” your probabilities grow in complexity. [...] (In parentheses: I am speaking in your terms of time.) Watching television, you are aware of events that occur on the other side of the earth, so your consciousness necessarily becomes less parochial.⁸ As this has happened the whole matter (smiling) of probabilities has begun to assume a more practical cast. [...]

More and more, you are beginning to deal with probabilities as you try to ascertain which of a number of probable events might physically occur. When the question of probabilities is a practical one, then scientists will give it more consideration.

(10:12.) Instead you have a rich interweaving of probabilities; for in one probability the two were indeed married, and that Stella [Butts] saw the house go to the eldest son (myself). In this probability, this Joseph instead comes upon the house of a relative stranger, finds it for sale, and can or cannot purchase it according to the new set of probabilities then emerging. [...] In this probability Joseph’s mother left little in financial terms, relatively speaking, and her house was sold. [...]

(Humorously:) Now, all probabilities are related. [...] She is able, again to some extent, to follow through with her own probable existences. [...]

[...] Again, the official mind says that it was a coincidence that this couple were, in their way, artistically inclined, enjoyed painting and writing, free-lanced, and still lived in an apartment after some years of marriage — and that the man was relatively quiet in contrast to the woman (with amusement). Yet again probabilities merge, for the woman could well have been a writer, the man an artist; and seeing Ruburt and Joseph, they related with other probabilities inherent in their own natures.

[...] If you understand the nature of probabilities, you will not need to pretend to ignore your present situation. You will recognize it instead as a probable reality that you have physically materialized. Taking that for granted, you will then begin the process necessary to bring a different probability into physical experience.

(With a smile:) Probable dictation: What you must understand is this: Each of the events in each of your lives was “once” probable. [...]

[...] Yesterday, the theft was one of innumerable probable events. [...] In one way or another, through your conscious thought you attracted such an event, and drew it from probability into actuality. [...]

When this does happen it usually occurs as a bleed-through from the subconscious from the dream state, for the subconscious is somewhat acquainted with probabilities, and to some degree experiences these in a problem-solving manner. It views various probabilities with the purposes of the ego in mind, and therefore aids the ego in its decisions as to which probable events it should choose for its own experience.

[...] Take for example probable event X. This so-called probable event or action will be experienced by the various portions of the self in their own way. [...]

[...] The portion of the self, or rather the portions of the self, that experience action in terms of what the ego would term probability, is further divorced from the ego, however, and this probability reality appears to the ego very rarely, and only very occasionally.

Now this event X is only one of a literally numberless amount of probable events which the conscious self could experience. For its purposes however the conscious self chooses this particular event X. But again, this event X, until the conscious self experiences it, is only one of many other probable events, different in no basic manner from the others. It becomes real, actual and different from those other probable events, only when it is experienced by our conscious self, or by this conscious self.

[...] What about all of these other probable events, however? [...] 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.

The imagination can vaguely perceive, of course, some probabilities, but the physical organism can directly experience but one of these within physical time, and in terms of continuity. The probable events however are precisely as real as that one event which is chosen from them to be a physical experience. [...]

(In mentioning my “sportsman self,” Seth referred to information he’d given about three of my probable selves in a private session on January 30, 1974 — just a few days before starting “Unknown” Reality. [...] But even without Seth’s help, interesting results can flow from an awareness of the probable-self concept: The reader can begin to intuitively consider his or her own probable selves, or those of others who may be closely related psychically or physically. I’m not writing here about rationalizing the existence of one or more probable selves to account for personal shortcomings in this reality, however, but of simply using the idea to enlarge our basic notions of the human potential. [...]

[...] These can exist whether or not the course itself seems advantageous, and can even overshadow the benefits [that] a successful course might have given, in those terms … Though it would seem, then, that you have made errors, the errors in themselves are creative, and have brought about unforeseen probabilities that now enrich — and also change — your original course.

[...] Your deepest natures called it out of the probable sequence into your joint reality — for a reason, because each of you knew that it could best help you to develop all of your respective abilities to their fullest, and also help others.

The doctor, you see, that you might have been and are not in this system, once dreamed of a probable universe in which he would be an artist. He continues to work out his own probabilities. [...] You call his system an alternate system of probability but this is precisely what he would call your system.

This traveling in probable systems goes on constantly, with variations, in the dream state. The individual chooses then which probabilities he desires to make actual in physical terms.

I am using you here and the physician probability as an example. [...] Reincarnation is but a part of this probability system, the part that falls within your particular universe.

Ruburt gave you some idea of some events that in all probability will occur. [...]

Now your probable selves are quite real. [...]

(To Maria.) You judged your probable self far too harshly. [...]

History, as you think of it, represents but one thin line of probabilities, in which you are presently immersed. [...] Evolution, as you think of it and as it is categorized by your scientists, represents but one probable line of evolution, the one in which, again, you are presently immersed.

(9:35.) There are, therefore, many other equally valid, equally real evolutionary developments that have occurred and are occurring and will occur, all within other probable systems of physical reality. [...]

[...] There are, latent, within your own physical forms other senses, unused, that could have come to the front but in your probability did not. [...]