“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

First, again, you have various stages of, say, pseudomatter, of dream images, that only gradually—in those terms—coalesce and become physically viable, for there are endless varieties of “matter” between the matter that you recognize and the antimatter of physicists’ theories.

They want to write great philosophical theories, for example, perhaps never putting the pen to the paper, or trusting themselves enough to begin. [...]

[...] Often at your particular stage of development as a race, these appear first in your world as fiction, art, or so-called pure theory.

[...] The idea is an old one; it is based upon the reality of counterparts, and presents another version of the theory. [...]

[...] 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. [...]

[...] In a curious fashion, however, that circle of safety provides each individual with the freedom and curiosity to go ahead and test independent theories and situations—so it also serves the purposes of creativity and knowledge, and even allows for the acquisition of new knowledge that was not in the original belief structures. [...]

Energy as it comes through your plane is individualized; and indeed, irregardless of any other theories, all energy contains some consciousness, in simple or more complicated gestalt fashion, as I have mentioned that atoms and molecules so possess a limited consciousness, and a generalized subconsciousness which contains within it a capsule comprehension of the universe as a whole.

[...] It is much easier to pretend that all such experiences are symbolic and not literal, to evolve complicated psychological theories, for example, to explain flying dreams.

[...] Also, as we grew up independently of each other, Jane and I gradually dispensed with conventional scientific ideas that life had occurred by chance; the emotional natures of our creative endeavors led us to question the theory. [...]

[...] Since the excerpts are still more representative than complete, however, due to the accumulated mass of information available, my own choices enter in: ESP class data are quoted a number of times; included is material summarizing Jane’s own theories about the Seth phenomena, as she worked them out in her recently completed Adventures in Consciousness; but reincarnation, while mentioned often, isn’t stressed in terms of particulars — that is, I refer to Seth’s statements that he, Jane and I led closely involved lives in Denmark in the 1600’s, but those lives aren’t studied per se. [...]

[...] You see, it is possible in theory for you to experience directly a concept-essence of the material in any given night’s session.⁸

[...] Only after such a basis [is established] will the idea of reincarnation achieve its natural validity, and only when it is understood that the subconscious, certain layers of it, is a link between the present personality and past ones, will the theory of reincarnation be accepted as fact.

[...] For Part Two of that book I drew 16 diagrams to illustrate her theories.

[...] When Seth quoted me as referring to a “life cloud,” he went back to the discussion Jane and I had at lunch today, concerning recent news reports and articles: Some prominent astrophysicists, mathematicians, and astronomers have announced their belief in a theory of “panspermia”—that in ordinary terms of time life on earth was “seeded” from space, instead of arising by pure chance in some primordial ooze or sea on our planet. [...] That lack of ordinary time in evolutionary theory is a question Jane and I have often wondered about.

The panspermian theory is that life reached the Earth from a living organization permeating our entire Milky Way galaxy, and that there is a creator, or intelligence, or God out there. [...] But even these latest scientific theories are based upon ideas of a past, present, and future; their proponents do not consider that basically time is simultaneous—that the universe is being created now. We had an interesting discussion. [...]

That note makes a handy reference for related concepts, for in it I also briefly discussed subatomic “particles”; the components of atoms; molecules; supposed faster-than-light particles (tachyons); Seth’s CU’s, or units of consciousness; his assertion that consciousness can travel faster than light in out-of-body states; Jane’s scientific vocabulary; and Einstein’s special theory of relativity. [...]

When he began to achieve some success, so that tours were offered, for example, he checked himself further against such “temptations” and to some extent, in theory if not in practice, you heartily concurred. [...]

[...] Involved, however, are very interesting “nonstandard” methods of regarding time, quantum theory, the infinite and the infinitesimal in numbers, model theory, and other mathematical tools.

[...] The audience for that particular book may be somewhat more limited, but it will be a fascinating endeavor; and in it I will hope to present a multidimensional theory of morality for those too sophisticated to accept any longer outdated concepts concerning the God concept.

[...] You accept all data that fit your theories, and ignore clues to the contrary. [...]

[...] Do not look for neat answers or tidy solutions, for when you do your explanations and theories will always be too small. [...]

Now: In direct opposition to current theories about the past, there was far less sexual specialization, say, in the time of the caveman than now.

(After supper tonight Jane and I had a discussion about the theory of evolution. [...]

(“Jane is writing a book on her theory of the world as idea construction. [...]

[...] It is much easier if your theories fit reality, but if they do not, then you do not change reality one iota. [...]