The "Introduction" and "Key Points" for this chapter were summarized by an AI editor based on the main text below; they are not words spoken by Mike during the lecture. The main text comes from Mike's commentary, and the block quotes are Seth's original words (the portions Mike read aloud).
Introduction
This chapter records Seth's dictation after he resumed writing the book. It begins by explaining the value of the three private sessions following Session 885, Rob's later decision to publish the private sessions, and Jane's idea for a second poetry collection; then it uses the Three Mile Island, Jonestown, and Iran events to bring up the proliferation of group consciousness. Seth then discusses the origin of the universe: in the beginning there was a divine psychological gestalt, containing everything within the spacious present; consciousness precedes matter, and matter is the materialization of consciousness; the five senses are extensions of the inner senses; the universe was born as a dream world; All That Is is both finished and unfinished; and he reminds us not to fall into delusions about the divine.
Key Points of This Chapter
- The group consciousness triggered by the Three Mile Island, Jonestown, and Iran events will continue to grow, and human actions can enable the greater consciousness to explore its own new ranges.
- In the beginning, the universe had no God the Father, Allah, Zeus, Buddha, and so on, but rather a sacred psychological gestalt that contains everything within the spacious present, abiding unmoved, and within multiple foci of manifold affection.
- Consciousness exists before matter; matter is the form by which consciousness concretizes itself; after physical death, consciousness still exists in a form composed of units of consciousness.
- The physical senses are extensions of the inner senses; all species have the inner senses, and through them form inner communication.
- All That Is, at the deepest level of consciousness, is both complete and incomplete; when humanity learns, All That Is is also learning and adjusting, but delusions of the divine can easily arise and must be treated with caution.
Main Text
Session 886 (Monday, December 3, 1979, 9:20 p.m.)
At the beginning, Rob said that since Seth's last regular session six weeks earlier, which was Session 885, they had only held three private sessions, or deleted sessions. I really wish I could present those sessions here, because Seth gave us very valuable information in them.
At that time, Rob did not yet know that he would eventually publish these sessions. Because according to his and Jane's original agreement, these private sessions would never be published, since they involved too much of their personal and private matters. But in the end, a few years before Rob passed away, he finally made a decision. What decision did he make? He said that no matter how much of their personal privacy this information involved, he felt that the value of the Seth material could not be allowed to disappear on the excuse of personal privacy. He felt that the preciousness and importance of the Seth material, its significance for all of humanity, was such that by comparison, their personal affairs were not worth mentioning. So in the end, he published all seven volumes of the private sessions, a full seven volumes, seven large books.
So the private session portion of the Seth material, although it contains a great deal of personal information, also contains a great deal of valuable information. Did Rob not know this at the time? At this point he did not know that this book would be published; perhaps he thought it would never see the light of day, so he felt it was a pity. He said: oh, it is such a pity that I cannot show these to you. We will have opportunities later to present the contents of these private sessions to everyone as well. Because these private sessions deal more with specific matters, where Seth discusses some of his views. I think for many readers, the help can sometimes be even greater. Many private, very hidden issues, because they leap past the general and go directly to specific questions, may offer great inspiration to people who have the same problems, in terms of insight and understanding of certain specific matters.
Fortunately, Rob eventually published all of them. This of course includes matters concerning themselves—Jane's somewhat unsound physical condition, her stiffness; Jane's body grew increasingly stiff, until finally she could not move. It also concerns the countless exchanges that constantly occur between our inner and outer realities, or what he called Framework 1 and Framework 2. It was in these three private sessions that Seth talked a great deal about how extensive data exchange and information communication take place between the inner world and the outer world, or between inner reality and outer reality, or what are called Framework 1 and Framework 2. Some of that data is personal, but most of it is universal.
Jane's Second Poetry Collection
In the afterword, I mentioned the idea of Jane's second poetry collection. Jane wanted to write a second book of poems. What poems would she write? She had progressed on this theme to such a degree that Seth was able to say this on November 21—that was one of their private sessions. Seth said: a collection of love poems is a good idea. Seth gave her a title, called A Collection of Love Poems. Why call it a collection of love poems? Because Jane wanted to gather and publish some of the poems, the little love poems, that she had written to Rob over the years since they first met in February 1954. Seth called it a collection of love poems. Last month she called her publisher to discuss this matter, to discuss this book. They were discussing possible titles for the book, but Jane had not yet found one she liked.
Three Mile Island, Jonestown, and the Iranian Events
In the afterword, in the afterword of this book, I also wrote about the great flowering of religious consciousness and scientific consciousness stirred up by Three Mile Island, as well as Jonestown and the Iranian events. Three Mile Island was a matter of scientific consciousness; Jonestown and the Iranian events were more a matter of religion and politics. These three events involved science, religion, and politics. Once these three important events appeared, they would continue to grow. The brewing and fermenting of these three events had an enormous impact on the whole of human society. It seemed as though they had a life of their own; once this group consciousness blossomed, it was as if it had its own consciousness.
Since Session 885, Jane and I had been watching these effects grow steadily—watching the news, watching the development of these events—the results of this blossoming of group consciousness. Now, our country's initial concern over the Three Mile Island accident had grown to include the problem of fallout, the subsequent airborne fallout, the question of why we build nuclear power plants near large population centers, and the question of carrying out large-scale evacuation at the site when a serious accident occurs—it seemed to expose a series of insurmountable challenges.
America began to reflect on this issue. In 1979, the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant leak accident1 led to intense debate throughout society over nuclear power safety and the threat to humanity. So in America, although its nuclear power technology is relatively advanced, they have always been relatively restrained in the development of nuclear energy. Most of America's electricity generation still uses natural gas, with some coal-fired generation, and some hydroelectric power, though not much. Europe, on the other hand, has moved fastest in nuclear power generation, because Europe itself has tight energy supplies. Europe's energy has always been tight; you can see that even today, Europe still imports large quantities of natural gas and oil from Russia. Because the whole of Europe is not that large in area, its resources are not that abundant, yet its population is large and its resource consumption is enormous.
America's characteristics are quite different. It lies in the middle of the American continent, with Canada to the north and Mexico to the south, including the Gulf of Mexico, and it has two coasts, east and west, with large amounts of oil on the seabeds, and it also has large oil fields inland that can be exploited. So overall, it is a country that does not lack energy, yet it still imports large quantities of oil and energy every year. So in essence it does not lack energy, but it also develops nuclear power moderately. After that event, America's attitude toward nuclear power became relatively conservative. But compared to many countries, it still developed quite a few nuclear power plants—I have not checked the specific numbers, but relative to Europe and Japan, its nuclear power generation is relatively conservative; but relative to countries without nuclear power generation, it has still developed a great deal.
As for Iran. In February 1979, Iranian guerrillas led by a Marxist mob occupied the American embassy in the capital Tehran and temporarily captured 71 Americans2. At the time it was said that this situation might happen again. Sure enough, on November 4 of the same year, Iranian students attacked the American embassy and took 63 hostages3, while three others were imprisoned in the Iranian foreign ministry. These Islamic fighters released 13 American citizens4, who arrived home before Thanksgiving. These fighters continued to hold the remaining 53 Americans5, and Iran defied our entire nation.
Many people do not understand why America and Iran are such bitter enemies, why America so relentlessly looks down on Iran, even taking pleasure in doing whatever it can against Iran. If you understand the history, you will know—we cannot judge many things based on a single event. In 1979, such serious events occurred in Iran: attacking the other side's embassy, kidnapping diplomatic personnel, detaining diplomatic personnel, and in the end killing some diplomatic personnel, and so on. In any era and in any country, this is an extremely serious political event.
A Very Interesting Example of Cause and Effect
Here is a very interesting example of cause and effect. Many people, when speaking of the Eight-Nation Alliance's burning of the Old Summer Palace6 during the Qing government, do not understand why the Eight-Nation Alliance invaded China without any apparent reason. There is a great deal of historical background here. At that time, these British and French countries, some European countries, had diplomatic relations with the Qing government; they had envoys, diplomatic missions, just like today, with ambassadors. And they had missionaries; at that time Christian missionaries were proselytizing in China. But for China's traditional culture, these foreign religions were considered heretical doctrines, and resistance arose instinctively. So some people would do extreme things such as seizing priests and burning churches—not to mention the larger background of the Boxer Rebellion later.
Later, because these foreign missions protested to the Qing government, asking why their people were being seized, their priests arrested, their churches destroyed, and so on, a fierce diplomatic conflict eventually broke out between the Qing government and these missions. In the end, the Qing government, for whatever reason, arrested the people from these missions, arrested those who had caused the most trouble, and not only arrested them but killed some of them—killed some of the people from the diplomatic missions. Killing members of a diplomatic mission is a matter of extremely serious nature.
At that point, the other side, including the Anglo-French forces and the Eight-Nation Alliance, began landing from warships at the Tanggu port in Tianjin. There were not many of them at all—think about how many people are on a warship; it was just those people on the warships. After landing, they fought their way from Tianjin to Beijing. Now, driving from Tianjin to Beijing takes just over an hour or two, and the high-speed rail takes only 30 minutes. But at that time, the Qing army's equipment was poor—still spears and broadswords—while the Eight-Nation Alliance was already using modern firearms; there was a generational gap in weaponry. You were still using cold weapons while they were using hot weapons. So they could not win and fled; after fleeing, they signed treaties, ceded territory, and paid indemnities. And these foreign governments could not swallow their anger: look, you killed our mission's people, and when we fought our way here, you neither declared war nor surrendered—you just ran. Then, in their fury, they set fire to the emperor's rear garden—the Old Summer Palace, the so-called emperor's rear garden—burning, killing, and looting to vent their rage.
So at the time you might feel that the Eight-Nation Alliance was utterly immoral, utterly despicable. Yes, some of what they did was excessive, but within this chain of cause and effect, you can see that many of their actions had a background.
So later, the whole world established very strict rules for the protection of diplomatic missions, including the Geneva Conventions and so on. Regarding diplomatic missions on both sides, China has also had this rule since ancient times—when two countries are at war, envoys are not executed. Two countries may fight to the death on the battlefield, but the protection of envoys on both sides is safeguarded by international law conventions and the Geneva Conventions.
So at that time, Iran detained the American embassy personnel, including attacking the embassy, detaining embassy personnel, and later including killing embassy personnel and so on (I do not know whether they were dealt with later; it seems they were not killed, I cannot remember clearly). This Iranian event led to extreme tension between the two countries. Iran had previously been a relatively open-minded country; before, Iran was a very wealthy country in the Middle East, because its crude oil reserves are enormous. Since this event, under sanctions from the international community, including sanctions led by the United States and Western countries, its economy has declined day by day. Up to now, most countries cannot do business with it, and cannot even have banking or financial dealings with it. Iran has been excluded from the entire world financial system, trade system, and political system. So you see, at the time, for the sake of their so-called patriotism (for Iran, these were patriots), the resulting consequences were these consequences. What we see today as Iran's present condition is a continuation of those consequences from back then.
The Multiplication of Group Consciousness
And the possibility mentioned here is not an original idea. But this multiplication of consciousness hints at certain rather astonishing abilities on the part of our human species. For this development demonstrates that even though we live as though we were tiny creatures within an overall consciousness, or within the incredible abundance of All That Is, our actions can still enable a great consciousness to explore its own new ranges.
What Rob means is that his idea—that the group consciousness led or guided by these events would develop independently, multiply independently—this involves rather astonishing abilities. Because what does this development demonstrate? It demonstrates that even though we humans, before the whole of All That Is, or before the overall consciousness of the entire universe, seem to be tiny, insignificant beings, even so, our actions can still enable that great consciousness to explore its own new ranges. Those events had never happened before; they were new events in human society—whether the Three Mile Island question of the safe use of nuclear energy in science, or the Jonestown question of religious belief (regarding Jonestown, there will be detailed discussion in The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events), or the Iranian events, and so on. These were all developing; consciousness was constantly developing.
Rob said: I must say, this is a rather frightening creative ability on our part. Rob still had his own judgments of good and evil, right and wrong; he considered these all quite frightening. We take these three events for granted without realizing it; we feel that these all happened normally. Of course, we as individuals and as a collective have always been doing this; both individually and collectively, we take it for granted.
Seth Resumes Dictation
Earlier today, Jane and I had talked about Seth resuming work on the book. Because it was already December, and their last transmission of material had been in October. But when he did so, I was still surprised. Jane also strongly hoped to get some startling information in this session, and wanted to ask some questions.
At the beginning, the transmission of this material was quite slow and deliberate, because it touched upon the beginning—the birth of the universe.
The Sacred Psychological Gestalt
Then Seth said: In the beginning, there was no God, no Allah, no Zoroaster, no Zeus, and no Buddha.
I do not know who Zoroaster is either; he is said to be the founder of Zoroastrianism. Zeus is a god from Greek mythology—the god of the universe, but he was not the earliest one either. You see, Greek mythology at the very beginning was extremely chaotic, filled with all the human qualities reflected in the divine. Go look at it; it is especially funny. If you do not know it, you can search online for Greek mythology, and it will start telling you from the first god onward—extremely chaotic. As for the Buddha, the Buddha actually never spoke of the creation of heaven and earth; in fact, he said exactly the opposite.
In the beginning, there was a sacred psychological gestalt.
In the beginning there were none of these so-called creators. There was only a psychological gestalt—Gesto, a word that Seth coined himself; I do not know whether such a word existed before. This is a word unique to it—psychological gestalt, or simply gestalt for short. So what exactly does this Gesto mean?
He said, I mean a being whose reality cannot be defined by the word "being," because it is the source from which all being emerges.
This psychological gestalt, or this most sacred psychological gestalt, is the source of all existence. But it itself cannot be defined by the word "existence," so he gave it a new term called gestalt. It does not matter—the various ancient civilizations of this world have all given it different names; the Chinese have many names for it, from Taixu, Taiji, Wuji, to Hundun.
That being exists in a psychological etymology.
That being is not a material existence; it is a psychological existence. This psychological existence is the source from which all material world existence emerges.
A spacious present, in which all past, present, and future, everything, is held in its close attention.
Within this psychological gestalt, there is a spacious present. Past, present, and future, all things, everything, are held in the close attention of this gestalt—even the tiniest speck of dust is attended to by it.
In a divine realm, motionless.
Here remember the core point: in a divine realm, motionless. This is what Buddhism calls the state of suchness, unmoving. Here I want to make one thing clear to everyone—Seth emphasizes that this motionlessness has a premise, and the premise is that it is within this divine realm. Do not forget this premise.
How should we understand this? At the stage of the source of the universe, within the source of All That Is, it is a divine motionlessness. But within this motionlessness there is not nothing; there is everything—past, present, and future as one spacious present. And this overall existence also maintains close attention to every single thing within this existence; it is that kind of motionlessness. And such a state, we give it the name of divine motionlessness within a divine realm, also called a sacred psychological gestalt. Every religion or school has its own different name for it; the term "suchness, unmoving" used in Buddhism is the same idea.
It is in such a brilliant attention that the greatest and the lowliest, the largest and the smallest, are equally held in a multi-faceted loving focus.
Seth's statement here is a very creative expression. His kind of suchness, unmoving, yet contains within it the existence of a multi-faceted loving focus. So within this suchness, unmoving, there is not nothing; there is everything. And within this suchness, unmoving, there is not no emotion either; there is loving focus within it, but this loving focus is multi-faceted. Previously he used a word called grace; here he changes the expression to loving focus—same idea; there is no essential difference between grace and loving focus.
Here remember one core point: multi-faceted. What does multi-faceted mean? It means multi-dimensional; it is better to understand it this way. For example, when he loves a person, he does not only love that person; he loves all the organs, tissues, cells, molecules, atoms, and so on within that person—all these different levels of love. He does not say that he only loves the highest gestalt; he loves everything in this world, in this universe—consciousnesses of different levels, gestalts of different levels, he loves them all; this is called multi-faceted loving focus. But within the different loving focuses, his focus is different—the focus of an atom and the focus of human consciousness are two completely different consciousness focuses. And each one enjoys the loving focus of this sacred gestalt.
Such a state, we call a sacred psychological gestalt. What this long passage describes is this sacred psychological gestalt, which is the source of our universe. If described in words, it is roughly like this. It is an extremely large psychological gestalt, with focus of attention on every level of consciousness. In the future, these focuses, each focus of consciousness, will materialize and form an individual that exists in our objective world.
What does "unchanging" mean here? Unchanging means that this love is equal; it does not mean loving some things more and some things less. Although it is on different levels—countless, it takes five hundred thousand cells to form a person, and each cell contains tens of millions of atoms and molecules—so everything is infinitely quantified and layered, yet this gestalt's loving focus toward them is equal and without distinction. That is, the universe's love for an atom, and its love for a person, and its love for a planet, are all the same. The "unchanging" here refers to this.
Your concepts of beginnings and endings make such a situation extremely difficult to explain.
This is difficult to explain, because you always have a time concept of beginning and ending.
Because in your terms, the beginning of the universe is meaningless. That is, in those terms, there is no such thing as a beginning.
If expressed in your human terms, there is no such thing as a beginning. Because time is an illusion, meaningless. As I have explained, the universe is always entering the present. And each present moment carries with it its own inherent past.
The universe enters the present in every moment, and every moment is brand new. The universe creates itself in every moment; it is not that it finished creating at some point long ago and we are the continuation of that creation—that is you thinking in terms of time. The universe created in the past and has now developed for so many years—it is not like that. The universe is always creating the present; for the universe there is only the present, and it is always entering the present. Remember, the universe is always entering the present—this is all present progressive tense, always entering the present, an eternal present progressive. Always entering the present, every moment, every second. And then we use the concept of time again; well, there is no way around it.
Vast amounts of available data, personal and global, combine to form each moment.
Vast amounts of available data, whether personal or global, form each moment. The small moments we as individuals form—there are seven billion people on the globe, so there are seven billion moments, and together they make up all the states of present human society on Earth. Each person is creating their own new universe, their own new reality, and the whole world is also creating its own brand-new world, its own brand-new reality, in every moment.
Yet you have agreed to accept only a small portion of this data as reality.
Remember, it is an agreement; we humans collectively agree to accept only a very small part of this as reality, while we choose to ignore the other parts.
For example, you accept only that data that fits your concepts of motion within time. As a result, your archaeological evidence usually presents a picture that conforms to your concepts of history, of geological periods, and so on.
He says, for example, you can only accept that part which you can accept within your understanding of the movement of time—that is, you accept only the concept that time can flow only from the past to the future. Within this concept, within this time framework, you can accept it. Anything that does not conform to this time framework, you choose to discard. For example, if you dream of a dead person, you feel this does not conform, and as soon as you wake up you immediately discard it. For example, if you see a person who has already died appear in your life, you feel you have seen a ghost; this is an abnormal phenomenon, and you immediately feel that either you are ill or something has happened to you. Why? Because it does not conform to your concept of time.
What he is saying here is not even that; he is saying that your archaeologists have discovered a great deal of archaeological evidence, but it is all evidence that conforms to your human concepts of time, so you can only see these; those that cannot be seen have all been thrown away by you.
The Conscious Mind and the Inner Senses
The conscious mind, a magnificent but limited eye with which to see.
Our conscious mind uses a magnificent—that is, very vast, very broad—but limited eye to see. It lacks all peripheral vision; it cannot see the periphery, only the most important core part.
I use the term "conscious mind" as you have defined it, and I use it because you are familiar with the term.
Because you allow it to accept as evidence only the physical data that the five senses can gather. Your conscious mind—here he refers to the human conscious mind—can only accept what the five senses give you. And anything beyond what the five senses give you, you all consider unreal, not evidence. Only what the five senses give you is considered real—hearing something, seeing something; seeing is believing; you must see it with your own eyes.
While at the same time, the five senses represent a rather flat view of reality, one that relates only to the most superficial, most obvious surface.
But the five senses can only process the most superficial things of your reality, yet you take these most superficial things as fact, unwilling to look even one layer deeper.
The physical senses are extensions of your inner senses.
Our five senses are the physical senses, extensions of your inner senses. In other words, the reason you can see is that your inner senses can see, and then the eyeball came into being so that you can see. It is not the other way around; it is not that you can see only because you first had eyes. This order of before and after, this causal relationship of root and branch, must be made clear—it is not that our inner senses are an extension and enhancement of the outer senses. I originally had outer visual senses, right? Now I want to open a third eye; we often use this expression. Why do we want to open our third eye? Because this third eye has always existed; you just kept it closed before, and now you open it. In other words, this third eye is not an extension of your physical eyes; quite the opposite, your physical eyes are the outward extension of your third eye—the eye you have never opened.
That is, all our outer senses are outward extensions of the inner senses, not the other way around.
The inner senses are a part of each specific species, to whatever degree.
Each specific species has inner senses, regardless of the degree of sensation of those senses.
The inner senses provide all species with an inner method of communication.
So from this angle, cells also possess the inner senses. Remember this: every species has the inner senses -- it is not only humans who have the inner senses, every species has the inner senses. And then these inner senses can carry out an inner communication among themselves through their inner senses, and this is a method of inner communication for all species.
Why is it said that when some people open the inner senses, they can see that all things are connected and all things are one, and they then have this consciousness of oneness? It is because as long as they open the inner senses, they can connect with all things, because all things establish their inner connections precisely through these inner senses. How do cells connect and communicate with one another? Through the inner senses. How do atoms communicate with one another? Also through the inner senses.
Atoms perceive their own position, velocity, and motion, and also the nature of their surroundings, and the matter that they themselves compose.
So what can the inner senses of atoms perceive? They can perceive their own position, velocity, motion, as well as their surrounding environment, and what kind of matter they themselves are forming. For example, take water -- water is composed of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. The hydrogen atom in water, and the hydrogen atom in hydrogen gas composed of two hydrogen atoms, are both hydrogen atoms, but their cognition is different. The hydrogen atom in water knows that it has combined with oxygen to form water, and it also knows its own state of motion, direction, and speed, and it also knows the surrounding environment. That is why water can become ice or become vapor, and it can also change its own form. This is all because at the smallest atomic and molecular level, they have their own consciousness, and they can perceive changes in the surrounding environment.
So here you can use different angles to re-examine some of the things you have learned. In scientific terms, changes in temperature lead to changes in energy, and changes in energy lead to chemical reactions among molecules, so matter displays different forms. But even now scientists have not fully understood why changes in temperature can make matter turn from ice into water, and from water into vapor. Their only explanation is that this temperature causes molecules to move differently, so the forms they display are different -- when the temperature is low and energy is low, they move slowly, and they become ice; when the temperature rises above zero, they move faster, and they become water; when the temperature rises above one hundred degrees, they cannot even remain water, and they become vapor, becoming water molecules floating in the air. They think it is this change in energy, and that is one explanation from scientists. In fact, we all know that these tiny particles all know that the external environment is changing.
The Universe Is a Natural Extension of Divine Creativity and Intent
Your world did not just come together, with mindless atoms forming here or there, and brainless gases combining into elements.
Once again:
The world was not created by a distant objective god either, as on a cosmic assembly line, with parts installed one by one, some of them defective parts.
Seth said this with humor.
And bringing out better products with each geographical season.
He is joking. Bringing out better products with each season means that we often have production lines producing products with frequent promotions and discounts, right? For example, Thanksgiving is coming soon, and there will soon be discounts.
What he means is that your universe was not, as you think, produced on an assembly line by a god or some such thing -- a creator. Nor was your universe formed without any consciousness, through such random combinations. Neither is the case.
The universe is generated from the essence of God.
So what is the essence of God? Did he not already say it in the previous passage -- it is an overall psychological gestalt, a source of overall existence that holds the same loving regard for every part within it, from large to small, from high to low, with multiple focal points of consciousness. If you ask what the essence of God is, you can describe it with that passage. This thing is very difficult to fully explain in language.
The universe is a natural extension of divine creativity and intent.
The universe is divine creativity -- remember, he added the word divine here, it is not an extension of ordinary creativity, it is an extension of that divine creativity and intent. His intention in adding the word divine is to tell you that it has multiple dimensions compared with our ordinary creativity -- it is multi-dimensional creativity and multi-dimensional consciousness. When you cannot understand what divine means, just think of it as multi-dimensional.
Beloved, generated from the inside out.
Remember this key word, beloved -- it is not only that there is creativity and intent, there is also belovedness, there is also love. This creation of the universe takes place under the premise of love, not creation for the sake of creation.
Therefore, before matter there was consciousness, rather than there first being matter, and then consciousness arising.
In certain basic and important terms, your own consciousness is a part of that divine gestalt.
In essence, in terms of the most core question, your own human consciousness is a part of that divine consciousness, and you are a part of that divine gestalt.
In terms of your earthly experience, it is a metaphysical, scientific, and creative error to separate matter and consciousness, because consciousness, in physical life, materializes itself as matter.
For you humans in the three-dimensional world, you insist on rigidly dividing matter and consciousness into two things as incompatible as fire and water. This is a scientific error, a creative error, and also a philosophical error. You regard consciousness and matter as two different things. Why does he say this? Because consciousness, in physical life, materializes itself as matter. So matter is a materialized consciousness, or you could say matter is the materialization of consciousness. Matter and consciousness are essentially the same thing.
Consciousness After Death
Long pause, again long pause.
Your consciousness will exist after your physical death, and will still survive, but they will also take another form, a form itself composed of units of consciousness.
He is saying again that after you die, this consciousness has changes compared with your present consciousness. Where is the change? Your present consciousness is combined with the physical body, and after you die you no longer have this physical body, so it is composed purely of units of consciousness. So the form changes. Therefore our consciousness after death has some essential differences from the consciousness while alive.
You have some habits of thinking in terms of hierarchies of consciousness.
As a habit, humans are always considering hierarchy -- from low to high, from high to low, from small to large, from large to small. This is an inertia in the way humans think about problems.
If we look at it according to this hierarchy of consciousness that you humans have, in terms of the earth, humanity occupies the top position.
If you humans insist on dividing consciousness into high and low, noble and base, advanced and primitive levels of consciousness, if you insist on dividing it this way, then in terms of the earth, your human consciousness does occupy the top position. This can be affirmed, and you need not doubt it. So this is what makes humans different from other things.
For example, the Bible says that man was placed at the top, to have dominion over the other animals.
This dominion means to have charge over, to have charge over the position of the other animals.
And it appears that if the consciousness of animals were upgraded, it would necessarily somewhat demean your own consciousness.
You humans always feel, first of all, that this is a fact -- if you look from the perspective of the earth, according to your present human logic, your human consciousness is indeed the highest level on the entire earth. If the earth were described as a human body, then humanity would be equivalent to the brain of the earth. But if you think this way, people then make another mistake: the consciousness of animals must not be raised, it must be demeaned -- because if the consciousness of animals were raised to a level of consciousness close to that of humans, would not humans then be demeaned?
But this is not the case.
That divine gestalt is expressed in such a way that its quality is undiluted.
It will not be diluted. It is not that because the consciousness of animals is raised, human consciousness becomes relatively less high. Human consciousness is a part of this divine gestalt, or of All That Is, and its quality is never diluted, it cannot be diluted with water.
So that basically, one part of existence is not higher or lower in scale than another part; they are all top-grade.
In essence, this consciousness of existence -- whether the consciousness of animals, the consciousness of atoms, or the consciousness of humans -- they are all of the same quality, with no high or low, noble or base, all of them top-grade. Then why did he say that human consciousness occupies the top position? Remember the premise: it is said from the human perspective, in terms of the earth.
By refusing to allow the conscious mind to use a larger range of attention, you limit its capacity.
You only allow the conscious mind to use the five senses to perceive this world, and you limit its larger range of attention -- the range of attention of the inner senses.
So that you have been closed and ignorant of the varied and rich experience of other species.
It is precisely because your conscious mind only relies on the five senses, seeing only the most superficial surface of things, that you cannot see or perceive the variety and inner richness of other species, whether living or non-living. So you are closed and ignorant. Therefore you feel that they indeed appear lower than you. This is the reason you feel they are lower -- because you cannot see anything else, you cannot see those inner things, and what you see is all surface.
You have allowed a certain stubborn, inflexible intellect to provide you with your definitions.
You use a rigid, fixed intellect that does not know how to change or adapt to define the world around you. For example, ants are lowly, pigs are a bit more advanced than ants but still lower than humans, and so on. You add your own judgments.
You humans classify realities other than your own rather than illuminating them.
What this means is that you only use a rigid intellect to define your world according to human standards, without truly looking at these things. Without truly looking carefully, truly experiencing carefully, or even truly establishing connections with them. So you can only see a way of dividing the world that conforms to human standards -- for example, humans are the highest, then ordinary animals are somewhat higher, and then it goes on grading from the animal classes and orders.
In the beginning, there was a subjective world that became objectified.
First of all, at the beginning it was a subjective world, but later it became objectified. How did it become objectified? It is because of our human rigid intellect, classifying reality according to our human cognition. Once this classification is established, we humans fix this classification in place, and it becomes rigid. Once rigid, it becomes an objective world. We then know mountains and rivers and the earth, all things in nature, biodiversity, and we give them names, give them labels, give them classifications. In this way, the world appears to be an objectively existing world. The reason lies here -- we humans use rigid consciousness and the five senses to distinguish, and this causes our world to change from a subjective world into an objective world.
What is a subjective world? A subjective world is one in which the thing being observed is changing, changing along with the interaction between the observer and it. This is called subjective. Objective means that no matter what you think, it does not change. This is called objective. And the world that we humans originally live in, or the world we truly live in, is a subjective world. Yet we forcibly use our intellect to cognize it as an objective world. You think that there is no connection between all things and yourself, only action and reaction, only you transforming it or it transforming you -- apart from forces, there is no inner connection between you. This is the current cognition of human science.
The Birth of the Universe -- The World of Dreams
In your terms, matter was not permanent at that time.
He is still talking about the very beginning of the universe. At the very beginning, consciousness had not yet stabilized, and our classifications and distinctions were not yet so clear. It was still a chaos, and consciousness was also unstable.
So in the beginning there was a world of dreams, in which consciousness formed a dream of physical reality, and gradually awakened within that world.
So at the beginning there was a world of dreams. It can be described as a world of dreams -- if you ask what it was like when the physical world first began to form, it was like a dream. But the greatest difference between this dream and an ordinary dream is that this dream was a dream in which consciousness wanted to form physical reality. In this dream, every consciousness wanted to materialize itself, to concretize itself. And within such a dream, our physical world gradually awakened.
Mountains rose and fell, oceans filled, tides roared, islands appeared. The seasons themselves were not stable, and in your terms, the magnetic field itself fluctuated.
He is describing what the universe looked like when it first began to be born -- mountains rising and collapsing, referring to the movement of the earth's crust; oceans filling, tides roaring; islands appearing; the seasons themselves not stable. Here he specifically mentions the magnetic field. Why mention the magnetic field? We will discuss this question later. At the very beginning the magnetic field was also unstable -- the south and north poles often swapped or often spun chaotically, and it was not necessarily that they swapped; they might even move to the position of the equator.
But all species were there at the beginning, although in an unstable fashion.
Unstable as it was, all species were there from the beginning.
Because when the world of dreams suddenly broke through into physical reality, there was the catharsis, excitement, and confusion that occurs when a mass creative event is accomplished.
What does this mean? It means that after all species were born at the beginning, they were all very excited, chattering away -- you could describe it this way. The things in the dream all came alive, and all suddenly manifested images in the physical world. Every consciousness was celebrating, was excited. Why? Because that was the form it wanted, that was the appearance it wanted.
Remember this point, and do not forget what was said earlier: all consciousness wants to materialize itself, to concretize itself, and this image is what it itself wants. This was not arranged for it by the universe, nor was it arranged by that divine gestalt -- the divine gestalt does not arrange; it is what each consciousness itself wanted. It is what each consciousness itself wanted to become. So when it discovered that it had truly become that appearance, it was a feeling of a dream come true. So every one was very excited. And also very chaotic -- you see, everyone is very excited, is that not chaotic? Just like our group, some time ago many friends gradually realized the essence of their own consciousness and their own nature, and there was also a burst of frenzy, ecstasy, and excitement, and it also appeared very chaotic. This is very normal.
When consciousness experimented with its own forms, there was far more plasticity.
Consciousness wanted to experiment with itself, to see how many possible forms of existence it could become. At first it became this way, and after a while it became that way. Right? We often joke -- one moment lining up in a straight line, the next moment lining up in a V shape. Consciousness likewise wanted to see what it could become, how much plasticity it had, how many dynamics, how many changes and fluctuations, always exploring its own possibilities.
Species and environment together formed themselves in concert, in glorious combinations, so that each fulfilled the requirements of its own existence, while at the same time adding to all other portions of physical reality.
This is an overall sonata -- like an overall grand symphony. In the middle of it, each one gloriously formed its own characteristics within the glorious combinations, and then also added to the others. In the whole symphony, if you take out a single instrument, its playing may not sound so good, but how is it that the whole symphony sounds so good when played together? Listen carefully: in a symphony there are many kinds of instruments, over a hundred kinds, and some sound good alone, while some do not sound good alone, but when you combine them together it sounds so good, better than any single one alone. Seth uses this as an example, and it is like this meaning -- each instrument sings out its own unique timbre, yet also completes and enriches the entire movement within the overall symphony. This is the state of the universe at its birth. Remember, this is dynamic -- in this combination, in the process of constantly trying out all its own possibilities, it also enriched and added to the possibilities of all other species, and also added to the existence of all others.
At this point Seth was speaking very eagerly, with many gestures.
That kind of thing does not fit your ideas of the beginning of the world at all.
Seth says, the picture I have described may be somewhat different from what you imagine the world should have been like at the beginning. You imagine that at the beginning the world should have been either very rigorous -- God created the world, so it should have been a very sacred matter, very rigorous, and God should have created the world according to a blueprint, how atoms were made, how molecules were made, and finally the appearance of humans. It was not like that, not as sacred and rigorous as you imagine. Or you think that this world was produced randomly, a probabilistic event of extremely small probability. He says it was not like that either.
The birth of this world was like a big party, like a big band performance, like a big orchestra, and that is how it was born -- with clamor, with excitement, with ecstasy, this universe was born.
We previously thought that consciousness was born out of matter, almost like a deliberate decision.
We previously either thought that this was a deliberate, long process of human development and evolution, or thought that there was an external god who created a mechanized natural world. Creationism and evolutionism, these are the two main human views of the universe.
This view also does not fit your ideas of good and evil, as I will explain later in this book.
His view -- this clamorous state, this ecstatic state at the birth of the universe -- also does not fit your ideas of good and evil. Because you always think there must be good and bad, good and evil, right and wrong, such as God and the devil, and so on. There is none.
Completed Yet Uncompleted
God, or All That Is, is in the deepest sense completed, yet uncompleted.
Why? Because he is entirely new in every moment.
Again, I understand that to your minds this seems contradictory.
Is it completed or not? You say he is completed, and you also say he is uncompleted; you say he is new in every moment; you say there was a gestalt from the very beginning -- which one is the truth? Was there a gestalt from the very beginning, or is he new in every moment?
Yet, in a manner of speaking, a creative product helps complete an artist, although an artist is of course never completed.
He gives this example in the hope that you can understand the relationship here. A good work may form or make an artist. Many artists become famous through a single work -- one painting, or a series of paintings, establishes that artist's position in the entire history of art. When we talk about a certain artist, we think of his works. If an artist has no works, do you think he can still be called an artist? Can an artist who has never produced a work still be called an artist? No.
But can this work fully represent this artist? Of course not; it is only one work of the artist. The artist is still creating new works. He uses this image to tell you: the artist is this universe, is what this universe should be, and no one can represent him; and the work is our physical world. The physical world is the work of the artist, and it can represent the artist, but it can never fully represent the artist -- because this artist is still constantly creating new works. Can the combination of all these works represent the artist? No. He uses this example so that you can understand the relationship between this universe and the physical world, just like the relationship between an artist and his works -- it can only be apprehended intuitively, and is very difficult to put into words. Because an artist is never completed; his thoughts change at every moment, and in the next second he may produce a new work.
And, in a certain fashion, when you humans are learning, All That Is, or God, is also learning, and making adjustments according to your knowledge.
In a conditional manner of speaking -- in a certain fashion, when we are learning, our All That Is is also learning. Why? Because we are a part of All That Is. When we learn, it is equivalent to All That Is also learning. So from a certain angle, when we are learning, it is also equivalent to All That Is and God learning. And according to the knowledge we learn, it is also making constant adjustments. This is understandable, right? When you learn, it is equivalent to All That Is learning.
Delusions of Divinity
We must be very careful here, because delusions of divinity sometimes come too easily.
This following passage is also very important. Why? Because delusions of divinity sometimes come too easily.
But in a basic sense, you all carry within you the undeniable stamp of All That Is, and an inborn capacity to glimpse, in your own way, the undeniable evidence of your own greater existence.
Let me briefly explain this passage to everyone. This passage is very interesting and has great reference value for many people. Seth says, I said that you are a part of All That Is, and when you learn, God is also learning, All That Is is also learning, and it makes adjustments according to the knowledge you learn -- this is from a certain angle. Then many people will say: I am a part of All That Is, I am God.
This statement, in essence, is correct; you are God. But in this context, Seth does not want you to over-mythologize this matter. His meaning is that you should not go too far. If you go too far on the question of "I am God," you must be especially careful. You will become insane -- if you have seen that kind of insane person, they are mad, crazy. Why? Because delusions of divinity sometimes come too easily. That is this sentence.
When you say "I am God," you are having a delusion about the power of God and about God. You say, Seth, you have said all of this, so whatever you say is right -- one moment you encourage us by saying you are God, you are God's children, you are apprentice gods, and so on, and the next moment you say you cannot have too many delusions about the delusions of God.
What does he mean? He means that as this kind of existence, an existence in the three-dimensional physical world, whether God or All That Is, you possess his ability -- what ability? The ability to explore, in your own way, the undeniable evidence of your own greater existence. You have such an ability. Why did All That Is create this universe? It was to glimpse the undeniable evidence of All That Is's own greater existence. This is the purpose of All That Is. And you, each person, are also using your own way -- remember, your own way, not the way of God or the way of All That Is. This point is the most core.
This is the fundamental point where many people go toward insanity and madness. That is to say, you can only stand in your present moment, and use your present way to understand that greater existence of yours. You explore, you search, you experience, you go through those evidences to prove that you have a greater self. In this process of experiencing, you constantly discover a greater self and constantly elevate yourself. This is a process, this is a state. It is not that you declare that you are a part of God, that you have all the abilities of God, and therefore you can use God's way to experience and feel the reality of a greater self -- these are two different concepts.
You can only use your way to experience a greater you; All That Is uses the way of All That Is to experience a greater All That Is. You cannot equate it by saying, I have the abilities of All That Is, I am a part of it, so I can use its angle and its way to glimpse that greater All That Is. Sorry, you cannot glimpse it, and you cannot see it.
Until one day you return to All That Is, and after you have merged with All That Is and become one with it, when you truly possess all the abilities of All That Is, then it will not be too late to say such words. But not now. When you do not yet have the abilities of All That Is, and you are saying these things and doing these things, that is delusion. Many people do not understand what delusion means, and what I just said here is delusion. In other words, if you cannot wave your hand and create a galaxy, then do not say such words. Until one day you wave your hand and a galaxy is created, then you can experience the feelings of All That Is.
But right now, when you wave your hand, you can make a bountiful table of food, and that is a kind of abundance. This abundance and the abundance of creating a galaxy are one kind of abundance; in essence they are the same, both are creation. Can you understand this? But you cannot say that when you do not yet have it, you go and indulge in delusion.
Remember this sentence here. The core key point in this is: in your own way, catch a glimpse of the undeniable evidence of your own greater existence. "Your own," remember, is the key phrase. So here at this critical moment, Seth is afraid that you will go to the other extreme -- walking down the street every day saying, I am God, I am part of God, and very soon you will be taken to the hospital. You cannot say, why are they arresting me -- since you are God, why can they still take you away? Is this question not ridiculous? Since you are God, why can you still be taken away by the doctors? Can you not stop the doctors from taking you? Can you not make the hospital disappear? Why can you not? You are God.
So what is especially clever and wise about Seth is this -- he knows when he should remind you of what to pay attention to. He is afraid you will go to the other extreme, so he quickly reminds you. This is a point that all of us who study the Seth material should pay attention to, and it is also the point where many people go astray.
As Close to the Beginning of the World as in Ancient Times
You are as close to the beginning of your world as Adam and Eve were, as the Romans, the Egyptians, and the Sumerians were.
This is also very interesting. Adam and Eve are the earliest ancestors of humanity, right, according to the Bible. The Romans -- the ancient Roman Empire, the Egyptians -- those ancient Egyptians who existed four or five thousand years ago, all of these he mentions are ancient. The Sumerians, these are all ancient peoples of remote antiquity. He says you are as close to the beginning of your world as these ancient humans were.
Remember, he added "the beginning of your world." Can you understand what this "your" refers to? The "your" here refers to the world of Adam and Eve, the world of the Romans, the world of the Egyptians, and the world of the Sumerians, and the world of us modern and contemporary people. All of these are the beginning of this world, just one step away from this moment -- one step away from this present moment. What he means is, you are the same as those ancient humans. You think they were closer to the beginning of the universe, but he says you are the same as them. For them, the birth of the universe was just one step away from the moment in which they existed.
You would think that the ancient Romans, the ancient Greeks, with their ancient myths, that the birth of these worlds was closer to them and farther from you. He says no. Their world is their world, and your world is your world. For them and for you, whether it is their world or your world, for people of every period, it is always one step away from the present moment of that period. What he means is, do not have this sense of history, as if they were closer to the origin of the universe.
In this book, because it is dictated, I have one purpose, and that is to change your concepts of yourselves. In terms of both your immortal consciousness and your physical heritage, to show you a truer picture of your history.
Whether it is the spiritual heritage or the physical heritage -- the spiritual refers to the inner world, and the physical heritage is our material world. In both respects, I hope to show, through my dictation, that you can have a truer picture of your history, whether from the inner world or the outer world. This is my purpose.
Then he says the dictation is over, and afterward he says a few other things, and then it ends.
So this content is very interesting.
注释与核实
-
Source: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Backgrounder on the Three Mile Island Accident" (https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/3mile-isle) ↩
-
According to Mike's original words, it was "temporarily captured 71 Americans"; upon verification, it should be "In November 1979, Iranian militants seized 66 Americans when they occupied the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, of whom 52 were ultimately held for 444 days." (Source: U.S. National Archives, "Tokens and Treasures," https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/tokens_and_treasures/presidents/jimmy_carter.html) ↩
-
Source: U.S. Department of State, "Looking Back at the Events That Created DS and the Diplomatic Security Service" (https://2017-2021.state.gov/looking-back-at-the-events-that-created-ds-and-the-diplomatic-security-service/) ↩
-
Source: U.S. National Archives, "The Hostage Crisis in Iran:-80" (https://www.archives.gov/files/declassification/iscap/pdf/2015-071-doc-25.pdf) ↩
-
Source: U.S. Air Force Historical Support Division, "1980 – Operation Eagle Claw" (https://www.afhistory.af.mil/FAQs/Fact-Sheets/Article/458949/1980-operation-eagle-claw/) ↩
-
This claim could not be verified. ↩