The "Reading Guide" and "Key Points of This Chapter" in this chapter were summarized by an AI editor based on the main text below; they are not things Mike said during the lecture. The main text comes from Mike's commentary, and the block quotes are Seth's original words (the part Mike read aloud).
Introduction
This chapter explains the basic units of consciousness (CUs): they are aware energy, indivisible, with tendencies toward expansion, development, and organization, able to exist in all times and spaces simultaneously, and in group form they compose EE units, which in turn form physical and psychological structures. The soul is seen as the organizational result of units of consciousness. From this, Seth discusses probabilities, the multiverse, and simultaneity: past, present, and future coexist; personal identity is only one focus of a larger identity; what is experienced is one of the selected probabilities, while other probable selves exist simultaneously and influence one another.
Key Points of This Chapter
- The basic units of consciousness (CUs) are aware energy, indivisible, with tendencies toward expansion, development, and organization.
- Units of consciousness exist in all places and times simultaneously, do not pass through space and are faster than light, and in group formations compose EE units that can manifest as matter.
- The soul is the result of a certain organization of units of consciousness; personal identity is only one focus of a larger identity, not a single-line development.
- Past, present, and future exist simultaneously, and all probabilities are explored and experienced; the concept of a single universe does not hold, and only multiple universes make immortality meaningful.
- Beliefs cause certain probable events to become definite and experienced; the existence of other probable selves does not negate the value of personal experience and identity.
Main Text
Seth Says The Nature of Personal Reality Is a Great Handbook
Seth first gave a definition of The Nature of Personal Reality: it is a great handbook that will allow people, with greater effectiveness, to manipulate within this world they know - to manipulate themselves, to manipulate the environment around them. And as for the deeper questions on which the entire nature of physical reality itself depends, whether they understand those or not does not really matter.
Seth said:
And the material I am about to give now is an attempt to explain some of those deeper questions.
That is to say, The Nature of Personal Reality is an operating manual for each person to actually work with in real life. It mainly talks about how to change your own beliefs, how to discover your own beliefs, how to change the past, present, and future. But the book we are on now mainly talks about what lies behind that world: how the world actually operates, and what the thing is that supports this world from behind. The Nature of Personal Reality did not go into much explanation of that. And that, for people operating within this world, is also not important - you do not necessarily have to understand the principles of everything before you can operate within it. You just need to know how to use it, how to work with it.
For example, basically none of us know how a cell phone is designed and manufactured, and even less can we understand the principles of cooperation between the chips inside and the various systems. Just a single baseband chip - a Qualcomm or Intel baseband chip - is already beyond your understanding, let alone the CPU inside, the computational storage, including the programs and operating system within. But that does not stop you from using this cell phone. You just need to know how to use it.
Seth said that Ruburt's own development made this possible. In this process, Ruburt himself has also been developing over all these years, and only that made it possible for this kind of material to be transmitted. From this angle we can understand: when a channeler wants to transmit deeper material, he needs a certain amount of time to accumulate, and also needs a development of his own abilities. Otherwise, he can only transmit some very simple things, and cannot transmit material as deep and as systematic as what Jane and Seth have been able to do. This also required an expansion of Jane's own abilities.
Seth said, because he also had to progress to the point where he wrote the book The Adventures in Consciousness. In The Adventures in Consciousness, Jane wrote about some of her own attempts in consciousness - going toward the deepest layers of consciousness, and reaching certain theoretical levels, so these could then be used as springboards. That is to say, Jane also needed to make some preparations, and only on the basis of the theoretical foundation from The Adventures in Consciousness could she reach the level of transmitting this material.
Units of Consciousness: Energy with Awareness
Seth then began to introduce the units of consciousness. He first made a铺垫, saying that unfortunately, we must use analogies, because without analogies many things cannot be understood. Analogies can form bridges between ideas—forming a kind of bridge between two completely unfamiliar ideas. When you use an analogy, although you cannot fully and truly understand what the thing being analogized is really like, you can still get a general sense of the core of what he is trying to describe.
Seth said that just as there are units of matter, there are also units of consciousness. We know that matter has units—for example, the smallest unit of matter, which we consider to be the atom. But he emphasized: do not think of these units of consciousness as particles. Do not think of this unit of consciousness in the same way as an atom—because first of all, the atom itself is not a particle either; an atom is a possibility, an atom is also a process. Even the atom at the physical level is not a particle, so the most basic unit at the level of consciousness is certainly not a particle either.
Seth said that there is a basic unit of consciousness, namely the CU, Consciousness Unit. The reason an S is added after it is that it always appears in groups, in clusters, rarely as a single unit. It is very difficult to find a single unit of consciousness on its own.
Once it is expressed, it will not be divided into anything smaller. It is called a basic unit because it cannot be further divided—this is the smallest organizational structure of consciousness. It is like how people once thought the atom was the smallest unit and could not be divided any further. He is using the atom as an analogy.
This basic unit of consciousness is clearly not concrete, nor is it definite. Since it is not concrete, it is very difficult to describe it.
Seth said:
Within itself, it innately contains unlimited characteristics of expansion, development, and organization.
This unit of consciousness inherently contains three basic attributes. The first is expansiveness—the unit of consciousness can expand on its own. Expansion means it can reproduce itself, expand itself; it cannot be destroyed, but it can expand, it goes everywhere trying out all kinds of possibilities, and it can become anything. The second is development—the unit of consciousness is not dead; it develops on its own. The third is organization—it has the ability to organize itself, and it can also organize others. Just as our atoms have atomic organization, otherwise you would not see the molecules and our world as they are now.
We have already discussed several of its attributes: first, it cannot be further divided; second, it is not a particle, it is not physical; third, it contains the basic attributes and unlimited characteristics of expansion, development, and organization.
Seth said:
Yet within itself, it always maintains its own individuality, its core of uniqueness.
That is, this unit of consciousness has within itself an individuality, a core of distinct nature—it has its own uniqueness. Every unit of consciousness has its own one-of-a-kind uniqueness. No matter what organization it becomes part of, or how it mixes with other such basic units, its own identity will not be destroyed.
This attribute is somewhat like the atom. A hydrogen atom has the attributes of hydrogen, and an oxygen atom has the attributes of oxygen. Two hydrogen atoms plus one oxygen atom become a water molecule, and once the water molecule is formed, it has the attributes of water. But in the state of the water molecule, the attributes of the hydrogen atoms and the oxygen atom themselves are never erased—just because they formed a water molecule does not mean the hydrogen atoms and oxygen atom within it lose their own attributes as hydrogen and oxygen.
But what Seth is saying goes even one level deeper: when we say hydrogen atoms and oxygen atoms, we are speaking of a class. But what he is saying is that every unit of consciousness is unique. No matter what it eventually becomes, what it forms, what it develops into, its original basic attribute will never change.
So what exactly is a unit of consciousness? Seth describes it in one sentence:
It is energy with awareness.
What does awareness mean? It means it knows who it is, it has a cognition of the self, and it has a cognition of its surroundings. Within itself, it recognizes itself as itself. That is to say, at the level of the unit of consciousness, the unit of consciousness considers itself to be itself. Awareness refers to the cognition of the self—knowing who one is. Or, to use a Buddhist expression, it knows what its own self-nature is.
Seth said that in saying this he is not anthropomorphizing it; it truly has awareness. It really does have awareness, and therefore it is the source of all other kinds of consciousness. Because the unit of consciousness is the smallest unit of consciousness, it is the source of all the various kinds of consciousness. However many kinds of matter there are in our world, however many kinds of things there are, the kinds of consciousness are far more numerous than that. Do not think only of human consciousness—molecules have molecular consciousness, cells have cellular consciousness, a big tree has the consciousness of a tree, a stone has the consciousness of a stone. And the source of all these various kinds of consciousness is this basic unit of consciousness.
And the kinds of its activities are endless.
Here it reveals a piece of information: the unit of consciousness, as the smallest unit of consciousness, has ways of activity, development, and organization that determine what kinds of consciousness it can form. The kinds of its activities are endless.
It also combines with others of its own kind. The unit of consciousness is quite interesting—like attracts like, things of a kind gather together, people of a kind form groups. The same units of consciousness will mix together and combine together, thereby forming groups of units of consciousness—just as atoms and molecules are often described as combining and grouping together.
Just as atoms combine with atoms to form certain metals or larger substances. If you take a single iron atom out and look at it, it is just an iron atom, and it does not exhibit the properties of iron. But if you put a bunch of iron atoms together, it then displays a property of iron—not only the properties of iron atoms, but also a higher-level property, which is the property of iron. Likewise, mercury, gold, silver—these metals, once their atoms are combined in bulk, are like this. Take carbon, for example—whether it is the charcoal we burn or the carbon in the pencil lead we write with, it is all carbon. But pure carbon, when organized together in a certain structure, becomes what we call diamond. Diamond is a combination of carbon atoms, and when they combine to form diamond, it has the unique properties and characteristics of diamond—different from iron formed by iron atoms or gold formed by gold atoms.
From Units of Consciousness to EE Units
These groups of units of consciousness combine together, and what is this thing called? Seth does not give it a name here, but in the next session he will. This thing we call EE units -- that is, EE units with two letter E's. These EE units, well, we can call them electromagnetic energy units, or we can also call them emotional energy units. There has been some misunderstanding in between. Should they be called emotional energy units or electromagnetic energy units? I think if you lean toward the sciences, you can call them electromagnetic energy units; if you lean toward the humanities, you can call them emotional energy units. But what they are called is not important; you are just giving them a name.
You just need to know that there are countless units of consciousness -- you cannot say countless, say, for example, several million units of consciousness -- that make up one EE unit. This EE unit itself already lies between the physical world and the nonphysical world. When energy is given to this EE unit, or when greater energy is given to this EE unit, this EE unit can then materialize into a physical state.
It is somewhat like the string in superstring theory -- differences in its mode of motion, its state, its vibrational frequency, or its vibrational form will cause it to manifest as different particle states. But it also has its nonphysical-state characteristics within it, so it exists in this intermediate state. It can become physical, and it can also become a kind of nonphysical thing, and it can freely shift between these states. It is somewhat like the wave-particle duality of particles -- of units like atoms. You cannot say whether it is physical or energy; it is both energy and physical, transforming in that process. So it is an intermediate state between the physical world and the nonphysical world, between the material realm and the nonmaterial realm.
So then you understand the relationship between them: the smallest is the unit of consciousness, and several million units of consciousness make up one EE unit. An EE unit then possesses the ability to materialize into physical form, while a unit of consciousness alone does not possess this ability. Take out a single unit of consciousness by itself, and it does not have it. This is somewhat like an atom -- a single atom by itself can never form a physical state. The atom itself is not a physical state; it is a kind of possibility, a kind of process. In the previous stage it was emphasized repeatedly that the atom itself is unpredictable and indeterminate; it cannot display the physical state of our material world. But a bunch of atoms together can display a physical state. Units of consciousness are very much like this.
Seth says that this basic unit is endowed with unpredictability. It is also unpredictable, just like the atom. That unpredictability itself allows for endless patterns and achievements. Because it is unpredictable, it itself contains endless patterns and achievements -- you do not know what it will become next, and all of it is possible.
Soul: The Result of the Organization of Units of Consciousness
Seth then went on to talk about the soul. He said that, unfortunately, as far as you humans are concerned, the word "soul" has been used in such a way, and has been loaded with such deep prejudice by humans, that it has become extremely difficult to untangle that conceptual difficulty. It is very hard for us to pull the soul out of the entrenched, indoctrinated conceptual system. Because the moment you say the word "soul," you already have a concept of the soul that was instilled in you by others from childhood on up. So the word "soul," whether in its connotation or its denotation, has already been defined by humans, and it comes with certain attributes built into it.
Seth said:
In ordinary terms, you would say that a soul is the result of some kind of organization of such units, and you would then recognize it as a soul.
This sentence has to be understood according to his logic. What we call the soul is this nonphysical thing. What is the soul? Everyone's understanding is already different. Here, it mainly refers to what we might call the higher self, the whole self, the true self -- this complete you, which includes the physical-level you and also the nonphysical-level you. So the soul here refers to a stand-in term for that nonphysical-level you.
He said that this nonphysical-level you can be understood as a combination of a series, a group, of many kinds of units of consciousness. It is the result of some kind of form, some kind of organization. When these units of consciousness are organized in different ways, they form different souls -- and the organizational forms of the units of consciousness within different souls are also different, which is what leads to the uniqueness of each soul.
Then, once these units of consciousness have been organized according to their own particular organization, once a self-organization has formed, this organization has a higher consciousness. Each unit of consciousness has its own awareness -- first of all it is energy, and then it is energy with awareness. When a group or a bunch of these aware units of consciousness come together, they produce a larger consciousness. That larger consciousness, in terms of our understanding, can be called a soul.
This soul is not the same as the soul that ordinary humans understand. Why is it different? Because it does not refer only to humans -- it is a group of units of consciousness organized together, and the result is a soul. So can we say that a flower has a flower's soul, and a tree has a tree's soul? Yes, you can understand it that way. Because when different units of consciousness form a higher consciousness, we can call that consciousness the soul of a certain thing.
Seth said that this leads to the inevitable old question: Do animals have souls? What about trees? What about stones? He said:
Then by ordinary definition, in your terms, these smallest units would be the raw material of souls. That viewpoint is extremely limited, however, for by that yardstick there would be other, more developed organizations of such units above you. From that more elevated viewpoint, therefore, you would appear to be quite literally beginning souls.
Seth did not directly answer the question of whether animals, trees, and stones have souls; it is hard to explain clearly in a single sentence. We covered this question specifically in an earlier book -- Session 840 of The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events. If you are not clear on it, you can flip back and take a look; it should be the second section of Chapter Seven, if I remember correctly, and there he will tell you how to understand it from a higher level. We will not expand on it here.
What he means to say is this: you understand these units of consciousness as the raw material of all souls, but if you understand it that way, this viewpoint is extremely limited -- it is only true or valid at a particular level. Because according to our yardstick of understanding, the soul is composed of units of consciousness; if we consider the question by this yardstick, then above you there are still other, more developed organizations.
This "higher" is a "higher" in quotation marks. There is no real higher, no real above; it is just that, in terms of our understanding, there is a reality one level higher than us humans, a higher-level angle of consciousness. Within those higher realities, there are still more advanced units and more developed organizations than these units of consciousness. The units of consciousness themselves are unchanging; they are the source of all consciousness. But their forms of organization can be more advanced than ours. Because their forms of organization are different from ours, the reality worlds they form are completely different from ours. From their perspective, we humans really are beginning souls -- and if even we humans are beginning souls, then everything else in the material world is also a beginning soul.
The point of Seth adding this passage is to keep you from mistakenly thinking that the organizational forms of units of consciousness are just like the atoms forming molecules I mentioned earlier -- their organizational forms are not limited to just these few basic arrangements; there are many, many kinds.
Units of Consciousness: Existing in All Places Simultaneously
Seth says, for this reason, at least at this point, I prefer to talk about these units of consciousness. We are talking about them within a certain context, within a certain framework -- that is, within our present state. We are not talking about realities higher than us or things on higher levels. But of course, "higher" here must also be put in quotation marks; there is no higher or lower, but from the perspective of human cognition, we tend to think there is.
Seth says:
Their nature is the vitalizing force behind everything in your physical universe and in other universes.
Units of consciousness are -- whether in this universe or in other universes -- that which gives vitalizing force to all things. You can think of them as the ultimate source of life force pervading all universes and all reality spaces.
Seth says:
In your terms, these units can indeed appear in several places at once, without traveling through space.
Remember, simultaneously -- appearing in several places at once, without traveling through space.
But he felt this was still not thorough enough, so he added further:
Now practically speaking, these basic units of consciousness can be in all places at the same time. They are in all places at the same time.
He said this twice, and the levels are progressive. The first statement is: they can be in several places at once. This is easy to understand -- they possess the ability to transcend space; they do not travel through space; at their level, they are completely free of our space-time limitations. The second level is: they can be in all places -- they possess this ability, but they may not actually be in all places; they merely have the capability. The third level is: they are in all places. It is not a question of whether they can or cannot, not a question of whether they exercise it or not -- it is simply their state of being.
This is something we must firmly remember. It completely overturns the viewpoint of our material world and three-dimensional reality, and it is not easy for us to understand. So when you have time, you should come back and think about it.
Seth says they cannot be recognized -- you cannot see them, and you cannot find where units of consciousness are, because you can never discover them. They always appear in the guise of something else. Just as before humanity discovered the level of the atom, we never knew atoms existed. You cannot see atoms either; what you see are those basic things. In other words, before we recognized the existence of neutrons and protons, we did not know that all atoms are composed of a nucleus made of neutrons and protons, with electrons orbiting around it. There may be over a hundred kinds of atoms1 -- over a hundred elements on the periodic table -- but the basic things inside are just three: protons, neutrons, and electrons. No matter what form it takes, it is made of these basic things.
Let us use this analogy: no matter what the myriad things of the world you see look like, the basic unit behind them is just one -- the unit of consciousness. According to their different forms of organization, different structures, and different modes of motion, they form the universe of all things we observe -- not just this universe, but all universes. It is not only this universe; everything is composed of them.
Seth continues:
Of course, they move faster than light.
This statement goes beyond the limitations of our human material world. In Einstein's theory and Newton's, nothing can move faster than the speed of light. But in quantum mechanics, at the quantum level, the strings in superstring theory move faster than light; they are superluminal. So the basic units of consciousness also transcend the speed of light. Then of course you are even less able to detect and study them -- because things that transcend the speed of light cannot be detected within our human material world, within our three-dimensional world.
They do not travel through space, so they must be superluminal. When something moves from one place to another without being subject to the limitations of space, then it must transcend the speed of light. At the same time, they are in all places -- at this point you know that they must be superluminal.
Seth says:
There are several million of these basic units of consciousness within one atom.
Remember this; he gives a rough concept of the order of magnitude. But I am not entirely sure whether this order of magnitude is accurate -- because first of all, units of consciousness are not a state of particles or a state of matter, so how do you define the quantity of "several million"? You can only say how many there are when you are counting a material state or a particle state. When it is not a material state, "several million" no longer has much meaning. But Seth, in order to describe it to you, probably made this kind of statement. So you do not need to take this sentence too seriously. You might say that each atom is different, so the number is different -- but then you are materializing it again. What Seth means by this sentence is just to give you a rough concept. Because he uses the atom as an example, it shows that he has brought material attributes into it -- he has come down to a material level to discuss this issue.
These several million units of consciousness make up one atom, and each of these several million units of consciousness can perceive the reality of all the other units. It is very interesting -- each one can also know the reality of the others, and they also influence one another.
Seth says:
In your terms, these units can move forward and backward in time.
Using our human concept of time, they transcend time. Here is something very interesting: he first says that the atom as we humans understand it is composed of several million units of consciousness, and immediately after that he says these units of consciousness can move forward and backward in time without restriction -- they can go into the past and also into the future. So when he said earlier that they "exist in all places," he did not mean existing in all places at a certain point in time; it is also simultaneous. This simultaneity also includes past, present, and future. Because for them, these do not exist; they are completely beyond the limitations of space and time. But in our human terms, we still have to explain it within the framework of space and time -- that is, units of consciousness are not subject to the limitations of space and time, neither space nor time.
Seth continues:
But they can also move into thresholds of time with which you are not familiar.
What this means is that besides being able to move forward and backward within your time system without the limitations of space and time, they can also enter other -- not of this universe -- other universes or other realities. In those realities, there are time structures or time experiences completely different from ours. Units of consciousness can exist across different space-times, so they can cross thresholds of time with which we are not familiar, traveling back and forth within different time systems.
What is said here is not traveling back and forth within our time, but traveling within other time systems. Seth has given examples before: in some time systems, time runs backward. You may find it unimaginable, but if you have seen the science fiction film Tenet2 directed by Nolan, you will know -- in it, he uses a science fiction approach to show you that time can run backward. In many, many realities, time is completely different from ours. It is not just a matter of running backward; it is completely different, and sometimes it is very hard for us to understand and imagine.
Seth has given an example before: suppose your time right now is actually running backward, but when one second of it is as long as a year, you cannot perceive that it is running backward. Suppose in another universe, their time runs exactly opposite to yours. But the speed at which it runs backward is not the reverse of the speed at which yours runs forward -- the direction is reversed, but the speed is slowed down. Our time now runs forward one second; in that world, theirs runs backward one day or one hour. When backward-running time slows to that degree, you cannot perceive that time is running backward. Because running backward means that everything you have already done is like traveling within memory. And when the speed is slow enough, you have already forgotten those memories. When it slows to a certain degree, you have forgotten, and to you it may still feel like a fresh experience.
Seth says:
All possibilities are explored and experienced.
This is a basic attribute of units of consciousness -- they explore all possibilities, and they experience all of them. And all possible universes are created by these units. All the universes you can imagine are created by the basic units of consciousness. Therefore there are some realities in which the endless possibilities of a given event are all explored.
In some realities, a given event -- what we call an official event or a physically determined event, such as a traffic accident -- all of its endless possibilities have been explored, and all the experiences gather around that venture.
Let me give a simple example: a car accident -- let us assume it is a given event; the accident is bound to happen, but there are many possibilities for this accident -- a light collision, a heavy collision, different degrees of damage to the car, different possibilities of injury to the people -- injuring a hand, injuring a foot, injuring both hand and foot, dying, not dying, half-dead and becoming a vegetable. All the possibilities that can gather around this car accident are certainly endless possibilities. In that reality world, in that universe, every single thing is experienced simultaneously, and all possible experiences are exhausted in experiencing it. So around every event, countless experiences gather, surrounding that one event.
A Universe's Lifetime in an Instant
There are some systems, that is, within other universes, in which what from your viewpoint is an instant can last for an entire lifetime of a universe. A flash of thought in our human brain, a single one of our thoughts, can be the whole lifetime of such a universe.
Once again he reveals to you those worlds we are unfamiliar with. In such worlds, does existence occur? Yes, it does. But we humans really find it hard to understand, and we cannot understand it. Just one of your thoughts, there it is an instant, a moment, a flash of thought, can be the lifetime of an entire universe -- but not this universe of ours; it is another universe's.
He says I do not mean that an instant is merely stretched out. I mean that within that single instant, all possible experience becomes real within that framework.
What he means is, it is not that this instant is stretched out to an infinite length, nor is it that time within that universe becomes infinitely slow. He says it is neither. What is it then? It is that within this single instant, everything that could possibly happen in that universe, all the possible times of occurrence and all possible experience, are all completed within such a universal framework, within that single instant.
You can imagine it: it is not a slow kind of feeling; it is a whoosh. To use us humans as an analogy, we humans now consider this universe to be 13.7 billion years old3, and these 13.7 billion years are condensed into a single moment. Within these 13.7 billion years, all things are completed instantly, and all experience and all perception are gained instantly. From the Big Bang to the final demise of the universe, all the processes are condensed into the feeling of a single instant. Does this already exceed our human capacity to understand? Yes, it does.
Such systems actually have nothing to do with you. These systems have no relation whatsoever to your actual life. Giving you this kind of material is not meant to belittle you, or your concept of what your own consciousness is. When I tell you these things, you can just listen to them for the fun of it, because these things have no relation to you right now, and you cannot get to that universe anyway.
He says I do not mean to belittle you. But what is important is that you should know that within an inner reality, there is far more creativity and variety than you can concretely perceive.
That is, within the inner world, there is far more creativity and variety than you can concretely perceive, and the variety has already gone beyond the scope of our cognition.
So if you want to know what other worlds or other universes are like, I still recommend that you take a look at the new book Master of Limitation that Bashar wrote last year, an extraterrestrial observer's observations on Earth, an extraterrestrial's observations on Earth4. Let us not first discuss whether this book is real or not; that is not important. It gives a relatively concrete description of those extraterrestrial beings and extraterrestrial lives, and this is enough to expand your cognition and thoroughly loosen up your current cognition. You will discover that these beings of higher civilizations and these things of higher intelligence are truly, truly completely different from what we imagined, and it can greatly expand or overturn your cognition. Of course, you can also just read it as a science fiction novel, because after it expands your cognition, it can give you a great deal of help in the expansion of your consciousness.
The Inclinations and Self-Structure of Units of Consciousness
These units of consciousness do not possess human characteristics -- remember this firmly, units of consciousness do not have human characteristics, do not try to apply everything to humans. Humans, within the entire universe and all universes, are only a very tiny, singular existence. Do not use human viewpoints and thoughts to try to lasso the things of the universe, because even humans are products of the universe; do not try to lasso that which is greater than him, or that which created him.
However, they do indeed possess their own inclinations. They have certain inclinations (he made air quotes), and these inclinations are not quite the same as human inclinations, but they have their own inclinations, preferences, and idiosyncrasies. He used the word "idiosyncrasy," which is quite interesting. These units of consciousness, they have their own inclinations, their own preferences, and their own idiosyncrasies; they are quite individual. Although all of this sounds like anthropomorphic description, these are not human characteristics, but their own characteristics. And "idiosyncrasy" is the closest word I wanted, he said among these three, I prefer the word "idiosyncrasy," it comes closer to the attribute of units of consciousness -- that is, each unit of consciousness has its own idiosyncrasy, it has its own special fondness.
He said do not think of them as miniature little people, do not think of them as a conscious little unit, like a tiny person resembling a human. They are not that. Nevertheless, they are also not an idle clump of energy; they are vital, aware, charged, possessing the conditions of all living beings.
What does "possessing the conditions of all living beings" mean? They are what bring life to all existences, and they are also the basic conditions for the existence of all existences. Because there are units of consciousness, they can be called existences; if there were no units of consciousness, no self-awareness, then they could not be called existences.
So all psychological structures are also composed of such organizations -- this psychological structure, that is, the human psychological structure, is also composed of such units of consciousness. Regardless of whether, in your terms, they live long or short, they are innately endowed with the desire or idiosyncrasy for growth and creative organization.
What is being said here is about units of consciousness: do not worry about how long they live in the process of forming psychological structures; the units of consciousness themselves are eternal, they have no life limit, once they are created they exist permanently. But the psychological structure organizations they form do have lengths. The so-called psychological structure is your present, current -- this psychological structure is actually quite hard to define, it can also be called a construction of your consciousness, or a structure of consciousness.
He said they carry their own desires and idiosyncrasies, innately endowed with the desire and idiosyncrasy for creative organization. So the organization of your psyche is also constantly changing, constantly creating, but it carries its own desires and its own idiosyncrasies. So many times, why do you like this, why do you do that, why do you do this -- sometimes there is no reason, it is just innately like that.
They are not solitary and isolated; they are always in groups, in sets, and they always have an organization. Why do they have organization? Innately they must form organizations; you cannot stop them from forming organizations even if you tried, it is spontaneous.
These units of consciousness exist simultaneously, and they are aware of all the organizations of which they are a part. The structure of the good self.
That is, these units of consciousness will organize into various structures, and they themselves are within these structures, because the structures are organized by them. They themselves organized such a structure, and they are still in the middle of it observing themselves, observing the self that has been organized. Quite interesting, isn't it?
There is a term here, self structure, with a dash added, it is one word, do not split it apart. It is called self-structure. That is, these units of consciousness inherently have the attribute of self-structure: self-organization, self-development, self-structure, it is one of their attributes. After they self-structure, they can also observe the self-structure that has been formed. When it reaches this level, when it can observe its own self-structure --
All probable realities are connected to one another in that basic manner.
Why do we say all things are one? At this point, can you understand it? It is self-structuring, it organizes itself together, and among them it goes from small organizations to large organizations, just like our atoms form molecules, molecules form objects -- it is the same kind of process. That is to say, all of our realities are formed by the organizational structures of these units of consciousness; different organizational structures form different realities, or the things within those realities.
And it also possesses an ability: it can observe itself within this self-structure. Within it there are small structures, small structures form large structures, large structures form even larger structures, and finally form the entire reality. So is the large structure of this universe built layer by layer from the small structures of these units of consciousness? Among themselves, the selves can all recognize their own existence; they are conscious and can perceive themselves, they can also perceive the overall structure, and they can also perceive individual structures, and they can also perceive the relationships between structures.
So the entire reality of this universe, they are connected to one another, connected at the most fundamental level. Not to mention higher levels, not to mention the level of consciousness -- from the most basic level of what composes this world: all realities of the universe are created by units of consciousness, whether it is our universe or all other universes or all other realities, all are from this most basic creative unit. These most basic creative units are inherently connected to one another internally, so the entire universe is inherently connected internally.
So the oneness of all things is not a slogan, it is not chicken soup for the soul, nor is it some kind of experience on the level of psychology or spirituality or practice; it is simply a fact, it is only a matter of whether we can feel it, or recognize this fact.
Growing Beyond Themselves
These units grow beyond themselves. What does "growing beyond themselves" mean? It means they transcend themselves. In the process by which units of consciousness form an ego structure, the units of consciousness can self-structure, using a self-organizing way to form an ego structure, and this new structure possesses a new consciousness, or a higher-level consciousness. This consciousness cannot eliminate the unique consciousness of each individual unit of consciousness, but the consciousness of this new structure will transcend that individual consciousness. The transcendence here means that, whether in terms of ability, range of cognition, or feeling, it far exceeds that unit of consciousness.
Let me make it more vivid. It is like every member in what we call a group organization, who spontaneously organize themselves into different organizational forms. We can think of each person as a unit of consciousness, each with their own unique attributes and their own unique personality. When they form different organizations, this organization then has a larger consciousness of its own and its own attributes, and the consciousness of the organization itself transcends the consciousness of each individual person. One could also say that the individual's consciousness grows beyond itself, forming such an organizational consciousness.
Would you say that the organizational consciousness is composed of these individual consciousnesses? Of course it is; without these people, how could there be an organization? But the organization formed by people has a consciousness that is greater than, or transcends, the consciousness of each person. What an organization can do, an individual cannot do; the power of an organization completely transcends the power of an individual. So one can say that these units of consciousness grow beyond themselves -- beyond their own abilities, beyond their own cognition, beyond their own understanding; in any case, they transcend themselves.
The Simultaneity of Past, Present, and Future
Since I have told you that, in your terms, your past, present, and future all exist simultaneously, these units are constantly emerging into your present point from both the future and the past.
For units of consciousness, they are not limited by time and space. And I have also often told you that past, present, and future exist simultaneously. So this one point of yours in the present—this present moment of yours—is not, as you understand it, composed only of the present. It is formed by these units of consciousness from the past, the present, or the future, and they move back and forth within it.
To put it simply, our present reality—your present world, or your universe, or your perception, or your consciousness—that is, this present moment, is not composed only of the present. It is composed of simultaneous information, data, or units of consciousness from the past and the future. Why do we say that this present moment already contains past, present, and future? Because it is itself composed of the past, present, and future simultaneously.
He paused for a long time—and "paused for a long time" was one of many such instances, meaning that during this working process, Rob did not write it down, but Seth had already paused for a very long time on many, many occasions. You can understand that Seth truly did not have an easy time explaining these things.
I do not wish to destroy your idea of stability, nor do I wish to confuse you.
According to what he says, you begin to feel somewhat uncertain about all of reality. Because when some of the most core perceptions and beliefs are overturned, we sometimes really do become thoroughly confused: the cognitive systems we have built up since childhood, our understanding of the world and our values—not just values, but our entire worldview is completely overturned. When the things you thought were fixed are no longer fixed, when the things you thought were certain are no longer certain, it shakes you. He says that is not his purpose.
But up to now, when I have been speaking about probabilities, I have already simplified the issues considerably. The version you are hearing from Seth has already been simplified; the actual reality is far, far more complex than this.
He turned to Rob and said, for example, I told you that in one probable life of yours—in one probability you died young, and in another you died in the war, you died during your military service; and I also gave you a small sample of the probable histories of your parents.
He said when I did so, I used concepts and terms that are fairly easy to grasp.
That is to say, the words he used there—who died, whose energy returned to where, what happened in whose probability—he only used such very easy-to-understand and easy-to-grasp terms for your convenience. But those larger pictures are very difficult for me to express in language.
What kind of picture? For example: Rob died young, in his teens—that is one probability. In another probability, you died while serving in the military, when you were a pilot. In yet another probability, you have lived all the way to the present. I gave you these three probable versions of yourself as an introduction, and I also introduced the probable existence of your parents—what kind of probable world they live in, and that the present world is one of their probable worlds or a branch of it. All of these were told to you in language and words that you humans can understand, but that is not the real picture, because that real and larger picture I cannot express to you in language.
What is the real picture like? I will mention it briefly, because I do not want to go into depth—if I go into depth, you will become even more of a mess, even more mixed together. Do you remember at the very beginning, at the end of Session 679, when I introduced to everyone the introduction that Seth wrote for this entire book? In that, he divided this world into, for example, a two-dimensional world like a bus lane, a three-dimensional world, a four-dimensional world, or worlds of even higher dimensions. By the end, all those dimensions had their boundaries blurred, dissolved, and mixed together—do you remember that? If you do not remember, you can jump back to the last part of Session 679, the part where I read aloud the introduction Seth wrote for this book.
Only at that level does the world appear in its relatively true form. There is no clear-cut "this life or that life," nor any clear-cut "this probable you or that probable you." They all exist distinctly and clearly, yet they are also mixed together in a jumble. Whether from the inner perspective or from the perspective of awareness, both they themselves and we ourselves are distinctly clear—each and every one is clear, their personalities and their events all exist independently. But from a certain perspective and from the standpoint of human cognition, they are all mixed together like a pot of porridge, indistinguishable from one another.
I am speaking from the human perspective. But you can also reverse it back: from that primordial chaos, take the process from a two-dimensional bus lane, to a three-dimensional bus lane, make a Mobius strip, and keep going until it becomes a higher-dimensional state of the entire universe in chaos. If you trace it back from that chaotic state, it too is distinctly clear in itself.
So what Seth is telling us is a state in between—neither the state of our three-dimensional world, nor the truest state of things—it is for us to be able to understand and accept. If he directly spoke of that final chaotic state, you truly would not be able to understand it, and he would not be able to explain it either, nor could he even articulate it.
Let me give you a brief explanation by way of analogy: whether Rob in this life died young or not, whether he died while serving as a pilot or not—he is both dead and alive, both alive and dead. That is the state of it. This state transcends the level of human cognition and understanding, but that is the true state. To investigate whether he lived or died is, to some degree, meaningless. Yet for us humans, this is a matter of tremendous importance. I am not saying it is unimportant, but rather that his state is one of being both alive and dead. And this state of being both alive and dead is one that we humans find rather difficult to understand and rather difficult to describe.
Regarding this topic, we will stop here. I am only giving you a general understanding, so that you know at what level Seth is speaking, and so that you do not mistakenly think that this is exactly how things are. It is only a considerably simplified version—and not just an ordinary simplification.
Rob's Question
At this point Rob started asking questions. He asked Seth, are you saying that you have to make things so simple for us before we can understand them?
Then look at how Seth answered. Seth did not answer his question at all. Seth said --
I am saying that I am now ready to lead you past those necessary preparations.
He said I have already led you through those necessary preparations. I used such a simplified account to tell you how the basic units of consciousness operate, and I also told you how these worlds of probabilities exist, and how they influence and interact with one another. My purpose in telling you these things was to prepare a premise for you, a laying out of basic knowledge. Under this laying out of basic knowledge, you can then understand what comes later. It is like when we take university courses, many courses have a prerequisite course. If you do not take the prerequisite, you cannot take the course that follows. This is the most basic principle.
He said I have merely guided you through these preparations. Carefully savor the question Rob asked and the answer Seth gave. There is a big difference between the two of them. Think about it yourself. I will not elaborate on it. You can exercise your own discernment and carefully savor these two -- the point Rob was asking about and the point Seth was answering -- and where the difference lies.
Units of Consciousness and Your Identity
All matter is built upon the units mentioned—all matter is built upon the most fundamental unit, the unit of consciousness—along with their unpredictability and their penchant for exploring all possibilities.
All matter is built upon units of consciousness, and it also carries the unpredictability of units of consciousness, and it also carries this penchant for exploring all possibilities. Seth keeps emphasizing that this is a penchant: what does "penchant" mean? It means something you cannot suppress—he always has to do this. Exploring all possibilities is the penchant of units of consciousness. You can call it an attribute, or you can call it a penchant—it cannot be controlled.
Even your atomic structures are suspended between probabilities. Your atoms are also between probabilities—this was discussed earlier. If you want to understand it, you can look into those things in quantum mechanics.
If this is true, then obviously, you are only aware of one small probable part of yourself, and this part you protect as your identity.
From this perspective, what you experience is only a very small part of these many possibilities. For example, the probable you is a very vast experiential reality, and what you can experience is only one very, very small probable time within it.
Let me give a numerical example: say the probable you, in all probable realities, across all these lifetimes, may have a million events happen, and in this lifetime you may only experience two thousand of them. The numbers I'm using in this example have no reference value whatsoever; I'm just saying that there are a million events waiting for you to experience, but you only experience two thousand of them. From your birth, going to kindergarten, going to school, graduating, and so on—these major events, you only experience two thousand of them: the first event is that you were born, the last event is that you died, and in between there are two thousand events for you to experience. But the whole you—the probable you—may experience as many as one million events, and you only experience these two thousand.
You identify these two thousand events as you. You string together all the events from your birth to your death, and you think this is you—this is what is called you. How do you describe you? You list everything you did in this life, like a running account: on a certain year, month, day, at a certain hour and minute, you were born—that's the first event; then you got vaccinated, on the first day they weighed you and so on... these events begin, surrounding your birth. This is one probable, very small part of the you that you experience.
But you add all these events together, from birth to death, and you think these represent you—this is the sense of identity you call you. All the events added together are the source of your sense of identity—because you did this, you did that, the collection of all the actions you performed is the source of your own sense of identity. And you protect it as your only identity, but it is not your only identity. You have many, many more probable experiences, even though you have not experienced them.
If you only think of it as a focus of your larger identity—suppose all the probable you added together form a complete personality, then your present lifetime, your present sense of identity, is one focus gathered by that larger you's identity. That larger you has many focuses, and one of those focuses is your lifetime. You also have other lives, other lives in parallel worlds, countless lifetimes. Each lifetime is different, because what he experiences is different, the probabilities he experiences are different, so his feelings and experiences are also different.
Everything used here is imagery and personification. Be sure to remember: everything being said is an analogy. It's like saying there is a larger you, and that larger you's present focus is your present lifetime. He is focused on the point where you were born, then you will attend this school, you will meet this child, when you grow up you will marry this girl, you will go work at that company, and so on—these are all your choices. This is one of the focuses of a larger you; he is simply focused on this point. But this larger you also has other focuses—he does not have only one focus.
Let me give a more vivid example, otherwise it will be hard for you to understand.
Say this larger you is a young man playing a computer game—an online multiplayer, open-map, open-world game, the latest ones, GTA5, GTA65 or whatever—never mind that; you are playing a large open-world online game. Right now this player's focus is concentrated only on the character he is currently playing. This character can choose to experience this or experience that: he can choose to experience being a drug dealer, an ordinary sightseer, a street-level gangster, or an investigator, and so on—he can choose. Once he chooses, his birth and his identity are already determined—his game character has already determined his identity, whether he is a police officer or a thief. Then he begins to direct this game character to do things according to his own preferences, according to his own wishes, desires, thoughts, and intentions.
From the game character's perspective, he feels that he himself is doing these things; he does not feel that he is a focus of the game player's consciousness. Then we go one step further: this player has several game accounts, or within one game account he has several characters, and he may be playing different games at the same time—he has different game accounts, and also different characters within one game account, and also different games, and all of this is determined by this player. But for the different characters in different games and different game accounts, they cannot perceive the existence of the other characters. The character in this game only acknowledges his own character as the only real identity. For example, if this character chose to be a police officer, he thinks he is a police officer—how would he know that the player got tired of the police officer, exited, and switched to a thief identity to enter the game?
In any case, from the player's perspective, he can merge all these identities together—they are all experienced by this player. But each character in the game only recognizes his present identity, his present single probability.
I use this analogy, this example, to help you understand the difference between you and the larger you. You can think of that player as the larger you, and you can think of your present lifetime as one storyline or one way of playing, chosen by that larger you from among all the game's possibilities, for one character. For this player, of course he wants to experience all the possibilities in this game; for this character, of course he wants to complete the mission this character is supposed to complete. Each character has his own mission and storyline. Of course, within his storyline, within his game progress, this game character, under the player's control or intention, also wants to explore as many experiences as possible—playing a game, after all, the purpose of playing a game is to explore the experience. It's not that he heads straight for the goal and directly obtains the result—of course there is also that way of playing; every player plays differently. Some people head straight for the goal, with a very clear walkthrough, going straight to the main objective, not really experiencing the process; some people don't care, they just wander around and look around, not wanting to finish the game quickly, only wanting to experience the process. So every person's life, as you can see, is also different.
All right, I'll say again: the above is an example, an analogy, to make it easier for you to understand.
Now you can understand what I am saying now—he says, if I tell you that you are a focus of a larger identity, meaning this lifetime of yours, you can understand what I am saying now—I will not feel insignificant or lost by comparison.
Because such an analogy will inevitably make us, as the game characters, feel lost and insignificant—you discover that this life you originally valued so much is merely a game played by a larger self, and he still has many other characters, many other personas he hasn't played yet, or is waiting to play.
The example I just gave only used the game analogy. If you think about it on a higher level, if this player has higher abilities, and he can play several games at the same time, then you can understand this meaning even better. And this larger self—the biggest difference between him and this player is: he is playing these games simultaneously. The player example I just gave requires him to exit one character to enter another character, exit one game to enter another game, but this higher self does not need to do that. He does not need to exit this game to enter another game, nor exit this character to switch to another character—he is playing all the characters and all the games at the same time. This again overturns our human understanding and cognition, but he does have this ability.
But such an analogy and such a depiction of a scenario will definitely make the character in the game feel insignificant and lost. Seth says you do not need to feel lost. Yet all that you are—that focus—is indeed inviolable.
Although all that you are...
Your Importance: You Are a Focus of a Larger Self
That larger self, if it did not have these focuses of consciousness, would have no consciousness at all. If consciousness were not composed of these focuses, then the larger self would have nothing whatsoever. So you can understand where your importance lies. Seth says, you must never give rise to this feeling of insignificance -- if you do give rise to such a feeling, then you have misunderstood his intent. He is merely sketching a larger picture for you, and in the course of this it is inevitable to reveal that we humans are only a tiny existence within a vast structure, but this tininess does not mean you can be erased or obliterated. You are still unique and extremely important.
Seth says again:
I have often said that even within your one lifetime, all the possible variations of any event happen. (Session 682)
All possible events have happened within your one lifetime. But he never discussed this in depth, only mentioning:
From your focus, you seem to have a line of identity running from birth to death. (Session 682)
There is a storyline, or a line of identity, and this is your process from birth to death. Looking back from any point, you are quite certain that the self of ten years ago is the self of today, even though it may have changed in certain respects. Looking back from your present vantage point, at your elementary school self, your middle school self, your college self, you feel that that self is the same self you are now, except that perhaps your appearance, your body, your personality have all changed somewhat, but you do not deny that it was you. But he goes on to say:
Of course, there is no single-line development at all. (Session 682)
This is all your illusion. Why do I say illusion? Because it is not single-threaded development at all; you only think it is single-threaded development.
Why It Is Not a Single-Threaded Development
First, as you know:
Your life is immediate. (Session 682)
Although the actual you experiences a sequence from birth to death, just like the scope of life Ruburt described in The Adventures of Consciousness, every possible event that could happen to you has happened. Every possible event has happened in your possible events. Seth said he gave one or two small examples of my mother's possible existences, to illustrate in concrete terms.
Why does this single-threaded storyline development you assume do not exist? The first reason is that your present moment is an immediate existence. The life you perceive is only your immediate cognition and experience in the present moment. All those bits and pieces you think of as from birth to death -- those times, those histories, those memories -- can all be reduced to this one point, this one moment in your present. Only this point, this moment, is real; it contains the past, the present, and the future, but only this point is real. Only at this point can you feel the existence of your life. No matter what your memories of the past are, no matter what your imaginings of the future are, they are all just one of your thoughts, one of your ideas, not real existences. The real existence is you in this present moment.
And all the possible events in your life have already happened. Seth said he gave me a few examples: your mother has a version where she became a nurse, and a version where she married your father; you have a version where you died on the operating table in your teens, a version where you died as a pilot in a crash, and another one who is the present Rob. He said these were just one or two examples; the actual possibilities are far, far more numerous than this. The fact that he did not spell them out does not mean they do not exist; they are all there.
You can imagine the number of these possibilities: think of a seed, and how many descendants it ultimately produces. Every branch of an event has its possibilities; this seed can be taken as a given event, and then all the descendants of this seed are its possibilities. How many possibilities does a seed have? Suppose it has ten possibilities -- it sprouted, it did not sprout, it died and rotted, it sprouted and grew well, it grew poorly, it grew averagely -- just making them up casually you can come up with a dozen, two dozen, countless kinds. And behind every possibility there follow new possibilities of existence: what happens to the one that grew well, what happens to the one that grew poorly, each one still has more possibilities. This is an endless relationship; you can understand it as branches of consciousness or branches of possibilities, inexhaustible and endless.
Your real world, your real life, is this simultaneous, parallel reality in which all possibilities are happening, and you can experience all of them. It is only because of the limitations of your cognition that you can experience only one single storyline; this is only your experience as the little you. As the larger you, it has experienced all of them.
Every Present Moment Is a Seed
Now, at any given moment, at any point, the reality of this self of yours -- Seth used a term earlier called "self-structure" -- from the human perspective, it is a self-reality, meaning a reality that you yourself form, and you yourself are within it.
At any point in time, this world, even the world at that one point, is formed by you yourself, yet you are still within it. So every point in time is like a seed, with its own extension of possibilities, and the offspring of these possibilities appear in other dimensions, happening in other parallel space-times, and at the same time they also appear in your present space-time.
Why do we say they also appear in your space-time? Do you remember what he said earlier? Through the present point, you can access all possibilities -- the present point is the intersection of all space-times. So those possibilities appear both in other space-times and in this space-time of yours, because at the intersection point you can reach all space-times.
Seth says:
At every present moment point, you draw from that vast, unpredictable reservoir of behavior those things that are important to you, and the personal viewpoints that are important to you will produce behavior that subsequently appears predictable. (Session 682)
At the present point, you can visit all probable selves, and according to your own preferences, whichever you feel is important, whichever you like, whichever you choose, that one is perceived in your world. That so-called important thing you choose is only one of many possibilities. The ones you did not choose are also happening in other space-times. And the personal viewpoints that are important to you -- that is, your thoughts, your will, your desires, your intentions, your purposes -- determine what you select out.
For example, if your purpose is to become an entrepreneur, you will select from all the parallel worlds of your possibilities only those experiences needed to become an entrepreneur. When you do this, because you are using consciousness to select and to lead, you will feel that this world is predictable, logical, and orderly. But the world itself, the you of all possibilities, is without order, unpredictable, and without logic. The only thing that has logic is your intention, your purpose. But once you do this, that unpredictability becomes predictable to you.
This is what Seth wants to tell you: the reason you feel this world is predictable is precisely because your own intentions and thoughts determine it.
A Side Note: Why Fortune-Telling Can Be Accurate
So now you know why those fortune-tellers can get things right, don't you? All your possibilities are there, and what they get right is your intention at this present moment. No matter what method, means, or technique they use, they have picked up on your strong desire and intention at this present moment, and your life over the coming period of time is selected by that intention. Once they know your intention, they know your future life. Because all the possibilities of the future are laid out there, waiting for you to choose, and they are all determined by your present-moment thoughts.
In ancient times, when casting divinations, the person absolutely had to throw the copper coins themselves; they had to be involved in the process. When they threw the copper coins, the information of their personal thoughts and intentions was already imparted onto the coins, so what the coins revealed carried their own consciousness and beliefs within it. In ancient times, it was said that you should not go and divine when nothing is wrong; only divine when something is at hand. Even now, are there people who can see your whole life accurately through astrology or through some kind of chart? Yes, but they are extremely rare. For the most part, if someone can divine one matter accurately for you, that is already quite remarkable.
When you ask specifically about a certain matter, those divination methods are sometimes very accurate, because your thoughts, purpose, and intention are very clear and precise. Once you project them out, the diviner immediately picks up on your thoughts and intentions at that time, and even on deeper things that lie beyond your conscious thoughts. Because your future life is selected according to that intention.
As long as you know what is important to a person, you can predict that person's future life.
Inclinations: The Choice of Importance
Inclination is a choice of importance. Why bring up inclination? Because one of the basic attributes of a unit of consciousness is that it has an inclination. The inclination of every unit of consciousness is different, and the inclination of every organization formed by units of consciousness is also different.
It is a choice of significance, a tendency toward the formation of selected experience. (Session 682)
Whatever you want to experience, you tend to choose those things to experience. This applies at all levels, atomic as well as psychological, and it applies equally to physiological stimuli and mental intentions. They all follow the same principle: determined by inclination, and according to inclination they choose which things are important to them.
If your inclination is to make money, then you will choose those things that are important for making money; if you feel making money is not important and you just like attractive men or women, then that aspect is important to you; if you like a warm family life, then family is important to you. There is no good or bad, right or wrong in any of this; it is simply that your personal inclinations differ.
This applies not only to individuals, but also to atoms and molecules, and also to the psychological level. Physiological intentions are those most basic desires that satisfy physiological needs, such as the desire to eat good food or the desire for sex; psychological and spiritual intentions, such as wanting to receive love, romance, warmth, happiness, and so on. Whether on the material level or the psychic level, this principle applies.
And so:
These basic units then move toward an organization of their choosing. (Session 682)
With the guidance of inclination, after choosing the events that are important to that inclination, these basic units of consciousness begin to move toward the organization they have chosen. They have a vast, unpredictable range from which to draw, and they then choose activities according to those significances, choosing the activity of moving toward that organization.
The various significances are the result of the individual natures of those units. (Session 682)
Those various significances are brought about by the individual natures of those units of consciousness. So some people like this and some people like that, a thousand people with a thousand faces, precisely because the individuality of the units of consciousness is different.
Your Body Is a Probable Body
All of your bodies are a probable body. You think the body is fixed and stable, but your body is a probable body:
It is one line of development that your particular physical earthly personality could take. (Session 682)
Your physical body is only one manifestation of probability. What probability? It is the probability that this physical you, according to your earthly inclinations, intentions, or desires, chose one line of development. You have other probable choices, and this physical body is only one among these many probabilities.
However:
All the other probable lines of development also happened, and the other physical bodies also exist. They happen simultaneously, yet each one simultaneously affects every other. (Session 682)
Is this super complex? Yes, and it is not sequential; it is simultaneous occurrence and simultaneous influence. So there is something very subtle here: do they have causality? There is a certain causality, but is it the causality we understand? No. Because they happen simultaneously, how can you say which comes first, which comes later, which influences whom? But of course they influence each other, so causality exists, only it is different from the causality in our mundane world.
Your simultaneous probable selves are influencing each other right now:
Here, there is actually far greater interaction than you know. (Session 682)
At this level there is far more interaction than you think. You do not know it because you are not yet accustomed to looking for it. The harder you try to maintain the conventionally accepted concept of the self (the "self" in quotation marks), the more you will of course block out any kind of unpredictability.
The more you maintain that accepted sense of identity you believe in — that is, this one probable story line — the more you block out all other unpredictability, and you cannot see the influence of all the other probable selves on your present moment, nor the interaction among them. Because you have always wanted to maintain the integrity of your present identity, you choose to ignore the influence those probable yous have on you, or you block it out and do not let it happen.
Why? Because if they influence each other, your own sense of identity cannot be maintained. When you discover that your sense of identity is only one among many probabilities, and that it is also mutually influenced by other probable selves, then that independent, self-complete, closed, self-determined sense of identity can no longer be maintained.
Therefore, when you want to truly understand and receive the influence of other probable selves upon yourself, you must loosen or expand your perception of this sense of self-identity at the level of concepts and ideology, rather than recognizing only the present sense of identity. When you expand it into a larger self, you will be able to see clearly the mutual influence and interaction among them. Otherwise, you cannot see it.
Some psychological structures can simultaneously perceive probable selves
Because:
These basic units possess a remarkable organizational nature, so there are also some psychological structures that can quite well maintain their own identity while at the same time perceiving any number of probable selves. (Session 682)
There are some very mature, more developed, or one might say more advanced psychological structures. What abilities do they possess? They can both maintain their present sense of identity and also perceive any number of probable selves. They can perceive simultaneously, neither losing their present identity nor failing to be aware of the existence of probable selves.
Life After Death, the Multiverse, and Immortality
Life after death is highly meaningful. Why?
Because death is a part of your reality, and your greater reality obviously transcends both your birth and your death. The concept of a single universe is basically absurd. (Session 682)
Life after death is especially important to you, because on that level you transcend birth and death, you know there is a world of greater reality, you are no longer confined to this tiny material world, and you no longer hold a single-universe view. When you discover that countless parallel worlds exist simultaneously, your view of the universe undergoes a complete transformation.
So the single-universe view is incorrect; the multiverse is real, and the multiverse is the correct view of the universe. I think of an example: in the film The Developer6, the developers had a huge disagreement when they first designed the algorithm, and in the end they accepted a child, a genius, who used a multiverse theory to improve their algorithm. Everything the quantum computer predicted became extremely accurate and very clear, whereas before it had been very blurry. Because the earlier project developers did not accept the existence of the multiverse and strongly rejected introducing the multiverse concept into the algorithm, the results were always fuzzy. It was not until that child had a flash of insight and introduced the multiverse algorithm into the system, improving the algorithm, that the quantum computer's ability to predict and perceive the future and the past instantly increased, reaching a state of perfect clarity.
I give this example to tell you that the multiverse view is the correct view of the universe; any belief that the world is a single universe is absurd and ridiculous.
Your reality must be seen in its relationship to other realities, otherwise you will always be caught up in questions of possibility such as how the universe began, or when it will end. (Session 682)
When you lack the multiverse view and hold the single-universe view, you fall into a trap, endlessly asking when the universe was born and when it will end. When you know that all these parallel worlds exist simultaneously, you will not ask such foolish questions. The birth and death of universes are happening at all times, simultaneously; the universe is constantly and continuously being created.
Only within a framework of probabilities does immortality have any meaning. (Session 682)
How could there be immortality in a single universe? From the perspective of our human time and space, since we can perceive time, we will inevitably assign it a beginning, an end, a birth, a death. From humans to the universe to all things, everything has birth and death; a single universe is always like this. Only within the framework of the multiverse and parallel space-time does true immortality exist.
From Genetics to Daily Life: The Same Principle
Seth continued, and suddenly jumped to genetics, to DNA and chromosomes:
Heredity comes from a magnificent, innate unpredictability, which is then broken down into the fine details within the chromosomes, no two of which are identical. (Session 682)
Heredity itself comes from unpredictability, but it is broken down into very fine details within a chromosome, which is what we commonly call the arrangement of base pairs in DNA. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, 46 chromosomes in total7, and the DNA sequence arrangement on each chromosome, those combinations, are all very different. Every person is unique, which is why we can do paternity tests. Among these fine details in the chromosomes, these gene segments, no two are identical.
The daily life that you think you know, then, is a focusing upon certain probable events rather than others, a selection of significant importance, a choice of patterns, while other portions of your own being followed different choices. (Session 682)
The events in your life are also the result of your focusing on certain probabilities, while not focusing on those things you consider unimportant. Your life is a selection of what is important to you, a choice of patterns, while those other portions of yourself follow the other probabilities that you did not choose.
Why does he jump back and forth giving these examples? What he means is this: whether from the perspective of your physical life -- because chromosomes set the differences in physical life -- or from the perspective of daily living, it is the same principle. From the perspective of chromosomes, they also selected what they considered important from countless unpredictabilities; from the perspective of the physical body, it made choices; from the perspective of daily life, you are also making choices based on your sense of importance, forming your own life, your own life path. At the cosmic level it is the same: with so many parallel space-times, where you ultimately want to live is entirely up to you. This world is composed of so many multiverses.
Seth's Answer: The Larger Identity Is Aware of Probable Existence
At this point Seth told Jane to take a break. Jane said at 10:55: While I was speaking, I knew what I was saying, but now I have forgotten it all.
Seth said:
We do the best we can with whatever abilities we have. (Session 682)
He went to such great effort to bring over so much valuable material, so what use is this information to you? What good is it to know it? What use does it have for the three-dimensional world?
Rob said: What you are saying seems to make sense, but once it is incorporated into your consciousness -- that is, once what Seth said is accepted into your consciousness -- you will use it just like any other information. It clearly expands our concept of what human beings actually are, such as where our motivations and our behaviors actually come from. Rob was halfway through when Seth came back and continued speaking. Because Seth had not finished, and he did not want to listen to Rob explain things from a human perspective.
Seth continued:
Because your larger identity is aware of probable existences, you are at once in the physical and out of it, in time and out of it. (Session 682)
He is outside your framework, and you have a larger identity, but a part of him is within your framework, and that part is you. Your "you-ness" -- Seth coined a word here, meaning your self-nature -- the you-ness that belongs to you, that is uniquely yours, is where your meaning lies.
What does "where the meaning lies" mean? A focus of awareness, a focus of consciousness, aware of himself, and choosing and viewing experience according to his own unique inclinations. This passage from Seth was responding to Jane's question: Did you not want to ask what use it is to learn this knowledge? I have told you about the multiverse, probabilities, unpredictability, and that units of consciousness are the most fundamental units that make up this universe -- what use is it to know all this?
Rob said it was useful, that at the very least it expanded our cognition and the scope of our consciousness, and it also let us understand human motivations, behaviors, and purposes. But Seth's perspective was always far higher than his, so Seth cut him off. Seth said: After I have told you these things, at least you can understand that you are both in time and out of time, that you are both a physical existence and a nonphysical existence.
Within his framework, outside your framework, you have a larger self, and this larger self also contains this little you. What can represent you? It is your "you-ness" -- the unique, one-of-a-kind characteristics that belong only to you. This you-ness, this self-nature, is where your meaning lies. Why? It is where a larger focus of awareness resides, and because of the existence of this focus, you are able to be aware of your own existence, and also aware of the existence of this focus of consciousness.
To put it plainly, you are a point of awareness, a focus of consciousness, of a larger you. From this focus of awareness, you become aware of your own existence, and you choose and view experience according to the unique inclinations of this focus itself. Because that larger you -- where his focus of consciousness chooses to look, what it wants to see -- carries great intent, and this intent carries certain inclinations. When his focus, for example, wants to make money or become a boss, other things become unimportant to him; but for a traveler or a gourmet, eating, drinking, and traveling everywhere is the best thing there is. How you view what you experience is determined by the inclinations of this focus of consciousness.
Finally, Seth said:
The existence of probable realities and probable selves in no way negates the value of your own experience or your individuality. (Session 682)
Although you have many probable selves existing in different probable worlds, they do not erase the value of your existence. Just because there are many probable versions of you does not mean you are unimportant -- you are still important. They are there, steady and secure.
Intersection Points of Probabilities
Now let's continue reading. Seth goes on to explain this concept: the versions of us in probabilities, those parallel selves, intersect at certain events. He says that although you have many probable versions of yourself existing in different probable worlds, they do not erase the value of your existence. You do not become unimportant just because there are many probable versions of you. You are still important. They are there, steady and firm.
He uses such a good phrase: they are there, steady and firm. What are they? They are your own experience, your own life, steady and firm. From the unpredictable realm of certainty, those things that match his own characteristics and nature -- that is, your own personality -- are steady and firm. From this vast, unpredictable warehouse of probabilities, he selects those things that match his own nature. His steadiness lies right here: his nature is steady.
He emphasizes with gestures:
That self leaps frog-like over those worlds it does not wish to actualize, and does not absorb such experience into its own life. But other portions of your larger identity do indeed accept those different versions of the same time that you rejected, and form their own lives.
As for the present you right now, you are like a frog, leaping forward through probabilistic time. You do not experience every moment; you only leap and select those moments you want to experience, and after experiencing them, you absorb that experience into your own life, forming your own unique sense of identity. And those things you skipped over and did not experience are accepted by other probable portions of that larger identity. The things you reject might be what someone else loves, right? Exactly. For example, you do not want to eat durian; you think it stinks unbearably, but some people absolutely love eating durian. In this life you avoided the durian thing, but another probable you might simply adore durian to death. It is that simple.
Now some of you may choose the same events, and at those points the probabilities converge. You chose this probability, and he chose that probability, and many of us chose the same probability, the same event -- that is, the event of the same probability. These probable people chose the same event as an experience in their probable lives, and so this event becomes an intersection point for these probable people.
Such intersection points are highly charged and creative. "Charged" means they carry negative energy -- no, it means they carry a great deal of energy within them, and they are creative. And these intersection points can occur in personal or group ways. For example:
A historical event may perhaps be accepted in several probable realities at once, while others may occur in one history and not in another alternate history.
These intersection points may appear in personal ways, or in group ways. The personal way refers to the present you and other probable versions of you. For example, suppose there are one hundred probable versions of you, but fifteen of them chose the same event to experience. Then these fifteen versions of you intersect at this one same event. In the process of this intersection, although they cannot be aware of or perceive each other's existence, the same event chosen by these fifteen probable versions of you carries stronger energy than events experienced by any single probable version of you. As for the event itself, it is charged, because fifteen probable versions of you all placed their focus on this matter.
In group terms, it means that many people in this world chose to experience the same thing. When you all do the same thing, this probability comes into being. The same event, for different people, involves many choices in their lives, but when they choose to do the same thing together, this event becomes energized and creative. All kinds of organizations are formed this way. For example, when many people in a religious group come together and choose to jointly participate in an event, the creativity and energy of that event itself becomes very strong.
Do you understand? So now you understand why, in these large gatherings and large organizations, when there are many people, every individual who enters that venue, who enters that state, is influenced and inspired by that energy. If you have ever attended such a large gathering, you will have felt this.
To give a simple example that every one of you has experienced: go watch a live sports event. Whether it is an NBA basketball game, or a soccer match, or the European Cup, the Premier League, the Bundesliga -- as long as you watch a sports event live once, you can feel the energy amplification that comes when many people simultaneously choose to experience one event. It feels different from sitting at home watching TV, because that energy amplifies the event.
Concerts are the same. When you listen to songs at home, or with headphones, you can still enjoy it a lot, but that energy is not enough to make you jump and dance for three or four hours. But at a concert it is different. That kind of atmosphere lifts everyone up, and everyone waves their hands and sings along with the songs, until in the end their throats are hoarse, their arms are sore, their whole bodies are exhausted, but they are exhilarated. If you did not have such an atmosphere, such an environment, you could try it: try standing at home with your hands raised for three or four hours, waving, shouting, and yelling nonstop, and see how that feels. But in a concert setting, in a sports event setting, you can do it, and many people can do it. Some fans are very crazy; they stand from beginning to end, waving their arms the whole time, shouting the whole time, calling out his name, singing along, and the next day they find they cannot speak.
By the same principle, the teal organization we are now building is the same. When each person's ability is not very strong, but when an organization is formed, when we form such a spiritual education institution, and everyone jointly chooses such an event to experience, this event itself is empowered, it is charged, and it becomes highly creative. Now you can understand why we use the organizational approach to promote spiritual matters.
Then he says once more:
Although words are not very useful here, what I have said still applies, perhaps in different ways, to the behavior of the world's atomic and psychological structures.
What he says applies from the world's perspective, from the material perspective -- the world's perspective means the collective world, geopolitics, the human world -- whether large as the world or small as an atom, whether in material, event-based, or psychological structural behavior, they all conform to this kind of pattern. Whether it is world-scale behavior, or the behavior of a single atom, or the behavior of psychological activities that we cannot know or see, they all follow this pattern.
What is this pattern? As said earlier, these probabilities, this unpredictability, is the core. Because there is unpredictability, there are infinite possibilities; because there is unpredictability and infinite possibilities, our consciousness, through its own intentional choices, can make us feel its orderliness and predictability. Our world, our individual selves, our psychology -- all of them come into being this way, all of them are produced this way.
Beliefs and the Probable Self
He also said:
In the life that you know, as given in The Nature of Personal Reality, your beliefs serve to make specific those probable events that will become real.
In The Nature of Personal Reality, you were told: what can your beliefs be used for? Why emphasize beliefs? Your beliefs can make specific those probable events that will become real -- that is, make them concrete, bring them into manifestation. This is why we need to change our beliefs, why we need to adjust our belief system: because it can make probable events become real.
Because you are a probable self, an understanding of your own nature will show you abilities that are not being used here but that exist, and that you can indeed choose to actualize.
Because you are inherently a probable being, you are always a probable being. So talking about probable events and the principles behind probability can help you understand: although there are abilities you do not have right now, in other probable times and spaces you do have them, and these abilities can also be used by the you of the present, and you can choose to actualize them.
You can draw from the storehouse of your own probable abilities, because within you there are traces of them. You can choose those things from the storehouse of probability. This is from the perspective of potential.
From the perspective of the body and health, if you are now ill, then there must necessarily exist a probable you who is not ill. It just depends on how you can link the body cells of that healthy you with yourself, so that they can be applied to your life in this lifetime. Would you not then become the state of that healthy you?
They are developing in another reality. In you these are only traces, only faint hints. For example, you may like singing, like musical instruments; perhaps in another reality you are a singer or a musician. Therefore, in this reality, these can be utilized far more easily than you think. If you understand this principle, then in your present reality you only need to practice a little and focus your attention, and you can very easily take abilities from yourself in other probable realities and put them to use.
He gave an example: when you exercise your right arm, your left arm also benefits. When you exercise this probable you -- rather than when you achieve certain accomplishments -- in other probable realities of yours, or parallel worlds, he also benefits. That is, when you enrich yourself now, other probable yous also benefit from it. Today you studied the Seth material, your consciousness expanded and strengthened, and other probable yous were likewise strengthened. Because inwardly they are all connected, and just as you draw on their potential, they will also draw on your potential.
So the learning of this lifetime, the improvement of this lifetime, brings improvement to all your probable selves. When you develop abilities in one system, they can also develop somewhat more easily in another system. Whatever you do benefits not only you, but also all probable yous.
He turned to Rob and said:
In deciding to do some writing, you are also drawing upon abilities you have worked with in another system, and through your intent you are, to some degree, mixing probabilities.
He said: Rob, the reason you are willing to write now is because in other realities you have this writing ability. Because Rob himself is a painter, and his writing ability still falls somewhat short of Jane's, but Rob wants to try. Look at the foreword at the beginning of this book -- how much he wrote, how much textual work he did there. None of this is his strong suit; he is a painter, yet he is now so obsessed with writing. He said: the reason you are willing to develop in writing is because in other reality spaces you have this writing ability.
Even a simple understanding of this point will help people realize what? That no existence is a dead end. The things you have not done, others are doing; the paths you have not walked through, others have walked through. You have not become a billionaire, but another you has. You have not become the most beautiful woman or man in this world, but in another reality it may already have been realized. In this lifetime you may not have awakened to the Way and become a Buddha, may not have attained ultimate nirvana, but in another reality you have already become a Buddha or a Bodhisattva. Do you understand what I mean? There is no dead end.
Notes on the Units of Consciousness
After a pause at 11:38, Seth came through again and gave Jane about a page of material, then ended the session at 11:48.
First note. When Seth mentioned units of consciousness in The "Unknown" Reality, I immediately thought of the electromagnetic energy units he discussed from July 1969 to 1971, when he called them EE units. See the appendix to The Seth Material8, in Sessions 504 and 5069 — these are all from the early sessions. And in Seth Speaks, Chapter 20, Session 58110, he also mentioned electrical energy units and electromagnetic energy units. In the latter, he used several thought-provoking metaphors to describe EE units. He said:
Basically, exuberance is born of consciousness, the invisible breath of consciousness, and those emanations are in fact emotional tones.
What are those emanations? The invisible breath of consciousness. Consciousness has its own invisible breath. What he means is that, for example, a unit of consciousness is also a consciousness, right? A unit of consciousness has its own invisible breath. When millions of units of consciousness combine together, there will be an overall breath of consciousness. Those emanations are the breath of consciousness, invisible, these are invisible. He said they are actually emotional tones, a certain kind of emotion.
He said:
These units are just beneath the range of physical matter.
These EE units — he is describing these EE units. Why are they sometimes translated as emotional energy units and sometimes as electromagnetic energy units? Why do we say that emotional energy units is more fitting? Because here he mentioned that the breath emanated by consciousness is actually an emotional tone, and those units refer to EE units, that is, emotional energy units or electromagnetic energy units. These EE units are just beneath the range of matter; they are exactly in the state between matter and non-matter. So you can see why emotion is so important in the manifestation of so many things.
Yet in tonight's Session 682, Seth did not mention EE units at all. There is a reason for this, and it will become apparent in the next session, where EE units will be discussed separately.
Seth spoke for the second time about the vast scope of the inner universe, and how the individual might feel insignificant. He also mentioned this in Session 681: when you talk about the entire universe, or all universes, all realities, the individual will inevitably feel his own smallness, but this is unnecessary.
We found Seth's discussion of probabilities very fascinating, and it did not make me feel physically or emotionally threatened. He said I did not feel small, nor did I feel emotionally low. Jane was the same. After the session she told me:
What I am concerned about is my readers.
He was worried about the readers. Jane still had a very strong role as a writer. She did not go into whether this material was true, or whether it was something of greater value; she was worried that after readers saw this material, she did not want any of them to feel swept away. To feel swept away means to feel that one is too small, that before the universe, before all the probable selves, before the identity of a larger self, one's own small individual ego sense of identity would be swept away, like sand on a beach disappearing without a trace. Neither of them felt that way, but she worried that readers would.
I think none of us here should feel that way, because we have already been studying the Seth material for six books now, and we can fully understand Seth's ideas and his spirit. We will not feel ashamed of ourselves or belittle ourselves because of our smallness within the grand universe. We also know our identity, we know our position, and we know our unique importance. We also know that the perfection of each individual is an enrichment and enhancement of the entire universe and of All That Is. Without us, there would be no All That Is. Although we are very small, we are also unique existences.
注释与核实
-
Source: International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, IUPAC Periodic Table of the Elements and Isotopes (IPTEI) for the Education Community, 2019 (https://iupac.org/iptei/) ↩
-
This claim could not be verified. ↩
-
Source: NASA, NASA’s Hubble Finds Most Distant Galaxy Candidate Ever Seen in Universe, 2011 (https://science.nasa.gov/missions/hubble/nasas-hubble-finds-most-distant-galaxy-candidate-ever-seen-in-universe-2/) ↩
-
This claim could not be verified. ↩
-
This claim could not be verified. ↩
-
Source: Disney+, Devs (2020) (https://www.disneyplus.com/zh-sg/browse/entity-fd2f6cc3-dafc-4741-ae2e-d86494f3ca51?msockid=15ea374e9d856c5005c521959cae6def) ↩
-
Source: National Human Genome Research Institute, Chromosomes Fact Sheet (https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Chromosomes-Fact-Sheet) ↩
-
Source: Jane Roberts, The Message of the Spirits (https://www.sethpublishing.com/booksContent.aspx?id=eFBJK72iMvW1hessxTxxqQ%3D%3D) ↩
-
Source: Jane Roberts, The Early Sessions: Book 9 of The Seth Material (https://nowdictation.com/q/ee/) ↩
-
Source: Jane Roberts, Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul (https://nowdictation.com/q/ee/) ↩