The "Reading Guide" and "Key Points" for 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 blockquotes are Seth's original words (the portions Mike read aloud).
Introduction
This chapter begins with Rob's question about having two dreams at the same time. Seth explains that double dreams are "dimensional seepage" between different realities, showing that the entity can simultaneously be aware of the experiences of all its personalities; ordinary people, because they cling to a single ego identity, usually retain only one main line of consciousness, whereas the brain is capable of processing multiple lines of consciousness in parallel. By stepping aside in one's writing or creating another self, one can practice maintaining two lines of consciousness at the same time without getting lost. At the end of the chapter, there is also discussion of the differences among species of consciousness and Jane's self-reflection after helping the police.
Key Points of This Chapter
- Double dreams are "dimensional seepage" between different realities, and also a preliminary sign that unused areas of the brain are beginning to activate.
- The entity can simultaneously perceive the experiences of all its personalities; ordinary people, because they cling to a single self-identity, can usually retain only one main line of consciousness.
- The brain is naturally capable of handling more than one main line of consciousness; experiencing multiple lines of consciousness at the same time is not a split personality, but an expansion of the idea of identity, and it does not threaten the original self.
- Through "stepping aside" in writing, or creating another self, one can practice maintaining two lines of consciousness at the same time without getting lost in either one.
- There are different families of consciousness on Earth, and they experience time, space, the body, and the world in different ways, but these differences are often obscured by outward differences.
Main Text
Double Dreams and the Unused Areas of the Brain
Today let's continue sharing with everyone Seth Book The "Unknown" Reality, Volume 1, Session 692, titled "Simultaneous Dreams, and the Unused Areas of the Brain." This session was held on Wednesday, April 24, 1974, at 10:03 p.m., a month after the previous session.
The content of this session is a bit different from what came before. Because this session was one where Rob came to class with his questions, he came with questions to solve them, so it is a kind of inserted content. But the content of this session is very important, very capable of opening up that part of our brain that has not been used.
In the interpretation section after this session, Teacher Xiyu designed a very effective and powerful series of exercises for everyone. If you can do that exercise from beginning to end, and through a period of practice, when you can reach that final state, when you can reach the ninth state, then you basically can already invert directly from the small self to a state of the higher self, until finally reaching the state of the essential self.
All right, now let's return to the main text.
Rob's Double Dream Experience
Over the past month, Jane and I were both busy preparing The Nature of Personal Reality for publication, so we did not hold sessions, though Jane's ESP class continued. This is Rob's description. He said that on the morning of Friday, March 29, he told Jane:
I woke up during the night, and I knew very clearly that I had just been dreaming two dreams at once.
The key point here is "dreaming two dreams at once," which is different from the usual understanding, it is not a dream within a dream, it is dreaming two dreams at the same time. Before one of the dreams vanished, I retained a bit of conscious memory of it. Before one of these two dreams vanished from memory, remember this, neither Jane nor I could recall ever hearing of or experiencing what I will call "double dreaming," called double dreaming. So I decided that when we returned to sessions, I would ask Seth to discuss these two dreams.
He came with questions. He wanted to ask some friends to see whether they had ever heard of or done this kind of double dreaming. And the first person I asked was Sue Watkins. Sue was also an old friend of theirs, and she often attended Seth sessions, and she was also a member of Seth's ESP class, and had personally attended many sessions where Jane delivered the Seth material. She had been attending the ESP class since 1967.
When Sue said that she had had this kind of experience several times, double dreaming, Rob was quite surprised. Because Rob had only done it once, but Sue said she had done double dreaming more than once, and she could also recall several such simultaneous dreams. That made her much more capable than Rob. What shocked Rob even more was that Sue described a double dream that another class member had had. In the first note, there is material on double dreams collected by Rob, and also a double dream of Sue's that she wrote down herself.
Dreaming two dreams at once led Rob to write down a second question for Seth. He hoped Seth would say more about what he had said at 11:29 in Session 690:
If your concepts are developed further, they will lead to a greater activation of that portion of the brain that is almost unused, and these in turn will trigger expansions in both psychic and biological terms.
That is, our brain has many undeveloped areas, unactivated areas, and as the Seth material progresses, it will activate these areas. And the activation of these areas, along with spiritual development, can bring not only spiritual development, but also biological development for us, and we will become a new kind of humanity. Remember, we will become a new kind of humanity, and this humanity's abilities will be greatly enhanced compared to before.
What Rob was curious about was whether the ability to have more than one dream at the same time had any connection with those parts of the brain that are not now being used. Was Rob's ability to dream two dreams at once the ability of this undeveloped part of the brain? That was what he actually wanted to ask Seth. So he actually came with two questions.
The Entity Is Aware of the Experience of All Its Personalities
When the session began, Seth answered his questions right away. Seth said:
Beginning with your dream, our content begins with your dream.
He began with a concluding statement:
The entity is aware of the experience of all of its personalities.
The entity is this being. We call it the entity, or this fundamental self, or the essential self, it is this entity. It is able to be aware of the experience of all of its personalities. This is something you must remember, that beneath the entity there are many personalities, and each personality has many fragments of personality, and all the experience of these personalities and personality fragments, this entity can feel. That is to say, this essential self of yours, this entity, can experience every reincarnation, every probable self's experience, it can perceive all of it.
Then he continued:
To that entity, in your terms, your own consciousness can be compared to a stream of consciousness. The larger portion of your own identity, then, is completely aware of the living data of all of your conscious and unconscious activities. And it is also aware of the same kind of data coming from all the other portions of itself and of you.
In short, this entity can feel all of its, what we call, its avatars, or its projections, or its personalities and personality fragments, all the streams of consciousness, all the experiences and feelings, it can experience them simultaneously.
So what he means is that this double dream of yours is just a small glimpse, or a demonstration of such an ability. Because:
You identify your experience with the usual line of consciousness with which you are familiar.
We identify our experience with this familiar line of consciousness, so you very seldom can bring in the data of any other self. Our ordinary small self does not have this ability, because our small self only identifies with the stream of consciousness of our present conscious data, we cannot identify with other streams of consciousness.
In other words, because of our identification with the uniqueness of self-identity, we think there is only this one self, so you have no way to bring other feelings, any data, into your present focus of consciousness and hold it there. And at the same time still maintain your own sense of identity, that is also very difficult. You have a self-identity on one stream of consciousness, and at the same time you can still have another identity, or the feeling of another conscious subject, you cannot maintain both at the same time, ordinary people do not have this ability.
Such data may occasionally leak through, or intrude into your own thoughts.
This kind of double dream is a kind of leakage, it seeped through, intruded into your own thoughts, mixed with them and was not recognized. In such cases, it takes on the coloration of your own thought patterns. That is, sometimes it comes in, but you do not notice it, you do not feel it, it may no longer be the consciousness of your own conscious subject, it is someone else's consciousness, it is another probable self's consciousness, or the consciousness of another avatar of the entity, but you cannot feel it. And it takes on the coloration of your own thought patterns, but it adds to the overall atmosphere of your existence.
Although you cannot effectively recognize it, it adds to your overall atmosphere. In other words, it adds to your overall sense, making it less easy for you to view the world from a single perspective, you have multiple perspectives, multiple identity angles. But it only adds to it.
But you must remember, for ordinary people it is only a leakage, only an intrusion, it is not a very sustained and stable state. Without understanding and training, you must lose your own consciousness in order to perceive other consciousness. If a person has not been trained, they can only switch, they cannot do it simultaneously, they can only first lose their own consciousness before they can feel other consciousness, they cannot do it at the same time. But a trained person can, our consciousness has this ability, as long as we have this training.
And the exercise that Teacher Xiyu gives after this session is a very good training, it is training you to do this very thing.
Multiple Identities in Writing
Seth said:
This ties in somewhat with what Ruburt said in ESP class last night.
Ruburt said in ESP class that, first of all, writing is one method by which you can step aside from life. What did he say about how to write? What is writing like? He said that in writing you must step aside from life a little, that is, you cannot cling tightly to this life, you must look at this life from the perspective of another observer.
Why? Because if you only write this story in the first person, if you write that way, it is not rich, it has no overall sense. You are just like a running account, what happened to me this morning, what I ate, and so on. This kind of first-person writing perspective, it has no, it is not rich, and it is not good to read.
So real writers do not write in such a single way, only a very few writers will write in such a single perspective, first person all the way through. But ordinary writers will have multiple perspectives, they will have psychological descriptions of other characters, different psychological descriptions of several characters. At this point, have you already switched consciousness? Right, because how can you know other people's consciousness? How do you know the consciousness and thoughts of the other characters in the novel? You do not know, but through the method of the novel you can embody it, you can display it.
This is the method by which you step aside from life. What is your purpose? Your purpose is to capture this life. In order to write this novel well, you must extract from life in this way, and in this way there is an added overall atmosphere:
And to preserve the unspeakable uniqueness of any given day.
If you describe this one day, this day in the novel, from multiple perspectives, then it has a unique, unspeakable uniqueness, and this day becomes different from an ordinary day.
But he said, Ruburt also said:
You can then discover that the writing itself becomes the experience of that day.
For example, say that day you were writing a novel. While you were writing the novel, and you described that day's feelings from a third-party perspective or multiple perspectives, it was as if you were both writing the novel, and you stepped outside as an outsider to watch yourself writing the novel, and then other people were watching you write the novel, your friends and relatives around you, or the things that happened to you that day.
And this becomes a very subtle experience, that is, while you are writing this novel, you are creating this novel. This day's experience is written out under your pen, you write "today I did such and such, I sat here writing my novel," and while you are writing, you have already written today's experience into your novel, you have already written today's experience in, and the experience of writing the novel itself has become today's experience. This is a very subtle concept.
Generally only people who have written novels, people who have been writers, may understand this more easily. When he conceives a character, when he creates a character, he will have this kind of feeling: sometimes he has to be together with the consciousness of this character, and sometimes he has to pull away from the consciousness of this character and observe from another angle. When this character is having a dialogue with other people, he is like a third person, standing to the side watching these two people in dialogue, describing their dialogue. Sometimes he describes the psychological changes of both sides, sometimes he focuses on the psychological changes of the protagonist's first-person perspective, that conscious subject.
But such a creative process itself becomes the experience of that day. Is this a bit mind-bending? This part is a bit mind-bending.
Then Seth said:
You are as afraid of getting lost in writing as you are of getting lost in normal life.
You are afraid that in daily life you cannot find yourself, cannot find your focus, or cannot find your sense of existence. That is, in the trivial matters of daily life, your identification with and recognition of your own identity is sometimes not so obvious, just as you disappear into, get lost in daily life, you do not even know who you are, you do not know what you want to do, you are just living habitually.
He said, just like this feeling, you also disappear into, get lost in your writing. Why does he say this? Because the experience of writing on this day, is it not also on this day, is writing this day also a day, a day in life? Yes. On this day, it seems that you have stepped away from life, you stand at a higher angle, or a third-party angle, one step away from life, and you watch this process. It seems you are depicting this life, yet you also write yourself in. And in the process of writing, you fall back into life, you cannot step away, if you step away how can you write? Right? You cannot leave this life, because in the process of writing you are in this life.
This is what he means. Here you are one subject, you are living your life on one hand, and on the other hand observing yourself living your life. But who is observing the living? And who is the one living? You have two senses of identity, right? Who exactly is living, and who is observing themselves living?
Seth said that what Ruburt said in ESP class had some point to it, and then he added:
Then you need to create another self.
He was actually teaching Ruburt. He said your best method is this, you are always in the identity of one person, sometimes inside, sometimes outside, sometimes close to life, sometimes above life. We often say that artistic creation comes from life but is higher than life. Ruburt, you are sometimes in life, sometimes above life, you switch back and forth, and this switching will sometimes confuse you. He said what is the best method? Do not switch anymore, create a new consciousness, create a character, create an identity, that is, this other "self," we call this an avatar.
You create a self, use this avatar to observe, do not lose your original intention of wanting to observe life. If you want to be a good writer, you must have this ability. When you write about yourself, writing about others is no problem, others you observe from a third-person perspective, but if this novel involves yourself, then you must set up an avatar, and use this avatar to observe yourself in life, in this novel, in this writing, in the decisions within this story plot.
Seth then said to Rob:
Now practically speaking, you cannot experience such other consciousness either.
You really cannot experience other consciousness at the same time, unless you learn to step a little more to the side. What does stepping to the side mean? It means having one more avatar to observe your own life, to observe this physical body of yours living in reality. That is, the real you is living here now, but you imagine another self standing beside you watching you, another self standing beside you watching you live, watching you experience. Unless you have this ability, otherwise you have no way to experience other consciousness at the same time, to experience two consciousnesses at the same time.
Just like the writer Ruburt spoke of, stepping one step away from life. But even if you do achieve it, even if you do it, you have this ability, you can step one step away and set up an avatar to observe yourself, still:
The experience of other consciousness itself would take the place of your own living space. Therefore you would need another self, so that you could maintain two lines of consciousness at once, without getting lost in either one, yet able to hold your own in each.
What does this mean? He says even if you have such an ability, you can very seldom hold it steady. Why? Because that other consciousness, that observer's consciousness, will take the place of the space of your present life. That is, you design an observer, and when you use the observer's consciousness to observe your own life, at that moment you will find that you are living from the observer's perspective. When you are living from the observer's perspective, your other self cannot maintain its consciousness, it is like a blank, as if your focus of consciousness has moved to the observer, and the original self does not know what it is doing.
He says what should you do at this point? You must establish such an avatar. Through the method of the avatar, if you are in one consciousness you cannot do it, but if you separate one consciousness into this avatar, you can do it. After a period of practice, you can look at your own life from the observer's perspective, and you can maintain these two streams of consciousness, these two story lines, without getting lost in either one. In both of these you can hold your ground, you can rest securely in each.
In this way, do you not have two consciousnesses operating at the same time? One is the self living, and one is the self observing itself living.
In normal life, to do this in a sustained fashion would be a very difficult achievement.
He says in your daily life, if you want to keep doing this all the time, this will be a very difficult achievement, not easy.
This is what we often tell everyone about the upgrading of consciousness. The so-called higher-dimensional consciousness does not mean having a sense of four-dimensional space, of three-dimensional space, no. What about five dimensions, six dimensions? None of that is useful, those are all physical space, if you extend it to N dimensions it is still physical space, it is expansion. But your real expansion is the expansion of your consciousness: if your consciousness can live in several spaces at the same time, then you can exist in multidimensional space-time, this is the most basic.
In the interpretation after this session, Teacher Xiyu will also introduce in detail the concept of dimensions from the perspective of consciousness, what exactly zero dimension, one dimension, two dimensions, three dimensions, four dimensions mean, which is different from the one dimension, two dimensions in physical space that we usually talk about. So what we need to elevate is the dimension of our consciousness, not the dimension of our space.
But through training, through learning and training, it can be done. Without understanding or training it cannot be done, but with understanding and training it can be done.
Simultaneity in the Dream State
Seth said:
In the dream state, your specialized focus does not need to be as precise and time-oriented as in the waking state.
In dreams your concept of time is not so clear, and also not precise. So in dreams, sometimes it is easier for you to feel the simultaneous existence of two consciousnesses, that is, you are dreaming two dreams.
In your, he is talking about Rob's example of the two dreams, you did indeed achieve something excellent:
You were indeed aware of simultaneous dreams, each experienced in a different reality.
You experienced two dreams in two different realities. You could not remember both dreams at the same time at that moment, because the physical brain apparatus cannot process simultaneous data at the same time.
This is connected with the unused portions of the brain.
As has been mentioned in this book, it was also mentioned in Session 687, and he also mentioned it in Session 690, it is connected with the abilities of that undeveloped part of the brain.
We cannot process two consciousnesses at the same time. Here it says we cannot process simultaneous data, everyone should not understand this as processing different information at the same time, these are two concepts, not the same thing. Do not understand it as "I can hear many sounds at the same time, I can see many objects and things with my eyes at the same time," that is not what it means.
He continued:
On certain levels, of course, the brain can process simultaneous data.
That is, the kind of simultaneity I just mentioned. Although on a conscious level you may only have a partial understanding of it, actually the brain can, but you do not know it. The brain can process multiple consciousnesses at the same time, but you do not know it.
The body is aware of the multitudinous simultaneous stimuli that escape you consciously, and can act upon them.
That is, those simultaneous stimuli that escape your consciousness, the body is aware of them, and can act based on them. This includes all the various sensory data needed on a conscious level. So here he mentions "all that is needed on a conscious level," remember, it is all the various sensory data. Does this mean that the outer senses, our five senses, and the data of the inner senses, it needs all of them, it obtains all of them? And we humans do not know this, are not aware of it, cannot recognize it.
Just as the origin of our intuition and inspiration comes from things in other dimensions, but we do not know it. It comes from some information of the inner senses, but we are unconscious of it, on a conscious level these multitudinous stimuli escape you.
But:
Because of the particular kind of self-orientation that mankind has decided upon.
Because humanity has decided upon that single self-orientation, many possibilities that are innate to this species, that could be developed, have remained latent. Because of our unique identification with our own self-identity, this information has been hidden, because you do not accept it.
The physical brain is innately capable of handling more than one main line of consciousness.
Our brain has the ability to process multiple main lines of consciousness in parallel at the same time, but because of your identification with your own identity, at present you only have one main line of consciousness.
The Expansion of the Idea of Identity
Incidentally, Seth said:
This does not mean the development of a dual personality.
He said when I speak of being able to process multiple main lines of consciousness at the same time, I do not mean that kind of dual personality. Because what is a dual personality? He said:
I mean a further expansion of the idea of identity. You would not simply be aware of the you that you have always known, as you are now, but a deeper sense of identity would emerge.
You have a deeper, larger sense of identity, and this is different from a dual personality. In a dual personality, the personalities do not understand each other, and they switch between each other, they do not come out at the same time, this personality comes out during this period, and another personality comes out in the next period, it alternates. And the personalities do not communicate with each other, they are not cooperative in nature.
This is different from the feeling of having multiple consciousnesses at the same time. Because when you have multiple senses of identity, while having a larger, higher sense of identity, you can still feel the information between each sense of identity, the perception of each consciousness, they are communicating on one platform at the same time, interacting on one platform. This is completely different from dual personality or multiple personality.
That deeper identity refers to that larger identity, that deeper identity, it includes the you that you have always known, it includes this small self, your present small self, but it does not pose any threat to it. It does not mean that once you know a larger self, the small self has been destroyed, has been eliminated. No, it does not threaten it.
The new you, this deeper sense of identity, is simply more than your present self. It is just a bit more than your present self, a bit larger, perceives more things, that is all. Do not overcomplicate it. That deeper you is simply more than your present you, you will have another expansion of consciousness, another awareness, of your own living self. You will discover another larger sense of identity, and it can also feel that it is alive; your small self also feels that it is alive, and the two do not conflict. It does not mean that when the larger self is alive, when you are aware that the larger self is alive, this small self becomes like a puppet. No, this small self is also living very vividly, just as you are now. You feel the existence of two consciousnesses at the same time, two yous existing at the same time.
Seth again cited Jane's example:
The same as the writer in that analogy being aware of the writer in life.
Just like the writer depicted in his own writing, in this story of himself writing. He is both the writer in the writing, and he is larger than him. That is, that self, although it is in a slightly separated position, can still comment on the life you are living. He is like a sports commentator, commenting from the side: how you are doing today, who you ran into, your mood turned bad, then you met your first love, and your mood stirred again, he is like a sports commentator at the side.
That is what it means. Isn't that exactly what a writer does? Think about it carefully: doesn't a writer write about life from this very angle? Suppose you are writing an autobiographical novel, then you will understand what he is saying. You stand outside the situation, looking at yourself living the life you write about from another identity, and you even comment on the life you write about, comment on that self, while at the same time you are living that life, because that life still has to unfold through you, and you are still the protagonist of that storyline. That is what he means.
So in a very small way, I must admit, that analogy hints at the deeper kind of time that occurs when your own selves, your probable selves, your split-off selves, are born from the self in order to operate on various different levels of activity.
Because you have multiple identities, you can experience this life at different times, from different angles, through different observations. So why is it said that fiction, and other works of art as well, comes from life but rises above life? Where does it rise above? Right here. When it operates on simultaneous levels of activity, it has a deeper time, and its cognition of the event is deeper, right?
And ordinary children do not have this ability, so the essays children write are all just running accounts, with nothing worth reading. Because they do not have this ability; they only do plain description of life, and they do not manifest that realm that rises above life.
In the case of the entity, as far as the entity is concerned:
Each such self dwells completely within its own dimension or system of reality.
That is to say, for the entity, each of these selves lives within its own dimension, lives within its own time and space, within its own reality, and all of them are alive. But their feelings, their experiences, the entity knows all of them; it can know them all simultaneously.
Can they know each other? That depends on the level of the small self. If the small self's level is high enough, it can also become aware of the existence of the other selves, and can also feel the consciousness of the other selves. Just as when Rob had this double dream, he felt the self in another time and space.
Seth then said to Rob:
In a preliminary way, you are beginning to open up unused areas of the brain.
Rob used a most initial way, the simplest way, and has already begun to open up those unused areas of the brain. Otherwise you would never have noticed two simultaneous dreams. If that area of your brain had not been opened, you would never have noticed at all that you could dream two dreams at the same time.
Even in the best of circumstances, however, language and your verbalized thought patterns will make such translations most difficult.
Even if you can realize that you had two dreams, you still cannot explain it, because of the limitations of your language.
To that extent at least, an individual who speaks several languages may have some idea of how concepts are structured through language patterns, and hence possess some additional freedom in such translations. He must first of all be aware that such a possibility exists, of course.
What he means is that when you experience two consciousnesses at the same time, it is very difficult for you to describe it in language. He says that for those who are bilingual or multilingual at the same time, it is best if it is their mother tongue; if it is not their mother tongue, they cannot do this. That is, for people with two mother tongues, for example if their parents come from two different countries and speak two different languages, they will possess a concept that allows them to understand this kind of thing.
Why can they understand it? Because when they think of something in their minds, two ways of expressing it in two languages arise at the same time; they can bring them out simultaneously. The image in the mind is one, but the expressions that come out can be two. And we ordinary people do not have this ability.
In other words, they can listen to two languages at the same time: for example, a television is explaining something in English, and then their mother is chatting with them in Chinese, and they can process the information from both sides at the same time. He says that for some people like this, they may be able to understand this kind of feeling and concept.
But in such translations there will be some additional freedom. What does additional freedom mean? It means that when you go to interpret that kind of consciousness, you necessarily add some of your own cognition and some of your own experience; that is the point of your freedom. Of course, they must first possess this ability; they must first be aware that such a possibility exists.
The way he describes it is like this: when a person can have a double dream, and has this ability, they generally cannot describe it in language. If this person themselves has the characteristic of being bilingual, they may have an ability to use two languages to describe two different dreams separately. He is only saying that this possibility is somewhat greater.
Dimensional Leakage
Seth said:
Generally speaking, your dreams are just such an experience.
He said, conversely:
The other dream experienced at the same time is your confused interpretation of the primary reality experienced by another portion of yourself in an entirely different reality.
You are actually giving a confused interpretation of what is happening in another reality. That is not real; it is a confused interpretation. Did that reality happen? It happened. But because when you are processing two dreams at the same time, your interpretation of that one is just a random interpretation. You cannot understand it, so you interpret it randomly.
What is this, he says?
This is a dimensional leakage.
Dimensional, that is, of dimensions, a dimensional leakage. That is, two spaces of consciousness, or two time-spaces, actually equivalent to two spaces of consciousness, when leakage occurs between these two spaces, you will obtain some information.
Once you become aware of this kind of experience, you are very likely to have more experiences of this kind in your dream state as well.
He says once you have this ability, you will have similar experiences in other dreams. Once you open up this ability, you may have more experiences in this regard.
Seth said they could take a break, or end the session. Rob still wanted to hear him speak, and then Seth continued:
Without some proper preparation, in the waking state you would find such an experience highly threatening. I must therefore be very careful in dealing with your ideas about the self, and your concept of a self.
Seth said that in the waking state, when you have this kind of experience, it is very dangerous. Why? Because your identity then has no sense of identity. When two identities appear at the same time, when two consciousnesses appear at the same time, in the waking state there will be tremendous confusion, and sometimes it can even cause danger, because you do not know which time and space you are in.
I occasionally experience this kind of feeling, not often. What is it? It is when sometimes, for example when I am reading, or when I am watching some informational videos, like documentaries, or something about the history of Western philosophy, or some informational videos, not movies or novels, but when I am doing informational study, and when I am perhaps relatively tired, or when I have entered that state of being half asleep and half awake, a bit drowsy, you will experience a feeling where you suddenly go through the events of another scene, somewhat like dreaming. That is, the video is still playing over here, or you are still looking at the book over here, but in your experience you have gone through another event, and then you cannot remember that event very clearly. And then in that moment of daze, you suddenly realize: what did I just experience? I experienced something. You can roughly know what that thing was; the scene, the images, the feelings are all still there, but the specifics cannot be recalled. You cannot recall the specifics too clearly. That kind of feeling, you occasionally have it.
He says this is exactly such a phenomenon. Seth said to Joseph:
I am not speaking of you in particular.
I am not speaking specifically about you, but rather emphasizing that humanity currently identifies its individual person with an extremely narrow concept of the self:
Those concepts are fiercely protected.
That is, the concept that there is only one self is fiercely protected. When I say that there are multiple yous existing, that you are both male and female, not in terms of attributes, but that you simultaneously have a male identity and a female identity, for example in another time and space you are a woman, and you can feel these two consciousnesses at the same time, then this sense of a single identity has a self-protective mechanism; it will fiercely protect its own sense of identity, and it will strongly reject it.
And they must indeed be understood, and given respect.
This sense of a single identity must be understood and respected. You cannot say you are going to destroy it; no. You must respect it and understand it; this is normal.
Even while attempting to expand them.
That is, when you are practicing, when you want to expand a second consciousness, a third consciousness, you must respect this sense of a single identity. It is correct, reasonable, appropriate, and should exist; it is not to be replaced or canceled. Even when you are expanding your consciousness, expanding more focal points of consciousness, you must also understand that this is normal and proper.
Kinds of Consciousness
Seth said:
Obviously through the ages the qualities of consciousness have changed in many different ways.
With the development of history, consciousness has also been changing in different ways. The consciousness of human beings in different periods was also different, and sometimes it really seems contradictory in this respect: it changes. That is, many things that seem contradictory to us, for example having a self and not having a self, these two are contradictory; in these two aspects it will change.
But in your present, you have nothing with which to compare your own present experience of consciousness.
This is a very sad thing. From a historical perspective, human consciousness is changing. When he refers to changes in consciousness, he does not mean changes in the content of consciousness, but changes in the kinds of consciousness. What does a change in the kind of consciousness mean? For example, the consciousness of a dog and the consciousness of a human being are two different kinds of consciousness. He is referring to this kind of change in consciousness, not a change in the content of consciousness.
In the process of human development, human consciousness has already undergone many changes. But in the present era, right now, you cannot see such a reference point. You cannot see human beings having two different kinds of consciousness. Our human consciousness currently only recognizes one kind of consciousness, which is human consciousness. We have not developed, for example, a European or American consciousness, an Eastern consciousness. No. We can only say their cultures are different, but we cannot say their consciousness is different.
He says we have no way to compare this, but historically this change in consciousness was a change in the kind of consciousness.
To a very limited degree, the different cultures and civilizations with which you are familiar in history represent glimpses of different characteristics of consciousness, and of different experience.
What does he mean? I use a very limited, extremely limited way to allow you to glimpse the differences in the kinds of consciousness. He says you can refer to the differences among cultures or civilizations in your history. A certain civilization, you can understand it as representing, to a very small degree, and you must remember, this is to a very limited degree, only for the sake of your understanding, for example the Mayan civilization, it may represent an ideology like that of the Maya, a kind of consciousness like that. For example, the Atlantean civilization, it may represent a consciousness of Atlantis, and its consciousness is different from the consciousness of modern human beings.
If we speak of more recent times, for example the Chinese civilization, then its kind of consciousness may be different from the kind of consciousness of ancient Egyptian civilization. There are common points, but there are also differences. In specific terms, they may belong to two different kinds of consciousness. Therefore in many cases their races are also different, their skin colors are also different, or everything is different.
But this difference is very limited. You must remember, this difference is very limited; compared with the difference between the consciousness of cats, dogs, and humans, it is a world of difference. There is not that great a difference, only a slight difference. Therefore he uses the phrase "very limited" here, only to let you understand that consciousness also has different kinds, not that there is only one kind of consciousness that humanity currently believes to be universal or common to all humans. No.
He said:
Just as there are physical species, so there are what you may call species of consciousness.
Just as you humans are divided into races, consciousness is also divided into kinds. He did not discuss the nine families of consciousness here, so we will not bring it up; in the early sessions he will mention it, and when it is mentioned then, we will discuss it.
Even now within your own species, there are different kinds of consciousness.
Just as in your present humanity, in the current humanity, there are also different kinds of consciousness. The difference lies in this:
Their specific life situations are experienced in different qualities.
They are different from you, so they experience life through different life situations. But we have not discovered it; that is a kind that is very strange, very unfamiliar, and not understood within your culture.
That is, there is a type of person in our present humanity whose way of experiencing life is completely different from ours, and their kind of consciousness is also different from that of our humanity. Let me give a simple example, and this example is not quite appropriate: for example, some people are born blind, and all of their consciousness is somewhat different from that of us normal people. But that difference is not that great, yet what I want to say is that it is different. For example, at least they have no concept of space, no concept of color, no concept of distance; they lack many concepts. That is, the entire visual system is absent for them. Therefore the way they perceive this world is also different from ours; their special life situations are also different from ours. And suppose there are those born deaf and mute; that is also different.
Yes, for us, our mainstream culture actually does not understand them. In fact, we do not know how they think, how they cognize this world, and we do not really care, nor do we pay much attention; there are only occasional reports.
It differs in the entirety of meaning, interpretation, and experience.
Why do we say our consciousness is different from these people? It is in meaning, interpretation, and experience, in the entirety of these, that it is different. And life itself is unfamiliar to the kind of experience you are familiar with. Yes, all different. Life itself and the perceptual systems, the experiential systems they possess, are all different.
This does not mean that such differences are the result of cultural background and circumstances.
This difference does not come from culture, but from life experience and experience. Because some of these people exist within your own culture. It is not that modern society has different ethnic groups and different cultures, therefore their consciousness is different from yours. Even those in the same culture as you, for example all in Western culture, their consciousness is also different from yours; likewise in Eastern culture, their consciousness is also different from yours.
This difference in consciousness is a difference in the kind of consciousness. Everyone must understand that it does not refer to a difference in the content of consciousness. No two people have the same content of consciousness; what he is talking about is the kind of consciousness. It differs at the level of kind.
And some with your kind of consciousness exist in another culture.
That is, our kind of consciousness, our kind of humanity, may exist in other cultures, and within those they become a minority. In this world, the deaf-mutes, the blind, the disabled, or some special people who are not quite like us that I just mentioned, they may be a minority to us. But he says in some other places, in some places, we normal people instead become the minority. In those places we become the minority.
Seth said:
I am simply saying that there are different species of consciousness upon your earth now.
There are nine families of consciousness on their earth. Although that may not be the best term, no better explanation has been found.
You have been so obsessed with exterior differences, particularly of skin color and nationality, that you have completely ignored other more serious variations.
You only use exterior differences, yet in fact sometimes you are different at the level of the kind of consciousness.
Those are variations in the forms consciousness takes within your physical human life.
Within the concrete life of human beings, your consciousness can choose among many forms. Whichever one it chooses, that form of consciousness is different.
Seth said:
In terms of your individual experience, Sumari is a case in point.
Sumari is the language of the songs Jane often sings. Within each family of consciousness, Sumari is one of the consciousnesses, one of the nine great families of consciousness. Sumari is a member of one of them:
And their characteristic ways of viewing physical experience.
The members of each family of consciousness view the physical world in their own specific, characteristic ways. Their ways of viewing the world and viewing experience are different, because their kinds of consciousness are different:
Even viewing time, space, and action differently.
Even their views of time, space, and action are different, so you can see how great the differences among kinds of consciousness are.
They know their own bodies in their own particular fashion.
Each group does indeed possess a different relationship with the body, with nature, and with the whole world. They know their own bodies in their own particular fashion; they cognize themselves from the unique angle of their consciousness. Therefore each family of consciousness does indeed possess a different relationship with the body, with nature, and with the entire world. That is, the relationship with their own bodies, the relationship with nature, and the relationship with the oneness of all things in the universe, each family of consciousness is different.
He continued:
Your stratified concepts of a self, however, cause you to ignore all such innate differences.
But we have ignored this point. We humans do not accept this point; up to now we humans believe that all human consciousness is one kind.
When you come up against concepts that you cannot understand, you have a tendency to rearrange your own ideas.
When you cannot understand some concepts...
Identity, Double Dreams, and the Levels of Consciousness
You often swap one concept for another -- you quietly substitute concepts.
For example, in some tribal societies today, the self is experienced far differently. So although what you call individual personality is maintained, each self also experiences itself as part of the other people in the tribe, and as part of the natural environment.
When Seth says "tribal societies" here, he is not referring to tribal societies in ancient times, but to our present life. The time we are living in now is somewhat like the tribal societies of ancient times. They each have their own different regions, cultures, and cultural backgrounds. For instance, the differences between Eastern and Western cultures are very obvious to us; Africa is also very different from us. That is what he is referring to. These tribal societies can be large or small, depending on your perception.
In different tribal societies, you experience yourself far differently. Although personality is maintained, each self also experiences itself as part of the other people in the tribe, and as part of the natural environment.
Many people find this hard to understand -- what exactly is he trying to say? What he wants to say is this: you need to recognize that human consciousness is not all the same. This difference is not just a difference in content; sometimes the very kind of consciousness is different. Different kinds of consciousness lead to different perceptions of time, space, and events.
For example, if you move between different tribes -- you are an African, and then you live in America, and then you marry a Chinese wife. When you live in these three places at different times, moving among them, you are essentially experiencing three different kinds of consciousness. That is the example he gives.
In each environment, for instance, when you go to America -- you went to school in America, you went to university there -- once you are in America you identify with American society, and you become a member of American society. When you go to Africa, you identify with your hometown, with the original tribe and the original inhabitants of your home region. You take off your suit, put on the local ethnic clothing, and you identify with the local culture. Then when you go with your Chinese wife to live in China, to visit your mother-in-law and live that life, you take on Chinese living habits, Chinese etiquette, customs, Chinese civilization -- even the food you eat is different. And in living that way, your consciousness itself -- your judgments of whether something is good or bad, right or wrong -- is also different.
Here he is talking about a concept of time and space. For example, take a simple example: the Indian people have a concept of time that is different from most people's. Their history has no time in it -- first of all, India does not really have history. It is not like China, where things are recorded very clearly: what year, what month, what day, what happened. They do not have that. They just say, "At that time, roughly during such-and-such a dynasty, something happened -- the Maurya dynasty, so-and-so, King Ashoka, and so on." They record these events, but they do not record time; they do not record which year or which month.
Second, even today their concept of time is very weak. If you have dealt with people from these countries, you will know. In Western countries it is not so bad, but if you go to their countries and you make an appointment with them, you need to allow at least one to two hours of leeway. For example, if you arrange to meet him at four o'clock, do not be at all surprised if he shows up at five. For him, that is already being very punctual; he thinks it is normal. Five-thirty is also him; six o'clock is also him. It is not just one person like this -- the whole society is like this. You need to understand this; you only know it if you have dealt with them. If you have not dealt with them, you will find it maddening. Actually, some places in China are also like this. I know that in some regions of China, the sense of time is sometimes not strong, while in other places it is very strong -- precise to the second. If you have dealt with people from Europe or America, you know their sense of time is very strong. There is no good or bad here; it is simply that different kinds of consciousness have different perceptions of time, space, and even behavior.
Therefore, you protect your concept of yourselves at all costs, even against the evidence of nature that clearly shows you are utterly interrelated.
He is saying that you are afraid of this business of switching between different tribes and losing your sense of identity. So although you switch between different cultures, different tribes, or different kinds of consciousness, you still hold on to a sense of self-identity. If you did not protect it, you would feel that the self had died, that it was a stillbirth, undeveloped. So you do everything you can to protect your ego, your sense of self-identity, and you vigorously deny the fact that you are one with nature. You are merged with nature, and because you are merged with it, your sense of self-identity can easily dissolve into nature -- and you are unwilling to let that happen.
Only when the innate relationships of all various kinds of existence are understood can the unique personal private experience and individuality of you gain the amplitude of their existence, and their true nobility.
What he means is this: when you can truly recognize that you are connected to all things, it will not make your individuality disappear, nor will it diminish your individuality -- it is not that once you are connected to all things, your individuality is gone. Quite the opposite: the more you recognize your connection to all things, the more your individuality can gain its greater amplitude. The more you can view things from multiple identities and multiple perspectives, the less you will erase the nobility of your own identity.
This is what many people are afraid of, and here he is giving you a precautionary warning. Because you are afraid, you do not dare to adopt multiple identities to look at the world; you are afraid your identity will be lost. Instead, he tells you: only when you look at the world through multiple identities will that true self, that true identity, that individual identity not disappear. That identity can then have more experience; its amplitude of experience becomes greater -- that is, its understanding, its comprehension and feeling and perception of life become the strongest and most complete, and only then do these small egos become truly noble.
It is not that once you recognize the higher self, once you recognize the fundamental self, the ego becomes meaningless. No -- you must understand this thoroughly. The switching of consciousness among the ego, the higher self, and the fundamental self depends on you. You can actually live simultaneously on these three different levels of consciousness, threading through all three layers.
When we overprotect our concepts of ourselves by limiting our experience, you are striking at your own greater individuality, and at the vast dimensions of your own existence.
The more afraid you are, the more you dare not go through experiences that would be experienced through other identities -- and when you think this is protecting your individuality, you are actually striking at your individuality, and also striking at the greater dimensions of your existence.
Then he says:
Now, this session is over. I give you both my heartfelt blessings.
Note 1: The Surprise of the Double Dream
After this session, Seth made another supplementary note. Seth said:
My surprise at the double-dream phenomenon continues, because by now I know of nine people who have had similar experiences, some of them overlapping double dreams.
You see, this person is very serious. He went around investigating, asking his friends whether they had experienced this double dream. Nine people had had this kind of experience or something similar. The so-called overlapping double dream is not just double; it could be four or five layers of dreams, seven or eight layers. A double dream is two dreams, but it is not just two dreams -- a person might be having many dreams at the same time.
That is to say, the second dream begins within the first dream, and extends beyond the end of the first dream.
Sometimes one dream ends and another begins, but that is not called a simultaneous dream. Rather, within the first dream, the second dream unfolds. Within the first dream there are two, three, four, five, six -- these dreams all appear simultaneously within the first dream, so they think this is actually still one dream.
At the beginning of this session, I mentioned one of Sue's multiple dreams -- that is, Sue Watkins. Here I will not go into her description of the dreams themselves, nor the details of those dreams, but only the outline of her subjective framework regarding the whole dream. The following is what Sue herself said:
As the dreaming self, she and Stephen were sitting in the living room of their house. Suddenly, self-knowledge, the relationships between events, symbols, and the inner logic of my life and experience became crystal clear. Just beyond the reach of my awareness, they had begun to accumulate in a strange way -- as if cells were piled upon cells, or a string of freight cars were jammed together. And my dreaming self could only handle so many things at once.
Remember, all of this was in a dream. The self in the dream, the subject of the dream, was her. She was sitting in the living room of her own house, and suddenly she had a crystal-clear flash of insight.
Some of you may have seen a video about an Indian girl's firsthand account after a near-death state1. In that state she also had a sudden understanding, a crystal-clear realization: she knew everything, knew who she was, knew why she had come into this life, why she had met all these people and what the reasons were for meeting them, and she could even see what the future would be like. She herself said it was like seeing a tapestry -- a tapestry is a magnificent woven picture, and on that tapestry the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously. This kind of clear transparency and realization is crystal clear, but you cannot describe it in words. If you say, "Tell me about it," he cannot say it. He just knows, and he knows it in an instant.
Many people do not quite understand how these flashes of insight happen. The so-called sudden enlightenment is exactly like this -- in an instant, crystal-clear transparency and clarity. Clear about what? About self-knowledge: knowing clearly why one got cancer. About events: the connections between events, why events happen. About symbols: all the symbols in life, and the inner logic of one's own life and experience, why life goes through these things -- all known.
And Sue had this kind of sudden insight in the dream state.
And the experience of remembering and being remembered was within me like liquid electricity.
Sue continued that as these crystal-clear images became more numerous and more intense, she could not take it anymore. She stood up and walked to the kitchen. She could only say that she was on the verge of bursting -- there was too much information, flooding in all at once, like everything she had ever experienced in her life, simultaneous insights, the amount of information was too great.
When I walked into the kitchen, my dreaming self's head was filled with vivid images, each image like any other dream, each cell an interpretation of this new awareness, and I projected all of these outward around me, and they became hundreds of brilliant images.
In the dream, she walked from the living room to the kitchen, and those insights in her mind turned into vivid images. Each image was an experience from her own life, an encounter, a realization, all playing out simultaneously like dreams.
I knew this was an expression of probabilities, containing both past and future events, as well as events from side angles that I could not even understand.
For example, the Indian girl -- she could not hear the conversation between the doctor and her husband because she was not in that room, but she knew it all. This is like a "side event": why someone treats you this way, why someone treats you that way, events that happened in a time and space you did not know about -- all of it was shown to her.
And all of it was happening simultaneously, and all of it was completely understood by the presiding dreaming self.
Being able to happen simultaneously, and also being able to understand it all simultaneously -- that is what is miraculous here. At this moment, her consciousness was completely a multidimensional consciousness. The so-called sudden enlightenment, the so-called awakening, when you get down to it scientifically and concretely, is that your consciousness has acquired a multidimensional processing capacity. As for how many dimensions, that depends on the state and the ability. As long as you have a multidimensional processing capacity, you have already crossed the threshold.
Although I felt that all of these were still the self-presiding self, all were the dreaming self, yet these dream selves were all equally focused.
Those images -- the dreaming self could feel the feelings of every person in the dreams, and each of those images -- the self within each dream scene -- she could also feel their feelings precisely. Her consciousness could focus on every single dream. Suppose there were a hundred dreams, and a hundred selves within those hundred dreams; the feelings, experiences, emotions, thoughts, and ideas of each scene at that time -- she could feel all of them completely. And this dreaming self, watching these hundreds of vivid dream images playing out, could also feel them.
The miraculous thing is right here. Each of them was the dreaming self, living in their own universe, living in their own time and space.
And extending their own connections outward in a manner very similar to mine, just as I extended their connections.
They were also extending their connections -- just as these simultaneous dreams were being projected outward, they were also extending their connections.
I actually became the experience of experiencing the I within all of these selves, while also being these selves that were contained within me.
She could simultaneously feel the hundred selves within the hundred dreams, and at the same time be these selves that were contained within her. The feelings of each dream self -- she could feel them; the combined feelings of all these dreams together -- she could also feel them. She had both the overall feeling and the individual feelings.
In at least one of these selves, the knowledge of this entire world came into consciousness.
At least one self perceived the knowledge within this dream, and brought the knowledge of this dream into its own consciousness, like a vague dream that it could recall -- half remembered, half forgotten.
And the experience of remembering and being remembered was within me like liquid electricity.
There are two roles here: who is remembering? Who is the one being remembered? For example, you have a dream, you wake up, and you vaguely recall it. The "you" in the dream is the one being remembered; the you who is now thinking about the dream is the one remembering. And in this experience of remembering, the subject is "I" -- I am remembering, not "I" am being remembered. This subject "I," inside, is like liquid electricity.
"Liquid electricity" is something that can only be sensed, very hard to put into words. How could electricity possibly be liquid? But the feeling is like liquid -- a liquid, electrically charged medium flowing through the entire dream, causing the whole dream to be activated and stimulated by an energy, and yet so clear and transparent. It is very hard to describe in words: it is like a gust of wind, but this wind is liquid, flowing through you, blowing through all your dreams, and then blowing through your consciousness, and your consciousness is like this electrically charged liquid. This feeling is at once clear, bright, and transparent, and also stimulated by energy.
When I woke, I could clearly remember only three of these dreams.
When she woke up, she could only remember three of the dreams. The first main dream was that she was chatting with Stephen, and then suddenly had a flash of insight, and her mind was filled with many images. She went to the kitchen and projected these images outward, and they became vivid, brilliant images, and then these images were all playing out their own experiences. There were hundreds of these images, but she could only remember three of them. The specific content of those dreams is not important; she was just telling you that this kind of experience exists.
Yet in this way, the feeling of simultaneously containing experience still continued.
Although the dream could not be remembered, that feeling like liquid electricity was still there. In fact, we can understand that at this moment, in this state, one could say that an upgrade of consciousness had occurred, an experience of a higher-dimensional consciousness.
Ligandi's Double Dream
Another dreamer is the author of the book Strange Experience2, named Ligandi, who wrote to the editor of True. He said:
As for the so-called double dream, I have indeed had two dreams at the same time. If you turn to page 144, you will find my description of two simultaneous dreams. In one of them, I was on a World War II troop train, sitting on that troop train as a soldier heading to Karachi, India. And in the other dream, I was sleeping in a very cold barracks. I wrote in that book that I was aware of every movement, sound, and smell on the train, yet I also knew I was in a very cold barracks, and I was aware that both the train and the barracks were dreams, while my body was asleep in a very cold tent in Florida.
Later, in one of the dreams, I got off the train and went back to look for myself; and in the other dream, I got up to add more coal to the stove, covered the blanket on the bunk bed in the barracks with my coat, and woke up in the tent.
He did indeed have two dreams. And the Karachi dream was a true dream — the people on the train in that dream were Air Force men he had known in his waking life, and a month later they really were sent to that place. Interesting, that was a genuine precognitive dream. And the other dream, in the freezing barracks, did not seem to have happened in real life.
And this is one of those places where I get to bring up one of those happy analogies I can occasionally make: because in essence, the occurrence of double or multiple dreams at least provides us with some subtle hints about our multiple lives.
The occurrence of double or multiple dreams gives us a perception of our multiple lives: we are simultaneously living in different realities. And according to what Seth said, those many lives are experienced simultaneously by our entity or whole self — those many reincarnational selves are all experienced simultaneously by the inner self or the entity.
Appendix: Jane's Experience Helping the Police
The appendix to this session actually doesn't have much to do with the main text. The appendix to Session 692 mainly talks about — you remember in the previous session, that policeman kept calling him, the one looking for the missing person. In this session, the focus is on Jane using some abilities she considered psychic, some extrasensory abilities, to help the police find this person.
Some of the information here is very valuable and very insightful, but some of it is also wrong and confused, and it caused some trouble for the police. So during that period she spent two full weeks communicating with the police, helping them search for the missing person. Then she wanted to explain, from two different angles, the feelings that Jane needed other people to understand, in order to bring this matter to a conclusion.
The following feelings are real feelings, and they're very interesting.
The first point Jane made — Jane said to me:
I did not carry any sense of smugness. When I used my psychic abilities to help the police solve the case, I was not smug about it. When I spoke to a group of people, say on a Monday night, when psychic abilities might or might not be involved, there was a strange feeling, as if I were operating on nine and ten different levels at the same time. At least the meanings and understandings exchanged between me and the other people in the room were all so different that those people simply could not understand how I was interpreting some of the things they said. Since what I was able to do was the nature of knowing itself, I did think I observed or perceived far more about this than they did, but I could not explain it to every person I spoke to — there was no time, and it would have exhausted me too much.
What Jane means is: when I went to help the police search for this missing person, when I talked with a group of people in a room, she was actually like simultaneously handling communication on eight or nine different levels, communicating simultaneously with eight or nine people at different levels of understanding. They didn't understand what she was saying either, and she couldn't be bothered to explain it one by one — the same sentence is understood differently on different levels, and explaining would be too tiring.
The second point. After eight days of living there, she added another note, which was after Session 694, on May 1, 1974. Among some of the personal material we received, Seth said this:
Ruburt made up his mind to explore the nature of reality. He wanted to protect himself, because he didn't want others to think he was some kind of mystic nut, until he had enough knowledge to understand what he was doing. He wanted to get some evidence, to explore the truth. He was afraid of people's gullibility, and everyone's excessive gullibility toward him also frightened him — because everyone thought he had psychic powers, and whatever he said, people would go do it. He was reasonably terrified of their superstition: they didn't ask anything, they just directly believed what he said.
When Ruburt realized that he really did know just a little bit — he did have a little bit of premonition, a little precognitive ability, but it wasn't very strong and wasn't very skilled — he was amazed at his own audacity: I only know that little bit, I'm just a novice who actually doesn't really know anything, and I actually dared to go help the police do this and solve the case. The strangest thing is, other people actually believed it.
There was no one he could call on for help. Although he could call on Seth for help, and Seth said: I could have helped him further, but I was also one of the things he was investigating.
Jane wanted to use this matter to investigate whether what Seth said was actually right. Actually, she had always been half-believing and half-doubting about Seth's words — on one hand she firmly believed they made sense, on the other hand she wanted to find actual scientific evidence. Even at this point she was still like this. Seth said he couldn't help her either, because she was even doubting Seth — he was within the scope of her investigation.
He also began to see two extremes in society. One was a very traditional and closed mainstream, in which he would look like a charlatan; and in the other, eager yet gullible.
The other extreme was blind faith and gullibility toward people like him — whatever he said, others believed it, willing to believe anything, as long as they were provided with hope, they could believe it. Doesn't this look a lot like how many cult organizations operate? Many people don't understand why cults can spread so widely. You can understand it through Jane's experience: as long as you dare to say that you can do such and such, that you can give them hope, that you can tell them "in the future I can take you to heaven" — even such a completely unreliable statement can make a group of people, can make billions of people around the world follow you. Because you provide them with hope, they devote themselves to you. It's that simple.
In this, Ruburt's activities were misunderstood — they treated him as a psychic medium. And for Ruburt, he would feel this was like deception.
Jane felt very bad about herself. She felt like she was like a psychic medium, deceiving people — because she herself didn't understand it either, and didn't fully believe it, but with one call a hundred responded, which startled her. How could this be? How could people be so ignorant? It made her very afraid.
Therefore he had to create a middle ground for himself, to build a bridge to those intellectuals who were skeptical but still maintained some free spontaneity.
She was neither one of those who blindly followed and blindly believed, nor one of those rigid, inflexible mainstream-value people. She wanted to bring in those intellectuals who could remain skeptical but still maintain some freedom and spontaneity, in order to reach the people at the other end — on one end were the conservative ones who insisted on scientific rationality, on the other end were those who insisted on superstition and blind faith. She wanted to find this middle ground: people who approached this material with a skeptical attitude, with a critical attitude, but with an open mind. She hoped to connect the people at both ends together.
This requires some of the most difficult operations for anyone.
What we're doing now is the same thing. The spiritual university we want to build, the research institution we want to establish, is actually about finding these middle-ground people that Seth mentioned, or that Jane wanted to find. We don't need those who blindly follow and blindly believe — people who don't ask anything, you say "yes," fine, I'll follow you, I don't even ask whether this thing is right or wrong; as long as you dare to promise to lead me toward the light, I'll follow you. This kind of person is terrifying. What we want to find is also this middle-state kind of person, who can connect both sides: someone who is rational, has a critical nature, has logical thinking, and has an open mind. But Seth said this is indeed very difficult, difficult for anyone.
With a constantly operating system of stimulus and counterbalance.
What does counterbalance mean? It means you can't be perfectly centered; you might lean a little left at times, a little right at times. You need to have a self-correcting, error-correcting ability to keep yourself in the middle. Because when you want to attract these people, when you want to build this bridge linking the two polar groups, you will inevitably tend toward one side. When you tend toward one side, you need to have the ability to return to the middle state. This is what Buddhism calls the state of the Middle Way3, not falling into any prejudice. What Seth wanted to say is that this thing is indeed difficult, but it's not impossible — it can be done.
I think because Jane chose in this life to develop the nature of those abilities themselves, he will always find these operations necessary, and they are indeed very difficult.
It doesn't matter who said this — regardless of who said it, it means that this life of Jane's may be a mission for her, something needed for her to develop these abilities. So to walk this path, she needed to train and improve her own abilities in the process. That's also why she always firmly held on to her identity as a writer, and never wanted to admit to an identity as a psychic channeler.
Exercises Designed by Teacher Xiyu
注释与核实
-
Source: Near-Death Experience Research Foundation, "Urvashi G NDE4" (https://www.nderf.org/Experiences/1urvashi_g_nde.html) ↩
-
Source: New York Public Library, "Strange Experience: The Autobiography of a Hexenmeister," 1971 (https://www.nypl.org/research/research-catalog/search?filters%5BsubjectLiteral%5D=Occultists.) ↩
-
According to Mike's original words, it was "the state of the Middle View spoken of in Buddhism"; upon verification, it should be "'Madhyamaka' is a major philosophical school and system of thought in Mahayana Buddhism, not a 'state.'" (Source: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "Madhyamaka," 2019, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/madhyamaka/) ↩