Saturday, November 29, 2014

The Psychological Bridge Between Seth and Jane

Seth Early Sessions, Vol 6, Session 241

There are indeed psychological frameworks that operate in communications such as ours, and I shall attempt to explain their function and composition.

I will first discuss our own particular circumstances, and then proceed to a more general discussion.  There is Ruburt’s ego, and his subconscious, as you know.  There are also other areas or levels that are part of his whole personality.  In our case a gestalt personality or a psychological bridge.

This psychological framework obviously must be receptive.  It must also be formed by portions of my own essence, and by portions of Ruburt’s personality.  It can be thought of almost as a psychological protrusion, though this is not precisely the word to explain it.

Bridge perhaps is better.  This psychological framework is in itself capable of growth, in terms of development.  It represents on Ruburt’s part a psychological expansion, and indeed on my own part also.  It is formed partially by abilities inherent within all personalities, psychic abilities, and it is composed of energy.  It is not a secondary personality, for it exists in quite a different dimension than secondary personalities.

This psychological framework is the medium through which we can communicate.  It is purely a psychic organization that telepathically transmits concepts from me to Ruburt.  We have always preferred the light trance state over a deeper trance for several reasons.

I am interested mainly in education, and with Ruburt’s training by me through our present methods, the processes themselves are more clearly seen and understood.  Some information comes to Ruburt fairly automatically, in that he speaks for me without having to consciously translate for me.

At the same time, because of the methods we use, some translation is often necessary.  In many cases this translation is done by the intervening psychological framework, which is simply the psychological point closest to the meeting of Ruburt’s personality and my own, for he does not fade out as a personality.  He extends himself in an expansion.  The psychological expansion on his end, and the psychological expansion on my end, form the gestalt, the psychological bridge, of which I have spoken.

As he is learning it is, however, often up to him to interpret the images that I send him.  The psychological bridge can transmit, you see, and to some extent translate, but not interpret.

This psychological gestalt is a connector.  I am dependent in a large measure upon Ruburt’s own knowledge, and lack of it, in that I cannot force for example from him, from his speech mechanism, concepts with which he is entirely unfamiliar.  I must introduce them step by step.

I could not have explained moment points to you, for example, until I had clearly given the idea of the spacious present.  It is not as simple a thing as it might seem, for there is no coercion involved, Ruburt always consenting to let me push concepts at him, which he interprets speech-wise with my assistance.

Often I give him an internal image, or experience, of a whole concept, but unless it could be vocalized it would have no meaning except to him.

(Seth began talking about moment points in the 149th-152nd sessions.  He began on the spacious present in session 44 in Volume 2.)

… Now, in some cases this is what happens.

Ruburt is of course much more familiar with sense impressions than he is with internal data, or with impressions that do not come to him through the physical senses.  Therefore in our experiments, often, I will give him an impression, and he will automatically translate it into visual terms, although his eyes are closed.  And then he is tempted to interpret it literally, as he would an ordinary visual image.

… For simplicity’s sake, I say that I gave him an image, but actually I game him the impression, which he translated into an image, so that he could deal with it in a more familiar way.

As a result in such instances, it is up to him to interpret the image correctly.  The words that you hear are my words and not Ruburt’s.  However, they are representations of my thought, as they are sifted through various layers, first of all of our composite psychological framework, and then through layers of Ruburt’s own personality.

There is often at his end a final tug and pull, so that the vocal mechanism will finally speak the correct interpretation.  Of course Ruburt’s own associations are used by me, with his consent, up to a certain point, to enable me to lead him to the proper subject or image.

Then when we are successful there is a divergence from his associations so that he says the correct word, even though the correct word, for him personally, would be the wrong word as far as his personal associations are concerned.

This point is fairly important, for it shows how the personal associations are utilized up to a certain point, and then sometimes quite suddenly dispensed with, for they have served our purposes.

On Ruburt’s part this can sometimes be disconcerting.  We must always work with psychological organizations however.  The emotions always follow associative lines in this regard.

The trick is to allow Ruburt’s associations free reign to a certain point, and then expertly insert the correct data.  This is sometimes difficult.  Ruburt’s associations may go for example from C, D, E, and F, but precisely where he would say G, we must insert X or Y, and do it so smoothly that he is quite unaware.

He consents for me, he consents to let me use his associations in such a manner.  Nevertheless there is a small sense of alienation when the associations do not follow through, but are diverted to the desired end.

Here is a very brief example.  Suppose I am trying to give him the impression of a glass of water.  It is fairly easy to insert the idea of water, but this may lead him personally to think of the Gulf of Mexico, or the ocean off of Marathon, or even of the Atlantic at York Beach.  I will use his associations unit I am certain that he has the concept of the word water, but precisely where he is about to say the ocean for example, and after having made use of his associations to get him to this point, I must suddenly make him say a glass of water.

No comments:

Post a Comment