From Session 142 in Volume 3 of Seth's Early Sessions:
"There are some points that should be mentioned concerning the definition of the self, or a self, as I gave it to you during our last session.
"The definition of course stands. I merely would like to be sure that the correct interpretation is given to the definition. The self, or a self, is not any particular thing, as I told you. It is true that there are no boundaries to enclose it within safe confines, where it can be said, "Here is the self."
"It is also true however that this lack of boundary allows for possibilities of development and expansion that would be impossible with a limited self. The self is not nebulous. Action changes itself, as we have described. Any self, therefore, is never the same self, but action contains within itself its own comprehension.
"Because there is no time, as you think of time, we will not say that action retains a memory of all its previous actions or selves, for this would be misleading. Action is aware of itself in all of its spontaneous and simultaneous workings. The self that you are, in a basic sense, is the self that you were in past instances within this existence, the self or series of selves that you were in previous existences within the physical field, and also the myriad selves that you are now, in various perception experiences unknown to the ego.
"Your self is all this, as well as the selves that you would call future selves. I wanted to make it clear that the self at any moment, while being no one thing, being indeed a series of simultaneous happenings, so to speak, is however far from meaningless, containing within it full inner comprehension of its various portions.
"Once again I make the point, a seeming paradox: The self constantly changes. The self at any given moment is not the self that it was, yet it is that which it was, since it is that which changed.
"It acts upon itself, being action. The inner self also changes, but it is also that which changes itself. We come now close to a definition finally for the entity, which cannot really be defined, because in your terms it escapes definition. However, the entity can be partially defined as the sum of all the selves within a given range of action, the simultaneous totality which on the one hand then cannot yet exist, since action can never complete itself, yet representing that impetus forever frustrated on the part of action for complete materialization.
"The blueprint is action's intent. The selves are action in progress toward this blueprint.
"There are selves within selves. Each self is interwound with all others, and yet each self, being composed of action, has within it the powers of action toward change, development, expansion, and the drive toward fulfillment.
"Herein also lies the freedom of each self: not being limited. We have spoken in the past of capsule comprehension. It is indeed a characteristic of action, indivisible from action, equally interwoven within it.
"Therefore each portion of action is aware of its simultaneous experience within all levels. Again, action carries itself along. Each self is therefore aware of its previous gestalt affiliations. Now, identities may or may not have egos. An atom is an identity.
"(Many sessions have dealt with capsule comprehension, some of them being the 24th, 27th, 62nd-64th; the 87th and 131st particularly, as well as later ones.)
"It is a self materialized in physical form. It is conscious of itself as belonging to action. The fact that it may be part of a larger gestalt self in no way belittles its own identity. It is conscious of the gestalts of which it is part.
"It is materialized action, a self, part of other selves, as you are part of other selves. The intensity here is different. You, any human being, represent a capability, an attraction, an electrical field of great intensity that is capable of efficiently acting as a unit within the physical field.
"You may also be part of a self operating within other fields, and operating also within another system of units. The inner self operates as a relay station, as a reference point for the various seemingly disconnected selves. It is only through contact with the inner self that knowledge of the whole self can be found.
"The inner self could be called, then, the nucleus, the original point of action from which all the other emanations that form the whole self began. There is here you see no limitation upon the direction in which action may move, nor any limit to the dimensions which action may create.
"The inner self would be then any given outthrust of original action outward, as explained earlier. This outthrust would, because of its nature, instantly send further outthrusts in as many directions as possible for it. And because it is action, and because no action can complete itself, and no action can completely materialize, then each outthrust or materialization would result in an in-thrust; not into the original action from which it came, but into itself.
"This gives us the creation of new inner selves, and all this is of electrical composition, and you should recall the information given you concerning the manner in which electrical fields are formed.
"(See the 122nd-127th sessions.)
"Again, this is no reason to feel that the individual is nothing, simply because he is one of so many. Action develops according to value fulfillment, and value fulfillment has little to do with size or numbers; and action turns into consciousness. Action working on itself becomes consciousness, and in speaking of consciousness I do not necessarily mean what you mean by the word.
"Your concept of consciousness is fearful and limiting, and depends for its existence upon ignorance and barriers, barriers that divide parts of the self from others, from other parts of the self, and from other selves, and from experiences of the selves.
"Value fulfillment opens the many eyes of the self to its various portions. It enables the self to expand, to join in a gestalt with other selves. It is only your ego which leads you to believe that such an expansion would result in a lessening of consciousness on the one hand, or an invasion of other selves on the other.
"My dear friends, there is so much here to be said. There are freedoms available that mankind never uses, or very seldom uses.
"And yet in another sense all selves are one self, in that all selves are action.
"But action must attempt to materialize itself and fulfill itself completely. It cannot do so, and the result is the formation of many selves, that are a part of action, and formed from action; and therefore each self must continue in the creation of other selves.
"Selves are not destroyed. They change into other selves, and yet are still themselves, for each new self is also the previous self which changed through acting upon itself. There will be no huge contraction of action back into itself, in those terms. There may very well be a conscious realization of each self, that it is a part of the original actionself.
"Lest we forget, action is another word for inner vitality. Selves are formed also by effective ranges of comprehension, which may be expanded. They cannot be contracted, for action cannot wipe out comprehension of itself. The electrically coded data of which we have spoken cannot be removed, for an action cannot withdraw a previous action.
"You understand that when I speak I am not saying that continuity, in terms of past and present, exists. I am using these terms merely for your convenience. An action can never negate itself. There may be counteraction, but no action can be wiped out.
"The ego is indeed a necessity within the physical field at this point of man's development. The ego is in a state of becoming, however. The ego is not what it was centuries ago, and it will not be the same centuries from now. It, the ego, will not admit the change, but its refusal to admit change in no way stops change.
"Efficient manipulation within the physical field will soon require that other portions of the self be utilized and recognized. In a manner of speaking, the ego can be compared to the nationalistic state of nations, necessary indeed for man's development, but already growing passé, and perhaps even mitigating against the survival of the species, where once it aided that survival.
"The worldwide view of man as a species, worldwide brotherhood, in no way hampers or endangers the individual man, and in no way endangers nations, but will represent one of the main hopes of mankind, without which no nations will endure.
"In like manner, when the ego concept is discarded as a concept, as the concept of nationalism will be discarded, so the individual self will not lose but gain. The individual self will expand, as the individual man will be capable of expanding when the old idea of nationalism is finally overthrown, and he can be benefited through learning of, and cooperation with, other men as brothers upon your planet.
"But as it is not wise to dispense with the idea of nationalism without gradual growths of understanding and preparation, and while the idea of nationalism cannot suddenly be dispensed with, so also the ego cannot be, and will not be, overthrown overnight; and even when it is finally left behind, it will still be used as a handy reference point; and through all this the self will not lose but gain, for all expansion outward, and expansion inward is gain, and all boundaries, whether inward or outward, are hampering and limiting. Basically, the self is not limited. The self does not need imaginary fences to protect its privacy, or its safety or its solitude. Only the ego is afraid of challenge, and therefore speaks of such limiting safety.
"If the self were the ego then indeed such precepts would be necessary, but the ego is a small part of the self. Necessary indeed, still, but less necessary than it once was."
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Action, Identities, Consciousness, Self and Ego
From Session 141 in Volume 3 of Seth's Early Sessions:
"We will continue our discussion concerning action and identities. I have said that identity is a part of action, and basically inseparable from action. Identity attempts to form meaningful patterns and relationships from action. Consciousness is action that perceives itself. The ego is action's attempt to stand off from itself.
"Action may show itself as motion, but it is much more than motion in the terms which you usually use, and motion is but one small dimension within action's realm. All types of consciousness represent a different focus of energy's perception within itself. There is no past or future to action. All action is simultaneous. Identities, some identities and some forms of consciousness, particularly the ego, perceive a past or a present, but this is merely the result of the manner in which such identities and consciousnesses view available data.
"A consciousness is characterized by the particular ways in which it views or perceives available action. It is characterized by the type of action which it is more likely to perceive. It is characterized by the pattern of perception itself.
"Since action is not apart from structure, but is indeed the formulator of structure, then it is obvious that generally the type, nature, extent and scope of characteristic perception patterns of a consciousness will determine its physical structure, and not the other way around.
"There is no one particular pattern followed by consciousness in its perception of itself as action. Mankind is more familiar with certain patterns and relatively unfamiliar with others. Any action changes itself. Nothing is constant. This rule is not forced upon action from some outside agency, but is simply a part of its own nature.
"Action, you may say, is carried away by itself. Reality possibilities are endless. You are familiar with very small portions of reality. Your perception characteristics at this time dictate and limit the aspects of action that you can perceive. You can, however, focus very clearly on other aspects. And particular types of consciousnesses and identities are merely the result of action's formation into perception patterns with which it can focus upon certain aspects of itself.
"It may be thought that such perception patterns or identities may be limited, but this is hardly the case. For without them, whole portions of reality would never be perceived. There is much here that will take us a long while to explain, for the line can theoretically be drawn anywhere in the formation of identities and consciousness. And herein lies your freedom.
"The dimensions of consciousness are not arbitrary. They are not clearly drawn. They are open, they are action.
"They are a dimensions, as I mentioned. Consciousness is not one thing, therefore consciousness is not of itself limiting. Boundaries may be set up in terms of a self. A self is a gestalt of action perception patterns, which are formed together through attraction.
"This, when it occurs, and this particular formation into a self may or may not occur, but when it occurs it is a result of our second previously mentioned dilemma. The self as you know it is in actuality a self plus an ego.
"(For material on the three creative dilemmas of inner reality, see the 138th session.)
"The ego, if you recall, is self's attempt to set itself apart from action, and to see or perceive action as an object. The ego attempts to attain stability and dominance, and resents change. It seeks to limit certain perceptions, to block out many perceptions of which the self is knowledgeable. In this way limitations become fairly rigid.
"An ego could be compared to a small dam in this respect. However, action constantly forms perceptual patterns in which it can view itself. Again, these patterns are formed one within the other, and they could be said to form that imaginary structure, which we called the fifth dimension, so many sessions ago.
"(See the 12th session, of January 2, 1964 [in Volume 1].)
"A particular consciousness is a gestalt of these conceptual patterns; but there is nothing to prevent a consciousness from increasing itself by experiencing other conceptual patterns or patterns of perception. This assimilation would increase, not decrease, any given consciousness. We use, or you use, words merely as a convenience. We therefore say that a consciousness is a gestalt of patterns of perception, by which action knows itself. But the patterns of perceptions may grow, and the consciousness reach out. The consciousness has changed. It is no longer the same consciousness, since it has extended itself. Yet it is the same consciousness, on the other hand, because it is that which has extended itself. So words can confuse us.
"A consciousness can be said to be a gestalt of patterns of perception then; and while the definition stands, it can only apply to any given consciousness for the breath of an instant, since the patterns of perception, being action, have already changed; and the particular consciousness of which we spoke, and which we tried to limit and pin down, is gone.
"Yet as you can see, what it was when we spoke of it is still present in what it will by now have become. The ego, through its own nature and characteristics, attempts to limit such change, but it succeeds only in limiting itself by limiting its perceptions. It still must change, as is obvious. But it changes along certain lines, moving within certain patterns of perception which are a characteristic of it.
"It cannot maintain stability, for all its efforts, and it cannot in any way limit the self. It, the ego, merely does not perceive because it will not perceive those other perception patterns, and that larger scope with which the whole self is constantly involved.
"This material on action, and identities, and consciousness, will add much to your understanding of dreams, of the whole self, and of other facets of reality of which I will speak shortly.
"The self, then, is not static by any means. It has no arbitrary boundaries. The term itself is used only for convenience; and indeed the concept of the self is a concept of the ego, which considers itself the self.
"The self then, being action which has formed itself into gestalts of pattern perceptions, by which it knows itself, this self changes constantly. And within the range of effective perception, starting at any particular point, there are patterns within patterns. For convenience's sake we will have to limit our discussion to some degree, taking the self as a particular gestalt within, or composed of, a particular range of perception patterns; though in actuality the range may be smaller or larger at any given time.
"The self then, unknown to the ego, perceives itself in a vast variety of experiences, and in, indeed, a vast number of realities. Each of these so-called realities, for one blends into the other, could be termed, or viewed as, a separate field. Each is therefore composed of the characteristic perception patterns that happen to lie within it, and these so-called minor fields could then be termed other selves, or minor selves, from the standpoint of the self that we are considering.
"From the standpoint of these seemingly minor selves, however, the viewpoint would be entirely different. If we take for example a particular range of various perception patterns, for convenience's sake, and label them one self, then the various patterns within would appear to be minor selves forming the whole.
"If however we changed our arbitrary boundary points, then the minor selves at either end would now seem to be portions of other selves. For practical purposes it may be said that a self is composed of a gestalt of perception patterns, within which a fairly constant efficiency is maintained. This is the best definition I can give you at this time.
"As this effective field of perception patterns changes, so do the apparent boundaries of the practical self. It is imperative that we move away from the concept of a self as an indivisible, rigid and limited reality. Indeed, I hesitate almost to continue, since I do not want to confuse you.
"The fact is, that any given self, as we have described the self, may have more than one ego, though these egos will not be aware of each other, even though operating simultaneously. You have information on the inner ego. There is also a dream ego, in that there is within that reality field a directive part of the self that is concerned with the construction of purpose and meaning.
"(For material on the inner ego, the self-conscious self behind the self-conscious self, see the 28th session.)
"You can here indeed see where I am leading you.
"The deeply and strongly dimensioned sphere I used as an analogy for an action, if you recall, for any portion of action; you can now indeed further imagine one entity being composed of such an action, with egos like many faces looking outward in all directions, and each perceiving vastly different fields of reality; looking inward and outward, backward and forward as it were, through and beyond. And yet each action, or entity, is a part of another, and is both within and without another. And none of it is meaningless, and yet in a basic manner all of it has the meaning that you give it.
"And what meaning you give it is there, and part of it, since you who project the meaning are yourselves part of it. The inner self is, therefore, that inner portion of action which forms the egos, and the selves, through the dilemmas of which I have spoken.
"Part of the self knows, and knows that it knows. Part of the self knows, and does not know it knows. The creative dilemmas of which I have spoken are the basis for all realities, and the heart of all meaning."
"We will continue our discussion concerning action and identities. I have said that identity is a part of action, and basically inseparable from action. Identity attempts to form meaningful patterns and relationships from action. Consciousness is action that perceives itself. The ego is action's attempt to stand off from itself.
"Action may show itself as motion, but it is much more than motion in the terms which you usually use, and motion is but one small dimension within action's realm. All types of consciousness represent a different focus of energy's perception within itself. There is no past or future to action. All action is simultaneous. Identities, some identities and some forms of consciousness, particularly the ego, perceive a past or a present, but this is merely the result of the manner in which such identities and consciousnesses view available data.
"A consciousness is characterized by the particular ways in which it views or perceives available action. It is characterized by the type of action which it is more likely to perceive. It is characterized by the pattern of perception itself.
"Since action is not apart from structure, but is indeed the formulator of structure, then it is obvious that generally the type, nature, extent and scope of characteristic perception patterns of a consciousness will determine its physical structure, and not the other way around.
"There is no one particular pattern followed by consciousness in its perception of itself as action. Mankind is more familiar with certain patterns and relatively unfamiliar with others. Any action changes itself. Nothing is constant. This rule is not forced upon action from some outside agency, but is simply a part of its own nature.
"Action, you may say, is carried away by itself. Reality possibilities are endless. You are familiar with very small portions of reality. Your perception characteristics at this time dictate and limit the aspects of action that you can perceive. You can, however, focus very clearly on other aspects. And particular types of consciousnesses and identities are merely the result of action's formation into perception patterns with which it can focus upon certain aspects of itself.
"It may be thought that such perception patterns or identities may be limited, but this is hardly the case. For without them, whole portions of reality would never be perceived. There is much here that will take us a long while to explain, for the line can theoretically be drawn anywhere in the formation of identities and consciousness. And herein lies your freedom.
"The dimensions of consciousness are not arbitrary. They are not clearly drawn. They are open, they are action.
"They are a dimensions, as I mentioned. Consciousness is not one thing, therefore consciousness is not of itself limiting. Boundaries may be set up in terms of a self. A self is a gestalt of action perception patterns, which are formed together through attraction.
"This, when it occurs, and this particular formation into a self may or may not occur, but when it occurs it is a result of our second previously mentioned dilemma. The self as you know it is in actuality a self plus an ego.
"(For material on the three creative dilemmas of inner reality, see the 138th session.)
"The ego, if you recall, is self's attempt to set itself apart from action, and to see or perceive action as an object. The ego attempts to attain stability and dominance, and resents change. It seeks to limit certain perceptions, to block out many perceptions of which the self is knowledgeable. In this way limitations become fairly rigid.
"An ego could be compared to a small dam in this respect. However, action constantly forms perceptual patterns in which it can view itself. Again, these patterns are formed one within the other, and they could be said to form that imaginary structure, which we called the fifth dimension, so many sessions ago.
"(See the 12th session, of January 2, 1964 [in Volume 1].)
"A particular consciousness is a gestalt of these conceptual patterns; but there is nothing to prevent a consciousness from increasing itself by experiencing other conceptual patterns or patterns of perception. This assimilation would increase, not decrease, any given consciousness. We use, or you use, words merely as a convenience. We therefore say that a consciousness is a gestalt of patterns of perception, by which action knows itself. But the patterns of perceptions may grow, and the consciousness reach out. The consciousness has changed. It is no longer the same consciousness, since it has extended itself. Yet it is the same consciousness, on the other hand, because it is that which has extended itself. So words can confuse us.
"A consciousness can be said to be a gestalt of patterns of perception then; and while the definition stands, it can only apply to any given consciousness for the breath of an instant, since the patterns of perception, being action, have already changed; and the particular consciousness of which we spoke, and which we tried to limit and pin down, is gone.
"Yet as you can see, what it was when we spoke of it is still present in what it will by now have become. The ego, through its own nature and characteristics, attempts to limit such change, but it succeeds only in limiting itself by limiting its perceptions. It still must change, as is obvious. But it changes along certain lines, moving within certain patterns of perception which are a characteristic of it.
"It cannot maintain stability, for all its efforts, and it cannot in any way limit the self. It, the ego, merely does not perceive because it will not perceive those other perception patterns, and that larger scope with which the whole self is constantly involved.
"This material on action, and identities, and consciousness, will add much to your understanding of dreams, of the whole self, and of other facets of reality of which I will speak shortly.
"The self, then, is not static by any means. It has no arbitrary boundaries. The term itself is used only for convenience; and indeed the concept of the self is a concept of the ego, which considers itself the self.
"The self then, being action which has formed itself into gestalts of pattern perceptions, by which it knows itself, this self changes constantly. And within the range of effective perception, starting at any particular point, there are patterns within patterns. For convenience's sake we will have to limit our discussion to some degree, taking the self as a particular gestalt within, or composed of, a particular range of perception patterns; though in actuality the range may be smaller or larger at any given time.
"The self then, unknown to the ego, perceives itself in a vast variety of experiences, and in, indeed, a vast number of realities. Each of these so-called realities, for one blends into the other, could be termed, or viewed as, a separate field. Each is therefore composed of the characteristic perception patterns that happen to lie within it, and these so-called minor fields could then be termed other selves, or minor selves, from the standpoint of the self that we are considering.
"From the standpoint of these seemingly minor selves, however, the viewpoint would be entirely different. If we take for example a particular range of various perception patterns, for convenience's sake, and label them one self, then the various patterns within would appear to be minor selves forming the whole.
"If however we changed our arbitrary boundary points, then the minor selves at either end would now seem to be portions of other selves. For practical purposes it may be said that a self is composed of a gestalt of perception patterns, within which a fairly constant efficiency is maintained. This is the best definition I can give you at this time.
"As this effective field of perception patterns changes, so do the apparent boundaries of the practical self. It is imperative that we move away from the concept of a self as an indivisible, rigid and limited reality. Indeed, I hesitate almost to continue, since I do not want to confuse you.
"The fact is, that any given self, as we have described the self, may have more than one ego, though these egos will not be aware of each other, even though operating simultaneously. You have information on the inner ego. There is also a dream ego, in that there is within that reality field a directive part of the self that is concerned with the construction of purpose and meaning.
"(For material on the inner ego, the self-conscious self behind the self-conscious self, see the 28th session.)
"You can here indeed see where I am leading you.
"The deeply and strongly dimensioned sphere I used as an analogy for an action, if you recall, for any portion of action; you can now indeed further imagine one entity being composed of such an action, with egos like many faces looking outward in all directions, and each perceiving vastly different fields of reality; looking inward and outward, backward and forward as it were, through and beyond. And yet each action, or entity, is a part of another, and is both within and without another. And none of it is meaningless, and yet in a basic manner all of it has the meaning that you give it.
"And what meaning you give it is there, and part of it, since you who project the meaning are yourselves part of it. The inner self is, therefore, that inner portion of action which forms the egos, and the selves, through the dilemmas of which I have spoken.
"Part of the self knows, and knows that it knows. Part of the self knows, and does not know it knows. The creative dilemmas of which I have spoken are the basis for all realities, and the heart of all meaning."
Monday, August 8, 2011
The Nature of Action
From Session 139 found in Volume 3 of Seth's Early Sessions:
"Action itself cannot be directly perceived. It cannot be seen nor touched. Its nature can never be examined from an objective viewpoint. The objective viewpoint will, at best, give but hints and signs. Action, to be examined in such a manner, would have to be stopped. You cannot tamper with action, not with the basic nature of action, because any such tampering causes it to change.
"Action can be experienced directly, however, but only when no effort is made to tamper with it. It must be plunged into. Once more, action is not a function of structure. Action is inseparable from structure. Structure is action. Identities are action, as I have explained. Your idea of action as it occurs within dreams comes closer to the real nature of action than does your idea of muscular force. For in dreams the ego makes little attempt to impede action. Though in dreams you see or feel your arm move, your legs run, still the arm and the legs of the physical body may not move.
You cannot touch the action. You cannot touch the action, now, of your own arm as you write. You see the results of the action. You can feel effects of the action, but you cannot directly perceive the action itself. Since identity is dependent upon action, then it should be seen that it is impossible for an identity to attain stability, since total stability would destroy it.
"We come here also to one of the other causes of the dreaming state, beside those of which we have spoken in the past. The mind, of itself and separated from the ego, must still be action, and therefore never still. Since action of any kind, being composed of inner vitality, must seek materialization, the dreams become the constructions of that dream universe of which, again, we have spoken. But action can never complete itself. The dream once begun continues, and the dream universe itself forms anew other constructions.
"Here is an analogy. Imagine then the inner vitality being some cosmic sphere, but a sphere of more dimensions than you can imagine. Its motion could be called action, but this is deceptive because action is the basic nature of the sphere itself. Action is its composition. Action is that from which it is, therefore it moves, it acts outward. But all outwardness turns ultimately inward, and then again outward in all directions. And each inward action forms a new dimension that must, again, be thrust outward toward utilization.
"Yet each outward thrust turns again inward; and of itself, because of the nature of action, is the creation of new action.
"Now, to continue with our analogy, this cosmic sphere which we have imagined would be a model for every action.
"Because of its own nature it must act, yet no action can ever complete itself. The sphere would act in as many ways as were open to it, and every action changes that which is acted upon. Therefore each action would create a new reality. In such a manner are all fields activated.
"If you will remember the three creative dilemmas discussed in our past session, you will see that we have here the reason for our self-perpetuating universe, the reason for termination within it, and the inherent necessity for change. If one thought were held forever, no other thoughts would follow, no action would follow, and no identity. In your own intimate psychological experience, in the intimate psychological experience of every individual within your race, you will find recognition of the thought.
"Thought cannot be seen or touched. Thought is action. A thought within your field must vanish, be terminated, disappear, before it can be replaced by another. The identical thought will not return. A very similar thought may return, but the two thoughts will not be identical, although you may perceive them as identical. This is an error of perception.
"No two actions are ever identical. We must mention here also a little regarding pulsations and the appearance or semblance of continuity. Every action involves a pulsation; you will recall we spoke of the pulsation of atoms and molecules.
"(For some material on pulsation see the 60-65th sessions, among others.)
"Now, I have just told you that one thought must terminate before another thought can appear. Although this might sound as if I am speaking in terms of continuity, I am not. The action of our imaginary sphere upon and within itself is simultaneous, and in all directions. All actions occur basically within the spacious present, but all action cannot be aware of itself except as it attempts further action, i.e., materializations.
"While so materialized, action is aware of itself in two basic ways; through its innate comprehension of itself, and through a secondary, more limited but more focused perception of self belonging to such materializations. The innate comprehension of course involves us with the inner self. The secondary self belonging to the materialization gives us, within your field, the ego.
"Action does not involve time as you know it. Action does not involve space as you know it. The semblance of continuity is merely the result of a choosing of some actions from an infinite number of simultaneous actions.
"I have several things I want to say.
"First, I want to make certain that action is understood, insofar as we have discussed it. Action is the inner vitality of all reality. It seeks to utilize itself in as many ways as possible. Its action, its attempts at outward materialization, however, must result in the creation of new inner vitality, for this is the stuff of which it is composed. And this new inner vitality will then seek materialization, and so the cycle is never completed.
"The word materialization is used because it is applicable within your field. Nevertheless, as you know such materializations hardly all result in the construction of matter."
... "A note now concerning thought, as it is a form of action with which all men are familiar. Here you can see that your ego accepts thoughts as a part of its identity. Thought's actions are accepted by the ego, yet the ego seems to stand apart from them; and because of ego's nature it fears to plunge into the action of a thought. For it, the ego, has but recently pried itself from action, and so perceives action now as if action were a province of ego, and not the other way around.
"But the ego's seeming independence from action is basically meaningless, since ego is also action, and can never be otherwise. Any such separation of action from itself only adds to the totality of action, in that it increases action's ability to perceive itself from as many viewpoints as possible. Perspectives represent action's action upon itself. Any one dimension must result in another dimension, for the action within any given dimension can never complete itself, but will continue."
"Action itself cannot be directly perceived. It cannot be seen nor touched. Its nature can never be examined from an objective viewpoint. The objective viewpoint will, at best, give but hints and signs. Action, to be examined in such a manner, would have to be stopped. You cannot tamper with action, not with the basic nature of action, because any such tampering causes it to change.
"Action can be experienced directly, however, but only when no effort is made to tamper with it. It must be plunged into. Once more, action is not a function of structure. Action is inseparable from structure. Structure is action. Identities are action, as I have explained. Your idea of action as it occurs within dreams comes closer to the real nature of action than does your idea of muscular force. For in dreams the ego makes little attempt to impede action. Though in dreams you see or feel your arm move, your legs run, still the arm and the legs of the physical body may not move.
You cannot touch the action. You cannot touch the action, now, of your own arm as you write. You see the results of the action. You can feel effects of the action, but you cannot directly perceive the action itself. Since identity is dependent upon action, then it should be seen that it is impossible for an identity to attain stability, since total stability would destroy it.
"We come here also to one of the other causes of the dreaming state, beside those of which we have spoken in the past. The mind, of itself and separated from the ego, must still be action, and therefore never still. Since action of any kind, being composed of inner vitality, must seek materialization, the dreams become the constructions of that dream universe of which, again, we have spoken. But action can never complete itself. The dream once begun continues, and the dream universe itself forms anew other constructions.
"Here is an analogy. Imagine then the inner vitality being some cosmic sphere, but a sphere of more dimensions than you can imagine. Its motion could be called action, but this is deceptive because action is the basic nature of the sphere itself. Action is its composition. Action is that from which it is, therefore it moves, it acts outward. But all outwardness turns ultimately inward, and then again outward in all directions. And each inward action forms a new dimension that must, again, be thrust outward toward utilization.
"Yet each outward thrust turns again inward; and of itself, because of the nature of action, is the creation of new action.
"Now, to continue with our analogy, this cosmic sphere which we have imagined would be a model for every action.
"Because of its own nature it must act, yet no action can ever complete itself. The sphere would act in as many ways as were open to it, and every action changes that which is acted upon. Therefore each action would create a new reality. In such a manner are all fields activated.
"If you will remember the three creative dilemmas discussed in our past session, you will see that we have here the reason for our self-perpetuating universe, the reason for termination within it, and the inherent necessity for change. If one thought were held forever, no other thoughts would follow, no action would follow, and no identity. In your own intimate psychological experience, in the intimate psychological experience of every individual within your race, you will find recognition of the thought.
"Thought cannot be seen or touched. Thought is action. A thought within your field must vanish, be terminated, disappear, before it can be replaced by another. The identical thought will not return. A very similar thought may return, but the two thoughts will not be identical, although you may perceive them as identical. This is an error of perception.
"No two actions are ever identical. We must mention here also a little regarding pulsations and the appearance or semblance of continuity. Every action involves a pulsation; you will recall we spoke of the pulsation of atoms and molecules.
"(For some material on pulsation see the 60-65th sessions, among others.)
"Now, I have just told you that one thought must terminate before another thought can appear. Although this might sound as if I am speaking in terms of continuity, I am not. The action of our imaginary sphere upon and within itself is simultaneous, and in all directions. All actions occur basically within the spacious present, but all action cannot be aware of itself except as it attempts further action, i.e., materializations.
"While so materialized, action is aware of itself in two basic ways; through its innate comprehension of itself, and through a secondary, more limited but more focused perception of self belonging to such materializations. The innate comprehension of course involves us with the inner self. The secondary self belonging to the materialization gives us, within your field, the ego.
"Action does not involve time as you know it. Action does not involve space as you know it. The semblance of continuity is merely the result of a choosing of some actions from an infinite number of simultaneous actions.
"I have several things I want to say.
"First, I want to make certain that action is understood, insofar as we have discussed it. Action is the inner vitality of all reality. It seeks to utilize itself in as many ways as possible. Its action, its attempts at outward materialization, however, must result in the creation of new inner vitality, for this is the stuff of which it is composed. And this new inner vitality will then seek materialization, and so the cycle is never completed.
"The word materialization is used because it is applicable within your field. Nevertheless, as you know such materializations hardly all result in the construction of matter."
... "A note now concerning thought, as it is a form of action with which all men are familiar. Here you can see that your ego accepts thoughts as a part of its identity. Thought's actions are accepted by the ego, yet the ego seems to stand apart from them; and because of ego's nature it fears to plunge into the action of a thought. For it, the ego, has but recently pried itself from action, and so perceives action now as if action were a province of ego, and not the other way around.
"But the ego's seeming independence from action is basically meaningless, since ego is also action, and can never be otherwise. Any such separation of action from itself only adds to the totality of action, in that it increases action's ability to perceive itself from as many viewpoints as possible. Perspectives represent action's action upon itself. Any one dimension must result in another dimension, for the action within any given dimension can never complete itself, but will continue."
Sunday, August 7, 2011
Identities and Action Continued and Three Apparent Dilemmas
From Session 138 in Volume 3 of Seth's Early Sessions:
Identities and Action (continued)
"We will continue this evening in our discussion of identities and action.
"Unfoldings continually occur, and all identities, with a few exceptions, contain within them also other identities, not duplicates. Our discussion in the past concerning gestalts should make this point clear. The frameworks and boundaries, the extents and limitations of identities, are not physical.
"(For the material on psychic gestalts, see the 59th, 62nd, 81st, 96th and 128th sessions, among many others.)
"Identities may be termed action which is conscious of itself. For the purposes of our discussion, the terms action and identity must be separated. However basically no such separation exists, for an identity is also a dimension of existence, action within action, an unfolding of action upon itself; and through this interweaving of action with itself, through this reaction, an identity is formed.
"The reality of such an identity exists within the action. The energy of the action, the workings of action within and upon itself, forms identity. There are other causes here that we will consider later. Yet although identity is formed from action, action and identity cannot be separated. you will remember our previous definition of action, for this will make this evening's discussion easier to understand.
"(See the 137th session.)
"Identity then, is action's effect upon itself. Without identities action would be meaningless, for there would be nothing upon which action could act. Action must, therefore, of its very nature, of itself and from its own workings, create identities. Again, action and identity cannot be separated. This applies from the most simple to the most complex.
"Once more, action is not a force outside that acts upon matter. Action is instead, the inside vitality of the inner universe. It is the dilemma between inner vitality's desire and impetus to completely materialize itself, and its inability to completely do so. This was also discussed briefly in sessions dealing with the first appearance of matter within the physical field.
"(See the 60th session, among others, along with the aforementioned material on psychic gestalts, etc. See also the 137th session.)"
Apparent Dilemmas
"Action is therefore a part of all structure. Here again is an apparent dilemma, an exquisite imbalance whose result is consciousness and existence. For consciousness and existence do not exist because of delicate balances, so much as they are made possible by lacks of balances, so richly creative there would be no reality as it is understood to be, if balance were ever maintained.
"I spoke of this second dilemma. The first dilemma is that which exists when inner vitality struggles to completely materialize, though it cannot completely materialize. The reasons for its inability to completely materialize have been given in a previous session, and I will discuss the matter again at a later date.
"(See the 133rd session among others.)
"This first dilemma results in action, and from action's own working upon itself we have seen that identity was formed, and that these two were separable.
"Action, having of itself, and because of its nature, formed identity, now also because of its nature would seem to destroy identity, since action must involve change. And any change would seem to threaten identity.
"It is however a mistaken notion that identity is dependent upon stability. Identity, because of its characteristics, will continually seek stability, while stability is impossible. And this is our second dilemma.
"It is this dilemma, precisely between identity's constant attempts to maintain stability, and action's inherent drive for change, that results in the imbalance, the exquisite creative by-product that is consciousness of self. We have a series of creative strains. Identity must seek stability while action must seek change, yet identity could not exist without change, without action, for it is the result of action, and not apart from it but a part of it.
"Identities are never constant, as you yourselves are not the same consciously or unconsciously from one moment to another. Every action is a termination, as we discussed earlier. And yet without the termination, identity would cease to exist, for consciousness without action would cease to be conscious.
"Consciousness therefore is not a thing in itself. It is a dimension of action. It is an almost miraculous state, made possible by what I choose to call a series of creative dilemmas.
"I will add a word here, only to remind you once more to read those sessions regarding inner vitality and the initial appearance of physical matter, for that discussion will help you with this one.
"It would be fairly easy to understand now how the second dilemma evolved from the first. I have said that the second dilemma resulted in, and constantly results in, consciousness of self. Now, consciousness of self is not the same thing as consciousness of ego self. Consciousness of self is still consciousness directly connected with action.
"Ego consciousness is the result of our third dilemma.
"The ego is a state resulting from the third creative dilemma, which happens when consciousness of self attempts to separate itself from action.
"Since this is obviously impossible, since no consciousness or identity can exist without action, because they are inseparable, we have our third dilemma.
"A note of further explanation here. The difference between consciousness of self as a result of our second dilemma, and ego consciousness as a result of our third dilemma, should be made very clear.
"Consciousness of self involves a consciousness of self within, amid and as a part of action. Ego consciousness, on the other hand, involves a state in which consciousness of self attempts to divorce itself from action, an attempt on the part of consciousness to perceive action as an object. Here we see that ego consciousness, in this attempt, strives to perceive action not only as separate, but to perceive it in such a fashion that it appears to ego that action is not only separate from itself, that is separate from the ego, but that action is initiated by the ego, and a result rather than a cause of ego's own existence.
"These three dilemmas represent three areas of reality within which inner reality, or inner vitality, can experience itself. And here we have also the reason, or one of the reasons why, inner vitality can never achieve complete materialization. The very action involved in vitality's attempt to materialize itself adds to the inner dimension of inner vitality.
"Action basically can never complete itself. Inner vitality, materializing in any form whatsoever, at once multiplies the possibilities of further materialization. At the same time, because inner vitality is self-generating, only a minute fraction of inner vitality is needed to seed a whole universe.
"Inner vitality attempts therefore to materialize itself completely, and yet because of its very nature, with each materialization it increases itself, making the attempt impossible. This is the basic dilemma, from which all types of reality spring. This of course leads us to the necessity for further discussion concerning the nature if inner vitality itself."
(My Note: This is reminiscent of Godel's incompleteness theorem!)
"In line with the statement that action necessarily changes that which it acts upon (which is basically itself), then it follows that the action involved in these sessions changes the nature of the sessions.
"I have spoken often of consciousness also as being merely the direction of focus. Action implies infinite possibilities of focus. Action never happens along a straight line, although at times you may perceive it in such a fashion.
"(Seth-Jane had some material on consciousness and the direction of focus in the 94th session, among others).
"Action exists within action. There are dimensions of action from which all diversity arises. All individuality that seems to be swept away because one action seems to terminate another, such individuality is indeed the result of the dimensions of action."
Identities and Action (continued)
"We will continue this evening in our discussion of identities and action.
"Unfoldings continually occur, and all identities, with a few exceptions, contain within them also other identities, not duplicates. Our discussion in the past concerning gestalts should make this point clear. The frameworks and boundaries, the extents and limitations of identities, are not physical.
"(For the material on psychic gestalts, see the 59th, 62nd, 81st, 96th and 128th sessions, among many others.)
"Identities may be termed action which is conscious of itself. For the purposes of our discussion, the terms action and identity must be separated. However basically no such separation exists, for an identity is also a dimension of existence, action within action, an unfolding of action upon itself; and through this interweaving of action with itself, through this reaction, an identity is formed.
"The reality of such an identity exists within the action. The energy of the action, the workings of action within and upon itself, forms identity. There are other causes here that we will consider later. Yet although identity is formed from action, action and identity cannot be separated. you will remember our previous definition of action, for this will make this evening's discussion easier to understand.
"(See the 137th session.)
"Identity then, is action's effect upon itself. Without identities action would be meaningless, for there would be nothing upon which action could act. Action must, therefore, of its very nature, of itself and from its own workings, create identities. Again, action and identity cannot be separated. This applies from the most simple to the most complex.
"Once more, action is not a force outside that acts upon matter. Action is instead, the inside vitality of the inner universe. It is the dilemma between inner vitality's desire and impetus to completely materialize itself, and its inability to completely do so. This was also discussed briefly in sessions dealing with the first appearance of matter within the physical field.
"(See the 60th session, among others, along with the aforementioned material on psychic gestalts, etc. See also the 137th session.)"
Apparent Dilemmas
"Action is therefore a part of all structure. Here again is an apparent dilemma, an exquisite imbalance whose result is consciousness and existence. For consciousness and existence do not exist because of delicate balances, so much as they are made possible by lacks of balances, so richly creative there would be no reality as it is understood to be, if balance were ever maintained.
"I spoke of this second dilemma. The first dilemma is that which exists when inner vitality struggles to completely materialize, though it cannot completely materialize. The reasons for its inability to completely materialize have been given in a previous session, and I will discuss the matter again at a later date.
"(See the 133rd session among others.)
"This first dilemma results in action, and from action's own working upon itself we have seen that identity was formed, and that these two were separable.
"Action, having of itself, and because of its nature, formed identity, now also because of its nature would seem to destroy identity, since action must involve change. And any change would seem to threaten identity.
"It is however a mistaken notion that identity is dependent upon stability. Identity, because of its characteristics, will continually seek stability, while stability is impossible. And this is our second dilemma.
"It is this dilemma, precisely between identity's constant attempts to maintain stability, and action's inherent drive for change, that results in the imbalance, the exquisite creative by-product that is consciousness of self. We have a series of creative strains. Identity must seek stability while action must seek change, yet identity could not exist without change, without action, for it is the result of action, and not apart from it but a part of it.
"Identities are never constant, as you yourselves are not the same consciously or unconsciously from one moment to another. Every action is a termination, as we discussed earlier. And yet without the termination, identity would cease to exist, for consciousness without action would cease to be conscious.
"Consciousness therefore is not a thing in itself. It is a dimension of action. It is an almost miraculous state, made possible by what I choose to call a series of creative dilemmas.
"I will add a word here, only to remind you once more to read those sessions regarding inner vitality and the initial appearance of physical matter, for that discussion will help you with this one.
"It would be fairly easy to understand now how the second dilemma evolved from the first. I have said that the second dilemma resulted in, and constantly results in, consciousness of self. Now, consciousness of self is not the same thing as consciousness of ego self. Consciousness of self is still consciousness directly connected with action.
"Ego consciousness is the result of our third dilemma.
"The ego is a state resulting from the third creative dilemma, which happens when consciousness of self attempts to separate itself from action.
"Since this is obviously impossible, since no consciousness or identity can exist without action, because they are inseparable, we have our third dilemma.
"A note of further explanation here. The difference between consciousness of self as a result of our second dilemma, and ego consciousness as a result of our third dilemma, should be made very clear.
"Consciousness of self involves a consciousness of self within, amid and as a part of action. Ego consciousness, on the other hand, involves a state in which consciousness of self attempts to divorce itself from action, an attempt on the part of consciousness to perceive action as an object. Here we see that ego consciousness, in this attempt, strives to perceive action not only as separate, but to perceive it in such a fashion that it appears to ego that action is not only separate from itself, that is separate from the ego, but that action is initiated by the ego, and a result rather than a cause of ego's own existence.
"These three dilemmas represent three areas of reality within which inner reality, or inner vitality, can experience itself. And here we have also the reason, or one of the reasons why, inner vitality can never achieve complete materialization. The very action involved in vitality's attempt to materialize itself adds to the inner dimension of inner vitality.
"Action basically can never complete itself. Inner vitality, materializing in any form whatsoever, at once multiplies the possibilities of further materialization. At the same time, because inner vitality is self-generating, only a minute fraction of inner vitality is needed to seed a whole universe.
"Inner vitality attempts therefore to materialize itself completely, and yet because of its very nature, with each materialization it increases itself, making the attempt impossible. This is the basic dilemma, from which all types of reality spring. This of course leads us to the necessity for further discussion concerning the nature if inner vitality itself."
(My Note: This is reminiscent of Godel's incompleteness theorem!)
"In line with the statement that action necessarily changes that which it acts upon (which is basically itself), then it follows that the action involved in these sessions changes the nature of the sessions.
"I have spoken often of consciousness also as being merely the direction of focus. Action implies infinite possibilities of focus. Action never happens along a straight line, although at times you may perceive it in such a fashion.
"(Seth-Jane had some material on consciousness and the direction of focus in the 94th session, among others).
"Action exists within action. There are dimensions of action from which all diversity arises. All individuality that seems to be swept away because one action seems to terminate another, such individuality is indeed the result of the dimensions of action."
Thursday, August 4, 2011
The Nature of Identities and Action
From Volume 3 of Seth's Early Sessions (session 137):
Nature of Identities
"We will further consider this evening the nature of identities. In our earlier discussions concerning the nature of matter, we made it plain that each individual created any given material object, through use of the inner senses, and following certain rules which were mentioned.
"Since any materialization is in effect a mediation between what we may call an ideal which is, by nature, of itself not materialized, and a practical working perceivable symbol of the idea, each materialization must be composed of some camouflage elements. Within the physical field these perceivable symbols are composed of matter, which is a conglomeration of atoms and molecules. Each individual, creating, say, his version of any given chair, uses entirely different atoms and molecules in his subconscious construction of it.
"He sees or perceives only his own construction. A rereading of sessions dealing with the nature of matter will help here. The chair created then by any given individual, and perceived by him, is an identity in that it exists at any given time, without any exact duplication. Basically, for any duplication to appear, the exact atoms and molecules would have to be used, and this is obviously impossible.
"The chair is an identity, and yet at no given moment is it the same chair, for already the atoms and molecules that compose it have changed, and been replaced by others. This process is explained thoroughly also in the mentioned previous sessions.
"(Among others, see the 60th-65th sessions.)
"There are obviously many kinds of identities. Now in our last session I told you that our imaginary sender "A" does not transmit a given thought. He does not even send a exact duplicate. Action, the very action of transmission, alters the nature, the electrical reality of the thought itself. This is an extremely important point.
"Nor does the receiver receive the thought in the same condition. The thought, the original thought, is retained by A. A, however, forms a thought as nearly identical as his possibilities allow it to be. This he transmits to B. But B can't receive the thought in its present condition, for the act of receiving a thought also changes it. He forms a thought as nearly identical as possible, and interprets it."
Action
"Action can never be considered apart from that which is seemingly acted upon, for action becomes a part of structure. Action begins from within, and is a result of inner vitality inherent within all realities. Some action is always present. Action itself is not a thing alone. It is not an identity. Action is a dimension of existence.
"Action is a dimension arising out of existence.
"It cannot be considered separately. It may appear in many guises, due to the nature of the particular reality of which it is part, and it involves much more than motion. Action may be considered also simply as the spontaneous nature of the inner vitality toward various expressive materializations.
"There is no separate outside identity or force, such as "force"; the two words here are being used with different meanings. There is no separate force that causes action All of these points are extremely important, and if I speak slowly it is to insure words as nearly correct as possible. Action is perceivable in some cases, and not in others.
"Action is more like growth than force. It is a by-product of any reality, and a part of all reality. you should be able to see many implications here when you read this material over. Again, action involves more than movement, as you think of movement, for value fulfillment is action. A dream involves action. Not only the action within the dream, but the action of dreaming itself.
"You may here get a glimmering of the connection between certain types of action and distance, as I have mentioned it briefly. There is always action within action, and any reality or any experience is instantaneous action. Motion is the type of action with which your are most familiar, but motion attains its importance within the physical field only because of your particular outer senses. For much action is entirely unperceived by you, particularly on a conscious level.
"The continued existence of your physical body is determined by action, although consciously you are not aware of this most of the time. Action may not seem to be going any place. Action, by its nature, while part of every reality, necessarily changes that reality and forms from it a new reality. This should be obvious.
"There will be much more in this material when you read it, than you may at first realize. Action approximates as nearly as possible that portion of inner vitality or energy which cannot be completely materialized within any camouflage, within any plane. Action itself cannot be directly perceived for this reason. But its effects upon camouflage can often be perceived.
"This material is leading up to some future discussions, and the nature of action will be most important. Action is as valid whether the act is conscious and voluntary, or whether it occurs within a dream or within a thought. It is as much a reality either way. Again, it is not an outside force. It arises from within the inner vitality of which all camouflage is composed. To some degree it is a result of inner vitality's attempt to completely express itself in materializations, and its inability to do so.
"As yet your scientists and physicists have a very limited concept of action. Their laws concerning action and force will only apply within the physical field.
"Action is basically electrical, but within your field only the most obvious forms of electrical action have been perceived. In this one respect your technology has let you down, but the electrical manifestation of which I speak could not even be searched for or anticipated within your physical field, until the reality of man's psychic nature began to make itself known. And it is only now beginning to become apparent.
"Discovery of these other electrical realities will explain much that previously could not be explained. All realities with which you will be concerned, and with which mankind is intimately concerned, are built up electrically. A dream is as valid an electrical reality as a lightning bolt, the difference being that the lightning bolt projects itself into your awareness through the outer senses.
"We shall have to consider, later, colour as it appears in dreams, but this is not the time for such a discussion. Identities exist within dreams also, and here the same nature of identities applies as those given earlier. The laws of action also apply here in the dream reality.
"Action is not affected by time as you know it. Action also takes place within the spacious present. You may, however, only perceive parts of action in your time breakdown. Ideally, psychological time experiences will allow you to perceive action more clearly and directly. The ego attempts to control action by standing apart from it. Any such division is arbitrary, and in no way affects the nature of action itself. All that changes is your perception of it.
"By slowing down his perception of action, man imagines that he lengthens time. This of course is not the case. He merely succeeds in perceiving action as bits and pieces, and fights its flow On the one hand action is indeed simultaneous, yet in it all action is contained, for it occurs within the unlimited spacious present. In dreams action is given more freedom, and allowed to flow in a less hampered fashion.
"The result is an effect of more rather than less time, and in many cases the deepening of perspectives. Action does not occur along any given line or direction exclusively, though you may perceive its motion in only one direction. It is a portion of other dimensions. Here again consideration of dreams in terms of action should make this point fairly clear.
"In dreams also, where no space as you know it exists, you have complete freedom of space. When the ego gives up its hold upon what it considers control of action, then as in dreams almost any action is possible. And when the ego gives up its claim of space in a dream, all space is available.
"Action always involves change.
"Again, it may not involve motion in terms with which you usually refer. There are many kinds of motion, for example, that you do not perceive as motion within the physical field.
"Action tampers with identity, yet were it not for action identity would be impossible. It may, here, sound like a contradiction; but to remain an identity, an identity must completely renew itself, and each renewal is indeed a termination. Yet without the termination no new action on the part of the identity would be possible. And without action no identity can be aware of its own existence.
"Remember here, however, that by action we do not necessarily mean motion as you perceive it. Action is the breath of inner vitality, of which all materializations of any kind are composed. It represents, again, the relationship between unexpressed inner vitality and materialized vitality
"There is always an imbalance here that may of itself be termed action. It cannot be perceived as any one thing, for it is a relationship and a dimension. It can be perceived most directly, and with less distortion, in the dream state. For here it is allowed the freedom of itself. Here you have also the inner vitality that has not been materialized within the realm of material camouflage. You have the tendency of this inner vitality to materialize, and its inability to completely do so. In the dream state the tendency for this vitality to materialize meets with little resistance. Action within actions result, without physical space. Distances appear and are experienced as such. Action is much less limited. Rather, action itself is not less limited, but you can experience action with less limitations, for the ego which erects such limitations lets down its guard.
"I would suggest that this session and the last session be read over most carefully. For again, they will be used as a basis for further material."
Nature of Identities
"We will further consider this evening the nature of identities. In our earlier discussions concerning the nature of matter, we made it plain that each individual created any given material object, through use of the inner senses, and following certain rules which were mentioned.
"Since any materialization is in effect a mediation between what we may call an ideal which is, by nature, of itself not materialized, and a practical working perceivable symbol of the idea, each materialization must be composed of some camouflage elements. Within the physical field these perceivable symbols are composed of matter, which is a conglomeration of atoms and molecules. Each individual, creating, say, his version of any given chair, uses entirely different atoms and molecules in his subconscious construction of it.
"He sees or perceives only his own construction. A rereading of sessions dealing with the nature of matter will help here. The chair created then by any given individual, and perceived by him, is an identity in that it exists at any given time, without any exact duplication. Basically, for any duplication to appear, the exact atoms and molecules would have to be used, and this is obviously impossible.
"The chair is an identity, and yet at no given moment is it the same chair, for already the atoms and molecules that compose it have changed, and been replaced by others. This process is explained thoroughly also in the mentioned previous sessions.
"(Among others, see the 60th-65th sessions.)
"There are obviously many kinds of identities. Now in our last session I told you that our imaginary sender "A" does not transmit a given thought. He does not even send a exact duplicate. Action, the very action of transmission, alters the nature, the electrical reality of the thought itself. This is an extremely important point.
"Nor does the receiver receive the thought in the same condition. The thought, the original thought, is retained by A. A, however, forms a thought as nearly identical as his possibilities allow it to be. This he transmits to B. But B can't receive the thought in its present condition, for the act of receiving a thought also changes it. He forms a thought as nearly identical as possible, and interprets it."
Action
"Action can never be considered apart from that which is seemingly acted upon, for action becomes a part of structure. Action begins from within, and is a result of inner vitality inherent within all realities. Some action is always present. Action itself is not a thing alone. It is not an identity. Action is a dimension of existence.
"Action is a dimension arising out of existence.
"It cannot be considered separately. It may appear in many guises, due to the nature of the particular reality of which it is part, and it involves much more than motion. Action may be considered also simply as the spontaneous nature of the inner vitality toward various expressive materializations.
"There is no separate outside identity or force, such as "force"; the two words here are being used with different meanings. There is no separate force that causes action All of these points are extremely important, and if I speak slowly it is to insure words as nearly correct as possible. Action is perceivable in some cases, and not in others.
"Action is more like growth than force. It is a by-product of any reality, and a part of all reality. you should be able to see many implications here when you read this material over. Again, action involves more than movement, as you think of movement, for value fulfillment is action. A dream involves action. Not only the action within the dream, but the action of dreaming itself.
"You may here get a glimmering of the connection between certain types of action and distance, as I have mentioned it briefly. There is always action within action, and any reality or any experience is instantaneous action. Motion is the type of action with which your are most familiar, but motion attains its importance within the physical field only because of your particular outer senses. For much action is entirely unperceived by you, particularly on a conscious level.
"The continued existence of your physical body is determined by action, although consciously you are not aware of this most of the time. Action may not seem to be going any place. Action, by its nature, while part of every reality, necessarily changes that reality and forms from it a new reality. This should be obvious.
"There will be much more in this material when you read it, than you may at first realize. Action approximates as nearly as possible that portion of inner vitality or energy which cannot be completely materialized within any camouflage, within any plane. Action itself cannot be directly perceived for this reason. But its effects upon camouflage can often be perceived.
"This material is leading up to some future discussions, and the nature of action will be most important. Action is as valid whether the act is conscious and voluntary, or whether it occurs within a dream or within a thought. It is as much a reality either way. Again, it is not an outside force. It arises from within the inner vitality of which all camouflage is composed. To some degree it is a result of inner vitality's attempt to completely express itself in materializations, and its inability to do so.
"As yet your scientists and physicists have a very limited concept of action. Their laws concerning action and force will only apply within the physical field.
"Action is basically electrical, but within your field only the most obvious forms of electrical action have been perceived. In this one respect your technology has let you down, but the electrical manifestation of which I speak could not even be searched for or anticipated within your physical field, until the reality of man's psychic nature began to make itself known. And it is only now beginning to become apparent.
"Discovery of these other electrical realities will explain much that previously could not be explained. All realities with which you will be concerned, and with which mankind is intimately concerned, are built up electrically. A dream is as valid an electrical reality as a lightning bolt, the difference being that the lightning bolt projects itself into your awareness through the outer senses.
"We shall have to consider, later, colour as it appears in dreams, but this is not the time for such a discussion. Identities exist within dreams also, and here the same nature of identities applies as those given earlier. The laws of action also apply here in the dream reality.
"Action is not affected by time as you know it. Action also takes place within the spacious present. You may, however, only perceive parts of action in your time breakdown. Ideally, psychological time experiences will allow you to perceive action more clearly and directly. The ego attempts to control action by standing apart from it. Any such division is arbitrary, and in no way affects the nature of action itself. All that changes is your perception of it.
"By slowing down his perception of action, man imagines that he lengthens time. This of course is not the case. He merely succeeds in perceiving action as bits and pieces, and fights its flow On the one hand action is indeed simultaneous, yet in it all action is contained, for it occurs within the unlimited spacious present. In dreams action is given more freedom, and allowed to flow in a less hampered fashion.
"The result is an effect of more rather than less time, and in many cases the deepening of perspectives. Action does not occur along any given line or direction exclusively, though you may perceive its motion in only one direction. It is a portion of other dimensions. Here again consideration of dreams in terms of action should make this point fairly clear.
"In dreams also, where no space as you know it exists, you have complete freedom of space. When the ego gives up its hold upon what it considers control of action, then as in dreams almost any action is possible. And when the ego gives up its claim of space in a dream, all space is available.
"Action always involves change.
"Again, it may not involve motion in terms with which you usually refer. There are many kinds of motion, for example, that you do not perceive as motion within the physical field.
"Action tampers with identity, yet were it not for action identity would be impossible. It may, here, sound like a contradiction; but to remain an identity, an identity must completely renew itself, and each renewal is indeed a termination. Yet without the termination no new action on the part of the identity would be possible. And without action no identity can be aware of its own existence.
"Remember here, however, that by action we do not necessarily mean motion as you perceive it. Action is the breath of inner vitality, of which all materializations of any kind are composed. It represents, again, the relationship between unexpressed inner vitality and materialized vitality
"There is always an imbalance here that may of itself be termed action. It cannot be perceived as any one thing, for it is a relationship and a dimension. It can be perceived most directly, and with less distortion, in the dream state. For here it is allowed the freedom of itself. Here you have also the inner vitality that has not been materialized within the realm of material camouflage. You have the tendency of this inner vitality to materialize, and its inability to completely do so. In the dream state the tendency for this vitality to materialize meets with little resistance. Action within actions result, without physical space. Distances appear and are experienced as such. Action is much less limited. Rather, action itself is not less limited, but you can experience action with less limitations, for the ego which erects such limitations lets down its guard.
"I would suggest that this session and the last session be read over most carefully. For again, they will be used as a basis for further material."
Monday, August 1, 2011
Uniqueness of a Thought in the Electrical Universe
From Seth's Early Sessions number 136 (found in Volume 3):
"The components of the electrical universe are drawn from all energy, in a manner that could be described as a cosmic juggling act. For this energy is never still, and it goes without saying that no electrical impulse is stable from one instant of reality to the next. That is, it is never the same or identical impulse. It is not identical. It is not therefore of the same intensity, though it may contain the same approximate electrical mass.
"Change alone allows for the possibility of identity within any universe, for without change there can be no value fulfillment, no experience, and no identity. Portions of the electrical universe are projected into many fields Therefore electricity to some degree is recognized as a reality within many fields
"Practically, your own identities exist electronically, as I have explained, in codified form. At some later occasion, we shall go into seeming duplications, for such duplications are only apparent, of a nature that could be compared to a reflective result. In such cases almost, though not entirely without exception, such a duplicate is projected by an original electronically. We are not quite ready yet for this material. I wanted however to mention the possibility of such occurrences, since such projections have and do happen with some frequency.
"If you will consider the projection of a thought, that is intangible, so that it affects another individual, and hence both directly and indirectly affects the action of physical matter, then you may consider the possibility of other such projections. We have here a rather delicate point. I have said that there are no duplicates. Yet you may say, are not some thoughts duplicates? The variations may indeed be slight, but the variations are always present. A thought transmitted knowingly or unknowingly by "A" is not precisely the same thought when it reaches receiver "B".
"The thought originally held by A is still retained by A, yet a seemingly identical thought reaches B. A has lost nothing. That is, in sending the thought, in trying to duplicate the thought, he himself still retains it, so what is passed on to receiver B? This is rather important, since an explanation will do much to account for the frequent difference that occurs in telepathic communications.
"Whether or not A, the sender, knowingly transmits this apparent duplicate, at the point of its transmission the sender forms an electrical impulse pattern that is supposed to duplicate the original thought But no such identical duplication is possible, as far as I know, within reality of any kind.
"A side note: Identical twins, for example, are hardly identical.
"As soon as the attempt is made to duplicate the original thought, then we find that the attempt itself strains and pulls; the impulses change minutely or to a greater degree. The point that I want to make here is that any attempt at such duplication actually forces, because of the nature of the attempt, the impulses to line up in a different pattern. When B receives the thought, it is already a new thought, bearing great resemblance to the original, but it is not the identical thought.
"In this case action forces change, and by the very nature of action no such duplications can occur. It may be said, for practical reasons, that A and B have identical thoughts. But the thoughts are not identical.
"An identity is by definition and nature, one.
An identity can appear, be perceived in more than one place, but in such a case there is but one identity being viewed from many perspective.
"We will be going into some matters that may appear complicated in the telling, but this is only the effect, again, of the necessity to use words in a single strung-out fashion, one before the other. Regardless of any seeming contradictions that might appear before this particular subject matter is covered, identities by nature cannot be duplicated.
"I cannot explain everything at once, and so obviously many questions would remain unanswered until we can get to them. For the original thought, as an identity, to actually be transmitted to a sender, you would have to face the inevitable result: If the identical thought were actually transmitted from A to B, then A would have it no longer. Since A obviously may still have the original thought, then B has not the identical thought; not an exact duplicate, but instead a similar but still unidentical thought.
"Prime identities cannot be duplicated. Duplication, exact duplication, is always merely an effect of insufficient knowledge. In some cases two thoughts may indeed appear identical, but whether or not examination can show it, such exact duplication is impossible. Now, when receiver B receives this transmitted thought, he may react and interpret that part of the thought that is similar to the original.
"He may, on the other hand, react to and interpret portions of the thought that are not similar. He may then react and interpret the similarity or the difference. His reaction here depends on several circumstances, including the intensity of the electrical pulsations that compose the thought, and his own inner facility in reacting to particular ranges of intensities. Habitually individuals establish various overall frequencies that they are able to handle, for various reasons that I believe I explained to you somewhat earlier.
"An individual will therefore feel more at home operating within certain frequencies, and he will feel less at home with others. The original thought is used as a pattern, therefore, for the creation of a new electrical reality, which may or may not be directed at any given receiver. It is obvious that the attempt to duplicate is present; and were it not for this attempt to duplicate, then there would be little similarity between any separate identities.
"Identical realities, therefore, do not exist, and any such appearances should be a tip-off that an error has been made.
"Now, the nature of the thought that is received by our sender B is determined by many factors. We shall merely consider a few of these. These include, to begin with, the original intensity of the thought as A possesses it, A's ability to duplicate the thought as far as possible, the relative stability of the electrical thought unit as it is formed by A, the familiarity or unfamiliarity of the range of frequencies that compose the new thought to any intended receiver.
"The receiver will understand and interpret in general the intensity range that he is in the habit of using himself. Some, or a portion of, the transmitted thought may fall within his range, and some may not. He may pick up the portions of the thought which are similar to the main thought, in which case some scientific proof of sorts can be achieved.
"It may happen however that the dissimilarity is what falls within his particular accustomed range, in which case proof would be inadequate. Such thoughts will be received by those individuals in whom a variety of circumstances happen to occur simultaneously.
"Now, I have told you that emotions also possess an electrical reality. Thoughts formed and sent out within the impulse range of emotion often succeed because of the peculiar nature of emotional electrical impulses themselves. They have a particularly strong electrical mass. They also usually fall within powerful intensities. For reasons that we will not discuss this evening, thoughts formed under a strong emotional impetus will carry greater vividness, have a greater tendency toward duplication, and are apt to be interpreted with some success.
"Also, all individuals have had familiarity with emotions, as they exist within electrical intensities, and are accustomed to reacting to them. The whole process is instantaneous. However, the thought which is now an approximation of the original thought, and actually an identity of its own ... the thought is changed once more by the receiver.
"He does not interpret the thought. He interprets its meaning, and forms a new thought identity."
"The components of the electrical universe are drawn from all energy, in a manner that could be described as a cosmic juggling act. For this energy is never still, and it goes without saying that no electrical impulse is stable from one instant of reality to the next. That is, it is never the same or identical impulse. It is not identical. It is not therefore of the same intensity, though it may contain the same approximate electrical mass.
"Change alone allows for the possibility of identity within any universe, for without change there can be no value fulfillment, no experience, and no identity. Portions of the electrical universe are projected into many fields Therefore electricity to some degree is recognized as a reality within many fields
"Practically, your own identities exist electronically, as I have explained, in codified form. At some later occasion, we shall go into seeming duplications, for such duplications are only apparent, of a nature that could be compared to a reflective result. In such cases almost, though not entirely without exception, such a duplicate is projected by an original electronically. We are not quite ready yet for this material. I wanted however to mention the possibility of such occurrences, since such projections have and do happen with some frequency.
"If you will consider the projection of a thought, that is intangible, so that it affects another individual, and hence both directly and indirectly affects the action of physical matter, then you may consider the possibility of other such projections. We have here a rather delicate point. I have said that there are no duplicates. Yet you may say, are not some thoughts duplicates? The variations may indeed be slight, but the variations are always present. A thought transmitted knowingly or unknowingly by "A" is not precisely the same thought when it reaches receiver "B".
"The thought originally held by A is still retained by A, yet a seemingly identical thought reaches B. A has lost nothing. That is, in sending the thought, in trying to duplicate the thought, he himself still retains it, so what is passed on to receiver B? This is rather important, since an explanation will do much to account for the frequent difference that occurs in telepathic communications.
"Whether or not A, the sender, knowingly transmits this apparent duplicate, at the point of its transmission the sender forms an electrical impulse pattern that is supposed to duplicate the original thought But no such identical duplication is possible, as far as I know, within reality of any kind.
"A side note: Identical twins, for example, are hardly identical.
"As soon as the attempt is made to duplicate the original thought, then we find that the attempt itself strains and pulls; the impulses change minutely or to a greater degree. The point that I want to make here is that any attempt at such duplication actually forces, because of the nature of the attempt, the impulses to line up in a different pattern. When B receives the thought, it is already a new thought, bearing great resemblance to the original, but it is not the identical thought.
"In this case action forces change, and by the very nature of action no such duplications can occur. It may be said, for practical reasons, that A and B have identical thoughts. But the thoughts are not identical.
"An identity is by definition and nature, one.
An identity can appear, be perceived in more than one place, but in such a case there is but one identity being viewed from many perspective.
"We will be going into some matters that may appear complicated in the telling, but this is only the effect, again, of the necessity to use words in a single strung-out fashion, one before the other. Regardless of any seeming contradictions that might appear before this particular subject matter is covered, identities by nature cannot be duplicated.
"I cannot explain everything at once, and so obviously many questions would remain unanswered until we can get to them. For the original thought, as an identity, to actually be transmitted to a sender, you would have to face the inevitable result: If the identical thought were actually transmitted from A to B, then A would have it no longer. Since A obviously may still have the original thought, then B has not the identical thought; not an exact duplicate, but instead a similar but still unidentical thought.
"Prime identities cannot be duplicated. Duplication, exact duplication, is always merely an effect of insufficient knowledge. In some cases two thoughts may indeed appear identical, but whether or not examination can show it, such exact duplication is impossible. Now, when receiver B receives this transmitted thought, he may react and interpret that part of the thought that is similar to the original.
"He may, on the other hand, react to and interpret portions of the thought that are not similar. He may then react and interpret the similarity or the difference. His reaction here depends on several circumstances, including the intensity of the electrical pulsations that compose the thought, and his own inner facility in reacting to particular ranges of intensities. Habitually individuals establish various overall frequencies that they are able to handle, for various reasons that I believe I explained to you somewhat earlier.
"An individual will therefore feel more at home operating within certain frequencies, and he will feel less at home with others. The original thought is used as a pattern, therefore, for the creation of a new electrical reality, which may or may not be directed at any given receiver. It is obvious that the attempt to duplicate is present; and were it not for this attempt to duplicate, then there would be little similarity between any separate identities.
"Identical realities, therefore, do not exist, and any such appearances should be a tip-off that an error has been made.
"Now, the nature of the thought that is received by our sender B is determined by many factors. We shall merely consider a few of these. These include, to begin with, the original intensity of the thought as A possesses it, A's ability to duplicate the thought as far as possible, the relative stability of the electrical thought unit as it is formed by A, the familiarity or unfamiliarity of the range of frequencies that compose the new thought to any intended receiver.
"The receiver will understand and interpret in general the intensity range that he is in the habit of using himself. Some, or a portion of, the transmitted thought may fall within his range, and some may not. He may pick up the portions of the thought which are similar to the main thought, in which case some scientific proof of sorts can be achieved.
"It may happen however that the dissimilarity is what falls within his particular accustomed range, in which case proof would be inadequate. Such thoughts will be received by those individuals in whom a variety of circumstances happen to occur simultaneously.
"Now, I have told you that emotions also possess an electrical reality. Thoughts formed and sent out within the impulse range of emotion often succeed because of the peculiar nature of emotional electrical impulses themselves. They have a particularly strong electrical mass. They also usually fall within powerful intensities. For reasons that we will not discuss this evening, thoughts formed under a strong emotional impetus will carry greater vividness, have a greater tendency toward duplication, and are apt to be interpreted with some success.
"Also, all individuals have had familiarity with emotions, as they exist within electrical intensities, and are accustomed to reacting to them. The whole process is instantaneous. However, the thought which is now an approximation of the original thought, and actually an identity of its own ... the thought is changed once more by the receiver.
"He does not interpret the thought. He interprets its meaning, and forms a new thought identity."
Edgar Cayce on the Electric Universe
I was reading the latest issue of Venture Inward from A.R.E. and found this Edgar Cayce quotes about electricity/electric reality:
1299-1: "Know then that the force in nature that is called electrical or electricity is that same force ye worship as Creative or God in action!"
2828-4: "Electricity or vibration is that same energy, same power, ye call God."
This seems to be in harmony with the Seth discussion on the Electric Universe.
1299-1: "Know then that the force in nature that is called electrical or electricity is that same force ye worship as Creative or God in action!"
2828-4: "Electricity or vibration is that same energy, same power, ye call God."
This seems to be in harmony with the Seth discussion on the Electric Universe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)