The Observer and the Observed are One, Freewill, Mind and Brain Interface.


Eye for reality and you

“The Observer and the Observed are One”            J. Krishnamurti


5% of people think
10% of people think they think
the other 85% would rather die than think
Thomas A Edison

When it comes to creating you own reality you do so on every level of existence whether you are focused into the physical, the astral, the mental or any other reality you care to envisage. You work within the parameters of that reality with the tools available to you in that reality. The connecting thread here is the desires of the consciousness that focuses in each of these different realities. There may be a reason to play with different presentations, different scenarios in an easily manipulated or malleable reality where ideas can be “imagineered” with ease and many potential scenarios examined, their results assessed and those not fitting the desired end are then discarded.

You can imagine just how fast these can be examined and then, what we will term as, the probable ones, to suit the situation in let us say, the adjoining plane which in this case happens to be the physical, are passed to the brain for evaluation. Now it behoves us to state here that the consciousnesses involved in the creation and maintenance of the physical body have, as you can imagine, a certain say in the matter. This is why different possible scenarios are presented. Like an experimenter one can test out different scenarios to see what outcomes arise should each different one be chosen? What might be influenced by one’s own biases in the mental plane might be differently influenced by the co-creating consciousnesses in the physical plane. After all you do have a certain degree of free will and therefore it is interesting to see when a course of action different from that of your own preference, we are talking now of the entity’s preference, when the physical organism brain/mind chooses one different to your preference then it is also educational as to whether that route is successful.

If you imagine both different aspects of the consciousness focus in each of the so-called planes creating and testing out their own hypothetical methods, routes, concepts, courses of action and then by cooperation and examination refining down to two or three so that the physical brain or the mind interfacing with the physical brain can present just a limited choice so as not to overwhelm the body consciousness. When speaking here we need to have you remember that words such as body consciousness encompass the brain and the connections with the, what you would call, astral self or mental self or mind. It is difficult to be definitive on this subject as all interpenetrate each other and one cannot put a locus on any particular aspect of contemplation or communication as the level of intensity as regards courses of action, ideas etc. can vary from one plane to another.

So who am I speaking to?

With regard to who is speaking, of course you already know, it is you who are speaking. Not just speaking the words but forming the words, forming the sentences. You have just crossed another threshold in this last year or two whereby you, as the observed have realised that you also are the observer. You have made the connection. Of course, while you are focused completely in waking reality the connection is extremely difficult to make but when you shut out physical reality the connection just re-forms. It is simply that you have rotated your gaze from physical to non-physical. You have just spun the dial. You have changed channels and therefore the information comes and of course for you to believe it, at present, you need to attribute it to another source. Not really believing that you yourself are the knowledgeable source because in waking reality you cannot access knowledge. So you have to go through this specialised ritual of sitting quietly and focusing away from the physical and waiting for the information to be delivered. Now what you are doing is no different to when you are practising mediumship, you simply open to transmission, but in this case you are allowing your, let us say, maternal/paternal or your non-aligned “ernal” to communicate with you. This is like giving guidance to a child in the physical world.

Now, because you are navigating to all intents and purposes 100% in the physical world your enquiries into the non-physical world are necessarily more like probes than structured enquiry. Now all the time you are both the interviewer and the interviewee it is obvious that a certain amount of information will be biased somewhat, sometimes to a marked degree depending on you, the observed’s, beliefs.  Because you will find it hard to express an opinion which is diametrically opposite to that of your own. However, we do appear to be educating ourselves, did you notice we said “ourselves” rather than the somewhat benign “you”. We are basically bringing our “selves” into a state of coherence and if all goes well you may find yourself in a position of being able to observe our other lives, or at least, one of them. But again, you will have to take time to focus away from the physical world in order that you, as we said, probe, and probe means obviously looking where you cannot see, and with luck you may find the right channel of another one of our focuses.

We will do what we can to help. As for us, this is quite an interesting experiment. Also, as you found out with your golfing experience, our other “soul” found a new ability which previously he would have considered impossible. Let us hope that you receive the same benefit.

Now, with regard to the episode which unfortunately you did not record. The bodies which are seen by your clairvoyants and to some extent measured or, let us say, ascertained, indicated, by your electrical equipment, here you are talking about the astral/ etheric body, if you wish. Then as we outlined last night, the body in each case is composed of consciousness. In the same way that your physical body is composed of consciousness.  Your physical body has its senses and experiences the reality which surrounds it and of course when you are speaking about the first stage after death you say that the astral body experiences an even more real environment which surrounds it and meets all those who have passed on, who at one stage you may have believed were dead. Your astral body, being composed of consciousness, albeit linked to the physical consciousness, is also able to focus and enjoy its own reality and, like yourself, it can focus in another direction. As “you” focus and receive information, as you are presently doing, and you receive information from those who are deceased, so your astral self, shall we call it, can focus, and does of course, towards you in the physical and it can also focus in other directions.

We will use the terms that you are currently used to, of emotional, mental and causal bodies etc. It is not quite as it seems but for now it is good enough. Now, in each one of these “bodies”, or “frequencies” or “levels of existence”, call them what you will, there is the consciousness. These are not just inanimate electrical fields, not that anything is ever inanimate, everything is alive and everything is connected to many things. It is not just a simple hierarchical system whereby the soul sits at the top, if you wish, “the soul”, and then creates all these bodies in order just to operate the physical body. Each, as it is termed ”body” has a full life, and, explores in just the same way that you do. Just as the observed and the observer are one, as we have come to use in a simplistic way, so of course there will be no argument when one says that the physical, the astral, the emotional, the mental, the causal, and any others you may care to intersperse with, are all one.

You could say that the physical body is the “observed” and all the other bodies are the “observers”. And, of course, they are all co-creators. They are all co-experiencers but that does not stop them multiplying their experiences and taking other probable actions. Now you have been told that although you take a decision to take one road, one path of action, other paths of action are explored in order to see what would have happened. Various scenarios have been proposed as to how this happens. That each time you make a decision another universe is created. This gives rise to infinite parallel universes or multiverse theories and various others. That does seem rather cumbersome, doesn’t it? Wouldn’t it be simpler, and let us use Occam’s razor here, that the simpler explanation would be that your various other “bodies”, who exist, in what you would call a non-local area, and can process information, experience etc. instantaneously and being “part of the action”, are able to straight away project and process and conclude alternative actions.

As you can see if you have, five courses of action, in most cases there are only two and only occasionally would there be a large number, given the speed of communication and also just plain extrapolation of probabilities, you can see that these probabilities are explored, and note taken. Now you may say, why doesn’t every decision turn out to be right? But then you may as well go straight back to the question of why you are inhabiting a reality which is sealed off, in general, from knowledge which is available to those outside that reality. On the other extreme we can say that you can look at your own conclusion that once you know the outcome of everything, there is no point in doing anything.

And so this physical reality is created by you in order to enjoy the game.  Once more, you may take a decision that does not work out but have you not learned more from that decision because you have learned what does not work and therefore you are able to conclude, or at least suppose, that another route followed would have worked. But you can only see that, by analysing the reasons why the other decision did not work. So, it is easier to learn from doing the wrong thing than from doing the right thing.

Now we have strayed a little from our explanation of last night but we feel we have added some more pertinent propositions.

We are a reservoir of knowledge and experience. It is not as much a question of who, or what, because knowledge of all is available to those who seek. Therefore endeavouring to envisage a limited form with a certain amount of knowledge and probably with a background of human existence is what the normal enquirer is expecting. But if you are faced with merely an “automated” for want of a better word, source of information that has access to myriad sources of information, how do you give that an identity, apart from the fact that that source, in your terms, seems to be manipulating the instrument. If the consciousness that generally manipulates the instrument is able to place itself in such a position as to have access to a wide range of knowledge then again we are back to the consciousness that cannot even know itself. It can only understand the activity that it is engaged in, in this instance, operating this particular instrument.

Now, previously you have asked, “who is speaking?” and we have replied, “you are speaking” because you are now aware you are connected to the part of you that you would label the observer, the one who is watching on, the one who is guiding and directing and supplying energy, you might say, but that is only supplying of focus, and the focus is energised if you wish in order to create activity, but if you can imagine that this is all in the mind, not a word that is correct, it is all in the imagination of the consciousness, so, you could say, if you wished, it is part of the whole who is speaking because everything you consider to be separate from you is part of the whole and is connected to the whole obviously because it is part of the whole and as such has access to the knowledge that the whole has. Not only the interconnections. It is like finding your way up river, you may be the river that you are currently focusing in, if you worked your way back upstream and you found other rivers coming in, which one would you think you were? Not only that, if you thought I will explore this river and then you found there are more tributaries and then little streams, then rivulets and then eventually maybe we could say spring but then that would lead us too far into the analogy, so let us say you found a little bit of trickle of water from a rounded rock which was collecting rain drops and then we could keep going and eventually what would we come to, we would come to atoms and hydrogen and oxygen and then on as usual to the electrical charges coming into and out of existence but now follow that back the other way and you find yourself part of the river. So, who are you? You are all of them aren’t you? You are all of them but it just depends where you want to focus. You can focus on being the electrical charge, you can focus on being the tributary, you can focus on being the river, which one do you prefer? Because that is what it is about, preference of focus. I take it that you have understood fully what is being said, you create your own reality by your preference of focus. Wherever you find yourself is because you have focused on that. The reason you focused on that is because it has attracted you, you like it, it interests you and as long as it does so your focus will stay there and you will say, “this is me, this is where I live, this is where I belong, this is my home until you find that it is no longer as interesting as it used to be and you will make plans to move on and arrange for your exit in an acceptable manner to the rest of the cast and you will at some stage merely switch your focus to another, which you are already experiencing, of course, but that one is more attractive than your present focus. Now can you understand that? You simply move your focus from one reality to another reality because you wish to do so. No judgement, no blame, and you do it at the appropriate time in general to cause as least pain as possible to those who you love and care for taking into account the inevitability of you having to leave this focus at some stage.

Perhaps you would touch on the question of no time, everything existing all at once. I (Jean) am going to be giving a talk on the survival of physical consciousness after death but that definitely implies one thing happening after the other. So can you enlighten me with regard to this concept, survival of consciousness after physical death bearing in mind no time?

When you speak to a child you use different representations to that when you speak to an adult. Different experiences have been assimilated at various times during the growth of that person. There are certain levels of understanding. Now, when we speak to those who are caught up in the illusion of time then is it easier to couch your words in a time-based linear format than to infuse those entities with a concept that they cannot relate to, in a process where we lessen the value of the information we wish to impart. So as far as your listeners are concerned, they see the termination of life as a moment in time, the movement, to those who have some understanding, to a new reality to which others before them have already passed. They consider that those who have passed to the new reality still exist in that new reality and because you create the precepts of your reality and so do those who have passed, we put together scenarios to satisfy the desires and the longings of the individuals that now have the ability to be, as they see it, together again. And so the message must be always presented in the manner in which it can be understood and give comfort and not sow confusion. Does that answer your question? When you are sufficiently, and we use time here for your understanding, in the situation where you no longer have a physical body then you will gradually understand the meaning of the “ever present”, I will not say timelessness, the ever present, and at that stage you will…… it is impossible in many respects to outline, apart from lame analogies, how it is to inhabit the timeless world instead of one where you can only see one moment following another.

Presumably, you are a group of consciousnesses speaking.

All selves are a group of consciousnesses. But, what you must realise, is that a consciousness is not a singular unit in terms of being able to exist in any particular reality in a meaningful form. It must group together with others if it wishes to co-create the reality in which it can participate as one of many. So that there is a, what you might call, society of participators, where roles can be played, experiences can be conjured up, challenges can be set, laughter, enjoyment etc.

We refer to Dave as the normal Dave we have always known and David as the well-spoken, seemingly younger aspect that occasionally surfaces. Can you explain please?

The first point we must make is that this may be a difficult subject to put across as we have, obviously, a very interested party here. It may be more difficult to bypass the intense curiosity that is part of this.

We first, as came up earlier, have the nature of time involved. You think you are living one life at a time, whereas it is not too difficult to see that you split your attention between different lives and different times. Although there are no times there are different imagined scenarios, which because of the physical environment, you have just lined up in sequential order and believe that is how things happen, but in truth, they all happen simultaneously. Let us not go into that as it is something that is just beyond our capability to explain in terms that you would understand.

Now, most of those existing on the physical plane are quite happy to just receive information from their senses and in fact get discombobulated, in other words disturbed, when they are confronted with information that does not fit in to the established pattern of events. Events, being all sensory perceptions. So even when this does happen then the walls are set up so that they are not allowed to be breached in future. There are few that actively seek the experience of other than the physical. Most have explored through meditation or taking hallucinogenic drugs. Veils are breached but because when you enter into an entirely different scenario with different laws, different parameters, different frame of reference, it is very difficult to interpret them in terms of the one you habitually inhabit. In other words, if a scene is all in red it is very difficult to describe the same scene only using blue. A very simple analogy. But for those whose belief system enables them to have a conviction of the possibility of awareness of other lives they have been leading then, especially mediums who are aware that they can receive sensory perceptions of all sorts from minds other than their own and of course they allow the use of the physical instrument by those minds, you can see you (they) are already well on the way to having one of the personalities of the higher consciousness able to use it’s particular mind, shall we say, to blend with the mind of another instrument which is part of the same consciousness. In other words, both personalities are productions of the same consciousness.

So let us say a producer is producing two plays at once. There will be certain things, because of the techniques, skills, portrayals, points of knowledge, opinions favoured by the producer, that they cannot help but somehow showing up as a signature in whichever film they produce. Much as an artist, while even trying to hide his normal technique can often be picked up by somebody who is very skilled in the techniques of various artists and can differentiate between one and the other.

Same thing is happening here, much as a parent and a child, that the parent here is saying “well this creation, I’m letting it run but it’s showing a lot of enquiry here”. So, just as you would a child, you would introduce it to something which it has obviously been thinking about and you say “well here it is, now let’s see what you do with this”. Because if a child is showing a particular aptitude in one area, you may say, well let’s take it to music lessons and we will see how it goes. Well the same is happening here. One instrument is following a particular line of enquiry and is turning this over and over and over, so you might say “I’ve got this one going over here. Let us take this particular form of expression and blend it”. Much like a cook making a different flavour. Instead of producing exactly the same recipe they just try a different recipe. And what happens here? The instrument’s knowledge is expanded, but of course so is the higher consciousness’ knowledge expanded. Because it has been used to, it always has kept its various expressions separate. And as much as it knows it has to keep each expression separate there are times when, simply because each one is a reflection of its own that it can’t help but at certain times reach comparisons and this is what we don’t know. We don’t know whether the higher consciousness does or is able to make comparisons between all its lives. One can only assume that it can. That makes sense doesn’t it? But it would keep each one separate so as not to confuse each individual instrument. That does not mean that you cannot take an expression of one instrument and not blend it with another and in terms of consciousness that is not too difficult. It is just a question of operating an instrument in a different fashion. If we take the example of programmes then it is quite easy. One has a certain programme, as you see now, speaks in one way, and it is no different to inserting that programme in the other instrument and that then produces exactly the same expression.

So this is what is happening in this case. Of course a certain amount of confusion arises in the instrument, because in much the same way as the brain lights up, “where has this suddenly come from”? Think back to your first question, free will, “well this isn’t my free will, so whose free will is it”? If it is pleasurable then one accepts it as a boon but if it wasn’t pleasurable you would be most discomforted. In this case because the instrument was actively looking for said experience or open to the experience and formulating the theory, that this was, is indeed possible. Being open to the underlying truth of several lives being lived at once and as we said before, indeed as the instrument has said before, the experience was given to validate the concept.

It is up to the instrument now, because the instrument and the consciousness are one, to decide whether it is happy to accept, on a temporary or a permanent basis, the new expressions that have been provided. But, it needs to be in close harmony with, let us say, the controlling consciousness who, because of our previous discussion, you would have to say, holds the ultimate sway. The term, right to dispensation as to “yes, OK this can go on” because it may or may not be in the original plan for that particular instrument. It may be an amusing diversion or it may be something which is “well at this stage, why not? Let it carry on”. It could well be an alternative avenue of exploration much like the hybridisation of plants. Let us see what happens. Now, if you recall, if we are going to allow the vehicle to drive itself and see how well you programmed it, well why not this? No difference. It is another form of creativity and see the results of your creation. It may also be that you’re merely devising a whole new instrument to utilise in, what you would term, another life experimentation, because if you think about the hybridisation of the flowers then you have to put two together, then produce the seed to see whether the seed produces the new flower. This is the same sort of thing. Again, this is all open to just which belief or opinion you wish to adopt as to the process in motion.

Many years ago David would sometimes remark that he felt sort of “semi-detached”. Any observations?

Yes, your feeling of being “semi-detached”.

The first intimations that you are more than what you previously thought. You have realised that you were, let us say, part of something, hence the feeling of “semi” detached but not fully detached because, through a glass darkly, you were beginning to sense the connection to your “higher self” or the larger aspect of who you are. Gradually that has built up and you no longer are using that term of semi-detached. And as we are speaking now, it is you who are speaking now or I that is speaking now or me that is speaking now because all are one and the same. And you, the instrument, we might say, is now seeing the world and yourself more and more from the position of the higher self.

Can we explore the subject of freewill?

A reasonable analogy would be of you having an idea and then putting it into operation. In other words “I’ll build this” and then building that. So you could say that the higher consciousness has the idea, has the intention and then gives itself the permission to carry out that idea. Can you understand this? It is all one, you are doing the whole thing, you think you have the free will but it is you all along, from start to finish. It is only that we feel that the doer is also the decision maker and you are but not in the way that you think. Your expanded self is the decision maker, your non-expanded self, your focused self is the doer. That is a better description.

The expanded thinker, rationaliser, weighing up consequences, a chooser of probabilities, all emanates from the total of yourself. But once you decide on exactly what your next actions are going to be that focus comes in, narrows right down and then executes the physical motion. So you can rest assured that you do have free will, you simply have to have trust in that there is a part of you that knows exactly what it is doing and even though you appear to make a mistake you could look upon this as having the intention to execute a particular action in a certain fashion but while doing so become momentarily distracted or less mindful of the task in hand and not executing it in the envisaged manner. Is that clear?

Let us take an analogy with which you are familiar. You intend to hit a certain golf shot, you go through you usual pre shot routine, but you let your attention be momentarily diverted by noticing a twig on the ground or whatever, but your mindfulness just varies that fraction even though you don’t realise and you don’t consider it makes any difference whatsoever and yet a poor shot results. You had every intention and were doing all the right things as you always do to execute that shot in the desired manner and yet simply by an unseen microsecond of inattention the action was not carried out in its normal programmed manner. You might just say something as if there, in the vast number of intramuscular connections that have to be made to execute a golf swing, there was a slight interruption, any analogy you wish here, in the electro connectivity, a bit of atmospheric disturbance shall we say? Which caused one connection not to fire and therefore threw the whole sequence fractionally out, the consequences of which were magnified many times over because of the distance between the muscles and the head of the club. Can you understand that? Yes. Then you can apply this to everything, so that you must be aware that your consciousness, which is you, is not infallible and is using this physical playground to experience and to enjoy and to experiment.

When you stand back and you observe, then to use your favourite phrase, you do not get caught up in the drama but when you walk down to the front of the theatre and up onto the stage and the lights are on you and you are surrounded by the rest of the cast and the conversation is going on and you find yourself a part of the conversation, then how do you expect to view the scene as a whole when you are part of the scene?

Not easy!

That is as good a description as you can get with the higher consciousness and its focused point of consciousness. The part that you find difficult to understand is that both can exist at the same time, the observer and the observed co-exist at all times.

And are in fact one.

Depends on where you want to be, you can be on the stage or you can be in the back of the audience. Either one is party to all the sights, sounds, emotions, everything. Do you understand?

But yet in the focus part all those sensory perceptions are enhanced, felt more, more immediate, more important, whereas to the observer they are items of interest. They are something to be viewed instead of experienced. Something to be assessed and we can only say related to, rather than, the best word is, owned. You will save your experiences, in that effectively they were your experiences, you own those experiences. Whereas the observer can just say that, I observed this experience, I understand, I can understand the feeling but the feeling does not, has not…

It’s like somebody watching the play. Somebody watching the play knows that it is a play and by knowing that it is a play you haven’t got that emotion and also the observer can see the whole picture whereas the person who is acting in the front of the play cannot see what is going on behind or to the side whereas the observer can see the whole thing, above below and even in front.

It is part of the survival of consciousness that you will be all that you ever were or that you are, however you wish to look at it. You will lose nothing but it will no longer have the importance to you that it does at the present and yet the things that you wish to have importance to you will still have importance to you. Now this may seem as if it is a form of assurance that you will not lose your connections to those you love but also remember that many in spirit, and you have read of enough of these returnees or ghosts as you may call them, to know that some have attachments to material objects. So it is no different, that to which you are emotionally attached will continue until you no longer wish to be emotionally attached and that is the same at this level as at any other level.

If you love somebody here when you move over you will love somebody there, but again just the same as here it may last, it may not last, the same applies. You can have a short relationship here or a very long relationship here and the same applies no matter which dimension of mind you find yourself inhabiting. So you can accept that if you continually think of somebody who has passed on then you know the bond exists and they will be there to greet you and your paths may continue to follow the same route or in a later time they may diverge but that is part of the ongoing life. As long as you feel well disposed toward another then you will continue to enjoy each other’s company.

Earlier we, David and I, were talking about the interaction between the mind and the brain, how responsibilities are shared, or are they? Is it the mind that is in complete control?

Now, you presently use lots of labour saving devices, which did not exist in prior ages, and yet now, of course, you are free to spend much more time in other activities, whereas previously you were, and as some are still, in various parts of the world, fully engaged upon obtaining enough food and shelter to sustain themselves through the seasons. You have now been able to negate an awful lot of requirements through labour saving devices, shelter, mass production of food, and so on, and so on.

Now, you are your consciousness, your mind, your brain are all engaged, we are not saying there is three, from the point of your understanding. All are engaged on constantly making life easier. Yes?  So once more if you were creating a physical body and you are improving it from generation to generation then why not also make that body a labour saving device, in this case a control saving device. Which is why, it is often speculated, that the human being is little more than a robot, or a puppet, being controlled by a non-physical mind. But as we were talking with you in the car, we say we because there is a very fine division between David and ourselves.

Now, you will program your instrument to do all the things that you really do not need to get involved with any more. You wish to be able to turn your attention to more interesting things. So gradually the operation of the body/brain is being improved. You used to have, and to a certain extent still do, many people, the vast majority, who take on one task at a time. Now you have invented the term “multi-tasking”. So what are you doing? You are shifting your focus quickly over several areas but you manage to keep all the balls in the air, all the plates spinning as a matter of course. You understand? Which gives you satisfaction in that you get a lot more knowledge, a lot more experience through handling a far wider range of activities than your parents were able to do. You have done this using more, labour saving devices. Quicker information transmission, quicker answering. If you had to wait for a letter and write a letter back, it could take you weeks to come to a decision or an agreement. Now, often this is done in seconds. How much more experience have you gained? Yes?

So would you say, from the point of view of organising a system, there is more interest in coming to this system now than there was, say, 500 years ago? What you can also say, “Is this the answer as to why the population is increasing so rapidly”? Because it is an attractive place, or shall we say, a more attractive place to enjoy, gain experience, learn, whatever phrases you wish to put upon the desire of consciousness to come with their peers to experience a certain period of activity in a dense physical plane. We are throwing in many connections for you to think about. Everything is connected, not just the consciousness but all the events and objects and progressions. As you care to sit and see the lateral connections then normal, you might say, human desires will be seen as the planners and instigators of what is happening. And of course you must substitute that for consciousness or rather the other way round.

How does the brain/mind fit in with what you have just said?

A labour saving device. The brain is a labour saving device, and as we said, many years ago it was programmed to do one task, now it is programmed to do many tasks, so giving the mind…… we have just explained how so many more activities, experiences, learning can be derived from one sojourn in the physical now, as against what could be experienced, say, 100 years ago. A lot of this is due to improving the labour saving device of the brain. Now you have the ability, through other labour saving devices, through other information transmissions, through aeroplanes, telephones, cars, the ability to be in several places within several hours whereas previously it may have taken several days to get to one place. So, can you see that the brain is a part of these constant improvements. Yes?

That does not mean that the brain is conscious in the way that you conceive it. It is still an instrument just like the physical body, which it is part of. One tends to perfectly accept the fact that the physical body is referred to as an instrument or a vehicle and yet wants to think of the brain and the mind as somehow separate whereas there is a constant feedback loop between the two. The brain is indeed a collection of consciousness…..all the time you believe that the physical body is, what you would term “a solid reality”, it is difficult for this subject to be explained. If you can take the physical body as merely being a collection of, what you might term, electromagnetic energy which, when you go further, is conscious, although you cannot see it, and understand that what you term “the mind” is composed of exactly the same substance, then it is no different to certain of your consciousness groups having the designated functions of liver, heart, leg, toe, eye, Yes? and others  having the function of controller, director, Yes?. One is a mental function another one is a physical function. One is the engine room one is the bridge. And yet they are connected, and part of the whole. It would be easier for you to understand this if you take away the view that the body is solid, is physical and the mind is non-physical. As soon as you realise that all is non-physical, you merely are using the created senses to give you the impression of physicality. Look at it this way; try to step outside, look at the body as totally invisible and just a set of moving waves, and then look around for where the mind is and likewise look at that as a set of moving waves enmeshed with the other set of moving waves. You will realise that all is consciousness. Can you see that?

Try to visualise that in your mind and then try to separate them. And for what purpose?

You must not try to see the body as one aspect and the mind as a separate aspect. They are one and the same.


Can we return to the subject of freewill please.

Can you frame that question a little more specifically?

I wasn’t being specific because I really wanted to get your thoughts on whether there actually is any free will or whether everything is decided before we come here right down to the last little bit. So really it is a question of how much free will do we really have?

So, let us draw a comparison once more between parent and child as we did last night. Knowing that you are both part of the same thing, in which case as the parent and child are locked together for the, you may as well say, lifetime, but obviously in the formative years until the child leaves home, then the parent has a very strong influence upon the decisions as to the action taken by the child. Would you agree? Yes. So, what did we say last night about how the consciousness who resides in the non-physical and has put a part of its consciousness in the physical but without access to the knowledge of anything outside the physical. Now, the child, in many respects that does not have the knowledge with which to argue, still accepts the dictate of the parent. So, you can immediately use your mind to see how that the, what you would call, higher self has a very strong influence over the part of it that you term lower self. Would you agree? So, shall we say free will is partial, which is why we asked about the framework in which you posed the question. Free will is free will up to a point. Now, free will, you only have free will within the constraints of the societal rules in which you live. Yes, you can do something but would that be unacceptable to those with which you wish to keep a harmonious relationship. Would you agree? So your free will is circumscribed, in much the same way the free will of a child is circumscribed, from a young age it’s severely circumscribed and as they reach the age of reason and the age where they can be trusted it is loosened and loosened into where when they leave home they are only… their free will is limited by what they wish to believe they wish to do and also by their feelings as to what their parents, relatives, friends will think of their actions. Can you see what I am getting at? So, free will is free will up to the point where you find that the costs outweigh the benefits.

We will move onto the next part having established that free will is subject to all your self-imposed constraints and also there is a restraint put upon it by your total self. Now let us draw another analogy whereby when the lower self is put under hypnosis it will agree to things that it would agree to generally in the fully awake state but it will not agree with things that it would never agree to in the awake state. So, once more we move to the higher consciousness, for want of a better word, and we say, ”that the higher consciousness is responsible for forming the physical and using that instrument for its own, what you would call purposes and influences the same. Again, when we go back to last night’s discussion with regard to the delay in conscious decision from when the brain has already the action into motion, in other words, the action comes before the decision, which most people would think is impossible, but it is totally evidential. We may say,” the machines do not lie.” Therefore, to any reasonable person the instruction has already been delivered to the brain from we know not where, so we have to posit that there is an extra physical entity which is outside time and has made the decision as to what to do. So, would you say then that the lower self has free will in that case? Because its decision was being taken for it. It thinks it has made a decision. In which case we have to then follow the logic through, the decision has been made, the brain goes into action and yet, the lower self then thinks it has made that decision. So, where has the thought come from? You must take this one stage further and think “the brain has lit up” but does that mean that the thought to take the decision has been put in? So, then you would say, “who has taken the decision and before you know where you are, you could say, “well actually there isn’t any free will.”

Yes. Because, what about, what we call for want of a better word, the higher self, to what extent has that got free will?

Well we are back to the turtles aren’t we? Now at the moment we only know when we think that what is being spoken at the moment should be coming through, or one would  think it must be coming through, the higher consciousness of the individual, then what would that consciousness have to say about this. One can only say, that as far as that higher consciousness is concerned it is still influenced by its own, you may say, prior conditioning. We were getting some realms of conjecture here because it is not prior conditioning as such, it is knowledge of, you might say, the illusory nature of existence. In reality it is doing what it wants to do, but, of course, that can be influenced by suggestion, by the arousal of desire, the arousal of curiosity from communications with other, what you would term, higher consciousness. Before we go into the realms of one consciousness, one mind and the aspects of god. It makes more reasonable sense that whatever the ocean of consciousness is, there arises hot spots, cold spots, waves, different temperatures, etc. different ”locations”, different states of being and that will give rise to different opinions, different views and therefore different courses of action and so there will be an influence on, for purposes of this discussion, upon the higher consciousness. But, again, you can still argue that having taken the decision at the bottom level, the lower self, then you can say, “ah, but I don’t really like that, I think I’ll change my decision.” But we are back to the chicken and egg, did the brain light up at that point and therefore signify that came from the higher self. Now if taken to what would seem to be a logical conclusion, we go back to the parent and child and at times you give the child free rein to see what it will do, how it works it out for itself, because you wish to see what the personality of the child is like, and its creativity etc. Much the same applies to the, what you might call in parlance, the brain child of the consciousness i.e. the instrument. As we said before you sit back and you let it drive itself and you see just how good a programmer you have been and how good a teacher you have been. I think we have covered your question, but again there is no just yes or no.

So where does this leave free will? If you assume once more that free will comes from your higher consciousness….the human being seems to think that free will exists at the physical level and yet we can go back to the brain experiments which show that by all logic and reasoning that the brain is being instructed to transmit to the senses that which is desired by the instructor even though the instrument decides [thinks] that they are making the decision.

So following the line of cause and effect backwards, “what caused the brain to light up?” Something knew, something knew even though ostensibly to those in the physical the target picture had not yet even been chosen [by the computer]. We can go further from the half second delay to the experiments where the whole sequence was brought forward into consciousness several days before the sequence was run. Almost as if to say “work that one out”.

Once you can accept, albeit reluctantly, the idea that free will is an attribute of your higher consciousness you have to trust in the driver of your vehicle. Let us use the concept of a dual-controlled vehicle. The instructor, who has the main controls, tells you “your controls are now working, you drive”. You start to drive and you think that you have all the control but you are unaware that the instructor decides, say, to turn right and because his wheel is connected to your wheel, the movement starts, the light comes on in the brain and you think “I’ll turn right here”.

There is a faint impression of the car starting to slow and you think “I’ll brake”. In other words, the law of cause and effect is operating but you are not aware of the cause, you think you are the cause. But what has happened is, the cause comes from another source, you feel the effects and you then translate that effect into your impression of cause.

Do you understand? I hope that we are making this relatively simple.

To summarise. Free will does exist but in your higher mind or higher consciousness, the total you.  It is indeed, your free will. But only if you can understand that you are your higher consciousness and not the instrument. It is to understand that what you call “self” is your consciousness, your higher self. If you can take on board that what you are looking at, what you are hearing, everything you think you  perceive, is being perceived by what you would call your “your out of body self”. Now imagine your out of body self, which you know by now, can see and hear and record, transmits to the instrument, the brain, for later reiteration.

Once you can understand that and say to yourself “I am that out of body self and is that out of body self my higher consciousness? Then it must have all the faculties that I think the physical has.”

“Therefore it activates the brain and it activates what we consider to be our visual and hearing faculties”. It would be like you using a megaphone or a loudspeaker, speaking to a microphone in one room with the loud speaker being in another. Is that a good parallel for you? So your out of body self, your higher self, has the microphone and the physical instrument has the loudspeaker. In other words the physical instrument is a pass through mechanism for the observations, actions, all the attributes of the senses. But this is all being sensed by the higher self which resides in the area of no time. It obviously has enough intelligence to ensure that what passes through the instrument is compounded into a structure which fits with the belief in linear time.

Seth said:- “Listen to me now and in so doing listen to yourselves. You come through as I come through. You are not non-beings in a god stream, you speak and the god listens. You are the god that listens. From you that god, that ”all that is”, learns what is happening in your corner of reality. You send messages backward through the fabric of time and space which is also, in your terms now, the fabric of that god’s being as again the smallest cell in your finger or toe sends messages to you and you, even if unconsciously, make adjustments in response. So in those terms and using that analogy do you send messages to that god as to what is happening in your corner of the universe and that god makes adjustments accordingly”. Would you comment please.

The terminology used in that paragraph is not one that we would particularly use, when we say we, we mean whatever intensity is coming through at the moment. Everything is connected as we said earlier. Now, because everything is connected then everything will have different focuses, although connected, and as an intensity of feeling is felt then the focus will move to where  they feel that intensity is beckoning, is of interest and if it is they will add their intensity to it. Of course, what we are effectively saying is a message has been sent, has been received, the focus has turned and therefore a message is then sent back. Because if it is of interest the message will be sent back and if it is not of interest it will just turn away. That means the intensity goes up fractionally and then fades away again. Now, when we use the word god one can say that is the total consciousness that is in that particular area of focus at any one time. Any consciousness that is focused within that particular event or object or whatever is learning, is experiencing, feeling what is going on in that event. So, messages are being sent backwards and forwards and each consciousness is learning, experiencing, feeling at the same time. Does that answer your question? Or do you need further elucidation?

Seth said:- “Man did not have to learn by trial and error what plants were beneficial to eat and what herbs were good for healing. The “knower” in him knew that and he acted on the information spontaneously. The knower is always present but the part of your culture that is built upon the notion that no such inner knowledge exists, and those foolish ideas of rational thought as the only provider of answers, often limit your use, your own use of inner abilities. You will end up with, if all goes well, a new kind of illuminated consciousness, an intellect that realises that the source of its own light is not itself but comes from the spontaneous power that provides the fuel for its thoughts”.

We are talking total interconnectedness. Every consciousness is part of the whole. All knowledge is available to all consciousness. Each gestalt of consciousness is quite able to speak, to link, with the other gestalt of consciousness that happens to be the poisonous herb and it can understand that it would be detrimental to the physical instrument but you must realise that we are in the business of uncertainty and excitement. You can add to that, “experiment”. You must also accept that it is a co-created reality, a co-created play. The intensity of feeling is to ingest the poisonous herb,      for what reason?      because it is part of the play, that is the decision that is taken. The human species has developed this belief that the human is there to survive from birth to some kind of averaged death of the particular instrument at some point in time. And yet this concept is held even though the same groups of consciousness set about killing each other at a very early time (age?). They do not say “we have all got to live till 70”. They are busily killing each other in their teens and twenties, en masse. And why? Because of the experience, the excitement and the uncertainty. The experimentation of war and battle, games, winning and losing, all the things that are not available when you are aware of every possibility. So of course the knowledge is available but the whole point of visiting the physical plane is to get away from that situation.  If we all knew (everything) we would be back over the other side and there would be no earth or universe.

Everything is a construct. Everything is a construct of consciousness, consciousness in motion.

We spoke earlier about the imagination of the human species, it is the imagination of consciousness, imagination focused. Focusing on an idea can lead to intense desire to experience same and generates the will to manifest. Belief and will are sides of the same coin.

So to sum up the subject of free will, could we say that in consensus reality, it is going with the flow?

Freewill is an inviolable, unassailable, inherent quality of every single, we use the word, unit of consciousness, or thing that has consciousness, whichever definition you care to entertain. Now, it is only because you identify yourself as a separate body that you consider that you as this separate body have a freewill that is constrained. Now, let us go back to the fact, and we will call it the fact that your physical reality is the manifestation of a fantastically intricate, consensus agreement between an unimaginable host of consciousnesses which are focusing upon creating and participating through their thoughts the manifestation of your physical reality. All of those consciousnesses are exercising their freewill now, through agreement but, of course, they agree in much the same way as you agree to pay your property taxes in return for your roads, schools, etc. You agree to your laws, and say you must only drive on the roads and not on the pavements and so you can think your way through many of these. Now, would you say that you have no freewill in that matter? You have given away, we will rephrase that, you have agreed to certain disciplines of behaviour because it actually suits you and you actually wish to have that. Now, that is not constraining your freewill that is an expression of your freewill. At any moment in time you can if you wish step up from where you are, walk out the door and never return. But other elements of your freewill say to you that it is comfortable here, I don’t want to lose all this I worked for and where would I go? So, are you exercising your freewill?

Yes, but then has that been agreed by multiple others?

Just rewind the disc and listen to what was said a few moments ago. Nothing that you experience happens without your prior agreement. You have agreed to the smallest, the largest, the most enjoyable, the most unenjoyable of your experiences.

Therefore, it would seem to me that freewill is not on the earth plane, it is where the agreements are being made.

Are you on the earth plane?

I suppose my higher consciousness is not, it is just the physical body that is experiencing the earth plane. But that’s what I am really talking about. Has the physical body got freewill? It seems to me the answer to that is no.

If you rewind the disc you will then, first of all consider, what exactly is the physical body other than a perception, other than a thought form agreed in manifestation by all the consciousnesses that are involved in participating and being a part of that thought form, the pattern has to be fleshed out in whatever terms you wish to think of. As we spoke of before, they can be from the most dense to the most clear visible reality to just being a product of the imagination in the mind’s eye that doesn’t actually even have a thought form. For example, imagine, we are digressing but, imagine how the thought arose for a motor car, one had a thought that riding horses is slow, uncomfortable, dangerous and wouldn’t it be nice if we could just really sit in comfortably and quiet whatever, and just sail along through the air at high speed until we get to where we want to go, so that was the wish, shall we say.  But as thoughts were applied to the wish, the thoughts gradually changed the intelligence, the associations were thought about and carriages appeared, pulled by the horses and so on and so on until you get to where you are today. Then only do you not have to ride horses but you get in jet planes. Thoughts not only exist, of course, but they mutate and change and grow, much in the same way as you grow, thoughts grow. We hope we have given you food for thought.

This post is a talk I gave to the Theosophical Society in 2014

    Seth, Consciousness and the Co-Creation of Reality

How your “SELF” is formed.

The Seth Quotes which can be accessed from the link below were shown before the talk started.

Seth Quotes from Seth Material talk to Theosophical April 2014NB

The talk then continued using Power Point pictures to illustrate things as the talk proceeded, most of the power points are included in the text as you will see.

List of Seth Books (Displayed as Power Point 2)

  •  The Seth Material 1970
  • Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul 1972
  • The Nature of Personal Reality: A Seth Book 1974
  • The “Unknown” Reality: A Seth Book in two volumes 1977-1979
  • The Nature of the Psyche: Its Human Expression. A Seth Book 1979
  • The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events. A Seth Book 1981
  • Dreams, “Evolution” and Value Fulfillment. A Seth Book in two volumes 1986
  • Seth, Dreams, and Projection of Consciousness 1986
  • The Magical Approach: Seth Speaks About the Art of Creative Living 1995

The Seth books are a series of books scientifically describing aspects of the formation of physical reality and personality. Virtually all human avenues of thought are discussed and explained in a vast and wide ranging display of superior knowledge and understanding.

They were channelled by Jane Roberts, a writer and poet. They were received from the mid sixties until the late seventies.  Jane Roberts tragically died in 1984 at the age of 54.

(Jane’s picture was Power Point 3)

Now at this point I feel it is only correct to allow Seth to introduce himself as he does in Chapter 1 of “Seth Speaks”

To add a touch of theatre Jean will play the part of Jane.

(I am afraid the voice you are going to hear will be mine but it will give you some idea of what it is like to listen to a trance medium.)

(Power Point 4)

Seth Speaks.

The Eternal Validity of the Soul

By Jane Roberts

“I am an energy personality essence,

no longer focused in physical matter.”

Seth:- Now… You have heard of ghost hunters, I can be quite literally be called a ghost writer, though I do not approve of the term  ”ghost”. It is true that I am usually not seen in physical terms. I do not like the word “Spirit”, either; and yet if your definition of that word implies the idea of a personality without a physical body, then I would have to agree that the description fits me.

I address an unseen audience. However, I know that my readers exist, and therefore I shall ask each of them, now, to grant me the same privilege. My name is Seth. Names are simply designations, symbols; and yet since you must use them I shall also.

My readers may suppose that they are physical creatures, bound within physical bodies, imprisoned within bone, flesh, and skin. If you believe that your existence is dependent upon this corporeal image, then you feel in danger of extinction, for no physical form lasts, and no body, however beautiful in youth, retains the same vigour and enchantment in old age. If you identify with your own youth, or beauty, or intellect, or accomplishments, then there is the constant gnawing knowledge that these attributes can and will vanish.

I am writing this book to assure you this is not the case. Basically you are no more of a physical being than I am, and I have donned and discarded more bodies than I care to tell. Personalities who do not exist do not write books. I am quite independent of a physical image and so are you.

Consciousness creates form. It is not the other way around. All personalities are not physical. It is only because you are so busily concerned with daily matters that you do not realise that there is a portion of you who knows that its own powers are far superior to those shown by the ordinary self.

You would be much better off in reading this book if you asked yourself who you are, rather than asked who I am, for you cannot understand what I am unless you understand the nature of personality and the characteristics of consciousness.

If you believe firmly that your consciousness in locked up somewhere inside your skull and is powerless to escape it , if you feel that your consciousness ends at the boundary of your body, then you sell yourself short, and you will think that I am a delusion. I am no more a delusion than you are, and that may be a loaded sentence.

I can say this to each of my readers honestly (smile): I am older than you are, at least in terms of age as you think of it.

If a writer can qualify as any kind of authority on the basis of age, therefore, then I should get a medal.

I am an energy personality essence, no longer focused in physical matter. As such, I am aware of some truths than many of you seem to have forgotten.

I hope to remind you of these. I do not speak so much to the part of you that you think of as yourself as to that part of you that you do not know, that you have to some extent denied and to some extent forgotten. That part of you reads this book, [even] as “you” read it.

And I (David) can add “That part of you is listening to this talk ‘even’ as you are listening.

Seth’s Main Themes (Power Point 5)

  • Consciousness is “All that is”
  • “Gestalts” of Consciousness form patterns which are projected into physical reality.
  • “Personality” is a product of a conglomerate of many minds, which is forever changing.
  • Each mind is capable of living many lives simultaneously in multiple dimensions/realities.
  • The nature of mass consciousness and mass events.

Now to study and even begin to understand the “Seth” material takes many years and personally I think it would be a great subject for a PhD.

As the years have passed since the publication of the “Seth” books it is hard to imagine that later scientific theories such as David Bohm’s Implicate/Explicate Order and others were not influenced by a  knowledge of Seth’s portrayal of reality.

(Power Point 6)

“To my great surprise – and slight annoyance- I found that Seth eloquently and lucidly articulated a view of reality that I had arrived at only after great effort and an extensive study of both paranormal phenomena  and quantum physics……..”

– Michael Talbot

-author of The Holographic Universe and                                                                                                            – Beyond the Quantum

So let us get right into the basic thrust of Seth’s view of how reality is formed. We cannot even begin to scratch the surface in one hour and I want to leave as much time as possible for questions.

(Power Point 7)

  • C.U.’s Units of Consciousness
  • E.E. Units Electro Magnetic Energy Units
  • Gestalt Consciousness a term encompassing the above.

All gestalt consciousnesses co-operate and conglomerate to form the individual components of the living world.

Seth states that consciousness is the basis of “All that is”. He describes( within the limits of our ability to comprehend) “CU’s” – Consciousness Units – which form EE Units – Electro Magnetic energy units- which combine into myriad patterns to produce reality as we know it. Seth’s recurring theme is that everything is a gestalt consciousness, a conglomerate of multiple units of consciousness which operate simultaneously in multiple dimensions. Think of Walt Disney coining the word “Imagineering” i.e. turning an idea into reality. Now, by virtue of 3D printing we can turn an idea into a solid object in minutes. You have an idea of an object, you design that object using a computer. Where it exists in a kind of three dimensional electro-magnetic reality.  A Hologram!

You slice that Hologram very thinly, connect the computer to your 3D printer, load the printer with the material of your choice, metal, plastic or even living cells, and the printer then constructs your object layer by layer.


(Power Point 8)

  • Consciousness is a way of perceiving the various dimensions of reality.
  • “You” form your physical body.
  • The “inner you” directs your activities
  • The “self” that you know is but one fragment of your entire identity.
  • Your “identity” is a gestalt consciousness able to experience multiple lives in multi dimensions simultaneously.

As Seth states on page 8 of the Seth Material.

Consciousness is a way of perceiving the various dimensions of reality. Consciousness, as you know it is highly specialised. The physical senses allow you to perceive the three dimensional world, and yet by their very nature they can inhibit the perception of equally valid dimensions. You would not think of identifying with one portion of your body and ignoring all other parts, and yet you are doing the same thing when you imagine that the egotistical self carries the burden of your identity.

I am telling you that you are not a cosmic bag of bones and flesh, thrown together through some mixture of chemicals and elements. I am telling you that your consciousness is not some fiery product, formed merely accidentally through the inter workings of chemical components.

You are not a forsaken offshoot of physical matter, nor is your consciousness meant to vanish like a puff of smoke. Instead you form the physical body that you know at a deeply unconscious level with great discrimination, miraculous clarity, and intimate unconscious knowledge of each minute cell that composes it. This is not meant symbolically.

Now because your conscious mind, as you think of it, is not aware of these activities, you do not identify with this inner portion of yourselves. You prefer to identify with the part of you who watches television or cooks or works- the part you think knows what it is doing but this seemingly unconscious portion of yourself is far more knowledgeable, and upon its smooth functioning your entire physical existence depends.

This portion is conscious, aware, alert. It is you “the physical”, so focussed in physical reality, who do not listen to it’s voice, who do not understand that it is the great psychological strength from which your physically orientated self springs. This inner portion of you sifts all information from all dimensions and unbelievable inner activities take place before you can so much as lift a finger, flicker an eyelid,  read this sentence upon the page or before a word is spoken.

You must understand that there are no real divisions to the self , however, so we speak of various portions only to make the basic idea clear.

You cannot understand yourselves, and you cannot accept my independent existence, until you rid yourself of the notion that personality is a “here and now” attribute of consciousness.

The self that you know is but one fragment of your entire identity. Like the various skins of an onion or segments of an orange, all connected through the one vitality and growing out into various realities while springing from the same source.

For convenience’s sake, you close out the multitudinous inner communications that leap between the tiniest parts of your flesh, yet even as physical creatures you are to some extent a portion of other consciousnesses’.  There are no limitations to the self. There are no limitations to its potentials. You can adopt artificial limitations through your own ignorance however. You can deny, but you cannot change, the facts. The personality is multi-dimensional, even though many people hide their heads, figuratively speaking, in the sand of three dimensional existence and pretend there is nothing more. In this book I hope to pull some heads out of the sand.

Now listening to me recite paragraphs from the Seth books although thought provoking is a little bit dry.  Now following the death of our son in 1994 I became intensely interested in the nature of consciousness after I had several paranormal experiences which convinced me that my son in some form continued to exist. Reading of other experiences is all very well but having the experience yourself validates your conviction. For three years we helped an English medium to develop into a first class materialisation medium, with adults and children materialising in the room and voices of deceased personages coming out of the air. We have been involved with many trance circles in the UK most of which were of poor quality. However , for a period of approximately 3 years, 2010,11 and 12 here in Sydney we sat to develop a local mental medium and she subsequently developed into a first class trance medium. The group of minds that spoke through her ( I must tell you minds of this nature invariably refer to the medium as the vehicle or the instrument) were able to converse with a knowledge and insight, in my opinion, approaching that of Seth. They did not wish to dictate a book but we plied them with questions on all manner of subjects and particularly I asked questions covered by Seth in order both to test the knowledge of the communicators and validate Seth’s opinions.

I have been a medium myself for some 15 years and probably due to the number of hours I have spent in séances conversing with non physical intelligences my clairaudience in certain states of mind has become quite strong. I sometimes come awake in the early hours and “listen” to such as the following, which often appears to be a simplified version of more intricate realities.

(Power Point 9)                  Entangled Minds.

Once upon a time, a thought arose, where it came from no-one knows. Minds saw this thought and liked the idea behind the thought. The thought was about having a certain life in the physical. Many more minds liked the idea of this life in the physical and joined the thought, until there were many, many minds and their thoughts linked together, united in their decision to experience that projected life.

They sorted out a mother and a father and it began. The child was born and was named Joe Public. As Joe’s life progressed other minds were attracted as they saw the events that were planned for this life, and they wanted to be part of it, wanted to experience this life, and as it went along many minds came, and many minds left, having experienced the event that they wished to experience. So, the conglomeration of minds known as  Joe, went along, forever adding and losing minds, but always known as Joe and all those minds that had ever been Joe, ever been a part of Joe, always had the memory of the experience of being Joe. So Joe was a part of many minds and many minds were a part of Joe and so it went on and Joe went on forever, forever changing, forever adding new minds, losing old minds, but was forever Joe, and Joe was forever connected to every other mind that had ever been a part of him. And every other mind who remembered their experience with Joe was always connected to Joe. And so Joe never had a real identity because Joe was a part of the whole of all these minds. And so was every other Joe and every other Joanna. Everything that exists is all a part of everything, a part of the thought world, endless conglomeration of thought, endless gestalts of consciousness.

So, can you see that you are a part of everything, always connected and always yourself, yet forever in the process of becoming – always able to say “I AM”.

David Ingman – received clairaudiently upon waking.

(Power Point 10)

  • When you think about the constant exchange of atoms (consciousnesses and minds) between your body and the rest of the material world it is the same thing going on.
  • When you think how it is considered that planets, stars and galaxies are formed from gaseous clouds, black holes and white holes etc. is the conglomeration of thought the same process, i.e. it produces our world, the world that we “see”?

It is a simplified explanation of how we as seeming individuals are an individual pattern composed of an ever changing group of conscious minds. This simple story neatly encompasses many of Seth’s statements regarding identity.

Think of a piece of music always recognisable but subject to different arrangements, different instruments, different musicians, different conductors. The composition remains the same but is ever-changing and is always recognisable depending on which minds are interpreting the piece. (remember Joe Public)

(Power Point 11)

  • Seth:- So psychological structures form to which names are given. The names are meaningless, but the structures behind them are not. Such psychological structures also retain their identity, their pattern of uniqueness, even while they change constantly, die and are reborn. (See Joe Public)
  • The eye rises out of the physical structure. The ego rises out of the structure of the psyche. It cannot see itself. As the eye cannot. Both look outward – in one case away from the physical body, and in the other case away from the inner psyche to the environment.
  • The creative body consciousness creates the eye. The creative inner psyche creates the ego. The body forms the eye in the splendid wisdom of its great unconscious knowing. The psyche brings forth the ego that perceives physically. Both the eye and the ego are formations focused toward perception of exterior reality.
  • Seth:- The Nature of Personal Reality:- Chapter 1

Now if you refer to the last two paragraphs of the “Living Picture of the World” Seth states – The ego cannot see itself as the eye cannot.

Now this may be hard to accept. You will never find an individual “you” …. you will only ever “see”, “feel”, “imagine” who you are, as you project and observe, the combined interpretation by the multiple consciousnesses that comprise “you” in a particular direction of focus, i.e. at any “moment in time.” The interpretation of how a “particular” pattern is being portrayed results in the personality that you believe you are.

So, if you are content with “who you are” continue to observe and reflect. But, if you wish to change a little or a lot, think of the attributes/ traits etc you would like to exhibit and know that you will attract like minds/thoughts (like attracts like). If you concentrate on portraying these attributes/traits, gradually “who you are” will become “who you desire to be”. You will be able to look back and say “that is who I was” and “this is who I AM”

(Power Point 12)

  • There is no such thing as dead matter
  • Nothing exists – neither rock, mineral, plant, animal or air – that is not filled with consciousness of its own kind.
  • There is no object that was not formed by consciousness.
  • You cannot understand what you are unless you understand such matters.
  • Seth Speaks:- Page 10

(Power Point 13)

  • You are like an actor in a play.
  • What you do not realise is that you are acting in many plays at the same time.
  • In different centuries, in different dimensions.
  • You co-create the script, the props, the setting, the themes.
  • You, and every other individual consciousness that takes part.
  • You are so focused in your roles however, so entranced that you have forgotten that they are of your own creation.
  • Seth Speaks:- Chapter4

You co-create your lives, you co-create your events, you co-create your body and once you realise that the consciousness that is you cannot be destroyed, only continually transformed, you will realise that the only purpose in life is the purpose that you create for yourself.

So we have briefly covered how Seth sees the formation of physical reality and our part in it so now let us look at his statement that we live simultaneous multiple lives in multiple realities or dimensions. Some will interpret this concept as reincarnational lives. Seth states that time is a particular belief we apply to our physical reality. Many physicists agree – there is no such thing as “time” and the majority subscribe to the multiverse and parallel universe theories.  Multiple dimensions by other names.

Chris Johnson, an author of books on Seth, said to me “What we think of as “past lives” or “other lives” ( as there is no time where they exist in the psyche) can influence your “current life’s thinking and beliefs. Importantly, this also applies in “reverse” – what you “resolve” in the way of challenges in this lifetime reverberates across all the lifetimes that contribute to your overall identity.

All exists at all times and each event happens when you focus upon it and what is more you find yourself a part of that reality in what, to you, is the present moment. As you switch focus from one dimension to the other this gives the impression that everything happens simultaneously as you seem to be participating in all of these events at once with no break in sequentiality.

But of course if our minds could work at the speed of today’s computers, and remember that communication between the smallest particles/waves is instantaneous, then experience, comprehension and analysis of multiple areas of interest can be performed in the blink of an eye giving the impression of simultaneity.

There was a recounting of an NDE on Victor Zammit’s website where the person who had the experience states that wherever he looked he seemed to be in a different life and what’s more they were all happening at the same time. As explained by Seth in what he calls “the spacious present”

Now, when I had reached this point I thought the presentation was finished but in the early hours of the next morning I awoke to receive the following:- (some of you may pick up the thread as we go along and arrive at the end before I do.)

(Power Point 14)

Entangled Minds (an expanded version)

Once upon a time a thought arose, where it came from no-one knows. Minds saw this thought and liked the idea behind the thought. The thought was about forming a world composed of light, with many things to see, do and experience.

Seven major gestalts of consciousness decided that they would make the idea reality. They were known as red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet. They agreed that the group would be known as Roy G. Biv or ROY for short.

ROY began mixing colours (of consciousness) from his infinite palette. When he thought that he had done enough he said, “let there be light,” and there was. (The Big Bang? i.e. when consciousness decided to explicate the Gravityverse. )

Now some of these innumerable compositions of light, gestalt consciousnesses were called people. The people, as they stood in awe and wonder at the world around them, soon realised that ROY was everywhere, and they said, “ROY is omnipresent,” and someone exclaimed, “but that means he must know of all that is and therefore is omniscient.  Such total knowledge must give ROY total power, so he must be omnipotent.”

Roy G. Biv was, is, and will always be, composed of multiple consciousnesses with infinite aspects which when displayed in their infinite variety of composition we label “physical reality”.

Now you will all be familiar with the light spectrum and its range of frequencies.

Now ROY can present all shades of himself depending on what mix of gestalts of consciousness (minds) he chooses to project. All these shades we now refer to as personalities, aspects of minds of different intensities displayed as one.

ROY is, amongst others, also known as Joe and Joanna Public.

Power Point 15  “Light Diagram”

At this point a picture was shown which unfortunately I have not been able to attach. it showed Consciousness, Minds and Diversity of Thought, Identity and Unity of Thought(s), The “Observers”, The Observed, Personalities and how everything is linked.

Now, again I considered the presentation was basically complete, but “someone” was following a different agenda.

The following morning, January 19th, I woke up as a different personality I spoke with a beautiful cut glass accent, I sang to a compendium of 30’s to 60’s songs for three hours with a vastly improved range, and clarity of tone. I was able to sustain notes for much longer than previously and my breathing pattern was effortless. Of particular surprise was the way my phrasing often times differed from the way I had sung those songs for the past 50 years.

My wife, daughter and son-in-law, thought this personality was wonderful, commented that it seemed to be in love with the world and everything in it, and they sensed a powerful presence. For my part I was serene and relaxed yet felt totally self-assured and had boundless energy. My mind, hard to describe, also felt expanded and somehow I was “larger”. All in all I was ecstatic about the new me.

I recognised that I had been given this experience to underline the basic truth of my lecture. This personality is the ideal that I have always wished to be and probably my long suffering wife’s dream also.

However, being the person I am, that evening I started to analyse what was happening and whilst realising the pros started searching for the cons, and also, what parts of my personality would I lose. I went to sleep thinking of these things.

The next morning I woke up and the old me was back, but the comparison left me in no doubt, I was being given a choice. I could be who I wished to be if I chose to.

The new personality made its appearance at odd occasions during the following weeks. During a particularly pleasant period I “heard” the dry amused comment “perhaps we have reached a happy medium.” The most interesting part of this experience was that “I” was always present as an “observer” – I was “watching” and “hearing” my body expressing itself as a different personality – I was both the “observer” and the “observed”.

I hoped that I would be able to call upon this aspect of myself at will, but unfortunately that has not been the case and it has not made itself known since February. However, “I” have been left with a milder personality and have also realised that speaking with an upper-class accent is unimportant, likewise the much-improved singing. All in all I am more at peace with who I am.

This was the end of the talk and I then invited questions from the audience.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.