Library » Science & Technology » The Dream-Art Science Sessions (700-704), Abridged
From The “Unknown” Reality, Vol. 1, By Jane Roberts and Robert F. Butts.
|
|
Preface
Jane Roberts and Robert F. Butts held the Seth sessions in Elmira, New York from December 8, 1963 until August 30, 1984. Their unique collaboration resulted in the publication of more than thirty-five books of poetry, fiction, metaphysics, and numerous paintings. Though written for a popular, not academic, audience, the twenty-one Seth-dictated books now form a highly regarded body of metaphysical work in the Western world. They’ve been translated into at least seventeen different languages to date.
Seth is the self-described “energy personality essence” channeled by Jane Roberts. However, the channeling phenomenon is still not well understood in terms of current scientific, philosophical, and theological worldviews. These conventional worldviews still see channeling as some kind of dissociative pathology, regressive neurosis/psychosis, or even demonic possession! Yet the emergent fields of Transpersonal and Integral Psychology have forged an authentic postconventional scientific paradigm that sheds new light on the channeling phenomenon.
Integral Psychology, and particularly the work of American philosopher Ken Wilber, has synthesized common elements in various “roadmaps of the psyche” from Vajrayana/Madhyamika Buddhism and Advaita/Vedanta Hinduism to the pioneering work of Jean Gebser, Jean Piaget, and Clare Graves (there are many dozens more). Together, they cover a general spectrum of consciousness from matter to body to mind to soul to spirit. In terms of the Seth material, this spectrum covers Frameworks 1, 2, 3, and 4 to All-That-Is (they don’t correlate in one to one fashion as we’ll see shortly, but they cover the same spectrum of consciousness).
Combined with compelling evidence now amassed in developmental psychology, cultural anthropology, hermeneutics, genetic epistemology, neurochemistry, evolutionary and systems theory, the Integral Psychology model allows us to speculate that channeling is a distinct intelligence (or developmental stream). In essence, channeling may be very similar to our linguistic, emotional, sexual, interpersonal, musical, mathematic, etc. abilities (there are at least two dozen that have been identified by research to date). In other words, channeling is another ability latent within every human being that develops in stages and blossoms to virtuostic levels in only small percentages of the population in any given time, like all the other intelligences. [1]
Interestingly, this model of developmental streams (also called modules, multiple intelligences, or lines) has existed since 1981 in the work of Ken Wilber. [2] There are many others who have done significant research in this area of developmental studies. [3] However, while mainstream acceptance and application of this work is still years away, the proverbial writing is clearly on the wall – an authentic postconventional scientific paradigm now exists that has opened the door to further research on the channeling phenomenon. It is a paradigm free of mythic, dogmatic religious, Newtonian, Darwinian, and Freudian limitations. [4]
In fact, Integral Psychology uses this new paradigm to integrate the best practices and partial truths of these earlier paradigms (inclusive). It doesn’t reject them outright (exclusive), but seeks their enduring contributions to the knowledge quest. For example, Freud penetrated to surface layers of the subconscious and learned how early trauma effects healthy development (neurosis, psychosis results through repression, dissociation, etc.). Darwin formulated a theory of biological development over vast periods of time based that helped to put the final nail in the Anglican Church’s institutional dominance as purveyor of Ultimate Truth (the Bible as absolute truth was forever refuted as mythic dogma). Newton formulated the principles of mechanics, the law of universal gravitation, proposed a theory for the propagation of light, and invented differential and integral calculus (creating modern physics and paving the way for the technological advances of the industrial revolution).
Aspects of their basic contributions are still viable today. However, the downside is that all of these geniuses could only see as far as their own personal development and self-realization allowed. Their blinders included the dominance of rationality at the expense of deep intuition and authentic spirituality. Freud banished spirit into the realm of regressive, childish domains. Darwin banished spirit into the objective process of natural selection and mutation. Newton never understood the role of spirit in his equations or the physical world. Still, it’s important not to throw out the baby with the bath water – acknowledge their amazing insights, but see them with integral eyes tuned to spirit-in-matter, spirit-in-body, and spirit-in-mind.
All of which leads to the potential for deeper understanding of Seth, Jane, and Rob’s magnum opus, The “Unknown” Reality (1977, 1979). Spanning sessions 679 through 744, it was the third Seth-dictated book, and the first to include extensive research and endnotes by Robert F. Butts. It is also unique in its format – the only Seth-dictated book to intentionally avoid chapters, relying instead upon six thematic sections of related sessions. The intent was to break up the linear, analytic, left-brained nature inherent in the chapter format. In other words, Seth purposefully appealed to our nonlinear, intuitive, right-brained nature, which, as we will see, is key for exploring the “unknown” reality. Furthermore, this is the only Seth book to include seventeen Practice Elements, a kind of introductory exercises or “yoga” (which means “union”) to put theory into practice. As such, The “Unknown” Reality is one of the most potentially transformational books in the Seth/Jane repertoire.
Seth used the metaphor of the “unknown” reality to hint at our own greater reality – the nested, invisible Source Reality from which we all spring. This Sethian worldview is also consonant with many of the concepts found in perennial philosophy which provides premodern “roadmaps of the psyche” and detailed methods (yoga) to access transpersonal awareness through what Seth calls inner senses – a transpersonal, deep intuition that complements the rational mind. [5] Both worldviews also hold that consciousness is primary and causal, not an effect of space-time or energy-matter. Seth used the concept of frameworks of consciousness to help explain this. Framework 1 represents the physical, objective world. Frameworks 2, 3, and 4 represent the invisible, subjective, inner world – the “unknown” reality from which all objectivity, space-time, and energy-matter emerge. [6]
Frameworks 1 and 2 have been compared to physicist David Bohm’s Explicate and Implicate Orders (Friedman, 1990, 1997 [7]). Framework 1 covers the familiar physical world of our waking states, and even some surface elements of the dreaming state. But Framework 2 is more closely understood as the frothy, counterintuitive realm described metaphorically by quantum mechanics as an infinite source of probable energy-matter fields in Framework 1. Thus, Framework 2 can never be measured by the stuff of Framework 1 – energy-matter – directly. It must be thus inferred by clever experiments that reveal its effects, much like the wind can’t be seen, yet can be deduced by observing its effects on trees or the surface of water.
Frameworks 3 and 4 are even further removed from physical reality, though no less important in its co-creation. However, there is not a lot of detail in the extant Seth material about them. [8] Still, we can get a sense of how they might relate by referring to the Great Chain of Being theorists, for example, Plotinus, Vasubandu, Fritjof Schuon, Ananda Coomaraswamy, Huston Smith, Rene Geunon, and Ken Wilber. Though they use different words, they all attempt to describe the same spectrum of consciousness from matter to body to mind to soul to spirit to nondual Spirit. Wilber, for example, uses the terms Great Nest of Being, Great Holarchy, and Kosmos. Seth’s term for the Great Chain is All-That-Is.
Figure I. The Great Nest of Being. Ken Wilber, Integral Psychology (2000). [9]
The above diagram is only one general way to divide up the “pie” of consciousness, but it shows the common elements in many of the world’s perennial wisdom traditions. Namely, there are distinct ontological frameworks, regional areas, realms, waves, fields, or deep structures within All-That-Is. As we will see below, the divisions shown in the Great Nest above and Seth’s Frameworks of Consciousness below don’t correspond in one to one fashion, but overlap. The linguistic divisions are secondary, of course, but they all attempt to illumine the innate spectrum of consciousness that has been mapped since premodern times by homo sapiens.
Framework 1 deals with:
Physical objects | (A = energy-matter consciousness) |
Bodies | (A+B = biological consciousness) |
Minds | (A+B+C = mental consciousness) |
“Narrower” aspects of the subtle (dream) field | (A+B+C+D = dreaming consciousness). |
Frameworks 2, 3, 4 deal with:
“Wider” aspects of the subtle (soul) field | (A+B+C+D = subtle consciousness) |
“Narrow” aspects of the causal (spirit) field | (A+B+C+D+E = causal consciousness). |
Note that nondual Spirit is listed “outside” of the five basic divisions (in the lower right of the diagram) to acknowledge the Aspects of Source Energy that are never born into and thus never die in terms of Frameworks 1, 2, 3, or 4. Put another way, these four frameworks and beyond (or matter, body, mind, soul, and spirit) are only a metaphorical map of the spectrum of consciousness – an intellectual tool – but are no substitute for the direct experience of the conscious mind through the inner senses.
There is another important concept to integrate from the Great Chain theorists. Namely, while there is some kind of “evolutionary” unfolding within Framework 1, in terms of Frameworks 2, 3, and 4 there are also simultaneous, complementary involutionary actions. Thus, linear perception occurs in Framework 1 only (matter, body, mind). But in Frameworks 2, 3, and 4 (subtle and causal), there are nested, simultaneous nonlinear perceptions that guide all energy-matter/space-time toward a “remembrance” or realization of nondual Spirit. Thus, all four frameworks of consciousness simultaneously “evolve” and “involve” in nested, holonic fashion. [10] While there is change-in-time in Framework 1, there is also simultaneous “no-change-in-no-time” that paradoxically is not static or fixed within Frameworks 2, 3, and 4.
Welcome to the “unknown” reality where the tools required for exploration are our conscious minds and inner senses.
Notice that Seth used quotation marks around the word “unknown” to emphasize that our Source Reality is already “known” to latent nonlinear aspects of our conscious minds. But those superconscious or causal aspects remain “asleep” or “forgotten” in the vast majority of people. Therefore, most of us are not aware that we have a latent superconscious or causal self (which Seth refers to as the inner self, inner ego, psyche, or soul). Yet, anyone can awaken this “remembrance” through learning to use their inner senses. And the good news is that they are innate in all of us.
An inherent idea in all of Seth’s books, then, is to make the “unknown” known, the forgotten (amnesis) remembered (anamnesis). Why? Because our species is at a crucial stage of development, and if we are to live sane, just, and beautiful lives in a world that now exceeds six billion people, we might consider the benefits of any “art-science” that helps us to explore the “unknown” reality. But I’m getting ahead of the story.
The “Unknown” Reality is not a book for beginners. For example, Seth built upon the foundation laid in the preceding 678 sessions to further explore concepts like:
Ø Probable realities.
Ø Worldviews (individual and collective belief systems).
Ø Reincarnation in the context of simultaneous time (nested linear and nonlinear “evolution” and “involution”).
Ø Consciousness units (CUs) and Electromagnetic Energy units (EEs).
Ø Multipersonhood (one-made-of-many = holonic personality = Aspect Psychology [11]).
Ø The nature of dreams and the dreaming self (subtle fields/Framework 2).
Ø Blueprints for reality (“root assumptions” or “involutionary givens”).
Ø The dream-art scientist, true mental physicist, complete physician (gross/subtle field exemplars).
Ø The multidimensional nature of the psyche (probable selves, reincarnational selves, counterpart selves, and “families” or species of consciousness).
While further explication of the above is beyond the scope of this Preface, they are very important for anyone interested in the study Seth’s dream-art science. [12] What we are dealing with is rocket science for the soul. It is not something to be pursued in a naïve fashion. It is thus highly recommended that any motivated student consider working with an authentic meditation teacher to complement their studies, as you will engage a transformational journey that has its own challenges and rewards. While the idea is to be playful and keep it fun, when shadows and darkness are inevitably encountered, that is not the time to quit the pursuit of our ideals [13], but to mindfully and joyfully work through them. An experienced teacher, transpersonal therapist, and/or a community of like-minded explorers can provide invaluable assistance.
On a personal note, oftentimes during my first reading twenty-five years ago, I could assimilate only three or four pages at a time, and worked on a Practice Element for a few days or weeks. I also kept a dream journal that was an invaluable phenomenological tool, and it took me close to two years to work through both volumes overall. I did this on my own, without the help of a meditation teacher, therapist, or community. Hindsight is usually 20/20, and I realize my progress would have been much smoother and quicker if I had not done this on my own.
Still, my experiences validated that this material is purposefully designed to transform consciousness to the point where the concepts not only become intellectually possible, but with a little luck and persistence, propositionally true through direct experience. After all, metaphysics is only spoken and written abstractions about transcendent experience, and not the experiences themselves. Therefore, the concept of integral post-metaphysics is based upon doing specific exercises, obtaining data, and verifying the validity with a group who have similarly engaged the exercises. That is the basis of all physical, mental, and spiritual scientific method, and is what we are promoting here in the pursuit of dream-art science. [14]
However, we are nowhere near this point in terms of mainstream cognitive or mental sciences, much less spiritual sciences. But the whole point is that we are heading in that direction. Thus, the exemplars given by Seth in the following sessions – the dream-art scientist, true mental physicist, complete physician – are intended to hint at potentials that lie on the horizon, without providing the specifics. That’s been left up to anyone interested. We are being introduced to probable futures, and they have their own force of attraction – what Ken Wilber calls “downward causation” and Agape – the loving nudge of Spirit-in-action that awakens the “remembrance” in each of us.
Therefore, this compilation is intended as an introduction to further motivate those interested to explore the actual books and do the Practice Elements over a period of time. Though there’s no quick-fix, instant karma, or weekend satori being offered here, anyone can pursue this. The price of membership is simply the commitment to personal transformation, learning the roadmaps and practices, and developing your inner senses.
One should also be mindful that The “Unknown” Reality sessions were dictated from February 4, 1974 through April 23, 1975, and the knowledge quest has advanced considerably since then. Again, this book was written for a non-academic audience, so the point is not to get hung up critiquing out-of-date science, but to seek to understand the conceptual milieu and its transpersonal themes.
Now, before we turn things over to Seth/Jane and Rob, let’s take a short walk down memory lane and revisit some of the cultural milestones that were in the air around time of these sessions:
Ø Parapsychology had been recognized in 1969 as a legitimate pursuit by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Ø Six moon landings (twelve men) occurred between 1969-1972, when the first Earthrises were captured on film (Apollo 8) and experienced vicariously by billions, helping to fuel the first postmodern view of planet Earth from the cold, silent emptiness of space.
Ø The Cold War was in full swing. US foreign policy was based on détente with Russia and a world-stunning recognition of the People’s Republic of China in 1972.
Ø The Association for Transpersonal Psychology was founded in 1972 by Abraham Maslow, Anthony Sutich, James Fadiman, Michael Murphy, and Miles Vich.
Ø The Viet Nam War ended in February 1973.
Ø Civil, feminist, animal, and ecological rights movements flourished. For example, the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe vs. Wade established abortion as a “fundamental right” for women.
Ø The Watergate scandal forced President Nixon to resign on August 8, 1974 culminating a national moral crisis of unprecedented proportions.
Ø EST, gestalt therapy, bioenergetics, Rolfing, message, jogging, health foods, tai chi, Esalen, hypnotism, modern dance, meditation, Silva Mind Control, Arica, acupuncture, sex therapy, Reichian therapy, More House and a host of others were explored by the beat generation and baby boomers galore. The New “Age of Aquarius” had dawned.
Ø The OPEC Oil Cartel’s combined earnings rose from $23 billion in 1972 to $140 billion in 1974. During 1973 there was an oil embargo that saw long lines at gas stations.
Ø Cheeseburgers, a pack of cigarettes, a gallon of gasoline cost less than a dollar in many places.
Ø Garrison Keillor’s A Prairie Home Companion radio show debuted.
Ø Hank Aaron of the Atlanta Braves broke Babe Ruth’s record when he hit his 715th career home run in a game against the Los Angeles Dodgers on April 8, 1974.
Ø In 1973-4, The Exorcist scared the bejeebers out of millions, and Devil sightings and cases of demonic possession increased proportionally. The Best Picture for 1974: The Godfather, Part II.
Ø In 1974, I Shot the Sheriff by Eric Clapton, Kung Fu Fighting by Carl Douglas, and Annie’s Song by John Denver all reached number one on the US pop charts.
Ø In 1974, Xerox decided to build a personal computer to be used for research. Project “Alto” begins. At Xerox PARC, Jack Hawley developed the first digital mouse. In 1976, Steve Wozniak offered his new computer (Apple) to Hewlett-Packard. They rejected it. Wozniak and Steve Jobs finished work on a computer circuit board, that they call the Apple I computer. Paul Allen began full time work at Microsoft. Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard, to devote his full attention to Microsoft.
Ø Jane Roberts was forty-five years old on May 8, 1974 and published Adventures in Consciousness: And Introduction to Aspect Psychology in 1975.
Ø A twenty-five year old Ken Wilber worked on his first book, The Spectrum of Consciousness (1977).
Ø The Three Mile Island nuclear accident, Jonestown mass suicides, Iranian revolution and hostage drama, the disco craze and Saturday Night Fever, Jane Roberts’s Psychic Manifesto and an American Vision all loomed on the horizon….
Though it’s been almost thirty years since this material was first dictated, it is clear that we have barely begun to scratch the surface of the “unknown” reality in any collective sense, and yet the signs are all around us, including the integral leading edge. That is, we now understand the importance of including the physical, mental, and spiritual fields of experience in any authentic integral science. There is thus the potential for a new array of integral art-sciences to provide systemic solutions to myriad educational, economic, and political challenges on a global scale. That’s the bright promise of the integral agenda anyway. As always, the realization of the ideal is up to each of us.
I have added various terms [in brackets] from my forth-coming book, Integral Conscious Creation, to provide context for the integral concepts therein (don’t confuse them with Rob’s bracketed words, the difference should be clear). For example, the colors in CAPS refer to those worldviews mapped by Clare Graves, Don Beck, and Chris Cowan. So in terms of hard science, ORANGE refers to the mechanistic Newtonian paradigm that was transcended and included by the GREEN quantum paradigm.
For an overview of these worldviews, see:
Emerging New Worldviews – An Excerpt from Integral Conscious Creation: Rocket Science for the Soul
For an overview of Ken Wilber’s integral model and terminology, see:
Ken Wilber’s Model of Human Development: An Overview
Finally, please support the publishers of the Seth/Jane/Rob books – Amber-Allen, Moment Point Press, and New Awareness Network – and make every effort to purchase them for further study. It’s crucial to read everything, including Rob’s copious notes, as they provide the wider context in which subtle meanings and interrelationships are sure to emerge.
Paul M. Helfrich
Castaic, CA
Summer 2003
Session 700
May 29, 1974
You must first of all understand that your own greater reality exists whether you are in flesh or out of it, and that your subjective experience has a far greater scope than the physical brain itself allows.
This – apart from corporal living – continues of course while you are a creature in space and time. It presents a parallel noncorporal existence, so to speak, that your brain does not register. In the sleep state you are in a connective area, where bleed-throughs occur.
… The blueprints for reality [i.e. “involutionary givens”] will not be found in the exterior universe. Some other civilizations experimented with a different kind of science than the one with which you are familiar. They met with varying degrees of success in their attempts to understand the nature of reality, and it is true that their overall goals were different than yours. Such people were focusing their consciousnesses in a completely different direction. Your own behavior, customs, sciences, arts, and disciplines are in a way uniquely yours, yet they also provide glimpses into the ways in which various groupings of abilities can be used to probe into the “unknown” reality.
Art is as much a science, in the truest sense of the word, as biology is. [ORANGE] Science as you think of it separates itself from the subject at hand. [GREEN] Art identifies with the subject. In your terms, then, other civilizations considered art as a fine science, and used it in such a way that it painted a very clear-cut picture of the nature of reality – a picture in which human emotion and motivation played a grand role.
Your [ORANGE] scientists spend many long years in training. If the same amount of time were spent to learn a different kind of science, you could indeed discover far more about the known and unknown realities. There are some individuals embarked upon a study of dreams, working in the “dream laboratories”; but here again there is prejudiced perception, with [ORANGE] scientists on the outside studying the dreams of others, or emphasizing the physical changes that occur in the dream state. The trouble is that many in the sciences do not comprehend that there is an inner reality [i.e. subjective/intersubjective perspectives]. (Intently:) It is not only as valid as the exterior one, but it is the origin for it. It is that world that offers you answers, solutions, and would reveal many of the blueprints that exist behind the world of your experience.
The true art of dreaming is a science long forgotten by your world. (1) Such an art, pursued, trains the mind in a new kind of [gross/subtle/causal field] consciousness – one that is equally at home in either existence, well-grounded and secure in each. Almost anyone can become a satisfied and productive amateur in this art-science but its true fulfillment takes years of training, a strong sense of purpose, and a dedication – as does any true vocation [i.e., not a quick-fix, instant karma, weekend satori].
To some extent, a natural talent is a prerequisite for such a true dream-art scientist. A sense of daring, exploration, independence, and spontaneity is required. Such a work is a joy. There are some such people who are quite unrecognized by your societies, because the particular gifts involved are given zero priority. But the talent still exists.
… A practitioner of this ancient art learns first of all how to become conscious in normal terms, while in the sleep state. Then he (2) becomes sensitive to the different subjective alterations that occur when dreams begin, happen, and end. He familiarizes himself with the symbolism of his own dreams, and sees how these do or do not correlate with the exterior symbols that appear in the waking life that he shares with others.
I will have more to say about these shared symbols later, for they can become agreed upon signposts.
There are inner meeting places, then, interior “places” that serve as points of inner commerce and communication. Period. In a completely different context, they are quite as used as any city or marketplace in the physical world. This will be elaborated upon later in the book. (3) Our dream-art scientist learns to recognize such points of correlation.
In a manner of speaking, they are indeed learning centers. (4) Many people have dreams in which they are attending classes, for example, in another kind of reality. Whether or not such dreams are “distorted,” many of them represent a valid inner experience. All of this, however, is but a beginning for our dream-art scientist, for he or she then begins to recognize the fact of involvement with many different levels and kinds of reality and activity. He must learn to isolate these, separate one from the other, and then try to understand the laws that govern them. As he does so, he learns that some of these realities nearly coincide with the physical one, that on certain levels events become physical in the future, for example, while others do not. He is then beginning to glimpse the blueprints for the world that you know.
… Now: You manufacture articles. It has taken you centuries to reach your point of [ORANGE] technological achievement. It seems to you then that objects come from the outside, generally speaking – for after all, do you not make them in your factories and laboratories?
In a way it seems that “artificial” or synthetic fabrics are not natural. You produce them from the outside. Yet your world is composed of quite natural products, objects that emerge, almost miraculously when you think of it, from the inside of the earth.
You work with material that is already there, provided. You mix, change, and rearrange what is already given. The entire physical universe emerges from an inside [action of involution/evolution], however, and none of your manufacture would provide you with even one object, were it not for those that appeared as source materials long before. Wood, plants, all the species of the earth, the seasons and the planet itself, come from this unidentifiable inside. Physical events have the same source.
… The true scientist understands that he must probe the interior and not the exterior universe; he will comprehend that he cannot isolate himself from a reality of which he is necessarily a part, and that to do so presents at best a distorted picture. In quite true terms, your dreams and the trees outside of your windows have a common denominator: they both spring from the withinness of consciousness. (5)
Simply as an analogy, look at it this way: Your present universe is a mass-shared dream, quite valid – a dream that presents reality in a certain light; a dream that is above all meaningful, creative, based not upon chaos (with a knowing look), but upon spontaneous order. To understand it, however, you must go to another level of consciousness – one where, perhaps, the dream momentarily does not seem so real. There, from another viewpoint, you can see it even more clearly, holding it like a photograph in your hands; at the same time you can see from that broader perspective that you do indeed also stand outside of the dream context, but in a “within” that cannot show in the snapshot because of its limitations.
Now: That is the end of dictation. Give us a moment, and we will continue.
This is personal material. First of all, however, this book will open up many very important areas, and provide guidelines for many others to follow….
Notes: Session 700
1. See the 698th session to 9:41.
2. Since from this point Seth uses the masculine pronouns “he” and “him” while discussing representatives of the race, I refer the reader to Note 5 for Session 696, in Section 3 [below].
[696/5n. … Every so often Jane hears from a female reader who wants to know why Seth often uses the male gender in his books, especially in passages like those in tonight’s 696th session. A little reflection will show that in spite of the “sexist” implications it would be quite difficult to present such material in other ways, so common is the use of “man,” “he,” “his,” and “him.” In the English language we often don’t have the right word, one meaning male and female equally, with which to represent the species. Many times “humanity” doesn’t fit. Nor do we like to substitute “it,” since it’s neuter and devoid of feeling as far as we’re concerned. We also don’t want to become involved with rewriting Seth’s material: We’re sure that when he produces passages cast in the male gender, his intentions are anything but prejudiced in favor of that sex.
While Jane and I talked about the situation, she spontaneously produced the following written material:
“Seth is using the English language (my native one) to discuss issues that often involve concepts most difficult to describe in the language itself-or, indeed, in any language.
“Obviously, Seth’s purpose is to explain what he can within the framework of that language, rather than to change the language itself – as would be necessary, for example, to escape its often prejudiced nature. This prejudice appears most obviously in its sexual aspects: ‘Mankind’ for the species in general, and ‘he’ in referring to the individual member. Linguistically this leaves the female out in the cold – and in more ways than one-for the masculine intent is clear.
“Using that language, however, Seth’s intent is also clear: Individual identity comes before sexual affiliation. That affiliation is a mixture of ‘female’ and ‘male’ elements that are complementary, not opposing. Neither is superior. Male and female also represent psychic and biological faces and a sexual stance. Through all of Seth’s books runs one common thread: Our sexual prejudice is the result of certain aspects of consciousness that we as a species long ago began stressing over others.”]
3. A note added later: Unfortunately, Seth didn’t keep his promise to elaborate upon dream/symbol meeting places.
4. Chapters 9 and 10 in Seth Speaks contain much information on dreams. For material on the classes held at after-death training centers, see in particular the 537th session in Chapter 9. While out of body during the sleep state, some people from our reality, Jane among them, assist those who have just died in adjusting to their various new environments. And from Seth in the 536th session: “… I had spent many lifetimes acting as [such] a guide under the tutorship of another in my daily sleep states.”
5. And trees have their dreams, too. See Note 1 for Session 698 [below].
[698/1n. Seth began talking about dreams and related subjects from the time these sessions began over 11 years ago. His material led Jane to do some excellent work with dreams on her own. See, for example, chapters 4 and 5 in The Coming of Seth, and Chapter 14 in The Seth Material. Actually, Seth and Jane dream data run through all of the books those two have produced so far, either singly or together.
The 92nd session for September 28, 1964, was a basic one for information on dreams, and Jane quotes various portions of it in chapters 5 and 14, as listed above; I ask the reader to review that material especially (and in both books). In connection with that session, here is some follow-up dream information that Seth gave in the 97th session:
“The dream world is indeed a natural by-product of the relationship between the inner self and the physical being. Not a reflection, therefore, but a by-product involving not only a chemical reaction but the transformation of energy from one state to another.
“In some respects all planes or fields of existence are indeed by-products of others. For example, without the peculiar spark set off through the interrelationship existing between the inner self and the physical being, the dream world would not exist. But conversely, the dream world is a necessity for the continued existence of the physical individual.
“This point is extremely important. As you know, animals dream. What you do not know is that all consciousnesses dream. We have said that to some degree even atoms and molecules have consciousness, and each one of those minute consciousnesses forms its own dreams, even as on the other hand each one forms its own physical image. Now, as in the physical field individual atoms combine for their own benefit into more complicated structure gestalts [i.e., subholons/holons/superholons[15]], so do they also combine to form such gestalts, though of a somewhat different nature, in the dream world.
“I have said that the dream world has its own sort of form and permanence. It is physically oriented, though not to the degree inherent in your ordinary universe. In the same manner that the physical image of an individual is built up, so is the dream image built up.
“The dream world is not a formless, haphazard, semiconstruction. It does not exist in bulk, but it does exist in form. This is not a contradiction nor a distortion. The true complexity and importance of the dream world as an independent field of existence has not yet been impressed upon [your ORANGE science]. Yet while your world and the dream world are basically independent, they still exert [evolutionary and involutionary] pressures and influences, one upon the other.
“It is essential that you realize that the dream world is a byproduct of your own existence. And because it is connected to you through chemical reactions, this leaves open the entryway of interactions, in animals as well as men. Since dreams are a by-product of any consciousness involved within matter, this leads us to the correct conclusion – that trees have their dreams, that all physical matter, being formed about individualized units of consciousness [CUs] of varying degrees, also participates in the involuntary construction of the dream universe.”]
Session
701
June 3, 1974
… The outsideness of the physical world [i.e., exterior perspectives] is connected, then, with a multidimensional “insideness” [i.e. interior perspectives]. That exterior world is thrust outward, however, and projected into reality in line with your conscious desires, beliefs, and intent. It is important that you remember this position of the conscious mind as you think of it. Each physical experience is unique, and while the energy for it and the creation of it come from within, the pristine, private, and yet shared quality of that experience could not exist in the same way (more emphatically) were it not so exteriorized.
The exteriorization has great purpose and meaning, then, and brings forth a different kind of expression. Though I may emphasize the importance of inner reality in this book, therefore, I am in no way denying the great validity and purpose of earthly experience [or exterior, objective perspectives].
Any exercises in this book should help you enrich that experience, and understand its framework and nature. None of the exercises should be used to try to “escape” the connotations of your own earthly reality [i.e., they are not intended to ascend-only or transcend-to-escape physical reality].
… Nevertheless, the blueprints lie within. … We will have more to say very shortly about our dream-art scientist (see the last session); yet there are also other important ways that could be used to study the nature of reality. One in particular does not involve the dream state per se. It does include the manipulation of consciousness, however. To some extent it includes identification with, rather than separation from, that which is being studied.
… While connected with your own civilization, the man Einstein (1) came closest perhaps in this regard, for he was able to quite naturally identify himself with various “functions” of the universe. He was able to listen to the inner voice of matter. He was intuitively and emotionally led to his discoveries. He leaned against time, and felt it give and wobble.
The true [mental] physicist (2) will be a bold explorer – not picking at the universe with small tools, but allowing his consciousness to flow into the many open doors that can be found with no instrument, but with the mind.
Your own consciousness as you think of it, as you are familiar with it, can indeed help lead you into some much greater understanding of the simultaneous nature of time (3) if you allow it to. You often use tools, instruments, and paraphernalia instead – but they do not feel time, in those terms. You do. Studying your own conscious experience with time will teach you far more. Period….
Practice Element 8
Using your conscious mind as a threshold, however, you can discover still more. Figuratively speaking, stand where you are. Think of that moment of conscious awareness as a path. Imagine many other such paths, all converging; again, imaginatively take one of them in your mind and follow it. Accept what you experience uncritically. To some small extent you are “altering” your consciousness. (Half humorously:) Of course, you are not “altering” it at all. You are simply using it in a different fashion, and focusing it – however briefly – in another direction. This is the simplest of exercises.
Suppose that you stood in one spot all of your physical life, and that you had to do this because you had been told that you must. In such a case you would only see what was directly before you. Your peripheral vision might give you hints of what was to each side, or you might hear sounds that came from behind. Objects – birds, for example – might flash by you, and you might wonder at their motion, significance, and origin. If you suddenly turned an inch to the right or the left you would not be altering your body, but simply changing its position, increasing your overall picture, turning very cautiously from your initial position. So the little exercise above is like that.
… You are presently little aware of the dimensions of consciousness – your own or those seemingly “beneath” your own. The true physicist is one who would dare turn around inside his own consciousness.
… There are inner structures within matter. These are swirls of energy. They have more purposes than one. The structures are formed by organizations of consciousness, or CU’s [consciousness units]. You have the most intimate knowledge of the nature of a cell, for example, or of an atom. They compose your flesh. There is, in certain terms, a continuum of consciousness there of which your present physical life is a part. You are in certain kinds of communication and communion with your own cells, and at certain levels of consciousness you know this. A true physicist would learn to reach that level of consciousness at will. There were pictures drawn of cellular structures long before any technological methods of seeing them were available, in your terms.
… There are shapes and formations that appear when your eyes are closed that are perfect replicas of atoms, molecules, and cells, but you do not recognize them as such. There are also paintings – so-called abstracts – unconsciously produced, many by amateurs, that are excellent representations of such inner organizations. (4)
Ruburt [Jane] has at times been able to throw his consciousness into small physical instruments (computer components, for instance), and to perceive their inner activity at the level of, say, electrons. Given time, in your terms, a knowledge of the structure of so-called particles could be quite as clearly understood by using such techniques. Now, however, your terms would not match. Yet your terms are precisely what imprison you, and lead you to the “wrong” kinds of questions.
(With amusement:) The wrong kinds of questions are the right ones for you, however, in your [still predominantly BLUE/ORANGE Western] civilization and with your beliefs, because you want to stay within that structure to that extent. Only now are you beginning to question your methods, and even your questions. (5) The true physicist would be able to ask his questions from his usual state of consciousness, and then turn that consciousness in other directions where he himself would be led into adventures with reality, in which the questions would themselves be changed. And then the answers would be felt.
(Very forcefully all through here:) But most physicists do not trust felt answers [subjective/intuitive perception]. Feeling is thought to be far less valid than a diagram. It seems you could not operate your world on feelings – but you are not doing very well trying to operate with diagrams, either!
In many cases your scientists seem to have the strange idea that you can understand a reality by destroying it; that you can perceive the life mechanism of an animal by killing it; or that you can examine a phenomenon best by separating yourself from it. So, often, you attempt to examine the nature of the brain in man by destroying the brains of animals, by separating portions of the animal brain from its components, isolating them, and tampering with the overall integrity of both the animal in question and of your own spiritual processes. By this I mean that each such attempt puts you more out of context, so to speak, with yourself and your environment, and other species. Period. While you may “learn” certain so-called facts, you are driven still further away from any great knowledge, because the so-called facts stand in your way. You do not as yet understand the uniqueness of consciousness [i.e. there is no working theory of consciousness in mainstream ORANGE scientific paradigms].
(Very emphatically:) It is absurd to believe that you can learn something about consciousness by destroying it. It is absurd to believe that you can learn one iota about the inner reality of life when your search leads you to destroy it. Destruction, you see, in your terms (underlined twice), presupposes a misunderstanding of life to begin with.
… There are ways of identifying with animals, with atoms and molecules. There are ways of learning from the animals. There are methods that can be used to discover how different species migrate, for example, and then to duplicate such feats technologically if you want to. These methods do not include dissection, for what you learn that way you will not be able to use (deeper and much louder).
In a way you are simply over-exuberant, like children playing a new game. You will discover that at best you are using children’s blocks. Some of you have already come to that conclusion. As this book continues, I will indeed outline some beginning proposals as to ways in which you can use your consciousness to understand the nature of reality, and to make some of those inner blueprints clear.
… Even in your terms of history and serial time, as a race you have tried various methods of dealing with the physical world. (6) In this latest venture you are discovering that exterior manipulation is not enough, that [ORANGE] technology alone is not “the answer.” Please understand me: There is nothing wrong with a loving technology [GREEN or wider].
If Einstein had been a better mathematician, (7) he would not have made the breakthroughs that he did. He would have been too cowed. Yet even then his mathematics did hold him back, and put a kink in his intuitions. Often you take it for granted that intuitive knowledge is not practical, will not work, or will not give you diagrams. Those same diagrams of which science is so proud, however, can also be barriers, giving you a dead instead of a living knowledge. Therefore, they can be quite impractical.
I admit that I am being sneaky here; but if you did not feel the need to kill animals to gain knowledge, then you would not have wars, either. You would understand the balances of nature far better.
If you did not feel any need to destroy reality (in your terms) in order to understand it, then you would not need to dissect animals, hoping to discover the reasons for human diseases. You would have attained a living knowledge long ago, in which diseases as such did not occur. You would have understood long ago the connections between mind and body, feelings, health, and illness.
I am not saying that you would have necessarily had a perfect world, but that you would have been dealing more directly with the blueprints for reality….
Notes: Session 701
1. Today Jane had been looking at Einstein’s own book on his theories of relativity. (Relativity, The Special and the General Theory, Tr. by Robert W. Lawson, Copyright 1961 by the Estate of Albert Einstein, Crown Publishers, Inc., New York, N.Y.) She soon laid it aside, telling me that she couldn’t understand much of it except by making a strong effort of will. The mathematics it contained were beyond her entirely. I had ordered the book last month after she expressed interest in seeing it. Einstein died in 1955 at the age of 76.
2. Two weeks after this session was held I added “[mental]” to Seth’s term, “the true physicist,” because he does refer to “mental physicists” in the next three sessions.
3. A note added five months later: For some of Seth’s early remarks about time, see the excerpts from the 14th session (for January 8, 1964) in Chapter 4 of The Seth Material. I quoted a few lines from the same session midway through the Introductory Notes for Volume 1 of “Unknown “ Reality (as well as after the 724th session in Volume 2), and considered some thoughts about our attempts to grasp Seth’s concept of simultaneous time. The notes introducing this first volume also contain other applicable material having to do with Jane’s trance production times for the Seth books.
4. As an artist myself, I’ve occasionally wondered if some abstract paintings could have such origins. It’s quite possible that I’ve talked about this with Jane, although I don’t remember doing so at any particular time.
5. In physics, questioning is certainly the mode of the day, however, even if in its own terms. Two months ago a prominent East Coast newspaper carried a long article about the “turmoil” and “confusion” in which modern [GREEN] physics finds itself because of recent discoveries on atomic and subatomic levels. Many of these new facts contradict respected old facts, and are leading to previously unheard of, or rejected, questions having to do with internal structures for such near-dimensionless processes as the electron, which moves about the atomic nucleus, and for the various “heavier” particles that make up the nucleus itself.
Now it’s suspected that, in many cases at least, some of the fundamental laws of nature aren’t directly available to us – that often our world presents to us only an approximate representation of its basic qualities. Science needs new theories to unify as many of the four forces of nature (gravity, electromagnetism, and the atomic “strong” and “weak” forces) as possible, instead of separating them as in the past. We are now told that simplicity is the thing.
(And, very simply, the idea that the “event horizons” of black holes may radiate detectable light could be a step in the unification of some of those forces – gravity and electromagnetism – as they are treated in relativity theory and quantum theory, respectively. See Note 4 for Session 681, and Note 4 for Session 688 [below].)
[681/4n. I thought that in his last sentence especially Seth was flirting with the principle of uncertainty, or indeterminacy, as postulated in 1927 by the German physicist Werner Heisenberg. In quantum mechanics this axiom maintains that it’s not possible to simultaneously ascertain the momentum and position of a subatomic wave-particle like an electron, say – electrons being one of the qualities that make up atoms. The day after this session was held, I asked Jane if she’d heard of Heisenberg. She hadn’t; nor did she understand his work, as best I could explain it to her.]
[688/4n. A typical black hole, according to predictions made by Einstein in his theory of gravity, is thought to be the collapsed remnants of a giant star that’s used up all of its nuclear energy. Its density is unimaginably great, its gravity so powerful that not even light can escape from it. Hence, such an object is invisible, forming a “hole” in space.
(Yet, it has been proposed that some light radiation might escape from the “event horizon” just above, or surrounding, the black hole, and that eventually this radiation may be detected with more advanced satellite equipment. Seth hasn’t commented one way or the other on such theoretical attributes of black holes.)
See the 593rd session in the Appendix of Seth Speaks, where Seth briefly discusses both black holes and their suggested counterparts, white holes.]
6. In Section 1, see the 683rd session to 10:11 [below].
[683. … Other kinds of psychological gestalts [i.e. blueprints for reality/“involutionary givens”] have been and are being tried – some that would appear quite inconceivable to you; and yet now and then versions of them appear within your system.
It is quite possible, for example, for several selves to occupy a body, and were this the norm it would be easily accepted. That implies another kind of multipersonhood, however, one actually allowing for the fulfillment of many abilities of various natures usually left unexpressed. It also implies a freedom and organization of consciousness that is unusual in your system of reality, and was not chosen there.
(“Some people are going to hook up all of this with possession, aren’t they?” I asked.)
(10:11.) Not when I am finished. Most individuals, for example, develop intellectually or emotionally or physically, ignoring to a large degree the body’s and the mind’s full [and the soul’s and spirit’s] potential. The limited structure that you presently identify with selfhood is simply not capable of fully using all of those characteristics.
The I-structure [outer ego] arises from the inner self [inner ego], formed about various interests, abilities, and drives. Selections are made as to the areas of concentration. You rarely find a person who is a great intellect, a great athlete, and also a person of deep emotional and spiritual understanding – an ideal prototype of what it seems mankind could produce.
In some systems of physical existence, a multipersonhood is established in which three or four “persons” emerge from the same inner self, each one utilizing to the best of its abilities those characteristics of its own. This presupposes a gestalt of awareness, however, in which each knows of the activities of the others, and participates; and you have a different version of mass consciousness. Do you see the correlation?
(“Yes.”)
In the systems in which evolution of consciousness has worked in that fashion, all faculties of body and mind in one “lifetime” are beautifully utilized. Nor is there any ambiguity about identity. The individual would say, for example, “I am Joe, and Jane, and Jim, and Bob.” There are physical variations of a sexual nature, so that on all levels identity includes the male and female. Shadows of all such probabilities appear within your own system, as oddities. Anything apparent to whatever degree in your system is developed in another.
The point of all this is that these units are unpredictable, and fulfill all probabilities of consciousness. Any concepts of gods or other beings that are based upon limited [BLUE/ORANGE/GREEN/YELLOW/TURQUOISE] ideas of personhood will ultimately be futile. You view the fantastic variety of physical life – its animals, insects, birds, fish, man and all his works – with hardly a qualm; yet you must understand that the nature of consciousness itself is far more varied, and you must learn to think of an inner reality that is as infinite as the exterior one. These concepts alone do alter your present consciousness, and change it in degree. The present idea of the soul, you see, is a “primitive” idea that can scarcely begin to explain the creativity or reality from which mankind’s being comes. You are multipersons (intently). You exist in many times and places at once. You exist as one person, simultaneously. This does not deny the independence of the persons, but your inner reality straddles their reality, while it also serves as a psychic world in which they can grow.
I do not want to get involved in a discussion of “levels,” in which progression is supposed to occur from one to the other. All such discussions are based upon your idea of one-personhood, consecutive time, and limited versions of the soul. There are red, yellow, and violet flowers. One is not more progressed than the others, but each is different.
These units combine into various kinds of gestalts of consciousness. Basically, it is not correct to say that one is more progressed than another. The petal of a flower, for example, is not more developed than the root. An ant on the ground may see that the petal is way above the root and stem, but ants are too wise to think that the petal must be better than the root.]
7. Evidently Albert Einstein wasn’t a great mathematician. He often commented upon his poor memory. He did much of his work through intuition and images. Not long after the outline for his Special Theory of Relativity was published in 1905, it was said that Einstein owed its accomplishment at least partly to the fact that he knew little about the mathematics of space and time.
In the 45th session for April 20, 1964, I find Seth saying: “Einstein traveled within and trusted his own intuitions, and used his inner senses. He would have discovered much more had he been able to trust his intuitions even more, and able to leave more of the so-called scientific proof of his theories to lesser men, to give himself more inner freedom.”
The inner senses, as described by Seth, are listed in Chapter 19 of The Seth Material. [And in endnote 5, p. 35.]
Session 702
June 10, 1974
… Ultimately your use of instruments, and your preoccupation with them as tools to study the greater nature of reality, will teach you one important lesson: The instruments are useful only in measuring the level of reality in which they themselves exist [Framework 1]. (1) Period.
They help you interpret the universe in horizontal [translational] terms, so to speak. In studying the deeper realities within and “behind” that universe [Frameworks 2, 3, 4], the instruments are not only useless but misleading. I am not suggesting that their use is futile, however – merely pointing out the limitations inherently involved.
So-called objective [ORANGE] science gives you a picture, a model, that has served well enough in its own fashion, enabling you to travel to the moon, for example, and to advance in a technology that for a time you set your hearts upon. In the framework of objective science as it now exists, however, even the technology will come up against a stone wall. Even as a means, objective [ORANGE] science is only helpful for a while, because it will constantly run up against deeper inner realities that are necessarily shunted aside and ignored simply because of its method and attitude. (2) No objective science or splendid technology alone will keep even one man or woman alive, for example, if that individual has decided to leave the flesh, or finds no joy in daily life.
(Pause.) A loving technology [GREEN or wider], again, would always add to the qualitative and spiritual deepening of experience. The inner order of existence and true science go together. The true scientist is not afraid of identifying with the reality he chooses to study. He knows that only then can he dare to begin to understand its nature. There are many unofficial scientists, true ones in that regard, unknown in this age. Many are quite ordinary people in exterior terms, with other professions. Yet it is no accident that greater discoveries are often made by “amateurs” – those who are relatively free from official dogmas, released from the pressure to get ahead in a given field – those whose creativity flows freely and naturally in those areas of their natural interest.
… Without an identification with the land, the planet and the seasons, all of your technology will not help you understand the earth, or even use it effectively, much less fully. Without an identification with the race as a whole, no technology can save the race. (Pause, during an intent delivery.) Unless man also identifies himself with the other kinds of life with which he shares the world, no technology will ever help him understand his experience. I am speaking in very practical terms. Gadgets will, ultimately, teach you nothing about the dimensions of your own consciousness. When you use them (biofeedback, for instance) even to attain alterations of consciousness, you are programming yourselves, stepping apart from yourselves.
… Such gadgets can be useful only if they show you that such alterations are naturally possible. Otherwise, with your ideas of applied science and technology, the gadgets will be the pivoting point, and the [ORANGE] ideas of manipulation will be stressed. In other words, unless the ideas behind objective science are altered, then gadget-produced altered states will almost certainly be used to manipulate, rather than free, consciousness.
I am not making a prediction here. I am simply pointing out one probability that exists. There have indeed been civilizations upon your planet (3) understood as well as you, and without your kind of technology, the workings of the planets, the positioning of stars – people who even foresaw “later” global changes. They used a mental physics. There were men before you who journeyed to the moon, and who brought back data quite as “scientific” and pertinent. There were those who understood the “origin” of your solar system far better than you. Some of these civilizations did not need spaceships. (4) Instead, highly trained men combining the abilities of dream-art scientists and mental physicists cooperated in journeys not only through time but through space. There are ancient maps drawn from a 200-mile-or-more vantage point – these meticulously completed on return from such journeys.
There were sketches of atoms and molecules, also drawn after trained men and women learned the art of identifying with such phenomena. There are significances hidden in the archives of many archaeological stores that are not recognized by you because you have not made the proper connections – and in some cases you have not advanced sufficiently to understand the information.
… The particular thrust and direction of your own [ORANGE] science have been directly opposed to the development of such inner sciences, however, so that to some extent each step in the one direction has thus far taken you further from the other. Yet all sciences are based on the desire for knowledge, and so there are intersections that occur even in the most diverse of paths; and you are at such an intersection.
Your own science has led you to its logical conclusion. It is not enough, and some suspect that its methods and attitudes have a built-in disadvantage. Physicists are going beyond themselves, so to speak, where even their own instruments cannot follow and where all rules do not apply. Even the [GREEN] prophet Einstein did not lead them far enough. You cannot stand apart from a reality and do any more than present diagrams of it. You will not understand its living heart or its nature.
The behavior of electrons, for example, will elude your technological knowledge – for in deepest terms what you will “perceive” will be a facade, an appearance or illusion. So far, within the rules of the game, you have been able to make your “facts” about electrons work. To follow their multidimensional activity however is another matter – (humorously:) a pun – and you need, if you will forgive me, a speedier means.
(Pause.) The blueprints for reality [i.e., “involutionary” givens] lie even beneath the electrons’ activity [with nested aspects in Frameworks 2, 3, 4]. As long as you think in terms of [subatomic] particles, you are basically off the track – or even when you think in terms of waves. The idea of interrelated fields comes closer, of course, yet even here you are simply changing one kind of term for one like it, only slightly different. In all of these cases you are ignoring the reality of consciousness [i.e., the Great Nest/All-That-Is], and its [holonic] gestalt formations and manifestations. Until you perceive the innate consciousness behind any “visible” or “invisible” manifestations, then, you put a definite barrier to your own knowledge.
Take your break.
(10:20. “I don’t know what he
said about electrons and things like that, “ Jane told me as soon as she was
out of her hour-long trance state, “but all of this is general and it’s leading
up to something more. I carried it as far as I could. Maybe we’ll get more on
it after break … “
(I thought it very interesting
that Seth had talked about subatomic waves and particles in the last paragraph
of his delivery tonight. Such ideas involve the physicists’ ongoing conception
of the duality of nature. For instance: Is light made up of waves or particles?
A contemporary accommodation, called complementarily, leads experimenters to
accept results that show either aspect to be true. As noted in the last
session, Jane had attempted to read Einstein’s book on his [GREEN] theories of relativity earlier that day.
We had briefly discussed Einstein’s work and some allied subjects before
tonight’s session, but I hadn’t asked her to give material on physics through
Seth. (5) In her own way, Jane is quite interested in the field, however, and
has done a little work in it with scientists. We may have more to say about
those efforts later in “Unknown” Reality.
(Now, however, we had time to just touch upon the data involving electrons when Jane told me that she was suddenly aware of more information on the same subject. Seth was ready. “I’ll do the best I can with this, “ she said, as she took off her glasses. Resume at 10:22.)
Ruburt’s [Jane’s] vocabulary is not an official scientific one. Nor for our purposes should it be – for that vocabulary is limiting.
In as simple a language as possible, and to some extent in your terms, the electron’s spin determines time “sequences” from your viewpoint. In those terms, then, a reversed spin is a reversed time motion. There is much you cannot observe. There is much that is extremely difficult to explain, simply because your verbal structure alone presupposes certain [linear, sequential] assumptions. Electrons, however, spin in many directions at once, (6) an effect impossible for you to perceive. You can only theorize about it. There are “electromagnetic momentums thus achieved and maintained,” certain stabilities that operate and maintain their own integrity, though these may not be “equal” at all portions of the spin. There are equalities set up “between” the inequalities.
Time, in your terms then, is spinning newly backward as surely as it is spinning newly (the telephone began to ring) – ignore it – into the future. And it is spinning