Present alters the past

[Blue]

Will a new belief in the present change the past to line up with it? What I mean is, if you've gone out to a certain restaurant with a friend for years, and you adopt a new belief now that you've never been to that restaurant in your life, will all of the memories where you did go to the restaurant change on their own to match your new belief?

[Deb]

Wow, great question! I'm have not completely studied Seth on this topic so I went to the search engine https://findingseth.com and searched on change past. 807 results! It also seems at some point Lynda Dahl did a whole cheat sheet on changing the past, which I thought I'd saved but can't find. I'll continue to look.

I did read quite a bit from the search engine, a fascinating topic. I would have to say yes to your question. Since you are making your reality all the time, even in cooperation with other people, then all of the memories of the event would have to change and match your own—in your personal reality. We are changing our past all the time according to Seth, but then it also makes sense that we would not remember that we did it, or remember the original version of the past that has been changed, because it would not have even occurred according to our present reality. A possible explanation that popped into my head is that version #1 of the event was a probability that you chose (or a series of choices). There were other probabilities, ones in which you didn't go to the restaurant. So... by changing the past, are we "going back" and now selecting a different probability? Switching tracks? That would also explain why everyone else involved would not remember the original version—they have been involved all along in the probability in which you didn't go to the restaurant and you'd now be aligned with their version.

I'm adding a few quotes from session 224, TES5, because while there are a lot of quotes in other books regarding changing the past, this one was new to me. What caught my imagination was Seth saying it is more than possible to react in the past to an event that has not yet occurred, to be influenced by our own future. Like things aren't confusing enough!

Seth: "The past is no more objective, no more independent from the perceiver, than is the present. These electromagnetic connections which compose the past were largely made by the individual perceiver, and the perceiver of course is always a participator.

The connections therefore can be changed at any time, and such changes are far from uncommon. They happen spontaneously on a subconscious basis a good deal of the time. The past was seldom what you remember it to be, for you have already rearranged it from the instant of any given occurrence."

[skip]

"And you are more free than you imagine to completely alter many aspects of your own past. If you say that the future is dependent upon the past, therefore, you must also say that the past is dependent upon the future. Once more, the past was never an independent, concrete object existing apart from the perceiving participator; for he made his past, and its only reality exists in the electromagnetic connections within his own organic and psychic structure.

"Every action changes every other action. We return to our ABC's. Therefore every action in the present affects those actions which you call the past. Ripples from a thrown stone go out in all directions.

"I am going to go out rather far on the limb right here. Remembering what you now know about the nature of time, you should know that the apparent boundaries between past, present and future are only illusions, caused by the amount of action you can physically perceive. Therefore, it is more than possible to react in the past to an event that has not yet occurred, to be influenced by your own future.

"We are not getting involved here in the free will or predestination question, though we have spoken about it, and we shall discuss it thoroughly in connection with time in general. Suffice it to say that it is more than possible for an individual to react in the past to an event in the future which may never occur.
(Goes on to explain this using the York Beach couple as an example.)"

—TES5 Session 224 January 17, 1966

I'll keep reading up on this topic, will update here if I learn anything pertinent to your question, and I'm also curious if my theory about jumping tracks has any validity. If you look through the search engine results and come up with anything interesting, please let us know!

Update: A-hah! I've been enjoyably reading the search engine results, and just came across this, so I think we're getting warmer:

"The past existed in multitudinous ways. You only experienced one probable past. By changing this past in your mind, now, in your present, you can change not only its nature but its effect, and not only upon yourself but upon others."
—SS Chapter 16: Session 566, February 15, 1971

"On the other hand as I have told you, your past continually changes. It does not appear to change to you, for you change with it. You are not aware of the changes that have come about."
—TES5 Session 234 February 16, 1966

[LarryH]

This topic got me to thinking about time as it relates to dimensions. Many consider time to be the fourth dimension. A way of thinking about that is to imagine being "outside" of time and looking down at the timeline and seeing not just the present but also the past and future as a line, as it were. Then the 5th dimension might be the level at which multiple timelines are present. Changing the past is an act of jumping into a different timeline. We sever the connection to the prior timeline and thus have no awareness of it. We may be doing this constantly, but without the memory of it, we would have no way of knowing it. On the other hand, there is a phenomenon known as, I believe, the Mandela effect. It is characterized by a large number of people having the distinct memory of an event that did not happen in this timeline. It is named after the fact that many people have the distinct memory of Nelson Mandela dying in prison long before he became president of S. Africa. So the implication is that those people jumped from a timeline into this one while retaining the memory from another timeline. There are other examples of this that do not come to mind.

[Blue]

Wow, great question! I'm have not completely studied Seth on this topic so I went to the search engine https://findingseth.com and searched on change past. 807 results! It also seems at some point Lynda Dahl did a whole cheat sheet on changing the past, which I thought I'd saved but can't find. I'll continue to look.

I did read quite a bit from the search engine, a fascinating topic. I would have to say yes to your question. Since you are making your reality all the time, even in cooperation with other people, then all of the memories of the event would have to change and match your own—in your personal reality. We are changing our past all the time according to Seth, but then it also makes sense that we would not remember that we did it, or remember the original version of the past that has been changed, because it would not have even occurred according to our present reality. A possible explanation that popped into my head is that version #1 of the event was a probability that you chose (or a series of choices). There were other probabilities, ones in which you didn't go to the restaurant. So... by changing the past, are we "going back" and now selecting a different probability? Switching tracks? That would also explain why everyone else involved would not remember the original version—they have been involved all along in the probability in which you didn't go to the restaurant and you'd now be aligned with their version.

I'm adding a few quotes from session 224, TES5, because while there are a lot of quotes in other books regarding changing the past, this one was new to me. What caught my imagination was Seth saying it is more than possible to react in the past to an event that has not yet occurred, to be influenced by our own future. Like things aren't confusing enough!

Seth: "The past is no more objective, no more independent from the perceiver, than is the present. These electromagnetic connections which compose the past were largely made by the individual perceiver, and the perceiver of course is always a participator.

The connections therefore can be changed at any time, and such changes are far from uncommon. They happen spontaneously on a subconscious basis a good deal of the time. The past was seldom what you remember it to be, for you have already rearranged it from the instant of any given occurrence."

[skip]

"And you are more free than you imagine to completely alter many aspects of your own past. If you say that the future is dependent upon the past, therefore, you must also say that the past is dependent upon the future. Once more, the past was never an independent, concrete object existing apart from the perceiving participator; for he made his past, and its only reality exists in the electromagnetic connections within his own organic and psychic structure.

"Every action changes every other action. We return to our ABC's. Therefore every action in the present affects those actions which you call the past. Ripples from a thrown stone go out in all directions.

"I am going to go out rather far on the limb right here. Remembering what you now know about the nature of time, you should know that the apparent boundaries between past, present and future are only illusions, caused by the amount of action you can physically perceive. Therefore, it is more than possible to react in the past to an event that has not yet occurred, to be influenced by your own future.

"We are not getting involved here in the free will or predestination question, though we have spoken about it, and we shall discuss it thoroughly in connection with time in general. Suffice it to say that it is more than possible for an individual to react in the past to an event in the future which may never occur.
(Goes on to explain this using the York Beach couple as an example.)"

—TES5 Session 224 January 17, 1966

I'll keep reading up on this topic, will update here if I learn anything pertinent to your question, and I'm also curious if my theory about jumping tracks has any validity. If you look through the search engine results and come up with anything interesting, please let us know!

Update: A-hah! I've been enjoyably reading the search engine results, and just came across this, so I think we're getting warmer:

"The past existed in multitudinous ways. You only experienced one probable past. By changing this past in your mind, now, in your present, you can change not only its nature but its effect, and not only upon yourself but upon others."
—SS Chapter 16: Session 566, February 15, 1971

"On the other hand as I have told you, your past continually changes. It does not appear to change to you, for you change with it. You are not aware of the changes that have come about."
—TES5 Session 234 February 16, 1966

Thank you Deb! Yes please let me know if you find anything else. I've been trying to apply this technique in the way I described only with a different subject and find myself running into difficulties because my mind wonders if it's possible 

[Blue]

This topic got me to thinking about time as it relates to dimensions. Many consider time to be the fourth dimension. A way of thinking about that is to imagine being "outside" of time and looking down at the timeline and seeing not just the present but also the past and future as a line, as it were. Then the 5th dimension might be the level at which multiple timelines are present. Changing the past is an act of jumping into a different timeline. We sever the connection to the prior timeline and thus have no awareness of it. We may be doing this constantly, but without the memory of it, we would have no way of knowing it. On the other hand, there is a phenomenon known as, I believe, the Mandela effect. It is characterized by a large number of people having the distinct memory of an event that did not happen in this timeline. It is named after the fact that many people have the distinct memory of Nelson Mandela dying in prison long before he became president of S. Africa. So the implication is that those people jumped from a timeline into this one while retaining the memory from another timeline. There are other examples of this that do not come to mind.

That's very interesting  Yes, I've wondered about the Mandela Effect and why it works like that in some cases.

[Blue]

In addition to my original post, I'm also wondering about changing a memory that involves another person. I've done this and imagined the other person doing something that is typically "out of character" for them. This then hindered me from fully believing in the new memory, though I want to. If anyone can offer me any sort of help with this to make it easier for me to believe, that would be great. Changing the memory so that the person acted in this new way is what makes the memory better.

[LenKop]

What's the intention behind changing the memory? Is it just a game to see whether it works? Is it proof searching? Or is there some kind of healing that seems necessary?

I think the intention plays a part, because it will be the fuel for the value fulfillment.

The South African Mandela effect is interesting from a Mass event POV. Seems awfully a lot like the Christ drama, with the risen hero freeing the nation and, in broader terms, the race.

Len

[Blue]

What's the intention behind changing the memory? Is it just a game to see whether it works? Is it proof searching? Or is there some kind of healing that seems necessary?

I think the intention plays a part, because it will be the fuel for the value fulfillment.

The South African Mandela effect is interesting from a Mass event POV. Seems awfully a lot like the Christ drama, with the risen hero freeing the nation and, in broader terms, the race.

Len

Hi Len, I'm doing it for healing. These past events are disturbing to me, and I think it will benefit me to change them.

[Deb]

If anyone can offer me any sort of help with this to make it easier for me to believe, that would be great. Changing the memory so that the person acted in this new way is what makes the memory better.

It seems that belief in the ability to change past events is not as important as expectations. Ala Seth. So you may not have to convince yourself that it's possible, but rather just experiment, play and be open to the idea that it will work.

My original thought was, if you change a belief (and the past), you wouldn't know it because the 'new' belief would be the only one you have in this reality. My 'switching probabilities' theory. But I stand corrected, by a Seth pro, Lynda Madden Dahl. And her statement explains a lot of things that have happened to me, personally:

Lynda: "We don't always change our complete memory of a past event, Deb. What we can always do, though, is change its emotional content - which allows us to create an alternate probable ending through our imagination. I've done it." I've done it too, not realizing what I'd done. Lynda is an extraordinary person.

Here's a post of Lynda's from Facebook. She's given me complete permission to quote or repost her here. Click on the + to get to the spoiler contents.

Sorry but you must log in to view spoiler contents.

[Blue]

It seems that belief in the ability to change past events is not as important as expectations. Ala Seth. So you may not have to convince yourself that it's possible, but rather just experiment, play and be open to the idea that it will work.

My original thought was, if you change a belief (and the past), you wouldn't know it because the 'new' belief would be the only one you have in this reality. My 'switching probabilities' theory. But I stand corrected, by a Seth pro, Lynda Madden Dahl. And her statement explains a lot of things that have happened to me, personally:

Lynda: "We don't always change our complete memory of a past event, Deb. What we can always do, though, is change its emotional content - which allows us to create an alternate probable ending through our imagination. I've done it." I've done it too, not realizing what I'd done. Lynda is an extraordinary person.

Here's a post of Lynda's from Facebook. She's given me complete permission to quote or repost her here. Click on the + to get to the spoiler contents.

Sorry but you must log in to view spoiler contents.

Thanks, Deb 

[Blue]

Wow, great question! I'm have not completely studied Seth on this topic so I went to the search engine https://findingseth.com and searched on change past. 807 results! It also seems at some point Lynda Dahl did a whole cheat sheet on changing the past, which I thought I'd saved but can't find. I'll continue to look.

I did read quite a bit from the search engine, a fascinating topic. I would have to say yes to your question. Since you are making your reality all the time, even in cooperation with other people, then all of the memories of the event would have to change and match your own—in your personal reality. We are changing our past all the time according to Seth, but then it also makes sense that we would not remember that we did it, or remember the original version of the past that has been changed, because it would not have even occurred according to our present reality. A possible explanation that popped into my head is that version #1 of the event was a probability that you chose (or a series of choices). There were other probabilities, ones in which you didn't go to the restaurant. So... by changing the past, are we "going back" and now selecting a different probability? Switching tracks? That would also explain why everyone else involved would not remember the original version—they have been involved all along in the probability in which you didn't go to the restaurant and you'd now be aligned with their version.

I'm adding a few quotes from session 224, TES5, because while there are a lot of quotes in other books regarding changing the past, this one was new to me. What caught my imagination was Seth saying it is more than possible to react in the past to an event that has not yet occurred, to be influenced by our own future. Like things aren't confusing enough!

Seth: "The past is no more objective, no more independent from the perceiver, than is the present. These electromagnetic connections which compose the past were largely made by the individual perceiver, and the perceiver of course is always a participator.

The connections therefore can be changed at any time, and such changes are far from uncommon. They happen spontaneously on a subconscious basis a good deal of the time. The past was seldom what you remember it to be, for you have already rearranged it from the instant of any given occurrence."

[skip]

"And you are more free than you imagine to completely alter many aspects of your own past. If you say that the future is dependent upon the past, therefore, you must also say that the past is dependent upon the future. Once more, the past was never an independent, concrete object existing apart from the perceiving participator; for he made his past, and its only reality exists in the electromagnetic connections within his own organic and psychic structure.

"Every action changes every other action. We return to our ABC's. Therefore every action in the present affects those actions which you call the past. Ripples from a thrown stone go out in all directions.

"I am going to go out rather far on the limb right here. Remembering what you now know about the nature of time, you should know that the apparent boundaries between past, present and future are only illusions, caused by the amount of action you can physically perceive. Therefore, it is more than possible to react in the past to an event that has not yet occurred, to be influenced by your own future.

"We are not getting involved here in the free will or predestination question, though we have spoken about it, and we shall discuss it thoroughly in connection with time in general. Suffice it to say that it is more than possible for an individual to react in the past to an event in the future which may never occur.
(Goes on to explain this using the York Beach couple as an example.)"

—TES5 Session 224 January 17, 1966

I'll keep reading up on this topic, will update here if I learn anything pertinent to your question, and I'm also curious if my theory about jumping tracks has any validity. If you look through the search engine results and come up with anything interesting, please let us know!

Update: A-hah! I've been enjoyably reading the search engine results, and just came across this, so I think we're getting warmer:

"The past existed in multitudinous ways. You only experienced one probable past. By changing this past in your mind, now, in your present, you can change not only its nature but its effect, and not only upon yourself but upon others."
—SS Chapter 16: Session 566, February 15, 1971

"On the other hand as I have told you, your past continually changes. It does not appear to change to you, for you change with it. You are not aware of the changes that have come about."
—TES5 Session 234 February 16, 1966

I think I might have found some Seth quotes that answer my original post. What do you think? 

"A new belief in the present ... can cause changes in the past on a neuronal level."

"...a strong belief in a particular ability generated in the present will reach into the past and effect whatever changes would have to occur there to now make the ability apparent."

[Deb]

What do you think? 

Yesss!!! Good ones!

I did see that quote about neuronal level, it reminded me of how Seth says (I think) that when we spontaneously heal, we actually go to our past and rather than healing the present body, we simply do not produce the disease in the first place.