White Piece of Paper Analogy

[jbseth]

Hi All,

In chapter 10 of her book, "Adventures in Consciousness", Jane tells us that:

"[...] the ego has a two-fold function. Besides directing physical focus, it also receives inner perceptions – when it is allowed to. When our religious and cultural fears don't inhibit us."

Then along with this she also says:

"In other words, the ego can use its abilities to look inward, correlate psychic experiences and psychedelic activity that otherwise might remain untranslatable. [...] Seth's material stresses this resiliency, particularly in The Nature of Personal Reality, and my own experience confirms it. The ego as the known "I" can meet other Aspects of the source self."

(In the glossary of this book, Jane describes the source self as the psyche or the soul and along with this, on the last page of Chapter 11, she describes some of these Aspects as Seth, Seth Two, Seven, Cyprus and Helper. )

Then she says:

"Granted, this meeting is an opaque one. Yet whole portions of Aspect Psychology were written in altered states of consciousness, and my ego was not experienced as less. It was just acting in a different way. In fact, almost the entire Part Two of this book was produced in just such a fashion."



Following this she describes how this occurred. She says that she sat down and felt within herself what she called her "Aspects Channel" and then wrote down the words that sprang into her usual consciousness. 

In this book, "Adventures in Consciousness", Part One: "Adventures", consists of Chapters 1 to 9 and Part Two: "An Introduction to Aspect Psychology", starts at Chapter 10.

In Chapter 12 of this book, Jane wrote what she called, the "Flat-Sheet-of-White-Paper-Analogy". I'm pretty sure that this "Flat Sheet of White Paper Analogy", was probably written by Jane in the exact manner that she describes above. What she wrote here in this analogy and what she says about it immediately afterward, I think, is one of the most interesting pieces of writing that I've ever come across.

Here's this analogy:
   

Sorry but you must log in to view spoiler contents.

This paper analogy appears to be a great analogy of the human ego self (the square on the paper) and its greater selves (the hand that drew the square and its consciousness).

However, it may also be a great analogy of All-That-Is (the paper and the square on the paper) as well as its greater reality (the hand that drew the square and its consciousness). Seth does tell us that All-That-Is, is greater than the sum of its parts. I think that maybe, this analogy, might be an example of what he meant by this?


- jbseth