Seth: events do not exist in the concrete, done-and-finished versions about which you have been taught/memory/Jung

"Because events do not exist in the concrete, done-and-finished versions about which you have been taught, then memory must also be a different story.

[... 6 paragraphs ...]

It would be most difficult to operate within your sphere of reality without the pretension of concrete, finished events. You form your past lives now in this life as surely as you form your future ones now also."

—Seth, NoME, Chapter 2, Session 806, July 30, 1977

"Jung’s collective unconscious was an attempt to give your world its psychological roots, but Jung1 could not perceive the clarity, organization, and deeper context in which that collective unconscious has its own existence. Reality as Framework 2 is organized in a different fashion than it is in the Framework 1 world, and the processes of reasoning are far quicker. In Framework 1 the reasoning processes work largely by deduction, and they must constantly check their own results against the seemingly concrete experience of physical events. The reasoning of the inner ego is involved with the creative invention of those experiences. It is involved with events in a context of a different kind, for it deals intimately with probabilities."

—Seth, NoME Chapter 3, Session 823, February 27, 1978

"Now. In your system of reality you are learning what mental energy is, and how to use it. You do this by constantly transforming your thoughts and emotions into physical form. You are supposed to get a clear picture of your inner development by perceiving the exterior environment. What seems to be a perception, an objective concrete event, independent and apart from you the perceiver, is instead the physical materialization of the perceiver’s own inner emotions, energy and mental environment."

—Seth, TES9, Session 469, March 19, 1969

"The first volume, like this one, defies easy description, then, since it leaps over many definitions we usually take for granted; and with its lack of chapter divisions it even confounds our ideas of what a book is. Yet it certainly contains a most intriguing, multidimensional view of the nature of probabilities, a view in which our ideas of a “simple, single event” must vanish; at least we can never again look at any event as being concrete, finished, or absolute. Seth stresses the importance of probabilities as they exist in relationship to a thought, an ordinary physical event, or the mass event of Homo sapiens as a species, and emphasizes the existence of probable realities as the understructure of free will.

[... 3 paragraphs ...]

Section 3: “The Private Probable Man, the Private Probable Woman, the Species in Probabilities, and Blueprints for Realities” — Nine sessions devoted to the importance of dreams in the creation of “concrete” events from probable ones. This section also includes discussions on the True Dream-Art Scientist, the True Mental Physicist, and the Complete Physician, as well as material on subatomic particles and the spin of electrons in relationship to perceived reality."

—Seth, UR2, Introductory Notes by Robert F. Butts

"Now. So-called hunches indeed are often caused by an inner recognition that a given event might occur. As you know, there is no cause and effect as you understand it. Nevertheless there are probabilities. Now basically it is not true to say that an individual’s decisions must be based upon concrete events within his own past, nor that he is largely imprisoned by his past, nor that his future actions are predetermined by his past experience. For as you now understand the past is as real as the future, no more and no less. The past exists as far as the individual is concerned as a pattern of electromagnetic currents within the brain, and these connections constantly change.

The individual can change past action within however the limitations earlier mentioned in our last session. Therefore his future actions are not dependent upon a concrete and unchanging past, for such a past never existed."

—Seth, TES5, Session 226, January 24, 1966

"Because you focus upon the similarities in experience, and play down the variances, then the oftentimes greater dissimilarities4 in so-called experience escape you completely. You take it for granted that memory is faulty if you do not agree with another person on the events that happened at a certain place and time — say those in a recently experienced historical past. You take it for granted that interpretations of events change, but that certain definite events occurred that are beyond alteration. Instead, the events themselves are not nearly that concrete. You accept one probable event. Someone else may experience instead a version of that event, which then becomes that individual’s felt reality."

—Seth, UR2, Section 6, Session 729, January 13, 1975

"Time expands in all directions, and away from any given point.8 The past is never done and finished, and the future is never concretely formed. You choose to experience certain versions of events. You then organize these, nibbling at them, so to speak, a bit “at a time.”"

—Seth, UR2, Section 5, Session 721, November 25, 1974