“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Now: In our book, I will be doing my best to explain the origin of your universe, and in such a way that most of the pertinent questions are answered, but man’s present concept of reality is so limited that I must often resort to analogies.

(The material below shows the contents of a discussion Jane and I had before this evening’s session, and Seth’s answers.)

[...] The answer came easily, though.)

[...] Now Seth came through with some material in answer to Jane’s question, before calling for a break at 9:38. [...]

[...] He’d posed some intriguing questions about Seth’s ideas of the “true” nature of the universe, and in the nonbook session for April 30 [the 849th], Seth had given a few paragraphs of material in a partial answer.)

[...] I said I needed reinforcement myself over my fears about her condition, and she answered that she might have to initiate a program of walking with the table, soon, if she didn’t spontaneously start doing more walking.

[...] I meant to answer your question earlier. [...]

[...] Now if only I can catch up, once again, on answering the fan mail! [...]

(In the terms of the overly conscientious self, Seth said in answer to my question.)

[...] We will end the session or answer any questions if you prefer.

[...] As you have your recognized, official personal past, so in your system of actuality you have more or less accepted an official mass history (see Note 2). Under examination, however, that history of the species shows many gaps and discrepancies, and it leaves many questions to be answered.

[...] Although we took the first few answers through the board, from the beginning Jane received them mentally also. [...]

[...] He expected a fairly brief answer. [...]

[...] She answered the door and explained that we were busy, and company left. [...]

[...] We could make no certain connections, nor did Seth’s answer to the fourth question help much.

[...] When you are asked about these sessions, that is your answer. [...]

[...] However, this evening I did not attempt to answer your guest’s two questions, not because I disapproved, merely because at this point the material is the important thing, and I didn’t want to be sidetracked.

I am trying to insert answers to some of your questions in a way that also is in rhythm with both of your needs at each session—so I bid you a fond good evening.

[...] I will try to answer all of your questions in one way or another. [...]

[...] Actually, that kind of vision contains its own spontaneous rationality, and often supplies us with answers more satisfying than purely intellectual ones.” [...]

(I think that some of the material in tonight’s session is a reflection, or answer, to an article that Jane read this afternoon, in the British Journal for Psychical Research, September 1977. [...]

[...] My answer has been couched in the terms in which the question is generally asked.

[...] Using the terms begun in the last chapter, I will say then that man’s emotional identification with nature is a strongly-felt reality in Framework 2. And there we must look for the answers regarding man’s relationship with nature. [...]