“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

[...] And again remember that these senses, these inner senses, operate as a whole, and that at least to some degree the divisions between them are somewhat arbitrary on my part, and are made for the sake of simplicity.

It is similar to the fourth sense in that it is free of course from the arbitrary past, present and future, and it is also similar in that it involves an intimate becoming, or a transformation of self into something else.

[...] Here again, the division is arbitrary.

(Afterwards we talked over Jane’s recent idea — to holding, say, a session per day for six consecutive days, to see how much Seth would get done on the book in such an arbitrary period. [...]

Egotistically you make arbitrary designations of necessity, perceiving only portions of any given action; again, the ego attempting to separate itself from overall action, and to see itself as an entirely independent structure.

[...] (Pause, hand raised.) I am concerned over your arbitrary idea of age and advancement in terms of what you should expect at your age. [...]

[...] Any such division is arbitrary, and in no way affects the nature of action itself. [...]

In usual historic terms, humanity has been experimenting with its own unique kind of consciousness, and as I have mentioned many times, this necessitated an arbitrary division between the subject and the perceiver — nature and man — and brought about a situation in which the species came to consider itself apart from the rest of existence.

The limits of identity are arbitrary on your part, developed throughout the stages of your evolutionary process, not for any reason inherent in identity itself, but merely for purely practical reasons on your physical field, having to do with the amount of matter that various kinds of identities could effectively manipulate and control.

(10:35.) The seeming division is not arbitrary, or forced upon you. [...]

[...] The divisions are quite arbitrary. [...]

[...] (Pause.) Men thought in terms of rhythms of the time, or of flowing time, not of time in sections that were arbitrary. [...]

Divisions between portions of the self are primarily arbitrary however. [...]

I want to begin by reminding you that these divisions to the self are rather arbitrary, for the sake of discussion. [...]

Understand again that these divisions are arbitrary. [...]

(I might add here that my arbitrary designation of an average pause on Jane’s part might run to perhaps ten seconds. [...]

The designations put upon these units of action are highly artificial, and represent limitations that are quite arbitrary. [...]

I have often said that all these divisions and separations are arbitrary. [...]

Any such divisions are of course arbitrary to begin with. [...]

[...] My choices are personally arbitrary, of course—yet why don’t we have a Rembrandt contributing to our current reality? [...]

[...] In actuality there is only a spacious present, so spacious that it cannot be explored all at once in your terms, hence your arbitrary division of it into larger rooms of past, present and future.