“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(Suddenly Jane leaned forward and said, “I got the idea—I was getting this—the name Bando Bah Zahyar Dhar... sacrificed the baby to a goddess in Persia. A goddess that you followed...She [Janice] was left screaming. The goddess’ name, I think; I never heard of anything like this, was something like Von Bazelraeha.. and they killed the children ...400 children one afternoon ...400 children in one day, and that baby was one of them. Sethpherverando was the name for the baby ...I’m getting the scene and I don’t want to get into the emotional end, so I keep cutting that off to just give you the information.

(“This goddess was the goddess of fertility...and you were from a province in Persia ...You were both poor ...Province was called Sepharthein in the southwest portion of Persia... It was a national holiday, sacrificial day ...something that we would translate into atonement but that wasn’t the word at all ...where children were sacrificed, so that the earth would grow ... You [Phil], that’s why you hit her [Janice] so strongly. You looked something like you do now, only your build was scrawnier. You lived in a mud-type hut ... You had other wives afterwards ...I’m trying to get something you can check, but it’s so long ago you can’t ...but the emotion is fantastic. She didn’t want you to take the baby, and you just took it. And this was supposed to make you wealthy. If you gave the baby it was supposed to make you really wealthy. It was supposed to do all kinds of fantastic things; and it didn’t, it didn’t, it didn’t! ...And you didn’t have the guts to go back ...and you wandered, and you wandered alone, because you didn’t have the guts to go back. And all you had was a cut—a wound in your left thigh. You were kicked by the mob, because after you threw in your baby boy, nobody gave a damn. It was just this fantastic mob ...and those kids were cooked...and it was all in the name of religion and in the name of all this stuff except that out of it you hoped to get wealth ...and all she [Janice] had was a woman’s common love for the child. She tried to hold it, and it meant nothing. Shortly after, an army came down, of stragglers, in that area; and they were hungry ... They were stragglers from another country and they didn’t have any food and they were disbanded.. And they burned everything they saw and took what they could take and that’s what they did... and you [Phil] never knew, never went back, and you’re meeting Pete K. now ...and I’m trying like hell to cut the emotion part out ‘cause I don’t want to get into...” [Jane stops here.]

(Jane said, “It’s all right, Janice,” and then said to Phil, “There was a baby. I don’t want to do this for you, see. I want you to do it, just comfort her and don’t worry about it.”

[...] And you speak in words that are familiar and you use baby talk when necessary. Baby talk in that you do not speak exactly as you would speak to an adult. And the baby talk is not obvious. [...]

And so I hope the baby talk [here] is not obvious!!! [...]

The story unfolds when the mother uncovers evidence of a mixup in the baby complex at the hospital: She had been given only one of her children, or some such affair; either that, or she had managed to adopt a baby from there. [...]

[...] I envisioned the delivery rooms there, and the room where visitors see their babies (I’ve never seen those rooms in “real” life).

[...] He wrote that such baby mixups are far from rare. [...]

[...] On Saturday October 8 Jane and I saw Linda’s day-old baby girl, Eileen Elizabeth, at the hospital near Tunkhannock, PA. We hadn’t asked Seth for any material on the baby.)

[...] Something at age 8 for this new baby, a minor operation, perhaps tonsils or appendix—this sort of thing. [...]

[...] “Turnabout with the child, a complete change of plan or a turnabout” refers to the fact that she wanted to keep the baby but its father refused to marry her and pushed her into having it adopted; she was a minor also at the time. [...]

[...] “When the Barbers were here the other night with their baby, I saw something like the same thing on the baby’s face—only yours was like the adult knowing version of that—you know what I mean?”

[...] The baby, in white sits on the lap of my brother’s wife, Ida. [...] The baby perhaps did not come through as well as the other three figures because of a lack of contrast.

[...] The child, the baby image, did not come through clearly. [...]

[...] No pain, movement in pelvis and I delivered a baby. Someone, a doctor, holds up two babies, twins, and I thought, somewhat humorously: ‘Oh no, twins! Really, this is too much.’ By this I meant, after having no babies all these years, now to have two at once! Then, though I’m not sure, I think that the doctor reassured me, that only one baby was involved. [...]

(Had baby in September.

(Yesterday we received from Hal Williams of Lancaster, PA, three medications he had promised to send: a baby cream, a calindula flower extract for use on Jane’s decubiti, and a powder—also I believe based on the calindula—for her to take at 12 hour intervals for blue fingers, if any. [...]

[...] Bill thinks he remembers noticing a woman he thought was Cuban, with a baby.”)

[...] Two died when they were babies. [...]

[...] They didn’t like their babies dying, though, but they just thought it was life. [...]

[...] Ruburt now thinks of a woman and child, and of a photograph of Marie Tubbs and a baby, in Florida.

[...] Ruburt now thinks of a woman and a child, and of a photograph of Marie Tubbs and a baby, in Florida… I feel we are off here, but that the connection is valid.” [...]

[...] I do want to point out that all fetuses do not necessarily intend to develop into normal babies, and that if medical science, through its techniques, ends up in directing a normal birth, the consciousness of the child may never feel normally allied with physical experience.

[...] I was a baby in my hometown, Saratoga Springs, N.Y. The time was about 1931 to start with. [...]

[...] There was no pain but a movement in the pelvis, and I delivered a baby. [...] Then the doctor reassured me that only one baby was involved. [...]

[...] He saw a female baby because the product will be intuitive and psychic rather than born from logic. [...]

(Even those at the writer’s conference in the summer of 1957, at Milford, Pennsylvania, told her she’d outgrow her urge to write — that she should have a baby. [...]

[...] Think of the classical statue of Shiva standing on the crushed baby—a loving participation in the illusion of tragedy. [...]

[...] But on the other hand the mother was early frightened by the idea of a vital male baby, who might be overly rambunctious and difficult to control. [...]

He is not to be babied. [...]