“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(In closing out the last session, Seth told us that he’d “cover everything that needs to be covered” in his books, and I wrote that sometimes I’d still choose to insert other particularly apropos material of his into whatever book he might be producing at the time. My chance to show how independent I am about doing just that arose much sooner than I’d expected it to — in tonight’s session, in fact. So inserting this material puts off by one — at least — Seth’s first session for Chapter 8 of Mass Events.

(At the end of the 852nd session I mentioned a letter Jane had received last month from a professor of physics, and that in a recent nonbook session Seth had come through with a partial answer to some of the professor’s questions. This afternoon Jane reread the letter, and wondered if Seth might give more material in reply; as she worked on Heroics she did get a line or two from Seth, commenting on that possibility. My main reason for presenting the excerpts that follow is the same as it’s been on other occasions: Seth’s material fits into Mass Events very well. Nor do I want to wait an indefinite time before he may incorporate similar information in a book — even this one. Neither does Jane. In general, then, tonight Seth discusses questions many correspondents have asked; but specifically, his material is a continuation of an answer to some of the professor’s questions. I know that eventually I’ll mail to that gentleman whatever insights Seth gives us.

(9:30.) Since I must use [an] objective vocabulary I am always seeking for analogies. By objective I refer to the use of language, the English language, that automatically sets up its own screens of perception — as of course any language must do to some extent.

The universe expands, as I have said before, as an idea expands; and as sentences are built upon words, in your terms, and paragraphs upon sentences, and as each retains its own logic and continuity and evidence within that framework, so do all the portions of the universe appear to you also with the same cohesiveness (dash) — meaning continuity and order. Any sentence is meaningful. It seems to fall in order by itself as you say it. Its order is obvious. That one sentence is (underlined) meaningful because of its organization of letters, or if it is spoken, its organization of vowels and syllables. It makes sense, however, not only because of the letters or vowels or syllables that are used within it, but because of all of the letters or vowels or syllables that it excludes.

It is not to say that you cannot understand the nature of the universe to some extent, but the answers lie in the natures of your own minds, in the processes of individual creativity, in studies that ask questions like: “Where did this thought come from? Where does it go? What effect does it have upon myself or others? How do I know how to dream, when I have never been taught to do so? How do I speak without understanding the mechanisms? Why do I feel that I have an eternal reality, when it is obvious that I was physically born and will physically die?”