“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Energy cannot be retained. It must be discharged. The very attempt to deny an action automatically changes the nature of the action, and also changes the nature of the individual who attempts to deny it. All energy seeks to materialize itself, which is another way of saying that action must act.

What you have here is an attempt to objectify, or stand apart from action in such a refusal. This is not the fault of the subconscious, but a fault of the ego, which refuses to assimilate or accept a given action. As you know, it is the ego who exists as a result of such objectivity. All the qualities that make up the ego are objectified to that degree, but they are collected about the ego with the ego as center. When the ego however refuses to accept an emotion as a part of itself, it tries one of two actions.

It is in this area that such conflicts arise. The man, or ego, who has never really accepted such violence as a part of his action pattern, will usually have no conflicts in this particular line, simply because the inclination was never a strong part of the ego’s inner image, and is more or less discarded automatically, along with all those other characteristics or inclinations which are not in his ego pattern.

This is obviously somewhat simplified, in that the ego constantly changes, and the above examples must be read carefully or their meaning could be misinterpreted. Actions may appear to be separate, but they are all part of other actions, this being of course the basis for all organization, including that of the ego and the inner self.

All boundaries, therefore, are apparent boundaries, boundaries in appearance only.

Groupings of actions of any kind merge into other groupings, both within the physical field and outside of it. All apparent units are merely formed by functions, the functions of action. In this context the ego is also a function of action. There are of course also functions within functions, which should be obvious.