“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

It is, momentarily, literally accepted by the personality as a part of the self, and here lies its danger. It is not just symbolically accepted, and I am not speaking in symbolic terms. The impeding action, as seen in an illness for example, is quite literally accepted by the personality structure, and by all corresponding systems, as a portion of the self. Once this occurs, a conflict instantly develops. The self does not want to give up a portion of itself, even while that portion may be painful or disadvantageous. There are many psychological reasons behind such a psychological truth.

Action accepts all stimuli in an affirmative manner. It is only when action becomes compartmented, so to speak, in the development of highly differentiated consciousness, that such refinement occurs. I am not here saying that unpleasant stimuli will not be felt as unpleasant, and reacted against, by less self-conscious organisms. I am saying that less self-conscious organisms will rejoice even in their automatic reaction against such stimuli, because any stimuli and reaction represents sensation, and sensation is another method by which such action knows and expresses itself.

Action at this level is conscious of itself, but the “I” differentiation is not definite enough to fear destruction or painful stimuli. Here we merely have action knowing itself. And knowing itself, it knows its basic indestructibility, knows its own oneness, and has no fear of destruction, for it is also part of destruction itself, from which further action will evolve.

We are also helped here by several characteristics of the personality, in that it is forever changing, and its flexibility will be of benefit. We merely want to change the direction in which it moves, or rather the direction in which some of its energy moves. It must be seen by the personality that the impeding action is a hardship on the part of the whole structure, and that this particular portion of the self is not basic to the original personality structure, but only adopted.

Indeed, oftentimes they serve to preserve the integrity of the whole psychological system, and to point out the existence of inner problems. Often they serve temporary functions, leading the personality from other more severe areas of difficulty. I am not here saying that all illness is good. I am saying that illness is a portion of the action of which any personality is composed, and therefore it is purposeful, and cannot be considered as an alien force that attacks the personality from without.

For we will be involved here with a definite classification as to when an illness is beneficial and when it is detrimental. This will be most important. An illness is almost always the result of another action that cannot be carried through.