“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(In order to understand the data it was necessary to write out a schedule of events; most of this was done after the session. As it was we spent about half an hour during break in an effort to begin to sort out the impressions. It developed that four letters were involved with the envelope object, and that one of these was enclosed in the experimental object. The common denominator here is that the date, January 25,1966, is somehow involved with all four letters. Seth uses this as a springboard for his impressions.

(Both letters of January 25 from F. Fell to Jane, although on different-sized paper, bore fold marks that revealed either one could have been enclosed in the experimental object, which is an envelope front from F. Fell, postmarked January 25. Since the data obtained from the experiment this evening refers to both letters, as will be shown, we have no way of knowing which letter was actually mailed in the experimental object. I did not realize until after the session that it would have helped to ask Seth this.

(“A note—there is some confusion here—that was not sent, or did not arrive. This lead Ruburt to think of a note he wrote but did not send, to Father Martin. I mention this for your information.” There is an interesting example of association at work here. Jane saw it before I did. Father Martin is a monk in a nearby monastery close to Elmira, and the author of letter #2, possibly enclosed by the envelope object, is Rhoda Monks.

(“Paws, and netlike shapes, and triangles.” These are very good references to letter #3, and take the form of doodles executed by Jane. She remembers making these on February 8, just before her telephone call to F. Fell. Letter #3, again, was written January 25, and the date connects this letter with the January 25 postmark on the envelope experimental object. Either letter #2 or letter #3 was enclosed in the experimental object.