“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Suffice it to say, I was not annoyed. (Underlined.)

(9:50. Jane had been in a good trance. Jane now said that she hadn’t been sure we could have a session tonight, as a result of our discussion beforehand. Note that the session didn’t begin until 9:27. This was not because the discussion had upset her, but because it had fired her up. She must be relaxed to begin a session. Resume at 10:01.)

A thought can be intense, then partially fade and grow intense again. (Pause.) Its own nature regulates its intensity, rather than any rules inherent in the nature of intensity itself. Some of these concepts are difficult to explain to you. In your terms it would be as if you experienced a future event, then a distant past event, then a moment from the present. You would not understand what was going on, nor see the inner logic within.

(See page 5, the 422nd session of July 10, 1968. My original question, which Seth has been discussing ever since, was: “What does the new personality, the larger Seth, think of our time system? He must have experienced many different ones.”)

I was not annoyed. I did not want however to become involved with the matter at that time, since you have no idea where it would lead us.

Now behind that simple explanation, you see, there are many subjects that we have not as yet embarked upon. I did not mean to put off an answer. I was simply not ready to give you a full one.