“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(Jane continues to show improvements. But she’s been bothered more than once lately by the contents of some of her mail — the letters of woe she attracts from readers who earnestly petition aid of various kinds from Seth and herself. Today the trigger was furnished by another letter from a lady who lives in Kentucky. She’s lost both breasts from cancer, and has a host of other physical and emotional problems. I suggested Seth comment on Jane’s reactions tonight. I also told Jane that her reactions were probably triggered at least in part because of her own vulnerable position, due to her personal challenges.

(Jane’s “walking” has improved much in the last week, especially, and overall since Seth began this series of personal sessions. She now can take, say, ten steps at a time, leaning on her typing table, instead of the one or two previously possible. But we’ve also grown careless again: She walks but once a day, instead of the twice I suggested recently, and which she agreed to, and which Seth seconded in a recent session. Still, we’re very pleased with her progress.

New sentence: In your historical past, when man identified his identity with the soul, he actually gave himself greater leeway in terms of psychological mobility, but eventually the concept of the soul as held resulted in a distrust of the intellect. (Pause.) That result was the inevitable follow-up of dogma. Period. Part of man’s latest over-identification with the intellect is, of course, an overreaction to those past historical events. Neither religion or science grant other creatures much subjective dimension, however: You like to think of yourselves, again, as the reasoning animal in terms of your species.

The animals possess a consciousness of self, and without the human intellect. You do not need a human intellect to be aware of your own consciousness. Animals, it is true, do not reflect upon the nature of their own identities as man does (pause), but this is because that nature is intuitively comprehended. It is self-evident.

I only want to show you that the sense of identity need not inevitably be coupled with the intellect exclusively. Your intellect is a part of you — a vital, functioning portion of your cognitive processes — but it does not contain (underlined) your identity.

The child first explores the components of its psychological environment, the inside stuff of subjective knowledge, and claims that inner territory, but the child does not identify its basic being with either its feelings or its thoughts. That is why, for example, it often seems that young children can die so easily. (Still intently): They can disentangle themselves because they have not as yet identified their basic beings with life experience. Period.

(9:46.) Despite all of that, men and women still find the solutions to many of their problems by rediscovering the larger sense of identity¹ — a sense of identity that accepts the intuitions and the feelings, the dreams and the magic hopes as vital characteristics, not adjuncts, of personhood. When I tell you to remember your own natural persons, I do then want to remind you not to identify with your intellects alone, but to enlarge your scopes of identity. Automatically those other, often-shunted-aside characteristics begin to add their richness, fulfillment, and vitality to your lives effortlessly.

He is not responsible for other people’s realities, but he is responsible for his own. Give us a moment … .(Pause, eyes closed). The ill woman’s reality does not threaten his own in any way. The situation, however, shows that he sometimes still thinks he should be able to solve all problems, and to know all the reasons for any given sorrow or tragedy. The intellect cannot handle that kind of information at that level.

As a matter of fact, the kind of literal answers that you may think you want can indeed lead you somewhat astray in terms of the larger picture, so Ruburt must say: “That is not my province,” send energy, a note now and then; but the particular problem, the specific problem is the woman’s, not Ruburt’s.

The reason for the problem is a philosophical concern of Ruburt’s, and of yours, but it is one whose answer — or answers — will gradually unfold. All of this information I consider necessary, again, to provide an overall atmosphere of comprehension that will allow the release of your own vitalities and strengths in an effortless manner, in such a way that your own problems begin to dissolve.

(Last Saturday, on the 23rd, I bought another pair of flea collars. Mitzi in the meantime had become thoroughly miserable, and I had determined that I was going to get a collar on her somehow. A friend had suggested using a towel to prevent her scratching. When I set out to do the job that afternoon, Jane suggested using catnip on the towel. After some coaxing on the back porch, I got Mitzi rolling around in the catnip on the towel, but only half succeeded in wrapping her up. I carried her squirming into the kitchen. Jane was doing the dishes. I knelt on the floor holding the cat, while Jane mentally tried to soothe her struggles — and I succeeded in getting the flea collar in place around her neck. Actually, Mitzi didn’t resist half as much as I’d feared she would. I’d thought I might totally alienate her this time if she fought too hard, but such was not the case. Jane said she’d sent Mitzi a stream of suggestions while I coaxed her into letting me put the collar on her. Everything worked well. I fed her a few times that afternoon, and succeeded in making friends okay. Mitzi hasn’t tried to get the collar off. It has a medicinal smell. Now, several days later — as I type this session on Wednesday night — she seems to feel much better.)

2. Jane wrote these notes in her journal last Sunday, the day before she delivered this session on August 25 — but I present them here to show how, from her own perspective, she very nicely covers events I too wrote about in connection with the session.