“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(We’ve also talked over Seth’s answer in the last session about why the subconscious doesn’t back off when it’s obvious that it’s gone too far in a protective role, say. I said that I understood his answer to my question all right, but yet that I felt there were still things there to be discussed; that in individual cases, for instance, the subconscious could go too far when there was no need to, and that in such cases it seemed to ignore the wishes and desires of the conscious personality involved. I felt, then, that there should be a more intimate give-and-take between all portions of a personality. Since in numerous cases throughout the species’ history, I added, this hadn’t happened, I thought there could be important insights there that we might learn from Seth. But primarily, my original question had to do with Jane’s own case, and at this time that was the one we were still interested in gaining insight into.)

(10:05.) Give us a moment.... You cannot say that any of Ruburt’s attitudes were “wrong,” nor can you say in larger terms that his method was “wrong.” You cannot say, and should not, place moral connotations in such situations. Each personality is different, and affects the body in a different way. You think of health as physical only. If you think in terms of an unhealthy relationship, for example, then you may at least begin to glimpse the ways in which individuals will seek prerogatives, so each case must be seen separately.

(10:22.) I simply want to stress that health in those terms does involve more. The “subconscious” will try to save an individual from great disappointment. This may mean the incidence of a disease, but the disease may save a person’s sanity. So the issues are not nearly as clear as it would at first seem.

He wanted to use his intuitive abilities fully, but felt that great caution must be used. He thought mainly of the health of your relationship together, and the health of his work. He became divided, seeing these as opposing tendencies in his personality, rather than as complementary ones that quite naturally met in his personality, so one was set against the other. Much of this appears in your pendulum work of late, but you both then project those ideas upon the world, so that you think of your readers as overly credulous, or of critics who are overly critical. This leads of course to people who are for you, but dumb; or against you but intellectual.

Now there are some people who consider overall balance a prerogative, and you will usually find them in decent health, with average concerns, and you will not find them taking risks. The subconscious does not exist, of course. “It” is a highly personalized portion of the self, uniquely tuned. Some people enjoy risks. The body may be in excellent health, and die that way in an accident. But the subconscious knows that the quality of life for that individual involves such exhilaration, and such a person literally chooses that rather than, for example, what someone else might consider a well-balanced long life.