“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(3. During a conversation Jane and I had wondered why the members of the human species were so woefully ignorant of the internal structure of their own bodies. Not that we wanted or needed conscious control—but why didn’t we have the conscious visual knowledge of the workings of our various bodily parts, be they heart, liver, or whatnot?

Now: in answer to, in partial answer to, your question concerning conscious knowledge of the body’s workings, I have several things to say.

Perhaps primarily the answer lies in the necessity that man recognize the spontaneous source of his being. I will come back to that. More than that, however, your question of course reflects your cultural beliefs and assumptions, and so you do not realize that in some ways such conscious knowledge of the body’s workings might limit rather than expand concepts and experience of the body and the self.

I assume that by your question you mean, why does not man understand how his heart works? I confess that I do not quite know how to explain what I mean. In all the terms of common sense, of course our body is composed of organs—heart, liver, and so forth, and I mention them at times. You must understand, however, that the very terms are arbitrary to a certain extent.

Native cultures, believing that the courage or fleetness of an eaten animal became part of the hunter’s mental and physical acquisition, handled the body in entirely different terms, and did very well. You can say that you have a brain and heart and liver and appendix, and so forth, and muscles and bones, and insist that all of these work in a certain fashion, as of course they do. Cutting the body open will show those organs. You can say with equal validity that the body holds a man’s ghost, that it is filled also with the organs of all the animals a man has consumed—that one man has the heart of a lion, and in that framework that is true.

(10:00.) Physicians, perhaps, can be used as an example of men who do have a conscious knowledge of the body’s workings. They should indeed then be the healthiest of men. Obviously this is not the case. Man must be free to experience the body as he wishes, and to be aware of its spontaneous order.

Medically much can be done in your framework to alter bodily parts. The body is not just a physical entity, however, nor is its working completely the result of the condition of all of its parts. People in seemingly good health, for example, all parts functioning normally as far as you know, medically, can suddenly die, or become ill, while no reason can be found. Such cases can occur, among other reasons, because of relationships between or among bodily parts that in your terms do not have a physical status.

A conscious knowledge of the eye’s working will not necessarily give you better vision. To a certain extent that system, while it has its advantages, is also limited and differently slanted in certain directions that can at least at times mitigate against the body’s health and well-being.

If he feels that he has not done enough that day before his nap, he then compares himself to those who come home from work around five, after “putting in a good day.” If he has worked enough in his terms the comparison is not so bothersome. Beside this, there is sometimes a feeling of isolation, since you nap separately, and at times he has felt that to be a rejection—not in deep terms, but important enough so that that feeling is combined with the first one mentioned.

I mention some things again and again, so you do not have to go back to old sessions, though you should occasionally. Then let Ruburt encourage his spontaneity. He will find himself writing well—inspired, with time for new work and typing manuscripts, with periods of relaxation and ambition.