“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(At 8:52: “I sort of feel him around, but I don’t think it will be very long.” Jane had been tempted to pass up the session and continue work on God of Jane, but I reminded her that I could use Seth’s information on the disclaimer in our reply to the legal department at Prentice-Hall. We knew by now that we were resigned to having the disclaimer inserted into Mass Events, but we wanted to have our say—partially out of anger and partially out of self-protection, since we didn’t believe all the legal department had told us; we wanted them to know we understood the subterfuges involved.

(Jane didn’t feel too well before the session, what with all her bodily changes still taking place, but she did well once she began the session.)

I had intended to mention the affair, again, in any case—but once more I am reminded that many facts are self-evident to me, while at your end they are highly questionable—and so your attitudes are bound to be covered in ways that mine are not.

(9:26.) Lawyers deal in a world of limited, fairly well-established facts. Those facts may be imaginatively assembled at times, but they are very slow to accept the inclusion of any new data, and they must be backers of the establishment from which, of course, they obtain their position.

I am making no recommendations, but hopefully adding to the information that you have at hand, and offering another framework from which you can view the situation. Your feelings about it are as important as your actions. You have every right to call them on any points you desire, of course. (Long pause.) In the overall cultural picture (long pause), “psychic matters” are no longer as easy to dismiss as they used to be. People’s curiosity has been aroused, and the established methods of gaining knowledge have been found less than satisfactory—so in a fashion the idea of the disclaimer is a kind of backhanded recognition. You and your works are protected. Your lives are aware as they are meant to be. You have made no great errors in your lives. You are doing what is right for you. If you accept those statements as true, then you will begin to feel an emotional sense of rightness with yourselves. You will drop habits of self-disapproval. You can even take it for granted that intellectually you may not know all of the reasons (underlined) for your own actions.

To the extent that he questions his own natural protection. Give us a moment.... You are dealing with two issues also. The natural person—the creator, the artist—in Ruburt, wants the book out without any interruptions, and cares little about other issues. The socially knowledgeable person does not want to be taken for a fool, be insulted, and wants to be treated with respect. To some extent that is a simplification, of course. Nothing is that simple, but the explanation does serve to clarify contradictory issues. Certainly the entire affair is to be used creatively. Art, including writing, of course—creativity itself—is bound to be, as per the Cézanne passage (I’d called to Jane’s attention a couple of weeks ago) sometimes disruptive. It brings into being that which was not there before. It rearranges some aspects of the world, and it is in its fashion as brilliant as a child’s clear eye. It sees truth clearly. Because it does, art can often make disclosures that offend the pious, the well-mannered.

Ruburt’s own passages (in God of Jane) about the television preacher are a case in point. They upset him to some extent—not for himself, but because he did not want to hurt other people who so believed in the dogma that he was disclosing to the world. It is very important, then, that you learn to trust your own creativity and your own vision, and allow it its expression, for it will always lead to a more fulfilling vision. End of session. Unless you have another question.