“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(In the last session Seth promised to begin dictation on his latest book after a long layoff, but as things turned out the book was not begun anew. Instead I asked that he deal with the challenges Jane and I still face, and apparently are unable to resolve—her symptoms, and my own feelings of panic, and related symptoms, as mentioned also in the last session.

(I also planned to start reviewing the first deleted sessions Seth gave on Jane’s symptoms, for I’ve never really forgotten them and always felt they were as good as any Seth has ever given on those subjects. The main one, the breakthrough session as I think of it, was the 367th for October 1, 1967. I read it over just before tonight’s session began, and was able to reaffirm my opinion that it’s still one of the best; at the same time it aroused questions, for it deals with causes in the past. According to Seth’s suggested use of the point of power, and his late deleted material, one isn’t supposed to dwell on the past, but go forward from the present—two major blocks of material, I told Jane this evening, that at first glance seem to contradict each other.

(I added that I doubt if they really do, but that the views need integration for us to understand it all clearly as a unified theory—sort of like field theory in physics, perhaps. I assume it will take lots of work to accomplish this, but am inserting these thoughts here as a remainder of one of the things I want to accomplish this year in this area. Jane and I also plan a list of questions for Seth on the whole situation, and I see these as accumulating into a notebook to accompany these sessions. I think we’ve already achieved some insights that we’ve let slide or didn’t understand.

(At this writing at least I plan to spend evenings typing new session material, and in the time left over to restudy the past material in the hopes of putting it all together with and/or without Seth’s help. But out of this work I expect our questions for Seth will come. I’m deeply troubled by Jane’s condition, and by what I regard as her strange passivity in the face of it; clues to this attitude exist in the 367th session. I’m sure my own role in the whole thing is a strong one, and that in my own way I’m as badly off as she is, although it may not show physically.

(I especially think Seth’s remarks in the last deleted session—for January 1, 1979, to be apropos: “You question your own characteristics, and so your accomplishments fade in your eyes.” I suppose what I want to know is why we must question those characteristics—or at least why we, meaning anyone, cannot live in harmony with them. Then at least we’d know some little peace of mind. As it is, that quality is very rare to us.

(Jane too read over the 367th session before the session this evening. It seems that essentially our situation is unchanged, 12 years later, which doesn’t say much for our learning capacities, I’m afraid. When the session began I half expected Seth to tell us to stay away from old deleted sessions, since as mentioned delving into the past can cause too intense a focus there, and reinforce problems, whatever they may be. But he didn’t. I said to Jane later that it seems Seth will tailor his material to suit our needs and/or moods of the moment, which may be one of the ways to integrate blocks of his material into a larger whole, which can display many facets or approaches.)

(“Good night, Seth.”

(“Thank you, Seth.” 10:27 PM. As usual, I think the material is excellent.)