“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(Jane surprised me by mentioning a session at about 7:40. By the time she called me to sit for it, it was 8:35—and her mood had changed. Before she’d felt “clear-headed.” Now she had questions, and wished we’d gone right into the session as soon as she had mentioned it. As we waited for the session to begin, I read her the first questions I’d noted down from rereading the 367th session—Seth’s first comprehensive session on her symptoms, and one that’s been referred to rather often lately. I still want to study all of those early personal sessions, but haven’t progressed far because of all the new material we’ve been getting lately. But they’re always there, waiting. I didn’t expect Seth to go into my written questions this evening, although he did refer to several of them, if rather obliquely....)

You two have largely worked alone, and your work goals involve of course the development of personality characteristics that must apply to artistic work. You are aware of the fact that a great painting can still be great despite depicting, say, acts of violence that are “bad.” In a certain fashion you began to apply the “wrong kind” of moral judgments. I will try to explain, though you may, Joseph, at first, disagree.

Ruburt does it when he reads poor material. He immediately makes a moral judgment against a poet whose material is artistically poor. The person involved may indeed have difficulty artistically in expression, and an artistic revulsion can then be quite acceptable, but not a moral one.