“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Behind your questions, however, there lies a vast area of unasked questions that we have barely touched upon. In dealing with Frameworks 1 and 2 alone, I have been simplifying, and those frameworks in a way represent (underlined) dimensions of events. How events happen is perhaps one of the greatest “mysteries” that you will encounter in physical life. Often I do need analogies, for to me that simultaneous, creative, cooperative nature of events exists with a sublime simplicity—a simplicity I am afraid that of necessity becomes complex as I try to describe it in terms that will make sense in your space-time framework.

You set a far more favorable group of probabilities into motion, a group that aids you and them as well, for they are also seeking creativity from their separate viewpoints. They are also fighting their own static. You do not have to contact them one by one in Framework 2. The book itself is like a magnet—any book. The same kinds of reactions, however, are involved in all activities, and it is sometimes frustrating for me that you cannot perceive the fascinating facets of any event. All group interactions of course are involved here. (Pause.) You still —and I do not simply mean you two alone—do not feel the unsurpassable force that thoughts have. You do not understand that they do form events, that to change events you must first change thoughts. You get what you concentrate upon. To brood or worry, or become resentful, is as regrettable as it would be if you, say, painted a big X over one of your paintings because you were dissatisfied with a detail or two. Over a period of time, resentments X out large areas of otherwise productive experience.

I have one other point to mention, apropos: our session regarding the two men (see the deleted session, for me, of April 18, 1979). You get in trouble only when you identify too strongly with the socially inoculated man, so that you can say “With my beliefs, I do not think I can learn to put Prentice in Framework 2.” (See my closing notes for the last deleted session.) The “my” there, in that sentence, refers to the socially inoculated man. The other man has no difficulties at all in that regard, and that man is you, too. You could at least ask his opinion.

(10:10. “I had a funny feeling before the session,” Jane said. “That it was one of those times when he had to dribble the material down to me word by word. It made me feel real impatient—not on his part but my own. I also had the feeling that there are about five frameworks out there, but that everything has to come down to us through Framework 1 before we can understand it.”