“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

DELETED SESSION

(Once again Jane was quite relaxed, but she wanted to have the session anyhow. “Bleary as usual,” she said. “I’ve been so out of it the past week....”

(I was feeling somewhat better, but wasn’t clear as I wanted to be yet. I had a few questions I wanted to ask Seth if I got the chance, but hadn’t talked them over with Jane before the session. We’d celebrated Thanksgiving last Thursday with our first turkey in two years.

(For the moment I’d forgotten the notes I wrote concluding the last session, deleted for November 12, having to do with Seth suggesting we throw our hassles with Prentice and foreign publishers into Framework 2; I’d written that I didn’t know whether or not I was capable of doing that at this time. But the questions I’d posed in those notes furnished the background for tonight’s session, somewhat to my surprise.

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.

(“Well, I reread that session often.” Nearly every day, I might have added.)

(Earlier in the month I’d grown so disgusted with the whole business that I’d resolved not to bother asking Seth for help—then before tonight’s session I’d spontaneously had the idea that I would ask if I got the chance. I reread daily many of the private sessions he’s given for us in the last year or two—especially those in Book 20. A number of those deal with my challenges involving the side, groin, taxes, and so forth. I seem to be a slow learner; either that or my accumulated resentments seem to be so deeply ingrained that I should work much harder at eradicating old beliefs.)

The session should help you understand that you are not a victim. There is much more, however, about the interactions of people in such events. I hope to make it all as clear as I can, because I want you to understand the nature of events, and your participation in them, and that of others.

If you want, make a list of questions that you want to ask. Remember, however, to concentrate now upon, say, Prentice’s failings are an exercise in negative meditation, in negative suggestion, so try, each of you, to avoid that. This session can help, particularly if you make comparisons yourselves along these lines between the private creative event and the mass one. Do you have questions?

I have given some material on that before, and it all applies, as given, to contradictions in your own beliefs between the male as breadwinner and the male as artist. There are, I believe, several sessions dealing with that.

In this case there was also the belief that there was a lack in the flow of communication, a blockage in the flow of creativity, so tell yourself that your creative ventures can flow through you easily and well. When you are upset, ask the creative man what he thinks. End of session and a fond good evening.

(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.”

(We’ve been talking about Frameworks 1 through 4 in recent days because of my notes for Mass Events. I felt somewhat relieved after the session. Seth had confirmed my own opinions, yet I fully acknowledge that I had been worrying about physical hassles for some time, and sometimes wondered whether I was right or should seek medical help.)