“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Ideally that force is to a large extent self-protecting. It is also perceived to whatever degree possible (underlined) by all those at Prentice who are involved. At Framework-2 levels those people want to produce an excellent book. Their desire is not as vigorous as yours. It is watered down by far more Framework 1 activity. There is much “static” at that level.

Now: When you concentrate mainly (underlined) in Framework 1 and its communications with Prentice, then while overall you do achieve results of a beneficial nature—the publication and distribution of the books in a largely adequate form—there are glaring discrepancies also: entanglements that you do not like because you have taken your intent from Framework 2, where the creative event began, and placed it into Framework 1’s communication system almost entirely. Obviously you need Framework 1, with its letters, telephone calls, and so forth—but Framework 1’s communication system, while physically handy, also is somewhat like a very poor telephone connection, with static at both ends.

You reach each person you want separately. You must make your message clear regardless of the other person’s needs or circumstances, intents of the moment, and so forth. The more harassed you become, the more the static increases at both ends.

Now: Framework 2’s communications system is set into motion as a primary rather than as a backup system of communications. When you learn to cut through the static—if you trust the system of communication—this is how it works.

(9:38.) First of all, you clear your wires by trying to clear your mind, and simply by trying to understand how Framework 2 works. You think of, say, any event in a book’s production, distribution, translation or whatever, as the kind of multidimensional creative effort and event I have tried to explain. All of those other people are connected to that event in Framework 2 on a nonphysical level, as they are connected on a physical level. Framework 2’s communication system is at once simpler and more complex that Framework 1’s. Just as, say, your intent to paint a picture automatically has your fingers all moving in the proper directions, and your body manipulating properly, so that the desired painting results, so in a larger fashion your clear intent is communicated to each of the people involved—at a level without static—yours or theirs.

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.

(9:50.) Give us a moment.... When you have fearful thoughts about a book—or worse, about a future book—then you feed other people’s static. You increase to some extent their doubts as well as your own. Your thoughts have reality, but behind that statement is the apparently unrecognizable truth that your physical world is the exteriorization of your thoughts.