“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(For the first time in a very long while, most of last week’s mail remains unanswered—sitting in the basket on the table at the end of the couch. Another batch of letters arrived from Prentice-Hall today, adding to the pile. Some of the letters are great, others very depressing. In other words, they range over the usual human situations we encounter. One even took us to task for “obscenities” in Volume 2 of “Unknown.” Jane and I have been talking about how best to deal with the implications of the mail—it often bothers her—but haven’t reached any conclusions. There may not be any simple one way to handle the situation. I ask a question or two about it in my list of questions for Seth.

(“Well, at least I’m somewhat comfortable in the chair tonight,” Jane said as we waited at 8:58. “I can lean back somewhat—but I’m always the most uncomfortable in the chair. I don’t know what I’m doing here instead of being in bed. Well, I’ll be ready in a minute....” Yet at the same time she sat stiffly forward, her body canted to her left; she didn’t look comfortable, and she decided to try the foam rubber pads beneath her thighs, a move that sometimes “helps relieve the pressure on those [pelvic] bones back there, and keeps me from feeling that I’m falling forward. They also help me when I move around in the chair.” Her talk reminded me, paradoxically, that last night while sitting on the couch she’d been able to cross her legs in a way she hadn’t been able to do for a long time.

The same applies to the conscious mind itself, which is not programmed in the same fashion to be the arbiter of microscopic events. It does not feel overly threatened, then, despite this, in many instances there will still be some blockage of PK effects. That blockage may still allow a kind of displacement targeting, however, in which case inner abilities are allowed to operate, but in a rather sabotaged way—not hitting the target with which the conscious mind is so familiar or concentrated upon, but hitting another microscopic target instead, in which effects are then noticeable.

It is the conscious mind as it is trained in your society that deals with black and white thinking, apropos of one of your questions. The connection between black and white thinking and creativity is legitimate, but it exists the other way around: as a rule the artist or creative person is (underlined) creative to the extent that he or she escapes black and white thinking, for the creative person deals with syntheses, original versions of reality and the consideration of different groups of probabilities—groups that appear otherwise very unlikely together from the standpoint of black and white thinking.

(Pause.) In your creativity you both largely avoid black and white thinking, and automatically leap out of that framework. The conscious mind is quite willing to let go in that regard, for art not only provides it with enjoyment but fulfills its own framework of action. It does not regard art as a game, exactly, but it does not expect the same rules to apply, either, to a painted apple on a canvas and a real one.

His eyes have improved reading. I will try to answer all of your questions in one way or another. Ruburt is working through many issues now well, however I do want to mention that Framework 2 often involves such “displaced” targets, when one desired event may be blocked in one area, but a beneficial event of like consequence instead happens in an area seemingly quite divorced from it.