1 result for (book:tps6 AND heading:"delet session februari 4 1981" AND stemmed:framework)

TPS6 Deleted Session February 4, 1981 10/67 (15%) public exposure latest disclaimer books
– The Personal Sessions: Book 6 of The Deleted Seth Material
– © 2017 Laurel Davies-Butts
– Deleted Session February 4, 1981 8:56 PM Wednesday

[... 14 paragraphs ...]

(I repeated in our discussion that it was perfectly all right with me if Jane chose not to publish any more Seth books, but concentrated on her own works, and she said she understood this. It’s my personal opinion, at least of the moment, that it will be quite a while before Dreams is either finished or printed. At least Jane now has some breathing space, and the cycle of resistance may be interrupted, say, if not reversed yet. We now have time for Framework 2 to operate. In this interim I may do some work on Dreams myself, or start something of my own.

[... 10 paragraphs ...]

He would have been in that case operating himself within the recognizable framework of psychological identity, being himself within the context of personality structure as it would be defined by all. He feels quite competent with his own books. They begin by giving some verbal tribute to old definitions, and then take off from there, having firmly established the fact that he is more or less in the same kettle of fish. In that regard there is little ambiguity.

[... 5 paragraphs ...]

Now. Your social systems have very few frameworks that even take such experiences into consideration. (Pause.) There are the esoteric schools, for example, the spiritualistic societies, the Eastern traditions. Overall they involve a very small esoteric group. The mainspring of society becomes touched by such groups now and then—but in the world of, say, the usual public encounter there are no accepted frameworks for such experiences.

You have first of all to explain your definition of personality, to attempt redefinitions of a very emotional kind, for when you are speaking of, say, space and time, that is one thing. When you are asking people to reexamine the whole matter of personal identity, you are setting conditions that may frighten many of them. Ruburt feels that he could, for example, explain any of his own books from his own framework quite well. To explain my books is something else again, and in that manner of speaking, my books are self-evident also.

[... 4 paragraphs ...]

Now Ruburt understood quite well in a fashion that his own experiences were taking him outside of that cohesive framework, not simply outside of science’s or religion’s dictums, but outside of those areas that science and religion ignored, deplored, or denied (all very intently).

(9:40.) In that regard he felt that he was violating an important cultural taboo, and embarked upon a program that would necessitate caution, self-protection, and a certain detachment. He was determined to go ahead, because his own value fulfillment sought those directions—such was his nature. My published works, however, presented him with what he felt to be a public stance in a different fashion than his own would (louder). My books automatically seemed to suggest a framework of reference to which few others could have access.

[... 1 paragraph ...]

Again, definitions of personality are important here. Ruburt could read poetry without first having to define the nature of a poet. He could meet any criticisms with suitable explanations, since any audience was not about to question the poet’s psychological validity. Any arguments would take place within an implied framework of definitions.

[... 6 paragraphs ...]

Give us a moment.... the books themselves—mine as well as his—are themselves indications of achievements (pause) that are not easily broken off, since they represent the natural, creative development of his own abilities and growth. They also provide, if you realize it, the solutions to your dilemmas, as I hope you shall shortly see. That is, they provide you with that larger framework of understanding, for the old frameworks of understanding force you to continue to explore your reality for larger definitions. In those areas of concern, then, Ruburt is still involved with too-small definitions.

I will have far more to say, but that is enough for discussion one. I know that it is difficult to understand, but the challenge is one of growth, one that exists in a fashion because you have moved into an ever-expanding framework —but in an uneven course.

[... 12 paragraphs ...]

(Today I also reminded Jane about a question we’ve thought about at other times: Why does the portion of her that’s raising such a fuss about protection not understand the damage it’s doing to the whole personality—including itself? The circle becomes self-defeating, of course, and as far as I’m concerned reached that status years ago. Yet it persists.... Any hope we have in all of this is that our new stance will allow us to focus on the good things we have in life, and to create a synthesis of old and new ideas that will result in Jane returning to normal mobility. In this session Seth referred to Jane’s need for value fulfillment as she explored her psychic gifts. He also stated that our old frameworks of understanding force us to continue to explore reality for larger definitions. All very well, if such explorations can be carried out with a reasonable feeling of safety or protection, evidently, but if that essential ingredient or feeling is missing, then more caution must be used by us—and as I see it, that’s where we stand now. The hope is that our hiatus as far as encountering the public goes will give us some valuable time to organize new approaches to our lives.

[... 4 paragraphs ...]

Similar sessions

TPS6 Deleted Session March 2. 1981 fiction writer novels public recognition
NotP Introduction by Jane Roberts psyche Cézanne sexuality bisexuality view
TPS6 Deleted Session March 4, 1981 hypothetical accomplishments portrait writer composite
TPS6 Deleted Session May 5, 1981 panic superself dj poohed Sinful