“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(We sat for the session at 8:10. We wanted Seth to comment on the DMSO, and on Jane’s very swollen right foot. [The left foot has lost some of its original swelling, and now appears much better by contrast.] I told Jane I thought Seth was correct in the deleted session for June 24, 1981, in which he said the swelling effect helps cushion the new motion of some joints, so there is no grating. I also told her I thought another reason applied, however, one that led to the swelling to begin with. She is waiting apprehensively to see what the public’s reaction to God of Jane is. Although a few hundred copies of this book may have been shipped, it hasn’t really come out yet. The idea had come to me some days ago that Jane’s foot troubles were directly related to her fears of being accepted in a controversial role. “I thought you knew something like that was going on.” I said. She shook her head: “I don’t know what I think. I’d like him to say something about the DMSO, and that material I got this afternoon, and maybe the foot....”)

(Long pause.) All societies basically need the insertion of fresh challenge and knowledge, however, or they stagnate. At the same time, of course, the society wants to maintain its familiar stance. For centuries Christianity served to preserve old frameworks while still allowing for transforming elements and symbolic activities that allowed individuals to assert some independence and originality by moving from one religious symbol, say, to another—still, however, within that larger framework.

(Long pause.) The original ideas connected with the Sinful Self’s beliefs were at one time, for example, not as obviously unfortunate, since the system itself also provided for salvation, methods of appeasement and so forth—all of which were thoroughly accepted through many centuries.

I am speaking in your terms of time, now. Individuals born into your time do not feel, say, the same sense of familiarity with the religious belief systems of past lives. (Pause.) Your age requires a greater sense of freedom and curiosity. In any case, the original innocent self is bonded to the parents, and to the parents’ beliefs for a time. This provides the necessary sense of safety and the sense of definition in which the child can safely use its explorative abilities.

When the person is a child no longer that need no longer exists in the same fashion. People often throw off their childhood beliefs then and begin to look for their own view of reality, once again. They may then count the more negative aspects of their backgrounds in a rather concentrated manner, for the system no longer serves to provide its psychological support. The person is forced to find fresh, more original solutions.

It is then transformed into what it was before such indoctrination by the culture. Then it was the innocent self, of course. This understanding helps release that energy for the use of the entire personality, as Ruburt’s paper correctly states. The personality is then free to explore and assimilate greater areas of original knowledge. You actually have the innocent self in a kind of second stage, for now it has the experience of the Sinful Self behind it.

(9:19. Long pause.) Ruburt is trying to move outside of the picture entirely. Only by so doing, of course, can the larger avenues of knowledge be opened and made available to the society—or to the self. For many centuries creativity itself was firmly directed by Christianity, and to some extent (underlined) Christianity brings with it an air of uneasiness for society—to the extent that any original thought or insight must indeed imply an intrusive force to a world that must exist in a rare balance that is the result of preserving old values and obtaining new knowledge.

There are archaeological ages given to man’s physical history, or the history of the earth, or to the coming or going of the physical events of nature. There are also reincarnational themes that have united people from various centuries. (Pause.) Even though many of the negative aspects of those themes may now be highly apparent—as with the Jews and the Christians, the Arabs or whatever—this is because actually those patterns are breaking up in your time. The original benefits are no longer as readily available as once they were. The itch is still there, but it is harder to scratch.

(9:33.) The strong bonding elements that were once of importance have served their purposes, and no longer soften the more unfortunate beliefs connected with such systems’ beliefs. They may appear in frenzied outbursts—all the more frenzied—because the original purpose of the culture has deserted it. Its integrity has been undermined. Its reconciling forces no longer really operate, and only its rough edges show.