“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

“If you think, ‘I have a headache,’ and if you do not replace this suggestion by a positive one, then you are automatically suggesting that the body set up those conditions that will result in the continuation of the malady. I will give you a commercial that is better than your Excedrin, you see, the short headache. I will tell you how to have none at all.” This was the only touch of humor in the whole session. In a session devoted to a particular person, Seth usually goes out of his way to make a few jovial comments to set the person at his or her ease.

Repression has been one of my own habits, particularly after I learned how destructive negative thoughts can be. At first I went overboard, or tried to. I’d catch myself thinking a resentful thought about a particular person or situation and I’d almost recoil, “Wow, that’s a terrible thing to think,” I’d say to myself.

As you read this, think back to various illnesses you have had, and see how this applies. Here Seth discusses illness in its relationship not only to the surface personality but to our deepest biological frameworks. Seth had previously spoken about Sally’s (Jon’s wife’s) need to disassociate herself from her “sick” identity. Now he elaborated:

“All illness is momentarily accepted by the personality as a part of the self, and here lies its danger. It is not just symbolically accepted, and I am not speaking in symbolic terms. An impeding action such as an illness is quite literally accepted by the personality structure, and once this occurs, a conflict develops. The self does not want to give up a portion of itself, even while that portion may be painful or disadvantageous. There are many reasons behind this.

Now Seth comes to this point, very important in his theories: “This acquiescence to even painful stimuli is a basic part of the nature of consciousness. Action does not differentiate between pleasant, painful, or joyful stimuli. These distinctions come much later, and on another level [here Seth is considering personality as composed of energy or action].

“The complicated human personality with its physical structure has evolved, along with some other structures, a highly differentiated ‘I’ consciousness [the ego, in other words], whose very nature is such that it attempts to preserve the apparent boundaries of identity. To do so it chooses between actions. But beneath this sophisticated gestalt are the simpler foundations of its being, and indeed the very acceptance of all stimuli without which identity would be impossible.

“Now all of this is basic knowledge if you would understand why the personality accepts even an impeding action such as illness despite the ego’s resistence to pain.”

Seth goes on to say that illness can be a “healthy” reaction, though it always involves personality problems: “It must be understood by the personality that the illness is a hardship on the part of the whole structure, and . . . not basic to the original personality.

“The whole focus of the personality can shift from constructive areas to a concentration of main energies in the area of the impeding action, or illness. In such a case, the illness actually represents a new unifying system. Now, if the old unifying system of the personality is broken down, the illness serving as a makeshift temporary emergency measure may hold the integrity of the personality intact until a new, constructive unifying principle replaces the original.

“Unifying principles are groups of actions about which the personality forms itself at any given time. These usually change in a relatively smooth fashion when action is allowed to flow unimpeded. [See how this ties in with Seth’s advice to the students on the value of spontaneity and the difficulties of repression.] These impediments [illnesses] may sometimes then preserve the integrity of the whole psychological system and point out the existence of inner psychic problems. Illness is a portion of the action of which personality is composed and therefore it is purposeful, and cannot be considered as an alien force that invades personality from without. . . .

“Illness could not be called an impeding action unless it persisted long after its purpose was served. Even then you could make no judgment without knowing all the facts . . . for the illness could still serve by giving the personality a sense of security, being kept on hand as an ever-present emergency device in case the new unifying system should fail.

“In other words, an action cannot be judged as impeding without a thorough knowledge of the actions that result in the makeup of any given personality. This is extremely important. To overlook this point is to risk the adoption of a more severe illness.

“All illness is almost always the result of another action that cannot be followed through. When the lines to the original action are released and the channels opened, the illness will vanish. However, the thwarted action may be one with disastrous consequences which the illness may prevent. The personality has its own logic.”

“In cases where the symptom itself is interior, as in ulcers, this is a sign that the personality is not yet willing to face the problem, and the symptom itself is shielded from physical sight—quite rightly, symbolically speaking. The relative observability of a symptom is, therefore, a clue to the personality’s attitude toward its problem.

“Many problems are never materialized. They remain as blank spots, uncultivated and unproductive areas within the psyche, areas in which there are no problems because no experience is permitted. . . . There is then a mental, psychic, or emotional lack of sight and a complete blockage. Such a denial of experience is far more detrimental than a specific problem, for there is an inability on the part of the personality to express itself at all in that area.”

According to Seth, each case of senility is different, but generally speaking, the personality transfers the vital parts of consciousness into the next area of existence, and is often fully aware there, and functioning. Gradually the personality’s mental focus leaves this life and begins to operate entirely on another level. The physical disease—the hardening of the arteries—is caused by the personality’s gradual refusal to accept new physical stimuli, thus avoiding physical experience (either purposefully or through error). People who are terrified of physical death might take this path, since when physical death occurs, consciousness is already acquainted with its new environment and the organism’s death is relatively meaningless. In any case, the individual’s inner decision causes the physical symptoms, not the other way around.

At the same moment I realized that my job was to explain the facts to her. I caught up with her, gently led her back into the house, and said, “Miss C, you don’t have to worry anymore about dying. It’s already happened. Your mind can be perfectly clear now. It’s all right.” She seemed to understand, and as I finished speaking with her, another person came to take my place.

“The uniqueness that is your own personality is to be cherished. The particular purposes of your present personality can only be met in the present circumstances in the way that is best overall. The challenges can be met at another time and in another life, this is true. But the particular people that you can help now, and the particular good that you can do now, can never be done in precisely the same way. …

“If you are in poor physical shape, this does not mean that you are an evil person. Let us clear that up. It means that you have a block in that particular area in which you are unable to utilize energy constructively. … Theoretically, if you are using energy the way you should, you would be in excellent health and filled with abundance. Various kinds of lacks can show up in many ways, however.

Another of Rob’s “vision” portraits, this one is of Bega, a personality who communicates through one of Jane’s students via automatic writing. (Robert Butts)

Above, Rob’s double portrait of Ruburt and Joseph. This represents Jane’s and Rob’s Whole Selves, the sum of their reincarnational personalities. (Robert Butts) Below, Jane and Rob in the same pose for comparison. (Rich Conz)