“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

What you consider death has no more basic reality than has your idea of time and space. Death really represents a blind spot in your present ability to perceive energy transformation, and even value fulfillment. Death merely represents the termination of your own perception, that is, the termination of your understanding. [...]

[...] The day of death is known. Consciously such knowledge is not given to the ego for obvious reasons, but every organism, through its inner senses, is equipped with subconscious knowledge of personal disasters, deaths, and so forth, the personality itself deciding beforehand what it considers disastrous; and the members of the species as a whole know in advance of their wars. [...]

[...] Our third law is spontaneity, and despite all appearances of beginning and end, despite all appearances of death and decay, all consciousness exists in the spacious present, in a spontaneous manner, in simultaneous harmony, and yet within the spacious present there is also durability.

[...] What you call death is merely the transformation of your own energy onto a sphere that cannot be perceived by the outer senses. [...]

[...] A man who kills with hatred will have his hatred to contend with, but he is not able to kill anyone who has not decided to die—and to die in a particular manner; that is, someone who wants his death blamed on another, who would not commit suicide, who would not choose a long illness—someone who is ready to die but does not want to deal with the circumstances, and wants indeed to be surprised by death.

Many such people feel before death that the body is a shell from which death will free them—and here you have a verbal symbol: the shell of the body, with a gun shell, and the soul being propelled out of the body, though that was not part of the dream. [...]

Death is death.

(“What happens in cases of accidental death, to the spirit?”)

(“But people who die accidentally don’t expect death. [...]

(If it is a death, and in Rob’s family, say of Linda, which I doubt, then why the return name of my mother’s friend? [...] In dream I think the death must have already happened. My death? [...]

(Also November 9, Monday, 7 PM: In doze, asked silently if I was being warned about a death. [...] It said warning was of my mother’s death, in December. [...]

[...] [She was a friend of my mother’s, now dead.] I took the envelope to contain notification of my mother’s death. [...] Then with relief saw that the death was not to be that close. [...]

[...] First I thought: “Well, I’ve always feared my mother’s death,” and I was almost relieved that it was over. Then relief when it wasn’t her death, but someone else’s.

(She said all of this in that matter-of-fact voice she’d used the last time, that she’d told me similar things about her death, before Seth had said very recently that she wasn’t going to die now, no matter what she thought or said. [...] Yet here she was, treating the possibility of death quite seriously again.

[...] She told me I’d have a great life after her death, and be free myself.

[...] I decided — again — that I was through worrying about whether she’d live or die, or whether she was starving herself to death, or whatever.

It is the ego which fears death so strongly. And yet the stability which ego so urgently seeks would, indeed, result in a death, since no further action would be allowed.

The personality necessarily continues to change after physical death. After physical death the personality simply ceases to project itself, as a rule, within the physical field, and no longer focuses within it.

Because the personality is that part of the individual which is conscious of itself as a part of action, and therefore aware of its relation with action, the personality is that part of the individual which survives physical death.

The ego fears death, yet in the space of your own physical lifetime portions of the self have undergone like transformations endless times, of which the ego is unaware.

[...] Ruburt is correct: Even in conventional terms a true horoscope would have to involve the time of death in your temporal reality, as well [as that of birth]. [...] Your beliefs in such concepts limit your perception, for by altering the focus of your attention you can to some extent become aware of perception before and after the recognized points of birth and death.

[...] They would be a commonplace in the animal world, for instance; witness the quick deaths of certain newborn kittens in a litter (as Jane and I have); or consider the puppy in an animal shelter, or pound, certain to be put to death in a few days if no one gives it a home. [...]

(As we lay in bed after last Monday’s session, Jane told me: “I’ve got it — from Seth, I think: A really complete astrological chart would have to include not only the time of your birth, but that of your death.” [...]

Dictation: Usually you think in terms of a hypothetical whole self or consciousness, emerging at birth and disappearing at death. [...]

[...] It now no longer exists, but they still resent the breaking up; and Ruburt’s yells, quite involuntary, represented in fact the death throes of the symptoms, and the part of the self who had accepted them as an attempt to solve problems.

[...] The death of that grouping is now a fact. [...]

[...] The death of the old grouping now allows for the birth of a new grouping, this time a grouping that will effectively deal with the problems at hand, and that will allow the personality to develop and expand. [...]

(“Did Jane know about the death of Otto Binder’s daughter?”)

He was indeed near death. [...]

[...] The social weight of other people’s beliefs about him and his impending death, dissolved.

Dream 1—I was looking at some weird contraption, maybe mechanical, that my father had made, to leave me some money after his death; money was supposed to come out of it. A nice old man, sort of a kindly bum, came by and told me father had made it two hours before his death so that I’d have some inheritance; and the old man might have had a key that worked it; I’m not sure; but there was something about a key.... [...]

[...] After Jane and I married a few years later we occasionally visited her father in various parts of the country — but still, we hadn’t seen him for several years before his death. Yet now it seemed that even beneath that scattered performance Jane’s psyche had felt stronger ties of some kind — at least with Del, if not with her mother — than either of us had suspected; that at least some part of her had sensed a sort of biological or creature loss upon the death of a blood relative. [...]

[...] The death of the student’s father had taken place on Thursday, November 11 of that year; Jane’s father, Delmer, died without forewarning on the following Tuesday, November 16; Jane came through with Sumari in class one week later, on November 23; and the next night, in the 598th session, Seth discussed Sumari for the first time.

[...] That growth was fated to bring about not only the death of its host, but the cancer itself. [...] Was Joe Bumbalo giving birth to a new life form that upon death would be released to continue its growth elsewhere, just as we believe Joe will do after his death?)

[...] I believe his death is near.

[...] In the same way there must, of course, be a rhythm of physical death, so that the experience of normal physical life is possible. It goes without saying that without death and disease — for the two go hand in hand — then normal corporeal existence would be impossible.

(Jane also felt that the sessions could be responsible for more deaths, or hurting people. [...]

[...] Suffering and death are not necessarily connected either. [...]

The new psychology shut off mobility after death, while giving each individual an unsavory primitive past heritage — a heritage genetically carried, that led finally only to the grave. (Long pause.) Psychological activity was scaled down in between life and death, then, even while the possibility of any after-death experience was considered the most unreasonable and unintellectual of speculations.

[...] (Pause.) There is no doubt that the church cast the soul in a position of stress, caught as it was between its heavenly source and original sin — but there was a sense of psychological mobility involved, one that saw continued existence after death.

[...] In your terms I am saying, of course, that physically death gives life. [...] Even your c-e-l-l-s (spelled) know that their deaths are necessary for the continuation of your physical form.

[...] In one way or another, most people are aware of a desire for death before they die — a desire they usually do not consciously acknowledge. [...]

(9:40.) Give us a moment… The phase of death is, then, a part of life’s cycle. [...]

There is enough evidence to build an excellent case for life after death. All of this involves direct experience—episodes, encountered by individuals, [that are] highly suggestive of the after death hypothesis; but the hypothesis is never taken seriously by your established sciences. There is far more evidence for reincarnation and life after death than there is, for example, for the existence of black holes. (With amusement:) Few people have seen a black hole, to make the most generous statement possible, while countless people have had private reincarnational experiences, or encounters that suggest the survival of the personality beyond death.

(The husband remarried 7 months after Malba’s death. [...] After the husband’s death the second wife went to California to live with her stepson and his family. [...]

[...] Here they were after death, and at least on her plane it was nothing like they had said it would be while living on earth. [...]

[...] She replied that she didn’t care to, that he remarried too soon after her death.

[...] Yet he too acquiesced to Jane’s death when she made her decision to go. [...]

Although I told myself that I knew Jane still lived, I wasn’t used to being in the presence of physical death. [...]

[...] Yet the day after my wife’s death I’d gone back to work, finishing Volume 2 of Dreams, “Evolution,” and Value Fulfillment. [...]

[...] A distant connection here with a death in the family involved.” The death in the family reference here could mean only Aunt Ella, which led us to Aunt Mabel and her home, near where we obtained the envelope object. [...]

(Now here is the data referring to the death of Jane’s grandmother: “Printed material with a picture. [...] Jane remembers clearly that on the day of her grandmother’s death she did not like what she had for supper. [...]

We will shortly have something to say here concerning the apparent death of stars, as this will tie in with our quasar material.

[...] A distant connection here with a death in the family involved.

(4:28.) Even when biological “failures” develop, as with stillborn infants, or malformed ones, the inner consciousness involved does not give up, and even though death results, the consciousness tries again under different conditions. In such cases death is not experienced by the organism as a failure, or as a biological mistake. [...]

[...] “I do get feelings while delivering the stuff,” she said, “wondering if I’m giving it the best way — like that material about the fetus not taking its death as a failure, but an experience. [...]