“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Often then you ignore your senses’ reality in the world — the luxurious vitality and comfort of the daily moment — by exaggerating the importance of secondary experience as defined for this discussion.

[...] In her glossary for Adventures Jane defines the living area as “The ‘paths’ our lives follow from birth to death.”

[...] Because I was using the word light for the first time in these experiments, [with a rather ill-defined idea of levitation in mind, after Jane’s attempts], I also told myself I was not afraid. [...]

The whole experience had a hard-to-define childlike or naïve quality, as several members of Jane’s ESP class remarked the next night when I read this account to them, and showed the sketch around.

[...] Now: As soon as you label yourself you are setting limitations, putting up boundaries and defining the reality of your psyche — usually according to quite limited beliefs.

[...] I had written to Dr. Instream on June 1,1965 and sent him sessions 138, 141, 142, 149, 153 and 154, plus lists of the inner senses and the basic laws of the inner universe as defined by Seth. [...]

[...] John Bradley, our salesman friend from Williamsport, PA, was a witness, and I believe this contributed to the envelope results, in some way I cannot define. [...]

[...] They do not appear physically, as say a table or a chair, yet they seem to define both a table and a chair, in that you cannot easily conceive of a piece of furniture, for example, existing except in the medium of space and time.

well-defined, between the refrigerator

[...] What you call the subconscious is merely an ill-defined meeting place of inner and outer experience; and I am forced to use these terms inner and outer only because of your misconception of duality.

[...] In her view, the quality called multipersonhood encompasses all of the inner personifications, or Aspects, of the source self, which she defines in the Glossary of Adventures as “the ‘unknown’ self, soul, or psyche; the fountainhead of our physical being.” [...]

[...] That “breakthrough” cannot be logically explained, but only compared to, say, an illumination — that is, a light occurring everywhere at once, that became a medium for life as you define it. [...]

[...] (When this session was held Jane knew nothing of the three laws of thermodynamics, or how they define energy/heat relationships in our universe. [...]

Many times in laboratory studies, substances called proteinoids (often misleadingly defined in dictionaries as “primitive proteins”) have been observed forming from amino acids, which are subunits of proteins. [...]

[...] You want it in black and white, defined? [...]

[...] See especially notes 7 and 10 there; chromoesthesia, or colored hearing, is defined in the latter. [...]

7. Seth first discussed his blueprints for reality in Session 696 for Volume 1: “Each probability system has its own set of ‘blueprints,’ clearly defining its freedoms and boundaries, and setting forth the most favorable structures capable of fulfillment … As an individual you carry within you such a blueprint … The information is knit into the genes and chromosomes, but it exists apart … In the same fashion the species en masse holds within its vast inner mind such working plans or blueprints.”

3. Our dictionary defines a soul mate as one of the opposite sex with whom an individual “has a deeply personal relationship” — a mundane enough description. [...]

[...] Actually there is only a certain rather well-defined period within which the dissociation is conducive to our sessions. [...]

3. Seth discussed his “blueprints for reality” a number of times in Volume 1 of “Unknown” Reality. See the 696th session, for instance: “Each probability system has its own set of ‘blueprints,’ clearly defining its freedoms and boundaries … These are not ‘inner images of perfection,’ and to some extent the blueprints themselves change … As an individual you carry within you such a blueprint, then; it contains all the information you require to bring about the most favorable version of yourself in the probable system you know … In the same fashion the species en masse holds within its vast inner mind such working plans or blueprints.”

[...] Only the most blind egotism, it seems to me, would dare define reality in its own terms or project its own limitations and experience upon the rest of existence.

(“You were going to define feeling for us.”)