“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

[...] Is there some definable concrete reality, of which your own is a mere shadow?

[...] We come now close to a definition finally for the entity, which cannot really be defined, because in your terms it escapes definition. However, the entity can be partially defined as the sum of all the selves within a given range of action, the simultaneous totality which on the one hand then cannot yet exist, since action can never complete itself, yet representing that impetus forever frustrated on the part of action for complete materialization.

[...] (Long pause.) These elements helped form and define your abilities, adding to their particular and peculiar nature.

[...] Then let your flawless technique follow the vision, and on occasion help define it.

Art was often used in the way you are using it now—at least to some extent in your case—as a method of defining such dream images, which were not necessarily to be found in the immediate environment at all. [...]

[...] Try to realize that even in your terms there have been multitudinous cultures upon the face of the earth, each one defining for all time, with great moral rectitude, the roles of men and women. [...]

[...] Jane initiates information on “world views,” with examples: Seth defines that concept as “the view of reality” held in the immortal mind of each of us, the “living picture” that exists outside of time or space, and that can be perceived by others. [...]

(Jim H.: “Now would you define bad in that context?”)

I do not define bad. [...]

[...] But then, for some years Seth has been reiterating that even in our terms there is no well-defined evolutionary path leading from our ancient state to our present one.)

[...] Danger in that context exists under certain conditions clearly known to the animals, clearly defined: The prey is known, for example, as is the hunter. [...]

[...] The reality of your own being cannot be defined by anyone but you, and then your own definition must be understood as a reference point at best. [...]

[...] Seth began to speak in a loud whisper or a very soft voice, however one chooses to define it, and maintained this aspect throughout the evening, with frequent breaks. [...]

(Long pause.) These attitudes may be reflected in rather simple compulsive actions: the woman who cleans the house endlessly, whether it needs it or not; the man who will follow certain precise, defined routes of activity — driving down certain streets only to work; washing his hands much more frequently than other people; the person who constantly buttons and unbuttons a sweater or vest. [...]

[...] And each species has its own overall characteristics and propensities that further help it define the sphere of influence in which it will exert its ability to make choices.

These are simple enough examples, but the man who possesses interests considered feminine by your culture, who naturally wants to enter fields of interest considered womanly, experiences drastic conflicts between his sense of personhood and identity — and his sexuality as it is culturally defined. [...]

[...] At our next session we shall go into this more deeply and define the psychedelic experience for you. [...]

“The therapy of value fulfillment will attempt to put individuals in touch with their basic instincts, to allow them to sense the impulsive shapes of their lives, to define their own versions of the ideal through the recognition of it as it exists in their own impulses and feelings and abilities, and to help them find acceptable and practical methods of exerting their natural power in the practical actualization of those ideals.”

[...] There are ways to bring the picture into focus: There are ways to tune into those other quite-natural frequencies, so that they present you with a more expansive view both of the world as you define it, and of its greater aspects. [...]

Since my own environment does not have easily defined physical elements, you will be able to understand its nature by inference, as I explain some related topics throughout this book.

(Long pause at 9:55.) I do not want to define for you an ideal picture to which you can never live up. [...]

I would give some thought then to my self-image, and to the image of an individual who is highly gifted as a painter, as a writer, as a thinker, and I would endeavor to loosen myself from any bonds that prevented me from using those abilities—in particular any sexual ones that defined my identity in terms of money alone.

([Joel:] “How would you define bad in that context?”)

I do not define bad and when I use the term, hopefully, I am using it according to your own inferior definition. [...]

[...] My reincarnational existences do not define what I am, however, nor do yours define you.