“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

[...] Each one of us is an immortal portion, a spark of endless perception and beauty and feeling — and yes, of conflict and denial at times — within this probable reality that we’re all creating together, even when we don’t know we’re doing it! [...]

(Most intently:) When this happens, the species by default must fall back upon vestiges of old instincts — that were not geared to operate in conjunction with a conscious reasoning mind, and do not comprehend your experience; that finds your “moment of reflection” an impertinent denial of impulse. [...]

[...] (Louder:) The denial of desire will bring you only listlessness. [...]

[...] The prick however is comparable to a conscious and subconscious denial of the construction’s validity. [...]

[...] The point of resistance becomes woven into the personality framework, the problem being not of the subconscious, but again of the ego’s denial or attempt to deny a portion of its own reality.

[...] An idiocy of a kind, and a complete blockage, a denial of experience along certain lines that is far more detrimental than a specific problem, for there is an inability of the personality to express itself to any effective degree in that area.

They will begin to follow a road of denial and repression, and grow more and more afraid of expressing their own talents or abilities. [...]

[...] Your creativity as artists is dependent upon the fulfillment of your personhood, not upon its denial. [...]

[...] By the denial of hope and the inhibition of joyful emotions he tried to protect himself against disappointment or defeat.

[...] Add to that list the belief that the great artist or writer concentrates upon his or her art so intensely and single-mindedly, and single-heartedly, that the focus itself forces the artist or poet to use those abilities to their utmost, or that great genius demands one-sided vision and a denial of the world. [...]

[...] Now his own background, with its self-denial and early religious esthetic training, also played its part, you see.

In a most basic manner, a denial of stimuli is a negative action, if any action could be called negative. [...]

[...] Often, again, the dream universe possesses concepts which will, some day, completely transform the history of your field; but a denial of such concepts as actualities or possibilities within reality, hold these back, and put off breakthroughs that are sorely needed.

There was an unabashed joy with the splendor of the body, and sensuous delight, that Ruburt can now remind himself of, and that served to help regenerate at least portions of Christendom that were given to ideals of bodily denial.

([Jane:]) “Which is denial.”

[...] Now the acquiescence that dwells within your atoms and molecules is an acquiescence that has to do with creativity that knows no negation, that realizes, instead, only the benefits and the joys and the reality of That Which Is, and within this acquiescence there is no denial and no negation for all things are experienced, recognized, and accepted as a part of All That Is. [...]

[...] Often when you hear a denial in such circumstances, you immediately leap to the correct conclusion — that in a month or so an affirmative answer will be given to the same question.

[...] It is this denial of experience, and the energy blockages involved, that build up the accumulation of unnecessary “unnatural” guilt. [...]

[...] He was a mystic, but a mystic given to great discipline, denial, restraint. [...]

[...] All of this applies quite apart from any other dehumanizing effects, such as overcrowded conditions, the denial of human privacy, and often the negation of dignity.