“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

[...] I am trying to discuss this in your terms, since basically, you must understand, the words “past,” “present,” and “future” are no more meaningful as far as true experience is concerned than are the words “ego,” “conscious,” or “unconscious.”

[...] Simply to explain the nature of personality as it is generally known, all kinds of terms are used: id, subconscious, ego, superego; all of these to differentiate the interweaving actions that make up the physical personality. [...]

Your ego gains assurance from what seems to be the memory of its immediate past. [...]

[...] Then I want to mention briefly Ruburt’s idea of my idea about the bed, and I want to at least mention the condensed time concept, and cover briefly something new, which is the self-conscious self behind the ego.

(Jane had also mentioned to me yesterday a flash she had received about the self-conscious self behind the ego; this in addition to the material on Ruburt’s psychic explosions. [...]

[...] And also to show you that the ego structure is not completely annihilated. [...]

[...] The stream has its own reality then, and the ego sees only the surface.

As you know however, it is almost impossible for you to be aware of the full perceptions possible, for the ego would never stand for it. [...]

[...] It would be difficult to carry the memories of the present ego personality with you. [...]

[...] This leads to ego confusion since the personality, trying hard to act in what it thinks is a reasonable manner, cannot understand the vehemence of its rebellion.

I very cleverly lulled Ruburt’s ego into a false sense of security, from its standpoint, and then it did not block me nearly as much as I thought it might. [...]

[...] As a rule the ego is not aware of its departure from one physical organism and its growth into another. [...]

[...] Reincarnation and projection are as real and as difficult for the ego to grasp, as the nature of dreams. [...]

[...] You identify the ego as male. [...]

The ego is much more dependent upon the physical self than are other portions of the personality. [...] The ego is like a guardian who is left at home, as watchdog.

[...] As a species you have grown “ego bound” instead, held in a spiritual rigidity, with the intuitive portions of the self either denied or distorted beyond any recognition.

[...] This unity and interdependence is in itself responsible for that interplay of mental and psychic action which results in the individual consciousness, that is, with the ego.

[...] As I mentioned, when you look into a mirror you do not see your ego. [...]

The ego is so strong that it clings even to the new materialization. [...]

[...] And so surely should our little idiot flower cower beneath this fine intellect of man that even the seasons themselves should tremble before this fine instrument of the ego. [...]

[...] As stated this creed grew out of the last, 584th session for May 3, 1971, Seth Speaks, pages 321 and 322, where Seth discussed the ego’s fear of being swamped by strong creative abilities, etc. [...]

[...] The conscious self would recall more of its dream adventures as a matter of course, and gradually these would be added to the totality of experience as the ego thinks of it.

[...] It is therefore necessary that an attempt be made as soon as possible to solve the problem, which of course must first be discovered by the ego, which has avoided it.

[...] Only the ego is usually unaware of these activities. [...]