“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

[...] To a certain extent any given inhabited area forms its own “entity.” [...]

[...] Out of habit, Jane — and consequently Seth — still talked about “Unknown” Reality as being one entity, even though just five days ago we’d learned from her editor that it would be published in two volumes.

[...] Nevertheless I will be glad to discuss your aunt Ella, whose entity name is Dorinella.

You must also realize that the entity who became her son also chose the circumstances, knowing of them in advance, for his own purposes. [...]

(“Can you give us his entity name?”)

[...] Entity name Salden, S-a-l-d-e-n. I will now end the session. [...]

Now he is a psychic entity and as such he is a valid reality, as Christ is, and you can all study that sentence. [...]

([Sue:] “Again, I’d like to ask; in the context of this class, are there two personalities here who are from the same entity?”)

(It will be remembered from the 26th session that Philip is the name of John Bradley’s entity, according to Seth.)

[...] The outer ego as a rule is not aware of what you may think of for now as the thoughts or communications of the inner ego; but the inner ego knows every step you take, every particle of air you breathe, every dream you have; and it is the source of your own personality and is the representative of the entity of which it is part.

If you perceived the constant change within your body with as much persistence as you attend to its seemingly permanent nature, then you would be amazed that you ever considered the body as one more or less constant, more or less cohesive, entity. [...]

[...] If you ask, “What is my individuality in all of this?” or, “Which ‘I’ am I?” then you are automatically thinking of yourself as a psychological entity with definite boundaries that must be protected at all costs. [...]

[...] The fact that such ideas do not occur to entities like the legal—or even the editorial—departments at Prentice-Hall shows, I think, the great gap that exists between our own views of life and theirs. [...]

Now in the past, in your distant past, when I spoke through others, or portions of my entity did so, then such personal connections also existed with those through whom we communicated. [...]

[...] If you think of a mass world brain — one entity — then it must wake and sleep in patterns. [...]

[...] With such training these experiences will lead you to other portions of your own entity. [...]

[...] In the sense that Seth and Jane stem from the same entity, as explained in certain sessions, the object would be Jane’s. Gladys Austin gave it to her.

(This re an entity, AA, received when Jane practices table-tipping with one of her ESP students, Venice McCullough.)

1. In Volume 2 of “Unknown” Reality Seth began developing his theory of counterparts — that the larger psychological self, or entity, of each of us manifests not just one physical life in any given century, say, but several, so as to gain that much more experience in a variety of roles involving different ages, nationalities and languages, sexual orientations, family roles, and so forth. [...]

[...] The entity follows it through the cycle of [simultaneous] reincarnations. [...]

[...] Only man would think to burden such pervasive parts of his own being, and those of other entities, with such negative concepts! [...]

(I continue my projections by writing that to a molecule of DNA the conventional notion of evolution — could such an entity grasp that idea, or even want to — might be hilarious indeed, given its own enhanced time scheme.¹⁷ Actually it would be more to the point if perhaps with the aid of hypnosis and/or visualization, we tried from our giant-sized viewpoints to touch such minute consciousnesses with our own,¹⁸ and so extend our knowledge in unexpected ways. [...]

[...] Yet those entities are quite immune to our notions of evolution, and they explore time contexts in ways far beyond our current human comprehension. [...]

[...] It wasn’t until after Jane’s death in 1984 that I took the “time” to understand that Jane’s Seth material—her great passionate body of work—really didn’t need to be categorized as public or private—that all of it was simply one multifaceted creative entity.

[...] As I’ve mentioned recently before, the fear itself could have by now—must have—acquired a life of its own, after all of those years, and it would as an entity resist being dispensed with, or transformed. [...]

(Mark is Seth’s entity name for Bill Macdonnel.) A child was present, hence the Nina connection again. [...]

[...] According to him, these “entity names” mean only that in our present lives we identify more with the male aspects of our entities, or whole selves — which in themselves are neither male or female, but contain within them a number of other selves [of both sexes] to whom we’re related, or a part of, reincarnationally and otherwise.

[...] I had no idea of this tonight,” Jane said as soon as she was Jane again — thereupon emphasizing anew some of our endless questions about the Seth phenomenon: What portion of her personality, or entity, whether that portion might be called a Seth, or whatever, had been busy planning — organizing — this new endeavor? [...]

[...] As I took her dictation I was wondering just how we would go about speaking with more than one entity at a session. [...]

To a certain extent, I must travel from those realities into your comprehension, wrest myself free in order to form an ever-changing, ever-moving, ever-on-the-move entity that can speak here and be there at the same time. [...]