“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

[...] It is only when you inhibit or deny them that harmful charges are built up that can affect others. [...] In this instance you are offended, then he can make whatever changes he so chooses, but if you ignore the feeling and the affair happens again, then the charge is built up and becomes harmful. [...]

[...] My saying that such a course of bodily harm is pointless is beside the point, when one considers how deeply they have ruled Jane for many years. [...]

[...] (Pause.) The schools of “positive thinking” try to remedy the situation, but often do more harm than good because they attempt to force beliefs upon you that you would like to hold, but do not in your present state of confusion.

[...] Many who say they believe in the power of thought are so afraid of it that they inhibit it in themselves, avoiding any that appear negative or harmful. [...]

[...] When he is enthusiastically and exuberantly working, the past becomes comparatively insignificant for him as far as harmful elements are concerned.

[...] They help in ridding the personality of harmful influences, and in generating new energy. [...]

[...] As long as Ruburt’s attitude is good the antibiotics will do no harm, and will provide an explanation as the conditions are cleared. [...]

I think now of a woman who is eager, who intends you no harm, but who could convince herself that she was not harming you one iota while she stabbed you in the back.

[...] It cannot harm either of you to try it, and it is this: try to take it for granted that distractions have a meaning in Framework 2 that is not as yet obvious in Framework 1. Oftentimes events that seem distracting, annoying, or that happen out of context, actually are parts of other patterns, larger ones that are part of Framework 2 activity. [...]

[...] You may end up doing them harm through repressed reactions that suddenly explode.

[...] You may, for example, sneeze or not sneeze, cough or not cough, walk to the window or the door, scratch your elbow, save a child from drowning, learn a lesson, commit suicide, harm another, or turn your cheek.

[...] You feel you have no part in nature except as you exert control over it through technology, or harm it, again through technology. [...]

[...] I am speaking at length about it because its lethargy could be harmful under certain circumstances. [...]

(Bill’s mother, who was also an arthritic cripple like Jane’s mother, was a very aggressive personality, a masculine one, who developed arthritis in order to lose her mobility and thus avoid harming Bill’s father and the children. [...]

(Speaking of the fact that civilized man should not kill, Seth said the whole idea of killing is fallacious to begin with: an enemy who is “dead” is far more harmful than one who is still alive. [...]

[...] Believing in the stereotyped idea of heaven can cause no harm, but a delay in facing up to new responsibilities. [...]

[...] You cannot do any basic harm. [...]

The naming and labelling of “diseases” is a harmful practice that to a large extent denies the innate mobility and ever-changing quality of the psyche as expressed in flesh. [...]

[...] (Long pause.) There would be no harm then, and perhaps some good done, by making such a contact.

[...] They are themselves fragments, struggling small fragments, without intention of harm. [...] It is only when you give tacit agreement that harm is inflicted. [...]

[...] It will automatically allow the inner portion of his personality to protect him from such probable harm.

If you believe, however, that the chemicals in certain foods will harm you drastically and bring about disastrous consequences, then even small doses of these can do you harm.