“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

“He [Ruburt-Jane] has an ability to identify with others, and communicate. [...]

[...] On those occasions where there is some bleeding through, I attempt to make some specific points in any case, that are identifying.

[...] Jane also saw the large X on a rectangular card shape, within, but saw no detail on this card shape that would have enabled her to identify the envelope object specifically.

[...] She had never seen my penned note bearing the date and identifying the brand of beer, Draft Beer. [...]

[...] Along these lines, we embarked on long-distance tests with a psychologist and a year’s series of envelope tests in which Seth was asked to identify the contents of doubly-sealed envelopes. [...]

[...] You identify with one small section of your psyche, and so you name as reality only one small aspect of the universe.

[...] When he spoke of wind she felt like wind, as any child will unself-consciously identify with the elements.

[...] He identified with you and loved you. [...]

[...] The king actually need not look like you at all, nor need you identify with him in the dream. [...]

[...] Desires and impulses became more immediate, clearer-cut, easier to identify. [...]

[...] When I say as I have that the overall entity, or whole self, is neither male or female, and yet refer [to some] entities by definitely male names such as ‘Ruburt’ and ‘Joseph’ [as Seth calls me] I merely mean that in the overall essence, the [given] entity identifies itself more with the so-called male characteristics than with the female.”

[...] The reason that you feel invulnerable is that you are subconsciously identifying with this godlike figure and it could lead you into difficulty. [...]

(We were discussing the evening’s material when I happened to remark that it seemed as though a performer on television, for example, when viewed by others, might be created by millions of viewers, many of whom would be independent of each other as far as our conception of distance is concerned; yet all the images so created would overlap enough to be identifiable as the one performer.

(John identified the second man described by Seth as a Mr. Dudley, and said that like Bill Driscoll, Dudley is a good salesman. [...]

[...] 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.

[...] Perhaps it was her poetic art of expression that helped me identify so strongly with her emotions, but I suddenly felt that even I had never really understood the myriad depths of her challenges and her reactions to them. [...]

[...] Her sinful self, according to Seth, no longer identifies with the Church. [...]

[...] Right now I’ll make just one point: The priest, burning Jane’s books in the backyard of the house she lived in, taught the growing girl in most specific terms that she had to protect her natural abilities and her inquiring mind even from the very institution—the Roman Catholic Church—that she had so strongly identified with.

[...] I’m sure that Jane knows what I’m doing, and identifies with the poignancy I feel as I begin this latest publishing venture. [...]

[...] “When he spoke of the wind,” Seth remarked, “she felt like the wind, as any child will unselfconsciously identify with the elements.” [...]

[...] When I say as I have that the overall entity [or whole self] is neither male nor female, and yet refer to [some] entities by definite male names such as “Ruburt” and “Joseph,” I merely mean that in the overall essence, the [given] entity identifies itself more with the so-called male characteristics than with the female.