“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Are laws made to protect man from the self as it is generally outlined by Freud and Darwin? Man had laws, however, far earlier. Are laws made then to protect man from his “sinful nature”? (Pause.) If you were all “perfect beings,” would you need laws at all? Do laws define what is unacceptable, or do they hint of some perhaps undifferentiated, barely sensed, more positive issues? Are laws an attempt to limit impulses? Do they represent society’s mass definitions of what behavior is acceptable and what is not?

Why do you have laws? You may follow it with that. Are laws made to protect life, to protect property, to establish order, to punish transgressors? Are laws made to protect man from his own cunning and chicanery? In short, are laws made to protect man from his own “basically criminal nature”?

What is the law? Why do you have law?

(“Law, or laws?”)

[...] At our first discussion, though, Peg told me that a brother-in-law had just come into a tremendous amount of money as a result of lawyers fees, he is a lawyer, and a rich account. She then tied this in with an unpleasant episode in the past where there was trouble with another sister-in-law, and this brother-in-law, and thought that the money would now make this sister-in-law sit up and wonder about her own actions in the past.)

[...] This could refer to grab in terms of greed, definitely in Peg’s account of the sister-in-law.)

(Refers to another sister-in-law of Peg’s, who was ill; no connection in particular though.)

Now the so-called laws of your camouflage universe do not apply to the inner universe. [...] However, the laws of the inner universe apply to all camouflage universes, and all consciousnesses on any plane must follow the basic laws of the inner universe. Some of these basic laws have counterparts known and accepted on various camouflage planes. There are various manifestations of these laws and various names given to them.

I am not giving you these laws necessarily in the order of their importance, merely in the order which is easiest for me to deliver to you. Creation is obviously one of the basic laws, which we will call the fifth law.

These basic laws are followed on many levels in your own universe. We will go into these laws in time. [...]

[...] The species of mankind, and all other species in your universe on your particular horizontal plane, follow this law under the auspices of evolution. On other planes this law is carried through in other manners, but it is never ignored.

The law in your country says that you are innocent until proven guilty. In the eyes of that law, then, you are each innocent until a crime is proven against you. [...]

So, dear reader, look at the law as it stands in this country with somewhat more kindly eyes than you have before — for it at least legally establishes a belief in your innocence, and for all of its failings, it protects you from the far more fanatical aspects, say, of any religion’s laws.

Religious laws deal with sin, whether or not a crime is committed (pause), and religious concepts usually take it for granted that the individual is guilty until proven innocent. [...]

[...] Those assumptions are the basis of what I will call natural law.

[...] The news article concerns the Feinberg Law, which spells out the intent of the New York State Legislature in the Education Law, concerning the removal of any school employees for treasonable or seditious acts. The pertinent lines in the story being: “This law in no way violates the constitutional rights of freedom of speech, press or assembly. [...]

[...] The whole of the news story indicated on the back of the object, as shown on page 169 concerns law, statues, the Constitution, overthrow, rights, government, etc., plus the mention of two names: Feinberg, and Aronowitz. Feinberg sponsored a law bearing his name, and possibly is, or was, a New York State legislator. We do not know the profession of Mr. Aronowitz, who is quoted in the article via a lecture delivered about the law. [...]

[...] The whole tone of the news story about the Feinberg law and the Education Law of New York State concerns the protection of civil rights, and protection by the Constitution; but without using the constitution as a hiding place for subversives, etc. [...]

[...] Laws or edicts.” As stated earlier, both the news items on the front and back of the object concerns laws, edicts, etc.

The fifth law of the inner universe is creation, as I have told you. Again, this is not necessarily the fifth law in terms of importance. I am simply giving you the laws in the simplest way.

Our next law is the law of infinite changeability and transmutation. [...]

[...] They act within the framework of your time, but the condensed knowledge that they contain carries with it its own peculiar and unique consciousness, that is not bound by your physical laws.

Our next rule, or law, of the inner universe is of course consciousness. [...]

Dictation: When I speak of natural law, I am not referring to the scientists’ laws of nature, such as the law of gravity, for example — which is not a law at all, but a manifestation appearing from the viewpoint of a certain level of consciousness as a result of perceptive apparatus. [...]

(Pause.) I am speaking of the inner laws of nature, that pervade existence. [...] The laws of nature that I am in the process of explaining underlie all realities, then, and form a firm basis for multitudinous kinds of “natures.” [...]

There are natural laws, then, that guide all kinds of life, and all realities — laws of love and cooperation — and those are the basic needs of which I am speaking.

Different countries follow different kinds of constitutions, and even within any geographical area there may be various local laws followed by the populace. [...] In the same manner, different portions of the psyche exist with their own local “laws,” their different kinds of “government.” [...]

[...] Different portions of the psyche are familiar with all of these mentioned occurrences — because the psyche straddles any of the local laws that you recognize as “official,” and has within itself the capacity to deal with an infinite number of reality-hyphen-experiences.

[...] You will take your local laws with you, and you will try to tell psychic time with a wristwatch.

[...] She’d also been picking up from Seth through the day some quite amused comments on a variety of subjects we’d mentioned, ranging from “carpets and health” to the “nature of the law, the connection between the law and ideals and their actualization; the reactions of Tam Mossman to our feelings about Fate Magazine,” etc.

Generally speaking, in those terms, the law is wise, for it forces you to make specifications, each one bringing about further definition, so that all parties at least understand (in parentheses theoretically [louder]) the meaning of the terms.

You may not achieve ideal solutions with the law, but it should allow practical specific actualization, at least in part, of an ideal situation. [...]

[...] The law, Prentice, health, the poor and nationalized medicine, our ideals—and start doing it from any point you wanted him to.”

[...] Your wife, your daughter-in-law and your son (all present this evening) were also members of that band. Your wife and your daughter-in-law, however, were brothers. [...]

You carried with you in your heads messages and laws that had been given to one of your kind in a time that was already nearly forgotten. [...]

Now: Since our little friend over here (Ron’s daughter-in-law, Sherry) is worried lest I annoy the neighbors (very loudly), I will smile what I hope is a gentle smile, and bid you a gentle good evening, with what blessings I have to give.

[...] Let me briefly continue that early Seth material here: “In drawing up his list of so-called natural laws, I have said (in the 16th session) that man decided that what appeared to be cause and effect to him was, therefore, a natural law of the universe. Not only do these so-called laws, which are not laws, vary according to where you are in the universe, they also vary according to what you are in the universe. [...] To a tree the laws are simply different. And if a tree wrote its laws of the universe, then you would know how different they are.”

During our next session I will give you further material on the inner laws of the universe, and show you again how the so-called laws of the universe, with which your scientists deal, are sadly inadequate and the result of the same kind of distortion as your cause and effect theory.

I have also mentioned that as your outer senses can perceive the camouflage universe, and as they act within its laws, so also the inner senses are equipped to perceive the inner basic universe, and they directly are familiar with its laws.

And in each of these planes of existence there is a reflection of the basic laws of the spacious present itself, which I am in the process of giving you. [...]

We will now go into one of our basic laws of the universe, and of the spacious present, which would seem to need little explanation: that of creation.

If you believe in the laws of cause and effect, as accepted, or in the laws of polarity, as accepted (and explained in a letter we received today), then you will be bound by those laws, for they will represent your artistic technique. [...]

Instead, the energy of life is inserted constantly into your world, in a way that has nothing to do with your so-called physical laws. [...]

[...] Those who set up laws and rules and regulations often find themselves confronted with those laws and rules and regulations in other lives and through their own struggle then, to escape from these, then they learn that the laws and rules and regulations were not beneficial. [...]

[...] But those who have been princes in the Church in the past often find themselves confronted in later lives with the laws and regulations that they themselves helped form. [...]

[...] Now, because of some of your ideas at the time, he formulated certain laws and regulations. [...]

There is little use in trying to discover other levels of your own reality if you insist upon applying the laws of physical life to your own larger experience. [...] You cannot, however, insist that the laws of your vaster existence, as you discover them, supersede the physical conditions of known life — for then no facts would apply either. [...]

[...] A brother and a sister-in-law, who are alive, were also present. [...]

[...] It would be easy to think that the dream foresaw Joseph’s own death, and that of his brother and sister-in-law. [...]

(A note: The second law of thermodynamics tells us that while the total energy in a closed system such as our universe remains constant, the amount of energy available for useful work is constantly decreasing. [...] Seth has insisted from the very beginning of our sessions that the law of entropy doesn’t apply, and that there are no closed systems.)

[...] There are other distortions in physical laws. [...]

[...] The law of entropy does not apply, therefore. [...]

[...] A brother-in-law involved here. If not of Philip’s, then a brother-in-law of the man who made the suggestion.

[...] John said that the senior partner in Smith’s law firm is named Murphy—hence the M initial. [...]

(John stated that his brothers-in-law live in Philadelphia and have no connection with John in Williamsport, or his political activities, etc.

(John also stated talent Clint Smith has one young brother-in-law who lives in Lancaster, PA, south of Williamsport; but as far as John knows there would be no connection here either.

6. Ever since Seth came through with the material in this (44th) session 10 years ago, I’ve been interested in comparing his second law of the inner universe with the second law of thermodynamics of our “camouflage” physical sciences. [...] At the same time I see them as linked through our distorted perception of that inner reality, thus pointing up Seth’s statement just given, that “the so-called laws of your camouflage universe do not apply to the inner universe.” (When this session was held Jane knew nothing of the three laws of thermodynamics, or how they define energy/heat relationships in our universe. [...]

Now, the so-called laws of your camouflage physical universe do not apply to the inner universe. [...] However, the laws of the inner universe apply to all camouflage realities. Some of these basic laws have counterparts known and accepted in various camouflage realities. [...]

These fundamental laws are followed on many levels in your own universe. [...] The species of mankind, and all other species in your universe on your particular horizontal plane, follow this law [value fulfillment] under the auspices of evolution (my emphasis).⁵ In other camouflage realities, this law is carried through in different manners, but it is never ignored.

Durability is our fourth law. Durability within the framework of the spacious present would not exist were it not for the laws of value fulfillment and energy transformation. [...]

We have of course much to be added to our discussion of principle laws, but the laws will wait. [...]

Because mental enzymes seem to give the same effects most of the time in your system, your scientists blithely label these as laws of nature; that is, the apparent laws of cause and effect. If you’ll forgive a pun, because a certain cause will usually give a certain effect in your physical universe, you may be justified in saying that the apparent results are laws that operate within your system. [...]

[...] Taking off at right angles involves another of your natural laws which are not actual laws but only seem to be from where you are. [...]

[...] They then accept it as a definite rule of nature, never realizing that just beyond their eyesight and just beyond their outer senses, this familiar tamed animal of a law changes appearance completely. [...]

[...] To conform to the laws of a particular plane is a practical necessity, and at this time, the ‘saucers’ cannot afford to stay betwixt and between for any indefinite period.