“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Particularly when the voices or communications give orders to be obeyed, they represent powerful, otherwise repressed, images and desires, strong enough to form about themselves their own personifications. Some may seem relatively genuine in terms of presenting a fairly well-rounded representation of a normal personality. That is a fairly rare occurrence, however. Usually you are presented with, say, semi-personalities, or even with lesser versions (dash)—fragmentary expressions of impulses and desires that are dramatically presented only in snatches, heard by the person as a voice, or perceived as a presence.

In many situations, the main personifications are instead of a ritual nature, taking advantage of psychological patterns already present in the culture’s art or religion or science. You end up with Christs, spacemen, various saints or spirits, or other personality fabrications whose characteristics and abilities are already known.

Such (pause) “communications” with the gods or demons, St. Pauls or Hitlers, represent in such instances dramatized, exaggerated personifications of the portion of the personality that is at the head of the chain of command at the moment.

In your terms of time, man has always projected unassimilated psychological elements of his own personality outward, but in much earlier times he did this using a multitudinous variety of images, personifications, gods, goddesses, demons and devils, good spirits and bad. Before the Roman gods were fully formalized, there was a spectacular range of good and bad deities, with all gradations [among them], that more or less “democratically” represented the unknown but sensed, splendid and tumultuous characteristics of the human soul, and have stood for those sensed but unknown glimpses of his own reality that man was in one way or another determined to explore.

[...] To prevent an overidentification of the individual with his present sex, within the male there resides an inner personification of femaleness. This personification of femaleness in the male is the true meaning of what Jung called the “anima.”

[...] The mother had an absolute terror of cats, and considered them the personification of evil. [...] She was extremely unbalanced, the mother, emotionally, and considered her husband’s mother, who was a foolishly naive, good-natured and innocent thing, as a personification of evil.

[...] He has since grown to like all animals but at the moment of the attack, you see, the cat instantly became this personification of evil to him, and again his primary concern was to flee. [...]

In very simplified terms, then, Jane regards Seth as a personagram, “a multidimensional personification of another Aspect of the entity or source self, as expressed through the medium.” [...] It wasn’t that I mistrusted the Seth personality, but I felt it was a personification of something else — and that ‘something else’ wasn’t a person in our terms … Yet in an odd way I felt that he was more than that, or represented more; and that his psychological reality straddled worlds … I sensed a multidimensionality of personality that I couldn’t define.”

The tale has always appealed to children because they recognize the validity behind it.² The fairy godmother is a creative personification of the personalized elements in Framework 2 — a personification therefore of the inner ego, that rises to the aid of the mortal self to grant its desires, even when the intents of the mortal self may not seem to fit into the practical framework of normal life. [...]

He was a study, a living example, of the effects of conflicting unexamined beliefs, a fierce and yet agonized personification of what can happen when an individual allows his conscious mind to deny its responsibilities — i.e., when an individual becomes afraid of his own consciousness.

[...] In her view, the quality called multipersonhood encompasses all of the inner personifications, or Aspects, of the source self, which she defines in the Glossary of Adventures as “the ‘unknown’ self, soul, or psyche; the fountainhead of our physical being.” In her own case, then, Seth would be a personification of an Aspect of her source self; but he would also have an existence of his own at other levels of reality.

[...] Obviously I am not speaking of a personification of a Superperson. [...]

[...] People in the Bible often were the personification of certain human characteristics. [...]

[...] I said it was essential that we communicate to that personification [named by Seth for convenience’s sake only] that its performance was quite destructive to Jane, and that it must release its hold. [...]

[...] All shrines are basically shrines to the authority of the self, regardless of the personifications or deifications involved. [...]

This phenomena is more common however than you would suppose, though unfortunately in many cases the secondary personality gives personification to buried fears and fantasies that are unhealthy to the dominant personality. [...]

[...] It may be that Seth is the psychological personification of that supraconscious extension of my normal self.

[...] And if Seth was a personification of my subconscious, then this would be an excellent example of subconscious fraud.

[...] A self is not simply the accidental personification of the body’s biological mechanism. [...]

In Seth Speaks, Seth developed Jung’s ideas about the anima and the animus by stating that such other-sex qualities or personifications within each of us actually represent memories of past lives. [...]