“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

[...] Only in dreams in your time, in your society, is the male free to cry unabashedly, to admit any kind of dependency, and only at certain occasions and usually in relative privacy is he allowed to express feelings of love.

[...] Jane is against the whole thing on esthetic and invasion-of-privacy grounds, not monetary ones so much, and I guess my feelings about it all are too ambiguous. [...]

[...] Yet I could see that I confused Jane, for to make such a venture possible we’d have to change certain beliefs and values that are deeply rooted within us; especially those about personal privacy and our reluctance to “go public” with such topical, immediate material, instead of trusting that the Seth material will exert a meaningful influence in society over the long run. [...]

[...] I also knew there were few private rooms in the Infirmary, and that if we lost our privacy it would interfere greatly with our work together—and that the creative work is as much a part of therapy as anything else. [...]

(Long pause.) The precious privacy of your existence, and indeed of your universe, is all the more miraculous, so to speak, precisely because its probable reality emerges from an infinite field of probabilities, each forever inviolate. [...]

You could have stayed in apartments all your life, denying yourself the privacy that you now enjoy, and thus avoided any conflict. [...]

(We were having the session in our bedroom for privacy. [...]

[...] A sense of privacy is always respected here, but also realize the sacred nature of spontaneity and of your own feelings, and do not make logical deductions now. [...]

[...] The self does not need imaginary fences to protect its privacy, or its safety or its solitude. [...]

[...] It is true indeed that all dreams to some extent are shared, for the privacy that you imagine exists within them is, as Ruburt correctly supposed, an illusion.

[...] This only serves to reinforce your beliefs that it is impossible to maintain your privacy, and you feel then less in control of your own time.

[...] That you would resent the lack of privacy involved, and blame him for it.

There would be no experience of what Ruburt (Seth’s “entity” name for Jane) calls “the dear privacy of the moment,” so if one portion of your being wants to rise above the solitary march of the moments, other parts of your psyche rush, delighted, into that particular time-focus that is your own. [...]

[...] The session was held in my studio for more privacy. [...]

[...] Using this room increases our sense of privacy, being sheltered from most noise as it is, and the risk of interruptions. [...]

[...] There were other homes about, but each one had a feeling of privacy amid its thick insulation of trees. [...]

[...] No wonder we sought privacy more and more: any public exposure came to be avoided automatically, as part of the protective coloration.

[...] We have no idea of pressing Seth’s personal information upon David; doing that would be an invasion of his privacy. [...]

[...] Some people do not give a whit for your privacy or your work. [...]

(Last Saturday Jane received several brief flashes from Seth; we have been concerned lately with the best way to handle the problem of witnesses—that is, to familiarize potential witnesses with the material, and at the same time keep our sense of privacy, and also maintain control of the sessions. [...]