“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

1. Seth’s statement here is reminiscent of some of his material on moment points. [...]

Rob thought the concentration of writing a statement of how I felt would help. [...]

[...] This is not to be construed, however, as a statement that all creative acts result from individual problems or neuroses. [...]

There are some similarities, and that is all I will say this evening because it would take me five hours to explain what I meant by that statement. [...]

[...] She verified Seth’s statements about Jim Crosson’s worries about holding an audience, etc. [...]

[...] He should be on the alert for restrictive statements, vocal or mental—I can’t, for example; I’d better go slowly; or mental pictures of that nature. [...]

[...] In Note 7 for that session I wrote that as an artist my intuitional reaction to that statement was to associate the multidirectional ability of the atom with Seth’s notions of simultaneous time and probabilities. [...]

(Now for two concluding paragraphs of commentary and reference: Jane’s statement that the four-fronted counterpart self persists outside of space and time implies a contradiction, of course — but this situation is one that we, as physical creatures, will in some manner always have to contend with when we encounter certain of Jane’s and Seth’s concepts [including that of the four-fronted counterpart self]. [...]

[...] If you wanted deeply wrought psychological statements, the symptoms also provided a framework around which they could occur—an inner framework of personal sessions devoted to the workings of personality, an inner library beside the books themselves, that perhaps you would not otherwise think of without such an impetus. [...]

[...] You will see here that indirectly but clearly we have given you the identity of the person whose death is foreseen, particularly when I add to the positive statement, though it may appear negative, that your mother, Joseph, is in no way involved.

Obviously, Seth didn’t follow through on the statement he’d made near the end of the last book session, which we held much earlier this month: “Remind me, for our next session, to wind in a discussion of those subjective entities as they learned how to translate themselves into physical individuals.” [...]

Now: I want to speak directly about Ruburt’s written statement of today.

(Jane and I were pleased at Seth’s statement that no distortion did occur, but only a partial blocking. [...]

[...] In connection with our feelings about the long intervals that have materialized several times during the production of this book, see my opening notes for the 815th session — especially those concerning simultaneous time, and my statement that “We do not plan to ask Seth when the book will be done.” [...]

(Sometimes my comments to Seth are rather cryptic because of the time it takes to speak to him and write out the statement at the same time. [...]

[...] Jane made some statements about her reputation resting upon the validity of the material, etc.

(Seth/Jane made this statement with a grin.)

[...] In the frontmatter, see the first of the four quotations from Seth; the one taken from a private session given just two months ago: “All energy contains consciousness (underlined). … A recognition of that simple statement would indeed change your world. [...]

The feelings Jane and I have for animals almost automatically lead us to associate at least some of the implications of Seth’s statement with another one he’d given earlier in Mass Events. [...]

[...] But these are statements of fact that you should recognize as such. [...]

[...] She was upset of course, and so was I. I went to bed very unhappy with our situation—and I suppose that that feeling helped lead me to the group of statements below the next morning, and this session.

We are making some simplified statements here to make the idea clear. [...]