“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Granted we survive death, what part of us survives? [...] Having a whole self may be great, but if my Jane Roberts self is engulfed by it after death, then to me that’s not much of a survival. It’s like saying that the little fish survives when it’s eaten by a bigger one because it becomes part of it.

[...] This communication goes on constantly, but your ego is so focused upon physical reality and survival within it that you do not hear the inner voice. [...]

[...] Those dreams are most closely related to survival in physical existence, and whenever that survival seems threatened such dreams arise to consciousness whenever possible.

[...] Such dreams, however, can also be triggered often, as in your own times, when the conscious mind is convinced that the survival of the species is threatened—and in such cases the dreams then actually represent man’s fears. [...]

[...] It has been fashionable in the past to believe that each species was oriented selfishly toward its own survival. [...] In that framework cooperation was simply a by-product of a primary drive toward survival. [...]

[...] (And I can note a week later that at the end of Session 707, Seth makes his own comment about cells surviving changes of form.)

[...] Deoxyribonucleic acid may exist within its host, whether man, plant, or animal — or bacteria or virus — in cooperative altruistic ventures with its carrier that are quite beside purely survival ones. [...] Basically, then, an overall genetics of cooperation becomes a truer long-run concept than the postulated deadly struggle for survival of the fittest, whether between man and molecules, say, or among members of the same species. [...]

[...] For how can you look at yourselves with self-respect, with dignity or with joy, if you believe that you are the end product of forces in which the fittest survive? Being the fittest implies those given most to what would appear to be murderous intent — for you must survive at the expense of your fellows, be you leaf, frog, plant, or animal.

You do not survive through cooperation, according to that theory, and nature is not given a kind or creative intent, but a murderous one. [...] How can you believe that you live in a safe universe when each species exists because it survives through claw, if it must hunt and kill out of murderous intent, as implied in the theories of evolution and of reality itself?

[...] (See Note 5.) Thus, in a process called gradualism, there has been over many millions of years the slow development of flora and fauna from the simple to the complex, with those structures surviving that are best suited to their environments — the “survival of the fittest,” in popular terms.

[...] There is a strong correlation in what happens when the medium feels that a surviving personality has taken over the personality itself.

The medium perceives so clearly the reality of the surviving personality that the medium to some extent directly perceives that reality. [...]

The overly conscientious self is afraid of emotion and display, and hence quite terrified of any ideas of communicating with survival personalities. [...]

The whole personality knows quite well that the spirit survives and that the personality is capable of communicating with such spirits. [...]

It is actually a most dependable measure, as far as its attitude and condition is concerned, in that if it becomes overly concerned the concern is caused by a fear for its own survival. And its survival is obviously a necessity for existences within the physical field, if it is to deal effectively with camouflage reality.

I am myself rather dusty this evening, since I am very relaxed, and indeed come with a certain smug satisfaction in having survived one hundred sessions; and you may feel a smug satisfaction also.

[...] That is, the question as to the survival of the physical image after the point of so-called death, and the lingering about the physical plane of portions of the personality.

This field projects itself, as should be obvious, into your own field of actuality, and as such the personality itself has its existence in both fields; and both systems, being open, are dependent one upon the other, and a failure to survive in one system threatens survival in the other. [...]

Both portions however have great capacities for survival, and are each strong, so that the personality has indeed survived. [...]

[...] Individuals can — they can — survive without organizations. Organizations cannot survive without individuals, and the most effective organizations are assemblies of individuals who assert their own private power in a group, and do not seek to hide within it (all very emphatically).

(Pause at 4:25.) The sooner you can rid yourself of rigid beliefs about the survival of the fittest, the better you will be. [...]

[...] Those who survive physical death are individuals as they have always been. [...]

The survival personality in itself does not automatically make one wise. Survival personalities are individuals. [...]

[...] But while you are awake this communication also goes on continually but you are not aware of it, for your ego is so focused upon physical reality and upon survival within it, that you do not allow yourself to listen to the inner voice. [...]

[...] They mitigate directly against man’s health, survival, and exuberance.

[...] In many cases the poor were saved, for most of the old homes and apartment houses survived while the newer ranch-style homes could not stand the onslaught of the water. [...] Women who had no stronger purpose than playing bridge ended up struggling for survival beside their more destitute sisters. [...]

There were old people, laden with negative beliefs about age, who discovered great vitality and further purpose under the stimuli of survival. [...]

[...] since on the other side so to speak there was an incomprehensible frightening chaotic dimension, malevolent, powers beyond our imagining; and that to question the stories was to threaten survival not just personally but to threaten the fabric and organization of reality as we knew it. [...]

[...] The belief in the struggle for survival so super-pervades that anything but the most competitive, determined, super-valiant, compulsive desire to hold onto life appears to be cowardly, a cop-out, at best an unexplainable, erratic, unnatural response to life’s conditions. [...]

[...] In that framework it seems as if people are cut down in their primes often, despite their own wishes, desires or intents, and it is taken for granted that death is the undesired, unwanted, unsought victor over creatures whose natural desires lead them to fight for natural survival at all costs. [...]

[...] I am here to tell you that I have survived physical death, and that you have survived physical death time and time again. [...]

They saw that the earth was simply changing its forms, but that the identity of each unit of consciousness survived—and so, although they saw the picture of death, they did not recognize it as the death that to many people now seems an inevitable end.

[...] They watched the drama of the “hunter” and the “prey,” seeing that each animal contributed so that the physical form of the earth could continue—but the rabbit eaten by the wolf survived in a dream body that men knew was its true form. [...]