“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

[...] It is because you so often view your world through a system of highly limited beliefs that you so often misread the implications of temporal life. [...]

To some extent (underlined) now, his beliefs stand for a certain conventionalized view of the world. To some extent (underlined) those views, colored by a different era, were those of your own father, concerning at least the world of commerce, business, and so forth. [...]

[...] I think I made some good points; even Bill said he probably exaggerated man’s greed, yet he wasn’t about to change his views. [...]

[...] Yet you must also provide for changes within that routine, for those changes give you a different view of your own subjective reality. [...]

[...] Is it a view of reality from Seth’s part of the psyche? [...]

(Perhaps the view reference in gray view refers to a short article on the page 11 side of the full page, in column one. [...] Could gray view refer to clouded vision, dim color perception? [...]

[...] A gray view. [...]

(“A gray view.” [...]

(I think it more than a coincidence that in these excerpts from Seth Speaks, Seth mentions Darwin’s theory of evolution and the Biblical story of creation in the same sentence, for those systems of belief represent the two poles of the controversy over origins in our modern Western societies: the strictly Darwinistic, mechanistic view of evolution, in which the weakest of any species are ruthlessly eliminated through natural, predatory selection, and the views of the creationists, who hold that God made the earth and all of its creatures just as described in the Bible.

(Jane and I certainly do not hold creationist views [see Note 1]. [...] Either way, this very fallible creature found himself vulnerable to forces that consciously he couldn’t understand — even though, in Seth’s view, down through the millennia man had chosen all of his religious and antireligious experiences.

[...] [I’m sure others have had similar experiences: Once a subject is focused upon, data relative to it seem to leap out from the background welter of daily events and “facts” surrounding one’s life.] Almost automatically, many of the notes for this appendix came to deal with the scientific thinking about evolution, and I realized that I wanted them to show the differences [as well as any similarities that might emerge] between Seth’s concepts and those “official” views prevailing in our physical reality.

[...] [An undetermined number of scientists hold creationist views, by the way, but I have no statistics to offer on how many do.] The Bible certainly advocates at least a relative immutability of species, rather than a common ancestry in which a single cell evolved into a variety of ever more complex and divergent forms. [...]

[...] These sessions, in that regard, came naturally, as the expression of natural abilities and tendencies, finally emerging despite your official views at the time, jointly.

The sessions brought about, however, a new kind of education that often seemed in direct conflict with the old, and with the official views of contemporary society. [...]

It is this portion who seems to stand outside and view the subjective self. [...]

The “grand view”, I am afraid, was not nearly specific enough, and referred to Mr. Fell’s view of the ocean in Florida.

[...] I can view your present. [...]

A connection with a grand view. [...]

(“A connection with a grand view.” [...]

[...] The view is high and quite pretty. To her left is the kitchen roof of the apartment below us, but this is to the side and does not obstruct the view. [...]

[...] Jane sits at her desk facing the row of windows to the west; from there she has an excellent view of the backyard and the street beyond. She “looks down and away” at grass and flowers, etc., and to her left, not obstructing her view, is the porch roof of the apartment on the ground floor.

[...] The fact that such ideas do not occur to entities like the legal—or even the editorial—departments at Prentice-Hall shows, I think, the great gap that exists between our own views of life and theirs. [...]

(10:17.) There are certain interior physical events that can happen within Ruburt’s body to help him move more naturally, but he cannot possibly consciously comprehend each change that must occur, and when viewed in that light the entire exercise seems so complicated as to be almost impossible. [...]

He may think of some hypothetical literary writer—a composite image again, comfortable enough, slightly avant-garde, fashionably so, in contact with his peers, quite forgetting again that his—and his mind has always been far less conventional than that, far more probing and again, forgetting that he always enjoyed viewing society from a vantage point slightly outside of it. [...]

[...] He tries to view his own work through some idealized image of a psyche who is as gifted as he is as a writer, and also highly gifted in meeting the public, putting on performances, acting as a healer, as a prophet, and as an expert therapist all at once, and in so doing his own characteristics and natural abilities and inclinations become lost along the way. [...]

[...] I hope to teach you a tolerance for others, for this will ensure the greatest development of your own abilities, and will also give you a more realistic view of the world.

[...] It is not all right to imagine that their kind speaks for the hostile world, or that they represent the views of many people. [...]

[...] He chose those feelings however so that he could view the world and reality in a certain light. [...]

[...] But you must also have faith in what you have done, for it was all done in faithful rendering of your view of reality (in quotes) “at any given time.” [...]

[...] It is far better to situate yourself firmly in your own reality, acknowledge it as your own, encourage your strength and creativity, and from that vantage point view those areas of the world or of your own society that need constructive help. [...]

[...] Each of your lives are miniature and yet gigantic episodes, mortal and immortal at once, providing experiences that you form meaningfully, opening up dimensions of reality available to no one else, for no one can view existence from your standpoint. [...]

[...] You were viewing your representation of the many-faceted light of your own being.

[...] You viewed that inner light, but the lampshades had two purposes: one, as you surmised, to give you a comforting image, literally to shade your eyes. [...]

3. See the passages following Jane’s entry for March 31, 1977, in Chapter 10 of her The After Death Journal of an American Philosopher: The World View of William James.

[...] Earlier today she’d been wondering where the Cézanne material might lead her—to books on world views involving other people, she’d speculated, or something like that....)

[...] At first Jane and I wondered why Sue would give us such a book, knowing our views on evolution. [...] It was a beautiful compendium of all of the fallacies and distortions and wishing-thinkings concerning the scientific view of evolution.

[...] When you discover what they are, you will find a point of unity within yourself from which you can with some detachment, view your other systems of belief.

[...] On second thought, however, you will realize that another belief blocked that one from your view, but that you were always aware of it; and that in a strange way it was also invisible because you took it for granted. [...]

Through this belief he viewed all of his experience, correlating it; he encouraged those impulses that furthered it, and impeded those that did not. [...]

[...] She was also working on her own The Afterdeath Journal of an American Philosopher: The World View of William James. [...] It’s always a pleasure to work on a Seth book, to explore with him his unique view of reality, and to try to put at least a few of his ideas to use in our everyday, “practical” world. [...]

[...] It’s safe to note, however, that now all of her work bears upon that unique, still-growing view of consciousness expressed by Seth and herself. [...]

[...] We do intend to spend the rest of our lives studying the ramifications of that “unique, still-growing view of consciousness.” [...]

[...] The two of you — for you are both involved — have not only initiated a new framework from which you and others can view the nature of reality more clearly, but you also had to start from scratch, so to speak, to get the material, learn to trust it, and then to apply it to your own lives — even while ‘the facts were not all in yet.’ At no point did you have all of the material to draw upon, as for example, your readers do at any given point. [...]

[...] You will seem to view finished reincarnational existences, even as from his present the geologist will discover only inanimate fossils embedded in rock. [...]

[...] In the same way, when you look “backward” into the psyche the life you may indistinctly view — the past life — is already vanished. [...]

I’ve become quite interested in such an achievement in view of my recent but very limited successes in touching upon several personal “past” involvements: the two nameless Roman soldiers, and the woman called Maumee. [...]