“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

[...] I’ll quote a few lines from the closing passages for that session in order to lead into what follows for Jane.

[...] You are dealing with the undersides of reality. [...]

[...] When you are dealing with “Unknown” Reality and your work on it, you perceive the overall completed book in flashes of perception—a circular kind of communication and comprehension. When you work on individual notes, however, you are back in the more normal necessary method of procedure, where you must know what you have said in time, consecutively. [...]

[...] Aside from the question of whether “evolution” in ordinary linear terms has been scientifically proven [concerning which point Jane and I have many reservations], we were drawn to the article because we thought its “factual” information might eventually supplement some of Seth’s material for “Unknown” Reality. [...]

[...] I hadn’t suggested that Seth come through, so we could see what she’d produce otherwise. [...]

[...] Her material, however, wasn’t influenced by the news story, for just about a year ago Seth-Jane delivered a session for Personal Reality on the mixing of animal and man: the 648th for March 14, 1973, in Chapter 12. [...]

1. One might say that Seth himself provided for Jane’s material here when, back in the 681st session, he talked about parallel events, alternate realities, and probable selves and worlds.

[...] Vast gulfs exist between one man’s reality and another’s. After death, experience has as much organization, highly intricate and involved, as you know now. You have your private hallucinations now, only you do not realize what they are. [...]

[...] The intellect should go hand in hand with the emotions and intuitions, but if it pulls against these too strongly, difficulties can arise when the newly freed consciousness seizes upon its ideas about reality after death, rather than facing the particular reality in which it finds itself. [...]

[...] Now, I have told you that thoughts and emotions form physical reality, and they form after-death experience. [...]

[...] The symbol is reality, you see. [...]

even while I wonder what my body is

and understand what the oak tree knows

and the spider trusts its own reality

(“What was the symbol on it?”)

I have nothing else to add, beside what was given in the previous session regarding Mark’s journeys.

[...] And it will do you no good to ask me what they are.

[...] As particular portions of matter are transformed, as the inner self, through the inner senses creates a simple material object that is picked up by the outer senses clearly as, say, a table, so are these other constructions that closely mirror inner reality that are perceived by the outer senses as effects.

[...] What he is trying to do is to turn on the “high intellect,” or “spacious mind.” The high intellect or spacious mind is a combination of what you think of as psychic or intuitional, and intellectual qualities—only raised to a much higher degree, and united.

(“What do you think of that reading Jane received in the mail today?” I referred to a reading by the medium, Elwood Babbit, given for someone who had written Jane several months ago; the individual subsequently saw Babbitt, and sent Jane a copy of the long, rambling, very generalized material that could have applied to many people. We noted wryly that the correspondent made no mention of what EB had charged for the reading. [...]

This happens when the intellect is in your terms strained to the utmost, and it finally opens up within itself to form what is in those terms a new faculty.

This means of course that his intellect is far more flexible than most—yet the intellect as you understand it has been conditioned to accept only a small portion of your intuitional reality. [...]

[...] These kinds of dilemmas are what bother us about the medical establishment: We don’t know whether to completely ignore such advice, or to heed it and thus accept medicine’s prognosis. [...] It may even be, I’ve often thought, that one cannot really leave the body alone, nor be meant to—for the physical body would be a portion of the reality each individual creates, and so is bound to be intimately involved with individual fears, desires, intents, successes, etc.)

(At first Jane didn’t know what she wanted to—or could—do. [...]

[...] “If it was me,” I said, and I probably shouldn’t have, “I couldn’t wait to get something on what’s going on, in the hope that it would help.” [...]

[...] “What I was getting from Seth was that any hospital serves as a terrific example of a belief system....” [...]

An important point here: You use consciousness—what you think of as rational consciousness—in an unusual manner. [...] You are learning how to form reality from your own beliefs. [...]

[...] At times during it I’d felt somewhat overwhelmed, thinking of what we still had to learn and accomplish, as well as about what we hadn’t learned in the past: Why was it all taking so long? [...]

[...] Even those made him question the nature of reality. [...]

[...] I told her I had lots of them, but had been refraining from asking them for the most part until we see what we can learn from the material. [...]

(I said that I was quite aware that Seth had recently said that all actions are eventually redeemed—but what about in the meantime? [...]

[...] To go ahead creatively, forming new versions of a spiritual reality, to state that man and his impulses were good, brought him finally into direct conflict with the old beliefs of the Sinful Self, whose value system was based upon the idea that the self was indeed sinful, not to be trusted. [...]

(9:00.) His Sinful Self therefore tried to restate its position in order to right the situation, but its reasoning, again, was that a sense of grace was dependent upon the prior admission of a sinful reality. [...]

[...] She may be so different in basic ways from most of her fellow human beings that conflicts may be almost inevitable—at least until later in life, when the personality has learned what the situation is and can make adjustments. [...]

[...] She hasn’t walked a great deal lately, but our emphasis is now on trusting the body’s own wisdom as to when it wants to perform, and what it wants to do. [...]

[...] Creativity is a kind of psychic play, an exploration of reality, and an individual reinterpretation of it, and of the events of Framework 1. The artist might need to know technique and certain methods, and so forth. [...]

[...] The creative person often is not wanted at a job, because their creativity by contrast with others’ behavior shows the vast difference between what I will now call joyful work and the usual variety.

[...] As events worked out, Seth was halfway through Volume 1 of “Unknown” Reality before I realized that these supplementary notes would work well as the first appendix in the first volume. [...] As in the Introductory Notes, I want to stress Jane’s role as the creative artist, disseminating her personal view of a larger inner reality, and her intuitive and conscious comprehension of at least some aspects of that reality; for such understanding can easily elude our Western-oriented, materialistic, technological outlook.

[...] No matter whether it’s natural or not …” Rather reluctantly, she agreed to let me present that personal material here; but only, I think, because she understood my desire to give what I consider to be pertinent background material for the Seth books. [...]

[...] I added that within those religious boundaries, mystics across the centuries and throughout the world have given voice to the same ideas in almost the same words, and that as an “independent” mystic Jane was in a position to approach the situation from a freer; more individual standpoint: She would be able to add fresh insights to what is certainly one of the species’ all-pervasive, unifying states. [...]

[...] Maybe that’s all I’m responsible for — odd thought — what else did I, do I, feel responsible for? [...]

(She was so much in pain that I ended up giving her at least ten minutes of what I thought were good suggestions. [...]

Alone, they carry within themselves the splendor of unknown knowledge, and they arise from the deep founts of Ruburt’s life, containing within themselves the neighborhood and world in which he grew, the power and vitality of the people he knew, the resourcefulness and energy that composed reality. [...]

[...] “I don’t know what he meant by the “Let us continue,” but that’s the last sentence I got. [...]

[...] “I feel so weird I don’t know what to do.”

[...] He is in a way a different kind of psychologist, examining the nature of psychological reality from different viewpoints. [...] (Long pause.) Most people, generally speaking, have one more or less familiar notion of a self that they try to actualize within physical reality. [...]

[...] (Long pause.) Ruburt is not responsible for other people’s conceptions of who or what I am, or who or what he is. [...]

(So here again, we have a reference to Jane’s possible feelings about Seth and what he does, regardless of whether his labors may be eventually published as “a Seth book.” [...]

[...] What it means in the context of tonight’s discussion is that he feels there is no established framework that he will accept to explain our relationship in, say, the public arena outside of the books, which allow him to make considered statements, and provide room for reasoned thought. [...]

[...] We haven’t had time to start on the copy of Personal Reality I brought the day after getting the idea. [...] “If you keep on improving like you have been, it looks like I’ll be taking the book apart a lot sooner than I thought I would—which, after all, is what we want you to be able to do: read by yourself.” [...]

[...] “What am I doing, Bob? God, what noises....” [...]

[...] I had a sense that the arm was moving almost by itself, somewhat uncoordinated, as if searching for its role with the body, or relearning for itself what it was for, what it could do. [...]

[...] “What am I doing, Bob?”

[...] What do you think of that?”)

(“In what year did she die?”)

(“What was the image our friend Bill Macdonnel saw in the rocking chair, in his bedroom in Niagara Falls, in December of 1961?”)

(“All right Seth, what do you think of Jane’s answer?”)

[...] In all such cases the mental action occurs simultaneously in all systems in which it will have a reality; in which it can be used as a reference point in other words.

[...] Such distortive effects, such distortions, are often correlated within a given system, and accepted as a foundation for the nature of reality. [...]

[...] They may appear closed to those within, but they are not closed, and there are openings in what appear closed places. [...]

[...] They are important however; and from what you now know you realize that these energy forms represent mental enclosure units, operating in the same manner as our earlier ones of which we spoke when discussing the early development of energy within the physical field.

[...] They are doing subconsciously what came naturally, attempting to form, as always, their own physical construction. [...]

You can glimpse other realities, and this knowledge and confidence will automatically be of benefit to you when the transition takes place. [...]

The full personality consciousness indeed places an additional strain upon what you may call the overall body consciousness, and prolongs the sense of pain connected with that body consciousness. [...]

If you know now that you exist independently of the body, if you have experiences within other realities and messages from them, then you need not fear leaving the body, for you can already begin to make inroads.

[...] You will feel aggressive, happy, despairing, or determined according to events that happen to you, your beliefs about yourself in relation to them, and your ideas of who and what you are. [...]

[...] What do you think of yourself, your daily life, your body, your relationship with others? [...]

[...] Do not shove them underneath, ignore them or try to substitute what you think of as good thoughts.

First be aware of the reality of your feelings. [...]

[...] You take it for granted without even thinking of it that the symbols — the letters — are not the reality — the information or thoughts — which they attempt to convey.

Now in the same way, I am telling you that objects are also symbols that stand for a reality whose meaning the objects, like the letters, transmit. [...]

(“At what, Seth?”)

[...] The letters upon the page have the reality only of ink and paper. [...]