Was Rob's mother a personality fragment?

[Sena]

I was a bit surprised to come across this while searching the Seth writings:

TPS1 Session 375 (Deleted) October 26, 1967

"Now, and no distortion here from our friend (Jane), your mother was from the beginning a fragment, an offshoot actually, from the personality that she was in her last existence. The offshoot of fragment had to, and chose to, deal with the relationship that then took place between this fragment and your father.

[... 1 paragraph ...]

The whole personality is a stubborn one, and had to learn in this manner. The vitality of the fragment personality but hints at the overall vitality of the whole self involved.

The characteristics are explosive and seemingly overwhelmingly impulsive, simply because by the nature of a fragment there are few balancing features, usually instead a one-sided explosive offshoot. These characteristics have in other lives held the personality back. Now the personality will realize the detrimental nature, and has purged itself, so to speak.

[... 2 paragraphs ...]

The fragment also knows that this life is being lived for the particular reason given. A duty is being performed. Certain characteristics and qualities incorporated about a fragment identity for a definite purpose. The fragment is always aware of this, and it is always aware of its inner identity with the whole personality."

—TPS1 Session 375 (Deleted) October 26, 1967

I would like to draw the reader's attention to the sentence I have highlighted in bold type. At first I thought Seth was referring to Jane's mother. Then I realized that Seth was NOT referring to Jane's mother. To whose mother was he referring? My curiosity  was aroused, and I realized that the only way to get the answer was to download Book 1 of the deleted sessions (not cheap). This is what I read in the book:

SESSION 375 (DELETED) OCTOBER 26, 1967 9 PM THURSDAY (This session is deleted from the record. (This afternoon Jane and I took my parents to the hospital in Sayre; mother for an ear examination, father to be admitted to the psychiatric ward. Tonight Jane assumed I would want Seth to talk about my parents, but I told her Seth could discuss anything he wanted to. I planned only a couple of questions to ask. (Jane began speaking at a slower pace than she has used recently, with her eyes opening often.) Good evening. ("Good evening, Seth.") Now give us a moment. (One minute pause, eyes closed.) The man that is left, your father, will be agitated, but then he will feel peaceful. It is almost like a reflex habit, a mechanical one, that keeps him now connected with your mother. (Pause.) There are very dim memories still lingering, confused. These are ghosts of memories, not this man's memories really at all—ghosts of those memories that still linger because of the physical connection, the relationship between the man who remained and the main personality who did not stay. On the one hand the woman takes pleasure that he now seems to need her so desperately. On the other hand she knows subconsciously that the need is actually counterfeit, and she resents this bitterly. (Long pause.) In each of her three sons she sees portions of the man she married. They are not however open to her. She cannot find what she is after in them, and because of this she is also angry. She did not want children. Your father did. Now, in a few of his delusions he was quite content. He imagined his sons as children sleeping. The whole personality who left is aware of the situation, but he is not vitally concerned. Your father began in this life as a whole personality. Various goals were set by him, and these were reached. He left a fragment of himself to satisfy the few lingering requirements. He wanted to be the father of boys. There is some matter here not clear, not distorted or blocked, simply not clear, concerning the actual desire for the birth of males, however. He wanted to be the father of three for his own reasons, rather than the father of one or two children, you see. Now, and no distortion here from our friend (Jane), your mother was from the beginning a fragment, an offshoot actually, from the personality that she was in her last existence. The offshoot of fragment had to, and chose to, deal with the relationship that then took place between this fragment and your father." (from "The Personal Sessions: Book One of the Deleted Seth Material: Personal Seth Sessions 11/15/65 - 12/6/71" by Jane Roberts, Robert Butts)

As I understand it, Seth seems to have said that Rob's mother was a personality fragment.

From the Kindle edition: https://amzn.eu/13iRUDF

[jbseth]

Hi Sena,

Thanks for starting this topic, I think you've picked a great one.


Seth says quite a bit about fragments across and throughout all of his books.

In answer to your question, "Was Rob's mother a personality fragment?", I'd say that the answer here was definitely, "Yes".  Seth had some very interesting things to say about Rob's parents and their probable relationships with each other in UR1, Section 1 and UR1, Section 2, S693 and 694.  What Seth is saying here in this deleted session about Rob's mother being this fragment personality, seems to tie into what he says about Rob's parents in UR1.


Here's some interesting things that Seth had to say about fragments in TES1, Session 9.


TES1, Session 9:

In a sense all things could be called fragments, but there are different kinds. Personality fragments differ from others in that they can cause other fragments to form from themselves. In a way, say, (Here Jane lay the board aside and stood up. Pacing back and forth, she began to dictate:) that a tree cannot, personality fragments form other fragments having all the properties of the parent fragment—emotional life and so forth.

As for others all fragments have (pause) are throwoffs or projections. Difficult to explain, I am not doing well. In a physical sense this board is a projection of wood or a tree, but in this case the board has less properties than the parent tree. The tree can grow, the board cannot. A personality fragment on the other hand never has less properties than its parent. This is the difference. A personality fragment has all the properties of its parents inherent, though it may not know how to use them. The board however cannot learn to grow, even though you stick it in the earth.

(Jane continues:) In a sense the present individual in any given life could be called a fragment of his entire entity, having all the properties of the original entity, though they remain latent or unused. The personality fragment in this sense can learn to develop what it has, rather than seek new powers. There are no new powers. The image that your friend saw was, as I said, a personality fragment of his own. It contained all the abilities of your friend, whether latent or not I do not know. This type of personality fragment is of different origin than your friend, who is himself a fragment of his own entity. We call this type a split personality fragment, or a personality image fragment. Usually it cannot operate on all levels of your physical plane.



-jbseth

[Sena]

Seth had some very interesting things to say about Rob's parents and their probable relationships with each other in UR1, Section 1 and UR1, Section 2, S693 and 694.  What Seth is saying here in this deleted session about Rob's mother being this fragment personality, seems to tie into what he says about Rob's parents in UR1.

jbseth, yes I shall look up UR1. It seems that Seth gave Rob some intensive psychotherapy, helping him understand the problems in his family of origin.

[jbseth]

Hi Sena,

Yeah, I would definitely agree. Not only did he give both Jane and Rob some good psychotherapy, but we also get to learn and benefit from what Seth had to say to them.

For me at least, I've always been extremely impressed by Seth's seeming ability with what he said in regards to his counselling, not only to Rob and Jane, but with others as well.

-jbseth


 

[Sena]

Not only did he give both Jane and Rob some good psychotherapy, but we also get to learn and benefit from what Seth had to say to them.

jbseth, this helps to confirm that Seth was not simply a part of Jane's own psyche, because there was no way that Jane could have acquired that knowledge by "natural" means.

[Deb]

Yep, Seth was talking about Rob's father. Rob really had the greater benefit of Seth, as he was able to ask questions and get direct answers while Jane was out of the loop. I suppose Jane could have done that telepathically if she wanted. I wonder if Seth said anything similar about Jane's mother? I have the feeling that Jane would try to block something like that from coming through. From what I know about her mother, it didn't sound like she had a very good life—things went downhill drastically after Jane's father left. I see from the search engine that there are some details about Jane's parents in DEaF1 and PS6, I'll have to check them out. I just wonder what Marie came into that life to accomplish or learn, and how well she did with that.

Seth did a great job explaining the difference between fragments and personality fragments with that tree analogy. The personality fragments in my mind are more like holograms, while plain fragments seem almost two dimensional, like a photograph.

And I agree Seth had a light of insightful things to say about Rob's parents in UR1. It doesn't sound like it was a very satisfying relationship for either of them. I also found Seth's information on Rob's probable selves, deaths at different ages, his mother's probables selves and her marriage to Mr. Markle to be fascinating.

I have to admit it's sometimes hard for me to imagine us having entities, multiple incarnations, counterparts, probable selves, thought forms and splinters/splinter personalities. When I try to envision it all in a 3D flow chart of some sort, each line in the chart ends bursting outward like fireworks and my chart quickly turns into a convoluted mess.

[jbseth]

Hi Sena, Hi Deb,

Sena. Yeah, there were several things that occurred to Jane and Rob over the years that seem pretty convincing to me that Jane wasn't doing all of this on her own.  Unfortunately I can only think of 2 examples at the moment, but I know there's more.

Example 1:
In TES1, S11, Seth materialized a hand directly over the top of Jane's hand, and then a little later on, in this same session, he materialized a body in front of Janes. I seriously doubt that Jane did this by herself.  Both Rob and Bill Macdonnel, who sat in on this session, seemed very surprised by this.

Example 2:
In TES8, Sessions 406 and 407, Jane started channeling Seth II, for the first time. After this 407, session in her notes on April 24, 1968, Janes writes the following.

Believe this all has to do with the above, plus with a strange session held the night before last, in which through me the voice said it was sort of 'beyond Seth'; the message coming from a higher portion of that personality; tremendous energy seemed to flow through me and the definite, thank God, certainty, that this came from beyond me, and was automatically translated into words at my end. Subjectively I feel this was as significant a development—almost—as the original Seth session. The sense of contact most ... undeniably there. The feeling I really was in contact with some... all encompassing reality.

Here we see that this is where Jane, herself, was finally convinced, that this information wasn't coming from her, herself.


Deb,

And that convoluted mess is just but one small part of All That Is. 

It kind of makes you wonder just how incredible All That Is, must actually be.


-jbseth