“evolution” (Darwinism)
VICKI: [asking a question on Mary’s behalf] “‘I don’t understand the concept of spiritual evolution. If we already are, how can we evolve?’”
ELIAS: (Chuckling) “He [Michael] is quite amusing! You do not understand! Once again, language! I incorporate different words. I am conscious to be expressing the least conflicting use of your language, and I also understand how easily your words may confuse you, or may invoke belief systems to which I am wishing to avoid and not be perpetuating of! Therefore, I choose not to be incorporating the words of ‘karma’ or ‘evolution,’ for you already possess belief systems with regard to these words. I substitute ‘becoming’ and ‘choices.’ It is the same.” [session 66, January 14, 1996]
ELIAS: “We have spoken many times that your religious-focus and your Darwinian theories are, in actuality, incorrect, as to your creations of your reality within this dimension. There is no progression of evolvement within any species, as thought of within these theories. There has been experimentation, within each species which physically manifests. In this, man also has experimented with different types of consciousness, these all also being probabilities. Within your agreements, you have chosen what you now view to be the selectivity of probabilities that you create presently.” [session 115, August 25, 1996]
JIM: “Are whales and dolphins of a higher consciousness, so to speak, or is that a belief system that we’ve incorporated? Do they have other senses that we, I know we’re aware of them, but do they possess other senses that they possess that …
ELIAS: Whales possess a higher vibrational quality, this allowing them a higher element, so to speak, for there is no higher of consciousness. We will rephrase that to be wider element of consciousness. They also possess inner senses partially comparable to your own. They possess an awareness of inner senses. These animals have evolved within their consciousness to almost incorporate essence. (Pause)
CATHY: Is that why they snuff their trainers, because they know there’s no right or wrong? (Laughing)
JIM: That makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it?
ELIAS: You would be amazed at the thinking process of these animals, and how they view your species!
CATHY: I’ll bet!
JIM: (Almost in unison) I’ll bet!” [session 43, October 08, 1995]
ELIAS: “This evening, we shall engage in a discussion of consciousness. This will also involve subject matter with reference to The Creating Universal One And Whole, for this is consciousness. Think of your present belief systems, which greatly incorporate your scientific technology, and ask yourselves with your rational, logical intellect how you may arrive at conclusions of an impersonal universe and elements possessing consciousness extending from non-conscious matter. Within your present belief systems, you accept that a cosmic explosion occurred and created your universe; this being completely random and possessing no consciousness. Your world began as gasses, rock; elements not possessing life, to your estimation; and from this, through your belief systems of evolution, you believe that miraculously, somehow, consciousness was incorporated into matter accidentally. If you inquire to me, I will express to you, this possesses no logic. Matter did not appear ‘cosmically’ within this explosion, and then create consciousness. Consciousness was; is.
I will express to you that in your terms of viewing in time elements – for you are focused within time – we shall use terminology of ‘before,’ which is also now, (smiling) but we shall be indulging of terminology that you may relate to.
Therefore, before the organization and orchestration of your universe as you view it was consciousness. Before essence, as you interpret it, was the whole. You may use any term you are wishing for this action. I do not use the term ‘being’ purposely, for your term of God or All-That-Is (1) or The Creating Universal One And Whole, whatever you choose to call it, is not a being. It is all consciousness. It is an action. It incorporates all.
Within this experience of what you term to be god are many, many elements. Before the incorporation of essence, so to speak, there were elements of consciousness. You may also term these to be ‘units,’ which others have expressed previously. (2) These elements of consciousness know no limits of time or space. You may think of these as very tiny black holes. You may think of them, if you will, in physical terms as elements smaller than your smallest physical particles; but these elements are that which create all physical expression. Everything within every universe within every dimension is created by these elements of consciousness, and they are everything. They are not only the driving force behind matter and action, but are matter and action also; this being the basis of what you term to be god.
I will also express to you, as I have many times previously, you incorporate all the same as this action of god. You are the same; but it is more. It is more than the sum of all of the dimensions, of all of the universes, of all of the parts; but without you, it would not be either. Therefore, no separation; for you also are intimately a part. You incorporate your own individuality, your own intent, your own desires and focus; but you also incorporate all of it, and it possess, so to speak, all of you. No one element, to the most minute unit of consciousness, is any less than another. Therefore, there is no contradiction in expressing to you that you each, within your individuality, are the center of the universe; for this is true.
Essence is what we will term a portion of this encompassing whole, although not a portion! (Smiling) Within your limitations of language, it is impossible to express to you the lack of division and separation; this being why I express to you to conceptualize these concepts that I offer to you, for within your thought patterns within physical focus, it is not possible for you to completely eliminate all separation and be understanding of these concepts. When I express to you that essence incorporates all systems, that all systems are open and available to you, this is what is incorporated by consciousness. You possess this. Every element of consciousness possesses all elements of the whole.
Each element chooses to manifest according to its desire and function. A flower manifests to the fullest of its ability. The units of consciousness that make up this flower are the same as that which you possess also. The flower’s intent and function is to be a flower. Your intent and function is to incorporate intellect and intuition, to be directing of your universe as you have created it. Therefore, make no mistake; you direct all of your physical manifestation in every area. We have discussed this many times within previous sessions. You create your individual reality, and collectively you create the reality en masse. Therefore, you are the creators of all that you perceive ... and far beyond.” [session 79, March 17, 1996]
ELIAS: “We shall engage discussion of the individual and mass belief systems, as you presently engage these subjects. Individuals may and can survive without groups. Groups cannot survive without individuals. You ask, ‘Where do mass belief systems originate? Where do they come from? Who initiates mass belief systems? Who are the they, that speak for you all?’ As my companion [Paul (Patel)] has expressed earlier, the they are you! (3)
You may not express an alignment with a belief system outwardly, but your non-expression is an alignment. Therefore, I express to you, mass belief systems begin with individuals expressing opinions. In this, they draw to them other individuals who agree with these opinions, creating the beginnings of a belief system. Many, many other individuals may not necessarily be in absolute agreement to these opinions, but their omission of expression lends to the creation of the belief system. The reason individuals do not express is that they do not trust their own voice. Therefore, within the group, which may not survive without the individuals, the individuals choose to express, or not to express. If they are choosing to be not expressing in opposition, the belief system takes hold and is allowed to stand; therefore being accepted and incorporated within your societies.
Many belief systems have originated with one individual expressing an observation, many times connected with elements of nature, as you view it. In this, they form an opinion of the action of a particular element within nature. This is translated into a parallel, within your species, as human behavior. In this, many other individuals view the observation as novel and interesting and new. Therefore, they align with it, believing that the individual who has made the observation, and who has expressed the opinion, is quite enlightened. Therefore, they shall be enlightened also, within agreement with this opinion. Those not in agreement do not always actualize, objectively, their disagreement. In this, they lend their support, within energy, within consciousness, to the formation of the belief system.
You may view your Darwinian opinions, belief systems, as an example. A mainstay within this theory is ‘the survival of the fittest.’ One individual makes an observation of nature. This individual translates this into a parallel of human behavior, suggesting to you all that human behavior follows in like kind, in this survival of the fittest. In this, you weed out those which are, or which you believe to be, weaker.
This individual expressed quite confidently. In this, the idea was new. The expression of the idea was new. Many individuals rallied round this expression, and were in agreement. They did not conduct the studies, but trusted the expression of another individual, to which they viewed to be more learned; and also, in this, not trusting their own expression. Many other individuals were not trusting of this opinion, but were not challenging. The opposition was not great enough to suppress the formation of the belief system.
Although this is not a universally or globally held belief system, it is a mass belief system. It exists with other belief systems alongside of it that are quite contrary; but the individuals separate themselves into different groups or ‘camps,’ aligning with those belief systems that they individually agree with, or that they agree with ‘more.’ They may not entirely agree with a given belief system within mass expression, but they align more with one than another. In this, they do not express opposition, and they lend their energy, within consciousness, to the development and the acceptance of these belief systems. Then you look to yourselves ‘later,’ in your view within your time period, and you express, ‘How do we acquire these belief systems? Why do we align with these mass belief systems? Who has begun them?’ Within consciousness, you have begun them; for you have chosen to express favorably, or you have chosen to not express.” [session 103, July 07, 1996]
NORM: “This question is kind of off the wall, but I’m interested in evolution and some of the ideas that scientists now feel, that it is not possible for the DNA molecule to express itself in a grown animal, in the behavior of the animal or the shape that the animal takes. A man by the name of Rupert Sheldrake has come up with the idea of morphic resonance. Do you feel that has any validity?
ELIAS: As to your physical sciences and the subject of evolution, this being one area in which your sciences lag. I express to you, within the terms that you think of as evolution, within your Darwinian theory, it will remain theory; for in actuality, there is no evolution. I have stated previously, you did not appear upon the planet eating apples! You also did not appear upon the planet evolving from a fish. You also did not evolve as man through a series of related primates. Each expression of man has been an expression in physical manifestation of consciousness, in regard to the essence families and experimentation of physical manifestation. Each has been unique within itself, and is not preliminary to another. One does not precede another. You do not evolve through your history and your ages. Your Earth does not evolve in the manner that you think of.
You think in linear terms. You think in time frame elements. In this way, you create explanations for yourselves of what you create. You create ongoing, within every moment. It is a continuous process. You do not create an element which exists throughout millenniums. You create anew within every moment. Each expression of creature and man is created independent and in itself, holding its own integrity and its own expression.
You may view, through your archeologists, through your anthropologists, what you view to be early expressions of man which you then attribute to your evolutionary process, but this is incorrect. These expressions are individual to themselves, as experimentations within consciousness within physical manifestations, which you have expressed within certain time periods, within certain time elements; manifesting upon this planet and then discontinuing with that particular manifestation, as viewing a more efficient manifestation and creating an invention of that. Therefore, there is no sequence to be followed. Your physical manifestation, every molecule within your physical manifestation physically, is now as it was; for this prototype, so to speak, was agreed upon as efficient.
You, as you are aware presently, do not hold the same living cells that you held within your physical manifestation within your past seven years. You are entirely new. You are entirely different. Your consciousness is recreating within every moment; as through your history, as through your millenniums of this planet, you are creating every moment anew. You choose, within one focus, to temporarily be creating in like form; but I shall express to you, you physically do not appear the same identically as you did within your past ten years. You shall not appear the same physically within your coming ten years, for you continuously change the appearance of your manifestation. You attribute this to simple explanations of aging process, for this is what you know; but you offer yourselves physical evidence continuously that you are continuing to be creating within the moment; ever changing, never the same.
NORM: So if I wanted to live to be one hundred and fifty or two hundred years or a thousand years, I could do it if I wanted.
ELIAS: This is your choice. What prevents you from extension of your physical manifestation are your belief systems. You look to stories as myths of ancients. You explain to yourselves that individuals within these myths, living to ages of nine hundred years, viewed their calendar differently. You explain to yourselves that individuals did not truly ever live such lifetimes, for this is impossible. Therefore, you offer yourselves explanations with different time sequences; shorter years. I express to you, within the time period of experimentation of manifestations early, as you term this to be, within the essence families and those of the Seers, many, all, chose much greater time elements for manifestation.
This is also purposefully created though. You choose to not manifest at such great lengths within years, for it is unnecessary. You may gain experiences within a smaller time framework. You, within your development of your abilities, offer yourselves more in certain areas of stimulation and experience. Therefore, you view it to be unnecessary to be manifesting for much years.
You also presently manifest more counterparts. Therefore, your experience is also widened. This also you express in reasoning of non-manifestation for hundreds of years; although you may choose to be continuing within your manifestation physically, and you hold the ability to accomplish this.” [session 133, November 17, 1996]
NORM: “The Darwinian theory of the development from very simple organisms to very complicated organisms and adaptive systems concepts is felt today to be the reason why, for example, the human genome was eventually developed after the billions of years of this Earth life. However, if you were to statistically attempt to put this together in the appropriate order, it would be many, many, many times longer than the 4.5 billion years, would it not?
ELIAS: Quite. Your Darwinian theory, which it remains theory, is a somewhat logical assumption of your development upon your planet; although it is also quite incorrect, for you have not evolved in this manner. You have not mutated, and contrary to your scientific studies, you do not create and move within the process of natural selection.
I have stated previously that you have experimented throughout your ages with different forms of manifestations, and you have presently agreed upon this manifestation of form as being most efficient temporarily; for within what you view to be future, you may be altering of this to a degree also. This is not evolution!
Each manifestation is unique to itself. It did not evolve from another form. It was created uniquely, independently itself within your history, this being the history of what you know of with your planet; although in this also you know very little, for your planet has existed and not existed and existed once again many times; this being one ‘blink in’ of your planet within this dimension, within this universe, within your solar system and galaxy, and all those elements which you think you recognize!” [session 176, May 25, 1997]
DREW: “When you refer to creatures, does that include insects?
ELIAS: Yes.
RETA: Is the highest level of creature the development of the ape?
ELIAS: In which direction do you indicate highest?
RETA: Well, I’m just trying to divide the human essence focus from a creature. I know all creatures are beautiful and all creatures are wonderful, but I was wondering ... The most developed creature, I guess on the way to being as wonderful as we are, would be, I would have thought, the ape.
ELIAS: In actuality, although these creatures hold behavior patterns quite similar in some manners to yourselves, within what you are expressing and within consciousness, to your way of thinking of development, your sea mammals would be more aligned in this area.
RETA: Oh, yeah.
MJ: Like dolphins, for example?
ELIAS: And whales.” [session 179, Jiune 19, 1997]
ROBIN: “I was wondering if we could talk about dolphins and their connection with humans?
ELIAS: I shall state to you that you have created this species and one other species, of what you term to be your whales, your water mammals, quite interestingly. Now; I shall also state to you that these particular species have been created in a manner that the energy which is provided has been accepted by the species itself and has also been chosen to be moving into an area of almost paralleling essence. These creatures are not of their own essences, but they are the closest physical expression in like manner to the expressed focuses of essence. In this, they move within consciousness into an agreement of probabilities to be creating of essence in themselves. In this, let me express to you: all of these elements, all of these creatures, are manifestations of you, which are manifestations of essence. Any manifestation of essence, any element of essence, may express a desire to be fragmented, and in this action of fragmentation, this is creating of a new essence. To this point within your particular reality, these expressed elements of essence, your creations, do not express the desire to fragment within themselves, and continue within consciousness to be elements of your expressions, your creations. These particular manifestations move closely into the area of expressing this particular desire.
In this action, if they are choosing this futurely, these particular creatures shall become the first within your particular physical dimension to hold essence of themselves, and in this shall be creating entirely of their reality themselves, and you shall not be creating of their reality with them. They have already developed objectively much more than any of your other creations within this particular dimension.
This also is lent energy to by other dimensions which hold creatures that are focuses of your essences that bear resemblances to these creatures within your seas. Therefore, you also within your focuses of essence lend energy to their choice, and encouragement and acknowledgment of their creation of this particular desire.” [session 287, June 18, 1998]
RICHARD: “I guess I have a question about incarnations or parallel realities. Do humans experience focuses as other species, and specifically dolphins? ‘Cause I had an experience with a powerful hallucinogen at one time, that I was actually remembering of a time when we were all – or I and other people that I was with – dolphins. I mean, it sounds crazy!
But then as I’ve been reading about it, I heard about this tribe in South America, where you mentioned I had a previous focus. It’s an area where there are these pink dolphins that actually are said to be able to shift their body structure. It sounds crazy, but I’ll just throw it out there anyway! They change their appearance and come out of the water basically, and then go back. The tribe that lives there protects these dolphins. If anybody goes anywhere near them trying to harm them, they will kill them, and it’s out of love, not anger.
I’m just very intrigued by this particular species of dolphins. I’m just wondering, ‘cause I really had a close ... I mean, I had an experience where I thought I was breathing ... I mean, I was under the water in a hot tub for five minutes! So it was just because of my belief system, maybe, that I was not needing to breathe air anymore? (Pause) I guess that’s a question! (Laughing)
ELIAS: Very well. This ... you may not be discounting yourself in this in your questioning, and not holding fearfulness with myself that I shall view this as an inconsequential question, for in actuality, this is an interesting question.
Early within the onset of these sessions, I offered information to this particular species, and that species which you term to be whales in this physical dimension. I have expressed that creatures within this dimension do not hold essence, but are created by you, which IS essence, although they are consciousness. But I have also expressed previously that these two particular species of creature within this dimension have moved into an area of assuming essence.
Now; at the time framework that I was discussing this physically with individuals previously, this action had not yet occurred, but was very close, as I was expressing. Within this present now, this is accomplished, that these particular creatures are also an expression of essence, and choosing to be manifest within this dimension NOT in the physical form of your species.
Now; as to the addressment of these particular creatures in this area of South America and your myths surrounding these creatures, these are not myths, they are not stories, and they are not what you term to be imagination.
In the experimentation of manipulating consciousness to be creating of essence, these particular creatures engage the action altering form, allowing the connection of the physical manifestation of essence within this dimension to be holding an accurate understanding and empathic sense of your species and to be creating of a connection physically, a knowing, but also recognizing that the choice is not to be manifest as essence in the form of your species, but to be manifest in this other species.
Now; within this present now, all of the species of this particular creature – dolphins, and also your whales – are manifestations of essence, unlike all of your other creations of creatures within this dimension.
This opens the window for much misunderstanding. Therefore, I shall clarify, for this is not to say that your creatures are lesser than you. They are different, for they are a creation of you. They are not essence. They are your creations, but they also are, in a manner of speaking, a part of you, just as your finger is not your entire body, but it is an element of you. Your dogs or your elephants are an extension of you. They are a creation of yours. Your dolphins and your whales are not. They are their own expression. They are their own essences.
RICHARD: And now, they’re creating their own realities.
ELIAS: Correct.
RICHARD: So then that has come about recently and will be a notable, dramatic change.
ELIAS: Correct.
In this, you have allowed yourself a similar experience in allowing yourself to empathically experience these other manifestations of essence, allowing yourself the experience of the dolphin in like manner to those particular dolphins which have offered themselves the experience of your species.
RICHARD: But when they did that, that experience, that was before they were essence. Wouldn’t that be a creation of our consciousness at that time, that caused them to take on a human form?
ELIAS: No! This has been their choice as consciousness, moving in the direction of creating essence for themselves within consciousness.
In that, they have created their experimentation with form within this dimension. This was an element of their choice, to experiment in their exploration of whether they shall participate within this dimension in similar form to you, or continue to manifest within the form they have chosen but incorporating essence. Therefore, there has been a time framework of experimentation of shifting shape.
Now; within this present now, this continues, but not for the same reason. This continues occasionally as a playful act, for they hold the knowing – unlike yourselves – objectively that they hold the ability to shift shape.
You also hold the ability to be creating this, but you do not offer yourselves the objective knowing of this. Therefore, you do not manifest this.
RICHARD: How? How do we do it?
ELIAS: Ha ha! (Grinning, and laughter)
You allow yourselves to become more familiar with you and your own consciousness, and you allow yourselves to begin to accept and trust – genuinely trust – yourselves, and in this you also open to more of your own communication of essence, and as you allow more of your own communication, you also open yourself to more of your own abilities.
I have expressed from the onset of these sessions, there is no thing that you may not accomplish within physical focus! It is merely your belief systems and your lack of trust within yourselves that prevent you from accomplishing and limit your abilities. Within this very present now, if you are choosing to be moving your physical form through objects of physical matter, you may. It is your choice, but you do not believe this!” [session 346, December 09, 1998]
MIKE: “This thing with the dolphins and whales, I read about it and I’m finding it quite interesting, and I was curious, now that they hold essence, can we as essence hold focuses as that species?
ELIAS: If you are so choosing, yes.
MIKE: So if I wanted to, instead of this being my final focus, I can manifest as a dolphin or a whale?
ELIAS: Yes.
MIKE: Okay. And also I was wondering, in conjunction with that, there are parks that trap these creatures for commercial reasons, such as Sea World and stuff, and I was wondering, are those kinds of parks going to be continuing on with their keeping of these animals, or is something going to happen where these animals are going to be set free, or what?
ELIAS: Within your present probabilities and your creations, this practice shall be most probably, in probabilities, continuing. This is no different of an expression than these similar types of actions that you have engaged within your own species, in caging each other and in subjecting each other to your judgments and your beliefs, and engaging activities as usage with each other as beasts of burden.
There is no difference in the expressions. You choose to be engaging these types of actions for experiences, and the experience is chosen also within the expression of these essences that manifest into these creatures.
MIKE: Okay. As a choice of that specific species, are they influenced ... are they gonna be holding the same choices, in a manner of speaking, as we do, of incorporating belief systems and being affected by our belief systems, or are they gonna incorporate their own and just be affected by their own beliefs?
ELIAS: I express to you, Mikah [Michael], that this is quite astute, and a very good question.
I shall express to you that the beliefs shall be influencing and shall be being incorporated, although let me also express to you that this species – or these manifestations that you term to be this species – now incorporating essence, engages this action of essence within the middle of the expression of the accomplishment of your shift in consciousness.
Now; look to your very small ones within your species, as they are lessening their hold upon these belief systems already, and are already exhibiting qualities of less affiliation and alignment with these established belief systems.
As these essences are incorporating into this shift in consciousness, there is the expression of the acceptance of belief systems. Therefore, the interaction of the belief systems is different.
This be one of the reasons that it matters not that the practice of your aquariums that house some of these creatures – that species or those species – may not discontinue, for it matters not. It is merely a choice of experience, and the belief is not affecting.
MIKE: So, are they going to be exhibiting ... because I know for a long time, scientists have always marveled at their intelligence and whatsuch, but are they going to be exhibiting more qualities that are more of what our scientists term to be more logical and more human?
ELIAS: Not necessarily. They are their own species. Why shall they incorporate actions more similar to your own? You are a different species. You hold different expressions.” [session 388, April 27, 1999]
MIKE: “This whole thing with the dolphins and the whales and their choice to be assuming essence, I’ve been trying to comprehend this within simultaneous time. Does that mean now that every whale and dolphin that we now view as pastly contains essence, or just from the point in linear terms that they chose the experience and forward?
ELIAS: Both.
MIKE: Both? So now, all the ones that we viewed pastly?
ELIAS: Within linear time framework, no. Outside of your linear time framework, yes.
MIKE: Okay. Alright, so basically, just from a point in linear terms, just from a point that they chose and forward?
ELIAS: Within linear terms, within your physical dimension. Outside of linear terms, within simultaneous time and consciousness, it would incorporate all.” [session 398, May 18, 1999]
LORRAINE: “Now I’d like to ask you a little bit about animals. I know that you know that I’m kind of an animal person.
I had a dog recently who passed away, who disengaged on September 10, and I guess I don’t really understand exactly what happens with animals. Does the same thing happen to an animal when it disengages, as a person? Does it go into transition?
I read a book once called “Always, Karen,” and she told her mother after she passed on that one of the things she did on the other side was to help animals pass over. Does that really happen? Do animals need to be helped during the transition period, and if so, was there somebody there for Caesar, helping him to transition?
ELIAS: Let me express to you:
Within the action of what is created with creatures, your creatures do not hold belief systems. Therefore, it is unnecessary for them, within the action of disengagement, to be entering into an action of transition. There is no need for transitioning with creatures, for they need not be shedding belief systems, for they do not hold belief systems within physical focus.
The action of transition is quite purposeful. This action is to be shedding the belief systems which are associated with any particular physical dimension, for within areas of consciousness that are removed from physical dimensions, belief systems are unnecessary.
LORRAINE: So there are areas of consciousness where there are no belief systems, no beliefs at all?
ELIAS: Correct. Belief systems are relative to physical dimensions. But within physical dimensions, there are elements of consciousness which are created, such as your creatures, that do not involve themselves in the alignment with or the participation with belief systems, for it is unnecessary in conjunction with their existence, so to speak.
Therefore, as a creature chooses to be disengaging physical focus, it does not enter the action of transition. In this, the creature, as an element of consciousness, chooses in the moment of disengagement how it shall continue to explore consciousness.
Now; creatures are not essence. I am aware that this may be distressing to you, but let me explain.
LORRAINE: So there’s consciousness that’s not essence.
ELIAS: Yes. In this, within consciousness, there are elements of consciousness that choose to be forming a personality essence. This is an energy configuration of consciousness that creates a specific design, so to speak, of consciousness, and these are termed essences.
Now; I am understanding that this concept is quite difficult within physical understanding, for there is no separation in actuality, but your language is limiting, and therefore it creates difficulties in explanations.
There is no separation within consciousness. Consciousness is consciousness. But there are elements of consciousness that designate themselves, in a manner of speaking, as individual personality essences. These are expressions of consciousness.
LORRAINE: Once they have done that, do they always remain that? Or can they choose not to ... in other words, go back and not be one of those, and be a cat or a dog at some point? Once you’re an essence, are you always essence after that? I guess that’s my question.
ELIAS: I shall express to you that as an essence is created, it does not uncreate itself as essence, although I shall also express to you, this is not an absolute. It is not a situation that it is impossible for this action to occur, but the action occurs quite purposefully in the exploration of becoming.
It is an avenue of consciousness in the exploration of becoming. Therefore, it is unnecessary to be uncreating itself as essence.
LORRAINE: Okay, so once we have this consciousness that’s become essence, is there ... let me think. The consciousness that’s not essence, that you say are creatures, they’re not from consciousness that is essence. So let’s say the consciousness that is creatures, does that consciousness at some point ... or can that consciousness then decide that it wants to pursue this other avenue of essence?
ELIAS: Yes, and in actuality....
LORRAINE: So, my essence could have been a cat. It could have been consciousness at some point that was creatures or whatever, that was doing something else and then pursued this avenue and now is essence, you’re saying? It’s very confusing!
ELIAS: Hypothetically speaking, this is possible, although this is not the situation that has been created.
There are a group of creatures within this particular dimension that have chosen to become essences, which I have expressed previously within recent time framework. Those of your water mammals, your whales and dolphins, these creatures have chosen to be creating of essence within consciousness.
As to the creation of other creatures within this particular dimension, they are creations of yours.
As essence, you manipulate energy within consciousness to be creating of all of the physical elements which are, in your terms, within existence within your physical universe. Therefore, you have also created your creatures.
Now; be understanding, once created, they subsequently hold their own choices. You do not create their reality for them. You merely have created the design and inserted that design into your physical reality.
Now; in this, as these creatures are not essences, they do not hold belief systems. They participate in reality in conjunction with you, and participate in actions in conjunction with your belief systems. Therefore, your belief systems are affecting of them, but they themselves do not hold and align with your belief systems.
Therefore, as they choose to be disengaging – for they also choose this action, just as you choose – what occurs within that moment is the creation of another choice, and in that choice, they may choose to reconfigure the energy of their consciousness to be remanifesting within this dimension if they are so choosing, or they may choose to be reconfiguring the energy of consciousness and participate within another physical dimension in a very different manner, or they may choose to be reconfiguring their energy and creating of any other element within physical dimensions, or to not be manifesting within physical dimensions at all.” [session 485, October 16, 1999]
BOBBI: “I have actually several questions here about dolphins and whales. You had said a while ago that they had made a decision to become essence.
ELIAS: Correct.
BOBBI: This raises a lot of questions in my mind then. If they are essence now, does that mean that we, as essence, can have a focus as a dolphin or a whale? (Pause)
ELIAS: If you are so choosing.
BOBBI: Okay. They are on this planet ... but are they part of this dimension? Is their experience as essence, in that capacity of being a whale, would that be considered part of this dimension?
ELIAS: Yes.
BOBBI: So their experiences are based on emotion and sexual orientation also?
ELIAS: Yes.
BOBBI: Oh, really! I also have questions about when that change occurred, from a group of consciousness to essence. Were new essences formed in that action, or were essences waiting there for that decision and they sort of stepped in, or how did that occur?
ELIAS: New essences have been formed; yes, you are correct.
BOBBI: Oh, really! So that would be a way that essence is created?
ELIAS: Within the action of fragmentation and the development, in a manner of speaking ... this is, of course, figuratively speaking, in relation to nonphysical aspects of consciousness and their translation into an explanation presently.
(Slowly) As essences merge, the element that may be fragmented is an element which desires to be fragmented, holding specific qualities of those essences which it is fragmented of.
Now; be remembering that each new essence, in a manner of speaking, holds all of the qualities of the fragmenting essence, but also creates a type of emphasis upon certain qualities that it chooses to be exploring.
(Slowly) And as essence is consciousness and consciousness is essence, those qualities of essence which are consciousness – which create the manifestations in your physical dimension of these particular creatures – have chosen to be fragmented into their own expression of essence.
Be remembering also, I have expressed to you, your creatures are a creation of you. They are consciousness; they are also a creation of you. They are not essence in themselves. They are a manifestation of you as essence; a projection of consciousness that is designated to specific functions and forms within your physical dimension. But as not essence in themselves, they also do not necessarily align with or manifest the base qualities of this particular physical reality and dimension as you as essence have designed it.
Therefore, a tree does not necessarily manifest its reality incorporating the base elements of expression of emotion and sexuality. YOU identify the tree through elements of sexuality and emotion, but the tree does not necessarily identify itself in this manner, for it is a creation of yours. But it is also an expression of consciousness, and in this, the qualities of that tree in consciousness are held by you as essence.
Now; in the choice of certain expressed qualities of essence, those being the qualities of consciousness that move together and create the physical manifestations of those creatures which you identify as dolphins and whales ... have expressed the desire to be creating new essences, holding those qualities of essence as their particular direction of attention, in a manner of speaking.
And in this, through the mergence of essences, there is an action of fragmentation which occurs, which has thusly created new expressions of essence which are already manifest within your physical dimension as these expressions of dolphins and whales.
BOBBI: I understand. I see what you’re saying. Do I have a focus as a dolphin or a whale? (Pause)
ELIAS: Within this present now, no. But I shall express to you also that within the qualities expressed, in another manner of speaking, yes. For you within your essence do not focus a manifestation of your essence as a dolphin or a whale, but through fragmentation, an aspect of your essence – which combines, in a manner of speaking, with other essences to be creating of a new essence – does focus as both.
BOBBI: Thanks. That’s interesting!” [session 556, February 09, 2000]
PAUL: “... I had an impression a while ago, a week or so ago, and I wanted to ask you, from your perspective, every interaction that you and I have had, whether it’s in a group or privately, from your perspective is a simultaneity. (Elias nods) And that’s so cool. And it leads into some other questions I want to ask about today.
And so for me it’s been a year [since we last spoke in person], and a lot has happened in my experience, in my creation, in my focus of attention, and yet here we are a year later (Elias nods throughout), and I just know in some sense from your focus of attention that it’s, it’s, this is all going on at the same time, and it has a serious impact on the information that you give out at any given time in some way that I don’t pretend to understand yet.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: Wow. (Elias laughs) That’s just interesting.
ELIAS: But I am also aware of your sequence of moments and your linear time framework, or your perception of linear time, which generates an actual reality.
PAUL: Right. Right. I’m wrestling with understanding these different levels of consciousness and I want to talk about that today a little bit and see what we come up with.
ELIAS: Very well. (Smiling)
PAUL: I guess in general it’s a continuation of our dream mission discussions. (4) So I wanted to start with some theory and just put that out on the table and get your reaction to it and see where it’s close or not and get your comments on it. But I wanted to – I brought a little map with me today, I talked to Mary about that, I want to refer to that too (Elias nods) – so I’m just talking about a map and a matrix, trying to get a very general, very, very simple, general overview of this matrix, I just wanted to say some things about that matrix and that. (5)
I want to use Seth’s levels of consciousness, what he calls the outer ego, the subconscious, and the inner ego as three distinct, nested, not really separate, parts of the spectrum of consciousness, as it relates to me at least.
ELIAS: Very well.
PAUL: And another part of that is to put your concepts of objective and subjective right next to that. It maps to that, but you just have two, where Seth uses the three. But you admit and talk about a mediating or translation layer that we’ve talked about between deep subjectivity and the objective physical. So there is sort of a third thing implied in your objective and subjective terminology.
ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, yes.
PAUL: Yes. And this ‘manner of speaking’ I want to explore, is what I’m trying to get at. Another part of this matrix is looking at our physiology, what a beautiful thing it is, and the design, and that there are basically, again, three major states of the focus of attention, which we could characterize as waking, dreaming, and sleeping (Elias nods), that kind of maps to this objective/subjective and Seth’s three-part also, okay. (6)
ELIAS: Very well. I am understanding.
PAUL: I’m just putting this out there as a matrix to try and talk about. And then there’s just a fourth sort of column to discuss too, which takes a look at the focus of attention in time as it develops in time. And, while it’s all simultaneous, we acknowledge that this outer ego, this waking level, linear time level, there is a sequence. We have a sapling that goes to – an acorn to a sapling to a tree reality that we’re creating here.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: And within that, what I just call ‘change-in-time’ now, instead of evolution – you call it becoming (Elias nods), this change in time sequence – we have, you’ve described alternate selves. And others, researchers, whatever, talked about subpersonalities or multiple intelligences, which I think map to what you call alternate selves. (Elias nods) And just as an example of those: we have an emotional self, we have a linguistic intelligence or subpersonality – and I know I’m splitting hairs in a way that may or may not agree with your perspective and I want to hear you comment on that – but we have mathematical skills, we have the musical skill, we have inner senses in a broad canvas, of how far we develop our inner senses during that change-in-time period and whatnot. (7) So that’s just an overview of this matrix that we’re looking at and exploring.
I guess I’ll just let you comment on that overview in terms of its accuracy and am I getting it right, closer, accurate? (Elias chuckles) Am I distorting it, and what distortions do you see in that view?
ELIAS: (Pause) Not necessarily. You are, in your terms, developing your individual philosophy, so to speak.
PAUL: And a roadmap, a roadmap of the psyche, shall we say. (8)
ELIAS: Correct, which I am understanding. I may express to you that some of what you are expressing are intertwined and are not necessarily what may be viewed as a separate column, so to speak.
PAUL: Yes, and thank you for reminding me. That’s an absolutely inherent part of the matrix is that it’s holistically nested, so there’s no separation, just as my body is made up of atoms, molecules, organs, we can assign a separateness to them and look at them in terms of a veil of some kind, a boundary of some kind, and yet, they exist within a whole; there is no separation between any of these columns.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: Thank you for reminding me and pointing that out. (Both laugh) That’s a very important part of it.
ELIAS: Correct. For within your physical reality, it is easily associated with separation, and therefore may become distorted in your recognition of these different qualities and expressions, but also separating them in inaccurate manners. For those such as you have described as your evaluating self, your communicating self, your emotional self, these are all expressions that lie within the objective and subjective awarenesses or expressions, and therefore are not separated from them, but are expressions of them.
PAUL: So in that sense, just to use Seth’s model, this outer ego/subconscious/inner ego structure has all of these streams – this communicating self, mathematical self, kinesthetic body movement athletic ability self – that covers all of these, they’re all – in other words, it’s not just a function of the waking, outer ego, physical body, it’s really supported by this whole nested structure that’s invisible; there’s invisible aspects that we’re trying to discern and understand, in my terms.
ELIAS: Correct, which are the qualities and the expressions, which are those that you term to be invisible. Expressions that are unseen in a physical sense, but are quite real and quite present and expressed.
PAUL: And affecting, influencing this change-in-time sequence that we all go through.
ELIAS: Correct. Quite correct. In this, I may express to you a similarity, although you are correct that I have offered two identifications as opposed to the three, but in other terms it may be viewed as three in a connected sense.
PAUL: Mmhm. Sure.
ELIAS: For there’s an incorporation of different terms, but the meaning is basically the same.
PAUL: We’re talking about the same spectrum of consciousness, whether we say it’s a 100 degrees in Centigrade or 212 degrees in Fahrenheit, it doesn’t matter.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: It does matter, but we need to be aware of those distinctions, because we can distort things if we get too locked into the terminology.
ELIAS: Yes, the terminology may be different, but it matters not.
PAUL: It’s covering the same spectrum. (9)
ELIAS: Yes. In this, I may express to you that there may be an identification of the objective awareness, the subjective awareness, and what you term to be in between, or the subconscious. In this, you may be identifying the action of communication, which, in your terms, within your translation of thought, translates into the link between the two, of the objective and the subjective.
PAUL: Right. So, just, if I didn’t state it earlier, I’ll state it again then. In this Seth model of the subconscious, that’s a mediating layer, a layer of translation between two very distinct – I get cloudy, it’s not separated – but there are distinct regions of consciousness, I’m not sure if that contradicts your Regional Area terminology…?
ELIAS: I am understanding what you are expressing. Once again, we may be incorporating different terminology, but I am understanding. You are expressing quite similar to what I am expressing. They are different expressions of yourself as consciousness. One is objective. One is subjective. One is abstract. One is not. They move in harmony; therefore, they are generating the same action, but in different expressions, for their function is different.
The subjective awareness is not abstract. The subjective awareness is quite literal. The objective awareness is quite abstract, and allows for your expression of creativity in physical manifestations. And the avenues of communication are the between, the link, of these two awarenesses, which generates them as not separated and continuously connected. (10)
As you offered within another example of your waking state, your dreaming state, and your sleeping state, this is also quite similar, for the dreaming state is in actuality an allowance of the individual to be incorporating the action of the subjective and also engaging the objective awareness in the capacity of a translating tool, and therefore you generate imagery.
PAUL: Mmhm. Now just a question, a tangential question, perhaps. Seth provided information of ‘before the beginning,’ in the beginning, I just call it a conscious creation myth, which is his abstract attempt to tell something that’s non-sequential in sequential terms. (Elias nods throughout) You’ve talked about Dream Walkers; he talks about Sleepwalkers. And there’s a bunch of concepts I just have to juggle and get right here, so. This subconscious translating layer that you were just talking about – the avenues of communication – in the beginning, before the beginning, maybe, somewhere in that time, that layer of consciousness was primary because the waking outer ego had not emerged. Is that an accurate statement in terms of our linear history in this dimension?
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: So therefore this, of course, this inner ego – what we’re calling that [deep, dreamless] sleeping area of consciousness – is fundamental and primary and what we would say causal, in terms of source? (Pause) I know I’m juggling concepts here into linear time. I know it’s causal, so I know the answer to that question, but I’m not expressing it the right way.
So let me try and rephrase where I’m coming from. (Elias nods) I’m talking about change-in-time, I’m talking about this dimension, and it’s, you know, however many billions of years old in this, what you call, blink …
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: …blink in, blink out (11) – and I want to try and get back to that too, so I’ve ramped up to a big level now, but we’ll see what happens. (Elias smiles, and nods throughout) In terms of this blink and our change-in-time – according to Seth, he does give an order of emergence to, let’s just call it what we call the outer ego, because this lamp (points to lamp) has an outer ego also in the same way, it’s not essence, but in terms of consciousness, this basic three-part structure works for all things physical, correct?
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: Okay. Cool. (Elias chuckles) Maybe I’ll get this one of these days! Anyway, so in terms of – and I know it’s hard to think in linear terms, and I’m kind of on a hamster wheel, but I’ll see how far we go with it. (Elias nods and smiles) In terms of change-in-time or evolution or becoming, Seth says that – and it makes sense – that parts of the biosphere [i.e., basic cellular life forms] would emerge first to generate a stable environment that allows for this. And then ‘higher’ forms of life – bacteria, moving things, fish, early forms of life – would emerge also. Now, back to my opening question about you and this simultaneity – all of these things exist at the same time.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: And I have in this conceptualization that I’m trying to translate accurately, I keep getting a sense that as things emerge into time, it’s all together, it’s all right there, and yet little pieces – there is an order of play. (Elias nods) You’ve given sequence of the Dream Walkers with their intents regarding the shift, things like that, so you’re on the record with showing change-in-time, even from this subjective area. (12)
ELIAS: Correct. Do not discount the element of time within your physical dimension, for, let me express to you, without the interplay of time, there is no physical matter. Therefore, to generate a physical reality, a physical dimension, you must be incorporating some type of configuration of time – not necessarily linear, and not necessarily in the manner in that you configure time in this physical dimension – but, also, remember that this particular physical dimension is one of the most complex and diverse physical realities that exists within consciousness. Therefore, you also incorporate a complex expression of time …
PAUL: Right.
ELIAS: …to generate all of the physical manifestations that you do within this physical reality.
PAUL: Right. And so part of this time framework, as it manifests, as it emerges from – let’s just call it the singularity of the blink out before the blink in process – as it emerges, there’s an order of play of emergence.
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: And so these belief systems that we have in evolution, even though there’s some that are very distorted, and pathologically so, with a very negative effect in cultural terms, (Elias nods) there’s still a grain, a gem, of truth to this flow in time and the emergence of life in this dimension; it has to be that way.
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: It doesn’t just poof in, in other words.
ELIAS: Correct. In this, view your arts, which are in a manner of speaking a creative mirror of the design of your physical dimension. Now; in composition of musical expressions, what do you express first?
PAUL: There’s a whole different, many ways of doing that, but for me personally I would get an idea, a seed.
ELIAS: And your idea incorporates what initially?
PAUL: A communication?
ELIAS: A melody.
PAUL: Okay. All right.
ELIAS: You begin with a melody, which is your subject. And you build around that subject, that central point, with your harmonies and your disharmonies and you create the background, so to speak, subsequent to the initial melody. Now; within your art of painting, what do you create first?
PAUL: I’m not a painter, but the background, the base layer, some base layer that you start to build upon.
ELIAS: Correct. You insert your central subject matter. Now; these two actions may be seemingly different, but in actuality their sequence may be somewhat different, but they are actually very similar. The subject in both compositions is the initial point, but what is expressed in the execution in one is the subject first, and in one is the background first.
Now; in association with the design of your physical reality, both are in play simultaneously in association with the Dream Walkers. The Dream Walkers are the subject, and exist, but are not physically manifest. The background is being created in association with the design of the reality. Both are in play, so to speak, simultaneously, but what you view in what you associate as your evolution, or your sequence of events is the development of the background first, and the insertion of the main subject subsequent, which is your species.
PAUL: Right. Good analogy.
ELIAS: But your species was in play while the background was being developed, in your terms, but not necessarily entirely physically solidly manifest as you view yourselves now.
PAUL: So in terms of this matrix, we would say that this inner ego was existing previously, and there, (Elias nods) fully waiting and working along with everything consciously….
ELIAS: Not waiting. Actively participating in designing the background, and designing the physical manifestations of your world, and experimenting with different types of physical manifestations. And in that experimentation, exploring the possibilities of physical manifestations and manipulating energy in a manner in association with time to be creating different types of physical expressions in what you term to be living and non-living. And in that experimentation, allowing for a tremendous freedom in creativity, and in keeping with your associations which have, in your terms, carried through your history, generating a fascination with large manifestations, but also recognizing that large manifestations are not always as efficient.
PAUL: Are you referring to the dinosaurs?
ELIAS: In part.
PAUL: In part. Yeah, huge, huge creatures, a lot of food, a lot of processing, the whole ecosystem.
ELIAS: Which generated quite an excitement in association with the Dream Walkers in manipulation of energy of consciousness to generate enormous physical manifestations within your physical dimension.
PAUL: So the Dream Walker layer, which I’ll just say is inner ego, or ‘below’ [i.e., wider], perhaps even, is intimately primary in creating all of this.
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: So essence, what you call essence, this personality tone within consciousness, all of consciousness, is instrumental, absolutely primary and causal in that sense of its primacy.
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: It causes, and that’s just an amazing thing to remember.
ELIAS: It creates.
PAUL: Wow. (Elias chuckles) Thank you for that, by the way, that’s helpful. A couple of related questions, then, just to bring me back from billion year stretches. (Elias laughs) So we’ve had this emergent, living, lovely thing – planet Earth – going through all of its wondrous, horrific, violent, lovely, glorious, creative change.
And before the outer ego – I mean, an outer ego emerged in terms of mountains or oceans as they solidified in time and they are physical and they’re working as physical matter, and building. (Elias nods throughout) So those outer egos emerge first – so Seth is accurate in his order of play, so to speak – and then flora and fauna, perhaps – and I can check back to the actual words, I don’t remember it at the moment – emerges, solidifies, and that builds.
And that allows other emergent qualities, of which eventually, in linear terms, mammals emerge from life forms. So, and this is again, it’s a paradox in linear terms, because it’s not like the first homo sapiens of our species just blinked in, it’s part of the singularity that emerges through all these – all of the stages are in me right now.
ELIAS: Correct! (13)
PAUL: All of those – the reptilian, the mammal, the plants – all of those things in this singularity are somehow in me in this body.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: Nested somehow, inherently allowing me to be me in this moment, without which I couldn’t exist.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: So there’s a sacred bond with this emergent quality to be aware of, and to….
ELIAS: For it is all you.
PAUL: For it is all us. (14) (Laughs)
I might believe that one of these days! (Elias laughs) But I’m getting there, I’m getting there, and I thank you.
ELIAS: Allow yourself imaginatively to visualize the scenario in association with yourself and in association with what you think of as this grand picture of the Dream Walkers. And in this, the action is the same. It is a desire of exploration and in that exploration to create.
Now; in association with the Dream Walkers, it is an experimentation of different types of forms, and an experimentation of emergence into more and more efficient forms that allow for the type of exploration that is expressed in desire in association with this physical dimension, and in this process, so to speak, also creating the blueprint of the reality.
PAUL: And Source Events are right there along with that?
ELIAS: Yes. And in this, creating your map of your design of this reality. (15)
Now; in your physical reality in this present now, you generate similar actions. You seek out physical locations upon your planet in which you shall dwell that are compatible, so to speak, with your energy signature – certain landscapes, certain types of climates, certain types of plants, certain creatures that you surround yourself with – and in this, you associate these different environments with different areas of your planet. In actuality, you move yourself to physical locations and in those physical locations you generate the type of environment that is resonating with your energy signature. But you designate in collectiveness different areas of your physical planet to be associated with different types of creations.
You do not incorporate in this physical location in which you dwell presently, you do not create kangaroos. You create deer. You create specific types of birds and bears and coyotes and rabbits and specific plants. In a different location of your planet you create marsupials, quite unusual creatures. In other areas of your planet you create tremendously lush plants, your rain forests, your jungles, and you also create treacherous creatures. All of which are expressions of your explorations and your choices in creating the environment that you desire and which allows you your most efficient manner of exploring what you choose to explore in any particular focus.
PAUL: Mmhm. That made perfect sense. Thank you for that. Just a couple of questions about this emergence, it’s just a historical interest of mine. So, early humans, in terms of the Dream Walker manifestation, there were forms in which this outer ego had not yet emerged, correct?
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: So, as an emergent quality of the entire environment, this was a necessary stage. I would not be here now without that sequence happening, correct? Of an early human without an ego – not to say – okay, it’s possible, anything is possible. (Laughs)
ELIAS: Not necessarily. This is the choice that has been engaged in experimentation.
PAUL: And again, that brings me back to this inner ego level as causal, (Elias nods throughout) as making these choices, and driving this thing somehow, in a way.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: Which is very important to remember. So early humans, then, there was great experimentation in form and so on and so forth, and at some point this outer ego emerges, so sexual reproduction was already happening before this outer ego…
ELIAS: Correct…
PAUL: …occurred, it had to.
ELIAS: …for the design of your physical reality was already being processed.
PAUL: So, wow. So there is a grain of truth to the evolutionary belief systems of this sort of plant form into a fish into a land-based creature, you know, into then mammals, dinosaurs, and then humanoids. They did evolve from – there’s linear and then there’s non-linear too – so that’s what is the toughest thing to reconcile.
ELIAS: I am understanding.
PAUL: (Laughing) I know YOU understand! I don’t! (Elias laughs) And I’m trying to, and I appreciate your patience!
ELIAS: This is an experimentation with the design of your physical dimension. What is the design of your physical dimension?
PAUL: You’re asking me? (Elias nods) Oh, I know that. Give me another leading question. I’m not, you mean….
ELIAS: What are the base elements of your physical reality?
PAUL: Oh. You’re talking about sexuality and emotion?
ELIAS: Correct! Which are what?
PAUL: A lot of fun and a lot of challenge.
ELIAS: What are they?
PAUL: I’m being humorous. Um, characteristics of consciousness.
ELIAS: They are the expressions of physical manifestation and communication. These are the base elements of your physical dimension, your physical reality, these two base expressions.
PAUL: I see.
ELIAS: Physical manifestation and communication.
PAUL: Right, right, right. I get it.
ELIAS: Now; in this, there is great experimentation with both of these base elements, and in this process there is a development in the design of this physical reality, the blueprint of this physical reality, as duality, which is not to be confused with duplicity. (16) This physical reality incorporates in its blueprint a duality.
Therefore, all that you create within this physical reality incorporates two aspects, two expressions, which is what you develop in your beliefs in relation to opposites…
PAUL: Mmhm. Duality.
ELIAS: …which in actuality they are not genuinely opposites, but this is a contributing factor, so to speak, to that belief.
In this, as you generate this physical reality, it appears – for you do incorporate linear time as an aspect of your physical reality – that there is a development in an evolutionary fashion. And I am not expressing that this is incorrect, for this is a manifestation of your perceptions, which is quite real.
PAUL: Mmhm. Of the outer ego, shall we say.
ELIAS: Correct. Correct. Therefore, the objective physical manifestations is a sequence of developments, but it is also not necessarily that one manifestation develops into another manifestation.
PAUL: Right.
ELIAS: For it is a continual experimentation of the subjective manipulating links of consciousness in association with time to create different manifestations in physical matter.
PAUL: And did you just describe what might have been called natural selection? And I know that’s a very distorted belief system. (17)
ELIAS: In a manner of speaking.
PAUL: The way you just said it, that sentence before I asked my question – and I’ll check the tape – that integrates this inner ego/subconscious/outer ego chain of causality…
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: …into what we would call natural selection in terms of emergence through time.
ELIAS: Quite!
PAUL: That is so cool!
ELIAS: For it is a continual experimentation of manipulating energy, which is consciousness, in different manners, and thusly, in your terms, selecting the preferred and the efficient. (18)
PAUL: Right, right. What a dance, what a magnificent dance.
ELIAS: Which the preferred IS the efficient.
PAUL: Mmhm. I just get a very beautiful feeling about this process – the tension and resolution and tension, when those resolution cycles, it’s just beautiful, and the tension – and it’s this dance that we dance and it’s a beautiful thing.
So just back to this evolutionary change-in-time idea. Human societies, then, as these outer egos emerged and manipulation in this environment settled down and personality could emerge (Elias nods throughout) – you do distinguish that focuses of essence have emotions, but animals do not have emotions, plants do not have emotions, rocks do not have emotions, they have something.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: They have a feeling tone, and they have an outer ego.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: But that emergent quality has to get to this….
ELIAS: What is emotion?
PAUL: Feeling, sensation.
ELIAS: No. (Pause) Emotion is communication.
PAUL: Ah! (Laughs) I knew that!
ELIAS: That is your in between that you are discussing.
PAUL: Right, right, the mediating [layer or subconscious]….
ELIAS: Emotion is the link; it is a communication avenue between the subjective awareness and the objective awareness.
PAUL: And that’s why….
ELIAS: And it generates a signal, a feeling.
Now; in this, plants and creatures do not incorporate emotion, for it is unnecessary. They do not incorporate the translating mechanism that you incorporate of thought. Therefore, it is unnecessary to be incorporating this type of communication. They do not incorporate impressions or emotion…
PAUL: They do have impulses?
ELIAS: …or imagination. These are three avenues of communication that you incorporate, but they do not, for it is unnecessary. In association with a creature, they do not incorporate belief systems, and therefore they do not incorporate the belief of separation, and therefore they do not manifest the separation of objective and subjective awarenesses. Therefore, there is no necessity for emotion, for emotion is not a reaction, it is not a response, it is not a feeling – it generates a signal of a feeling to alert your attention.
Now; in this, I am not expressing and have not expressed previously that creatures do not express and you interpret their expressions as emotions. But they are not necessarily emotions. There is merely no separation between the objective and subjective awarenesses of a creature or a plant, and therefore it freely expresses what you incorporate as, shall we say, an extra step.
PAUL: From that I wanted to ask about whales and dolphins. (Elias nods throughout) This is a very intriguing part of your information and this emergent quality of consciousness and time. So we have in my lifetime, according to your information, say five, six years, and previous to that the whales and dolphins on this planet did not incorporate essence.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: Now they did have an outer ego structure in their perception, but they did not have emotion then according to what you just said.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: So that avenue of communication was not active. (Elias nods throughout) There’s something in this Dream Walker layer, inner ego layer, in its creativity and manipulation that – and the efficiency and the balance – that senses this population of form is emergent, it’s getting ready to take that next step, so to speak, and so this avenue of communication suddenly – emotion – arises in their consciousness. Is that accurate?
ELIAS: Yes, and you, in your terms within your lifetime, have allowed yourself to witness what you may term to be the evolution of consciousness…
PAUL: Yeah!
ELIAS: …in choices and in that experimentation in what you term to be development. For these creatures incorporated communication – not emotional communication inwardly, prior to the choice to be incorporated as essence – but developing, in your terms, in choices to begin expressing a type of communication in association with objective awareness, developing a communication between each other objectively.
PAUL: Now when this population hit a critical threshold for this emergence in its tension to manifest hit – what we’ll just call critical mass – was is it a simultaneity in an instant (snaps fingers!), or was it this mass is achieved in a non-, this non-physical, causal area, and so in time, in terms of linear time and sequence, it kind of sprinkles through the populations. Because you have adults, children, through all different developmental cycles in the moment point, in the now, when this threshold is reached, so it’s affecting the pregnant ones, the unborn ones, the young ones, the adolescents, the adults. So how did that…?
ELIAS: All.
PAUL: Was it a simultaneity? (Snaps fingers!)
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: It was just a (snaps fingers!), within terms of time, it was a (snaps fingers!) poof.
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: And backing up, with human beings, in the populations of early human beings, the same (snaps fingers!) process hit that population in terms of essence manifesting in that form.
ELIAS: In association with what you term to be human beings, your homo sapiens, your species, the moment that there was an emergence of one within your physical reality it was the expression of essence.
PAUL: And did it pull the rest of the population towards essence, the expression of essence, the manifestation of this emotional communication layer that previously did not exist? Did that single individual who manifest that act as a trigger point for the rest of the population?
ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, yes.
PAUL: Okay. I know that’s a tough one.
ELIAS: That was the moment point of the threshold of the Dream Walkers, which had already been in association with your linear time, but not entirely physically manifest – in existence, but not entirely physically manifest. Therefore, at the moment point of the first actual physical matter manifestation of your species was the spark point of the movement of essence – which the Dream Walkers were – the movement of essence into an actual physical manifestation within your physical dimension.
PAUL: All across the population.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: The same way.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: This is a crystal ball question, so you can answer it appropriately, accordingly. There have been other populations that exist too that have this creative tension of emergence to manifest essence. So it’s almost like at times you sense this whole thing is alive, it’s totally alive, yet this structure of focuses of essence, of attention, are not manifest, and yet they yearn towards that, everything yearns towards that in a way?
ELIAS: No.
PAUL: Okay, good.
ELIAS: I am understanding your thought process, but let me clarify. All that exists within your physical reality has been created by you. Therefore all that exists within your reality, your entirety of your universe, is an aspect of you.
PAUL: Mmhm. I understand.
ELIAS: It is a projection of you through your perception.
Now; is it you? No. It is a projection of energy that you create a manifestation in association with, and it is all consciousness, for you are consciousness.
Now; in similar manner to the concept of fragmentation, which I am quite understanding that…
PAUL: (Laughing) … that I don’t understand.
ELIAS: …that none of you understand, but in similar manner to that concept, your creatures of your whales and your dolphins are a projection of you; therefore, they are an aspect of you.
Now; that aspect of you desires to be, in a manner of speaking, fragmented…
PAUL: Ahhhh, OK.
ELIAS: …and therefore be essence.
PAUL: I’ll work on that some more. That’s close, I’m getting close.
ELIAS: It is generated from you. It is not that these creatures have been inhabiting your planet, so to speak, separate and apart from yourself and in one moment have decided, ‘I choose to be essence now.’ No. They are already aspects of you. They in themselves are not essence, but they are consciousness. They merely are not incorporating an energy personality tone as do you. And, therefore, they are not generating other manifestations or other attentions simultaneous to themselves, for they are one of your attentions. And that attention of you, in conjunction with you, expresses a desire to be a personality energy tone. And you, in agreement and in association with your desire, express compliance with that. Therefore, in a manner of speaking, it is a type of fragmentation.
PAUL: Oh, that’s interesting. That’s helpful. That’s a nice bridging concept. And so, there are other populations that are yearning for this similar fragmentation. It’s part of the design of this dimension, (Elias nods) it has to be.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: Interesting. Any predictions – I’m joking! (Elias smiles) – on, you know, like cats and dogs. I mean, you know, god, they’ve got to be getting close. Elephants, chimps, orangutans, there’s so many species – are some of those in the next millennium yearning towards a fragmentation, becoming….
ELIAS: Not within this present now, but….
PAUL: Okay, but who knows, tomorrow.
ELIAS: And this may be quite difficult in actuality to be offering predictions, for you are continuously changing and you continuously incorporate choice. And thus far, in your terms, you are expressing satisfaction with the design of your dimension and the design of what you create. And I am understanding your expression in your inquisitiveness in relation to these creatures that you have mentioned, but also view how very efficiently you incorporate them into your reality and your association with them and your design with them in their reflection of you.
PAUL: Sure, and I go into the political level too in terms of complication: six billion of us manifest now, tremendously complex political situation of all these focuses and attention going through their acorn-sapling-tree development and relating with each other. So to add more populations to that, the probabilities must be, the calculations, whatever involved, it’s tremendously vast. So there’s a pressure to maintain equanimity, I guess, as we go along, and yet, who knows, we get bored, and poof! we go over here, right, and so it goes.
ELIAS: And as you continue, as I have stated previously, you also, in your terms of development, are moving in directions of expansion, which is the nature of consciousness also. And in reflection of that, you choose to be expanding within your physical universe.
PAUL: Right. Now just a couple more questions in this area, I know time is happening and I’ll squeeze in what I can. (Elias chuckles) The whales and dolphins – they map to this outer ego/subconscious/inner ego developmental structure, unique to their species – not human, don’t humanize them…
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: …but they will loosely follow this, this is in the blueprints…
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: …in the design.
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: It’s inherent in this dimension.
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: So as those populations develop and evolve, their social structures – there might be some similarities to human development, because we have millions of years, well, let’s say tens of thousands of years in terms of civilized populations that we can look at in our little framework that we are aware of.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: So these populations of whales and dolphins will follow this general blueprint, and whatever creative choices get made, of course, get made.
ELIAS: Not necessarily in physical expressions.
PAUL: Right, okay.
ELIAS: For they have chosen to be a different species.
PAUL: Species, right.
ELIAS: And they have chosen to be incorporating a different type of environment, which also offers you information in association with this shift, which it is no accident. This has been chosen within this time framework for this offers you an opportunity to view different expressions of essence within one physical dimension, which I have been expressing to all from the onset of this forum, you all occupy the same space arrangement. All physical dimensions occupy the same space arrangement.
In this, there are many essences that do not necessarily choose to be manifest within your physical dimension but are within other dimensions. And in that expression, this choice to be generating a different species within your physical reality which chooses quite different types of realities but incorporates the blueprint of this dimension offers you the opportunity to view different manifestations which are also essence, allowing you to more easily recognize and accept that you also incorporate other focuses of attention in other dimensions which are not similar to yourself and generate quite different realities, but they are also you.
PAUL: That’s a big one. One more general question in this area about the shift. If we can loosely say that this acorn-sapling-tree change-in-time structure in focuses of essence – human beings, whales, dolphins – goes through what we could just generally call a (Elias nods) preconventional stage, a conventional stage, and a postconventional stage. It’s very general….
ELIAS: I am understanding.
PAUL: Okay, it works for you. And it seems as populations tend to get to the postconventional stages, there’s more potential for a harmony and choices of least conflict or whatever. That make sense? That’s consonant…?
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: So, is part of this shift – and this is coming from this inner ego, Dream Walker, causal source dimension – part of this shift, the nature of this shift, is to somehow get – because the population’s growing – to – accelerate isn’t the right word – but to get people from this conventional to postconventional stage at a younger age? Or to do the opposite and prolong it and to somehow…. What I’m sensing in this shift – and you just brought it up with the fact that there’s no accident with the whales and dolphins in this emergent quality – there’s something emergent in this shift, that’s what I’m trying to get at.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: And does this little three-part thing – preconventional, conventional, postconventional…? How does this shift affect the population moving through that developmental stage? Does it accelerate it to get them… yeah, to the postconventional?
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: So postconventional development will happen sooner in large percentages of the population? (19)
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: So we could say in this now, in this moment point, if we take a snapshot of all the focuses and where they’re at in that spectrum and just make a map of that, shall we say – which I won’t even pretend to try – it would tend to be very conventional with smaller percentages of the population at postconventional.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: But with this shift something is changing.
ELIAS: It is accelerating.
PAUL: To accelerate the developmental stages to postconventional, and post-post-, (Elias nods throughout) and there’s others up the stream that await us.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: In all their magnificence.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: Excellent. (Laughs)
ELIAS: And in this, do not confuse yourself in the idea that you are generating a utopia in association with this shift in consciousness. What you are creating is a wider awareness objectively and an intimate knowledge of yourselves that allows you the freedom to intentionally manipulate your energy in association with your choices, in association with your freedom, to generate what you want.
Now; understand; within any moment, although you all express that your ideal is to be generating a reality in which you express no conflict, but I may express to you, all of you, within any given point have experienced within your focuses moments in which you choose intentionally to create conflict and you want to create conflict. Therefore, you are moving into more of an expression of less conflict, but this is not the point.
The point is that if you are creating conflict, you shall be aware that you are intentionally choosing that and not expressing blame to another individual or circumstances or situations, but recognizing that you yourselves have created it and that you chose it and that you want it.
PAUL: That’s a really good point to make, and I call it naïve utopianism, (Elias nods throughout) and I suffered through it and occasionally lapse back into it myself, so I’m aware that it’s very important to point this out in the conversation we’re having, because ‘tomorrow is always better,’ and ‘tomorrow the shift,’ and tomorrow never comes!
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: Tomorrow is always tomorrow! All we have is this moment now. (20)
ELIAS: For tomorrow is always today.
PAUL: (Laughs) And yesterday too!
ELIAS: (Chuckling) And I may express to you, for the most part, generally speaking, in association with your sequence of moments, you do choose to be expressing less conflict, or the least amount of conflict, and you do choose to be expressing without conflict, but you do also at times express moments in which you do choose to be incorporating conflict.
PAUL: And there’s something inherent in this preconventional to conventional spectrum where we create conflict, because the sexual reproduction – the testosterone, the adolescence, that whole thing (Elias nods throughout) – focuses will continue to go through those stages.
ELIAS: Yes.
PAUL: So there’s an inherent instability that they will continue to go through. However, you’re saying that there will be an acceleration across the mass populations towards these postconventional stages of awareness and with all these streams.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: And alternate selves will be pushing towards that postconventional, which doesn’t lessen conflict, so [in terms of warfare] we’ll see more situations like the National Football League (21), rather than the War on Terrorism.
ELIAS: Correct.
PAUL: We can go out and I break an arm off, and it’s horrific and all this and that, however it’s within a very ritualized format, where there’s rules.
ELIAS: Correct. As an example, you may experience with your partner – you choose for the most part, generally speaking, to move in association and in interaction with your partner without conflict – but, in moments, you may be quite aware that you are generating an intentional conflict with your partner, and your partner may express, ‘I’m not wishing to engage conflict with you,’ and you may express, ‘I wish to be engaging conflict!’
PAUL: (Laughing) We’re going there!
ELIAS: And you shall drive yourself and express a satisfaction in generating an intentional argument.
PAUL: I believe more and more in doing that in the right times and places.
ELIAS: Ha ha ha ha ha! But the point is that you are intentionally, and aware of, creating this action, and you are not victim to it, and you are not expressing judgment or blame in association with the other individual. You know what you are generating.
PAUL: Thank you very much for this.” [session 1246, January 16, 2003]
End Notes:
(1) Paul’s note: Seth/Jane Roberts’ term for expressing the concept of God as an action of eternal becoming, inseparable from and contained within Everything, incomprehensible in Its Totality.
This information was first introduced in The Seth Material, Chapter 18, The God Concept – The Creation – The Three Christs, (1970), sessions #426-428, (no date given.)
Elias initially used the term “Creating Universal One And Whole” to describe the same Reality. This was subsequently replaced by “all of consciousness.”
Digests: find out more about Creating Universal One And Whole/all of consciousness.
(2) Paul’s note: a reference to the concept introduced by Seth/Jane Roberts in The “Unknown” Reality, (1977), Vol. 1, session 682, February 13, 1974. These “units” are the underpinnings of all consciousness and form the foundation for all phsycial and non-physical manifestations.
Elias also modified his use of the term from “units” to “links” to reflect that these links exist as part of an open system. According to classical Newtonian physics, the universe is perceived as a closed, finite, machine that can be broken down into parts like molecules and atoms. Quantum mechanics, in the 20th century, has essentially thrown out this model discovering that there is a hidden domain from which all physical things spring. Thus our physical universe is no longer understood to be a closed system, but intersecting and exchanging energy with countless probable/alternate universes.
ELIAS: “Now! First of all, we will incorporate an adjustment of some terminology, to be more efficient for our purposes.
... We will also adjust the term of ‘units’ of consciousness to ‘links’ of consciousness, for units imply a closed system. Therefore, in speaking to you of consciousness, I shall employ the terminology of links.” [session 92, May 05, 1996]
(3) Vic’s note: Elias often refers to the essence of Paul (Patel) as “my dear friend.” Paul (Patel) was introduced by Elias as an essence that had much relevant information to deliver, and would most likely, deliver it through Ron via “automatic writing.” Patel is the essence name and Paul is a focus of Patel’s that Ron connect’s with very strongly. Hence, we often use both names to describe this essence. Elias occasionally uses only the name Paul or Patel but they refer to the same essence. Ron began this energy exchange on June 10, 1996.
For the most part, Paul (Patel) delivers information that is similar to the information that Elias delivers. However, it seems to be of a more personal nature than the information offered by Elias. Most of the exchanges are either in response to specific questions asked, or are a complement to the concepts presented in the information offered by Elias.
Digests: find out more about Paul (Patel).
(4) Paul’s note: this refers to a series of private sessions from Fall 1999:
493, October 26, 1999
The dream mission is the exploration of subjective awareness (the inner self) – its structures and mechanics – and how we can learn to better access it from the waking state. It also involves learning more about dreaming, meditation, and other altered states.
(5) Paul’s note: I created a 2’ x 3’ “map” that visualized a group of Elias’ concepts including primary and observing essences, and beginning-continuing-final focuses. It also included several concepts from Seth/Jane Roberts such as the nine forms of time from The Education of Oversoul Seven (1973,1995), counterparts, probable selves, and Frameworks of Consciousness. I brought this with me to the session, and briefly reviewed it with Mary so that Elias would have a physical frame of reference for our discussion. (I also referred to this map in my next session 1357, May 29, 2003).
These are photos of the actual map, taken with our cat, Rumi.
For an updated version see Integral Conscious Creation Maps (Holonic Personality).
(I use the term holonic personality to describe these multidimensional structures within the psyche [essence] discussed by Seth, Elias, Ken Wilber, and other perennial wisdom traditions. For more info on holons and holarchy see session 1357, May 29, 2003, endnote 4.)
(6) Paul’s note: the following compares the main aspects of multidimensional, holonic personality according to:
The “fourth sort of column” I mentioned deals with the above mental structures and states as they change-in-time through physical stages. So I sometimes use the analogy of acorn, sapling, and tree to represent general physical stages.
(7) Paul’s note: the following compares what Elias calls alternate selves with American psychologist Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligences:
Digests: find out more about alternate selves.
(8) Paul’s note: it’s interesting that Elias acknowledged that I’m developing a “philosophy.” For the past six years I’ve been researching “evolutionary” systems theories, psychology, philosophy, theology, and various channeled sources that have greatly expanded my understanding.
The main aspects that I’m exploring in this session include a preliminary roadmap of the psyche (essence) and All-That-Is, and later the cosmogenesis and “evolution” of our multiverse derived from the works of Seth, Elias, and Ken Wilber. Taken as a whole, I call this “philosophy” Integral Conscious Creation.
For more info see What is Integral Conscious Creation?.
(9) Paul’s note: it’s easy to get confused by surface level differences in semantics when comparing Seth, Elias, and other perennial wisdom sources (e.g., Vedanta Hinduism, etc.). So it’s worth noting here that Elias agrees that he covers the same spectrum of consciousness as Seth. Even though he uses his own terminology “the meaning is basically the same.” While there’s plenty of room to haggle over subtle differences, there’s still a high level of similarity between the two sources.
For example, here’s a simple comparison of different words used by Seth and Elias to describe the same general concepts:
Intro: find out more about A Seth, Elias Comparative Overview.
(10) Paul’s note: we can now update the matrix (in endnote 6) to include Elias’ avenues of communication as the mediating or translating region between objective and subjective awareness:
(11) Paul’s note: Elias talks about two distinct kinds of blinking in/out actions. First, is the incredibly fast quantum micro level (ten to the minus fifty-six second; see session 179, June 01, 1997). Second, is the incredibly slow macro level of billions of years (see session 262, January 25, 1998). Interestingly, this second kind is similar to the Yugas in Hindu cosmology that include million, billion, and quadrillion year cycles of manifestation. I referred to the second kind of blinking in this exchange.
Digests: find out more about blinking in and out.
(12) Paul’s note: I referred to the very evocative information given in 1997 in which Elias outlined a linear “order of play” of Dream Walker interaction in relation to what he calls the “shift in consciousness.”
Digests: find out more about the sequence of the Dream Walkers within the actions of their intents.
Digests: find out more about the shift in consciousness.
(13) Paul’s note: this “order of play” is offered in Dreams, “Evolution,” and Value Fulfillment, Vol. 1 (1986/1997), where Seth/Jane Roberts introduces a creation myth – what I call a “conscious creation myth” – that explains cosmogenesis in symbolic terms of what happened “before the beginning,” in the beginning, and thereafter, in terms of human involution/evolution on Earth.
Seth weaves many concepts into his creation storyline:
- All-That-Is/consciousness units (CUs/causal field)
- sleepwalkers/electromagnetic energy units (EEs/subtle field)
- Frameworks 4, 3, 2 (subtle field)
- the dream state (subtle field) functions as a “language of translation” for the waking state (physical field)
- Framework 1 (physical field)
- the paradoxical “before the beginning”
- families of consciousness (innate intention)
- the multidimensional psyche (outer ego, subconscious, inner ego)
- the inner senses (deep intuitions/translogical hyperception)
- reincarnation in the context of simultaneous time frameworks
- probabilities
In the following excerpt, Seth shows that there was a “dreamtime” that was primary to the emergence and evolution of objective forms and functions to date – from matter (physiosphere), to bodies (biosphere), to self-reflexive minds (noosphere). In terms of objective awareness there was/is/will be a simultaneous nonphysical region of activity that always “precedes” physical forms. Therefore, less complex physical forms will by necessity precede the emergence of focuses of essence. In other words, Seth and Elias’ creation mythos support an important hypothesis in modern evolutionary theory: there was a hominid ancestor that was not yet a focus of essence but whose DNA we did inherit.
In nonlinear terms, then, this all happens in a vast spacious present. That is, the “dreamtime” is still happening all around and “inside” of us in terms of subjective awareness and no-time. However, in terms of objective awareness and linear time, there is a perceivable order of emergence. For example, Seth said that in our primordial past,
“While men had their dream bodies alone they enjoyed a remarkable freedom, of course, for those bodies did not have to be fed or clothed. They did not have to operate under the law of gravity. Men could wander as they wished about the landscape. They did not yet identify themselves to any great degree as being themselves separate from either the environment or other creatures. They knew themselves to be themselves, but their identities were not as closely allied with their forms as is now the case.
“The dream world was bound to waken, however, for that was the course it had set itself upon. This awakening, again, happened spontaneously, and yet with its own order. In the terms of this discussion the other creatures of the earth actually awakened before man did, and relatively speaking, their dream bodies formed themselves into physical ones before man’s did. The animals became physically effective, therefore, while to some degree man still lingered in that dream reality.
“The plants [i.e., biosphere] awakened before the animals [i.e., noosphere] – and there are reasons for these varying degrees of ‘wakefulness’ that have nothing to do basically with the differentiations of specieshood as defined by science from the outside but have to do with the inner affiliations of consciousness, and with species or families of consciousness [note: this is a reference to what Elias calls Dream Walkers in this session and what Seth calls sleepwalkers]. Those affiliations fell into being as all of the consciousnesses that were embarked upon physical reality divided up the almost unimaginable creative achievements that would be responsible for the physically effective world.” [session 899, February 06, 1980, DEV, Vol 1.]
Thus, Seth hints at an order of emergence in our ancient past (aspects of which exist simultaneously Now in subjective terms) that went roughly from matter (physiosphere) to bodies (biosphere) to self-reflexive minds (noosphere) that is consonant with the “order of play” I discuss with Elias in this session. What’s amazing is that these intersubjective perspectives are still missing from most contemporary evolutionary theory. The integral approach is thus designed to allow us to begin to fill in these blanks without throwing out the baby with the bathwater. That is, we don’t have to completely discard Darwin or anyone else, just expand and refine their limits since every model, theory, or storyline deals with partial snapshots of All-That-Is by default.
For example, it should be clearer that our contemporary sciences of archeology and anthropology still don’t recognize the fact that all potential species of flora and fauna inhabit the Earth in all moment points. However, while the physical, objective aspects are being measured and studied, the subjective aspects are still completely omitted because there isn’t a viable theory of consciousness within their paradigms that would open the doors of perception to explore them. Yet.
Finally, there’s an important distinction to make in the overall “order of play.” Namely, the physiosphere, biosphere, and noosphere each contain nested variations of the basic three-part mental structure explored earlier in the session:
- Outer ego (physical construction region)
- Mediating/Translation region (“subconscious” region)
- Inner ego (nonphysical source region)
Put another way, all quantum fields (physiosphere) as they existed before a focus of essence emerged had a rudimentary outer ego, subconscious (translating region), and inner ego. As cellular life (biosphere) emerged, a new level of complexity manifested that transcended yet included the previous one. So all biospheric manifestations included elements of the physiosphere (atoms and molecules) yet formed a novel structure: cellular life forms. And on and on this process goes. Eventually, cellular life forms became so complex that a focus of essence (noosphere) emerged.
To summarize the “order of play” or emergence in Framework 1 terms:
- Quantum Fields = physiospheric outer ego, subconscious, inner ego
- Biological life forms (includes quantum fields) = biospheric outer ego, subconscious, inner ego
- Self-reflexive minds (includes quantum fields and biological life forms) = noospheric outer ego, subconscious, inner ego
Obviously, the type of nested outer ego structure will be quite different between a salt atom, a paramecium, and a human being, since each nest builds upon preceding structures and becomes increasingly sophisticated. Still, I find it quite beautiful that the basic functions and structures exist within each general region of emergence.
For more info on the holonic relationships between quantum fields (physiosphere), cellular life (biosphere), and self-reflexive minds (noosphere) see session 1357, May 29, 2003, endnote 4.
For more info on Seth’s mythos see Seth on “The Origins of the Universe and of the Species” – An Integral Conscious Creation Myth.
For Elias’ variation of Seth’s creation mythos see:
Digests: “before the beginning”.
Digests: Dream Walkers.
Digests: Source Events.
(14) Paul’s note: I had the following excerpt by Ken Wilber in mind when Elias verified these queries:
“When MacLean [who formulated the theory of the triune mammalian brain: reptilian, paleo-mammalian, and neo-mammalian regions] said that when humans lie on the couch for psychoanalysis, they lie down with a crocodile and a horse, that wasn’t the half of it: we lie down with the planets and the stars, the lakes and the rivers, the plankton and the oaks, the lizards and the birds, the rabbits and the apes–and, to repeat, not simply because they are our neighbors in our own universe, but because they are components in our own being, they are literally our bones and bold and marrow and guts and feelings and fears.” Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution (1995,2000) P. 109.
(15) Paul’s note: according to Elias, Source Events provide the “source energy” for Regional Area 1 constructions. They exist in Regional Area 2 (which is the same as Seth’s Framework 2).
Digests: find out more about Source Events.
Digests: find out more about Regional Area 2.
Also, note the similarity of Elias’ Source Events to Seth’s “master events” from Dreams, “Evolution,” and Value Fulfillment, Vol. 2 (1986,1997), p. 372. Interestingly, Source Events are similar to Ken Wilber’s “involutionary givens” in Excerpt A: An Integral Age at the Leading Edge.
Elias imparts in the preceding paragraph that the Dream Walker “region” of consciousness is causal in the sense that these holonic aspects create the actual “blueprints for reality” that exist within Regional Area 2. This is another general area of similarity with the Seth material. In The “Unknown” Reality, Vol. 1 (1977,1996), Seth/Jane Roberts introduces the concept of dream-art science as a potential methodology in which to explore the “blueprints for reality” from an expanded version of our waking, Framework 1 consciousness capable of exploring the “unknown” reality of Framework 2.
I believe that this endeavor is not only worthwhile, but a key to discovering, or more accurately “remembering,” how conscious creation actually works in space-time (objective awareness) and no-space-no-time (subjective awareness). This is also the goal of Elias’ “dream mission.”
Put another way, our current understanding of the relationship between Framework 1 and 2 is found in the field of physics (quantum mechanics). For example, David Bohm’s explicate and implicate orders. But upon closer examination we soon realize that this still deals with only the thin outer crust of energy-matter (physiosphere), and doesn’t adequately explain how bodies (biosphere) or minds (noosphere) work in Framework 1 terms alone! That would require the additional sciences of biology, developmental psychology, cultural anthropology, for example. To date, all of these disciplines exist in parallel at best, and more often in complete isolation from each other.
Seth’s dream-art science and Wilber’s integral approach outline, in a general way, the basic requirements to adequately study All-That-Is in a more holonic embrace:
This conceptual foundation helps us to outline an integral approach that more adequately investigates the mechanics of conscious creation.
For more info see The Dream-Art Science Sessions (700-704), Abridged.
(16) Paul’s note: Elias makes a clear distinction between duality or pairs of opposites and duplicity, which is one of the ten foundational belief systems.
RODNEY: “Would you distinguish again the distinction between duality and duplicity?”
ELIAS: “I am aware that your new religion of your metaphysics moves in the direction of designating duality as the same as duplicity, but in actuality, I am quite careful in my choice of words that I offer to you in explanation of these belief systems and concepts.
“Duality is suggestive of two, or a double of elements. Duplicity, although it incorporates what you term to be opposites, it is not necessarily merely two. It is an incorporation of very different conflicting elements within you simultaneously, in opposition to each other. Duality does not always suggest conflict or opposing elements. You may hold duality in certain areas that may complement each other. Within duplicity, these elements of the belief system that you hold do not complement each other. They are opposing of each other and creating of conflict.”
RODNEY: “In other words, the north pole and the south pole are complementary ...”
ELIAS: “Correct.”
RODNEY: “... dualities.”
ELIAS: “Correct.”
RODNEY: “They are not in conflict.”
ELIAS: “They are not within conflict. Duplicity IS within conflict. It is a creation of conflict.”
“… And where you hold duplicity, you also hold conflict.” [session 328, October 03, 1998]
(17) Paul’s note: according to Charles Darwin’s original theory, circa 1859, natural selection is the theory and storyline used to rationalize biological mutations over vast spans of time from a purely materialistic perspective. That is, the theory never included a viable theory of consciousness, or interior aspects of subjective reality. Also, it has never been proven as fact, and has been heavily modified in the subsequent one hundred and fifty years by scientists in a variety of fields. Since Darwin’s theory did not include a working theory of consciousness, the entire subjective and intersubjective realms of reality were not included in his or many derivative theories. We can now see this as a glaring omission that leaves out half of the story of “evolution” – the subjective and intersubjective half that deals with consciousness.
However, as of this writing, the idea has been greatly expanded to include not only just biological processes, but social (interobjective), cultural (intersubjective), and mental (subjective) processes that work in complementary fashion. Ken Wilber, Allan Combs, Michael Murphy, and George Leonard are notable integral theorists working in this area.
Still, when Elias said, “continual experimentation of the subjective manipulating links of consciousness in association with time to create different manifestations in physical matter,” I had the immediate impression that he had just offered his own clarification that expanded these contemporary definitions from the perspective of the causal intersubjective region. That is, from the Regional Area 4 perspective that Elias claims is his natural focus of attention. (And, as he often says, aspects of all essences exist there as well.)
Put it all together and a multidimensional (holonic) picture begins to emerge in which we begin to see that virtually all contemporary evolutionary theories are still blinded by Regional Area 1 perceptive artifacts, namely, the dominance of the outer ego which sees itself as the center of all-of-consciousness to such extremes that it has reduced all subjective aspects of essence into objective things, processes, or “its.” Again, that’s only half of the story!
Therefore, we also want to integrate the view from the inside, so to speak. And Elias’ (and Seth’s) information further animates those missing perspectives. The integral approach holds the view that consciousness is causal, and specifically (Elias’) objective awareness, avenues of communication, subjective awareness or (Seth’s) outer ego, subconscious, and inner ego all work in concert to simultaneously co-create the four Regional Areas (or Frameworks) in holonic fashion. Therefore, any accurate story or theory of evolution in this Now must take into careful consideration both linear (space-time) and nonlinear (no-space-no-time), objective and subjective aspects of the psyche (essence) and All-That-Is.
Finally, it should become clear that Elias is not completely refuting our linear belief systems of “evolution” in this session, but making sure that we see them for what they are, namely, belief systems (memes) or artifacts of Regional Area 1 constructions.
(18) Paul’s note: Elias’ statement – “selecting the preferred and the efficient.” – is consonant with our contemporary sciences of complexity that have greatly expanded our understanding of “evolutionary” processes since the time of Darwin. Again, this is not to say that Darwin was 100% in error, he wasn’t. He was just dealing with a much smaller snapshot of All-That-Is that, with 20/20 hindsight, we now see as true but very, very partial.
However, the belief system of evolution has been refined in amazing and more accurate ways since the time of Darwin, like all authentic science. I’m not suggesting that current sciences of complexity will ever provide anything that approaches a complete picture without a working theory of consciousness, and again, an integral approach provides one.
For more information and a good example of how far we’ve come since Darwin, check out Ken Wilber’s Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution (1995, 2000). It integrates a viable theory of consciousness into a scientific, artistic, and moral context along with aspects of body, mind, and spirit. Wilber includes recent breakthroughs in evolutionary as well as perennial wisdom traditions (e.g., Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, Christian, etc.). In terms of recent sciences, there are many wonderful refinements that greatly expand Darwin’s original theory. For example:
“The new sciences … are collectively known as the sciences of complexity–including General Systems Theory (Bertalanffy, Weiss), cybernetics (Wiener), nonequilibrium thermodynamics (Prigogine), cellular automata theory (von Neumann), catastrophe theory (Thom), autopoietic system theory (Maturana and Varela), dynamic systems theory (Shaw, Abraham), and chaos theories, among others.” (SES, p. 22)
All this to say that when Elias implies that the action of evolution “is a continual experimentation of manipulating energy, which is consciousness, in different manners, and thusly, in your terms, selecting the preferred and the efficient,” he offers further clues from his subjective perspective as to how this action of “efficient selection” occurs throughout various holonic structures within essence and its focuses in relation to Regional Area 1 constructs. And these may well form core “evolutionary” processes that we’ve barely begun to understand.
Scale that up to over six billion focuses in this Now, and we can begin to imagine how “exceedingly complex” the holonic action of conscious creation is in Regional Area 1 alone! The contemporary sciences listed above add their own puzzle pieces to our increased objective understanding of how things work and thus complement both Seth and Elias’ more story-like versions of “before the beginning,” in the beginning, and thereafter.
The significant point, again, is that Elias provides a subjective or more fully informed interior perspective on the process of “evolution” that acknowledges the importance of linear time and its constructions, but also reminds us that there is a vast inner realm of choice and action that we are only beginning to become objectively aware of that is intimately involved in conscious creation and co-creation. This is a natural outcome of the action of what Elias calls the “shift in consciousness” and part and parcel of my intent in formulating “integral conscious creation” that includes Wilber’s subjective, intersubjective, and objective aspects of the psyche (essence).
(19) Paul’s note: developmental psychologists (e.g., Piaget, Kohlberg, Loevinger, Graves, Gilligan, Cook-Greuter, Beck, Kegan, etc.) have mapped various stages of human growth (or evolution) for over fifty years. In terms of overall development, there is rough consensus that humans develop from what can be generally called preconventional to conventional to postconventional stages in first, second, and third world cultures and are thus universal to homo sapiens on this planet.
These stages include various intelligences or abilities that have been further broken down into subsets, for example, morals, cognition, emotions, sexual, self-needs, self-identity, logical-mathematic, linguistic, musical, etc. Each provides a snapshot of overall personal development that is “necessary but not sufficient.” That is, no single intelligence is the main one, even though many researchers still make the mistake of believing their research shows the most important one, as Piaget did with cognition. It is the view of Wilber’s Integral Psychology, and I agree, that there are many ways of looking at personal development, but each provides a “necessary but not sufficient” snapshot of the total focus personality.
Returning to the stages, then, let’s take a brief look at cognition as it develops through preconventional, conventional, and postconventional stages. Preconventional cognition believes that the moon is literally made out of cheese, or that if I cover my own eyes, then you can’t see me. In other words, it’s impossible for me to take the role of other or walk a mile in someone’s shoes.
Conventional cognition can take the role of other. It also uses early forms of reason and intellect but often reaches conclusions like the Renaissance Archbishop who stated that since the human body has seven orifices, that is why God created seven planets to revolve around the Earth. That is, the human body and outer ego are still the central filters. Perception is still driven by egocentric (self) or ethnocentric (family, tribe, country, etc.) filters.
Postconventional cognition realizes that space-time, and energy-matter aren’t solid or permanent constructs. It also becomes aware that there is an underlying nonphysical domain from which physical manifestation emerges and returns to. That is, I as an individual belong to something far greater than my outer egoic sense of self. Perception thus begins to become worldcentric and universal.
Also, since Elias claims that all species of whale, dolphin, (and porpoise) are now “focuses of essence,” then these basic developmental stages would apply to them as well, acknowledging that their physiological, cultural, social, and geopolitical aqua-differences may include some interesting variations that we aren’t yet aware of. Put another way, since expressions of essence on this planet now include homo sapiens and cetaceans, they will use similar patterns of development laid down by previous generations that rely on the same “blueprints for reality.” But there is no dream-art science research being done yet in this area, because that would include some kind of dream archeology and dream anthropology, for example, that further explores the blueprints in Framework 2 in conjunction with the Framework 1 constructions.
All this to say that it makes sense when Elias suggests that a key outcome the “shift in consciousness” is to move or transform large quantities of the human (and by implication whale, dolphin, and porpoise) populations into postconventional stages of development and beyond. In this context, then, we can develop new scientific research methods to track emergent probable futures and see just how this will be accomplished (given the fact that something like 80% of the focuses in this Now are at preconventional or conventional and the fact that every focus begins at stage 1 – preconventional – and develops from there).
(20) Paul’s note: “naïve utopianism” is the belief system that the grass will always be greener on the other side of the fence, and that tomorrow will somehow always be better today. And of course, tomorrow always remains just that – tomorrow! A more accurate view is that as the emergent complexity in Regional Area 1 terms increases and more humans, whales, dolphins, porpoises and who knows what else manifest, there will be new and amazing creations, inventions, discoveries and interdependencies.
However, we need to balance that developmental view with the notion that each new epoch of cultural development has side effects that carry the potentials for new pathologies and dis-eases. For example, it is now understood that many problems created by humans at a certain stage of development, complexity, and belief systems can not be solved at that level (i.e., pollution, deforestation, weapons of mass destruction, slavery, poverty, woman’s, gay and lesbian rights, etc.).
As Albert Einstein said, “the significant problems we face can never be solved at the level of thinking that created them.” And so, in very general systemic terms, new levels of complexity emerge that provide a wider awareness that can take in more factors and come up with efficient new solutions. That’s the good news!
The bad news, of course, is that there is always the potential for complementary forms of pathology, dis-ease, or collective dysfunction at any stage as long as we’re dealing with physical constructions in space-time. All of this is to say that there is no predetermined end point to this action of “evolution” or consciousness changing-in-time/no-time. (However, this session does raise the question about what Source Events lead to the “blink out” that ends the current meta-cycle of manifestation referred to in endnote 11.)
(21) Paul’s note: NFL stands for the National Football League – the version of football played in the U.S.A.
Digests – see also: | alternate selves | aspects of essence; an overview | attention (doing and choosing) | avenues of communication | “before the beginning” | becoming | belief systems; an overview | blinking in and out | blueprints | choices/agreements | connective tissue of consciousness | Creating Universal One And Whole/all of consciousness | creature consciousness | counterparts; individual | dimension | dream mission | Dream Walkers; an overview | energy signatures | essence; an overview | essence families; an overview | expression of essence | feeling tones | focus of essence; an overview | forum | fragmentation | hamster wheel | impressions | information | inner senses; an overview | inner senses; conceptualization | “karma” | manifestation | objective/subjective awareness | perception | probabilities | separation | Seth/Jane Roberts | sexuality and emotion | shift in consciousness | simultaneous time | Source Events | time frameworks | victims/perpetrators |
The Elias Transcripts are held in © copyright 1995 – 2024 by Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.
© copyright 1997 – 2024 by Paul M. Helfrich, All Rights Reserved. | Comments to: helfrich@eliasforum.org