the Elias forum: Explore the transcript archive.

Home

Introduction

Digests

Transcripts

Exercises

Gems

Library

Search

Donate

Monday, January 19, 2004

<  Session 1498 (Private)  >

ďSorting Out Objective, Subjective, Conscious, Subconscious, and ThoughtĒ


Participants: Mary (Michael) and Steve.

(Eliasí arrival time is 23 seconds.)

ELIAS: Good morning!

STEVE: Hello, Elias.

ELIAS: And what shall we discuss this morning?

STEVE: Well, let me say what I said to Mary. I argue with you a lot, probably more than any other patient that you have (Elias chuckles), and you told me once before that was okay. I guess I do it, as you know, on points I donít understand, to try to get me to understand it, and also the people in the room on Saturday, hopefully. (1) I believe that you know what youíre talking about. One reason I do is that Iíve plugged in your concepts into what Iím trying to do in my life, and itís without any reasonable doubt they work. Iím very grateful to you for providing this service and to Mary for channeling you.

ELIAS: You are very welcome, my friend.

STEVE: Iím going to bring you up to date. I havenít seen you since February, and Iíve made lots of strides. Lots has happened since then. First, I just want to go over some principles with you, if I could.

ELIAS: Very well.

STEVE: By the way, how much longer are you going to be doing this? Will we have you for years, or you donít know?

ELIAS: (Smiles) Perhaps.

STEVE: Or maybe another day, and then youíll cut out?

ELIAS: As long as you all continue to question and to request my interaction, I shall continue.

STEVE: Well, good, itís up to us. Iíll be here!

When you tell us to accept and trust ourselves, to use this mantra ďI am a glorious personĒ forty or fifty times a day to start, you seem to be using the word ďacceptĒ in a different manner than when youíre talking about accepting beliefs. When youíre talking about accepting beliefs, youíre talking about doing it in a nonjudgmental fashion, but when youíre talking about accepting self, you seem to be doing it in a loving, very positive, glorious-person fashion. Do you mean it differently?

ELIAS: Somewhat. For in the acceptance of beliefs, it is an action of recognizing that you continue to incorporate your own opinions and your own preferences. Therefore, there is, as has been presented already, some element of judgment per say, for you are generating a judgment in conjunction with what you prefer and what you do not prefer. The action of not incorporating the judgment in relation to beliefs is the recognition that you may be incorporating your own evaluations of what is positive or negative or what is good or bad or right or wrong in relation to your own experiences and expressions and behaviors, but recognizing also that other individuals or other expressions may choose different behaviors, different expressions, different experiences, and you donít express a judgment concerning their choices.

In the acceptance of self, you are correct that there is somewhat of a difference in that expression and that action. For as I speak to each of you of acceptance of self, that would be more comprehensive, in your terms, for that is an expression of genuinely appreciating and accepting and not incorporating judgment in relation to yourself and all of the aspects of yourself and your choices and your directions and your beliefs, and in that, accepting that these are your choices and that regardless of whether they fit within other individualís guidelines or regardless of whether they are within the parameters of other individualís rules or not, that it matters not, that they are your expressions and that there is no necessity for you to be judging yourself.

STEVE: Do you think itís wise for us to think of ourselves as not just someone to not have a judgment about but to actually embrace positively as a glorious being?

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: Thank you for that. Next, are my beliefs in action when Iím asleep?

ELIAS: Somewhat, yes.

STEVE: What about when Iím dreaming?

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: I thought I was in some other dimension then.

ELIAS: Not necessarily.

STEVE: Sometimes I am, though?

ELIAS: At times. But even if you are projecting to another area of consciousness, another dimension, you continue to be the focus of attention that you are. Therefore, there is some element of your beliefs that continue to be expressed.

STEVE: I thought maybe if I could find a way to accept my beliefs at a time when they werenít on guard, like when I was dreaming, I could slip it past Ďem without them countermanding it.

ELIAS: (Grins and laughs) I may express to you that within your sleep state, as I have expressed previously, in the action of dreaming, your beliefs are somewhat relaxed; they are not as rigid.

STEVE: Maybe that would work, then.

ELIAS: But the point is, is not to be in opposition with them.

STEVE: But you said theyíre fighting, theyíre fighting to keep the way they are. You used that word.

ELIAS: This is a misunderstanding. What I have expressed is that YOU fight with them.

STEVE: I fight for them?

ELIAS: WITH them.

STEVE: Let me tell you something that they do with me. When I come up with something that makes it appear that I might be able to overcome them Ė you donít like that word, so Iíll just say to get to a point where theyíre not affecting me anymore Ė they change the disease I have in my brain, that Iíve discussed with you before, in such a way to make it much more difficult for me to use any kind of telepathic message to myself to get me to do that. They seem to feel threatened by attempts that I make to neutralize them, and they make it more difficult for me.

ELIAS: Now; let me clarify with you. First of all, notice how you associate with beliefs. Notice the terminology that you incorporate, for this is important, for it is an evidence to yourself of how you generate an association with beliefs. The manner in which you describe your experience in relation to beliefs is in referring to the beliefs as entities: ďthey.Ē

Now; this is significant. For what you are generating is an association with your beliefs as entities. In a manner of speaking, let us incorporate a hypothetical visualization. You are one individual, and as an individual, you have generated an association with your beliefs as many entities, as other individuals almost, and they have been separated from yourself in such a manner that you are this one entity, and all of these beliefs are other entities in themselves.

Now; in that association, you generate this perception that you are opposing these other entities as foes, as actual things.

Now; in this, let me express to you, your beliefs are not entities; they are not things. They are expressions. They are expressions of you...

STEVE: What part of me cooked them up?

ELIAS: In your choice to manifest within this physical dimension...

STEVE: What part of me? My subjective awareness, my objective awareness?

ELIAS: No.

STEVE: Who cooked them up?

ELIAS: This is what I am responding to you. In your choice to be participating in this manifestation in this physical reality, you agree to participate within the blueprint of this physical reality.

STEVE: Was that before I had a brain?

ELIAS: As essence. In a manner of speaking, yes.

STEVE: So it wasnít my conscious mind that cooked them up.

ELIAS: It is woven into the design of your manifestation.

STEVE: My conscious mind came along later, after I had a brain.

ELIAS: That may or may not be. I may express to you, in the manner in which manifestations occur in this physical reality, your what you term to be conscious awareness or your objective awareness may or may not be expressed prior to your physical development of an actual brain. It is dependent upon the attention of the individual focus, and whether it chooses to be inserted in conjunction with the physical body at the moment of conception or subsequent to that moment within the development of the fetus, or the awareness may be expressed prior to the actual physical conception.

STEVE: So what are you trying to say, then? As far as youíre saying that my belief systems are not another entity, they are me, but apparently that me feels threatened when I find a way to maybe achieve acceptance of these belief systems or neutralize the one thatís causing my disease, and makes it more difficult to neutralize it by putting a stronger or different kind of block on my brain. So me is fighting me, I suppose.

ELIAS: That would be more accurate.

STEVE: Let me ask you this. Your two main ways of achieving a difference in our reality would be to accept a belief, and the other one would be to achieve a state of no doubt that itís going to occur. Those are two different concepts, right?

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: Does each one trump the other, so that if you had a state of no doubt, you wouldnít have to accept the belief? You could just do it by saying, ďI want to fly, and I have a belief that I canít but I donít have to worry about that, because if I can just believe that I can fly, Iíll fly.Ē So therefore, it trumps needing to accept my belief.

ELIAS: In that action, you would be generating the acceptance of the belief. It is not that it would trump it, so to speak, but the action of acceptance would be automatically generated.

STEVE: So that is necessary, then. Even if you have no doubt, it is necessary to accept the belief, and thatís done for you by not doubting.

ELIAS: That is one method that you may be incorporating.

STEVE: Just out of curiosity Ė I donít know if you know, because youíre an essence and you can just kind of snap your fingers and do stuff, how difficult it is for us earthly people to achieve a state of no doubt Ė but if you think to yourself with your conscious mind, the one Iím talking to you with, not some underneath layer, I think to myself how can I get myself to believe this, to have no doubt, I can make a little bit of an inroad into that. I can have less doubt, but there will be still some doubt. I do not seem to be able to extinguish that no matter what I do. Do you know of a way to do it?

ELIAS: Yes, and I am aware of the challenge and the difficulty that is expressed in these actions and the unfamiliarity of it. This is one of the reasons that I continue to engage conversation with individuals and offer information to them in an action of helpfulness to be...

STEVE: By the way, when I do make an inroad into it and I have less doubt, my telepathic ability works better. Go ahead.

ELIAS: I am understanding.

STEVE: But not completely how I want it to, just a little better.

ELIAS: Now; that is an example of what I shall express to you. The manner in which you achieve the action of not doubting yourself in physical focus is to be offering yourself evidence. Let me express to you...

STEVE: Evidence that itís working, you mean?

ELIAS: Yes. Let me express to you in conjunction with yourself individually. You and I have engaged conversations previously, and one of the directions that you have incorporated with myself is challenging myself to prove to you...

STEVE: I was hoping you didnít remember that!

ELIAS: (Smiles) This is significant, for this is a significant example. This is a method that you and many other individuals incorporate, not merely with myself, for I choose not to play that game, but with yourselves. It becomes quite important and significant, for in allowing yourself to incorporate steps, what you may term to be risk in movements in certain actions that you are aware that you do incorporate a doubt of your ability, if you practice and you allow yourself to incorporate steps in increments of risking the action of moving into some expression, even though you know that you are continuing to doubt your ability, as you allow yourself these increments of movement and you offer yourself evidence that it works, in your terms, each time you incorporate that action, you dissipate some of the doubt, for you offer yourself proof. In offering yourself that proof, each time you incorporate the action, you also reinforce a little more of your trust of yourself, which dissipates that doubt. Eventually in that process, you begin to eliminate the doubt.

STEVE: Anything in addition that you have that I should know?

ELIAS: In what capacity?

STEVE: About how to create no doubt? Or is that the only thing I can do?

ELIAS: I may express to you that experimentation is one of your most efficient methods.

STEVE: Check this out; this might interest you. Here I am, three months ago, saying how do I neutralize this belief that I donít want, to get rid of this disease thatís blocking my brain, because then Iíll really let loose my telepathic and psychic ability that Iíve demonstrated at times when this clamp in my brain wasnít so strong, and I would probably be able to enter the shift more. Maybe itís just being psychic that this belief is afraid of. It would be pretty unfamiliar. I mean, thereís certain fears about it, like if Iím walking down the street and I see somebody I donít like and I think ďI hope that guy gets sick,Ē I might make him sick! Itís a little scary. I suppose itís that fear thatís causing my belief to tighten down on that brain clamp when I make some progress to neutralizing it.

So, at any rate, I found out that I could partially neutralize that belief... No, let me back up. There seems to be two parts to getting rid of this brain clamp. The first part, it seems to be put on there originally by my subjective awareness without a belief system, or maybe in conjunction with it, because of the fact that I appeared to be using them in a way that was not the way my subjective awareness wanted me to. For example, if I would be intrusive, if I would try to do things telepathically to others, maybe try to decrease the energy of someone in order for the team that I was rooting for to win by decreasing the energy of the other team. Iíve done that before. Iíve done it many times, to the point where if you were paying attention to what was going on on the TV, you could not deny that it was occurring. My subjective awareness used to really tighten my clamp down when I was doing that; it didnít like that.

I donít know exactly what it is that Iím allowed to do, so how do I create a mantra that covers everything? I actually wrote one down: I said as long as I am refraining from countermanding this sentence, that refraining causes every thought that I have, every visualization that I have, every psychic attempt that I make that my subjective awareness disapproves of is hereby countermanded so that they will not take effect. The minute I wrote that down, I felt a change in me, and fifteen days later, I started to lose this clamp. It was twelve oíclock, the middle of the day. I started getting a full flood of neurotransmitter activity that had been blocked for years Ė more dopamine, more feeling of pleasure, a reduced muscle contraction in my throat, which is one of the signs of this thing. And I thought, ďIt worked! My subjective awareness likes this mantra that apparently makes it impossible for me to do anything it doesnít like, and itís gonna let me loose,Ē and I started to panic.

I thought Iíve got to create another mantra really fast, to make sure I donít use this on people inadvertently with just a flash thought, like I hope that guy dies. So I started to create this other mantra that I donít want any of my thoughts to work unless I write them down. As I was writing this down during what I would call a prodromal period, this period where I was leading into a complete elimination of my disease that was apparently going to occur in an hour or two Ė it was going so fast Ė I inadvertently put down that anything Iíve done before this date is negated. I realized I just negated this mantra that I wonít do anything that my subjective awareness disagrees with. The minute I did that, this period stopped, just that second. I got the full brain clamp again. I said Iíll wait for fifteen days and hope it happens again, and this time I wonít erase the original mantra. Iíll leave that one on. I did, and fifteen days later, literally the exact minute that it had ended the first time, it started again. The exact same feeling came over me. I didnít really know it was going to occur in fifteen days. I was hoping it would. I was hoping it would happen sooner, but it didnít, it happened on the fifteenth day.

So this time I knew that I could abort it, and that was the worst mistake I ever made, knowing that I could abort it. Apparently, what it did was it created a doubt in me that I was going to get through this preliminary period and achieve it. I thought if I have some nutty thought in my brain during this time, itís going to abort it. Every single time I had a doubt like that, it would, in fact, abort it. So I created a Frankenstein monster! For three months, every fifteen days when this would occur again, I would try to find a way to get around the belief system that found a way to stop this elimination of my disease from happening.

I got into the accepting deal, and I thought maybe I would try to accept it. I would write mantras or I would say during this period that as long as I refrain from countermanding the sentence that refraining causes me to accept... And by the way, if I use a telepathic message that says I am healing my hip Ė for three years Iíve known I have this power to affect things Ė ninety-nine percent of the time itíll make my hip worse. One percent of the time, when I have less of a clamp on my brain, itíll make it better. However, if I use your word Ė and I didnít know this was going to work, I just thought letís try it and see if I can change it Ė if I say my objective awareness perceives that my hips are healing, it never makes it worse. It doesnít always makes it better; it does occasionally, maybe not any more often than just saying I am making my hips better, but it never makes it worse. It had that beneficial effect. Thatís one way I know you know what youíre talking about.

So I write this mantra saying as long as Iím refraining from countermanding the sentence or as long as Iím touching any part of this sentence Ė that works too, because itís an act by me, itís refraining or itís touching Ė that act triggers this telepathic message continuously without even thinking about it. That causes my objective awareness to perceive that I accept this belief system that I donít want to have this disease removed because I fear the unknown and blah blah blah. That worked, and it actually got me into the prodromal period that I was referring to without waiting fifteen days. The first time I tried it, it lasted forty-five minutes. Then clank, my belief got the upper hand again, because when we do anything telepathically, if we continue to do it over and over again, it reduces in power. It never gets eliminated completely; it seems to get cut in half in about a day. The point is apparently the stronger the telepathic message is to accept, the better it works, to the point where itís not quite strong enough to do the job and then the belief comes back.

As you stated Saturday, you can accept it temporarily but then it comes back, which always confused me because you had said in your writing that tolerance was temporary. Acceptance, true acceptance is always permanent. What is the discrepancy in that, that seems to be different than what you said on Saturday?

ELIAS: Very well. Tolerance is not acceptance. It is a temporary expression of...

STEVE: Let me stop you. On the one hand, you say that true acceptance is permanent, but on Saturday you said that you can really accept, like the guy who accepted that his room was dirty, but itíll creep back. So if itís permanent, how can it creep back?

ELIAS: Let me clarify. Acceptance is an action that you generate in the moment.

Now; the acceptance that you generate in any particular moment is a genuine action and is, in a manner of speaking, what you would term to be permanent for that moment and that situation and that addressment to a particular belief in itself...

STEVE: Permanent for that moment.

ELIAS: Yes, in a manner of speaking.

Now; as I stated in that scenario, the acceptance of any belief in any moment is quite genuine, but that is not to say that the belief is eliminated. It is not. The belief continues, and therefore...

STEVE: Itís neutralized temporarily?

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: Fully?

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: But not permanently.

ELIAS: Correct, for that negates choice. For, the belief has not been eliminated. Regardless that it has been neutralized in that moment, it continues to be expressed.

STEVE: Waiting to pounce.

ELIAS: Not necessarily, but I am understanding your perception of this foe.

STEVE: So it pounced again...

ELIAS: Very well.

STEVE: But it was interesting that I could actually make it stop for forty-five minutes, and during that time, interestingly, I was able to do it again a number of times, temporarily. I was...

ELIAS: Now; let me interject. Let me offer an explanation of what you are doing in this action that you are incorporating.

STEVE: Is it completely different than I think?

ELIAS: Not necessarily. And let me also offer you a suggestion subsequently. What you are actually doing in this action that you have incorporated is to be not fighting with your own expressed belief. Regardless of how you translate it through thought, what you managed to accomplish was an action of recognizing your belief and moving in conjunction with it, offering yourself your own method, your own guidelines to be moving within the framework of the belief and therefore not opposing it, which...

STEVE: Why did it break down after a certain period of time, then?

ELIAS: Let me continue. Which in certain moments in your action and your experience, you accomplished neutralizing temporarily and accepting the belief, which allowed you...

STEVE: I donít really think in my thoughts I accepted it.

ELIAS: I am understanding but...

STEVE: Was it something else underneath that was doing the accepting, was my subjective...

ELIAS: Regardless whether your thoughts are translating the action accurately or not, this is the action that you were accomplishing.

STEVE: Because if I had thought about it during those moments, I would have still had a negative feeling about this.

ELIAS: I am aware. Let me continue.

Now; the initial response that I am offering to you is an identification of what you are actually accomplishing, what you are actually doing. The second element that I shall be offering to you is a suggestion to accompany what you were doing, which may be helpful in your expression of extending the time framework in which you allow yourself to accomplish.

Now; first of all, recognize that you are, in those moments, actually doing what I have expressed to many individuals Ė it is your method Ė but you are doing the action of not fighting and struggling and forcing energy against your expressed belief. You are recognizing the belief, you are expressing to yourself very well, I recognize I incorporate this belief. This is what is hindering me, so to speak. Therefore, I shall incorporate these mantras in conjunction with that belief to satisfy my own expression of this belief and not to be moving against it.

Now; the suggestion that I shall offer to you is, in conjunction with the action that you have already designed for yourself, express to yourself the recognition that regardless of what actions you choose, you are not responsible for the choices or the actions of other individuals. You are responsible for you, but you are not responsible for other individuals.

STEVE: What do they have to do with it?

ELIAS: This is quite significant in actuality, for the reason that you block yourself is that you express a belief that you do incorporate responsibility for other individuals and their actions and choices, and therefore...

STEVE: You mean when I said I was spooked that I might do something that hurts somebody inadvertently?

ELIAS: Yes, and therefore you are concerning yourself with how you incorporate your choices.

STEVE: Mostly Iím spooked that I might hurt myself with an inadvertent statement!

ELIAS: But there is also an element of incorporating personal responsibility for other individuals, which this is what you are protecting yourself from.

STEVE: Let me make sure I understand one concept. When you used the term ďobjective awareness,Ē that includes the thinking and the conscious mind, is that correct? Includes it but is not limited to it.

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: There is a subconscious part of it. You donít like that word, but I donít have any other word for it.

ELIAS: I am understanding.

STEVE: I need to know, what part of me do we need to get to do the accepting? You say itís irrelevant whether my thoughts accept it. Is it irrelevant?

ELIAS: I would not necessarily express to you that it is irrelevant, for thought is what you incorporate objectively as a translating mechanism. Therefore, it is quite useful, for it is the tool that you incorporate, that you use...

STEVE: Translate between who?

ELIAS: Yourself.

STEVE: Who am I translating between? I donít understand.

ELIAS: Different aspects of yourself, different communications of yourself.

STEVE: You donít mean translating from the objective awareness to the conscious mind, then? Thatís not what you mean by translating?

ELIAS: No. There are many objective communications that you are continuously offering to yourself, and your thoughts translate that information. As an example, you incorporate five outer senses, and in those senses you are continuously offering yourself communications, information, input. That is translated in thought.

STEVE: In other words, youíre saying from the five senses to where?

ELIAS: Thought.

STEVE: No, it translates it.

ELIAS: Correct.

STEVE: To whom? To which part of me?

ELIAS: To you!

STEVE: To all of me?

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: So it actually translates directly to the subjective awareness? Itís got a line through to it?

ELIAS: Yes, and vice versa.

STEVE: That sounds like itís a pretty important thing.

ELIAS: I do not negate the importance of thought. It is an important objective tool, and it is an important objective mechanism.

STEVE: Then you have this conscious mind thatís not thought, thatís still a different part of me than the objective awareness, thatís not conscious, is that correct?

ELIAS: That is you. That is not your mind. What you are describing is that illusive non-thing that generates...

STEVE: What is? The objective awareness, are you talking about?

ELIAS: No.

STEVE: Conscious mind?

ELIAS: That is what you are describing it as.

STEVE: When I say my conscious mind, I donít mean my thoughts.

ELIAS: Correct.

STEVE: I mean... Whew.

ELIAS: What it is that is you.

STEVE: When I use the word ďconscious mind,Ē I am excluding the part of me that would take a long process of perceiving impulses, et cetera, to know about. Iím talking about the part thatís able to know instantaneously without any interpretation or perception of impulses Ė thereís a stove over there; Iím talking to you; Iíve got to drive home. I guess those are thoughts, partly. But Iím awake, Iím here on earth, and I know whatís happening and I donít have to go through a three-day period of looking at impulses to know. Thatís my conscious mind.

ELIAS: I am quite understanding.

STEVE: You mean the same thing, right?

ELIAS: Yes. That is what generates you as you. That is you as essence, as a focus, as an attention of essence; that is you. All of the other expressions, all of the other elements of you are mechanisms associated with your physical manifestation, whether they be subjective or objective.

STEVE: Say that again, please.

ELIAS: All of the other factors of you, what you term to be your mind, which is another term for your thoughts or any of your senses or any of your communications Ė which there are many avenues of communications that you offer to yourself Ė or your physical body form, any of these are physical manifestations, projections of that element of yourself that you describe as your conscious self, your conscious mind. It is not your mind. It is not associated with any physical manifestation. That is the element of you that is consciousness. That is your essence. That is what generates you as being you.

STEVE: What I was trying to do was I was trying to differentiate it from the part thatís more hidden from me, the rest of the objective awareness that I described before as subconscious.

ELIAS: That is what I express to you as the subjective awareness. What you describe as...

STEVE: Well, then, Iím totally confused. I thought that I wasnít immediately aware of most of what my objective awareness was doing without looking at impulses, impressions, body consciousness, and then interpreting, hopefully correctly Ė many times not Ė what it is that itís communicating and doing. Now youíve got me confused. I thought the subjective awareness said okay, letís break his arm. It directs the objective awareness to create a broken arm. So far so good? (Elias shakes his head) Okay, something simpler. Letís say breathe. It directs the objective awareness to have me breathe. Thatís not correct?

ELIAS: (Elias shakes his head) It does not direct the objective awareness.

Now; the subjective awareness does instruct the body consciousness...

STEVE: But it doesnít instruct the objective awareness to create it?

ELIAS: No. It moves simultaneously and in harmony with the objective awareness. This is the reason that it is important, and I continue to reiterate to many individuals that it is significant that they pay attention to what they are actually doing objectively, for the subjective awareness is doing the same action in different imagery. If you break your arm, as your example, your objective awareness is generating a direction and movement, and also your subjective is in...

STEVE: Your objective awareness is doing what?

ELIAS: Your objective awareness is generating a movement in a direction...

STEVE: Is breaking my arm.

ELIAS: It may be generating many different expressions, and the subjective awareness may instruct the physical body to be creating a broken arm, but the objective is also participating and is generating that action simultaneously. One is not following the other.

STEVE: You know, interestingly enough, instead of saying, ďMy objective awareness perceives that I am getting stronger or healing my hip,Ē if I take out the word ďobjectiveĒ and just leave ďmy awareness perceives,Ē itís stronger.

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: That would include my subjective.

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: Iím still not clear on this one point. I have a liver, and itís working. If you want me to tell you itís working, I have no consciousness of it working. There must be a part of my objective awareness that is beneath what I call my conscious mind. There must be a subconscious part of objective awareness, and you said before that there was, right?

ELIAS: No, that is what you term it to be, subconscious.

STEVE: Iím aware of it in a different way than Iím aware of things that are occurring in this room. Iím not aware of my liver. If you say that maybe I could learn about my liver by looking at my impulses or impressions, that would be a long process!

ELIAS: I am understanding, but...

STEVE: So there must be a part of my objective awareness thatís different than my conscious mind.

ELIAS: No. The reason that you perceive this in this manner is that this is very familiar, and what is very familiar, generally speaking, with most individuals Ė you are not merely the only individual Ė but with most individuals, most of the actions that you incorporate within your waking state, your sleep state, within your existence, so to speak, in physical manifestation are generated in what I have termed to be automatic pilot.

Your attention does not incorporate a focus upon many, many, many actions, your physical body functions, unless you generate a body function that you perceive to be malfunctioning. In which situation, you do move your attention to the malfunctioning aspect of your physical body. But if you perceive that it is not malfunctioning, you do not move your attention to any specific element of your physical body. It is not merely your physical body. You do not pay attention to many, many, many actions...

STEVE: You couldnít make me pay attention to them. A person could put a gun to my head and say pay attention to your properly functioning liver, and I wouldnít know how to do that.

ELIAS: For you are not interested.

STEVE: Well, I would be if there was a gun to my head.

ELIAS: Perhaps; perhaps not.

STEVE: I still couldnít do it.

ELIAS: Or you WOULDNíT do it. It is not that you cannot...

STEVE: Hereís my follow-up question. Weíre running out of time. Sometimes I interrupt; Iím sorry about that. You want us to alter our perception of our objective awareness, and in doing so create a different reality for ourselves. Therefore, you want us to get into our, what Iíve been using as a word, conscious mind, what the communications are beneath the surface, and just listening to the communications will alter our perception. It wonít alter the perception of the subjective awareness, will it?

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: But if my subjective awareness is creating it...

ELIAS: In actuality...

STEVE: ...what does it care if my conscious mind knows what the communications are? It already knows what they are.

ELIAS: In actuality, let me amend that statement. But let me also qualify and clarify your statement. First of all, it is an alteration of your objective awareness, your perception, that element of your objective awareness that actually creates your physical reality.

Now...

STEVE: That we want to change the perception of.

ELIAS: Let me also express to you, I do not want you to alter your perception; YOU want to alter your perception.

STEVE: But youíre rooting for us, Iím sure.

ELIAS: Quite.

Now; in this, as the subjective and the objective are in harmony, it does alter the direction of the subjective movement, but perception is an objective expression. It is not a subjective...

STEVE: But didnít you just say the opposite?

ELIAS: No.

STEVE: I said do we want to alter the perception of the subjective awareness, and you said yes.

ELIAS: Which, I also expressed to you to allow me to amend that statement. For what occurs is not an alteration of perception subjectively, for perception is not a subjective mechanism. It is an objective expression; it is an objective mechanism. But what it does is, as the objective and the subjective are in harmony with each other, what occurs is that the movement, the direction of the subjective also alters.

STEVE: I see. If I can alter the perception of the objective, that will alter the action of the subjective.

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: Thatís nice to know. By the way, I think I understand that the objective awareness is the part of you that is the conscious mind, the way I have used it, and the other part of what you would call the conscious mind that Iím not paying attention to. Is that a full statement of what the objective awareness is? (Elias nods) Itís perception of that thing that I just described, the whole thing, that we want to alter. Therefore, alter from what to what? In the specific case of me having this belief of a fear of becoming more psychic, what do we want to alter it from, the objective awareness, and what do we want to alter it to, to neutralize that belief?

ELIAS: What you are altering is the expression of the perception in relation to the belief. In a manner of speaking, for the most part what you have generated is an absolute, that your perception is that if you incorporate certain actions, if you do this, thusly another action shall occur. This is an expressed belief.

Now; this negates your choices. It narrows your choices tremendously, in which you offer yourself very few choices, but there are many more choices available to you. But in this confinement of these choices, let us merely focus upon that and address to that. In what you are attempting as you offer yourself permission to incorporate a psychic action of any type for any length of time with the conditions that you have set for yourself, what you are doing is offering yourself permission to engage an action that you are blocking yourself from engaging, temporarily, and allowing yourself to exercise that action in conjunction with the belief.

Now; what that does in relation to your question of what you are altering your perception from to...

STEVE: You mean, youíre saying thatís my goal, what you just said, thatís my goal?

ELIAS: To alter your perception.

STEVE: To do the psychic thing in conjunction with my belief, thatís my purpose here, to do that.

ELIAS: No, it is not your purpose. It is the action that you are incorporating now, for this is the direction you are incorporating. But in that action, as you allow yourself to accomplish that action even in increments, as you continue to incorporate that action you are incrementally changing your perception, for your perception begins to move in a direction of more of an allowance and more of a reinforcement of yourself, which dissipates the strength of the belief.

STEVE: So I could always monitor if somethingís working, because Iíll get less muscle contraction in my throat and Iíll get less of a washcloth feeling over my head, so Iíll be able to do stuff. Iíll always have a very easy way, as opposed to some people who have to look at impulses and oh-my-god what does that mean, Iíll have a hundred percent way of knowing whether it worked or not...

ELIAS: Yes.

STEVE: ...and Iíll just keep doing that, and maybe I can chip away at this thing.

ELIAS: Yes. For this is...

STEVE: Very good. Let me ask you just one quick question.

ELIAS: Very well.

STEVE: Do you perceive anything different about my energy than the other people that you see, or thereís a difference?

ELIAS: (Quietly) Of course your energy is different, for each of you is unique.

STEVE: But thereís nothing in a unique category from all the rest, though, about someone thatís apparently got a clamp on his brain because he might be partially psychic? That energy looks the same as other peopleís, in a sense? Is that right?

ELIAS: (Gently) No, my friend. Each of you incorporates a very, very different energy.

STEVE: So when I come in, you donít go oh, god, that alien thingís here again. You never thought like Iíve never seen energy like this before.

ELIAS: No.

STEVE: Well, weíd better go, and thank you very much. Youíve been very helpful today. Thank you very, very much.

ELIAS: You are very welcome, my friend, and I shall anticipate our next meeting.

STEVE: In our next meeting, Iíll give you a progress report.

ELIAS: Very well! And I shall continue to be offering my energy to you in supportiveness.

STEVE: Any little bit will help!

ELIAS: Very well, my friend, in great affection as always...

STEVE: Same to you.

ELIAS: ...au revoir.

STEVE: Goodbye.

Elias departs after 1 hour, 5 minutes.


Endnotes:

(1) Steve is referring to the Castaic, California group session 1496 that took place on January 17, 2004.

< Previous session | Go to the top | Next session >


© 2004 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.