Friday, February 20, 2004
“More on Fragmentation”
Participants: Mary (Michael), Ben (Albert), Anne (Monique) and Liam (Benny).
(Elias’ arrival time is 15 seconds.)
ELIAS: Good evening!
ANNE: Hi! Can you hear us okay?
ELIAS: What shall we discuss?
ANNE: Can you hear us okay, Elias?
ELIAS: Yes, although I am aware of an interference with your recording.
ANNE: Yesterday there was like communication problems. Can I ask you a quick question then?
ELIAS: You may.
ANNE: I keep getting a young man around 16 as a recent focus of mine. Is it correct to say that he’s from 2066?
ANNE: He looks very normal actually, like a really conservative young man into astronomy and science.
ELIAS: And this surprises you?
ANNE: Yes, because it’s sort of on the cusp of the completion of the Shift to be honest, so you would expect him to be a little bit more... In fashion, at least I’d imagine him to be a little bit different.
ELIAS: (Chuckles) Not necessarily.
ANNE: Is he in the Midwest in the States?
BEN: Is this a concurrent focus or has he not been born yet? Oh, that’s right, if he’s 16 he hasn’t been born yet.
I had a question about Anne that we possibly share a focus where I felt like I was making a bargain with her, that I was perhaps trying to ask for her daughter’s hand in marriage, or that I was trying to present myself as an acceptable suitor.
BEN: So this is a focus that we share?
BEN: And what is the time framework and what country?
BEN: And in what country?
ANNE: Turkey! We were talking about this.
BEN: So is the daughter someone else I might know, someone else in the forum?
ANNE: It isn’t Liam, is it?
ELIAS: No. Shall you not investigate? I may express to you that it is a present friend of Albert.
BEN: I wanted to marry Kevin? (Elias laughs)
This is a question. Anne and I are both creating coughs right now and we think that even though we’re both doing similar imagery, it’s for different reasons. Do you have anything you could add to that?
ELIAS: And what is your impression?
BEN: Anne, you speak first, because I think you have more of a handle on it than I do.
ANNE: Well, mine has something to do with smoking, because it came on after we had Patrick’s session on Sunday.
ELIAS: Yes, you are correct.
ANNE: So it’s smoking related.
BEN: I thought that maybe it had something to do with the fact that maybe when speaking with Patrick you were almost giving him permission to smoke, and because Anne had quit smoking she felt like well, maybe I should be smoking. If it’s okay to smoke, then why did I stop smoking?
ELIAS: That is an association that is being generated by the individual, but that is not precisely what I expressed. I did not express permission for the other individual to be engaging the action of smoking. I merely offered information that it concerns a choice, that it is associated with beliefs that are expressed, and that he may choose whether he prefers to continue to engage this action or whether he chooses to be expressing in alignment with his expressed belief. But either direction is merely a choice.
BEN: Right. So what about in this moment and Anne’s choice of coughing, what does that have to do with?
ELIAS: That is associated with the action of smoking, a signal in a manner of speaking, confirming her expressed belief that this action is harmful.
BEN: For me, I kept thinking that maybe my cough has something to do with not expressing myself or something.
ELIAS: Somewhat restricting.
BEN: Restricting my expression?
BEN: I noticed that it seems like I’m coughing first thing in the morning or maybe before I go to sleep at night, but for the most part I’m not coughing during the day.
ELIAS: And what clue does this offer you?
BEN: I guess it is something subjective and not really related to objective day-to-day things.
ELIAS: Not necessarily. Allow yourself to notice more clearly the time frameworks in which you incorporate this action.
BEN: I have noticed that it happens when I wake up in the morning. It’s not like I’ve been coughing through the night or anything else like that. I wake up and then I start coughing.
ELIAS: And in the evening, in the time framework in which you are approaching time to be retiring for the day.
BEN: So I’m getting warm but I’m not getting it yet!
ELIAS: It is associated with restricting yourself in association with the time framework surrounding your sleep state.
BEN: You mean like in some sense I feel like I shouldn’t be going to sleep or I shouldn’t be waking up?
ELIAS: No. Surrounding your sleep state, not concerning your sleep state.
BEN: So what are my associations with my sleep state? Is that what I should be asking myself?
ELIAS: No, surrounding your sleep state: intimacy.
BEN: Intimacy with myself?
BEN: And Benny?
ELIAS: (Laughs) One point!
BEN: To tell you the truth, looking back on my previous relationships, I am not really aware of a whole lot of restrictions or intimacy issues or whatever that I’m currently going through. This relationship seems to be quite easy.
ELIAS: I am understanding, but it is a restriction of you in expressiveness of yourself. Not that it is necessary for you to incorporate any specific action that you are not incorporating. That is not the point. It is a time framework in which you are expressing somewhat of a vulnerability, and not allowing yourself or not noticing that within that time framework you are constricting your energy.
BEN: Well, I’ll have to be on the lookout for that.
ANNE: I was thinking about when you create alternate realities, because something happened today, interestingly. I turned on the radio in the car – and you know we have been having this issue around smoking cigarettes – and I turn on the radio and the first news item that comes up is that there potentially is a cure for lung cancer. This is the last thing I would imagine happening in this world. There was no prior clue that this was actually going to come out in science, and I kind of felt like I had stepped into some kind of slightly alternate reality. What is actually the case here?
ELIAS: Are you remembering what I expressed to your partner concerning facts?
ELIAS: This is an example. Facts change. They are not absolutes, and regardless of what you attribute to any action that you incorporate as an absolute expressing cause and effect, it is not actually an absolute and your facts change.
(Portion deleted by request)
ANNE: How many focuses do Ben and I share?
ANNE: How many do Patrick and I share?
ANNE: How many focuses do I have in total in this physical dimension?
ELIAS: Six hundred and sixteen.
BEN: I have like 480 or something?
BEN: How many concurrent Annes are there?
BEN: And where are they?
ELIAS: I shall leave this to your investigations.
BEN: I would say that one of them is in East Asia.
ANNE: One is in New York, one is in east Asia, and one is here.
BEN: Four in addition to Anne’s focus?
BEN: Four, including Anne?
BEN: So she’s here in London, New York, East Asia... I say Paris.
BEN: So one is in New York. Which part, Manhattan or Queens?
ANNE: I say it’s Manhattan.
ANNE: East Asia, there’s a lot of countries...
BEN: In Japan or Korea?
ANNE: I had an old boyfriend by the name of Neil. When I first saw him, I had an extremely sort of... I don’t even know how to describe the reaction I had towards him. It was a recognition of some sort and I’ve never had that since or before. I thought he would be one of my focuses.
ELIAS: No. That which you would term to be a soul mate.
BEN: What type of soul mate?
ELIAS: In what terms?
BEN: Well, there are soul mates that hate each other and there are soul mates who really like each other.
ELIAS: That is dependent upon the actual interaction and choice of the focus. It does not designate a type of soul mate.
Soul mates are essences that choose to be manifest together in many different focuses and perhaps even manifest together in many different dimensions together in what you recognize as some type of intimate relationship. Whether it be adversarial in some focuses or in what you would view as a more positive relationship, it matters not. It is a choice of essences to focus attentions together and a type of connection in energy between the essences that generates this desire to be exploring in many areas of consciousness together.
This is not to say that you may objectively meet a focus of that essence in every focus or that you may necessarily generate a romantic inclination or an on-going relationship with the individual within any particular focus, for you may objectively meet the individual and not choose to be engaging that type of action with them, but you shall recognize a strong familiarity.
BEN: Becky in North Carolina, is she possibly a soul mate of Liam’s?
BEN: What is her essence name?
ELIAS: Essence name, Lani, L-A-N-I (LAH nee). And your impression as to essence families, Albert?
BEN: She is Sumari/Milumet.
ANNE: And Neil? I don’t know his essence name but could you tell me?
ELIAS: Essence name, Wiere, W-I-E-R-E (WEER).
ANNE: I think his alignment is Ilda and family I think Gramada, but I’m not sure.
ANNE: So it’s exactly the same as mine?
BEN: And is he common as well?
BEN: And Lani is common?
BEN: Benny seems to think that Lani might be soft.
BEN: Benny and I are or are not soul mates?
BEN: Oh, so we are. So he’s soul mates with me as well as Lani.
ELIAS: Yes. You may incorporate many soul mates.
ANNE: I haven’t seen any of my other soul mates, then. Do I have any other soul mates?
ELIAS: Not that you have objectively met with in this focus, but yes, you incorporate many other soul mates.
BEN: Anne recently told me about Patrick’s fragmentation, about how he now has completely different essence information. Now, of course, for me I have a particular, I guess it’s like an absolute or a truth or whatever else, where I have an idea about what this essence information means in general. So when I find out that somebody has completely different essence information, it’s hard for me to explain. I describe it as if someone could change their nationality, but that has to do with where you were born or who your parents were and it can’t be changed in six months. If it is changed, I would expect this person to turn out to be a different person. Could you give me any insights about my beliefs or associations with what essence information means, period?
ELIAS: I may confirm that you do generate an association in absolutes concerning this information, which I have expressed there are no absolutes. Let me also explain to you that an individual may choose to be fragmenting or an individual may choose to be aligning themselves more strongly with a different essence, which may be an observing essence of their focus, and the information shall change. But that does not necessarily alter the individual or their intent or their direction or their personality.
BEN: Well, let me ask this. Previously Patrick had the essence name of Roth, so is this essence named Roth manifesting physical focuses in this dimension now?
BEN: So the relationship between Eric and Roth, is this sort of like... This is not a first focus for the Eric essence, correct?
BEN: You were saying before about sort of an observing essence. Is that what’s going on? In other words, there was some relationship of this Eric essence all along, and now this Eric essence is directing or primary, and Roth is no longer involved.
ELIAS: No, this would be a situation of fragmentation, as I expressed, which is the generating of another essence. As I have explained previously, this type of action occurs continuously within essence. As I have also expressed, whatever the fragmented essence chooses to incorporate as qualities of the fragmenting essence, they do. The action of fragmenting is the choice of different qualities incorporated within an existing essence or essences, for it may be an action that is incorporated in relation to several or even many essences which may be merged in one action, and a quality chooses to be expressed as its own personality essence.
Now; all of the experiences of the fragmenting essence or essences are incorporated within the new essence. It is not an action in which the new essence that is generated, in your terms, would be viewed as a blank slate. It incorporates all of the experiences of the fragmenting essences.
This action of fragmentation may not necessarily be obviously expressed within an actual physical focus. At times there may be some evidence expressed in the choice of the focus to be altering their expression and changing the manner in which they express themselves. They may even choose to be expressing some alterations of personality, but that is not quite common. That would be what you would term to be more rare. Generally speaking, the individual does not display much alteration, if any, in the action of fragmentation.
BEN: We had David staying last night with us. He mentioned something about Liam being dispersed. What was he talking about?
ELIAS: I may express to you that [he is] not a dispersed essence, but that may be confused at times with the engagement of the empathic sense. Some individuals engage their empathic sense quite naturally and that at times may be confused with being a dispersed essence.
BEN: What would that empathic sense be recognized as?
ELIAS: It is merely an expression of energy and another individual recognizing that you express a type of energy, that if you are so choosing you allow yourself to engage your empathic sense quite naturally and easily.
BEN: What’s the relationship with that and being dispersed? Are dispersed people more empathic?
ELIAS: Not necessarily. But essences that are dispersed easily tap into energy of other essences, which within physical focus it is an action in which the focus may easily and naturally, without intentionally attempting, be tapping into other individuals within their world and offering themselves information concerning the other individuals. It is somewhat of a different action, but the energy appears very similar.
BEN: That leads me on to Sumari people. We were talking about that Sumari people oftentimes seem to be manipulative, sponging, moochers. So can you explain where we came up with that generalization?
ELIAS: In association with alignment and family?
BEN: I think in the discussion we were not distinguishing between the two. I guess clarity is what we’re looking for. We were just talking about things that we had observed, generalizations we were making, and it seemed to be associated with the Sumari family and that’s about as far as we got.
ANNE: Actually, let me quickly ask you before you answer that: is my friend Glen Sumari aligned or family and must be soft?
ANNE: And he’s common?
ELIAS: Your impression?
BEN: So back to our question about our generalizations about what we think about Sumari, can you clarify?
ELIAS: I would express to you that this is not necessarily associated with the families. I may express a confirmation, in a manner, concerning the perception that there is a difference expressed between the orientations, but that also within your perceptions is influenced by your beliefs concerning what is appropriate and what is not appropriate – which is quite understandable that you would generate similar perceptions, for individuals draw to each other in expressing similar perceptions.
ANNE: So what you’re saying is that Sumari can basically appear any way, but the three of us here collectively believe Sumaris to be spongers?
ELIAS: It is a perception that you have generated viewing what you perceive to be commonalities in some individuals that are incorporating the same family or an alignment. But let me also express to you that this is a very familiar action which has been incorporated for millenniums within your physical reality. This is the manner in which you generate more separation and you justify judgments.
ANNE: Well, it is a bit difficult when you’re going for coffee with someone and they just refuse to pay for anything!
ELIAS: But this is your creation! (Laughter) And to be ascribing blame to the other individual and judgment is not paying attention to yourself and what YOU are creating, for you are creating the scenario of the other individual. Therefore, it is significant what type of energy you are projecting that creates that type of scenario.
ANNE: I thought of asking him a couple of weeks ago. I said, “Well, I’m sorry but I feel as though you’re taking advantage of me.” He got really angry, he got really angry, and then started saying that he was an extremely generous person – but I’ve never seen it, never.
BEN: But then you said he started acting differently after you brought it up.
ANNE: After I mentioned it, he started finally paying for things himself.
ELIAS: But what have YOU been generating within these scenarios?
ANNE: What was I generating?
ANNE: You mean prior to my telling him?
ANNE: To be honest, I was expecting him to sponge like he always does.
ELIAS: And therefore, this is what you create. But you also create yourself being a victim of the other individual. The other individual is not creating your reality. Therefore, if you are dissatisfied with some action that is occurring within your reality, my suggestion is that you pay attention to what YOU are creating, for you are creating the other individual and what is occurring.
ANNE: Well, I think I kind of fixed it by mentioning it.
ELIAS: Ah. You have, in your terms, fixed the situation temporarily, for you have generated a bandage. You have not addressed to your creation; you have addressed to the other individual’s creation, which IS your creation. Therefore, what you have accomplished is generating a camouflage for yourself.
Now; in choosing to generate an actual different reality that may be more lasting than temporary, if you are genuinely allowing yourself to pay attention to what YOU are doing and what type of energy you are projecting, you may address to that and choose to be expressing a different type of energy. It is not that you expect the other individual to be a sponge, in your terms, but that you expect yourself to generate the action of the responsibility.
BEN: As long as we’re talking about Anne, what’s Anne’s draw to London?
ELIAS: In what capacity?
BEN: Well, I think in my own sense I have an idea of why I want to live in London. But because Anne does live in London and she’s American, I wonder why did Anne come to London? I imagine her imagery would be different from mine.
ELIAS: Correct. And shall you not inquire this of the individual?
BEN: (Laughter) We’ll take this off line, then. (Elias laughs)
(Portion deleted by request.)
ANNE: A couple of images have come up – werewolves, a lot of those, not obviously on the street but on television. I’d like to know about that and foxes. I saw one coming here.
ELIAS: The first creature is imagery that you are presenting to yourself concerning other-dimensional focuses. The second creature, offer to myself your impression as to why you are presenting yourself with that imagery.
ANNE: When I see the foxes, I think they are quite cute. They are quite pretty and sweet looking and cute but wild at the same time.
ELIAS: And swift of movement, which is imagery that you are presenting to yourself concerning freedom, YOUR freedom.
ANNE: So they are there to remind me of my own freedom?
ANNE: If you had to describe each of our energies as an animal, which animal would each be? (Pause)
ELIAS: I would express your energy as a large antelope.
ANNE: And Ben?
ELIAS: That energy I would express similar to a horse.
ANNE: And Liam?
ELIAS: That energy similar to a fish.
ANNE: And Patrick?
ELIAS: That energy...
(Tape ends after 1 hour.)
© 2004 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.