Saturday, February 19, 2005
ďOpposing Your Medical BeliefsĒ
Participants: Mary (Michael), Margot (Giselle) and Howard (Bosht).
(Eliasí arrival time is 14 seconds.)
ELIAS: Good afternoon!
MARGOT: Good afternoon, Elias! (Elias chuckles) Itís so nice to hear your voice!
ELIAS: And you, also!
MARGOT: Well, thatís good! I always like it when someone wants to hear my voice! (Elias laughs) I know Iíve been talking to you a lot, so I know you already know what Iím going to talk about. But for the sake of the fact that this needs to go into a transcript, I guess I might as well ask the questions that have been going through my head.
The first one Iíd like to ask, though, would have to do with the last time that we talked. We were talking about the fact that I obviously like to be entertained rather than entertain myself. I know this is true, and I told you that the last time. But after we talked about that, after the session was over, somehow I got it into my head that you were saying that wanting to be entertained is wrong. I know thereís no wrong in all this, so Iíd like you to maybe kind of clear that up for me, because I did get it into my head that thatís a wrong action of mine.
ELIAS: No, it is not wrong; it is merely a preference.
MARGOT: A preference! Oh, thatís such a good word! (Elias chuckles) Yes, it is. It is, and it still continues to be so. I get to feeling like a lazy slob, but thatís all right, too. Iím old enough that I can be anything I want to be, so okey-doke. (Elias laughs)
A few weeks ago, I began to experience a kind of strange anxiety. In fact, it was a brand new kind of anxiety for me, about upcoming trips to see friends and to go to sessions. Weíre going to go to New Orleans in April, and we have a few old friends who have decided to come here and see us. Ordinarily this is very, very exciting to me, but Iíve begun to be very anxious about it. I havenít figured out the anxiety. I donít feel the intensity of that anymore, but Iíd like to know why there was that change in my behavior and the way I was thinking about it all that I got so anxious. Can you give me a clue?
ELIAS: Yes. This is occurring or has occurred in relation to your experiences of incorporating certain times in which you are generating clarity and certain times in which you are more scattered or generating what you view as confusion and the lack of control of that and the unpredictability of it, and therefore generating somewhat of an apprehension concerning whether you might incorporate those experiences of being scattered or confused in what you deem to be inappropriate settings. It is becoming somewhat acceptable for you to be experiencing in this manner if you are within your familiar environment and with individuals that you generate a closeness with, such as your partner. But in situations or settings that involve other individuals in more of a group capacity and individuals that you may know but are not generating that intimacy with, there is an apprehension, that if you are expressing a time framework of confusion, that that would be perceived as unacceptable behavior.
MARGOT: Right, I can see that. I donít know why I couldnít see that myself, but I can sure see it now. Thatís absolutely right.
ELIAS: But you may also assure yourself, Giselle, that thus far you have not actually generated those experiences of confusion in the environment of interacting with other individuals in the settings of groups.
MARGOT: No, I donít believe I have, but itís because Iím working very hard to appear normal! (Laughs with Elias) It seems like I have days on end that I have to work kind of hard on appearing to be like everybody else, but thatís okay. I manage it somehow.
Somethingís been going on with me for about three weeks. First of all, one day about three weeks ago, I suddenly decided right out of the blue that I needed to talk to you. I found this to be kind of strange because I really didnít have much to ask you, just three or four things. But I had such a strong urge to make the appointment that I did, and then it began to appear that I was psychic and I knew that at some time in the future I would need to talk to you. So whatever it was, I got the appointment today that weíre doing right now. Then things began to start being kind of strange, and I realized that I really did need to talk to you, so I was glad that Iíd had the foresight to make the appointment to do so.
The first thing that started is everything started to seem so weird that I decided that maybe I had gotten myself polarized; Iím quite good at that. I got out everything that youíve ever said about it and read it through and looked at myself a great deal, trying to find out just what it was, but I just came back to the same old areas that Iím always polarized in, which would be politics and medical beliefs. Then, about that time, I found that I had a lump, quite a large lump, in my right breast. So then I pulled out everything youíve ever said about right side/left side, hoping that that would give me a clue. At first, for a couple of weeks, I wasnít very concerned about this lump because Iíve had lumps in my breasts off and on all my life and they dissolve away, but this one hadnít begun to dissolve away.
That was going on, and then I all of a sudden became very frightened about it, which I thought also was very strange. Even though I have all these medical belief systems about not liking doctors and very seldom going to one, I did wind up going to the doctor and ended up with an appointment with a surgeon to have the lump removed on a certain day, but then I was even more frightened. I was absolutely in a panic. I got in touch with Marj/Grady, my dear friend, and she just said a few terse words that brought me right back down to earth again Ė I was over my fear and woke up the next day completely relaxed about any fear at all. She had reminded me that I could simply choose not to feel the fear, which I had felt was very hard to do and I couldnít make that choice at all.
Anyway, this all occurred during this last week, and Iíve been really feeling very good and not frightened at all about it. Iíve still got the lump, and Iím still wondering why after all these years I would create a lump. Can you give me any idea what that was about, that action?
ELIAS: And your impression?
MARGOT: Iíve told you all of the impressions that I had. I know that if youíll just give me a hint or two, I will trip on it right away, but I just have not been able to.
ELIAS: First of all, you are addressing to your beliefs in association with physicians and medical practices. In this, as you created a familiar manifestation, you generated the fear in association with the physician. For in moving in the direction of not opposing your beliefs, or attempting to not oppose your beliefs, you frightened yourself in what you could potentially create. You incorporated a fear of what you could potentially create if you are engaging your physician and moving into those medical beliefs and not opposing them.
Let me express to you, your perception concerning these medical beliefs has been that if you oppose them, you shall not create them Ė you shall prevent creating certain physical manifestations if you are opposing those beliefs. That is not true, but that has been your assessment. Therefore, in NOT opposing those beliefs, you automatically move in the other direction of fearing that you are welcoming a physical manifestation that may be potentially harmful, which is also not true, but it is very real. The perception is very real, that to hold at bay any harmful physical manifestation, you must not offer it any energy or any ease. You must be in opposition to it.
MARGOT: Oh! Iíve never thought about the opposition part of that. So I created the lump just simply out of the fact that I opposed the belief?
ELIAS: No, you created the reverse. You created the physical manifestation in your movement and exploration of these beliefs that you incorporate concerning physicians and medical practices. You were attempting to not be opposing those beliefs and moving with them, but that generated the fear. That is what frightened you for that is unfamiliar, to move with those beliefs rather than opposing them. The opposition of them is what generates your perception of safety, that you shall not create some physical manifestation that is harmful to you.
MARGOT: Howard is on the line now, and I hope he understands that because Iím still not very clear about it. I think you probably said it twice, and this is quite important to me to understand this.
ELIAS: Very well. Let me offer a different explanation. You incorporate certain beliefs concerning physicians and the medical practices of them.
Now; you do not agree with the actual beliefs that you incorporate. Therefore, you THINK that you do not approve of physicians and how they generate their medical practices. That is your disagreement with your beliefs that generates those types of thought processes.
The actual belief that you do incorporate and that is expressed is that these physicians incorporate considerable physical knowledge and that they understand how the physical body operates and functions, and that they do incorporate different methods to fix certain manifestations that an individual may develop. Whether you agree with their methods or not does not invalidate the belief itself and that it is expressed.
Now; in moving with your disagreement of your physicians and their medical practices, what is familiar for you to do is to OPPOSE their directions, and express an opposing energy to not create a physical manifestation that could be potentially dangerous. You do not create or have not created a failed liver, for that is a potentially dangerous manifestation. And in conjunction with your beliefs and your opposition to your beliefs, if you are opposing your belief concerning these physicians and their medical practices, you shall prevent yourself from engaging them by not creating a failed liver. Therefore, it is unnecessary for you to engage the physician. But if you are not opposing your expressed beliefs, that opens the window for the possibility that you perhaps might create some physical manifestation.
Now; the physical manifestation that you create may not necessarily be potentially dangerous or harmful, but you are now moving in the direction of not opposing the physicians or the medical practices and therefore not opposing your expressed beliefs. Within your perception, that opens the window for suggestion that the physician may perhaps express to you that what you have created is potentially dangerous or harmful, and therefore, so it shall be. (1)
HOWARD: Is this a game that we play with ourselves to test our beliefs?
ELIAS: It is not necessarily a testing. This has been a direction that you, Giselle, have been addressing to for a time framework now. You have been attempting to examine your expressed beliefs concerning physicians and their practices, and recognizing your disagreement with your own beliefs and recognizing your opposition to your own beliefs.
HOWARD: Is the conscious kinda like at war with the subjective here? Youíve said several times something about the beliefs that you hold, Margot holds, that sheís been at odds with her beliefs.
ELIAS: Correct. That is not uncommon.
HOWARD: To be at odds with your beliefs is a conscious thing, it seems me.
ELIAS: Partially. It is a conscious action, but you may not necessarily incorporate an awareness of it or an understanding of it without exploring that. It is a conscious action, in your terms, and you do provide yourself with evidence of the conflict, but you may not necessarily identify what is being generated or what is in play that is creating that conflict.
Giselle and I have discussed in previous conversations her expressed beliefs concerning physicians and medical practices and methods, and we have discussed the element of her disagreement objectively with that but how that disagreement creates conflict, for that creates a forcing of energy, which actually generates certain physical manifestations.
MARGOT: Thatís really interesting, Elias. I had no idea that that was going on with me. Youíve certainly given me a lot to think about.
HOWARD: I would like to include an analogy here to see if I get this. We have a friend who was into, as we were, into the cleaning energies of empowered disks, that by using tone and meditation she would be able to facilitate the cleaning of auras and the physical body itself by passing these disks over herself and other people. One night she slept with her head surrounded by these disks, and the next morning her face broke out in hives. It was grotesque to see how she was affected. At least, that was my impression.
We went to visit them, we were in the neighborhood and dropped by, and we couldnít say anything for a long time about what we obviously could see. Finally we asked her whatís going on, and she said, ďI was...
MARGOT: ...experimenting,Ē I think.
HOWARD: Yes. She said something about she had been noticing these breakouts, and she wanted to make sure that her husband knew that at any time now she was going to ascend. As she described what was going on, I said, ďYouíve been using these disks in a very powerful manner. It seems to me that you are manifesting this breakout all over your face. I would recommend for you to stop this stuff that you are doing, because you are getting an effect, a physical effect. You are manifesting the physical effect that you think you are trying to cure.Ē And she said, ďOH! I understand.Ē She stopped the doing and her face cleared up.
MARGOT: And she didnít ascend yet, either.
HOWARD: Is that what weíre talking about here?
ELIAS: It is similar, yes. For remember, you create what you concentrate upon.
Now; your concentration is centered with your beliefs, and in this, this entire scenario that we have been discussing is quite similar. If you incorporate expressed beliefs that physicians express the ability to heal and that they incorporate significant knowledge and information that facilitates those abilities to heal or to fix, there is an innate trust in that expressed belief as being real, which is not good or bad, but it is real.
If you are opposing that belief for you disagree with their methods, regardless of the incorporation of the belief that they do incorporate the knowledge and the ability, if you disagree with their methods and are expressing an opposing energy, you may not necessarily be aware of that opposition, for what you are paying attention to Ė not necessarily what you are concentrating upon Ė but what you are paying attention to is your thought process, and you are assessing that as what you believe. In that, you begin to express an opposing energy to the actual belief, which reinforces the concentration upon that belief, and you may very likely create some physical manifestation, for you are concentrating upon these particular beliefs Ė which is what you have created, Giselle, many times.
Now; the manifestations that you have created we have discussed, and I have offered you explanations which you have listened to and accepted and have moved in a direction of evaluating your own beliefs and how you oppose them at times and how that generates physical manifestations. In that exploration that you have been engaging, you have been offering yourself information concerning these expressed beliefs, and you have been attempting to not oppose them.
But the key in this is that there are certain elements of that opposing of your beliefs that also provide you with a type of protection, for whatever you create in the physical manifestations in relation to that opposing energy are not life threatening.
MARGOT: Well, thatís good to know!
ELIAS: Now; what you have done is attempt to move into an expression of not opposing, but in that, you surrender that protecting element. For in the opposition, you also hold at bay any serious, or what you would term to be serious, manifestation that may, in your perception, absolutely require engaging your physicians and their medical methods, for it may be a dangerous manifestation.
That protective element of your opposition has generated within you a manner in which you do create physical manifestations but not to an extent of being potentially dangerous or life threatening. That has allowed you underlyingly some element of safety and a false sense of trust of yourself to generate health.
In this, as you and I have explored these beliefs together, it has motivated you to evaluate these beliefs more fully and to identify them more fully and to move into addressing to them, which I am acknowledging of. But in that, you frightened yourself, for you removed that protective element that provides you with this false sense of safety and trust. In not opposing your beliefs, you generated the perception of the possibility that if you are not opposing them, you thusly open a window to potentially create some real, serious, dangerous manifestation that shall require the engagement of your physicians, which is not what you want to be creating. But it generates a feeling of a lack of control of what you are manifesting, and the fear is expressed in that if you are not opposing your own beliefs that you disagree with, perhaps you shall open the door to be creating all manners of manifestations physically that you do not want. That is not true, but that is what frightened you.
MARGOT: I see, Elias. I think we could probably write a whole book about that now! (Elias laughs)
HOWARD: Could I offer what I might consider a beginning point of this, in terms of what I have observed? Margot had been trying to find a doctor. First we went to the walk-in clinic, and then we went to this new doctor who was in co-practice with one of the earlier physicians that both Margot and I had met when we were attending the walk-in-clinic. Margot was assigned to the doctor who held very strong beliefs. Margot was attempting to get control of her blood pressure to see if the medications that she had previously needed to be either boosted or changed. I think that is when it began, because when she came back from that, she was dissatisfied with the whole situation, and we couldnít find anybody either of us felt particularly good about. Then this lump in the breast appeared ďto be noticed.Ē It could have always been there, for all we know. Thatís why we canít tell when it began.
So we went back again to the same doctor and suddenly it was a mammogram and then other kinds of tests and visits to surgeons, and it seemed to be run-away. I believe it more or less began with the visit to the walk-in-clinic regarding the blood pressure.
MARGOT: I donít know, Howard, when it began. It just...
HOWARD: Any observations on that from you, Elias?
ELIAS: I may express to you that is an event that you began noticing different aspects of this scenario, but Giselle has been moving in this direction of evaluating and examining these beliefs for a time framework.
HOWARD: Yes, thatís true. Margot?
MARGOT: You want me to take it back?
HOWARD: If you wish.
MARGOT: Why donít you go ahead.
HOWARD: Well, mine are quite a bit different in terms questions. The first question on my list is regarding the artist Charles Russell. My mother loved his work and so do I, and I wondered is it possible that Charles Russell was a focus of Leonardo da Vinci.
HOWARD: Okay, I could ask was he a focus of mine?
ELIAS: No, but your mother is an observing essence of that focus.
HOWARD: Very good. One the first metaphysical books that I bought and enjoyed a lot is Ė speaking of Russells Ė is one written by Walter Russell, ďThe Message of the Divine Iliad.Ē I feel very close to him like I do Krishnamurti. Is Walter Russell a part of our group? I am trying to put this in a way to allow me to explore more. Can you give me any hints on him or his work, or how I might have known him? He seems very familiar.
ELIAS: You do share focuses with that individual, and you do share a focus directly with that individual.
HOWARD: What do you mean ďdirectlyĒ?
ELIAS: You incorporate a focus of yourself that is known to that individual.
HOWARD: Oh, okay. This is about me and an impression Iíve had from the time of my childhood. When I heard the ďeurekaĒ exclamation that Archimedes said when he was in the pool or bathtub and his discovery of the difference between volume and mass, that volume could be measured by the amount of water displaced by the mass that raises in a vessel, I feel that that was me, because I see it so clearly. So, was Archimedes a focus of mine?
ELIAS: Observing and partial. There is a fluctuation of that particular focus between essences.
ELIAS: Therefore, I may express to you, yes, this is a focus of you, and also you are an observing essence.
HOWARD: Just for my clarity, this would be similar to my understanding of Mad King Ludwig, where the two essences...?
HOWARD: Thank you for that.
ELIAS: You are welcome.
HOWARD: I am quite honored to be even part of one of the fathers of science.
I have mentioned many times this place in Cyprus called the ďValley of Kings.Ē Iíve got to know more about it, if you could help me here. I would like to know what its age is and if it was part of any culture in this current reality. It seems dimensional to me. It seems much older than our history, like pre-Egyptian almost. I might even say it feels Atlantean. Am I correct?
ELIAS: What your impressions are expressing in information to you is that this area has also been expressed in the previous blink of this physical reality of your physical planet.
HOWARD: Can you tell me anything about my focus in that culture?
ELIAS: In what capacity?
HOWARD: Well, itís old. There are several places on the planet that I have seen and I felt so at home at.
ELIAS: This would not be an association with this blink now of your planet, but a strong affinity and affection for your participation in the previous blink of this planet in this area.
HOWARD: Iíll work on that. I might even get a name one of these days!
ELIAS: And that would be a fun adventure to pursue.
HOWARD: Another image I had was when I was reading a book, written by ďThe Red-Light BanditĒ in the Malibu area and Mulholland Drive in Los Angeles. He was a child prodigy and he wrote about playing the piano by colors. He could learn any song by listening to the song and seeing the colors. This was like this image of I have of Archimedes. He was really quite something. He was a very gifted fellow and delayed his execution for quite a long time, until he was finally put to death. I wondered if this individual was focus of mine. Iíll give his name; itís not a big deal, Caryl Chessman.
ELIAS: Observing throughout the entirety.
HOWARD: The last one, in terms of identification: Gage Taylor, when he passed away, one of the things he said to me prior to going was that he and Uri had identified me as being a focus of Gandhi.
ELIAS: No, but in that, you do incorporate a focus in that time framework that does incorporate close relationship to that individual and expresses a tremendous admiration.
HOWARD: That wouldnít have been a political leader, would it?
ELIAS: More personal.
HOWARD: I have one or two more; one is a simple one and has been on my list forever. We have a friend who we havenít seen for quite a while, and his name is M.P. He has an invention that he puts on his head, and it occurred to me that this might be what I might term a dream machine. Is M.P.ís hat a dream machine?
ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, yes.
HOWARD: The final question, I recently learned something regarding biblical stuff, and it turned my point of view of the Bible and the events of the Bible upside down. The information is a very simple comment, stating that the tribes of Israel were separate tribal units and spent a great deal of time warring with each other. When I heard this, I had a moment of clarity, and suddenly my understanding of biblical history was erased or set aside, because suddenly it wasnít in conflict with normal human and tribal behavior.
I thought of other cultures of the world that have their heroes that brought them together, like Attila uniting the Huns, Genghis Khan uniting the Mongols, Alexander bringing the disparate factions of the Macedonians and the Greeks together for his conquest, and even here, on this continent, Deganawida who united the Iroquois Confederacy. It suddenly occurred to me that Israel and the Semitic tribes were no different from the Huns or the Mongols or the Macedonian-Greeks, and that they were to come together under one chief, probably a war-like chief, hence the tribes of Israel.
I then wondered where the Bible itself became factual, which chapter was that? Who, in fact, was this one leader who brought these factions together?
ELIAS: First of all, as I have expressed previously, the Bible is not factual Ė or it may be considered to be factual in the context that facts are not absolutes and that they change. In that, as I have expressed previously, this book is a compilation of stories that have not actually occurred in the manner in they have been recorded. There have been occurrences associated with these stories, but they are more collective than individual.
And yes, you are correct that these tribes, so to speak, were in opposition to each other, and were not necessarily united by one individual but were united in theory in some element of philosophy, but not necessarily united as a nation, per se.
HOWARD: And that philosophy would probably be the early Zoroastrian idea of one god.
HOWARD: So would I say that this would about 500 BC, at the time of the Stoicís consternation with the one god idea?
ELIAS: Slightly previous.
HOWARD: Well, there you go Margot, we just solved another problem! (Margot laughs with Elias) Iím through.
MARGOT: I think that weíre about through. Iím going to talk to you again soon, Elias. I need to digest everything that you said here today, and Iíll be back with you then, which will be quite soon, I think.
ELIAS: Very well, I shall be anticipating...
MARGOT: Thank you very much. This helps.
ELIAS: You are very welcome, my friend, and I express to you my encouragement in your movement. Be aware that I am always with you.
MARGOT: Oh, I am very much aware of that, thank you.
ELIAS: You are very welcome, my dear friend. To you both in great affection and supportiveness and genuine lovingness. Au revoir.
MARGOT: Au revoir.
Elias departs after 1 hour.
(1) Howardís note: I have listened to and read this passage over and over again. I know it is important, but I donít understand it. The fact is that Margot was dead five months later. We engaged the services of a surgeon and involved ourselves with the ďmethodsĒ of chemotherapy. And she died. Not from the cancer but from failed lungs and emphysema. Would she still be alive if she opposed the physicians and their methods? Is it that simple or that complex?
© 2005 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.