Monday, May 29, 2000
Participants: Mary (Michael) and Joseph (Dainel).
Elias arrives at 9:31 AM. (Arrival time is 21 seconds.)
ELIAS: Good morning!
JOSEPH: Good morning, Elias! This is Joseph, which Iím sure you know! (Elias laughs) Good day to you!
ELIAS: And good day to you too!
JOSEPH: In our last session, Elias, which was quite recent, there are continuing questions and discussions that I want to add to that, and then go on with other things.
ELIAS: Very well.
JOSEPH: To begin with, I want to make some comments about the last session. The truth of the information that my mind presented to me Ė the information of my other focuses Ė rings so loud and clear to me that confirmation by you has scarcely an impact. It seems like the confirmation was for two reasons. One was to correct where I was not completely accurate on some details, which you did in several places, like one was when you told me that Rich and I were half-brothers in the ancient Egyptian focus Ė we did not have the same mother. (Short pause) If someone doesnít believe me when I tell them about my other focuses, perhaps theyíll believe it when you confirm it. So thatís what I want to say about that session in general.
Now, in that session, we talked about insane people, and after I was finished talking with you, I realized I didnít ask you everything I wanted to ask you. People are seen in public talking to themselves continually. I mean, when Iím out and about, and also when Iím at the nursing home where I go to play the piano. These people donít seem to take care of themselves. They live out in the streets and donít wash, or an institution takes care of them. Certainly people in the future wonít be like this, will they? (Short pause) Okay, you can answer that, please.
ELIAS: Let me express to you, first of all, this is a choice. Therefore, there may be some individuals that continue to choose this type of experience, although your viewing of them and your understanding of their choice shall be different than your definition and your viewing of them is now.
But as to your question in relation to all individuals, no, this type of action or manifestation is not what you would term to be the association of the norm, although the idea of what you perceive to be speaking to yourself or engaging a conversation with elements in your reality that appear to not be there, you may be engaging in some of these types of activities.
Let me express to you, as I explain to you that the reality, as accomplished by the action of this shift, being manifest in relation to what you now view in individuals that you deem to be insane, I am not expressing to you that all of you futurely shall be choosing to be manifest in the type of reality that you associate now with insanity. These individuals are creating quite specific choices in how they are creating their individual reality.
But I shall express to you that certain elements of that reality, certain actions that are incorporated in that type of reality, may also be incorporated into your reality as you move more fully into the action of this shift and inserting this shift into your objective reality, for there are many parallels between what these individuals are creating now and the action that you are moving into within this shift in consciousness Ė a lessening of separation of yourself and other elements of reality, a widening of your awareness, more of an objective awareness of aspects of your reality that you allow yourselves only a subjective awareness of now.
But in this, all of your reality is being altered, and the largest aspect of your reality which is being altered is your interaction with belief systems.
The reason that you view these individuals in a non-desirable manner or with any association of negativity is that you are influencing your perception through your beliefs, and therefore creating judgments. In the action of this shift, the point is to be moving into a new creation of this physical reality in which you shall be accepting of belief systems, and therefore neutralizing the action of judgment. This action creates an entirely different movement of your perception, and therefore alters all of your reality.
JOSEPH: Okay, Elias. Thank you very much for that. Iíll mull that over, and get more out of it as I do that.
In the last session too, you surprised me about mentioning that I have a focus in the early 1800ís with Bernie, my next-door neighbor, the nun, and I was asking myself for information about that, and my mind took me back to my childhood. I grew up in Wisconsin, and there was a parish priest that I associated with all during my childhood. His sister was his housekeeper. His unmarried sister took care of his house because he was so unorganized.
Since this was so strong in my mind, I wondered if Bernie and I were in that type of situation early in the Prague focus, and also, since Bernie is a nun now, might Bernie have been the parish priest, and I was the sister who took care of him? Answer that first, and when you give me the answer, Iíll ask you a further question that I have about that. Thank you.
ELIAS: Yes, this individual engages the role of priesthood.
JOSEPH: Bernie was a priest then?
JOSEPH: And I was his sister?
JOSEPH: Okay. Then the next thing I wondered about was, during this focus right now here in Chicago, I live a rather gay lifestyle, and a fellow that was public had conflict that kinda spilled out onto the airwaves and disturbed the nun whose morals are quite a bit different from my own, and Iím wondering if there is some parallel situation in that Prague focus, and I wonder if I was messing around with men and horrifying my poor brother the priest. Would you want to comment on that?
ELIAS: I shall express to you that the manifestation in that focus is expressed differently in your preferences than you express within this focus, but you are correct that there is a parallel in action in that focus with this focus, in that your choice of behavior is viewed by the other individual as not entirely acceptable.
JOSEPH: Okay. Well, that answers that well enough. I asked you something about my cat Bernice, and I have further questions about that. The questions are only pertinent if Bernice is still alive. If she has disengaged, just say so and Iíll go on to something else. Is she still alive?
JOSEPH: Okay. Then I have two questions. The first one that I had was, how is she feeding herself? She has to be cared for. And when you answer that, Iím gonna ask another question.
ELIAS: As I have stated to you, this creature is within a time framework of not entirely creating the choice for disengagement, but moving into that type of....
JOSEPH: Yes, I understand that from the last session.
ELIAS: Now; in this, as to your inquiry of how it is caring for itself, the creature offers itself enough physical sustenance....
JOSEPH: Like mice and birds?
ELIAS: No. The creature is acquiring what you may term to be physically scraps or morsels of sustenance, which is physically enough to sustain it. But it is also not expelling a tremendous amount of energy in its physical expression. Therefore, it is not requiring of much fuel, in your terms.
JOSEPH: Where is it getting these morsels? From the garbage, or from someone handing them out, or what? Some handouts from people, or what?
ELIAS: At times. For the most part, it is scavenging.
JOSEPH: Hmm. Okay, that makes sense. Alright, the other question is, several days ago, Bernie had this experience of seeing a grackle in her yard that was acting erratically. The bird looked like it had something wrong with it; it was just hopping around. Then some hours later, Bernie found this large, heavy grackle dead among our flowers.
The next morning, or I think it was the next morning, Bernie had a dream about Bernice. The dream was so vivid that she heard Bernice meowing. She thought for sure that the cat had showed up in my back yard. And my first impression was, I wondered if that grackle was representing Berniceís disengagement, and Bernice had come to Bernie to verify that, although it doesnít seem to be accurate. Would you make a comment on this, please?
ELIAS: As I have stated to you previously, this is not occurring yet, but the probabilities are moving in that direction. Therefore, your friend is offering imagery to herself in allowance for a type of objective preparation, so to speak, in dream state.
Many individuals create this type of action, allowing themselves to be experiencing certain actions within dream state, which thusly allows them within waking state to be engaging less intensity of the experience.
JOSEPH: I understand you. Okay, thank you.
In the last session too, we had some discussion about this focus in ancient Egypt, and I have some continuing questions. I tried to get some more information, and I may have, but I want to ask you about that. I want to tie that into an experience that has pertinence to my questions about that focus, and also questions about just other experiences Iíve had.
A lot of times in my mind, Iíll see two persons. In my mindís eye, Iíll see two people. Itís happened with two people at work. For example, someone who used to be a manager there and then disengaged through AIDS, and someone who was recently fired. And then I also see my brother Tom and I see black men, African-American men, in the same picture in my mind.
Now, in this Egyptian focus, we talked about Richard being involved, and I keep seeing Richard with Curtis, and I want to explain Curtis. Curtis was one of Chicagoís premier gang-bangers. He spent 18 years behind bars for ... well, first of all, I lived six months with him, and then found out that he was one of Chicagoís premier gang-bangers, that he had spent 18 years behind bars for the murder of (inaudible). He told me about that while sitting next to me on the bed one night. Now heís spending another 18 years for something he hasnít revealed, and will be out on parole in one year, and I donít want anything more to do with him.
As I said, my mindís eye connects that with Richard. Is that simply because murder is involved with both of them, or is there some other reason for that? Also, just tell me generally what that experience of seeing two people together in my mind is all about. Okay, Iíll let you talk about it, Elias.
ELIAS: These are different associations, and it is in actuality dependent upon the individual that you are viewing as to what you are associating with that individual.
At times you may be viewing two individuals in relation to one individual, and this may be your allowance within yourself to be viewing the individual and also another focus associated with that particular individual. But this is not always what you are viewing as you engage this action. At other times you may be viewing one individual, and you may view another individual in relation to them, and what you are creating in those situations is viewing associations of participations that these two individuals share in other focuses.
In this, as you view two physically focused individuals together that you objectively identify and recognize now, the reason you are offering that association to yourself is that you are offering yourself information that these two individuals share other focuses together and hold an influencing energy in relation to each other, even if they are not objectively associating with each other presently.
Now; in other situations, you allow yourself to view an individual that you recognize within this focus, and you also view manifestations of other individuals that you do not objectively recognize.
Those types of associations are imagery that you offer to yourself concerning the one individual and their own focuses that they participate in, other manifestations of themselves, not necessarily in relation to any other individual. Are you understanding?
JOSEPH: Yes, I am. Okay, the other impression that I had from my Egyptian focus was a little more vague, and I wonder ... you know, from time to time, I sometimes have a little trouble with authority. Itís never serious in the sense of running contrary to the law or getting fired from a job, but it causes a little conflict every now and then, and Iím wondering if thatís an influence from the Egyptian focus.
ELIAS: (Firmly) No. This particular action and association that you create presently is a manifestation of this particular focus, and this is also a movement which is experienced in relation to your own individual movement in this shift in consciousness. That lends energy to your repelling of the concept of authoritative figures within....
JOSEPH: Oh, thatís interesting, very interesting! Okay.
Iíve always felt very unusual all of my life, like I always jokingly say that I Ė well, itís more of a truth than a joke Ė that I tried conforming for a few minutes once when I was a teenager, and gave it up for the rest of my life. I have two reasons to account for that now that Iíve gotten into the things that youíve been teaching us, and I want you to comment on those.
First of all, I know that being soft has something to do with it; my orientation is soft. I also wonder if my essence has other focuses primarily in other dimensions that are so unusual. I feel that more than I feel a connection with this particular physical dimension. Would you comment?
ELIAS: You are correct that one aspect of your experience is related to your orientation in this focus. I may also express to you that you are also correct, in your allowance of bleed-through energy from other-dimensional focuses.
Now; let me express to you that within your physical dimension, there are some individuals Ė as they manifest Ė that allow for a thinner veil, so to speak, between this particular physical dimension and other physical dimensions in consciousness, and as they choose to be creating that type of action within a particular manifestation, they also allow an energy influence Ė in some aspects Ė from the other-dimensional focuses, and the commonality in experience that these individuals feel, so to speak, is quite similar to what you are expressing.
They experience this underlying feeling within their focus of an unusual type of difference, which is not entirely associated with their particular orientation. Many individuals may experience a feeling of difference in association to their orientation in a particular focus, but what you are expressing is a different type of feeling, a different type of underlying influencing energy in which you allow certain expressions of energy to be moving and influencing in your physical manifestation within this dimension.
At times, this is objectively mirrored outwardly, and you allow yourself to be creating associations, as in the examples of your creative expressions in association with other-dimensional focuses, and at times your visualizations that may also be associated with other-dimensional focuses.
JOSEPH: So Iím creating a very thin veil is the main thing, right?
JOSEPH: Okay. In one session that I read, you mentioned that when a person takes up an activity or an interest, he draws similar focuses to him in energy and helpfulness, and in the last session, we talked about a number of focuses, and none of them seem to have a connection with the strong interest that I express in my painting, and also that I express with the piano. Are there other focuses that are connected to these activities and lend energy and helpfulness?
Tied to that question is a strong connection I feel to (inaudible). I donít particularly care for his music, so there seems to be some connection that has nothing to do with anything I know about his life or about his music.
So, thereís two parts to that question, and Iíll let you comment on that, please.
ELIAS: You view this particular individual, in a draw in association, not for the reason that you are manifest as that individual in another focus, but that this particular individual presents a challenge in his creative expression in association with your creative expression.
As to your inquiry in association with other focuses that may be influencing or lending energy to this focus in similar expression, let me offer to you, other focuses that we have already been discussing ARE lending energy to you in this focus, in association with the creations that you choose in this focus.
Individuals easily misinterpret and misunderstand the information which is being offered.
[You] associate in automatic manners within your thought processes, in the manner that you view a focus that creates physical actions very similarly to the actions that you create to be more influencing than those that may be expressed differently, and this not necessarily the situation. Many times, other focuses that are creating quite similar actions physically to yourself in this focus may be influencing in some expressions, but not necessarily in the expressions of the associated creations.
Therefore, you may be engaging another focus which expresses artistic creations, and in actuality, you DO engage in another focus which creates artistic expressions in the manner of painting and sculpting, and you have already offered yourself some information as to another focus in which you engage musical expressions. But the actual actions of musical expressions or creative expressions in painting or drawing or sculpting may not necessarily be as strongly influencing in association with this particular focus as other aspects of those particular focuses.
And in this, other focuses that you engage that are NOT creating these types of physical manifestations artistically may be MORE influencing of your artistic expressions than those that are also expressing artistically.
JOSEPH: That ties in a lot with something else Iíve thought about. You know, there are focuses where I engage in long-term grieving and solitude, and a lot of distance from people is required for the long hours of practicing I do, and also for that matter for painting, but more for practicing, and Iíve also wondered if that wasnít some kind of preparation, in my ability to be alone that much.
ELIAS: It is not a question of preparation. It is a situation in which you allow yourself in this focus to draw upon experiences and choices of other focuses that you may incorporate beneficially in this focus.
JOSEPH: I understand you.
Okay, I have questioned ... primarily this question is about intent, and it has some subsidiary questions added to that. I donít really know what my intent is. I donít understand the idea or the concept.
I know I belong to Gramada and Iím aligned with Sumari, and one of the things about Gramada is organization. I wonder if that has a lot to do with the particular style of painting I do, and also the type of work I do, which is stock work and organizing stock. Sumari, the only thing I can connect with that is my interest in ... well, early on it was in psychic things, and now with the Elias material. Would you please comment on what Iíve been saying here?
ELIAS: As to your associations of families and the manifestation in influence within intent of these families, and how they are manifest within your individual focus or how you apply these family intents in your particular focus, you have Ė as you easily view Ė incorporated many underlying qualities of the Gramada family throughout your focus presently. As to the association of the Sumari, there are many obvious manifestations of this movement throughout your focus also.
The Sumari are notably individuals that move from one expression to another quite consistently, and in actuality, for the most part, quite often. Although an individual belonging to or aligning with the Sumari family may be creating some actions or some choices that appear to be long-term expressions, so to speak, they also create diversity within that long-term expression, for the Sumari enjoy variety and diversity and change. They are creating interests in temporarily manners, associating themselves with different types of movement in a tremendous expression of exploration of variety.
They may engage this type of action in association with other individuals, and therefore be creating many ...
JOSEPH: Is that my relation to all these relationships with men that I have?
ELIAS: Yes. (Smiling)
... many expressions of relationships, or they may express this in the area of employment, or in their creativity, moving from one type of expression to another to another, or they may engage several types of expressions of creativity simultaneously.
One individual direction of attention creates boredom, and therefore, in a continuous action of stimulation, these individuals create a stirring motion continuously.
JOSEPH: That explains why Iíve found my job so satisfactory. That company, the store where I work, does nothing but change constantly, radically! (Laughing)
ELIAS: And in this, you may view throughout your focus that you have participated in this type of action continuously, and not engaged in holding your attention in one singular direction for extensive time frameworks.
JOSEPH: I follow you, and I relate to that. Last time, you told me that my friend Warren, my closest friend here in Chicago, belonged to Vold, and thatís a very changeable family too. I think perhaps a big part of an explanation for the way we relate so well is that I change and he loves change and weíre both enjoying the changing! (Laughing)
ELIAS: You are correct. Individuals that are aligning with or belonging to these two essence families may easily move together in expressions of harmony or association with each other, for both of these essence families employ a tremendous movement in the expression of change.
JOSEPH: You know, when I started this inquiry, I mentioned intent. I donít know if my mind wandered, but have you said something about intent? ĎCause if you did, I can catch it later on the tape.
ELIAS: As to your individual intent within this particular focus, first of all, I shall challenge you to be assessing your focus.
Allow yourself to be noticing the movement of your individual focus and allow yourself to investigate how you have created your reality throughout this focus, and in this exercise, offer yourself, first, information as to your association with the big picture, so to speak, of your particular manifestation in this focus.
What you are creating in viewing your intent is similar to the action of piecing together a puzzle. You place the pieces of individual experiences and actions that you have created throughout your focus together to be incorporating a picture of the entirety of your individual focus. You hold the ability to be viewing this big picture, so to speak, and I am encouraging of you to be offering information to yourself, for you DO allow yourself an objective ability quite easily to be ascertaining much information concerning yourself individually.
JOSEPH: Okay, thank you. About the time my father died, which was in June of 1974, I had many dreams over a long period of time, many months. Both of my parents were in the dreams, but especially my father. Of course, it was so far back that I donít remember it in much detail anymore. My mother died in 1989. I had emotional ties to her, something I didnít have with my father, but it was my father that I was dreaming so much about, mainly. I always felt that I was exploring probabilities with my father, or my parents, in the dream state, and leading and guiding them, and now that seems to conflict with the new information that youíre providing about what happens after an individual disengages. If I was taking my parents through probabilities, then thatís a capacity I have that I donít even know about. Go ahead and comment on that, please.
ELIAS: Let me express to you once again, there are no absolutes, and as I express this to you, I am offering you this information quite intentionally, for you lean in the direction of associating actions in singularity. You associate the action of disengaging or death with certain movements, and that an individual shall be creating that movement singularly.
You are multidimensional beings. You are expressions of consciousness. Therefore, you also create many actions simultaneously.
One aspect of your consciousness, and of a particular focus, may be engaging one action in transition, and other aspects may be engaging different actions. You are not limited to one particular movement.
JOSEPH: So I wasnít totally wrong in what I thought was going on in those dreams.
In this, let me express to you also, you may be creating a probable reality in which you create a probable you, and you may also create probable manifestations of other individuals. It is not singularly the expression of other individuals to be participating with you in the creation of any given probable reality. You may create a probable reality individually in which other individuals are manifest as YOU create them.
JOSEPH: Okay. Well, thank you for that.
When you told us that a person comes into this life either as male, female, or other, that also has caused me a lot of confusion because of the type of men that I have associated myself with and tried to understand. It seems like youíre lumping ďotherĒ all together, when theyíre male and female just like heterosexuals are male and female. In fact, homosexual males and females seem to be more separated, like lesbians seem to keep away from gay men more than the male and female heterosexuals, because male and female heterosexuals ... you know, heterosexuals WANT to be together!
Also, Iíve had numerous sex partners who visited me and who lived heterosexual existences, and in fact, I couldnít tell whether ... it wasnít so cut and dried. You know, they had come here to focus as a male, for what you call a male focus. I would like to ask you about some of those, but first, before I do that, would you want to comment on my discussion here?
ELIAS: Let me express to you, I have offered this information previously, within a time framework prior to our engagement of discussions of orientations and the definitions and explanations of the orientations.
Now; in this, I have purposefully offered associations, NOT in absolutes and NOT in ...
JOSEPH: It came off that way, but I must have misunderstood you.
ELIAS: ... NOT in the expression to you in relation to the gender of male, the gender of female, and the association of the choice of homosexuality as a separate type of manifestation in association with gender, but in an offering to all of you of an association of a particular TYPE of perception that you were already associating with within your beliefs and your understanding.
In this, your identification of male and female was not merely an association of gender. It was an association of a particular type of expression. You do not merely identify in the expression of gender as a physical manifestation, and within that time framework, as I offered that information briefly, I was expressing to individuals information in association with their perception of how certain individuals perceive and interact in expressions with their world. There are certain qualities and expressions that you all associate in the definition of gender.
Now; subsequently, as you have allowed yourselves to be assimilating more and more information in increments, you have also, in a manner of speaking, allowed yourselves a preparation for our discussions concerning orientation, and therefore, within your previous year, I have offered information as to the actual definitions that YOU all collectively have created, in creating this physical dimension with respect to gender and orientations.
You are correct. You have manifest and created TWO genders, and I have offered explanation and information that these two genders are not associated with orientation. They are not interchangeable with orientation. They are a different expression of your physical reality.
Gender is merely a physical body manifestation and physical function, and is not associated with perception and how you interact with your world other than physical functioning.
Now; within the time framework that this information was offered concerning male, female, and other, I was not expressing information concerning physical manifestations of physical functions.
I was offering information concerning your associations with certain types of perceptions....
JOSEPH: So in other words, many of these men that Iím fleshing with are not cut and dried. Theyíre not a heterosexual existence; theyíre not a homosexual existence. Is that correct?
ELIAS: These words....
JOSEPH: Pardon me?
ELIAS: These words of heterosexual or homosexual or bisexual are classifications that you have created within your beliefs as an attempt to be isolating/separating individuals into certain categories. Now....
JOSEPH: I think the world tends to categorize, and my experience has conflicted with that, and I think thatís the basis of my question.
ELIAS: Yes, I am understanding, and you are....
JOSEPH: So you donít disagree with that, right?
ELIAS: No, and....
JOSEPH: Okay, that answers that good enough Ďcause weíre almost at the end of the time, and I want to ask you one more quick question. I have sexual responses to rather unusual things. Well, one is not that unusual, but another one is. I have a sexual response to urine, both watching a man urinate and drinking it. The other thing thatís even more astonishing and hard to understand is, one time I had an experience of watching a man smoke and getting very turned on. The individual was not an appealing person; I would never involve myself sexually with him ever, ever. But what he was doing was so unusual. He was inhaling cigarette smoke continuously. In fact, he was not taking in any oxygen or any air at all. I mean, like almost killing himself, it almost seemed like. Why was I so aroused by that? It was really strange.
ELIAS: (Chuckling) This is an association within you that creates a fascination.
Now; many times individuals may be what you term to be sexually aroused physically by certain actions that are physically expressed that may hold a fascination for the individual.
In this particular expression, you have created a response, not to the individual themselves, but to the action that they engage in a physical manifestation, creating a function of the physical body which appears to you to be unusual and contrary to the normal function of the physical body. It, in a manner of speaking, stretches your imagination of the physical capacity of your physical body expression, and in this, you draw yourself to expressions of expanding the imagination as to the physical expression of an individual body and its performance and its capacity for performance, and how it may incorporate any type of unusual action that appears to you to not be entirely natural to it.
JOSEPH: But I donít see how that connects with a sexual response or how that produces a sexual response.
ELIAS: Sexual responses are quite a natural expression in your physical reality. They are merely a physical responsiveness of the physical body consciousness in an input of information which creates a type of stimulus, and in this, you have created belief systems associated with these responses, and therefore you differentiate these responses and classify them differently than other responses that you may be incorporating within your experience.
In this, a sexual response is quite reasonable in your particular individual creation, for your fascination associated with sexuality Ė in YOUR definition of sexuality Ė is to be creating an exploration and expansiveness of experience. Therefore, there are many incorporations of physical actions that you may allow yourself to be incorporating a sexual response to. Are you understanding?
JOSEPH: Yes. Elias, the time has gone past an hour, and as much as Iíd like to continue to discuss some things with you, Iíll have to let them go till another session. So I want to thank you very much, and Iíll say good-bye.
ELIAS: Very well, my friend. We shall continue within our next meeting.
I express great encouragement to you in your exercise in allowing yourself to be recognizing your intent in this focus, and also encouragement to be continuing in your exploration of consciousness and other focuses. I offer to you great affection, my friend.
JOSEPH: And I reciprocate.
ELIAS: And I shall continue to be expressing energy to you. This day in lovingness, au revoir.
JOSEPH: Good-bye. Thank you.
Elias departs at 10:37 AM.
© 2000 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.