Sunday, April 08, 2001
ďFocuses: Themes, Beliefs, and JudgmentsĒ
ďDifferences Between Intermediate and Soft OrientationĒ
Participants: Mary (Michael), Ben (Albert), Edward (Colleen), and Frank (Tyne).
Elias arrives at 4:54 PM. (Arrival time is 23 seconds.)
ELIAS: Greetings, gentlemen! (Grinning)
FRANK & EDWARD: Hello.
ELIAS: (Chuckling) And shall we now engage in play? Ha ha ha! Very well, and which of the little mice shall begin our interaction?
FRANK: I guess I will.
ELIAS: Very well.
FRANK: Iíve had a number of times in the last year or so that I hear children laughing late night. I donít know what it means, if anything.
ELIAS: Very well. Shall we begin in you attempting to offer to myself an impression of this experience?
FRANK: Itíll be late, late at night, nobody around, very quiet, and Iíll just hear brief moments of children laughing. Iíll even have headphones on or something, and nothing out of the ordinary, thereís no one else around.
ELIAS: I am understanding.
FRANK: But I donít know why. It doesnít mean anything to me.
ELIAS: And you offer yourself no impression?
ELIAS: Very well. I shall express to you an explanation of this imagery that you present to yourself. In this, you offer yourself an experience in which you audibly hear the laughter of children.
Now; allow yourself the recognition of the symbology of this experience; the association of children and freeness, the laughter of children, the appreciation of their being.
As you express this experience to yourself, what you are offering to yourself is a communication to be paying attention to self, to be appreciating of yourself, to be allowing yourself the freedom of expression in that appreciation in joyfulness of celebration of YOUR beingness, to allow yourself a deviation from the seriousness which you incorporate, for you do incorporate a seriousness within your focus.
Your manifestation in this physical dimension is a game. It is an exploration. It is not one of cosmic seriousness in which you must be viewing your focus as a growth to be attaining particular levels of enlightenment, or in which you must be creating the right choices. Allow yourself the recognition of the game, and that you are creating experiences in this physical dimension as an exploration, an adventure; and be playful. Allow yourself the joyfulness of laughter, the simplicity of what you associate with children. For in your terms, this is the nature of your spirit.
Shall you not allow that expression rather than the analyzation of all that you create or encounter or draw to yourself? It matters not. Allow yourself to merely express the wonder in all of your reality.
FRANK: Thank you.
ELIAS: You are very welcome, my friend.
EDWARD: Albert here went to see another group of ... not another group, I donít know Ė some other dead person. (Laughter) And at that session, they were speaking about the German focus and the Nazi focus, and I had expressed some ideas of where I felt I fit in that focus. They said that I was [name omitted], but I wasnít there [at that other session]. One of my focuses is [name omitted] Ė is that correct?
ELIAS: And your impression?
EDWARD: My impression would be that it could be correct, because [name omitted] is the one German in the hierarchy who had a very Romanesque idea of his rank and station in service to the state, and my impression is that I was very tied to the Romans, that I was at some point very significant in the early part of the Roman Empire. So, it feels right to me.
ELIAS: And you are correct. Now; in this allowance of yourself, Colleen, shall you not allow yourself to view the theme or the thread, so to speak, in the fabric of the essence? This allows you objectively to be aware of the signature of energy which is expressed in ALL of your focuses, regardless of the choice of manifestation or subject matter.
This is an opportunity for you, Colleen, to view yourself in an expansive manner, and to view this underlying expression that permeates all of your focuses. For each essence chooses to be creating many manifestations in a particular physical dimension, but there is a quality of each essence, a tone which is expressed and that also manifests itself in the expression of each focus of that essence.
EDWARD: I know, I agree there. I mean, thatís how I felt about it when they said it. I had thought maybe Hitler or something like that, because of the ... well, he is misconceived in this whole notion, the way we look at him. When they said [name omitted], I realized, yes, that really fits.
We spoke once about me being a cardinal, and I realized I was the Cardinal Borghese, no doubt. I was Cardinal Borghese, who set down the attempt at the Counter Reformation. In the Roman Empire, Iím not sure where I place there, yet. But itís always these ideas of right and wrong, and these ideas of behavior and especially public behavior. Private behavior is one thing, but like you donít break down in public, you do not show this face in public. But youíre always telling me that none of that matters! (Laughing, and Elias chuckles) So itís like, yes, I seem to be focusing a certain way, but it seems to be irrelevant.
ELIAS: Let me express to you, my friend, you and I speak now within a time framework in which there is great movement of this shift in consciousness. Therefore, the expressions of these focuses of essence in relation to the beliefs and in relation to this shift in consciousness in this time framework matter not. This is not an invalidation or a discounting of any of your other focuses of essence. But what I offer to you, particularly in THIS framework, holds significance, that you allow yourself the recognition of all of these expressions as influenced by beliefs.
Now; as you recognize the influence of the beliefs that create these types of expressions, you also offer yourself the opportunity to open your awareness NOW, in the movement of this shift in consciousness, recognizing that you have created expressions in alignment with these beliefs, not to be eliminating or changing those beliefs presently, but in the recognition of them, to be accepting of them and allowing yourself NEW movement in choice, not continuing in limitation of the automatic response which aligns with those beliefs. Are you understanding?
EDWARD: Somewhat, yes. Let me see if Iím understanding this. What youíre saying is that in the belief system, itís not that thereís not necessarily a right or wrong, as much as itís my perception that there is one.
EDWARD: So there CAN be right and wrong, but itís our perception that colors them so greatly that we canít really see whatís true, something like what you said before about mathematics not being a universal truth, even though weíve always accepted that, and that our perception so colors everything that we canít see.
ELIAS: You limit your choices. In a manner of speaking, you are correct. I am understanding of your incorporation of language and your association with what you are expressing in your choice of language terms. What I am expressing to you, you are correct. A more undistorted offering of what you are expressing is that you are limiting your choices.
Let me express to you, if you are interactive with another individual in this present now and the other individual creates a choice or a manifestation, an action, that you view to be wrong, you create an automatic immediate association. There is an automatic immediate judgment. This is a limitation and it is a blocking of your own expression, for the judgment is not merely expressed in relation to the other individual, it is also directly expressed in relation to yourself. This eliminates many of your choices.
You hold many choices. If you engage merely the automatic response, you eliminate all other choices, and you focus your attention merely on one choice which is automatic, and you limit your perception.
Let me express to you, another individual may create a choice, an action, and you may be interactive with that individual, and in relation to your beliefs, you assess that the action of the other individual is wrong.
Now; that is an automatic response. Without recognizing that as an automatic response, you narrow your perception. You allow for no other choice.
In that same interaction with another individual, NOT discounting the reality of your beliefs, NOT changing or eliminating your beliefs, you may view the choice of the other individual. You may initially express the automatic judgment, but if you are allowing yourself an openness and an acceptance of that belief, you shall allow yourself to stop, to recognize that the other individual is merely creating a choice, that you may be in disagreement with that choice but that does not necessarily express a judgment in relation to the other individualís choice.
You do not need be in agreement with another individualís expression; you may incorporate differences in preference, difference in opinion; you may be expressing disagreement concerning certain choices Ė this is not an absolute expression of judgment. And in recognition of your own beliefs and the influence of those beliefs, you may allow yourself to turn your perception and express to yourself, ďIt matters not. I choose this expression. This expression, this choice, is my preference. This individual chooses another expression, a difference in choice. It matters not. My choice is not right; the other individualís choice is not right. The other individualís choice is not wrong, and neither is my choice. They are merely different.Ē And once you allow yourself to view the difference, you may move into another layer of exploration in which you allow yourself to view the similarity of the differences.
THIS is what I am expressing to you, not to be creating judgment upon other focuses and their expressions, not to be creating judgment upon THIS focus and your expressions, or to be creating judgment upon your beliefs. This is futile. This is not the point of this shift in consciousness.
I have expressed many times, you shall continue to be engaging belief systems in this physical dimension. Even within the incorporation of this shift in consciousness, belief systems are a base element, an intricate expression of the blueprint of this particular physical focus, this physical dimension. Without these beliefs, you may eliminate this particular dimension, for you have created this dimension with the incorporation of these beliefs for that particular type of experience. There are myriads of physical dimensions. This is merely one. This one incorporates this type of belief systems. They shall continue. What shall be altered is your interaction with them, your acceptance of them, your recognition within yourselves that you DO incorporate beliefs, but you are not subject to them.
To this point within your reality and your linear time framework Ė your history Ė throughout your history you have allowed yourselves the expression of being subject to your beliefs, in a manner of speaking as though they themselves are entities dictating to you how you shall create your reality, what you shall create within your reality, how you shall allow your own expressions or not, what you shall offer yourselves permission to be creating, what you shall vastly NOT offer yourself permission to be creating. The belief systems themselves have become so vast in their strength, which you all collectively have expressed, that they become almost entities in themselves and you their pawns.
But they are expressions of your reality; they are expressions of you. YOU hold the power of energy, NOT the beliefs. The beliefs may remain, it matters not. But in acceptance of them, the mere recognition of their existence and not allowing the automatic expression of them, not allowing the automatic dictation of them, you offer to yourself vast freedom, for you allow yourself to incorporate trust.
EDWARD: One thing, before Ben gets mad at you, before Albert does his famous ďI love EliasĒ routine! (Laughing, and Elias chuckles)
When youíre saying that, it ties into what Iím about to do tomorrow. We had this weird thing with a bossís boss at work on Thursday. He was a complete jackass, and of course tomorrow heís going to be at our meeting, and heís going to quiz us and all this. Iíve been feeling very trapped by that, that I have to know these numbers, I have to know these figures. What Iím hearing you say is, if I can just go sit down at it tomorrow and instead of my belief system being that this is going to be something really horrible, instead just to allow it to be what itís going to be. Because itís going to be Ė begin and end Ė then there will be nothing at all.
ELIAS: Examine your association in this one scenario; allow yourself to view. You have been presented with the expression of another individual. You have responded within yourself to the expression of the other individual. And what have you created? An expectation of yourself, and you incorporate anxiety concerning that expectation, a ďshould,Ē a ďmust,Ē in your response to this individual. And what do you create subsequent to THAT expression? An anticipation of future, a lack of appreciation of the now and a projection into the expression of the future which has not been created yet, AND you create an automatic response in discounting of yourself for you express to yourself, ďI cannot comply. I cannot create the accomplishment of the expectationĒ; and in this, you deny your choice, and you express to yourself that you create in inadequacy. And what have you created in this circle but a discounting and a distrust of yourself and no permission to be?
And I may express to you that you may allow yourself not to be projecting your attention to the future, to tomorrow, to the next day. It has not arrived; it is not being created. What is being created is now. Allow yourself an appreciation of now, and allow yourself permission that you can and that you may create what you choose to create.
If you are in disagreement with another individual and their choice, why shall you comply? You are allowing other individuals to dictate to you your reality. Why shall you not move into your meeting, so to speak, and express yourself in the now in trust of yourself, of your own choice? Dictate to yourself.
EDWARD: Itís that need to eat... (Laughter)
ELIAS: Ah! And there is the other anticipation...
EDWARD: Yes, of the future.
ELIAS: ...and expectation that if you are not in compliance with another individual and their expression, that they hold the power to be creating your reality for you.
EDWARD: No, no, I understand. Technically, they donít, but on some surface level they certainly seem ... well, I guess what youíre saying is I create the situation to be there to allow them to create that reality for me.
ELIAS: You draw that reality to you, and therefore you create it.
Therefore what I express to you, Colleen, is that you may enter your meeting, you may express yourself in disagreement and non-compliance, and you may also trust that you are creating the scenario, and you are not subject to the dictates of other individuals. You are NOT a victim.
(Firmly) You hold the ability and the power, in strength, to express yourself and create the reality which you want, and in the trust of yourself I shall express to you quite definitely, the other individual shall not dismiss you from your employ if you are not creating that and in agreement with it. Another individual CANNOT create your reality. Regardless of your physical appearances within your physical dimension, another individual may not create your reality.
Therefore, if you are trusting of yourself and allowing yourself to be expressing what you want in that trust, not doubting, not allowing for the dictates of another individual, you SHALL create precisely what you want, and no other individual may interrupt that. This is the STRENGTH of your power, of your energy. It is tremendous; but you discount yourselves, and you become your own victims.
EDWARD: (To Ben) Want to chime in here? Do you have a couple of questions? (Elias chuckles) Go ahead.
BEN: So... (Laughter)
ELIAS: (Humorously, and bowing) Yes sir, master, oh master!
BEN: That wonít be necessary. (Laughter, and Elias laughs loudly)
In regards to the information that weíve been getting from other sources, thatís one thing. But as far as the impressions that Iíve been getting on my own, this actually boils right down to this last group session when you were here, when you were giving essence information for Suki. (1)
Now, as far as essence names or whatever, Iím curious about the fact that C9 and you gave completely different essence information. But in terms of the orientation, this was something that I had a very definite impression about myself, and I felt that you were intentionally baiting me in the group to disagree with you. (Elias begins smiling) Because you ... this is open to debate, this subject (Elias chuckles), because I think I know Suki pretty well, and I know this whole idea of sexual orientation is your idea (Elias grins and looks very amused), but I think I have a pretty good idea that sheís intermediate. So I would be open to discussing this possibility of her being soft, even though I know sheís not!
ELIAS: Ah! Therefore shall I clarify and inquire of yourself, is our dispute of essence name AND orientation, or merely of orientation?
BEN: The essence name aspect is not something I can tell you I have a particular handle on. I think itís fascinating that you both came up with completely different Ė as far as Iím concerned Ė essences, completely different individuals. But as far as orientation is concerned, that was something I felt like I was possibly picking up on on my own, and I had a definite impression. I donít care what C9 says, I donít care what you say, as far as Iím concerned, Sukiís intermediate!
ELIAS: Ah! Very well. First of all, I may express to you that I have already offered information to the individuals that participate in this exchange with this essence that they identify as C9, and I have offered to them, and shall again now, that there is an aspect of distortion which is incorporated in this exchange. Therefore, the information is not entirely, in your terms, correct.
ELIAS: Therefore as to the essence name, as has previously been distorted in other offerings of essence names, this also was filtered through a translation, and therefore there is an alteration, a difference in the offering. As to the identification of orientation, express to myself your impression, your identification of your impression.
BEN: My identification of my impression?
EDWARD: In other words, what the hell were you thinking?
BEN: What do I think intermediate means?
EDWARD: No, why do you think she is?
ELIAS: You have expressed to myself that you have offered yourself an impression that this individual incorporates the orientation of intermediate. You have also offered to myself that you hold an intimate knowing of this individual objectively, and therefore you have created the assessment of this orientation.
ELIAS: Ah! These are very different expressions, and I may express to you that the recognition in physical terms of this individual and the intimacy of your relationship has colored your interpretation of your impression, which is, in actuality, quite understandable. For I may express to you, there are certain aspects of these two particular orientations that are transversed in many individualís understanding of the expressions of these orientations. Qualities that are in actuality ascribed to those individuals of soft are many times misunderstood and ascribed to individuals that hold the orientation of intermediate.
I am understanding that in my offering of description and information concerning qualities of intermediate and soft orientations there is an automatic association of many individuals in which you view individuals holding the orientation of soft to be much more interactive objectively than those individuals of intermediate.
Let me express to you my friend, in your physical terms ... which I am recognizing shall be incorporating judgments and automatic associations, but I shall offer this to you in this particular interaction as a physical assessment of individuals holding the orientation of intermediate, that you may understand in your reality and your assessments of individuals.
An individual holding the orientation of intermediate may appear to you, objectively, to be quite self-absorbed to the exclusion of other individuals or their concern of other individuals. Individuals holding the orientation of intermediate objectively express a type of interaction with other individuals that may be viewed by you as being quite, in your terms, egocentric, to what may appear to be almost an extreme. (Laughter) Regardless of your intimacy with the individual, their focus shall be NOT upon you. Their focus of their attention shall be entirely upon themselves. I may express to you, this individual does not display these qualities.
BEN: I think Iíll know one when I see one, next time!
ELIAS: Now; I may also qualify in our mundane terms, for the record for Lawrence and his transcription, this is quite an expression of physical terms, and I may express to all individuals that may be encountering this transcription NOT to be creating the judgment of other individuals with this particular description of those individuals holding the orientation of intermediate, for this SHALL incorporate automatic judgments. (Laughter)
EDWARD: See what you started!
ELIAS: I am merely offering this explanation that you may hold an understanding and create a distinction within your objective recognition of the differences of these two orientations.
In actuality, individuals holding the orientation of soft, in your terms, are much more likely to be isolating of themselves at times, to not be objectively interactive with other individuals but also to be expressing a genuine movement that is requiring, in your terms, of some aspect of interaction of other individuals even within the time frameworks in which they view themselves, or other individuals view them, as being isolating of themselves.
I have offered previously, one of the reasons that these individuals in particular create this type of expression of singularity and what you term to be isolation is the continuous expression of objective and subjective awareness which expresses in equality with these individuals in an objective manner, which becomes confusing with these individuals; and at times they may experience an overwhelmingness in that action, and therefore view within their perceptions that they need be removing themselves from interaction with other individuals, that they may allow themselves movement into clarity.
I may also express to you all, in actuality, this isolation does not necessarily accomplish what they wish it shall be accomplishing.
EDWARD: But you get to see great TV, so... (Elias chuckles) Oh, wait a minute! Letís test Ben for a second here. So Frankís orientation is...?
ELIAS: You are correct.
EDWARD: One for you!
FRANK: Now, but...
ELIAS: Ah! And shall this be expressed in colorfulness in the interaction between these two individuals? For as I have expressed previously, this one orientation is the one of the three that shall express more conflict in the intimacy of two individuals holding the same orientation.
EDWARD: So in other words, weíre doomed! (Laughter)
ELIAS: (Laughing) No! I may express to you...
BEN: Itís more colorful!
ELIAS: ...you do incorporate the same language, as I have expressed in relation to orientation, but you also express a tremendous intensity of your language.
As I have offered once previously, this particular type of interaction between individuals both incorporating the orientation of soft may be likened to an analogy of a game of bouncing a ball to each other. You may bounce a ball to Albert, and Albert shall bounce the ball back to you. (2) You may bounce the ball to another individual holding the orientation of intermediate, and they may hold the ball temporarily, but they shall also bounce the ball back to you and play. You may bounce the ball to Tyne, and he shall THROW the ball back to you and express to you, ďThis is YOUR ball. I shall play with MY ball, and you shall play with your ball, and do not attempt to throw the ball to me again!Ē (Wild laughter) HA HA HA HA HA! Therefore, my suggestion is that you each incorporate play with your own ball and not attempt to be throwing the ball to each other! HA HA HA! (Loud laughter continues)
EDWARD: (Laughing) Oh, thatís funny!
BEN: A quick Suki question, as a follow up. So is F. Holland Day also a focus of her essence, or not?
ELIAS: And your impression, GENUINE impression?
BEN: My impression before all of this was yes, but knowing that she had no affinity for intermediate and seems to have no affinity for F. Holland Day ... I have an affinity for F. Holland Day. Iím not sure if I just threw it on her as, you know, an available suspect.
ELIAS: I may express to you, once again, many times individuals within a particular focus may not express an affinity for another focus.
BEN: Oh, I see a similarity between them, but she doesnít see it.
ELIAS: Correct. The individual does not necessarily express an affinity for the other focus. I may express to you, validation.
BEN: Okay, thank you.
ELIAS: You are quite welcome.
EDWARD: When weíre talking about the different focuses and stuff, and you were explaining about the [name omitted] character, and since Iím under the impression that our essences have been here a long time...
ELIAS: In linear terms.
EDWARD: Linear terms, if you take the linear terms. Well, you decided to stop, youíve decided to stop recreating a physical essence, correct?
ELIAS: And so shall you.
EDWARD: We all shall, at some point. I canít get a handle on the ... you know, you look at the different time periods, and I got a very good handle on things, but I canít figure out the Roman one or the Egyptian one. I canít put them in reference points.
BEN: Reference points to what?
EDWARD: To what those focuses were, who they are, because to me the Egyptian one and the Roman one are the key to the other ones that keep going. At that point, my general impression is that those two focuses are when I sort of set the thread in motion. Does that make any sense?
ELIAS: Let me express to you, I am understanding of your sense, so to speak, and your impression concerning these focuses.
Now; let me also offer to you that you view similarities of these two focuses and therefore create a confusion between them. One of these focuses, that which you identify as Egyptian, is your beginning focus. Therefore, you are correct in your assessment of setting into motion, for the beginning focus is the focus that introduces ALL focuses simultaneously into this physical dimension. Therefore, in a manner of speaking, it IS directing. It creates the onset.
The final focus is also, in a manner of speaking, directing. For at the moment of its disengagement from this physical dimension, it is offering a signal to all other focuses of that essence that they shall all remove.
EDWARD: Are you saying that you can see our final focuses, then? Youíre aware of our final focuses?
ELIAS: Quite, and you are also. You each hold impressions, and I may express to you that the identification of a beginning, a final or a continuing focus is one of the most obvious impressions that all of you offer to yourselves. You continue throughout the entirety of a focus with what you term to be an inner sense, an inner knowing, of your position, be you the designated final focus, be you the designated beginning focus, or a continuing focus. You all hold a very strong inner knowing of your position of focus of attention. I may inquire of you, [and] it matters not what you hold in influence of your beliefs. It matters not whether you align with beliefs of reincarnation, or whether you align with beliefs that you create merely one manifestation within this physical dimension. You know within yourselves what your designation is as an attention of essence, a focus of attention.
Individuals may express that they hold the impression that they be a final focus for they are tired and they wish not to be continuing within this physical dimension. It matters not the explanation that you offer to yourself, you hold a knowing. Other individuals may hold no sense of that type of expression, and shall know they are a continuing focus. Other individuals hold a knowing of the newness of themselves as an essence focused within this dimension, and they shall recognize that they are a beginning focus.
EDWARD: Who is the Egyptian?
ELIAS: What is YOUR impression of the Egyptian?
EDWARD: Oh, well, I have a couple. I could...
BEN: Something military?
EDWARD: No, the one that comes first to mind is Akhenaton, because heís such a strange character. The characteristics of Akhenaton stand out so greatly from the linear history of Egypt, of ancient Egypt, and for some reason Iíve always identified with that character. But Iím not sure if Iím on the right track or if itís earlier. Is it?
ELIAS: Shall I express to you that you are upon the correct track? (Chuckling)
EDWARD: So itís him, or itís in the same period?
ELIAS: In that time period, yes, and closely associated with that individual.
EDWARD: Nefertiti? (Pause)
EDWARD: Thereís only like four really important people around him. Thereís him, the general, and then the second son who will succeed him, Tutankhamen. (Elias leans forward and smiles) Oh no! (Wild prolonged laughter) Iím something like twelve and somebody bashes me in the head!
ELIAS: (Laughing) And this is an expression of a beginning focus!
BEN: Pretty good beginning, if you ask me! (Laughter continues)
EDWARD: So that explains everything! Itís all about jewelry, girls! (More laughter) Well, thatís a good way to start! At least I wasnít eaten by a saber-toothed tiger!
BEN: (To Frank) Would you like to play this game? Come on!
EDWARD: Heís shy, and I think heís a little bit afraid of Elias.
ELIAS: And this is acceptable. You may incorporate your questions as you are comfortable.
FRANK: Thank you.
ELIAS: I shall not be intrusive.
Very well, boys! (Chuckles) I may express to you all that I engage tremendous pleasure in our interactions. It is quite amusing and greatly fun, and a tremendous offering of challenge with you all! (Laughs) I shall be disengaging this evening to not be taxing upon Michael, for he is overtaxing of himself this day, is he not?
EDWARD: Well, we bought him chips.
BEN: And beer. (Laughter)
ELIAS: The genuine expressions of compassion and friendship within your physical focus! HA HA HA!
EDWARD: One question before you go Ė one. Itís the one I was going to ask before. I mean, itís just occurred to me. I realize that thereís an interesting connection between me and Michael that was instantaneous and is very deep. She is the only one thatís been able to pull me out of most of my isolation when she comes to town. Why is that?
ELIAS: You share many focuses with Michael, and you have created many types of relationships with Michael in variety; unlike Albert, who chooses to be creating very similar manifestations with Michael.
BEN: No judgments, right? (Laughing)
ELIAS: (Laughs) You have created many interactions with this individual, and have created many intimate relationships. In your terms, you know each other very well, which also is recognized in your affection with each other.
EDWARD: Weíll explore more of that later. Thank you.
ELIAS: You are quite welcome. I may express to you all tremendous affection from myself, and encouragement in your challenges, and we shall challenge each other futurely! HA HA! For it is an incorporation of such great fun! To you all, as always, in lovingness, au revoir.
GROUP: Au revoir.
Elias departs at 5:57 PM.
(2) Ben (Albert) holds the orientation of common.
Digests: find out more about orientations.
© 2001 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.