the Elias forum: Explore the transcript archive.

Home

Introduction

Digests

Transcripts

Exercises

Gems

Library

Search

Donate

Sunday, April 15, 2001

<  Session 823 (Private/Phone)  >

ďThemes and Preferences of EssenceĒ


Participants: Mary (Michael) and Howard (Bosht).

Elias arrives at 1:47 PM. (Arrival time is 20 seconds.)

ELIAS: Good morning, Bosht!

HOWARD: Good morning! Itís so wonderful to speak with you again, and have the chat with Mary. The snow has melted pretty much outside, and itís wonderful, a wonderful morning! (Elias chuckles) So, how are you?

ELIAS: As always!

HOWARD: That is good! (Elias laughs) I can almost say I am ďas always.Ē

ELIAS: Ah, very well! (Chuckles)

HOWARD: But I still have a few more issues, of course, to work on, but this morning Iím very perky! (Elias chuckles) Feeling wonderful!

I thought today if we could kind of stay on a theme Ė and that is going to be the subject, as far as Iím concerned, a theme, a theory, actually, that Iíve been developing. I need a little build-up prior to getting into it, because it all fits part and parcel with this idea that Iíve been formulating.

So, my first question has to do with Shynla, who gave me a gift Ė it must have been a couple of years ago Ė which is a small picture, an advertisement, actually, on a mirror, or painted on the back of a mirror, an advertisement of a defunct tobacco brand depicting a picture of an Indian on a horse. The name of the tobacco is a famous Indian chief, (1) who is noted for being a great warrior as well as a peacemaker. When Cathy gave me the gift, it was so unexpected and a pleasure to receive that Iíve hung it here and look at it daily. And considering who she is, and all the marvelous attributes that she has, I was wondering, is this person, the Indian chief, a focus of mine or I of him? I guess thatís what I have to say.

ELIAS: (Chuckling) I shall express to you the identification that this is a focus of Shynla!

HOWARD: Is that cool or what! (Elias laughs) That is so awesome!

ELIAS: Therefore, you have been presented with a gift of Shynlaís self.

HOWARD: Oh, that is so wonderful! I had not thought of that! (Elias chuckles) But I just knew there was meaning here. Well, my goodness! I admired this person a lot, so it makes a little sense, doesnít it? (Elias laughs) Iím sure sheíll be happy to hear what has transpired here.

Now, the next one is a question, totally personal for Margot and myself, but has a lot to do with themes, again. I would like to ask ... Iím going to try to read this here, because itís very difficult for me to state it extemporaneously. This may be difficult to answer, since time is simultaneous and I may mistake the parameters, but Iíll try, anyway. Margot and I have an anniversary coming up next weekend on the 22nd of April. We will have been together this time around for 12 years. I joked with her the other night that it was probably our 1000th anniversary, since weíve been together as intimate partners at least a hundred times or more! It occurred to me that I could be asking or finding out how many times weíve been intimately involved in this dimensional reality; and if it is possible, with this being the final focus for both of us, could you add up all the years we shared an intimate relationship? Iíd like to know how many candles I should order for our cake.

ELIAS: Ha ha ha ha ha! I may express to you, my friend, you may be incorporating a quite large cake to be accommodating candles!

HOWARD: (Laughing) I know! Thatís the joke of it, or the image of it, I suppose. (Elias laughs) Maybe I should ask how big should the cake be?

ELIAS: (Laughing) Quite large, perhaps with many tiers! Ha ha ha ha ha!

HOWARD: Okay, yeah! (Laughing)

ELIAS: Ha ha! Very well! One moment (17-second pause) ... in this physical dimension, you incorporate 92 intimate relationships in what you term to be romantic expressions.

HOWARD: Okay, thatís right.

ELIAS: I may express to you, the numbering of what you identify as anniversaries incorporated in the sum of your relationships is totaling 3004.

HOWARD: Oh my goodness gracious! Thatís gotta be a record! (Elias laughs) Thatís wonderful! Oh, that exceeds my wildest guess. I was up to 2000 the other night, and I cut it back to 1000 just to be reasonable. Thank you so much for that!

ELIAS: You are quite welcome, my friend.

HOWARD: With 3004 candles, weíve got to set the house on fire, Iím afraid.

ELIAS: HA HA HA HA HA! I shall be offering my congratulations to you both on your incorporation of yet another anniversary!

HOWARD: Yes, it is wonderful. Finally on this tact before we go on, how many lifetimes have I had in this physical dimension?

ELIAS: And shall I express to you the inquiry as to your impression?

HOWARD: My impression Ė 1804.

ELIAS: Ah! I may express to you, my friend, this is an excellent guess! (Laughing) And I may express to you also, 1844.

HOWARD: Wow! Okay! (Elias chuckles, and Howard laughs) Yes, well, Iím going to quit with musing on that one.

Vicki seems to think that I am the individual Heinrich Tessenau, a German architect in the twenties and thirties. Is this correct?

ELIAS: And your impression?

HOWARD: Not!

ELIAS: (Chuckles) I may express to you that your impression is correct.

HOWARD: The reason I bring this up is because of another impression that Iíve had. Although Iím not clear on the World War II situation and the personalities involved there in the Third Reich, I do have impressions about the periphery of what was happening to the community around it. Especially, speaking of architecture, I donít really have a feeling about Tessenau Ė which weíve confirmed Ė but I do have a feeling about the Bauhaus. I was watching a movie just recently and saw a prop; it was Mies van der Roheís Barcelona chair, which I just adore those chairs! I immediately thought of Mies and the Bauhaus, and without thinking, I blurted out the name Kandinsky. Now, this really surprised me since I have no feeling of connection to him, but to the school. And I said, ďWell, Iím just going to go with my impressions here.Ē I have a feeling that Kandinsky was a focus of mine. (Pause)

ELIAS: Correct.

HOWARD: Okay, thank you.

ELIAS: You are welcome.

HOWARD: (Laughing) And thatís another artist; thatís another artist. (Elias chuckles)

All right, so now this is to the point of threads. Since the discovery of Sarah Purser and William Boyd as focuses of mine, I wondered why I had no attraction to them Ė and we could include Kandinsky, too, now Ė while at the same time, I was attracted to some of their contemporaries. We have identified several focuses and the list grows, and Iím more perplexed than ever about it; but I do see stones, as in physical stones of information, building up, creating a structure about our lives/focuses and other esoteric meanings to life and its experiences.

So I have formulated a theory, and we can call it ďBoshtís Coincidental Focus Thematic Action/Attraction Theory.Ē (Elias chuckles) In Sarah Purserís case, she admired Aubrey Beardsley, and Iím sure Degas, Lautrec, Monet and Gauguin because I like them. In William Boydís case, it was Tom Mix, William F. Hart, Bob Steele, Walter Brennan, Andy Devine, and a whole bunch of dramatic actors, screen actors. Thereís even Clint Eastwood, who I admire a tremendous amount, and even though he wasnít a contemporary of Boyd except in the latter years of Boydís life, I get a feeling of envy and disappointment, exhilaration and awe, at some of his very basic spaghetti westerns. I think this is a critical assessment and admiration that comes from William Boyd. Is this correct?

ELIAS: Yes.

HOWARD: I think Iíve set up the basic premise very well, so Iíll move on to the broader idea, which is themes and threads of themes. You have mentioned that groups participate in books, and they are comprised of chapter focuses. Most books have themes; some do not, as I recall you said to Vic in the last session. (2) I feel very strongly that this is correct, so Iím gonna give you one point on that one!

ELIAS: Ah! And I graciously accept! Ha ha ha ha!

HOWARD: Cool! I also feel that individuals participate in themes which may or may not be part of a group focus book. In my current focus, for example, I am interested in several themes: music, but not just any music Ė jazz, blues, and some classical. I also enjoy Gregorian chants, minor-keyed ensemble music, flamenco guitar, and a particular vein of rock Ďn roll. Iím also interested in art, not just any style of art, but art, a certain style of architecture, some modern sculpture, impressionist, graphic, and photographic. So you can see that Iím narrowing these themes down to certain streams.

Obviously, Iím also interested in philosophy and history, theology, mythology, and so on. I enjoy reading and thinking, and somewhere in this whole mix is politics and war. But the theme that seems to be with me as an overriding enjoyable idea is music itself, and I am in this particular focus a spectator and a listener. I enjoy whatís happening to me when I listen to music I like, and I like the feelings inside.

So when I heard your session with Vic, and I heard the word ďtheme,Ē it occurred with me that we have participated in thematic personal threads also, and music itself jumps out to me as a personal thread. As I see it, since Iím not currently doing music as a performer or composer but as a listener/admirer, I saw myself as part of a very long theme, a very long thread that would begin about the time of Stephen Foster in the 1850ís, and it was the development in American music, which has gone on, well, to date; but there were certain deaths of individuals in the sixties and then later in the eighties that has kind of disconnected me from the ongoing evolution of music.

Actually what Iím referring to is tone itself, one of the trinity aspects of our basic reality. Iím recognizing that tone has a relationship to color and light, and within the tone resides the color that is the major or minor key, and the light or the images meant to illuminate and be remembered. While art can do this, prose can do this, music, I feel, keeps alive and carries light and tone forward.

My conclusion has caused me to think about other people I enjoy, especially jazz in Miles Davis, Bill Evans, then rock Ďn roll with Roger Waters and Santana, and vocals of the jazz ladies Sarah Vaughn and Billie Holiday. I got this thought, I said, ďOkay, Iíve either participated with, been friends with, been a player with all these folks throughout this particular time of about 150 years, and really enjoying the way the music is moving. When I came to this, I got a name out of the blue, a pianist who played with or was contemporary with Miles Davis, Bill Evans, and Thelonius Monk and those guys. His name was Phineas Newborn, Jr. Is this correct?

ELIAS: As a focus of your essence?

HOWARD: Yes. (Pause)

ELIAS: No. I may confirm that you do manifest some focuses which have allowed themselves an objective interaction with some of these individuals that you have identified, not in creating relationship with them, but in admiration of their expression and also creating similar expressions.

HOWARD: Okay. Thatís exactly the way I feel about it, lots of admiration and great joy too, being around them, being involved with. It seems like Iíve been doing this on this particular theme quite heavily or extensively in the last century-and-a-half.

ELIAS: Let me offer to you, my friend, in actuality you have created an affinity for certain expressions in your linear terms for much longer than merely two centuries.

HOWARD: I agree with that also!

ELIAS: I may also offer to you information concerning your subject matter of the themes that are created by essences in relation to your physical dimension. In this, I have spoken previously of the preferences of essences.

Now; you, within one individual focus of attention, are an expression of essence. Therefore, you incorporate all of the preferences of essence. Therefore, you may choose in one focus to be moving your attention more singularly in the expression of certain preferences, and therefore creating or exploring more avenues of that particular preference, but you also do incorporate all of the preferences of your particular essence.

In viewing other focuses in which you may allow yourself to identify what you term to be these threads or similarities, you allow yourself to become more familiar with yourself as essence. For in this, you identify that you have manifest in certain focuses of essence that you in this particular focus do not hold what you may term to be an attraction to presently. But what holds significance is that you allow yourself the recognition of the attractions OF those focuses, for they are the same, for they are you.

In the individual focus, there may be Ė or there may not be Ė an appreciation and attraction expressed of self in that particular focus. If that focus expresses an appreciation of self and of their expression in that focus of attention, you, as another focus of attention, shall hold more of an appreciation of that individual, for it is an expression of you.

If the individual is discounting of themselves in an individual focus of attention, you, as another focus of attention, shall offer little attraction or attention to that focus. Are you understanding?

HOWARD: Yes.

ELIAS: The movement of essence is very similarly mirrored in each individual focus of attention. In your individual manifestation, you are in actuality all of essence.

Therefore, as you view yourself without separation, and you move your attention in a manner in which you may view any of these other manifestations as merely different expressions of you presently, eliminating the factor of time Ė which also reinforces the perception of separation Ė you may allow yourself a clearer understanding of the expression of yourself as essence.

In similar manner to viewing yourself and your many faces within this one focus, you create many different types of expressions in this one focus of attention. Each individual that you allow yourself to be interactive with in this particular focus, you shall be presenting a different face to, in your terms. You project different types of expressions with each interaction that you create with each individual that you choose to be interactive with.

In similar manner, you may view all of your focuses to be this type of expression. They are all present within you; they ARE all you. They are different faces of you. They are creating different explorations and interactions and experiences with the same theme.

HOWARD: Marvelous! Using the example of music as I have, it just is marvelous how it moves. In the experience, I feel all kinds of stuff going on here, and actually it reinforces for me a meaning of life that I hadnít really tapped into before.

ELIAS: This may also offer to you, my friend, a clearer understanding and recognition of the vastness and the diversity of essence, even within one exploration of one particular physical dimension.

In this, you may offer to yourself a clearer understanding of what I have expressed previously in conversation with individuals, that the explorations that you create in this physical dimension alone are numberless, that the movement that you create in the exploration of one subject is so vast that even in the creation of one essence manifesting thousands of focuses of attentions it shall not incorporate all of the experiences in association with that one subject. Therefore, there is the incorporation of counterpart action. And this may be suggestive to you, my friend, of the wonder of merely this one physical dimension.

HOWARD: Yep! It really is remarkable, it really is. Well, thank you so much for your comments on this. I was thinking that just the idea of American music, my infatuation with it, the allowance that grew out of early vaudevillian and traveling carnival shows Ė the idea of improvisation could not have been done at any other time Ė and the freedom of individual expression that American music has brought to the world has influenced the worldís music, actually.

ELIAS: Ah, but my friend, it is a circle; for the expression of what you identify in music within your culture is in actuality an incorporation and conglomeration of musical expressions from cultures throughout your world.

HOWARD: Thatís true; that is true!

ELIAS: And this is incorporated into YOUR culture in the design of your culture and expressed with the flavor of your culture, creating the mix in harmony to complete the circle and express the melding of tone that is offered once again outward to the world of which it came.

HOWARD: Wow! That is exactly right! Thatís true. That image that I spoke about many years ago of the Indian in a meditative state Ė or whatever he was doing Ė about the world, and he was seeing the deer and the grizzly coming together, and that things will never be the same. It was America, North America especially, being the melting pot of these expanding ideas from all around the world, and how it mixed together there.

ELIAS: And you may view yourselves as the alchemists.

HOWARD: (Laughing) Okay! Iíll go with that! Thatís good! (Elias chuckles)

Well, Iíd like to wrap this up just a little bit, then. In rock Ďn roll, thereís this fellow, Roger Waters, who wrote the modern-day opera called ďThe Wall,Ē and I admire that a great deal just because itís so incredibly expressive of adolescence and early manhood, womanhood, and the frustrations with society as a whole. Last Christmas, Margotís daughter came to visit and brought with her several of her students, boy students, from her school. When they left, I gave them a copy of the video of the live concert of ďThe Wall,Ē performed by Roger Waters at Berlin in 1990. The next time I saw them, they were all excited and wanted to know if I was the lead guitarist in the band.

Now, if you recall, I asked if that guitarist was a focus of my oldest son, and you said no. So I thought it was very interesting that they decided that it might have been me, so Iíve gotta ask Ė because actually I think I am Ė is that young man a focus of mine? Or is he mirroring my thematic desire to be involved in this creation?

ELIAS: The latter is the correct.

HOWARD: Okay. Thatís fine, (laughing) no problem! (Elias chuckles)

ELIAS: Let me express to you also, my friend, it is quite common that other individuals may view an expression of energy which is offered by any individual that may be created in strength, and in such association with certain expressions or certain other individuals that the initial response is a literal translation that the individuals are one and the same. Are you understanding?

HOWARD: Barely, but yes, I do get it somehow.

ELIAS: In this particular situation, you may view an example. You hold an affinity for this particular expression of music and the individuals that create it.

HOWARD: Yes, I do!

ELIAS: You also project a very similar type of energy, which may be associated with the energy that is projected by those individuals in the creation of that music. Are you following thus far?

HOWARD: Yes, I am.

ELIAS: Therefore, as you encounter other individuals, shall we say as you meet other individuals, they may recognize this energy expression objectively. Their automatic association is to view that similarity of expression and energy as the same. Therefore, their automatic association is that you are he.

HOWARD: I got it! I do see that, yes.

ELIAS: This is quite commonly expressed in the individualís recognition of the similarity of energy expression.

HOWARD: I understand, and thatís true! I guess Iíve known that; that is true. Well, I think Iíve wrapped that up, unless you have more to say?

ELIAS: You may continue.

HOWARD: I have a very old question that has been parked on this list for some time in regard to a childhood memory. Iím in Montana, so Iím at least three or younger. I was a very kind of wild kid, or at least undisciplined, in the sense of being fearless. I had gone to the outside of town and was at a farm, and I got myself trapped inside what I would call a railroad sidecar. It was actually, as I remember it, a large stainless steel container on wheels that the farmers put milk in and then was hauled to a processing plant; so it was quite big. I got myself inside this container, and I couldnít get out. Someone came, reached down inside, pulled me out and put me on the ground. He didnít tell my mom or anyone that I was there; he just put me on the ground and I ran home. And Iíve got to ask, who was this person that did this? I get the idea it was an angel, (Elias smiles) but that could be a metaphor; I mean, it could have been anybody. But what am I remembering, and who was that person?

ELIAS: (Chuckling) I may express to you, in a manner of speaking, your impression is correct. It matters not how you identify or what term you incorporate in physical naming of the manifestation. These are merely different expressions influenced by your beliefs in identification, in such as angel or guide or fairy. It matters not.

What you have recognized is a participation of a non-physical essence which has created an intervening apparition. This is in actuality more commonly expressed than individuals allow themselves to be recognizing of within your physical dimension. There are many essences that do not choose to be physically manifest within your physical dimension, but nonetheless participate in interaction within your physical dimension.

HOWARD: Yes! Yes, well that memory is still with me, even though I was such a youngster at the time. There was no explanation, and I accepted it, and I ran home knowing that I just got myself out of a big jam somehow! (Laughing, and Elias laughs) Iím sure that other people have had this happen to them, and it just wasnít my time to go.

Regarding the Scotland experience or the chapter focus Ė I guess this probably could be my last question Ė really, the first time when we heard about this and the sorcerer, my first impression was Saint Patrick, and Margot said almost simultaneously Saint Germaine. But both of those time periods are split apart by 800, 700 years. I had to think that possibly this sorcerer ... that Margot was right, that it was Saint Germaine.

ELIAS: Therefore your identification is associated with what time framework?

HOWARD: It would be 12th century at the time of the Crusades, returning warriors. This is my build-up, my take on it, because this is what I remember of that time, coming back from the Crusades with Richard the Lionhearted, arriving in Scotland. I would say 12th century, and I would say we may have also brought back some of the eastern magic that could be even further blossomed out, that some of the Knights Templar, some of the magic that was going on with those guys and what they had learned, and that the individual was the one that we would call Saint Germaine.

ELIAS: I may express to you, neither of these identifications of saints are associated with that particular focus directly. I may express to you also, the identification of your time framework is in actuality early 13th century.

HOWARD: Early 13th. Well, thatís the Chartres Cathedral, isnít it? (Elias chuckles) But thatís French stuff, you see. Knights Templar ... well, maybe I do have one more question, and then weíll drop it.

I donít feel a connection to the chapter focus of the French Revolution. I said to whomever asked me in the beginning, ďNo, I was doing the American Revolution.Ē Then I thought, now wait a minute, itís possible to do both. There is one character other than Benjamin Franklin that comes to mind, and thatís Thomas Paine, and that feels very right. So, would I be Thomas Paine?

ELIAS: I may express to you, no, although I am recognizing of your attraction, so to speak, to this individual.

You do participate within that chapter focus which has been identified as the French Revolution; although, I may also express to you, the reason that you do not create what you term to be a feeling or an association with that particular focus is that you do not incorporate many years within that particular focus. In this, you have manifest but incorporate few years, and disengage as a small boy, not in association with political movement; but I may also offer to you that the disengagement in that focus was chosen through the incorporation of dis-ease.

HOWARD: It was a terrible time, it really was. That probably explains it, to my satisfaction at this moment.

ELIAS: Very well!

HOWARD: I guess thatís all I have for today. I never did get around to finding out what colors I had. Let me just offer this: I donít think I have one color; I believe Iím a tri-color guy. I get three colors all the time.

ELIAS: And I may offer you an explanation, and you may allow yourself to investigate further. You offer yourself three colors, for you offer yourself one which may be identified as the signature color, you offer yourself another which may be identified as the primary color of this particular focus of attention, and you offer yourself the third as the fluctuating color, which is incorporated in association with your primary color of this particular focus each time you are, in your terms, connecting with any other focus of essence.

HOWARD: Wow.

ELIAS: They are each expressions of energy.

HOWARD: Yes. What a concept; what a thought! What an image!

ELIAS: (Chuckling) Therefore, you may continue your investigation, and perhaps offer yourself the identification of which color is the expression of which. (Chuckles)

HOWARD: Okay, Iíll work on that.

ELIAS: Very well, my friend.

HOWARD: Thank you so much.

ELIAS: You are quite welcome. As always, I offer to you tremendous affection, great encouragement in your movement, and an expression of playfulness of my energy.

HOWARD: I will accept that; I ďexceptĒ it, too! (Elias chuckles) Continuously, actually. Thank you so much!

ELIAS: You are quite welcome. I anticipate our next meeting; to you, au revoir.

HOWARD: Good-bye.

Elias departs at 2:48 PM.


Endnotes:

(1) Margotís note: the name of the Native American on the mirror is Red Cloud.

(2) Refer to session 796, March 13, 2001.


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


© 2001 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.