the Elias forum: Explore the transcript archive.










Wednesday, August 14, 1996

<  Session 112 (Group/Castaic)  >

“Something Doesn’t Feel Right”

Participants: Mary (Michael), Vicki (Lawrence), Ron (Olivia), Cathy (Shynla), Bill (Kasha), and Gail (William).

Elias arrives at 8:26 PM. (“Time” was twenty seconds.)

ELIAS: Good evening. Much engagement this evening! Much activity within probabilities! We are aware of the focus for this evening. Therefore, I shall dispense with formalities, and you may ask. (Pause)

VICKI: Okay. Well, I’ve got more than one question, if nobody else wants to go first. (Pause) Okay. I’ve been trying to define what has seemed to be a real feeling of uncomfortableness regarding some changes, or what seem to be changes to me, in the information being delivered. I want to be clear that I’m not talking about the majority of the information, which actually seems to be clearer, but there are certain things that seem to be maybe distorted in a way that they never used to be, or ... See, I’m not real sure, because I can’t really identify it. I just know that whatever it is, it’s making me uncomfortable, and I need to identify it so that I can not worry about it. So, I’m curious if you have anything to offer as to what’s making me uncomfortable?

ELIAS: These are difficult areas, as I have stated previously. The area to which we are presently engaging discussion with, probabilities, is quite difficult to be expressing within your understood language without incorporating distortion. What you view is not necessarily distortion within the information, but the automatic distortion within understanding of the information presented. I have stated to you all that this would be occurring.

Within my introduction to this subject matter, I was explaining to you that this area is quite easy for you to be incorporating misunderstandings and distortion, for there are no absolutes within this area of discussion; although you, within your desire to know, express a willingness to enter these areas. As I have stated to you, this information was chosen to not be expressed to you presently, until your understanding of essence and self is more comprehensive. Within my initiation of introduction to this subject matter, I expressed to you each to be examining your readiness, for we are quite understanding of the element of distortion that may be, within probabilities, occurring. Partially, you incorporate an understanding of this action. There are, in actuality, many events that have simultaneously occurred that have caused confusion within Lawrence’s perceptions.

As to the issue of changing: Within this engagement, the phenomenon itself, as you are already aware, is changing, as it is always changing. As to the distortion element: As it has been stated, there is always a degree of distortion incorporated within the information that you receive, although within following the intent, this distortion is minor. (Pause)

VICKI: Well, I understand the things that you’ve just said. I guess maybe I need to be more specific about some of the things I’ve been thinking about. I haven’t gotten the impression of any more or less distortion than I ever have in these sessions regarding the subject matter itself, of which is presently probabilities; but within interaction on a personal level with individuals, it seems to me that I’m viewing, in my perception for the first time, an allowance of belief systems, or what I view to be belief systems, where I never felt like I viewed that before. There was a point in time some months ago when I wondered, I questioned you about whether or not the information you were delivering was in fact a belief system, and we had a discussion back at that time about that. This seems different. There seems, on a personal level of interaction of Elias with any individual, (and I’ll use myself for an example, because that’s the best example I can use) a difference. More than one time recently, within my own experience, I have felt that my questions themselves were unacceptable, and I was cut off, and I’m curious about that too, because they weren’t personal questions. They were questions about the information, and I got real direct messages, unspoken messages from you, that the questions were unacceptable and not to pursue them. I don’t understand, and I’d like to understand what’s going on.

ELIAS: You address two questions within this situation presently. Addressing to your first question, an allowance of belief systems; this is partially correct. Your perception is not distorted within this recognition. Also, I will express that this does incorporate a difference. This is motivated by your movements. Presently, you each engage very base belief systems. These are, within themselves and their own action, difficult enough. We are quite aware and understanding of the difficulty and the conflict that you experience within engagement of this action of widening. Therefore, in an effort to be non-intrusive and accepting of each individual’s movement, there is an allowance, temporarily, of existing belief systems. This will not be incorporated within an ongoing basis; but as you are engaging quite difficult action presently, within an acceptance of this movement, within events, there also is a tolerance of existing belief systems. This also, you are correct, has been exhibited briefly at times within our past, so to speak. We have engaged interaction with certain individuals, that you are aware of, that the existing belief systems have not been challenged; for they are held so tightly that this engagement would be causing trauma. This would be causing more conflict than is necessary; for as my dear friend has stated to you, the movement will occur, regardless. It is unnecessary for us to be initiating conflict.

Therefore, I express to Lawrence, in helpfulness to be sorting out this confusion; your perceptions are partially correct, within all of your perceptions that you were allowing yourself to be open to. Your understanding of our motivation is not within your objective expression, but your subjective knowing has allowed a bleed-through of information, as to an awareness of action which is occurring.

As to your second question, this being a misinterpretation ... partially! (Laughter) Your misinterpretation comes only in your perception of feeling attached to the perception, which is shading your perception. Your knowing of energy exchange and response is partially correct.

Recently, within certain subjects, you have leaned in a direction of “jumping ahead.” This is not an incorrect expression; but as I stated within our most recent session, for the benefit of the collective understanding of all of the individuals within our group, we are choosing to move slowly within these subjects. Therefore, we have chosen specifically to be limiting information presently to physical focus, and to areas of probability within only physical focus. We have deviated from this “plan,” so to speak, as you have incorporated great confusion from information offered as to energy exchange of Elizabeth and Patel. This, we are greatly understanding, has spurred questioning; but in an effort to be diverting from distortion, and an allowance of a greater understanding, we have chosen to move step by step within the progression, as my friend expresses, for your understanding.

Therefore, when Lawrence incorporates a “shell-jumping,” Elias responds lovingly by expressing an answer without an answer! Your questions will be addressed. I shall answer these questions. Presently, these questions incorporate answers that you will not understand. Therefore, it is pointless to be offering this information. It is important presently that you engage your subjective bleed-through and merging with your objective understanding, for Elias is not wishing to be continuing expressing to you, “This is your answer. Conceptualize!” This is a non-answer to you!

Within an understanding of this expression and wishing to be offering efficient answers for your widening, presently we engage an action of engaging your subjective focus. You are engaging your subjective focus and allowing a mergence into your objective expression and understanding. If you were not, you would not be aware of these elements to which you have opened yourself to within our most recent session. As to the subject of “putting off,” within our loving affection to Lawrence, there is no expression of this. There is no expression of intrusiveness.

VICKI: Well, I was attaching a feeling to it, and I can see that was probably a little silly, but I ...

ELIAS: (Interrupting) This, excuse me, is not silly! This is your realistic expression. This is your familiar creation. You are presently engaging creating differently; from your periphery, which is unfamiliar. To be expressing or expecting that you will automatically move away from your familiar expressions is unrealistic, and we are quite understanding of this.

VICKI: Well, it certainly has been helpful to ask these questions. I understand much more now. Thank you very much.

ELIAS: I am, as I have always been and continue to express to you, continuously engaged with you and at your disposal for helpfulness. The affection held for this essence of Lawrence is greater than you understand objectively. The understanding of automatic response is great also. Therefore, there is always an acceptance of the expression, just as it is always accepted within your challenging.

VICKI: Well, it certainly is helpful to get information in these kinds of areas. I was starting to think I was just going off the deep end, going nutso or something!

ELIAS: There is no “nutso” (laughter) within this movement and your awareness. There is only, as I have expressed also with Kasha, a lack of information.

I shall offer you also acknowledgment; although I shall be entering onto record, I am not offering lollipops within this acknowledgment! (Laughter) Lawrence also has engaged a subjective identification of energy within our most recent session also. The reason that you express these feelings, of what you view to be negativity, is that you do not accept your own knowing and also you do not accept your own movement, to which we are continuously acknowledging of your movement; and within your rebelliousness of non-acceptance of self, you express to Elias that, “I may be expressing too childishly.” This is incorrect. I am recognizing of great movement, regardless of your non-recognition of your own movement! (Grinning)

In this, I acknowledge also movement, connected with subjectively, in recognition of greater exchange of energy. This should not be unusual, within concept, to you. You have allowed yourself enough interaction within this phenomenon and energy exchange to be realizing certain aspects of its incorporation. At different times within our engagement together, you have held the ability, objectively, to be identifying or noticing of energy being introduced to you. Within this particular session, new energy has been introduced; a familiar energy, but an unfamiliar energy! Within your recognition of energy, you have not identified this one, so to speak. You have incorporated engagement with Otha, and hold a limited identification of what you express to be the physical feeling of this essence. Now, you may incorporate an identification or a noticing of Ordin.

I have expressed to you many times that each of these essences incorporated within our group, our game, shall show themselves to you. You have already engaged subjectively, and allowed a bleed-through objectively, in visualization of these essences. Now, you may engage their energy exchange also. This is unfamiliar. Therefore, you express there is an element different; “not right.” Incorrect! In actuality, there is no “not right” or incorrect! It is only different; an incorporation of different energy, within movement and energy exchange, which you do not identify and is unfamiliar; therefore seeming to be Elias is different. Elias remains the same. The energy exchange is continually changing.

We shall be ringing bells and expressing singing quite joyfully, at the moment that Lawrence is accepting of acknowledgments from essence!

VICKI: And very wonderful bells they will be, too!

ELIAS: Very wonderful!

VICKI: Well, I guess I’ll keep coming to sessions, then ...

ELIAS: (Very humorously) Oh, thank you! We are so appreciative, (laughter) for I am supposing that our sessions would be not continuing if Lawrence is choosing to be not engaging; for within Michael’s belief system, which we allow and indulge, (more laughter) he believes not the engagement of this phenomenon without his twin!

VICKI: Thanks a lot.

ELIAS: You are very welcome. (Pause) Are you wishing more information this evening? (Here, Cathy and Gail arguing back and forth about who should ask a question, saying “You! No, you!) Ah! This is faintly reminiscent of the twins before manifestation! “No, you!” (Laughter)

GAIL: Okay. I have a question, I think. I can’t get my brain to think! I’m having a flip-flop question and answering within myself about the belief system of symbols. Concerning the healing, one part of me understands that you don’t need crystals or whatever to assist in exchanging energy with someone to be helpful in a healing; and another part, as I’m feeling, is that to be helpful to other people, they need these symbols. I can’t quite figure out how to settle that discussion within myself.

ELIAS: These symbols, as you refer to them, are also, as we have expressed previously, focus points. If you are understanding that the object itself is not the energy which is creating of a healing action, so to speak, then you may hold no conflict; for you may engage whatever focal point you are choosing to be helpful to your expression. You are correct that there is an exchange between both individuals; the individual expressing the action of implementation of what you think of as healing, and the individual being healed.

The thought process and belief systems within the individual being healed, in your terms, is most important; for in actuality, they create the event of healing within themselves. Therefore, if they are trusting and believing that your action with crystals is helpful, this shall act as a focal point to them, to which they may direct their energy and allow themselves to incorporate the action of affectingness within themselves, just as individuals incorporate your medical profession. It is not your physicians that heal the individual, with all of their technology! It is the individual and their desire and intent that heals themself; to which, as we have explained previously, there is, in actuality, no healing action occurring. They are only reinstating an alignment of cells and energy as they had previously created it, and eliminating the action of disorder within their physical expression; be this emotional, physical, mental, or spiritual.

As I have expressed to Yarr and also to Dimin, if you are choosing to be engaging different actions within your subject of healing, these are all acceptable. Within physical focus, we are understanding that many times, it is quite difficult for you to be trusting of self and accepting, within reality, that you need not any of these “tools.” The action of allowance of subjective expression with no focal points is difficult, and incorporates great trust of self; also great mergence of subjective and objective expression. Therefore, it is not unacceptable to be incorporating the usage of any focal point; although within an element of non-acceptance of belief systems, I shall repeat, as I have many, many times, the action is initiated and accomplished by the individual. There is an energy exchange for helpfulness within consciousness, but the accomplishment is occurring only by the individual affected; for no other individual may be affecting of your expression, physically focused or otherwise. Your essence, your consciousness affects you.

GAIL: So whatever tool the other person, or other symbol the other person needs to have there with them is their belief system, and if I choose to allow my subjective self and my conscious self to merge, I can be helpful in that way, even though they need to have their symbols? Am I getting this?

ELIAS: Correct. Understand that your helpfulness is a merging of energy. You, as the “healer,” in your terms, are not accomplishing any action. You are helping, within consciousness and within energy, to be directing of the other individual’s action. You may be adding to their energy to be helpful in accomplishing the action to which they choose to engage, but you, independent of them, are not accomplishing a healing within them, so to speak; for you may not affect one cell within another individual without their interaction. They accomplish; just as you accomplish within your expression.

GAIL: So technically, if I was assisting them, I’m just a symbol? Is that right? I would be a symbol to them, just like a crystal?

ELIAS: Correct, within the definition of what I have offered you presently of symbols; in that they hold their own vitality and their own reality, and also simultaneously are representative of another element. Therefore yes, you are correct; but this symbol, as do all other symbols, manifests energy and movement. Within this, you are not static. You are not what you view to be a dormant symbol. Just as I have expressed previously, these symbols of crystals are not dormant either, for they do hold the ability, within their choice of manifestation of this particular element, to be an energy conductor.

GAIL: So the crystals that I chose, or they chose me, is that ...

ELIAS: There is a cooperation.

GAIL: And is this the reason that I have these in my possession ?

ELIAS: You may choose this action, if you are wishing. You provide yourself presently with many choices, which you are allowing to bleed through from your subjective self into your objective awareness. As I was expressing to you at our last session, this action was an example of probable self intersection. If you are choosing to be continuing with this probable action, you may.

GAIL: May I choose more than one?

ELIAS: You may choose thousands, if you are wishing.

GAIL: Well, I’ll accept this one, as long as I get to choose more!

ELIAS: The intersections of probable selves and probabilities are continuously occurring, and hold a continuous probability for occurrence.

GAIL: Okay. Thank you. You cleared up a few thoughts.

ELIAS: You are welcome. As I have stated, these are difficult areas. You are very accustomed to viewing your focus within one direction; one accepted, real perception; your primary focus. Therefore, you view these concepts to be quite abstract. In this, it is difficult to truly be assimilating an understanding objectively of these concepts.

(Firmly) Make no mistake! You hold this information presently, subjectively. Therefore, you do understand; but within your directed focus and understanding, you do not. This, as I have also stated many times, is not a negative. It is a highly creative expression and highly efficient expression, for the purity of your experience. You only choose, within this moment, a present probability of engaging these concepts in an effort to be avoiding trauma within transition and within your shift; which you may change these probabilities within intersections also, at any moment. (Pause)

I shall disengage this transmission presently and allow your interaction, and allow for Michael’s overwhelming curiosity within this present energy exchange! (Referring to Paul’s transmission this evening)

(To Vicki) I shall once again, within a trusting situation, return the twin to you. Much affection is extended.

VICKI: And to you also.

ELIAS: Au revoir!

Elias departs at 9:16 PM.

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

© 1996 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.