Sunday, January 11, 1998
Participants: Mary (Michael), Vicki (Lawrence), Ron (Olivia), Cathy (Shynla), David (Mylo), Bobbi (Jale), Sue (Catherine), Lisa (Behal), Helen (Jsenne), Drew (Matthew), Gail (William), Norm (Stephen), Reta (Dehl), and a new participant, Deina (Anna).
Vic’s note: For the record, this is the first transcript I’ve worked on since Mary’s decision to relocate.
Elias arrives at 6:48 PM. (Time was sixteen seconds.)
ELIAS: Good evening! (Smiling) Shall we on to our game?
LISA: Countries, Denmark, Borledim.
ELIAS: One point! (The group congratulates Lisa)
LISA: My first one!
RON: Inventions, the refrigerator, Borledim.
ELIAS: One point! (Grinning, and we all laugh)
DREW: Entertainers, Sammy Davis Junior, Zuli.
ELIAS: One point.
GAIL: Art, physical focus essence connections, Julie, surrealism.
HELEN: Mass events, the skiing accidents of Sonny Bono and Kennedy, Tumold.
ELIAS: Acceptable. (Chime! as a penny goes into the bowl)
NORM: Astronomical objects, twinkling or variable stars, Sumari.
ELIAS: One point.
BOBBI: Animals, green snapping turtle, Milumet.
ELIAS: One point. (Chime!)
VICKI: For Paul: Muses, Euterpe, Zuli.
ELIAS: Less probable.
ELIAS: One point.
VICKI: For Howard: Archangels, Michael, Ilda.
ELIAS: One point. (Chime!)
VICKI: For Margot: Archangels, Chamuel, Sumafi.
ELIAS: One point. (Chime!)
VICKI: For Mary: Muses, Terpsichore, Zuli.
ELIAS: One point. (Chime!) Much clinking, once again! (Laughter)
VICKI: For myself: Wars, Battle of Châlons, Vold.
ELIAS: One point. (Chime!)
CATHY: Quotes, Sumafi, “This is as good as it gets.” (Laughter)
ELIAS: (Grinning) Acceptable!
SUE: TV personalities, Xena Warrior Princess, Zuli.
ELIAS: One point. (Chime!)
RETA: Music, Adagio For Strings, Milumet.
ELIAS: Acceptable. (Chime!)
DREW: Can I ask a question about the game?
ELIAS: You may.
DREW: Some of the things we enter do not have essence, correct? (Elias nods) So how can they be of essence families?
ELIAS: Their qualities.
DREW: Their qualities? Is that something you’ve talked about before that I should ask about later?
ELIAS: No. (In an amused way)
DREW: For example, last week I guessed a pencil with Sumafi. Then I was thinking, how can a pencil, which is not of essence, be of an essence family?
ELIAS: For it is imagery. It is a symbol. The symbol is a symbol of something, but it also holds its own integrity. Therefore, all of the entries into your game are representative symbols of those families which they are connected to. They hold qualities that are representative of these families.
DREW: Then is it really accurate to say they are of those families, or is it more accurate to say they’re representative of the families?
ELIAS: Representative of these families, just as the essences which are aligned with each of these families are representatives of these families; their qualities.
Now I shall inquire of all of you, and you may express to me your new addition to your game ... with your clinking! (Laughter)
CATHY: Drew?? (It was Drew’s idea to play for pennies)
DREW: We’ve decided to make it a competition!
ELIAS: Ah! (Grinning)
DREW: Add a little bit of competitiveness to the game entries! Every time somebody enters they have to throw a penny in the bowl, and at the end of the year, whoever has the most correct gets the pennies. In the spirit of fun, we thought you wouldn’t mind.
ELIAS: (Humorously) It matters not! (Laughter) If this be a motivating factor for you, which competition serves as motivation for you within your particular physical focus many times, then it matters not to me. It is your game! (Pause)
Very well. And what shall you choose for your topic of discussion for this evening? (Ten-second pause)
NORM: Duplicity. How about duplicity?
ELIAS: And what shall you inquire of duplicity?
NORM: Well, I’ve been working on trying to understand my views and belief systems in regard to the relationship between the focus and the essence. We’re here as a focus and separated from essence, and yet duplicity is stating that we shouldn’t be thinking that way. We shouldn’t be thinking of what we are here for and accomplishing, and it seems to be a contradiction. Yet I realize that we should realize that we are truly of essence. Am I stating this right? The shift is the thing that is going to make us not have duplicity, or think that we are really who we are. That is going to make a lot of changes, not only in our own personalities but in society in general. I have several questions. For example, is personality a truth?
NORM: Thank you. I’ve been having dreams lately that are unusual ... I guess not too unusual, but to me they’re indicating that I am beginning to close the gap and realize my belief systems in regard to whom I am and what I am. For example, I’ve had a recurring dream about a large machine carrying a caterpillar, a bulldozer, which is a very heavy object, and it was flying through the air! I wondered, “What is making that thing fly through the air?” I did notice that it had a propeller on the front of it, but it was ridiculous because in physical life or in standard physics that would not create a lifting amount great enough to lift perhaps ten tons, and there were no wings involved. So in my efforts to resolve who I am, which has been a question with me for a very long time, I feel that I would like to have any comments that you would like to say about that.
ELIAS: As to your dream, or as to who you are?? (Grinning, and we all laugh)
NORM: All of this! All of it! Philosophize, as you’re well aware or capable of doing.
ELIAS: Within your imagery of your dream, you are offering yourself alternate imagery in viewing elements that do not make sense logically. You are offering yourself a new viewing of reality beyond the rigidity that you have held throughout most of your focus. You have directed your focus to be viewing elements of reality as solid, concrete, logical. Not all of reality follows this pattern. Although you may be creating your reality in this manner, there is more to reality than merely the physics that you teach yourself.
As to the relationship between the focus and essence, they are the same. Essence is not a THING outside of you. It is within you. It IS you, although it seems contradictory, for you hold many focuses and in your thought process you think to yourselves that these are all elements other than you, for you think of yourselves very limitedly. You think of yourselves as an entity. I have expressed to you terminology such as “attention” intentionally, that you may open your thought process about yourselves as being much more than what you view within this one focus.
You use terminology as “only this focus.” This is an expression of your duplicity. It is an expression of how you devalue yourselves. This is duplicity. You are only separated from essence, so to speak, in your attention. You are not separated from essence in reality, but you focus your attention in different areas. One area of you – your essence, which IS you – is focused here, just as within this physical focus you may focus your attention in many different areas.
As I have expressed previously, your attention may be diverted in several areas at once. You may occupy yourself within any moment and your attention may be split, so to speak, in several different directions at once. The main aspect of your attention may be focused in one direction upon one activity, but you are also focusing different elements in what you may term to be a lesser capacity in many other areas.
Let us use an example: Within your physical focus, within any moment within your day, you may occupy yourself with a project. Let us express that you are focusing your attention upon writing a letter. The main element of your attention is focused upon writing a letter, but your attention may also be occupied with listening to music while you are writing the letter. You may be also aware of a dog barking. You are also aware of the temperature within your room. You are also aware of different sounds and movements. You are aware of your physical body. You may be drinking a glass of water while you are writing. All of these actions are elements of your attention. Some appear to you as being lesser in your attention, for you are focused upon one action. In this same manner, you as essence are focusing an aspect of your attention in this focus. Therefore, for this focus the attention seems to be directed to this particular focus more so than to all of the other elements and actions of the essence, but you also allow yourselves bleed-throughs, or what we speak of as bleed-throughs, of many other focuses and many other actions of essence, for the attention is held there also. Each focus holds the same element of attention.
These are difficult areas for your thought process, for you think of yourselves very singularly. You do this, that you do not distract yourselves. Essence holds tremendous ability. Unlike the attention that you allow yourself within each focus, you do not believe within your belief systems that you may focus your attention in more than one event at one time. You shall always hold your attention directed in one area more than another area. This is a belief system which you have developed, but it also provides you with clarity or purity in each of your experiences. It allows you to separate out all of your experiences, and therefore allows you less confusion within the individual focus.
I have offered an exercise in clarity, that you may practice with your own abilities and recognize that you may be focusing your attention in several areas simultaneously, and you MAY accomplish this! This offers you information as to the reality of essence and answers part of your own questions as to HOW this may be possible – “How may essence be equally focused in all of these focuses? How may its attention be equal in all of these events simultaneously?” – for your logic, your rationale, dictates to you within your belief systems that one area of attention must be predominant.
NORM: I asked a question, I believe last week or the week before, in regard to the Dream Walkers and whether or not they were whole essence, and they are. Somehow I have like a dream of a Dream Walker being like a misty element of human-like form moving over the earth. Now, is that correct? Did they ever do that, or do they do that?
ELIAS: In your terms, this would be close to accuracy.
NORM: But they are not a focus. Are they doing that now? I also wanted to ask that question. If I had the appropriate belief systems, could I see them do this?
ELIAS: The Dream Walkers are continuously interactive, as I have expressed in speaking of the Dream Walkers. They may choose different forms to be interactive with you. And yes, you may be viewing a Dream Walker. You may be interactive with a Dream Walker if you are allowing.
NORM: The Dream Walkers ... it is my idea that they are continually creating and viewing their creation. Is that correct?
ELIAS: As are you!
NORM: Well, yeah ...
ELIAS: They are not different from you! They are essences, as are you. They merely choose a different action. They choose not to be completely physically-focused.
NORM: When you dream, there’s a slight difference in consciousness. The attention is in a different manner when you’re asleep. Is that essentially what you’re saying?
ELIAS: Within your sleep state, you allow yourself to be connecting with imagery that is projected from Regional Area 2. Therefore, you also allow yourself a relaxation of your belief systems. You continue to hold belief systems, for you hold belief systems subjectively, but they are more relaxed.
NORM: So then Regional Area 2 is much more general than I have thought of it before. It is about to be created. It has all the probabilities, the possibilities of creation as we choose them to be.
NORM: Not only in this probable world, in this probable dimension, but in all our closely-related probable dimensions. Is that true?
ELIAS: Within this dimension, related to this particular physical focus, yes.
NORM: Right. Well, let me work on it.
RETA: Can I go on with that idea?
ELIAS: Another element that you hold very strongly within the area of duplicity is the belief system that you are you, and essence is a thing outside of you which is directing of your reality. This stems from your belief systems dealing with duplicity. You devalue yourselves. You discount yourselves, and therefore you hold belief systems that there is some element outside of yourself that is greater than you and may be directing of your focus, for the focus is less than essence, which it is not.
NORM: And so it’s a true statement that it’s only my belief systems that really limit my capabilities?
ELIAS: It is your belief systems. Your terminology of placing “only” is another example of duplicity, of devaluing. Your belief systems are influencing in how you are creating your reality, and how you are creating your reality IS REALITY within every moment. It is also an element of your value fulfillment, which you ARE accomplishing. If you are not accomplishing, you shall NOT be focused here. You shall refocus within another area. You devalue yourselves in looking to your belief systems as viewing that they are bad. They are not bad. They ARE your reality.
(Intently) I express to you that the action of the shift is to be ACCEPTING your belief systems. I do not express to you EVER that it is to be eliminating of your belief systems. They ARE your reality. You may not accept a belief system if you are viewing the belief system as bad. You WILL NOT accept a belief system if you are viewing it as bad. THIS is a basic element of duplicity.
RETA: Two questions on this attention ... talking about a person that has attention on many different things all at once. We usually think we’re focusing on one particular thing. There are some people who can be doing at one time myriads of things and doing them very well and paying attention in their mind to every one of them as they come, even if they’re coming all at once, and there are others that can only do one thing at a time. They cannot be distracted or they can’t even do that. Is this a stronger focus, or is this just their belief system, or is it just that some of them have more capabilities than others, or what is it?
ELIAS: It is influenced by your belief systems and what you choose to allow yourself within your own abilities. Some individuals choose to allow themselves more of an openness and less limitation, but these are all elements that are influenced by the individual belief systems.
RETA: It just seems that sometimes one person will just have to absolutely be focused on one thing, and they get interrupted and it’s just blown out, and other people can carry a lot.
ELIAS: Many individuals hold this belief system and it is reinforced en masse. Some individuals choose within the attention of an individual focus to move outside of this mass belief system, as you choose in different areas individually to move outside of MANY mass belief systems.
RETA: Okay. The other question sort of had to do with personality. You were talking about personality. I can’t remember us discussing personality for a long time. I was curious if in all my focuses ... or if as an essence, after we’d gone through Regional Area 3 and 4 ... if I were to meet someone in this group, for instance, would their personality, their energy system, still be the same? I mean, would you carry more or less the same personality in your whole essence, all your focuses? The general trend?
ELIAS: Not necessarily, for the essence chooses different types of elements of personalities within different focuses, although there are aspects of the personality tone which carries through all of the focuses that hold much similarity.
RETA: So if you were able to understand the tone, you might be able to collectively see one essence from another essence just because of their tone?
RETA: As you say, Dehl seems to be a tone that I have. Is that just for this focus, or is that my essence focus?
ELIAS: This would be the tone of your essence, which is held throughout all of the focuses.
RETA: Okay, and then if I were to have an idea of a personality, a stronger personality in one area, you still think it would be generally distributed, or would there be one stronger personality than the others, or would they be equal?
ELIAS: They are different, just as you may look to yourself within this focus and you think of yourself as holding a basic personality type, do you not?
ELIAS: But within the focus, you hold many moods.
ELIAS: You may experience different emotions ...
ELIAS: ... and in these moods or emotions, your personality may alter or change. If you are angry, your personality alters. If you are sorrowful, your personality alters. If you are joyful, your personality alters. In like manner, the personality tone of essence remains constant, but the focuses may be expressing different aspects of the tone.
RETA: Okay then, one more. Would you say that the focus I’m in right now would be – I’m not going to be able to say that ’cause you’re gonna say no -- one of the better focuses? (Laughter) I know what you’re going to say. There is no better!
ELIAS: Correct. (Grinning)
RETA: Oh gosh! Okay.
NORM: Talking about the experiences, we focus here for experience, for the intents that we want to experience as a personality. In the shift, the relationship between the focuses that are present here is going to be a realization by all focuses that all other focuses are of the same quality.
NORM: And equality will be perhaps closer than ever before, but the intents of the experiences could be drastically different. Therefore, there could be people that want to be a housemaid or there could be people that want to be a dictator, but the equality will be that everybody realizes the true essence of all the focuses.
NORM: Your statement in regard to the possibility or probability that money would no longer be needed is certainly intriguing from several different aspects. I’m trying to visualize a society that doesn’t need money, and it would certainly be an idealistic society. Are we truly going for an idealistic society?
ELIAS: This would be an interpretation of a belief system, that you BELIEVE this to be idealistic. It is merely more creative, expansive, a knowing of more of your reality, less limiting.
NORM: The total potentiality is going to be much more enormous than it is today.
ELIAS: Your awareness shall be wider. Therefore, you shall allow yourself more of your abilities. You hold the abilities now, but you do not allow yourself the awareness within your attention.
NORM: And it’s a cooperative effort, too.
NORM: And that cooperation was really necessary for all of us to arrive at those capabilities, not singularly, but ...
ELIAS: You may singularly, but you have chosen in agreement to be accomplishing this globally.
NORM: Our creativity ... will we be able to create our own basic needs? If I wanted to create a turkey dinner, I could do that? I could just create a turkey dinner?
ELIAS: (Grinning) You are not becoming magicians! (Laughter)
NORM: Shucks! Well, I’m trying to figure out how I would get a dinner!
GAIL: Are you hungry?? (We’re all cracking up)
NORM: No! You know, fifty years from now, I want to get a dinner! If I don’t have any money in my pocket ...
(Here, somebody that I can’t identify says “Barter.”)
NORM: Yeah, right.
ELIAS: It shall not be necessary. Trade shall not be necessary.
VICKI: That’s an exchange too.
ELIAS: All that you require shall be, for you shall each choose to be accomplishing, within what you now term to be jobs, what you choose, what you WISH to do, what you wish to be accomplishing. Therefore, it shall be unnecessary for trade, for all shall be available. Within your present now all is available, but you hold belief systems that you must trade for different objects.
NORM: That IS a belief system!
RETA: In the past we’ve had groups who have gotten together to try to live as equals, where everyone brings in food or attire or whatever is necessary for goods, and then they only individually take those things that are necessary, which is fine except none of those groups have been successful, because after several years there are those people who work harder and those who become very lazy. There are people who want to accomplish and study to be better, and there are those who steal from the group. I haven’t read of any that have accomplished that ... maybe the Iroquois Indians for several years. They had a three-hundred-year capability. They went that long before they had any problems, but I’ve not ever read of a group that it was a success.
ELIAS: This shift has never been accomplished within this dimension!
RETA: Well, I understand that.
ELIAS: Your reality shall be entirely different!
NORM: For example, we WILL have to eat! (Laughter)
ELIAS: Yes. (Grinning)
DAVID: What is this obsession with eating??
RETA: We’re not changing. We’re still flesh and blood.
NORM: Well, yeah. I could create the energy and the vitamins in my stomach or whatever.
HELEN: We don’t really have to eat. Isn’t that right, Elias?? (Elias gives Helen an “Oh brother” look, and we all crack up)
ELIAS: (Grinning) I have not expressed to you that you do not require some type of sustenance. I merely expressed to you that it matters not what you are consuming.
HELEN: You said we could eat rocks.
ELIAS: If you are so choosing.
HELEN: And survive on that.
ELIAS: If you are so choosing, and if your belief systems allow.
HELEN: There’s plenty of rocks, Norm! (You crack me up, Helen!)
ELIAS: There are also plenty of turkeys! (Much laughter)
CATHY: So isn’t duplicity a basic belief in good and bad and right and wrong?
ELIAS: Yes, and how you view yourselves.
CATHY: Okay. So ... alright, I’ll use myself as an example. My dog was scratching at her ears a couple of months ago, and I believe that that’s bad. But within the context of all this information I said, “Okay, she’s creating her own reality. I’m going to ignore this.” So I tried to do that. I tried to do it for two months, and she kept scratching at her ears. I would only look at it maybe once a week, which before I would have looked at them twice a day. And so finally I decided that because I have a belief in modern western veterinary medicine, I would take the dog there and have her ears cleaned out so I could just forget about it, because I could not stop concentrating on it because my dog was constantly scratching at her ears. So what am I doing now? Am I .. okay, I recognized it, but I didn’t do anything different, so to speak, than I would have before I had this information, except for the fact that I let her scratch her ears for a whole lot longer than I would have before!
ELIAS: And what have you shown yourself about your acceptance of belief systems? Let me express to you that within the context of this information, you misinterpret what I am expressing to you.
CATHY: That’s why I’m asking!
ELIAS: You look to information of belief systems. I offer you information of belief systems. You assimilate this information and you convolute the information. You view within yourselves, “Ah! I hold a belief system in this area. This is bad! This is wrong!” Therefore, you attempt to alter the belief system. You move into what you term to be an opposite direction, which does not accomplish accepting your belief system. It merely accomplishes giving you conflict and creating NEW belief systems and reinforcing your own elements of duplicity, for if you are not allowing yourself an actualization of what you want in your creation, you automatically discount yourself.
You look to the belief system. You recognize the belief system. You express to yourself, “This is bad. Therefore, I shall change the belief system,” although you have NOT changed the belief system. You hold the same belief system. You change your behavior. In changing your behavior, you continue with the same belief system that you held previously, but you also create an expectation. “If I am changing my behavior, if I am expressing ‘This be the animal’s choice. I shall pay no attention’,” you are altering your behavior. You do not BELIEVE this. You continue to hold the same belief system. You have not changed the belief system. Therefore, you create an expectation: “If I am not paying attention, the animal shall cease its action.”
CATHY: Well, that comes from “You create what you concentrate on!”
ELIAS: But YOU are not creating this. The animal is creating this.
CATHY: And then it goes to animals create their own reality, and I get really fricking confused sometimes!
ELIAS: Creatures DO create their own reality.
CATHY: So, another thing I could have done was just let her create her reality. It was another option that I had.
ELIAS: In accepting the belief system that it matters not, that this be the creature’s creation, (Cathy groans) or in accepting the creature’s creation. You may not be entirely accepting the belief system, but you may be accepting of the creation.
NORM: Wouldn’t there have been an interchange between the dog and Cathy, such that the dog knew that Cathy needed a challenge in regard to the belief systems and created the itching ear?
ELIAS: At times this is an action that creatures may be creating, as being influenced by YOU.
RETA: So then can’t we just go straight ahead and say the animal created that so it could get help, and then Cathy helped it?
ELIAS: (Grinning) This also is your belief system! Creatures create what they are choosing to be creating the same as you create what you are choosing to be creating.
RETA: And so the animal could have been creating this for help, and she could have been helpful by ...
ELIAS: Creatures do not create elements within what you term to be health for helpfulness to themselves. These are elements of belief systems. The creatures do not hold belief systems as do you.
RETA: Alright then, instinctively it had a pain in its ear, and it created the scratching to get attention.
ELIAS: Creatures also inherently KNOW that they may uncreate whatever they choose to be uncreating.
RETA: They do? Hmm.
CATHY: Okay. Well, I’m going to read this or listen to the tape, and then ... ’cause I don’t want to get on the hamster wheel about it. I’m just trying to figure out how to, you know, deal with my belief systems. (Elias nods and starts to say something, but ...)
HELEN: I have a question about what you were saying. I think I got what you were saying about belief systems, because you’re saying that what we’ve been doing is thinking that we’ve got to see that we have a belief system and we’ve got to take the opposite action to get rid of it. But what you want us to do or what would be more helpful to us is to recognize that we have a belief system and accept it. It doesn’t necessarily need changing, but recognize that by believing whatever it is we believe that we have created our reality through all of these different belief systems.
HELEN: What it reminded me of is like when you have a relationship with someone, and something about them bothers you. You can’t change another person. The only thing you can do is to accept, and then whatever it is about that other person seems to go away when you accept. It seems to not be in your stream of consciousness as much. Is that what you’re saying about our belief systems?
ELIAS: It does not hold the power any longer.
HELEN: Yes, after acceptance.
GAIL: Did I do the same thing with a cold? Sort of what Cathy did, not accept? I mean, I didn’t want it. Therefore, I decided I wasn’t going to get it, and I got it anyway. Is that the same idea? (Pause)
ELIAS: In a manner of speaking.
GAIL: So I have to accept the fact that we’ve created germs, and that I believe we pass it from one person to another?
ELIAS: This is a belief system ...
GAIL: Right. Hmm.
ELIAS: ... that continues to be held, but you also express to yourself that you do NOT believe this, but you do!
GAIL: I found that one out! (Laughter) I got the cold!
CATHY: Well, didn’t I accept that taking the dog to the vet would fix the problem, as it did?
ELIAS: And this be why you have accomplished, for you are accepting of this aspect of the belief system.
CATHY: It’s just a partial acceptance, because no one has accepted a belief system, right?
ELIAS: Correct, but this also offers you the opportunity to view how your belief systems are affecting, and when you ARE accepting of aspects of belief systems, you offer yourself accomplishments. You offer yourself no conflict. You also diffuse elements of duplicity.
ELIAS: We shall break, and you may continue with your questioning.
BREAK 7:45 PM.
GAIL: I have a question. I’m not sure how to actually formulate the question, but I’ll try to do this. I’m essence, and in this focus I’m focused as Gail. And talking about the clarity exercise and paying attention to your emotions and your feelings, these emotions and feelings that I have I feel trigger other aspects of myself to come through. So far, am I correct?
GAIL: And I’m sensing when I have certain emotions, I feel like an aspect is here. Can I connect and ... I want to sort of say jump over into – I know I’m doing the duplicity thing, but this is how I have to make sense of it – jump over into that aspect and view what that aspect is viewing in its focus and connect with him or her, in sort of the idea of the clarity thing? You know, how you pay attention to, like you described, music or drinking water or whatever, you pay attention to other aspects coming in and trying to connect with that or pay attention to that sense?
ELIAS: Here, once again, you are separating. These aspects are not other focuses. Therefore, there is no “jumping into” another aspect, for it IS YOU and it is seeing other elements of your reality.
GAIL: And I am seeing other aspects of their reality?
ELIAS: Their reality IS your reality.
GAIL: Okay. The aspect of Becky viewing through me and me feeling her, and her learning something from me and me learning something from her ...
ELIAS: I have cautioned you in this area previously!
GAIL: Okay ... tell me again!
ELIAS: Discontinue this action!
GAIL: Right. I haven’t done it, that I’m aware of.
ELIAS: Therefore, you need not concentrate upon this!
GAIL: Okay. I’m trying to understand my focus with other focuses, and I know it’s one, but it’s not me.
ELIAS: My suggestion to you, once again, is to focus your attention upon THIS focus.
GAIL: Alright. Just forget about that, right?
ELIAS: Focus your attention upon the now and your own belief systems and their affectingness on you within the now.
GAIL: Okay. I have a question about a dream also that I had – actually, it’s recurred a couple of times – where I just view an eye, and I feel like it’s my eye but it’s not my eye. It’s familiar, but I’m not sure who it belongs to.
ELIAS: This is imagery that you are presenting to yourself to offer you information to be viewing yourself. It is you.
GAIL: Okay. Thank you.
ELIAS: You are welcome.
BOBBI: I have a question. Apparently there’s at times been some confusion in the transcribing of sessions between my voice and Sue’s initially, and more recently, as Margot was doing this, assigning my name to her questions that she had actually come up with in session. Is there any connection with that?
ELIAS: At times you allow yourselves an action that you interpret as being confusing. At times within a focus you allow yourself more of an opening of your periphery, and this allows you more of an interactiveness within what you view as the concept of the inter-connectedness of all of you. Therefore, at times you excuse actions that you do not explain to yourselves as being a confusion or a misinterpretation. In actuality, you DO allow yourselves in certain moments to loosen your hold upon your attention within the focus, therefore allowing the focus to drift, in a manner of speaking -- figuratively – and in this allow yourselves a knowing of the lack of separation within consciousness.
You do not understand objectively what you are doing. Therefore, as in every area you create an explanation, and the explanation becomes the belief system that you have confused yourself or that there is another explanation of a connectedness of focuses or whichever explanation you choose to offer yourselves. You are merely attempting to explain aspects of your reality to yourselves within what you view to be the context of this information. This be another example of the misinterpretations of this information. You are offered an explanation, and you use this explanation to be explaining many different actions that SEEM to you objectively to be similar. (Pause)
BOBBI: Okay ...
ELIAS: (Smiling) I may express essence names. I express to you that an essence name is an interpretation, a word representing a tone within your language. I may express two essence names that sound objectively in words to you to be similar. You associate tone with sound. Therefore, when you hear two essence names that sound similar you automatically move into the area of expressing, “Oh, these two names must be very similar in tone.” This is not necessarily so. I may express two of the same name to you and they may hold very different tones, but they are translated into your language into words the same. Therefore, you also confuse certain aspects of your reality and your experiences, attempting to be explaining them within the context of this information. You do not ALWAYS move in this direction, but there are many times that you do move in this direction of misinterpretation. You view an action, an event, and you view a similar event, and within the context of this information you assume that they are connected or that they are the same action. This is not necessarily the case either, but this is the process that you choose: to automatically move into these directions in processing this information.
BOBBI: Okay, so those were two separate actions is what you’re saying, correct?
ELIAS: Correct. The action of Jeselle is connected with an action of experience within transition.
BOBBI: Okay. And in transcribing then, the first one between Sue and I, that would be something else?
ELIAS: Correct. This would be of that which I have expressed presently: a fading momentarily, so to speak, and an allowance of the interconnectedness, the lack of separation, momentarily.
BOBBI: Since I’m not doing the transcribing, is this something that I would be doing, and Vicki, as she’s transcribing it, picks up on this?
ELIAS: No. This is the experience of the individual transcribing.
BOBBI: Okay, I understand.
VICKI: So basically, it’s imagery.
ELIAS: Correct. It is experience. It is a momentary experience of lack of separation; a good example for noticing.
VICKI: I’d like to ask a question about Cathy’s question about the dog. Recently we mutually chose to align with belief systems that we hadn’t aligned with for a while, of diet and exercise, and we feel better. It was kind of an experiment of aligning with the belief system that you know that you hold that has worked for you for many years, rather than not aligning with it and attempting to affect your reality anyway. So I guess one question I have ... I have a couple of questions about this. In this type of an action that we did ... and I would think that what she did with her dog is the same sort of thing. When she chose to finally take it to the veterinarian, she chose to align with her belief system rather than allow it to cause her conflict, and therefore she’s experiencing the reality she wants to experience. In that action, are you in actuality reinforcing the belief system, or are you moving towards an acceptance of the belief system?
ELIAS: You are moving closer to the acceptance of the belief system.
VICKI: Okay. Well, I’m a little confused about that, because haven’t we for the most part been aligning with belief systems for centuries?
VICKI: And does that mean that for these centuries, we’ve been moving towards an acceptance?
ELIAS: Partially, but you also create judgments upon aligning with these belief systems. In not creating a judgment upon your choice objectively to be aligning with the belief system, you are moving into an area closer to accepting the belief system.
VICKI: Okay, I think I understand that. (To Cathy) So, I feel like I’m not creating a judgment on this particular diet and exercise thing. Do you?
VICKI: And so I would be curious, do you feel like you’re creating a judgment regarding the dog in your action?
VICKI: So you have less conflict?
CATHY: Oh, way! After I did it, it went away.
VICKI: So part of the misinterpretation that you’re talking about has to do with this ... actually, what Cathy was attempting to do, ignore the dog, is an attempt get rid of the belief system?
ELIAS: Correct, which is not the point.
VICKI: I think we’ve all done this here and there in the last few years. Although I have to say that there are times that this action has worked, so to speak, and so there’s a reinforcement in that area, you know, of kind of realizing that you’ve held a belief system for a long time and you’ve done things a certain way for a long time, and within an experiment, trying something different, you find out that it actually worked and you actually accomplished what you wanted to accomplish.
ELIAS: Correct ... without the expectation.
VICKI: So the expectation is what makes the difference?
LISA: By judgment, do you mean looking at it as bad or good or right or wrong? Is that what you mean by judgment?
NORM: So how did the dog get rid of the itching, in this case?
ELIAS: Within the alignment of the belief systems.
NORM: Of Cathy or of the dog?
ELIAS: Of the individual, not the animal.
DREW: But only by agreement with Cathy, because if the dog wanted to continue the malady, it would have.
ELIAS: Correct. (Pause)
VICKI: Okay, I have another question. Going back to what Norm was talking about earlier, he made a statement, something to the effect of that when the shift is accomplished we won’t be dealing with these belief systems of duplicity in the same manner that we are now. The way I’ve thought about it a lot is that when we accept the belief systems, that is in effect creating the shift. Is that a backwards thought process on my part ... again?
VICKI: Okay. Well then, that raises a contradiction for me in terms, because I’ve been thinking about the action of accepting belief systems as creating the shift, but then you’ve said quite a few times that regardless of whether anybody accepts a belief system or not, the shift is occurring through mass agreement. We are creating it.
ELIAS: Correct. They are each other.
VICKI: So I guess that’s the part I don’t get. If we’re creating the shift within our ...
ELIAS: You may not accomplish one without the other.
VICKI: Okay. So I think I misunderstood this statement that the shift will happen regardless. Could you kind of clarify that?
ELIAS: You objectively hold information concerning belief systems and the acceptance of belief systems. You have chosen to draw yourselves to information to be offering you the opportunity to lessen trauma within this shift. The trauma is related to the acceptance of belief systems. You shall all be accomplishing the acceptance of belief systems as the action of this shift. You may not all choose objectively to offer yourselves objective information that you may be connecting to in accomplishing this action. Therefore, those individuals NOT offering themselves objective information shall be experiencing trauma in this shift. They shall be accepting of belief systems, but they shall also be experiencing trauma. You offer yourselves the opportunity to move into the area of objectively creating within your reality the acceptance of these belief systems. They are each other. They are not separate actions. This shift in consciousness is NOW. (Pause)
VICKI: Okay. I have one other question, going back to the thing about the belief systems. Cathy had an expectation when she didn’t treat this dog that by not concentrating on the ears, the reality would change.
VICKI: She also had an expectation when she took the dog to the vet that the reality would change. What’s the difference?
ELIAS: The difference is not an expectation. The difference is a knowing.
ELIAS: The expectation is held in not aligning with the belief system, but continuing to hold the belief system that an action shall be created by the creature. Within the action of engaging the animal with the medical profession, there is no questioning within Shynla. It is not an expectation. It is a knowing within her. It is accepted. There is no question. She holds no doubtfulness that this physician shall be accomplishing. She holds doubtfulness within the expectation that SHE shall be accomplishing in ignorance of the belief system; not that the animal shall be accomplishing, but that SHE shall be accomplishing.
VICKI: Okay, I think I understand a little better. Thank you.
DAVID: I have a dream I’d like to ask you about that keeps knocking on my head. Again, it’s another one of those beginning of UFO dreams that I have every now and then. It’s nighttime and I’m standing outside and looking up into the sky, and I notice maybe four, maybe five UFOs hovering closer to me than they’ve ever been in the other dreams that I’ve had. They were literally just above me and they were just hovering there for a second and I didn’t feel scared. Suddenly the scene changed and I was in a bus, and there was a driver of the bus who I didn’t recognize. I was the only one on this bus, and it was driving along the coastline that was parallel to the ocean, the vast ocean, and I noticed that just under the surface of the ocean was all red molten lava about to rise to the surface. I felt a little bit fearful of this, thinking, “Oh my god, what’s this all about?” The bus driver kept driving along the coastline as if we were going into more danger, and as went around the corner this dinosaur appeared and I thought, “Oh! We’re definitely going to get eaten now!” And with that fear, another dinosaur seemed to pop out of mid-air with a different shape altogether and started attacking the bigger dinosaur. So they got busy, which allowed us to drive past them. As we drove past them, a splash of the ocean hit the bus, which was the molten lava, and I remember feeling protected, still wondering who the driver was ’cause I couldn’t see him. Eventually the bus went up to a hillside and to the safeness of the hillside, and he got up and said, “Okay, we change drivers here.” And then I woke up, but it was very vivid.
ELIAS: Your imagery of your crafts is imagery to yourself of elements within your present reality that you view to be looming over you, but not in a threatening manner; events that you view to be within probabilities. Therefore, the terminology of “looming” is not to be interpreted as negative – hovering. This imagery within this particular dream is about yourself presently and how you view yourself, and what you anticipate within probabilities presently and futurely. In this you are assessing your movement and your position, beginning with your probabilities of events which hover for future viewing and evaluation.
Continuing on with your journey, your driver is an aspect of yourself moving through within a protected vehicle. The vehicle represents what you view to be your protectiveness of yourself. As you move through upon your journey, the lava beneath the surface of the water is your representation to yourself of those belief systems that you feel slightly beneath the surface of yourself that you have not connected with yet, but are close. As these approach more surfacely, there is a feeling of them attacking you or covering you, hitting you, but you continue to be protected within yourself by the vehicle. As you continue, you also face within your imagery your fears and allow yourself imagery in the respect that these fears may appear to be enormous creatures that may be very threatening, but they also may be dissipating themselves, allowing you a new freedom to continue and to also create a new aspect of yourself within your focus; therefore the changing of the driver.
DAVID: I like that dream! Thank you.
ELIAS: You are welcome.
LISA: I had a dream. It was last night and this is all I remember, but I think I had walked out of a cinema or a theater and I caught up with these two guys and a girl. They were walking along a boardwalk, and I just started talking to them. They were British, and they linked arms with me. They were already walking arm-and-arm with each other down this wide boardwalk, and I put my arm into one of the guy’s arms and we started talking like we’d known each other forever, and ... I don’t know. It was just like we picked up from somewhere, like we’d known each other, and there was just all these great feelings flowing between us, you know, love, just like I knew him. Anyway, it was like I was at home or something. I felt at home. My boyfriend Eddie was walking ... sometimes I saw him twenty feet in front of us or behind us, and he wasn’t part of it. I felt like his energy was like he didn’t want to ... he couldn’t link up with us. You know what I’m saying? And that’s all I remember, but it was like I was back with family or something.
ELIAS: This is imagery you have presented to yourself in relation to your movement into this forum. You have offered yourself the opportunity to abate some elements of your own fearfulness and some elements of your own issues of self-worth in participation within this forum and recognizing that other individuals within this forum are embracing of you and accepting of you, therefore offering you your feeling within your imagery of acceptance of yourself and of other individuals. You also image your partner as not participating within this action. Therefore, you image this as his removal from you in distance.
LISA: He’s distant from our group ’cause he’s not participating? I mean, that shows that he’s not participating?
ELIAS: You image this as an element of distance from yourself also.
LISA: Yeah, I feel very distant from him. I feel like he also maybe feels distant from me too. I don’t know.
HELEN: I had a dream, a very brief one, that I was sliding across a wooden floor, and I had a wonderful feeling of exhilaration, and your words came to me that our happiness and our feelings of joy on this earth are fleeting.
ELIAS: This would be influenced by a belief system, but I shall express that your imagery offers you also the opportunity to view the simplicity of joy.
HELEN: Would it be connected to anything that has recently happened in my life, or just an overall theme of the simplicity of joy?
HELEN: Thank you.
ELIAS: You are welcome.
SUE: I have a question about the two skiing deaths that happened recently, Sonny Bono and ... was it Michael Kennedy? Somehow I picture Sonny Bono hearing about it and thinking, “Gee, that would be a neat way to die,” and then choosing to die that way. Or else the two of them on some level agreeing that they would die in the same fashion as some sort of example to all of us, of I don’t know what. Was there any connection between the deaths?
ELIAS: No. They are individual choices.
SUE: So it’s simply a coincidence that they chose the same ...
ELIAS: It is not a coincidence. It is a choice; a similarity.
Offer essence name for new essence: Anna.
GAIL: I have a question. Can you tell me what I’ve been creating in my left hand index finger for a while, kind of an annoyance? Is that telling me to pay attention to myself?
ELIAS: It is an opportunity for you to view physical affectingness that you are creating, and to view the belief systems that you hold presently in these areas of creating and uncreating.
GAIL: I’m not sure I understand.
ELIAS: You are offering yourself an opportunity to view a creation and connect with your own belief systems in regard to the creation, and also view the belief systems that you hold in regard to uncreating any physical affectingness. View your own words: “The affectingness is annoying.”
GAIL: I’ll have to think about this one.
ELIAS: It is an opportunity to view your belief systems in the area of annoyance.
GAIL: Okay, thank you.
ELIAS: You are welcome.
RETA: Can we back up and go back to what we were talking at the first? I was talking about different groups trying to live as equals, more or less, with helpfulness to each other to try to exist this way. Was it true that the Iroquois lasted around two hundred and seventy-five to three hundred years? Or have there been other groups that have been able to do this without conflict?
ELIAS: There are many different cultures that exist without conflict and without exchange.
RETA: Are there some now?
RETA: I was thinking of the Quakers now, but they do have conflict. Their young people do not like the controlling factors that they use to keep them in this method of existence.
ELIAS: This would NOT be an example. I am expressing of cultures that do not engage in trade.
RETA: Well, I’m sure there are a lot of ... I wouldn’t say they were modern cultures. There are tribes that do this still, yes.
RETA: But what about the two million people in this one area, or six million right here in this area? How would that work?
ELIAS: It shall be unnecessary! Once again, I shall express to you: each individual shall be producing what they are choosing to be producing, and this shall be accomplished within harmony. You shall hold no need for trade.
RETA: My word of “trade” would be if I had a farm and I had plenty and I gave to everyone else, but I expected them to work on the farm. Wouldn’t that be a trade?
ELIAS: This would be a trade ...
RETA: Trade, yeah!
ELIAS: ... for you hold an expectation for another individual to trade for your goods. This shall be unnecessary!
RETA: Okay, say I have a farm and they have a clothing mill. We’re still trading!
ELIAS: No. It is merely made available to all.
SUE: Like you put it all in a warehouse and people just go and take what they need?
RETA: But doesn’t that get back to ...
ELIAS: Hypothetically, although this would be an oversimplification. There shall be mass distribution.
RETA: But then we get back to those that take more than they need!
ELIAS: This also is a belief system! (Laughter)
RETA: I guess I have a belief system that most people would try, but there are those that would be dishonest.
ELIAS: (Grinning) This is a belief system! (Laughter)
RETA: And I have it. Fundamentally, it’s been proven ...
ELIAS: In accepting these belief systems ...
RETA: I accept it!
ELIAS: ... their power is neutralized. (Speaking slowly and clearly) Therefore, it is not affecting as it is now.
RETA: Okay, but with the technology that we have, if there were not a need to pursue living wages or excellence or whatever, would we still pursue higher technology?
ELIAS: Absolutely, for you do not eliminate your motivation and your curiosity and your exploration merely if you are eliminating your trade system.
RETA: But I’m just thinking from the base up, that the trade system is caused by worker bees.
ELIAS: Another belief system! (Laughter)
SUE: Okay. I’m sorry, but I have to ask this! When there’s no more money, will the state wither away? The government?
ELIAS: It shall change, but it shall not be eliminated.
RETA: They’re too far in debt to eliminate it! (Laughter) It’ll take them almost seventy-five years just to pay off their debt!
DREW: During the break, Mary felt like you were going to pop in a couple of times. Is there some information you want to share with us that we haven’t heard yet tonight?
ELIAS: My “push” to be engaging this energy exchange was prompted by much misinterpretation which was being espoused among you!
ELIAS: (Humorously) I seem to remember comments of allowing the creature to continue with its creation and not care until it is DEAD (wild laughter) if it is choosing! Or individuals choosing to allow a child to be DEAD in not interfering with their creation, and this should be of no concern!
DREW: Well?? (Laughter)
ELIAS: (Grinning) This is NOT what I was expressing to you!
DREW: Well, let’s pursue this for a second. There are people who will, if their children get sick, not take them to a doctor or align with western beliefs about medicine, and there may have been instances where the children get better without medical treatment. But there have been stories in the news where they end up dying, and in fact the parents end up sometimes going to jail because of it. Is it not fair to say that they are aligning with their belief systems, which are to a large extent what we’ve been talking about here, in terms of letting the creator create their reality wherever that reality may take them, even if it takes them to death?
DREW: So it’s NOT inaccurate to say that if a parent has a sick child and the parent to some extent is in alignment with this information and allows the child to create its reality even if it means death, that’s not contrary to what we’ve been talking about!
ELIAS: In one respect, no; it is not contrary to what we are speaking of, but you have missed the point! We are speaking of belief systems and accepting belief systems as opposed to holding the belief system and ignoring the belief system.
DREW: Well, I think my comment was made relative to the dog, in the sense that the only way she could not have had conflict about not taking the animal to the doctor would be if she would be okay with the animal creating whatever reality it wanted to create, even if it meant dying.
ELIAS: Correct, within the context of accepting her own belief systems.
DREW: Right, and short of that she would experience conflict unless she took action that was in alignment with her belief systems.
DREW: So, I wasn’t inaccurate! (Laughter)
ELIAS: We are speaking of conflict and the belief systems that are influencing and creating of conflict.
DREW: Right, I understand ... I understand.
ELIAS: I was not speaking of different belief systems and debating right belief systems and wrong belief systems or better or worse belief systems or different belief systems. I was speaking in addressing to specific belief systems as examples of how you misinterpret the information which is offered to you and the action that you take within your misinterpretation and how this is creating of conflict and not accomplishing what you are meaning to be accomplishing objectively, for you have misunderstood.
DREW: I understand. Yeah, I understand that. I wasn’t placing a judgment as to one belief system being right or wrong ...
ELIAS: I am aware.
DREW: The point I was making was simply that to really be in alignment with this information in terms of allowing others to create their own reality ...
ELIAS: You are correct.
DREW: ... you have to be prepared for whatever they choose, even if it means a reality that you may not be comfortable with.
ELIAS: You are absolutely correct.
DREW: Okay. Whew!
ELIAS: But you are not accomplishing this entirely yet. Therefore, you also present yourselves with opportunities to view the actions of your belief systems and offer yourselves more information as to the acceptance of these belief systems. It is merely a question of opening to your periphery and noticing what is creating of your conflict and the belief systems associated, and recognizing that ignoring the belief system or changing the belief system is not accepting the belief system.
DREW: And what happens if that belief system – as to some extent Cathy’s belief system of the dog was – is intrusive in terms of the other individual’s creating of their reality? Is that a consideration, or do we just align with our belief systems and take whatever action ...
ELIAS: This also leads us back once again to our classes upon acceptance – Acceptance 101 and Acceptance 102 – of yourselves and of each other.
DREW: So when your belief systems are in conflict with someone else’s creation, do you align with your own belief systems, accept them, and follow your impulses that may follow accordingly? Even if it is intrusive in terms of ...
ELIAS: If you are ACCEPTING of your belief systems, they are neutralized. Therefore, they shall not BE intrusive to another individual, for you shall not be placing judgment. (Pause)
DREW: Is there another word besides “acceptance” for belief systems that you can give us? Does acceptance just mean acknowledgment?
DREW: What exactly is it? (Pause) Identification without judgment?
ELIAS: It is the LACK of judgment.
DREW: The lack of judgment renders that belief system powerless?
VICKI: So if Cathy accepted her belief systems of veterinary medicine and all that stuff and the dog created an ailment, if she had accepted her belief systems she could either choose one action or the other and it would not matter.
DREW: Because she wouldn’t consider one better than the other.
ELIAS: Correct, and there is no judgment.
VICKI: So it would just be a matter of choice.
ELIAS: Absolutely. It is a matter of choice, and there is no judgment. Acceptance is the lack of judgment.
DREW: Thank you.
Margot’s note: Geez! This comes as sort of like a magic formula! It’s all so much clearer now! Couldn’t we have gotten to this place months or years earlier?? I feel like I just passed GO and collected $200!
RETA: I remember when we talked about this a while ago, and I had a little conflict with it. We talked about ... for instance, something was happening to a couple, and I knew that I could intervene or choose to be helpful and maybe that would not happen. Let’s say they were going to be thrown out of their house and I could come up with money so they wouldn’t be thrown out of their house. And as we were talking about it the next few weeks, it came to the point where it sounded like, “Well, if they go ahead and do that, that’s what their choice was.” And I was so upset with the conflict of that idea that helpfulness was just not necessary that I stopped thinking about it for awhile, and I really have a hard time with that. I still believe, and it’s part of my belief systems, that you should be intuitive to other people’s needs and desires and that you should be helpful as much as you can be, and just because they go off and trip over the wire and fall down, you shouldn’t say, “Too bad. That was their choice.” I think we’re losing the point there somewhere.
ELIAS: Acceptance of this belief system would allow you the opportunity to choose to engage this action of helpfulness, IF you so choose, WITHOUT an expectation and WITHOUT a judgment that another individual does NOT choose this.
RETA: How would you know, though?
VICKI: Would that mean, for example ... to use her example, she knows people that are going to be losing their home, and her offer of helpfulness would be to give them money so they didn’t lose their home. So then if the people took the money and flushed it down the toilet or did something else with it, it would not matter to Reta?
VICKI: That would be the expectation.
VICKI: And within an acceptance of the belief system, it wouldn’t matter. She would offer the money and she wouldn’t care what they did with it.
ELIAS: Correct, for this is the offering of helpfulness that she is creating. But the response shall matter not.
VICKI: So you’re not discounting the helpfulness at all, correct?
DREW: But helpfulness isn’t better. It’s because it’s the choice of experience that you choose to create.
DREW: Not being helpful is just as okay.
ELIAS: Correct, WITHOUT a judgment.
DREW: It would HAVE to be without a judgment if it’s just as okay. If they lost their home and they were out in the street, that’s okay too!
ELIAS: IF you do not hold the belief system; if you have ACCEPTED the belief system.
HELEN: If you didn’t think you “should” have helped them.
SUE: And if you didn’t think it was better NOT to help them.
DREW: It’s not a question of if you think you SHOULD help them. It’s whether you CHOOSE to help them, regardless of whether it’s right or wrong or should or shouldn’t. It’s the experience that you desire to have. There is no “should” ideally, post-shift.
HELEN: What I’m saying is, if you’re okay with your belief system on not helping someone. You have to be okay with not helping someone ’cause then if they get thrown out into the street, if you feel bad about that and you would feel like you SHOULD have helped them, then you’re not really aligned with your belief system.
VICKI: You haven’t accepted your belief system.
SUE: And also it wouldn’t bother you if somebody else helped them. It wouldn’t make you feel that they shouldn’t have done that, or that maybe you should have.
VICKI: You wouldn’t feel guilty.
RETA: Now on the other side, we were going through this at the same time where some not too good things happened to people that we read about in the newspaper and so on. It was almost as if to say, “Well, that was their choice.” I still have feelings for that person. Even though I don’t know them, I still feel that they were a victim of circumstances, and I know that’s my belief system. But for a while I felt that everyone was saying, “Oh, okay. That’s just what they did. That’s their choice.” Just dismissing it that way. That’s a little hard for me to understand, that people would just start dismissing other people’s choices that way without empathy or ...
ELIAS: (Firmly) BOTH choices are acceptable. Your choice to be feeling is acceptable. Another individual’s choice to not be feeling is acceptable. In accepting your own belief systems, both choices BECOME acceptable. They are not acceptable to you presently, for you have not accepted the belief system. Therefore, a judgment is placed.
RETA: I believe that’s true.
ELIAS: Therefore, once again, acceptance is the LACK of judgment.
NORM: So I’m trying to summarize my mental activity, in that cause and effect, right and wrong, all of this is a creativity of action and experience by all.
NORM: What else needs be said? Not much!
ELIAS: (Grinning and nodding) Correct.
We shall disengage this evening, and I shall be engaging you soon. Therefore, to you all this evening, I bid you all adieu!
Elias departs at 9:02 PM.
© 1998 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.