Saturday, July 31, 1999
“Translations of Nonphysical Actions”
Participants: Mary (Michael) and Rodney (Zacharie).
Elias arrives at 1:25 PM. (Arrival time is 18 seconds.)
ELIAS: Good afternoon!
RODNEY: Good afternoon, Elias! (Elias chuckles) How are you?
ELIAS: As always!
RODNEY: As always! You know, I was thinking today that you get to answer a lot of questions, and that’s about it. I never hear about what YOU do, where YOU are.
ELIAS: Ha ha ha ha!
RODNEY: Is it possible for you to talk about that in terms that I would understand? (Pause)
ELIAS: Not realistically, in the translation that you hold an understanding of. You filter through your belief systems and through what you know and identify objectively in conjunction with this particular physical dimension. There are many aspects of consciousness in other physical dimensions and in nonphysical areas of consciousness that are quite foreign from your understanding.
Therefore, in offering any explanation of the area of consciousness that I occupy and activities, so to speak, or motions that I engage within nonphysical areas of consciousness, [it] would be within your translation of your understanding quite distorted, for it would merely be an offering of a picture book, so to speak, in a language that is entirely foreign to the language which is spoken.
Therefore, the presentment of movement within much of the nonphysical areas of consciousness would merely be lending energy to the perpetuation of established belief systems that you already hold within your physical dimension, which I choose not to be engaging, that I am not reinforcing those belief systems, which we are attempting to be neutralizing. Ha ha ha!
RODNEY: Yes, okay. I have not asked you to comment on it very much, but I believe you said that we do interact in other dimensions, you and I. I would not have an understanding of that either, would I? (Pause) I did not look it up, Elias, so I’m being sloppy about this, and I apologize for that.
ELIAS: Apology is not necessary.
Let me express to you that you are correct; you would not hold an accurate understanding of these interactions.
Let me express to you that essences interact with each other throughout physical and nonphysical dimensions, and in this, the activities that are engaged or the movements that are engaged within other dimensions physically and within nonphysical areas of consciousness once again are far removed from your understanding in this particular physical dimension.
Think to yourself of nothingness. Now; within your interpretation of nothingness, you visualize something.
ELIAS: You visualize darkness or blackness.
RODNEY: I visualize empty space.
ELIAS: Quite, but you are visualizing space.
ELIAS: Therefore, the term nothingness is quite distorted, as it is filtered through your objective awareness and your translation and your identification, for the term that I may express as nothingness is quite different from what you interpret, for you within physical focus do not objectively conceive of nothing. You shall always associate with something, be it emptiness or a vacuum, blackness, vacancy – it matters not. It shall be something. It shall not be nothing.
RODNEY: And that’s just a beginning of how I would not understand your terminology.
ELIAS: Correct, for I am offering information to you within the confines of your language and your understanding, and your understanding is filtered through your perception, which is directly associated with this physical dimension. All that you know objectively, all that you identify objectively, and all that you understand is in relation to this physical dimension. Therefore, as you move into areas of questioning of other physical dimensions or of nonphysical areas of consciousness, there is incorporated a great deal of distortion, for it is filtered through your perception and your identifications within this physical dimension.
RODNEY: Okay. I won’t try to go in that direction any more then!
ELIAS: Ha ha ha!
Now; I express to you that there are elements that are objectively becoming incorporated into your physical reality that are quite unfamiliar to you all, which is the process of widening your awareness and incorporating more reality into this physical dimension, but this be the reason that I confine myself and my interaction with you to the elements concerning this physical dimension and what is affecting of you.
I may interject information as to different elements of other physical dimensions or nonphysical activity which may be within a given point directly affecting of you, or at times indirectly affecting of you, but it IS affecting of you. Therefore, it holds value and purpose in the offering of explanation, in part, with you. But as I have stated, I also limit that information merely to what you may be assimilating and understanding and what may be beneficial to you objectively to be connecting with, in offering you explanation to some of your experiences within this physical dimension.
RODNEY: Okay. I have so many questions here that we will not be able to handle them all within reason, but I’d like to begin. Our last session together was just fantastic! I transcribed the whole thing by hand, and I’m not accustomed to doing that, and I have a couple of questions regarding it.
In it, you spoke of a hologram. I was speaking of my family member who recently passed away, and it was in the context of my wanting to be of influence with him, and his rejecting that influence. And in your discussion of that with me ... and incidentally, as a byline here, I did suffer severe lower back problems, and I continually referred back to the description of how I create that conflict that you gave me, and I do believe that it was incredibly helpful. I’ve recovered quite well, thank you.
But in that discussion – it’s actually my brother-in-law – you spoke of him ... instead of accepting information from such mere mortals as I, that he did allow himself to get information through a hologram, one that he actually spoke with. Did I understand that correctly, that he was interacting with a vision prior to his transition?
ELIAS: What I have expressed to you is that the individual has offered himself information that shall be helpful within the action of transition.
Now; as to the concept of the hologram, what I am expressing to you is – as we have been discussing already in this session – a translation of an action which occurs within nonphysical areas of consciousness that is designated as transition. I shall be clear.
In this, what I have expressed to you is a translation, a figurative idea or picture that you may identify with and understand as to the action that occurs within the area of transition nonphysically.
Now; what the individual is creating within certain throes of that action of transition is a projection of their belief systems into what they may view as an actual objective reality.
Now; we shall approach this slowly, that you may understand, but be remembering, this is figurative and it is a translation, for I am expressing to you nonphysical actions which you do not have translatable identifications for accurately.
ELIAS: Therefore, in this, as an individual focus disengages from this physical dimension – or what you term to be dies – that focus, that individual enters into the beginning throes of an area of consciousness which is identified as transition.
In this action of transition – for it is not a place – but in this action of transition, initially the individual retains their objective awareness in very like manner to physical focus.
They have not yet moved into the area of the presentment of all of their focuses simultaneously. They merely project singularly their objective awareness and materialize the scenarios of their belief systems.
Now; this you may liken to a hologram, for it does not hold the solidity in quality that your physical dimension holds, although it may APPEAR that it holds that same type of solidity.
In this, think of your concepts that you present yourselves with presently in your science fiction. In your technology of your science fiction presently, you project the idea of holograms as holding the quality of such solidity that they appear to be actual reality. Are you following?
ELIAS: Very well.
In this, what I am expressing to you is that an individual focus that has disengaged or has died within physical focus moves to the action of transition, in which they continue to hold temporarily the same – or almost the same – quality of objective awareness as they held while they were participating in physical focus. Therefore, the area of transition appears to them to be quite similar.
In this, they shall create the imagery or the hologram, so to speak, of very similar creations – the same earth, the same human beings, the same creatures, the same vegetation, the same structures. All of these elements are familiar to them and they are all intimately involved with their belief systems, and as they are continuing to project through an objective awareness, they create a type of holographic imagery that appears to be solid and appears very similar to your reality within physical focus.
Now; an individual may continue in this type of creation for some time framework, in your terms. Be remembering once again, this is figurative, for within nonphysical areas of consciousness there is no time framework, but within your concept it may translate into a time framework.
Therefore, the individual may continue in this type of creation of this holographic imagery for an extended time framework appearance, not yet moving into the actual action of transition, which is the shedding of belief systems, for the actual action of transition initiates and continues the viewing of all focuses simultaneously.
This action, incorporating the individual’s belief systems which have not been shed yet, would be creating of tremendous trauma and confusion were the individual to project themselves entirely into the action of transition immediately following their disengagement of physical focus.
Therefore, individuals do not engage this type of action. They move into the action of transition as they allow themselves an acclimating time framework, in a manner of speaking, for as they continue within the initial throes of transition, they also hold a realization that what they are creating in objective imagery more and more deviates from the type of objective creations that were created within physical focus. They become less and less solid and more and more changeable.
In this, as they realize that their reality holds much greater suppleness and changeability, they also realize that what they are creating in their holographic imagery is directly based upon their beliefs, but in difference to physical reality. You may hold an awareness that what you are creating within your reality is directly influenced by your belief systems to a point, but it holds a very different quality, for your physical dimension holds a solidity.
You do not question your belief systems as you view a wall. You do not question your belief systems as you view a structure. You do not view the structure and express to yourself that this is a projection of imagery based upon your beliefs. You merely accept that this is what you create within physical focus and that it is solid.
In this, you create another belief which expresses to you that solidity is absolute.
RODNEY: Ah, the absolute again!
ELIAS: Within nonphysical projections of imagery, the individual becomes quite aware objectively that their creation is not as solid as it appears initially. They also become aware that the form of a thing is based upon their perception, which filters [through] their belief systems.
Therefore, as they alter their attention with belief systems, and move from one aspect of belief systems to another or examine their belief systems from one angle or another, their physical imagery also alters. In this, they demonstrate to themselves the lack of absoluteness and allow themselves a gradual ease into more of an understanding of their reality beyond belief systems.
This is the information that I was expressing to you in our last session concerning the action that this individual has engaged in creating this holographic imagery to himself, not entirely moving into the action of transition in force, so to speak....
RODNEY: But it was preliminary to that.
RODNEY: It was moving in that direction.
ELIAS: He is not yet engaging the action in which he is viewing all of his focuses simultaneously.
RODNEY: Right, I understand that. This was a preliminary step in that direction.
RODNEY: Thank you. That’s very helpful.
My mother passed away about two years ago, and in the three or four or five months preceding her disengagement, her death, she was aware of ... she called them beings. She had visitors. She had little boys and little girls and people and horses. She was very aware of a great deal of activity that was taking place around her and she spoke about it a little bit, but she did not speak about it a lot.
At our last dinner together, actually one of the main dinners, which was the last Thanksgiving, my sister was laughing at the fact that while she was feeding my mother, who was ninety-seven at the time, my mother was trying to feed a cookie to a little girl who was there and who was an image that she knew was there.
I’m telling you this because I want to ask you if these were not also her projections of images, her holograms, so to speak, that she was creating in response to activities that were taking place in nonphysical consciousness around her disengaging from this reality.
ELIAS: Not entirely. Now; let me express to you the difference, for there are differences that are created by different individuals. This is entirely a choice of the individual.
We have spoken previously of the engagement of transition within physical focus. An individual may choose to be engaging transition while they are continuing within physical focus, and in this, they may be creating certain aspects of the transitional action while they continue to be engaging physical focus. This many times – but not always – creates a situation with that particular individual in which they do not engage much of this initial activity that we have spoken of this day subsequent to disengagement.
Therefore, what I am expressing to you is that generally speaking, if an individual is engaging transition within physical focus, they eliminate much of the need, so to speak – once again, figuratively speaking – to be creating of these initial holographic images before engaging the viewing of all of their focuses, for they have already begun engaging other focuses....
RODNEY: Are you saying that my mother was engaging in transition before her disengagement?
ELIAS: Correct, and in this, what she has allowed herself to be interacting with is other focuses of herself ...
ELIAS: ... therefore allowing herself the opportunity to move into the action of transition with very little activity of this holographic projection of imagery.
RODNEY: I see. Okay. Yeah, she seemed to be quite okay with the whole affair.
ELIAS: Quite, and I shall express to you that for the most part, individuals within physical focus do not hold fearfulness of these interactions within themselves.
At times, they may be responsive to OTHER individuals that are projecting their belief systems to them, in their expressions that it is unacceptable for them to be engaging invisible individuals, although the individuals are not invisible! They are merely not visible to your awareness, for you choose not to view them, but they are quite visible and quite real, and the individual that is interacting with them is quite aware of their presence and holds no element of fearfulness within themselves, left to themselves and not influenced by other individuals objectively surrounding them.
Now; they may be responsive at times to this type of action in questioning, and based upon THEIR belief systems that they hold individually, they may hold responsiveness in confusion and they may also rebel objectively with this type of interaction, for their belief systems dictate to them that this is unacceptable behavior and that they are experiencing lunacy.
RODNEY: That did not occur with my mother.
ELIAS: Correct. What I am expressing is that if you are....
RODNEY: If anything, she took it with ... I hesitate to use the word humorously, but she certainly was okay with it.
ELIAS: Quite, for this is not a threatening action. It is merely an interaction and viewing of other focuses of the individual, which is the direction which occurs within the action of transition.
RODNEY: Well, I thank you for all of that. That seems to fill a need that I had in understanding these things.
I would like to mention one other thing about our last session which was extremely provocative. I have this notion that if we have a very strong idea or visualization, that it somehow creates or we are in the act of creating our reality. I’m thinking about the dog in my dream, which holds such a cherished idea for me. I’m wondering, do dreams elements continue on? Do they have an identity of their own? What happens to them after the dream? I guess I’m asking a crazy question here, and that is, what happened to the dog in my dream?
ELIAS: This is not a crazy question, as you term this to be. Let me express to you, dream imagery is a projection of YOU.
RODNEY: Could I stop you for one second?
ELIAS: You may.
RODNEY: I would like to change my tape. (Brief pause) Thank you very much.
ELIAS: You are welcome.
Dream imagery is a projection of you. It is quite similar to the imagery that you create within waking state. In this, you may be creating of events within waking state, and they are an element of your creation.
Dream imagery is created in like manner to events in your waking state; not necessarily in the creation of solid forms or objects or creatures, but that all of the imagery within your dream state is an event. Therefore, the dog or another individual or any element within your dream is an aspect of you. The activity that is being created in that is the event, which creates an action, a direction that correlates with your objective waking reality.
In this, there is no dog to be continuing – or for any reality to be continuing with it or for it to be creating choices in any type of reality – for it is not a dog necessarily. It is a projection of energy – in like manner to our hologram – of yourself. It is an element, an aspect of yourself that you project outwardly into a form temporarily.
This is a very efficient manipulation of energy. It is a projection of energy from yourself outward that you manipulate in like manner to manipulating a piece of clay. You form it into whatever image you choose to be forming it into, whatever symbology shall speak to you most efficiently, and you examine the action, the event, as you create its playing within your dream imagery.
Once you discontinue the dream, the energy remains within you, that you reconfigure and once again project outwardly into your waking objective state or awareness, and are thusly creating of your objective reality.
In a manner of speaking, your dream imagery is your blueprints for the construct of your waking reality.
RODNEY: Okay. I think what prompted me to ask the question is some dialogue in the Seth material where Jane Roberts discovered a hairy creature in one of her out-of-body experiences, which Seth explained had been created by her because of a depression that she had been involved in, in the preceding days. I get from what you’re saying that dream imagery is of a totally different order than what we actively create during our waking moments. Robert Butts engaged himself in painting some of the imagery that came to him in his dreams, and Seth encouraged him to do that, and I’m wondering, I do not engage in that kind of artistic creation, or I haven’t, and it occurred to me that it might be of some value to me. Would you comment on that?
ELIAS: Very well.
Now; let us initially address to the entirety of your statement, for first of all, your dream imagery holds a different quality than your waking creations in certain aspects, but they are not of an entirely different order, for they are both projections of your energy that you are creating and they are both expressions of you.
One is a subjective expression which is a communication to yourself and translated objectively into imagery. The other is a subjective movement which is translated into objective solidity, so to speak, in waking state. Therefore, they are quite in harmony with each other and they are not entirely of a different quality.
Let me be clear in this, for they are much closer in quality than your realize.
This be the reason that individuals hold much difficulty in offering themselves dream interpretation, for they view dream imagery to be far removed from waking objective imagery that they create, and this is not necessarily the situation.
As to the projection of this creature, this is a different type of action than dream imagery, for this is an actual projection of energy into an entity.
RODNEY: Which creature? Are you talking about Jane’s creature?
ELIAS: All of you hold the ability to be creating of this same type of imagery. All of you hold the ability to be projecting a concentration of energy from yourselves and create an actual entity that holds physical form and solidity before you.
Now; I shall express to you that many times this type of projection, this type of creation, is created from the motivation of fear or anxiety that is allowed to be accumulating great quantities, in a manner of speaking, of energy in concentration, and as an individual concentrates great quantities of energy within anxiety or fearfulness in one direction, they may be in actuality projecting outward from their energy field a manifestation of energy that shall produce itself into an actual entity – a creature, an object – and this entity....
RODNEY: Which I understand, in her case, or I was led to believe, went on to have a life of its own.
ELIAS: This may occur at times also.
In this, you shall be creating the same type of action as a probable self, and that entity shall not continue in this actual physical dimension in your awareness, but shall slide into a probable reality which shall parallel this reality, and it may continue in that reality, creating its own choices, being its own entity.
RODNEY: You know, this is a fascinating area to me. From what you’re telling me, it seems that there would be the opportunity for us to be creating beings, or let me call them creations, out of love energy instead of fearfulness, and that we might do this with an objective purpose in mind.
ELIAS: And you may!
RODNEY: But I don’t know if I’ve ever heard anyone discuss this!
ELIAS: The reason that individuals are not necessarily discussing of this type of creation is the same as they are not necessarily readily willing to be discussing the other type of creation. These are all based upon your belief systems. Your general translation of the type of creature or entity which is created in the manner that you have presented, which we have been discussing, would be viewed as a demon or some entity that holds threatening qualities, and there are very strong religious belief systems that attach to this type of creation.
RODNEY: I’m aware of that.
ELIAS: There are also very strong religious belief systems that attach to the other type of expression, for you may be creating of the same type of projection in the expression of lovingness and be projecting energy in that manner, and you may also be creating of an actual entity if you are concentrating the volume of energy which is projected. But in these types of projections, at times you express to yourselves that you have encountered the spontaneous appearance of an angel. (With a sly grin)
RODNEY: Okay. I haven’t done that yet!
ELIAS: Either of these creations are very infrequent. Individuals, generally speaking, do not create either of these extremes of projections of concentrated energy, but it does occur.
RODNEY: Well, it would appear to me that if we weren’t so uptight about the religious connotations here, we might be a little bit freer in our belief systems to be creative in this way.
ELIAS: If you are so choosing, although it matters not.
Shall you project the concentration of energy into one area to be creating of an actual entity and form which shall be concentrated into boundaries, physically speaking, of itself, or shall you disperse this energy and be dissipating the intensity of it, but also offering the expression throughout your experiences and your encounters and your engagements and interactions with other individuals, in either manner?
RODNEY: Okay. I’m going to have to go back over that. Can I move on to another area?
ELIAS: You may.
RODNEY: I’ve met two people lately who spoke of a relationship with me in another focus. One was a younger girl who believed that I was her husband in another focus, and I must admit, there was an abrupt recognition of significant energy that took place between the two of us when she made this pronouncement. Her first name began with a B.
The other one was an older woman, a more mature woman, whose first name began with an E, and she claimed that we had had a relationship in another focus, but that I had moved on and married or taken a wife more in my station, which she implied was higher than hers.
I’m trying to come to some kind of an awareness of being in touch with other focuses, and I was wondering if you would comment on these two in particular, not only that I am curious about them, but that I’m attempting to become aware of what it would feel like to be in contact with that kind of information.
ELIAS: I shall express to you that both of these accounts are correct.
RODNEY: They are correct?
ELIAS: Yes. In this, there is held an awareness objectively by these individuals of their interaction with yourself in another focus, for they are allowing the bleed-through and allowing themselves the openness to this awareness objectively.
Now; as to your questioning in the direction of what you may be experiencing in this type of awareness, I express to you that as you allow yourself to be open to self and you begin widening your awareness, as you are already, you also become sensitized, so to speak, to movements within energy, and you become sensitized to remembrances.
Remembrances are not memories of events, but they are remembrances of yourself and of all of yourself as essence.
Now; this may incorporate at times the memory of events, but this is not necessary, so to speak.
I am encouraging of individuals to be investigating and exploring other focuses that they hold merely for the reason that this offers them more information of self and more of a familiarity with the expansiveness of self, and moves their attention outside of the singularity of this one focus.
Therefore, it may be beneficial to many individuals to be offering themselves an exploration of other focuses, but regardless of whether you choose to be investigating other focuses or not, you shall notice within physical focus certain draws that you hold to other individuals that you objectively encounter.
You have experienced this also within your focus. You experience certain individuals that you respond to in repelling them, certain individuals that you respond to fondly, certain individuals that may briefly, momentarily spark a feeling of déjà vu. This occurs within all individuals manifesting in physical focus, for you all hold an awareness objectively, to an extent, of the interconnectedness and of all of your focuses that you hold and the interactions that you hold with other individuals.
Now; if you are so choosing to be moving into the area of investigating other focuses, I am encouraging of your action in this area. If you are not choosing to be engaging this action, this also is acceptable. Regardless, you shall notice objectively draws – or the lack of draw – to other individuals that you interact with and that you encounter.
Now; at times this may be a responsiveness to counterpart action, but at times it may be merely a recognition that you engage other focuses with another individual.
Let me express to you, many, many times, individuals may inquire of myself, “What is my connection to this individual or that individual?” You may read these passages many times within our transcribing.
RODNEY: I have, yes!
ELIAS: In this, for the most part, you shall identify that my response to this type of questioning is that the individual shares another focus with that individual that they are inquiring about. More often, this is the reason that they are experiencing or feeling the responsiveness or the draw or the connectedness to another individual – more often this is the reason, than that they are engaging counterpart action.
At times, it is a counterpart action that is occurring, but as you view throughout our transcribing, much more often it is simply a situation that the individual is recognizing their connection, in their terms, or their interaction that they have held in another focus with that individual, and they are noticing of that within this focus.
RODNEY: I am particularly aware of a session that you recently had with a woman named Vivien in which she is very aware of many of her other focuses, and she prompts me to ask you a couple of questions. One is, how many focuses have I had in this physical dimension, and how many have I had that I might be able to become aware of?
ELIAS: Within this physical dimension, total numbering of focuses, 1014.
RODNEY: Oh my god!
ELIAS: Within this physical dimension, those focuses holding similar tone to this present focus that shall be more easily accessed to you, 408.
RODNEY: Those sound like awfully large numbers. Would it be possible for you to name a particular time and area of a particular focus that I might focus my attention on?
ELIAS: Very well. I may offer to you a beginning point, so to speak.
RODNEY: One which I might have an easier time with.
ELIAS: Very well. I may express two that you may play with.
RODNEY: Excuse me?
ELIAS: One focus in the physical location of Greece. You hold the position of what is recognized as a scholar or a teacher. You hold interaction with fourteen students. In this, you offer instruction to these students, which hold the position of aristocracy....
RODNEY: Excuse me. I’m changing a tape again. (Brief pause) Okay, I’m sorry. Offering instruction in what?
ELIAS: To these students which hold the class of aristocracy, you instruct them in the area of philosophy and mathematics and strategy.
In this, you do not engage in the partnership of marriage, so to speak, although you do engage relationship with several younger females in pleasurable activity but are not intimately involved with them, for your activity of teaching and study holds priority within your focus.
RODNEY: By not intimately, you mean not of an emotional nature?
RODNEY: Okay. You are implying physical pleasures, however.
ELIAS: Correct. You may also investigate another focus....
RODNEY: Can I ask you what the time period of this was?
ELIAS: Time framework, sixth century B.C.
RODNEY: Really! Is there any particular locale in Greece that you could identify, or would that not be helpful?
ELIAS: I may offer, but this may be a very good beginning point for YOU to be investigating!
RODNEY: Okay! (Laughing)
ELIAS: HA HA! I may also express to you....
RODNEY: This sounds like a focus that I could begin to understand.
ELIAS: Quite! In this also, you may recognize that you do hold friendship with several other individuals, all being male, in intimacy in the manner of close friendship, that you would term it to be, sharing philosophies and thoughts and emotional expressions also.
ELIAS: You may also be investigating another focus in the area of your South America. This would be in the physical location of what is identified as Chili....
ELIAS: Correct. In this, the time framework being mid 1800’s, and the individual occupies the position of a peasant. This individual resides within a small village, is interactive with many, many other villagers, is quite amiable, but holds little gain monetarily.
RODNEY: Little gain.
ELIAS: Correct, but offers much to other individuals and to herself in the area of humorous expression and entertainment.
RODNEY: Wait a minute. Humorous ... offers much to others?
ELIAS: And self.
RODNEY: And self ... of a humorous nature?
ELIAS: And entertainment.
ELIAS: This individual, you may express, is well-liked.
RODNEY: By everyone?
RODNEY: Okay! That looks like a good place to start!
ELIAS: And I express to you that you may be incorporating much fun in your investigation!
RODNEY: (Laughing) Thank you, sir!
ELIAS: You are quite welcome!
RODNEY: In this same vein, I’m curious to know ... I belong to a men’s ... I helped form a small group, twelve men, about five or six years ago, and we’ve been meeting every other week ever since, and we have shared a great deal of our lives with each other during those years, and I’m curious to know if I have any relationships with any of these men in other focuses.
ELIAS: And you begin upon your track! Congratulations, Zacharie! (Rodney cracks up) I shall be offering you one point....
RODNEY: What’s that?
ELIAS: I shall be offering you one point, for you already are beginning with your connection, for I have offered this particular focus in the area of Greece quite intentionally, that you may allow yourself the objective connection of the bleed-through action that occurs within this present focus in conjunction with that particular focus, as you DO hold relationship with certain individuals within your group that you have initiated in that focus also!
RODNEY: Oh my! (Laughing)
ELIAS: And have I not expressed to you in the explanation, you hold intimate relationship in friendship with several other individuals, all being male, in that focus, and your relationship is to share philosophy, discussion, experiences, and emotional expressions, in very like manner to what you have created in this focus.
RODNEY: Very good, sir! (Elias chuckles) I thank you for that encouragement!
ELIAS: You are quite welcome. I shall be accepting one more question and we shall be disengaging, for I wish not to be taxing upon Michael.
RODNEY: I appreciate that. In the discussion ... you’ve covered so much here! (Pause) One other question is this: In your discussion of sexual orientation and the orientations of intermediate, common, and soft, I could not help but draw a parallel between the behavior of common, which I believe you have previously told me that I am of that orientation ...
ELIAS: You are correct.
RODNEY: ... and the definition of extrovert as put forth by Carl Jung. My understanding of what he meant by that is that extroverts also focus their attention outwardly and appear to be energized by what is happening outwardly, and that the term introvert pertains to individuals who focus their attention inwardly and are energized by the events that take place inwardly. I’m not suggesting that that’s only what you mean by common and intermediate, but I was wondering if that correlation is at least partially correct.
ELIAS: Partially, yes, although you may also attribute certain expressions of extrovert to individuals holding the orientation of soft at times.
RODNEY: Oh yes. I actually made a note here that your definition of soft would incorporate both the behaviors of an extrovert and of an introvert at one time or another.
RODNEY: Okay, okay. I’m simply trying to improve my understanding of these concepts that you’re putting forth. (Elias chuckles) I thank you!
ELIAS: And I am quite encouraging of your continuing explorations, Zacharie!
RODNEY: I hope to be talking to you again soon.
ELIAS: Ah, and I also!
RODNEY: (Laughing) Thank you!
ELIAS: And we shall continue our interaction, and I shall continue to be offering energy to you in your investigations and your fun!
RODNEY: Thank you, sir!
ELIAS: Ha ha ha! You are quite welcome, sir!
RODNEY: (Laughing) Bye bye.
ELIAS: Ha ha! To you this day, offering of great affection and anticipation of our next meeting, and a very fond au revoir.
RODNEY: Thank you.
Elias departs at 2:50 PM.
© 1999 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.