Session 202007201


Session 3 of the Difference and Acceptance Triptych
“The Importance of the Individual: Listen to Yourself and Others”
“The Twelve Essences of the Energy Exchange”
“Elias’ Goal in Interaction”
“The Weapon of Wit”
“Cooperation, Acceptance of Differences and the Distraction of Being Right”
“A Zombie Apocalypse without the Zombies”
“The Creation of a New Society”

Session 20200720

Session 3 of the Difference and Acceptance Triptych
“The Importance of the Individual: Listen to Yourself and Others”
“The Twelve Essences of the Energy Exchange”
“Elias’ Goal in Interaction”
“The Weapon of Wit”
“Cooperation, Acceptance of Differences and the Distraction of Being Right”
“A Zombie Apocalypse without the Zombies”
“The Creation of a New Society”

Monday, July 20, 2020 (Private/Phone)

Participants: Mary (Michael) and Jean-Francois (Samta)

“What is important in all of this is that if you are an individual that is not actively involved in the participation of creating the new society, it is important to not be in a position of opposition, because those people that are attempting to build and create a new society are incorporating enough difficulty attempting to decipher what will be successful.”

ELIAS: Good afternoon!

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Hey, good afternoon to the fabulous twelve.

ELIAS: (Laughs) And how are YOU proceeding, my friend?

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Oh, I’m rapturous, thank you. What about you?

ELIAS: Rapturous? That is impressive. (Laughs)

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Well, I figure fake it until you make it, right?

ELIAS: Ah, excellent, excellent. (Both laugh) And rapturous would be an excellent direction (chuckles) to be, in your terms, faking it. (Chuckles)

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yeah, I’m shooting for the stars, Elias. (Both laugh) I was just chatting with Mary, and it was interesting because we were talking about some of the changes in the energy exchange over the years, including in terms of language. And you know, one thing that I’ve been wondering about with regards to the energy exchange is… Well, first of all, when we speak to you, I think, it’s easy to forget that you’re actually a collective, and I tend to make you singular in my mind. So, the twelve essences that were involved in the energy exchange from the beginning, are these same twelve essences still involved?

ELIAS: Most definitely. Yes.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: And that is to remain a constant for the duration of the energy exchange, right?

ELIAS: Yes.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Are there additions? Are there other essences that participate at times?

ELIAS: No.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: No. Okay. So, that is a set parameter?

ELIAS: Yes.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: But I would imagine that there are fluctuations over the years or with different people, where maybe different essences come to the fore?

ELIAS: What I would say in relation to that is it isn’t that we exchange positions, but what I would say is that in relation to, or dependent upon, the individual that is engaging conversation with myself, there may be a rearrangement of (pause) the most prominent influences in the secondary position. Therefore, at times there may be in the secondary position to myself Rose, or it may be Ordin, or it may be Twyla. It depends on who the individual is that is being engaged in the conversation, and therefore a different essence might be in a secondary position because that essence may be more directly involved with that particular individual.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: So, when we speak to you, we’re not actually speaking to the collective of twelve; we’re speaking to you, one of the twelve?

ELIAS: Correct.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: And then the other eleven are participating in association, and some of them will come closer to a given time of exchange, but we’re actually always interfacing with you specifically, directly?

ELIAS: Correct. Correct.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Okay.

ELIAS: Now, in that, I will offer you an example: If I am engaging a conversation, let us say with Yarr, now he will generally engage many questions and interactions with myself in relation to subjects of healing. And in that, he is directly engaging with Twyla’s energy in other time frameworks—not in the conversation with myself, but in other time frameworks he is directly engaging with Twyla in different capacities. Therefore, when he engages conversation with myself, Twyla will be in that secondary position and therefore will be also offering additional information in relation to the questions that Yarr may pose. Are you understanding?

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yes, I am. And that makes me wonder, when I speak to you, which of the essences are usually or more often coming to that secondary position? I would think… You know, I used to be more aware of Tompkin and Twyla. I don’t know if I would have expected them to be often in that secondary position. I don’t know if that’s still the case at this time.

ELIAS: I would say you are correct; it isn’t, but I would also say Tompkin as a secondary in relation to you, no. But I would say that there have been times previously in our conversations together in which Twyla has been in a secondary position. I would say that that hasn’t been the situation for approximately, in your time framework, about a year and a half. But there were many times previously in which that WAS the situation, in which Twyla was in the secondary position in relation to our conversations together.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: So, who tends to be in that second position now?

ELIAS: (Pause) That depends. There isn’t always an essence in a secondary position.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Okay.

ELIAS: There is when there is something specific and when the other individual is actually engaging with another essence consistently.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Okay. I understand.

ELIAS: Therefore, I would say that individuals that are consistently interacting with Rose, Rose would be in the secondary position when I am engaging with them. But that doesn’t mean that with everyone, every time I am engaging conversation with them, that there is always another essence in a secondary position. In many, many, many conversations there isn’t.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Mm-hm. Mm-hm. Well, that’s fine. I’m very happy to talk to you. (Both laugh)

When I was in India, in northern India, I was spending time in Tibetan communities, and that is a culture where there’s a lot of reverence for the teachers, the so-called masters. And I remember one time I was attending a teaching of a famous teacher of the Tibetan lineage, and he’s known to be somewhat original and eclectic. And at the break time of that teaching, the people that were his students and other enthusiastic visitors, they all lined up on each side of the aisle where he was going to walk out for the break. And everybody’s bowing and making offerings and all sorts of things like that—that is very prevalent in that tradition—but the teacher, as he stood up, opened up a cell phone, a mobile, started to – and he was looking straight at it and was tapping stuff on it – and he walked in an almost petulant way through the students, ignoring them. And it was very interesting to notice that, because obviously he was doing it on purpose. And it seemed to me that he was sort of doing… It was a controversial thing to do, but it seemed to me that he was doing that intentionally, probably as a way to kind of break or weaken that sort of adoration that the people were lavishing on him. Because here he was, doing something a spiritual master shouldn’t be doing and ignoring them.

All of this to ask, do you ever engage in behavior or interactions in the conversations where you intentionally say something controversial or do something controversial to challenge the people that you’re talking to or that are going to be listening to it? Do you do that at times?

ELIAS: By all means, yes.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: (Laughs) Oh. Okay, tell me more.

ELIAS: I have been expressing from the onset of this forum that the most important factor is that people are listening to themselves, that that is, in a manner of speaking, the goal and why I am engaging with all of you. And in that, I would express that my interaction with all of you is not to be invoking a new religious expression and not to be reinforcing constructs that you are moving in the direction of looking at and not engaging any longer because they don’t serve you. And in that, I am not in a position—nor do I choose to be in a position—of being a god; I am in a direction of being helpful to individuals, to lessen trauma and to offer information, but in that, not to be revered.

And this is the reason that I have expressed many times I am no different than all of you. I am an essence, and so are you. And you have the same information as do I, and the same abilities as do I—it is simply that you have forgotten. But you are remembering, and you are engaging “the remembrance”—which isn’t necessarily remembering—but in that, becoming more self-aware, and that is the point. I have always moved in the direction of expressing an encouragement to all of you that eventually you would move in a direction in which you wouldn’t need or require my interaction with you, my conversations with you, that you would engage conversation with myself in friendship simply because you choose to, not because you need questions answered. That would be the end goal, so to speak: moving in that direction of you all being the power and having the ability to engage your own questions and answers and being self-sufficient. I am continuing to always be encouraging of all of you in that direction.

I would say that this is also the reason that, especially as we continue, there are times in which individuals, even yourself, may ask questions of myself and my answers will be challenging to you, and I will express to you, “You can answer this.”

JEAN-FRANCOIS: I think that happened last session, right? (Laughs)

ELIAS: It did! (Laughs)

JEAN-FRANCOIS: It did. Yes. And it was duly noted. But overall, it has fluctuated, but would you say that with regards to my conversations with you I have been moving in that direction that you’re speaking of now? More so in the past year, maybe?

ELIAS: I would say most definitely. And I would say also that many, many, many of you that engage conversation with myself have been more and more and more moving in these directions in which you ARE being much more self-reliant, which is excellent. And when you have the ability to answer your own questions and you are simply being lazy and not doing it, I definitely will express that to you. But I would say that at this point now, many of you are becoming more adept at paying attention, answering your own questions, being more aware—and I am tremendously, tremendously acknowledging that—but that you still have time frameworks in which you may be somewhat confused and you might require some aid, or you simply require being reminded.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Hm. Well, I have noticed that we don’t seem to be able to get away with not being self-directing in our conversations with you as much as we used to.

ELIAS: Yes. Yes.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: I think you’re less indulgent about that.

ELIAS: Yes, I agree. (Jean-Francois laughs) But that is because you have the ability and you have the awareness. And—

JEAN-FRANCOIS: And we certainly need it now more than ever.


ELIAS: I agree. And because you have the ability and you have the awareness, it is actually important for you to use it and to definitely practice with it. I understand that there are time frameworks in which you might be confused or you might forget, and that is natural and understandable. But there are also time frameworks in which you fall back into those habits of you have the ability but you are not using it and you are simply moving in that direction of wanting someone else to express the answers for you. And—

JEAN-FRANCOIS: And Elias is not for the lazy. (Laughs)

ELIAS: And you are correct. (Both laugh)

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Oh, Elias, I have to say, I was so enthusiastic when I heard you say in the previous webinar, the internet group session, you were making an analogy with weapons and you were enumerating ways that we can engage constructively in this whole COVID situation—especially with regards to masks, which have become the big thing—but you named wit. You named wit as a constructive way to engage, and that just made my day when I heard you say that, because I thought, Oh, if I can “wit” my way through the shift, I’ve got it made, you know?

ELIAS: I would agree. (Both laugh)

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yeah, what made you say that?

ELIAS: Because that is actually a considerable weapon. I would say to you, my friend, that actually that is a weapon that has been used for centuries, and you have forgotten about it.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: It’s a kind of elegant way to poke fun at whatever the subject is.

ELIAS: It can be. And it can also be a manner in which you can express, in a manner of speaking, truths; or it can be a manner in which you can express what is real or what you genuinely believe but in a manner that is not necessarily provoking.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: At its best it’s not discounting, it’s not provoking, but it’s a little bit like that role of the joker at court, right? He gets away with saying things nobody would get away with because of how he says it.

ELIAS: Yes. Yes. Yes. And THAT is significant, because that is also a weapon because it is a manner in which you can be, in a manner of speaking, figuratively, throwing your own cannonballs to make a point, to bring something to the forefront, to bring something to awareness, and also be in that position in which you aren’t necessarily physically provoking.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Mm-hm. And there’s a whole lot to be witty about right now: this mask thing…

ELIAS: I very much agree.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: This whole COVID thing is not going away; actually, it’s increasing again. And you know, there’s been a lot of discussions about that with you over the past several months, and I think there hasn’t really been—or that I can recall, anyway – clear conversations bringing it back to the fundamentals of reality creation. Because people can argue back and forth about physical mechanics or physical occurrences and science and tests and proving things, but the bottom line is that if we concentrate on this to the extent that we have been – and I know a thing or two about concentrating on health challenges personally (Elias laughs)—but if we concentrate like that so much, I mean, of course it’s not going to go away. Of course it’s going to get worse.

ELIAS: Precisely. Precisely. But, as I expressed recently, this event is the spark. [1] This was the match that lit the fire. You’ve been moving in a direction of spreading the fuel and the oil all over your world for several years at this point, and in that, you were simply waiting for the right spark.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yes. I mean, I get it that it’s very… it’s very purposeful and—

ELIAS: Precisely. And in that, it… This mass event needed a spark, and it needed that spark to light a fire, and it needed to be a significant enough spark that would light the fire and keep the fire going. That if the fire started to dampen or die out, that it would be a strong enough spark or that that match could light again in a capacity that would keep that fire stoked, in a manner of speaking—[inaudible].

I recently expressed to other individuals [that] you, in this, created, in a manner of speaking, your zombie apocalypse without the zombies.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: I could have said something witty about that, but keep going.

ELIAS: (Both laugh) In this, what I would say is, I have expressed to all of you from the onset that you were not moving in the direction of an apocalypse, that this was not something that you were choosing to do. Therefore, you weren’t choosing to engage a world war in which you would be engaging nuclear weapons to the point that you were eradicating the entire world and moving in a direction of practically generating an extinction of your own species in the midst of bringing your planet to total ruin, but that this century is the objective insertion of this shift, and that there are significant issues and significant subjects that require change in order for this shift to be completed.

I would say that recently another individual expressed a question in relation to what happened in association with these conversations from the point of our group interaction in Rome, that that was some type of change. [2] It was! It was a turning point, which I have expressed, that that was the beginning of a definite turn in relation to the objective insertion of this shift; that it was genuinely beginning to move en masse at that point in relation to peoples being displaced, refugees, the climate change subject, the unrest in relation to cultures and races, and the conflicts and the great divide between peoples. That all began to become prominent and more objective and more significant, and it has continued to escalate since then. And also, a significant change in your technology—it began to move in a much stronger direction at that point.

It WAS a turning point. And since then, you have been spreading that fuel. You have been spreading that oil all over your world. You have been coating it with oil, and you used the virus as the match, and it was successful.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: I’ll say.

ELIAS: And it is still being successful. It isn’t necessary for you to move tremendously in the same direction that you did at the beginning with this virus, because you already accomplished that part of the movement. But—

JEAN-FRANCOIS: So, what’s this part now about?

ELIAS: This is continuing to emphasize all of those pieces. This is continuing to emphasize the differences—the, in manner of speaking, need for cooperation, necessity for cooperation.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: I’m sorry to interrupt you. Would you qualify that cooperation? Because I think that would be interpreted differently by different people. What do you mean by cooperation? Do you mean like following all the rules?

ELIAS: No. No. But as I have defined that recently [3], cooperation is expressing freedom in the context of not generating conflict, not generating aggression, but honoring yourself and whatever else it is you are engaging, whatever other individuals you are engaging. Whether it be a specific other individual or whether it be a group of individuals, or whether it be your world in general, it is not a meeting of the minds, it is not meeting in the middle, it is not having to find a common agreement, because you DON’T have to agree.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yeah, we think we have to agree to function as a society.

ELIAS: I understand. And in this, it is a matter of recognizing that cooperation is not acquiescing, conceding or compromising; it is honoring both, and in honoring of both, it is being creative and finding and creating an avenue in which regardless of whether you agree or not, you can find an avenue that you can create an expression of no conflict AND honoring both yourself and the other individual.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: So, cooperation will look different from moment to moment, situation to situation, individual to individual?

ELIAS: Yes, it will.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yeah.

ELIAS: It is not one general expression—no. It is a matter of each situation and each individual, because it is a matter of discovering and inventing or creating some manner in which you can be honoring of the situation of yourself and the other individual that—

JEAN-FRANCOIS: It sounds like – Oh, sorry. Go ahead.

ELIAS: You may continue.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: I was just going to say it sounds like a good opportunity to insert wit. (Laughs)

ELIAS: Yes!

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Wouldn’t it be compatible, cooperation and wit?

ELIAS: It could be, but I would also express that yes, that that also can be very valuable in relation to generating a new expression, a new experiment; but it also requires openness, that it isn’t about one or the other being right.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: I get it. I get it.

ELIAS: But in that, also not discounting the rightness of either of you, that you aren’t forfeiting what you believe is right. That would be compromise. That would not be cooperation.

Now, in that, I would say that you can continue to incorporate your opinion and whatever you believe is your own rightness, but that there is no push or necessity to express that in a manner in which you are proving or instructing or convincing another individual of that rightness. And all of it begins with you.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yeah, it does sound like it’s putting us in a position to birth a new type of expression.

ELIAS: It is. In this also it is already putting you—or has put you—in a position in which you are birthing, in a manner of speaking, creating society. And in that, what is important in all of this is that if you are an individual that is not actively involved in the participation of creating the new society, it is important to not be in a position of opposition, because those people that are attempting to build and create a new society are incorporating enough difficulty attempting to decipher what will be successful. They are beginning again. And they can’t entirely use the old society as a model; therefore, they are beginning new, and they don’t know any more than you do what will be successful or how to do it.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Well, that’s—

ELIAS: [inaudible] And let me express to you, it isn’t being expressed by your governments.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: No kidding.

ELIAS: It is being expressed by the people, now, in small communities. Even in large cities there are small communities all over those large cities that are actively involved in the action of developing new societies, when they are deciding what businesses are open, what businesses should be open, how should they be open, for how long should they be open, how should we engage, how should we develop this in which it will be productive and our economy will be stimulated, but we are also accommodating the people that are not afraid and that want to be engaging, but we are also accommodating all of the people that ARE afraid and don’t want to be interactive and don’t want everything to be open and that they will have to be in proximity with each other because they are afraid.

How would you engage your town? How would you now develop a new society, a new structure for your town where you live, and how everyone in your town – not even your town, let us say two square blocks, that is all. And organizing in that two square blocks every individual, and in that, listening to every individual in that two square blocks, and those that want change, those that don’t want change, those that want to move forward, those that are terrified and don’t want to move at all—how would you arrange them all? (Pause) And how would you create that [inaudible] cooperation and develop a new system that honors all of them? It is not so easy.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: No. No. (Elias laughs) No. I was hoping you were (laughs)… I thought for a moment you were waiting for my answer, and I was like, Elias—

ELIAS: I am!

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Weren’t you being rhetorical? (Laughs)

ELIAS: Not entirely!

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Oh, my goodness. I… Hm.

ELIAS: Do you have any idea how you would even begin to engage that? (Laughs)

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yes. Yes, I would. It would mean talking to one another.

ELIAS: It would. But it would also mean listening to one another.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yes. Excellent point.

ELIAS: And in order to genuinely listen to one another, you have to stop judging what is absolutely right.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yes. That’s that piece of accepting differences.

ELIAS: Precisely. And in that, I would say that most of you—or many, many, many of you—are having challenges simply with each other wearing masks or not!

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Well, I mean it’s one thing if it’s optional, but then it creates a whole other dynamic if it’s imposed by law.

ELIAS: It isn’t imposed by law yet.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Well, I—

ELIAS: There is no law that has been passed.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Well, like here in this city, in Montreal, they put a new regulation where people have to wear masks indoors anywhere public starting this past weekend and that police have the power to fine up to $6,000 if… But they’re going to fine, and get this: they’re not going to fine the individual not wearing the mask, they’re going to fine the business or the establishment that allowed that person to come in. So, this kind of structure of regulation really complicates the whole thing.

ELIAS: I would agree. And in that, what would you say about that situation?

Now, before you answer that, think about the people that are in a position of attempting to create the new rules, and they are attempting to create the new rules in relation to ALL of the people. And in that, in creating the new rules, as with anyone and any group, what is the first direction that you move in? You move in paying attention to who is the majority. What do the majority of people want? Or, what are the majority of people expressing? If the majority of people are expressing fear, then you address to that first and then you move on from that. Why? Because it is the same as with an individual body. If you have a pain in your body, you first address to the physical symptoms, then you can address to why that is being expressed. But as long as the physical symptom continues, it is a distraction, and it is much more difficult to address anything else until you have dealt with the physical symptom. Correct?

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Okay. That makes sense. I --

ELIAS: [Inaudible]

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yes, yes. I mean, to look at it from that angle actually helps me to be more understanding and accepting.

ELIAS: And in that, then it is a matter of recognizing that this is not as black and white or, in a manner of speaking, as simplistic as whether you wear a mask or not.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: I know.

ELIAS: But that because people have made this such a nuisance of a subject, because people have decided to not be actually paying attention to themselves and not be actually moving in a direction of being more aware but actually moving in the direction of being reactive and continuing to express that importance with being right, that becomes a significant distraction. And then those people that are in your town that are attempting to find a new direction, they can’t, because this noise keeps happening.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Well, I agree that it’s noise.

Listen, I… I mean, it’s interesting. We have a few minutes left, and I would like to ask you a few other questions.

ELIAS: Very well.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: But this was very helpful, because I hadn’t quite viewed it in that manner, that the… Basically this is a measure to ease the symptom of fear.

ELIAS: Precisely.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Yeah. Okay.

I have a question for Adam.

ELIAS: Yes.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Actually, I have a question in relation to Adam. I would like to know, what is Adam’s greatest gift?

ELIAS: (Pause) That is an excellent question. His greatest gift is his ability to actually accept.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: To be accepting?

ELIAS: Yes. I would say that he for many, many, many years expressed that in its infancy, in a manner of speaking, in forgiveness and tolerance. And I would say that as he has become more aware as he has moved more in the direction of being a student of himself and learning to be more aware, it has developed into an actual expression of acceptance. I would say he now moves in the same direction of method that he has used for a considerable time in his life in beginning with forgiveness or tolerance, but that it develops into acceptance.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Thank you.

ELIAS: You are very welcome.

[Question and answer with personal information deleted]

[The timer for the end of the session rings]

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Okay. We are done. I wanted to do an update with you about shielding and personalizing, and I wanted to talk more about the trees (Elias laughs), but that will have to be next time. But I think I’ve done my part in giving COVID air time. So—

ELIAS: Very well.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: (Laughs) So, but I really appreciate it. Thank you so much, Elias. Thank you for coming to play with us.

ELIAS: You are very welcome, my friend. I shall tremendously be anticipating our next meeting and those subjects.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Aha. Yes, we will.

ELIAS: Very well. In tremendous love to you, as always, my dear friend, au revoir.

JEAN-FRANCOIS: Au revoir.

[1] Session 202007081

[2] and [3] Session 20200718

(Elias departs after 58 minutes)