Session 201709261


Session 20170926-1
“Introduction to The Equation”
"Choosing What You Feel, Changing Energy"
“The Construct of Reciprocity”

Tuesday, September 26, 2017 (Private/Phone)

Participants: Mary (Michael) and Fatma

(Audio is edited and begins with Elias in mid-sentence)

ELIAS: — and that has a tremendous influence on the situation and what you feel.

Now, remember: you can choose (inaudible).

FATMA: (Laughs) Let’s work on that. Yes. Sorry, you said…?

ELIAS: Therefore, the first piece is to focus in on a particular feeling. Choose one, recognizing yes, you are feeling several different things. But focus on one first, and then acknowledge that feeling, recognize what you don’t want about it or what you don’t like about it, and then do some action that you do like. It doesn’t matter what it is. It can be anything, but do something that you do like.

And as I have expressed previously, it is very likely that it may require doing that two or three times, perhaps even four times, depending upon how strong the feelings are, because you will do some actions and engage something for a few minutes and you will feel different, and then the other feeling will return. And you do it again, because each time you do that, it is changing your energy. You don’t notice it immediately, but it is changing your energy. And in changing your energy, it is also changing your mood, which is significant.

Therefore, repeat the action until you notice that you may not be expressing an excellent mood, but you notice that your mood has changed. You notice that you aren’t feeling that agitation or that restlessness. That is the beginning, because what you are doing is practicing in choosing what you feel. You are not getting rid of the other feeling, you are not ignoring it, but you are choosing what you are feeling. And this is very unfamiliar process, but you can do it.

And in doing it, it automatically also shows you that you do have that power, that you do have that choice. And if you want to think about it in terms of control temporarily, you can; that you do have control in relation to what you feel, because it feels that you don’t have control when you are feeling in directions that you don’t want to feel or that are uncomfortable. Therefore, in this, it gives you that sense that you can be directing of this, even in relation to a feeling.

FATMA: Yes. Okay, so you know what I get lost at is actually choosing the feeling I want to feel. This is where… I mean, I was trying to change.

ELIAS: You don’t have to choose the feeling that you want to feel.

FATMA: Okay.

ELIAS: That is not what I expressed. What I expressed is do something you like.

FATMA: Do something I like. Okay.

ELIAS: Anything; anything. It could be watching your television. It could be reading a few pages of a book. It could be making a cup of tea. It could be going outside. It could be going outside and going to a café.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: It matters not what it is. At times, it is helpful if the feeling is stronger, it is helpful to change your environment, because that automatically aids you in changing what you are doing, and it changes your attention because you have different stimulus, because the environment is different.

Therefore, moving to a different room or going outside or going to a different location, you don’t have to have an agenda. You don’t have to have a specific destination. The point is not choosing what you want to feel. The point is choosing something you like.

FATMA: Yeah. I mean, I notice since I’ve become even impatient with my music. I mean this is… I will still do it, but it’s this thing where the impatience…

ELIAS: And I would express, no. If you are impatient with a particular expression such as your music, don’t engage it. Do something different, because doing it anyway is that action of forcing or pushing.

FATMA: Right. Yes.

ELIAS: That is, in a manner of speaking, what we discussed previously of doing something in spite of the feeling. You don’t want to move in that direction.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: It does not accomplish what you want to accomplish. Therefore, it is more a matter of merely doing something different. And it can be a momentary action. It can be literally anything, but something that you like.

FATMA: Okay, I will keep doing that, and yes.

ELIAS: And remember to acknowledge those feelings. And what does that mean? What do you do when you acknowledge that feeling?

FATMA: Okay, so… thank you for asking that. Okay. (Both laugh)

ELIAS: That is my job, to remind you.

FATMA: (Laughs) Yes. So, what I do is that I try telling myself that I am into that… Okay, I don’t think I even do that. But in a way, it is sort of like I tell myself I am entitled to feel the way I am feeling, it is okay to feel this way.

ELIAS: No.

FATMA: Okay.

ELIAS: You identify the feeling: restless, anxious, angry, irritated, frustrated, agitated – whatever it is. You define the feeling and then you express, “It is what it is.” You don’t have to express that it is, in your words, okay to feel what you are feeling, because you don’t like it!

FATMA: Yeah. Yeah.

ELIAS: Therefore, you are not attempting to tell yourself that it is good or that you should like it. You are merely expressing, “It is what it is.”

FATMA: Yes. Yes.

ELIAS: And allowing it to BE what it IS. That is accepting it for what it is: “I don’t like it, and I accept that I don’t like it. And it is what it is.”

FATMA: Okay. Okay. That’s… Okay. (Sighs)

(Audio is edited to remove a section at this point and resumes with Elias speaking.)

ELIAS: Yes. Yes. And I would express that you, among likely 90% of the population.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Therefore, it is very familiar. This is the piece about constructs.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: And in that, principles are constructs. Principles are what you or any individual develops in your mind, so to speak, in relation to the reason why you should be or you should contain in a particular manner.

Now; the element with principles that creates difficulty and conflict is that with principles you don’t only hold yourself to them, you hold other individuals to them. And they are all made up of constructs, and therefore they are all justified continuously.

Such as, we’ll use this situation as an example: other individuals expressing in a manner and behaving in a manner of entitlement, and therefore expecting from you.

Now; what makes that important?

FATMA: (Sighs) For me, what makes it important is one, I don’t feel there is reciprocity. It’s a one-way street, which makes me feel I am abused.

ELIAS: Now; stop.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: That is enough.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Therefore, the first point – and this is a concept. Therefore, pay attention to what we are doing in this.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Because we are creating a process that you can follow.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Therefore, you make one statement: that it is a one-way street.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: That is the first statement. That is the first reason. That is the first construct.

Therefore, write that down: it is a one-way street.

FATMA: Yes. Okay.

ELIAS: Now, next to that write down what does that mean? What is… How can you define that in one word? You can define that in one word of "reciprocity."

FATMA: Mm-hm. Okay.

ELIAS: That there is no reciprocity.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Therefore, that is the first point. Now the next point: it is a one-way street, and…?

FATMA: It makes me feel inferior.

ELIAS: Very well. Next point: inferior. And next to that, what does that mean? Inequality.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Now; what else?

FATMA: And deriving from the inferior, I cannot… It’s a little bit longer, because this is… it’s sort of like I would want to say "yes" normally. I mean, I have absolutely no issues in saying "yes," but then I feel conflicted because of whatever I feel and then I want to say "no." But I don’t want to also say "no" because of one, I feel inferior and therefore I cannot express it. But even if I can express the "no" it would be out of spite, not out of because this is what I want.

ELIAS: Very well. Now; that is your reaction to the first two points. You have the first two points, and then you react to those two points.

Now; in that, another important piece is that if the first two points weren’t present, you likely would automatically move in the direction of giving to them.

FATMA: Yeah, if they weren’t present, yes.

ELIAS: If the first two points—

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: — weren’t present.

FATMA: Yes. Yes. Yes.

ELIAS: Therefore, in that, you move back to those first two points and you ask yourself, “Why am I making these two points important? How is” –and this is the next piece of the process; this is important--“How is the first point of reciprocity and the second point of equality diminishing me?” Because that is what you think it is doing. That is your perception, that somehow because the other individual is expressing that entitlement, in some manner that communicates to you and creates a perception that they are diminishing you—

FATMA: Because I don’t feel secure.

ELIAS: — and making you less important, and they are diminishing you.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Now; number one and number two equal the definition. The definition of number one and number two equal diminishing. In that equation, how are they diminishing you?

Now before you answer that, while you pause momentarily, let me express to you that when another individual is approaching you in a capacity of entitlement, and they are projecting an energy of demanding from you or wanting from you, they actually in THEIR perception aren’t diminishing you, because their perception of you is that you have more and you are more than themself. They are diminishing themself. They are actually expressing a perception of themself that they are lacking, that they don’t have enough and that they have no power to provide.

Therefore, THEY are projecting an energy of themself as being diminished and perceiving you as greater than them.

Now, turn the equation. Read it backwards. Because in actuality, the reflection that you are receiving – and this is the reason that you incorporate the irritated feeling – is that the other individual in that equation is already diminished, which equals a lack of reciprocity and equality, which equals the beginning. In that, you have the equation, what equals what, and when you read the equation backwards, that is the perception of the other individual. They have not diminished you; you are experiencing their energy, which is already diminished. And in that, you are interpreting it as them diminishing you or lessening your importance, because you are personalizing their expression, that what they are expressing is "doing to you." That is personalizing. In actuality, it is not personal. They would express in the same manner to anyone that they perceived as being more and having more than themself. They would automatically express in that manner.

Therefore, in this, what you receive is twofold. One is the energy that they are projecting that is uncomfortable because you value them. Therefore, what they are expressing doesn’t match your perception of them.

FATMA: Yeah, most definitely. Most definitely yes. Yes.

ELIAS: Because you value you them and you don’t perceive them as diminished, but they are diminishing themself.

FATMA: I see. Okay.

ELIAS: And that creates an irritation, because your perception is different, they don’t match. And you don’t want them to diminish themself because your perception is that they are important.

The other piece is you don’t translate that to yourself, because you actually aren’t aware of that equation and what is occurring, therefore you automatically turn it and personalize it, and that creates an irritation also. Therefore, then you have two irritations.

And what do you do with that? You pay attention to the feeling of being annoyed or irritated, and you react to it, and you allow the feeling to dictate your behavior. It dictates your moods. It dictates what you do, what you say, how you say it, and then ultimately it dictates what your choice is. And likely, it dictates to you NOT to do something, and then you don’t feel content with the choice that you engage.

FATMA: Yes. Exactly. Exactly. Exactly.

ELIAS: Now; this method, this exercise, if you will, is applicable in any situation that involves you and other individuals. This is actually a method in which you can be accomplishing several actions simultaneously. One, you are actually acknowledging your feeling, you are defining it, but you are also being more present, and you are also looking at a reflection – not a mirror, a reflection – and evaluating what that reflection is and what it means. And that gives more choices.

And in that, it also is giving you the ability to change what is important. The justification, the personalization is not important.

FATMA: Yeah, because now that you’ve explained this—

(Audio is edited to remove a section at this point and resumes with Elias in mid-sentence.)

ELIAS: — bring forward that subject of reciprocity again.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: And let me express to you, this is a significantly large subject that most individuals adhere to very strongly, that there should be reciprocity: when you do, other individuals should respond. When you do, other individuals should give back. There should be a give and take, and when someone takes they should give back. This is an enormous construct that almost all of you express in varying degrees, but most of you express it very strongly. Even if you don’t express it in words, you feel it.

And it creates significant problems. It creates a lot of conflict. It creates resentment. It creates aggravation, it creates blame. It is a tremendous catalyst for so many expressions that you don’t like that are uncomfortable and that hurt. And at the core of it is this construct of reciprocity, that when I do, something should give back. If something else does, I expect myself to give back. Therefore if I do, something else should give back.

The pressure of this construct is enormous, in two different factors: the pressure of it in the expectation and the disappointment in relation to others giving back or acknowledging, and the pressure to give back if someone else gives to you.

This is such an enormous construct, and it is so strong. In this, this is the reason—one of the reasons—that for a considerable time framework not even addressing to the subject and the construct of reciprocity but in expressing to each of you, in a separate manner, about learning how to receive or learning how to give without expectation, learning how to give with no expectation at all, and learning how to receive without assuming an expectation from the giver and without accepting an expectation from the giver.

(Timer sounds) I will allow you to contemplate that momentarily, and we will return.

FATMA: Yes.

(Audio is edited to remove a section at this point and resumes with Elias speaking.)

ELIAS: Very well.

FATMA: Yes, so she would most likely ask me to handle the inheritance case and sort out the documents and stuff. And she has lots of time on her hands, and she doesn’t want to do anything herself. And I would be… I would feel like I am being used because I am the lawyer in the family.

ELIAS: Very well. This is an easy example.

FATMA: Right. Okay. Yes.

ELIAS: Very well. First of all, use your equation.

FATMA: Yes. I… Okay, so okay, let me go back to my notes. The equation is inferior and… Sorry, equality and reciprocity—

ELIAS: Now, modify. Modify your equation, because now you are using an example in which she perceives you know more, --

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: --therefore you are more qualified. Therefore it is acceptable for her to expect you to do this action.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: But it is coming from the same position. The first pieces of your equation on your side are somewhat different this time, because it isn’t that she is viewing you as less than, in your perception. She is actually viewing you as more than, in your perception. This is your own perception.

Remember: when you first write out the equation, it is coming from YOUR perception.

FATMA: Yes, I mean… Yes. But also, I would add an element to that in my perception. I feel like my hands are sort of like twisted. I mean, I don’t know how to explain, but I feel—

ELIAS: Very well. Then, we begin again.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Therefore, what do you feel?

FATMA: I feel it’s okay. Yes, I know more than her in my perception, but this doesn’t require my knowledge for it to be done. And it’s just she is lazy, and probably again reciprocity. She's lazy, she doesn’t want to do anything herself, and it’s a never-ending cycle.

ELIAS: Very well, stop skipping. Stop skipping.

FATMA: Yes. Okay. (Laughs) Yes.

ELIAS: Stop explaining,—

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: — and identify the first feeling.

FATMA: The first feeling: feeling controlled or manipulated—

ELIAS: Very well. The first feeling is being controlled.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: What else?

FATMA: Would manipulated be the same as being controlled?

ELIAS: Yes.

FATMA: Yes. And feeling there is no exit.

ELIAS: Very well. Feeling controlled and feeling trapped. Are you writing this down?

FATMA: Okay. No, I will. Controlled and trapped, yes, and…unfair.

ELIAS: Unfair. Therefore, you feel (pause)…what?

FATMA: I feel… As an accumulation of the three together?

ELIAS: No.

FATMA: No. In addition?

ELIAS: Let me express to you—

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: — the unfair would be in the second column. Therefore, what is the feeling? The unfair is defining it.

FATMA: Ah! It’s actually okay. So, actually unfair would be related to both controlled and trapped? No.

ELIAS: No. Controlled, you are feeling controlled.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: You are feeling trapped.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: In the third feeling, you are feeling (pause) as a non-person.

FATMA: Yes. Yes.

ELIAS: You are feeling not acknowledged. You are feeling a non-person.

FATMA: And this I would also add to the first equation, too.

ELIAS: You are feeling as object.

FATMA: Yeah. And this I would also add to the first scenario we discussed. It accompanies the other situation at least, yes.

ELIAS: Very well.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Now; you have three factors. With the first one, control, that equals no choices.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: With the second one, what does that equal?

FATMA: I would say the same, but trapped equals…

ELIAS: Trapped equals what? (Pause) Confined.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Or constricted. And the third, a non-person, equals unfair.

Now; the equal to each of them is what? What do all of those equal once again? Diminishing you. When you personalize it, all of those together equal diminishing you, because it is unfair, it is taking away your choices, and you are constricted.

Now; reverse the equation. She feels the lack of control. She already feels diminished, because she perceives she can’t do something. You can, and she can’t. She doesn’t have as much knowledge as you. She doesn’t have your schooling or your education. Therefore, she is diminished in that, and she has no control of that.

The trapped, when you reverse that—in that, what would you express that she is expressing? Being diminished, what is the reverse of the second line?

FATMA: Confined?

ELIAS: She is confined or constricted because she doesn’t have knowledge. Therefore, she is trapped in the position of not having the ability to do something, to do something specific.

Now in the third, the unfair and the non-person, she is diminished with the first two, which creates the third in that she is not good enough. She doesn’t know as much as you do, she doesn’t have the education that you do, she doesn’t understand.

Now; in reversing this, in relation to viewing the equation from the other perception and perspective, then removing the personal piece, it is about your choices.

Now; in relation to the inheritance and the documents and the paperwork and the legal aspect, in that, if you remove the personal piece, then it is a matter of choices. Do you want to engage this, or do you not want to engage this? Are you interested in it, or are you not interested in it?

You already know that she has an interest in it, therefore your choices can be if you aren’t interested, if you don’t want to do it, then you have other choices. You can suggest someone to her that can do it for her, OR you can express, “If you would like, I can help you to do it. I can aid you doing it, because it is important to you and you want it done and you want to do it.” Which does what? Encourages that aspect of not reinforcing the lack of control, that she isn’t confined and trapped because she can’t do something, and that she isn’t less than or a non-person, and that there is a fair element because she can engage it herself if she chooses. If she doesn’t choose, she has other choices. She can engage another individual to do it for her, if she is so choosing.

But in expressing yourself in your choices, you may or may not express that choice that you would be willing to help her. And even in that, it is not black and white. You might express that you would be willing to help her in a limited capacity: “I will help initiate it with you. I will help you, in simple terms, get started with it. I am not interested in engaging it, but I can help you begin the process, and then you can follow the process yourself.”

Therefore, you have many different choices in that, and you stop viewing her as, or judging her, as being lazy and merely not wanting to do it. You are being proactive rather than being reactive. You are not personalizing and, dependent upon what you choose, you may actually also be encouraging her to empower herself.

In actuality, regardless of what you choose, you would be encouraging her to empower herself if you are moving from the perspective of your choice, recognizing that you don’t want to do it and honoring that, but not moving in that black-and-white direction and personalizing it, which creates those uncomfortable feelings. That is what the signal, the feelings are signaling you to, that statement about what you are already doing, not what you are going to do but what you are doing now: “I am personalizing this. I am receiving this energy and this interaction from this other individual, and I am turning it against myself.” That is what those feelings are signaling you to.

That is what hurt comes from. Other people don’t hurt you. You hurt you, in relation to other people or other things.

FATMA: Okay.

(Audio is edited to remove a section at this point and resumes with Fatma in mid-sentence.)

FATMA: — accept whatever she did. I mean, yes, intellectually, I accept that these are her guidelines. But I feel… Let me start putting the equation as I am speaking to you.

I feel I have been like a Kleenex, to be used when it’s convenient, and when it’s not convenient to be thrown away. And this is actually what bothers me the most, feeling like—

ELIAS: Very well.

FATMA: Yeah.

ELIAS: And this you can use your equation for also. And in this, the whole point of this equation is to begin moving in a direction of empowering you and giving you choices, or allowing you to be aware of what choices you have and engage them, and removing that automatic, familiar piece of personalizing, which causes pain, discomfort, discounting and blame.

FATMA: Okay. So…

ELIAS: It is not about justifying the other individual, and it is not actually about understanding the other individual. You don’t have to understand the other individual in using this equation. It is not about excusing them or understanding them or removing them, in a manner of speaking, from the equation. It is not about that. It is all about understanding you and your responses and your reactions and what affects you and why, and therefore what your choices are to change it.

FATMA: Okay. Can we work a couple of equations together? Is that okay?

ELIAS: Yes.

FATMA: Yeah.

ELIAS: Absolutely. Yes.

FATMA: Thank you. Okay, so in this equation… Okay, so I am putting this, I don’t know how to name it, this feeling of feeling like a commodity, like a convenience food, like not important maybe.

ELIAS: Very well. Therefore, you are feeling as if you are an object.

FATMA: Yes. And feeling like I was duped, in a way. I mean, feeling like I cannot trust myself in recognizing who is a good friend.

ELIAS: Why?

FATMA: Because if I had seen the signs earlier, which were clear and it was always like that. I mean, I should have stopped from when it was like I’m only interacting when it’s convenient to me and it is what it is, and that’s it. Even if you’re going through shit but it is not convenient for me, I just drop you.

ELIAS: Very well. Therefore, in that situation, first of all there is that element of reciprocity again.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: And what I would say to you is you can expect that subject and that construct of reciprocity to rear its powerful head in many, many, many situations, if not most of them. Therefore, that may be a component in many of them. Therefore, don’t always look for different reasons or different expressions because they may be the same. They may be just applied in different imagery.

Therefore, in this, there is the factor of being some object or a commodity rather than a person with feelings. And there is the piece of reciprocity, that what is given isn’t returned. And…? Would you add anything to that?

FATMA: I think feeling duped goes with the reciprocity, right?

ELIAS: No, for I would express that no, that would be another, different expression. For that involves honesty, which is another enormous construct. Enormous. (Laughs) Very strong. Therefore, that would be a feeling of distrust, which equals honesty or the lack of. (Pause)

Now once again, what do all of those equal?

FATMA: I feel everything would equal that I feel less than.

ELIAS: Yes. That you feel unimportant, that it all equals less than or not important or not valued. Most of your end-equals will be either "diminished" or "not important" or "not valuable." Most of your end-equals will be that. Not all of them, because some of them might be overwhelm.

But in this situation, now reverse the equation again. Now in this, I would express that the other individual in some capacity is expressing from a perception of not enough: not enough energy, not enough time, not enough capacity, that they likely incorporate a perception that they themself require too much time and energy for themself; and that they have little to spare, which is another enormous construct, because none of you have a limited supply of energy or time or ability. It is what you do with it and how you use it. But nevertheless, that does not invalidate the realness of an individual’s perception.

And in many situations, I will express to you, especially with individuals that engage conversations with myself, they don’t understand the concept yet, and therefore they are moving and they are giving themselves information – and I definitely acknowledge that – but in that, they employ many concepts, in a manner of speaking, in a considerably one-sided manner.

An example: the concept of being self-aware, paying attention to yourself. Most individuals incorporate implementing that in a one-sided manner, in which they are paying attention to some aspect of themself, what they think or what they feel; or sometimes they are paying attention to what they are doing, but only from a particular perspective and not necessarily being actually self-aware. They are using the concepts, but they don’t fully understand them yet. And in not fully understanding them yet, they use the concepts in a limited capacity, and generally it is very one-sided or narrow, because that is the capacity that they can grasp at any particular point. Which does, as you know yourself, affect your choices, your behavior and your perception.

Therefore, using the equation again, you look at your feelings and what they equal and what all of that combined equals. Then you reverse it. And in reversing it, you assign it back to the other individual. Not precisely in the same manner as yourself, obviously, but you look at the equation from a different perspective, from the perspective of this individual is beginning with limitation. Therefore, they are projecting their perception in relation to they are already limited. They have a limited amount of energy, a limited amount of time, a limited amount of giving. Therefore, they have a limited amount of projecting, which is all untrue, but it is nonetheless real because it is their perception.

Now; the next piece is what? What is the next step?

FATMA: I’m sorry. The next piece in the equation?

ELIAS: Once you have reversed the equation—

FATMA: I remove the personalization.

ELIAS: Yes.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Yes. Yes. Congratulations!

FATMA: Thank you.

ELIAS: You are understanding. Yes!

FATMA: A little bit. (Laughs) A little bit.

ELIAS: Now; you remove the personalization. Excellent. I would express to you, my friend, that is so exciting. If I were physically focused, I would embrace you in that moment.

FATMA: Oh! Thank you so much. (Laughs)

ELIAS: That is excellent. Yes. You’ve got it.

FATMA: Thank you. Thank you.

ELIAS: You remove the personalization. What does that mean? This is not being done TO you or directed AT you. It is not personal to you. The other individual would do the same with anyone. Anyone that they perceive requires more than they can give, they would respond to in the same manner.

[Forcefully] And that is not about what you are doing. That is about their perception.

FATMA: Yeah, I mean—

ELIAS: Because they already have a perception of limitation.

FATMA: And which also brings me to the other point of I felt also about, and this is what I… Because this, as much as this, I had figured it out in a way. But what hurt me in that was feeling unheard. Because I said, but this is not what I require at all.

ELIAS: I am understanding.

FATMA: Yeah.

ELIAS: I am understanding. It is that feeling of being unheard. Therefore, you are a non-person. But it is important that you remove that personalizing piece.

FATMA: In which case—I mean, okay…

ELIAS: The reason that you remove that personalizing piece, remember, is because it gives you choices. If that piece is removed, then you recognize it is not that you are a non-person or that you are unimportant, but that the other individual does not have the capacity at that point to engage you in a manner that witnesses you.

Therefore, your choice then is to move in a different direction and to move in directions in which you are interacting with individuals that DO have the capacity to witness you.

FATMA: Which are none for the time being, or actually very limited. And I wonder whether I am such a—

ELIAS: Stop saying none.

FATMA: No, none is wrong. Okay, I acknowledge that none is wrong.

ELIAS: Stop expressing that, because you reinforce that very frequently.

FATMA: But the vibe I keep getting from… Okay, I have some individuals which I acknowledge. I acknowledge those. But the general feeling, I feel like there is something in me that pushes people away from me, like I’m going to eat them alive if they come close to me, and I hate that feeling.

ELIAS: I am understanding. And much of that is reactive to what you have experienced previously. And in that, this is what we are addressing to. It is not about changing other individuals—it is about changing you.

And in that, it is about being more self-aware and recognizing what kinds of actions you have engaged and allowed, and have expressed consistently or even habitually, that creates this diminishing of you, this questioning of you, this non-trusting of yourself. ALL of these aspects are associated with the same thing, and this is a method that you can use to turn that and change it.

FATMA: Yes. Okay. So, so far, I am going to use maybe one or two examples afterwards and then study them by heart for when we speak next.

ELIAS: Very well.

FATMA: Make you a proud teacher. But I want… (Both laugh)

ELIAS: And I am.

FATMA: Thank you. Okay. So, interesting: when we return the equation on the other scenarios that we discussed, somehow, it’s sort of like – almost, not entirely but almost – went away except with that last individual. The hurt is so big in that one. Which is interesting, why it is bigger than the other one.

ELIAS: I would express that is also understandable and easy.

FATMA: Yeah.

ELIAS: Because you automatically expressed a trust, and therefore what was translated was that that trust was betrayed.

FATMA: Right. Ah, yeah, because I… Yes. Okay.

ELIAS: That is what created the hurt.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: And that is directly associated with the personal.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Because you personalize it, that creates that more intense, more significant, and a wound, a hurt.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Because you included a factor of trust. Now, that does not mean – this is an important piece also – that does not mean that you shouldn’t include a factor of trust. It does not mean that at all. And do not walk away with that idea, that you can engage other individuals and what is important is to not trust them.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: Or not allow yourself to give that trust. No; absolutely not. I would express that that trust is you expressing that openness and that vulnerability, and that is an exceptionally important piece in connecting with other individuals. It is important that you learn how to not personalize and then be hurt, in relation to that trust, but it is definitely not a situation of not expressing that trust. In actuality, in the other examples that we have engaged in the equation and reversing it, you are actually, in a manner of speaking, practicing and teaching yourself how to trust in a more healthy manner.

FATMA: Yes. Which—

ELIAS: Therefore, that piece is automatically being encouraged and being expressed. Therefore, it is NOT about not trusting. What I would say to you is that is the reason that this hurt was so much greater and so much more obvious to you in this scenario than it would be in other scenarios, because you did allow yourself that vulnerability and that openness. And you knew you were expressing that vulnerability and that openness. And then there is involved the same again, the reciprocity.

FATMA: Yes.

ELIAS: And in that, if you are being open and vulnerable and trusting, the expectation that the other individual will do the same and will return that. And that is your danger zone, because you are personalizing and you are including that reciprocity.

In this, giving is not an action that you do with any expectation. If there is any expectation, it is not giving. In this, it is a matter of recognizing. You reverse the equation, as I expressed. You recognize what you did. Remember, in the first part of the equation is your feelings. In the first part of the equation, you didn’t list hurt.

FATMA: I didn’t what? Sorry?

ELIAS: You didn’t list hurt.

FATMA: Yes. I didn’t. Yes.

ELIAS: If you listed hurt, that is a feeling also. If you listed hurt, you would have moved to what THAT equals—vulnerability and trust—and that would have included that aspect of reciprocity also.

FATMA: And what would have been the reflection of hurt and reciprocity and vulnerability in the other person in that case?

ELIAS: What I expressed to you: it is the perception of not enough and limitation.

FATMA: Okay. So, it’s actually because—

ELIAS: Now let me express to you how an individual might express that. How an individual might express that is, remember what I expressed to you: they generally incorporate the concepts in a one-sided manner, because they don’t fully understand them yet. Therefore, how that can be displayed is the other individual might express that they are expressing or honoring boundaries.

FATMA: Precisely. Yes. Yes.

ELIAS: What it is stemming from is the perception of not enough and limitation. Therefore, then that translates through your equation in the reverse, and you see what that reflection is from the other individual. Not personalizing, removing the personalizing piece. Then you see: “I felt hurt or I still feel hurt because I didn’t recognize the other individual’s limitation. And because I was expressing that vulnerability and that trust, I was also expressing that reciprocity.”

That was automatic. And when that wasn’t expressed, when it wasn’t given back, then you feel that hurt. But when you reverse the equation, then you can see if the other individual is expressing from a perspective and a perception of the reverse of your equation, then they aren’t capable of that reciprocity. Therefore, you can’t expect it from them.

But even not understanding that, or even not accepting that,—which you don’t have to—you can still see that there was an attachment. There was a construct attached to your openness, to your trust and your vulnerability. There was a cost: “I will give this to you, but there is a cost. I will allow you to purchase this from me. I won’t give it to you. You can purchase it from me by expressing that reciprocity.”

FATMA: Okay. I will not mention the other examples. I will work on them (both laugh) and then come back.

(Audio is edited to remove a section at this point and resumes with Fatma speaking.)

FATMA: Okay, that actually drives me into this question of I guess like maybe 99%, if not 100%, of all human actions are not meant to be personal?

ELIAS: Yes. I would agree.

FATMA: Yeah.

ELIAS: I would express that to you, definitely, yes. I would express that there are actually very few interactions that you engage that are intentionally personal and intended to be hurtful. There are very few. And generally, when an individual is expressing in a definite, intentional, personal manner intending to be hurtful, in many, many, many situations most individuals do not actually react by being hurt. They react in being irritated.

FATMA: Mm-hm. I see. Okay.

ELIAS: What I would say to you is, what you can play with and notice, is when another individual is intentionally being personal to you, generally it is in a direction that you would deem to be positive.

FATMA: Okay.

ELIAS: It is in a direction in which another individual is expressing excitement about you or for you, or they are generating an encouragement to you. Not always—there are many time frameworks in which an individual may be encouraging to you and it is more for themself than it is for you. Therefore, that is not always an expression of personal. But in some situations and expressions, another individual may be encouraging of you genuinely, and that would be an example of a personal expression towards you.

Generally speaking, when individuals are actually expressing to you in a direct, personal manner, they are generally doing it in a manner that you would receive as positive, not negative.

When they are expressing in a negative capacity—or what you perceive to be negative, because they don’t always perceive it to be negative—but when you perceive another individual to be generating an expression in a personal manner towards you, it generally isn’t. And I would very much emphasize that when it is, you generally don’t respond to it or react to it in a personal manner; you dismiss it quickly. And it might irritate you or it might generate a feeling of being angry, but it generally doesn’t create a feeling of hurt.

FATMA: Okay.

(Audio is edited to remove a section at this point and does not resume. Total edited session is 1 hour 25 minutes in length)