Session 377


“The Camouflage of Responsibility”
“Soft/Intermediate/Common — An Introduction”

Tuesday, March 23, 1999 © 1999 (Private/Phone)
Vic’s note:  I would like to welcome Bobbi to the transcribing team.  This is her first transcript, and she’s hooked!  Thanks, Bobbi!
Participants:  Mary (Michael), Paul (Caroll), Joanne (Tyl), and a new participant, Frieda (Brenda).  (Frieda is Paul’s mother)
Elias arrives at 1:45 PM. (Arrival time is 19 seconds)

ELIAS:  Greetings!  We meet again! (Smiling)

PAUL:  Yes, we do!  Greetings!

JO:  Hello!

ELIAS:  (Chuckling)  Welcome to new essence this day!

FRIEDA:  Thank you.  Hello.

ELIAS:  (Chuckling)  And you are prepared with your inquiries?

PAUL:  Yes.  We have questions, as always!

ELIAS:  You may proceed.

FRIEDA:  Elias, I would like to ask what my family is, what family I’m aligned with.

ELIAS:  Alignment in this focus, Ilda.

FRIEDA:  Ilda, in THIS focus.

ELIAS:  Correct.

FRIEDA:  Can you tell me which focus I am in?

ELIAS:  (Grinning)  You are within the focus of your attention within this present now!  You are yourself! (Chuckling)

FRIEDA:  Ha ha ha!  I understand that we have at least three focuses that we go through.  Am I correct in that understanding?

ELIAS:  Correct.  If you are choosing to be manifest within this particular dimension, you agree to be manifest at the least three times, for the experience of three different orientations.

FRIEDA:  I see.  Can you tell me which orientation I am in?

ELIAS:  Yes.  Now; I shall express to you that soon, so to speak, futurely, I shall be offering information concerning gender and orientation as elements of your creation of sexuality within this particular dimension, which shall offer more of an explanation to you.  In this, what I shall be addressing to is what you are inquiring about now.

Presently within your physical societies, you do not identify with these orientations with defining words.  Therefore, I am offering new words to be defining these three orientations, for the idea that you hold within physical focus as to the identification of these three orientations is incorrect.  It is a manifestation or what you may term to be an aspect of the belief system, and is not an accurate identification of the orientations in themselves.  But I shall offer you a slight explanation, that you may understand what I offer to you in response to your question.

Your question is, which orientation have you chosen to be manifest within in this focus.  I express to you that the orientation that you have chosen, I will be designating as intermediate.  This, in your belief system — underline in your belief system — you would identify as feminine or female.

Let me explain that female is the definition and designation of a gender, but within physical focus you have created an extensive belief system with respect to your creation of sexuality.  In this, YOU designate the three types of orientation as male, female, and homosexual.  I have expressed previously, for the benefit of the understanding of individuals, the designation of male, female, and other.  I choose now — as we are addressing to this particular belief system within this wave in consciousness which is occurring presently — to be altering those terminologies and introducing new terminology that you may define these different orientations with.

The designation for these shall be soft, intermediate, and common.  These may be associated with what you term to be homosexual, female, and male, but I wish not be reinforcing the existing belief system and your identification with it.  Therefore, I am designating new terminology for these three types of orientation within your physical focus, that you may not necessarily identify orientation with gender, for they are quite different expressions.

Gender is merely your physical manifestation of body type and function.  It is not that element which is creating or affecting your perception and how you view yourself and how you view your world, or how you process information.  It is merely a function and a designation of type of form.

Orientation is quite different, in that this is the element which is underlyingly, all-encompassingly affecting of your perception, which is your reality.  This is how you view yourself, how you interact with yourself, how you view other individuals, how you interact with other individuals, how you perceive your world and how you interact with it, your societies, and all of your reality.  THIS is your orientation.  As I have expressed, the choice of orientation that you have identified with in this particular focus would be designated as intermediate.

FRIEDA:  Can you give me my name, my essence name? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Essence name, Brenda. (rolling the “R” slightly)

FRIEDA:  Thank you.

JO:  And the essence family belonging to?

FRIEDA:  Yes, the essence family belonging to.

ELIAS:  Essence family, Sumafi.

FRIEDA:  Thank you.

ELIAS:  You are welcome.

PAUL:  Elias, I just have a follow-up question on the orientation information you just gave us.  I wanted to be clear that I heard the terms correctly, and that would be common, intermediate, and soft?

ELIAS:  Correct.

JO:  Okay, Frieda?  Okay, hi.  My job seems to be presenting me with important parallels to other focuses, and I’ve been overwhelmed with Egyptian imagery, enough for me to say “enough already,” and I would like some validation about that.  But the next question is, I seem to have created this focus to remind myself of those others, especially those two other focuses I believe, and that the parallels are for my own remembrance, and that the differences are important too, because they represent differences in beliefs.  So, I’d like some validation about those kinds of parallels, and the Egyptian imagery especially.

ELIAS:  You are correct that you are offering yourself imagery to be helpful to yourself objectively in allowing you movement into your own remembrance.

Now; let me express to you also that the differences in focuses are also significant; not merely that you hold difference in beliefs, but you also hold difference in choices.

In this, as your attention focuses within this particular focus, you are offering yourself the opportunity for the remembrance and widening your awareness.  Therefore, you incorporate objective knowing and partial understanding of other focuses.

This offers you more information that you may be applying to this particular present focus.  It also offers you what you may term to be a wider range of choices, for as you widen your awareness, you also open yourself to more of your own creativity and more of your choices.  You move out of the area, within your perception, of black and white — either/or, so to speak — and more into the area of gray, which encompasses much more of your probabilities and choices, which you may access objectively, not merely subjectively.

JO:  I often feel conflict because I feel pulled in so many different directions creatively, but I tell myself that this job is helping to widen me because of that remembrance.  Now, is this correct, or am I creating conflict unnecessarily?

ELIAS:  Let me express to you, Tyl, that you are creating the conflict within yourself, and this is motivated within your pushing of yourself.  You hold strong expectations of self.  You also hold strong aspects of beliefs in the area of productivity.  You are moving into your own creative expressions, but within your own impatience, you push yourself into an expression of productivity that is unnecessary. (Intently) It is unnecessary for you singularly to be accomplishing ALL actions.  This is a very strong aspect of beliefs.

Now; let me express to you that you lean in a direction many times of assuming responsibility for different actions and situations, for you view this to be easier or more efficient.

Now; what I am expressing to you is that this is a camouflage.  Many, many, many individuals also camouflage in this same manner.  Let me offer to you a very clear, simple example.

A parent, a mother, may encounter the child and may express to the child a request: “Please be engaging the action of picking up your belongings.  Put them in their place.”  The child may offer resistance in this area.  The mother’s response is, “Never mind.  I shall accomplish this task, and you may continue with your activity.  It is easier and quicker that I be accomplishing this.”

In this, what the mother is expressing in actuality is assuming personal responsibility for another individual — for the child — and also expressing a judgment that she may be accomplishing of this task better than the child, more efficiently than the child.  In this, she also at times may be creating conflict within herself, for she experiences frustration.

You lean in the direction of very similar action with other individuals.  You are pushing yourself in directions of assuming more responsibility than is necessary.

I am not expressing to you that it is inefficient to be holding your attention in many different directions, for it is not, but there is a difference in holding your attention in many different directions and pushing yourself for accomplishment within certain guidelines and expectations and assuming responsibility for much productivity.

In this, what you are creating is fatigue with yourself, for you are not allowing yourself to be moving in compliance with your own expectation.  I suggest to you that you may offer yourself less conflict if you are allowing yourself to relax, and not to be pushing yourself so intensely.

JO:  Thank you.  Along those lines, I’ve been trying to get a sense of this alignment of mine also, and my imagery has involved several different things, including all children, all faiths, which I believe I accomplish subjectively, mothering the mothers and birthing men.  Is it accurate to say that all three of these actions apply to all of my focuses?  And also, I don’t need to have any children to be accomplishing.  Is this correct?

ELIAS:  You are correct.  It is not what you may term to be a requirement to be incorporating children in this alignment.

Let me express to you that you have chosen this family intentionally, and as I have expressed to you previously, an intent reasoning for this choice is that you be turning your attention inward as opposed to outward.

You have expressed many qualities that may be associated with this family within other focuses.  You offer yourself the opportunity within THIS focus to be turning your attention inward and offering to self all of the action and all of the qualities that may be expressed in the engagement of child-raising.

You are offering yourself the opportunity to be allowing YOURSELF these expressions, not another individual.  This is very much a part of your intent within this particular focus.

You may also find helpfulness and information if you are allowing yourself to be reviewing the interaction that I have offered to Candace recently, for I have offered information in this direction, that you mirror each other and that you are presenting this mirror image that you may allow yourselves to more fully view the action that you are expressing to yourselves subjectively, which is surfacing, so to speak, into objective awareness.

Therefore, you may choose any action outwardly to be expressing within your intent in this focus, but I express to you that you shall benefit self tremendously in turning your attention to self and offering this intent in its expression to YOURSELF.

JO:  Thank you.

ELIAS:  You are quite welcome.  I have expressed this previously to you and have acknowledged to you the wondrousness of yourself and the ability that you hold very strongly to be offering helpfulness and nurturing and comfort to other individuals, and have expressed to you what you may term to be a longing that you view this within yourself and that you offer this same expression to yourself, in opposition to the driving that you express to yourself.

You deal with yourself very harshly, and this creates conflict within you.  Offer an expression of compassion and nurturing to yourself.  Allow yourself relaxation, and you may be viewing what I view, in the wondrousness of yourself!

JO:  (Inaudible)

ELIAS:  (Chuckling)  You are very welcome.

PAUL:  Elias, I have a question.  When we last spoke, we talked about the fact that in this focus, I am a final focus.  I have some follow-up questions about final focuses and so forth.  My first question is, when the final focus dies, all other focuses have a choice to either fragment or similarly disengage or die.  Are the other focuses limited to the present now of the final focus, or does that — within the context of simultaneous or no time — include all of the focuses that are manifested in that particular time framework?

ELIAS:  This would apply to all of the focuses that you hold within essence that are associated with this dimension.

PAUL:  Okay, that works.  Interesting.  So it’s not just limited to the present now, but it’s all of the focuses.

ELIAS:  Correct.  This would encompass all future focuses, all past focuses, all present focuses.  All of the manifestations that are occurring within this particular dimension shall create the choice to be also disengaging or to be fragmenting and creating of a new essence.

PAUL:  So, I guess what I’m trying to understand is, from the no space/time perspective ... actually, this as a concept works quite well for me.  It makes sense.

ELIAS:  Correct, for it matters not that you do not incorporate time within what you term to be simultaneousness of time, for the final focus is merely the designation of one focus which holds an action that offers a direction and a communication to all of the other focuses within this particular dimension.

PAUL:  Great.  Thank you.  In a similar vein, I’m wondering — in regard to the shift that we’re presently in the middle of — is there a greater concentration of final focuses that have manifest to help facilitate various aspects of this shift?

ELIAS:  Not necessarily, although it may appear that there are very many final focuses presently.  Be remembering that the designation of final focus is also the offering to all other focuses the choice to be fragmenting.  Therefore, there is always, in your terms, the generation of new creation within essence in the action of this fragmentation, and it matters not the count, so to speak, of individuals that may be designated as final focuses.

But as to the specifics of your question — that there may be more final focuses within this particular time framework to be lending energy to the facilitation of this shift — no.  This would not be necessarily an action that would be lending energy to the facilitation of this shift in consciousness.

In actuality, what may be identified as an action that lends energy to the facilitation of this shift presently is the incorporation of more essences participating in manifesting into this particular dimension presently.

PAUL:  That’s very interesting, and leads to another question then.  I have a sense that as individuals now and in the future disengage and die, in the action of this shift and this change and transition, that there’s a relationship between the action of transition that those focuses will be experiencing.  I guess what I’m saying is, the shift also includes the experience of transition in this time and in the future, and is related somehow to the continuing physically focused people during the shift.  Is that correct?

ELIAS:  Partially.  There is a similarity in certain elements of transition and certain elements of this shift in consciousness.

The base line of action of accomplishment within transition and this shift in consciousness are different, for within one there is an acceptance but continuation of belief systems, and within the other there is an action of shedding belief systems and also disengaging objective awareness.  Therefore, there are some elements of these two actions that differ greatly, in your terms, but in other areas, there are some actions that are incorporated similarly.

Many of the experiences that you may hold, if engaging transition within physical focus, may be quite similar or the same as many of the experiences that you shall hold in widening your awareness and engaging this shift in consciousness.

Once this shift in consciousness has been completed, so to speak, in your terms, the actions of transition and of this shift in consciousness shall be in many areas quite the same, and you may not be distinguishing within the two.  They also shall be quite common.  This shall be your reality, in a manner of speaking.  Therefore, the action of transition shall not appear strange or outside of your norm, so to speak, but shall be accepted as officially accepted behavior, for you all shall be engaged in very similar experiences.

As I have stated previously, one of the actions that shall be engaged in the accomplishment of this shift in consciousness is to be dropping the veil between this physical dimension and the movement into non-physical areas of consciousness that you view to be related to death, which would be transition non-physically.  Therefore, you shall hold the ability to be objectively communicating with individuals that have disengaged.

Presently there remains a veil in this area, and in that action, as you have created that veil, individuals that are engaging the action of transition non-physically do not hold their attention singularly to any particular area of this physical dimension.  This be the reason that there is a presentment of difficulty in the situations of individuals inquiring with respect to what you term to be loved ones, friends, or relatives that have disengaged physical focus and are engaging the action of transition.  I hold an awareness that your desire or your want in these types of inquiries is to be validated that the individual continues beyond death and is remembering of you.

This poses difficulties with many individuals, for these are very closely associated emotionally and may be very affecting of individuals.  Simultaneously, within my intent and following that intent, I choose not to be reinforcing your belief systems.  Therefore, the presentment of information in this particular area may not be addressed at times, for there is no choice engaged to be hurtful to any individual, but there is also no choice being engaged to be reinforcing of belief systems, as to the occurrence once an individual has disengaged and their focus of attention.

But as to your question, these areas shall not be so severely separated within the accomplishment of this shift.  Therefore, you shall hold a clearer understanding of the action which occurs within transition physically and non-physically.  You shall also hold a greater understanding, for you shall allow yourselves in not engaging transition very similar experiences.

You allow yourselves understanding of certain situations if you are also engaging the experiences.  In this, you shall offer yourselves more of an ease within your movements and your acceptance, for you also shall hold very similar experiences.

PAUL:  Thank you very much.  That was very helpful.

A follow-up question on focuses:  Our friends Nicky and Michael, we spoke to them a week or so ago, and Michael mentioned to me that you had offered him information in regard to the number of manifestations he holds in this universe/dimension, and that there was a new twist, to my understanding, in that you offered him a number, something like 53, but also a second number, something in the order of 731, or something like that.  And I was wondering if you could offer me information in regard to my focuses, and help explain to me a little bit about those two different types of information regarding focuses and manifestations.

ELIAS:  Quite.  What I have expressed to Mikah is, individuals request a number of focuses that they hold within this physical dimension, and I may be offering a number to them, and this number is relating to the number of focuses that they may easily access and identify in similar tone to themselves.  But there is another number that may be offered, which is the entirety of focuses within this dimension of that particular essence.

Now; I have expressed, each of you hold more than one focus within one time framework.  Within this particular time framework presently, each of you holds more than one focus of essence.  Within each time framework that essence has focused its attention and holds manifestations within, there are also more than one focus manifest in each of these time frameworks.

You within this time framework may access a focus of essence within a different time framework — that which you designate as past or future — more easily than you may access a focus of essence which occupies the same time framework as yourself, for each manifestation of essence — each focus of essence within each time framework — holds a slightly different tone from each other, this offering essence a diversity in experience within its manifestations in one time period.

In my offering of number to Mikah, I have offered initially the number of focuses that his essence holds within this dimension that may be easily accessed by himself, for they hold similar tone.  The second number offered is the entirety of focuses held by essence in this dimension.

PAUL:  So, let’s just take a past time framework.  Let me see if I understand this.

What I heard you say, I think, is that the past/present/future focuses of my essence that hold similar tone are easier for me to connect with, rather than the additional focuses that share the same time framework with me as a single focus now.  But also, the past focuses/future focuses that also have multiple focuses ... from my perspective in my present now, there is a slightly more difficult aspect or quality to them that makes it harder to connect with.  Is that anywhere close to what you just said?

ELIAS:  Correct.

Example:  You may offer yourself the opportunity to be connecting with what you may term to be a past focus.  You may identify a particular past focus within a particular time framework.  In that, you may engage your hypnosis or your meditation or your dream state or any of your various methods that you incorporate to be accessing a particular focus, and each time that you direct your attention pastly within the same time framework, the same past focus shall appear.

Let us express the example that you may be connecting with a past focus which is a laborer in construction of what you view as your Great Pyramids.  Each time that you engage that direction of attention to access that same time framework, you shall return to accessing that same focus.  You shall connect with that same focus.

Now; you may hold in essence four or more focuses of essence within that same time framework within different areas of location of your planet, but the one that you shall continue to connect with shall be the laborer building these pyramids, and you shall not necessarily access the other number of focuses within that particular time framework.  You automatically magnate to the one focus, for it holds a very similar tone to yourself.  Therefore, there is an ease in accessing a connection with that particular focus.  This is not to say that you may not be accessing the other focuses.  I am merely expressing that you shall be experiencing more difficulty — more of a thickness — in your accomplishment in accessing the other focuses within that time framework, for they hold a slightly different tone.

The one focus also generally shall hold certain qualities within its manifestation and within its intent that may be similar to your own.  This also creates more of an ease or less of a thickness within energy for you to be accessing that particular focus, but there are more than one focus within each time framework.  Therefore, I offer to you the number — in the request with individuals — that shall be easily accessed by you, that hold a similar tone.  If specifically requesting the number of all focuses of essence within this particular dimension, I may also access that information, but it shall not be offered automatically, for you shall not automatically access all of these focuses.

PAUL:  So, a follow-up question to that, Elias.  Within energy, as you explain it, the relationship between the similarity of tone versus the relationship between maybe a little more dissimilar tone, is it a two-way relationship?  Meaning ... let’s take this example of the focus of the past builder of the pyramids.  Is it just as easy for that focus of Caroll to connect with me?  And let’s take another focus that exists in that time of the pyramids, that shares that time with the laborer.  Is it easy or is it difficult for that focus to connect with me, in terms of similarity of tone?

ELIAS:  No.  It would be shared between yourself and that laborer.  That focus may access you as easily as you may access it.  Another focus within that time framework may access another focus within this time framework of your essence, for they shall hold similarity in tone, but they shall hold difficulty and more thickness in their attempt to be accessing you.  Are you understanding?

PAUL:  Yes, I am, and I have another follow-up question then. In October of 1997, we talked about an experience of mine, an out-of-body, where I connected with what I believe you termed at that time as an alternate future self.  I did get a name of Manson and a very clear visual, but I had difficulty communicating and talking.  So my question is, is that focus that I connected with in that experience, is that one of the focuses that’s probably holding a dissimilar tone?  Because it was difficult for me to communicate.  Is that correct?

ELIAS:  No.  Although you held difficulty in communication, you did not hold difficulty in accessing.

Many times you may experience difficulty in your actual objective communication and interaction with another focus.  You are crossing what you may term to be barriers — time dimensions — and therefore you are engaging different layers of consciousness, and translations need be placed in order, in a manner of speaking.  Therefore, you shall be experiencing certain elements of difficulty if you are attempting to be objectively interacting with the other individual.

Be remembering, this other individual IS another individual, but is also simultaneously you.

Therefore, this creates a difficulty, for engaging other focuses of essence within physical focus may disrupt your identity temporarily, as I have expressed previously.  Therefore, there are barriers that you have created within physical focus to be preventing this action of confusing your individual identity.

In this, a focus which holds a slightly different tone from yourself ... you shall hold difficulty in accessing objective awareness of them at all.

PAUL:  So, another question then.  It seems that the design of these veils, these barriers that we’ve talked about, is to help prevent disorientation and confusion from the essence point of view with all of its focuses, in managing all of the focuses so that they don’t bleed through too intensely.

ELIAS:  You are correct.

This has ALL been created quite purposefully and intently, that you have designed certain separations and veils within this dimension for the purity of your experiences within each focus of essence.  You have designed the focuses of essence to be quite singular, and in that, as they bleed through to each other, there IS a lessening of this separation that you have created and a dropping of these veils, and there is also a byproduct, temporarily, in the confusion of the singular identity.

Now; this confusion in identity shall not be occurring if you are merely viewing another focus.  If you are not actively, so to speak, engaging another focus of essence and you are merely viewing another focus, you shall not be threatening your individual identity.

For you have equipped yourself within your focus with an automatic identification, and within your belief systems — which do, many times, move to your benefit — you have created a system, so to speak, of identifying self and not allowing any other element to be interrupting or threatening this.  You shall view another focus, and you shall automatically not associate that focus as yourself.  You shall continue to identify yourself as yourself — separate, apart, and different.  Therefore, you are not confusing yourself.

But once you move into the area of dropping these veils and engaging interaction with another focus, you also are loosening your hold within your separation, therefore creating a window between these focuses that may lend to the confusion of your own individual identity within your focus.

PAUL:  Thank you.  One other question.  Given this magnificent multi-dimensional design of essences and manifestations and focuses in physical time frameworks and all of the subtle relationships between them — counterpart action, fragments, splinters, and so forth ... all this is happening in multiple time frameworks and from other points of view or perception and in simultaneous or no time.

How is it that each focus wakes up each morning, after perhaps sleep state or an experience of subjective activity ... how does it know where and when? (Elias grins)  How does it happen so precisely, in terms of time, that we don’t get lost in all of this?  Not identity, but just in terms of where and when, time and place?

ELIAS:  Ah!  This is the magnificence of essence, for all within essence is immaculate and perfect!  In this, as it is focusing its attention within all of these areas, let me express to you that you also mirror this action to an extent within your physical focuses.

How may YOU engage more than one activity within one time framework and not confuse yourself and continue within the identification of each task or event or interaction simultaneously?  You may be incorporating several different actions simultaneously and not be confusing yourselves.  This is a small mirror action of what essence is creating within consciousness.

Each focus of attention is a precise and immaculate stream of energy which is directed intently and specifically and quite purposefully in a particular area, a particular direction, and within essence it does not confuse itself in its actions and is multi-dimensionally experiencing continuously in its gathering of information and experiences, which is the action of becoming continuously.

Is it not glorious to view the wondrousness and the spectacular movement of what you are?

PAUL:  It’s just spectacular, it absolutely is!  The precision, as you said ... the immaculate focuses of energy and keeping it all straight ... even from my perspective, it’s just magnificent!

ELIAS:  Quite, and this be the reason that I express to you that you are glorious beings!  You do not merely focus your attention of essence in all of these directions of the focuses within all of the physical dimensions and all of the areas of consciousness non-physically simultaneously, but you also focus your attention in the creation of all of these dimensions themselves and all that is created within them and all that exists within them!

ALL of this is your creation, and is it not wondrous?

PAUL:  Some of us are actually beginning to believe that, Elias!

ELIAS:  In this, I express to you all, why shall you be discounting of self if you are such magnificent beings that you may be creating of such gloriousness?

PAUL:  I think it’s group-hug time! (Laughter)

ELIAS:  HA HA! (Grinning)

PAUL:  Thank you.

ELIAS:  You are quite welcome!

JO:  I would just like to ask a follow-up question about Paul in the laborer-constructing-the-pyramids focus, which I think is one of his focuses, and I’d like confirmation of this.  Is this the individual who I saw in my dream, and I interpreted the relationship with him as being my brother, and that I was carrying his child?

ELIAS:  You are correct.

JO:  And I believe that this was around the time of the beginning of the creation of the pyramids, and that my current pharaoh on my work front may have a focus as Snefru.  Is this correct?

ELIAS:  This would be within the time period of the creation of the second pyramid constructed.

JO:  Okay.  Was I correct that the king of my organization was a pharaoh during that time period? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Correct.

JO:  Oh, cool!  And that we were doing things like manipulating matter through sound, and that the flood imagery that I got several months ago had to do with an experiment that went awry? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Correct.

JO:  And there are also Egyptian threads in my Judea focus too.  I guess the Egyptian magician imagery was so strong that I’m wondering if it pertains to both the Egyptian and Judea focuses.

ELIAS:  They are different focuses, but the manifestations are similar, yes.

JO:  Okay, and that part of my heritage in the Judea focus had to do with that Egyptian magician imagery, and that I had some Egyptian blood. (Pause)

ELIAS:  (Chuckling)  A mixed breed.

JO:  Yes, and also of the tribe of Asher?

ELIAS:  Correct.

JO:  Ah!  And if you could help me sort through the mishmash ... I’m getting maybe a marketplace, and I’m seeing weaving and Egyptian cotton and felt and purple and buyers and sellers and farmers and wine makers and people on the beach.  Are these all impressions from my early Judea focus?

ELIAS:  No.  This would be connected to an area that you may designate close to what you identify as Cairo presently.

JO:  Okay, and so I was correct then probably about our home being north of Mount Carmel, near the ocean?

ELIAS:  Correct.

JO:  And what’s up with those trees?  Was that our livelihood, those trees?  Almond, perhaps? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Partially.

JO:  Partially.

ELIAS:  Not entirely.

JO:  Okay, I’ll work on that some more then.  And just some impressions about people ... my friend Rich is Agrippa? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Correct.

JO:  And Suzette is Susanna? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Correct.

JO:  And John is Herod? (Pause)

ELIAS:  No.

JO:  No, okay.  Is Joe a focus of Cynthia? (Pause)

ELIAS:  No.

JO:  Is John Allegro a focus of Tyl? (Pause)

ELIAS:  No, but holds similar fragmentation in what you would term to be previous.  This is figuratively speaking.

JO:  Okay, so I’m resonating with his interpretation of events, but also, those events are fairly accurate.  Is that correct?

ELIAS:  Correct.

JO:  Okay.  Is my friend Bill a focus of Tyl, or is his mother a focus of Tyl? (Pause)

ELIAS:  No.

JO:  And one more question.  Did I know you in your Arabian focus, or around that time? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Yes.

JO:  Yes, and did it have to do with frankincense and myrrh?

ELIAS:  No.  I may express to you a hint.  I choose to be much more flamboyant, and....

JO:  I used to be?

ELIAS:  I choose to be much more flamboyant, and expressive in this particular time framework as dashing!

JO:  (Laughing)  You say that about every focus!

PAUL:  (Laughing)  How unusual!

ELIAS:  Quite!

JO:  That’s wonderful!

ELIAS:  Although I shall be admitting to the manifestation of some focuses that you may term to be less exciting and less colorful.

JO:  I’ll be looking for you then!  Thank you.

ELIAS:  You are welcome. (Chuckling)

JO:  That’s all I’ve got.

PAUL:  And I just have one more question for today.  You delivered some information last fall about aspects, the different aspects of Elias in terms of the energy exchange, and I’m just wondering ... today, in our conversation with you, how many aspects of Elias have we interacted with?

ELIAS:  Within this particular session, is your inquiry?

PAUL:  Yes, within this particular session.

ELIAS:  Let me express to you that within each particular engagement of energy exchange, there shall be an experience of one aspect.  It shall not be altering from one aspect to another within one engagement, for this would present difficulty for you, and confusion.  And also, it would not be lending energy to an understanding, for each aspect interacts slightly differently and is projecting of a slightly different quality of energy.

The aspects do interchange, but not within one particular session time framework, and I may express to you that there are designated aspects that interact within this forum more than other aspects.

PAUL:  This aspect that we’ve been interacting with today, have we interacted with this particular aspect previously?

ELIAS:  Yes, for this particular aspect is one that is designated as being interactive within this forum often.

PAUL:  Great.  Thank you so much.

ELIAS:  You are very welcome.

PAUL:  I guess that does it for us today, old friend, and as always, it’s been a great pleasure.

FRIEDA:  Thank you, Elias.  It was a pleasure meeting you.

ELIAS:  You are very welcome, and I am expressing acknowledgment of you also, and anticipate our next meeting.

It is a pleasure meeting me!  HA HA HA! (Grinning, and laughter)

JO:  Thanks, Elias.

ELIAS:  I extend to you each this day much energy and encouragement.  I also offer to you a very loving and affectionate au revoir.

PAUL:  Au revoir.

Elias departs at 3:06 PM.

FOOTNOTES:

(1)  I have changed “that” to “which” in the following phrase: “... which is the action of becoming continuously.”