Friday, August 8, 2003 (Private/Phone)

Participants: Mary (Michael) and Don (Allard)

Elias arrives at 9:41 AM. (Arrival time is 15 seconds.)

ELIAS: Good morning!

DON: Good morning.

ELIAS: (Chuckles) We meet again!

DON: Yes, so we do. (Elias laughs) Well, shall I start with some questions?

ELIAS: You may.

DON: I have a few impression questions first.

ELIAS: Very well.

DON: Is Marilyn a focus of Calum? (Pause)

ELIAS: Observing essence.

DON: I see. And does she observe Ingrid Bergman?

ELIAS: No.

DON: Then the connection between her essence and Calum is an observing essence connection of some sort?

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: Is Spartan military commander Lysander a focus of Allesander’s?

ELIAS: Observing essence.

DON: Nanaiis has the impression that I have a focus in Atlantis named Starbuk. Would you confirm that?

ELIAS: Correct.

DON: Did Allesander fragment Soloron?

ELIAS: Correct.

DON: Did Soloron fragment only from Allesander or were there other essences involved? (Pause)

ELIAS: This one essence.

DON: Sometime ago you confirmed that the name or the tone of my Dream Walker aspect could be translated as Mllarros (muh LAR rohs). I wanted to make sure, is that actually the tone of a particular essence?

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: And belonging to which family? (Pause)

ELIAS: Sumafi.

DON: My Dream Walker aspect is Mllarros, or is from Mllarros, and he belongs to Sumafi but I belong to Vold. Is that an unusual situation?

ELIAS: Not necessarily, no.

DON: I was confused about that. Now, if I were to decide to switch the family I belong to, I would still have most likely a Dream Walker aspect and I would have that from Mllarros?

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: If I were, say, to join Sumafi, belong to Sumafi rather than Vold, I would no longer be a Hearer, you would say, but a Seer?

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: I had some strong impressions about Mllarros a couple of days ago. One was an impression where I think I was picking up perhaps, had a conceptualization perhaps, of blueprints he might have participated in creating. To describe the impression, I felt like I was in a deep blackness or a deep emptiness, but it felt more like a rich blackness. I saw a very small but intense bright white light. It wasn’t illuminating anything because there was nothing to illuminate. Then, even though I observed this light as if it were outside of me, I felt it attached to my head, almost like a miner’s light or an old-fashioned doctor’s light, and I started feeling that light compressing even more strongly. As it compressed, I think the energy was transmuted into extremely rapid movement, although it was hard for me to tell I was moving because of the darkness. As I felt myself moving very rapidly, I felt myself coming to choice points, and at every one of these choice points, I took the choice that would lead to more intense blackness or emptiness.

Now, my impression — well, it’s hard for me to make much sense of this — but it makes me think, first of all, that this might be a conceptualization either of thought or the intense singularity of focus we have in this dimension. I thought that perhaps Mllarros participated in the blueprint for one of those.

ELIAS: Thought.

DON: So that was the conceptualization of thought?

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: And Mllarros participated in that blueprint?

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: I had the impression also that that conceptualization was both an impression of Mllarros and somehow my own essence also. I felt as if Mllarros had created, or participated in creating, the light itself, then compressing it and using that for what seemed to be physical movement that I thought was an impression of my own essence.

ELIAS: Correct.

DON: Good. Do you have an interpretation of that or...?

ELIAS: The interpretation would be your offering to yourself a translation of two actions: one of the introduction of the blueprint of thought, and the other as the action of enacting thought in association with the physical reality.

DON: That’s what I’ve done by choosing to be physically focused.

ELIAS: Correct.

DON: This impression of reaching choice points and choosing those that led to more darkness or emptiness is a reflection or a conceptualization of some sort of a preference of mine within this dimension?

ELIAS: It may be, but not necessarily. It is not necessarily associated specifically with preference, but rather with the association of thought in relation to choice — a movement into choice, which is interpreted or translated in thought.

What you are presenting to yourself in this imagery and in this impression is a type of viewing of a mechanism, so to speak — how movements and choice are connected with thought, not preceded by, but how thought is the objective expression translating for your understanding of choices, which may be associated with preferences but not limited to preferences.

DON: I had another impression of Mllarros, which was of a very different sort. If I just looked for him — and this has happened twice now, recently and then when I first became objectively aware of him — if I look for him, I see a man that looks perhaps vaguely Hebrew on a white sandy beach, barefoot and tan. First, I wonder since he’s not physically focused, does this still have some accuracy as a translation of his tone?

ELIAS: It is an interpretation, yes.

DON: I was taking a walk Tuesday and I was thinking about the connection between my essence and his, and I noticed that I saw his feet more clearly in this imagery I created than any other part of him, and his left foot... Actually, as I was thinking about this, I had a very strong pain in my left foot that almost buckled me for a few seconds. I’m not sure how to interpret that imagery. It seemed to be imagery of our connection somehow, but I didn’t know what to make of it.

ELIAS: Interesting imagery you have presented to yourself, allowing yourself a physical sensation in association with an energy connection.

The reason that you incorporate this physical manifestation is to generate more of a reality to you in your interpretation of an energy connection between your essence and that essence. In a manner of speaking, you have generated this physical manifestation to create more of a real expression of connection with some thing that is not physical and therefore is not quite objectively understood. Are you understanding?

DON: I think so, yes.

ELIAS: This generates more of a reality and moves the experience out of the realm of how you define imagination, for in your definition of imagination, it is fantasy and not real.

DON: Interesting. That makes sense, because many of my impressions feel similar to imagination to me, and while I won’t say that I doubt them... Yeah, but I can see how that is. It definitely has made the connection feel more real for me.

ELIAS: Yes. Were you to be engaging an energy connection with any other essence that has incorporated physical focuses, it would be likely that you would not generate that type of an experience, for you already incorporate some element of reality, knowing that the essence has incorporated something known to you in physical manifestation. Therefore, you allow yourself to focus upon a form and somewhat of an identifying element in association with the essence, for it has been translatable within your physical dimension and reality. But one that has not been translated, manifest within your physical reality, offers you no objective association. Therefore to generate more of a reality of that essence, you generate some familiarity in an actual physical experience.

DON: Yes. Interesting. So there was no particular symbology to it being a pain in my left foot, I take it. It’s more that I chose that for the area of my pain and weakness because that was the imagery I created of Mllarros so strongly.

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: While I was getting these impressions of Mllarros, I began feeling a connection and energy, or attention rather, focused upon what I was doing, by my focus Jungle Jim. I felt like he was communicating something to me, either that he uses this Dream Walker aspect of ours — of mine — quite objectively or maybe something else. Do you have anything to say about that?

ELIAS: It is a manipulation of energy, and in this, an awareness of that aspect and its participation, so to speak, in an element of the blueprint related to thought, manipulating energy in a manner which generates what you created in your experience of the conceptualization — more in an objective manner and an actual manipulation of energy to be incorporating thought in a different manner than what you are familiar with.

DON: Would this different manner of using thought be in any way related to the strange subjective word play that I engaged in a while back in Regional Area 2?

ELIAS: Somewhat. It is a manner in which the individual manipulates energy and attention in association with choices, incorporating thought in a different manner, which is more closely associated with your experience of the conceptualization but expressed in an objective manner, generating a type of method of translating choices in a different manner.

DON: As I received these impressions recently about my Dream Walker aspect, even though it would be easy to say that this is not very practical information for me, somehow it felt, even though I’m not quite grasping how, I was giving myself this information because it does have the potential for me to be able to use it quite practically in this focus.

ELIAS: Yes, you are correct.

DON: And it has to do with this discussion you’ve been giving on thought just now?

ELIAS: And also in association with the movement that is occurring in this time framework concerning truths.

DON: Oh! Oh, yes, I did have that impression also, that it was somehow related to truth — the beliefs of this wave, rather — even though I’m not quite grasping it.

ELIAS: I am understanding, but this is what you are moving into, and you are presenting yourself with these impressions in association with that movement. This shall allow you, in what you term to be practical manners, to incorporate an actual recognition of and understanding of your truths.

DON: I have, on another subject, I have a short impression question. In terms of the accuracy of my astrological natal chart and how well it reflects actually the choices I make, would you say that the most accurate chart would be one that would be cast on the day of my birth at about 12:21 PM?

ELIAS: Define your association of accurate in relation to choices and...

DON: I guess accurate in that that chart would best reflect my intent specifically in this focus — let’s say at 12:21 as opposed to one at 12:30 or 12:00. Or is that really irrelevant to my focus or to my intent in terms of...?

ELIAS: It may be, in association with your choices in some capacities, more so in association with expressed qualities and personality.

DON: That’s actually what I meant, my choice of those.

ELIAS: Yes, but not necessarily as to your intent, per se.

DON: You put it more the way I would have.

Speaking of my intent, I was wondering, when I first discussed that with you, did you confirm that self-understanding was also a part of my intent in this focus?

ELIAS: Yes. Let me express to you a qualification that self-understanding is associated with the intensity of experiences, not in the generality of self-understanding, for that would be an expression that you all incorporate within your manifestations in this physical dimension. But in association with the intensity of experiences and generating an understanding of self in that and the experience of it, yes.

DON: Looking upon my intent once again, I wondered if self-direction somehow doesn’t play a part in my intent. Not that I’ve been particularly self-directed, but it feels that an examination of how I’ve directed has been of part of my intent.

ELIAS: It is not necessarily associated with your intent. That is an expression which is associated with the Shift and your participation in it, and your choice to be manifest in the time framework in which you are participating in this Shift.

DON: I recently created a situation at work that I was extremely anxious about. I felt your energy as being supportive in a different way than I’m used to, and I thought more directly supportive mainly because I asked for it, it felt like. The outcome I ended up choosing in the situation was the least traumatic I could imagine. I felt you saying something to me after, I felt your energy... If I were to translate it into words — this isn’t quite it — but it was something like you were asking me, “Now what shall you do with your freedom?” (Elias chuckles) Is this an accurate...?

ELIAS: Translation, yes! Ha ha ha!

DON: Well, first, thank you! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

ELIAS: You are quite welcome. And I also am more real than you may perceive me to be at times! Ha ha ha!

DON: (Laughs) And yet that does beg the question that I still haven’t answered for myself. Now what will I do with my freedom? (Elias laughs) I’m still thinking about it.

Recently, I had a strong sense of expanded identity that lasted for a few hours. This was a few weeks ago. At one point it felt somehow like all of my focuses – well, about half my focuses actually participated in this, it felt like, although they all had some leaning towards it — it felt as if they were all aligning somehow, as the planets might all align to lie in a straight line with the sun. I felt that alignment approach, and at one point that lasted only maybe only a couple of seconds, it felt that actually about half aligned.

First, I’m not quite sure how to interpret this or what was actually happening, but I’ll also say that at this time it turned out that Gloria and Melody were both aware of some unusual perceptions or something unusual happening that sort of reminds me of this. I feel like their experiences are connected to mine. I’m wondering not only what that experience was when they connected, but was it actually something global that we all just happened to notice, or something in a smaller group? What do you have to say about it?

ELIAS: Not necessarily global, but many individuals are generating similar experiences in association with becoming more objectively aware of the reality of yourselves as essence, not merely as a concept and not as a separate entity from yourself, but experiencing yourself in this vastness as being all of it. Therefore, you translate into imagery of this alignment and participation what you associate as a perfect symmetry.

DON: Oh, it felt to me that those focuses of mine that seemed to actually align, each has inserted somewhere within their timeframe at least a brief flash of an objective awareness similar to mine.

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: And then maybe it just passed for each of them? They inserted it as they chose, but...

ELIAS: Yes. Some translating as an experience of déjà vu, others translating as a momentary spiritual experience, others merely incorporating somewhat of a confusion, noticing an experience but generating no objective explanation.

DON: Now, on yet another subject, you know I’ve been thinking about your reminders to me about being playful. (Both laugh) And I don’t think I really even have a good sense of what playfulness is. I wonder, how would you define playfulness?

ELIAS: I may express playfulness is generated in the absence of seriousness. Ha ha ha!

DON: My next question was going to be “how do you define seriousness?” (Elias laughs) The absence of playfulness is fine.

ELIAS: Ha ha ha! Seriousness is a viewing and a generation of perception that is analytical with little point — not an analyticalness in genuine discovery, but an analyticalness which does not actually, in your terms, lead to actual answer.

DON: I see. So analysis that does lead to actual answer, even though in form it might look quite similar, you could say could be quite playful.

ELIAS: Yes. That analyticalness may be expressed quite playfully if the perception is genuinely moving in a direction of genuine discovery and surprise. If there is an acknowledgment of the surprise and the discovery and an acceptance of it, it becomes a game, and that generates a playfulness.

DON: So my impressions regarding Mllarros could be considered playful?

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: I feel silly to even have to ask what playfulness is!

ELIAS: On the contrary, my friend, individuals incorporate many words that they do not actually incorporate an objective definition for or an actual understanding of, and therefore they are merely empty terms. As I have stated, you are in the objective insertion of this Shift, in which you are redefining many of your terms or offering yourselves a definition of terms that you have not actually incorporated previously, for you do not question.

This is another aspect of the significance of this wave in consciousness addressing to truths — those elements of your reality that are unquestioned, they merely are, but you may not necessarily even know what they are.

DON: On another subject, this is regarding another session recently published. I don’t mean to be intrusive, but this individual generates similarly to myself and I’d like to ask a little more about it. You discussed the scenario in which an individual tried out for a basketball team and wasn’t accepted. In this scenario, you said, I believe, that for him to join this team was not in alignment with his direction at that time. So, his choosing self ultimately chose not to join regardless of what he thought he wanted, and if perhaps he had listened to his impressions he would have received information as to why joining the team was not in alignment with his direction and might have reduced the trauma he experienced when he wasn’t accepted. First I want to make sure, am I paraphrasing you accurately enough?

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: What confuses me about this scenario is that his choosing self chose not to be on the team, but his choosing self also chose to try out for it, even though his impressions might have told him that he didn’t want to. Now, did he try out because in the moment of choosing to try out, his choosing self had been supplied insufficient information?

ELIAS: No. His thought mechanism incorporates insufficient information, and this is the point. This is quite commonly expressed with individuals within your physical reality, for you move your attention singularly to one aspect — generally speaking, to your thought mechanism — and not to what you are actually choosing/doing and what your actual communications are.

If you exclude the choosing and the communicating from your attention, your thoughts are not offered accurate information, and therefore your thoughts may express differently from what you actually do. Or your thoughts may be expressing somewhat accurately in association with what you do, but they may not necessarily be incorporating information concerning what your communications are.

This is the reason that it is important that you allow your attention to be flexible and to move in a balance with all three elements of yourself, therefore objectively providing yourself with an accurate translation in thought and providing yourself with an objective understanding of what you are actually doing and communicating to yourself, and therefore allowing yourself to intentionally manipulate in what you want and in association with your preferences and your direction in any particular moment.

DON: In giving myself the signal of ambivalence, if you can call that a signal... Firstly, would you even call ambivalence an emotion?

ELIAS: It is a signal.

DON: Signal, yes. That could be a signal that I’m not giving my thoughts sufficient information, I guess.

ELIAS: What is your communication? Look to what you are doing and what you are feeling, and allow yourself to evaluate what you are communicating. This is the practice to be incorporated, that you shall allow yourself to be aware objectively of what you are actually generating.

DON: Okay. I have a few questions from Jene.

ELIAS: Very well.

DON: I feel, on the last subject, I feel pretty foggy today. (Elias laughs) What’s your perception of my energy today?

ELIAS: Quite the same! Ha ha ha! Moving your ship through your fog, are you? (Both laugh)

DON: Yes! Jene first has a focus impression. Is Zelda Fitzgerald a focus of hers? (Pause)

ELIAS: Observing essence.

DON: And then this question I’ll read verbatim: “A hypothetical question: I want go to see a particular movie showing at a particular theatre. It costs money, which I don’t have. The automatic response is to deny myself this choice because I don’t have the money. In other words, I deny myself what I want, allow money to dictate my choices. Please offer five other choices that I am not allowing myself to view.”

ELIAS: (Chuckles) And I shall express the exercise itself in response to this individual. Incorporate this very question as an exercise to generate.

DON: Yeah, that makes sense.

ELIAS: And may provide information as to the expressed beliefs and may also offer clues that may lead to the identification of the truths.

DON: We still have a little time here. She has one other question: “I notice how my motivations can alter into expectations. I have a feeling that an expectation is a motivation with an added bit of specific energy — impatience and distrust, perhaps. Please define the terms motivation and expectation.”

ELIAS: Motivation is what you may view as a type of drive inspired by desire; it may also be inspired by want. Or it may be inspired by both!

DON: Want and desire being different, then?

ELIAS: Yes. Expectation is a projection in anticipation of some expression which has not been generated yet.

Now; expectations may be associated at times with preferences, but in not recognizing that they are associated with your beliefs, they generally turn to express some direction which incorporates strong potential for disappointment or discounting.

DON: By the way, before I forget, I think Allesander would like to know, was Soloron fragmenting from Allesander a focus-based fragmentation?

ELIAS: No.

DON: Then we’re back to Jene’s last question. Given those definitions, she asks you: “Would you like to make any comments regarding my conducting my Elias Study Course, knowing what my motivations and expectations are?”

ELIAS: My comment shall be to incorporate a direction of sharing rather than instructing.

DON: I noticed that in the sessions I’ve had with you, we rarely speak of orientation, and I’ve wondered if that is because it’s somehow something that I would easily latch onto as a justification for a difference, being intermediate. Do you have anything to say about that? And because of that, we have not talked about it much.

ELIAS: I may express to you, we do not incorporate much discussion concerning orientation between you and I, for generally speaking you do not present a direction that shall incorporate that type of discussion. And I may acknowledge and validate your impression that one of the reasons that you choose not to be engaging much discussion concerning orientation is correct. You do incorporate a likelihood, so to speak, that you may move in a direction of justifying more separation in difference in moving into that type of discussion, for you do automatically generate a perception in somewhat of a strength in the association with difference.

Therefore, I may acknowledge to you that you choose not to reinforce that by offering yourself information that your automatic response in this time framework would be to generate more separation and more difference.

DON: Allie identified some focuses, or has some impressions of some focuses that we share, by name. She gets the names Lopan and Zola for her and myself, respectively. When I tried to get an impression of this, I felt what seemed to be focuses of ours as Vikings or northern European, where I was a woman with long wavy red hair. Allie was a man who I was partnered with, who would go away for long periods of time. I felt fear around this man, both fear that he might not come back and I was afraid of him physically. (Elias chuckles) I think these are focuses of ours; that is, these impressions I have, I don’t think these are the focuses associated with those two names.

ELIAS: You are correct.

DON: Those names are focuses of ours, though?

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: Shared?

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: I also pick up focuses of ours that we share where we’re partnered, I think, in an Amazonian tribe, again with me female and Allie male. Maybe this is separate, also us being associated somehow within a very primitive tribe, perhaps what we might call now pre-human. Would you confirm these?

ELIAS: Not what you would term pre-human, but yes, I may validate your impression as to that focus also.

DON: Are these names that she gets of other-dimensional focuses of ours?

ELIAS: Yes.

DON: Is there an essence that I, in this timeframe, would have two focuses or more that I’d be acquainted with personally? I’ve been looking and haven’t been able to find one, but I feel like there is.

ELIAS: Another essence which you are acquainted with more than one focus of?

DON: Yes. That is, my focus Don is.

ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, and you may be more objectively aware of futurely, dependent upon your choices. I may express to you Myranda is one.

DON: Yes, yes. I knew of Myranda, however I wasn’t thinking of both of her focuses as acquaintances. I haven’t really objectively connected with one of them.

ELIAS: I am understanding, but as I have stated...

DON: Oh, yes, futurely.

ELIAS: Correct.

DON: Well, I think that’s all the time we have, Elias.

ELIAS: Very well, my friend. I shall be anticipating our next meeting, as always. Ha ha ha! And I shall continue to remind you to be incorporating playfulness, now that you incorporate a definition of it! Ha ha ha! Perhaps you may engage it more easily now that you incorporate an understanding of what you are engaging. (Laughs)

Very well, my friend. As always, I shall continue to be offering my energy to you in supportiveness continuously.

DON: And thanks again for your help.

ELIAS: You are quite welcome, my friend. You may ask at any time and I shall respond. To you as always my friend, in great fondness, au revoir.

DON: Au revoir.

Elias departs at 10:42 AM.

(1) Briefly, on the difference between desires and wants: “Your desire is that movement which follows your intent, and many times your desire is a subjective element.” “A ‘want’ is a belief system! You only want what you do not have, for you are influenced by belief systems which tell you that what you have is not adequate or that your experience is not adequate. Therefore, you ‘want’ a different experience. This is a direct influence of belief systems.” For more information on the difference between desires and wants, see .

©2006 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved

---

Copyright 2003 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.