Session 1496
Translations: DE ES PT

Distortion, Absolutes, the Truth Wave in Consciousness


"Distortion, Absolutes, and the Truth Wave in Consciousness"
"Acceptance, Opinion and Preference"
"The Reality You Generate IS the Official Reality"
"Thinking and Creating; Thinking and Attention"

Saturday, January 17, 2004 (Group/Castaic, California)

Participants: Mary (Michael), Anet (Alexi), Bobbi (Jale), Bobby, Brad (Quinian), Catherine, Cathy (Shynla), Daryl (Ashrah), Don (Allard), Elena (Deena), Erin (Melody), Gail (William), George (Bethette), Gerald, Howard (Bosht), Jack, Jene (Rudim), Jo (Tyl), John (Tess), Jon (Sung), Julie (Fontine), Kathleen (Curt), Keith (Allistar), Letty (Castille), Margot (Giselle), Mike, Nancy (Caliegh), Naomi (Kallile), Pam (Pviette), Pat (Fryolla), Paul H (Caroll), Paul T (Xutrah), Ron (Olivia), Sabrina (Stencett), Sharon (Camden), Sheri (Milde), Stella (Cindel), Steve, Wendy (Myiisha), Will

Elias arrives at 1:26 PM. (Arrival time is 25 seconds.)

ELIAS: Good afternoon!

GROUP: Good afternoon, Elias.

ELIAS: Welcome!

Now; this day we shall be engaging a conversation, a discussion, concerning, initially, distortion.

What is your definition of distortion, and what is the meaning of distortion in your assessment? (Pause)

MARGOT: A representation of an idea that is not representing the material that is trying to be presented, a change in the way the material is presented from even just a slight angle - the meaning of the material, I should say.

ELIAS: And what defines the "meaning of the material"?

MARGOT: Well, that goes back to absolutes. Was that the right answer? (Group laughter)

ELIAS: If there is a right answer! (Laughs) This is what is significant.

Each of you incorporates an assessment of what constitutes distortion; but each of you assess that through your own perception, and each of you generates your meaning of distortion in association with your truths.

Now; as we continue to be engaging this wave in consciousness addressing to truths, this is a significant factor to be considering, for this generates many differences, many conflicts, and it is, generally speaking, a common ground for absolutes and truths.

How do you assess the information that I offer to you? For I have expressed to you that I offer this information to you in association with my direction and what you may term to be my agenda in the least amount of distortion, and I have expressed that to you from the onset of this forum. But what does that mean to you, to each of you, and how do you process that information? What is your association with that statement, and what does that influence in association with your beliefs and how you allow your beliefs to influence your actions, your interactions, and your assessments of other information? (Slight pause) This is a question. (Laughter)

PAUL H: Less distortion - this is Paul H, for the record - less distortion is better, so anything that is more distorted, any other information that holds greater distortion is badder or worse.

ELIAS: This is quite accurate.

PAUL H: And if that information is offered by one of the other essence family intents, since you've associated that concept with Sumafi intent, then it is badder or worse.

ELIAS: But what is the guideline? The essence family?

WENDY: This is Wendy. When I receive information with less distortion, I sometimes experience it as unfamiliar and a little bit difficult to integrate with my everyday life. I am not Sumafi - but that's okay - and I have been aware that there is sort of a belief system of Elias that we kind of built up. I don't think I understand or that I'm familiar enough with information that is not distorted to really make judgments. So I use that, I keep that in mind when I am trying to integrate the information. I'm always wary when I'm judging something as better or worse. That's about as far as I've gotten with it.

ELIAS: Very well.

STEVE: I just had the thought that you used to say that Seth's material was more distorted than yours. He would say things like you can just affirm to yourself with your thoughts that you want something and create it that way, and you absolutely say that is not correct. Therefore, it must be that distortion means more not true than undistorted material.

ELIAS: Ah! This is the point. This is a general association that all of you in some capacity generate, that if there is distortion in information, it is not true, and undistorted information is more true - which is not true. (Laughter)

For, what is significant that you understand is that regardless of what information is offered to you, regardless of whether I or any other essence may express any information to any of you - and per se perhaps it may be entirely undistorted, which would be another absolute; which there is no entirely undistorted information, for it is all filtered through layers of consciousness and languages and energies and perceptions - and this is the key, that regardless of what information you draw to yourselves - for this is the action that you are engaging; it is not that I am offering information to you - it is that you are drawing this information to yourselves. You each individually engage a choice to interact with myself, and that is an element of your method or your process of offering yourself information. I am merely an avenue of that.

Now; in that offering of information, you each incorporate that information through your own perceptions. Therefore, what is true and what is not true? I am aware that many individuals within this time framework, in association with this wave addressing to truths, are incorporating confusion and difficulty - perhaps not quite conflict with many individuals, although that is being expressed also presently and even trauma. But for many individuals there is an expression of frustration that is occurring, for their truths may conflict with other individuals' truths, and therefore the right and wrong, the true and untrue, the distorted and undistorted are being much more emphasized, and the questioning of what is right or who is right and what is wrong or who is wrong becomes also much more emphasized.

In this time framework, there is much comparison that is being expressed, and I have expressed to all of you many times, comparison is dangerous for it is an automatic discounting of yourselves and of other individuals. There is no absolute right; there is no absolute wrong. There are many different perceptions of individuals' preferences and their opinions.

And I may express to you and allow me to emphasize, duplicity is a belief system. It is an element of the design of your reality. It is a belief system. It is not being eliminated in any manner, as none of the belief systems are being eliminated. This is the reason that I have expressed to you all from the onset of this forum that regardless that you are moving in this shift in consciousness and regardless that you are moving into acceptance, you shall continue to incorporate your opinions and your preferences; but you may hold your opinions and your preferences knowing that they are not wrong but also moving into a knowing that they are not absolutely right, either. They are your opinions and your preferences, and in your terms, they are right with you but that does not invalidate the rightness of another individual's expressions - or not even another individual's expression but the possibility of an expression.

Individuals generally speaking incorporate their own perception of right behavior. One expression of right behavior is honesty. Each of you incorporates your own definition of honesty and how it should be expressed.

Now; as a truth, you set this into an absolute within your perception, your definition of honesty, and that is the only definition of honesty. Therefore it is not what you merely shall express, although you automatically hold to your own definition of honesty, but more importantly it is your expectation of how other individuals should be behaving and expressing in association with your definition of honesty. In this, you set into motion this cycle of judgment.

Now; you may incorporate your definition of honesty and (Polly, Mary's little dog, suddenly jumps up and begins growling and racing back and forth across the front of the room between Elias and the participants, which generates some muted comments and amusement from the group) you may incorporate your opinion concerning behavior, concerning right behavior, concerning what is acceptable behavior, and you may express that yourself. (Polly continues to race back and forth, growling) What generates conflict is that you set that for guidelines for other individuals or other expressions of consciousness. (Chuckles, and group laughter) Once again, there are no accidents! Ha ha ha! An example of unacceptable, not right behavior in a particular setting or scenario! (Laughter)

CATHY: Oh, you got that right!

ELIAS: (Humorously) We have once again provided not merely entertainment but an example of what we are speaking of: right behavior and what is expected in that, and how you automatically respond and the automatic judgment that is expressed. Even if you are not translating in thought that you are generating a judgment, if you are experiencing a feeling, a twinge, within you at the display of not right behavior, I may assure you that you are expressing a judgment. You merely have not identified it.

CATHY: I didn't identify that?!

ELIAS: Yes, you did, Shynla. But how many other individuals presently did not necessarily incorporate a thought of judgment or of identifying uncomfortableness but did experience some twinge? Regardless of whether your twinge was humorous or whether it was uncomfortable, it matters not; for if you experienced a twinge at all, it was a signal.

STELLA: Even if it was amusement?


STELLA: Is that a twinge?


DON: Amusement's a judgment?

ELIAS: In itself, no. But in reaction to certain behaviors and to certain actions or scenarios, it may be, for many times individuals express in an automatic manner that they assess is more acceptable.

STELLA: So is that what I'm doing?

ELIAS: You already have generated associations in conjunction with this information of what is right and wrong for you to be expressing yourselves. You already express within yourselves your own guidelines that set a tone for what you define as accepting or not accepting. I may express to you that many of you have not quite understood fully what acceptance is; but you generate a concept of acceptance, and you express that within yourself you must be responding in a certain manner or you are not being accepting.

Therefore, you may not necessarily be accepting and you may not necessarily be comfortable with a particular situation or behavior, and in conjunction with how you are interpreting and how you are perceiving this concept of acceptance, you may turn your response automatically from an uncomfortable twinge to a humorous twinge or an amusing twinge, for that is more acceptable. But the reaction occurred.

If the behavior was actually accepted, even incorporating your own opinion and your own preference, if your own truths were addressed to genuinely, the twinge would not occur. It would matter not, for you would understand that your truths are yours and they are applicable to you, and that it matters not that they may not be expressed in others, regardless of what the others are. (Chuckles)

I may assess that it is quite amusing in your physical time framework that each year in this particular forum we seem to incorporate some form of entertainment that is associated with the topic at hand! Ha ha ha ha! Which is not necessarily associated with myself!

KEITH: Elias, can you make the distinction between judgment and a belief system? I'm kind of picking up that judgments are bad, whereas you can't get away from belief systems but judgments... You're saying if we're aware of a belief system then we wouldn't be judging?

ELIAS: Not necessarily! You may be quite aware of beliefs that you express, beliefs that other individuals express. You may incorporate the ability objectively to be identifying many different beliefs and what belief systems they are associated with, and understand conceptually what is being expressed and that they are beliefs; but beliefs are quite real.

In this, what I am expressing to you is not an eradication of judgment entirely, for that would be an elimination of the belief system of duplicity. The belief system of duplicity intertwines itself with every other belief, and it is an assessment of good and bad, of right and wrong.

Now; what you are moving into in acceptance is not that you shall discontinue to incorporate your individual opinions concerning right and wrong or good and bad, but that they are relative to you and the recognition that they are not absolutes, and this is the key. For what you generate in the judgment that I am speaking of is an expression of absolutes in accordance with these rights and wrongs and goods and bads, that it is not merely applicable to you but that it is an absolute that is expected of what you term to be everyone and everything, that your reality moves in a particular manner and that it must move in a particular manner, that the manifestations in it, the movements in it are absolute and unchangeable, and that it is expressed throughout your universe in a particular manner that is what it is which is outside of you - that there is some reality outside of your reality, an official reality that is not your individual reality but a bigger reality, that is the guiding reality and that is the absolute reality. That is what you are striving to attain, this absolute real reality in which the truth resides, and there is no other reality.

There is the reality that each of you generates, and that is the official reality. That IS the real reality, and no other power is setting its rules or guiding it greater than you. There is no outside manipulation.

Therefore in the appreciation and the value of every individual - for every individual is an expression of essence, of consciousness; every individual is equally as valuable as every other individual; none are more valuable and none are less valuable - and in that, if every individual is unique and valuable and an expression of consciousness, and if every expression of consciousness in that value is worth in equal measure, how may you determine what is absolutely right and what is absolutely wrong, or what is absolutely good and what is absolutely bad?

Not one individual within this forum presently this day incorporates all of their focuses as what you now in this present moment would consider to be moral, good, ethical individuals. Regardless of how right you view yourselves to be now, you all incorporate some scoundrel within your focuses. And why? For you choose to be engaging this physical reality to explore and to experience, and if your purpose is to experience, why shall you not choose a tremendous variety of experiences?

Let me express to each of you - for I remember and am quite pleased with the remembrance! - I may express to each of you that those scoundrels, those knaves, those individuals that you view to be dark and evil are quite colorful, and they perceive themselves to be quite right also and would view you to be quite wrong; for this is what motivates all of you, your rightness in whatever you do. And the scurvy knaves believe themselves to be quite right also and within their rights to be generating whatever choices and actions that they incorporate. They do not view themselves to be scoundrels; they do not view themselves to be wrong. They view all other individuals to be wrong, as many of you do now. "It is not I that am wrong - it is the rest of the world!"

The rest of the world is not wrong, either. You merely incorporate differences in your perceptions, and this motivates you in different actions. The significance is to recognize that your rightness in whatever you generate is associated with your truths, and your truths are not wrong but they are YOUR truths, and they are not absolute to your world.

Individuals recently have incorporated discussion with myself concerning the reality of the roundness of your earth or the flatness of your earth and whether your earth actually incorporated this flatness within the time framework in which it was believed to be flat. And I may express to you, in the reality of the mass expression, your world was flat for that is what was generated.

What is real is what you perceive. If you perceive yourself to be sitting within a chair, that is where you are and that is what you are doing and that is real. I may express to you that you are sitting within the air, but your reality is that you are sitting within a chair and it is quite real and it is quite solid and it is supporting you.

And I may express once again, there are tricky areas in this wave in truth, for it is not even necessary for you to believe some expression to incorporate a belief and to express it. You may believe one expression, but what is it that you believe? What you believe is a translation of what you think, and what is it that you think?

Your thinking is an interpretation. Therefore, you may think, which may be at times an expression of what you say you believe, but that may be quite different from what you actually incorporate as a belief that is actually expressed, and this generates tremendous confusion also. For what you view is that you believe one expression - what you think - and you do another. This is the reason that this wave is so very powerful.

It is also significant that we speak of distortions, for regardless of what I express to you, every individual within this room incorporates their own unique perception; therefore, every individual within this room is incorporating their own action of distortion of what I am expressing. Regardless that you incorporate your tape recording, regardless that you incorporate the action of your transcriptions and that you are meticulous in recording each word in what you assess to be perfectness, it matters not. For every individual shall hear differently, for every individual incorporates their own unique perception. Therefore, through that filter you shall each incorporate the information somewhat differently. Now which of you is right? (Paul H raises his hand.) Ah, are you? (Laughter)

PAUL H: (Laughing) I was just being a shill! (Laughter)

LETTY: Elias, I have a question. When you say - oh sorry, Letty/Castille - when you say that we think we understand a belief system and we do something else, like when we've talked in the past about things that happened to me or illnesses or whatever, you have mentioned that I aligned with a mass belief and it's usually a belief that I didn't know I had. So is that what you mean? Is that what you explained about the thinking process versus the doing, that we think we have one belief system but in action we are doing another belief?

ELIAS: At times, yes. You think as a mechanism of translation.

Now; as I have explained previously, you are translating in association with how you are directing your attention.

Now; many times your thinking is a translation of your ideals: your ideals of yourself, your ideals in association with your beliefs - which they may not necessarily be identifying beliefs, but it is associated with your beliefs - the elements of yourself or your world that are comfortable for you, that you prefer, that you appreciate. You automatically gravitate in thought translations to these ideals. You automatically gravitate to what you assess as good or better or comfortable or pleasurable, and the reason that you generate that automatic action is that you automatically generate an assessment in conjunction with your beliefs moving into the expression of utopia, that the right is good, that the comfortable, that the joyful, is associated with value.

In a physical example, if you hold in one hand a diamond or a ruby and you hold within another hand a mere pebble, which do you assess that you value? If you are inquired of, which of these stones incorporates value? You automatically move to what you term to be the precious stone, the valuable, the shiny, the bright, the reflective. You do not move to the rock for this is common, for there are many, many, many stones that you may discover in any location; they are very common. Therefore, what is less common is more valued. This is an interesting point. The reason that you value the joyfulness is for it is less common.

If you genuinely evaluate your focuses, your hours and days and minutes and months and years, how much of your actual time is experienced in actual joy and excitement, and how much of your actual time is experienced in neutrality or confusion or conflict or uncomfortableness or drama in an association with bad - for many, many, many individuals associate any expression of drama as bad. You generate much more of those expressions, and therefore you create an assessment that what is less commonly expressed is more valuable.

This is again not true, for if you did not value these other expressions of uncomfortableness or of conflict or of frustration, you would not generate them. Many times they are quite motivating. Many times excitement is not necessarily motivating. For uncomfortableness presents a challenge; it is a puzzle and puzzles are a fascination, for you are fascinated with discovering solutions, problems and solutions, and problems and solutions are also good.

PAT: Elias, I have a question - this is Pat B - with a truth, when one is born, when you are a fresh baby and you're born, are you born with your truths right there? For instance, obviously if you're hungry or you're wet or you're crying, you already have your feeling of what's good: good to be fed, bad to be starving. If when you're born, you choose your parents and they agree to that, do you already have your truth out there before you ever actually emerge into this world, or is the truth coming to you from cultural mass beliefs, all those other areas?

ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, you develop your truths.

PAT: So when you're born, fresh, you don't have a truth?

ELIAS: Yes, you do. You do immediately begin to incorporate truths, absolutes, as you have expressed.

PAT: There's no way out of it! (Laughter)

ELIAS: It is not a question of a way out, my friend. It is a question of recognizing what is and what you have chosen. You are in this reality for you chose to be in this reality. You chose this as an exploration. You chose to be experiencing in a physical manifestation in conjunction with the blueprint of this particular physical reality. There are many, many, many physical realities, and you participate in many of them. This is merely one, and in this one you choose to be participating in conjunction with its blueprint.

PAT: So are you saying that when you're born you have a little bit of truths, but as you grow you take on more truths?

ELIAS: You develop different truths, and truths change. They are influenced by your preferences, and your preferences are preferred beliefs. In this, as you associate stronger and stronger with particular beliefs and begin to express them in absolutes, they become your truths.

But in response to your statement of "there is no way out," in a manner of speaking there is. For although you continue to express your truths and you continue to express your beliefs for you continue to be manifest within this reality, you also incorporate the ability and the energy of this shift in consciousness to assist you in a manner of speaking, for collective energy does generate more of an ease in change. You incorporate the ability to widen your awareness to a capacity in which you understand your own truths and you understand that they are not absolutes.

PAT: Does essence have its truth, or only as focuses do we have truths?

ELIAS: Essence is consciousness, and there are some expressions of consciousness that would be considered truths; but those are truths that are not associated with beliefs. A truth that is not associated with beliefs may be translatable in some manner in every area of consciousness, regardless of whether it is physical or non-physical, but they are not associated with what you term to be concepts or ideas.

JON: So let's say I believe that my thoughts create my reality and Erin doesn't believe that, she believes she creates her reality by directing her attention and that type of thing. Would you say that either of us is more correct than the other? (Pause)

ELIAS: In your identification, yes; in your action, no. In your accuracy of how you assess how you are creating, your assessment is less accurate; in what you do - for thought does not create your reality - therefore in what you do, automatically, regardless of what you think, you are generating the same action as the other individual. How you view what you are doing, how you understand objectively what you are doing, is less accurate.

PAUL H: Does that also apply to the flat earth versus the spherical earth assessment, so those individuals who think they live on a flat planet do and those individuals who think they live on a spherical planet do? But you said a yes/no to Jon's question, so would that apply...

ELIAS: Not necessarily. There is a distinction, for this is an assessment of how you are creating your reality, an objective understanding of how you are creating your reality and a questioning of how you are creating your reality. This is not an assessment of how the reality is being created; it is merely being generated and not questioned. Therefore, as I have expressed with you (looking at Jon), yes and no, for you are generating your reality in similar manner, but your assessment of it, your understanding of it, is less accurate.

The actions are the same in your scenario (looking at Paul H). The individuals that are creating the flatness of your planet are generating that reality of the flatness of it. The individuals that are generating the spherical aspect of your planet are creating that.

(Turning back to Jon) You are both creating your reality similarly, but your understanding of how you are creating it may be more or less accurate in how it is actually being created.

(To Paul H) Their realities are being created similarly, and their ideas or their understanding of how they are creating it is also similar.

STEVE: Elias, may I follow up on this question? You're using the words "less accurate" now. When we started this conversation, I said that Seth says we can successfully create what we want by our thoughts, by just expressing over and over again we want this or that. You have said to us many times that that won't work, that's not how it's done.

Your whole theme here now is there are no absolute truths. Therefore would you say that Seth's methods may indeed work with a certain individual and that your method may not, and vice versa?


STEVE: So when you say that he's less accurate in how it actually works, that's your opinion, that's your preference, and that is not necessarily going to be some other essence's opinion or preference.

ELIAS: It is not an opinion and it is not a preference, for I do not incorporate your beliefs and those are associated with beliefs. It is an assessment.

In this, in recognizing that an individual may successfully incorporate an action of suggestibility with themselves - which you all incorporate an element of yourselves of suggestibility - and in the incorporation of that suggestibility, you may engage an action of engaging your own suggestibility, concentrating your attention upon thought. What you may actually be doing is moving your attention to different beliefs, which allows you to generate what you assess as thinking and thusly creating from thought. This shall be your reality. Your understanding objectively of what you are actually doing may be less accurate, but that is not to say that it will not occur.

STEVE: Are you therefore saying that it is an absolute truth that thoughts do not create reality?

ELIAS: It is not an absolute truth, no. But...

STEVE: So in fact they might?

ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, but not in the manner that you are associating with.

Thought is not a thing. Thought is a mechanism. It is an objective mechanism that is incorporated within your physical reality to translate to you in an objective manner communications and choices or actions that you are incorporating in association with your beliefs.

STEVE: In what sense is that not an absolute truth? You seem to be describing it as an absolute truth. "That's the way it works; that's what the deal is."

ELIAS: It is a mechanism. But depending on how you manipulate that mechanism and what beliefs you incorporate to work in conjunction with that mechanism, you may be generating evidence that your thoughts precede what you create. What I am expressing to you is...

STEVE: As an absolute truth?


STEVE: Why not?

ELIAS: There are no absolutes.

STEVE: Then there's a possibility that you're wrong; is that what you mean by there's not an absolute truth to that?

ELIAS: It is not a question of right or wrong. This is the point of this discussion. There are no absolute rights or wrongs; it is what YOU create and what you perceive.

STEVE: So I could create a reality for me that my thoughts, not just as a misinterpretation but as in fact, that my thoughts are creating my reality?

ELIAS: You may.

DON: I think I sort of see his point. I wonder also how can you speak of the accuracy of an assessment as being greater or less than?

ELIAS: I am understanding.

What I am expressing to you is in conjunction with what you have chosen. I am not the designer of your reality; you are. In this, I am also not participating physically in manifestation within your reality; you are. You ARE incorporating your beliefs. You ARE incorporating the design. Regardless of whether you MAY change that reality and that you MAY incorporate a different reality and transform the mechanism of thought into a creating mechanism - which you may - it is not an absolute.

You can; will you? That is less likely. Do you presently? No.

STEVE: Nobody? Not even people that are telepathic like Uri Geller or somebody?


STEVE: He bends those spoons!

ELIAS: That is not an action that is incorporated through thought.

Regardless of whether you CAN incorporate an action - you CAN presently in this moment stand and walk and move physically through that wall; it is possible. Will you? In most likelihood, no, for your beliefs are strong and they influence what you create. Can you create through thought if you are reconfiguring the design of thought and its function? Yes.

Therefore, I may not express to you that this is an absolute and that I am expressing to you an absolute truth that you cannot generate reality through thought. But will you, in this time framework in this present manifestation in this now? No. Are you? No.

STEVE: Then how does Uri Geller bend the spoon? He's thinking about the spoon being bent. That's how he would claim he's doing it.

ELIAS: That is his assessment.

STEVE: Then how does he in fact do it?

ELIAS: In energy, in a concentration in mergence with the object and allowing the energy of himself and the energy of the object to move together and to bend.

STEVE: But the thoughts do instigate it, right?

ELIAS: The thought is a translation simultaneous to the action of what is occurring. That is your confusion.

STEVE: But if he didn't think about it, the energy wouldn't be released like that.

ELIAS: Not necessarily.

STEVE: It only happens when he thinks about it; it doesn't happen when he's driving down the street!

ELIAS: That is his translation. He is generating the thought within the time framework simultaneously to the action.

Now; if you sit and you think, presently in this moment with a spoon before you, shall you bend it?



STEVE: Negative.

ELIAS: What is the difference? If thought is what is generating the bending of the spoon...

STEVE: Well, he might have a different set of wiring in his brain that allows that to be effective.

ELIAS: But if you are all equal in power and in value and in measure, any ability that any one of you incorporates, you all incorporate.

STEVE: But for the fact that we're wired differently and maybe have a block on our telepathic ability therefore, or we have belief systems that do the same thing. He seems to have gotten rid of his, if he ever had them in the first place.

ELIAS: Ah, I may assure you that he has not "gotten rid of" his beliefs. Were that to be the scenario, he would not be incorporating manifestation within this physical reality for he would not be choosing to participate, for that is the design of this reality.

What I may express to you in emphasis is that your manifestation within this reality is a choice. You chose to be manifest in this reality, and I am understanding that for many individuals this is a difficult concept to be accepting, that you chose to be manifest and you chose to participate in this particular reality to explore the elements of this particular reality in conjunction with the beliefs that are its blueprint. But you also are not confined to this reality; you are also not singularly choosing merely to be manifest within this reality. You are choosing also simultaneously many realities.

This is the significance of this wave: your individual truths and how you view them and the strength of them. They may be incorporated in power to be empowering of yourselves, or they may be incorporated in power to be limiting you and to be generating you as a victim of yourself with them, and that may be very powerful also. This is the point of recognizing them and identifying them and understanding them.

This expression of absolutes in distortion is another truth that you incorporate, that there are some absolutes and there are some not, that there are some expressions that are distorted and there are some that are absolutely not. This is NOT true.

DON: This is where my confusion came in, but I didn't quite express it. If you can have a concept of something being less accurate and then another assessment being more accurate, that implies an assessment that is most accurate that would be an absolute...

ELIAS: No, it is not an absolute. I am speaking to you in conjunction with what you are expressing and in conjunction with your beliefs in this present time framework. It is pointless to be offering information to you that you cannot assess and that you cannot incorporate within your actual experience and your actual objective understanding.

You and I have incorporated discussion concerning the lack of absolutes in conjunction with the lack of separation, and the expression of individuals generating singularities in conjunction with focuses and the inaccuracy of that. In this, to be offering the information that each of you individually is drawing to yourself, as I began, I am an avenue of your own questioning, of your own process. You are drawing this information to yourselves. Were you not to be drawing this information to yourselves, I would not be speaking to you.

Each of you within your own individual process is inquiring of information that YOU want, and your method - or one of your methods - of offering yourselves that information is to incorporate a discussion with myself, individually or collectively. This also is a point that is significant for you to understand, for it is a very common occurrence with many, many, many of you that you become frustrated within yourselves and you discount yourselves: why have you not offered this information to yourself, why did you need to be incorporating a discussion or a conversation with myself to be offering yourself that information? That IS you offering yourself that information! For that is an avenue of one of your methods.

I shall not offer information that you are not drawing to yourself, that you are not seeking. I am merely another one of your avenues.

ERIN: I have a question. I find it really difficult to identify my truths and my beliefs. I'm wondering if it has to do with a block that I have, that maybe I don't want to identify them for some reason, like I think they're bad or I don't want to deal with them or something. I guess my question is, why is it so difficult for me to identify my beliefs and truths?

ELIAS: I may express to you that especially within this time framework of this wave, it is difficult for many individuals, for you are all collectively cooperatively expressing the movement of this wave differently from other waves. You have incorporated an action which you are familiar with, of identifying intellectually. You identify through thought. You think, and that is your identification of your beliefs or your truths.

This wave is designed differently, and you all have designed it. The expression of your truths is not being presented through the translation of thought but through action. Therefore it is significant that you pay attention to what you are actually doing and engaging, which it is also not an accident that prior to the beginning of this wave I incorporated many discussions with all of you concerning paying attention to what you are actually doing, in preparation for this wave for this is how it is being expressed. If you are not paying attention to what you are actually doing, you shall also incorporate difficulty in identifying what your truths are.

ERIN: I had an experience where I was talking to my sister on the phone about my brother. I realize now in talking to you that I was expressing my belief as an absolute during the conversation, but when I was having it, it was a truth and it felt like... During that moment I couldn't identify it; I couldn't identify it until looking backwards at it. So I'm generating experiences that seem almost somehow dangerous; I don't know if that's the right word...

ELIAS: But even in the incorporation of recognition subsequent to the event, you do offer yourself objective identification and understanding of the action that you have incorporated, which allows you more of an awareness in different situations and different actions in which you may be paying attention and trigger associations with the same truth.

It is significant to be aware of what you are doing, and how you are expressing in the moment, and how you are projecting energy, and what absolutes you are expressing. I am aware that this is challenging, for it is an unfamiliar action to be paying attention to how you are expressing an absolute, for it is an absolute and it is familiar and it is not questioned. If it is an absolute, it IS. And therefore, what else may be expressed?

ERIN: That's what I remember; that's what it felt like, that it had to be the way I was expressing it. I also remember in that moment feeling that I disliked my expression in that conversation.

ELIAS: Which offers you the opportunity to evaluate what you are expressing.

We shall break, and I shall incorporate the continuation of interaction with your questions, for this is a significant subject. (Chuckles)

BREAK (2:46 PM)
RESUME (3:38 PM; arrival time is 19 seconds.)

ELIAS: Continuing! And your questions?

PAT: I have one. This is Pat B, for the record. I'm not the only who has this question, but I'm voicing it for a number of us. How long is this wave of truth going to be here and affect us? Because some of us are having a heck of a time, to put it lightly.

ELIAS: I cannot say (laughter), for this is your choice.

PAT: What are the probabilities that it's going to be shorter than longer? ELIAS: In this present moment?

PAT: Yes.

ELIAS: The probabilities are that it is on-going.

PAT: Well, shit! (Much group laughter)

ELIAS: (Chuckles) I may express to you that it may be dissipating, and you may notice it dissipating, in the time framework in which you have addressed to your truths and it is not a challenge any longer.

PAT: So we take responsibility for our own...? Okay.

DON: Does that mean it has an individual time course, like if we're having an easy time of it it may already be waning?


PAT: And if some of our truths were stronger than others, we'd have a longer period of time being confronted?

ELIAS: Not necessarily; it is your direction, it is your choice. You may be addressing to truths that are stronger than other truths and incorporate a relatively short time in addressing to them or a longer time. It is dependent upon how you are paying attention and whether you are recognizing them or not, and once recognizing them whether you are allowing yourself to accept them as your truths and evaluate that and move into a genuine expression of acceptance and understanding.

PAT: So when you use the term "the wave of truth," it's not like one wave that's out there for everybody. It could be a little bit for one person and a big bit for another person.

ELIAS: Correct. It is a general wave in energy.

Now; in that general wave in energy, ALL of the individuals are participating in some capacity. Some individuals may be evaluating and addressing to their truths in what you term to be a short time framework and continue to participate in energy in the wave in an offering of energy to other individuals in cooperation with them, in a supportiveness to the individuals that may be incorporating more time framework.

STEVE: Elias, I've been trying to adopt a mind-set of chronic acceptance of everything that comes down the pike: other individuals, conditions in my life, what I think are my beliefs. But you say we all create perfectly and for our best value fulfillment, and then I think to myself, does Elias mean I create perfectly including the influence of my belief systems or not including them? Because you don't speak that well of our belief systems, and if we're creating perfectly with them, that seems to contradict how you feel about our belief systems.

You're going to say, "I don't feel negatively about it; I don't pass judgment on them, but they are less efficient than other methods of creation." So if it's perfect, how can it be less efficient? Or are you not speaking of creating perfectly including our belief systems being part of the influence?

ELIAS: Including, with your beliefs being an aspect of influencing.

What do you define as a more efficient method of creating within your reality, considering that your belief systems are an aspect of the blueprint of this particular physical reality?

STEVE: They're your words, when you speak of "try to accept your belief systems, but at the same time if you wish to alter them because they are not serving you as efficiently as you'd like..." You speak of that, that if they're not serving you efficiently then you can change them. Would you agree as you sit here that our belief systems are holding us back from the shift? I'd like to get into the shift...

ELIAS: (Patiently) No, your belief systems...

STEVE: ...and my belief systems are holding me back; therefore I don't think that well of my belief systems. I get a negative feeling about them when I think they're holding me back from the thrill of the shift. So how can that be said to be perfectly created?

ELIAS: They are not, in your terms, holding you back from participating within this shift, and you are not eliminating them. They are not negative, but some influences of some beliefs may be limiting or may be hindering; but those are also choices.

They are moving perfectly in conjunction with what you are creating in the moment in conjunction with your intent in the moment; but in conjunction with your awareness and widening your awareness, they may be somewhat hindering in some of their influences - not the belief itself, but the influences that occur in relation to the belief.

There are many influences associated with every belief. There are many beliefs associated with every belief system, and in this some influences are what you may term to be good, for they are expressed in conjunction with your preferences, and some you may consider to not be good, for they are not in conjunction with your preferences.

Now; if your direction in the movement of this shift and in widening your awareness is to be objectively directing yourself in what you want, in creating what you want, it is significant to recognize what the influences of your beliefs are, for some influences may be expressed in influencing your perception and your choices to be generated in opposition to what you want. But what is significant first of all is to be aware and to be clear as to what you want.

STEVE: Elias, since you've now said they are a hindrance to us achieving certain things that we may want or they are a hindrance to us passing into this shift in consciousness, how am I ever going to get myself to the point where I can accept these belief systems, meaning passing no judgment on something that is a hindrance?

ELIAS: For once you are recognizing that one belief incorporates many different influences, you may also recognize that you possess the quality of choice and you may objectively, knowingly, choose.

You are objectively choosing, but this is not to say that you are objectively aware of what you are choosing in any particular moment for you may not be paying attention to what you are actually doing, and therefore you are not necessarily aware of what you are choosing.

Every action that you incorporate is a choice, but you may not perceive it as a choice. You may perceive it as merely an occurrence or you may perceive an action that you incorporate as being dictated by some outside influence and that it is not being generated by yourself. You may also not recognize how all of your actions are interrelated and interconnected, for it is the projection of the type of energy that you are expressing outwardly that generates the different choices that you create and that you implement.

Many, many, many choices may be generated in a relatively short time framework and they may appear surfacely to you to be quite unrelated and that they do not generate any association with each other; but in actuality, it is the type of energy that you project outwardly through your perception that generates a general expression of energy which is affecting of every direction that you engage within your day.

Now; if you are allowing a belief that is expressed that concerns not being in control of your reality or not creating all of your reality and co-creating your reality, you shall be projecting a type of energy that allows for your choice of many actions that appear to you to not be your choice. If you are generating and allowing yourself through automatic responses and not genuinely paying attention to what you are expressing, if you are allowing yourself to be expressing a belief that there is some other outside influence or even inside influence that is directing you without your permission, you shall be generating a perception that moves with that belief and projects an energy that shall validate that belief and shall generate that reality.

Beliefs are real, and they influence what you create, and they influence your perception. Your perception creates your actual reality. It creates you, your physical manifestation; it creates your building; it creates your chair; it creates the other individuals in the room. It creates every aspect of your reality that you experience, and it is influenced by your expressed beliefs.

You incorporate all beliefs within all of the belief systems. You choose to express some, not all.

Now; in your terms of "changing a belief," you are not actually changing a belief. You are not transfiguring it into another belief or a different belief. You are not eliminating one and creating a new one. What you are doing is redirecting your energy through your awareness and allowing your attention to move to the expression of DIFFERENT beliefs. They are all already incorporated...

STEVE: Through acceptance of the belief system, right?

ELIAS: Yes. In acceptance of the belief, you recognize that you continue to hold that belief. It has not been eliminated.

STEVE: And am I recognizing that it is a hindrance?

ELIAS: You recognize that there are influences of that belief in some directions that may be what you view as a hindrance, but you also recognize...

STEVE: I don't accept hindrances!

ELIAS: (Patiently and slower) You also recognize that there are some influences that you prefer. Therefore, in association with that recognition, you choose what influences you shall express and that you shall allow.

STEVE: So give us a sentence to use...

WILL: Excuse me, Steve; I have an example related to what you're talking about. I'm trying to understand what both of you are talking about and just to see if I understand this. My name is Will.

I have three teenagers at home. Earlier you were talking about the twinge, when the dog was running around. When I come home I experience twinges as I see clothes draped around the couch, and I see food out. I have all these twinges and frustration about why this house isn't more clean. What I began to reflect on a few weeks ago is that I have this belief that a clean house is a better house, and if my house was clean my life would be better. So that became conscious for me, which it wasn't before. That was step one.

The second step was I began to have this idea that the house was perfect the way it was. That just came to me; I'd never thought that before. So I came to the house, it was the same way, and all of a sudden it seemed that sock is supposed to be there, that glass is supposed to be there, and the twinges went away for me.

Now from what both of you are saying, what I'm hearing is that's an experience for me of this isn't right or wrong, but of acceptance.

ELIAS: Yes. For this is what I have expressed to many individuals, that many times you may be generating an acceptance and you shall experience that, but it is not necessarily an action that necessitates an analyzation through thought. You merely do, and it automatically occurs. This is an interesting and a valuable example that you have offered, for it is a simple example of an action that did not necessarily incorporate tremendous thought but did incorporate a recognition of a truth.

Now; the recognition of the truth may not have necessarily been generated entirely clearly in thought. You may not have expressed in thought to yourself, "Ah, I have recognized a truth, that regardless of your status or your position or your wealth or your poverty within your society, the measure of your worth in your expression of acceptability is in cleanliness." You did not even generate that much of an identification, but you did offer yourself somewhat of an identification, a translation in thought, that a clean house is a good house. This also is a religious belief.

Now; in this, you have not evaluated or analyzed in conjunction with thought all of these elements of this belief, nor have you identified it as a truth per se, but you identified it clearly enough and recognized the strength of it enough that you have identified this as one of your truths.

Now; in recognizing that, without analyzation, without incorporating all of these steps in thought that many of you incorporate, for it is familiar to you for this is the manner in which you have addressed to other waves, you merely allowed yourself to recognize your responses, your action, and what you were generating within yourself, your automatic response. That was an identification of automatic responses.

In that recognition of the automatic response, you allowed yourself to relax and move your attention in a different manner, not to hold to the original perception as an absolute with no other choice, but recognizing you prefer the house to be clean, but it is not and that is not necessarily bad. It is an identification of your preference and your opinion, but not an absolute. Therefore, you allowed yourself to perceive the house differently, moving your attention.

This is not an elimination of the belief; you continue to incorporate the preference that the clean house is better, which is not wrong and is not bad and need not be eliminated. It is your preference, but you recognize that it is not an absolute and that other individuals may not express the same preference or the same attention in that manner, and that other individuals may express that whether the house is clean or not matters not, and their preference may be not to pay attention to whether the house is messy. But as you accept that this is your preference and you recognize that it is not an absolute, the perception changes.

Now; the belief, as I have stated, remains. It is not eliminated. It continues to be expressed but it is NEUTRALIZED, for the judgment concerning differences no longer remains.

Now; this is generated in the moment. You may return to your home another day and you may express that same twinge, for acceptance is not an action that is generated once and forever; for that negates choice and it also negates change. Therefore as choice and change are innate qualities of consciousness, which is what you are, that is your free will, and in that you present yourself with the opportunity to be accepting of any belief in any moment.

At times you may be accepting of a belief and the experience within your perception may be powerful enough that you easily generate that acceptance repeatedly, and it does not become a challenge any longer. It becomes familiar to repeatedly be generating that acceptance.

At times it may be more challenging. You may be accepting of a belief in some scenarios, and in other scenarios that same belief may be expressed and you may experience more challenge in generating that acceptance. That also is a matter of energy and whether the energy that you are expressing is familiar with energy that other individuals are expressing, and whether you are genuinely allowing yourselves the ease in the acceptance of differences, which is a tremendous challenge in this wave, for you are presenting yourselves with many examples of differences and this is what generates absolutes. You recognize or you notice YOUR preferences, and this is what you expect in the expressions and behaviors of other individuals.

Now; in this also, a recognition of your own energy expression is quite significant. For if you are not recognizing that you are generating these expressions, that you are generating the twinge, that it is your truth that is creating this scenario, that it is your perception that is generating these feelings, these communications, these responses, you do not allow yourself choice and you express a type of energy that does not incorporate responsibility for your own choices.

Responsibility is not a bad term. It is a very liberating action. For if you are responsible, you are directing and you cannot be a victim.

STEVE: Elias, if I could ask one last question on that theme I was asking you about? Could you finish this sentence so I could maybe understand what kind of mind-set I'm supposed to attack this with, if you'll pardon my expression. "Although my beliefs are a hindrance to me entering the shift in consciousness in the immediate future, I accept them anyway because..." If you could finish that sentence for me, how you would want our mind-sets to be. (Pause)

ELIAS: "Because I offer myself choice."

Now; I have completed your sentence and I shall clarify the beginning of your sentence: you already ARE participating in this shift in consciousness.

STEVE: Okay, but I want to complete it; I want to get to the end. That's the goal!

ELIAS: There is no end to the shift in consciousness.

STEVE: "Because I have choices," is your answer. I wonder if any of us could get into a true acceptance of things that are causing us hindrances by a mind-set of "okay, I may have hindrances but I have choices." I'm trying to understand what that means, exactly. I'm trying to wrap myself around what that means exactly. I have choices, therefore I make no judgment about the hindrance because I have choices not to be hindered by it, is that the idea?

ELIAS: Offer an example of a belief that you identify.

STEVE: I'll tell you what. It would be helpful to us if you would tell us what is the reason, what is the payoff, for us to be in this area of consciousness which does not include the shift. What is the payoff for us in being stuck in a non-psychic, non-clairvoyant, non-telepathic, non-aware world?

ELIAS: (Quietly) But you are not.

STEVE: That's the belief that's hindering us.

ELIAS: You ARE participating in this shift in consciousness.

STEVE: Well, before that happened, before 1900. What was hanging us up? What's hanging us up now from getting as far as we can with the shift?

ELIAS: It is not...

STEVE: We're still being hindered by whatever the beliefs are. Why did we create these beliefs in the first place? What was the payoff for us to have created these beliefs that keep us in this narrow focus?

ELIAS: (Gently) To experience, to explore.

STEVE: So that's my example, that's my belief. My belief apparently is I want to be exploring a narrow limited world.

ELIAS: Is it?

STEVE: Well, you said it was.

ELIAS: I did not.

STEVE: That's why we created it, you said.

ELIAS: To explore, not in limitation.

STEVE: That's what it is, you think. You think that.

ELIAS: I do not. (Scattered laughter)

STEVE: You find it limited. You use the word all the time, "limited."

ELIAS: I am reflecting you.

STEVE: You only use that word because we think it's limited?

ELIAS: You do. And this is your collective choice, to be moving into this shift and offering yourself information concerning WHAT you are actually doing. Therefore I am responding and expressing to you an identification of what you are actually doing. You are not asking me how to do it; you are doing it. You are choosing what you are choosing. You are asking me what you are doing.

YOU generate the judgments concerning what you are doing. YOU express the evaluation concerning what you are doing, whether it is good or bad or acceptable or unacceptable. I do not express to any of you any valuation if whether what you are doing is good or bad or better or worse. It matters not; it is what you are doing.

STEVE: I'll leave you out of it, and I'll just say that that's the belief system I'd like to get rid of. That's the reason you're saying we created this, to explore - and I won't use a charged word like "limited" any more - to explore an awareness that apparently is not the widest that we can achieve. That's what's hindering me, that mood, that's...

ELIAS: That you are not participating in this shift?

STEVE: I suppose everybody you say is to some degree, but we haven't gotten very far so far, right?

ELIAS: It is dependent upon the individual and how each individual widens their awareness and their willingness to be incorporating an openness to unfamiliar.

Now; what is familiar to you? All that you have expressed. You express to me that your identification of this shift in consciousness is to become more telepathic, more psychic.

STEVE: That'd be good! (Laughter)

ELIAS: That is what your identification of what this shift in consciousness is, and that you are not participating in this shift in consciousness for you don't offer yourself evidence of those expressions.

STEVE: I think that that part of me is being blocked by my beliefs.

ELIAS: And what influences that association that you are being blocked?

STEVE: It's obvious I can't do it; at least I don't know of any method of doing it, and I would like to do it.

ELIAS: But what is your belief?

STEVE: A wider awareness would create that ability more easily; it would facilitate it.

ELIAS: Not necessarily.

STEVE: To be clairvoyant equals a wider awareness - it's the same words, really.

ELIAS: Ah, are they? Individuals have incorporated clairvoyance, as you term it, for centuries and have not incorporated the wideness of awareness associated with this shift in consciousness.

(Calling on Elena, who has been waving her hand) Yes?

ELENA: Earlier did you say that there are truths unconnected to belief systems?


ELENA: Can you tell us about that?

ELIAS: These are truths that are qualities of consciousness. They are not expressions of beliefs and they are translatable within every area of consciousness in some manner. They are not associated with concept. They are associated with action.

ELENA: Like what kind of action?

ELIAS: Choice.

ELENA: Are there any others?

ELIAS: There are many different expressions of truths. I have offered some listing of truths previously...

ELENA: Color?

ELIAS: Yes. Tone, consciousness, reality. There are many, but they are actions. They are not concepts, for consciousness is an action. It is not a thing. Therefore the truths are not things.

Truths that we are speaking of in this conversation are YOUR truths in association with your beliefs. They are beliefs that you have generated into absolutes, and therefore they become your truths. But your truths are not true.

PAT: Are our truths equal to our judgments? Because if we don't make a judgment on something, how do we decide what a truth is? Are you saying that our truth is also our judgments?

ELIAS: Not necessarily.

PAT: Can you explain that? Because my truth comes "I believe this is correct," and that would come from my judgment that something's not correct or something is correct or good or bad or blah, blah, blah.


PAT: Could truth equal judgment?

ELIAS: In association with your individual preferences, yes. It is an evaluation of what you prefer and what you do not prefer.

PAT: And what I prefer is according to my truths.

ELIAS: Yes, but your truths also are associated with what you do not prefer. Murder is wrong - absolute. That is not what you prefer; it is what you do not prefer.

PAT: But that's also my judgment that it is wrong, therefore...


PAT: So would every truth that anyone would ever have be based on their judgment?


NANCY: Elias, how does that relate to feeling tones, when you identify or assess knowledge through a feeling tone? How does that fit in with what you're talking about?

ELIAS: In what capacity?

NANCY: In an identification of information that you would hold as a truth of your own.

ELIAS: Quite similarly. You may offer yourself information through this method and in conjunction with your beliefs and what you are presenting to yourself and your preferences. That also may be generated into a truth in creating an absolute.

NANCY: So the apprehension of a feeling tone...

ELIAS: They are not absolutes, either. But you draw that to yourself or you generate that to offer yourself information. That is not to say that the information that you offer to yourself is absolute, although it may be in conjunction with your preferences, and it may be an offering to you to generate a greater understanding of certain movements that you create.

NANCY: Because that is how I would assess the truth. The value of the truth for me comes through what I used to call my truth meter. By using that feeling tone I'm recognizing "this is what's bothering me."

ELIAS: But this is what I have expressed from the onset of this forum. The point is generating your own remembrance, which is not memory. It is an intimacy with yourself, a knowing of yourself. You offer yourself information in many different manners; I am merely one. You offer yourselves information to generate that remembrance, that knowing of yourself, and you know for it rings true to you. That is not to say that it is an absolute, for differences may ring true to other individuals. But what you shall evaluate in your gauge of what measures with your preferences and your movement and your exploration is whether is rings true to you.

NANCY: Thank you.

ELIAS: You are welcome.

ERIN: My question is, I've been paying attention to the energy that I'm projecting, and I know this is probably going to get real personal about what my beliefs are, but sometimes I'm projecting a certain energy and I feel like I can't change it. Whatever energy I'm projecting is where I am at that moment. Whether it's a feeling or a feeling of energy, I don't actually feel like I could change it. What is my personal belief that makes me feel like I don't have a choice over the energy I'm projecting or even an emotion, either way, that I'm experiencing in the moment?

ELIAS: Very well. I may express to you in identification, many individuals generate quite similarly in different capacities, for it is quite commonly expressed the belief that the subjective aspect of yourself is more powerful and more directing than the objective aspect of yourself. The objective aspect of yourself you view to be less controlling, less directing, less powerful, and subject to the subjective.

Therefore any element that you assess as a subjective action - a communication, a projection of energy - you do not necessarily associate those with objective. For you continue to separate the objective and the subjective as two entities, and not necessarily as entities that move in harmony with each other but entities that follow each other, and that the subjective is the more powerful, the directing awareness, and that the objective follows the subjective. Therefore, being the weaker of the two, it does not always incorporate the ability to change or to choose an action that is being expressed in the moment. This once again is not true, but it is a strong influence of a belief.

DON: Is that a belief more commonly expressed by intermediates?

ELIAS: Not necessarily, no. This is not necessarily associated with an orientation. This is an expression, a belief, that is expressed by many, many, many individuals, and it is also associated with the religious belief system, for there are many beliefs that reinforce this expression of not directing yourselves, that there are aspects of yourselves that you do not control and that are directing of you without your will. You merely exchanged names.

You incorporated the identity of "god" previously, and you moved from the identification of god to "a higher power," and you moved from the identification of a higher power to an "essence," and you moved from the identification of an essence to "subjective awareness." But in actuality they are all the same, they merely incorporate different names, and subjective awareness continues to be associated as the god.

PAM: What about the choosing aspect, because to me it kind of relates to what you were talking about in a recent transcript. It was so fascinating to me. As I understood what you said, it was separate from our influencing beliefs, this choosing aspect. I think it's this choosing aspect that does the creation, but I don't feel this choosing aspect. I don't grasp it, I don't understand it, I don't have an objective view of this part of me because to me, I choose based on a belief. Either something happened that I didn't want and here's my limitation belief, or I choose a preference which is based on a belief, so my choices are based on beliefs...

ELIAS: Yes, they are.

PAM: ...but the transcript says that this choosing aspect is really quite separate, can be totally separate from this belief.

ELIAS: This is a misunderstanding. This is associated with attention.

PAM: And what is attention but thought?

ELIAS: It is not thought.

PAM: That's something else I need help with! I keep thinking how else do we concentrate but thinking on something. So how else do we concentrate?

ELIAS: You may concentrate in many different manners, and attention is not thought. It may be directed to thought, but it is not thought in itself.

PAM: And it's also not emotion, correct?

ELIAS: No, that is a communication.

Now; the information that was presented was in association with attention and your awareness of what is occurring.

Now; in association with attention, your choosing action may not necessarily be concerned with any particular belief. That is not to say that specific beliefs are not influencing your choosing, but your attention may not be directed to the belief, and therefore you may be choosing in conjunction with a belief but BELIEVING something different; for believing is not necessarily associated with your expressed beliefs.

NAOMI: Elias, if I may ask - this is Naomi - this is where I get a little confused as far as understanding. If I look at where I am and I don't feel I like where I am, but at some point I chose this. Now I realize that maybe wants are not beliefs. Is that what you're saying, a belief is not necessarily a want? Sometimes we do things not in conjunction with what we really believe.

ELIAS: Correct.

NAOMI: That helps me with that. If we could go back to acceptance, at what point do we accept where we are and at what point do we choose to go on? Is it when we become too uncomfortable to accept where we are?

ELIAS: That is dependent upon the individual.

NAOMI: I thought you'd say that! (Laughs)

ELIAS: It is dependent upon your individual expression and what motivates you and what you listen to. Each individual is different, for you each incorporate a different perception. It also is associated with what you value.

NAOMI: Sometimes I feel that if our energy is going somewhere else - and I understand that that's okay because that's consciousness, it's movement, it's a natural thing to do - but if our energy's going somewhere else, sometimes it can be a real struggle to make that happen because of the situation a person is in at the moment.

If I could use the example of the clean house - what if you don't want a messy house? And your energy is so strong and not accepting of a dirty house that you insist that it's clean. You really have to work hard to make that happen. Or is that a belief that I have?

ELIAS: That is also a belief. It is dependent upon the energy that you are projecting. If you are projecting an energy of difficulty and of work, this is what you shall create. If you are projecting an energy of ease and knowing that this is what you want and therefore this is what you shall create, you may not necessarily be incorporating difficulty or strenuousness.

This is the significance of being aware of what type of energy you are expressing and whether you are expressing a forcing of energy and a fighting of energy, or whether you are expressing an ease, whether you are expressing an energy in fear or doubt, or whether you are expressing an energy of confidence and acknowledgment of yourself, whether you are expressing an energy of expectation of other individuals and waiting for other individuals to express first and therefore allow yourself to respond for you cannot initiate. There are many different types of expression and energy, and it is significant to be aware of what type of energy you are projecting.

The manner in which you allow yourself to be aware of what type of energy you are projecting is to be aware of those three elements of yourself, not merely what you are thinking but what you are communicating to yourself and what you are actually doing, and whether you are actually projecting energy in anticipation or whether you are present with yourself in the moment.

NAOMI: I had an emotional experience last week - I was very proud of myself that I recognized it, to start with - but at work, I realized I didn't want to be in that situation; at least that's what my emotions were communicating to me. This is where patience comes in, because I think I want to make a change, but it's not happening right now and I have to wait for me to insert it into my objective reality.

ELIAS: That is not patience; that is waiting. Patience is an action of allowance, and waiting is not an action of allowance. It is waiting and anticipating, and it is expecting that some occurrence or action shall be inserted into your reality, not by you but by some miraculous cosmic action (laughter), and that shall be your sign and thusly you shall act. Which is a method and it is not wrong, but I am merely clarifying that patience is not waiting.

WENDY: Could you just review patience again?

ELIAS: Patience is an action of allowance. It is an action of relaxing and allowing the flow of energy within yourself and allowing yourself to participate with other energies around you in allowance in whatever direction it shall naturally flow, without an expectation.

WENDY: Thank you.

ELIAS: You are welcome.

STELLA: Elias, Letty and I, we do our stuff really good together, but she's been doing the opposite of what I've been doing. Usually we mirror each other very well, and now she's really relaxed and I'm really envious! (Laughter) I am so frustrated, because I keep waiting. This patience thing, you know - forget it! I want to get a job. If anybody's hearing me, please! (Laughter) I really am and she is like, nothing. Can you explain what's going on? All of a sudden our energy's shifted.

ELIAS: Which is once again a natural complement, which you have been generating for an extended time framework.

STELLA: So what should I do, should I go with her energy?


STELLA: Kind of gain from her energy?

ELIAS: It is not a matter of generating the same as the other individual, but merely noticing what you are generating and noticing what you are presenting to yourself in the complement, recognizing and evaluating what your preferences are...

STELLA: I know I like to be busy; I want to work. I really and truly... Elias, really, I'm so tired already! I've read so many books. I don't have a hobby. I can't deal with things; I can't. I don't do gardening...

ELIAS: But you are comparing.

STELLA: No, no, I'm comparing with myself! I don't have hobbies. I don't know, I get up in the morning and it's like what the hell do I do with myself today? I've painted and repainted my nails, I keep reworking that stuff. And I read so many books. I spend so much money on buying books, Elias, it's amazing. I don't know, I can't seem to... I just want to be out there doing something, Elias. Can you help me?

SEVERAL GROUP MEMBERS: She can help me for a while! (Much laughter)

ELIAS: And what is your challenge that...

STELLA: See, I don't know how I'm challenging myself. Is it that my preference is that I like to work?


STELLA: Oh, thank you! Okay! (Laughter)

ELIAS: Which...

STELLA: I think I was feeling that maybe, when I last spoke to you, and you told me to relax and get intimate with myself. And I did that already (much loud laughter), and now I'm done! I don't think I need anymore time to be intimate with myself! I've already seen all my aspects, I embraced them all - thank you very much, we've got to get going - so I'm ready! So it's okay?

ELIAS: Yes! Now if you merely discontinue your comparison with Castille and allow yourself...

STELLA: I know I'm starting to get the message, because I know we do this stuff really good together; but somehow now she's there and I'm here, and like wait a minute, something's happening here.

ELIAS: It is not so very different, Cindel. It is merely a reflection that Castille is comfortable in her preference to be not incorporating employment and you are not comfortable in not being in employment, that your comfort or your preference is to be incorporating that employment. You are denying yourself that in comparison with Castille, that you should be comfortable in what you are doing now and it should be your preference. And it is not.

LETTY: So relax and get a job! (Laughter)

STELLA: Because right now I'd work for nothing. You know those people with the signs "I'll work for food"? I mean, I'll work for nothing! (Laughing, and group laughter) Thank you so much, Elias.

ELIAS: (Chuckles) You are quite welcome.

We shall incorporate one more question and discontinue.

STEVE: Elias, I liked your answer, as I sit here thinking about it, whereby you finished my sentence in spite of the fact that my beliefs are a hindrance. You finished that sentence, "I accept it because I have other choices."

Now by that I'm hoping you meant that I shouldn't be thinking negatively about any of my beliefs because I have the ability to neutralize them, and therefore they won't have any power over me and I can make other choices. How can I complain about something I can change? Is that the idea?

ELIAS: In a manner of speaking.

STEVE: When you say that, you usually don't mean that I really got it right. (Laughter)

ELIAS: (Elias grins) It is not a matter of right. Let me express to you, my friend, within your beliefs and within your perception I shall express to you, yes, you have incorporated an understanding right, in this moment.

STEVE: In my world or yours?

ELIAS: In YOUR world.

STEVE: In my world I got it right and in your world I missed it?

ELIAS: It is not a matter of missing; it is a matter of your perception.

STEVE: Give it to us in your world, maybe by expanding it slightly.

ELIAS: You are not limited, for you do incorporate choice. You are not eliminating the beliefs...

STEVE: I know that, that's why I used this "neutralized" thing.

ELIAS: I am quite understanding that this is the reason you incorporated that word, but I am also understanding that your association continues to be that you will rid yourself of certain beliefs.

STEVE: No, no, no, I understand where you're coming from. I understand how you want us to believe on that. You don't have to worry about that.

ELIAS: Very well! (Much laughter, and Elias continues humorously) I shall take this under advisement and not worry!

STEVE: So I got it right from both of our points of view then evidently, right?

ELIAS: Very well. (Laughter) And I offer you my encouragement to continue and my supportiveness in your rightness! (Chuckles)

I express to you all as always, pay attention! Notice! Be aware! And remember, you already have widened your awarenesses, all of you, and many of your methods that you have incorporated previously are not necessarily, in your common vernacular, working any longer. Express a willingness to be exploring the unfamiliar, for it fits more acceptably in your reality now, and the familiar does not fit as well any longer. You may choose difficulty or you may choose ease. Whichever you choose, I express my supportiveness and encouragement to you, for whatever you choose is to your benefit and is worth.

To you each, as always in my tremendous affection, all of my friends, I anticipate our continued friendship and interaction, and express to you a very fond au revoir.

GROUP: Au revoir.

Elias departs at 4:51 PM.

(1) Just to fill in this exchange, Stella and Letty were both laid off from their jobs a few months ago when the company they both worked for was bought out.

©2004 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved

Copyright 2004 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.