Session 1805
Translations: ES

Intrusiveness to Your Aspects


“Intrusiveness to Your Aspects”
“More on Political Focus”
“Duplicity versus Duality”

Friday, July 22, 2005 (Private/Phone) Participants: Mary (Michael) and Ken (Alida)

(Elias’ arrival time is 16 seconds.)

ELIAS: Good morning!

KEN: Good morning, Elias! Good morning! So good to talk with you!

ELIAS: Ha ha! And you, also.

KEN: Yes. I have been very busy since we talked last time, very busy these last two months! (Elias chuckles) Probable switching, shifting of primary aspects, things like that.


KEN: Visiting probabilities, including one lately that’s kind of not a very safe place to be, with people there that seem to like to enslave others.


KEN: That’s not really good. The first one was actually kind of nice. I would have liked to have explored it more. It started on May 24 with a very, very vivid dream about another particular version of me, a probable Ken, that was a workaholic. It was a probability that apparently didn’t have the interstate highway system, so it was actually more complicated driving to work. He was way overtired, sick and tired of all the difficulties of the logistics required in day-to-day living. So, we were going to switch places and let him take on my nice, calm, peaceful situation over here that I worked hard to build, and then I was going to take over his. Have you been aware of people whose probabilities switch places like that?

ELIAS: It can occur, temporarily.

KEN: You don’t think it happens very often, where they just work out the focus that way, though?


KEN: Oh, I see. The way I was looking at it was it would be something sort of similar to what people call the walk-in situation, where it needs to kind of take time to readjust to our new surroundings and then deal with the differences and stuff, while also being aware that it’s the same essence behind us.

ELIAS: Yes, but that does not occur frequently, and even less frequently with the individual incorporating an actual objective awareness of what has occurred.

KEN: I think it was partly because of my breakthroughs at the beginning of the year, where I’m actually aware of how memory works now, that I was willing to entertain that and have both memories present to me.

ELIAS: I am understanding. And what did you offer to yourself in information in this experience?

KEN: Well, one thing, of course, that was absolutely fascinating to me was to see the two probabilities, how they switched places, how they split from each other in the 1930s — it was actually before I was even born in this particular focus — and what the differences are. A part of it, too, was how the probabilities work. I got a perspective at the very end of actually looking in on what I call “Probable Ken,” which is a part of essence that handles probabilities. That was real nice. That was a really interesting place to be. It was like thunder and lightning, black and white, a place of mazes of realities.

ELIAS: Yes. And in this experience, what did you present to yourself in relation to an awareness of you and what you create and your preferences?

KEN: One thing, I love to explore; I love to explore. That’s definitely one of the preferences. One is a really good, big picture view that I am really essence. That’s one thing that’s a lot stronger now than it was.

ELIAS: Which is quite valuable, and also viewing other probable you’s that may be generating experiences that emphasize to you to appreciate what you yourself are creating.

KEN: Oh, yes! Becoming aware of how I have made Seattle into an oasis in a fairly rugged physical reality.


KEN: Yes, thank you, that’s a good thing, appreciating what I have actually done myself.

ELIAS: Correct. And in exchanging with other probable selves, and viewing...

KEN: This guy, “Busy Ken,” he named me “Laid Back Ken.” I actually had a second name, “Lackadaisical Ken.” (Elias laughs) Another thing also about this is I am learning to work consciously with different energies being present and being comfortable with those. Like I had part of a Sunday and a part of a Monday where his body was sick on his side, so he was able to come over and spend time over here, leaving only like a minimum part of essence with his body there. I sort of actually let him quote “drive” unquote while I took a more of an observer point of view. That was actually really a good experience to do that and be comfortable with it. Isn’t that what Mary does when she lets you come in, just sort of steps aside and lets you drive?

ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, yes.

KEN: One thing is that I am opening the doors to doing like energy exchanges. I’ve actually done some phone sessions with a good friend of mine who’s in the East Bay of California, east of San Francisco, with a Michael essence, like an energy exchange.

ELIAS: I am understanding.

KEN: So, I’m becoming familiar with that, the mechanics behind that, and making that work fairly smoothly.

ELIAS: I am understanding. This is expanding your exploration and allowing you to genuinely be widening your awareness in shifting.

KEN: This last probability that I found... I’m gonna read you a little bit of a dream here, “Dream in Seattle.” Entropy drills, everyone’s to take elevators to the first floor. I keep asking people about fire drills, but it keeps coming out negative. I ask where the staircases are but nobody knows. Elevators refer to the certain floors. People earn entropy, a term I got from that, but it’s just sort of a nonphysical currency kind of a thing, by working hard and well. I’d been earning negative entropy by playing with the elevators. Entertainment was hard work; I found a casino floor and also a floor where there was rain plus the room spun; I asked about that and was told this was planned and this is an entertainment floor. I spent time on the cafeteria floor, also. A man in a wheelchair tried to manipulate a device I had but came up blank, and I think that’s where he said I’d used up all my entropy. I think I was outside once or twice. There were tall buildings all over the place. I was very safety oriented there; I could not conceive of a building without stairs. I am thinking my job was research; I had lots of papers with me, but that job was secondary to someone else’s primary. Very feisty women, one in particular that came in, pulled someone out and punched them out. I talked to one woman and was told things were tight and I was supposed to be working hard; high-tech parallel. Then later, I got a follow-up on this where I was in the loony bin. In effect, what I got was I actually had done a switch with this probable focus and had actually gotten him in trouble over there. I got some insights about this also. What was coming through was that this is a very highly controlled version of our reality, and I’m thinking it’s one where your Shift is not taking place. Is that true that the Shift is not in every probability?

ELIAS: Correct.

KEN: There are probabilities where they’re just not ready and their people are really not growing the same way?

ELIAS: I am understanding.

KEN: This one looked like the psychedelic sixties were met with deadly force, and people were, in effect, eliminated that did what you do, and channeling was not allowed.

ELIAS: I am understanding, yes.

KEN: It’s like some of these probabilities are not quite the easiest places to look around.

ELIAS: Yes, and...

KEN: But in this case, I also got that the Ken over there was basically stuck, and even if I got him in trouble, it’s at least helping him to unstick himself and maybe to do at least some personal growth.

ELIAS: I am understanding.

KEN: And I’m not through working with him, either.

ELIAS: And what are you offering to yourself in this experience?

KEN: I’m still investigating that. One of the things was I was taking things very neutrally, even the idea of me being in a loony bin. “You take the loony bin too lightly,” was what the comment was. It may be that I’m learning that I am... I don’t know; this is an interesting question. I need to learn a little more about this part.

ELIAS: But also what you experience in that neutrality would be accurate and in this type of experience would not be unusual, for you are aware that that is not your reality. Therefore, it is not as affecting of you. In a manner of speaking, although you are allowing yourself to somewhat participate, you are also somewhat of an observer. You are aware that this is not your reality, and therefore, what may be occurring in that reality is somewhat of a background environment for it is not your primary environment. Therefore, what occurs within it is not as affecting.

KEN: Right, but on the other hand, I do feel a personal responsibility to the Ken that’s over there. I definitely don’t want to get him killed, for one thing.

ELIAS: I am understanding, but this also is presenting valuable information to you in association with interfering in other realities and attempting to manipulate within other realities in manners that do not fit within their reality. Although all of this is you, every aspect is its own attention and is creating a reality in each probable reality or any other reality in accordance with the design of that reality. It may be similar to your reality, but there are also differences.

KEN: In this case, the differences are very, very important ones.

ELIAS: And more obvious. In this, you may allow yourself, temporarily, to observe or even participate in some manners in limited capacity. But in generating action that interferes with the flow of the other reality, what you engage is an action of intrusiveness.

KEN: That’s what happened in this particular case.

ELIAS: Which, as I have expressed many times previously, although you can be intrusive to another individual, for the most part individuals are not, and it does not occur very frequently, in actuality. But you do incorporate the ability to be intrusive with yourself in many different manners. That would be an action that can involve other focuses or other dimensional focuses or probable selves. For if you expand your awareness and allow yourself an openness to actually interact with another focus or with a probable self, there is a tremendous potential set forth in which you can easily generate interfering and thusly be expressing an intrusiveness. For you shall be filtering information through your beliefs and through what is known within your reality and through your own guidelines, and that may not necessarily apply within the other reality.

KEN: One part of that being my going around hunting for fire emergency signs in buildings and stuff like that, looking for public stairways that didn’t exist.


KEN: Obviously, the more important one was that it’s not good to behave like that because people get picked up and put in loony bins.

ELIAS: I am understanding.

KEN: That’s good, thank you. That’s definitely good input, that even with probable selves interfering is something that should be looked at very, very, very, very carefully.

ELIAS: Yes, and in this, widening your awareness and exploring other realities may be an interesting and informative and fun adventure, but to be aware that you do not belong in their reality and their reality does not necessarily follow the guidelines of your reality. Therefore, your participation is more as an observer and offering yourself information to widen your awareness and therefore allow you greater freedom in your own reality.

KEN: Yes, good. Thank you.

ELIAS: You are welcome.

KEN: Last time we talked, you told me I’m a political focus. I’ve been reading up on that. It’s like a soft focus but not quite. We see things by feel or experience things by feel. How does that fit?

ELIAS: These designations of focus types are associated with how you process information.

Now; in processing information, a thought-focused individual processes information through thought. They do not generally incorporate what you would necessarily identify as a feeling concerning what they are processing.

KEN: So the feelings can come later, obviously.

ELIAS: Correct, but that is not their initial manner in how they process information. An emotionally focused individual processes information initially through feeling. They offer themselves more information through feeling.

Now; a political-focused individual processes information somewhat in both manners. They do process information partially in association with thought, being somewhat analytical, but also process information in conjunction with thought with intuition. The political-focused individual is always generating processing of information in conjunction with intuition — partially with thought but always with intuition.

Also, these individuals incorporate their environment as another element of how they process information, which that also is somewhat associated with the intermediate orientation but in somewhat of a different capacity. What is occurring in the individual’s environment plays into how they process information of what they are doing or what is occurring or what information they are presenting to themselves. The actual environment in which any experience is occurring is an element of that manner of processing.

KEN: The reason I was bringing this up was that in my inner explorations, oftentimes I figure out where I am based on subtle sensations. I’m not really even relying on what I see or what I hear, but it’s like subtly feeling that I’m moving to the left or the right or I’m moving backwards or I’m kind of expanding out. It’s that kind of a thing, very subtle.

ELIAS: Correct.

KEN: That sort of seemed to match one of the things that I saw on the website on political focus.

ELIAS: Yes, for that is one of the aspects of how you process through feeing, which is connected to intuition.

KEN: Body sensation is what I’m talking about here.

ELIAS: I am understanding, but that is also connected to intuition, for that is the sense data that you offer to yourself which is connected with feeling — not emotion but feeling. In that, you incorporate that element as another manner in which you process information.

Individuals that are emotionally focused, although they incorporate thought, they initially are processing information and inputting information through feeling and may subsequently incorporate a thought process concerning it, but not initially.

A thought-focused individual processes through thought, and although subsequently they may incorporate some feeling in association with the information they have offered to themselves, it is not an expression that they require. Therefore, many times they are not expressing a feeling concerning whatever information or experiences that they are processing.

As a political focus, that feeling element, that intuitional element and that sense data element are always a factor in how you process information.

KEN: Kind of like a holistic thing, where you have the thought at the same time as the intuition.

ELIAS: Yes, and in that, the environment that you create is an element of that, for that is what also involves the sense information.

KEN: Any idea why this is so rare? You’ve said that emotional is the majority, then thought is second, then political and religious are like very small percentages.

ELIAS: That would not be classified as very small percentages, but they are less than the other two. There are considerable numbers of individuals that incorporate a political focus, but there are more individuals that incorporate a thought or an emotional focus — many more that incorporate the emotional focus.

It is merely a matter of choices of combinations in the particular focus and those that process in what you would term to be the most widely accepted manners, in which individuals may generate more of an understanding in speaking similar languages.

KEN: My guess would have actually been that thought is more widespread than emotional, because of the fact that our culture seems to favor intellectualism more than intuition.

ELIAS: That is correct in association with your individual society and with some others also, but generally speaking, individuals generate the emotional focus much more commonly throughout the entirety of your reality, throughout your world. But even within your society, there are more emotionally focused individuals than there are thought focused. But that also provides somewhat of a balance naturally. For within your societies, you are encouraged to move in the expression of intellectual, but in generating an emotional focus, that creates somewhat of a balance to be generating the intellectual but also processing information through feeling.

KEN: Now, the other side of political is being the networker, it sounds like — the ability to be with other focuses, just in general.

ELIAS: Yes, for individuals that are political focus generate somewhat of an ease in interaction with either thought or emotionally focused individuals.

KEN: That’s my general thing, that I tend to get along with anybody I need to work with.

ELIAS: Political-focused individuals incorporate more of an understanding of the language of the thought and the emotional focuses.

KEN: Okay, third topic! I read that book, by the way, “The Shift: A Time of Change,” wonderful, wonderful book. The guy, David Tate, he did a wonderful job of putting together general sessions and stuff and general information from what you’ve done.

One of the chapters in there that was most interesting was duplicity. What an interesting topic! It’s like the whole thing of getting into duality mode in general was the biggest move on our parts to getting to where we are now.

ELIAS: Duality and duplicity are two different subjects.

KEN: They are?

ELIAS: Yes. Duality is one element of the blueprint of this reality, but duplicity is one of the belief systems — which is also an element of the blueprint of this reality, but it is not the only belief system.

In this, the duality of your reality is expressed in association with gender. All of your reality is expressed in this duality, which you, at times, view as opposites. In actuality, all of the dualities within your reality are complements in some manner with each other. But they are associated with your design of gender — the male and the female, the intellect and the intuition and so forth.

Duplicity is a different subject. Duplicity is the belief system that associates with judgment of any type.

KEN: Good and evil.

ELIAS: Yes. Good, bad, right, wrong — it is the association with any type of judgment.

KEN: Now, is it an extrapolation of duality? Because duality, we have light and dark, day and night, things like that. Is it that somebody had this brilliant idea to extend that to good and bad, right and wrong?

ELIAS: No, for the expressions of duality are neutral; they are complements of each other. The expression of duplicity is the judgment of any type in association with any other expression. This is the reason that I have expressed from the onset that duplicity is the one belief system that intertwines itself with every other belief system. It is associated with every other belief system and every experience and expression within your reality. There is some assessment associated with duplicity, and as I have expressed, duplicity in itself is not bad either and is not being eliminated, for it is...

KEN: That was one of the things I was chuckling about when I was reading the chapter, that we can perpetuate duplicity by judging duplicity as bad. (Laughs)

ELIAS: Correct, and it is not being eliminated any more than any other belief system.

KEN: What I’m kind of getting at is that my neutrality is actually the best approach to this. Neutrality takes the judgment away.

ELIAS: But that is not the point, for that is somewhat of another method or attempt to eliminate, to take away.

KEN: But I’m not saying I’m attempting to do anything. I’ll give you an example. Earlier, we were talking about the probability thing, where because of the actions of my interfering, I ended up in a loony bin. I was presenting that as a neutral “hmm, interesting” kind of a thing, and another person there was like, “Oh no, oh my gosh, you’re taking the loony bin way, way too lightly.” It’s like it was almost... The neutrality thing is looking at something, just reporting the facts, that kind of thing?


KEN: The other person was trying to get me into the judgment point of view with it.

ELIAS: I am understanding, and in some capacities and some experiences, you do and you shall express a neutrality.

What I am expressing beyond that is that you generate an acceptance also of the expressions that you do incorporate with some element of judgment, knowing that it is associated with your preferences, that there shall continue to be elements and expressions and manifestations within your reality that you like or dislike, which is an expression of what you like is good and what you do not like is bad. But you understand that you are expressing this duplicity, these judgments, in association with yourself, as your own guidelines, not as an absolute and not necessarily pertaining to any other individual or reality.

KEN: So, in other words, just accepting that I prefer this over that, no problem, they both occur, I have my preferences, let’s just go on.

ELIAS: Yes. Therefore, there is an aspect of neutrality in what you are expressing, but there is also an aspect of judgment in assessing what you deem to be good or bad, or what you like or what you dislike.

KEN: It looks like one of the anecdotes is to see the one that’s behind all of them.

ELIAS: Yes. That is the point, that regardless of difference, it is all interconnected.

KEN: Like seeing that these other probable Ken’s are still part of the same essence and still part of me.

ELIAS: Correct, but choosing different experiences and incorporating different guidelines.

KEN: Definitely different guidelines! (Both laugh) So neutrality is part way there, but seeing the one that’s behind all of this is the real point, and the acceptance follows from that.


KEN: Good. My goodness, we have another ten minutes here. Let’s see; I’m going through here and seeing if there’s anything in my earlier question list that hasn’t been dealt with. This is my list; I had a big list for May 20. (Elias laughs)

When people ask you how many focuses they have, you often give them two numbers. You give them one number of how many focuses are specifically tied to each other that make them easy. I think I’ve gotten a number from a different source that gives me like 110. Does that sound about right if you were going to give me that number?


KEN: Then you have a larger number of all the focuses that includes concurrences and I guess what’s called counterparts?

ELIAS: No. The other number is that which is, in the moment, the total numbering of focuses that an individual incorporates in this physical dimension. There are...

KEN: But that’s this physical dimension, not other probabilities?

ELIAS: Correct.

KEN: That’s what I’m kind of getting at is that it’s almost like there are three different numbers that might be germane, but one of those numbers would be... Maybe it would have to go through a different technique to get it.


KEN: That would be like numbers of how many viable, active probabilities actually have energy behind them.

ELIAS: That cannot be numbered. I do not offer numbers of probable realities or other dimensional focuses, for that cannot be numbered. In this reality, I offer in response to the question in the moment what the number of the physical focuses in this physical reality are. That also fluctuates; it does not remain stable.

KEN: Well, the number of probabilities probably fluctuates vastly, doesn’t it?

ELIAS: Correct.

KEN: One of the topics I’ve learned of before is the topic of probable merging, that you can have a probability that does not have much energy behind it but it is close to a another probability, and the two of them basically in effect live in the same general world probability.

ELIAS: It can.

KEN: The idea being that the numbers can go up and they can go down at times.

ELIAS: Correct.

Now; the lesser number, which I have offered to some individuals, is that of the focuses that incorporate a similar energy and tone to your own. Those are the most easily accessed focuses. You can access all of your focuses, but those that generate a similar energy and tone to yourself are much more easily accessed than the others.

KEN: Are these the ones also, in effect, that would tend to align themselves to history in such a way that somebody would perpetuate the belief system of reincarnation?

ELIAS: Not necessarily.

KEN: So two of them could be in the same tone and also be like counterparts from the same time period?


KEN: That was one of the questions that I had for my prior session, if that particular number was how people were getting the idea of reincarnation.

ELIAS: Not necessarily. It may generate a slight influence, but the belief of reincarnation is more associated with the remembering or the experiencing or the association with other focuses, or what you commonly term to be other lifetimes.

This is not a new action. It is being experienced much more widespread and en mass in association with this shift, but the action of an individual incorporating a memory or recall of another focus has been being expressed throughout all of your history. Individuals have always, within your physical reality, generated associations and even memory of other focuses — and have always incorporated bleed-through from other focuses — to generate an explanation to themselves. For in association with religious beliefs and mass beliefs, you create the belief concerning reincarnation.

KEN: Is it the fact that because people are filtering this through the belief system of reincarnation that they tend to block out focuses that are at a time period in the future and also focuses that are concurring focuses, like counterparts?

ELIAS: Yes, for the idea of reincarnation is that you are one individual. Therefore, you cannot be generating future focuses, for you are focused now and this one focus repeatedly is born and dies and continues to participate in this physical reality, which that is the explanation that individuals have offered to themselves or groups have offered to themselves in their belief concerning how you can incorporate other focuses in this physical reality but also be you.

In widening your awareness and offering yourself more information and new information, you begin to understand that all focuses are simultaneous, and they are all different focuses of attention. The expression is essence, but that is not a thing or an entity, either. It is an action which generates physical manifestations, and those physical manifestations are different points of attention.

KEN: To continue my answer to a question that you asked earlier, that’s another thing which I had gotten from these parallel experiences, that the experience of even probable focuses is their own part of essence.


KEN: For example, I let “Busy Ken,” what I called him, come through and operate my body. I had this feeling of a different focus.


KEN: It’s like a different part of essence, and of course, you’re about to yell at me hey, it’s not parts! (Laughs)

ELIAS: I am understanding.

KEN: All of essence. But it’s like a different focus that’s itself.


KEN: And I am myself.

ELIAS: Correct.

KEN: The other thing I noticed when I had him with me was that we each had our own privacy of thoughts. Like the inner-chatter, quote unquote, is only mine.

ELIAS: Correct.

KEN: I sort of worked that out with him, sort of figured this out kind of gradually through the day, that if I’m thinking internally, then it’s just this one aspect that’s thinking. He can do the same thing, and then, of course, if I’m, say, reading aloud, then we both hear it.


KEN: So that’s how you can have multiple aspects in one body and not overwhelm everything.


KEN: Well good! (Laughs) I thank you a great deal! It looks like we are getting pretty darn close to the end of this thing. Do you have any final words for me before we close up for today?

ELIAS: Merely an encouragement, my friend. You are generating interesting new adventures, and I shall be expressing my energy to you in supportiveness also.

KEN: Well, thank you, thank you.

ELIAS: You are quite welcome.

KEN: Yes, this is a great deal of fun that I’ve had here. I know now to have a little more discretion in avoiding interfering, but other than that, happy exploring!

ELIAS: Correct! (Laughs) Very well! I shall be anticipating our next meeting and the further sharing of your explorations and adventures.

KEN: Yes, I’m going to write a short story about that first one, a science fiction short story about the first probable Shift.

ELIAS: Ah, very well. I am encouraging of you, my friend. To you in great affection as always, au revoir.

Elias departs after 58 minutes.

(1) Originally offered as “The expression that is the one is essence, but that is not a thing or an entity, either.”

©2009 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved

Copyright 2005 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.