Participants: Mary (Michael) and Anjuli (Myranda)

Thursday, April 13, 2006 (Private/Phone)

ELIAS: Good afternoon!

ANJULI: Good afternoon, and we meet again, that soon! Look how I did that! I thought it would be the session of my mother, and I was so sure, feeling now I want to apply all the new information; I would like to have a session with Elias, but I really do not need a session that soon. Not needing, anyway, but you know what I mean. Then suddenly my mother said she is not ready for her session, and she has to go to the church in the evening, and church and Elias is too much. (Elias laughs) I fully understand that one! Anyway, I am really curious why I created a session again.

ELIAS: And what is your assessment?

ANJULI: About creating this session?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: After the last session, I started to focus in a new way on what you said about paying attention to how energy is configuring and not on how it is configured.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: That was one thing, and then I started to explore how I can redefine almost everything. I paid attention to what do I associate with the session as to the energy exchange, how important do I take that or how much importance do I give to language and (inaudible) and how much to how energy is reconfiguring. I was thinking more in the common way of how it is configured. To start to pay attention in a different way was at first unfamiliar, but it was redefining everything in a very different way. I found I always feel a connection with you outside of the energy exchange, but it started to be my main attention somehow, or what I define as real was the energy with you or watching how I create this configuring. So, I didn’t have any expectations or plans in terms of looking at it from outside from imagery view.

ELIAS: I am understanding.

ANJULI: It somehow manifested by itself.

ELIAS: You have offered yourself considerable information and new experiences.

ANJULI: I felt very excited about that, because I felt much lightness in my energy and lots of widening and lots of excitement. I also started to deal differently with the explorations of differences, like watching that I am associating automatically that people have similar guidelines and similar explorations as I have, or a little bit similar at least, and now I start to think they could be entirely different.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: I had an experience at first when I viewed something about my preferences of friendship and interacting or whatever. I started to think I should be a little bit disappointed as to some interactions, and then I was investigating again and I thought, oh, I understand that we are different and that people have different guidelines, but I still have this association that the other guideline is some sort of, not less, but at least something I should, because it is not expressed according to my guidelines, feel as not treated... I do not know the right word for that.

ELIAS: Fairly.

ANJULI: Then I felt that for the other individual it is also friendship and interaction and intensity but from another angle, but it is the same value.

ELIAS: Yes, and significance.

ANJULI: With this, all of the disappointment disappears, and I start to redefine, for example, what I view to be interaction and even relationship. It is not that a relationship is a relationship when it goes by my guidelines, and when it does not go by my guidelines... Well, I go by my guidelines and the other person by their guidelines, and then it did not feel like a connection, but that was no longer the case and no longer my experience, because it is connection.

ELIAS: Congratulations! This is significant movement, for this allows you not to discount yourself and to acknowledge your own guidelines, but it also allows you to be more accepting of differences. In that, there is less of an automatic association that other individuals should always be following your guidelines or your guidelines become invalidating.

ANJULI: I find that I interact with differences in a different way, and I am not that challenged anymore because now I know that. The direction, the exploring of the direction I take in a relationship where I feel to be differences, more or less strong differences, changes because of that. It is as if I started with incorporating a new sense about feeling into the difference by not using my guidelines as a lens...

ELIAS: Ah!

ANJULI: ...and somehow that works.

ELIAS: In that, you offer yourself more information, for you can thusly open yourself to the idea of other perceptions in a more real manner, not merely expressing to yourself in thought or in words that other individuals incorporate different perceptions, but in a genuine understanding and knowing expression of actually realizing and experiencing that other individuals genuinely do incorporate different perceptions. Even in association with certain expressions that individuals would term to be universal, each individual incorporates their own unique expression or association with those expressions that would be viewed as universal.

As an example of cause and effect, many individuals would express that cause and effect would be a truth that would be expressed by all individuals within your reality. Not necessarily so! Cause and effect is a belief, and it is likely that most if not all individuals within your reality do generate some associations with cause and effect as an expressed belief, but not necessarily as a truth. Some individuals may not be as absolute with the belief of cause and effect as other individuals, and the individuals that do incorporate cause and effect as a truth would absolutely perceive that every other individual upon your planet would also. In that, it becomes challenging or difficult to perceive that any individual would not express cause and effect as a core truth.

ANJULI: Is this the same with linear and simultaneous time, that we can more or less strongly view linear time as an absolute, and some interact more with simultaneous time and some less?

ELIAS: Yes, in which some individuals may express a core truth as linear time but some individuals may not.

The truths are those beliefs that you each have set into an absolute. But you all incorporate all of the beliefs, and some beliefs are shared by most or all individuals within your reality. That does not necessarily mean that all individuals express those beliefs as their individual truths or guidelines. Some individuals may not necessarily incorporate the belief of linear time as strongly as others and therefore may generate more flexibility in playing with time or bending time. It is a matter of perception and degrees of how absolute a particular belief is with each individual creating that as being one of their guidelines, one of their truths.

ANJULI: We talked about simultaneous and linear time recently on one of the lists, and that was also for me interesting to watch, because I so much understood that... Well, I was experiencing the interactions from my consciousness identity and feeling how I, as consciousness focused through one individual, one focus of an essence, focus more on some specific, clear, pure experience of linear time, and another focus of another essence mixes it more with simultaneous time. From each angle each individual looks at what the others explore from a certain view, and it did not feel to be less or more. Although I know that within the Shift we are using this word of “widening” as if a little bit we may associate that with good and bad and better, also, I did not experience it from that view, not as that. I felt it is all connected, and I did not isolate a certain expression, a certain choice of exploration of one individual from all the other expressions of other individuals, and from that angle it looks different.

ELIAS: Yes, I am understanding. The manner in which it is familiar to view reality is, figuratively speaking, from a peripheral point. If you visualize a spoked wheel, what is familiar within this reality is to be viewing reality from the outermost point of one spoke. If you are that spoke and you are viewing from that outermost point, you cannot view all of the other spokes. You cannot view the entire wheel. But as you move the attention down that spoke closer and closer to the center point, the perception changes quite dramatically. For once you move to the center point of the wheel, you can view all of the different spokes, all of the different directions. In that, in relation to your reality, the other spokes may also represent other individuals or environments, and in this, viewing from the outermost point, you cannot view the perspective of the other spokes. Being in the center point, you can view the perspective of the other spokes.

In this, incorporating the figurative example of the wheel, if the wheel is upright and the attentions are focused at the outermost point of the spokes, some spoke’s reality consists of the ground, for that is all that they shall view. Other spokes shall incorporate the reality of the sky. Other spokes may view the reality of structures. But whatever the reality of each spoke is, the reality of the other spokes is foreign and would not necessarily be comprehended, for what is viewed in the reality of each spoke is not necessarily incorporated at all in other spokes. This is what occurs with differences and in association with truths.

ANJULI: Right, and I found that I am interacting with differences with this new view – or not new view – but more clearly, and I am more aware of that view and the various ways of how people may verbalize in emails, the various preferences of the Sumari or Vold or Sumafi, although that is also... But do you know what I mean?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: And the various ways of how something is expressed, how a concept is expressed and how it is explored. I was always playful in that, but more from the intuitional view or what, and now there is the same intuitional view or spontaneity but more clarity.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: That was so exciting and felt very empowering, because I was continuing to express in my way, and I had more of an ease with the energy language and the verbal language. I don’t want to express just a certain sentence in energy language; I am also expressing, playing not singularly in my expressions. I want to do various games at once, and combine that in the talking. That was so much more easy and lots of fun. Then I saw that this is a tool also to explore my process in my fun about creating my story with you and the Inmiland explorations and all my fun. It felt like lots of lightness, much more widening and very validating. With some things, I thought now I want to talk with Elias about that.

ELIAS: And it also generates more of an ease for you, which you can allow yourself to relax. Also, one significant element or by-product of this action of moving more towards the center point is that in viewing the differences and realizing them, you stop personalizing, which also generates much more freedom.

ANJULI: Ja, that is very true. I felt that clearly. I was not even personalizing or was not challenged anymore with what so far has been difficult for me, when I connect with someone and feel they translate what I do and express differently or do not translate a large aspect of what I express or whatever, that felt to me uncomfortable even when I pay attention to self. It felt uncomfortable in terms of it did not feel like a connecting or interacting or what.

ELIAS: I am understanding.

ANJULI: Especially when I felt that view of the other person to be quite absolute in “that is how it is” or “that is how Anjuli is.” But I started to deal with this very differently, and this changed the energy that I draw to myself and how I interact with them and is also relaxing the other person, but definitely not a personalizing so much anymore.

ELIAS: That allows you to move more in an ease and comfort, and it also allows you to express less questioning: why does this individual do this, why would this individual express this? Those questions are no longer automatic responses, for you know that there is a difference, and therefore, the “why” question is no longer relevant, and it is no longer personal: why would the other individual do this to me?

ANJULI: The talk on the list about linear and simultaneous time, my understanding and expressing of that, would you say that was a clear expressing of the concept and the experience in an Elias-ly view? Do you know what I mean? (Elias laughs) It was a feeling of knowing and trusting, but at times there was a little bit the desire of wanting to ask you to make sure that I did not distort, although there was not the feeling that I did that. But I do ask now.

ELIAS: And your explanation of linear and simultaneous time is what? How do you define that?

ANJULI: That depends a little bit with whom I talk about it, but for myself, I view it from the angle of essence actions, and I have a lot of ease with that. I feel linear time to be a game we do in this dimension and that we can play with time in the way we want. But if you mean my definition when we talked about it on the lists, we used the example of final focuses to explore that concept.

Elias: Very well, and what did you express?

ANJULI: We used you, your final focus Oscar Wilde, for the concept of final focus, concurrent and overlapping focuses, your final focus Oscar Wilde who disengaged in 1900. Jens/Ranatad asked in his session #1400 about a focus of you that was later than 1900, and you said yes, it is your focus, and that is how this question about your focuses came up.

For me, it is that the final focus disengages – this is an essence action – the final focus gives the signal, and all of the attentions of the essence are removed from that dimension, all the other focuses disengage too or fragment. When you are associating yourself with linear time, and you strongly associate yourself with that, Oscar Wilde is dead and your other focuses are fragmented or also dead, and there is no focus of you anymore.

ELIAS: I am understanding.

ANJULI: Then you could continue with the exploration of aligning with linear time, and you have the concept of current focuses, and the current focuses disengage with the final focus, disengage within the same week, and the overlapping focuses and the past and future ones disengage within their time, according to linear time.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: In simultaneous time, they die when they want. It does not matter if they count as current or overlapping or future or past, they choose when they want to die.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANJULI: They use any time in their life to connect with the moment when the final focus disengages. They use the signal of the final focus and connect that with whatever time they like. Maybe they are 40 years old, and they decide now I choose to die, and I connect with the time of 1900...

ELIAS: Correct.

ANJULI: ...the time when their final focus died...

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: ...and that is the now for that focus, when that focus chooses that to be simultaneous...

ELIAS: Correct.

ANJULI: ...with the moment of the disengagement of the final focus. So, all the focuses have their own day when they choose to die.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: They can be entirely free about when they want to die. When they want to die, they connect with the signal of the final focus, and all of the death-days are then simultaneous for them.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANJULI: Or they fragment, like my dear one in the future, Timothy Sutherland, who fragmented in one of his probable expressions from being Timothy/Elias after his birth and then after a short time, when Oscar Wilde disengaged and gave the signal to all focuses of Elias in this dimension, he then fragmented into Timothy/Eliantan.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: Ja, and then it does not matter. I can interact with any essence action. I can, as I did, interact with Arkandin, and when his final focus disengaged, I can view how all of his focuses are removed from this dimension, and simultaneously can connect with how all of his focuses are still here. I can connect with his other essence actions of him having more or less focuses as a choice of how he wants to explore this dimension, or any essence action he does, and it is all simultaneous. Or I can choose to view only one essence action, like when his final focus disengaged and all of his attentions are removed.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: And then as to current focuses, let’s say I want to become 200 years old, and my Argentine focus, who counts so far as a current focus, let’s say wants to be only 50 years old. Then he, of course, would not die in the same week, according to linear time, as me.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: Then, in linear time view, I would all of a sudden have other current focuses. Those that will be born in the upcoming 20 years are then my current focuses.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: Ja! And I was right with everything. (Elias laughs) There was just one little feeling I was not sure about. Ordin and Patel have their final focuses in the past, right?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: It does not matter, but I was just curious. When I talk of Ordin or one of the other essences who have their final focuses like you in the past, that feels a little bit different than when I talk about you. I was wondering if this is related with the energy exchange. Because when we interact with you in the energy exchange, we interact with that focus of you which has removed all of the attentions from this dimension. We may focus more strongly on that essence action of you, which has removed the attention. I was not sure if it also is related a little bit to a direction you want to do with the forum, which... I don’t know exactly what that feeling was. I know how it is for me, but I was not sure when I interact with the forum about that. There was something which I was not sure about.

ELIAS: I am understanding what you are expressing, and in a manner of speaking, you are correct, for the other essences involved in this energy exchange are not objectively, in a physical manner of communication in conversation or discussion, interactive with all of you. They are all interactive but in a more indirect manner. Myself, being the primary expression of the energy exchange, physically, objectively interacts with each of you in a conversational or discussional manner. Therefore in generating this type of energy, filtering this type of energy through layers of consciousness to create this energy exchange, entails more of a focused attention and energy. Are you understanding thus far?

ANJULI: Yes.

ELIAS: This is a different type of action than the other essences are engaging in this energy exchange, and to allow for the exchange to be focused in which I can access the energy of all of you and can translate that in energy through the exchange in an actual physical interaction conversationally with you, it is necessary to generate a directed and concentrated stream of energy. Incorporating current or present focuses in your reality would somewhat distract from that energy stream and would create, figuratively speaking – this is not literal – but figuratively it would create a type of detracting from the clarity of the energy that is being filtered through.

ANJULI: So, that means in the concept as to final focuses, that we can, within simultaneous time, view and interact with future focuses of Arkandin or Ordin or with you. That is not a difference.

ELIAS: Correct. You are correct.

ANJULI: Still, it is. I mean, not for me not but... I do feel that there is a difference because of the energy exchange. I can imagine if there was a current focus of you... Like if I discovered a current focus of Ordin, it does not distract me from anything when I interact with him. But with you, it would be different. There could be essences, for example, who really never incorporated focuses later than 1900, not even originally. But you did focus later than 1900, only we don’t connect with them because of the energy exchange.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: A little bit of why this could be confusing for people is that when the final focus takes all of the attentions from this dimension, it could be that people view focuses as bodies which are in our collective, and we cannot imagine that, for example, when you take all of your attentions of this dimension, all of your focuses fly away, so to speak, and the collective is without all of those people. For me, it is not like that, because I feel whatever energy I connect with, that is up to me. I can insert new people into the past. I can connect with the collective without the focuses of Ashrah or with the focuses of Ashrah, and then it feels different and I can be playful with that.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: So, I understood that, although it is difficult for me to verbalize it. But that understanding is right?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: I am personally anyway more interested in you in your dimension. I have some curiosity about your other focuses in our dimension, but it is not like... I like to connect with your energy now in your dimension and play with that.

ELIAS: (Chuckles) And you can.

ANJULI: Ja, and I do. For example, I can do all of the type of energy mixes which I do when I connect with Tobi. Somehow, I don’t mind anymore. He is Eliantan, he is you, he is him. But the energy, I don’t know. Previously we were identifying this is that focus of that essence, and now I play with the energies and then they... This is again about paying attention to how it configures?

ELIAS: In what?

ANJULI: There is a change of how I interact. When I see Ordin’s focus on TV, sometimes he is Ordin, sometimes I interact through the same person with Timothy, and when I interact with Tobi, I feel I interact with myself configured into Tobi and with Eliantan being Tobi and you as Tobi.

ELIAS: Yes, that would be concerning configuring energy.

ANJULI: I guess I was not clear in how I expressed that. What did I now express in energy about this with you?

ELIAS: You are incorporating different energies, and in that, you are configuring them with one image, which is another exploration of no separation, and that without separation, you can configure any energy with one image.

ANJULI: Ah, it is great to ask a Sumafi – but you are not a Sumafi. (Elias laughs) Okay, Elias, I have a little list of questions. Maybe we go a little bit through that list?

ELIAS: Very well.

ANJULI: Howard was connecting Katarina Witt with Myranda, and he is wondering what the connection is, this feeling.

ELIAS: Counterpart.

ANJULI: And why is he connecting me with her?

ELIAS: There is also a similarity in energy.

ANJULI: Is Mumbee Robin, son of Ronja Robin/Myranda, a focus of Sandel?

ELIAS: (Pause) Observing.

ANJULI: Is the musician John Frusciante of Red Hot Chili Peppers band a focus of Michelle/Evealyn?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: Is Margaret Regner, the mother of Tobi/Eliantan, a focus of Evealyn?

ELIAS: (Pause) Counterpart.

ANJULI: Nanaiis, Evealyn, Eliantan, Myranda and Oona, we were forming a pyramid. We are calling it the NEEMO pyramid, and we think our intent is about allowing for our own power and for expressing our own passion, and also a supportiveness of Tobi/Eliantan, the action he is doing with the collective. Is all of this correct?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: Nanaiis wanted to insert a new focus which is in his new band. Did she manage that, in Tobi’s new band?

ELIAS: (Pause) Not quite, but she has incorporated the action of being observing.

ANJULI: Is the essence animal of Sandy/Allessander a falcon?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: Is Rosamund a focus of Awan, and King Henry II a focus of Arkandin?

ELIAS: (Pause) Both observing.

ANJULI: And then I had an interaction with a future time framework of Gottlieb, of his focus Gottlieb/Gottlieb. I felt him to be 128 years old, but he looked young. Is this correct, or did I interact with another focus of his essence?

ELIAS: Another focus, but the age is correct.

ANJULI: The other focus is 128 years old?

ELIAS: Yes, and the name is correct also.

ANJULI: Oh, he is also called Gottlieb as focus name?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: Now we have something to investigate! (Elias laughs) Was that a future focus of him?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: And the father of Tobi Regner/Eliantan, Johannes Regner, is he a focus of the essence Jiavani?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: I have a letter from my mother for you, Elias. (Omitted) And then, Elias, many dear greetings from Gottlieb.

ELIAS: And to him, also.

ANJULI: He did not talk so very much about his relationship with Sabine. I felt into this relationship because I was curious, and then talked to him about my impression that I did not feel that they are sending many love letters to each other or have butterflies in their stomach when meeting each other. He validated that, and then he asked me about my impressions about that relationship. We discussed this today again, because he meanwhile talked with Sabine and she said something like that. She feels they have skipped the phase in romantic relationships where you have butterflies in your stomach, and that it feels for her as if they are a long-married couple, that they already know each other very long. I personally felt that he is exploring different ways of how you can have an intimate relationship and that maybe he chose now this time a relationship which is different from the ones he created previously, one which is more about the familiar and the known as a balance to his explorations of the unknown and the unusualness.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: That is one of the differences maybe, or is this the difference we have about the tools each of us uses? We both are exploring unusualness, and I am currently doing that with paying attention to... We both use our widening as a tool?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: We both create situations for our widening, and that is what he is doing also, getting to know about differences and all that, but he is doing something different about how he is dealing with the familiar or he is using his attention in a different way. Somehow there is something different.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: And the direction he is exploring is for him beneficial?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: And is, so to speak, a good tool for him?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: Well, it is a little bit unfamiliar. I am still exploring what we talked about in the last session about the physical senses.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANJULI: I don’t have many explorations right now, just a little bit of a change of how I feel about that. But is this also about paying attention to how energy is configuring, or is it that we use the physical senses so much in the way of thinking that is reality or as a main focus? That is what is too absolute for me, so to speak. I want to be more playful with it, and then I can change what I view with my physical senses differently when I pay attention to how energy is configuring. This is what I use as an example when I am listening to the music of Tobi/Eliantan and his voice, for which I use my physical senses but I strongly have my attention on energy. There is something different when I listen to him. I think I have many questions in that area, but if you could say a little bit about that so that I can continue to explore in that direction?

ELIAS: This would be a considerable subject matter, my friend.

ANJULI: Maybe enough for an entire new session with you?

ELIAS: Yes, many aspects of that subject! (Laughs) Perhaps we shall explore and discuss this in our next meeting.

ANJULI: Ja, but you know that I am a final focus with impatience, and when I view that in linear time as later... We can start to discuss it already right after the session?

ELIAS: Very well.

ANJULI: And then we do another session about that and focus for the whole session on this beautiful subject.

ELIAS: Very well!

ANJULI: Maybe I have a little bit more information by then.

ELIAS: Ha ha! And more of your own explorations.

ANJULI: Ja, I will, I will. (Both laugh)

ELIAS: Very well!

ANJULI: I am going to do some Easter egg hunting with you at Easter.

ELIAS: Very well, I shall join you.

ANJULI: Okay. (Laughing) Elias, I love you so much.

ELIAS: I express great lovingness to you, Myranda, and tremendous appreciation. In great friendship and affection, au revoir.

ANJULI: Thank you very much.

Elias departs after 1 hour, 8 minutes.

---

Copyright 2006 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.