Influential Bleed-Throughs
Topics:
“Influential Bleed-Throughs”
“Beliefs May Not Be True, But They Are Very Real”
“Detaching From Attachments”
Thursday, August 13, 2009 (Private/Phone)
Participants: Mary (Michael) and Rose (Quillan)
ELIAS: Good afternoon!
ROSE: Good afternoon, Elias. Here we go again! (Both laugh) Ah! It’s good to talk to you again.
ELIAS: And you also.
ROSE: Thank you!
I would like to talk today once again about the situation of my spine. And... I have some preparing notes as always, but I also want to take it kind of relaxed and let bubble up and show up whatever will show up.
I would like to start with a question. You said, if I got you right, that I was dealing with a bleed-through of another focus in this time previous to the injury, and I would like to have a look at what kind of bleed-through was that. I mean, what…? You know. (Elias chuckles)
ELIAS: Very well. This individual that you allowed to bleed through incorporated an unusual experience. Now, this experience was somewhat of a combination of different elements. Would you like this individual’s name?
ROSE: Yes.
ELIAS: And perhaps you can allow yourself to tap into this individual more yourself?
ROSE: Yes.
ELIAS: Very well. The physical name of this individual is Robert. This individual within his focus, as a child, incorporated the ability to tap into other areas of consciousness and other-dimensional focuses quite easily. Now, as a child, the individual did not question this and allowed himself to engage this action somewhat frequently. As a child, the adults surrounding this individual did not view this action as threatening or as strange, for they viewed this individual Robert as being a child and being very imaginative. Therefore, in some capacities his experiences were encouraged.
As he incorporated more age, the experiences continued but he began to be more secretive in relation to these experiences, recognizing that other individuals around him no longer viewed this as imaginative but began to view his experiences as unusual. Therefore, he began to recede from other individuals in relation to his experiences.
In the age group of what you would term to be the decade of his 20s, he began questioning himself. In that, he began to engage some experiences that were not necessarily associated with other-dimensional focuses or other areas of consciousness but were experiences of himself that he did not objectively understand. In that, he began to generate evaluations that his experiences were evidence to himself that he was, in your terms, unstable. He began to follow that direction of perception and began to believe that his experiences were not real and that they were wrong; and in that perception, he delved further and further into himself but with a judgment of himself that there were facets of himself that were not normal, that were wrong, that were unstable and to an extent uncontrollable, which merely generated more discounting and confusion with himself. Eventually he began to re-engage the allowance of experiences in relation to other-dimensional focuses which, as you might recognize, reinforced his assessment and his idea of himself that this was wrong, that it was not real and that he was slipping more and more into an uncontrollable state.
In this, this individual Robert did incorporate one friend that he allowed himself to share some – very few, but some – of his experiences, and although his friend did incorporate a genuineness in caring, he also agreed that the experiences were not real and that they were dangerous. This created an assessment with this individual that the only manner that he could control and silence these experiences that he had thusly begun to assess as dangerous, in addition to not being normal, was to silence himself. And in your terms, this is what he engaged. He chose to disengage in the method of suicide.
Let me express to you that when you disengage, it is not merely that you do not cease to exist – which you do not – but your memories do not cease to exist either. Your memories remain. Just as we spoke yesterday in our conversation, you ARE essence, and without the independence or that separation of the individual focus and essence, all of the experiences, all of the memories of every focus of yourself are present and contained.
Now, within physical focus the receptacle, or the holder of memory, is your body consciousness. Your body consciousness retains all of the memory of all of your experiences in this focus. When you disengage, the memories are not lost. They are transferred from the holding facility or the storage facility, which is your physical body consciousness, to essence as consciousness. Therefore, they remain. They are merely not contained in the body consciousness any longer.
Now, in this, any memory, any experience, can be accessed by any focus and can be incorporated into the experience of another focus of essence. As I have explained previously, it is not that these memories or experiences are thrust upon any other focus of essence, but that the individual focus may be engaging a similar direction as another focus and therefore that creates an openness to those memories. And what occurs is the individual allows that bleed-through from another focus, for they themself are already engaging some action or experience or direction or exploration that is similar to another focus. And when a bleed-through is allowed, it enhances the experience of the focus that is allowing it.
Now, this is not to say that the focus allowing that bleed-through objectively understands what they are doing. Many times they do not. Many times their experience becomes enhanced, but objectively they do not necessarily incorporate an understanding of what is occurring. For what is occurring is not presented in the form of a memory; it is presented in the form of the present experience. Therefore, the individual that is experiencing it does not objectively distinguish that there may be factors that are not necessarily their own experience, that there may be factors that are being included as memories but they do not appear as memories in the individual’s awareness. They are shadows; in a figurative manner of speaking, they are ghost images. But the individual objectively does not necessarily recognize that. They view it all as their own experience, and in that, many times the individual becomes confused or can even become overwhelmed in not objectively understanding what they are engaging.
In very similar manner to Robert, not necessarily understanding what he was tapping into in his time framework, the idea or the concept of other lifetimes, other focuses, other physical manifestations in other dimensions was not a subject that was presented. It was, in your terms, unheard of, or unthinkable – not unthinkable in the manner of what could be and that it is thought of as impossible, but unthinkable in that there would be no motivation, no stimulus to even entertain the idea or to even generate the idea of that possibility.
ROSE: Ja. I know what you mean.
ELIAS: Therefore, his assessment, in his understanding, was that these were experiences that were all generated from himself in that one focus, and that was very confusing, for many of the experiences did not fit in your reality but were very real. And in that, he did not objectively view that he incorporated the ability to reconcile what his experiences were and what his view of reality was – very similar to what you may term to be somewhat ancient times in which mass beliefs expressed that your world was not a planet, that your world was some other manifestation with boundaries or borders that you could actually fall off of.
Those ideas were very real in the perception of what reality was in their time. Were they correct? No, not necessarily, but if an individual perceived himself to be actually perched upon the edge of their world, could they actually create an action of falling off and disappearing? Yes! For that was real, and as I have expressed many times, there may be many elements of your reality or your experiences that are not necessarily valid, they are not necessarily genuine, they are not necessarily true, but that does not negate that they are real. And being real, you can generate any very real experience from those concepts that you believe.
ROSE: Mm.
ELIAS: You believe it is real, therefore it IS real, and in that, you can create many aspects of very real experiences regardless of whether they are valid or not.
ROSE: Now, of course I am a little curious. When somebody went to “the border of the world“ and then it disappeared according to the beliefs of this person, did this person then simply just disappear like my sweater or whatever?
ELIAS: In relation to this reality, yes.
ROSE: Uh-huh. Because the belief was so strong, and then it was like manifested, or the opposite of manifested - it was, like, lived?
ELIAS: Yes!
ROSE: Mm-hm, okay.
ELIAS: Now, is that to say that the individual ceases to exist? No, for the individual is consciousness. But do they cease to exist in this reality? Yes.
ROSE: Okay. Did they shift to parallel Earth, or did they then disengage this focus?
ELIAS: They would disengage this focus.
ROSE: Okay.
ELIAS: But not in death, for death is an actual occurrence.
ROSE: Like a cloud disappears?
ELIAS: Yes.
ROSE: Mm-hm. Poof! (Chuckles)
ELIAS: Yes! Or as your sweater. Yes, it would cease to be in existence in this reality and therefore would be disengaged from this reality, but not in the action of death, merely an instantaneous action of not engaging this reality any longer and immediately moving into some other expression of consciousness.
ROSE: Like blinking in and blinking out so rapidly, and the blinking out is the last action and then no more blinking in?
ELIAS: Yes, you are correct.
ROSE: Okay.
Since the time is running again, I would like to go back to the topic of this spine and so on. This addressing of beliefs and everything: Is there something necessary which I’m not doing yet?
ELIAS: (Pause) It is not that you are NOT doing; it is that you are in the midst of doing.
ROSE: Okay.
ELIAS: You are in the midst of identifying your genuine self, and in that process you are in the midst of disentangling yourself from all of the attachments to your genuine identity: who you are and what you are. And all of those attachments include associations in relation to what you can do and what you cannot do, for they are attachments to who you are, what you have been taught, what you have learned, AND what your experiences have been.
Contrary to what many individuals may think, your experiences create very strong attachments to your identity, or what you assess to be who you are and what you are. But they are actually attachments; they are not who you genuinely are or what you genuinely are, they are what you do and what you have experienced. But those experiences are very strong, and what you are in the midst of is detaching them – not ignoring them, not forgetting them, not eliminating them, not disappearing them, but generating a process in which you are detaching them in the manner that you recognize, “Yes, this is an experience. This is very real, but it is not absolute and it is not what I am, and it is not who I am.”
This is a challenging process, for there are many of your experiences that you do equate with who you are, or more so WHAT you are. And in physical expressions, it is difficult to detach, though what appears to be what you are as what you actually are… If an individual generates a physical manifestation of deaf, or of deafness in one ear, or deafness in both ears, they perceive that to be what they are.
[The timer for the end of the session rings] (Rose’s note: Here actually the session time is up, but Elias keeps talking and I did not dare to interrupt him for I had a feeling that this is not only important for myself but for others also. Also he has stopped sessions very precisely, so I thought he wanted to convey this and I did let him talk and described the situation later to Mary.)
This is a part of their physical manifestation, therefore it is perceived to be a part of what they are – perhaps not WHO they are, but quite definitely a part of WHAT they are. That in actuality is not what they are; it is an attachment. But detaching that manifestation in relation to what they are is challenging, for it is so very intertwined in what they perceive to be what they are. And, in that, it is very much associated with what they believe. They believe that they are deaf, and therefore they trust that they are, for you trust what you believe, whether it is valid or not.
Let me express to you, this may be a fine example, for in association with the manifestation of being deaf, for most of your history, until very recent time framework, and even in some situations to this present time framework, this manifestation of deafness has been perceived as irreversible. If you are deaf, if you have been born deaf, or if you have engaged some physical manifestation that has damaged the mechanism of hearing, until very recent time frameworks it has been perceived for millennia that this is a condition physically that cannot be reversed, it cannot be addressed to, and that it cannot be regenerated – or generated, if it has been a manifestation from birth.
You are embarking upon an age in which you are beginning to recognize that that perception is not true, that the body consciousness is more adept than you perceived it to be, that the body consciousness CAN actually regenerate in manners that were perceived to be impossible, that with certain manipulations the body consciousness CAN adjust itself in manners to compensate, so to speak, with what may be perceived as damage, whether it be in relation to dis-ease or whether it be in relation to damage.
Any physical manifestation can be altered, but what you believe in the moment is a very strong factor, just as in the situation with deafness. Individuals believed in the moment, in each moment, that this is a physical manifestation that cannot be generated; if it is lost it is lost, [and the] the body consciousness does not incorporate the ability to alter that. The best that can be achieved is that there can be inventions of devices or apparatuses that can enhance vibrations that can simulate hearing. And now, your sciences, your technologies are beginning – very slightly, but it is a beginning – to understand that the body consciousness does incorporate more abilities than was perceived previously, and that which was lost is not necessarily lost permanently and that it can be regenerated – and not necessarily with an apparatus that merely simulates sound, but in actually regenerating sound or the ability to connect with it.
The body consciousness in any capacity can do the same. It is merely a matter that you believe so strongly that it cannot; and therefore, each moment that you believe that it cannot, you accept and you trust those attachments to what you are, rather than allowing yourself to delve beneath and beyond that into the core of what you genuinely are. Are you understanding?
ROSE: Yes, and I think this ties very much together or into the topic which we had yesterday of independence. [Session 20090812]
ELIAS: Yes, it very much does – more so than most of you recognize yet.
ROSE: Ja. To me it seems to be like, first you kind of shed off your upbringing and your beliefs – social beliefs and cultural beliefs. You go back to your natural kind of being like you are spontaneous, yet your social society tells you that shall not be spontaneous but you shall be so and so. You go back to your original spontaneousness as example, and then the next “step“ would be to go back to be your essence.
ELIAS: Yes!
ROSE: And this is the process of becoming independent: independent of the patterns, independent of your attachment to your personality, no matter how “genuine” it is, and you go back to your essence and you come from there.
ELIAS: Yes. And you discover relationship rather than independence. You move with and towards rather than away from.
ROSE: Jaaaa. Like you look at the things in connection and not in segregation or separated.
ELIAS: Yes.
ROSE: You look at it in connection.
ELIAS: Yes, very much so. Precisely.
ROSE: Thank you very much. We need to stop, otherwise I am much over the time. (Laughs)
ELIAS: You are very welcome, my friend. (Laughs)
ROSE: Thank you. Thank you, Elias. (Sighs) Ah, it’s been a pleasure again.
ELIAS: And I agree. (Both laugh)
ROSE: Till the next time…
ELIAS: Until our next meeting, in tremendous encouragement and in great lovingness to you, my dear friend, au revoir.
ROSE: Au revoir, same to you.
(Elias departs after 38 minutes)
Copyright 2009 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.