Definitions of Aliens, Extraterrestrials and Other-Dimensional Bleed-Throughs
“Definitions of Aliens, Extraterrestrials and Other-Dimensional Bleed-Throughs”
“Evolution, De-Evolution and Stop Points”
“Out-Of-Body Projections and Robert Monroe’s Explanations”
“Believing Is Trusting”
“Healing Others: An Expression of Confidence”
Friday, April 6, 2012 (Private/In Person)
Participants: Mary (Michael), Dan (Zynn), Inna (Beatrice) and Natasha (Nichole)
[Note: This is the third of four sessions held with various participants in this group on this day, with breaks in between.]
ALL: Continuing. (Elias chuckles)
DAN: “And what shall we discuss?” (All laugh)
NATASHA: See, we have a problem with preciseness (Elias laughs), because we know what we want to ask you but to formulate the question…
DAN: Okay, I can formulate a question for you. These two are utterly convinced that aliens created human life on earth.
NATASHA: Not aliens, other beings.
DAN: Other beings.
INNA: From different systems or something, whatever.
DAN: So we want to ask you, one, would you admit it now? And two, we want to challenge you: How come you shied away from those questions and didn’t admit it before? And what's the reason for you not going into those areas? So here, those are the two questions. [To Inna and Natasha] Correct?
ELIAS: And why did I not admit it before? (Laughter)
NATASHA: No. No. It’s not that you didn’t admit it before. No. Generally you don't like to go into this area, so you do admit it. But you don't like to go into this area. That's what we noticed through the years, and you must have a good reason for it. Maybe it's your way of presenting the information, and maybe you think that it's not that important for our development now. That's possible. That's my impression.
ELIAS: Partially. Discussing extraterrestrials is not actually entirely relevant to your development, for you are not interacting with them. I would express yes, at times in isolated incidences, some individuals allow themselves to be connecting interdimensionally, which is different from extraterrestrials. Extraterrestrials are beings that exist within your universe but are not terrestrial to your planet.
NATASHA: I guess we all mix it together.
ELIAS: Other-dimensional beings are not beings that exist within your known present universe. They exist in OTHER universes, in other dimensions. You exist in one dimension; there are many, many, many dimensions, and there are beings that exist in other dimensions. And at times, individuals within your dimension – as also the reverse, beings or individuals in other dimensions – may generate the same action, in which you may connect with, and actually at times even generate a projection of, another focus of yourselves that exists in another dimension. That is what you termed to be aliens.
They are not arriving in spaceships and interacting with you from another planet. They are other-dimensional bleed-throughs that some individuals connect to. They are not foreign, in the respect that they are actually other focuses of themselves. Just as, at times, some individuals generate such a strong awareness of another focus in this dimension of themself that they can actually visualize that individual, picture them, describe them, know of their memories, their experiences – it is very similar action. It is connecting with another focus, merely not a focus in this particular dimension.
As to the question of actual extraterrestrials – other beings that DO exist in your universe but not on your planet – yes, they do exist, and I have not ever expressed that they do not. I WILL express to you that thus far you as a species have not encountered them, and they have not encountered you, for there is to this point – or has been to this point – no reason for you to BE encountering each other or to be aware of your existences. You recognize, or you incorporate, an inner knowing that you are not the only beings in your universe, as do other beings in your universe, but you have not generated evidence yet of that, for you have not generated the inventions to create a connecting signal that indicates your locations.
Before you invented seaworthy ships, individuals existing upon your planet knew that there were other individuals in other places of your planet but had never encountered them and had no means for signaling them to know where they were. It is a very similar situation; you have not yet invented the means to signal each other to know where you are in your universe. And I would express to you very distinctly: Yes, there are other beings in your universe that do exist in very different configurations from yourselves. No, they do not necessarily have much more advanced technology than you do. They are not flying around your universe looking for you any more than you are flying around your universe looking for them. (Laughter)
DAN: Do we potentially have focuses as them, or they potentially have focuses as us?
INNA: But it is a fine line such as now in, you know, people see them.
ELIAS: Which are bleed-throughs.
INNA: It’s not real.
ELIAS: They ARE real, but they are not extraterrestrial. They are interdimensional. They are bleed-through. They do not exist in YOUR universe. They exist in ANOTHER universe, in another reality. And therefore, to answer your question: No, you were not created or designed by other beings or by extraterrestrials.
DAN: Okay. So the reason why some people think we were is twofold, I think. One is they looked at some artifacts, such as pyramids in Egypt, which let's say for –
ELIAS: (Interrupting) And once again you discount yourselves so tremendously that you as a human species could not POSSIBLY invent the pyramids.
DAN: Yeah, but they say the civilization as we now imagined it to be, at that time the society as we see could not possibly have had tools to achieve that degree of precision or smoothness of the surface, or pointing things exactly to the north, etc. And if we did have such tools, then I guess we cannot explain where did those tools go and where is the evidence? That's one side, and the other side is all those regression therapies and hypnosis and remote viewers, etc., coming up with those visions of Simians or the Tulians [from movies and novels], whoever, coming to this planet to work with us and to create a different type of species.
NATASHA: And who created [inaudible]?
INNA: It's not about who created, but it's in a lot of books that say the history of humanity was very much influenced by these beings, whatever we call them – you know, you can call them whatever. But they were pleasant, and with real gods that we call gods in Egypt or whoever talk to Moses and gave him... You know, I read that somebody gave him this tablet and it was like made by laser by some being with a high technology and they could do it. So it was a lot of influence of, say, maybe more advanced civilization is more on the history of humanity and its influence in history.
ELIAS: Let me express to you: Very realistically, what you have done is, to an extent, you have outgrown God. Therefore, you have invented a new god, and the new god is extraterrestrial. (Laughter) The new god is aliens – beings with higher technology, higher intelligence, more awareness, which are generally God. You have replaced God, to an extent, with a more logical expression of God – not a misty figure, not an elusive father figure that resides in the clouds, not a booming voice but a more practical, more logical manifestation of God: higher intelligence, greater technology, which is basically the same as God. You created God in your image, not God created you in HIS image, and you continue to do so! You create ALIENS in your image and present them with a greater intelligence, a higher technology. I would express to you, No, no, no!
You yourselves – your own species – have developed in a natural and also a curious manner, for… Let me present it to you in this manner. In this time framework, you incorporate the technology of motion pictures, and science fiction in motion pictures is a popular subject.
Now; the apocalypse has always been a popular subject, in relation to science fiction or not. In your science fiction stories, or motion pictures, when you incorporate the idea of the apocalypse and futuristic, what is the general initial expression of what would be subsequent to an apocalypse?
DAN: That technological society is destroyed by an apocalypse, and they start from scratch.
Now; this is a very common theme with your species, that you advance in certain capacities, you evolve in certain capacities, and you de-evolve, and you evolve again in a different manner, and you de-evolve, and you evolve again in another different manner. In that time framework, the types of inventions and the types of materials that you use now for construction and building and designing are different. The materials that were incorporated in other time frameworks were not the same, but the abilities were also not the same.
In that time framework, I would express to you that the reason individuals incorporate such a fascination with the Egyptians is that they were not necessarily as technologically advanced or evolved as you are, but they were individually and energetically MORE evolved than you are. And this is a natural process and pattern that you have generated throughout your history. You evolve in one direction and you create a stop point.
Now, the stop point is not necessarily a destruction. What actually occurs is, you evolve in a particular direction, and you move very progressively in that direction and allow yourselves considerable abilities, but that moves only to a point. And at a particular point, collectively, it becomes recognized that it is a limit point. And therefore, in a manner of speaking, you abandon that direction, and generally speaking in abandoning it, you also in some respects destroy it.
NATASHA: So, it's like erasing all the knowledge that they ever knew.
ELIAS: Almost – not entirely, but almost, for it reaches a point in which you approach an awareness that this is not enough, and it is not effective enough, and is limiting, and therefore it is a time framework to change and to move in a different evolution, a different direction, and you do. And you progress and you progress, and you develop and you develop, and eventually you reach another stop point in which that is not enough, and you will create some expression to change that direction.
Generally speaking, the reason that you move in a direction of destroying is that that creates the motivation to create new, if you destroy. I would express that in some capacities, the Greeks and the Romans were also, in addition to the Egyptians, moving in a very evolved manner which reached a stop point and was not enough, and therefore it also was destroyed, which allows for new growth and entirely different directions.
That is what you are doing now. You have reached another stop point, and you have decided to incorporate this Shift. And in some respects, some aspects of your reality – of your structure of your reality – will be destroyed to make way for a new structure, a new evolution. Therefore, you in your own time framework are actually experiencing one of these evolutionary shifts.
The Egyptians, in many capacities, expressed a greater awareness, objectively, of energy and the movement of energy and the manipulation of energy, which also allowed them to be aware of positioning and structure and all of those factors that you conceive, “How could they create this? They did not incorporate the tools that we incorporate now.” The tools that you have now were not necessary then, for they understood that it was not only a matter of physical manipulation in relation to strength, that it was very much involving a manipulation of energy to create what they wanted. And they became very accomplished with it – very accomplished in relation to manipulation of energy, which you can manipulate physical objects very well with energy.
In this, in that time framework, they did not develop in other manners as much. They did not evolve in relation to technology or tools, physical aspects, as much. Therefore, not being balanced, that created a stop point, an obstacle: “Very well, destroy, rebuild, move in a new direction” – and you did, and you began to manipulate different resources. You began to focus more upon metals and how you could manipulate those resources in different manners and develop them in much different manners, and you allowed yourselves to be very creative and inventive. This has occurred throughout your history.
As to the question of who created you or where did you come from? You created you – a version of you created you. You created a universe first, a physical space arrangement to occupy, and from that, essences, consciousness, partially manifest as designers of species to occupy your universe, which is what I have expressed in the identification of the Dream Walkers. They are versions of you. As you evolved, you developed into actual human species and entirely physically manifest. Dream Walkers were not entirely physically manifest; they were to an extent at a particular point partially manifest, but not entirely. But that also was an evolution of yourselves.
NATASHA: About evolution, all those prehistoric men, Neanderthal men – they were part of the process?
ELIAS: Yes. Yes.
NATASHA: The Dream Walkers being their first, and then…
ELIAS: Yes. All a part of the design, the experimentation, the evolution – which, in your logic and your rationale, you may appreciate. For as essences and creating a physical universe and moving in a direction as essences of wanting to create from a beginning and to create in a manner that allowed the freedom of all experiences and development and expansion, you begin from “no thing” and begin to develop “the things” and allow them to evolve naturally, therefore generating the entire experience and the expansion.
That is the point of consciousness. Consciousness is continuously, never endingly expanding. Therefore, it is always seeking methods and manners in which to create a scenario TO expand, creating a physical dimension. And all that exists within it is a tremendous canvas to explore expanding and developing in MYRIADS of capacities, and that is what you have done.
DAN: But there is a long way between the Neanderthal as we seem to picture it and Vedic civilization or Egyptian civilization or [inaudible]. There is a long way.
NATASHA: Or an Atlantis civilization, which is especially different.
DAN: It’s like one looks almost futuristic, another one looks almost animal-like.
ELIAS: Which also brings us round to what we were discussing in relation to Moses and the 40 years. That seems to be a long time framework – in actuality, it's not, but it is a natural progression of development. And there is much to be explored in your physical dimension before you explode into inventing. Before you even reach the point of inventing, there is a tremendous volume of activity and environment and existence to explore, even before the invention of language! The existence itself is a tremendous exploration!
You are very familiar with existing. For the most part, most of you do not even pay attention to your existence or how you exist; you know that you do, and you function. You are not necessarily paying attention to every aspect of HOW you are existing, or what that existence is, or how it interplays with all that is around you – not merely on your planet! Your sun, your stars, your universe: it all interplays as a physical being in the newness of a physical being. There is a tremendous amount to explore merely in existence: that you exist and that other manifestations exist also! And how do you interplay with all of that? It is a tremendous landscape.
Now, you take that landscape and your existence for granted. You do not even pay attention to it, for you are more preoccupied with what you can invent, and what you can create, and what you can explore in THAT manner, which is also a natural progression. And beyond that, in this Shift you have generated such a tremendous burst of inventing to this point that to an extent you’ve begun to lose interest in that also. You know you can do it; you are aware of your abilities; you are aware that you are creative; you are aware that you are inventive. Now, what is more unexplored territory is the inner landscape: WHO are you? What are you actually? How do you function? – what influences you, not what you can influence. And in that, you shift again into another avenue that allows you to expand and explore.
I would express to you that in relation to the simultaneousness of time, futurely a new exploration will be to combine those and explore what you can influence outward and what you can influence inward and what influences YOU inwardly and outwardly, and therefore combining the inward movement with the outward expression. But at this point your attention is moving and shifting again from being creative and inventive into exploring inner landscapes and what that is – the how and why and what of all of that.
Therefore, no, you are not being visited by aliens. No, extraterrestrials did not build or influence the building of the pyramids or any other unusual structures. No, you are not being visited by spacecrafts. Yes, they do exist, and they are real, and they do bleed through, but you also bleed through to THEIR dimensions, and you are equally as strange and unusual and curious to them as they are to you. And yes, in those bleed-throughs, at times, figuratively speaking, you leave a footprint; you leave an imprint. And at times they leave an imprint too, which are not necessarily communications, are not necessarily messages; they are an imprint that that bleed-through occurred, and it is very real – and this is the reason that you have crop circles.
NATASHA: I just talked about it!
ELIAS: For they are imprints. This is the reason that you have your aurora borealis. It is an imprint. It is a rift between dimensions, and therefore, there is an unusual manifestation in that location. For when different dimensions intersect and you intersect with each other, you do leave imprints. You leave evidences, and you do generate a footprint in that reality to validate that it is real. It does not belong in your reality, but that is not to say that it is not real – it is.
And as I have expressed previously: Every image that you can imagine actually exists. Regardless of how bizarre or strange or unreal it may be, you imagined it for it does exist, and it IS real. It merely may not be a part of YOUR reality.
NATASHA: Okay, can I ask a question about out-of-body? I've read a lot of out-of-body experiences by other people, and some of them are talking about different… that sometimes they get like into a different area. So is it this dimension or another dimension, or is it a parallel universe they get into?
ELIAS: It can be any of these. When you generate a projection – what you term to be an out-of-body experience – what you are doing is you are projecting your objective awareness away from your body consciousness. And in that, you can do that in any fashion that you choose. You can project into other areas of consciousness that are not physical at all. You can project to other dimensions. You can project to other time frameworks. You can project to other areas of your own universe.
You can project your awareness in ANY direction at all. And therefore, the experiences of projections, of out-of-body experiences, can be very varied. For it is dependent upon what the individual is engaging, what their intention is, what their desire is even beyond an intention, what their curiosity is.
NATASHA: I mean, I think that some people just don't know what there is to visit so they just want to have out-of-body in very general terms. They don't know where they’re going when they’re going.
ELIAS: That is also the situation in some cases, in which they incorporate a desire to explore, and they are curious to experience some aspect of reality or some aspect of consciousness that is entirely foreign to them. And perhaps a part of their intention is to be surprised. And in that, they may very well surprise themself! (All laugh)
NATASHA: But again, coming back to this Robert Monroe guy, who actually defined in his books pretty well the areas that he visited and he kind of classified them into focuses, like 15 or 15 through 17 – I just made up the numbers – but there are generally focus numbers that he would call that this is an area of beliefs, this area is like free travel and this area is like a general pool where souls come after they die, and so on.
So, did he know what he was visiting? Because he was visiting those areas through the years, and that he explored them. My question is, did he create them himself? Because other people were able to visit them too, like the TMI Institute and stuff. I would like to know more about this.
ELIAS: (Pause) No, he did not create them entirely himself. I would express that he allowed himself a tremendous openness to allow the types of projections that he did and the awareness of them, the recall. For you all generate projections, and you do it frequently, but generally speaking, most of you do not generate a recall of it. You do store the memory within your body consciousness, but you do not necessarily generate an objective recall of that memory.
Therefore, I would express that he has allowed himself a considerable openness and trust to generate the recall and also to generate the allowance of himself to project in relation to intention, that he was specific and engaged projections specifically with intention.
Now, in that, there is a factor of filtration. I would express that his explanations – his design, so to speak – is his filtration through his perception and what he understands, and therefore, in some capacity, it is a translation of the experiences that is understandable, or that can be understandable.
NATASHA: When translating we always probably lose something, but that's how he was able to translate that.
ELIAS: It will not be precise, but it is significant what he has allowed himself to accomplish and that he has allowed himself that objective awareness and intention in relation to projections. And that what he has developed from that in his philosophy, in his design, in his structure is not entirely his own invention, is what I'm expressing to you; that he HAS actually experienced, and he HAS projected to other areas of consciousness. And in that, those do exist. His design of it is somewhat colored through his own understanding – and also beyond his own understanding what is understandable, what you as a species can understand.
NATASHA: Okay, so whatever is in a human capacity?
ELIAS: Yes, yes. Within a human capacity to understand, yes.
DAN: I wanted to ask about the three of us – or about our pyramid for just the three of us – if there is a direction. And I know it's up to us, and I know it's in the moment. But we discussed previously that, for example, some pyramids have a very specific intent and some do not necessarily. You mentioned our pyramid did not have one at the time, maybe, but –
ELIAS: And let me also interject that, generally speaking, with any pyramid it does not always incorporate an intent in every moment; it fluctuates. At times, any particular pyramid may incorporate a very specific direction or intent temporarily but is not ongoing.
DAN: So, beyond the three of us feeling that we are very much interested in allowing the Shift or helping the Shift – I guess we are part of the Shift – beyond that, is there some indication that we could explore or focus on?
ELIAS: I would express, yes, that all of you share a significant curiosity in relation to unknown factors: unknown actions, unknown areas, unknown manifestations. This is also the reason that you incorporate curiosity in relation to other-dimensional expressions. Therefore, using the pyramid action together can facilitate allowing you to generate explorations in those directions, including projections; that pooling your energies together and using that pyramid action can facilitate those types of actions and explorations in relation to your curiosities quite effectively.
And unknown actions include not only expressions outside of your physical dimension. Even within your physical dimension, defying certain expressions of beliefs, such as very strong beliefs that regulate or set guidelines in relation to gravity, or how reality is manifest, the classic analogy of my own of the apple in your hand and those types of curiosities and unknown expressions or unknown manifestations even within your own physical reality, but also beyond. And those types of directions and subjects you can facilitate more easily by incorporating that pyramid action.
NATASHA: It even could be like suspending some medical beliefs, or beliefs about [inaudible]?
ELIAS: Yes. Now, understand that what you're doing in those situations is not necessarily eliminating or suspending a belief, but what you are doing is you are allowing yourselves to incorporate a different influence and you are focusing away from the common influence and allowing yourself to focus upon a different influence.
NATASHA: I even have ideas that actually you can make up an influence that you can attach to whatever action.
ELIAS: Which you would not be, in your terms, making up; it would merely be that you think you are making it up and you have become aware of it. (All laugh)
NATASHA: Ah, okay! So you say that you can take any mundane action and repeat it in whatever manner or method that you choose –
NATASHA: – and you just kind of give yourself a prescription that “this action will help me with such, such, and such.”
NATASHA: And it will.
ELIAS: And it will!
ELIAS: Yes! For it is a matter of what you focus on, what you concentrate upon, AND what you believe.
This is a very important factor, for as I have expressed many times, believing is merely another word for trusting. But at times the idea of believing is easier to express than the idea of trusting. It is the same action, but it is easier for you to express it if you are expressing that you BELIEVE this. And also, you recognize that BELIEVING can change – whereas, the word “trusting” seems more rigid. It seems that trusting does not change: you either trust or you do not. But trusting changes also.
NATASHA: So believing is more flexible?
ELIAS: You think it is, yes. And this is the reason that it is easier for you to express that or for you to manipulate your reality in relation to that word.
DAN: For example, if I trust myself or trust my abilities, that doesn't mean that I don't discover new abilities or it will increase the trust or place trust where it wasn’t before.
ELIAS: Correct! Or that you may be expressing trust in one direction, in one time framework, and you may approach a point in which that direction is not important to you anymore. And therefore if it is not important to you, you will not pay attention to it, so it is not necessary to trust it any longer, for you will not be engaging it, for it is unimportant.
DAN: Yeah, it feels to me that twenty years ago, in many ways I was more trusting than I am now, in some ways.
ELIAS: But in some manners you are more trusting than you were then, in different manners.
ELIAS: It is very similar to any action that you can incorporate. If you trust that you can ride a bicycle, you will. If you approach a point in which you have no interest in riding a bicycle, it is not necessary for you to trust the bicycle or yourself riding it any longer, for is not important to you, and therefore you may NOT trust the bicycle any longer.
“Trust” is a very flexible expression also; you merely do not perceive it in that manner. Therefore, it can be very helpful and beneficial to exchange the word for “believing.” And you very much do allow yourselves to engage and create what you believe. If you believe it, you will do it. You will create it.
NATASHA: Thank you so much, Elias. [To Inna and Dan] Do you have any more questions?
DAN: We have plenty of questions! (Elias laughs)
NATASHA: Well, let’s go ahead, because Mary’s set for an hour and 15 minutes. That means we have 20 minutes.
DAN: Twenty minutes? Okay. Well, I don't know if those will sound like crystal ball questions, but we have questions about which locations and cultures resonate with us. We have questions about which modalities of healing that resonate with us. Let’s start with locations. Is that okay?
ELIAS: Very well, and offer your impressions. (Laughter)
INNA: For each of us?
NATASHA: I think I resonate with this country, but lately I feel a pull to California.
NATASHA: I don’t know! Actually I talked about it but didn't think about it. (Laughs) Now I’m trying to listen for my impressions and I’m kind of in a space. I don’t know.
ELIAS: Very well. [To Dan] And you?
DAN: Yeah, I definitely resonate with this country, I think, as a whole. But I'm not sure about California because supposedly in California people are more role playing or… it sounds childish, but let's say pretending to be somebody they are not, so I'm not sure I will deal with that well.
I may be able to feel good in a town like this one, and I do resonate, I think, with mountains. I do resonate with Brattleboro and with lakes, with mountains. But then if I imagine myself here, I think l may not be stimulated enough. I may feel better in a bigger city. So I don't have anything strong.
ELIAS: Very well. [To Inna] And you?
INNA: For me, the strongest is Thailand. I would say Tuscany and the South of France? California is good. Brazil, I don't know; I feel I would like to go but I’ve never been there, but I feel that I would love to. (Group laughter) I think that’s it.
ELIAS: These are interesting offerings and very much based upon what you think you like, not necessarily what you actually resonate with, but they are an identification of what you may like.
[To Dan and Natasha] I would express to you both that you would not necessarily resonate with California. And I would express to you both that – [to Inna] and you also, you very much so – that it would not incorporate much time and you would be uncomfortable – you most of all.
INNA: I liked when I was in San Francisco. I liked it.
ELIAS: I would express that for you, in what we have discussed in our previous conversation and your natural inclination for connecting, it would be much more difficult, and therefore it would not resonate with you much. It would be perhaps for all of you fun and interesting to explore, but not necessarily to dwell in that area, for you would not resonate with the culture.
[To Inna] For you, I would express that you would resonate very well, very strongly, in certain areas of Mexico, of certain areas – not entirely, but certain areas – of Chile, and in certain areas of Peru.
ELIAS: Yes. [To Dan] I would express that you would resonate, yes, with this country, that you would also resonate with certain areas of Canada – western areas of Canada, not eastern areas. You would also resonate with certain areas in Egypt.
NATASHA: Really? Wow.
ELIAS: [To Natasha] I would express that you would resonate in certain parts of Switzerland, certain areas of Japan, very much so. That is a very strong resonance with you. I would also express that in certain limited areas, both of you would resonate in South Africa.
NATASHA: I wanted to go to Africa for many years.
ELIAS: Not the entire country, but in certain areas you would both resonate.
INNA: Thank you. That’s interesting.
ELIAS: You are very welcome.
Well, this one we covered I think, but we were also interested in healing. I know Inna is not much interested in healing, but (all laugh) what we were thinking is self-healing or otherwise, what healing modalities, right?
INNA: I tell you what I would like to do in in healing. You take a glass of water, you project your intention to heal and you drink it. It’s that simple.
ELIAS: And you can do that.
INNA: That's what I’m going to do.
ELIAS: And that is merely, once again, a matter of believing. And you can do that.
INNA: Do you like it?
NATASHA: I do.
ELIAS: But what would your curiosities be in relation to healing?
NATASHA: For me it's always, you know… But again, healing is a tricky subject because you're involved with other people.
ELIAS: At times.
INNA: [Inaudible] self-heal too.
NATASHA: I think I DO self-healing.
ELIAS: Correct. At times you are involving other individuals. And what would be the concern in relation to other individuals?
NATASHA: Well, I guess choice. I cannot force my healing onto somebody who doesn’t want it.
ELIAS: That is correct. But an individual that is seeking out healing action is agreeing and willing to accept the energy of another individual in cooperation with their own energy.
NATASHA: Yes, of course.
INNA: You would like to GIVE healing more than receive healing.
NATASHA: Of course I would love to give healing if I could help anybody, but I understand that into this… It's like not a custom, it’s like the whole ceremony, almost a religious ceremony. The other individual needs to believe that you're a healer, right? He needs to trust you and he needs to believe that whatever you will do will help him. So I don't know how to go about it. I don't have such a strong desire to heal, I just… You know, just people that are close to me, I really… [inaudible].
ELIAS: I would express to you that it is actually the reverse to begin with. It is actually that it is necessary for YOU to believe that you can manipulate energy, or that you can sense and define and identify different aspects in another individual in their energy in what may be affecting of them, and that is all that is actually required. For if YOU trust it, if YOU believe it, you will express it. And if you express it, they will believe it, for they will incorporate the evidence of it.
When you are allowing yourself to be attuned to another individual's energy, and you are trusting yourself or believing in yourself that you are receiving communications, or that you are allowing yourself to SEE what may be dysfunctioning with another individual, it is merely a matter of not questioning yourself and expressing – or allowing yourself to express – that confidence that whatever you are receiving is correct, and not to question it or to guess with it, but merely to allow it.
And that actually is a matter of an expression of confidence, for it may not necessarily be that you do not believe what you are receiving, or what you are tapping into, or what you are presenting to yourself but that you may be afraid to express it – or that you may not be confident to express it. And in that, it is a matter of balancing coupling that believing with that confidence that yes, you are correct, and this is what you see.
And the area that this seems to many individuals that entertain the idea of healing [to be] “tricky” is, the individual will lean in the direction of questioning themselves, for they question, “Is this my interpretation? Is it actually correct, or is it my interpretation?” It is both. That is not to say that is not correct. Your interpretation IS correct. It is your interpretation of what you see. That is not to say that it is not correct.
In that, however you translate, it is accurate for you to express it. And let me express to you very definitely, this is the key point. For the thought or the association of “is this my interpretation?” – the reason that individuals express this is that you generate this idea of being accurate, being undistorted, and therefore feeding back to the other individual an undistorted, accurate expression of what is occurring. In actuality, that is irrelevant, for that matters not. The moment the words are projected out of you physically, the moment you express the WORDS of your translation, the other individual receives it and will translate it again. They will translate it in their OWN language!
Therefore, however you express what you are tapping into, what you see, what you feel, it matters not how you express that; they will reinterpret it again themselves.
It is the very same action that occurs in EVERY conversation that I incorporate with ANY other individual. I express the information, and they IMMEDIATELY will interpret that information – not precisely in the manner that I expressed it. It will automatically immediately change, for it is filtered through your own perception, your own ideas, your own experiences, your own associations, how you connect to it. You can express to another individual, you may place your hands upon them or not, and you may feel their energy, and let us say that you perhaps even SEE certain parts of their energy and you may express, “I see a dark, reddish area of your body consciousness in this location, and there seems to be an obstruction or constriction.” And the other individual listening is filtering and processing that information and may be interpreting that in an ENTIRELY different manner. “Red” may be translated to that individual as “hot,” and in their perception you did not even say “red,” you said “hot.”
Therefore, it matters not, and it is –
DAN: But if the individual is suggestible, my concern would be that they would develop a problem where it wasn't before, just because [inaudible].
ELIAS: Generally, no, not in relation to in-the-moment-healing. For as I expressed, they are allowing you to interact with them. If they do not want to know, if they do not want to participate, they will express that to you. They will shield, they will reject, they will recede. If they are cooperating with you, they are agreeing to that interaction, and they are accepting what you are presenting.
In relation to suggestibility, that is much more influencing in regard to directions that individuals express in association with predictions, or premonitions, and expressing in relation to future actions, not what is occurring presently but what MAY occur. Yes, in those situations you can express a suggestion to another individual and it may be likely that they will create what you suggested, whereas they may not have without the suggestion. But that is more in relation to future actions, not present actions.
DAN: I have a quick question. In Castaneda’s books, is she [meaning Inna] Don Juan?
[The timer for the session rings]
ELIAS: No. (All laugh loudly)
DAN: No. Okay. (All laugh)
INNA: I wouldn’t feel it [inaudible]. (Elias laughs)
DAN: Interesting. For some reason it occurred to me.
ELIAS: But a similarity in energy. (All laugh)
NATASHA: Elias, thank you so, so much.
DAN: Elias doesn’t always say yes! (All laugh)
ELIAS: You are correct, I do not. (Laughs)
You are very welcome, my dear friends, as always. I express great encouragement to each of you. And I also express a special appreciation to you each in your accomplishments, in your movements, and in your sensitivities.
To each of you in tremendous lovingness, as always, and in great anticipation of our next meeting, au revoir.
GROUP: Au revoir.
(Elias departs after 1 hour 15 minutes)
Copyright 2012 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.