Thursday, May 3, 2012

Participants: Mary (Michael) and Ann (Vivette)

(Note: This session was not officially recorded. The transcript here was produced with care soon after the session was held, based on a recording made by the participant. The recording has since gone missing due to a hard drive crash. Although the transcript has not been officially proofed, we’re posting it to the website, as the session theme is likely of broad interest to many people.)

ELIAS: Good afternoon!

ANN: Good afternoon Elias!

ELIAS: And what shall we discuss?

ANN: Guess what we’re going to do today?

ELIAS: What?

ANN: We are going to have an intermediate session.

ELIAS: Ah, congratulations.

ANN: And it took a softie to put the questions together (laughing) for the intermediate session.

ELIAS: (Laughs)

ANN: So anyhow I’m going to just go down the list and ask the questions and if there’s time left over maybe I’ll ask some other stuff and if there’s not then we’ll just do as far on the list as we can get.

ELIAS: Very well.

ANN: Okay, so, first question. “You said that intermediates are quite pliable. What is the factor that makes them pliable and makes them easily adjust to other individuals? Can you say more about the pliability aspect and how it is expressed?”

ELIAS: (Chuckles) Yes. The reason that intermediate individuals can interact with different types of individuals and in a manner of speaking are quite pliable is that generally speaking, intermediate individuals do not actually concern themselves with other individuals. Therefore whatever other individuals may be expressing, an intermediate individual generally does not necessarily invest themself in what other individuals are doing or what they are expressing or how they are expressing, therefore in a manner of speaking, as they are not investing themself, they also are not motivated by that factor of proving to other individuals in general interactions or convincing other individuals through debate, for debate is not an expression that intermediate individuals generally engage. That is an action that engages the other individual’s point of view or opinion and in the action of debate, the intention is to win, so to speak, is to move in the direction to overpower the other individual and therefore create the win of the right expression or the right opinion or the right direction. That is the action of a debate. In regard to intermediate individuals, they are not as concerned with whether other individuals think or perceive themself to be right or not, and they are not concerned as much with the rightness of the other individual. Are you understanding what I expressed?

Ann: I believe so, yes.

ELIAS: Therefore, more simply, they are not concerned with convincing the other individual that they themselves are right, for that would require an investment, and they are also not concerned with whether the other individual is right. For whether the other individual is right or not, it matters not in many, many situations with an intermediate individual, for they already generate their own assessment of whether they themselves are right or not, and if they are right, then the other individual’s opinion is a moot point, it does not matter. Therefore, as they are not naturally debaters, there is no motivation or push with most intermediate individuals to convince other individuals.

ANN: Or to change the other individuals.

ELIAS: Yes. An intermediate individual is more likely to stop the conversation or give up than they are to attempt to convince another individual. They are more likely to observe how a conversation is proceeding and what the other individual’s opinion is, and if the other individual is strong in their opinion an intermediate individual is more likely to retreat and not engage them.

ANN: And is that why we would seem pliable is because we’re not trying…because we just let them be them and we be us, or something?

ELIAS: Yes. For there is not as much threat. There is much less confrontational energy. An intermediate individual is much less likely to be confrontational. They are not as likely to push their opinion or their perception in relation to other individuals. Now this is not to say that they automatically accept another individual’s position, but they are not as likely to be confrontational about it.

ANN: Although we can think of exceptions.

ELIAS: Therefore that is interpreted by other individuals as an allowance, and in a manner of speaking it is.

ANN: Yeah. all right, that makes sense. Okay, let me ask another question. “If there were a hypothetical planet that was mostly made of intermediates, what would some of the objective expressions of that planet be like? How would it be different than this dimension’s expression?”

ELIAS: If there were a planet of intermediates, I would express that it would be considerably different. As you are aware, within your planet, most individuals are common, and the significant difference between common and intermediate is the factor of producing. Intermediates produce but in a very different manner. And therefore a planet that would be dominated by intermediate individuals would be much less likely to incorporate inventions of things, for the manner in which intermediates are productive is more in relation to expression, in efficiency. Whatever you do, it is more important to do it effectively or do it more efficiently than to be actually producing a thing. The action is more important to an intermediate, therefore, let us say that as a common may invent a product, a manifestation, a thing to express more efficiency, which is expressed very obviously in all of the...or most of the inventions that you incorporate within your world. For transportation, for communication, a common individual will produce a thing that will facilitate an action. An intermediate individual will produce an action that will facilitate an action. They are more focused upon creating more efficient actions than more efficient things. In that, a planet that would be dominated by intermediate individuals would likely incorporate much less things and they would be developing more effective methods for whatever the subject is that they want to accomplish. As an example, a common individual will invent a train, a locomotive, or an airplane, or a telephone, or an automobile. Some of these inventions are created to facilitate travel. Some of them are created to facilitate communication. An intermediate individual would not necessarily be concerned with travel. They would be more focused upon how to act more efficiently within the physical proximity that they occupy. The aspect of importance upon traveling would be much less, and if there were aspects in which travel would become more important, which that would likely be a lengthy process of evolution for intermediate individuals, for given to their natural nature, it would not necessarily be important to them to travel. But I would express that if that became a subject that was important, they would likely be expressing in directions to develop methods that did not necessarily include physical inventions. Intermediate individuals are not as focused or concerned with objects, which that may seem, in this present time framework, to be somewhat of a paradox, but what your question is, and what we are discussing is your actual nature.

ANN: Well let me ask you something for clarification, because I don’t think I’m understanding the point you are getting at with the travel, because immediately when you said intermediates wouldn’t want to travel, they would want to be concerned with their immediate surroundings, I can think of three intermediates right off the top of my head that love to travel. So I’m not thinking it’s not the love of travel. When you say that they want to do it the easiest…

ELIAS: That is now. Let me express to you, that is now in the environment that you occupy, and travel is available to you. The inventions that facilitate that have already been created. Therefore they are already available to you. It is not that an intermediate would not be interested in adventure or new discoveries. They are not as interested in inventing the physical manifestations that would facilitate that. Therefore, given their nature, if the planet were dominated by intermediate individuals, you would likely incorporate less physical inventions and you would likely create other manners to facilitate similar actions. Therefore I would express to you, and this is all hypothetical, but if intermediates were dominating your planet, it would be much more likely that at this point of your evolution now, you would be teleporting.

ANN: Well! How about that! It surprises me not in the least!

ELIAS: For an intermediate is more focused and more concerned with how to create more efficient actions, not things.

ANN: Now, that definitely resonates, and I read something from Bill Gates the other day. He said, “If you have a difficult problem, give it to someone lazy because they will figure out the quickest, easiest way to do it.” And I’m thinking we could substitute the word “lazy” for “intermediate” here.

ELIAS: You could. And is not a matter of lazy, you are correct. It is a matter of the difference in that lens of perception and what is important in how different individuals process. In that, an intermediate individual is more focused and sees more importance in efficient actions rather than efficient things.

ANN: Yeah, that makes sense to me. Okay.

ELIAS: Therefore, in relation to communications, perhaps a world dominated by intermediate individuals, would be at this point in your evolution, also engaging more telepathic actions rather than the invention of a computer or a telephone.

ANN: Yeah.

ELIAS: For intermediate individuals are more concerned with, and it is more important to them what they themselves can do. And what they do do. Not what can do it for them.

ANN: Okay. Another question. “What is the natural expression or tendency in intermediates with relationships? Is there a general tendency or expression with their sexual expression? I remember hearing Elias say that intermediates may not necessarily be interested in having sex as often or as much as commons, for example. Why?”

ELIAS: What specifically are you asking in this question? Are you inquiring of relationships in general and what is more natural and more important to intermediate individuals, or are you inquiring as to what is more sexual expression?

ANN: Probably both. Let’s start with the first one.

ELIAS: Very well. With regard to relationships, intermediate individuals would more naturally express an ongoing relationship and more comfortable relationship by engaging partners that are a complement not only to themselves but also to their orientation. Now that is not limited only to other intermediate individuals but can be expressed by other orientations dependent upon the individual’s personality, but what would be a significant component would be that the intermediate individual would be allowed to express themself in the manner that they do naturally without competition. Now, what is meant by that is, generally speaking, intermediate individuals naturally gravitate to the position of being central in relation to attention. Now, let me express that in clarity. This is not to say that intermediates naturally want to occupy the spotlight. What it is to say is that, generally speaking, intermediate individuals are comfortable being a center point, which means that whatever is occurring around them is occurring with respect to them, that if the individual chooses to be interacting with themselves and let us say wants to be alone--they want to be alone but they want to know that any other individual around them is available to them when they want them. Not that they necessarily will engage them, but they are most comfortable when they know that those attentions are available to them in any moment, that they do not have to seek them out. Which is also another factor of this efficiency expression. Intermediate individuals are not tremendously motivated to be seeking out or complicating, not that you cannot complicate, and many of you do, and often. But in your natural expression, you will naturally want to move in the least complicated manners, therefore whatever you require or you think you require, should be readily available to you. It should not be an expression that you must engage a tremendous effort to acquire. If tremendous effort is required to acquire some expression, the interest dissipates quickly.

ANN: Boy can I resonate with that Elias!

ELIAS: Therefore if the individual is engaging with other individuals, they are most comfortable if that engaging action is easy. If it becomes difficult or if it requires considerable energy and effort, the intermediate individual will likely lose interest quickly.

ANN: I can’t even imagine somebody wanting to engage something that’s difficult and complicated, but I know….

ELIAS: Ah, but there are many individuals that do.

ANN: I know.

ELIAS: And in that, yes, this is such a natural expression for an intermediate individual that it is difficult to fathom why other individuals would complicate or would express so much energy and effort in any direction, for that is not a natural action for an intermediate individual, in any expression. Even in relation to actions that are fun, or hobbies. An intermediate individual is much less likely to engage a hobby that requires tremendous concentration, or that is extremely detailed and intricate. An intermediate individual will become bored and frustrated with that type of hobby very quickly. If it is an action that they can generate more quickly, easily, effectively, efficiently, they will engage it. Now this is not to say that intermediate individuals will not place themselves in situations that present a challenge, but they do that in situations that will challenge them to discover a more efficient method--a faster and easier, more effective and more efficient method or action of doing whatever they are doing, and they automatically will engage in that manner. This is one action that, at times, can create some dissension or difficulties with other individuals in that an intermediate individual will very quickly recognize when another individual is engaging an action that is not entirely efficient. And the intermediate individual will be prompted to automatically and immediately respond to offer a better method. Or to generate a suggestion, “You could do this in this manner and it would be much more effective.” (Ann and Elias laugh together.) Not always well received. (More laughing.)

ANN: It’s good hearing this stuff and being aware that not everybody thinks the same way you do or I do or any one individual does.

ELIAS: Correct. The interesting aspect with this is that if the other individual that is presenting that intermediate expression to themself would actually allow themselves to stop momentarily and genuinely view or observe what the intermediate individual is offering, generally speaking, the intermediate individual does not generally incorporate an agenda with their suggestion. They generally, once again, are not invested, and therefore it matters not whether the other individual actually accepts their suggestion or not, it is merely an automatic expression for an intermediate individual to offer. Therefore, actually, genuinely, it is not necessarily either a judgment or a threat. The intention is merely born out of an observation and that intermediate individual’s natural automatic expression to automatically discover a more effective and more efficient method, and they automatically generally will express it, but they are less concerned with whether the other individual accepts it or not, for this is another factor with intermediate individuals, is that they are more concerned with what they are doing than what other individuals are doing, and therefore they also recognize very quickly that if another individual is generating an inefficient action, they very quickly recognize, “But I am not doing it, therefore it matters not.”

Now, in relationships, what moves in a natural complement to an intermediate individual is to recognize these qualities and these traits, so to speak, that an intermediate individual will automatically offer suggestions, but is not concerned whether you accept them or not. That they are not necessarily generating a judgment, that is merely the manner in which they process in their world. They are always looking to what is more effective or what is more efficient or what is simpler in any action. Therefore also allowing the intermediate individual to be the queen or the king is another very effective expression in regard to relationships. An intermediate individual is not necessarily apt to be dictating to other individuals, but in relation to wanting to be the center, they almost require being important. Therefore if they can occupy the position in a relationship of being the king or the queen, they will be much more comfortable.

ANN: So what happens when you get two intermediates together?

ELIAS: When two intermediate individuals generate a relationship together, if they are aware of their orientation, they naturally will likely be respectful of each other, and in that would naturally allow that exchange of sharing being the king or the queen, or the king and the queen, and allowing themselves to share that position, for in knowing what their orientation is, they understand that that is a natural expression and they naturally will allow it in the other individual. Now this will eventually occur with two intermediate individuals even if they do not recognize objectively what their orientation is. They will begin to recognize qualities in the other individuals that are very similar to themselves, and they will begin to recognize behaviors that are very similar to themself, and therefore they will begin to generate an understanding and an allowance of the other individual. This is the reason that intermediates, in similar manner to common individuals in this point, express well together in relationships, for they reflect each other well. It can create difficulties if they are not paying attention to themselves, but not in the same capacity as two soft individuals. Intermediate individuals do incorporate also a quality of a natural compassion for whatever is similar to themself. They automatically express a natural gentleness, nurturing, and allowance for whatever they recognize in another individual that is similar to themself. Once again, they are the center.

ANN: Now, for those soft people who I know will be interested, you said “unlike softs.” How is that unlike softs?

ELIAS: Soft individuals, as I have expressed previously, incorporate significant challenges when they pair themselves together unless they are very aware of themselves and aware of their orientation, and are expressing that self-awareness. If they are not self-aware, soft individuals are very likely to generate significant difficulty and irritation in relationships with each other, for soft individuals are less likely to be playing back and forth. Soft individuals do not naturally express back and forth. This is a very common misconception or misunderstanding between the soft orientation and the intermediate orientation. Individuals attach that expression and that quality to intermediates, which is incorrect. Intermediates are very effective at back and forth interaction and they do naturally express that nurturing and allowance in relation to any expression, behavior or direction that is similar to their own. A soft individual will not necessarily express in that manner. Whether it is similar to their own or not, a soft individual does not automatically express that nurturing and that compassion and that allowance to other individuals regardless of similarities. Soft individuals generally are more focused upon their own direction first.

ANN: And they always think that’s intermediates.

ELIAS: In some capacities, in some manners, in some qualities, softs and commons are almost reversed or almost opposites. An intermediate expresses that quality of being very focused upon themself, which in some capacities is similar to a soft individual, which is also one of the reasons that very frequently soft individuals and intermediate individuals can generate very successful relationships of different capacities, and very successful interactions, but what the intermediate individual will express, which would be more similar to a common individual, in one capacity, is that an intermediate individual does pay attention to other individuals also, and does incorporate an interest in other individuals, but where they differ from a common individual is that they do automatically and quite immediately express that nurturing, that allowance, and that sensitivity, in a manner of speaking, to other individuals whenever they recognize similarities to themself, whether it be in expression or in qualities, perceptions, even directions or behaviors. When they recognize a similarity with other individuals, there is that automatic connecting aspect with an intermediate individual.

Therefore, when you view these different expressions and qualities, what would move smoothly and well with an intermediate individual with regard to a relationship would be another individual that is willing to engage them whenever they want to be engaged, a willingness to allow them to move in their own direction and not interrupt them, and acceptance of their natural expression to suggest and not be threatened by that or not be annoyed with it. To accept the expression of the suggestion, not that they must accept the suggestion itself, but to be accepting of the expression or the behavior of offering suggestions, and I would express a willingness to allow the other individual, the intermediate individual, to occupy that position of being the center, and being the queen, or the king. Not as a dictator, but in the capacity of being the center.

ANN: Yeah. Okay, I want to get to two more questions. I think we might be running out of time, but.… Okay, so I guess there’s this thing, “I remember hearing Elias say that intermediates may not necessarily be as interested in having sex as often or as much as commons. Why would that be?” for example.

ELIAS: That is correct. Now, this is somewhat intricate. Intermediate individuals are generally expressing intimacy in different capacities. Intermediate individuals are more likely to appreciate limited physical contact in relation to intimacy and be very satisfied with that, as an example. An intermediate individual would be more likely to be satisfied and comfortable with time frameworks of being physically close to another individual, perhaps touching another individual in limited capacity, such as what you term to be cuddling. An intermediate individual is more likely to be very comfortable with that action but intermediate individuals are not as comfortable, generally speaking, with physical contact. Hugging, cuddling, even kissing, yes. But there is a limit to what they are most comfortable with. When you move in directions of sexual interaction, that becomes somewhat too intimate or too close, physically. Most intermediate individuals are not as comfortable with physical interaction. They want to know and experience that they are important and that there is an expression of affection that is shared with a partner, but for an intermediate individual, their body consciousness is almost sacred. It belongs to them and that is an expression that they are not as willing to share.

ANN: All right, can I interject something here?

ELIAS: You may.

ANN: When you say this, some of it resonates with me but more so, like I, a long time ago quit going to doctors. I almost resented the gynecologist and having them prod me and poke me, and I just don’t want to do it. I’d rather get sick and have the disease take over than doing all these preventative things, blah blah blah, and so when you say that your body is almost sacred, that makes sense to me from that perspective, being an intermediate, but from the sexual…like I know my mother is intermediate and my brother, and I know several intermediate people, and my grandmother who said that they did not enjoy sex that much and that makes sense, but the body being sacred…to me, the sex--that’s a connection.

ELIAS: I am not expressing that intermediate individuals do not enjoy sexual activity. I would express to you that intermediate individuals can be very passionate and can enjoy sexual activity very much. What I am expressing is sexual expression in relation to intimacy.
ANN: But that’s what I don’t get. I think that’s the way to be intimate with somebody, is through sex. Or one of the many ways, I should say. Not the way, but that feels intimate to me. I don’t know.

ELIAS: And, I would express that, just as I have expressed previously with this orientation and with all orientations, these are general statements and they are not a rule. Therefore, this is not to say that there may not be some individuals that express somewhat differently. That is not wrong or bad in relation to your orientation, but generally speaking, most intermediate individuals are less comfortable in sexual activity for they do generate that very same idea that sexual activity is an intimate expression and they are not as comfortable sharing physically that intimacy.

ANN: You would think that would be a soft thing because aren’t softs not liking to expose themselves? But maybe that’s something different.

ELIAS: No. But I would express that there are similarities in that, but the reasons are different. It is not that a soft individual incorporates an expression of not wanting to share their physical body consciousness in that intimacy, for they generate that intimacy with themself. It is more that sexual activity with a soft individual is a matter of passion, and they express passion in so many other directions that sexual activity is not a main direction of passion for a soft individual. With an intermediate individual, yes they do view it as an expression of passion and intimacy, but generally speaking, for the most part, with intermediate individuals, they are less inclined to share that aspect of that physical aspect of intimacy, in very similar manner to your expression of you dislike engaging physicians, for you do not like being prodded. You do not like being touched in certain capacities. I would express to you that it is very unlikely that you would be comfortable at all if you were in a situation in which you were surrounded by several other individuals and they were continuously touching you.

ANN: Yeah.

ELIAS: You would become uncomfortable with that.

ANN: Yeah.

ELIAS: If other individuals around you were standing very close to you while they were interacting with you and were continuously touching you, you would become annoyed, and you would automatically move away.

ANN: Elias, the buzzer rang so I want to get one more quick question in and then we’ll have to go, but, “If the soft expression of power is energy manipulation and recognition, and the common expression of power is in external achievements, what is the intermediate expression of power?” It’s action, right?

ELIAS: Action.

ANN: Ha!

ELIAS: Action and efficiency.

ANN: Oh, we answered that already. I didn’t even need to ask it. Efficiency! (Both laugh) Well, if I didn’t, if there was any question I was an intermediate before, there would be little question now. A lot of it resonated. And, once again, enjoyable talking to you, as always.

ELIAS: And you also, my dear friend. I shall greatly be anticipating our next meeting.

ANN: Me too!

ELIAS: (Laughs) And once again we will return to you.

ANN: Hey, now you’re talking my language, Elias! (both laugh)

ELIAS: As always, in tremendous affection and in great lovingness to you the queen. (Laughs)

ANN: Oh, I love the sound of that! (both laugh)

ELIAS: I express until our next meeting, my dear friend, au revoir!

ANN: Au revoir! And (makes kissing sound).

---

Copyright 2012 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.