Foundations for Relationships
"Foundations for Relationships"
“Differences in Communication”
“Being Present Is Accepting Yourself NOW”
“Processing Is Not Thinking"
“The Importance of Connection”
“You Choose What You Believe, What You Accept, What You Express”
“Your Energy Field, Disengagement and the You of You”
“How to See an Energy Field”
(A video of this session is available .)
(Mary's talk before the session is available .)
Saturday, May 28, 2016 (Group/Hinsdale, New Hampshire)
Participants: Mary (Michael), Adam (Avril), Ann (Vivette), Anon (Lystell), Brighter (Joilee), Brigitt (Camile), Carole (Aileen), Daniel (Zynn), Denise (Azura), Hernan (Hernan), Inna (Beatrix), Jared (Twen), Jean (Lyla), Jean-François (Samta), John (Lonn), John (Rrussell), Lynda (Ruther), Magdalena (Michella), Melissa (Leah), Natasha (Nicole), Rodney (Zacharie), Sandra (Atahfa), Val (Atticus), and Veronica (Amadis).
ELIAS: Good afternoon!
GROUP: Good afternoon!
ELIAS: (Laughs) This day we will be discussing a variety of subjects, but we will begin with one subject that appears to concern many of you in association with communication with other individuals and interacting with other individuals, and how do you communicate or interact and not be bothered by other individuals and their differences, or your own differences, and how do you fit. This is a subject that many individuals concern themselves with: how to fit with other individuals, or how not to be discounting yourself if you don’t fit with other individuals.
And in that, perhaps exploring the subject about how to be drawing to yourself other individuals that incorporate similarities to you, and therefore not be expressing these difficulties in attempting to fit yourself into a situation with other individuals in which you don’t fit, or how to be interactive with other individuals that are very different from yourselves.
You are individuals that naturally gravitate to other individuals that are similar to yourselves. This is a validating action. You automatically are drawn to other individuals that incorporate similar interests, similar guidelines and express in similar manners to yourself.
But with so many individuals in your world, it is very easy to find yourselves in the company of individuals that are very different from yourselves. And in that, you may incorporate some commonalities, but perhaps not enough to generate a foundation for a relationship, a friendship or any other type of relationship.
And in that, individuals become confused, for they express, “But we have this one subject in common, and that should be enough.” But many times it is not enough, for individuals automatically seek out other individuals that express similarities because it is validating to you. Whenever you question yourselves, when other individuals express in a similar manner to yourself, it validates you. It aids you in not questioning yourself as much and not discounting yourself. There [are] enough people in your world that will discount you; it is safe and it is more comfortable to incorporate like people in relationships, regardless of what type of relationships they may be.
Now, in this, this is not to say that everything about other individuals would be the same as yourself, but that there are certain factors, certain guidelines with each of you that are, in a manner of speaking, basic to your personality and how you express yourselves and what is important to you. And in that, those are the factors that aid you in building a foundation that you can base a relationship on.
Now; the difficulty with this is that there are so many individuals that will meet other individuals objectively, view one commonality or express an attraction to another individual, and in that, automatically move forward in a direction of thinking that you can build a relationship with another individual based in one commonality or based in an attraction. And generally speaking, that is not enough for you to actually generate a relationship with another individual.
And what occurs is you begin to generate conflict, you begin to notice differences, they begin to become bothersome, and what many of you do is turn that on yourselves and express that there is something wrong with you, for you are not creating this relationship. You are doing something wrong, or you are not being accepting enough.
Let me reiterate again: acceptance does not require agreement or that you LIKE something. It is not necessary to LIKE something or to agree with it to accept it. Therefore, another individual can be expressing in a very different manner to yourself, and you are not required to like it or to agree with it, but you can accept it.
Now, in that, does that mean that because you can accept it, that you should have the ability to develop a friendship with that individual? Of course not. For what do you have to build on? You require a foundation to build a relationship. If there is no foundation, you cannot build.
Therefore, what IS important is that you DO share commonalities and that you recognize the importance of yourself and of the other individual. That is significant. When you don’t like someone you automatically are generating an association, whether you are thinking about it or not, that this individual is not important. They are no longer important.
In general, philosophically, you may express every individual is important, but on an individual basis, when you encounter another individual that you considerably disagree with or that you don’t like or that is bothersome to you, you automatically express a perception that that individual has become unimportant to you. Therefore, importance is a significant piece of the foundation of building a relationship with other individuals.
Now; in this, how do you determine what you would fit with or what would fit with you? This is not about criteria. This is not about what you want from another individual. It is about what is your natural flow and what flows with it.
What do you naturally generate? What do you naturally do? Are you an individual that is loud and enjoys excitement and is very active? An individual that is very quiet and reserved and observant is likely not a significant match, for those differences are significant enough to begin to generate an association that that individual is not important. Or, you question your own importance because you can’t fit with the other individual and you SHOULD be able to fit.
Now; the reason this is important with all of you, in addition to why it is important in general, but all of you are individuals that generally follow information that I offer. You study, you pay attention, you are developing yourselves, and you are moving in expansion. The pitfall with that is that individuals incorporate a tendency to be more harsh and judgmental with themselves, for you generate an expectation that you have so much information you should be enlightened. You should know better. You should BE better at whatever you are doing. This is a very harsh judgment that you express with yourselves. It is such a harsh expectation of yourselves.
Now; what is so important is having that ability to accept yourself NOW. We have engaged conversation and information considerably about the subject of being present. Being present is accepting yourself, who you are and what you are NOW, in this moment in this day, and how you express yourself - everything about you.
That is not to say that you may not express some aspects of yourself that you want to improve or you want to expand. That is natural. Remember: this is the nature of reality. You are always creating more. Therefore, you are always expanding.
Therefore, in that, there will always be some aspects of yourself that you want to expand, that you want to improve, that you want to express better. That is natural. It is not automatically natural to couple that with discounting what and who you are now, and automatically expressing that you are not enough or not good enough or not expanded enough or not shifted enough now - you are. It is a matter of accepting who you are, what you express, HOW you express now, and in your perception it may not be perfect, and it may not be everything you want yourself to be yet, but it IS good enough now. That it is not lacking now, THAT is significantly important.
And in that, this is an important factor that interplays with how you engage other individuals, and how you develop relationships. For in this, as I expressed, it is not about criteria lists: “I want this individual to be tall, and they should be of a certain complexion, and they should have a good sense of humor, and they should be kind, and they should be interested in Elias’ information (group laughter), and they should be independent, and incorporate a sufficient job; and in that, be sexually active, be complimentary to me – flattering is always good (group laughter) – and with blue eyes.” (Group laughter) This is your criteria list.
It is not about a criteria list. (Group laughter).
ANON: It IS a criteria list.
ELIAS: Ah! (Group laughter) It is not about incorporating a criteria list of what you want the other individual to be or what you want them to look like, or how you want them to express themselves. Your criteria list is based on an altered form of a clone of you.
In this, rather than a criteria list, it is about knowing who YOU are, being present and accepting who you are NOW, in this day, TO-day, not concerning yourself with who you were yesterday or four hours ago, not concerning yourself with who you will be tomorrow or next week, but who you are today, and what is important to you, what is ALWAYS important to you.
An individual that genuinely loves and interacts with animals, this is a part of your expression every day. This is a part of how you express yourselves. This is a very important point, for this is the gauge of what your flow is, what your natural expression is, and what you will be attracted to or what sets the guidelines for other individuals that are similar to you - not identical, not entirely the same, but that have similarities to yourself - that you can build on those commonalities.
An individual that incorporates a genuine love of animals, this is an individual that this is a part of how you express yourself. Not that you are always engaging a subject of animals, but if you pay attention to anything that is a part of how you express yourself, you will begin to notice that parts of that show through.
An individual that is passionate about animals - even if they are not speaking about animals, even if they are not engaging any subject that objectively is connected with animals - while they are speaking with you and how they move will be different. Their movements in their body will be more flowing, as to not be startling. Their voice will generally be more even - not loud, not too soft, not abrupt - for that is also related to how they interact with animals: to be soothing, to be engaging, to not be threatening.
Individuals will express themselves in their movements and their tone in HOW they engage you in relation to what is important to them, what is the manner in which they express themself.
An individual that expresses themself in a very analytical manner, perhaps a mathematical manner, these are expressions of you. They are ongoing, consistent interests whether you engage them or not, for you may have time periods in which you are not engaging that particular subject, but you never deviate from that underlying interest.
Individuals that incorporate a mathematical and analytical interest and express themselves in that manner will likely express in their body language certain postures. They likely will not be individuals that are completely slouched. (Group laughter) They likely will be individuals that move more precise. This is not to say that they may be rigid, but they are definite in their movements. When they speak, they will be precise in how they are speaking. When they interact with you, they will be looking for those aspects of whatever you express that they can connect to in an analytical manner.
An individual that is expressing themselves in an artistic manner may include in their speech how they describe what they are explaining in manners that are connected with either movement or color, or even tones. They may not use the words of colors, but they will incorporate words such as warm and cool and soft and hard and flowing, and they will use words that reflect that natural expression of themself. This is how they express themself.
And in that, when you know what your genuine interest is and you know what your natural expression is, you also will know what individuals you flow with and what individuals you will not necessarily flow with. You can accept the individuals that you don’t flow with, but that does not mean you must or should be generating relationships with them.
For it is not better or more enlightened or more awakened or more accepting of you to force yourself to be amiable and polite and engage individuals that are moving in directions as opposing magnets. Regardless of how you express yourself, if you are engaging individuals that are opposing magnets, you will never stick together. When you oppose magnets, what do they do? They push away. They will always push away.
You as people are not designed to be developing relationships with every other individual on your planet.
Let me express to you, the reason this is important is that you gauge so much of yourselves by what you reflect to yourselves in other individuals, and you use that to discount yourselves and to question yourselves.
If another individual is not expressing to you in a manner that is favorable, let us say, you automatically are wondering, “What am I doing that is creating this situation?” and “What am I doing wrong?” and “How long do I have to do this before I get it?” (Group laughter) “How much do I have to WORK on myself before I am happy? How much do I have to UNCOVER before I am able to express myself and engage fun? Why is it always work? Why can’t I merely have fun?”
Every single individual in your world has some type of issue. Every single individual in your world incorporates some type of problem or some aspect of themself that they don’t like, or something that they wish was better, or something that they want to improve.
(Clearly and deliberately) It is not imperative that you pull yourselves apart and that you dissect yourselves and that you analyze yourselves to nauseating degrees. (Group laughter) In actuality, that does not help you, and it does not give you more information about yourselves. It merely frustrates you, and it adds to how much you discount yourselves.
I would express to you this day that all of this information is leading you all in the direction of allowing yourselves to BE who you are now.
There are certain expressions, there are certain qualities or associations that you may have that you notice that you don’t like and that are repeatedly difficult for you. And those certain aspects are significant to address to. That is not every aspect of your life. That is not every aspect of yourself.
At times, each of you incorporates some difficulty that you don’t understand or that there is some aspect of what you are doing that you are not satisfied with or you don’t like or you are not happy. ALL of you experience that. You are not living in utopia.
In that, when you notice what you don’t like or what is creating a situation that you are not happy, then it may be beneficial to look at that one subject and address to that, to allow yourselves to be more aware and therefore move in a direction in which you can be more accepting of yourselves. But in general, everything about your lives does not require being analyzed. If you choose to incorporate a ham sandwich and you choose to drink coffee, it is not necessary that you analyze every reason why you chose the ham sandwich and is drinking coffee good for you or bad for you or is it going to kill you? (Group laughter)
If you incorporate some aspect of your life or some outside source - let us use coffee as an example - and I qualify, any of you that enjoy drinking coffee, continue to do so. (Group laughter)
Let us say, as an example, that you are consuming coffee on a daily basis and you notice that your body is not responding to that coffee in a favorable manner. You feel uncomfortable. Does that mean that coffee is poison to you? No. Does it mean that coffee is poison to everyone, in every situation? No. Does it mean that perhaps you might observe that one element in your life and alter it to allow you to feel more comfortable? Likely so. But it is not necessarily some deep-seated issue that you are expressing.
In this, knowing this also can help you to be accepting of what your natural expression is: that everyone incorporates their own individual balance. One individual’s balance is different from another individual’s balance. One individual’s balance may seem to other individuals to be extreme. And it may not be, for that one individual. It may be their balance.
Some individuals are more intense than other individuals. Some individuals are more emotional than other individuals. Some individuals are more analytical. It is a matter of recognizing, what are YOU. Some individuals are loud, and some are quiet. Does that mean being loud is bad, or being quiet is bad? No. That may be a natural expression for the individual.
It is a matter of rather than analyzing yourselves, looking at yourselves and finding what is you, and finding what you like about you, rather than all of the aspects that you don’t like about you.
You already know what you don’t like about you. Therefore, I would suggest that you lay that to rest, for each of you is acutely aware of what you don’t like about yourselves. You may not be as aware of what you do like about yourselves. Therefore, that may be an official exploration. What DO I like about me? What is good about me? And what do I have to express that benefits everyone around me? Not what is my mission (group laughter), but what do I add to everything around me? For every one of you does, merely by breathing. Not necessarily by what you earn, but by existing you are adding to everything around you. How are you doing that? You do it every moment, regardless of how useless you think you are. You are not, and you are always adding to everything around you. In this, what I would express, give yourselves credit. You deserve it, and more.
We shall open for questions. Yes?
ANON: Hi, I’m (Anon). I don’t know the protocol.
So in a situation in which there is a need or it’s beneficial to interact with another individual who you already know you don’t have a lot of commonality with – you know that, or you kind of perceive that they are discounting you in some capacity – what would be in that situation the best way to approach that person, to interact with them, to attain what you want?
ELIAS: Very well. First of all, recognize that when you are approaching or interacting with another individual, the first piece is not to assume that they are discounting you, for when you move in that direction, you likely will reflect that.
Therefore, if you are assuming, unless the other individual is blatantly expressing to you, “I don’t like you!” – that would be an obvious display – but otherwise, I would express if you incorporate an interest or you have some investment in wanting to be interactive with an individual for a particular reason - let us use an example of a student and a professor. And in that, the student may want information from the professor, and the professor may not necessarily be responsive to the student. That is not necessarily to say that in the professor’s perception that they are discounting or even dismissing the student. But the student might perceive that in that manner. Therefore, that can be an example of what you are expressing.
In that, as the individual that is looking for the information or the interaction from the other individual, if you are not generating, such as the student, what you want in a particular time framework, then it is a matter of allowing yourself to pause, express to yourself, “Where am I?”, and then look around you. Take in your environment. Recognize what is occurring around you.
When other individuals are not responsive to you in the manner that you want them to be responsive to you, there can be many factors involved in that type of situation. Let us use our professor and the student as an example.
Now; if the student pauses and expresses that question to themself, “Where am I?”, which means “What am I doing? What type of energy am I expressing? What am I engaging? Am I being demanding? Am I pushing? Am I inviting, or am I expecting?” Also, in addition to that, if, let us say, the student answers themself by expressing, “No. I do not believe I am pushing. No, I do not believe that I am expecting.” If the individual can express no to themself in all those different questions, then it is a matter of look around you. What is occurring in your environment? The professor may be distracted. It may not be you. It might be, for you might answer some of those questions, “Actually yes, I do have an expectation in that I want this, and actually perhaps I am pushing.”
But even if the student is expressing no to all of those questions, it might not be a situation in which the student is creating a difficulty. It might be that there may be outside stimulation or situations that may be distracting the professor. Therefore, in that, as the student evaluates, looking around themself and expressing, “Ah! There is considerable stimulation occurring in this moment, and that could generate significant distraction.”
And in that, then it would be for the student to evaluate, “What would be a better time framework for me to engage this individual to accomplish what I want individually? And perhaps I can choose another time framework in which I can engage this individual.”
For you are evaluating what do you want and what is the timing. Is the timing conducive to what you want, or is it not? Is the timing moving in opposition to what you want? This is all about what YOU are creating. But it is significant to recognize that you are not occupying this reality alone. Therefore, other individuals are expressing themselves also, in their own capacity.
And in that, when you can discern which part of what you are reflecting is you DOING - in the capacity of perhaps pushing or perhaps expectation - which part is not you DOING but is you choosing something that is not precisely conducive to what you want? Which could be timing. It could be environment. It could be how you are expressing.
Therefore, it gives you information, for you are creating every aspect of your reality, but you are not creating what the other individual does. But you are creating BEING there with the other individual; you are INCLUDING them in your reality. In this, the other individual is reflecting, in some capacity, to you.
Therefore, it may not be reflecting to you what you are doing. This is the aspect of reflection that so many individuals confuse. They think of reflection as a mirror: if this individual is expressing in this manner, I must be doing that. No, not necessarily. You may not be. But it may be an opportunity for you to look at other factors, not necessarily what I am doing that is creating this reflection, but I am drawing this reflection to myself to be aware of other factors and what my choices are. And in that, what can I choose differently that will allow me to accomplish what I want to accomplish in an easier and more flowing manner?
But what is significantly important initially is not to assume. Not to assume that another individual is expressing in a particular manner in any given moment, for your assumption is based in your guidelines, not theirs.
Therefore, whatever you are assuming, it may or may not be correct. You actually have a less than fifty-fifty percentage of your assumption being correct, for you are projecting onto the other individual what YOU feel and what YOU think and what YOU perceive and what YOU would or wouldn’t do in the same situation. And if they are expressing differently from what you would or wouldn’t do in the same situation, there is an automatic assumption that they are discounting you or they don’t like you or they are opposing you, if you will personalize it automatically.
And in that, that is what is assumption feeds. It feeds personalizing. And it is not about personalizing. It is about knowing what you are doing and what you want and how to create that in a more effective and efficient manner. It is not that you can’t, but be aware of what you are expressing. From the initial moment that you begin expressing that assumption, you are already changing YOUR energy and you are projecting an energy that pushes away, regardless of what type of assumption you are generating.
Even if you are assuming that another individual is nice and loving - even if you are assuming in a positive manner, what you think of as a positive manner - when you assume, you are automatically projecting yourself onto the other individual. And when you do that, regardless of HOW you do it, you automatically are projecting an energy that the other individual will oppose.
(Clearly and deliberately) None of you like to be told what you are or what to do. Without speaking at all, that is what you are doing when you assume about other individuals. You are telling them in energy what they are. And they may not hear one single word, but they will feel that, and they will automatically push away. None of you want to be told who you are or what you are doing. That is assumptions.
ANON: Thank you.
ELIAS: You are very welcome. Yes?
JOHN: Let me take the mike.
JOHN: This is efficient. (Elias laughs) Running joke.
So I have a question, because you talked initially about this type of discount. It could be discounting, or it’s just sort of an intellectual pitfall, right? One can get into what is interaction with other individuals, and I think that – I just want to express this right – there is a concept or philosophy that may be applied overenthusiastically, which is that in any given situation or scenario with any given individual, if you are having the quote-unquote right perception, then any outcome is possible.
JOHN: And so, that -
ELIAS: And what is the right perception? THAT is what I was expressing in relation to being enlightened or awakened or shifted. That would be the right perception, would it not?
JOHN: I don’t know. It could not. It’s a concept that may be incorrect, but every individual has the ability to manipulate a situation with any specific other individual into whatever outcome they want it to be.
LYNDA: Really? That’s not true.
ELIAS: Incorrect. I would express -
JOHN: I think that is a guiding - yeah, change your perception -
ELIAS: I would agree that there are many individuals that incorporate that perception and that idea. There are many, and that is the reason that I expressed that previously about being enlightened and awakened.
There are many individuals that incorporate this idea, that yes, if you have the right perception or if you are expanded enough or if you are accepting enough, that not only CAN you manipulate anything and create anything you want in relation to other individuals, but that you will. And that you will always draw to you everything that you want, and you will never be bothered, and you will never present anything to yourself that is irritating or that is bothersome or that you don’t like. That is entirely incorrect.
If that were so, first of all, it negates choice. It eliminates half your choices. Also, you would not be in this reality. And you are. You are physically participating in this reality. And if that were the situation, you would poof away and not be in this reality, for that is not how this reality operates and functions.
In this, you are not creating utopia. And you do not incorporate the ability of mind control, in your words, in relation to other individuals. And you CANNOT manipulate other individuals in creating their reality.
I have expressed from the onset of this forum, that is one aspect you cannot do. You cannot create other individuals’ choices or their reality. You do not.
In this, yes, you all have influences; you do. Yes, you all have the ability to manipulate energy. You do NOT have the ability to create another individual’s reality or their choices, no matter how much you manipulate.
Now; in that, what you CAN do - which is an entirely different subject - you can create your own image of another individual, which is merely a projection of YOUR energy in the form of another individual. You can do that, and you can manipulate every aspect of it, because it is your energy, and it is your image. In this, you are not directly interacting with any other individual. You are not interacting with any other energy, only your own. And therefore, yes, you could create an image in whatever form you choose.
JOHN: I don’t need to keep extending this, but I think one area where this comes up a lot is this idea of collective versus individual.
ELIAS: Very well. In relation to a collective, I would express that whenever you incorporate two or more individuals, the energy you express together in cooperation with each other is stronger and therefore is more powerful. You can manipulate more quickly, more effectively, at times even more efficiently. When there [is] more than one individual together in the same direction, that is a cooperation. That is not one individual manipulating many individuals to do something. Every individual is choosing whether they choose to participate or not.
Now; in that, yes, there are time frameworks throughout your history in which individuals seem to be controlled, but they are choosing to allow that to happen. And in that, the age-old question is why would anyone choose to be manipulated or to be controlled? But in actuality, you ALL do at times. There is not one of you that has never allowed yourself to be manipulated or to be guided, or in simple terms to be controlled.
You ALL do it, and you all have experienced it, but that is a choice also. You choose to allow yourselves to move in those directions, and that generally occurs in not being as self-aware. But is that an actual expression of one individual genuinely actually manipulating and controlling another individual? No. It is not. You can’t. You cannot do it.
ANN: This is Ann, and I’m kind of curious about when you talk about compatibility in relationships. Sometimes I think - for an example, my brother. Like I think I would be compatible with him in philosophical things. And even I remember as a little child - I guess the question would start where we’re not compatible – and you’ve said something that made me kind of rethink this, but – we’re not compatible in some aspects, or it might be more difficult to be in a relationship with him because I feel that he doesn’t have the confidence in himself, that makes him maybe act differently. It’s not like this as much anymore, but just as an example I remember being a child and he gave me a dollar bill or five dollars or something and he says, “Oh, you can have it,” and I was like excited, but then I know he didn’t want me to have it, so he said it was counterfeit. And I remember knowing it wasn’t counterfeit, but I remember thinking I didn’t - and I guess, it’s coming from me, the thinking I didn’t want to - I was thinking he was vulnerable in his self-confidence or whatever and didn’t, even though I’m the younger sister, didn’t want to contribute to that, so I gave him the dollar back.
So the question is, I think we would have a different relationship if he felt more secure about himself. But then as I listened to you talk, I was thinking the reason it was hard for me was because I wasn’t expressing myself genuinely, because I was worried about his feelings. And I think that that was my little epiphany that I just had, that that is the difficulty, so maybe it’s my fault (laughs). Or maybe the difficulty is on my end.
But my curiosity is, I do think it would be easier to get along with some people that I think I’m compatible with, but if they don’t feel good about themselves it’s harder to get along with them. Or like with my daughter, when she doesn’t feel good about herself, it’s just so difficult to be with someone who doesn’t like themselves. But you MAY be compatible. So did you get my question?
ELIAS: Yes. (Group laughter) That’s an excellent point. And in that, one of the reasons that it is an excellent point is that the answer is not black and white.
There is a part of the answer in when you were children what seemed incompatible, you are correct, that that reflection at that time was more of a mirror, that you could see in this individual a piece of this individual and how they expressed themselves that was very similar to yourself, and you didn’t like it. And that was more of a mirror situation.
Now; as time moves forward and you engage the same individual and you begin to see that it is not only that individual but any individual that is not self-confident or does not view themselves in relation to their worth or discounts themselves, that that is more difficult for you to engage with that type of individual, and there are two aspects of this.
Remembering, we began with the mirror, therefore this may be an entirely different situation with a different individual. With a different individual that never had that mirror action occurring and always was repelled by individuals that are not self-confident or not valuing themselves, and never themselves express that lack of self-confidence or questioning of themselves in how they express themselves, it would be a very different situation and a different answer.
In this, with you, knowing that initial piece in which there WAS a mirror, and then moving forward and becoming more confident in yourself and expanding and developing and evolving as you have, and becoming more expressive and more comfortable with yourself and accepting yourself, now it is no longer a mirror. When other individuals express themselves in a less confident manner, it is not because you are (inaudible) to yourself any longer, but it does remain a reflection.
And in that, this piece for you is, this is an expression that you didn’t like yourself. It has always been, in your experience, an aspect that you didn’t like, and therefore NOW it is a reminder of what you don’t like.
It is an opportunity to be accepting and to recognize that that is a reflection. Does that mean, once again, that if you are enlightened enough, or if you have the right perception, that you could have a relationship with one of these individuals and it would not be bothersome to you? Very likely not.
For that is not a commonality. And it would continuously be a reminder to you of what you don’t like. Therefore, it would be difficult, for you would be then influenced to continuously be trying to encourage or uplift or build up the other individual. And where is your attention?
ANN: And that’s assuming, kind of (inaudible).
ELIAS: Yes it is. Yes it is. And where is your attention? Are you being present when you are doing that? No, you are not. Therefore, it would be very distracting for you. That is not a foundation for a genuine relationship. That is a foundation for I-want-to-fix-you.
ANN: Right. So if I change myself, or if I drop - I can already feel a little bit of that dropping. So if I were to drop that wanting to fix them and just be with him, I could actually make it, but it would still be annoying, even if I drop it?
ELIAS: No. It may not be annoying to you. I would express that it may not be bothersome to you, and that would be a tremendous step and an accomplishment. But I would also express that if he were to continue long term to express in that manner, even in accepting and even moving to a point in which you would not be bothered and you would not be fixing, you would have no common ground to build that foundation.
Now; does that mean that you cannot accept that individual, that you cannot love that individual, that you cannot interact with them? No, you can. Will you likely develop an intimate relationship with that individual? Not likely.
ANN: So just a quick one, and we’ll go on to it more in my private session, but like with my daughter I feel a little bit differently, the past and stuff. I feel that when we grow that we could have a better chance of developing an intimate relationship than with my -
ELIAS: Very much so.
ANN: Okay. Thank you.
ELIAS: We shall break, and we shall continue shortly.
GROUP: Thank you.
(Break after 1 hour 12 minutes, for 1 hour and 23 minutes)
ELIAS: Continuing! And your questions.
VERONICA: Thank you. It’s Veronica. Elias, you refer to our controlling, creating our own environment, not creating the reality of others, so could you explain how we perceive the other person acting in a way that does not conform with reality, with our perception of the other person’s actions?
ELIAS: Define “not conform with reality.”
VERONICA: Of what’s not actually happening.
ELIAS: And how would you define, how would YOU define, what is not actually happening between you?
VERONICA: I’m talking to the other person and I’m asking them if they will do something, and the person says no, but I walk away from the conversation thinking that the person said yes. So in my mind, I’m left with a positive response, but in actuality that’s not what happened. Would you say that that was my imagination?
VERONICA: No? Oh.
ELIAS: But it is a matter of perception. And in that, this is the reason that I have expressed many times that you each are creating your reality and they don’t always match. And in that, your perception is what creates what is real. And what is real for you may not be the same as what is real for another individual. And it is not always a misunderstanding.
In many situations there ARE misunderstandings, for individuals are not adequately communicating with each other, which is another subject which we can touch upon also. But in a situation such as this, it is not necessarily that you are misunderstanding or that you are imagining a scenario, but that you create one outcome and another individual creates a different outcome.
Now; in that situation, there can be many variables that create those differences in each individual’s reality in which they don’t match. In that, it can involve how you are interacting with another individual. What becomes confusing is when that occurs, each individual perceives that whatever they expressed in their reality was the real reality, and that the other individual misunderstood or expressed differently or changed it.
And in that, in many situations that is likely not the scenario that is actually happening, that you are actually expressing two different realities that are not quite entirely intersecting, regardless that you are actually engaging a conversation or you are in the same time and the same place in the same scenario with another individual, and your perception moves in one direction and their perception moves in a different direction.
Now; in that, when that occurs there can be many reasons why that occurs. For remember: everything in your reality is reflecting to you. Not mirroring, but everything is reflecting to you, therefore there could be many reasons that there was somewhat of a disconnect between yourself and the other individuals.
And as I expressed previously in the other scenario, it may not necessarily be that you heard incorrectly or that you were projecting in a manner that you didn’t want. It may be the other individual in that moment may have been interacting with you, and THEY may have changed the response. Or they may have been moving in a direction of interacting with you, and at some point they may have changed the energy of that and they may have changed their response. What you were receiving may have been their initial response. And they changed it.
Therefore, there are variables. It does not occur often, relatively speaking. For the most part, when you are interacting with another individual you are creating a reality in which they do for the most part match. Meaning, you can misinterpret through how you are expressing yourself or how you are hearing another individual or what influences are in play in a particular moment. Therefore, that is a possibility.
Relatively infrequently do you find yourself in a scenario in which both individuals are creating different realities that are obviously different and both individuals will move in an absolute direction, that what they expressed was what they expressed and what they heard or what they experienced was what happened and it didn’t, in your reality. It really didn’t, in the other individual’s reality, and vice-versa. For in that, the other individual will express, “But you did this,” and you will maintain in an absolute manner, “No, I did not.”
In this, those are intersections in which likely what is occurring - this is in general, with obviously other specific elements, dependent upon the situation, but in a general sense - what is likely occurring is that both individuals are not actually concentrated in that interaction. Each of the individuals is somewhat distracted, and therefore one creates one reality and the other creates another reality and they don’t match.
But in that, when it is an expression that is that obvious, that clear of a distinction of an opposite and a significant difference, that is generally not a misunderstanding. That is generally you are creating two different realities in that moment. It is a matter of misunderstandings being not as black and white, not as obvious. There are interpretations that are being expressed or, as we expressed previously, there could be a projection of an assumption that is occurring which would create a difference. But even in that, both individuals are creating some similarities in their realities. There are connecting points. Whereas in a situation such as this, both individuals are creating very different expressions. (Pause)
DENISE: Can you say a little more about what we discussed in my session on Friday about differences in intensity and how that can affect relationships, and observers versus whatever the opposite would be? (Group laughter)
ELIAS: As you are all aware, each of you expresses your own unique energy, your own unique personality, in how you express yourself. And in that, as we were discussing previously, this is not to say that with differences you cannot generate a relationship with another individual, if you do incorporate enough commonalities to build a foundation.
But in some situations, some of those differences may express themselves in obvious manners, and that can at times be frustrating to each of the individuals, or it can create miscommunications or misunderstandings. And also at times it can create a situation in which the individual themself may incorporate a stronger tendency to question themself and wonder what they are doing wrong or how they are expressing themself in an inadequate manner or in a wrong manner; or in that, they may question themselves in the capacity of wondering what to do to change how they are expressing themselves. And in some capacities, how they are expressing themself is natural, and therefore they would be attempting to change their very self to accommodate some idea of what they should be.
Now; in this, what we were discussing are differences in some personalities in relation to some individuals express themselves more subtly, in more of a position of being an observer. And these individuals are less contributing in conversations, are less overt in what they are expressing.
And many individuals that express that natural direction of observing generate an action that most of you don’t. They think and speak at the same time. They think while they are communicating. They think about what they are communicating, how they are communicating, what words they are using. Therefore, these individuals generally will incorporate more pauses while they are engaging a conversation. They will generally display a behavior of listening more than contributing, and when they do contribute, they may be speaking more softly. They may at times seem to be mumbling. They are not necessarily, but they are thinking about their words as they are expressing themselves.
Most of you don’t do this. Most of you don’t think while you speak. You are not thinking the words while you are saying them, and you are generally not thinking the words before you say them. You are processing very quickly, and you are not necessarily processing in words. The words are formed in a natural action in relation to all of the information that you have already processed or are processing while you are engaging.
Therefore, you engage a conversation with another individual, and you very quickly respond, and when you are speaking of a subject, you are flowing with your speech and you are more likely to speak more quickly. And in that, you are more likely to enunciate more clearly, for you are not thinking the words.
Some individuals process very differently. It is not necessarily slower. They may be processing as quickly as any of you, but they are doing it in a different capacity, and therefore they are generating more pauses, they may be speaking more softly. And in that, they even may speak more slowly at times, but that is not an indicator that they are processing more slowly. They are processing the same. It is merely the delivery that is different.
Now; in this, some individuals are expressing themselves with more intensity. And in that, as I was discussing previously, it is not only the manner in which individuals express themselves verbally, but you will notice, if you pay attention, that just as we were speaking of how individuals express themselves in relation to their interest, how they express themselves in relation to how they process is also a factor.
An individual, as I expressed, that is more of an observer likely will express themself more softly in volume. An individual that generates in their own balance more of an intensity may be more inclined to express themself loudly. And in that, they may also incorporate movements with their body that are more obvious, more exaggerated, in a manner of speaking. They are emphasizing what they are expressing through movement of their body. Their body is responding to that intensity.
Therefore, in this, it is not that those differences in expression are necessarily a factor that would prevent individuals from generating a relationship together, if there are enough other factors that are commonalities. But it can create a challenge.
When you are engaging a relationship with another individual and you are expressing some significant differences, that can create challenges for both of the individuals in understanding, in patience, in accepting and not moving in directions of either judgment or skipping ahead and doing for.
Now; when you are skipping ahead and doing for, you may not be doing that verbally; you may be doing it in your thoughts. In which, the other individual is expressing themself and you are skipping ahead of them and expressing for them in your own thoughts, in which you are no longer listening to what the other individual is expressing.
And that can be expressed in either direction. Regardless that the individual that is expressing more intensity may be inclined to speak faster and is not thinking while they are speaking, therefore they appear to be processing faster, it is not necessarily entirely correct. And the individual that is the observer could be - because they are thinking while they are speaking or they are engaging their thought process throughout the scenario while the other individual is speaking - they may be themselves skipping ahead and expressing for, meaning they are anticipating what the other individual is going to say before they say it.
Which, at times you may anticipate what another individual is going to say before they say it, because they have already said it, because they have already expressed themselves and they are in a sense repeating themselves. But in many situations you may not be correct in what you are skipping ahead and expressing for with the other individual, and what occurs is then you don’t hear them, for you are not listening. And you hear what you anticipated.
Therefore, YOUR words are now, in a manner of speaking, metaphorically, coming out of the other individual’s mouth, which is not actually occurring. This is different from what we were discussing in two different realities. But this would be an example of a misunderstanding, for the other individual is becoming impatient and is skipping ahead and is expressing within themselves for the other individual, “You are about to say this. I already know that.” But you don’t know that, because the other individual hasn’t said it yet.
And in that, if the other individual does say what you are anticipating, it is because they have already said it and they are merely repeating themselves. Therefore, they have already communicated that expression to you, and you know they are being repetitious. But this also can create misunderstandings and difficulties, for you are distracting yourselves. You are not actually being present. You are not actually listening.
Now; what becomes a difficulty in these types of situations is that first of all, individuals that are more inclined to be observers and do generate that action of thinking while they are speaking, they also incorporate a tendency to be thinking while they are listening. And that can be a stumbling block. For when you are thinking and attempting to listen, you are not actually listening.
Processing doesn’t require thinking. But if you are an individual that is thinking while you are speaking, that is such a natural action and it is so familiar that it spills into thinking while you are listening, and that can be distracting.
In this, in many, many situations, even if you are an individual that isn’t thinking while you are listening, if the other individual is, they can influence you to do the same.
Now, this is not creating another individual’s choice. It is not manipulating another individual. But you all influence each other when you interact, and even when you don’t interact you are influencing of each other.
In that, if you are engaging conversation with another individual, and while they are speaking and you are appearing to be listening, for you are being quiet, therefore you seem that you are listening but you are thinking while they are speaking, you are not genuinely listening, and therefore you are projecting an energy of not listening, and the other individual receives that and will likely automatically do the same.
Why do individuals move in groups and express themselves in a manner that seems to be controlled and that they seem to be expressing themselves in a manner of sheep? This is one of the reasons, is that they are expressing very similarly.
And in that, they are not listening. And when you aren’t listening, then all you are processing is you: YOUR perception, YOUR guidelines, YOUR feelings. Which are all important, but they can be distracting in relation to connecting with another individual and interacting with another individual.
Why is it important to connect?
ANN: To widen your awareness. Because you learn more than if you were just by yourself, really. It’s the whole picture. You get more than just a piece.
ELIAS: Precisely. That is why it is important to be connecting; for in that, it alters your perception. It gives you more input. It gives you information. It expands you. That is why it is important to be connecting. It is ultimately important.
On your own, individually, singularly, you can only expand to a certain degree. You can only evolve to a certain degree because you only have one source of information, which is you. And you can only explore every aspect of you to a certain degree. Even if you removed every other individual from the face of your planet, there are other essences. There are other energies. There is always something for you to be connecting with.
If you removed every other human from your planet and you were the only human on your planet, there are countless other manifestations on your planet living, or what you term to be not living. It matters not. And all of it provides you with input, with a connection. That is the reason, yes. For it allows you to expand.
You have chosen to participate in a physical reality which includes a base element of separation. Each of you incorporate a separate body. Every one of you is in its own separate, individual container. By the nature of this physical reality, you are generating separateness. Therefore, it is a very essential factor to be connecting, to traverse that veil of separation and to connect - not to eliminate it, for you are individuals, and you are unique. But to thin that veil to the extent in which you can comprehend that you are more than what your senses tell you, and that you are interconnected, and that despite these individual manifestations you are greater and grander than the individual manifestations. And to know that and to experience that, it requires connecting objectively, not merely subjectively.
DANIEL: Hi. This is Daniel. So I may be one of those individuals who are thinking while speaking and listening. So I’m trying to learn to listen better, and I notice that in some situations I can just start listening. If it’s a story, if I ask Natasha, “Where did you go today?” and she says, “I went here and there, met that individual,” I can actually genuinely listen. I may not recall some of it because I am not doing anything, just listening, and it’s unfamiliar. So I may not recall, but as I am listening I am seeing those things.
Now, when it’s a different situation and I am listening, let’s say, to a lecture such as yours today, and you are making a statement. You say, let’s say, you can learn less; therefore you can only hold so much by yourself as opposed to others, as opposed to tuning in to others. So I begin to evaluate this thing, and I begin to compare and contrast. And I think about all those features, right?
And so my question I guess is, how does one listen without evaluating and drawing pictures and going through scenarios? How would I appreciate your statement if I didn’t then try to understand it that way?
ELIAS: Excellent question. This is an action that you are now moving in the direction of learning, for it is very unfamiliar. You have not been taught how to do this. And once again, enter in the thinking. You think that if you are not thinking about what is being expressed that you will forget it or you won’t assimilate it or you won’t evaluate it, and therefore you won’t understand and you won’t expand. Very incorrect. Not true.
What I would express to you is that when you can allow yourself to genuinely be paying attention, and not accessing and not thinking and not questioning, the questions will come later, when you are not listening. Then the thinking will express itself, for you have inputted information, and what is the purpose of your thought mechanism? To translate, to interpret. Therefore, the thinking will occur.
And in that, your example of listening to a story, such as listening to your partner’s events during the day, you do that partially because there is a partial interest - not an entire interest, but there is a partial interest - but that interest is motivated because you love her. And you are interested in HER, not necessarily that you are interested in what she did. That is a significant factor. That doesn’t mean that you aren’t listening when you ask that question, and when she is relaying the information and you aren’t thinking, and you are genuinely listening. And some of it you may not necessarily recall. That is not to say that you did not assimilate it. You did.
But you may not recall some of the specifics of what she expressed, and the reason you don’t recall them is because that was not the point in asking the question. Your interest was not necessarily in what she actually did. Your interest is in her and her being. And therefore, you are asking a question to engage her, to connect with her. And therefore in that, certain aspects of what she may relate to you may be more important to you than others, and you may remember those facts. Usually those facts of whatever was conveyed to you will be the aspects of whatever she said that are important to her and that you can use in your information about her. She may be expressing, “I engaged a walk along the boardwalk and I met this man and he was bothersome to me, but then I saw this bright orange shell and it was so interesting. And then I was watching the water, and then I had something to eat.”
Now; what you may remember of her account of her day may have been the shell, the color, the water. For you received that information and identified those points were important to her, and those points caught her attention.
Now; futurely you can use those points - perhaps you will buy her orange flowers, or perhaps you will give her a gift with similar shells, or perhaps you will engage picnic at the water with her. Those are pieces of the information that you can use to connect with her. The other pieces of the information you are not as interested in, and that is not the point anyway. Your point was not to have a moment-by-moment recount of everything she did within her day, but more to be connecting with her and sharing, because you are interested in HER, not necessarily what she did.
Therefore, in that, it is much easier - you are correct - to listen to another individual when they are telling a story, when they are recounting their day or when they are expressing a story in some capacity, something they are interested in and you are merely listening.
When you are listening to a lecture or when you are having a conversation, it becomes more difficult to quiet that automatic thinking, for you THINK you are supposed to be processing what you are inputting. And you THINK that the manner in which you process is through THINKING. But it is not. That is not how you process.
Therefore, in that, you are encouraged and have learned to continue to pay attention to your thinking, to always be paying attention to your thinking, and to question your thinking. But in that, it is distracting. It has a function. It has a purpose. You use it, or you rely on it, in a manner of speaking, incorrectly. Just as you may use your feet incorrectly at times, or you may use your fingers incorrectly. And in that, in relation to any part of your body, you may use different parts of your body incorrectly.
DANIEL: So I have an example, a follow-up. So if we lose the recording of Mary’s session, and you are saying that most of us in a couple of days will have a hard time, or even a couple of hours will have a hard time (group laughter) describing what it was about, right? What have you said? I mean -
ELIAS: But you HAVE received it. Regardless of whether you can recount it or not, you received it. And in that, you are already assimilating it. Therefore, you will display it.
Regardless of whether you can recount anything that I have expressed to you today, when you encounter another individual that is speaking very softly, you will be more likely to listen more carefully. When you engage another individual a week from now and you are bothered or annoyed that they are not paying attention to you in the manner that you want them to, you will IN ACTION remember, and you will likely be automatically asking yourself, “Is the timing correct? Am I expecting this individual to pay attention to me in this moment? What is occurring around me?” You will not even notice that you are doing it, but you will do it. You will be DISPLAYING what we have discussed, regardless of whether you can recount it in words or not.
DANIEL: Excellent. Yes. I noticed some of that. That is true. But that is very unfamiliar, because I am trying to grasp - as you speak, I am trying to grasp and (inaudible) and evaluate it, because I am afraid to lose it.
ELIAS: And do not discount yourself for that. And do not expect yourselves to stop thinking. Do not expect yourselves to stop doing that in processing while you are listening. You will do it less and less. But pushing yourselves in directions to turn off your thinking altogether is somewhat ludicrous, and you would likely be unsuccessful, for it is very automatic.
Therefore, move in a natural flow, and as I expressed in the beginning of our conversation, accept yourselves for what you are and what you are doing NOW, and how you are expressing yourselves NOW. And in that, the more you do that, the more you WILL flow in the direction that you want to, for you already are, for you are accepting what you are doing NOW, rather than discounting yourselves that you are not doing it good enough yet. That word “yet”: we should strike that word from your language - YET. (Group laughter)
NATASHA: Yes. I am going to try to keep this flow and allow myself to speak. (Elias laughs)
NATASHA: Yeah. By the way, I am Natasha. Anyway, your answer to Daniel, it (inaudible) the question to me in connection to how we process information. Even though we may not recall when we walk out of this building what it was all about, you’re saying the feeling communicates, so to speak, in other words, after. So it brought a question to me of how actually do we process information if we are not required to think right away? It seems -
SANDRA: Good question. I have the same one. What is the process?
JOHN: Same one. I was going to ask it.
NATASHA: So the process is, let’s say here we’re sitting with you, but somebody that, for whatever reason, anybody of us could end up in a situation and listen to an entity or to a person not somebody like you - dark, so to speak. So does it mean that this automatically will happen that the processing will happen, assimilation, that we will display this dark stuff, whatever we were speaking about? Do you understand what I’m asking about? (Group laughter)
DANIEL: If you were a evil witch. (Group laughter)
NATASHA: Yes. Where is the choice in all of this?
ELIAS: There is always choice. Yes, obviously. But it is an excellent question. And in that also, yes, what would be the difference of assimilating if there was a dark entity speaking to you presently, or what you think of or perceive as an evil presence expressing to you in evil manners? What is the difference? There is no difference. You would be assimilating. You would be receiving the information, and you would be assimilating. Where is the choice? The choice is how you respond to it, whether you accept it or not, whether you resonate with it or not, whether you believe it or not. Those are the choices: what you believe, what you accept, what you express.
In that, yes, you are very suggestible, and I have expressed that many times. And that is the reason I have also expressed, even in relation to myself, I encourage each and every one of you not to blindly accept everything that I express to you. Evaluate whether it resonates with YOU and HOW it resonates with you. And in that, interpret it in a manner that does resonate with you, not to blindly accept everything or anything.
It is your choice. You always have choice.
Now; in relation to how do you process if you are not processing through thought: you are not your thoughts. This is what is a difficult concept for most individuals. Most of you can theoretically or philosophically express that you are something different than your brain, that your brain is a part of you but you are not your brain, or that you have a mind but you are not your mind.
And in that, I would also express that most of you do not clearly have a definition of what your mind even is. You know what your brain is. You are not entirely certain what your mind is, but it is yours, and it is a part of you. That is what you do define. Not that you know what that is, that is a part of you.
But in this, you equate your thinking as being a part of your mind. You all generally do have some vague concept of some other additional part that is connected with your mind (group laughter) that is in addition to your mind, but you are not quite sure what that is either. (Group laughter)
Now; in this, what I would express to you is that first of all, yes, you are not your brain. Your brain is a physical aspect of your body. It is a physical organ in your body.
Now; in that, where do thoughts originate? They do not originate in your body. Your body responds through synapses in your brain, and your physical brain in neurological capacities sends messages or impulses. Those are the messages: impulses to different aspects of your body.
Now; those impulses are very similar to your computers. I have expressed for many years, your computers are excellent reflections of you, and ingenious creation as reflections of you. But in that, what is the basis of the language of your computers? (Inaudible group responses) Which is what? And which is displayed in what? Ones and zeros, ones and zeros, ones and zeros, ones and zeros. Yes.
These are very similar. They are an excellent reflection of those messages - which are not messages, they are impulses that occur within your body, through your nervous system which is generated with its command post, in a manner of speaking, being your brain, very similar to your hard drive with your computers, which produce all of those pulses of ones and zeros, ones and zeros, zeros and ones.
Those zeros and ones in themselves mean nothing. Correct? They are merely zeros and ones. They are symbols. But they are put together in certain combinations which then you interpret and they mean something. And they create pictures, and they create sounds, and they create information, but in themselves they are only ones and zeros. They are only symbols.
In your body, your brain creates the ones and zeros, which pulse through your entire body; in themselves, they are pulses. They are firings of your neurological system. They are your ones and zeros. In themselves, they mean nothing.
Not physically in your body is your awareness, which is not physically in your body. You cannot use a scan. You cannot use a test. You cannot see with a microscope anything in a physical image that is that part of you that you would define as your mind. It is not your brain. You even think that your mind is in your head, and it is not.
Your mind is a word for your awareness. Your awareness is that aspect of you that is directing this physical body, that is inputting those firings of those synapses, that is directing all of that nervous system that is creating those ones and zeros, but that awareness is attaching to those ones and zeros meanings.
INNA: You’re saying it’s a connected system, or more is it the same amount?
ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, yes. But it is not housed in the computer. It is not a physical entity. Therefore, it is not attached to your physical body.
Now; a part of that CAN be seen, can be physically viewed in your energy field, and can be touched and can be felt. That is an actual physical display of that aspect of you that is not housed inside of your body that is the part of you that cannot be separated from your physical body that is directing that body and reflecting and projecting out from that body. And in that, you can view and to a degree even measure - not entirely, but to a degree - you can measure that energy field. That field is the one physical display of your mind, of what your mind is.
SANDRA: Is this what the aura is?
ELIAS: Yes. You incorporate many different words for it, but that is what it is. It is that field that surrounds your body and pulses and expands and contracts and changes color and is always in motion and is very fluid. And in that, that is the physical display of that aspect of you that is your awareness.
ANN: If this can’t detach from your physical body, what happens when the body dies? Where does the mind or awareness go?
ELIAS: Then it detaches.
ANN: That’s good news. (Group laughter)
ELIAS: As long as your body continues to function, as long as your body continues in that state that you define as living, that energy field cannot be separated from it. When you disengage, when you die, that is the point in which that energy field is separated from the body consciousness.
Even when you remove ALL of your awareness from the body consciousness, or it seems that you do, by removing your subjective and objective, as I have expressed previously in the state of being what you term to be unconscious - not a coma, but in a state of being unconscious, or as you term it to be. The body consciousness cannot maintain that state for any prolonged time framework because you are pulling away almost all of your awareness. But in that, there is a slight aspect in which that energy field will remain, not disconnected. It will be very contracted, but it will be connected.
SANDRA: So the process by which this energy field is eventually withdrawn from the physical body consciousness varies with each individual, right? It varies over time? It varies over configuration?
RODNEY: You should be using the speaker.
ELIAS: Of it to be withdrawn? No.
ELIAS: No. It will vary in projection. It will vary in what you see if you look at an energy field. It contracts and expands.
SANDRA: I meant in disengagement.
ELIAS: At disengagement, the energy field will disconnect from the body consciousness within approximately two weeks of pronouncement of death.
SANDRA: Right. So what happened was, I worked in an emergency room where a lot of people died.
FEMALE: Can you talk into the microphone?
RODNEY: Microphone, microphone.
SANDRA: Okay. Coming in. Coming in.
So in this experience, I would have time to go into a room with a body that had just, according to science and medicine, had just disengaged. It was flatlining on the equipment. But somehow that didn’t seem to be what was happening in front of me. There was a lot of perturbation. And these people that passed away, the field left in different ways. Sometimes there was a lifting up of energy. Sometimes it was a streaming out of energy. Sometimes it came up through the head. Sometimes it was colorful. Sometimes there was no color. Sometimes not much happened at all. So that’s why I asked you the question.
SANDRA: Because it was -
ELIAS: Yes. And that would be dependent upon the individual, and -
SANDRA: Could it be beliefs, too, of the individual?
ELIAS: No. No, it does not involve their beliefs. But it does involve their life force, in a manner of speaking, how connected they are to the physical reality or how disconnected they are at the time of their death. And in that, as I expressed, generally an individual’s energy field does not disconnect from their body consciousness immediately. They may in stages, or they may in part, but the entirety of the energy field does not disconnect from the body consciousness for approximately two of your weeks.
SANDRA: Now, one other thing is an experiment that was done in Russia by a Russian scientist who claimed that these - they weighed before death and after death bodies. There was a slight shift of one or two ounces in weight. Now, I know the body is a physical-electrical phenomenon. The subtle field is also a molecular, finer phenomenon. Was there weight to this?
ELIAS: Of course. It is a physical manifestation, or you would not be able to measure it.
DANIEL: But I think the result was in reverse. After death it was a little heavier than before, eh?
DANIEL: Yeah. I think scientists may have been surprised with the reverse.
DANIEL: That’s what I heard.
SANDRA: So what happened? Was it heavier or lighter? The body?
ELIAS: Now; what would you think? NOW use your thought mechanism, and think and process that statement. Why would the body consciousness be heavier without the energy field than with it? There is a logical, in your terms, logical -
DANIEL: It seems to lift us.
ELIAS: Yes it does. It lifts you.
SANDRA: Uplifts the body?
ANN: Ah! Excellent. Thank you, Danny.
ELIAS: In that, your body will weigh less if it is floating than it will if you are lying on the ground.
ANN: Well, dead weight, right?
ELIAS: Yes. For in that, you have nothing to create that buoyancy. Your energy field counterbalances some of the effect of gravity.
ANN: Do your emotions, then, do they make you lighter or heavier physically? Like if you’re feeling lighter?
ELIAS: They can. They generally do not, not in a physical sense, but they can, yes.
BRIGITT: Where is Mary? Mary’s awareness is here now, because her body is here.
ELIAS: The subjective awareness is, yes, fully engaged.
ELIAS: The objective awareness is removed.
JOHN: A quick one. So that’s almost a definition of an energy exchange, therefore, right? But it’s different from energy centers, right? The energy fields? Which is part of the body consciousness.
ELIAS: Ah! In this, there is a distinction to a degree but not entirely, for also you cannot see your energy centers within your body, and for the most part your energy centers within your body you cannot measure, for you cannot find them, for they are not physical.
Now; it is possible you do already incorporate the technology now, and you will be expanding that - you already are. It is possible futurely that you will have the capability of seeing and measuring energy centers in a similar capacity that you do with an energy field - which is not much, but it is viewable. It is to a degree measurable.
But in that, your energy field and your energy centers are inseparable. They are a part of each other. In actuality, incorporating the words or the terminology “each other” would be incorrect, for it is all the same expression. It is merely that your energy centers are within your body and then the outward expression of those energy centers is what comprises your energy field. Therefore, it is all intermixed.
JOHN: So that was actually the original topic that I wanted to get a quick yes or no. But I actually had a second different question on the topic you were talking about earlier, which is thinking, and thinking while you’re expressing, or not thinking while you’re expressing. And this may be obvious to some individuals, but it’s not obvious to me and it may not be obvious to some other individuals like me, but I’m not sure what I do. Like, it seems very context dependent. In some cases I am expressing without thinking while I’m expressing, and in other cases I’m definitely thinking while I’m expressing. And in some cases, especially in situations like wherever I’ve got to be very analytical and really, really thinking, I feel like I HAVE to think while I express, just by definition of the scenario.
ELIAS: I am understanding what you are expressing, but what I am saying is not that difficult to distinguish. No. You can be thinking, but you are not actually thinking while words are exiting your mouth.
ELIAS: You are thinking in between sentences, or you are thinking in between words, or when you are thinking in between paragraphs. But you are not thinking while words are exiting your mouth. You are not thinking and speaking simultaneously. There are some individuals that do. There are not many. They are in the minority. Most of you don’t think and speak at the same time.
ANON: Then is it always that way, that some individuals do think and speak at the same time and others do not? In other words, an individual that does that will not generally also switch to the other mode?
ELIAS: Correct. That would be exceptionally rare, exceptionally rare. You do one or the other. In that, that would be so confusing to your body consciousness that it would be considerably difficult to communicate at all.
Now, there are individuals that do that and you label them to be lunatics. In actuality, you label them to be mentally disturbed or that they incorporate some type of mental disease. Some individuals - not all, by far not all - some individuals that you define as schizophrenic do this. But it is exceptionally confusing to the body consciousness. It actually creates more of a separation, in which the individual begins to separate from themself and almost create two entities or more within themself. And this is not the same as multiple personalities. This is a different action. It is exceptionally rare.
ANON: Okay, so maybe I’m crazy. At times, with me, I seem to shift between one mode and the other mode of expressing, depending on my state of mind, and even within the same conversation. So what you’re saying is that impression is actually incorrect?
ELIAS: I would agree. Yes, it is incorrect, just as in this situation you process so quickly, so rapidly, your awareness and even your physical brain move so fast that you are processing and acting, enacting actions in fractions of seconds.
Therefore, it can seem that you are speaking and thinking simultaneously, for you can be thinking very quickly and speaking very quickly in relation to a thought, but you are not thinking the words while you are saying them.
ANON: So just out of curiosity, my impression is that in my case, because sometimes I do notice how I am carefully choosing the word while I speak -
ELIAS: That is also different. You can carefully be choosing your words. And you are thinking. You are processing and choosing: what words do I want to express? And that also is not thinking and speaking at the same time. You are doing that very quickly. As soon, the moment, that you have chosen the word you may be expressing it, and therefore it may seem that you are speaking and thinking at the same time.
Individuals that actually do this -
PARTICIPANT: Are there any here? (Group comments and laughter)
ELIAS: No. One.
DENISE: I’m the only one?
DENISE: I was going to ask. I thought Melissa was one, too.
BRIGHTER: I thought so too.
ELIAS: No. One.
ELIAS: In this, an individual that does this, as I expressed, you will notice in a display in how they speak. Many times while they are speaking, it will seem to you listening that they are either slurring their words or they are mumbling.
ANN: Is John’s mother that way, too? The same way Denise is? Thinking and speaking at the same time?
BRIGHTER: What is the motivation of somebody who - like the sort of deep, inner motivation of somebody to be expressing that way? Who is thinking and speaking at the same time versus the others?
ELIAS: That is not a matter of motivation.
BRIGHTER: Or - I don’t know how to phrase this but -
ELIAS: It is a different choice of manifestation. It is a different choice of the configuration of the individual and how they are processing. Therefore, it is a choice that the individual generates at the onset of a focus to be experiencing this focus in this capacity. Just as it would be with some individuals that you do deem to be mentally ill. It is an exploration of a different experience, not being the same. For some individuals, it may be a challenge in how to generate and balance that experience. It is a matter of the individual as to why they would choose that, but it is an experience, and that is why you are here, to experience.
In this, it is difficult to understand, I am aware, and I am aware that it also is a matter of because you think about what you want to say, that that may seem to be the same expression. What I would say to that is that you are being aware of how you are interacting, and you are choosing deliberately how you are expressing yourself, and that it is important to you that you are expressing yourself accurately.
I would say to you, individuals that think and speak simultaneously, they are not always aware of that. They are not always aware of expressing themselves precisely in the manner that they want to or meaning what they are expressing. In many situations, they may stumble, and they may express to another individual in the conversation, “That’s not what I meant. I meant to say this,” for they are not processing entirely. They are thinking and speaking the words at the same time.
Therefore, in that, as I expressed, it is not that they are doing it slower, but they are doing it different, and therefore they are not always as precise. They are not doing what you are doing. You are thinking and choosing: what words do I want to say? How do I want to express myself? They are not always doing that. They are merely expressing the word and the thought at the same moment. And it may not be what they mean.
ANN: Do you think when we’re interacting with a person like that we kind of without even thinking about it listen to them more closely?
ELIAS: In many situations, yes. For it, in many situations, requires you to pay attention to them to understand what they are saying.
DANIEL: So how does the words come? Sometimes I’m surprised, like I’m watching myself speak and I’m like, “Wow! Where did this come from?” It’s almost like someone else is speaking and I’m listening. How [is it] that I even have the formation?
ELIAS: That is - returning to the energy field - that is the aspect of you that is NOT your body consciousness but is directing your body consciousness. This is the elusive aspect of you which we call awareness and perception. Perception is not an expression that you can see, and awareness is not what you can see. And in that, they are not a physical manifestation, and therefore it is more difficult to understand “What part of me is that?” That is the YOU part of you.
Where do your words come from, if you are not thinking of them? They are coming from your awareness. Your thought mechanism moves so much more slowly than your awareness. Your processing of information is almost instantaneous. It is so fast. As much as your computers are such an excellent reflection of you, they are slugs compared to how fast you process. (Group laughter) They are so slow in comparison with how fast you process information. And your thought process moves somewhat on a par with your computers. Your thinking moves approximately at a similar rate of speed as your computers move. Your processing moves lightning speed compared to that. You do not require thinking. That is much too inefficient, much too slow. As you will notice, if you are processing and listening and you are thinking about what words you want to use, what are the most correct words, it incorporates much more time than if you are merely speaking.
You have to think about what words you are choosing if you are thinking. Thinking is very slow. It incorporates much more time.
In this, what is that about you that is processing? That is the you of you. What is you? Is it your brain? Is it your heart? Is it your body? Is it your senses? What makes you you? Nothing in your body. Your body reflects you, but without you IN your body or directing your body, you would not be you.
(Slowly and deliberately) You are not your body. Your body is one of the things you DO. And I have expressed many times: you are not what you do. That is not who you ARE. Your body is one of the things you do. You create it. You are continuously creating it. You project it. You maintain it. Your body is what you do. It is not who you are.
The who you are is contained in that energy field and those energy centers. They are continuously driving you, and fueling you, and inspiring you, and making you sad, and depressing you (group laughter), and encouraging you and creating. THAT is you.
SANDRA: So this I think was very interesting, because I was with newborn babies and I was asleep. And when the scream from the baby came and I was asleep, it came in an oval in the field, it didn’t come through the ear. And it was really weird, and it happened all the time. Was it mind? (Inaudible) And the field was wow! like a yellow. That’s how the sound came through in its pure form. And then the brain came: oh, you’re not asleep, you’re awake, the kid’s in danger. And so that was very interesting.
But another thing was when I almost had a head-on collision when I was younger, and I knew that I could be disengaging - it was an accident. And suddenly time stopped, and I could see a whole segment of my life flash. I know it was an aspect of mind, let’s say, or a removal of something. It wasn’t the field. But what was that experience?
ELIAS: That is probabilities. That is glimpsing probabilities, which you do in actuality more frequently than you realize. When you incorporate these flashes, and you do it at different times, and they may be expressed in actual visuals, or a feeling, or a thought; but in that, you are very clear. Regardless of how you are expressing it, you know what the scenario is, and it is very real. They are glimpses into probabilities.
What you are doing is you are dividing your attention in that moment between this present probability that you are creating now in this reality and other probabilities that you are creating now in OTHER realities. You are glimpsing both simultaneously. Therefore, you are here, physically, in this reality, but you are not inserting that probability into this reality, but you are experiencing it nevertheless. Therefore, you are experiencing both at the same time. That is a split in attention.
VERONICA: Elias? Yes. Is the energy field measurable by using L-rods? I have seen that.
ELIAS: At times.
VERONICA: But I don’t know whether it’s a projection on the person’s part. Is it measurable with the L-rod?
ELIAS: It can be.
VERONICA: And when you pat your hand on the person’s body, in an energy session, you could feel layers.
ELIAS: Yes, you can. Depending on how aware you are, but yes. You can physically feel an energy field. You can physically SEE an energy field, if you are allowing yourself, and you can to a degree measure it. You can watch it expand or contract. As I have expressed previously to many, many, many of you, SEEING an energy field is in actuality relatively easy. It is not difficult to visually see an energy field.
VERONICA: Can you give us a quick lesson, then?
BRIGHTER: I’m up for it.
ANON: Count me in.
VERONICA: Who wants a lesson? Raise your hand. (Group laughter)
ELIAS: Very well. I will express, we will use Ruther as our example (group applause), for the energy field with Michael at this present time framework would be considerably different. Therefore, this would be an example of a usual energy field. Or, you can use the dog. It matters not. It matters not.
Now; in this, what I will express to each of you is first, look at the subject, whichever you choose: the dog or Ruther.
Now; in that, do not stare. You are merely looking at the subject quickly - quickly. You are not staring. Quickly.
Therefore, you are aware of the position that the individual is in, and you are aware of their appearance. Therefore, it is not necessary to be concentrating on their appearance or their position.
Now; begin with the head. This is the most concentration of energy always. Do not look at their heads. (Group laughter) Look just above to the side of their heads. Therefore, look just at the edge of their hair.
Now; relax your eyes and look just on the edge of their hair.
VERONICA: The edge of their what?
ELIAS: You will begin to see a white glow. It will be very quick. You will begin to see a white glow. It is not difficult to hold the image of that white glow.
The more you accept the image of the white glow, then you will begin to view a fluctuation. It will either become contracted, or it will expand, or some areas around the head will be more extended than other areas. It will fluctuate.
The more you allow yourself - in a relaxed state without concentrating, without that intensity of concentration - the more you relax and allow yourself to observe that white glow, it will begin to take on color. When it takes on color, you will be able to see the movement, for in the white it is difficult to see it moving. It is constantly in movement. Once the color begins to present itself in your vision, it is easier to see the color moving.
Imagine to yourselves, which almost all of you have seen at some point, a spot of oil on your ground, on your street in water. What does it do? It creates rainbows, but it swirls. It creates patterns and swirls. That is what your energy field does. It is not solid. It does not contain one solid color.
But most of you will initially see one color, one dominant color. Most individuals will see as the dominant color either red or blue. It is unusual to see other colors initially, for they are less dominant.
In this, once you begin to see the colors, you can do this at will in any moment. Once you begin to see the colors, you can play with that, and you can watch it as if you were watching the individual speaking to and moving, for their energy IS moving.
VERONICA: Even on TV, right?
ELIAS: You can do this with anything. You can do it with your chair. Your chair holds an energy field. What I will express to you is with objects that you do not deem to be living - a table, a chair, a floor, a building - anything that you view to not be living will not incorporate color. You will see a white glow around them, and that white glow is around everything; literally everything.
BRIGHTER: Sometimes with people also, is like an expression of white actually involved?
ELIAS: It can incorporate some aspects of white, but generally there will be a dominant color. And combined or mixed with that can be some streaks of white, but it will not be the dominant color.
Now; with creatures, animals, they generally - unless they are significantly ill or creating some physical manifestation - creatures generally express an energy field with the dominant color of pink. Therefore, you will likely not view many or much of any other color in a creature’s energy field. It will appear to you to be almost solid pink, that is unless they are creating some physical manifestation. Then you will view some darker aspects that may appear to be a darker pink or red or even a wine color.
With humans also you can detect different physical manifestations, for they will reflect in your energy field, and generally they will correspond with the area of the body that is being affected. Therefore, if you incorporate a broken arm, your energy field will appear darker in that area.
SANDRA: As a perception, can you tune into different parts of people’s energy specifically? In other words -
ELIAS: Yes. Automatically.
SANDRA: - if I see a redhead in my field, if she’s a redhead, but say I’m seeing the dog (inaudible) and I see what someone else doesn’t see, -
SANDRA: - but I see what I see.
ELIAS: Yes. But generally, most individuals initially will view those colors of red or blue as the dominant colors. That is what you will most generally tune into.
Now; I will express that regardless of your perception or what you are looking for, each individual is expressing their own energy. Therefore, for the most part you will see similar colors. Therefore, if someone’s energy field is dominantly being expressed in yellow, almost all of you will mostly see yellow.
ANN: So one time I kind of saw color on my own, like it was green. Is that what you’re talking about? Or was it something else?
ELIAS: Yes. Yes.
ANN: So most people, when they look at me, they would see green? Or was it just for that moment?
ELIAS: For that moment. But they might, dependent upon what energy you are expressing in the moment. For remember: each one of your energy centers is coordinated with a color, for it is a vibrational quality. Therefore, in that, dependent upon which energy center you are expressing more energy projection from, that will be the dominant color in your energy field.
SANDRA: Oh, so you project - are you a lot of gold? I feel like you electrify the space around you.
ELIAS: I would express that if you are attempting to view the energy field that I am projecting around Michael, it will be predominantly gold and silver.
DENISE: Okay. What would held energy look like in the energy field?
ELIAS: It would also be darker. Not as dark as a physical manifestation or an affliction, so to speak, but it would be darker and it will move slower.
SANDRA: Thick. Thicker?
ELIAS: Yes, in a manner of speaking. Thicker.
I will incorporate one more question. Yes?
ANON: So, when were describing the energy field of an individual and you were saying that the you is the energy field, I was wondering if that is the you of that focus’s personality, or is that the you of the essence?
ELIAS: Both. There is no separation of that.
ANON: But - Okay, never mind. Thank you. (Elias and group laugh)
VERONICA: Elias? Elias? Sometimes when I look into the air, whether I’m indoors or outdoors, I see specks.
VERONICA: And the specks move.
VERONICA: At first I thought there was something wrong with my eyes. But is that awareness bouncing? What is that?
ELIAS: That is energy. It may be other energies, other essences. It may be energy deposits. There is energy all around you. You do not generally see it, but I would express that there is not one aspect of your environment that is not completely full. Everything, even empty space, is completely full. And in that, you are seeing other energy.
DANIEL: One thing. When I’m watching someone make a presentation, sometimes I see part of their energy float across the room. (Inaudible) What is that?
ELIAS: That is projecting. This is a fun expression to experiment with. You can watch an individual’s energy field, or you can place two individuals close to each other and watch how their energies gravitate and move towards - they automatically will move towards each other. And in that, watch what they do and how they mingle and when they separate.
DANIEL: And for me, what is helpful is if the background is white.
ELIAS: If you place what you are looking at in front of a solid background, it will be easier and much more quick that you will see the field. But it does not have to be white. It is merely a matter of being a solid background, for it is less distracting.
JOHN: So like since you’re talking about all this stuff, it seems likely the religious wave is pretty much like over? (Group laughter)
ELIAS: No. I will inform you when it is.
ANN: Does Bernie have a chance? (Group laughter)
ELIAS: That remains to be seen, and I would encourage all of you to make your voices known.
ANN: “Feel the Bern!”
DENISE: Did you have anything to do with the fireworks last night?
ELIAS: No. That was you. (Group cheers and laughter)
I express tremendous encouragement to all of you and great lovingness as always. Until our next meeting, in wondrous affection, au revoir.
GROUP: Au revoir! (Applause)
(Elias departs after 1 hour 47 minutes. Total session time was 3 hours)
Copyright 2016 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.