Interconnectedness
Topics:
Session 202010242
“Interconnectedness”
“Two Generations of Scarred Individuals”
“Filling the Emptiness”
“Cooperation”
“Hope vs. Faith and Trust”
“An Intense Exercise for Healing: Reuniting Memory with Feeling”
“Changing Perception”
Saturday, October 24, 2020 (Group/Hinsdale, New Hampshire)
Participants: Mary (Michael), Ann (Vivette), Cathy (Shynla), Christina (Melian), Denise (Azura), Eric (Doren), Ivan K., Jean (Lyla), Jim O., John (Lonn), John (Rrussell), Karen (Turell), Katie (Muriel), Kenny G. (Marcel), Leonor (Kitzell), Lynda (Ruther), Marcos (Marta), Mark (Liam), Melissa (Leah), Ron (Olivia), Sandra (Atafah), Val (Atticus) and Veronica (Amadis)
“Be wondrous with yourselves and each other, and remember the magic word: cooperation”
ELIAS: Good afternoon! (Group applause, shouting and cheering; some participants shout in unison, “Happy 25, you’re not alive but you still jive!”) Very well. Thank you. (Group laughter and Elias chuckles) A quarter of a century. (Chuckles)
And now at this point, what we shall be discussing is flow and interconnectedness, and the pieces that prevent you from expressing that interconnectedness, the automatic pieces that you don’t necessarily even see that stop you from that interconnectedness, or the objective realization of that interconnectedness.
All of you have been diligently moving in the direction of expanding your individual awarenesses, and you are now on that cusp of moving into that actual experience and realization of interconnectedness. And as I have expressed recently in our internet group, interconnectedness is not connecting with a tree or a rock or a cloud or the earth in general; it is the recognition of everything and how it flows, and how it all moves one into the next and into the next and into the next, and how everything is connected. Which I have been expressing to all of you for quite some time, but now you are beginning to actually see it, or are just about to see it, and in that, giving yourselves glimpses of that interconnectedness in your own experience, in your own life. How your experiences in your life are connected, regardless of the subjects, that it doesn’t matter what the subject is. One moment you may be engaging one activity, and in the next moment you may be doing something entirely different, but they do flow together if you allow them to. Or without the awareness, you move in this capacity of stop-start, stop-start, stop-start, and you don’t realize how connected everything is. And in not realizing that, you don’t have adequate information to be making choices intentionally in the most beneficial direction for yourself—and therefore also, by extension, for everyone else.
In this, when you also are recognizing that interconnectedness and how everything flows together, it allows you not only to be making choices that are self-directed and self-structuring and that ARE to your greatest benefit, but it also allows you to see the bigger picture of your world, of your life, of how you touch beyond what you see, that you ARE actually affecting much farther than you realize, that you are constantly touching other individuals and influencing situations. And in that, although you may not see it objectively, the more aware you are and the more you are aware of that interconnectedness—not necessarily with other people but the interconnectedness of yourselves and everything you do—the more you begin to actually catch a glimmer of how that is rippling out and actually touching other people and influencing in subjects and situations that are far beyond what you would have imagined, and how powerful you are, how much strength you have in that energy that you possess.
In this, one of the greatest obstacles in relation to experiencing interconnectedness is the automatic barriers that you create between yourselves and the rest of your world. And you create those barriers not actually even realizing how you are doing that, or that you are even doing that in many situations, because of influences in earlier time frameworks, in earlier experiences in your life. In this, what I will say to you also is that there are two distinct types of experiences: the experiences that you have as children, and then the experiences that you have as adults.
Now, let me say to you, children are tremendously resilient, although you do carry experiences and trauma from childhood through your life until you address to it, and there are definite influences. The traumas that you might create as an adult are actually in many capacities more difficult to address to. They are more difficult to neutralize. Traumas that you generate as an adult you don’t necessarily protect yourself by forgetting, and because you don’t forget, or because you are aware of them, you place shields around yourselves that are impenetrable and are difficult to address to and are difficult to remove.
In this, the traumas and the difficulties and experiences that children experience, which I would say in relation to the present time framework I have recently expressed information that in the entire world—not simply your country, but throughout the entire world—there are actually two generations of individuals, two generations of people that approximately 70% of your world has experienced childhood traumas, which was born out of your Second World War.
Your Second World War was a treacherous time framework in your history. It was very different from any other time in your history, because you moved into a direction in which you lacked two very important pieces, one being honor and the other being the conviction of rightness.
Now, although I expressed considerable information to each of you about the dangers of being absolutely right, in war, throughout your history it has always been a very important factor to have the conviction of rightness on your side. And each side has always had that, throughout your history. That in every war in your history, from ancient times to before ancient times to that second world war, all of the participants—the soldiers, the commanders—all of the participants in every war have had the conviction of their rightness on each side, believing genuinely that they were right and that was what they were fighting for, that rightness.
And they incorporated another factor which was exceptionally important, which was honor. Both sides of every war have always incorporated that expression and that conviction of honor, that even in the face of their enemy, if they were face to face with their enemy they expressed that conviction of honor with their enemy. What that means is they acknowledged the humanness of their enemy. They acknowledged that even in the face of another individual that they believed was tremendously wrong and was their enemy, they also saw them as a fellow human, a man—because until recently, men were the ones that fought the wars.
Now, in that, in the acknowledgment of their fellow men in honoring them as fellow humans, this set a very different dynamic between peoples throughout history. And although every war has yielded trauma with almost everyone that participates in them—because , unbeknownst to any of YOU, you cannot take a life and not have it affect you; you cannot kill another human and not be affected by it. It isn’t possible. In this, because of the conviction of rightness and because of the conviction of honor, until your Second World War the soldiers, the commanders, everyone that fought in these wars—all of them—they experienced their traumas during these wars, but when they returned home they had the ability to re-assimilate themselves into their societies—into their families, into their homes, into their societies.
From the time of your Second World War, these two factors were lacking. There was no longer the conviction of rightness on either side, contrary to what you might think. Even the Japanese, even the Germans didn’t have the conviction of rightness. They had the conviction of conquering and ruling, and the rest of the world was defending, but [none] of the peoples had a genuine conviction of rightness, that they were right in what they were fighting for. Without that conviction of being right in what you are fighting for, it is simply an expression of opposition; there is only defense. And in that, even those that you viewed as the aggressors—the Italians, the Germans, the Japanese—even these people were [acting in] defense. They were ideally wanting to conquer and rule, but they also were defending their territories and defending their ideas--not ideals. They didn’t have ideals, they had ideas – which is different.
And the other piece that was lacking was honor. There was no honor, because there was no rightness. There was only defending. And in that, the enemy was not viewed as human—by either side. The enemy was not human.
This is an important factor, because this is what carried on after the war, which then bred two generations of children that were viewed as not human. Two generations of children that were perceived as possessions, that had no purpose other than being a possession and other than being a legacy as lineage—not a legacy to be proud of, a legacy simply to carry on a lineage. And in that, they had no other purpose.
Animals had greater purpose. The family dog had a purpose of protecting the home. The family cat had a purpose of ridding the house of any rodents. They had purposes; therefore, they were valued more. Children were burdensome, because they required attention and they required food and they required clothing, and therefore they were a burden. They didn’t produce anything, therefore being less than human because they were not viewed as people until they were adults. Then you became a human. Then you became an individual, a person. But before that, you were simply a possession that the individuals, the parents, could incorporate behavior in whatever manner they chose.
Now; in this, these children became the outlet of the trauma and rage of a generation of individuals—masses of individuals—that had experienced horrific trauma and torture in war and had no outlet for any of that. And therefore, what they did was they came home, they did not assimilate into society, they did not assimilate into their families, they isolated themselves and they isolated their families, and they created two generations of scarred individuals.
Now; the reason that I am expressing this information to all of you is because most of you—not all of you, but most of you—are of an age that you fit into those two generations. Therefore, most of you have some factors of trauma in your lives that have been affecting you throughout your lives whether you are aware of it or not; and in that, have been affecting your behaviors, your choices. And that is what creates the difficulties that people incorporate with relationships, with jobs, with family, with money. The difficulties that people incorporate in expressing themselves and that they are addressing to with myself, they come from these experiences. These are the influences and what you present in behavior.
Now; how is that relevant? It is very relevant, because it is almost impossible for you to move in a direction of recognition of interconnectedness and the experience of interconnectedness, even with yourself, if you have SHIELDS around you, if you are holding the world at bay, or if you are isolating yourselves because you don’t know how to interact, or you don’t know how to be.
One very significant piece that these two generations have expressed in behavior that is tremendously common—which almost all of you have experienced—is taking personal responsibility for others, that it is your responsibility to make sure that other people are happy and are safe and are secure and are well—that is your job. Because that isn’t what YOU received, therefore YOU are responsible to give that, to take care of. And taking care of can be expressed in many different manners: it can be in financial manners—not necessarily that you have money that you would be taking care of other people with, but that you would manage other people in their money—that you are the ones that take care of managing everything with other people.
In this also, what it has created in these two generations of being almost what you would term to be outcasts, it has created a need in people to be needed, that many individuals will express that a foundation of a relationship is that you are needed. And people believe this. And people may not necessarily express it in words, but they definitely express it in actions, that you need to be needed. And these expressions all create shields. They create barriers. When you move in directions of needing to be needed, you create behaviors that influence other people to be dependent. Therefore, you are indispensable, because other people are dependent on you and that is important.
I acknowledge many of you, that you have looked at these expressions and these subjects and that you are addressing to them and that you are recognizing how influencing they are. And in that, you can be examples to other individuals of how inefficient that is—and it isn’t love. It isn’t an expression of genuinely taking care of, either. It is need, and need is not something that is a benefit to any of you.
In this, I am exceptionally encouraging to all of you in your movements and in your expressions to be moving beyond these influences from childhood or from adulthood, and moving in directions in which you can be connected and in which you can begin to see the wondrousness of your own flow and how exceptional it is, and how empowering it is that you can actually choose what you WANT to choose—that you can choose what you want to feel, you can choose what you want to do, you can choose what you want to engage and who you want to engage with. You can choose it all, intentionally, and in that, empower yourselves and be an empowerment to everyone around you and begin to see how far that touch actually extends, because that is how glorious all of you actually are.
Now; I shall open for questions from all of you, in what do you perceive or what do you see in your experiences that create the most difficulties? What do you recognize or wonder about?
JEAN: Elias, I have a question along these lines. So, with some of the dissociative behaviors that you discussed with me in my childhood and how I transferred some things to animals, could you say that my issues, “Oh, those animals need me” is part of what you’re talking about?
ELIAS: Definitely.
JEAN: Could you talk about that a little bit?
ELIAS: I would say that that is obvious, especially in numbers.
JEAN: (Laughs, to group) I have twenty cats, okay? (Group laughter) And I had twenty horses.
ELIAS: Yes. And that is a tremendous, obvious example. And what does that do? That falsely fills this emptiness that you experience. You have this emptiness that you don’t know what it is. You don’t know where it comes from, you don’t know what to do with it, you generate a relationship with another individual, you have a partnership, you have a husband, a wife, and there is still this piece, this emptiness. What is this? What it is, is that non-human [perception by adults]. What it is, is being taught throughout your childhood that you are unimportant, that you are not a human, you belong to your parents—they own you.
And in that, what you are experiencing in this hole that you feel, this emptiness, something is missing that you keep trying to fill up, is that value: “I am valuable, I am important, I AM an individual, and I am the center of the universe!” Every child that is born is born innately with that perception: “I am the center of the universe.” And of course you are, because you ARE the most important manifestation. But in actions you are taught, “No, you are not. You are unimportant. You are less valuable than the cat or the dog that resides in our home, because they have a job and you don’t. You belong to me, you are a possession, you are a BURDEN as a possession because you take but you give nothing.”
And in that, every frustration, every anxiety, every irritation that those adults expressed and experienced was then exacted on those children. And therefore, in that, this is one manifestation—one symptom, in a manner of speaking—one of the clues, that you have numbers [of animals] because there is this constant wanting to fill this emptiness: “And if they need me – and they DO, because I provide for them, I feed them, I house them, I take care of them—I am valuable, and I am important. They need me.” No; you need them. They will survive, in one manner or another.
That doesn’t mean they don’t give to you. They do, but you begin to realize that it is never enough, that no matter how many you have, no matter how much you give to them and how much they give to you, it isn’t enough. It doesn’t fill that emptiness, because the emptiness is that resignation that it must be true that “I am not valuable, I am not worth, and I am not important. I am only one person. What can one person do? What IS one person? Nothing. How much does one person touch? Nothing.”
Very, very, very incorrect. One person is tremendous and touches infinitely, and therefore is very important. But it can be expressed in many, many different manners, as I said. That is one example.
And that doesn’t mean that I would be saying to you or to anyone else, “If you are addressing to this situation, you should immediately return home and set all of these cats free and don’t have any.” That would be ridiculous. What is important is not how many you have but why, and addressing to that. And that doesn’t mean that you have to eliminate something that was born out of an issue; it simply means to address to the issue, and then you can actually be genuinely giving, not being so that something can be dependent on you.
JEAN: You know, it’s interesting, when you were saying that the family dog was more important. I grew up in a household like that. I still have some issues with dogs. I really don’t like dogs, and I think it’s because when I was a child my mother loved the dog far more than me. It was just, “Don’t touch her! Don’t get near her! You leave her alone!” And any animal she was able to relate to, but you know, me: no.
LEONOR: I have a question, Elias. Talking about associations and trauma and all that, if I’m essence, right? I’m essence, so how come when a person dies they don’t remember their death?
ELIAS: To avoid trauma. That is an excellent question. And in that, as we are speaking about trauma today, that is the reason. When an individual dies, they blink in non-physically and there IS a period of time in which they are continuing to create objective imagery. They maintain their objective perception. And in that, in varying degrees, there are varying time frameworks that individuals continue to be expressing that objective imagery before they begin to question it and move in the direction of remembering their death. But they don’t remember their death initially, because in that, remember: When you blink in non-physically, you are taking with you your objective awareness, your perception. And in that, think to yourself in this moment, one moment you are having a conversation in this room with myself, and the next moment you are someplace that you don’t remember how you got there, but wherever you are is familiar to you, and suddenly you are aware that you died in a car crash returning from this meeting to your home. And you immediately would be horrified, because suddenly you realize, “I’m not physically focused any longer. I’m not alive any longer. What about my life? What about what I want to do? What about the people that I love? Where are they?” It would be very traumatic.
LEONOR: Would it be traumatic for the focus, or for the essence? Who is avoiding the trauma, the focus or the essence?
ELIAS: Focus. But it is the same.
LEONOR: It’s like my toe is [inaudible], so… I’m essence and my toe is one of the focuses, so my toe is [inaudible] wake up?
ELIAS: Yes.
LEONOR: Yes? Okay.
ELIAS: Yes. Yes. Because you as a focus have an objective awareness and a perception. As essence, you don’t have perception. You don’t NEED perception, because that is an objective, physical manifestation—it is a physical function. Therefore, when you blink in non-physically, it is you, this individual, that is blinking in non-physically. And when you remember your death, if you remembered your death immediately, it would be traumatic. But once you have incorporated some time, and you have blinked into that non-physical state, and you have gradually noticed you have abilities that you didn’t have when you were in physical focus, and you gradually notice that that aunt or uncle that you genuinely didn’t like that was always arguing with you hasn’t argued with you once for a time, and they seem to agree with everything you say, and THAT is strange, and what are these odd holes everywhere that I can hear things from or I can feel something from? Everything begins to seem strange, and the stranger it begins to seem, the more you begin to question. But at that point you’ve already been exploring, and you’ve already experimented with what you can do, and therefore you aren’t afraid of it, because you’ve already experimented with what you can do. You can jump twenty feet high without a trampoline. (Group laughter) And in that, when you remember your death, it isn’t bothersome to you, because you already realized, and that explains to you, “Oh, this is why I can jump twenty feet and I don’t need a trampoline. This is why I can think about going to Tuscany, and I’m there!” In that, you avoid that trauma and you don’t generate any fear, therefore that is the reason. Eventually, you shed that objective awareness and that perception, and then you experience yourself as essence.
LEONOR: So then you join your whole essence? As a whole? Because right now I’m not experiencing essence, I’m just experiencing who I am now. It’s only a little energy of my essence. I couldn’t experience the whole essence. It would be too much, right?
ELIAS: You could, and that is the direction that you are moving in with this shift. And THAT is the point. And that is what we are discussing now, this day, in relation to interconnectedness, and why I said interconnectedness isn’t being connected to a tree or to the earth in general—it is being connected to YOU and your experiences and who you are, and being able to begin to see your own energy and how everything flows together, and how it is all you and therefore, see yourself AS essence, not only as this focus.
LEONOR: Thank you, Elias.
ELIAS: Yes?
VERONICA: Elias? I would like to relate this topic to myself and my children. Many, many years ago, when I had my breakdown, my children were becoming very self-sufficient. They were forced into it because of my illness. And now they are all doing well, and I have tried to have them accept me as a mother who departed from what was not expected of me. I forgive--I’ll use the word forgive, but I understand their behavior in maintaining their separateness, having their own guidelines, but I miss—truly miss—the human loss of that contact, because I truly love them. I have no idea what they’re like now, because they keep their distance. So, I think that we both have the idea of freedom. It’s like we possess both sides of what you have presented, the ownership and the honoring, but they don’t honor me, and I feel a terrible loss because of it. How can I get over that, that feeling of loss, when they were my wonderful children? And they ARE my wonderful children, but not now. (Pause) It’s like I’m a mother without children. (Laughs)
ELIAS: The first piece is the recognition of what I was expressing. You are a part of the generation of the war. Now, understand that not everyone in that generation fought in the war, not everyone in that generation participated in experiences of their own trauma, but the energy of that was so overwhelming it encompassed the entire world—very similar to the energy NOW which is affecting and encompassing the entire world.
But in that, your children are in the position of that first generation affected by that energy. And then in that, you have incorporated your OWN traumas in relation to the overwhelm of energy and situations and experiences, which is what you identify and term to be your breakdown. Which, with them, that was your separation and your expression of disconnecting from them, which their interpretation of that is that they had no value and were unimportant.
This is a very important piece, because for the generations—those two generations especially, after your generation—what is tremendously important is to not blame. You are on the receiving end of the blame, and it is tremendously hurtful, and it is tremendously unproductive, and it disconnects.
What can YOU do? You have no control over their choices, and you can’t make their choices for them, regardless of how much you want to. Therefore, what is important is that you can express yourself in earnest, in genuineness, to them in whatever form you choose or whatever form you believe that they will receive or that they will at least be aware of, even if they don’t receive it.
And in that, for you to continue to express yourself in that genuine love. They may not realize it until after you disengage. That is a possibility, because if the person continues to blame—and that is the reason I am addressing to most of the individuals present that fall into that first and second generation of people, because that is a very important piece: not to blame. The people in this generation of the Second World War, it isn’t their fault that this energy is so pervasive. It isn’t their fault that they included two generations of children that were unimportant and not valued. It isn’t to excuse them, but it is definitely to recognize that they are not at fault and that they are not to blame.
But there are many individuals presently that still are in the position of blaming, and I know that your children, to varying degrees, do that. And what I would say to you is, what is most important is for you to be continuing to express genuinely what you believe, what you feel, how much you appreciate them, how much you love them, whether they accept it or not; to know that you didn’t allow that opportunity to pass by, because that is what fills that void for you. It isn’t their acceptance of it—although that would be nice—but what creates that void with you is this constant blame of yourself that you are in agreement with them. They blame you, and you blame you: “I should have been better. I should have done better. I should have done more.” (Whispers) Stop.
(Pause) We shall break. And I shall engage you shortly.
(Break occurs after 57 minutes)
ELIAS: Continuing! And you may present your questions. (Pause, and Elias chuckles)
KATIE: Okay, I’ve got one. I had to chuckle when you mentioned about personal responsibility as a job. It actually is my job--that’s what I actually do for a living. How do I work with that?
ELIAS: Meaning?
KATIE: I guess I am doing it out of a need to be needed. I definitely have that characteristic. I have a history of that my entire life.
ELIAS: And meaning that is your job how?
KATIE: I get paid for it. I take care of people in their home.
ELIAS: You can be a caretaker and not be taking personal responsibility for someone.
KATIE: Okay.
ELIAS: There’s a difference. You can BE a caretaker, you can take care of people, you can give care, and you can be supportive to people and not take personal responsibility for them, not perceive that you are personally responsible for them and for their choices and that you making choices for them is better than them making choices, that you know better than they do, or you know more than they do, or that your choices are better for them than their own choices. In that, what you are doing is creating a dynamic in which the other individual becomes dependent on you, and that creates this circle of need. It creates you need them to be dependent on you, and they need you because they ARE dependent on you and they can’t do for themself.
Now; I understand that there are situations in which some people are in positions in which they do require another individual to be a caregiver, that they can’t do certain actions for themselves, or they can’t do certain actions for themselves any longer, or they may be ill and they can’t function in certain manners without help. That is sharing and helping. That isn’t setting yourself in a position in which your direction is better than theirs, that you are dictating to them. THAT is expressing personal responsibility for another individual. Most individuals do this with family members, but many individuals that do it even with family members have a tendency to do it with friends. And in that, it is automatic, that you see the choice that another individual makes in any given situation and you immediately and automatically are assessing, “If you do it this direction, it will be better. If you do THIS rather than what you ARE doing, it will be more efficient. It will be more effective”—moving in a direction in which you are making an assessment that whatever the choice is of the other individual, your idea is better or more effective and better for them.
Whatever your expression of better is, in relation to another individual, it is based in your guidelines and your perception in what is important to YOU, not necessarily what is important to the other individual or what is the most beneficial to the other individual, even if it is a situation in which you perceive that the other individual is being harmful to themself.
Let us say that you are interactive with another individual or a family member that is excessively engaging substances and is being harmful to themself, and you want to intervene and you are expressing a better direction for them. You don’t know how their value fulfillment will be expressed. You know what YOU perceive is better or worse or good or bad or effective or ineffective. You know what YOUR perception is of that, and you have your guidelines in relation to what is healthy, what is not healthy. And that is important for you and is right for you, but it isn’t necessarily right for another individual, even in situations in which you might make an assessment that they are actually harming themself. That may be a direction that that individual has set themselves in to experience for a reason—and they may not even know what the reason is yet, but they may discover what the reason is.
I know that for many of you, “taking care of” is a manner in which you perceive you are expressing how much you love someone or how much you care about someone. How much you love someone, how much you care about someone isn’t necessarily expressed by taking care of them; it depends on how you do that and WHAT you do, and what position you are encouraging the other individual to be in. The question is, when you are taking care of someone, are you moving in a direction of caring for them to their greatest benefit?
It may BE your livelihood, it may be your CAREER to be a caretaker, and that doesn’t necessarily mean that you are taking personal responsibility for the other individual. If you are caring for them and you are also honoring them, and you are listening to them and you are acknowledging them, then you aren’t taking personal responsibility for them, and you are encouraging them in their own choices, in their own capabilities—
KATIE: So, it’s more about keeping it more supportive.
ELIAS: Definitely.
KATIE: Okay.
ELIAS: And sharing. When you cross that line into the perception that your direction is better, that whatever you are expressing is the better way, and you are encouraging the other individual to depend on you, then you are moving in the direction of that personal responsibility, which is different. And that is not helpful to you or to the other individual.
When you are caring for another individual, you always want to be encouraging them. You always want to be acknowledging them in how important they are and valuable they are and what they have to contribute.
KATIE: Okay.
ELIAS: In whatever capacity that may be. Every individual that exists in your reality expresses value in themself in relation to their contribution to their world. If they aren’t contributing anything to the world, then what is the point of their existence? That is the general perception.
KATIE: Well, and a lot of my clients are hospice patients. So, they’re getting ready to go anyway. And most of the time it’s because they want to.
ELIAS: And in that, that doesn’t mean that they haven’t contributed.
KATIE: Right.
ELIAS: They may have made their contribution, and now they are preparing themselves to disengage, and that is acceptable. And in that, it is simply a matter of acknowledgment and reminding them of their value and their importance, because every individual IS important.
But it is an excellent question and is an excellent distinction to make, that the fact that you may be a caregiver doesn’t necessarily mean that you are taking personal responsibility for another individual.
KATIE: How well am I doing on that?
ELIAS: Very.
KATIE: Oh, good! (Group applauds and Elias chuckles)
KAREN: Elias, I have a question.
ELIAS: Yes?
KAREN: You’ve been talking about the nuances around how this idea of the hole inside ourselves of non-value plays itself out, and there’s many different ways. And I was thinking comparison might be one of these ways, too?
ELIAS: Definitely.
KAREN: And I was wondering, can you just kind of give a general survey of the ways this sensation plays itself out beyond codependency, beyond comparison? Like what other ways you can identify it in behavior?
ELIAS: Very well. Striving to be the best. Being an overachiever. (Group laughter and chatter) Being exceptional at anything, but not simply because you love what it is that you are doing, but because you HAVE to be exceptional, that you are proving to the world how important you are.
Or, needing to be in the spotlight. Needing to be noticed. Needing to be recognized in relation to anything that you do. That you have to be important, and that in any given situation you have to be ultimately important. That if someone else is more important or in the spotlight, you have to take that away from them. You have to move that light over to yourself and move it away from someone else.
Or, the opposite: hiding in the shadows but having to be indispensable in the shadow. That you don’t need the spotlight, but that whatever you are doing is indispensable. That someone or something can’t exist without you, because you are expressing how important you are, how vital you are to something.
Or, it could be that you are an exceptional giver, that you are always giving to everyone else. That you can’t receive. That it’s bad to receive. That you would be bad if you are receiving. You can only be giving.
It can show itself in exceptional drive to be successful in business, that an individual may be pushing themselves to tremendous limits to be ultimately successful, or making the most money. Money is a significant subject, that the more money you have the more important you are, and the more valuable you are, and therefore striving to make as much money as possible.
Or, the opposite: being a perpetual victim and needing others TO take care of you because you can’t succeed alone, because you can’t be ultimately successful yourself, because you aren’t enough yourself, that there is always something that isn’t enough.
Another piece—which is VERY common—is that factor of not enough in everything, that nothing is enough. No matter what it is, it isn’t enough.
Wanting to be invisible is another symptom, not calling attention to yourself and shrinking in the presence of other individuals, being very quiet and shrinking back and not drawing attention to yourself. Or, drawing attention to yourself excessively.
And the ultimate: having to be right. (Group chatter) That you have to be right, and that in that you are willing to debate to the end (group laughter) in relation to your rightness.
ANN: We don’t know anyone like that. (Group laughter)
ELIAS: And having PROOF of your rightness and how right you are, and how absolute that is and unquestionable that is, that there IS no question—you are right and that is it, period. And in that, the rightness leads to the smartest, the best, the most effective, the most efficient, and simply the best at everything, or anything, because you are always right. (Group laughter)
Right to the point that others are wrong. That is significantly destructive, because when you have to elevate yourself in a manner that you discount someone else, you are showing how much you discount yourself, how much you aren’t worthy and how much you aren’t valuable, because you have to express that and prove that you are so valuable.
When you genuinely recognize your worth and your importance, you don’t have to express it. You don’t have to make someone else small. You don’t have to argue with them. You don’t have to prove that you are right. You can listen to them be right and not agree with them, but you can learn from them. (Whispers) What a concept! (Group laughter)
You can learn from someone that you dislike intensely and that you completely disagree with and you think that that individual is an entire idiot? You absolutely can. You can learn from those individuals. Your neighbor that is continuously irritating you because they keep running over your yard and tearing up your precious plants and allowing their dog to eliminate in your yard, and they NEVER address to it, and it is SO irritating, and THEN the individual has the NERVE to argue with you about how right they are and how insignificant you are. And what can you learn from this individual? (Pause)
IVAN: What not to do.
ELIAS: That is one expression, yes.
KATIE: Self-expression?
ELIAS: Yes, but—
MARK: Patience.
ELIAS: You definitely can learn patience.
SANDRA: Allowance.
ELIAS: Which is patience.
LEONOR: Elias, how about reflection?
ELIAS: It IS a reflection, yes. Therefore, in that, what you can learn from this individual is how important something is to them, and how strongly they will defend what is important to them.
What were we discussing at the beginning of this conversation? In your Second World War, what was missing?
GROUP: You’re not human. Honor.
ELIAS: Honor and the conviction of rightness.
Now, that isn’t to say that YOU should be expressing your rightness. As I expressed, if you are actually self-aware, you don’t have to express your rightness to someone else. You don’t have to PROVE yourself to someone else; you already know within yourself, and their expression doesn’t threaten you.
But in that, you also can see from the other individual’s expression their conviction that something is very important to them. And in that, you might not agree with them, but your right isn’t their right, just as much as their right isn’t yours.
And in that, you also learn from them the importance of acknowledgment. Because when someone isn’t acknowledged, they need to express their rightness. Therefore, you learn how important it is to BE acknowledging, even that person that you don’t like and that you disagree with—
ANN: I have a question.
ELIAS: Yes?
ANN: So, how then in that situation would you acknowledge some of that echo and be genuine still? Like, if someone was running through my yard, tire tracks, on and on, I would obviously get upset. I would think they were not respectful of my property, whatever. And so, if I wanted to acknowledge them, how would I do that?
ELIAS: It depends on what they are expressing in your presence in a conversation or in a statement, whatever they may be expressing.
ANN: Just repeating back to them?
ELIAS: No. Not repeating back to them, but taking what they are expressing and then acknowledging how you see how important that is to them.
ANN: Okay.
ELIAS: And not echoing them, but acknowledging. And what is acknowledging?
ANN: It’s witnessing.
ELIAS: And what does that mean?
ANN: I see them.
ELIAS: What is the action of acknowledgment?
ANN: Validate.
ELIAS: You validate, and you accept.
LEONOR: Elias, I have one question, because I have a confusion here. If somebody has a dog going back and forth and pooping in my yard, my confusion is should I honor myself and tell it to get the hell out of my yard? Because I’ve got to honor myself first, right? What’s important to me first. Or should I just acknowledge that the person needs, you know, somebody to love them? (Laughs) And I need to allow him to poop in my yard?
ELIAS: It isn’t a matter of allowing him to generate the action that you don’t like, but it also isn’t a matter of matching that energy. It is a matter of recognizing that there’s a reason that this individual is doing this. Therefore, when you express, “Don’t do that!”, that likely is not going to produce the response that you want, and the individual likely isn’t going to listen to you and is likely going to continue to generate the same behavior. And you can threaten them, and they likely will STILL continue to do the same behavior.
When you cooperate with individuals rather than matching energy with them, it creates a very different outcome.
LEONOR: [Inaudible] I’m not going to tell him not to do that, but if the person is doing it, and I have these experiences with me, would I be very nice?
ELIAS: You don’t have to be very nice.
LEONOR: Other people, you know, they’ll respect me, and then when I’m a bitch, people respect me. So, that’s what I’m trying to figure out, like how do I react? Just, “Excuse me, can you pick up the poop?” And the person says, “No.” He’s going to say, “That wasn’t me” or whatever, argue with me, then what do you do?
RON: You talk to the dog. (Group laughter)
ELIAS: What I am expressing to you is, it isn’t a matter of being nice. It also isn’t a matter of expressing opposition and matching energy. There is nothing wrong with expressing yourself and saying to the other individual, “Can you please clean that up?” Or, you don’t even have to be that cordial. You can simply express, “Clean up this mess.” You can do that, and there isn’t anything wrong with that. What I am expressing to you is, when you do that, it is very likely that the energy that you are projecting is angry or irritated. And in that, when you are projecting that energy, you are matching the energy of the other individual. And you might produce in that moment the result that you want—you likely won’t. The other individual likely will be defensive and will counter you and won’t do what you want them to do. But even if they do, even if they cower and they do respond in the manner that you want, they likely will retaliate in some manner, because now you have—in their perception—humiliated them, and that makes them angry.
Therefore, in that, you aren’t creating what you want. What I am expressing to you is when you can genuinely use your creativity, use your brains, and in that, move in a direction of cooperation. And in that, you are honoring the other individual and you are honoring yourself, not simply one.
In that, it is a matter of stopping. And remember: You have incredible brains. They move exceptionally fast. You can process a tremendous volume of information in less than a second. Therefore, in the situation, in the moment, you can process a tremendous amount of information and find a solution in the moment, looking at the other individual, SEEING the other individual, seeing their energy and processing that information: Why is this individual doing this? And you don’t have to have the entire answer to that question; all you have to do is ask the question to yourself, in a manner of genuineness. Not (speaking angrily) “WHY IS THIS INDIVIDUAL DOING THIS?” but (speaking calmly) “Why is this individual doing this? What do you need?” It isn’t your job to provide what they need, but when you ask those questions to yourself, you approach the situation very differently.
And in that, you are paying attention to YOU, not THEM. You are expressing, “What should I do? I should honor myself?” Yes! And how you honor yourself is to pay attention to you and what you are doing. If you are asking yourself those questions, you are paying attention to you. You aren’t focused on the other person and what they did and what you don’t like about it—which is what you WERE doing when you were simply expressing, “Excuse me. Pick that up!”
LEONOR: Being reactive.
ELIAS: Yes. That IS being reactive. And in this, that’s the point: Pay attention. Be aware. You don’t need a tremendous amount of time to process in the moment any of these situations. You can process that exceptionally fast. You do! You simply don’t do it, because you are accustomed to reacting, not looking at that situation as “Oh, this IS a reflection.” You don’t say that to yourself in that moment; you say, “Stop it and pick that up!”
MARK: You just step in it.
ELIAS: (Laughs) And that is even MORE of a reflection! (Laughs) And what are YOU doing? (Laughs) And I would say, this is the point, my friends, is that you are paying attention to you, you are recognizing what YOU are doing, and you aren’t moving in these automatic, reactive directions. But you actually are beginning to recognize what you yourselves are doing and the energy that you are projecting, and you are moving in the direction of cooperation. That is the ultimate key, because that is what binds you together, not pushes you apart. And that is the point, that you come together.
Look at your world. That is what it is doing. As much as you might have the perception on and off that the world is pushing apart, no, in actuality it is coming together more and more and more. You are no longer separated by country boundaries. Everyone is experiencing the same. Everyone is engaging the same subjects. It doesn’t MATTER what country you are in any longer; you are all facing yourselves with the same subject. You are all moving in the same direction. THAT, my friends, is your evidence of this Shift.
Yes?
MARK: A question about, you said two generations of creating this trauma are affecting the generations now, like myself, of trauma, and that that’s blocking our interconnectedness and our flow.
ELIAS: It can.
MARK: It can. So, if that’s the case, is a change in perception the mechanism to deal with that trauma?
ELIAS: Yes.
MARK: Could you give me a definition of hope?
ELIAS: A definition of hope?
MARK: From your perspective, yeah. Hope: Is it negative or a positive?
ELIAS: Negative. Hope is the want for something to change in relation to what you want it to be.
MARK: Okay.
ELIAS: Hope ultimately leads you in a direction of disappointment. Hope is not a positive, effective expression. FAITH is definitely a direction that will contribute to you creating what you want.
MARK: So, I have a significant amount of compassion for Veronica, and I’m now going to ask this: If this Shift is going, it’s moving, and people address to their traumas, that if you have faith—if you have faith, not hope—that all this is going to play out, it’s a way to perceive that whole situation differently?
ELIAS: Yes.
MARK: Veronica’s situation?
ELIAS: Yes.
MARK: Okay. Thank you.
ELIAS: You are welcome.
VERONICA: Can I ask a question [inaudible] about….Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Melissa.
MELISSA: That’s fine.
ELIAS: In relation to what he is expressing?
VERONICA: Yes. Yes.
ELIAS: Faith is the expression and the action of trusting what you don’t know and what you can’t see. Faith is future-based. Trust is present. You have trust in yourself and in what you do now, and that is foundational. Faith is the expression of extending that trust to the future in relation to what you can’t see yet and what you don’t know yet, but you trust that future manifestation because you have the trust in what you are doing now, and that that creates that foundation for that future expression.
How does that relate to or is associated with you, in your situation with your children, is what I was expressing to you previously. It is about what you do genuinely now that you CONTINUE to do. That you express yourself, that you express your love, your appreciation for them, and you don’t stop. Regardless of whether they reciprocate that or not, you are expressing that because you trust you in what you are expressing, and you have faith that laying that foundation will have an influence and create the future that is important to you and that you want. Are you understanding?
VERONICA: Yes. And I am thinking that the only way that I believe I do that is remembering the love that did exist, which I believe continues to exist somewhere.
ELIAS: It does, because once you express love, it cannot be undone—ever.
VERONICA: But I feel it is an internal act which energy goes out.
ELIAS: Yes! Yes. It is.
Now; what I would also say to you in that is that it isn’t simply about a feeling. Feeling isn’t love.
VERONICA: Right.
ELIAS: And it isn’t only a matter of thinking about it or wishing about it. It is a matter of action: acting on what that is, acting on that love. Therefore, that is the reason that I said to you to express it, to express yourself—in whatever manner you choose. It doesn’t have to be directly, such as a conversation in physical proximity or a telephone conversation. It could be in letters. But something that you are engaging an action, expressing that love, that appreciation in relation to them, and that you continue to express it regardless of what they do or what they express, because it isn’t about the expectation of reciprocation. It is about what you do, and the foundation that you lay, and the faith in what it yields.
VERONICA: I believe the direction, as I’ve been thinking about it, is a [inaudible].
ELIAS: Excellent. I would be very encouraging. (Gently) You are exceptionally loved.
Yes?
SANDRA: Oh. I was going to ask if then the outcome of continued faith and trust leads to the knowing? Like, if you believe something and trust something, have faith in something so much, there’s a state like of knowing, and then is that the next awareness?
ELIAS: Yes.
SANDRA: Thank you.
ELIAS: Yes.
SANDRA: That’s all. Thank you.
ELIAS: (Chuckles) Yes?
KENNY: You were expressing the importance of dealing with early childhood trauma, which a lot of us have experienced, and some of us—and I’m including myself, but I’m sure also many people here—experienced some very SEVERE childhood trauma, and it leads to what’s commonly known as post-traumatic stress, in which we become very reactive so quickly it’s hard to notice it, it’s hard to catch. Now, I’m getting better at it, okay? But in terms of when you talk about reducing these behaviors in terms of having dealt with the issues, I’m assuming you’re talking about a healing of the trauma? I mean, the most common ways are therapy, etc., etc., but what…? If you wanted to say a general something to this audience and to myself, what would be the clearest, most Elias or sparky way of saying, “This is the formula for healing”? What would be the simplest way of saying that?
ELIAS: Very well. I have engaged in a very simple method with many individuals in relation to this very subject. And it is an INTENSE method, but it definitely is a simple method.
KENNY: I’m intense. Do the work. (Group laughter)
ELIAS: The point is to be reuniting memory with feeling. When people engage trauma, they separate. You don’t do it intentionally. Your actual, physical brain and your neurological system separates the memory from the feeling.
Now remember: Feelings are signals; they aren’t communications. But in that, feelings are definitely important. And in relation to trauma, and extreme trauma, that you are—
KENNY: I’m just going to mention one thing. My memories are actually fairly intact. So…
ELIAS: And let me express to you that—
KENNY: Okay. I just wanted to say that.
ELIAS: That some individuals have significant recall of their memories. Some individuals do not. This exercise is effective in either direction. But even when you have recall of your memories, that doesn’t mean that the feeling is connected –
KENNY: Obviously not. (Laughs)
ELIAS: — with the memory. You have the memory, you can recall the memory, but you have a neutrality about it. You simply recall the memory, but you don’t FEEL it. You don’t feel it in the manner that you felt it when it happened.
KENNY: No.
ELIAS: Reuniting, or reincorporating, the feeling with the memory is the goal, because the body consciousness separates them to protect you. Because at the time of the trauma, if the body consciousness doesn’t separate those two factors, it can shatter the psyche. It can shatter your perception mechanism.
KENNY: I came close to that.
ELIAS: Therefore, that is what your psyche is. It is the perception mechanism, that which creates your reality, the projector. And at times, with certain traumas, if those two factors aren’t separated, the projector breaks. Therefore, the body consciousness knows that and automatically separates them, but when you do that, then it creates influences in behaviors that are disruptive.
KENNY: So to speak, yes.
ELIAS: Therefore, the point is to put back together, to reintegrate, the memory with the feeling.
Now, there is a simple exercise that can be done to do that, but it is important that the exercise is done precisely in the manner to do that.
KENNY: Should it not be done alone?
ELIAS: It is actually more advisable to not do it alone.
KENNY: That’s what I would suspect in this case.
ELIAS: It can be done alone, but it would definitely be advisable to not do it alone and to have another individual facilitating.
KENNY: I agree with that part.
ELIAS: The exercise is relatively simple. It is a matter of choosing a memory—and some people don’t have the recall of a memory, therefore they would be choosing a feeling. But if they do have the recall of a memory, they choose a memory, and you don’t have to choose many; you can choose between one and three for an entire childhood, and that is enough.
KENNY: That’s all it took.
ELIAS: In that, you choose a memory, and what you do is you begin to move through the recall of the memory. There are three steps. You divide the memory into three sections. One is the first part of the memory, then you move to the second part of the memory, then you move to the third part of the memory. What was the beginning of the memory? What was the middle? What was the end of the memory? Those are the three parts.
You revisit the first, and you attempt to feel. What did you feel when that part of the memory was happening? While you are doing this, you either tap (Elias demonstrates) on your knees, alternating hands, or you tap with your fingers, alternating hands—ONLY while you are recalling; no other time. Only while you are recalling. Doing this (demonstrates) or doing this (demonstrates) at other times disrupts the entire process. You stop after each section for approximately one minute. If you were successful at pulling together the memory and the feeling, your body consciousness will react. You will begin to feel fluttering in your stomach.
You move to the second part, the middle part of the memory, and you do the same action. You attempt to pull together what you felt when that was happening, and you tap. And then you stop, and you have one to one and a half minutes you are not engaging the memory any longer.
You move to the third aspect of the memory, and you do the same action.
Now; in that, then you revisit the first, and you ask again, “What is the first part of the memory?” Your memory likely—if you were successful—your memory will be more expanded. You will begin to notice other parts of that memory that you didn’t recall previously—and the emotional charge, the feeling, will be much less.
When you move through the second and third piece of the memory, you will know that you are being more successful because your body consciousness will react more. The first part of the memory, you may have fluttering in your stomach. The second part of the memory, you will start to shake. The third part of the memory, you will shake and you may even have teeth shattering. Your body will react with electrical charge, to the point in which you will be uncontrollably shaking. But it will only continue for approximately one to two minutes; it won’t continue past that time framework. Your body will stop automatically. It may feel as if it is a long time that that is happening, but in actuality it won’t continue past two minutes, because your body will stop and it will calm.
What is happening in that time framework is your physical brain—your actual, physical brain—is generating an entirely new action. It is creating an actual, physical groove in the left hemisphere of your brain.
KENNY: A neural pathway.
ELIAS: And what happens is when you reunite the feeling and the memory, the memory moves from the right hemisphere of your brain to the left hemisphere of your brain and is deposited in that new groove. The right hemisphere of your brain holds trauma memories. It saves them. They become stuck there, because that is the part of your brain that protects you. The left hemisphere of your brain is, in a manner of speaking, the balanced hemisphere of your brain. And in that, this is the hemisphere of your brain that knows you are safe and therefore doesn’t need protecting.
This is a very effective exercise. I would not suggest that you randomly engage this exercise, because you can move in directions, if you don’t realize what you are doing, of shattering the perception.
JOHN/RRUSSELL: What does that mean?
ELIAS: You break the projector. It can result in a catatonic state. It can result in fracturing the perception in different parts; therefore, the perception then only functions in certain parts. Or it can move in a direction in which your perception is fractured in such a manner that it can’t engage this reality any longer. That doesn’t mean you die; it simply means that your perception is broken, and that is not something that you necessarily want to create in this reality.
This is why your brain does what it does to protect you, and allows you to continue to function and continue to move about in your reality and interact with each other and ISN’T fractured. But it also creates a situation in which there are very strong influences of your behaviors that you might not even be aware of, and they show up in many different types of expressions.
(Elias speaks to John and Karen) Another one that would be a subject that the two of YOU explore—sexuality—that is ANOTHER avenue that this type of expression is a symptom of. People that are very repressed, or people that are excessively expressive in sexual expressions—people that seem to be what you term to be addicted to sex, that it is excessive with them. These are also symptoms of behaviors that are associated with unidentified traumas.
There are many, many, many, many different avenues in which it can be expressed, and therefore because the symptoms are so diverse, it is a subject that most individuals automatically would not assume that there would be one cause. But I would say that if individuals actually shared information—which many, many, many of you don’t—but if you actually did share information about your experiences, you would be surprised at how many of you share traumatic experiences and think that no one else does, or think that you are different, that you are the exception and that most people don’t have these experiences—but most people do.
ANN: This is kind of a curiosity thing, but… So, you were saying these last two generations, in World War II there was a lot of trauma. In MY perception, it just seems like if you go back in time in our history it’s been very violent in many times in our history, extremely violent. And I had the perception, I guess in error, that we were maybe coming OUT of that trauma from, you know, 100 years ago, 1000 years ago, when they did the guillotines and the quartering and whatever. It seems like it was more traumatic back then. And you’re saying now, because of the war, of the trauma. So, that is very interesting to me. I guess I learned something new.
JEAN: And that it’s different from World War I. How was World War I different?
ELIAS: Because during THAT war, they still were incorporating that expression of honor and the conviction of rightness.
ANN: So, children did not feel as unimportant, like 100 years ago, as they do now? That is shocking to me. Interesting.
JOHN/RRUSSELL: I have a question. I’m kind of curious, bringing it to the present day with… I mean, they talk about a generation of children now who are growing up with trauma. I mean, I just know reading my own neighborhood Facebook, whatever group that I go to very occasionally, there’s children who haven’t been outside socializing with others for months, right? Or children having to wear masks inside their house all day long. Just odd, right, I mean the sort of behaviors with the children being isolated and then that’s the trauma that results. So, I’m just wondering if you’d say a few words about that? It’s minor by comparison.
ELIAS: That isn’t necessarily trauma.
JOHN/RRUSSELL: Okay.
ELIAS: It may be disturbing to some children, but I would also say that children in the younger generation—when I express two generations, that is between the ages of 50 and 80. The children in the present generations, from birth to adolescence now, are definitely much more self-directing, and they are at times compliant. Many parents may express the opinion that children in those ages are more difficult than ever, because they ARE more self-directing and less likely to be told what to do. They are more defiant, in many parents’ assessment, although they aren’t necessarily being defiant—they are simply noncompliant. (Group laughter)
But I would say that between adolescent and, let us say, the age of approximately 25, 28, in that age group the general direction is they are also more self-directing [with] much, much less trauma in their lives, in their experiences, much more encouragement of self-expression. They have definitely been encouraged to be themselves, although they also have been encouraged to be a part of the world. And in that, there is a considerable amount of despair and hopelessness, in the definition of hope, that they see nothing that will move in the direction that they want. But they don’t have a tremendous amount of trauma in their experiences.
Between 28-30 and 50, this group has some trauma, much less than 50-62—much less—but they do incorporate a significant degree, because they are coming from a generation that has very little information—or had very little information and had very little awareness of how to be incorporating them in what you would term to be a healthy, nurturing, encouraging manner. BUT—they were acknowledged as human, and they were acknowledged as people, from very young ages. Therefore, that is a significant difference and what you would term to be improvement.
From 50 to 62-65, this is the second generation of the trauma, the torture, the abuse. The first generation would be from 65-66 to almost 80. That would be the first generation, and they have tremendous trauma, and trauma to the point of torture. And in that, you talk about torturous actions that have happened in history through wars, and torturous actions that were expressed in war and there was no outlet for it in relation to why it was being done; and therefore, then it becomes acceptable to do it regardless. And who becomes the target of that but those individuals that are not human? And that would be those children.
Now, in that, I would say the second generation was slightly less in the trauma, but close. Therefore, those two generations have suffered considerable difficulty. And in this, I would say that young generations now, they don’t express much trauma. They may be uncomfortable, they may not like certain actions, certain actions may be somewhat repressive to them, [but] they will move beyond it, and they will move beyond it rather quickly, and they are very resilient. Children have always been very resilient, even in those two generations. You are here, you are alive, you have survived, you are productive, and you are expanding, and you are self-aware. Therefore, even with tremendous trauma there is that element of encouragement and nurturing, and that you can be expressing that faith that it will incorporate a different outcome, and you can change it.
Yes?
VERONICA: During the Second World War, I remember the Japanese, and I affiliate it with the expression “honor.” Isn’t that where you have the hari-kari expression? What were they honoring? It was honor. It was wanting to commit suicide?
ELIAS: But that isn’t actual, genuine honor. That what they expressed was a particular perception of what was acceptable and what was not—what was acceptable to the empire and the emperor, and what was not. And that what was acceptable was to be nothing less than always victorious and always the best, and if you are conquered you are not the best, and you are definitely not victorious.
VERONICA: Is part of this ethos in China today?
ELIAS: No. China incorporates a very different cultural perception. China actually has expressed for thousands of years, even in relation to the warlords—which dominated their history for a significant time framework—even in relation to those times, the culture in China has moved in a direction of philosophical disciplines that they express in relation to physical expressions, physical disciplines that are definitely incorporated in almost a religious capacity which they express in the direction of connecting themselves to the universe. They connect themselves to each other and to the universe in most of their philosophies and their disciplines. And they incorporate a high value on strength—but strength is, in their philosophy, generated first from within and then is expressed outwardly, which actually is quite accurate.
VERONICA: I have a Chinese friend, and that’s what I see in her. The Tai Chi, and the [inaudible].
ELIAS: Yes.
VERONICA: And I call them the Midas Touch friends. I mean, they’re so successful with everything they do, and I see tremendous cooperation.
ELIAS: Yes. And balance. That is very highly prized.
VERONICA: Thank you.
ELIAS: You are very welcome. We shall incorporate one more question.
MARK: You gave Kenny an example of how to address to the trauma. That’s just one example, correct? So, could you discuss another one related to changing your perception? And when I asked you previously, you agreed that by changing your perception you could address to that trauma. I feel like there’s a confusion there.
ELIAS: Very well. Changing your perception generally occurs by giving yourself new or different information, and your ability to accept that new or different information—because you can present new or different information to yourself and not accept it, and therefore your perception doesn’t change at all.
BUT—this would be a matter of what we were discussing in relation to not matching energy, that you can change your perception by changing what you are paying attention to, first of all, and how you are paying attention to it, such as in the example that if you are concentrating on the dismay and the despair of what your children are not doing or how they aren’t expressing that compassion or that connection with you, then you hold a specific perception that you keep perpetuating.
Now, in that, changing that, first of all, is a matter of changing what you are paying attention to. Instead of paying attention to what they are doing, beginning to pay attention to what you are doing and how you are doing it, and making that more important and making the other person’s part less important. You pay more attention to what you make important. If something isn’t important to you, you pay very little attention to it.
Therefore, the key is to change what is important to you, pay more attention in a particular direction and less attention in another direction. In this, even if you don’t believe it initially, it doesn’t matter; because the repetition of the action of paying attention to something else, something different, eventually it BECOMES more important automatically, and the other that you AREN’T paying attention to automatically becomes less important.
Let me express in this manner: An individual expresses a significant irritation towards their partner because their partner is not taking care of themself in the manner that they believe is important. Their partner doesn’t consume food in the manner that is important and is nutritional to them, their partner doesn’t exercise in a manner that is significant, and therefore they physically aren’t taking care of themself in the manner that they think is important. And because of that, they continuously are angry or irritated, and they are continuously hounding their partner, “Eat this and do these exercises!” And their partner doesn’t do it, and there is this conflict that is happening frequently.
Now; in that, what is happening is, first of all it is a matter of looking at what is the motivation. The reason that the individual is expressing in that manner and that it is so important to them is because they love this individual, and if this individual isn’t taking care of themself in their perception then they can possibly die, and then the individual will be alone, and they will be very sad. Therefore, because they love this individual and because they don’t want them to die, they become angry and they insist, “You have to eat in this manner! You have to exercise in this manner!”
Now; what they have done is make that very important, make what they don’t want important. They made the fear important. Rather than making the LOVE important, they made the fear important.
In this, now: If that individual, regardless that they still believe that their partner should be eating and exercising in a certain manner—regardless—if they stop and they move their attention to what is actually important, which is “I love my partner; I love this individual; that is why I am afraid,” if they stop paying attention to the afraid part and they only pay attention to the “I love my partner” part and then choose to generate an action—as I expressed, it isn’t only a matter of thinking about something; you have to DO something. Therefore, they choose an action. Every time they become upset or irritated that their partner is eating the wrong thing or they are sitting on their computer and not doing anything and not exercising, instead of barking at them they stop and say, “I love you and I’m afraid, ” and that is all. And they walk away.
Now, in that, that doesn’t change that they still believe that their partner should be doing what they believe they should be doing, but I would say to you that within a period of perhaps two weeks, perhaps three weeks, suddenly they will begin to notice that they aren’t as irritated with their partner. They don’t feel that fear. And they don’t know when that changed, but suddenly it isn’t so important that their partner is exercising or eating. AND—the miracle that happens is, suddenly their partner begins eating and exercising, because they aren’t being hounded.
This is how you change your perception. You don’t have to believe it initially; it will automatically change.
MARK: So, if you move your attention, change your importance, does it have the same impact as the groove—
ELIAS: Yes. Yes.
MARK: --that you discussed previously?
ELIAS: Yes. Yes. It does. Because that also creates new neurological pathways.
VERONICA: What role would imagination play in changing the neural pathways?
ELIAS: Imagination is exceptional.
VERONICA: But there’s no action in there.
ELIAS: But there can be, because imagination sparks inspiration, and when you are inspired you act.
VERONICA: Thank you.
ELIAS: You are very welcome.
I express wondrous encouragement to all of you, and tremendous, tremendous love and friendship. Be wondrous with yourselves and each other, and remember the magic word: cooperation.
To all of you in great affection, as always, until our next meeting, au revoir.
GROUP: Au revoir, Elias. (Applause)
(Elias departs after 1 hour and 31 minutes. Total session time was 2 hours 28 minutes)
Copyright 2020 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.