Monday, March 19, 2007 (Private)

Participants: Mary (Michael), Anet (Alexi) and Paul (Xutrah)

ELIAS: Good morning!

PAUL: Good morning!

ANET: Good morning, Elias. Nice to see you again.

ELIAS: (Chuckles) And you also. And what shall we discuss?

ANET: All kinds of things. First, my brother Eddie would like to know his essence name.

ELIAS: Essence name, Annore, A-N-N-O-R-E (an ORE).

ANET: And for my friend Mary Sue, her essence name?

ELIAS: Essence name, Xantha, X-A-N-T-H-A (ZAN thuh).

ANET: That’s pretty; she’ll like that. For essence family belonging, we both think Tumold but possibly Milumet.

ELIAS: Tumold.

ANET: And alignment, she thinks Sumafi; I think Sumari.

ELIAS: Sumafi

ANET: Orientation, soft?

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: Focus type, religious?

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: And total number of focuses in this dimension?

ELIAS: Eight hundred eighty-one.

ANET: And the number of past, present and future?

ELIAS: That fluctuates.

ANET: Oh, with her more than normal?

ELIAS: No, with every individual. This number that I offer to you now is the present number of focuses. That fluctuates also in different time frameworks; therefore, it would be inaccurate to identify past or future focuses. I can offer present focuses: six.

ANET: Does she have a significant number of future ones?

ELIAS: Approximately two-thirds past, one-third future.

ANET: It’s about like mine, similar to mine. I feel like she’s got more female than male.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: In about a 70/30 ratio?

ELIAS: Close.

ANET: And is she a final focus?

ELIAS: No.

ANET: For Alexi, shared focuses with Xutrah, is it about 76?

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: That’s my impression; Xutrah’s impression is that about 27 are intimate focuses.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: Xutrah is also a final focus, and he estimates that about one-third of his focuses will fragment when he disengages.

ELIAS: That would be a choice. Therefore, that would be difficult to estimate, for that can fluctuate tremendously also.

ANET: For me, number of shared focuses with Ogean, is it 124?

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: He wanted to know how many are past, present and future – he thought a lot were future – but you just told me that fluctuates a lot.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: But a significant number in the future?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: I’d like to confirm my core truth is that things should be balanced.

ELIAS: I would agree.

ANET: A lot of beliefs stem from that: fairness, justice, aesthetics, all kinds of stuff.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: I do have a Dream Walker aspect?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: There was a name somebody gave me one time, not about a Dream Walker, but I wondered if it could apply to it, a name like Dyal.

ELIAS: (Pause) Diel (dee ELL).

ANET: Oh, how would you spell that?

ELIAS: D-I-E-L.

ANET: Is he involved in designing human emotions, something to do with emotions?

ELIAS: Figuratively speaking, yes, there would be an involvement.

ANET: Okay, so I haven’t quite got that, what Diel’s role is.

ELIAS: It is difficult to explain the involvement and the precise actions of Dream Walkers, for these are not necessarily actual individuals but the essences that design the blueprint of this reality. There are many, many, many facets of that blueprint, and therefore, there are interminglings of many essences in many of the designs of the blueprint. Therefore, an involvement with the construct of emotion, yes, I can express affirmative that this essence did participate in involvement with that but not solely.

ANET: Right. They don’t have real defined job descriptions, so to speak. (Laughs)

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: That makes sense. My impression is I am not a dispersed essence.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: But sometimes it feels that way because of my empathic sense, using that.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: The creature my focus is most like, I’m thinking either a sparrow or a cottontail rabbit.

ELIAS: A sparrow.

ANET: And for my essence, am I most like a swan?

ELIAS: I would agree.

ANET: The last time we spoke objectively, I had 989 focuses, and three years ago I got a confirmation that that’s still the number. I can’t get a clear reading of if it’s increased. I’m getting it could possibly have increased to 1112.

ELIAS: (Pause) The number is correct, but 2000.

ANET: What? Oh my God, I’ve been busy! (Elias chuckles) Two thousand – 2112? That’s a nice balanced number. (Elias laughs) Maybe this still isn’t correct; I had gotten at one point that the ones close to me in tone were 142.

ELIAS: Approximately, correct.

ANET: The musical note or tone of my essence, is that an E-flat?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: Do I have an other-dimensional focus – and I understand this is a translation, that it’s not literal with OD things – as the goddess Minerva?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: I feel like Alexi, my essence – that’s still my essence, right? I didn’t feel like that had changed – that she fragmented from three essences.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: One of those was Ayla?

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: Was one Awan?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: And the other, is it Iona?

ELIAS: (Pause) Yes.

ANET: So that’s the Aphrodite connection. I felt like I was fragmented from Aphrodite, but Iona is Aphrodite, so that makes sense.

My French Resistance focus, to whom I’m very close in tone, I call her Sophie-Marie. Was that actually her name?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: Focuses of my essence in which Alexi is directing, here are some impressions I’ve had: Louise de La Valliere.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: And she was also soft.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: Was she my initiating focus?

ELIAS: No.

ANET: Pliny the Elder?

ELIAS: (Pause) Correct.

ANET: Sybil Sanderson, singer.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: (Pause) Martha Jefferson, wife of Thomas Jefferson.

ELIAS: Observing.

ANET: Observing, okay. Lifetime?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: And wife of Alfred Sisley? This was somebody else’s impression.

ELIAS: (Pause) Also observing.

ANET: Is that a lifetime observing as well?

ELIAS: Partial.

ANET: Some observing essence impressions I’ve gotten: Alexander Hamilton, OEL [observing essence lifetime].

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: Bertrand Russell, I think may be partial.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: Edith Piaf, partial, probably.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: Emmylou Harris, lifetime, and we’re also counterparts.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: Garrison Keillor, partial.

ELIAS: (Pause) Yes.

ANET: I feel like I generated that. I had a dream about him in 2003 or 2004, and I felt like I generated it then.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: I was thinking Helen of Troy, but she’s an Awan focus, so I don’t know. Since I’m fragmented from Awan, that might be why I felt like I was partial OE. Does that still apply?

ELIAS: Both.

ANET: Mary Queen of Scots?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: Partial?

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: Definitely during the time she was imprisoned. (Both laugh) And Olivia Newton-John, partial?

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: And counterparts, Princess Diana of Wales?

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: That was one-way; I was counterpart to her but she not to me.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: And Lucy Grealy, the writer and poet who died in 2002? That was two-way, I feel like.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: Alina Kabaeva, a Russian gymnast, we’re counterparts? (Elias nods) For Xutrah, does he have a focus as the second wife of Edward DeVere?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: Does my alignment – I’m Tumold/Sumafi, still, I feel like – does my alignment ever fluctuate to Vold?

ELIAS: It is not that it actually fluctuates, but as with any individual, as I have expressed previously, you incorporate qualities of all of the essence families, and at times, you may choose to be expressing those qualities more than other times.

ANET: I guess sometimes I just kind of go around the circle and am in the Vold area, and that gets expressed but hasn’t really changed.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: Several years ago I had a dream that involved a blond, blue-eyed dentist who was teaching a class, and I was one of the students. Was that you, that dentist was you? (Elias nods) So, that dream was my objective introduction to you, not physical objective but…

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: But you were subjectively interactive even before that?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: My shared focuses with Ogean, 124, how many of those are close, intimate ones?

ELIAS: 36.

ANET: I’m interested in being able to do things that are outside conventionally accepted beliefs, and I’m thinking that my intent – my overall intent is achieving freedom, breaking out of limitations that appear to be external but are self-imposed – I’m thinking that my more specific intent in this focus has to do with facilitating the Shift and achieving freedom from the rigid confines of beliefs that we’ve had to this point.

ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, in that it would be more of an expansion of the perception of the beliefs rather than moving outside of them.

ANET: I think I’m trying to move outside of them. (Laughs)

ELIAS: That may generate considerable difficulty if you choose to continue to participate within physical focus.

ANET: I’m not always too sure I want to continue to do that! (Laughs)

ELIAS: For within this physical reality, as I have expressed many times, beliefs are an element of the blueprint of it. Therefore, even in being fully shifted, you will continue to express beliefs, and you will continue to operate within the structure of beliefs. It is a matter of expanding your perception, therefore allowing you more freedom within the structure of beliefs, allowing you to manipulate in different manners that allow you more freedom within that structure.

ANET: So that would be in line with my intent, not like trying to get rid of them or go outside of them but to have more freedom within that structure we have chosen in this dimension?

ELIAS: Yes, yes.

ANET: When I’m in that mode, things are a little easier. When I try the other way, I get more trauma.

ELIAS: Yes. Beliefs are not being changed; they are not being eliminated. This is an element of the blueprint of this reality – which is not required that you participate, but if you choose not to participate, you would not be participating within this reality.

ANET: Yes. If you’re going to play the game, these are the basic ground rules.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: I wonder, is my lifelong love of getting rid of stuff, is that a manifestation of trying to eliminate beliefs?

ELIAS: Partially, yes. For that also would be in alignment with your intent, which can be misconstrued somewhat, spilling into an area of attempting to push that unconventionality in the attempt to push out or eliminate the beliefs; but that can generate conflict, difficulty, trauma, for they are not disappearing.

ANET: I mean, I know that intellectually but... (Elias laughs) Part of it, too, I’m a final focus in transition. The transition was about the summer of 2001 that it started? I know I’m, at some point, going to be shedding beliefs, and sometimes I think I’m trying to shed them while I’m still in physical focus.

ELIAS: Which you will not. But let me explain: When an individual chooses to engage transition within physical focus, there are many different actions that can be incorporated in relation to that. For the most part, in this time framework most individuals that are generating transition within physical focus are engaging that action as a helpful incorporation to be accepting beliefs and allowing for an easier movement within the shift itself. Some individuals are generating a preparation for disengagement but most individuals are not. They are incorporating this action to facilitate accepting beliefs and therefore generating more ease in their action of shifting.

The action of shedding beliefs does not occur until you engage transition nonphysically, which, even with that, most individuals do not immediately engage transition upon the choice to disengage.

ANET: I feel like my choice to engage transition is a little of both. It’s definitely to help with the ease of shifting and accepting beliefs, but I also think I am preparing for disengagement. Not immediately, probably, but I feel that possibility around all the time.

ELIAS: I would agree.

ANET: I have the sense that I have a little more to do, that if I were to disengage right now, it wouldn’t be the most efficient. I feel like the maximum would be about 11 years, although I know that’s my choice and I could change it anytime. But it’s almost like I’m on the down slope.

Some of the things that interest me are this stretching of beliefs to do things currently not believed to be possible in most societies. I know there are some societies where shamans can heal broken bones in a couple of minutes, that kind of thing. In the west we don’t believe that’s possible, so we don’t allow it. Those kinds of things, or even things like reversing gray hair that’s believed to be permanent, I want to do those sorts of things. I understand that generally when we don’t like something, be that a broken bone or gray hair or anything, we tend to create opposing energy, and the opposing energy simply serves to perpetuate it.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: Occasionally I can get in the space of acceptance of something, and then things just magically manifest – the job will show up or whatever. I struggle with getting out of, when I’m in that opposing energy with something, with anything, getting from that opposing energy into an energy of acceptance that will allow something else to manifest. How do we do that?

ELIAS: First of all by recognizing that you are generating that opposing energy, which is not quite difficult to recognize that, and once recognizing it, also recognizing how much importance you are generating in relation to it and dissipating the importance of it, which also dissipates your attention with it.

For as I have expressed, if an expression is not important or if a manifestation is not important, you pay less attention to it. Also, recognizing genuinely that it is significant to merely acknowledge what you are actually doing when you are concentrating upon what you do not want, and when you are noticing that you are generating that opposing energy, acknowledge that rather than attempting to change it or push it away. That generates more importance with it.

ANET: You’re fighting against it.

ELIAS: Yes. But if you merely notice and acknowledge “this is what I am doing; this is what I am feeling” and you engage some other action, you intentionally move your attention away from it. You can revisit that subject in a later time framework – which may be not a long time framework, but in a later time framework, once you have somewhat disassociated from it, that will allow for new inspiration, which will change your direction with the subject.

When you acknowledge, you change the energy that you are projecting. Therefore, if you are acknowledging “yes, I do not like this manifestation in this moment, but in this moment I do not objectively know what other expression to engage,” walk away from it. For in that, you are acknowledging what you are actually doing in the moment. You are not generating a judgment of it. You are dissipating the opposing energy, and that opens a window for you to generate new information.

In that, if you allow yourself to set aside that which you do not like momentarily and move your attention in a different direction and occupy yourself with a different subject, that window opens for the inspiration, in which when you reengage the subject that you have set aside, you are much more likely to offer yourself new information and new choices. It is not a matter of attempting to discover a method or attempting to find an answer. It will present itself to you. You will present it.

ANET: It’s an allowing.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: There are energy psychology techniques that involve tapping on acupuncture/acupressure meridians, and they work very well for many people, but they don’t seem to have much effect when I use them on myself. I’m puzzled about why that is.

ELIAS: Different methods are successful for different individuals in relation to their beliefs, their suggestibility, their associations and their openness.

Now; not all of these factors must be present, but many methods that many individuals generate success with are successful for the individuals that engage them accept the suggestion that it is successful. As they initiate and initially engage the actions, they are already generating the association that it will be successful and are not doubting it. They are not trying; they are doing, for they do not doubt that the success will be accomplished, for they have already accepted that suggestion that it will be successful.

Those same methods can be engaged by other individuals that may be somewhat questioning, and the difference in the action is is that they are not actually doing, they are trying. They are attempting. It can be likened to one individual merely jumps into a pool and begins to swim, for it has been suggested to them that they can. They do not doubt that, and therefore, they do. Another individual receives that same suggestion and examines their body consciousness and puts their foot in the water and is questioning inside “how?”

ANET: That would be me! (Laughs)

ELIAS: Therefore, they do not jump into the water and immediately achieve that success, for they are questioning: How do I accomplish this? How is this successful? What is occurring in this action? What am I actually affecting? In that questioning, you are not actually engaging the action. Subsequently, even if you did engage the action, it may not be successful, for you have not accepted the suggestion. You are playing with the suggestion.

Suggestibility is a strong force within your reality, and this is the reason that many actions and methods are accepted within your societies, and they produce the results in alignment with the suggestion. Such as, the suggestion is expressed that some food substance is contaminated, and masses of individuals will receive that suggestion, accept it without question and will not doubt, and they will create an illness in association with the contamination. Other individuals may consume the food substance that is expressed to be contaminated and not generate any symptom or reaction to that, for they have not accepted the suggestion, or at times, they have not accepted the suggestion for they have not allowed the suggestion to be presented to them.

ANET: That’s an easy way to do it.

ELIAS: Quite so. There may be a public announcement in relation to some substance, and some individuals may not hear that public announcement, and therefore, they may engage the contamination and not become contaminated, for that has been their method to not accept the suggestion.

You all engage degrees of suggestibility. Suggestibility is not bad.

ANET: It can be very efficient.

ELIAS: It can be, and it can be very effective. In that, at times it can generate quite an ease with certain actions, for it does allow you to not question, and in not questioning, you generate that confidence and that trust, and you create.

ANET: Sometimes I feel like I know too much. Though I know all of these things are beliefs, in a sense they are all rituals, be it medication or the therapies I talked about. It’s like I know too much. If I just went in not knowing what I know about beliefs, some of these things would probably work better than they do for me.

ELIAS: Although, every action that you incorporate is associated with beliefs. Therefore, there is no moment within your focus that is not being expressed through the filter of some beliefs. Therefore, it is merely a matter of recognizing what you choose to be effective.

If every moment and every action is filtered through a belief, it matters not that a medication or a substance or a food actually incorporates no inherent affectingness in itself. It is what you believe it will do that creates what it will do. You can believe whatever you choose in relation to any substance or any action. This is the reason individuals can engage poisonous snakes.

ANET: And drink strychnine.

ELIAS: And the snakes ARE poisonous, for they are not a manufactured substance. But although the snakes are poisonous, individuals engage certain beliefs that nullify the poison. The snakes ARE poisonous – if they incorporate another creature and bite them, the creature will die, for the creature does not incorporate beliefs.

ANET: So they are inherently poisonous.

ELIAS: Yes! There are certain manifestations within your reality that do generate what you would term to be dangerous elements, just as a lion incorporates very large teeth. They are quite real, and they can be quite damaging. A snake that is a venomous snake incorporates quite real poison that can be very dangerous and even lethal.

But you, as humans, incorporate beliefs. Therefore, it matters not that the lion incorporates very large teeth or that the snake incorporates poisonous venom, for it is dependent upon which beliefs you choose to be expressed as you engage these creatures or these situations as to whether those elements will be harmful to you or not.

If you are projecting in energy in a certain manner and are not doubting, not questioning and genuinely trusting yourself that you will not create – not that the creature will not create, but that YOU will not create – harmfulness to yourself, you can walk up to a lion that is quite wild and stand before it and place your hand upon it, and it will not harm you, for that is the energy that you are projecting. This is the reason that individuals can incorporate poisonous snakes and not be harmed.

ANET: So we tend to look at beliefs as always limiting, but in fact they’re the opposite of limiting because they allow us to do things we could not otherwise do without them.

ELIAS: Correct. That is the point. It is not a matter of viewing your beliefs as your enemy, but recognizing that in accepting your beliefs, recognizing that they are present and accepting that, you engage your actual freedom and power, for that allows you to manipulate in the manner that is most empowering to you and allows you to create what you want.

ANET: So stop trying to get rid of all these beliefs, because they can be very useful. (Laughs)

ELIAS: Quite so! Yes, that would be the point.

ANET: How many focuses do Elias and I share in this dimension?

ELIAS: Forty-four.

ANET: In the French Revolution time period, I had a feeling – I can’t tune in on my focus there very well – I had a feeling I was a male revolutionary. Xutrah saw me as a female who was acquainted with Elias and Jacques Bodreaux. Are both of these focuses of mine?

ELIAS: Yes. You incorporate several focuses in that time framework.

ANET: Are those the only two in France?

ELIAS: No.

ANET: Oh, so I was really heavily involved in that. Did the male revolutionary know Elias and Jacques as well?

ELIAS: No. That would be in another area.

ANET: In March of 1988, I had an experience in which I heard and saw a tall male being, all dressed in black, that I knew was not human. I heard it come into the house. It walked up the stairs. I was absolutely terrified, but when it came into my view, I knew it meant me no harm. It walked over to my bed; I can’t remember if it touched me or not, but then it just… I don’t think it disappeared. I think I stopped being able to see it, like somebody switched a movie frame. Was that an other-dimensional focus of mine who was just curious and wanted to come meet me?

ELIAS: Yes. That would be what we term to be a bleed-through. Many times with bleed-throughs, there is mutual curiosity. And when you can actually view it, it can actually view you also. You are encountering each other and are allowing your curiosities to see as an investigation, which also influences much pondering, for each attempts to decipher what the other is.

ANET: I sort of had the feeling that he knew more than I did, that I was really confused but he was purposeful and he knew what he was doing.

ELIAS: Partially, for that manifestation knew that it was penetrating. Therefore, there was an intentional action but did incorporate confusion and curiosity as to your configuration of energy and form.

ANET: I feel like – and I know these things aren’t linear, but that’s my perspective – after I disengage and transition and leave this dimension, I feel like I’m going to a dimension that’s like an elf or fairy-type realm.

ELIAS: You can.

ANET: I know you say everything is decided in the moment, but I feel like I’m deciding this ahead of time.

ELIAS: I am understanding. You already incorporate focuses in a dimension such as that; therefore, that may be an influence in why you feel that you are planning this action beforehand. But the choice is generated in the moment, and therefore, you, this personality, may choose subsequent to transition and disengagement to be exploring within that dimension also.

ANET: Because a friend of mine had a dream about a being in that dimension, and she said, ”That was you.” So that was an other-dimensional focus of mine she dreamed about?

ELIAS: Yes. But you also may choose…

ANET: This personality?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: To go there.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: I feel like my energy in this focus is lightening.

ELIAS: Yes, I would agree.

ANET: And that would be why sometimes automatic doors do not open for me! (Both laugh) People do not see me in a bank line. It’s like I go invisible.

ELIAS: I am understanding. (Chuckles) I would express a considerable difference in your energy from our previous meeting.

ANET: I feel that too. You were very helpful; thank you. (Elias chuckles) My friend Darrell, I feel like we’ve shared quite a few focuses. Around in the upper 30s?

ELIAS: More.

ANET: More than that – 96?

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: Oh my God! That was a genuine impression. And about a third of those have been intimate focuses?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: I didn’t specifically ask him if he wanted to know this, and so you may not want to give it, but his essence name?

ELIAS: Essence name, Mario.

ANET: He’s definitely a common.

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: Is he Zuli or Zuli aligned?

ELIAS: Aligned.

ANET: Does he also belong to Tumold?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: My three siblings are all commons; my mother’s a soft?

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: And my aunt Margaret is intermediate? (Elias nods) My father, was he a common?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: I feel that my mother has few focuses in this dimension, no more than a hundred.

ELIAS: Correct.

ANET: (Pause) I can’t think of any more questions. (To Paul) Can you think of anything?

PAUL: All sorts of things, but this is your session.

ANET: Let me think of what else, what other things I didn’t write down. The SCIO machine that Darrell has been using, this seems like it’s something that, within my beliefs, would be helpful for me to investigate and get involved in. Would you concur with that?

ELIAS: I would.

ANET: I feel like my energy is getting less compatible with the area I’m living in Colorado than it has been. Which doesn’t mean I can’t stay there, but I’m feeling like it might be time for me to consider moving elsewhere.

ELIAS: I would express that it is not necessarily that your energy is becoming less compatible, but that you are becoming more aware that this is an area that you do not resonate with as strongly.

ANET: That’s a better way to put it.

ELIAS: For many individuals choose areas in which they shall dwell, not paying attention to energy, and in that, it is not that they necessarily do not resonate, but they also are not resonating strongly. Therefore, they generate a type of neutrality in relation to the physical environment and location, which many individuals can continue in that neutrality and function adequately and not generate much of an affectingness in relation to themselves in association with their environment. That also is not bad, for they do not incorporate any other experience as a reference, if they are not paying attention to their own energy. Therefore, that is acceptable.

But when you begin expanding your awareness and you begin paying attention to energy, you may begin to notice that you do not necessarily resonate very strongly with the particular area in which you dwell. In that, it becomes more and more obvious, and you become more and more motivated to change your physical location. Or what occurs at times is that an individual may be neutral in relation to where they are dwelling, and they may incorporate a trip to another area and they notice the difference in energy.

When you strongly resonate with a physical location, you know. You will feel it. You will generate a very different perception. You will be invigorated, and you will be excited in association with the actual environment, and that excitement does not dissipate within time. It continues, for the resonance is present, and therefore, as you continue to resonate with the energy of the area, you continue that excitement and that affection for a particular location.

ANET: It can even grow.

ELIAS: Yes, it can, for your resonance can become stronger as you continue to engage that particular area that you resonate with.

ANET: My friend Todd, is he an intermediate?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: His essence name?

ELIAS: (Pause) Shilou (SHY loo), S-H-I-L-O-U.

ANET: He’s got Zuli somewhere too, also aligned. (Elias nods) His family, is he Sumafi?

ELIAS: Yes.

ANET: Poor thing! (Laughs)

(To Paul) You have time for a question. It looks like we’re just at an hour.

PAUL: Okay, it’s quick. So nice to engage with you, my friend.

ELIAS: And you also.

PAUL: The energy shift within this focus that I’ve been experiencing within relatively recent timeframes, it’s incorporating more of the feminine energy. But in terms of orientation or family alignments, would you say that it’s more of a shift in affinity for family alignment or orientation? I know I can’t switch orientation, but can I incorporate elements of another orientation, specifically soft?

ELIAS: Yes. You can explore different qualities and elements and associations and even perceptions of the soft orientation, which will allow you a greater understanding in relation to the orientation itself and other individuals that do incorporate that orientation. It will also allow you to experience in different manners, and you can actually incorporate some of those qualities yourself.

PAUL: It’s quite an exploration. (Both laugh) I’m enjoying it very much.

ELIAS: Very well.

PAUL: One more thing: I look forward to playing with you objectively within my transitional period.

ELIAS: Very well. You may name the game, and I shall participate.

PAUL: Indeed!

ELIAS: (Laughs) Very well, my friends. To you both in great affection, dear friendship, tremendous appreciation and great lovingness, until our next meeting, au revoir.

BOTH: Au revoir.

Elias departs after 1 hour, 2 minutes.

---

Copyright 2007 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.