Sunday, January 18, 1998 © 1998
(Group)
Participants: Mary (Michael), Vicki (Lawrence), Ron (Olivia),
Cathy (Shynla), Bobbi (Jale), Sue (Catherine), Reta (Dehl), Norm (Stephen),
Drew (Matthew), and a new participant, Kaan (Ian).
Vic's note: To reiterate, I often edit game entries into
category, entry, and essence family. Also, I sometimes edit people's questions
slightly to make them easier to read.
Elias arrives at 6:57 PM. (Time was eighteen seconds)
ELIAS: Good evening! (Smiling) Shall we on to our game?
RETA: I've got a couple.
NORM: Just one.
RETA: No, three!
NORM: Just one!
CATHY: You can only have one!
RETA: But they're in sequence!
CATHY: Well, then you do one a week! (Now, children!)
RETA: Forget it! (Elias sports a big grin here)
CATHY: Ooo, she's taking her toys and goin' home! (Laughter)
RETA: Songs, Love At Home would be Borledim, Love One Another, Milumet,
and Love Is Where You Find It, Vold.
ELIAS: To your third, one point. (Grinning slyly at Reta)
RETA: And the other two, no? (Elias just grins) Okay.
RON: Anatomical features, hands, Gramada.
ELIAS: One point.
CATHY: Food, hamburgers, Sumari.
ELIAS: (Chuckling) One point.
DREW: Household items, an eraser, Sumafi.
ELIAS: Less probable.
DREW: Artists, photographer Eric Kroll, Vold.
ELIAS: Acceptable.
NORM: Astronomical objects, comets, Ilda.
ELIAS: Acceptable.
VICKI: For Howard: The archangels, Raphael, Milumet.
ELIAS: One point.
VICKI: For Paul: The muses, Urania, Gramada.
ELIAS: Less probable.
VICKI: Polyhymnia with Borledim. (Also for Paul)
ELIAS: Less probable.
VICKI: For Margot: The archangels, Uriel, Zuli.
ELIAS: Less probable. Re-evaluate color.
VICKI: For myself: Artists, connecting essence families, Billy Joel
with Gramada and Ilda.
ELIAS: One point.
VICKI: I almost forgot Mary ... oh yeah, Mary! For Mary: To enter the
Aspect Seer Intent tile as an equation key tile
in Sumafi.
ELIAS: Acceptable.
BOBBI: I have a tile. It's pink with a checkerboard triangle on it.
It's under Borledim as family or family unit.
ELIAS: Acceptable. Clinking, clinking! (Grinning) (This is in reference
to our new addition to the game, of throwing pennies into a bowl for each
game entry offered)
ELIAS: Very well. This evening, shall we enter our discussion of your
creatures? (Cathy mutters something in frustration here because she had
stated before the session that she wasn't prepared for this subject, and
so we had chosen another) This being one of the topics that you have suggested
that you are wishing to be discussing!
CATHY: So, why would a dog attack somebody in a coma? (Laughter)
ELIAS: (Grinning) Why would a creature be attacking of an individual
which appears to be non-threatening? For within your belief systems, you
believe that an animal shall only be attacking if it is being threatened
or what you view to be as fearful or in defense of itself, for this is
your belief system, within a lack of understanding of the consciousness
of creatures. As I have stated previously, domesticated animals hold slight
differences in consciousness than other creatures, for they are more influenced
by your consciousness. Therefore, they also assume aspects of your consciousness.
You with your belief systems are also influencing of them. You are also
influencing of them within your thoughts and your emotions.
Consciousness transmits energy regardless of the physical state. I have
expressed previously that the state of a coma is merely a removal of partial
subjective interaction -- a partial removal of the objective interaction
also -- but there remains an aspect of the subjective interaction with
the individual choosing to be in the state of coma. Therefore, there continues
a certain amount of subjective communication. The individual holds an awareness
partially objectively also. This be the reason that your physicians may
suggest to you that an individual within this state may hear you and also
may respond to you. They also within this state hold the ability to be
communicating subjectively.
Creatures receive more of their communication with you as individuals
subjectively than they do objectively. They process information more efficiently
subjectively. Therefore, a communication may be presented by an individual
within this state of coma subjectively, and it may be received by a creature
and responded to.
CATHY: So this was a subjective communication from this person saying....
RON: "Bite me!"
CATHY: Yeah!
ELIAS: It is a response to subjective communication.
CATHY: An automatic response by the dog?
ELIAS: Your view of automatic response by an animal is filtered through
your belief systems. You understand that the animals do not think in terms
that you think -- they do not think in language as you think -- although
they do think! Their thought process is different from yours, but they
do hold a thought process. This allows them also more vivid dream action.
CATHY: So, was it like an impulse?
ELIAS: It was a RESPONSE.
VICKI: What kind of subjective communication was occurring to initiate
the response?
ELIAS: Agitation.
VICKI: On the part of the individual?
ELIAS: Correct, which is connected to by the creature and responded
to. You view examples of your creatures which you view as pets responding
to your subjective activity and your objective activity continuously. Your
creatures also respond to your belief systems. They respond to your moods.
CATHY: I have a hard time with that one 'cause I know I've been in some
raunchy moods sometimes and have gotten some very good dog work out of
some very what I call sensitive dogs. Of course, I do have a belief system
that some dogs are more in tune, so to speak, with me than others, but
I KNOW. I've had the experience too many times of being in a total state
of anxiety and still pulling stuff off, and that's why this doesn't make
sense to me.
ELIAS: I am not expressing that a creature that is not your pet shall
be responding to all of your moods. They SHALL respond to your belief systems.
Also, your creature that resides with you shall respond to your belief
systems despite your moods, at times.
CATHY: So they create things with intentions, but they don't have belief
systems?
ELIAS: Creatures do not hold an intent as you hold an intent.
CATHY: Well, I didn't mean that. I just mean, if they're chewing on
themselves or licking their paws or something I quote/unquote call a neurotic
behavior, are they doing that because I'm bouncing something off them or
because of my subjective activity or because that's just what they want
to create 'cause they create their own reality or....
ELIAS: It is dependent upon the creature. At times they are creating
what they wish to be creating for their own experience. At times their
creations are very influenced by your belief systems. They may be creating
of an event or an action, and may also respond differently within their
own creation dependent upon YOUR belief systems and the influence that
you project to them.
VICKI: I have a question. You said that we have belief systems that
creatures attack us because they feel threatened. Is this the reality of
the situation?
ELIAS: Not always.
VICKI: What is the reality of the situation?
ELIAS: At times they may be merely responding to your energy and to
your belief systems.
VICKI: Would that be something that a person would normally be objectively
aware of?
ELIAS: No; although in a manner of speaking, individuals at times DO
hold a partial awareness of this. Example: An individual may be walking
upon their road. They hold a tremendous fear of an animal, that it shall
be aggressive to them and that it shall attack them -- a dog. A dog appears,
but within this creature its nature is not to be attacking this individual.
As it approaches this individual, the individual is creating their own
reality within their belief systems and fear and is projecting this energy
to this creature, which is subjectively received and responded to, and
this creature that may not ever bite another individual ever may suddenly
alter its behavior and be attacking of this individual within a cooperation.
It has not been threatened. It is not fearful. It is merely responding
to the energy projected by the individual within their fears and their
belief systems.
VICKI: So that's kind of where we get the old saying that dogs smell
fear? They do respond to fear?
ELIAS: To YOUR fear.
VICKI: Right. Well, I'd like to ask a personal question in this area
so I can understand better. I've taken care of a lot of people's animals,
animals that I don't know, and I've never had any problem with those animals.
So, I've had a lot of experience in this area. One time I was taking care
of an animal for Cathy, which I've also done a lot of times. This particular
animal responded to me with fear. It didn't attack me, but it did bark
at me. It did growl at me. It would not let me approach it. It took me
forever to contain it the way that I needed to contain it, and I've always
been real curious as to what happened that day because it was a singular
experience.
ELIAS: As I have stated, creatures are more complex than you realize
and they do create their own realities also, and at times they also experience
the same types of experiences in bleed-through as do you, therefore creating
differences in their behaviors and their personalities ... which they hold
personalities! In this, at times certain creatures may become more sensitive
to individuals in recognizing certain bleed-through actions.
(Here, Elias turns and grins at Cathy) This shall be a session that
Shynla shall mirror Michael and not be repeating! There are areas for you
all that you find objectively very difficult, but this is not to say that
they are not truthful.
At times, certain animals may be responding within bleed-through action
of a recognition; not in the manner that you recognize within thought processes,
objectively knowing, but they may be responding to a certain individual
in certain manners, holding a subjective recognition of another focus.
They hold the same action that you hold, although they are not of essence;
but they are also your creations. Therefore, subjectively they do hold
much information within consciousness as to focuses and actions.
Within THIS situation, the creature is responding outside of your belief
systems and challenging in recognition, in bleed-through of another focus
NOT as a dog, and interaction that has been held between you.
VICKI: Really! That's interesting. Do you buy that one, Cathy??
CATHY: Would that dog have done the same thing to me if I would have
gone in at the same time that Vicki did and approached the dog? Would I
have gotten the same reaction?
ELIAS: No.
CATHY: Because he was familiar with me?
ELIAS: For the reason that this would not be the same bleed-through
action and recognition.
VICKI: So in other words, it's possible that in another focus I had
an interaction with this animal ... say, it might have been a bear.
ELIAS: A horse.
VICKI: Oh, it was a horse, and that's what was being responded to?
ELIAS: Correct.
VICKI: Huh!
CATHY: Hmm!
ELIAS: Your interaction with horses has not always been the same as
it is within THIS focus.
VICKI: Hmm!
ELIAS: Not quite as loving! (Grinning)
VICKI: Oh! (Laughing)
NORM: We're talking about karma here!
ELIAS: Not at all! It is merely a response in a recognition.
VICKI: Yeah, I didn't think animals responded to that.
ELIAS: (To Cathy) Just as I have expressed to you previously in your
inquiry of why your little dog responds to clicking sounds.
CATHY: Then tell me why she doesn't do that any more!
ELIAS: It is unnecessary.
CATHY: (With a hint of sarcasm) Why? Because she moved through something??
(Elias stares at Cathy with his famous "Oh brother" look) Ooo! (Much laughter)
ELIAS: I may be playful if you wish to be playful, and we may discuss
another subject! (Laughter) The creature need not "move through" a belief
system or an issue, for it does not hold these.
CATHY: So it was myself?
ELIAS: No.
CATHY: Then why is she not irritated? Because the other dog's doing
it now? Because he is!
ELIAS: The dog held a temporary response for the reason that I offered
you: in response to another focus and the similar clicking sound. The dog
moves to a point of non-allowance of this bleed-through action in recognition
that this is not the same action occurring. It does not hold a thought
process as do you. It does think, but not in the same manner that you think.
Therefore, it does not analyze and evaluate that this sound is occurring
and it is responding to the sound from the bleed-through. It does not analyze
this action; it merely responds. Therefore, as it becomes accustomed to
this sound and the safety of the sound, that no action occurs to it in
harmfulness as suggested by the bleed-through, it becomes comfortable.
CATHY: So this was HER bleed-through of another animal she was manifest
as, correct?
ELIAS: Correct.
CATHY: Okay, so why does the other dog do it? Is it the same thing?
ELIAS: This is a response to you.
CATHY: A response to me.
ELIAS: Correct, and your belief systems.
CATHY: But I'm not even thinking about anything! I mean, I'm doing something
at the computer and I go to pop something open and bang! He's like right
there! That's in response to something that I'm thinking subjectively,
that I'm....
ELIAS: No. This is in response to your belief systems; which it is unnecessary
for you to hold continuous objective thought! Your belief systems hold
energy and are projected continuously. You hold a judgment which creates
a belief system as to the personality type of this animal, and it is responsive
to your belief systems and the energy that you project. It is your term
for these creatures, this creature. It is neurotic! (Laughter) Therefore,
it responds in like manner to you.
CATHY: Yeah, but ... (we all crack up) ... but before I was objectively
aware that this dog reacted this way to certain noises ... the only thing
I have to go by is that the noise happens and I see the dog just beside
himself, you know? And so each time I see that, I just reinforce it and
make it like something he's just always going to always keep doing because
I believe that's what he's going to do? So in response to me.... (Cathy
is getting frustrated)
ELIAS: He may discontinue THIS action and create ANOTHER action in a
neurosis!
CATHY: Well then, let me ask you this! What would I do or not do, or
attempt, either one, to possibly make this dog more comfortable?
ELIAS: Allow yourself to hold less value judgments, and relax your very
strong belief systems in the area of these animals. You hold VERY strong
belief systems and VERY strong judgments in this area.
CATHY: Yes, I do! I'm not going to argue that point, and I'll tell you
that I've put that dog in situations where I thought, "Oh, this ought to
be really good!" And I know I'm thinking, "Oh, he's just going to flip
on this one!" No response! So you see how I can't figure it out? This dog
has been the biggest I-can't-figure-out-dog I've ever been around in my
life! And I know I've drawn to him for some reason, but I just can't figure
it out! (Note that Cathy is an animal trainer in the film industry, so
she works with animals she doesn't know on a regular basis)
ELIAS: And does this not seem quite simple to you? You have drawn
to this animal to be challenging of your belief systems, for it displays
behavior that is not predictable.
CATHY: You have that right!
ELIAS: Therefore, this offers you the opportunity to challenge these
belief systems.
CATHY: Oh boy! 'Cause I'll tell you, this is one dog I have not been
able to ... I use the term "get in his head." Haven't been there, so it's
all ... well, I'm not surprised that I'd be drawn to this dog! Okay, somebody
else ask a question! I'm going to take a rest! (Laughter, and Elias chuckles)
RETA: How about the dogs and cats in our lives? Have they been other
animals in other focuses of our lives sometimes?
ELIAS: At times, yes.
RETA: For instance, I had a dog that I really loved in California. It
was the smartest little dog! We moved to New Jersey, and the dog kept wanting
to go home. It kept running away, coming back to California. Was that because
I wanted to be there?
ELIAS: At times, this may be the situation. For the most part, this
is a natural behavior that creatures create. Within physical focus they
hold to familiarity as YOU hold to familiarity, but you challenge your
familiarity and you explore beyond what is familiar to you, for you are
inspired to this action, being essence. The creatures are not essence.
Therefore, within physical manifestation of consciousness, it holds to
its familiarity in a physical focus very strongly.
RETA: Well, our cats just circled and pretty soon they were familiar,
but the dog just wanted to go. It finally was found by a trucker quite
a few hundred miles away. But I just wondered if it was my thought-pattern,
wanting to be back in California.
ELIAS: This may be quite influencing.
NORM: This particular dog appeared to talk to Reta. It would actually
growl and whine and come up and look ... you'd swear that it was actually
talking to her. This was most unusual, the first time I've ever seen anything
like that. What kind of a response is that?
ELIAS: In actuality, this is more common that you realize. Many creatures
that are domesticated, that reside with individuals as pets, attempt to
be establishing a communication objectively with the individuals that they
reside [with].
NORM: Recently, in fact I think it was today, I was reading an article
about a football player who was extremely aggressive. He had owned pit
bulls and they mauled his children. Now, the pit bull was obviously bred
by us or created by us to be extremely aggressive. So, the mauling of the
children could have been, as you say, any of the actions that you've talked
about today, and it could have been that it was an experience that the
pit bulls were wanting to have?
ELIAS: These situations I have spoken of previously. These situations
are VERY influenced by the individuals that reside with the creatures.
Creatures are responding to the emotion and issues of the individuals [with]
which they live.
NORM: For example, elephants have been used by the rajahs of India as
war elephants, and they can be trained to respond to thirty different commands
by the rider of the elephant. So in this case, they are really being taught
to do things that are not normally in their nature?
ELIAS: Correct; but creatures are, in your terms, much more intelligent
than you allow for them.
KAAN: Elias, I have a question. First of all, very nice to meet you
in objective terms! I had a creature event that I could not understand
the meaning of that I drew upon myself. I was driving very late one night
from one state to another, and was reviewing some of my fears. In association
with these fears, the idea came that somehow in the Chinese system, my
birth year was associated with rabbits. This wasn't a pleasant idea and
I especially associated with these fears, but I sort of tried to accept
them and thought, "What if that's the case? What if these fears are like
that?" and tried to see through them. As I was working with this, accepting
those fears that were coming, a rabbit rushed by from the side of the road
and basically died on the right front tire of the car. To this date, I
don't remember consciously running over an animal. It was in the middle
of nowhere. Obviously this was an event that I drew upon myself. However,
I could not interpret it. I wanted to do some interpretation, saying, "Well,
this is how rabbit characters die, with these types of fears." I couldn't
interpret it, but I wanted to ask your opinion on it.
ELIAS: As I have stated, creatures are of your creation. Therefore,
you may draw upon these creations at different moments to be offering yourself
objective imagery in situations and they shall be in cooperation, recognizing
that they are not separated from you. You look to yourselves as separated
from nature, as you term it, and from each other and from all of your creatures,
but they hold an understanding that they are not separated from you. Therefore,
in this knowing they may be in cooperation with you in consciousness, holding
no fearfulness of what you term to be death.
Creatures hold no fearfulness of death. Therefore, it matters not, for
they also hold an understanding that at the moment of what you term to
be death, the energy of their consciousness shall merely reconfigure and
rearrange itself. In this, they may be drawn by you in cooperation, to
offer you objective imagery for your own noticing and information. The
rabbit offers itself as imagery to you, in your attempt for movement in
the issue of fearfulness, as a symbol to be putting an end to the fearfulness,
for you view death as an ending.
KAAN: Thank you.
ELIAS: You are welcome. This is not ALWAYS the situation. You may be
terminating, so to speak, (grinning) small creatures' little lives with
your carriages or other instruments many times. This is not to say that
each squirrel that you are moving over and ending their little life --
or each chipmunk or each rabbit or each possum or skunk or what have you
-- is always an example of this, but this particular situation IS an example
of this.
KAAN: Yes. Because of the intensity of the experience, there was an
understanding. However, the final point that you made was never clear in
my mind, that it could be taken as a symbol of that. It was obvious that
I drew upon this and I was saying something, but I couldn't interpret my
message in that sense. Thank you.
The other thing is, in the line that you're developing about the creatures,
I have followed some information from another source a while back about
animals, so I want to run that by you, in terms of each creature having
their own line of evolution and being a particular flavor-type or essence-type
or whatever, and basically having their own evolution that is independent
of us on this earth, with the exception of possibly those pets that are
interacting more heavily with us ... not like us, being individualized,
but a more collective form. And when they're dying, for instance, they're
not living through the final moment of death in the body but jumping into
another instance of an animal life immediately, and not experiencing physical
death in the body in the way that we may be experiencing. So, is that correct?
ELIAS: I am understanding. In a manner of speaking, yes, you are correct,
for a creature is not requiring a period of transition in their movement
within consciousness. They merely reconstruct and reconfigure the energy
pattern. It is unnecessary for a transitional period, for they do not hold
belief systems.
KAAN: What is the essential difference in their inner construction that
sets us apart from their type of development? Obviously we're working with
belief systems, but the modality of their consciousness being different,
can it be described in other terms that we can understand?
ELIAS: They are not essence. They are created of consciousness. They
hold their own consciousness, but they are not of essence. They are a creation
that YOU have created, being essence, from consciousness, but they do not
hold essence. Therefore, they also do not hold belief systems. This is
not to say that essence holds belief systems, but within physical focus
you have created certain experiences that you choose.
Creatures, your planet, your vegetation, may all be viewed as tentacles
of you. Your finger does not think, but it responds to you. At times, your
finger may hold an automatic response. It may twitch. In like manner, all
that you have created within physical focus are as tentacles extending
out from you. Certain tentacles you assign certain qualities to, mirroring
you.
KAAN: So in other realities, they may actually display different qualities?
ELIAS: Absolutely! They may not BE creatures!
KAAN: But their context is strictly related to the intentions of the
essence, and within that they don't exist, in some sense?
ELIAS: Correct.
SUE: It seems to me that there was a mass belief system that cats and
dogs hated each other and would chase each other and fight, and it seems
to me that this is not as commonly accepted as it used to be, and also
that cats and dogs don't respond to each other in that way as much as they
used to. Is that correct? Is that an example of a belief system, a mass
belief system, that's changed?
ELIAS: Correct, and you may also view how your mass belief systems are
affecting of your creatures and their behavior.
SUE: When I got my first cat, I got her as a kitten. She was part of
a litter of six kittens. I took some time deciding between her and a sister
who looked very similar, and finally I picked this one. Somehow I've always
had the feeling that it didn't really matter which one I picked, that I
would have ended up with the same cat no matter which of the two physical
animals I chose. Is there any truth in that?
ELIAS: The response of the creature to you would have been the same.
SUE: Okay. I think that's what I suspected.
ELIAS: The personalities would have been slightly different, but the
response to you would have been the same.
SUE: Also, there is a squirrel that lives in the tree next to my balcony,
and in the past six months or a year I've started feeding peanuts to the
squirrel and taking interest in the squirrel, and the squirrel shows less
fear of me than he used to and probably less than he should, for safety
reasons for a squirrel ... not that I'm going to do anything to him! I
was just curious why this occurred, if there's any reason for it. I guess
I really want to know what the squirrel thinks of me, if there's any way
of knowing that.
ELIAS: Many times, creatures that you view to be wild -- undomesticated
creatures -- shall present themselves to individuals as an offering. It
allows you the opportunity to feel less separated from that element which
you view to be nature, which you view yourself to be separated from.
SUE: Okay. So as I started growing more plants on my balcony and getting
that connection with nature, I suppose the squirrel also responded to that?
ELIAS: Correct. It is responding to YOU.
VICKI: I have a question about how animals think. I had an experience
where I was medicating one of my cats, which the cat didn't like. What
I found interesting was that the cat started to bite me, and I know that
it was an automatic response on the cat's part. It stopped itself as it
got to my finger. It was very clear that there was an automatic response
that was stopped on the part of the animal. I'm curious what that indicates
about how they think.
ELIAS: You are assuming that the creature is merely responding automatically.
VICKI: Okay. Yeah, I am.
ELIAS: Therefore, you are also intrigued that it displays non-automatic
response. The creature is not responding within what you believe to be
an automatic response. You merely BELIEVE within your belief systems that
creatures hold automatic responses, for they do not think; they function
through instinct. YOU function through instinct! We have discussed this
previously. Instinct is not what you THINK it may be.
The creature is responding in offering YOU its desire. It is responding
in its manner of communication to you. It does not communicate with you
within language. Therefore, it is communicating to you in what you shall
understand: "I am in disagreement with this action." But it also is responding
to you in not following through with this action, recognizing that the
follow-through of the action is not necessary. It has made its point.
VICKI: Hmm!
ELIAS: It wishes not to be harmful to you, but it also wishes to be
in communication to you. Your creatures communicate to you continuously
within actions. Their thought, so to speak, is translated into a type of
sign language.
VICKI: Well, my immediate thought after that is, that being the case,
it's a pretty lousy thing for me to continue my action with a creature
under those circumstances.
ELIAS: But you hold belief systems in these areas.
VICKI: Yeah, that's where that comes from.
ELIAS: You hold belief systems that you must be affecting of your creatures'
creations, that they have not created this through their choice, in the
same manner that you "catch" a cold! (Grinning)
VICKI: Yeah, I understand that part, but it's interesting to think about
that action as not an automatic response but as a language that basically
I didn't respond to, that probably many of us don't respond to.
ELIAS: Quite, for you are operating within your belief systems and you
are not listening or noticing the communication, for you are blocking that
and blinding yourself to this within your belief systems.
VICKI: Interesting. So conceivably then, were I to accept that particular
belief system and be responding outside of it, I would no longer have medicated
the cat?
ELIAS: Correct.
VICKI: I get it.
ELIAS: You would be accepting of the creature's creation and its communication
to you.
VICKI: On the other hand, if I stop medicating the creature but continue
to hold the belief system, that's different.
ELIAS: You may be influencing of the perpetuation of the creation, for
you continue to hold the belief system and you are avoiding.
VICKI: Hmm. That's interesting.
DREW: Isn't every interaction with a creature and everything else an
agreement?
ELIAS: (With a touch of exasperation) Not in the manner of speaking
that your thought process leans in.
DREW: Well, wasn't there an agreement between
her and the cat?
ELIAS: You agree to exist. You agree to interact. But in the same manner,
in alignment with your thought process, that you may interact with another
individual, in one layer of consciousness you are in agreement for any
interaction to be occurring, but objectively you may not be in agreement
for Stephen to rise presently and punch you!
DREW: Well, that's the same analogy as somebody being murdered by somebody
else.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: That only happens by agreement.
ELIAS: But the agreement is not necessarily objectively.
DREW: As I understand it, that's only because of belief systems.
ELIAS: Here we enter into another area of misinterpretation! You automatically
move into the areas of placing judgments and misinterpretations upon this
information. I offer you realities, truth within essence, but I have also
stated to you many times that your physical reality IS YOUR REALITY. Therefore,
within your physical reality you DO hold right and wrong, good and bad,
AS REALITY. You DO hold very strong belief systems in what is acceptable
and what is not acceptable. When I am expressing to you that there is no
right and wrong and that all is an agreement, this is WITHIN ESSENCE. But
your physical reality IS reality, and therefore you have created rules
that you abide by that make up your officially accepted reality. In this,
agreements, which I have stated many times previously, are not the same
as what your thought process in physical focus dictates.
DREW: Well, I understand that there's a difference between what I call
theory and practice. Basically, here we're learning theory, which is a
little different from objective practice. But isn't the whole point of
this to try to expand and get beyond the illusion of victim and perpetrator
and someone being subjected to someone else's action and activity?
ELIAS: It is to widen your awareness. The perpetrator and the victim
are NOT illusions. They are your reality!
DREW: They're belief systems.
ELIAS: They are belief systems, but they are reality!
DREW: Well, but they would only be reality to those people who held
those belief systems.
ELIAS: And do you not hold these belief systems?
DREW: It depends on the situation. There may be a circumstance where
... there are people who murder. Those people obviously have different
belief systems than someone who would consider it wrong to murder, I would
venture to say.
ELIAS: Not necessarily.
DREW: Not necessarily, but even if there's ONE person for whom that's
true, then that disproves it as a rule. If we're creating our own realities
and we all have our own belief systems, then everyone's reality is different
based on their belief systems. Would that be correct to say?
ELIAS: In some aspects.
DREW: So if my belief systems differ from someone else's, then my reality
and my vision of what is right and wrong and good and bad will be different
from theirs.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: So good and bad and right and wrong are not truths.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: So, we're starting to blur the lines. No, we're actually creating
a distinction that I've been working for the past year to some extent to
eliminate. We've talked about this before in terms of car accidents and
murder victims and how it was all by agreement and there are no victims
and there are no perpetrators, there is no right, there is no wrong, in
the big picture of things.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: And I've been making an effort to incorporate some of that within
my belief systems, to put some of that into practice. So NOW to say, "Well,
that's all the big picture of it, but in reality it doesn't work that way,
and...."
ELIAS: It MAY, as you are widening your awareness. I am merely stating
to you that you are not discounting of the reality that is officially accepted,
for in discounting the reality that is officially accepted, you also automatically
move into the area of discounting Acceptance 102.
DREW: If Stephen got up right now and punched me in the nose, I might
not like it and I might think it's wrong, but it could only happen by agreement.
Isn't that true?
ELIAS: In another layer of consciousness, true. But objectively, not
necessarily, not in the manner than you think of.
DREW: I understand. I'd probably want to punch him back or defend myself
or....
ELIAS: You may not! You may be accepting of this. It is dependent upon
the wideness of your awareness ...
DREW: Well, I'm not that wide yet! (Laughter)
ELIAS: ... and your acceptance of self and other individuals' realities.
DREW: Which gets back to this incorporation of the big picture, the
theory within our practical daily life.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: So now let's take this back to Vicki's example of the cat. The
cat holds no belief systems. Any action that Vicki would have with this
cat could only be by agreement.
ELIAS: In one layer of consciousness. The agreement may not be objectively.
DREW: Well, if the cat holds no belief systems, what would cause the
cat to see itself as a victim of displeasurable action?
ELIAS: It is not viewing itself as a victim. It is recognizing of its
creation of its reality, and it is merely responding to its own desire
to be creating its reality.
DREW: Which it is!
ELIAS: But the individual is attempting to alter its creation of its
reality. Not all creatures may be responding in this manner. You may be
attempting to alter a creature's reality by offering it medication, as
you have stated, and it shall be compliant with this if it is objectively
in agreement with your action. If it is choosing to be creating of a specific
event or experience and YOU through your belief systems are attempting
to alter its creation, it MAY choose to comply with you, but it may choose
initially to voice its opinion of its own creation.
DREW: If we all create our own reality -- and if this is different for
animals, that might be the distinction or why I'm getting confused -- how
can you alter someone else's reality??
ELIAS: You may alter a creature's reality. You may alter a plant's reality.
They are not essence.
DREW: But don't they only draw to themselves the action by agreement?
I don't understand this. This doesn't make sense. I'm totally lost here,
because if I step on a bug and crush it, isn't that only by agreement?
ELIAS: Not in the manner that you are thinking.
DREW: Subjectively.
ELIAS: Not entirely subjectively either. In another layer of consciousness,
yes, it is an agreement, for every action is an agreement in another layer
of consciousness. They agree to exist. Consciousness itself agrees to configure.
It agrees to exist within a physical reality. It agrees to interact. But
you are creating your reality spontaneously within each moment. Therefore,
the idea that you hold of agreement to incidents or events is not the same
as your thought process magnates to.
Consciousness agrees to experience. Therefore, in THIS respect, there
is no right, there is no wrong, there are no victims, there are no perpetrators,
there is no good, there is no bad. But within each individual dimension
and reality, YOU choose the types of experiences. (Pause)
DREW: Well, I think that's exactly my point. Let's take it out of the
realm of animals for a second, because that may be a distinction. That
may be the difference. If I create my own reality, nobody in this room
and nobody I interact with at any point in my life can alter my reality
in any way that I don't choose for them to do it.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: Okay. Is that true with animals as well?
ELIAS: No.
DREW: Okay. So I just want to make sure I understand this, at least
in terms of other individuals. If Stephen were to get up and punch me in
the nose, he could not do that unless I chose that as part of my reality.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: He could not alter my reality in any way I choose him not to.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: Not so with an animal.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: Okay!
ELIAS: We shall break, and you may continue with your questions.
BREAK 8:11 PM
RESUME 8:33 PM (Time was five seconds)
ELIAS: Continuing.
RETA: I just want to ask you how the energy of these flowers comes to
you, these lovely flowers that are in this room this evening. How does
that energy come to you?
ELIAS: As energy. (Grinning)
RETA: Oh, I'm thinking tone....
ELIAS: It is a creation of your physical focus.
RETA: It's just a complicated little energy system there? Do you see
the color? Do you feel the color or see the color in the energy?
ELIAS: No.
RETA: So to you it's just a flower, not necessarily colored?
ELIAS: It is energy, no different from any other energy within your
room, other than yourselves.
RETA: But would you know that it's a flower, distinct from a box of
chocolates?
ELIAS: I do not distinguish. If I am focusing upon an object within
your room for a purpose, then I shall be identifying the object. But generally,
if I have no purpose for identifying an object within your focus, my attention
is focused upon the individuals, the essences which are occupying your
space arrangement. All other energy is blended together as energy and not
distinguishable.
KAAN: So if you need to focus on an object, would you be actually looking
and drawing an understanding of that object from within our context, within
our beliefs, within our attention on it?
ELIAS: Correct. For the purposes of examples, at times I may be focusing
upon an object within your space arrangement and I may be using an object
as an example for you in an analogy. But generally speaking, as I am interacting
with you, I am interacting with each of your focuses within this time framework
and all of its aspects that are parts of it, so to speak. Therefore, I
am interacting with YOUR energy and your personalities and your subjective
and objective attentions. I am not focusing my attention and energy upon
objects within your space arrangement. In a manner of speaking, to me it
appears merely as energy.
DREW: Can we follow up the conversation where we left off at break?
ELIAS: If you are so choosing.
DREW: If it is possible to be altering of the reality that an animal
chooses and if it is possible for an animal to experience action that it
has not necessarily agreed to, then what does that say to an animal's freedom
of choice?
ELIAS: The creature holds the freedom of choice. If the creature wishes
you completely to not be altering its creation, if it is in complete disagreement,
it shall remove itself from you. It shall not allow you to alter its reality.
SUE: So it will run away or die?
ELIAS: Correct, or it may be forcefully communicating to you. It may
be attacking and not allowing you to be altering its creation. It may not
remove itself completely if it so chooses, if it is choosing to continue
to be within your presence, but it shall create an action that shall prevent
you from altering its creation.
DREW: So then it's NOT possible to alter the reality of a creature if
it's not choosing then?
ELIAS: If it is not in complete agreement; but you may be altering the
reality that a creature is choosing within your belief systems as they
are dictated by you, and the creature may not be in agreement with this
initially and it may be expressing of this, but it may also be choosing
to alter its disagreement with you in compliance with you. The creature
DOES create its own reality also.
KAAN: On that point, if we use more of our own essence within physicality
or objective reality, would we have an overruling power or entry in changing
creatures' realities just because we are accessing a deeper layer of consciousness
in which we have even allowed the process of its own choosing to take place?
ELIAS: You have created your creatures to be developing their own choice
and their own free will, as you have stated. Initially, this was not the
case. Initially, you were creating all actions for these creatures and
dictating to them their reality, but in this dimension you have created
the reality of allowance of these creatures to be creating of their OWN
reality. Therefore now, and for much of your time framework, they are creating
of their own reality. They are creating this independent of you, in a manner
of speaking, but they also continue their connection with you. Therefore,
they also continue to allow you to be very influencing of their creating
of their reality.
KAAN: But that level is not ordinarily accessible in the objective state
that we know ourselves, where we can override.
ELIAS: Objectively, you ARE quite influencing. Objectively, many times
you DO override their creation of their reality, for they are creating
of an action that you may be in disagreement with. Therefore, you shall
impose YOUR energy and belief systems upon them and alter their behavior.
KAAN: So would confining wild horses be an objective example?
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: But those horses couldn't be confined unless they agreed to the
experience.
ELIAS: (Humorously) We are going to ride this hamster wheel for quite
a while tonight! (Much laughter)
DREW: It seems like a fairly important concept because on the one hand,
I'm hearing yes, you can alter their reality. On the other hand, I'm hearing
they have free choice and they can do whatever they want. So I'm a little
confused about which it is.
ELIAS: It is BOTH.
DREW: It is both. Could wild horses be corralled if they hadn't chosen
to be?
ELIAS: They do not objectively choose to be!
DREW: Understood. I understand that. I'm talking about on a subjective
level.
ELIAS: No; but objectively they do NOT choose to be, and you impose
YOUR belief systems upon them.
The point of all of this discussion is to allow you the opportunity
to view more of your reality, therefore hold a greater understanding of
acceptance. By identifying your belief systems and how they are affecting
of not only yourselves and each other but of your creatures and of all
that you create, you may also view how you are subjecting other elements
of your reality to your belief systems also, and the affectingness of these
belief systems. You have not quite identified that you even HOLD belief
systems in many areas. Therefore, how may you be affecting of certain elements
if you do not hold a belief system in this area? How may you widen your
awareness if you may not even identify that you hold belief systems? In
offering this information, this provides you the opportunity to view more
of your belief systems and how they are influencing and affecting of all
of your reality that you create.
DREW: Okay, I'll let it go for now! (Laughter)
VICKI: Wouldn't this be the same if Drew attempts to alter my reality?
I have a choice at that point whether or not to allow that?
ELIAS: Correct.
VICKI: Isn't it pretty much the same?
ELIAS: Very much the same.
DREW: Except it's different! (Laughter)
ELIAS: There IS a difference, correct.
DREW: Because you said it IS possible to alter a creature's reality,
but not another individual's reality.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: So there IS a difference, and that seems like a fairly important
difference to me.
ELIAS: You are correct, for you may alter a creature's reality in areas
that you may not with another individual; this being for the reason that
YOU have created YOUR reality differently, as being essence, in the same
manner that you may choose an action for yourself. In like manner to our
tentacles, you may create an action for yourself. You may choose to cut
off your finger. Your finger is not choosing to be cut off, but you are
choosing for your finger. Your creatures are an element of you. You MAY
alter their reality. You have altered the reality of your finger if you
are cutting it off. You have disengaged it from your physical form. It
is not your finger's choice, and your finger holds consciousness, and you
have altered its reality.
VICKI: Would we find that wild animals are probably less compliant with
our altering of their reality than our domestic animals?
ELIAS: You are correct. You do not interact objectively to the extent
with what you term to be wild animals. Therefore, you allow them more of
a freedom to be creating their own reality in the manner that they choose.
DREW: If animals don't fear death, why, for example, do zebras run when
a lion attacks the herd?
ELIAS: There are several reasons for this action. The manner that you
have created your creatures in mirrors elements of yourself and the manner
that you have created your own physical forms. Within this particular dimension,
one of the aspects of your physical creation which also mirrors an aspect
of essence is movement. All of your creatures move. You move. Within your
physical form, you require movement for its functioning. As you view, if
you are not engaging movement for extended periods of your time, your physical
form begins to deteriorate. The manner that you have created your creatures
in some respects mirrors this, but they do not hold the thought processes
that you hold. Therefore, they do not hold the motivation for movement
as do you.
In this, look to your creatures. They engage more subjective activity
than objective. Look to the behavior of very many of your species of creatures
and how much of their physical time they spend sleeping, which they do.
They spend MUCH of their time sleeping. Therefore, as they have been created
to be subjectively interacting more than objective interaction, you have
created a design for movement. Be remembering, this is ONE reason. In this,
there is a need for motivation for movement. Your herd animals, which are
mainly grazing animals, which are mainly prey animals, spend much of their
time framework grazing and sleeping. Your predator animals spend much of
their time merely sleeping. Therefore, within the action of movement, it
is motivating for your predator to be engaging the action of catching its
prey, which serves as physical motion that continues their physical form
in its fitness, so to speak. They may not chase a prey that merely stands.
There shall be nothing to catch if they are chasing a tree! Therefore,
it is a cooperation between the predator and the prey, that one shall receive
its motion in pursuit and one shall receive much of its motion in retreat.
DREW: So that whole action of a lion chasing a herd is basically for
the exercise?
ELIAS: In many respects, yes.
DREW: Huh!
ELIAS: A lion shall not motivate itself to move very much if it is not
in pursuit, and it shall not be in pursuit if it is not feeding itself.
A lion may lay about for days and not be consuming and not be moving.
DREW: Interesting!
KAAN: So there is no element of fearfulness while the animal is being
chased? The experience of the animal is nothing close to our fear?
ELIAS: No.
VICKI: It's not??
ELIAS: No. There IS a type of emotional responsiveness, but it is not
what you would be understanding in the area of fearfulness. There is a
bond of community and family within these creatures and therefore there
is an element of emotional involvement, but it is not fear in the manner
that you view fear.
KAAN: When we look in the animal's eyes, there is something we recognize
in that base emotion, though. As a fearful person's eyes will change in
a pretty good manner, the animals' eyes will also change upon danger, in
which we can recognize the same base emotion. Now, we do label that fear.
ELIAS: Correct.
KAAN: But in them, that's not how it is. So, we must be experiencing
that base feeling, even though on top of it fear and other belief systems
are tagged on. Is that correct?
ELIAS: Correct. (Here, Cathy and Vic start talking at the same time)
VICKI: (To Cathy) Go ahead!
CATHY: Domestic animals, do they have fear?
ELIAS: Domestic animals acquire an element of fear, which is in response
to what they learn from you.
CATHY: So I'm correct in my assessment of a certain dog that I believe
has been trained through fear, and that's the only way he knows how to
work.
ELIAS: There are some creatures that you interact with which have been
domesticated that LEARN fear. They learn this from YOU.
CATHY: Right, and so actually, their motivation to work is fear.
ELIAS: It is an acquired emotion.
CATHY: I understand this. So, I am correct.
ELIAS: Correct.
CATHY: There are a lot of animals that their motivation to work is fear.
ELIAS: Correct.
BOBBI: So could they pick up that fear, not particularly by an interactive
experience of fearfulness? I'm thinking particularly of a situation where
my cat was out all night. That particular night, I saw a coyote in the
backyard. I figured, "That's it, she's gone." She came in the next morning
and stayed in the house hiding for the next three days, to me seeming very
fearful. Was she picking up on my fearfulness for her, for her safety?
ELIAS: Correct.
BOBBI: Responding to that?
ELIAS: It is not necessarily an action and a response from an event.
You believe within your belief systems that if you are harsh with an animal
or you are violent with an animal that they are responding fearfully to
the action. What they are responding to is you and your projection of fearfulness.
You hold the fearfulness of the creature and its ability to be hurtful.
Therefore, you rearrange this energy and project it outward to the creature
and it assumes this emotion. They hold, as you have stated, the basic element,
which is different. The experience of this is different. It is not fear
in the manner that you experience fear within emotion, but it may BECOME
a learned emotion from its interaction with you.
CATHY: This is a belief system, I know, but I have a real issue with
animals that are motivated through fear to work, and so that makes it difficult
for me to work one that way, but I have. I have, if that's the only way
I can figure out how to do it in the moment. But is that probably one of
the reasons why I'm having a little bit of difficulty, is because I have
such a big belief system in that area?
ELIAS: At times.
CATHY: But most of it is probably fear, the fear that I have myself,
my fear?
ELIAS: Correct. The fear that YOU hold shall be projected to those creatures
that you are very interactive with.
CATHY: When I'm speaking of my fear, I'm speaking of ... because to
me in my experience, if I think a dog is going to bite me, I'm not going
to push it in any manner, way, shape or form, or else I'm going to have
leverage or something to where it can't get to me. Most of the animals
I've worked with, I don't believe I've had a fear of them biting me or
something like that, within what I'm asking them to do. That part was kind
of confusing to me, when you were talking about the projection of fear
that way. I'm talking about fear of myself and of my abilities, blah blah
blah.
ELIAS: Quite; but other individuals may be interactive with your animals,
and their reasoning subjectively for this treatment is that they hold the
fear and they project this out to the creature, viewing that this shall
be protective of themselves.
CATHY: Well, I'm not really understanding this!
VICKI: I have a question about fear and animals. I've had a lot of experiences
with dropping a mouse in a snake cage and watching the mouse piss all over
itself. If it ain't scared, what is it?
ELIAS: It is responding in several manners. In one respect it is responding
to the energy that YOU project. In another manner it is merely responding
physically to the situation, which it is aware of, but its awareness is
also influenced by you. Within a natural situation, a snake may come upon
a mouse. The mouse shall pay little attention to the snake, for it is NOT
fearful. This be the reason that so many mice are eaten by so many snakes!
(Grinning) You may also view the experience of another individual who may
drop a mouse into a cage with a snake, and the mouse may climb all over
the snake. It is not afraid of the snake.
KAAN: Mary had a question: What is the similarity between a creature
and a child which makes us approach them in a
similar way at times, treat dogs like children or children like dogs in
playfulness or our expectation of their behavior and their spontaneity?
ELIAS: The similarity that you view is very simple; this is that children
are interacting more subjectively than objectively. They also hold much
more subjective awareness than objective awareness for a time frame. In
this, they may be more likened to your creatures, for they also are interacting
more subjectively than objectively.
A small infant is more comparable to your creatures in their behavior
than even a small child. A small infant also spends much of its time framework
sleeping and interacting subjectively and responding to what you think
of as basic needs, but also holding some emotion and a different type of
thought process, for it has not objectively learned language yet.
KAAN: So most of our beliefs hang on with our rational side, which objectifies
things which they lack. Is that true?
ELIAS: Not necessarily. Your beliefs are also held subjectively.
KAAN: But those are the basic beliefs that construct this reality, not
the later things that are acquired in society and culture. Is that true?
ELIAS: At times, for there are times that you transition into physical
focus and you bring with you, so to speak, many belief systems.
KAAN: So an infant would still have those belief systems, but they're
not expressed at that level because it doesn't have the....
ELIAS: Correct. They are not objectifying, although at times they do
not hold these belief systems. It is a matter of choice of the focus.
KAAN: So if they DO hold these belief systems, the infants reacting
to OUR beliefs at an early age would be filtered through these belief systems
subjectively?
ELIAS: Correct.
VICKI: I have a question about what you guys were talking about, this
concept of children and animals. It makes sense to me what you said about
infants. That's been my experience too. Infants DO sleep a lot, just like
animals do, and quite often respond in similar manners. To go back to Mary's
question, I was listening to her express her question too. Her experience
is that her domestic pets ... she equates their behavior with the behavior
of small children. My personal experience is entirely different, and I'm
sure each individual can relate a different experience. My question is,
isn't that an individual choice as to how your animals respond to you?
ELIAS: And which animals you draw to yourself. You draw certain animals
to yourself in compliance with your belief systems and in compliance of
what you choose to be creating.
VICKI: Right. So two different people can go get a dog, say, and they're
going to be picking two completely different personalities depending on
their own personal ...
ELIAS: Correct.
VICKI: ... what? Issues? Choices? Belief systems? Desires?
ELIAS: All.
VICKI: All of these things.
ELIAS: And their creatures shall be responding in like manner.
VICKI: Yeah, that makes sense to me.
ELIAS: Michael may be drawing to himself creatures that are in compliance
with his belief systems and his desires and his choices, and these creatures
are in agreement with this. Therefore, if he holds a belief system that
his creatures shall be responding as small children, they shall be in agreement
with this and comply with this and respond as small children. You may each
be very influencing of your creatures in this same manner. They are responding
within consciousness to YOUR belief systems.
VICKI: Right, which brings up one other question I have, and I'm sure
we've all had this experience too, where you select an animal and within
a very short period of time ... you don't keep the animal. You get rid
of the animal because it's behavior is such that it causes you too much
conflict. What have you drawn to yourself in those sorts of situations?
It's kind of counter to what we were just talking about.
ELIAS: You have drawn to yourself the opportunity to view that these
creatures DO create their reality and may not always be manipulated by
you.
VICKI: That makes sense. So when you want to get rid of your children,
this would be the same thing, right? (Much laughter)
ELIAS: (Grinning) This would be your choice, although you hold stronger
belief systems in THIS area, for you hold the belief systems that many
times creatures may be disposable!
VICKI: Hmm! That's way different!
ELIAS: You do not hold the belief system of disposable children!
VICKI: No, we're not putting our children to sleep yet!
ELIAS: This is quite true!
KAAN: Elias, may I ask my essence name and essence family, as well as
my wife and a friend who introduced me to you, Owen Massie?
ELIAS: Essence name, Ian; family, Sumafi; alignment, Milumet. Your partner:
essence name, Bartholomew; family, Sumari; alignment Ilda. Your friend:
essence name, (chuckling) Cynthia!
VICKI: Cynthia? (Elias nods)
ELIAS: Family, Ilda; alignment, Sumari.
KAAN: Thank you.
ELIAS: You are welcome.
SUE: I have a question. This may be a silly question, but ...
CATHY: P.I. (Laughter)
SUE: What does P.I. mean?
VICKI: Personal invalidation.
ELIAS: She is quite good at recognizing other individuals!
SUE: Thank you! Do our domesticated animals feel love for us?
ELIAS: They hold emotion and they do experience affection. They do not
experience what YOU term to be love, but they DO experience the emotion
of affection.
KAAN: How about fascination?
ELIAS: Yes, they hold fascination.
KAAN: With our reality and interacting with us?
ELIAS: In certain respects, yes.
KAAN: About babies, I've heard of an experiment in which children at
a young age can understand the language primitively at an early stage.
You may ask them to close their eyes and put them into the middle of the
room on a chair, where there's a quite a distance between the wall and
the chair, and you ask them to close their eyes and touch the wall, and
they could make a sound or knock on the wall. They could make a sound.
Now if I repeat this experiment in a similar situation and can't get this,
would that be because my beliefs are affecting the child? Are they like
animals? Are they that responsive to our belief systems?
ELIAS: Not necessarily. Different individuals choose different rates,
so to speak, in which to be interactive objectively. Each individual entering
physical focus is entering within an action of transition into physical
focus. As they begin the physical focus, they are almost entirely subjectively
oriented. As your time frame progresses, they increase their interactiveness
objectively, but it is the choice of each focus as to their interaction
objectively and how much interaction they choose to be allowing at what
time rate.
There is an understanding far beyond what you believe within infants.
They may not allow themselves the ability to be communicating objectively
with you within language, but they hold an understanding of their environment
around them and of you from a much earlier age than you realize. They also
hold an understanding of you subjectively from the moment that the essence
enters the physical form.
KAAN: Is there any way where we can actually push, intentionally or
unintentionally, their progress rate or objectify it more than what they
would be interested in objectifying?
ELIAS: No. This is the choice of the individual focus.
KAAN: Is there any flexibility in the parent guiding the child? What
is the parents' facilitating role in the manifestation of how much of objectivity
they are going to be engaging or recognizing?
ELIAS: You hold many belief systems in the area of parenting.
VICKI: (Interrupting) May I change the tape?
ELIAS: Yes. (Tape change at 9:20 PM; resume at 9:21 PM)
ELIAS: You also hold belief systems in the area of environment.
KAAN: Me individually, or humanity?
ELIAS: En masse. Therefore, you believe that environment and parents
are ultimately influencing of the small ones. The small ones acquire this
belief system also very, very young. This belief system becomes accepted
as the small one is still within its infancy.
KAAN: Would dropping that belief system within the parents' own effort
influence the child then to be not acquiring that belief system? Or was
it also in their choosing that this would take place?
ELIAS: It is the choice of the focus. This be the reason that many individuals
experience within parenting that they may be choosing their methods quite
carefully and to their belief systems quite diligently to be the most helpful
to their child, and their child may be completely unresponsive to their
efforts. For the most part within your officially accepted reality, the
entering focus is in compliance with the family that it has chosen to engage
itself with. Therefore, there is an aspect of similarity within the beliefs
of the children and the beliefs of the parents.
KAAN: So a parent's natural recognition of his own self-value, his own
self-exploration, is the most natural, so to speak, way to allow the child
to be, without taking the child into constriction in some objectified unnatural
way? Would that be a correct statement?
ELIAS: An efficient method of parenting children within this time framework,
within the action of your shift, would be to allow yourself an acceptance
of self and an acceptance of the child, an awareness that you create your
reality and that the child also creates its reality from the moment of
its birth, and also a recognition of impulses; allowance for the child
to be expressing and following its own impulses and not blocking these
with the small one in response to your own belief systems of acceptable
and unacceptable behavior. (Fifteen-second pause, which is long for this
group!)
DREW: Can I follow up on something we talked about yesterday regarding
conflict and issues and challenges? It has to do with a question I asked
you yesterday about being able to identify whether a conflict is coming
as a result of a belief system and not accepting your situation and ultimately
accepting it and kind of getting over it, if you will, or a recognition
that you are not in alignment with intent and the conflict is a result
of inefficiency in terms of actualizing your intent. I know personally
it would be helpful for me to have any information along those lines in
terms of recognition of what's causing the conflict, and how to recognize
whether it's a matter of changing course or a matter of accepting belief
systems.
ELIAS: And my response has been to you to examine what you are creating
within the NOW.
DREW: Well, I've been thinking about that since yesterday, and actually
been practicing it a little bit. Within the MOMENT ... I kind of discovered
today that when I focus on the MOMENT, within the moment itself there is
no conflict.
ELIAS: Quite.
DREW: However, within my current situation, there's lots of it.
ELIAS: This be what I have identified to you in our session yesterday.
The reason many times you create conflict and you are experiencing conflict,
for many individuals, is that you are NOT focusing within the now. You
are projecting to the future.
DREW: Well, what about a situation where your imagery that you've surrounded
yourself with, your current lifestyle or situation, causes you conflict
or a degree of unhappiness? I'm trying to determine whether that's a matter
of my belief systems in terms of what's good or bad or how things should
or should not be and learning to accept the way things are, or is the imagery
I've created for my noticing and understanding that I should be doing something
different?
ELIAS: The conflict that YOU are experiencing stems from your belief
systems and your rigidity within your belief systems, and your inability
presently to focus upon the now.
DREW: At the moment.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: So when you say that the conflict is a result of my belief systems
to some extent, does that mean I need to just accept my situation, or that
my belief systems are CAUSING a situation which I'm finding uncomfortable?
ELIAS: YOU create the situation filtered through your belief systems.
Your belief systems are not an entity that creates your reality FOR you.
YOU are creating your situation and your reality within the influence of
your belief systems.
DREW: In alignment with my belief systems.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: So changing my belief systems will change my reality. (Here, Elias
sports a crooked smile, and we all laugh)
ELIAS: Yes, in a manner of speaking.
DREW: Well, this is a bit of a hamster wheel too, because it's hard
to know ... boy! Do I just accept it and get over it? This is the way is
it and it's perfectly fine?
ELIAS: And are you believing of this? (Grinning)
DREW: No, but is that just a belief system or is it some subjective
information to myself that I need to change course? We've discussed before
that a life of poverty and illness and devastation could be perfectly in
alignment with your intent for your particular reality.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: So it's hard, when one is experiencing difficulty, to know whether
or not that's the choice I made for this reality and therefore I should
be accepting of it because it's not bad. Or, I'm going around the country
to cross the river!
ELIAS: You ARE creating your reality within your intent, but you also
are widening your awareness and allowing yourself the information that
if you are not pleased with the reality that you are creating, that you
hold the ability to alter this. The most efficient method for altering
your reality in areas that are creating conflict is to be addressing to
those belief systems that are influencing of your creation. The most efficient
method for this action is to be looking to what you are creating within
the NOW.
DREW: The moment, the instant, this moment in time. I don't know. It's
somehow elusive to me how the moment, this instant, what I'm creating in
this, will ... well, maybe I just have to do it.
ELIAS: Quite! When you are finding yourself experiencing conflict, within
that moment identify to yourself what you are creating, why you are experiencing
this conflict.
DREW: Did you at one time tell us or tell me that the only reason we
feel like we need to change a situation is because we believe it's not
a good situation, that in fact if we accepted our beliefs and that there
is no right or wrong or good or bad, we wouldn't seek change?
ELIAS: I have not expressed that you would not seek change. Your motivation
shall be different.
DREW: Yes. It wouldn't come out of a displeasure for a current situation.
It would come out of a creative becoming.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: And so wouldn't it then stand to reason that where I am is where
I should be and there is no reason to be displeased with it? That's just
belief systems.
(Here, Elias begins coughing and continues for thirty seconds, at which
point Mary pops back in at 9:35 PM)
MARY: (Laughing) My fault! I'm sorry! I'm sorry! (Laughter) I'm sorry!
I'm sorry! I know I did that! (Cracking up and coughing at the same time)
RETA: Well, you were coughing! That's okay, you were coughing!
CATHY: Were you playing, Mare?? She was f#&king around!
MARY: I was! I'm sorry. (Still coughing)
SUE: And we were just going to get the answer to the most important
question!! (Much laughter throughout all of this)
MARY: That's alright, I'll let him come back! It was my fault.
RETA: I just thought you were coughing and HAD to come out of it.
MARY: No, I was f#&king around! (Still coughing and laughing)
CATHY: She was playing!
MARY: I was! Well, Donald made a suggestion to me the other day. I guess
it doesn't work! (Laughter)
CATHY: Did he get it in a meditation?? (Sarcastically, and Mary cracks
up, and the coughing continues)
DREW: Wow! (Commenting on the fact that Mary is still coughing)
MARY: Oh god! I feel like I stabbed myself in the throat!
DREW: Does this have anything to do with the phenomenon? Or is that
just a physical thing, that you happen to be coughing?
MARY: Well, it seems like if I get too close sometimes ... I guess ...
I don't know why it always comes through this area, but it does! (Indicating
the throat area, and still coughing)
DREW: You were experimenting a little bit? (Mary nods and laughs)
SUE: Maybe 'cause the throat is what Elias uses?
MARY: Well, I've been like just standing in this wave for so long now,
you know, and Donald made a suggestion that maybe I try to move when I'm
in it and try to get a little closer to what I think I identify as Elias'
energy, so I thought maybe I'd try it. I didn't know if I could or not.
Guess I won't! Maybe I'm not ready for that yet! Maybe I'll just stay standing
up! (Laughing, and still coughing) I really thought I could do it now.
I mean, I've been standing for a long time! I thought maybe I was ready.
DREW: How far did you get?
MARY: Not very far! It's like some sort of a ... I don't know how you
could describe it. It's like a barrier or like a membrane or something
that seems to be a lot tougher than I thought! (Pause) Okay. I'm sorry.
I didn't mean to interrupt.
DREW: It's okay. I didn't mean to be ... I hope I'm not like dragging
this out with my questions.
MARY: You can just go right back to ... (cracking up at something)
RETA: Go back and stand in the wave. Is it still purple?
MARY: What?
RETA: Where you are?
MARY: I don't see anything purple. I don't see ANYTHING.
RETA: Oh, I thought you were in a purple....
MARY: I don't see anything at all. (Whispering) Okay. Sorry. F#&k
me dead! Okay, I can do this. (Mary closes her eyes and Elias arrives in
three seconds, at 9:39 PM)
ELIAS: Continuing. Belief systems versus intent. (Grinning)
DREW: I don't want to dwell on this too long, but IF I accepted that
everything was okay, everything is perfect as you've indicated everything
is, I would feel no need to change my circumstances as a result of not
being happy with them. I may want to change them for the creative experience,
but not because I'm not happy.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: So my question then is, is my task to be accepting of my belief
systems and understand everything is perfect as it is and just be essentially
happy with the way things are, OR be recognizing that for some reason this
imagery is indicative of me not actualizing my intent as efficiently as
I should be? (Pause)
ELIAS: (Grinning) Let me express to you that if you held the belief
system that you could be accepting of all of your belief systems presently,
instantaneously, within this now, I would be expressing to you that this
would be the MOST efficient action, but you do NOT believe this. Therefore,
my suggestion is that you look to the belief systems that are affecting
you.
DREW: The belief systems that are affecting me in the sense that they're
making me unhappy with my situation, or the belief systems that are creating
the situation in the first place?
ELIAS: The belief systems that are creating conflict.
DREW: And if I look to the now, as I've been trying to do since yesterday,
which has been an exercise in itself, just trying to be in the moment,
is there anything ... you're suggesting that specifically when I'm experiencing
conflict in particular, get in touch with the now? Is that right?
ELIAS: I am expressing to you to be experiencing the now ALWAYS.
DREW: What came to me today is that within the now, there is no conflict.
It's only within my evaluation of my overall situation, my belief systems,
my interpretation, that the conflict arises. And yet on the one hand I
say it's ONLY when I do that, but that in fact is the reality! And so,
if in this exercise of concentrating on the now there is no conflict....
ELIAS: Is this not what you strive for, is to hold no conflict? I offer
you the method for no conflict, and you dispute this!
DREW: No, I'm trying to understand it!
ELIAS: When you are experiencing conflict within the now, then you shall
present yourself with the opportunity to examine what is creating the conflict.
But if you are not experiencing conflict within the now, then what be the
problem? Is this not what you wish, is no conflict?
DREW: Yeah, but I'd like to change my imagery too! You would say the
same thing to me if I was crippled and dying of cancer: "Accept it. This
is the reality you've chosen. Everything is perfect."
ELIAS: Not necessarily. If you are not wishing to be continuing in your
creation I may be expressing to you, "Then you may alter this experience."
DREW: But would your advice to me in the now be in eliminating the conflict
or to change ... you know, it's kind of like saying to someone, "Get over
it! This is the way it is!" or "If you don't like it, change it!" I'm not
sure which of those ... if they go hand-in-hand. It seems to me that you
can't do both, can you?
ELIAS: You are not in a position within your belief systems presently
to be accepting of the belief systems. I continue to express to you that
ultimately this is the action that is the most efficient and that ultimately
you shall be accepting of your belief systems, for you have chosen to be
engaged within this shift and they are the same. But in recognition of
your present creation and belief systems and that you shall not allow yourself
within this present now to be accepting of your belief systems, I am not
expressing the "get over it." I am expressing, if you are not pleased with
your choice of your creation of your reality, then you may alter this.
You hold the ability. (Pause)
NORM: I have some questions in regard to creatures. The definition of
creatures in regard to everything that you've been talking about applies
to, for example, one-celled animals to multi-celled animals. Also, it occurs
to me that the characteristics and personalities of creatures can also
be applied to such things as storms, and that the interaction that occurs
between storms and individuals is very similar to the action that occurs
between creatures and individuals. Am I going too far there?
ELIAS: There is a distinction. You have created these creatures to hold
personality.
NORM: Storms don't hold personality?
ELIAS: You have also created these creatures with choice and emotion.
Storms are a projection of emotion, of YOU. They are an action.
NORM: Hmm. And the earth is almost like a creature?
ELIAS: It also is a projection of you.
NORM: And all of us, of course.
ELIAS: Correct.
NORM: And can be modified by us, and of course is being modified.
ELIAS: Correct.
NORM: Are we doing quite well in the modification of probabilities?
ELIAS: As always! (Grinning)
RETA: According to all the news and stories and everything, we're still
going to doom and gloom!
ELIAS: This be a belief system also!
RETA: When I talk to folks that are talking about these doom and gloom
things that are coming -- in February, 1998! -- and so on, I say, "I'm
not going to lend energy to that because I don't want to believe that,
and I'm not going to." And they just kind of stare at me and say, "But
it's in the newspaper!" So there are more publications, more media-hype,
more knowledge of doom and gloom than there is of acceptance or hope, except
when you talk to individuals. Then there is more hope for becoming a better
society and not having massive devastation of the world and so on. Too
bad we can't get some of these hopeful people into the media!
ELIAS: They are both probabilities.
KAAN: I'm observing a difference with certain beliefs in which I can
lift them and throw them away, because underneath there's another recognizable
belief system that is coming or a movement in which they are ready to go
and I can surf on them. In others, I can recognize what the belief is that
is causing conflict, but it is attached to something else deeper which
I can't see which surfaces as, "I don't want to do that," although I recognize
that I'd like to change this belief. That's a deeper feeling. It's not
a conceptualized belief or anything recognizable. Is that something that
we really project to experience? Is it a larger category of things that
we have to retain around, or it is just because our focus is not penetrating
enough to unearth that thing below that surface belief?
ELIAS: You are approaching the awareness within periphery to be pulling
the core belief systems and identifying these. Within your physical focus
you look to this as a process, and also within the process of identifying
belief systems and dislodging them, so to speak, you go through your layers
of belief systems. You identify your surface belief systems initially.
Then you allow yourselves to move into the area of identifying more closely-held
belief systems, and then eventually you allow yourself to identify core,
base belief systems, which are held so very strongly that you do not even
recognize them.
KAAN: Well, they have to be recognized in an intellectual conceptual
level, in a clarity, to be removed. Or is there an inner sense process
to deal with them?
ELIAS: This is a part of your process, is allowing yourselves to objectively
identify more of what you know subjectively. This be part of the action
of your shift, is to be becoming more objectively aware of the subjective
activity that you know.
KAAN: There's another feeling where in the time of quickly eliminating
belief systems, one then seems like a particular clearing occurs and one
would like to have something. It creates a sense of emptiness and no desire;
no motion, therefore.
ELIAS: You are not eliminating belief systems. You are moving into a
direction of accepting the belief systems that you hold, but you are not
eliminating.
KAAN: But we may choose to focus out of them, therefore not creating
through them any more.
ELIAS: You shall ALWAYS be creating your reality with belief systems.
You are learning to be accepting of those belief systems, and in the acceptance
of these belief systems their hold upon you is loosened, which allows you
a greater ability to be experiencing your creativity. It allows you more
freedom. (Pause, with Elias smiling at Kaan) This is a difficult concept!
CATHY: So, is my basic core belief system, with my drawing myself to
this particular animal, just the basic duplicity thing?
ELIAS: In drawing yourself to this particular animal, you are offering
yourself the opportunity to be examining base belief systems in the area
of creatures. You hold very strong belief systems in the area of creatures:
how they are, how they create their reality, how they do NOT create their
reality, how influencing or how non-influencing YOU are with them, how
they do NOT think and how they are instinctual, and how they are responsive
automatically.
CATHY: (Laughing) Well, I'm just trying to figure out kind of which
direction to go in to deal with this, because there's so many things! I
mean, other than acceptance of myself and acceptance of the dog and certain
things that he does, I just have no ... well, no, that's not true. I have
a big belief that he's neurotic and that he has separation anxiety from
me, and that when I leave he's going to maim himself in some way, shape
or form, which he will! And then even when I'm in the house, I cannot move
ten feet from one room to the other without this dog right on my heels!
And I just....
ELIAS: And your belief systems are very influencing of the creature's
creation and behavior!
CATHY: Okay, since I know that he's done this behavior with other trainers
before, that's reinforcing of my belief system, right?
ELIAS: Correct.
CATHY: So....
ELIAS: The creature is creating what it chooses to be creating. You
choose to draw yourself to this creature for your own information. Other
individuals choose NOT to draw themselves to this creature, for they do
not choose to be interactive with its choice of its creation. Just as Lawrence
has expressed, you may draw yourself to a creature, and if you are unaccepting
of its behavior you shall eliminate the creature. You shall not continue
to keep this creature within your home. You have chosen to continue a relationship
with this creature, for it offers you the opportunity to identify your
own belief systems in the direction of what YOU think and what YOU believe
about creatures!
CATHY: What I think and I believe. Well, I'll tell you, my creature
is a lot less irritating than THAT creature! That's all I can say!
ELIAS: But this creature attains your attention, does it not?
CATHY: Yeah, it attains my attention!
ELIAS: Quite!
CATHY: But so does Caleigh, only she doesn't bug me! I tell her that
almost every day. I find myself telling her that every day! (Caleigh is
Cathy's dog, as opposed to the dog around which most of these questions
are based)
ELIAS: And what have we expressed in our yesterday? You shall draw experiences
to you that are uncomfortable, for this attains your attention more!
CATHY: So that I can widen and engage my periphery, or torture myself??
(Laughing)
ELIAS: That you may offer yourself the opportunity to identify the belief
systems that you hold, and in this also you shall be widening your periphery.
CATHY: But it needs to go a bit farther than just identifying, doesn't
it? I mean, I know....
ELIAS: You have NOT identified!
CATHY: (Sighing deeply) But the....
ELIAS: This be your first step! (Grinning)
CATHY: (Sighing again) Well, one of them has to be the mass belief system
that most trainers have about this dog! I mean, that has to be one of them!
ELIAS: One.
CATHY: And they all choose not to work him!
ELIAS: And you choose to!
CATHY: Well, I'm still confused, but I'll just continue. I don't get
it.
ELIAS: Within each moment of the now, examine the conflict and attempt
to be identifying the belief system that is influencing and creating this
conflict.
CATHY: Well, I think it's the belief system in myself, that I can't
accomplish and that I'm very fearful.
ELIAS: This be an underlying belief system that you hold in very many
areas, but there are also other specific belief systems that this creature
offers you the opportunity to view.
CATHY: Okay. I'll examine. Thank you.
ELIAS: You are welcome.
RETA: You're actually then saying the same thing to Shynla as you are
to Drew. In that moment of conflict, that's your opportunity to examine
the conflict that you're having at that moment.
ELIAS: I'm expressing this to you ALL.
RETA: Well, I know, but this is two different kinds of examples, one
with a creature and one with self. And so, the moment of conflict would
be maybe an opening of your mind a little bit? Most of us impose fences
around ourselves and allow ourselves only to think so far, but in those
moments of conflict then, you're allowing yourself more of an opening so
that you can examine and come out of there with more facts because you
have allowed yourself to look a little bit deeper?
ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, yes.
RETA: And then evaluate what you've found in that moment? Because I'm
sure that every one of us has some kind of conflict. I had a conflict day
today and he had a conflict day today, and we're not handling it that way.
I know that!
ELIAS: Address to these issues and challenges, conflicts, within the
moment, within the now, and allow yourself the opportunity to view within
the NOW, and you shall offer yourself more information.
RETA: What's happening is, we're viewing the conflict and letting it
override maybe good sense, staying within that conflict and becoming upset
rather than using that moment to arrive at a better decision about what
we should do. I know that's what I do. That conflict becomes more important
than rational thinking, and we have to change that.
ELIAS: The conflict becomes more important than the choices.
RETA: Yes.
ELIAS: Therefore, you do not SEE the choices.
RETA: That's right, and so I've got to turn that around and use those
moments of conflict and widen them and look at them.
DREW: The conflict becomes more important than the choices?
ELIAS: It holds your attention and diverts your attention from your
choices.
DREW: So within that moment, the information we're looking for is options
and choices as opposed to the belief systems creating the conflict?
ELIAS: Both!
DREW: The conflict obscures our ability to see our choices.
ELIAS: Correct.
RETA: And yet, the emotion of that conflict does really give us more
space to look.
ELIAS: You also intensify your emotion within conflict, which also clouds
your vision.
VICKI: So I'm hearing you ... what's going on here is we're coming to
a conclusion that the conflict opens your awareness? I mean....
ELIAS: It offers you an opportunity to widen your awareness.
VICKI: But the actual conflict doesn't open your awareness, does it?
ELIAS: It offers you the opportunity to widen your awareness. You have
drawn the conflict to yourself for this reason!
VICKI: So this would be an opportunity I don't have in times of no conflict??
ELIAS: You hold the ability and you have the opportunity, but you also
are not paying attention.
VICKI: So if you happen to be finding yourself drawing very little conflict
to yourself most of the time, what does that indicate?
ELIAS: A choice. Many individuals shall not pay attention to what they
wish to address to if they are not creating conflict. It is not necessary,
but it is an efficient method for many individuals.
VICKI: Okay, I think I understand.
ELIAS: It is the individual choice and what THEY shall pay attention
to.
RETA: Well, in the past, sometimes I've found that when I'm in conflict
and it's intensified that I put myself down rather than looking at the
qualities that I could use to get out of that. So, I'm going to reverse
that process. (Pause)
ELIAS: I shall be disengaging this evening, and we may be continuing
with this subject at our next meeting, as it is appearing to be unfinished
with you! (Exclamations of agreement) Very well. I shall anticipate our
Part Two at our next meeting.
DREW: Part Three!
ELIAS: To you all this evening, I bid you much affection and a loving
adieu!
Elias departs at 10:08 PM.
FOOTNOTES:
(1) In October of '95, Ron had a dream in which he received
A.S.I. as an equation. The following evening, Elias began the session with
this equation. This edited excerpt is from 10/18/95:
ELIAS: Bon jour! Aspect, Seer, Intent. (Pause) A.S.I. The eyes being
the symbol of the Seers. This being a construct equation of Seer doorways.
This fits into a larger equation, to which now you have a puzzle piece
that you may fit this to another. This is part of your city construction,
which will also go alongside of Michael's tile. So, you have begun! Also
incorporated within this is a connection with Sophia, in seeing or viewing
the same essence Seer as Michael has incorporated. Your hallway is also
a part of your construction. Therefore, your city has begun!
You will notice within the equation two doorways; one representing what
you term future, one representing what you term past, both being linked
with your archeological focus as your clues within your book; one future
focus, one past; both aspects of the same, each part of the twins. This
is your equation.
© 1998 Vicki Pendley/Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved
Copyright 1998 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.