Sunday, January 18, 1998 © 1998
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.
NORM: Astronomical objects, comets, Ilda.
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.
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!"
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?
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?
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: Your interaction with horses has not always been the same as it is within THIS focus.
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?
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?
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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
DREW: So good and bad and right and wrong are not truths.
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.
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.
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.
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.
DREW: Okay. Is that true with animals as well?
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.
DREW: He could not alter my reality in any way I choose him not to.
DREW: Not so with an animal.
ELIAS: We shall break, and you may continue with your questions.
BREAK 8:11 PM
RESUME 8:33 PM (Time was five seconds)
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?
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
CATHY: There are a lot of animals that their motivation to work is fear.
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?
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?
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 ...
VICKI: ... what? Issues? Choices? Belief systems? Desires?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
NORM: And can be modified by us, and of course is being modified.
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: 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!
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!
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.
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?
DREW: The conflict obscures our ability to see our choices.
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.
(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.