Wednesday, July 28, 1999-2 © 1999 (Private/Phone)
Participants:  Mary (Michael), Jo (Tyl), and Paul (Caroll).
Elias arrives at 1:50 PM. (Arrival time is 16 seconds)

ELIAS:  Good day to you!

JO:  Good day!

PAUL:  And a big hello to you, old friend!

JO:  Thank you for your ongoing support and comfort.  It’s very appreciated.

ELIAS:  You are quite welcome.

PAUL:  I’m going to begin today — we have our list of questions, as always — with some questions for a friend of ours named Stephen Katz who’s in Australia and has been trying to get someone to ask these questions for him.  I’m following an impression of mine and want to give him the Elias gamut, as it were, of information to think about.  So, I would like to ask, on behalf of Stephen, his essence name and family alignment and belonging to.

ELIAS:  Essence name, Ornah; O-R-N-A-H. (or’na)  Essence family, Sumari; alignment, Zuli.

PAUL:  Interesting.  He says he’s a Seth reader, so seeing that Sumari connection is no surprise.  I’d also like to ask his orientation in this focus. (Pause)

ELIAS:  Orientation in this focus, common.

PAUL:  I’d also like to ask for the number of focuses, both the total number of focuses in this dimension and the number of focuses close in tone to his.

ELIAS:  Very well.  One moment. (Pause)  Numbering of focuses holding similar tone, 26; complete number of focuses in this dimension, 433.

Bobbi’s note:  How strange — the same as the number of this session!

PAUL:  Thank you.  And the last question on his behalf is, is he a beginning or continuing or final focus? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Continuing.

PAUL:  Thank you so much on Stephen’s behalf.  I’m going to turn it over to Jo here.

JO:  I’d like to ask for our friend Carter if his orientation is soft? (Pause)

ELIAS:  No.  Orientation, common.

JO:  And for our friend Jeffrey Sax, if his orientation is intermediate? (Pause)

ELIAS:  No.  Orientation, common.

JO:  And I would also like, if you will, his essence name, and to confirm or not confirm that he is of the Sumari family and aligned with Ilda. (Pause)

ELIAS:  Sumari/Ilda, correct.  Essence name, Dwhal; D-W-H-A-L. (dwol)

JO:  Thank you.

ELIAS:  You are welcome.

JO:  And Paul’s and my orientation ... we believe that Paul is of the common orientation?

ELIAS:  Correct.

JO:  And I am soft?

ELIAS:  Correct.

JO:  Well, based on what you’ve said about people ... you made a very strong comment regarding people having difficulty in relationships because these orientations are set up for conflict.  I’m paraphrasing here, but I wonder what you would say about our relationship, and being in a very comfortable, intimate relationship, and what we should be doing with this information now.

ELIAS:  Let me express to you, first of all, I am not expressing to any individual that combining orientations in intimate relationships of partnerships is “set” for conflict, so to speak.

I have stated previously that if you are choosing to be engaging in relationship of intimate form of partnership with another individual that holds a different orientation from yourself, you shall be experiencing elements of conflict.

Now; in this, I am not expressing that you may not be creating a relationship of this type, and I am not expressing that within your physical terms you are doomed if you are creating this type of relationship.  What I am expressing to you is that each orientation, figuratively speaking — which shows itself objectively quite obviously — speaks its own language, so to speak.

Therefore, in combining different orientations, you shall experience conflicts temporarily, and this “temporary” may vary greatly, for you shall be speaking different languages.  Therefore, your perceptions are, in a manner of speaking, quite different from each other.

The reason that you experience conflict is that you have set your reality in motion in a certain type of direction based upon your belief systems, and in this, one of the expressions that you create within your reality is a lack of tolerance of difference and an insistence upon conforming each other to yourselves.

You move in the direction of expressing your point, so to speak — your opinions, your perceptions — to each other and attempting to sway another individual to your perception, which is a very similar expression to the attempts that you create within your focuses of creating another individual’s reality, which you hold an awareness now that you may not be accomplishing, but you continue to attempt.

You camouflage your attempt in expressing to yourselves very many different types of excuses for your expressions.  You express that you are being helpful.  You express that you are offering more information.  You express that you are offering more of an ease for another individual’s direction.  You may express many different types of directions in your camouflage, but the base line in this area is that you are not accepting the expression of another individual and you are attempting to alter their reality for them.

In this, as you DO all move in this direction so very automatically, if you are creating a relationship with an individual holding a different orientation from yourself, you shall be automatically creating an element of conflict, for you shall be bringing surfacely these differences and creating obvious expressions of these differences.

Now; you may express to me that you hold confusion in this area, for you have created a relationship of complete harmony and this moves in contrary expression to what I am offering to you in information, and I shall express to you that I beg to differ, for....

JO:  I don’t remember saying “complete harmony”!

ELIAS:  Ha ha ha ha ha! (Paul and Jo crack up)

In this, you hold a very strong awareness within you each that there are areas that you DO speak different languages and you DO attempt to be offering your perception to each other and attempting to sway one another to the conversion of your individual perceptions.  This is quite common within physical focus.

Now; what I AM expressing, quite realistically within physical focus and influenced by your belief systems and your automatic expressions within physical focus, [is] that if you ARE choosing to be entering into intimate partnership with another individual of a different orientation, there is more of a probability that you shall not continue in a lasting relationship with that individual; not that it is not possible, but that you within physical focus choose not to move into the direction of engaging the energy that is required for the translation of the languages.

You may be translating of these different languages and you hold the ability to be creating this quite efficiently, in very like manner to physical languages.  If you are so choosing, you may be introduced to one particular language within your physical focus — as what you term to be your native language objectively — and you may be choosing to incorporate another language, and you may speak another language quite fluently and you may hold an objective, efficient understanding of that other language.

In like manner, you may be accomplishing the same in the area of orientation, but many individuals do not choose to incorporate more than one language, for this is requiring of concentrated energy in understanding, interpretation, translation, practice, and many individuals choose not to be moving in this type of direction and manipulating their energy in volume in this type of expression.

Therefore, I may express to you that many, many, many relationships of partnership do not continue if they are engaging two different orientations, for you view this to be exhausting and fatiguing of yourselves and quite frustrating at times, so to speak.  But there ARE individuals that DO move in this direction and DO choose to be translating and interpreting and understanding and learning the other language.

Therefore, I express to you that this is not an absolute, that you must be engaging relationship in intimate partnership with another individual holding the same orientation as yourself, or you shall always be doomed to failure if you are not engaging another individual of your same orientation.  I am merely offering you explanation to what you create within your reality, that you may be understanding why certain thicknesses occur in natural form within your physical expressions and how you create your reality and how you may alter that reality if you are so choosing.

It is quite difficult to alter your reality objectively if you do not know what you are altering!  If you do not realize objectively that you hold the ability to alter, you shall not necessarily move in the direction of attempting to alter, and in this lack of movement, you merely perpetuate the belief systems that you hold.  The point of this shift is to be accepting belief systems and allowing much more freedom of your expressions and your abilities and your creativity.

In this, if you are not holding an awareness of your beliefs and if you are not holding an awareness of your natural expression and what you have created within your physical dimension, how shall you objectively alter it?

Therefore, I offer you information, that you may view yourselves and hold a more efficient understanding objectively of yourselves and of each other and of your belief systems, and in this, you offer yourselves the opportunity to view all of your reality much more widely, and as you view a wider awareness of your reality, you also offer yourselves less limits and more opportunity to be expressive of yourselves with much less conflict.

JO:  Thank you.  That’s very helpful.  The orientation information really helps to describe the language barrier that we’ve sensed all along.  We just never were able to ... we really didn’t know where that was coming from, so that’s very helpful.  Thank you.

ELIAS:  You are welcome.

In this, let me also express to you that one of the reasons that individuals holding different orientations encounter and create much conflict within their relationship is their perception, which is directly influenced by their orientation, for in this, you perceive yourselves and your world differently.  Therefore, you also respond to yourselves, to each other, and to your world quite differently.  Your expressions are foreign to each other, and it may appear at times as though you occupy entirely different planets, not merely different countries, for your reality IS very different.

In this, mass belief systems enter also, for the mass belief systems express to you that there ARE absolutes, that you DO hold certain areas of perception within your reality that are the same, and I express to you that this is incorrect.  Each of you holds your own unique, individual perception.

Now; you may hold similarities in holding the same orientations, but your individual expressions of those similarities are different.  The point is to be recognizing all of these differences, all of this diversity, and realizing the wondrousness of all of these expressions.  You need not be the same.  It matters not!

You have created your reality quite efficiently to be accommodating of all of these unique differences.  Therefore, you need not be placing all of the pegs into one shaped hole. (Chuckling)

JO:  We even seem to have different perceptions about how much conflict we have based on these differences.  It seems like we even view this situation very differently.

ELIAS:  Quite, and this also is an expression of the differences of orientation.  Individuals holding the orientation of soft may be expressing in certain areas that the conflict experienced is intense in its expression, but in other areas that pertain merely to the individual, they may express little conflict.  Let me clarify.

An individual that is of the orientation of common may express tremendous concern in areas that are directly affecting of themselves, and may be in your physical terms quite sensitive to situations and creations and emotions and thoughts in relation to individuals that they view themselves to hold closeness to, but their concern and their direction shall move in relation to their perception and shall encompass what is directly affecting of themselves in some manner.

Now; in difference to individuals holding intermediate orientation, individuals of the orientation of common shall allow an affectingness of other individuals surrounding them in their immediate company, so to speak — those individuals that they hold relationship to in family, in friendship, in partnership — but it shall be filtered through what may be directly affecting of them in some manner.  This shall hold importance.

Now; an individual holding the orientation of soft may not necessarily be affected merely by events or concepts or emotions or thoughts that are directly, objectively affecting of themself.  They may be affected, so to speak, by many other elements that appear to be outside of themselves, and they hold a direct responsiveness in affectingness, and this holds importance.

Therefore, within the two individuals directly engaging each other, their perceptions of what may hold importance or intensity may be quite different.  You may choose any subject matter that you wish to view and you may express much differences in your perceptions, and this shall be quite influencing of the intensity of the engagement of your interaction in relation to these subject matters.

JO:  For example, my connecting with information about relationships, for example, and sexuality.  Even though it doesn’t directly affect me necessarily, the ideas of it are something that I resonate to more than Paul does, and that is influencing of me more than him.

ELIAS:  Individuals holding the orientation of soft are great cause-bearers — ha ha ha! (Paul and Jo crack up) — for they are objectively aware of the interconnectedness of all individuals.  Therefore, they also are objectively affected by all of your reality within this physical dimension.

I shall venture to express to you that given the opportunity — or allowing themselves to present the opportunity to themselves — they may be connecting with other-dimensional focuses and allow themselves to be quite affected also.

Now; you do not hold an objective understanding or recognition of other physical dimensions, but were another physical dimension to be presented to you in any area that you would deem through your belief systems to be “cause worthy,” so to speak, you would automatically allow yourself to be quite affected, for it matters not.

This is an objective responsiveness to an objective expression — not merely subjective — of interconnectedness with all other aspects of consciousness; all other individuals within your physical reality, all other situations, all other creations, not merely what you create individually, for there is an awareness that it is all affecting of each other.

Therefore, the expressions are quite different within the orientation of soft and the orientation of common, for individuals within the orientation of common are creating outwardly.  Orientation of soft, be remembering, is creating inwardly AND outwardly.

What I am expressing in this is that the objective and subjective are moving in a particular type of expression that translates objectively.  Common creates their reality through their perception outwardly, which is the expression of objective imagery.

Do not be confused.  This is not to say that individuals creating the orientation of common do not create subjective movement also, for they do.  You all hold subjective movement.  You all hold objective movement.  This is not concerning that subject matter.  This subject of orientation is concerning the subject matter of perception and how you are creating your reality, how you are interpreting, how you are translating all of the imagery within your reality.

Individuals of the orientation of common translate their imagery, subjectively or objectively, in an objective manner.  They view outwardly.  Therefore, there is a very distinct difference between these two expressions of orientation, for individuals of soft combine these expressions of subjective and objective, in their perception, in their expression of their perception, into an objective expression.

We shall not be discussing individuals of intermediate presently, for this is not relevant to your experiences with each other.

In this, many times also, individuals holding the orientation of soft may experience difficulties in translating into language all that they are experiencing, and objectively shar[ing] these experiences with another individual holding a different orientation.

This be the reason that many, many, many individuals magnate to ongoing relationships with individuals of the same orientation, for there is an automatic, natural understanding.  There is also an automatic, natural movement into acceptance.  There is no necessity to be converting the partner to a different perception, for there is a natural understanding and knowing, for they hold a very similar perception.  This is what is creating of the lack of conflict between individuals that hold the same orientation.

Now; in this, you may be continuing within your relationship of partnership and you may be viewing these challenges, but do not delude yourself into another area of camouflage by expressing to yourselves that you shall accomplish, for this is noble and for the reason that you are so very enlightened, for this shall NOT accomplish the translation.

The accomplishment of the translation is a genuine expression, not merely of curiosity but of appreciation of difference, and in this, there becomes an allowance of acceptance in the expressions of difference, not a frustration and more of a thickness.

Many individuals may avail themselves of this information that is being offered now and shall move into areas of conquest: “I shall engage in interaction and relationship in intimate fashion with a partner of a different orientation than myself, for this shall be a conquest and it shall be a medal.”

I express to you that this type of motivation is to be examined, for the genuine expression that shall create the natural flow and the movement into an ongoing lastingness — in objective terms — of relationship of this type is the willingness to explore within curiosity the differences of languages, and the willingness of acceptance, and the genuine knowing that it matters not.  Are you understanding?

JO:  Yes, thank you.  The cause that I’m currently bearing (Elias grins) is very outside of beliefs about relationships and about the kind of relationship that we have, and I would like some feedback on that, as well as my allowing a bleed-through from another focus who has different beliefs about sex and relationships, and how that is also influencing my perception. (Pause)

ELIAS:  And shall we be clear as to your identification of what you are addressing to in this questioning?

JO:  I guess it’s the “thou shalt’s” of an exclusive relationship.  I seem to be connecting with someone who would probably rather die than be married and is persecuted for having beliefs about sexual freedom, and I don’t know why this is supposed to be helpful to me.  I believe that it is, but I’m not sure how it is.  I think I rebel in theory with a lot of the necessity to vow to someone when this other person enjoys such a variety of relationships, although I can’t say that I believe it non-theoretically in this focus because I’ve also created a wonderful exclusive relationship with someone.  So I guess I’m just confused about what’s happening here in this exchange with this other focus in Judea.

ELIAS:  Let me express to you that there are natural movements that you incorporate within this physical dimension, and there are belief systems which are incorporated around natural movements.  There are belief systems that extend beyond your natural movements.

Now; in this, the concept of holding within a relationship in singular fashion, of one individual expressing devotion to one other individual exclusively throughout the entirety of a focus, IS a manifestation of beliefs, but it also stems, so to speak, from a natural movement.  This is how you confuse yourselves, for you create belief systems that deviate from your natural expressions.

Now; within your natural expressions, there are no rules that express to you that you must be devoting yourself in relationship to one individual throughout the entirety of your focus, but you also do move in natural expression in magnating to a partner that holds the same orientation, the same language, the same expressions as yourself, and moving in cooperation with that individual in partnership.

Now; this is not created for your religious reasons of procreation.  This is not created for your reasons of beliefs that you must be monogamous, that this is the manner in which you were intended to be expressing your reality.  It is merely a natural flow.

Look to yourselves and look to your curiosities and your expressions and your questionings and how very often they move in the direction of soul mates and split-aparts.  You hold a fascination in this area.  Why do you hold a fascination in this area?  For the reason that I have expressed to you many times previously: your beliefs are based in truths.  They deviate quite far from these truths; they are quite distorted from these truths, but their base lines are springing from what you know underlyingly.  Therefore, in this, you do automatically naturally move into the expression of partnership.

Now; this expression at times may vary.  In its natural movement and natural form, it may not be exclusive to one particular individual.  It may be expressed in two or three or perhaps four individuals, not necessarily paired through your beliefs of pairing genders either.  But you have expressed so many aspects of belief systems that you have complicated your reality and you have limited yourselves quite strongly.

In your belief systems presently, you move in the direction that you shall move through your focus, you shall choose a point within your focus, and you shall create the institution, so to speak, of marriage and establish a relationship singularly with one other individual — preferably of a different gender — and in this, you shall continue throughout your focus and create your focuses together in harmony, and you express great confusion and conflict in wondering within yourselves why this does not express in the manner that you imagine.

But you are not remembering the natural flow of your creations, the natural flow of yourselves, within your orientations, within your creations in this reality, and not influenced by all of the countless aspects of your belief systems.  I express to you that you naturally magnate to partnerships for reinforcement, for validation — which you term to be companionship — for stimulation, for exploration of all that you present yourself with within your physical sojourn.

In this, you experience the interconnectedness of other individuals in emotion, in energy, in thought, in abilities, in creativity, in all of your exploration of your physical reality.

You have created a reality that is expressed objectively singularly.  You have created individual physical forms, you have created unique and individual personalities, you have created individual perceptions, you have created individual realities.  In this, your manner of lessening separation, of offering yourself the objective sense of interconnectedness and the reminder in objective terms that you are not singular, is to be creating partnerships and experiencing your reality in physical terms in conjunction with other individuals.

Now; in this, this be the reason that you create the manifestation of the orientation of intermediate less frequently than any other orientation, for this particular expression of orientation magnates much more singularly and focuses their perception, their attention, very intensely upon self and easily moves into the expressions of a lack of interaction with other individuals.  This is an experience that essence chooses to be exploring within this dimension, but also, as I have stated, creates this expression less often than any other type of orientation, for you ARE naturally expressing in the direction of interconnectedness.  All of consciousness is interconnected.

Now; as to the beliefs of monogamy and all of the terms that you place in conjunction with this concept — loyalty, devotion, commitment, love — these are aspects of your belief systems; not that love itself is the expression of an aspect of your belief systems, but in many of its expressions, it is.

Therefore, I express to you that you may hold the awareness that you move in a natural direction to seek out another individual or individuals that shall share your sojourn and your exploration in objective terms with you throughout your focus, and this be the natural leaning and inclination, to pair yourselves with another individual, but it is the expression of your belief systems that moves you into the constraints of that natural movement.

Now; within your expression, you move in this direction slightly more intensely in your attention for the reason of your recognition of differences within orientations.  Therefore, as you have magnated to each other in different orientation, it also magnifies certain elements of your reality that you shall turn your attention to in magnifying the differences between you.

Each of you hears what I am expressing to you now, within this present moment.  Each of you hears it differently.

Each of you holds an understanding of what I am expressing to you.  Each of your understandings are different.

In this, as we disengage our conversation, I express an experiment for you.  Do not move in the direction of competition and do not move in the direction of expressing discussion of what I have offered to you in information this day, in the direction of expressing to each other, “Elias has expressed this.”  But rather, listen to each other in offering each other your individual perceptions of what I have offered to you, and as you are listening to each other, allow yourselves the openness to be moving into it matters not.

I shall express to you also quite genuinely, at times objectively, you shall not understand each other.  Your perceptions are so very different that they shall not gel together, but it matters not, for it is quite acceptable that you hold these differences.  There is no conversion necessary, for one perception is not better than the other perception.  One perception is not right and the other wrong.  They are merely different, and the same may be accomplished with both.

One may plant a tree in a pot, and one may plant a tree in the ground.  Both trees shall grow.  You may tend to them differently.  Your experience may be different.  Your perception of the care of the tree may be different.  But the trees shall both grow.  It matters not.  Are you understanding?

JO:  Yes, thank you.  That was....

Vic’s note:  And here, we run out of tape at 2:55 PM.  I hate it when that happens!  It’s kind of like missing the end of a good movie.

© 1999  Vicki Pendley/Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved

---

Copyright 1999 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.