Session 559

Personality and Preferences


“Personality and Preferences”
“Weathering the Weather”
“How Now Brown Cow?”

Sunday, February 13, 2000
© 2000 (Private/Phone)
Participants:  Mary (Michael) and Margot (Giselle).
Elias arrives at 1:54 PM. (Arrival time is 20 seconds)

ELIAS:  Good morning!

MARGOT:  Good morning, Elias! (Elias chuckles)  We have snow!

ELIAS:  And this pleases you?

MARGOT:  Oh, yes!  Because we got so confused and conflicted here, and we messed so bad with everything, I guess, that we didn’t have any snow until yesterday.  And by that time, of course, we were very confused and conflicted because we didn’t have any snow, and that was on everybody’s mind.  So maybe we reversed it?  ‘Cause we’re supposed to get more snow.  Are we making any progress here? (Laughing)

ELIAS:  Ah!  This would be a question of your perception!  For view, within your community and yourselves, the expressions that you have moved into previously and the direction that you have created, in which you have expressed previously that you wish to be incorporating a difference within your weather patterns and not incorporating this chill, so to speak, or the presentment of this type of precipitation in the form of snow, for it is difficult to be objectively managing.

Therefore, you have chosen to move in the expression collectively of not creating this, and subsequently, you also are regretful, and longing for the very element that you have chosen not to be creating!

MARGOT:  Isn’t that strange!

ELIAS:  HA HA HA!  But look to this imagery, for you long for the familiar!  You express the desire to be altering your reality and moving into new expressions, manipulating energy in new manners, but as you DO create this new expression of energy, you also long for the familiar, and therefore, you re-create the familiar!

MARGOT:  That is interesting imagery!  Hmm! (Elias chuckles)  The first thing that I’d like to get into today is, I have a niece, and she and her husband would very much like to have me talk to you about some things.  First, they would like their essence names and families and alignments and orientations, so if we could start with that.  Her name is Cindy, if you could give me her information.

ELIAS:  Very well.  Essence name, Diana.

MARGOT:  Ooo!  Okay, I know how to spell that, I think.

ELIAS:  Essence family, Sumari; alignment in this focus, Zuli.

MARGOT:  Whoa!  That isn’t what I thought, but that’s fine.  Let’s go on!  Okay!

ELIAS:  Orientation, common.

MARGOT:  Okay, and her husband Kyle?

ELIAS:  Essence name, Peta; P-E-T-A.

MARGOT:  Okay, and his family?

ELIAS:  Essence family, Ilda; alignment, Sumari; orientation, common.

MARGOT:  Okay, thank you very much.  They’ve created an experience — it’s been at least five years ago now — that has given them both a lot of grief, and they don’t seem to be able to get out of it.  I think this has very much to do with the wave that we’re in, because they’re having to deal with all the aspects of that wave.  They are so miserable right now that they just feel like they’ve reached the end with the whole thing.  So, they would like to have you address that, if you would, and then their idea is that if they still have things they need to ask about, they will set up a session with you themselves. (Pause)  Okay?

ELIAS:  Very well.  I shall express to you, in this situation, it may be more beneficial to these individuals in this situation as they allow themselves to be interactive with myself objectively, that I may be addressing to them what you term to be directly, therefore in this action creating not merely an objective interaction, but also a subjective interaction in energy, which shall be facilitating more of an understanding objectively of the information that may be offered to them.

Also, let me express to you that in certain elements of this subject matter, there are considerations of sensitivities.


ELIAS:  And in this, it may be beneficial to be incorporating interaction in what you term to be privately with these individuals, as to not be intrusive and offering information through another individual which is concerning elements of sensitivity, which may be disturbing objectively to these individuals.  Are you understanding?

MARGOT:  Yes I am, and I agree one hundred percent.  That will be fine, and then you can expect to hear from them.

ELIAS:  You may offer my invitation for exchange.

MARGOT:  I will.  Thank you.  I think before we go any further, I would really like to have you tell me what my vibrational color tone is, or my vibrational quality.  I’ve been thinking about it; I come up with coral.

ELIAS:  Ah!  I express to you that I may be extending to you an acknowledgment and an encouragement to be continuing in your evaluation of self!

Margot’s note:  Note how I caught him off-guard....just imagine, he’s thinking, she came up with this piece of info ALL BY HERSELF!

ELIAS:  Now; express to me your identification of this color.

MARGOT:  Okay.  Coral to me is a kind of a peachy-red.  It’s a little deeper than orange.

ELIAS:  You are correct; more of an incorporation of pink.


ELIAS:  You are correct.

MARGOT:  So that’s it?

ELIAS:  Yes.

MARGOT:  Oh!  Thank you!

ELIAS:  Be remembering that the incorporation of pink overshadows the orange tones.  Therefore, this particular vibrational quality may be what you identify as a type of pinky-peach.

MARGOT:  Yes!  So if I had asked you this and you had told me what the color is, what the vibrational quality is, what name would you have given to it?

ELIAS:  I shall have expressed to you a rose coral.

MARGOT:  Okay, very good!  And my middle name is Rose, so I guess that’s what I had in mind.

ELIAS:  Ha ha ha ha!

MARGOT:  Okay.  Several of us have chatted recently about the fact that we all seem to have various reactions to the weather, and so I finally decided that since I was going to be talking to you soon, I would ask you about it.  I think that ... well, I don’t know what I think, actually, (Elias grins) ‘cause I can’t resolve this.

Anyway, first of all, Melinda says that her sensitivity to cold makes her hands and feet go numb.  She says, “I’d love to know what sensitivity to temperature represents.  I recently connected with a notion that if impaired circulation is at the root of this, then my issue is being a perfectionist and so gosh-darned hard on myself.” (Short pause)  Do you want me to talk to you about the rest of this, and then you’ll speak to all of us?

ELIAS:  Well, I may begin in addressing to this particular imagery with this particular individual, and I may express that in this type of interaction with what you identify as weather or temperatures, there is an offering of information in automatic responsiveness.

In this, an extreme in temperature is invoking an automatic response, and that automatic response draws attention to a withdrawing into self and a lack of circulation, so to speak, to outer extremities.

In this, as this individual feels threatened ... which you may also translate into extreme temperatures, for your identification of extreme temperatures moves in the identification that it IS threatening to you physically.

Therefore, as she associates the terminology and the physical action of the temperature and her physical body interaction with the temperature, there is a retreat of pulling energy inward and centralizing the individual energy and not projecting a volume of energy to outward extremities of the physical body, which is also a mirror action of other situations, in which in time frameworks she may feel a threatening situation, and the automatic response is to be pulling energy inward in a centralized fashion and not allowing the energy to flow freely outwardly in the relaxation of energy field, and this is the imagery which is presented in the physical body affectingness of numbness of hands.

Now; let me also express to you, Giselle, each individual interacts with elements of weather differently, for each of you is interactive with and responsive to your weather as you are creating it or participating in its creation ...

MARGOT:  Yes, that was my thought about this.

ELIAS:  ... and this is based upon your perception — how you perceive and assess the weather that you are participating within.

This also moves in conjunction with preference many times, in a manner of speaking.  You all hold certain preferences that you create within an individual focus as to which types of weather, so to speak, you wish to be continuously participating in, in its creation.

MARGOT:  I understand.  I think what you’ve just said applies a lot to what Deb said.  Deb says, “In bitter cold, I get big ugly welts on my exposed parts that look like mosquito bites.  They go away after I warm up again.” (Pause)  Is this a lot like what Melinda does?



ELIAS:  This is, as I have stated, a different type of creation which moves in conjunction with the individual response to what they are participating within, and preferences.

As I have stated, each individual shall be creating their individual responses in conjunction with their beliefs and their preferences, but each individual also is choosing to be participating in all of these weather creations.

Now; in this, some individuals — such as this individual of which you have just spoken — may be creating, willingly and within their preference, to be participating in certain types of weather patterns which incorporate cold or frigid temperatures, and there is an element of appreciation of those types of weather patterns, but to a point, within the expression of preference.

Beyond certain expressions of temperatures, it is not in alignment with the individual’s preference, and therefore there is an automatic response which is created in conjunction with that temperature.  But it is temporary and not extremely affecting physically, for there is also a knowing that in less extreme or what the individual perceives to be more of an expression of moderation, this type of weather is acceptable and is within the parameters of preference.

MARGOT:  I understand, and that’s very interesting.  Debbie lives in Florida and Melinda lives in Louisiana, and they have it quite warm down there most of the time.  That leads me into two in the group who have found themselves drawn to climates that they don’t really like.

Vivien doesn’t do well in Florida’s hot and damp climate, and says that when she’s uncomfortably warm, she can’t even think straight.  Linda, on the other hand, loves warm and damp, but has just moved to Michigan from Texas, which is very unfamiliar to her.  Is this a preference type of thing, and they’re in the type of a climate that they haven’t drawn themselves to?

ELIAS:  No.  Now, once again, these are individual creations and responses, and you may view the vast range of differences that occur within the creations of individuals, and also the affectingness of the belief systems that are held and implemented by each individual.

In this, these two individuals parallel in some expressions of their belief systems.  They participate in physical locations that exhibit particular weather patterns which are what you would term to be disagreeable to them each, but they have chosen to be participating in the mass creation of those weather patterns and place themselves in those physical locations in conjunction with their beliefs of relationships.

MARGOT:  I see!  Okay.  Now, for myself, mine isn’t very much like these others that I’ve told you about.  I also don’t like it hot at all because it’s hard for me to think, like Viv says.  But the thing that I want to ask you about is that all my life, I’ve had no more than a ten-degree comfort span with weather.  If it goes one way in either direction — if I get too cold or I get too hot — then I am compelled to do something immediately to change that so I can feel comfortable again, either by putting more clothes on, taking clothes off, turning on the heat, turning off the heat.  Howard, however, is just the opposite.  Temperatures have to be very extreme before he feels it.

ELIAS:  These also are individual expressions.  In this, you have created a partnership which complements each other in the situation that you present with yourself and Bosht.  For in this, YOU may hold a preference in the expression of temperature, but you also hold a preference in the participation of changing of seasons, to an extent; not within extreme, but you do hold a preference in aligning yourself with weather patterns that afford you the ability to be viewing and participating in different types of weather patterns which are identified within your focus as seasonal changes.

MARGOT:  Yes, that is very true!

ELIAS:  Now; in this, you hold an understanding, objectively and subjectively, that you may alter your objective participation to be accommodating of your preference.

You also participate in a relationship with an individual that does not incorporate much sense affectingness in relation to temperature and weather patterns.  This affords you — in conjunction with that individual, in relationship with that individual — the freedom to be incorporating the involvement or participation in creating the same weather patterns, but allows you the expression of adjusting your temperature to be suitable to YOUR objective preference, and this is not intrusive or bothersome to your partner.

MARGOT:  Oh yes!  Wow!  I thought perhaps you were going to say I was just a spoiled brat, but you didn’t!  I appreciate that!

ELIAS:  Ha ha ha ha!

MARGOT:  Okay, when it comes to this sort of thing, do we get our preferences — in the manner in which we’ve been speaking — from our selection of genetic coding, or where do we get our tastes in these areas?

ELIAS:  Preferences are elements that you incorporate in conjunction with personality.  In this, personality is not merely your outward expression of how you project yourself in interaction with other individuals.  Personality is an expression of self which holds many, many, many aspects, and there are many qualities of personality.

One of the categories, in a manner of speaking, of personality is the element of preference.  Preference moves in many different types of expressions — to elements of your reality that you may view in your assessment to be very small, and also incorporating elements of your reality that you assess to be very large.  It matters not.  You hold preferences in relationships, in body types, in colors, in sounds, in taste, in smells, in temperature, in weather ... in all areas of your reality and your focus, you incorporate preferences.

Now; these preferences are quite different in expression from orientation.  Do not confuse these two elements!

MARGOT:  Yes, I understand that.

ELIAS:  Preference is a construct of the individual personality.

Now; there are — as we have spoken previously and as is exhibited within your game — qualities of personalities which may be identified within your physical assessment as personality types, which are expressions, quite liberally and generally offered, that appear to be similar in many capacities.

Although be remembering, each personality expression is unique and individual, and in this, each expression which is offered outwardly is a creation of the individual’s reality, and this is created through the perception of the individual, which is also highly individual.

But there are certain elements, certain qualities of personalities, that may be generalized to be offering you an identification of a personality TYPE, and therefore, you recognize similarities in yourself and in conjunction with other individuals, and may group yourselves generally in certain types of expressions.

(Intently)  This, though, I may express to you, may be in certain manners what you may identify in your physical dimension as dangerous, for as you recognize these similarities and you generalize in these similarities of personality qualities or preferences, you also lean, within your belief systems, in the direction of confusing yourselves, and directing your definitions and your identifications in conjunction with elements that they are not, such as the expression of recognition that there are general personality types, so to speak, that may move in the direction of creating certain objective expressions in preference, and those are identified as the expressions of individuals’ orientations, and they are not.

MARGOT:  Right.  I understand that.  Thank you!  I’m very clear on a lot of things now about that, and about this whole subject that we’ve been talking about.

I’d like to move into visual imagery again.  I’ve gotten into this before, but this time I have six kinds of imagery that I see, and I would like to have you give me some feedback on it.

The first one is funny because I’ve been doing this for so long, but every day when I go to work, I pass by a bluff with pine trees, and on this bluff, in the pine trees there, every day for three years now or more, I have thought I have seen a cow, a brown cow. (Elias grins)  I know by now, of course, that it is only a big rock, but my first thought, when I see it out of the corner of my eye, when I see that rock, I think it’s a cow, and I laugh at myself constantly over this!

I think in a manuscript quite a while ago, you said that whatever you’ve seen, you’ve really seen.  But I can’t square that somehow with the fact that I keep doing this over and over again!

ELIAS:  Ah!  Now, Giselle, allow yourself the simplicity in recognizing that there are no absolutes.

MARGOT:  (Laughing)  Okay!

ELIAS:  Therefore, although you may perceive that you know that this object is a rock, and you may chuckle at yourself in the recognition that you perceive it momentarily to be a cow, in the moment, it IS a cow, and this is not contradictory.  For regardless of the perception of any other individual that may allow themselves to view this same rock within any moment, this is not discounting of your perception that within a moment, it is NOT a rock.  And I express to you, there are no absolutes!  Therefore, the rock is merely a rock for the time framework that you perceive it to be a rock.

MARGOT:  And it’s a cow for the time framework in which I perceive it to be a cow!

ELIAS:  Correct.

MARGOT:  Okay, I’ll have to think about that.  I guess I feel better! (Laughing)

ELIAS:  It is an expression of energy configuration.

Now; let me express to you, energy that is manipulated as consciousness within this physical dimension is in agreement to be manifesting physically, within matter and within form and solidity, in conjunction with your perception.  This is the agreement of consciousness in this particular physical dimension.

Therefore, in the inclusion of no absolutes but the expression of agreement that energy in consciousness shall configure itself in conjunction with your perception, as you collectively perceive the rock to be a rock, you shall create the rock, and the energy which is expressed in physical matter shall configure itself solidly, and form in matter the expression of a rock.

But as you individually view this same energy configuration or expression, you, within your perception momentarily, are identifying it as the cow, and the energy consciousness which is expressed shall configure itself in that manner in that moment.

MARGOT:  Okay, so let’s say that somebody else could be going on the same road, and they glance at the rock and think it’s a cow.  So they have indeed right then created a physical brown cow, just as I do.

ELIAS:  Yes, you are correct.

MARGOT:  Okay!

ELIAS:  And you may also be traveling with another individual, and within the same moment, you may view the cow and another individual may view another element which is entirely different.  And both of these configurations simultaneously shall exist, and they are both expressions of your individual perceptions, and they are both quite real!

MARGOT:  Thank you.  I think I understand more about energy now.  That was very, very helpful.

The next thing I want to ask you about, as it pertains to imagery, is a dream I had.  It was completely in reference to the Oversoul Seven story, and it was on two levels — the underlying one being the story, and then the version, let’s say, that I was seeing in the dream.  I hope I’ve described that so it’s understandable.

In the dream, you, Elias, were Seth.  Vic was Lydia.  I was trying to figure out who Howard and I were, and when I woke up, I could only recall that Howard’s name was Algernon.  I was very excited in this dream because I decided in the dream that this was a way that anybody reading the book could determine how their essence fit into that story, and then they would be provided with the pattern of their intent.  And I woke up and I was so excited, and then I thought about it, and I thought, what was that anyway?

ELIAS:  (Grinning)  I express to you that you have offered yourself quite an expressive element of imagery in this dream configuration, and you have allowed yourself an understanding of information.

What you have offered to yourself is an objective translation of subjective knowing.  You have translated certain elements within your subjective knowing into objective identification, with one exception — the exception of the identification of Bosht in the naming of Algernon.


ELIAS:  HA HA!  This is merely an aside identification which is symbolic of your playful assessment of this individual within this focus, and you attach this particular naming to this individual as an identification symbolically of your assessment that this individual simultaneously may hold the quality of exceptional intelligence and knowing and exceptional lack of intelligence and non-knowing.  HA HA HA!  (Elias really got a kick out of this!)

MARGOT:  (Cracking up)  He’ll be so pleased to hear that, Elias!

ELIAS:  Ha ha!  Is this not your assessment?  Ha ha ha ha!

MARGOT:  (Laughing)  While we’re talking about this, I’ll throw this in here.  Ever since I first read the stories, I have always aligned myself with Lydia.  Now I understand that Vic was the model, and she and I have talked about this, and we’ve laughed about the fact that we both really identify with this character in the story.  Is that just another sign or another attribute of the fact that Vic and I get along so well, and we seem to be so much alike?

ELIAS:  I shall express to you that although certain essences, in expressions of those particular energy personalities, were incorporated as models, so to speak, for the incorporation of this story, they also are not absolutes.

In this, be remembering that there is no separation, and in this lack of separation, although there may be an identification of personality energy within essences, all essences are interconnected.

And in this, as a translation into your physical dimension in a literary work, so to speak, which presents a story that you objectively, as individuals within your physical dimension, may understand and identify and recognize in translation, it is also that precisely — a translation — and therefore is not the actual singular identification of any one particular essence.

Therefore, I may express to you or to any individual that the model for the character of Lydia may be Lawrence.  I may express that the model for the character of Joseph may be Michael, but this is quite a generalization and is merely a translation of a type, not an absolute that may be translated into “this character is this individual.”

MARGOT:  Thank you.  I understand that.

ELIAS:  Therefore, many, many, many, many individuals may identify themselves in each character singularly and may express to themselves and to other individuals, “I view myself within this character within this story,” and they shall be correct.

MARGOT:  Okay.  I understand that.  Thank you.  I’m going to give you one more example of imagery, and then our time is going to be up, and then we’ll start my next session off with the rest of them.

When I was ten years old, I had to have an emergency appendectomy, and was rushed into the operating room quickly, and they put me to sleep.  When I went to sleep, I had a very strong sense of the fact that I was falling.  I was in some place with a very bright light, and I was falling, and I fell and fell and fell, and it came to me — even though I was ten and very young — it came to me that if I ever hit the bottom of the bright light tube that I seemed to be falling through, that I’d die.  Of course I woke up, and I wasn’t dead, but this has come to my mind so many times in my life that I’d like to ask you what that was.

ELIAS:  This is imagery that you have presented to yourself in an actual experience and action which moves quite in conjunction with your identification and assessment of aspects of belief systems.

First of all, I shall express to you that this action that you have experienced of falling is your creation, in movement and in action, of your identification of a lack of control — elements that appear to you objectively to be out of your control in an objective sense, so to speak — and in this, you continue the action of falling as you present yourself with the participation of actions physically that appear to be not of your choice, not of your creation, but thrust upon you and out of your control and out of your permission.

MARGOT:  That makes a lot of sense!

ELIAS:  The action of falling and reaching the destination of the bottom, so to speak, and the association of the end of the falling action and the collision, is the identification of ending.

This association of ending is what you translate into the identification of death.  Therefore, as you cease the action of falling — in conjunction with a lack of control, for you also view death to be an element which is not of your control — there is a very strong association with the element of death, as it is identified as an ending also.

MARGOT:  I understand.  Thank you very much!

ELIAS:  You are quite welcome.

MARGOT:  We will get back into these three other examples that I have the next time we talk, and that won’t be very long!

ELIAS:  Very well!  I shall be anticipating our interaction, and we shall continue in our investigation of your imagery.

MARGOT:  Thank you!

ELIAS:  I offer to you much encouragement, and you may express my greetings to your friends as you offer information to them concerning their participation in weather.

MARGOT:  Oh, thank you very much!  They will like that!

ELIAS:  (Chuckling)  I express to you this day, Giselle, great affection, and anticipate our continued fun!

MARGOT:  Thank you.

ELIAS:  To you in lovingness, au revoir.

MARGOT:  Au revoir.

Elias departs at 2:50 PM.


(1)  I could be wrong, but I think this is the first time Elias has ever started a sentence with “Well...”

© 2000  Vicki Pendley/Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved

Copyright 2000 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.