Monday, July 3, 2000
© 2001 (Private/Phone)
Participants:  Mary (Michael) and Joseph (Dainel).
Elias arrives at 9:57 AM. (Arrival time is 26 seconds)

ELIAS:  Good morning, Dainel.

JOSEPH:  Good morning, Elias!  I guess I don’t have to introduce myself! (Elias chuckles)  So, we’ll waltz right into it.

ELIAS:  Very well.

JOSEPH:  First, I have a comment to make about an analogy you often give.  Du hast einen Vogel!  Get it? (Elias chuckles)  I guess you do! (Laughing)

I wish to take care of a favor for a dear friend.  George wonders if you would help with confirmation on a name of a focus.  He knows the first name for sure.  It’s Marcus.  More than one person got various names for the rest of the name.  George got Marcus Antonius Aurelius Caifano.  Is this correct?  Vicki got another one ... but George got Marcus Antonius Aurelius Caifano.  Is this correct? (Pause)

ELIAS:  No.

JOSEPH:  Okay.  Now, Vicki got Marcus Polonius or Plubius.  Is either correct? (Pause)

ELIAS:  You may acknowledge affirmative in relation to Lawrence’s impression.

JOSEPH:  Polonius or Plubius?

ELIAS:  Polonius.

JOSEPH:  Polonius?

ELIAS:  Yes.

JOSEPH:  Okay, thank you.  Okay, George also wonders why an essence is referred to as he or she, when essence is not supposed to have a sex.  For example, you refer to Ron, who is Olivia, as she, and Seth called Jane, who is Ruburt, he.  Has this been explained in another session already, and could you give me an idea of which session you might have explained it in?

ELIAS:  This is merely an identification of a particular type of configuration of energy that you within this physical dimension identify in relation to genders, and as it is a familiar expression to you and is relative to your physical dimension — for you do create your physical reality in relation to the expressions of gender — it is merely an expression that may be offered as a translation of certain types of identifications associated with a particular type of expression of energy that you are familiar with.

JOSEPH:  Okay, thank you for that.  A dear friend of George’s has just disengaged, a dog named Emma.  George is aware that animals do not have beliefs to get rid of after this physical life, but he’s wondering where Emma is now, and what she is.  George has suggested that she might be a baby whale swimming alongside its mama in the ocean.  I answered George with the suggestion that this might be imagery, and before I go on with what I think about this, I’ll let you answer his question.  Where is Emma now?  What is she? (Pause)

ELIAS:  I shall express to you that this configuration of consciousness has not reconfigured into an actual manifestation at this present moment.  I may also express to you that you are correct in your expression of your impression that he is offering to himself imagery, which may be comforting within your physical expressions.

JOSEPH:  George is disturbed because he had to take the dog to the vet to have it put to sleep, and he mainly wants your confirmation that it was Emma’s choice to disengage.

ELIAS:  Yes.

JOSEPH:  Okay, I’ll tell him that.  Thank you.

One evening I was listening to NPR in the kitchen while I was making supper, and there was a program on this radio station about a famous personage, and this jarred information in regions of my consciousness that are usually blocked off, that the individual I was hearing about is another focus of mine.  This person did paintings and sculptures, and is one of those famous artists.  You mentioned that I had a focus as a sculptor and a painter.  How about one born March 6, 1475?  How about if we play guessing games with the readers of the transcripts, and not call the artist by name? (Elias starts laughing)  Do you know what I’m talking about?

ELIAS:  Yes. (Grinning)  In your attempt to not be drawing attention to the notoriety of the individual, but merely in the expression of confirmation or validation of your impression, which I am acknowledging of....

JOSEPH:  Oh, thank you.

Okay, you’re aware that it’s one of my big pleasures in life to have a horoscope of any individual I know.  The astrological chart offers a deeper insight into what I already know about a person.  The only way I can construct a chart on this famous focus of mine is for you to offer me the individual’s exact time of birth, and the location.  Would you be willing to? (Pause)

ELIAS:  I shall express to you first that you attempt to be offering yourself this information, and subsequently, if you view yourself to be in your terms unsuccessful, I shall be compliant.

JOSEPH:  Repeat that.  I didn’t hear the complete thing.  You said I should try to do this myself, and then if I what?

ELIAS:  If you deem yourself to be unsuccessful....

JOSEPH:  Oh, okay.  Now I get it.  Thank you.  Okay, thank you.

I wonder if the importance of fame that I carry through this present life of obscurity is something from my connection to this successful and highly renowned artist focus of mine, and connected with that is something that has bothered me for many years.  Although I like the type of work that I do, I’ve always hated the image.  It’s as though someone is looking down on me.  Now I wonder if that feeling/desire to continue the recognition in my focus is from this famous sculptor.

ELIAS:  No.  This is an association which is directly related to the beliefs that are held and influencing within this particular focus presently.

JOSEPH:  Okay.  If my memory serves me, this artist had an unusually strong enjoyment of the beauty of the male body.  I think I sense a parallel to my present focus.  Essence is expressing this enjoyment of male in another way, in my response to the personality of male.

ELIAS:  It is a quality that you share in expression, yes.

JOSEPH:  Okay, thank you.  I know I’m connected with this focus, this famous focus, but all the focuses I was aware of experienced lives of misery and great conflict.  We talked about it in a previous session.

Then I began to realize that my viewing of this focus of an artist who enjoys his life may have been that I started to gain and accrue self-acceptance.  Also, I’m now telling myself that I’m a wondrous, glorious being worthy of this, that, and everything else.  Is that correct, and perhaps I can now expect to contact more focuses that are living relatively happy, fulfilling lives?

ELIAS:  If you are so choosing, yes. (Grinning)

JOSEPH:  Okay.  The focus of the person we were just talking about was concurrent with the life of Martin Luther, and so the sculptor lived through the Reformation.  I wonder what this individual thought of that, and I wonder how he reacted to that.  More importantly, this focus of mine had many contacts with two factions, with both the side of the pope and the side of Luther.  In this focus, I grew up among Catholics and Protestants who often offended each other and sometimes engaged in rather bitter conflicts.  Now I realize that these persons from my childhood may well have been other focuses of those sixteenth century individuals who participated in the Reformation and conflict, and which that other focus of mine is in contact with.

ELIAS:  Yes, you are correct.

JOSEPH:  Okay, thank you.  Back to the Egyptian focus for a quick detail, did I stab and kill Richard with a sword while he sat in a chair? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Your impression is correct.

JOSEPH:  Now I’ll make another quick return to the Greek focus.  I think I know how my man died.  Did he fall down a rocky slope and break his neck? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Yes.

JOSEPH:  A bit of clarification on our previous conversation, and all I request is a quick yes or no.  Is Richard, from the Egyptian focus, and Curtis, the gang-banger I mentioned, are they focuses of the same essence?

ELIAS:  No.

JOSEPH:  Okay.  Are Lee, Mike, and Kevin focuses of one essence?

ELIAS:  No.

JOSEPH:  Are my brother and the black man I see within my mind’s eye focuses of the same essence? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Yes.

JOSEPH:  Okay.  Are some of those black men I see the ones I’ve been around in the nursing home who have Thomas in their names? (Pause)

ELIAS:  You have encountered one.

JOSEPH:  One.  Is that Robert Thomas, the man I see almost every weekend in one nursing home? (Pause)

ELIAS:  Yes.

JOSEPH:  Okay.  As I laid in my bed one night after I meditated on a man I want to visit me for sex, something came into my mind and stuck there.  What came into mind were two focuses in the slavery era, the American slavery era, a black man and woman.  They were separated and sold to separate owners, but the woman felt the pain more keenly than the man did.  At first I thought these focuses were the basis of the relationship I’m trying to form through my meditations.  The man I’m trying to draw to me is a heterosexual married man now, whose focus is that of the female slave.  This heterosexual American slave feels a bleed-through of her longing that’s becoming expressed towards me when the two of us meet, since I have a focus as a male slave.  And after that was in my mind for half a day, I began to wonder if these two focuses were the basis of the attachment that Curtis and I had for each other.  Maybe that explains why he continues to cling to me even though I reject him.  My question to you is, these two focuses that are coming into my mind, the male and female slaves, are they someone I’m trying to draw to me, or is that an explanation of my relationship with Curtis?

ELIAS:  What you are engaging in offering yourself this type of information is a validation of your shared experiences with other individuals.  You are also offering to yourself another validation in your interconnectedness with other individuals and experiences that you share, and you are allowing yourself to draw parallels between the experiences of different focuses.

This is not to say that one experience or many experiences within any focus is creating the experiences that you are engaging within this focus, or that they are the reason for your experiences within this focus.  You are merely offering yourself imagery and impressions which provide you with information, that you may view parallels of these types of experiences.

Many times, this type of action within certain individuals is beneficial, for within your physical dimension, you move in a manner of viewing reality outside of yourself, and in that action, as you allow yourself to view the experiences and choices and creations of other individuals, you offer to yourself a type of clarity in your assessment of those experiences and choices, and subsequently you may allow yourself to view your own choices and creations more clearly.

In this, as you draw parallels between your creations in this focus and what you view in the experiences of other focuses, you allow yourself to identify and clearly view the interactions that are occurring in other focuses that you participate within, in the same manner that you view other individuals outside of yourself and allow yourself a clarity in what they are creating.

This creates more of an ease as you turn your attention back to self, in allowing you more clarity as to what YOU are creating presently.

[It is] not that the other experiences in other focuses are dictating your experiences now, or that they are influencing you in a manner to be producing those same types of actions, but that you may offer yourself more clarity in what YOU engage and the choices that you create in THIS focus.

Are you understanding?

JOSEPH:  Barely.  It’s very difficult for me to comprehend.  I think I almost get it.  I think the only question that remains is ... do I actually have a focus as the black man that I envisioned?

ELIAS:  Yes.

JOSEPH:  And does Curtis have a focus as this woman?

ELIAS:  Yes.

JOSEPH:  Okay, so what you’re explaining to me is how these focuses interact or what the basis of my experience is.  Okay, I understand now.  I’m gonna have to think more about that.  Thank you.

ELIAS:  You are welcome.

JOSEPH:  Okay, is a conversation between you and Vivien.  She mentions connecting with focuses in nonphysical realms.  On page 8, she describes a monster with a head like a mushroom and tendrils hanging down, etc.  I see this creature so clearly that it caused me to think that I might have a focus in this dimension.  Do I?

ELIAS:  Yes.

JOSEPH:  Okay.  I’m batting close to a hundred here! (Elias chuckles)  Congratulations to me!

ELIAS:  Very well!

JOSEPH:  What you said to me in the last session, when I asked you about male, female, and other, completely confused me.  You explained gender at length ... well, you talked about gender at length, which didn’t seem to pertain.  I don’t have any confusion about gender or what you mean by that.  Then you brought in the orientations, which distracted me just as much.  After mulling all of this, I decided to stick with the opinions I formed about sex before I ever even heard of you, with some modifications from what you tell us.  So I’m gonna describe what I think, and you can comment to the extent you wish.

A male comes into this focus with the decision already made as to whether to experience sex with just females or with other males, and also with a pool of probabilities from which he can create his life.  A portion of males — I think it’s a small percentage — decides on sexual interest and activity with females only.  A smaller portion decides on sexual interest or activity with males only.  The rest of the males experience a varying interest in females and a varying interest in other males, from a little bit, to more and more, to the point where the interest or activity is directed to about half of each, males and females.  Thus there is a gradual shading, from a male being completely heterosexual, to one having slight homosexual tendencies, to being interested in both sexes, to having more and more interest in other males, to being completely interested in other males.  In other words, when the whole spectrum of humanity is taken into consideration, there is no boundary between a male’s interest in females and a male’s interest in other males.  Okay ... I just hope you won’t confuse me! (Laughing)  Go ahead and express yourself. (Elias chuckles)

ELIAS:  I may say to you once again, the identification of gender as a choice for manifestation is merely a choice of physical appearance and function.  As to the identification of sexual preference, this is the design of the individual, but is....

JOSEPH:  To what point?  The design of the individual to what point?

ELIAS:  That is an individual choice also.  It is not predetermined.

JOSEPH:  So it can be at any point in his life?  It’s a probability that he can choose at any point?

ELIAS:  Quite, for this is not associated with gender or with orientation.  It is an objective preference.  It is a choice which is created in relation to your physical manifestation in this particular dimension.  It is relative to this physical dimension and the design of this physical dimension.

At times, an essence may focus its attention into a particular manifestation, and from the onset of that manifestation, the individual may choose a particular preference and may continue that preference throughout the entirety of the focus.  Many times this is the design of this type of preferential choice, but it is not ALWAYS the design of the preferential choice.  It is not a rule.

But there are many times in which the individual is expressing this type of choice, which creates the appearance, within your physical viewing and understanding, that the choice has been created before manifestation, and that the individual is predestined to a particular expression, and that it is not a situation of choice OR preference.

But I shall express to you quite definitely, the expression of sexual interaction with any other individual is quite a choice of preference, which is an objective creation relative to this physical dimension.

JOSEPH:  When you talk about preference and objective choice, the reason I’m puzzled about all that is because there are millions — that I know of, and I know there’s numerous more essences that I’m not aware of — of men who do not choose to engage in homosexual activity, but they also feel a strong impulse to try to fight it.  That’s objective!  How can objective choice be in conflict with....

ELIAS:  That IS objective, and all of your conflict in ANY expression is objective.

JOSEPH:  I mean, it seems to come from another realm, the urge for homosexual experiences.  It doesn’t seem to be objective.  Their objective desires just stay within the framework of society, the heterosexual framework.

ELIAS:  Not necessarily.  This is an expression of your beliefs.

Every expression, every movement, every choice that you create of any type of manifestation — be it thought or feeling or emotion or physical action — within your physical reality is, within your waking state, an objective choice.  It is an element and an expression of your objective reality.

Even elements of your dream interaction are objective, for any expression that you hold in memory which may be associated with familiar objects or actions that relate, so to speak, to your physical waking reality may be expressed as objective.

JOSEPH:  Well, you know, I am not understanding this very well, but I don’t think it’s possible.  I think something has to evolve inside of me for me to gain comprehension; some movement has to take place.

I would like to go on to specifics.  There have been several men in my life that I’ve really been puzzled about because of the way they teeter-totter between interest in males and interest in females, and I wonder if you would express ... and also, these men cannot express themselves.  None of them can describe what they’re going through or what they’re feeling.  The only one who could tell me would be Elias.  The most important man in all of this is Louis, who has been visiting me for sex since 1982, and this has been a very beautiful experience.  When he first met me, he was starting to raise a family — he has two sons in high school now — and in the middle of that his wife divorced him, and he wanted to stay married to her.  I don’t understand how he feels about men and women.  Do you want to express anything?

ELIAS:  Let me express to you, Dainel, the difficulty that you are encountering in your thought process in association with this subject matter is an expression of your beliefs, which are quite strongly held, and this creates....

JOSEPH:  Which beliefs?

ELIAS:  Beliefs concerning expressions associated with sexuality.  In this, you focus your attention....

JOSEPH:  Do you mean my personal beliefs, or the beliefs I align with in society?

ELIAS:  Both.

JOSEPH:  Both, okay.  Okay, continue.

ELIAS:  You focus your attention quite intensely in a defined association with this particular subject matter, and in this, the expressions that fall outside of your defined association are objectively incomprehensible to you, in a manner of speaking.  They do not fit in the expression that you view to be acceptable.

Let me also express to you, these expressions, these definitions, are in actuality quite simple, and may be explained quite simply as being influenced by individuals’ beliefs and their alignment with mass belief systems.  You are creating this same type of action in a different manner.

Some individuals allow themselves to be strongly influenced by societal beliefs, and they themselves hold very strong beliefs in similar manner, and therefore, as within the expression of all individuals within your physical dimension, they allow these beliefs to be quite influencing of their perception, which also dictates their reality, and therefore, they create the type of reality through their perception that is strongly influenced by the beliefs that they align with.  You create this action also.

JOSEPH:  I’m barely understanding, but I want to ask a question to see if I understand part of it.  When you talk about mass beliefs, are you referring to the fact that they are living a heterosexual married life, and they align with mass beliefs in that way?

ELIAS:  Yes.

JOSEPH:  And their real preference/choice is a homosexual existence?

ELIAS:  It is not necessarily a situation of what you term to be the real choice or the unreal choice.

JOSEPH:  The unreal choice?

ELIAS:  I am expressing to you that in certain situations, individuals ARE expressing their reality in relation to what you are inquiring of.  It is not unreal that an individual be aligning with what you identify as mass belief systems, and creating a design within their focus to be expressing themselves in what YOU identify as heterosexuality, and also express certain wants or desires or attractions physically to be experiencing what YOU identify as homosexual activity.

It is not a question of either/or.  This is an influence of your beliefs, that you need be defined, within an individual focus and reality, as choosing one direction or another direction in association with your expression of sexuality.

What I am expressing to you is that these are objective choices of preference which are quite changeable, and may be expressed consistently throughout a particular focus in one direction, but it is not a rule.  Therefore, it is not an absolute, and there is the ability within all of you to alter your preference within any given time framework.  It is your choice.  This is an expression of your innate free will.

You are not locked into any expression concerning your preferences, in a manner of speaking, even within your choices of male and female or any of the expressions of the three orientations.  Genuinely, you are not locked into those experiences and choices either.  But in certain expressions of your reality, you have created such an intensity of strength of your beliefs that you do not alter certain choices, and you do not perceive them as BEING alterable.  You view them as absolutes.

You manifest as male within this physical focus, you yourself, and in this, it is objectively incomprehensible to you to engage the genuine realistic recognition that this is a choice of physical configuration and that you hold the ability, through your perception, to alter that configuration of energy of physical mass within any given moment.

I have expressed previously that the choice of orientation that you create within any particular manifestation in this dimension is a subjective choice.  Therefore, although it is possible theoretically to alter that choice, you do not alter that choice, for it is also possible for you to alter the choice of your physical gender, but you do not alter your physical gender, and essentially, it is quite understandable that you do not exert the expression in energy to be altering these types of choices, for you are experiencing many other focuses simultaneously which ARE expressing different choices.  Therefore, YOU are experiencing different choices.

What I am expressing to you, Dainel, is that you allow yourself to view the strength of your beliefs, and how they are greatly influencing of your perception within your physical focus.

You choose particular expressions in this focus that may be quite confusing or even incomprehensible to another individual, for they are not within their design of experience, and their beliefs move in different types of expressions, influencing their perception.  You are creating the same type of action in relation to your beliefs.

It is confusing or baffling to you objectively within your thought process to view the choices of some other individuals within their focus, for they are not in alignment with your beliefs, your perception, and your choices.  But this is not to say that they are inefficiently expressing themselves or their reality, or that they are even denying themselves within their experience.

For I shall express to you, all of you are creating your value fulfillment, and all of you are creating experiences that are beneficial to you.  They may not be objectively comfortable, and they may express conflict and confusion within you, but they ARE beneficial and you ARE choosing all of these experiences.

(Intently)  This, I may express to you, is the most difficult concept for all of you to be incorporating as reality, that you actually DO create — objectively — ALL of your reality, every moment, and that all of that reality IS chosen.  It is a CHOICE. (Pause)

JOSEPH:  I don’t know if the next question makes any sense in view of what you just told me ‘cause I only understood some of what you said, but I’m gonna ask this question anyway.  Can an extremely masculine man also be soft?  I mean, what I classify as an extremely masculine man, can he also be of soft orientation?

ELIAS:  Yes.

JOSEPH:  Okay....

ELIAS:  I may express to you, conversely, an individual, a man that you assess within your identifications physically as displaying extremely feminine qualities, may be holding the orientation of common or intermediate.

JOSEPH:  Okay, so anybody could be any orientation is what you’re saying, right?

ELIAS:  Yes, and this is not the determining factor in relation to sexual preference.  Preference is an entirely different expression, and this is objectively chosen.

JOSEPH:  That part I understand.  The part that’s more confusing is what you call choice, because it doesn’t seem like choice.  I guess it’s because of beliefs, which I can’t really come anywhere near understanding.

On the subject of soft, in the course of reading the transcripts, I’ve come across descriptions of the soft orientation, and for the most part, I fit into what is described about soft.  But one thing that you mentioned doesn’t seem to pertain to me, and it’s that the people who are soft are in continuous interaction with others.  You also said that individuals who are soft and solitary are in conflict.

ELIAS:  I am quite understanding of your confusion in this aspect of the offering of information.  I am understanding of many individuals’ confusion concerning that particular aspect of the information which has been offered.

For objectively — as you experience within your own focus, and other individuals holding the orientation of soft also experience within their focuses, and within the viewing of other individuals in relation to this orientation of soft — it appears surfacely that these individuals holding this orientation of soft create a propensity for isolation more so than do individuals within the other two expressions of orientations.  Therefore, surfacely this appears to be contradictory.

I shall express to you, as I offer information of continuous interaction, I am not expressing this information in the definition that you identify as interaction, for your automatic association with this offering of information is limited, and is defined in actual, objective, expressive, individual interaction between yourself and other individuals.

Now; many times you associate this in the expression of relationships in intimacy or partnerships.  Let me express to you, as an individual holding the orientation of soft, if you are allowing yourself to view your focus in its entirety, from the onset of your focus to this point within your linear time framework, you may allow yourself to view that in some capacity, you are always engaging interaction, and in the time frameworks that you engage no interaction with other individuals, you shall allow yourself to view your own expression of discomfort.  It matters not....

JOSEPH:  You know, Elias, lots of times I’m in more discomfort WITH people than when I’m alone.

ELIAS:  I am understanding.

JOSEPH:  So I don’t quite understand what you’re saying.

ELIAS:  And this also is an expression that is experienced within individuals that are of this orientation of soft.  They also....

JOSEPH:  I understand the reactions to others is part of being soft.  That’s clear to me.  It’s the part about being alone that puzzles me.

ELIAS:  But are you genuinely what you term to be alone?

JOSEPH:  The thing that I miss in my life is having sex and having a partner, and that’s only for a short amount of time, and most of the time I’m affected by it when I’m alone and I feel good, and I don’t have that because I can’t seem to produce it.  That’s my single biggest problem.

ELIAS:  I am understanding of the direction in which you have channeled your energy and your objective expression.  You express to myself and to yourself and to other individuals that your want is to be interactive with other individuals in the engagement of sexual activity, but that you prize your time framework in which you are experiencing your aloneness, so to speak.

What I am expressing to you is the suggestion that you view the reality of what you are creating, and also your natural movement.

First of all, even within your time framework that you experience in aloneness, you are not in actuality alone.

JOSEPH:  I don’t understand that!

ELIAS:  Look to your activity.  You engage what you....

JOSEPH:  Well, at work I’m around people, but I’m not interacting.  Other people are interacting much more than I am ‘cause they’re all common.  Then at home, there’s actually no one here.

ELIAS:  Let us view your activity within your home, and your direction of attention, and what you may physically term as your preoccupation of your time framework in your aloneness.

JOSEPH:  But does that mean that I’m practicing for other people, to play for other people?  Is that constantly being with someone?

ELIAS:  You engage much activity in investigation of other focuses of your essence ... and of other focuses of OTHER essences!

JOSEPH:  Good god! (Laughing)  I’m not aware of doing that.  I mean, a little bit, maybe.

ELIAS:  This is not alone!

JOSEPH:  Well, I repeat, I’m not aware of doing a lot of that.  Maybe a little bit....

ELIAS:  I shall express to you that within your particular focus....

JOSEPH:  Are you saying that people that are common and intermediate aren’t really interacting that much?  They aren’t really having those fantasies, or they’re having different types of fantasies than I am?  Is that what you’re saying?

ELIAS:  I am not expressing fantasy to you....

JOSEPH:  Well, I’m calling ... it’s not quite fantasy.  It’s what you call investigating other focuses, just to translate that.

ELIAS:  (Chuckling)  Which, within your definition, creates the expression of a lack of reality.

In this, what I am expressing to you, Dainel, is that you experience certain aspects of discomfort and a lack of ease and pleasure within your focus, which creates some elements of confusion and some elements of conflict, which we have discussed and which you express within yourself many times, and the reason that you engage these types of expressions of confusion and conflict in association with certain manifestations is that you ARE moving, in some expressions, contrary to the natural flow of your individual orientation.

This is not to say that the identification of continuous interaction must be expressed in constant engagement of other individuals.  You are associating a continuous engagement of other individuals in a definition of continuous interaction, and they are not quite the same.  You may be interactive with other individuals continuously, and you may not be experiencing certain elements of conflict in certain expressions, and this is not to say that you need be engaging other individuals continuously.  Your energy shall be interactive regardless of your engagement with other individuals ... and you hold an awareness of this objectively already!

You are aware, within your workplace, within other situations, that you are engaging other individuals’ energies, regardless of your objective physical engagement of these individuals.  You are aware of your interaction with other individuals’ energies. (Pause)  You may define this action within your thought process differently than I am expressing it to you, but you do hold an awareness of the interaction that is occurring, regardless of physical proximity and regardless of physical engagement. (Pause)

JOSEPH:  Well, Elias, the time has gone way over, and I’m gonna have to wind it up real fast here, so I won’t ask any more questions.

I just want to thank you for all your input, all your helpfulness, whatever — information.

ELIAS:  You are welcome, Dainel.  Allow yourself a time framework of assimilation.

JOSEPH:  There’s some very difficult things to comprehend, extremely.

ELIAS:  I am understanding.  I am also understanding that belief systems are expressed quite strongly.

And this be the reason that I continue to be interactive with all of you, for this is the expression of difficulty in movement within this shift in consciousness.  Your movement into acceptance is quite unfamiliar.  It is very familiar to be in alignment and expressive of these belief systems, and I continue to be expressing my energy in encouragement to you, and you ARE offering yourself much information.

I may also express to you, allow yourself a relaxation in your movement.  You are assimilating much information quickly, and in that action, you may also be creating some elements of confusion merely in the action of swift movement.

JOSEPH:  I can understand that concept.  Can I ask a real quick yes-or-no question?  Don’t go into discussion; just say yes or no.  Is all the practicing on the piano that I do continuously contrary to my intent in any way, or is it contrary to my orientation of soft?

ELIAS:  No.

JOSEPH:  Okay, thank you.

ELIAS:  (Chuckling)  You are very welcome, my friend.  I shall continue to be offering energy to you....

JOSEPH:  Offer energy to these men so they’ll have more interest in me! (Laughing)

ELIAS:  HA HA HA HA!

JOSEPH:  Offer energy to my attractiveness or something! (Laughing)

ELIAS:  Ah!  And I shall leave this design to you!  Ha ha ha ha!

JOSEPH:  That’s not very helpful! (Laughing)

ELIAS:  Ha ha ha ha ha!  I shall offer energy to you in encouragement to be accepting of you, and THAT shall be helpful to your creation of your attraction! (Laughing)

To you in great affection, and anticipation of our continuation of fun.... (Laughing)

JOSEPH:  Much gratitude!

ELIAS:  I express to you, my friend, au revoir.

JOSEPH:  Good-bye.

Elias departs at 11:04 AM.

FOOTNOTES:

(1)  When I heard “Du hast einen Vogel” on the tape, I was clueless as to what Joseph was saying, so I asked him.  He told me the words and then said, “That’s German and means, ‘You’re crazy!’  Literally, it translates into, ‘You have a bird.’  It’s obviously in reference to all Elias’ cages of birds or beliefs, which drive me crazy!”

(2)  This was funny because I didn’t remember having this impression.  I searched my email filing cabinet at length, trying to find where I had sent George these names, but nothing was there.  I finally asked him about it, and he said Vivien had this impression, not me.

© 2001  Vicki Pendley/Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved

---

Copyright 2000 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.