Monday, May 21, 2001 (Private/Phone)
Participants: Mary (Michael), Ben (Albert), and Mike (Mikah)
Elias arrives at 7:09 PM. (Arrival time is 30 seconds.)

ELIAS: Good evening!

BOTH: Good evening!

ELIAS: (Laughs) And what shall we be discussing this evening?

BEN: Well, I don't know where it's going to end up, but I know where I want to start! (Mike laughs)

ELIAS: Very well. Proceed!

BEN: I wanted to start out talking about the relationship that I have with Mikah here. I can only compare it to my relationship with Colleen in the sense that I feel really connected to him, but it extends in a different sort of direction because we seem to have very similar preferences and tastes. It's kind of on a different level or whatever. I know we have 14 focuses together, and we've been discussing impressions and things like that, and so I wanted to start out with that line of questioning.

ELIAS: Very well. What is the nature of your question?

BEN: What's going on? Is it just the fact that we've got these 14 focuses going on?

ELIAS: I may express to you that you are allowing yourselves to be noticing the interconnectedness that you hold and the familiarity that you hold together.

It is quite amusing that individuals within physical focus move in this direction of amazement that they experience and recognize this familiarity and interconnectedness with each other, and expect that they should not; and as you encounter another individual that you are familiar with and you hold a familiarity with their energy, you surprise yourselves and question that interaction.

In this, that you do hold this numbering of focuses together also expresses that you merge and interrelate within essence often, and therefore there is a familiarity in energy and an ease in what you create in relationship within a particular physical focus, and this is expressed quite commonly within your physical dimension.

BEN: If I tell you some of the impressions that we've come up with, can you color in the blanks with names or dates or validations?

ELIAS: Perhaps ... proceed! (Elias grins, and Ben and Mike laugh)

BEN: Aw, c'mon!

ELIAS: Ha ha ha ha! Proceed.

BEN: One of mine is the feeling that at some point, Mikah was my father. (Pause)

ELIAS: And your impression, Mikah?

MIKE: Oh, definitely! (Laughs) I see it as both ways, though. I think that there's a focus where I'm the father, and I think there's another focus where he's the father.

ELIAS: I may express to you that you are both correct.

Now; as to your request - filling the blanks, so to speak - in relationship of father [and] son, in which you, Albert, are the father, I shall identify a time framework [of] 1570, physical location, Scotland. I may also offer to you identification of reverse - Mikah being the father, Albert being the child - time framework 1112, physical location, that which you identify now as Prague. I may also express to you in this capacity of relationship, future focus, time framework 2255, physical location, that which you now identify as Greece.

BEN: And that's with Mikah being the father again?

ELIAS: Yes.

MIKE: I have one. Is there one around fifth century AD, Japan?

ELIAS: Not in this particular expression of relationship, but yes.

MIKE: As a teacher/student relationship? (Pause)

ELIAS: Yes.

MIKE: Would it be involved with possibly something like the martial arts or some other kind of formal training in similar capacity?

ELIAS: I may express to you, Mikah, that in this particular culture and time framework, what you identify presently as martial arts and philosophy and culture are all intertwined. Therefore, yes, you are correct, but not in the capacity that you identify with presently, for you separate these expressions presently.

BEN: One of my impressions was that we were soldiers together.

ELIAS: And offer further identification.

BEN: My guess was like World War I, but I think Mikah came up with the concept of the Franco-Prussian War. (Pause)

ELIAS: This is correct, in relationship to King Frederick.

MIKE: So you're saying for Prussia, but do you mean one of us had a relationship with King Frederick?

ELIAS: No. I am merely identifying a time framework and in relationship to that political association.

MIKE: Now, in relation to my focus as Stefan, is Ben either - and I'm going to massacre this name because I don't know how to pronounce it - but he's Hofmannsthal? Or Maximin? (Pause)

ELIAS: Maximin.

BEN: Really!

MIKE: Interesting!

BEN: I don't know what you guys are talking about! (Mike laughs)

MIKE: Another one is a focus as brothers in early 1600s France? (Pause)

ELIAS: Correct - southern region.

MIKE: Were we twins?

ELIAS: No; closely associated within what you identify as age.

MIKE: I have one more. Possibly, are we students in the early beginnings of Harvard University, I think in the 1700s? (23-second pause)

ELIAS: Identification of time framework incorrect - early 1800s.

MIKE: Were we students of art, art history students?

ELIAS: Yes, although I may also express to you that Albert engaged interest in philosophy which overshadowed the interest in artistic expression.

BEN: One of my impressions is, I still have this idea that Mikah's always dying on me, or that I'm always saying good-bye to him. In fact, with the soldiers issue, I felt that maybe he died in battle and I didn't, or maybe I died later. That's another thing that seems to be cropping up. I don't know if that's a frequent event.

ELIAS: I may express to you, not necessarily disengagement, but...

BEN: Separation.

ELIAS: Yes, you are correct in the aspect of separation.

MIKE: The only other impression I had was something relating to Columbia University, a connection as far as focuses.

ELIAS: No. This is associated with this focus presently.

BEN: And Michael/Mary is involved with it, too, I presume.

ELIAS: Yes.

BEN: And Jean-Louis Pascal? (Pause)

ELIAS: Yes.

BEN: That's an easy one! (Laughter) I'd love it if we could have ... it doesn't have to be for all of these, but I'd really like to have names for one of these. I'm really into names, so if we could pick one of these and you could give me names, too, that would be great.

ELIAS: (Chuckling) Ah! But you are not incorporating your homework!

BEN: Oh, okay! (Mike laughs)

ELIAS: You have offered yourselves impressions; therefore, validate yourselves and continue.

BEN: All right!

MIKE: I have a question as far as that. I have a couple of names, but could you tell us which one of the focuses that we came up with that they relate to?

ELIAS: Offer your impressions.

MIKE: One is where Ben's name is Paul and my name is Mike. (17-second pause)

ELIAS: Scotland.

BEN: So did Lynda/Ruther know me in that time framework, too? She called me Paul by accident in Castaic, and it upset her; I don't know why.

ELIAS: Yes.

BEN: What was your relationship to me or us?

ELIAS: That which you may identify as friendship.

BEN: Here's another question. Since I have this Roger-Marx focus and he's got the Jean Monet focus, was there some interaction between us? You know, was my son the same age that he was, or did we know one another at that point or later, or...? (Pause)

ELIAS: You have met, and have encountered brief interaction.

MIKE: I have a question not related to Ben's and my relationship. I don't exactly have a number in mind as an impression, but I have a feeling it's a lot. How many focuses out of my 731 do I have in the capacity of a warrior of some type? (Pause)

ELIAS: One moment. (25-second pause) Four hundred eighty-six.

MIKE: Interesting! Okay, 486. All right.

BEN: So with all this discussion of people coming up with World War II focuses, the only name that came up to me as a possibility, based on the impression of what my involvement in that situation was, was Leni Riefenstahl or perhaps some other artist during the time, or perhaps as one of the other forum members' wives.

ELIAS: I may express to you that you may be allowing yourself your communication through impressions. You are correct in your association of an artistic expression, but not with this particular individual.

BEN: Is this a focus of Tyne's essence, Leni? (Pause)

ELIAS: Yes, you are correct.

BEN: I don't get to be Arno Breker, do I?

ELIAS: (Laughs) And this is your object of affection - no! (Mike laughs)

BEN: Well, it was worth a try!

MIKE: Speaking of the Nazi period, I was wondering what my relationship to this Anne Frank story is. It's been a fascination of mine for a long time, and I was wondering if possibly I have a focus as maybe the father or one of the inhabitants of the annex that they lived in.

ELIAS: I may express to you, no, you do not hold a physical relationship with this individual, but you do incorporate a focus which experiences similar actions and associations, and this is the reason that you create this objective association with this particular individual.

Many times, I may express to you both, you create associations objectively in relation to the similarities of your experiences and creations that you incorporate within different physical focuses. This is not to say that you may necessarily be identified as a particular individual, but that there are many individuals that incorporate similar experiences; and as one is singularly focused upon, it is, in a manner of speaking, emphasizing those experiences, and as you have incorporated similar experiences, you recognize the familiarity, but your automatic response is to associate yourself as involved with that individual or that you may be that individual. Are you understanding?

BOTH: Yes.

BEN: Along those same lines then, do I have some kind of connection with Yves Tanguy, the painter Yves Tanguy?

ELIAS: Yes.

BEN: Because my impression would be that I was in love with him.

ELIAS: And I may express to you that your impression is correct.

Now; I may express to you that you have not in actuality in that focus engaged a physical interaction with that individual, but that you also hold a focus in that time framework and that focus expresses an admiration of this individual and holds an attraction to that individual physically, emotionally, and artistically.

BEN: So, like a fan or groupie. (Mike laughs)

ELIAS: No.

BEN: Beyond that, somebody I ... so they never met, but yet just admired him?

ELIAS: Beyond admiration. The individual within this particular focus creates an attraction to that individual which is expressed in what you may identify as beyond an admiration, in your definition of admiration, and creates, in your physical terms, a fantasy concerning this individual and a longing for an interaction with this individual, but in actuality is not creating an actual physical interaction with this individual.

Now; in that focus, you also emulate that individual in your expression of artistic creation.

BEN: So I knew him personally?

ELIAS: No. You know of him.

BEN: Ah. Okay!

MIKE: All right, I have, I think, just two more focus questions. One, was I involved with killing King Tut? (Pause)

ELIAS: No.

MIKE: By asking this, I feel like this may be intruding on whoever it is who was Hemingway, but at the same time I don't. It feels right on a certain level, only because of my reactions to two books that he wrote, A Farewell to Arms and The Old Man and the Sea. My reactions to those books before I read this piece of information was sort of like a repel, like the books were nothing, and after that I read this researcher who believes, and supposedly has some kind of evidence, that my focus of Pauline Pfeiffer actually was the ghostwriter for both those books and that Hemingway had only a small amount of input, if any, into either one of those books. That to me seemed more right than the fact that Hemingway wrote it all himself. I was wondering if I am correct with that.

ELIAS: I may express to you, Mikah, that the actual writing of the books was performed by this individual that you identify as Hemingway. I may also express to you that the inspiration or the ideas of the stories were not created by he himself individually. Therefore, I may validate your impression in expressing to you that this other individual was in actuality the inspiration of these stories, but did not actually incorporate the writing of them.

BEN: I'll go back to my Oscar suspect list; I have two more impressions. One was that Aubrey Beardsley was a focus of Opan, and that James Whistler was a focus of Yarr's.

ELIAS: Second impression correct.

BEN: Thank you!

MIKE: I have a question not related to focuses - so Mary will be pleased - and it has to do with real life! I wanted to know what is it that I am creating as far as travel right now, or whatever it is I'm creating to be doing with myself. My own objective wants and whatsuch haven't really been present. I'm not really quite sure what it is I want, but yet there's an underlying push and a desire to be doing something, but I don't know what it is. At the same time, when I have tried to objectively apply an action to buy a ticket to go to one of the two places that I really don't want to be going, like California or back to my grandfather's - and I have to be somewhere by next week - my computer freezes up or something happens to where I can't buy the tickets. So I was wondering, what is it that I'm creating?

ELIAS: Now; express to myself, Mikah, what is your impression, for you are quite familiar at this point with impressions AND also with what you create.

MIKE: My initial impression at the beginning of the month, before I started having conflict, was that I was going to be doing something possibly overseas or doing some kind of traveling. I really want to travel, and that's what I felt I was going to be doing, but objectively events were happening that I allowed to not validate my impression. Then I started to doubt my objective wants, as far as that goes. But that's as far as I know, that I'm going to be doing some kind of traveling, and that's about all I've come to recognize or notice.

ELIAS: And this is the beginning, in which you allow yourself to recognize your objective want in relation to travel and your objective creation in relation to travel.

Now; you block your ability to be creating accommodations for travel in relation to the familiar and the safe, in a manner of speaking, locations, for this is not in actual alignment with what you want; but you doubt your ability to be creating what you want. Therefore, you create the automatic association with the familiar in relation to these two physical locations, but this is not in actuality what you want to be creating.

You want to be creating travel, but not to these physical locations; but you view yourself within your abilities to hold the options or the choices only in relation to these two physical locations. This is your communication to yourself in relation to your wants, attempting to offer the identification to you that you in actuality may be creating the expression of your want, regardless of how it may appear to you to be impossible.

MIKE: This sounds kind of silly, but what do I do? I mean, we had this talk a couple of years ago where you told me that I tended to do the effortlessness thing "as sitting upon my pillow, waiting for things to fall from the sky," when it's necessary to apply some kind of action. I'm a bit confused as to how I am supposed to apply action if I don't know what direction, if all I have is this broad want to be traveling, but yet I don't know where to go or what to do to be applying some kind of an action to be getting that want.

ELIAS: Very well! In this, you may begin in identifying the nature of what you want in relation to travel. What physical location do you wish to be traveling to, rather than the physical locations that you identify that you do NOT wish to be traveling to? And as you identify that, you allow yourself to express a trust within yourself that you do hold the ability to generate that creation. Once you have allowed yourself to recognize that you hold the ability to generate that and discontinue your doubt in relation to your ability, you shall also create or draw to yourself or generate from within yourself the means to actually implement that action.

As you move in associations with your reality in generalities, you do not create the expression of specifically generating the manifestation of what you want, for you have not identified what it is that you want. But once you direct your attention into specific identifications of what you want and turn your attention in that direction and discontinue your doubt of your ability to be creating that specific expression, and allow yourself to relax and allow for the manifestation, you set into motion the creation of it.

As you continue to concern yourself with what you term as the particulars of physical aspects such as "how shall I generate the financial creation to be allowing myself to enact this direction," or "how shall I accomplish the physical incorporation of action of moving myself to this particular specific physical location," what you are expressing to yourself is doubt of your ability.

In the moment that you move into the expression of knowing and identifying within yourself that you may be creating a particular movement to a particular physical location in relation to your travel and that you shall create this for this is the object of your want, you discontinue the doubt of your ability, and therefore you allow yourself free flow of movement to accomplish creating what you want.

Now; I may express to you, if you are continuing in confusion and are requiring of a physical example of this type of movement and expression, I may offer to you the suggestion that you engage conversation and interaction with Michael in relation to his creation of his travel to France, in the incorporation of accomplishment of that which appears to be impossible and has materialized.

BEN: Can I take this in a different direction?

ELIAS: You may.

BEN: What about the search for an intimate partner? I just got off the phone talking to Michael, who was talking to Shynla, and I was teasing Mikah and we were having this whole conversation. So, when you are not talking about just going to a physical location, but you're talking about an ideal intimate partner, do you do the same thing? Do you sit there and go through all the particulars, and say this is exactly the kind of person that I want, and then just put your blinders up to everything else?

ELIAS: No, and I am not expressing this in relation to Mikah's movement, either. I am not expressing to you or to Mikah that you may be creating a narrowness of vision, but merely identifying in specific what you want.

In the expression of travel, Mikah is expressing a generality of what he wants in the identification that he wishes to be traveling, but he is not offering the specific identification of that want. In relation to travel, this may be translated into a physical location, and the physical location may be recognized by paying attention to self and listening to your individual draw. What do you want? What are you directing your attention to, not in the expression of the generality "I want or wish to be traveling," but recognizing the motivation of that want. "I want to be traveling, for there is a motivation which is being expressed within myself," and the nature of that motivation is what?

Now; in the relation to what you identify as relationships in intimacy, in a manner of speaking the process is the same. You express to yourself, "I want a relationship in intimacy with another individual." What is the motivation? What are you seeking? Create an allowance within yourself to specifically identify the nature of your want and the motivation which concerns it. For as you continue to view these movements and these associations within yourselves, you allow yourselves to become objectively more aware of your motivations in these expressions.

Many times, I may express to you, individuals offer generalities in association with wants which are objective imagery concerning what they are addressing to within self, and as I have stated many times, objective imagery is quite changeable. Therefore, this is not what holds significance. What holds significance is what you are creating inwardly and the associations that you hold with those creations, and therefore projecting outwardly the manifestation of objective imagery in relation to what you want.

What is expressed within your physical reality is not necessarily what it appears to be. You may express to yourself, "I want to be creating an intimate relationship with another individual." This is your presentment of objective imagery, and it may not necessarily be in actuality what it appears to be within the expression of the imagery, for the nature of your genuine want may not necessarily be to be incorporating an intimate relationship with another individual. This is merely the imagery that you present to yourself in your translation, and as you allow yourself to investigate the nature of your motivation and your own beliefs and your own association with self, you may be offering yourself quite a different expression in identifying the actual nature of your want.

*You may be expressing to yourself, "I want to be traveling." This is quite general, in the nature of the statement. You may allow yourself to quickly identify objectively where you do NOT wish to be traveling to, but you may be much more challenged in identifying where you DO wish to be traveling to, and the travel may be expressed in an actual physical location in association with your movement, your desires, and what you are addressing to and investigating and exploring within the moment, or it may not necessarily be associated with actual physical travel. It may associated with movement within yourself, and this is the reason that there is great significance incorporated in paying attention to self and listening to self to allow yourself the ability objectively to identify your own individual communication.

Now; in this situation with you, Mikah, in relation to travel, you are in actuality creating a motivation in association with actual, physical travel, not in relation to the two physical locations that you have identified. And this is your opportunity to turn your attention to self, to explore and to listen to yourself in relation to the physical location that you do wish to be traveling to and for what reason, not concerning yourself with how you shall accomplish that but trusting that you are expressing the desire in relation to your motivation and that you do hold the ability. Key point: you do hold the ability to create that, regardless of how impossible it may seem. This be the reason that I have expressed to you, if you are so choosing you may be incorporating discussion with Michael, for Michael created a very similar experience, similar motivation and similar circumstances.

MIKE: I understand. This has made perfect sense, and this has brought a lot more clarity to what's been going through my head. But I know that as soon as I sit in front of my computer tomorrow, once I figure out where it is I want to go, I'm going to go find my nice big plush pillow to sit on and wait for it to fall out of the sky!

This is difficult for me, because when I tried to use my experience of coming here to New York, to Columbia, I had objects to be manipulating in some form, writing an essay or reforming an essay, putting myself into travel plans into coming to New York, where do I want to stay, why do I want to do this, why do I want to do that? Once I figure out where it is I want to go and a possible reason - say I want to go to Amsterdam just to go sit by a lake - do I just acknowledge that, I can do this, and that's it?

ELIAS: You express to yourself that want, you allow yourself an identification of the motivation concerned with that want, you allow yourself the recognition of your direction in relation to that want, and you acknowledge to yourself that you hold the ability to create it and therefore you shall create it, and you do not concern yourself with the mechanics of how it may be created. For in trusting your ability, you allow yourself an openness to be creating any avenue that you may be incorporating and accepting any avenue that you present to yourself to accomplish that creation.

BEN: See, one thing for me is this whole thing of Michael going to Paris. I know that I was involved in it. In fact, it's like I kind of put the idea in her head somehow, that she could go there or that she should go there or whatever, and she seemed so surprised when she actually did it. What's the nature of influence, if that's possible, in this particular circumstance?

ELIAS: Very well. You draw yourselves to each other, and you allow yourselves to present information to each other within specific timing points.

In this, you are correct. You offered the suggestion to Michael, and in that suggestion, you incorporate no doubt in your expression that this is an accomplishable action, which was recognized by Michael - although was questioned within himself - but was received [from] you. And therefore the idea, so to speak, began to be entertained, and this created an openness in relation to the desire. Michael incorporated a tremendous desire, and although there continued to be the incorporation of doubt of his own ability to generate that action singularly within himself, as you offered the expression and the projection of energy of the possibility, that influenced within Michael an openness to other avenues of accomplishing this action than merely the singular creation of it in physical terms within his own expression.

Now; mind this information that I am expressing to you presently - it was his creation. But within the thought process and associations of Michael objectively, he created a difference of expression between what he shall create individually physically and that which may be allowed to be created in cooperation with any other avenue that may be presented to him in his association. In actuality, he did create all of that reality; but I am also aware of your associations within physical focus, and your translations of those associations.

But in your expression to Michael, this was received and therefore influencing in his allowance to create an openness to other avenues and expressions in how he may be creating his reality, which in that scenario and within the construct of his beliefs, he incorporated an involvement with another individual. But the outcome is the same - the creation is his.

MIKE: Can I ask three more focus questions? (Ben laughs)

ELIAS: You may, as you incorporate these, in your terms, quickly!
(Laughter)

MIKE: Well, fine! One is with the sculpture that Michelangelo did of my focus. I was wondering if the actual sculpture itself, the portrayal of it, is not of a Cardinal but rather of one of the slaves on one of the Medici tombs? (Pause)

ELIAS: Ah, I am quite acknowledging of you, Mikah! (Ben laughs) You are correct, and in this, I am acknowledging of your listening to your impressions.

MIKE: Would it be the "Awakening Slave"?

ELIAS: Yes.

MIKE: (Laughs) Okay! The other one is Raphael. His portrait of a Cardinal, is that my focus? (Pause)

ELIAS: Raphael - you are correct.

MIKE: I have a feeling that if I don't have a direct connection with Henri Matisse himself as that focus, I have an impression that I may know him now in this focus, one of those either/or things. I feel like I know the essence.

ELIAS: You are correct. You are familiar with that essence of Henri Matisse in that particular focus, and you are familiar with the essence.

MIKE: So it's not anyone I know now then, is it? (Pause)

ELIAS: I shall express to you to be investigating, for this is in actuality available to you presently.

MIKE: The thought drifted across my head that it could be Ron/Olivia.

ELIAS: No.

MIKE: All right, then that's going to do it for me.

ELIAS: Very well.

BEN: Unless you have something sensational to say for me, that'll be it.

ELIAS: Ah, but you ARE sensational! (Laughter)

BEN: Why, thank you! (Laughing)

ELIAS: And I am quite appreciating of you! I may express to you both great affection as always, and a continuation of playfulness in energy.

MIKE: (Laughing) Thank you!

BEN: Thanks!

ELIAS: Continue with your investigations, my friends, and we shall be interacting futurely. To you both this evening, au revoir.

BEN: Au revoir.

MIKE: Auf wiedersehen!

Elias departs at 8:13 PM.

©2002 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved

---

Copyright 2001 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.