the Elias forum: Digests of Essential Elias.

Home

Introduction

Digests

Transcripts

Exercises

Gems

Library

Search

Donate

Seth, Jane RobertsPlay Real Audio:

Paul’s note: Jane Roberts engaged an energy exchange with an “energy personality essence” named Seth from December 1963 until her passing in September 1984. Seth/Jane produced over 40 books of material during that time that now forms a body of philosophy that is called the Seth Material.

Some of Seth/Jane’s concepts included probable realities, simultaneous time or “no-time,” “reincarnation” based upon “no-time” not karma, the eternal validity of the soul, we create our own reality, counterparts, the nine families of consciousness, the purpose of physical life as value fulfillment, and a huge transition in human consciousness that is to be completed by 2075, to name a few.

According to Seth, all of us belong to one of nine basic “pools” or “families” of consciousness. The intents of these families covers the gamut of human experience, from being a healer, teacher, farmer, artist, bearer of children to athletes, warriors, inventors, scientists, philosphers, etc. Another way to think of this concept is that we all hold an intent that is uniquely ours, created in us, by us, before we choose to be physically born. According to Elias, these intents are expressed in every day terms by our belonging to and aligning with these nine fundamental “families.”

Accordingly, Seth, Jane Roberts, Rob Butts, and many of their students belong to the Sumari (Speakers) family of consciousness. Many of the people involved with the Elias forum belong to the Sumafi (Seers) family.

To date, Elias continues to enhance and refine many of the concepts presented by Seth/Jane, while also introducing new concepts built upon the foundation laid by Seth/Jane.

ELIAS: “As I continue in information to you, as an addition and also a repetition of information of another essence [Seth], I may alter terminology for the purpose of not creating belief systems within you to be encouraging you to be creating a new ‘sect.’ Therefore my terms may, at times, be slightly different, although their definition and meanings are the same.” [session 88, April 21, 1996]

Elias is building upon the foundation laid by Seth in much the same way music historians now consider Brahms’ First Symphony to be “Beethoven’s Tenth.” In other words, their relationship is that of belonging to the same tradition of thought and teaching intent. They are thus complementary bodies of information. As always, it is up to you, the reader, to make you own determination.

Finally, appropriate references to the existing books written by Seth/Jane Roberts, in which Elias discusses similar concepts, are referred to throughout this web site.

Introduction: find out more about the similarities and differences between Seth and Elias.

Elias “gems”

ELIAS: “We will also address to the question of another essence in our focus. I will, from this point, speak to you in your terms. I am confident that you understand my terms, and can interpret accordingly. Therefore, it is not necessary for me to continue in this ridiculousness of ‘in my terms, in your terms.’ You are all intelligent essences, and capable of interpreting on your own without my extreme help. This essence is of one you will speak of as ‘Seth.’ This is not his name. It is a name he has chosen to identify his essence to you. As I have expressed, names are not important. This Seth essence I have had interaction with, and was of great instruction. This essence is no longer incorporated in my present focus. It has widened its focus and expanded to Michael’s [Mary’s] visiting place. (1) This essence will not speak to you in physical focus anymore. He had a tremendous message to deliver, and has done so. I, in admiration and respect, continue in this message.

“In regards to this message, we will also address to Lawrence [Vicki] in his ‘Doubting Thomasness!’ There are absolute truths. My focus is not a belief system. You in your focus are not a belief system. You incorporate belief systems for the purpose of interpretation, be it physical interpretation, or philosophical, or religious, or political, or artistic, or emotional, or thought. Beliefs are all interpretations of manifestation. They are not necessarily truths. Facts, in your dimension or other dimensions, are interpretations. They are not truths. There are universal truths that apply to every focus in every dimension in every universe, everywhere. I do not speak to you of new or different beliefs. I offer you expressions of reality. This is not a belief system. In this same regard, other essences, be they expressions of ‘aliens’ or be they expressions of essences such as Seth, offer you this same information. This information, as I have stated, is reality, and an opportunity for you to widen your focus, incorporating the fullness of your essence to incorporate the whole.”

VICKI: “... I think I forgot my question. It was about Seth. (Pause) So Seth was focused in the teaching realm that you are focused in now?”

ELIAS: “Yes.”

VICKI: “And now he is no longer focused there?”

ELIAS: “No. (Pause) Partially ... I have stated in the beginning of this session that I will speak ‘in your terms.’”

VICKI: “Yes.”

ELIAS: “Allowing that, you will interpret encompassing ‘my terms.’ Incorporating the simultaneousness of non-existent time, Seth is incorporated in my focus, but is also not.”

VICKI: “Would there ... this phenomenon of channeling, would that always be coming from the teaching place?”

ELIAS: “No. It will more easily come from my focus, but it is not impossible for an essence to connect with you from what you would view as Seth’s focus now. Just as other essence elements of Seth incorporated from a wider awareness of focus, (as opposed to another level), he may also, if he chose, interact with you presently also, just as any essence which Michael [Mary] encountered in that state which Seth now occupies also may speak to you if they choose, just as I may incorporate in the future a wider expression of my essence to speak with you, which you may view as another essence, only because you think of oranges! (2) (Laughter) Those expressions of those awarenesses are rarely expressed in this physical focus, only because you would not understand or comprehend what is being related to you. Its only purpose in any expression would merely be to express itself to you so that you will be aware of its existence.”

VICKI: “Thank you.”

ELIAS: “I will also address to a very inconsequential question, as dealing with our wonderful friend essence Donovan. My transmission will never be the same as Seth’s, for I am Elias. There is nothing wrong with my ‘radio transmission.’ It is only softer, for I choose it to be softer. (The next sentence is spoken very loudly) IT IS NOT THAT I MAY NOT PROJECT VERY LOUDLY IF I WISH, BUT I DO NOT WISH!!! It is inconsistent with my basic nature. (Much laughter)”

VICKI: “Well, I can tell you that Olivia [Ron] likes your basic nature much more that Seth’s, anyways.”

ELIAS: “I do also! (Laughter)”

JULIE: “I don’t know who Seth is, so I’m really confused.”

ELIAS: “Seth is an energy personality essence, in his terms. He spoke in this physical focus, for a time, to instruct you with much great wisdom, and compassion, and love. His interest was for your development and continues now, as was before him also.” [session 14, June 16, 1995]

JIM: “I’m re-reading Seth books and I’ve just gone through one that the first time I read it I was quite impressed. This time I’ve gone through and I see conflicts with what you’ve said. I favor what you’ve said over what he’s got there. I don’t understand that, why it was good the first time and not the second.”

ELIAS: “Let me express to you, first of all, within the time framework in which you initially engaged that information from that essence, it offered you an avenue in which to expand your awareness in a different manner.

“Now; you have been generating that action for quite some time. In creating that action and offering yourself more and more information, you have also moved into a preference of assimilating information with less distortion and less interpretation.

“Now; this is not to say that the information that was offered by that essence is not valid, for it is. At times, I may express to you, individuals may misinterpret what has been offered in information by that essence in incorporating the information in absolute terms. Therefore, they may not necessarily incorporate an objective understanding of the coloration of that information. It is not that it is invalid or that it is wrong, for it is not; but that essence incorporated a different essence family, a different intent [Sumari], and therefore chose to be expressive in a very different manner than myself [Sumafi].

“I choose to be interactive directly with individuals within your physical dimension. I also choose intentionally to be offering information which does not necessarily reinforce your existing expressed beliefs. Not that your beliefs are bad or that they are enemies or that they should be eliminated, but they are quite familiar to you.

“In the purpose of interacting with each of you in association with this shift in consciousness, the point is to allow yourselves to expand your perception and to recognize your beliefs – not merely to recognize your beliefs, but to recognize that you also incorporate choice and how to move your attention. If you are offering yourself information that merely consistently reinforces what you incorporate already as expressed beliefs, you do not necessarily challenge yourself to widen your awareness. This is what you are incorporating in assimilating the information that I am offering.

“For the most part, it is quite similar to other information which is offered by other essences and has been offered by other essences. I am merely incorporating the information in a different manner and incorporating a different language, so to speak. Those individuals that seek to be assimilating information in the least expression of distortion and are genuinely seeking information concerning how they may be creating their reality and how they may be intentionally manipulating their energy in not merely a beneficial manner but a more efficient and less conflicting manner, those individuals draw themselves, such as yourself, to the information that I am expressing.” [session 1343, May 15, 2003]

Elias “gems”

ELIAS: “I am aware that our members of our Sunday group do not understand the implications of belief systems, or the importance of these. I have said to you, a time ago, that in my interaction with you I am continuing in delivering information and helpfulness, (pause) as I have been instructed and have expressed a desire to do so, continuing with masters, as you would call them, such as Seth. I use this essence as an example that you may identify with, this being one in which I continue information, in connecting with you. In this, I will express that I also will emphasize, repeatedly until it is first nature to you, that you create your reality, and this is quite influenced by your belief systems.” [session 32, August 23, 1995]

ELIAS: “I will express to you that in regards to this unformulated question of Michael’s [Mary’s] (3), this individual of your Jane Roberts interacted with our essence of Seth for much time, within your terms. Much information was delivered. Within some, a few, of these manuscripts that have been offered publicly, you may research and you may find that this was discussed many times. You will not find an account of how often this very subject was addressed, but I will express to you that this subject was addressed very many times. This was a very serious issue; and although there were some other issues also involved with this individual, with personal challenges, the issue of ‘boxing up’ creativity was the main element of, shall we say, in your terms, destructiveness, for you view this to be a self-destructive element; although, in actuality, it is not destructive. As I was expressing earlier, this is a choice. The individual feels no need to be continuing.

Within your belief systems, many of you do not choose to simply retire for the evening, and never return. Therefore, you choose physical ailments to allow your departure with an explanation; this being something other individuals surrounding you may attach to as an explanation, and may be more accepting of. It is not necessary for the individual. Their mind, so to speak, has already been made up. They have already decided that their expression will not be incorporated within the particular developmental focus, for it is too constricting and they do not understand [the method] of how to unconstrict it. Therefore, as I have expressed, they view their focus to be pointless.

The incorporation of the intersection with Seth allowed many of your years of continued creative expression, to a point; but as this creative expression was continually ‘boxed into’ cultural time, it was an insufficient and ineffective expression.

Many individuals may force their creative expression to be ‘coming through’ within the confines of cultural time, viewing that they need to be producing, therefore pushing their productivity. This, though, is not a true creative expression.

Many literary words were produced by this individual during her focus. Her creativity and expression was basically focused within the element of poetry. I will wager you will not encounter many poetry books of this individual!

Many creative individuals will find other methods to be expressing of their creativity, but it is not the ‘main line,’ so to speak. In this, they block their intent, and create tremendous conflict. They may not feel this conflict, but they will also feel a constriction, a squeezing; a knowing of a missing element; something undone. As the element undone continues, the constriction tightens. This eventually seeks expression, as does all energy. Therefore, it expresses in the only way that you understand and know how to express; it creates what you view to be a negative expression, a physical manifestation or a psychological manifestation. The individual will create a situation of physical disability and eventual termination, or mental disability resulting in what you view to be ‘not sane.’ Either way, they are disconnecting with physical focus and discontinuing, for they find no further purposefulness within this particular expression; and also knowing that they possess the ability to move on, and recreate in elements that they may be expressive within.” [session 74, February 25, 1996]

VICKI: “For the record, I would also like to offer up the black tile to the city. (Mary saw the black tile in a dream.) (4)

ELIAS: Very good! You may re-engage yourselves with this quest, as you are beginning to be moving more quickly. You may be running out of time for building your future focus and your city! You shall have essences of Seers walking around with no structure around them!

VICKI: We could all fit in the library!

ELIAS: Very small city! (To Jene) And you, also holding the same ability as Ruburt [Jane] in being a dream artist, may incorporate within this endeavor. You may offer much to the construction of this new focus, for you shall continue with the initiation which has already begun with Seth, who also initiated this city.

JENE: Big job!

ELIAS: A continuation.

JENE: ... I have another question. Yesterday, in a dream in the afternoon, I had a restriction in my throat, and was extremely angry, and couldn’t speak in the dream. That often happens, and I used to become very angry. In the transcript, I read Ruburt [Jane] has a fiery temper, as do I, and that it shows itself in the dream state. Was there a correlation yesterday?

ELIAS: Absolutely; although this was your experience. Do not be interpreting too far to be exchanging with this other essence, although you spring from the same. Therefore, as I have expressed previously, you hold the identical same encoding, so to speak, of essence as does this essence of Ruburt [Jane]. You have chosen your own experiences to be continuing within elements that this essence was not choosing to engage. (Pause) More personal information! (Pause)

You occupy this now; a continuation. Your connection is great with this essence. Your focus is very aligned, but your direction is for continuation, and the least distortion. The idea has been put forth; the initiation, the fire, sprung from Seth. Within that element, although the essence incorporated great care to hold very little distortion, your time element within your physical focus was allowing of great movement within energy, which was also allowing of distortion. The continuation is the fine tuning, so to speak; the commitment to widening awareness, within truth, with as little distortion as physical focus affords. This also demands great acceptance. (Pause) Are you understanding?

JENE: The feeling tones are understanding.

ELIAS: Very good. We shall continue much more. I shall be addressing to many belief systems, be forewarned ... but lovingly. (Smiling)

JENE: Thank you.” [session 91, May 01, 1996]

ELIAS: “I have expressed to you, many times, there are not only eight Seers! There are very many. You, all being a part of the Sumafi family, also hold the aspect of Seers. You intuitively and subjectively hold a knowing, not in separation, but in understanding of direction; for within the element of the Seers, you hold an intent to be guiding. The continuation is the moving through. I have expressed, the Sumari created their expression through their engagement of their Speakers, of which Ruburt [Jane] was quite instrumental in mobilizing the consciousness of this essence group, which was also affecting of other essence families to be responding. Now, within this present now, the Sumafi and the engagement of the Seers, more quietly but quite equally as powerfully, engage the ‘push through.’” [session 97, May 27, 1996]

NORM: “According to some of the books that were written by Jane Roberts and Seth, The Universal One And Whole, or he called it All-That-Is (5), was contained energy that attempted to figure out how to create other essences. It was a very frustrating time or action for him, The Universal One And Whole, and he finally figured it out, and out of that came all essences that had the similarity and some of the attributes that he has. I was thinking that the containment of the cabbage heads was like that in The Universal One And Whole, before the original creation of all the essences. Does that work?

ELIAS: Within early explanations, within this forum also, was offered very simplistic explanations of the action of essence creation, so to speak. This followed similarly, briefly, very briefly, to this explanation of which you speak. This explanation of which you speak was offered within an acceptance in consciousness that would allow only that information. It is similar in kind to your story of creation within your bible, of your Adam and Eve. It is an illustration for your understanding. This was held to, as I have stated, very briefly within this forum also, but has been moved through and expanded, that you do not view All-That-Is or The Creating Universal One And Whole as an entity. It is not. It is an action. There was in actuality no specific creation of essence, for essence always has been, just as consciousness always has been. There is no containment. To liken consciousness to the cabbage is to be placing a containment around an entity. There is no entity. It is all.

NORM: Action is everything too. Action is the universal dimension.

ELIAS: Motion. Change. Movement.

NORM: Creativity.

ELIAS: All of these words within your language signify action, which is all of consciousness. There is no separation. There was no ‘one before another.’” [session 141, December 22, 1996]

BOB: “I’m not understanding ...

ELIAS: And you are continuing once again, to be thinking within your thought process very singularly.

BOB: As usual!

ELIAS: You are you. You are the entirety of your entity, for you are encapsulated within your physical expression. Incorrect! You are essence. You are a focus of essence. You incorporate the entirety of essence within you, but you are an individual personality focus of essence. Essence holds many focuses. You may manifest more than one focus of essence within one time period.

BOB: Okay ...

RETA: There was a description in a Seth book about this to help us describe it, and it was like Christmas lights on a long string and that would be your essence, and being plugged in would be with your essence family, and all the lights twinkling on would be your focuses coming in and out and back and forth. (6) Would that be an analogy that we could understand?

ELIAS: You may think in these terms if you are choosing. This is simplistic, but effective; although no more simplistic than our explanation of camera lenses. Therefore, if this is helpful to you to visualize a concept, this is acceptable.” [session 143, December 29, 1996]

NORM: “I read before that Seth said that action and creativity are the two dimensions of true reality. Is that how I should be thinking?

ELIAS: This was an illustration. There are many dimensions to reality. All of them are reality. All of consciousness is reality. All of creativity and creation is reality in its innumerable forms, or lack of form.

What you view within this phenomenon is also a filtration through layers of consciousness; a translation of no language; a translation of energy and knowing into objective language and speech patterns. You filter through belief systems and thought processes that you attach belief systems to. You may widen this by accepting the belief systems that you hold. You first must identify the belief systems that you hold; for you all hold belief systems, and you all hold concepts that you do not hold belief systems! As you identify and understand that although you think you believe certain concepts, you believe contrary, you shall allow yourself to widen by acceptance of these belief systems. In this, you shall allow yourself the opportunity to be actualizing your reality more efficiently. In this, you may compare that you may begin thinking as I am thinking; for the only difference is that I am remembering, and I understand what I remember. You do not remember.” [session 147, January 12, 1997]

DREW: “Let me finally ask a question for Michael [Mary], if I may. Michael [Mary] has begun reading Seth, not just the notes of the life of Jane and Rob, but the Seth material ...

ELIAS: We are aware.

DREW: ... and is finding contradictions with the material that you have been offering and is confused and frustrated by that, and asked if you could give some explanation as to how there could be contradictions or help Michael [Mary] to understand the contradictions, and all of us to understand the contradictions.

ELIAS: And how appropriate that you may ask this question in following your questioning, for it is the same, for you hold interpretations and you focus upon words; and as you inquire to me of the word of joyfulness, which is offered for the express purpose that it symbolizes a certain meaning within you although it does not represent your definition, in this same manner information has been offered throughout your ages by many, in different terminology.

Information has been offered to be accommodating and influencing of individuals in strategic manners; for essences of Dream Walkers, who have not physically manifest throughout your history but continue with you in cooperation of your creation of this reality, communicate throughout your history information to you all to be helpful in your remembrance, that you may not drift so very far within your separation, in your desire for the purity of your experience. Therefore, they serve as reminders to you, but these reminders are also offered in conjunction with the individuals that seek the information. The response is influencing of the information. What you may assimilate shall be offered. It is known, within essence, what you shall assimilate.

You have been offered information in line with your creation of progression, for this is how you have created your reality; progressively; and within what you view to be your future time period shall be experienced another which shall seemingly be contradictory to Elias, but shall not be contradicting. It shall be additional; to your way of thinking, a furthering; a continuation of information; as was the one before, and as was the one before.

You may assure Michael [Mary] that although he experiences confusion and conflict within information, there is no conflict. There is a very slight, underline, very slight bleed-through allowance of belief systems within previous information, but this is not exceedingly influencing of contradictory information. For the most part, information was offered intentionally within the manner that it was delivered, as this was the most efficient incorporation of information within consciousness to be assimilated, in opposition to belief systems within that present now. To your way of thinking, within this present now you have gained information in preparation. Therefore, you continue with what you may view to be a greater capacity objectively for assimilating information further.

Also, you incorporate a different intent, which is also quite influencing. Information shall be delivered within the context of the intent. The Sumari holds different intent from Sumafi. The Vold, of which you witnessed a collective of this day, holds a different intent than Sumafi. Therefore, the information shall be angled differently. It is no less valid. It is leaning within consciousness differently, but all leanings intermingle. Therefore, they are all connected.” [session 154, February 23, 1997]

ELIAS: “Many of you present within this forum are familiar with another teacher, one preceding this one [Seth]. In this, reference has been made to an event which occurred few times within the phenomenon. The event was viewed strangely and was offered no identification. Therefore, the individuals physically focused attached their own identification to the event. Their identification was labeled Seth 2. The event was explained. The individuals receiving the information and the individuals subsequent to the initial receiving of the information did not understand the explanation. I have offered you also small amounts of information within this same area, to which you have not understood also.

Within the action of the energy exchange which occurred within this recent time period of an answering of questions for individuals, it was noted that the energy exchange appeared differently. I shall explain to you a bit of this essence, that you may more understand the multidimensionality of your own essence.

This essence is many focuses. You, for the most part, encounter one focus, which speaks to you within an energy exchange. You have come to know this focus of this essence as Elias. You view this focus as holding certain qualities and personality. You identify this focus with the experience of a certain energy which you recognize. There are myriads of focuses of this essence, all of which are interchangeable. Each holds a minutely different tone, all of which collectively create one tone.

Many of you have acquired information, through reading material, of Seven. (7) Those of you familiar with this information, think now of the action of Seven; the ability to be merged and focused in any area of consciousness and to be that focus, while simultaneously holding the identification of self. This essence focuses in many different areas of consciousness. Activity occurs within many directions. Awareness and knowledge of each of these directions is held simultaneously. Tones may be interchanged at will.

There also, within your understanding, may be an identification of an oversoul, in your terminology, which may at very limited time periods speak as what you may think of as the whole. This is not diminishing of the focus, for each focus is all of the whole. Each focus incorporates different qualities. You identify these as personality within your definition of personality, for our definition of personality is different. You recognize this personality. You also recognize the absence of this personality. This is not the absence of the essence. It is an exchange of different focus. Therefore, it may appear unfamiliar, but familiar. It shall seem different, but it shall be known as Elias. Therefore, you may experience confusion. (8)

All of you are the same within essence. You are all multidimensional. You all not only hold the ability to exchange and interchange with all of your focuses, but you do. You merely are not aware objectively, continuously. I express this to you as you are aware at times, although you do not identify the action or the feeling as an interchange with another focus. You identify the feeling the same as you identify the difference of Elias. It is Elias, but it is different. It is myself, but I am different. This being the same action which is accomplished quite efficiently, that you do not interrupt your flow of your focus.

As to the occurrence of the previous teacher [Seth], this may also occur within this phenomenon; not to this moment presently, but it may occur. This is recognized by the lack of emotional output, for this expression of which we speak moves through layers of consciousness from total subjectivity which does not incorporate physical focus of any type. Therefore, it is devoid of elements which are created for physical focuses.

This occurrence within this recent session was a change in direction of attention upon the part of this essence. Therefore, to prevent interruption of interaction, another focus moves into alignment. In this action, there is a slight but noticeable difference. This is not what you may term the first occurrence of this event within this present phenomenon. This has occurred previously, although there are different focuses which you may think of as more removed from this one than others. They are not, in actuality. They are all the same; but you within your thought process may view them as slightly more removed within tone, therefore holding more of what you view within an objective awareness in difference.

This was not another essence identified as Seth 2. It was/is the totality of tone allowed to flow through.

It may be expressed to you within these sessions, but merely for your entertainment, many different expressions within this one essence. If choosing, it may be displayed to you weekly different tones entirely, to the extent that you may view that Michael [Mary] has retracted his agreement and established himself as his radio station! (9) (Laughter) In actuality, there being only one transmission, but with different expressions for they are different focuses. Each of these focuses occupies different areas of consciousness and attends to different events which are all contributant to this becoming, as you presently occupy many areas of physical focuses which are contributant to your becoming. (Pause)

VICKI: So in that experience, I think you said that there was a redirection of attention. To what?

ELIAS: This focus redirected attention, allowing a different focus to be continuing within the energy exchange here, as this that you recognize completely addressed to another element within essence. If you are wishing to know of this action, I shall divulge to you, this particular focus was directed within consciousness to be interacting with another focus which you may think of in the movement stage, in your terms, of disengaging transition. In this action, helpfulness was required. Therefore, this focus engaged action with that focus in helpfulness. It is all one. It is all you. It is all I. But each is individual also, and independent.

VICKI: Could I assume then that whatever focus would be directed here, Mary’s experience would be only slightly different, as it was this week?

ELIAS: Correct. Michael [Mary] will be noticing of fluctuations in energy. As you notice a difference and unfamiliarity in familiarity, so also does Michael [Mary]; although he does not differentiate in the same manner, for the experience of energy encompasses the totality of tone. Therefore, the identification of this essence remains the same. He shall notice only a fluctuation within energy.

RON: Is that the same thing I experienced with Paul (Patel) tonight? (10)

ELIAS: No. This being, once again, a development of manifestation for your introduction of another essence energy; this being what you each have identified for the most part as viewing feminine energy, within our game, of yellow. Each one of these essences, as has been stated many times, shall be manifesting energy to be incorporating with you, that you may identify these energies. You have been exposed, in a manner of speaking, already to your purple, and you have identified your green, and also partially your red. Very much so, your orange. Of course, blue! (11) (Grinning) Those remaining shall be offering identification of their energy, for it is a cooperative.

It is not a singular act or event which you witness, although you witness what you may term within this particular phenomenon a singular energy exchange; essence to essence; but with much mergence and input from other essences.

VICKI: So this appeared as exhibiting less emotion because the focus is less interactive with physical focus, or what?

ELIAS: Correct.

VICKI: And that’s just a choice?

ELIAS: (Pausing) It is an area of experience and becoming within consciousness.

NORM: Does that require a dual phenomenon between Michael [Mary] and Elias and Elias and the other?

ELIAS: It is automatic.

RETA: And did you say we may have that event ourselves? Or were you just describing the Seth 2 event?

ELIAS: Eventually, you may.

DREW: Would the information that we would receive from one of these other focuses be different in point of view or in content or perspective, or in any way different than the information we get from the focus which is Elias?

ELIAS: No; only in delivery. There may be a noticing of difference in what you view to be personality ... or the lack of! (Grinning)

VICKI: Vocal tone, I noticed.

ELIAS: This may also occur. As in your terms you think of focuses being more removed from physical focus or interactiveness with physical focus, there becomes also what you term to be a lacking of personality, which in actuality is a lacking of emotional quality; which in this, there is less affectingness of vocal tones, for within the incorporation of personality there is an affectingness of individual identification. Therefore, vocal tones are reflective of this. As the focus is removed from physical elements, it becomes devoid of any incorporation of these tones. In this, the vocal tone may audibly sound much the same as Michael’s [Mary’s] voice. No affectingness or little affectingness shall occur within physical adjustment of tone. (12)

RETA: Would you say that this other focus, the higher plane focus, would be classified in Regional Area 4 or 5? Would that be a classification? Or is that not even in the same terminology?

ELIAS: It is not relevant.

VICKI: I always assumed that Seth 2 was a wider awareness of Seth, but judging from my experience and from the explanation just given, this isn’t really what it’s all about. It’s another focus. Is this correct?

ELIAS: It is a wider awareness, just as I have expressed that within your thinking you may classify this as the oversoul of the focuses, the entirety of essence, the wider awareness; within one essence, not another essence.

NORM: It was my interpretation that Seth 2 had the responsibility of the creation of the blueprint for this particular focus, this particular reality that we are in here. Is that a true statement?

ELIAS: This is a difficult area, for as you enter this area you also move into notions that you are ‘less than’ or that you do not create your reality for yourself. A focus is no less than the entirety. It is the entirety. There are differences within experience which is assimilated by the entirety of essence, but focuses experience different experiences. There are, within essence, elements removed from physical focus. These are difficult concepts, I am understanding; just as within our beginnings it was not accepted that you may be physically focused and non-physically focused simultaneously, for you are. There are elements of essence which are not choosing to experience any physical focus. These you term as wider awarenesses. In your terms of wider awareness, you believe these elements of essence to be more, or greater within knowledge. The experience is different. (To Reta) They are not occupying a ‘higher plane.’

NORM: Are there families of oversouls?

ELIAS: I use this word oversoul figuratively for your understanding. There are cooperations of the concept of oversouls which you may liken to your families of physical focus, although they are different.

NORM: There’s no end to oversouls of oversouls?

ELIAS: There is no end within consciousness! (Smiling)

DREW: Is this phenomenon of an alternate focus of Elias available to us this evening to interact with?

ELIAS: It is unnecessary.

DREW: For the experience! (Vic’s note: good comeback, Drew!)

ELIAS: (Chuckling) You may not find this exchange quite as charming as this focus of Elias, dare I say? (Humorously, grinning at Vic)

VICKI: Absolutely!

ELIAS: For this focus holds much more charisma! Although you may be so graced futurely to be witness to another focus of this essence, much to your disappointment, I am sure!” (Much laughter) [session 156, March 02, 1997]

NORM: “I was reading in Seth where he was explaining that there was a reality where the future and the present were known, but not the past. That is a reality?

ELIAS: Correct. It is the reverse of what you have created.

NORM: It has nothing to do with negative time. It is ordinary time?

ELIAS: Correct ... to this focus!

RETA: That would be interesting, to know your future but not your past.

NORM: Can you offer anything more on that?

RETA: You can’t call it experience, because that would be past. (Elias stares at Reta) No, you could call it experience because it’s experience! Excuse me.

ELIAS: Correct. Experience is not noted by past, for this is a perception.

RETA: It would be interesting to say, ‘I’m remembering the future and looking forward to the past.’ I mean, it’s backwards.

ELIAS: To your perception, although to another it shall seem entirely normal, and your perception shall be appearing quite odd!

DREW: Is that a physical focus?

ELIAS: Correct. There are physical focuses in which the time element, to your way of thinking, appears so rapid that their existence appears as a hum. You experience these dimensions, for you are focused within these dimensions!” [session 157, March 09, 1997]


Play Real Audio: Play audio clip [ 3:37" ]

ELIAS: “This essence is that of Elias, within the family of Sumafi. Within your dimension presently you engage a collective event, which is translated into a global event, which you recognize as a shift in consciousness. Individuals holding no knowledge of information that you have availed yourselves of recognize also this shift. They do not hold an understanding objectively of the workings, so to speak, of this shift in consciousness, but they are aware, as they feel a shifting within themselves and as they notice changes moving throughout your objective creations – a new allowance of subjective information that you have chosen to allow to bleed through into your awareness objectively. It is reflected in all of your creations – all of your arts, all of your sciences, even your religions. There is a growing awareness.

This [information regarding a shift] has been presented to you individuals previously by another. (13) Now this family of Sumafi continues the information, to be detailing to you helpfulness within understanding of this shift in consciousness and the role objectively that you have chosen to engage within helpfulness in preventing trauma; for you move from your religious era into a new creation of consciousness within your dimension, within this planet. [ end of audio clip ]

JIM: ... Elias, Seth had said that one of the Christ entities would return in the near future, to in effect tear down most religions and change things. Will this be part of the shift? Is there any indication that something like this will happen? (14)

ELIAS: This has occurred presently – not within your understanding, but this essence, within a mergence of another tone, has chosen to be physically manifesting. I shall explain.

One essence has been choosing, within what you view to be your past, to physically manifest within three physical manifestations within the same time period. One manifestation, one lens focus of this essence, chose to be continuing within the ending of this religious era. In this, one aspect, one lens focus, one of these three manifestations within non-physical consciousness has merged with one essence which has not incorporated physical focus previously. In this, this non-physical essence not previously manifest was incorporated as a Dream Walker. This essence incorporates that aspect merged of the other essence. In this, this non-physically focused essence has already incorporated the only manifestation of its choosing. This has been accomplished presently.

The accomplishment of the physical manifestation was occurring within what you view to be your year previous to this. This essence has manifest within the physical focuses of nine individuals, one to be representing of each family of consciousness within this dimension. All nine are male entities/manifestations. All nine are manifest. They are all very small children. You may be considering them babies, all, for they have all been manifest within the same time period of one-and-one-half years. In this, all of these physically focused children, which presently occupy different space arrangements upon your planet, hold exceptional abilities within the intent of each family and within a knowing of subjective awareness. Therefore, each shall be quite influencing within the accomplishment of this shift and the dissolution of your religious era. It shall not be the form upon the blazing horse across your sky, much to your disappointment! (Laughter) But less dramatically, they shall all be quite influencing within this shift, and it shall be accomplished in its entirety within their lifetime.

JIM: That’s amazing!

PAUL: ... “Elias, one more question, following up what you just said previously to Michael’s question, about the date of the lifetimes of the nine individuals. Does that coincide with the Seth material and the date of 2075?

ELIAS: It shall be accomplished within this time period. Therefore, you may view that these individuals shall be continuing within their physical focus throughout this time period. You may be, within your belief systems of your limitations of lifetime, accepting that all of these children are quite small within your present now, and it is not conflicting to your belief systems that they shall be continuing within this amount of years.

Q: Are they fully aware of their role?

ELIAS: Presently, within their subjective awareness, as they are transitioning into objective awareness, yes.

Q: Will they go through a time where they forget?

ELIAS: Partially. They shall not forget completely, but they shall hold a time period of forgetfulness, but this also shall be brief. This is an allowance for understanding of you, within your completeness of objective focusing in attention. Therefore, they will be incorporating this experience for their understanding.

FRANK: ... Can you expand on that, and also if you had any more involvement in other facets of the Jane Roberts/Seth material where you had a co-creation and involvement, which I expect you do?

ELIAS: Limited, in your terms. This was an interaction with another essence [Seth] quite connected within consciousness to this individual focus of this woman [Jane Roberts]. Therefore the interaction, for the most part, was exclusive.

Within the creation of this one written material [Oversoul Seven], this individual [Jane Roberts] shall have expressed to you all that your teacher [Seth] was not involved in its creation. (15) There was an awareness on the part of this individual of interaction of other aspects of consciousness. This was interpreted by this individual to be aspects of herself, of her own essence. In part, this is a correct assessment, but only in part; for within an interaction within this time period of this creation, you may view this essence of Elias to be comparable to the role of Cyprus. (16) You may interpret an interaction which was ongoing, in your terms, of this essence [Elias] and your teacher [Seth] within the creation of this written material. The individual physically focused was very aware that this material was not produced with objective awareness within herself. Therefore, she also held an awareness that this information was acquired, in her terms, from somewhere else; another interaction.

Now; I express to you that this one written element is important to you also, for this written material was a projection of now, and you may view the characters of this book [The Education of Oversoul Seven] as those in the same as the individuals which incorporate the pyramid action presently within physical focus, of these individual[s] present: Lawrence [Vicki], Shynla [Cathy], Olivia [Ron], Michael [Mary]. They are your characters within this book. These are the same, within the four main characters originally, within the original initial scripts of these books. (17) The information incorporated into these books was a projection for now; for within this time period, you may understand the action of your shift and the information which has been offered with the intent of the Sumafi, to be delivering information to you of reality that you now may understand as not only a story.

JIM: ... “I remember in some of the Seth material that Seth had said if mankind didn’t make certain choices at this point in time, that the species could degenerate into cults and religious wars.

ELIAS: Quite! This is the prediction of your religious era!

JIM: Well, you could choose that probability rather than the other probability. Is that what he meant?

ELIAS: You have chosen already to be manifesting this shift, although within any moment you may choose differently. But within this present now, you do not choose differently. You continue within your established choice of this shift. (Humorously) I shall be communicating with you and allowing you information if you are changing your decision! (Much laughter)

JIM: That I appreciate!

ELIAS: Therefore, you shall hold the ability to prepare yourself before your annihilation! (Grinning, as we all crack up)

JIM: I doubt if I’ll take an Armageddon point of view! (Laughing)

ELIAS: It is less probable! Are you wishing of more questions?

PAUL: I have one more question for today. Looking at Jane and Seth and Rob and the way they met as to their objective state, and looking at Mary, who I still haven’t met tonight, and Elias ... it’s a gender question. I’m noticing the similarities – Jane as a female, Seth referring to an entity name of Ruburt, a male, and Seth being a male – it’s in a very similar alignment. Why that gender choice?

ELIAS: There is no gender. Within tone, you may choose within essence a leaning within consciousness that you objectively identify and interpret as male or female. Within words, you objectively interpret within male and female. The word, which is of the essence name, is a word. It is a tone. Throughout your history, you have created these words to be names in many cases, for you identify the significance of tone. Therefore, you choose these tones, in translation into your language, to be names of identification.

Within your reality, you incorporate gender. Therefore, you also incorporate gender within your naming. Within essence, there is no distinction, although there are leanings within tones of aspects of personality. In this, you interpret this within male or female, logical or intuitive – masculine energy, feminine passiveness. These are identifications that are relative to your physical dimension, this physical dimension. Many other physical dimensions do not incorporate gender, this being one that you have chosen to be incorporating gender; but as I have expressed, this also being an extensively complex reality. You have chosen many aspects quite intricately to be experiencing within this particular dimension of reality physically.

Within essence, it may seem coincidental that these two individuals incorporate masculine essence namings, and that these essences with engaging this energy exchange also hold masculine namings. This is an alignment within those leanings, and within personality and consciousness, that is facilitating of this exchange. It in your terms creates more of an ease to be accomplishing, through many layers of consciousness, the energy exchange which occurs. It is more difficult to be engaging the energy exchange if you are not within alignment in tone and personality and your leanings. They being the same family orientation, these two essences also being the same family orientation. They [are] holding very similar tone, for one is fragmented of the other. In this, this essence and Michael [Mary] hold extreme similar tone, being also fragmented. Lawrence [Vicki] also holds very similar tone, as they have been fragmented as one essence and chosen to be splitting into two essences. Therefore, there is a tremendous alignment and connection within energy and consciousness. There be your similarity and your coincidence.

RON: ... Elias, what’s Seth’s essence name?

ELIAS: (Chuckling, and we all laugh) You possess this information already, and you may be investigating to be finding of this information; for I wish not to be intrusive to individuals that this may be causing conflict within.

RON: Fair enough!

ELIAS: I am quite sure!” [session 185, June 21, 1997]

JIM: “Elias, can you give us any more information on the entity, or whatever you want to term it, that calls itself Seth Two?

ELIAS: You view this to be a separation, also being a belief system. You view this to be a different entity from that which you recognize as your teacher [Seth]. It is not. As I have expressed to you within an explanation much simplified of this essence [Elias], there are many, many aspects of essence, countless aspects of essence. All are actualized within every area of consciousness; this being why I express to you that you may not be viewing ascended masters, for you are ascended masters! You are all things within all dimensions within all areas of consciousness, for there is no separation. Therefore, simultaneous to this attention within this lens focus that you recognize as you, you also occupy all other areas of consciousness that you create belief systems around, expressing that they occupy “higher levels." They occupy different areas of consciousness. Their experience is different.

You hold aspects of self, of essence, that have never in your terms chosen to physically objectify. Therefore, this experience is not of those aspects. This is not to say that they do not incorporate the experience as you experience this, but within the creation of the reality that they occupy, they may not be focused within their attention upon those experiences. They exist, but they do not focus their attention upon them. You do not focus your attention upon every individual hair upon your head! It exists. It experiences. It is aware of all of your experience, but your attention is not focused upon every individual hair! In this same manner, within the entirety of essence, each aspect of essence does not focus its attention upon the entirety of essence, although it incorporates the entirety of self and experience. Just as you hold the ability to access any area of your essence within consciousness, so do any other aspects hold the ability to access you.

In this, this aspect of the same essence holds attention within a different area of consciousness and experience. It is not a higher plane. It is a different experience which has not chosen physical experience, therefore is not incorporating a language that you identify with within your emotional creation of your focus. In this manner, the individual [Jane] interacting with your teacher [Seth] within exchange was allowing for the accessing of other aspects of that essence, in this allowing a partial communication. This is limited, for it moves through many more layers of consciousness to actualize within your language. You do not understand the communication, for it is very unfamiliar to you. It does not hold your attention, for it is unfamiliar to you objectively.

This essence that you view presently may choose to be accessing other aspects of the essence and presenting them to you within this energy exchange, but you would not listen, for this would not hold your attention, for you cannot identify presently within the experience that you have chosen within this dimension; for you have intentionally chosen to be forgetful for the purity of your experience within this focus of creation. Therefore, you experience unfamiliarity which does not hold your attention.” [session 186, June 22, 1997]

VIVIEN: “I remember when I first found the first Seth book that I read – Seth Speaks – that changed my life so profoundly, and I’m wondering ... I really don’t know what my question is, but I’m wondering what the connections are with you, with Seth, with Jane, with Rob. I’ve had lots of dreams about Jane and Rob, and a couple of dreams recently with you. I had a feeling that you were there. The last dream was a couple of days ago. I awoke and I heard your voice saying ... I can’t remember what it is now, but I heard it very clearly, and I felt as if I was in a classroom with you. Perhaps you could start by telling me a little bit about that, if you would.

ELIAS: Let us begin with the beginning! You have drawn yourself to information of this other teacher [Seth] in preparation for the direction that you have chosen to continue with this essence of Elias. In this, you have offered yourself information for your understanding as a preparatory introduction to these concepts and to the action of this shift. Many individuals find this information difficult to assimilate if they are not allowing themselves within previous time periods other information to be preparing themselves for this information. This information is a continuation of this other essence’s information; moving you into the action of this shift more decisively, altering your perceptions and addressing to belief systems.

Before this other teacher was espousing on the subject of belief systems, individuals held no awareness that they hold belief systems. This was a foreign concept to you. Now, as you move more definitively into the action of this shift objectively – not as much subjectively, as has been the case within the rest of your century, but as you move into more of an objective awareness of this shift – you also need be addressing to belief systems, for this is the point of this shift in consciousness which shall be altering of your entire reality. But initially, you must be addressing to the situation that you hold belief systems, and that all of your events that you create within your reality are filtered through your belief systems. You do not act, except occasionally, outside of your belief systems. There are certain areas and actions or events that may occur within your focus which are not necessarily filtered through your belief systems, although they are influenced by your belief systems, for they appear within your objective awareness.

In this, you have drawn yourself to information to prepare yourself for ongoing information, and this be the connection between the two essences [Seth and Elias] and the action which is furthered between these two essences. Also, [you are] allowing yourself within your individual intent to be better understanding the action of this shift, and therefore allowing yourself to be more helpful within its action. Some individuals draw themselves to information to be helpful within the action of this shift and some individuals merely participate within the action of this shift, needing helpfulness. This be your connection between these two actions.” [session 225, October 04, 1997]

VICKI: “I have just a couple of little things here. Briefly, Jane Roberts ... was she Sumari aligned with Sumafi in her focus?

ELIAS: Sumari/Sumari.

VICKI: Sumari/Sumari?

ELIAS: Correct.” [session 237, November 09, 1997]

CATHY: “Oh, okay. And is Rob [Butts] aligned with the Ilda family?

ELIAS: Correct.

CATHY: Okay.” [session 247, December 07, 1997]

VICKI: “I do have a few questions, one for another person and one for myself. The first one is for Jim Moore, who was here recently for a session. His question is, ‘Seth says that disease is caused by an initial or underlying belief. What was the initial belief that caused the cancer?’

ELIAS: The belief system held was an uncertainty that you may be creating of some element within your physical form and not hold the ability to uncreate this, that it is an invasion. This is a belief system of a disease that is beyond your control, and that once invaded you hold little ability in affectingness, especially without the helpfulness of your medical sciences. The offering, as I have expressed to him, is to be dislodging these belief systems and offering to himself an opening within awareness that you DO create your reality in all of its aspects and forms, and that you do not contract a disease. You create it from within, and you hold the ability to uncreate it also.” [session 241, November 22 ,1997]

CATHY: “Okay. And then I have another little question: Have you offered us information that is in some of the unpublished Seth material?

ELIAS: Some.

CATHY: Some. Okay. Well, that’s good for me for right now.” [session 246, November 30, 1997]

NATHAN: “I have one more question. Are you in any way connected with Seth?

ELIAS: (Smiling) In a manner of speaking, but also not. (Laughter) This has been my teacher also within other areas of consciousness, but within this present now, that essence of which you speak has moved into another area of consciousness in a different direction than that which I occupy presently. But the information which has been offered by that teacher has served as the prelude for this information and therefore has been purposefully delivered and executed, and has been in cooperation with this essence of Elias in agreement of offering information to you all to be in preparation of this shift in consciousness.

Initially, what has been important to be offered is information of yourselves, for if you do not know yourselves, you shall not be prepared for what you are creating. This teacher has offered you information of yourselves, and now within this present time frame, I offer you information of what you create". [session 280, May 14, 1998]

JOE: “Many religions teach of a melting into or a giving up of individuality to a God. Now, Seth said that All-That-Is is a giver of individuality, and once given, was inviolable. Do you agree with this?

ELIAS: Partially. I shall express to you that this is a limited explanation, for it continues within the expression of the belief system that there is some element which is beyond you. It designates a separation of essence and all-that-is.

Now; I express to you that I am in partial agreement, for in physical terms, you may view that there is a type of separation – although there is not a separation – of essence and all of consciousness, but they are intermingled and are in actuality all the same. The only separation that may be identified is the quality within consciousness that identifies essence within a personality tone, but essence is consciousness.

Therefore, in this, I am in disagreement as to any element that is ‘given,’ so to speak, for this implies that there is some being or some entity or some state of being which is beyond yourself, which yourself is essence and is consciousness. Therefore, the designation of the term ‘All-That-Is’ is merely a different designation for the term of ‘God,’ and I express to you that within consciousness, there is no separation.

Therefore, if you are referring to any aspect of consciousness that may be designated as God, you are also simultaneously expressing of yourself, for it is all the same.

In this, NOTHING may be given to you that you do not already possess.

Therefore, consciousness holds the quality of individuality. It is not given to you; it is possessed by you. And in this, there is no element of consciousness that shall separate you from uniqueness or from individuality, for this is a choice of creation within essence. It is a quality that is held by essence, but it is not an element or a thing which is given to you or may be revoked. (Pause)

JOE: Seth said we all have built-in natural protection against our own and other’s negative thoughts. How strong is this, and to what depth does it go?

ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, this is correct, although I express to you that I do not align with the terminology of ‘protection,’ for this merely is a reinforcement of your belief systems that there is any element within you or outside of you that needs be protected, and there is not. But I shall express to you that you do hold a very efficient and strong energy field which may allow or disallow what you term to be negativity or negative energy, and it may be enacted within self, regarding self, or regarding other individuals and situations. It is quite efficient. Within physical focus, you would term this to be your energy field, which is an element of your energy, your essence. Therefore, it may be directed inwardly or directed outwardly, and is quite efficient.

I express to you in clarification that within this shift in consciousness, as you move in the direction of widening your awareness and opening yourselves, moving into new areas of expression within physical focus, allowing yourselves vulnerability – which is also another term which is synonymous with openness – it is unnecessary for you to be directing your attention in the area of protectiveness to self, but merely to be recognizing that you choose to be participating in these types of expressions of what you term to be negativity, and you may also choose not to be expressive in this manner or participating with other individuals in this manner. But it is not necessarily a question of protecting yourself from elements of negativity. It is merely a choice to be engaging less thickness or more thickness within your focus.

JOE: ... In Session 185, when you spoke at Elmira, New York, you said that this had been presented previously by another. Were you talking about Seth in particular?

ELIAS: Yes; addressing to not the entirety of all of the information that I offered within that time period, but addressing to certain elements of information which was being presented that had also been presented previously by that essence.” (18) [session 408, May 30, 1999]

PAUL: “... the nine children of Rose are somewhere around four or five years old now, and quite physically focused individuals. I’m curious what role they are playing within this particular mass actualization of movement [regarding the insertion of the shift probablities]?

ELIAS: Their role is to be moving in conjunction with this shift in consciousness with ease, incorporating all elements of your reality without conflict and the actualization of acceptance.

Each of these manifestations participates in different expressions of beliefs, different expressions of actualized reality through objective perception, and expresses an acceptance of those creations of reality within the expressions of the beliefs, and each of these manifestations offers a lending of energy to this shift in consciousness through an expression of a lack of conflict.

PAUL: Interesting. Thank you. In a related area, I know we’ve talked about religious belief systems today, and it’s that time of year in our country, in our culture, the Christmas season, so to speak, and I wanted to address to an area that’s difficult for me, but being the season, I figure I’ll just jump in!

Anyway, I want to talk a little bit about my interpretation of some of the writings of Seth in the Seth books regarding this Christ entity, and I’ve had time obviously to reflect on some of my own religious beliefs in this area.

The first point I guess I’m realizing is that in our culture, we’re taught that this so-called Christ figure is a single individual with great superpowers, and at least in the context of the information in the Seth material, particularly in Seth Speaks, chapter 21, he discusses this Christ entity, as he called it, or the Christ essence, I guess we could call it – whatever – in a multidimensional context, and the more I look back at this and review the information, the clearer it becomes to me that this is not a singular manifestation.

We’ve talked about the three focuses of this essence – John the Baptist, the historical Jesus, and Paul or Saul of Tarsus – and in Seth Speaks, he says that the disciples, the twelve disciples ... he describes them as fragment personalities. There was a character, a teacher of righteousness character, that Seth describes as a probable self, and he talks about other religious heroes in that era, and then also of course this new personality or second, third, fourth coming, et cetera, in what we’re terming our shift.

So to sort of summarize what I’m saying and asking you, it seems clear, from this information at least, that this manifestation of individuals two thousand years ago ... there are at least 15 or 16 focus personalities that are clearly related. So this Christ that we look at as a single man is in fact – figuratively, let’s even use that word – 15 or 16 Christs at that time, not to mention the dozens of other related figures who were interpreting the Source Events as they translated into physical focus at that time.

So my question to you is, in Seth Speaks, he talks about this figurative second coming and says there is no such thing, as you do, but Seth very clearly talked about this so-called return as a singular person, and as you know, I am active on a mailing list where we explore these ideas, and I’m struck by people’s interpretation, literal interpretation and expectation, that fits back into the officially accepted mapping of a single individual. And you, in your information that I’ve been studying for several years now, very clearly talk about this in terms of these nine children as a multiple situation, a multiple multidimensional manifestation, which in a sense is similar to what Seth was talking about happened two thousand years ago. (19)

So my question, after a long preamble: why did Seth choose to address this returning focus based on Saul of Tarsus as a singularity, when it’s so clear that you have discussed it in terms of multiple manifestations?

ELIAS: Let me express to you first of all, the intent of these essences – myself and that of what you identify as Seth – are different. Therefore, the expressions objectively shall appear to you differently, although essentially they are not so very different. The presentment may be objectively offered differently in conjunction with the intent, but this is the direction of energy within the expression of the intent of a specific type of movement in a specific type of direction with what you may identify in your physical terms as a purpose.

Now; we shall be speaking figuratively in this explanation, for I am incorporating terminology as ‘purpose,’ and as you are aware, in actuality your purpose within this reality is merely to be experiencing, and therefore our purpose in interaction with you is merely experience also, in literal terms.

But in figurative terms, the purpose of the interaction is to be offering specific directions, and in those directions, there may be allowances within the intent of certain essences to be offering information which moves in conjunction and supportiveness of certain belief systems if that direction shall be incorporating the point, and the point is not necessarily to be discounting of the individuals within the physical dimension or to be expressing a right or wrong, but to be offering information that shall be facilitating of a widening of awareness, and in many aspects of communication, this may be accomplished in conjunction with the existing belief systems and not in a challenging of those existing belief systems. This moves quite intricately with the expression of the intent.

In the intent of the Sumari, the direction of expression is not placed in emphasis with the identification of accuracy of terms or philosophies, so to speak, but in the movement of energy into the creation of the expression of new explorations. Therefore, the action in the expression is to facilitate a movement of energy in the direction of allowance of new exploration. This may be accomplished even within the incorporation of existing belief systems and the association with familiarity, for the rocking of the boat, so to speak, is not intended to be creating of the expressions of trauma or the introduction of trauma, but merely to be introducing concepts through an acceptable expression that shall be sparking objective investigation, and in this, the purpose has been accomplished.

In a manner of speaking, this moves quite in conjunction with information that I also offer to you in conjunction with choices. The choices themselves, the actions themselves, matter not. They are choices. They are manifestations. They are actions. The beliefs themselves, in themselves, matter not. The beliefs that you hold in themselves are not right or wrong. They are not good or bad. They are in themselves neutral.

Therefore, the choice of expression – in the context of the intent of that essence – matters not. The information which is offered in its action is what matters, so to speak. It is the allowance for the incorporation of opening in your perceptions that matters, not HOW it shall be accomplished.

Therefore, the idea of what has been expressed of one individual matters not. The concept of the movement holds the importance. If the concept of the movement is offered and accepted in the translation through the aspect of the belief which is already held and if that is accomplishing of the purpose, so to speak, why shall it not be incorporated? For it matters not, for the idea is not what holds importance.

The one or the nine or the ten thousand manifestations and the idea of these are not what holds the importance. The movement of energy in the concept of the shift is what holds the importance, for this is the movement of the alteration of your reality. The manifestation is merely the symbolization of it. It is a manifestation of a focal point or a symbol which is offered as imagery of the concept, in like manner to what you identify as the Christ entity, so to speak.

The Christ entity – what is the Christ entity? In actuality, you do not hold a definition for the Christ entity. You hold speculation. You hold theory. You hold ideas/opinions of what this may be, but you do not look to the designation of the Christ entity, so to speak, as you look to a wall within physical matter and express to yourself, ‘This is a wall. These are the properties in physical matter of this physical wall. I may identify in physical objective terms what this object is.’ You identify the Christ entity as if it is an object, a manifestation, a thing, but you do not identify what this thing is.

I express to you that the Christ entity – or the thing of the Christ entity – is a symbol. It is what you present to yourselves as an explanation or a symbol, a figurehead, a focal point of a movement of energy which may be identified in the manifestation of an individual or of one essence manifest into many individuals. What be the difference? It is merely a difference in terms – once again, our term of terms! (Grinning) And....

JO: And so it doesn’t really matter, in redefining these terms, since many of them are symbols, if we use the term ‘All-That-Is’ as opposed to ‘The Creating Universal One and Whole’?

ELIAS: Correct. They are merely terms. They are offered in conjunction with the existing held belief systems in communication with individuals within this physical dimension that shall offer a beginning point, so to speak, in the allowance of information to be incorporated.

This may be expanded upon as the individuals individually and en masse allow themselves objectively to be vulnerable and to be widening their awareness objectively, and therefore incorporating more information, and as you are widening your awareness, you DO incorporate more information objectively. You expand your incorporation of your definitions. Your redefining of terms is an expansion of terms which is allowed through your widening of awareness.

I express to you that one essence is manifest within physical focuses in the expression of the symbol, so to speak, of this Christ entity, which is representative of the movement of energy. I also express to you that one essence offers the manifestations in multiple in THIS time framework. Another essence [Seth] holding a different intent [Sumari] expresses to you the information of multi-dimensionality of essence and offers that information in conjunction with a concept which you view to be past and which you view to be in existence in continuation presently, and in this, the information is merely offered in different physical terminology. The information that I have offered to you is essentially the same.

I express to you that you are all multidimensional. Therefore, why shall one essence not be multidimensional? Why shall one focus of essence not be multidimensional, as you all are multidimensional?

Therefore, the expression of Jesus is also multidimensional, as you are multidimensional. The expression of essence in that time framework, in conjunction with a movement in consciousness, manifest in several focuses. You yourselves manifest in several focuses. The expression of this essence presently is expressed in several focuses. This is not unusual or uncommon.

Therefore, you may look to the essence of Rose, and it is manifest within nine physical manifestations in this time framework in this physical dimension. You also are focused in multiples within this time framework in this physical dimension. These are not amazing stories. These are not unusual expressions or rare expressions of essence.

This essence of Rose, in conjunction with countless other essences, manifests into specific focuses with specific intents that are of this shift in consciousness and are expressed in conjunction with the offering of the shift and the intent of each essence family as a representation of these intents, which is a difference in the choice of expression from other essences, for other essences are not necessarily choosing a limitation in that type of expression, for you as essence allow more of an expansiveness in your intent and your expression of each focus.

This particular essence, in the manifestations to the point of their fragmentation ... which is not accomplished yet in your linear time framework. But to that point, the expression is manifest in a manner of limitation, for it is merely the expression of the shift and the expression of the represented essence family intent. This be the reason that each of these manifestations holds an essence family and alignment the same, for their expression does not deviate but follows the intent of that one essence family as a representation of the energy of that family. But this does not set apart these individual focuses as any more unique than any other focus which is manifest. It is merely your identification of definitions – once again – which sets them apart, and this moves in conjunction with your beliefs.

PAUL: That was very beautiful and interesting, and I just want to try to summarize my understanding from the question I asked you – that 23 years ago a book called Seth Speaks comes into my reality, and I sit and I read it, and I get through that chapter where he offers that information, in his terms, of the three Christs or the three focuses of Christ, so to speak, and talks about a return to help fix up some of the problems created in organized religion, and that mapped at that time onto to my existing religious belief systems that acknowledged the concept of a Christ, so to speak, and even the so-called second coming, which is popular knowledge in our culture.

So at that point in time, I read that information and it maps onto existing beliefs, but certainly expands them and provides interesting areas of exploration and speculation, and then 23 years ... 21 years later, I happen upon information offered by yourself, and it takes that idea and certainly on one level seems to contradict it, but on another level widens it and maps onto a widened set of beliefs that I hold at that time, and also helps me to speculate and explore this movement of energy that you’re talking about in a new way. Is that sort of correct?

ELIAS: Yes. You are merely allowing yourself to continue to proceed. You have opened the door, so to speak, in the incorporation of one element of information, and you have walked into the room through the door in another incorporation of information. Therefore, they are not contradictory in the manner that the door is not contradicting the room, but they are offering differing functions.

PAUL: And so I guess my final question in this area for today is, your information certainly places importance and significance on the symbols of these nine essence families and their intents, and I guess I’m just making a statement here that that is what strikes me about it, and that is sort of the frontier, as it were, to explore behind these symbols and what deeper meanings, I guess, are being translated through Source Events, source energy, into our physical objective awareness.

ELIAS: It is the presentment of energy to be actualized in the movement of this shift, the representation of that energy, and its manifestations as offered by each of these nine manifestations in conjunction with the actions and intents of the nine essence families, which you all are belonging to and which provides a directional point for all of your reality in this particular dimension.

PAUL: So, Elias, is it most probable that as this shift completes its circle, so to speak, in the coming century, that this concept, this archetype, this symbol of nine essence families, so to speak, will hold an objective awareness in everybody alive on the planet?

ELIAS: In the movement of probabilities in conjunction with this shift in consciousness, most probably, presently, yes.

PAUL: Fascinating! Interesting. Thank you.

ELIAS: You are very welcome.” [session 530, December 29, 1999]

JOE: “Elias, in the books dictated by Seth, he talks of All-That-Is, and he talks of All-That-Is being, in his terms, a primal gestalt.

Now, in the beginning ... and I know that’s a very, very relative term. In Seth’s books, he talks about All-That-Is basically giving up of himself – and I’m saying ‘him’ just in an explanatory sort of way – giving up of himself to many, many different parts, each basically being granted individuality as a soul. According to Seth, all souls were in the beginning, and none since, and yet different aspects of an individual essence can give freedom to a part of itself. But also, Seth said that this isn’t done lightly.

In reading all of the transcripts ... not all the transcripts, but in reading the transcripts, I kind of get the feeling that you’re saying basically the same thing. Can you offer any insight into that, or something along those lines?

ELIAS: Are you wishing of information as to what you have defined as ‘All-That-Is,’ or are you wishing for information concerning the offering of individuality to different aspects of what you have termed to be the soul? (No pause for a response)

I express to you that my identification is merely a difference in terminology, in that Seth has presented this concept of ‘All-That-Is,’ and I express a similar concept in the terminology of ‘all of consciousness,” which is essentially the same expression.

As to the ‘individuality of soul,’ my identification of this, to not be aligning with or reinforcing of religious beliefs, is incorporated in the terminology of ‘essence,’ which are aspects of consciousness holding individuality and personality expressions, but are also aspects of the whole, so to speak, which is all of consciousness, and cannot be, in a manner of speaking, separated from consciousness as that whole.

Therefore, in this, which direction of discussion are you choosing to be engaging, that of all of consciousness and its function, or that of essence and its identification?

JOE: I think you’ve answered the question without going off in a particular direction, because my intent in the answer to the question was ... and this is in part my own, having read all of Seth’s books and having read the transcripts that Vicki sends me all the time, as well as on the Elias website.

I try to correlate between what Seth has said and what you’ve said, and I know, because of the difference in family orientations and the difference just because you are both individuals, as we all are, that you see things a little bit different, but you are both trying to say the same thing. I think, in what you’ve just told me and what I’ve read in Seth, that that’s exactly correct, that you are both saying exactly the same thing, but from your own individual perspectives.

ELIAS: And I may express to you, the presentment of terminology may be different, as directed by the different intents of those essences which are expressing them. Within the offering of information that I express, in conjunction with the intent of this essence, there is an expression of awareness of reinforcement of existing associations of beliefs within your physical dimension.

Now; be understanding, this is not to say that I am expressing a judgment upon any of the expressions of your beliefs or any of the aspects of your beliefs within your physical dimension, for as I have stated, it is recognized that within themselves, they are neutral. They are neither good or bad.

But in this, there are very strongly held associations by many individuals, with respect to certain types of terminologies that trigger automatic associations with certain ideas, philosophies, and strongly held aspects of beliefs, that may be expressing limitations within many individuals within your physical reality.

And in this, there is created by this essence an expression of intention to not be reinforcing those automatic associations which may be creating limitations in the expressions of individuals within your physical focus.

But I may also express to you, essentially the concepts and the information is the same, which has been offered not merely by myself and through the expression of the other essence of Seth, but also [by] many other essences and many other expressions of information which have been offered to you throughout your history.

JOE: I think that comes through clearly, at least pretty clearly to me, and in fact, it really helps with the clarity of being able to understand the information that you are trying to impart.

ELIAS: Quite. Let me express to you, Holden [Joe], many individuals may create a perception, that they express the information that I may be offering in this time framework is different or new in relation to any other information which has been offered through other essences throughout your history.

But I shall express to you, in its basis, I am offering to you very similar – and at times the same – information which has been presented to you throughout your history. I merely am presenting that information in different terminology, in alignment with my intent of family and in association with this movement of this shift in consciousness, recognizing the direction of this shift in consciousness and what this shift is, in a manner of speaking, intended to be creating through your collective design and choice.

In compliance with that objective, the terminology that I may incorporate may appear differently than other information which has been offered through other essences, but the basis of the information and the concepts themselves are the same.

JOE: Well, for whatever reason, in my case ... and I can only speak for myself. But in my case, the way it’s being done by yourself, for whatever reason, offers me a lot of clarity and not so much confusion. So, the interaction that I’ve had with you, not only in previous discussions but also through the transcripts, has clarified a lot.

ELIAS: Quite, and I am understanding of this type of interaction, and in this, there is an accomplishment of the point.

I may express to you, not all individuals within your physical dimension shall be allowing themselves to receive and assimilate information in the manner in which it may be offered by myself, and this is quite acceptable.

The information that I offer, in the manner in which it is offered, is expressed objectively, that individuals may draw themselves to it and offer themselves this very expression of clarity and understanding through this particular expression.

But I may express to you also, there are many other individuals throughout your planet that allow themselves to be assimilating information OF THE SAME CONCEPTS in very different types of expressions.

But as I have stated previously, you all, without exception within your physical dimension presently, are participating in this shift in consciousness. Therefore, you all shall offer yourselves your most efficient manner of assimilating information individually in conjunction with your choice to be creating this shift in consciousness.

JOE: Mary and I were talking about something similar to that a little bit before we started this session. But the information is there, and I guess each and every one of us, just exactly as you’re saying, each and every one of us has our own way, and we’re drawn to whatever information works the best for us within a focus.

ELIAS: Quite, and I shall express to you also, there are many, many, many individuals that draw themselves to the information that I presently offer, and each of those individuals assimilates it differently.

JOE: But isn’t the end result the same, in that there is at least an accomplishment in understanding?

ELIAS: Yes, quite! This is the wondrousness of the diversity of yourselves and of all of consciousness. You shall each assimilate the same information through your individual mechanisms of your own perceptions, and it shall be beneficial, and you shall allow yourselves each to incorporate that in your own design. But you are all creating essentially the same movement and engaging the same objective, but in your diversity and uniqueness and individuality, you all accomplish this in your own individual expressions.

JOE: Then too, I know I am thankful for the ability to be able to perceive that we all are unique in that respect.

ELIAS: Quite!” [session 749, December 31, 2000]

DAVID: “... I’m not sure why I’ve drawn myself to these things, but I figured there was a reason. The first thing is, back in the time framework when Seth was speaking through Jane Roberts, I get the impression that in some way you and Seth were of the same, which would mean that Seth’s essence name would have been Rastin. (20) Am I off base here?

ELIAS: These are not expressions of the same essence, no.

DAVID: So what am I picking up, then?

ELIAS: A similarity of expressed direction.

DAVID: So there’s no connection, say, for example, my impression that you and Seth were twin essences of some form?

ELIAS: No, but I may express to you, as I have previously in this forum, I incorporate an awareness of that essence, and in your terms have been interactive with that essence.

DAVID: So why is it a mystery as to what Seth’s real essence name is? (Pause)

ELIAS: Clarify your question.

DAVID: Well, I don’t know, maybe I’m just reading certain information that I’ve drawn myself to throughout many pockets of the transcripts that somehow have indicated that Seth’s essence name was not that, that it was another essence name that was never revealed. Because there was one time when Ron asked you what Seth’s essence name was, and you basically said that we have this information already; however, you would not give it because you didn’t want to upset some certain individuals, which made me think that Seth was not his true essence name. (21)

ELIAS: And what shall suggest to you that this is not the essence name?

DAVID: Because, I don’t know, there were things that have come up in the transcripts that relate to you being... It’s like some people would say, ‘Are you and Seth somehow of the same?’ and your answer in one transcript would be, ‘Yes, and at the same time, no.’ It was just too many references that didn’t clear up the fact that Seth had a different name, that it wasn’t his essence name. If, at the time, Seth was his essence name, then that’s fine. It just didn’t seem to be clarified. It gave the impression that it wasn’t in some of the questions and answers that people have asked you about in the past, that’s all.

ELIAS: I shall express to you first of all, that essence and this essence are not the same energy personality essence. I may express to you also that there is no separation of essences. This is an association that you generate in relation to your belief in separation, which is expressed within your physical dimension. Therefore, there is confusion within your objective understanding, for you generate associations with what is known objectively to you in relation to the physical design of your dimension, which is quite understandable. But I have repeatedly expressed, these are translations, and I have repeatedly offered to you all that you generate thoughts and associations in absolutes, and there are no absolutes.

Therefore, you may express an impression to yourself that one essence is the same as another essence, and in a manner of speaking you are correct for there is no distinction in consciousness. There are merely distinctions concerning personality ENERGIES, but not in relation to entities. Therefore, as you offer yourself an impression such as this, partially you are correct in association with consciousness and the lack of separation and that there are no ENTITIES of consciousness. But in association with energy personalities they are not the same, as essences.

As to the confusion concerning essence names, this is merely a tone of the essence, associated with this physical dimension and the collective of all the attentions or focuses that are expressed in this physical dimension. I have expressed to you all that the essence name that is offered to you is a translation and is not the entirety of the tone of any particular essence. It is associated with the entirety of the tone of the focuses of attention of a particular essence in association with your dimension.

DAVID: So basically then, just to clarify the information, you gave your original essence name as Rastin, which is fine. Therefore, was Seth the original essence name given of the essence of Seth? (22)

ELIAS: Yes.

DAVID: Yes?

ELIAS: Yes.

DAVID: So basically, Seth’s essence name then was Seth. It wasn’t made up like we did with yours; we changed it to Elias.

ELIAS: You did not change...

DAVID: Well, not me! But if I’m connected with everything, yes, I did! (Laughs)

ELIAS: But this is MY choice.

DAVID: But I thought I was creating you! (Laughing)

ELIAS: Within your perception objectively, within your physical reality, yes. You are creating your PERCEPTION of myself. You are not creating myself. You do not create my energy expression and you do not create my choices, as NO essence creates the expression of any other essence or their choices. But you do create your perception of myself, and therefore you create the objective expression of myself.” [session 1080, May 13, 2002]

JIM: “I’m re-reading Seth books and I’ve just gone through one that the first time I read it I was quite impressed. This time I’ve gone through and I see conflicts with what you’ve said. I favor what you’ve said over what he’s got there. I don’t understand that, why it was good the first time and not the second.

ELIAS: Let me express to you, first of all, within the time framework in which you initially engaged that information from that essence, it offered you an avenue in which to expand your awareness in a different manner.

Now; you have been generating that action for quite some time. In creating that action and offering yourself more and more information, you have also moved into a preference of assimilating information with less distortion and less interpretation.

Now; this is not to say that the information that was offered by that essence is not valid, for it is. At times, I may express to you, individuals may misinterpret what has been offered in information by that essence in incorporating the information in absolute terms. Therefore, they may not necessarily incorporate an objective understanding of the coloration of that information. It is not that it is invalid or that it is wrong, for it is not; but that essence incorporated a different essence family, a different intent [Sumari], and therefore chose to be expressive in a very different manner than myself [Sumafi].

I choose to be interactive directly with individuals within your physical dimension. I also choose intentionally to be offering information which does not necessarily reinforce your existing expressed beliefs. Not that your beliefs are bad or that they are enemies or that they should be eliminated, but they are quite familiar to you.

In the purpose of interacting with each of you in association with this shift in consciousness, the point is to allow yourselves to expand your perception and to recognize your beliefs – not merely to recognize your beliefs, but to recognize that you also incorporate choice and how to move your attention. If you are offering yourself information that merely consistently reinforces what you incorporate already as expressed beliefs, you do not necessarily challenge yourself to widen your awareness. This is what you are incorporating in assimilating the information that I am offering.

For the most part, it is quite similar to other information which is offered by other essences and has been offered by other essences. I am merely incorporating the information in a different manner and incorporating a different language, so to speak. Those individuals that seek to be assimilating information in the least expression of distortion and are genuinely seeking information concerning how they may be creating their reality and how they may be intentionally manipulating their energy in not merely a beneficial manner but a more efficient and less conflicting manner, those individuals draw themselves, such as yourself, to the information that I am expressing. Are you understanding?

JIM: That sounds very Sumafi to me. (Elias laughs) One of the things that crosses my mind once in a while is why should I bother working with the beliefs and trying to widen my horizon if I’m going to trip over the threshold into disengagement fairly shortly? It’ll all happen then.

ELIAS: Ah! This is an interesting question. But it may be quite purposeful for you to be continuing to address to your beliefs, for what you accomplish within physical focus allows you more freedom once you disengage, for you widen your awareness. Therefore, once you choose to be disengaging, you also incorporate a wider awareness objectively in that state.

Therefore, perhaps as you move into that choice of disengagement and if you are generating a time framework in which you are experimenting with the objective awareness and creating physical imagery, the time framework, so to speak, in which you become aware that you are manipulating all of the imagery is much quicker.

JIM: Yes, I can see that.

ELIAS: This also facilitates the action of nonphysical transition. For the more that you incorporate the action of recognizing and accepting beliefs within physical focus, the less challenging or what you may term to be time consuming it may be to be shedding those beliefs.

For once a belief is accepted, that is not to say that it becomes permanently accepted, for it does not; for you accept beliefs in the moment. But once you have generated the action of accepting beliefs in any moment, you become much more aware of the experience of that action and it becomes easier.

Therefore, once you engage nonphysical transition, as it is not an action of accepting beliefs any longer but shedding those beliefs, the beliefs that you have allowed yourself to be accepting of in different moments within physical focus become beliefs that are easily shed, for there is no matter of examination of them and addressing to them.

JIM: That makes sense. (Elias chuckles) I don’t know if I’ve accepted beliefs or not. I don’t know how to word it, but I think I’ve made some progress.

ELIAS: I may express to you that in certain moments you have accepted some beliefs and continue to do so. Remember, accepting a belief is not an action that is incorporated once and thusly becomes solid, absolute and permanent, for that negates choice. Therefore, it is a matter of accepting a belief in the moment.

You shall recognize your expression of acceptance of a belief as you present it to yourself in any manner, perhaps through an engagement of interaction with another individual, and as you present the belief to yourself, you are not reactive to it. It genuinely does not incorporate any judgment within you and it matters not. You do not react to it in a manner of judgment in either good or bad.

JIM: I think I’m making progress in that direction. I don’t feel very judgmental. In fact, I judge myself for not judging, I guess.

ELIAS: (Laughs) That may appear to be quite ludicrous! Would this not be the point, to be moving into an expression of non-judgment? It appears to be quite humorous to be judging yourself for not judging! Ha ha ha!

JIM: Humor is the way to go, I’ve found. The more humor I can inject, the better.

ELIAS: This does offer you much more of an expression of playfulness and fun! Ha ha ha!

JIM: It does.

ELIAS: Which I am tremendously advocating. Ha ha!

JIM: Yes, I know. It’s one of the enjoyable things about your sessions.” [session 1343, May 15, 2003]

JOHN: “In one of the Seth books, he says that Christ was not crucified. Since there is no absolute historical truth as to whether Christ was crucified or not, why would Seth use language that made it sound as if he’s teaching that the absolute truth was that Christ was not crucified?

ELIAS: I will express to you, as I have previously with other individuals, the agenda of that essence was different from this agenda. In this, I have expressed that in my interaction with all of you, I incorporate the least amount of distortion as would be possible in relation to what you understand, offering information in personal situations in relation to your widening of awareness and shifting. That essence was offering information in association with this shift also, but in a different manner. In that, there was less concern with distortion in association with your beliefs.

In offering what you would view as new concepts – which, in actuality, they are not new, but being presented in a new manner – that was the point of that essence’s interactions, to begin an objective movement, to begin the movement of preparation for the objective element of this shift, which that essence accomplished quite successfully. But there are elements that are presented that may have been offered in conjunction with your beliefs, but also presenting information as a beginning point of introducing the concept of no absolutes. Therefore, the manner in which that essence presented information was different from myself, but was creating an introduction to the same concepts.

In expressing that this individual was not crucified, it prompts you to question, for your religions express that he absolutely was. Therefore, it prompts you to question those absolutes by introducing a different absolute. Therefore, the method may be different, but it accomplished the introduction quite successfully.” [session 2284, June 02, 2007]


Library: find out more about an annotated book listing of Seth/Jane Roberts.



End Notes:

(1) Paul’s note: a reference to an experience Mary had early on in which she projected during a session, while engaging the energy exchange with Elias, to an area of consciousness far removed from our physical one. Mary described it as containing various colors, shapes, and sounds that she found difficult, if not impossible, to describe in words.

(2) Paul’s note: Elias uses the metaphor of orange sections to show that there is no separation within consciousness, that it’s all connected. He says that we create the artificial division of sections where none really exist. The same is true with our physical selves and our essence.

(3) Vic’s note: Mary’s question was in regards to whether or not Jane Roberts ended her physical focus as a result of a lack of creative expression.

(4) Paul’s note: Elias plays a game with forum participants, in which they try and connect their impressions of various categories of objects, people, even concepts to the nine essence families. The goal is to learn how to recognize the working together of our intuitions and our intellect through our impressions.

In each public session, participants can offer their impressions and Elias usually responds with an answer of one point, acceptable, or less probable.

Digests: find out more about the game.

Included in the game is a category of tiles that Elias says are to be found in the (inner) city that we are presently beginning to build.

Digests: follow these links for more information on:
tiles | the city.

(5) Paul’s note: Seth/Jane Roberts’ term for expressing the concept of God as an action of eternal becoming, inseparable from and contained within Everything, incomprehensible in Its Totality.

This information was first introduced in The Seth Material, Chapter 18, The God Concept – The Creation – The Three Christs, (1970), sessions #426-428, (no date given.)

Elias initially used the term “Creating Universal One And Whole” to describe the same Reality. This was subsequently replaced by “all of consciousness.”

Digests: find out more about Creating Universal One And Whole/all of consciousness.

Introduction: follow this link for a Seth, Elias Comparative Overview.

(6) Paul’s note: Reta is refering to the Christmas light analogy, found in The “Unknown” Reality, Vol. 2, (1978), session 740, February 26, 1975. Seth compares our multiple, simultaneous focus personalities to the lights circling a tree. They can’t been seen at one time, from a physical perspective, but indeed all exist simultaneously. He also goes on to make the point that various “scales of awareness [focuses] contain their own infinities, no matter how finite they appear to be.”

Toward the same end, Elias likes to use the analogy of a multidimensional camera with mulitple lens/focuses – with each lens representing an individual focus personality.

(7) Paul’s note: Oversoul Seven is the name used for the lead character in a series of “fictional” books written by Jane Roberts; The Education of Oversoul Seven (1973), ), The Further Education of Oversoul Seven (1979), and Oversoul Seven and the Museum of Time (1984).

Digests: find out more about Oversoul Seven.

(8) Vic’s note: I sure noticed the absence of personality! I kept thinking that it was Elias, but it wasn’t, but it was. Very confusing, and not nearly as enjoyable as the Elias I’m used to!

(9) Paul’s note: during the first year of sessions, as the phenomenon developed, Mary made it clear that she didn’t wish to “channel” anything or anyone else besides Elias. In her words, she wasn’t going to serve as a cosmic “radio station.”

(10) Vic’s note: Elias often refers to the essence of Paul (Patel) as “my dear friend.” Paul (Patel) was introduced by Elias as an essence that had much relevant information to deliver, and would most likely, deliver it through Ron via “automatic writing.” Patel is the essence name and Paul is a focus of Patel’s that Ron connect’s with very strongly. Hence, we often use both names to describe this essence. Elias occasionally uses only the name Paul or Patel but they refer to the same essence. Ron began this energy exchange on June 10, 1996.

For the most part, Paul (Patel) delivers information that is similar to the information that Elias delivers. However, it seems to be of a more personal nature than the information offered by Elias. Most of the exchanges are either in response to specific questions asked, or are a complement to the concepts presented in the information offered by Elias.

Digests: find out more about Paul (Patel).

(11) Vic’s note: Referring to the essences that help support the energy exchange between Mary and Elias; Ayla represents yellow, Ordin represents purple, Otha represents green, Tomkin represents red, Patel represents orange, and Elias represents blue. These colors each represent an essence family in the educational game.

Digests: find out more about the game.

(12) Vic’s note: I wouldn’t say that the vocal tone in this session resembled Mary’s at all, but it did sound obviously different at certain points throughout the session ; a higher pitch than usual.

(13) Paul’s note: a reference to the 2075 probabilities originally presented by Seth/Jane Roberts in Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul, (1972), Chapter 22, The Meaning of Religion, session 586, July 24, 1971.

(14) Paul’s note: I’m including information from the Seth Material, channeled by Jane Roberts from 1963 – 1984, in this note because so many Elias readers are also Seth readers and these two sources share interesting similarities.

Jane first published some of, what she termed, “Christ material” in The Seth Material (1970), Chapter 18, The God Concept – The Creation – The Three Christs. However, Seth only actually names John the Baptist and Jesus Christ saying that he would offer the third name at a later date.

In Seth Speaks, (1972), Chapter 21, The Meaning of Religion, session 586, Seth talks about the ‘Christ entity’ in terms of three physical focuses: John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, and Paul or Saul of Tarsus. Seth also mentions that the twelve disciples were fragment personalities of the ‘Christ entity’ and the historical figure named “the teacher of righteousness” was a probable self. All this to say that Seth’s version of the ‘Christ entity’ phenomenon is multidimensional and multipersonal in nature.

Now, according to Elias, these three primary physical focuses – whom we know today as John, Jesus, and Paul – were also manifestations of a single essence. But in addtion, Elias has offered that this ‘Christ essence,’ so to speak, belongs to the Milumet essence family.

(Vic’s transcript note: Jene expressed irritation during the break with Elias’ refusal to answer [my earlier] question about essence naming [for the focus of Jesus Christ]. She also said that this is the first time she has felt irritation with Elias during a session. I am sharing this for the benefit of folks who don’t attend sessions because quite often, information delivered after a break is directly related to conversation during the break.

ELIAS: “Continuing: (To Jene) I shall offer, for your clarification and curiosity ...

JENE: Thank you.

ELIAS: ... essence family.

JENE: Okay. That’s cool.

ELIAS: For you are correct that we are focused upon the actions of essence families, and this holds significance. Therefore, I shall express the essence family. This particular essence in question, which was manifest within three physical manifestations, is of the family of Milumet.

As to a distortion, you are partially correct in that the manifestation within the intent of the family of Milumet was to be expressing of what you now term to be spirituality. In the actual expression, it was to be reminding you of your connections with essence. You are correct, in a sense, that this information has been distorted, although you have purposefully chosen the progression that you have created throughout your history, leading you within your progression of probabilities to this experience of your present shift.

Therefore, you may in one respect express that you have distorted the information offered of essence, but within another respect you have changed the information for your own experience. This essence family, within initiating of your religious time period, focused upon the intent of a remembrance of no separation of essence. This was translated symbolically, physically.” [session 141, December 22, 1996]

Later, Elias also provided the essence name for this ‘Christ essence’ during a later session :

VIVIEN: “The other thing I wanted to ask is the essence names of Mary and of Jesus. (Pause)

ELIAS: Essence name held by the focus of Mary, Sheen. Essence name held by the focus of Jesus, Telleth.

VIVIEN: Telleth. Okay, thank you.” [session 382, April 12, 1999]

According to Seth, it was Paul who, in creating the organization of the church that was left unsatisfied, in that he had not fulfilled his original intent. Both John and Jesus succeeded in fulfilling theirs’. So that unfulfilled intent forms the basis for Paul’s “return,” so to speak, to help make human kind more aware of their connection with All-That-Is, no longer requiring the direct mediation of priesthoods and calcified beauracracies to directly experience the Divine Within.

While Seth speaks of this so-called “return” in very singular terms, Elias expands and diverges at this point. According to Elias, that unfulfilled intent forms the basis for the focus of Paul’s mergence with the essence of Rose to remanifest as nine male children and lend energy to our shift.

Digests: find out more about the nine children of Rose.

Digests: find out more about mergence.

Finally, for those interested, Paul (Patel) offered the essence family alignments for the three primary focuses of the ‘Christ essence’ during an online chat, dated March 10, 1998:

PATEL: “Greetings this energy has been quite encompassing of you all tonight.

PAUL: Hi Patel!

TOM: Greetings Paul (Patel).

MJ: Hello Paul (Patel).

PAUL: Yes it has!

TOM: Yes, we have felt you.

PATEL: Certain questions have arisen that may well be answered by yourselves but I shall be available to you if you so choose.

PAUL: ... A question from Tyl [Joanne]; what are the family alignments of the three focuses of the Milumet essence?

PATEL: Apologizing for delay, Olivia [Ron] has issues within this exchange.

PATEL: Focus of Jesus, Vold.

PATEL: Focus of John, also Tumold.

PATEL: Focus of Paul, Tumold.

PAUL: Thank you very much!”

Digests: find out more about Paul (Patel).

Summary of the ‘Christ essence’
names and family connections
essence name: Telleth (source: Elias)
essence family belonging to: Milumet (source: Elias)
essence family alignment: John the Baptist/Tumold (source: Patel)
essence family alignment: Jesus Christ/Vold (source: Patel)
essence family alignment: Paul/Saul of Tarsus/Tumold (source: Patel)

Digests: find out more about essence families; belonging to/aligning with.

(15) Paul’s note: Jane Roberts states in her introductions to the Oversoul Seven trilogy that she did not write them in conventional terms, but they were “delivered” in, more or less, finished form via automatic writing.

(16) Paul’s note: Elias is implying here that he holds a teaching focus similar to Cyprus – another character in all three Seven books – who is Oversoul Seven’s teacher. In that relationship Cyprus has a wider focus and “remembers” more of his aspect selves than Seven does, as Seven is still “more” focused on his physical selves than Cyprus.

(17) Paul’s note: this session occurred in a small hotel room (106) at the Holiday Inn during the June 1997 Seth Network Int'l. conference in Elmira, NY. The people attending, myself included, were all in the midst of exploring the work of Seth/Jane Roberts. I had brought up the topic of Oversoul Seven earlier by asking a question about the sound tiles found in the City of the Speakers in the first Oversoul Seven book.

In this reply, Elias is saying that the four people closely involved in what he terms “the pyramid focus” – Vicki Pendley, Cathy McCallum, Ron Churchman, and Mary Ennis – are figuratively represented by the four main characters in the first Seven book – The Education of Oversoul Seven – Lydia, Ma-ah, Proteus, and Joseph. This was startling, even embarassing to those four when Elias mentioned it at the time (well three actually because Mary was in trance and doesn’t usually recall much of what Elias discusses during a session.) Anyway, the connection went right over my head (and most everyone else’s present at the time) as we didn’t know that he was refering their essence names (Lawrence, Shynla, Olivia, and Michael.) At the time, all I connected with was the fact that Elias was somehow involved in the actual creation of the Oversoul Seven books.

The “pyramid focus,” at this time consisted of these four individuals – Vicki, Cathy, Ron and Mary. Shortly after this session, a “fifth point” appeared named David Tate. According to Elias, ... well this is one of those sci-fi concepts of his, so I'’ll defer to the proverbial horses’s mouth.

Digests: find out more about pyramid focuses.

To finish this footnote, the four main characters in The Education of Oversoul Seven are: Lydia, Ma-ah, Proteus, and Joseph. Lydia lives in late 20th century USA, Ma-ah in 35,000 B.C., Proteus in the 23rd century, and Joseph in 17th century Denmark. All are focuses of Oversoul Seven. Their unfolding stories reveal an interconnected saga that embodies many of the main concepts in the information offered by Seth: probable realities, simultaneous time or “no-time,” “reincarnation” based upon “no-time” not karma, the eternal validity of the soul, we create our own reality, counterparts, the nine families of consciousness, and the purpose of physical life as value fulfillment, to name a few.

(18) Paul’s note: I was present for the later half of session 185, held in Elmira, NY at the SNI Sethnet 1997 conference. Many of us asked questions based upon our knowledge of the Seth/Jane books. Topics included Oversoul Seven, the Speakers, sound tiles, “before the beginning,” Dream Walkers, the Christ Entity, the three personalities of Christ, the 2075 probabilities, extraterrestrials/UFOs, belief systems, probabilities, you create your reality, and more.

Transcripts: find out more about this session .

(19) Paul’s note: I moderate the Sethnet email list at groups.yahoo.com/group/sethnet where the list focus is upon the 40-plus books published by Jane Roberts and Robert Butts.

(20) Vic’s note: Elias first introduced himself as Rastin, or “Raz.” Mary was uncomfortable with this name and insisted on calling him Elias, as she had “remembered” an individual named Elias during a past-life regression a few years prior. She was very comfortable with this particular memory, as she had remembered Elias as a very close friend. Recently, Elias told us that we had altered probabilities (whatever that means!) and that his “essence tone” is now Elias.

(21) Paul’s note: here’s the actual exchange:

RON: “Elias, what’s Seth’s essence name?”

ELIAS: (Chuckling, and we all laugh) “You possess this information already, and you may be investigating to be finding of this information; for I wish not to be intrusive to individuals that this may be causing conflict within.”

RON: “Fair enough!”

ELIAS: “I am quite sure!” [session 185, June 21, 1997]

(22) Paul’s note: Seth first introduced himself through one of his focus personalities that lived in Elmira, named Frank Watts on the Ouija board with Jane Roberts and Rob Butts.

(“Are you there? Can you give us your initials?”)

F. W.

(“Please spell out your first name.”)

Frank.

(“Last name.”)

Watts.

(“Can you give us the year of your death, Frank Watts?”)

1942. (The Early Sessions, Book 1, New Awareness Network, Manhasset, N.Y., 1997, p. 1-2.)

Later, in session 4, he introduced himself as Seth.

(“Frank Watts, can we refer back to you on any specific questions in the future, for further elaboration?”)

Yes. I prefer not to be called Frank Watts. That personality was rather collarless.

(“What would you prefer to be called?”)

To God all names are his name.

(“But we still need some kind of name or title we can use in talking to you.”)

You may call me whatever you choose. I call myself Seth. It fits the me of me, the personality most clearly approximating the whole self I am, or am trying to be. Joseph is your whole self more or less, the image of the sum of your various personalities in the past and in the future. (Ibid, p. 23.)

Digests – see also: | absolutes | accepting self | becoming | belief systems; an overview | bleed-through | choices/agreements | Creating Universal One And Whole/all of consciousness | dimension | dis-ease | distortion | Dream Walkers; an overview | energy exchanges; Elias, Paul (Patel) | equations | essence; an overview | essence families; an overview (Milumet/Watchers, Sumari/Speakers, Sumafi/Seers) | essence family intents | espression of essence | focal points | focus of essence; an overview | forum | impressions | information | intents | manifestation | mergence | objective/subjective awareness | oversoul | perception | probable selves | Regional Area 4 | religion (spirituality) | religious era | remembrance of essence | Rose; the nine children of | separation | A Seth, Elias Comparative Overview | shift in consciousness | time frameworks | trauma of the shift in consciousness | truth | widening awareness | you create your reality |

[ Go to the top ]


The Elias Transcripts are held in © copyright 1995 – 2015 by Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.

© copyright 1997 – 2015 by Paul M. Helfrich, All Rights Reserved. | Comments to: helfrich@eliasforum.org