the Elias forum: Digests of Essential Elias.

Home

Introduction

Digests

Transcripts

Exercises

Gems

Library

Search

Donate

creature consciousness

Elias “gems”

ELIAS: “Creatures are not essence. Therefore, unlike essence which focuses simultaneously in many different physical dimensions, the creatures are a creation of yours within consciousness. They are a direction of energy of consciousness. Therefore, you direct energy within each physical manifestation aligned with the framework of that particular dimension, such as your genetic encoding within this particular physical dimension which is not incorporated within other physical dimensions. In this, you are within other physical dimensions presently. Your elephant is not. It is unique to this dimension and this physical focus.

“The creatures also hold free will and choice, for all consciousness holds free will and choice. You have manifest this, but as it is created it may continue within its own choices. Therefore it may choose, for its own value fulfillment, to be experiencing another dimension within physical manifestation. In this, within agreement to you it shall become extinct, and its energy shall be rearranged and remanifest within another physical dimension, encoded with the specifications which are necessary for that physical dimension.

“Your dinosaurs exist within another dimension. They move freely and appear in the same form as you visualize them to be within your dimension, but they do not exist within your time framework within this dimension any longer. Within another dimension they do exist, with different inner encoding. This is not necessarily genetic encoding in the same manner as your encoding, for this is unique to this dimension.” [session 179, June 01, 1997]

NATASHA: “I have a question I didn’t ask you in my previous sessions; I forgot, so I want to ask it now. Why am I drawn so much to water? Is it a matter of preference in this focus, or do I have something in other focuses that I dealt in water or lived in the water or something?”

ELIAS: “Both. You incorporate a preference in this focus and that is the reason that you draw other focuses and the energy of other focuses into a reinforcement of your experience in this focus.”

“In other focuses you incorporate an affinity to water in association with accomplishments, sports, and also in a genuine lack of separation in recognizing your interconnectedness to a symbol that represents life. And I may also express to you that you incorporate a focus as whale.”

NATASHA: “Thank you very much.”

ELIAS: “You are quite welcome.” [session 1468, November 08, 2003]

Elias “gems”

JIM: “Are whales and dolphins of a higher consciousness, so to speak, or is that a belief system that we’ve incorporated? Do they have other senses that we, I know we’re aware of them, but do they possess other senses that they possess that …

ELIAS: Whales possess a higher vibrational quality, this allowing them a higher element, so to speak, for there is no higher of consciousness. We will rephrase that to be wider element of consciousness. They also possess inner senses partially comparable to your own. They possess an awareness of inner senses. These animals have evolved within their consciousness to almost incorporate essence. (Pause)

CATHY: Is that why they snuff their trainers, because they know there’s no right or wrong? (Laughing)

JIM: That makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it?

ELIAS: You would be amazed at the thinking process of these animals, and how they view your species!

CATHY: I’ll bet!

JIM: (Almost in unison) I’ll bet!” [session 43, October 08, 1995]

ELIAS: “We have been speaking of your cultural time and your natural time, your intellect and your intuition, to further offer you information to be connecting and understanding of yourselves and your connections. We will also be discussing your relationship with nature. Now I pose to you the question, ‘What is your connection with nature?’ (Pause)

VICKI: Well, we have created it.

ELIAS: How are you connected? (Pause)

RON: Hopefully, I think we would be part of it.

ELIAS: How are you part of it? (Pause)

JIM: Everything that nature is we are, and vice versa. (Pause)

ELIAS: Think to yourselves how you view your species in relation to nature. How do you view a plant in relation to nature? How do you view an antelope or a caribou in relation to nature? (Pause) Now express to me, how does man fit into nature?

JIM: Not very well! (Laughing)

ELIAS: This is precisely the answer I was expecting! You separate yourselves automatically. You view an animal, and although you may not have the ability to express, in words, how you believe it to be connected with nature, you automatically connect it. You view a tree or a flower, and there is no separation from nature. You view an ocean, and it is natural. It is part of nature. You cannot separate out these elements from nature, but you do separate out your species, therefore creating a barrier. You do this, for you do not see your own connections. You do not view your own affectingness. You do not see your interaction with nature. Therefore, how may you apply natural elements to yourselves, if you are not a part of nature itself? How may you incorporate natural time, if you are not natural? (Pause)

I will say to you, now view man and his connection to nature, for without your species, nature would not be what it is. As all other elements contribute to nature, so also do you. We have discussed previously these elements, but you do not make the connections. We have discussed your weather, your planetary conditions; earthquakes, floods, tornadoes; which you create, which are part of nature. We have also discussed your archaeology; your artifacts, your ancient remains; which remain only through holding of your remembrance. These are the contributions that you add to nature.

Through your emotions, you are influencing of your planetary conditions; your weather, your tides, your elements of natural occurrences upon your planet. Through your thought process, you hold the clarity of the focus. Your animals, your flowers, your clouds, your oceans, appear as they appear, for you are part of them. You hold the clarity. You hold the vision. What you see, what you visualize, is what is created. Therefore, you are a very intricate part of nature. You also feel the natural movement continuously, this being your natural time; which is natural to you equally as it is to your creatures.

VICKI: ... Okay. [Cathy’s] question is, do we create the reality of animals?

ELIAS: In a manner of your speaking, partially, yes; partially, no. Animals incorporate their own consciousness, and they also create their own reality, just as does a plant. It is not dependent upon essence to be creating of reality, for all consciousness creates reality. Therefore, an animal creates its reality; although some animals are quite affected by your consciousness, and influenced by your consciousness. Therefore, in a sense, you help to create the reality of some animals. In another sense, you are influencing of creating the reality of all animals; for we have discussed, this evening, that you are a part of nature, a very intricate part, which is quite affecting of all creatures. Therefore, in this respect yes, you create the reality of the creature; although they create their experiences, although you influence many of their experiences also.

You are more directly affecting of your domesticated animals, that your are directly involved with and connected to; for your consciousness works in cooperation with these animals, and you are more directly affecting of their reality. As I have expressed, you may project, to an animal that you are connected with, elements of your consciousness for the animal to be experiencing; or the animal may pick up, so to speak, elements of your consciousness and incorporate them into their experience. This is not accomplished on a ‘thinking level,’ so to speak. The animal does not make a decision and say to itself, ‘I believe I shall be depressed today, therefore my human connection may be happy’; although many times, an animal will assume elements of consciousness that you are projecting, and they will express them, whereas you may not; as in our case of your spouse, (looking at Jim) who also connected with your creature of your dog, which was experiencing physical expressions. (Pause) Shynla [Cathy] incorporates this with her own animal also.

VICKI: So when I notice her dog having moods, quite often that is a connection with Shynla [Cathy]?

ELIAS: Very much so. You will also notice physical expressions. This individual, choosing not to be expressing of discomfort within physical focus, this being not a part of her reality, not wishing to experience uncomfortableness, which her creature has connected with and experiences for her; also allowing expressions of belief systems, which you also may project. You may not be wishing to be incorporating your medical profession personally, continuously; therefore your pet will require much attention. Be remembering also, these examples are expressions of what you would term extreme areas, areas that are within consciousness of the individuals involved, with fears within belief systems, elements that may not be quite so easily expressed themselves. Therefore, they may connect with their creatures.

VICKI: So, these are ... what did you just say? Instances involving extremes?

ELIAS: Correct.

VICKI: So my experience with my own animals, that they require very little medical attention, as do I also require very little medical attention, that would be ...

ELIAS: A mirroring; as does Ron also require very little, which creates an ‘atmosphere’ around these creatures. The individual may not require much medical attention personally, but within a ‘layer of consciousness’ incorporates a belief system which leans heavily in this area; therefore it is an expression of energy and consciousness, which is ‘picked up on.’” [session 77 March 10, 1996]

VICKI: “Well, I have two questions, one for me, one for Michael [Mary]. For Michael [Mary], what about the mass manifestations of illness, say, within the animal world?

ELIAS: Creatures incorporate their own consciousness, as do all things. I have expressed to you that you do not incorporate an understanding of animal consciousness. Although they do not incorporate essence as do you, they do incorporate a highly efficient consciousness. They also incorporate a collective consciousness. I have expressed, there is thought. There is great feeling. Many creatures do not incorporate the thought process as you view this to be, but their emotional expression is great. I will also express to you that within their collective consciousness, they may choose for their own reasons collectively, not individually, to incorporate an action as to attain your noticing.

VICKI: Their choice.

ELIAS: Their choice.

VICKI: Their creation.

ELIAS: Some creatures will choose to mass create situations to be expressing of an issue. This issue to which Michael [Mary] holds confusion is related to a very simple expression. Man, in his ever-growing attempts to be incorporating ‘better’ ways of accomplishing, chooses to be feeding animals elements that are unnatural to them. I am not expressing of your drugs! (He’s reading my mind again!) I am expressing that certain animals eat vegetation. Their expression within physical form is designed, molecularly and cellularly, to assimilate this type of energy, which is less dense than other energy. We have spoken of this previously. In this, you choose to be incorporating fleshy products to animals that do not consume this type of energy. Therefore, within a collective expression, they choose to manifest illness.

VICKI: Do you mean they were feeding those cows meat??? (Incredulously) (In reference to the ‘mad cow disease’ in England)

ELIAS: Correct.

VICKI: Oh! (She’s blown away)

ELIAS: It is making for ‘beefier beef!’ (Grinning)

VICKI: Wow! That’s interesting! (And stupid!) And so then they respond with this mass response.

ELIAS: You may express, within your understanding, that this may be classified as a ‘protest!’ (Grinning)

VICKI: Oh, that’s interesting!

JIM: They all got real mad!

ELIAS: They do not incorporate anger. (Smiling)

JIM: Yes. Thank you.

VICKI: Well, what good is the mass protest if nobody knows that it’s a mass protest?

ELIAS: Ah, but they do respond. They may not understand the consciousness, but the event is noticed, and also acted upon.

VICKI: So the connection between the feeding and the expression is noticed by the people that are feeding the animals?

ELIAS: Correct.” [session 85, April 10, 1996]

CATHY: “Okay, I have a question. I would like to know if my puppy is manifesting a hematoma for me so I can view my issues of personal responsibility and my belief system in modern western veterinary medicine. (Quite sarcastically, as per the norm!)

ELIAS: Which you answer for yourself already!

CATHY: It’s a little tough to widen those belief systems, obviously!

ELIAS: You draw to you those issues which you choose to be addressing.

DREW: How do you help a puppy understand it can heal itself?

ELIAS: It is unnecessary! (Somebody says ‘It’s his creation')

DREW: His creation for her understanding?

ELIAS: In part.

DREW: Could a puppy have its own issues for which it would manifest disease?

ELIAS: If choosing, yes.

CATHY: But this is in alignment with me.

ELIAS: Correct.

CATHY: Isn’t that nice? That’s swell!

ELIAS: This is not always the case. There are times when you shall view creatures manifesting certain developments, in cooperation in consciousness, for the benefit of individuals. This is not always the situation though, for there are also times that creatures manifest for their own reasoning. You attach negative and positive to these manifestations. The creature does not.

VICKI: Do animals manifest physically as a result of holding energy in similar manner to people?

ELIAS: At times.

VICKI: Oh. They have belief systems and they hold energy because of their belief systems???

ELIAS: I did not express that they hold belief systems! It is not necessary to hold belief systems to hold energy.

GAIL: But we as humans do that. Animals don’t.

ELIAS: Correct. Creatures manifest for many different reasons. You, within your singularity of perception, view that creatures do not manifest unless they are within alignment to human individuals and creating in conjunction with your consciousness. Creatures are consciousness. Therefore, they also manifest their own value fulfillment. They also manifest their own experience physically. They do not hold the same thought process as do you, although they do hold thought processes. They do not hold the same emotional process as do you, although they do manifest emotional processes. They also dream, as do plants, as do rocks, as does all of consciousness; cells, molecules, atoms. All consciousness manifests certain behavior.

VICKI: Why is it that so many domestic animals sleep so much?

ELIAS: Their function, within the reality that you have created cooperatively, is different from the function of creatures independent of your human species, so to speak. Therefore, it is unnecessary for waking consciousness to be focused and alert within their own creating of their environment and their situations, for you create this much for them within this cooperation. Therefore, they incorporate more subjective activity. In this manner also, they are more influenced by your consciousness objectively within manifestation, for they are engaged in subjective activity more of your time element; allowing intersection with other consciousness, you, for more of your time period.

Creatures that you view to be wild, in your terminology, occupy more of their time element, which is perceived differently than you perceive the same time element, with the creation of their environment and their circumstances and their situations. You view this to be survival. It is far beyond survival, for they actively participate in the creation of their environment, to which they innately know they are connected with and a part of. They view no separation. Therefore, they also are aware that their attention must be directed in the area of creating their reality, which is the grasses, the plains, the oceans, the land, the trees, and also the cooperation and intermingling in creation of each other. In this, they also hold the innate understanding that there is no separation of consciousness. Therefore, what you view to be the cycle of life or your food chain is merely a reconstruction of energy in exchange by consumption, incorporating the experience of one consciousness into another; which these creatures hold the awareness of, for this is their focus. This is not your focus. This is not to say that these creature’s existences are more valuable or more enlightened than yours. It is different in its direction. Your creations focus within another angle for different experiences.” [session 154, February 23, 1997]

JIM: Do our creatures all have the same choices and alignments with their parents, as to how they would choose to manifest?

ELIAS: No. Within this, they choose physical genetic encoding to parents in alignment with this, but they do not incorporate as much information as do you. It is not quite the complex situation. Creatures also manifest within different creatures from focus to focus. They may not continue within the same species, excepting for your aquatic mammals. These exchange within each other, but not within other creatures within manifestations.

VICKI: Why is that?

ELIAS: It is the choice of this manifestation of consciousness. It is also the choice in agreement of yourselves, as creating of these constructs of energy consciousness within this dimension and physical focus.

JIM: Could a giraffe choose to manifest as a dolphin?

ELIAS: No. They may choose to be manifesting as another creature, but these aquatic mammals may only be exchanging within remanifestation to each other.

JIM: So it’s a higher consciousness, so to speak, within creatures ... I don’t mean to use those terms.

ELIAS: I am disliking of this higher consciousness! It is different.

JIM: Okay, a different consciousness. I understand that.

CAROL: So the consciousness would pre-exist, such as the way wolves mate for life and geese mate for life? That consciousness would pre-exist, and then that would be a choice to manifest within that physical manifestation because of those predispositions or those intents or choices? Well, they don’t have intents.

ELIAS: Yes, they do! There is no predisposition.

CAROL: Well, speaking of it in the way we were talking before, about someone deciding to physically manifest as a physical focus and choosing the parents, that type of a situation, would that exist in a consciousness that chose to become a wolf because it wanted the experience of mating for life, as opposed to some other creatures that don’t incorporate that action?

ELIAS: A focus of essence does not manifest as a creature. A creature does not manifest as an individual of your species.

CAROL: I didn’t mean that. Maybe I said it wrong ...

ELIAS: A creature may manifest as any chosen expression within creaturehood for the experience, except aquatic mammals or humans. They are not predisposed ...

CAROL: Let me clarify that because I really want to understand this. Do they sort of know ahead of time that wolves mate for life and want that experience?

ELIAS: This is what I am expressing to you. They are not predisposed. They manifest within a direction of consciousness for that experience, yes; but they are not predisposed to this. In this, I express to you also that there is not a closed system; for if you are singularly directing your attention to a wolf ... Consciousness that has chosen to engage manifestation as a creature within this dimension physically may choose to be a bear. It may choose subsequently to be a wolf, and as it is not predisposed it may, if it is choosing, for it holds free will, choose to not mate for life. It may choose, within alignment of the mass consciousness ... which is not a belief system! But within the mass consciousness and agreement of behavior within physical focus, it may choose to align and mate for life.

CAROL: Okay. What I’m trying to understand is what reasons would they have for choosing specifically different ... Is it because they have free will, and it’s just a choice?

ELIAS: It is merely a choice of experience.” [session 173, May 11, 1997]

ELIAS: “There are new species appearing upon your planet faster than there are species that become extinct. It is not an equal exchange of replacement. It is an endeavor of creativity. Therefore, within consciousness collectively, groups of essences introduce new species quite often upon your planet. This, as with all other creations, is requiring of much concentration within energy to be creating the physical manifestation encoded with its own genetic line, which shall be new and different from every other species known to your planet.

Species that become extinct, as we have touched upon previously, choose to become extinct. This is accomplished in many different ways with the aid of other species, yours also, which has aided many creatures in becoming extinct. This is not an elimination of the species or the creature. They have chosen to be disengaging from this particular physical dimension and shall manifest within another dimension. They have served for their value fulfillment within this dimension and choose to be experiencing within another dimension; therefore becoming extinct in one and appearing within another. Some species upon your planet have become extinct in another dimension and become manifest within your dimension!” (Chuckling, and we all laugh) [session 179, June 01, 1997]

DREW: “When you refer to creatures, does that include insects?

ELIAS: Yes.

RETA: Is the highest level of creature the development of the ape?

ELIAS: In which direction do you indicate highest?

RETA: Well, I’m just trying to divide the human essence focus from a creature. I know all creatures are beautiful and all creatures are wonderful, but I was wondering ... The most developed creature, I guess on the way to being as wonderful as we are, would be, I would have thought, the ape.

ELIAS: In actuality, although these creatures hold behavior patterns quite similar in some manners to yourselves, within what you are expressing and within consciousness, to your way of thinking of development, your sea mammals would be more aligned in this area.

RETA: Oh, yeah.

MJ: Like dolphins, for example?

ELIAS: And whales.” [session 179, Jiune 19, 1997]

MARGOT: “One more question on genetics: In regard to animal genetics, although animals can manifest as any kind of species from manifestation to manifestation, would a dog, for example, actually come back as a beetle, or a cat as a bird? Don’t animals usually tend to take their manifestations within a certain species, such as four-leggeds staying within that category?

ELIAS: No.

VICKI: Are there any generals to that?

ELIAS: Within your differences of species of animals, they may choose whatever experience they are wishing. This is a manifestation of consciousness directed by you. Therefore, there are no guidelines within the action of remanifestation.” [session 191a, July 10, 1997]

JIM: “One question, returning to the concept of cancer: Dogs get cancer. Do they create their own cancer?

ELIAS: Yes.

JIM: Do they have a ... they must have subjective mind.

ELIAS: Correct.

JIM: And they make choices?

ELIAS: Correct; although not in the same direction that you create choices.

JIM: Much more limited choices?

ELIAS: They are much more simple. They do not create in the same direction that you create. Their reasoning is much more simplified.

Creatures create diseases that your species creates as a result of your species. They have acquired the ability to be creating the same disease that you create, for YOU have created it, but their reasoning is much more simplified, and in their creation they are aware that they are creating an element that shall lead to their disengagement. Therefore, they are purposefully creating this. It is merely YOUR choices that you alter the creature’s creation by interfering with its creation. It has learned to create what you create, but it does not uncreate this situation if creating a severity of it. It allows for itself to be disengaging within its creation, but your species interferes and alters the creature’s creation by introducing it to your belief systems and your medical professions.

JIM: They must have learned it all from a subjective level.

ELIAS: Not necessarily. It is within a harmony. They learn this creation within a harmony of objective and subjective.

JIM: That gives them the ability to empathize far beyond what we would think.

ELIAS: Absolutely! They view you, they connect with your creations within physical focus, and they learn your creativity!” [session 232, October 31, 1997]

SUE: “I have a question. I dealt with asthma a few years ago, and one of my two cats has asthma, and I wonder if you could tell me if there’s any connection between her problem and mine?

ELIAS: Yes.

SUE: Can you tell me anything about what the connection is?

ELIAS: It is a sympathetic expression in connection to your energy. Many times creatures that are connected to you intimately, as what you view to be or express to be pets, mirror elements within yourself. They shall reflect back to you your own creations that you create within your reality. At times, they shall be offering expressions to you for your information and noticing. At times, they may be creating of situations within themselves physically that you project outwardly – not objectively, subjectively – that you wish not to be creating within yourself, and within agreement the creature may be creating for you. They may also mirror many elements of your belief systems, of your emotion, and of your physical creations.

SUE: So I’ve not only created it in myself, but I’ve sort of created it in her as well?

ELIAS: The creature holds the choice to be creating, but you are influencing, yes.

SUE: Okay. Thank you.

CHRIS: Okay, also if she got asthma and gave it to her cat, can she make it go away then, under the same principles?

ELIAS: She did not give this to the cat. The cat chooses to be mirroring an action within the individual.

CHRIS: She’s not really projecting it?

ELIAS: Energy; but the creature holds the choice to be accepting this or not and to be creating this as a mirror action. The creature also holds the choice to continue or to not continue within this action. Therefore, although you are influencing, you are not creating the situation, and if you are influencing of yourself and uncreating or affecting of your own situation, the creature may be choosing to be mirroring this also. Creatures often mirror your own fascinations and your own creations, and as you lend energy to these they continue to be creating of these elements, and as you are not lending energy they also allow the dissipation of the creation ... as you are familiar, Shynla! (Grinning) For you are quite adept at this creating, are you not??

CATHY: Yes, I am. I’m very adept at it. I do it very well, thank you.

ELIAS: Excellently! Perfectly! (Much laughter)

CATHY: You got it. Is there any other way?

ELIAS: Absolutely not!

JIM: So that’s what would follow through with my dog as well, with the lesion that we had discussed a few weeks ago?

ELIAS: Correct.

JIM: The fact now that I’m paying less attention to it ... he’s still bothering it. It’s still evident. Have I not allowed that to fully let go yet?

ELIAS: Correct.

DREW: Although the dog may choose to have the lesion regardless.

ELIAS: Quite!

JIM: That’s true, no matter what.

ELIAS: Absolutely!

JIM: And my acceptance of that....

ELIAS: Absolutely! Acceptance, acceptance, acceptance! (Jim sighs deeply and we all crack up, as we’ve been observing Jim deal with this issue for quite some time now)

BOBBI: Why would they choose to do that? Just helpfulness?

ELIAS: Not always. At times, they are merely mirroring you. It is an energy exchange. You are continuously influencing within energy of all things.

BOBBI: So they just pick up on that?

ELIAS: At times they are choosing to be manifesting certain elements for your noticing and in helpfulness within information to you, but at times they are merely accepting of your energy and influence and creating accordingly.

I have expressed to you many times, every action that you create is influencing of ALL of consciousness. This presents itself evidently within individuals and creatures objectively close to you, that you may hold evidence of your affectingness.” [session 246, November 30, 1997]

DON: “Is it possible that this huge power of the sexual experience is part of the reason we’ve built up all these taboos about it? Do we fear it? Do we feel that we’re close to something, and build up fears and taboos?

ELIAS: Absolutely. (Don says something inaudible here) Absolutely. It is creating of much fearfulness, for it is an expression unbounded of yourself within physical focus which holds MUCH powerfulness.

DON: So maybe that’s the reason that humans and animals have such a different reaction to sex? Because animals don’t feel that power that we feel. For them, there’s no aspect to sex other than the physical aspect.

ELIAS: Not necessarily. Your creatures also do not hold belief systems. Therefore, they do not place judgments upon their sexual activity. But look to your creatures. They display tremendous ritual, and they also are accepting of their sexual actions. They place no belief systems and judgments upon them. They accept them for what they are. They do not hold quite the same action as do you, for they are not responding within their sexual orientation to elements of essence as are you, but they hold less difficulties and conflicts than do you, for they do not hold the belief systems. They also hold intimacy.

DON: Are a lot of our belief systems built on fears that we will experience coming too close to something that’s essentially true?

ELIAS: Correct.

DON: And animals can’t experience that, so they couldn’t develop belief systems.

ELIAS: They have not been created in this manner. Your creatures are not essence. Therefore, they have not been created in a manner that you endow them with all of your belief systems. This is not necessarily limiting of them. In many aspects, they experience more freedom than you allow yourselves.

DON: There’s not much correlation. You look at dolphins and other very intelligent animals, and there’s really not much evidence that they develop any of the belief systems that we have.

ELIAS: No.

DON: So I guess my question is – what I’m trying to get to is – is there a direct correlation between the fact that we are central creatures and that we do develop belief systems? Are the two related? I mean, are we fighting ourselves in that way?

ELIAS: Yes, you are conflicting yourselves, but you are conflicting yourselves within your belief systems. You are limiting yourselves within your belief systems. You are no closer to consciousness than a dolphin. A creature merely holds no fearfulness of consciousness, for it has not separated itself as far from consciousness. There is an allowance of more subjective activity within creatures, for they do not block their subjective interaction. You hold fearfulness of what you term to be unknown; that which you have separated from, that which you do not remember.

DON: Is it because we do remember it on some level that we’re fearful of it?

ELIAS: No. It is that you have forgotten, and THIS creates the fearfulness; but as you move into a remembrance, the fearfulness dissipates.

HELEN: In other words, our belief systems are what keep us at a distance from our essence, so we can have purity of experience ...

ELIAS: Correct.

HELEN: ... in physical focus, and that’s why they were developed in the first place?

ELIAS: Correct; but it is becoming unnecessary for this separation. Therefore, you create this shift in consciousness to be exploring new aspects of your reality, incorporating more of your remembrance and of essence.

HELEN: And less belief systems.

ELIAS: Less separation.

HELEN: Less separation. But belief systems create the separation.

ELIAS: In accepting the belief systems, you create less separation.” [session 255, January 04, 1998]

SUE: “One question about my cat having asthma. One thing I realized after we talked about it a few weeks ago was that I tend to give her a lot of attention when she starts coughing, and I realized that I might be reinforcing her doing that. I’m still giving her the medicine that she appears to need, but I’m trying to ignore her when she coughs. Is that likely to make any difference in her having this?

ELIAS: As you reinforce, it shall continue to be created. It is being created in sympathetic action and agreement to yourself. As you do not reinforce your OWN need for attention within this area and you also do not reinforce this action with the creature, you do not concentrate upon this action as much and you do not lend energy to the perpetuation of its creation.

SUE: Okay. I thought it was probably better to not pay attention to her when she did it, but at times I felt like I was being mean to her, so I wasn’t sure whether....

ELIAS: You are also reinforcing your OWN belief systems within a mirror action in continuing this action. In this act, you are offering yourself a viewing of your own expectations and wantings within this focus. You are desiring of nurturing and affection and closeness; attention. Therefore, as the creature mirrors your action to you, you give to the creature what you are seeking yourself, but you are also perpetuating the creation.

SUE: Right. I feel guilty about her because she was always very playful, and the asthma slows her down and makes her quieter. I feel bad, as if I created this in her by wanting her to be less playful. Not that I mind her playing, but it annoyed me that she wanted me to play with her all the time.

ELIAS: This creature has created this action, this ailment, this constriction as an offering to YOU, in agreement and compliance with no expectation. It has offered this action to you, that you may view the very many elements of your own belief systems which cause you conflict. Therefore, it is unnecessary for you to engage guilt!

SUE: Thank you. That makes me feel better.” [session 256, January 10, 1998]

ELIAS: “Very well. This evening, shall we enter our discussion of your creatures? (Cathy mutters something in frustration here because she had stated before the session that she wasn’t prepared for this subject, and so we had chosen another) This being one of the topics that you have suggested that you are wishing to be discussing!

CATHY: So, why would a dog attack somebody in a coma? (Laughter)

ELIAS: (Grinning) Why would a creature be attacking of an individual which appears to be non-threatening? For within your belief systems, you believe that an animal shall only be attacking if it is being threatened or what you view to be as fearful or in defense of itself, for this is your belief system, within a lack of understanding of the consciousness of creatures. As I have stated previously, domesticated animals hold slight differences in consciousness than other creatures, for they are more influenced by your consciousness. Therefore, they also assume aspects of your consciousness. You with your belief systems are also influencing of them. You are also influencing of them within your thoughts and your emotions.

Consciousness transmits energy regardless of the physical state. I have expressed previously that the state of a coma is merely a removal of partial subjective interaction – a partial removal of the objective interaction also – but there remains an aspect of the subjective interaction with the individual choosing to be in the state of coma. Therefore, there continues a certain amount of subjective communication. The individual holds an awareness partially objectively also. This be the reason that your physicians may suggest to you that an individual within this state may hear you and also may respond to you. They also within this state hold the ability to be communicating subjectively.

Creatures receive more of their communication with you as individuals subjectively than they do objectively. They process information more efficiently subjectively. Therefore, a communication may be presented by an individual within this state of coma subjectively, and it may be received by a creature and responded to.

CATHY: So this was a subjective communication from this person saying....

RON: ‘Bite me!’

CATHY: Yeah!

ELIAS: It is a response to subjective communication.

CATHY: An automatic response by the dog?

ELIAS: Your view of automatic response by an animal is filtered through your belief systems. You understand that the animals do not think in terms that you think – they do not think in language as you think – although they do think! Their thought process is different from yours, but they do hold a thought process. This allows them also more vivid dream action.

CATHY: So, was it like an impulse?

ELIAS: It was a RESPONSE.

VICKI: What kind of subjective communication was occurring to initiate the response?

ELIAS: Agitation.

VICKI: On the part of the individual?

ELIAS: Correct, which is connected to by the creature and responded to. You view examples of your creatures which you view as pets responding to your subjective activity and your objective activity continuously. Your creatures also respond to your belief systems. They respond to your moods.

CATHY: I have a hard time with that one ’cause I know I’ve been in some raunchy moods sometimes and have gotten some very good dog work out of some very what I call sensitive dogs. Of course, I do have a belief system that some dogs are more in tune, so to speak, with me than others, but I KNOW. I’ve had the experience too many times of being in a total state of anxiety and still pulling stuff off, and that’s why this doesn’t make sense to me.

ELIAS: I am not expressing that a creature that is not your pet shall be responding to all of your moods. They SHALL respond to your belief systems. Also, your creature that resides with you shall respond to your belief systems despite your moods, at times.

CATHY: So they create things with intentions, but they don’t have belief systems?

ELIAS: Creatures do not hold an intent as you hold an intent.

CATHY: Well, I didn’t mean that. I just mean, if they’re chewing on themselves or licking their paws or something I quote/unquote call a neurotic behavior, are they doing that because I’m bouncing something off them or because of my subjective activity or because that’s just what they want to create ’cause they create their own reality or....

ELIAS: It is dependent upon the creature. At times they are creating what they wish to be creating for their own experience. At times their creations are very influenced by your belief systems. They may be creating of an event or an action, and may also respond differently within their own creation dependent upon YOUR belief systems and the influence that you project to them.

VICKI: I have a question. You said that we have belief systems that creatures attack us because they feel threatened. Is this the reality of the situation?

ELIAS: Not always.

VICKI: What is the reality of the situation?

ELIAS: At times they may be merely responding to your energy and to your belief systems.

VICKI: Would that be something that a person would normally be objectively aware of?

ELIAS: No; although in a manner of speaking, individuals at times DO hold a partial awareness of this. Example: An individual may be walking upon their road. They hold a tremendous fear of an animal, that it shall be aggressive to them and that it shall attack them – a dog. A dog appears, but within this creature its nature is not to be attacking this individual. As it approaches this individual, the individual is creating their own reality within their belief systems and fear and is projecting this energy to this creature, which is subjectively received and responded to, and this creature that may not ever bite another individual ever may suddenly alter its behavior and be attacking of this individual within a cooperation. It has not been threatened. It is not fearful. It is merely responding to the energy projected by the individual within their fears and their belief systems.

VICKI: So that’s kind of where we get the old saying that dogs smell fear? They do respond to fear?

ELIAS: To YOUR fear.

VICKI: Right. Well, I’d like to ask a personal question in this area so I can understand better. I’ve taken care of a lot of people’s animals, animals that I don’t know, and I’ve never had any problem with those animals. So, I’ve had a lot of experience in this area. One time I was taking care of an animal for Cathy, which I’ve also done a lot of times. This particular animal responded to me with fear. It didn’t attack me, but it did bark at me. It did growl at me. It would not let me approach it. It took me forever to contain it the way that I needed to contain it, and I’ve always been real curious as to what happened that day because it was a singular experience.

ELIAS: As I have stated, creatures are more complex than you realize and they do create their own realities also, and at times they also experience the same types of experiences in bleed-through as do you, therefore creating differences in their behaviors and their personalities ... which they hold personalities! In this, at times certain creatures may become more sensitive to individuals in recognizing certain bleed-through actions.

(Here, Elias turns and grins at Cathy) This shall be a session that Shynla [Cathy] shall mirror Michael [Mary] and not be repeating! There are areas for you all that you find objectively very difficult, but this is not to say that they are not truthful.

At times, certain animals may be responding within bleed-through action of a recognition; not in the manner that you recognize within thought processes, objectively knowing, but they may be responding to a certain individual in certain manners, holding a subjective recognition of another focus. They hold the same action that you hold, although they are not of essence; but they are also your creations. Therefore, subjectively they do hold much information within consciousness as to focuses and actions.

Within THIS situation, the creature is responding outside of your belief systems and challenging in recognition, in bleed-through of another focus NOT as a dog, and interaction that has been held between you.

VICKI: Really! That’s interesting. Do you buy that one, Cathy??

CATHY: Would that dog have done the same thing to me if I would have gone in at the same time that Vicki did and approached the dog? Would I have gotten the same reaction?

ELIAS: No.

CATHY: Because he was familiar with me?

ELIAS: For the reason that this would not be the same bleed-through action and recognition.

VICKI: So in other words, it’s possible that in another focus I had an interaction with this animal ... say, it might have been a bear.

ELIAS: A horse.

VICKI: Oh, it was a horse, and that’s what was being responded to?

ELIAS: Correct.

VICKI: Huh!

CATHY: Hmm!

ELIAS: Your interaction with horses has not always been the same as it is within THIS focus.

VICKI: Hmm!

ELIAS: Not quite as loving! (Grinning)

VICKI: Oh! (Laughing)

NORM: We’re talking about karma here!

ELIAS: Not at all! It is merely a response in a recognition.

VICKI: Yeah, I didn’t think animals responded to that.

ELIAS: (To Cathy) Just as I have expressed to you previously in your inquiry of why your little dog responds to clicking sounds.

CATHY: Then tell me why she doesn’t do that any more!

ELIAS: It is unnecessary.

CATHY: (With a hint of sarcasm) Why? Because she moved through something?? (Elias stares at Cathy with his famous ‘Oh brother’ look) Ooo! (Much laughter)

ELIAS: I may be playful if you wish to be playful, and we may discuss another subject! (Laughter) The creature need not ‘move through’ a belief system or an issue, for it does not hold these.

CATHY: So it was myself?

ELIAS: No.

CATHY: Then why is she not irritated? Because the other dog’s doing it now? Because he is!

ELIAS: The dog held a temporary response for the reason that I offered you: in response to another focus and the similar clicking sound. The dog moves to a point of non-allowance of this bleed-through action in recognition that this is not the same action occurring. It does not hold a thought process as do you. It does think, but not in the same manner that you think. Therefore, it does not analyze and evaluate that this sound is occurring and it is responding to the sound from the bleed-through. It does not analyze this action; it merely responds. Therefore, as it becomes accustomed to this sound and the safety of the sound, that no action occurs to it in harmfulness as suggested by the bleed-through, it becomes comfortable.

CATHY: So this was HER bleed-through of another animal she was manifest as, correct?

ELIAS: Correct.

CATHY: Okay, so why does the other dog do it? Is it the same thing?

ELIAS: This is a response to you.

CATHY: A response to me.

ELIAS: Correct, and your belief systems.

CATHY: But I’m not even thinking about anything! I mean, I’m doing something at the computer and I go to pop something open and bang! He’s like right there! That’s in response to something that I’m thinking subjectively, that I’m....

ELIAS: No. This is in response to your belief systems; which it is unnecessary for you to hold continuous objective thought! Your belief systems hold energy and are projected continuously. You hold a judgment which creates a belief system as to the personality type of this animal, and it is responsive to your belief systems and the energy that you project. It is your term for these creatures, this creature. It is neurotic! (Laughter) Therefore, it responds in like manner to you.

CATHY: Yeah, but ... (we all crack up) ... but before I was objectively aware that this dog reacted this way to certain noises ... the only thing I have to go by is that the noise happens and I see the dog just beside himself, you know? And so each time I see that, I just reinforce it and make it like something he’s just always going to always keep doing because I believe that’s what he’s going to do? So in response to me.... (Cathy is getting frustrated)

ELIAS: He may discontinue THIS action and create ANOTHER action in a neurosis!

CATHY: Well then, let me ask you this! What would I do or not do, or attempt, either one, to possibly make this dog more comfortable?

ELIAS: Allow yourself to hold less value judgments, and relax your very strong belief systems in the area of these animals. You hold VERY strong belief systems and VERY strong judgments in this area.

CATHY: Yes, I do! I’m not going to argue that point, and I’ll tell you that I’ve put that dog in situations where I thought, ‘Oh, this ought to be really good!’ And I know I’m thinking, ‘Oh, he’s just going to flip on this one!’ No response! So you see how I can’t figure it out? This dog has been the biggest I-can’t-figure-out-dog I’ve ever been around in my life! And I know I’ve drawn to him for some reason, but I just can’t figure it out! (Vic’s note: Cathy is an animal trainer in the film industry, so she works with animals she doesn’t know on a regular basis)

ELIAS: And does this not seem quite simple to you? You have drawn to this animal to be challenging of your belief systems, for it displays behavior that is not predictable.

CATHY: You have that right!

ELIAS: Therefore, this offers you the opportunity to challenge these belief systems.

CATHY: Oh boy! ’Cause I’ll tell you, this is one dog I have not been able to ... I use the term ‘get in his head.’ Haven’t been there, so it’s all ... well, I’m not surprised that I’d be drawn to this dog! Okay, somebody else ask a question! I’m going to take a rest! (Laughter, and Elias chuckles)

RETA: How about the dogs and cats in our lives? Have they been other animals in other focuses of our lives sometimes?

ELIAS: At times, yes.

RETA: For instance, I had a dog that I really loved in California. It was the smartest little dog! We moved to New Jersey, and the dog kept wanting to go home. It kept running away, coming back to California. Was that because I wanted to be there?

ELIAS: At times, this may be the situation. For the most part, this is a natural behavior that creatures create. Within physical focus they hold to familiarity as YOU hold to familiarity, but you challenge your familiarity and you explore beyond what is familiar to you, for you are inspired to this action, being essence. The creatures are not essence. Therefore, within physical manifestation of consciousness, it holds to its familiarity in a physical focus very strongly.

RETA: Well, our cats just circled and pretty soon they were familiar, but the dog just wanted to go. It finally was found by a trucker quite a few hundred miles away. But I just wondered if it was my thought-pattern, wanting to be back in California.

ELIAS: This may be quite influencing.

NORM: This particular dog appeared to talk to Reta. It would actually growl and whine and come up and look ... you’d swear that it was actually talking to her. This was most unusual, the first time I’ve ever seen anything like that. What kind of a response is that?

ELIAS: In actuality, this is more common that you realize. Many creatures that are domesticated, that reside with individuals as pets, attempt to be establishing a communication objectively with the individuals that they reside [with].

NORM: Recently, in fact I think it was today, I was reading an article about a football player who was extremely aggressive. He had owned pit bulls and they mauled his children. Now, the pit bull was obviously bred by us or created by us to be extremely aggressive. So, the mauling of the children could have been, as you say, any of the actions that you’ve talked about today, and it could have been that it was an experience that the pit bulls were wanting to have?

ELIAS: These situations I have spoken of previously. These situations are VERY influenced by the individuals that reside with the creatures. Creatures are responding to the emotion and issues of the individuals [with] which they live.

NORM: For example, elephants have been used by the rajahs of India as war elephants, and they can be trained to respond to thirty different commands by the rider of the elephant. So in this case, they are really being taught to do things that are not normally in their nature?

ELIAS: Correct; but creatures are, in your terms, much more intelligent than you allow for them.

KAAN: Elias, I have a question. First of all, very nice to meet you in objective terms! I had a creature event that I could not understand the meaning of that I drew upon myself. I was driving very late one night from one state to another, and was reviewing some of my fears. In association with these fears, the idea came that somehow in the Chinese system, my birth year was associated with rabbits. This wasn’t a pleasant idea and I especially associated with these fears, but I sort of tried to accept them and thought, ‘What if that’s the case? What if these fears are like that?’ and tried to see through them. As I was working with this, accepting those fears that were coming, a rabbit rushed by from the side of the road and basically died on the right front tire of the car. To this date, I don’t remember consciously running over an animal. It was in the middle of nowhere. Obviously this was an event that I drew upon myself. However, I could not interpret it. I wanted to do some interpretation, saying, ‘Well, this is how rabbit characters die, with these types of fears.’ I couldn’t interpret it, but I wanted to ask your opinion on it.

ELIAS: As I have stated, creatures are of your creation. Therefore, you may draw upon these creations at different moments to be offering yourself objective imagery in situations and they shall be in cooperation, recognizing that they are not separated from you. You look to yourselves as separated from nature, as you term it, and from each other and from all of your creatures, but they hold an understanding that they are not separated from you. Therefore, in this knowing they may be in cooperation with you in consciousness, holding no fearfulness of what you term to be death.

Creatures hold no fearfulness of death. Therefore, it matters not, for they also hold an understanding that at the moment of what you term to be death, the energy of their consciousness shall merely reconfigure and rearrange itself. In this, they may be drawn by you in cooperation, to offer you objective imagery for your own noticing and information. The rabbit offers itself as imagery to you, in your attempt for movement in the issue of fearfulness, as a symbol to be putting an end to the fearfulness, for you view death as an ending.

KAAN: Thank you.

ELIAS: You are welcome. This is not ALWAYS the situation. You may be terminating, so to speak, (grinning) small creatures’ little lives with your carriages or other instruments many times. This is not to say that each squirrel that you are moving over and ending their little life – or each chipmunk or each rabbit or each possum or skunk or what have you – is always an example of this, but this particular situation IS an example of this.

KAAN: Yes. Because of the intensity of the experience, there was an understanding. However, the final point that you made was never clear in my mind, that it could be taken as a symbol of that. It was obvious that I drew upon this and I was saying something, but I couldn’t interpret my message in that sense. Thank you.

The other thing is, in the line that you’re developing about the creatures, I have followed some information from another source a while back about animals, so I want to run that by you, in terms of each creature having their own line of evolution and being a particular flavor-type or essence-type or whatever, and basically having their own evolution that is independent of us on this earth, with the exception of possibly those pets that are interacting more heavily with us ... not like us, being individualized, but a more collective form. And when they’re dying, for instance, they’re not living through the final moment of death in the body but jumping into another instance of an animal life immediately, and not experiencing physical death in the body in the way that we may be experiencing. So, is that correct?

ELIAS: I am understanding. In a manner of speaking, yes, you are correct, for a creature is not requiring a period of transition in their movement within consciousness. They merely reconstruct and reconfigure the energy pattern. It is unnecessary for a transitional period, for they do not hold belief systems.

KAAN: What is the essential difference in their inner construction that sets us apart from their type of development? Obviously we’re working with belief systems, but the modality of their consciousness being different, can it be described in other terms that we can understand?

ELIAS: They are not essence. They are created of consciousness. They hold their own consciousness, but they are not of essence. They are a creation that YOU have created, being essence, from consciousness, but they do not hold essence. Therefore, they also do not hold belief systems. This is not to say that essence holds belief systems, but within physical focus you have created certain experiences that you choose.

Creatures, your planet, your vegetation, may all be viewed as tentacles of you. Your finger does not think, but it responds to you. At times, your finger may hold an automatic response. It may twitch. In like manner, all that you have created within physical focus are as tentacles extending out from you. Certain tentacles you assign certain qualities to, mirroring you.

KAAN: So in other realities, they may actually display different qualities?

ELIAS: Absolutely! They may not BE creatures!

KAAN: But their context is strictly related to the intentions of the essence, and within that they don’t exist, in some sense?

ELIAS: Correct.

SUE: It seems to me that there was a mass belief system that cats and dogs hated each other and would chase each other and fight, and it seems to me that this is not as commonly accepted as it used to be, and also that cats and dogs don’t respond to each other in that way as much as they used to. Is that correct? Is that an example of a belief system, a mass belief system, that’s changed?

ELIAS: Correct, and you may also view how your mass belief systems are affecting of your creatures and their behavior.

SUE: When I got my first cat, I got her as a kitten. She was part of a litter of six kittens. I took some time deciding between her and a sister who looked very similar, and finally I picked this one. Somehow I’ve always had the feeling that it didn’t really matter which one I picked, that I would have ended up with the same cat no matter which of the two physical animals I chose. Is there any truth in that?

ELIAS: The response of the creature to you would have been the same.

SUE: Okay. I think that’s what I suspected.

ELIAS: The personalities would have been slightly different, but the response to you would have been the same.

SUE: Also, there is a squirrel that lives in the tree next to my balcony, and in the past six months or a year I’ve started feeding peanuts to the squirrel and taking interest in the squirrel, and the squirrel shows less fear of me than he used to and probably less than he should, for safety reasons for a squirrel ... not that I’m going to do anything to him! I was just curious why this occurred, if there’s any reason for it. I guess I really want to know what the squirrel thinks of me, if there’s any way of knowing that.

ELIAS: Many times, creatures that you view to be wild – undomesticated creatures – shall present themselves to individuals as an offering. It allows you the opportunity to feel less separated from that element which you view to be nature, which you view yourself to be separated from.

SUE: Okay. So as I started growing more plants on my balcony and getting that connection with nature, I suppose the squirrel also responded to that?

ELIAS: Correct. It is responding to YOU.

VICKI: I have a question about how animals think. I had an experience where I was medicating one of my cats, which the cat didn’t like. What I found interesting was that the cat started to bite me, and I know that it was an automatic response on the cat’s part. It stopped itself as it got to my finger. It was very clear that there was an automatic response that was stopped on the part of the animal. I’m curious what that indicates about how they think.

ELIAS: You are assuming that the creature is merely responding automatically.

VICKI: Okay. Yeah, I am.

ELIAS: Therefore, you are also intrigued that it displays non-automatic response. The creature is not responding within what you believe to be an automatic response. You merely BELIEVE within your belief systems that creatures hold automatic responses, for they do not think; they function through instinct. YOU function through instinct! We have discussed this previously. Instinct is not what you THINK it may be.

The creature is responding in offering YOU its desire. It is responding in its manner of communication to you. It does not communicate with you within language. Therefore, it is communicating to you in what you shall understand: ‘I am in disagreement with this action.’ But it also is responding to you in not following through with this action, recognizing that the follow-through of the action is not necessary. It has made its point.

VICKI: Hmm!

ELIAS: It wishes not to be harmful to you, but it also wishes to be in communication to you. Your creatures communicate to you continuously within actions. Their thought, so to speak, is translated into a type of sign language.

VICKI: Well, my immediate thought after that is, that being the case, it’s a pretty lousy thing for me to continue my action with a creature under those circumstances.

ELIAS: But you hold belief systems in these areas.

VICKI: Yeah, that’s where that comes from.

ELIAS: You hold belief systems that you must be affecting of your creatures’ creations, that they have not created this through their choice, in the same manner that you ‘catch’ a cold! (Grinning)

VICKI: Yeah, I understand that part, but it’s interesting to think about that action as not an automatic response but as a language that basically I didn’t respond to, that probably many of us don’t respond to.

ELIAS: Quite, for you are operating within your belief systems and you are not listening or noticing the communication, for you are blocking that and blinding yourself to this within your belief systems.

VICKI: Interesting. So conceivably then, were I to accept that particular belief system and be responding outside of it, I would no longer have medicated the cat?

ELIAS: Correct.

VICKI: I get it.

ELIAS: You would be accepting of the creature’s creation and its communication to you.

VICKI: On the other hand, if I stop medicating the creature but continue to hold the belief system, that’s different.

ELIAS: You may be influencing of the perpetuation of the creation, for you continue to hold the belief system and you are avoiding.

VICKI: Hmm. That’s interesting.

DREW: ... So now let’s take this back to Vicki’s example of the cat. The cat holds no belief systems. Any action that Vicki would have with this cat could only be by agreement.

ELIAS: In one layer of consciousness. The agreement may not be objectively.

DREW: Well, if the cat holds no belief systems, what would cause the cat to see itself as a victim of displeasurable action?

ELIAS: It is not viewing itself as a victim. It is recognizing of its creation of its reality, and it is merely responding to its own desire to be creating its reality.

DREW: Which it is!

ELIAS: But the individual is attempting to alter its creation of its reality. Not all creatures may be responding in this manner. You may be attempting to alter a creature’s reality by offering it medication, as you have stated, and it shall be compliant with this if it is objectively in agreement with your action. If it is choosing to be creating of a specific event or experience and YOU through your belief systems are attempting to alter its creation, it MAY choose to comply with you, but it may choose initially to voice its opinion of its own creation.

DREW: If we all create our own reality – and if this is different for animals, that might be the distinction or why I’m getting confused – how can you alter someone else’s reality??

ELIAS: You may alter a creature’s reality. You may alter a plant’s reality. They are not essence.

DREW: But don’t they only draw to themselves the action by agreement? I don’t understand this. This doesn’t make sense. I’m totally lost here, because if I step on a bug and crush it, isn’t that only by agreement?

ELIAS: Not in the manner that you are thinking.

DREW: Subjectively.

ELIAS: Not entirely subjectively either. In another layer of consciousness, yes, it is an agreement, for every action is an agreement in another layer of consciousness. They agree to exist. Consciousness itself agrees to configure. It agrees to exist within a physical reality. It agrees to interact. But you are creating your reality spontaneously within each moment. Therefore, the idea that you hold of agreement to incidents or events is not the same as your thought process magnates to.

Consciousness agrees to experience. Therefore, in THIS respect, there is no right, there is no wrong, there are no victims, there are no perpetrators, there is no good, there is no bad. But within each individual dimension and reality, YOU choose the types of experiences. (Pause)

DREW: Well, I think that’s exactly my point. Let’s take it out of the realm of animals for a second, because that may be a distinction. That may be the difference. If I create my own reality, nobody in this room and nobody I interact with at any point in my life can alter my reality in any way that I don’t choose for them to do it.

ELIAS: Correct.

DREW: Okay. Is that true with animals as well?

ELIAS: No.

DREW: Okay. So I just want to make sure I understand this, at least in terms of other individuals. If Stephen [Norm] were to get up and punch me in the nose, he could not do that unless I chose that as part of my reality.

ELIAS: Correct.

DREW: He could not alter my reality in any way I choose him not to.

ELIAS: Correct.

DREW: Not so with an animal.

ELIAS: Correct.

DREW: ... Can we follow up the conversation where we left off at break?

ELIAS: If you are so choosing.

DREW: If it is possible to be altering of the reality that an animal chooses and if it is possible for an animal to experience action that it has not necessarily agreed to, then what does that say to an animal’s freedom of choice?

ELIAS: The creature holds the freedom of choice. If the creature wishes you completely to not be altering its creation, if it is in complete disagreement, it shall remove itself from you. It shall not allow you to alter its reality.

SUE: So it will run away or die?

ELIAS: Correct, or it may be forcefully communicating to you. It may be attacking and not allowing you to be altering its creation. It may not remove itself completely if it so chooses, if it is choosing to continue to be within your presence, but it shall create an action that shall prevent you from altering its creation.

DREW: So then it’s NOT possible to alter the reality of a creature if it’s not choosing then?

ELIAS: If it is not in complete agreement; but you may be altering the reality that a creature is choosing within your belief systems as they are dictated by you, and the creature may not be in agreement with this initially and it may be expressing of this, but it may also be choosing to alter its disagreement with you in compliance with you. The creature DOES create its own reality also.

KAAN: On that point, if we use more of our own essence within physicality or objective reality, would we have an overruling power or entry in changing creatures’ realities just because we are accessing a deeper layer of consciousness in which we have even allowed the process of its own choosing to take place?

ELIAS: You have created your creatures to be developing their own choice and their own free will, as you have stated. Initially, this was not the case. Initially, you were creating all actions for these creatures and dictating to them their reality, but in this dimension you have created the reality of allowance of these creatures to be creating of their OWN reality. Therefore now, and for much of your time framework, they are creating of their own reality. They are creating this independent of you, in a manner of speaking, but they also continue their connection with you. Therefore, they also continue to allow you to be very influencing of their creating of their reality.

KAAN: But that level is not ordinarily accessible in the objective state that we know ourselves, where we can override.

ELIAS: Objectively, you ARE quite influencing. Objectively, many times you DO override their creation of their reality, for they are creating of an action that you may be in disagreement with. Therefore, you shall impose YOUR energy and belief systems upon them and alter their behavior.

KAAN: So would confining wild horses be an objective example?

ELIAS: Correct.

DREW: But those horses couldn’t be confined unless they agreed to the experience.

ELIAS: (Humorously) We are going to ride this hamster wheel for quite a while tonight! (Much laughter)

DREW: It seems like a fairly important concept because on the one hand, I’m hearing yes, you can alter their reality. On the other hand, I’m hearing they have free choice and they can do whatever they want. So I’m a little confused about which it is.

ELIAS: It is BOTH.

DREW: It is both. Could wild horses be corralled if they hadn’t chosen to be?

ELIAS: They do not objectively choose to be!

DREW: Understood. I understand that. I’m talking about on a subjective level.

ELIAS: No; but objectively they do NOT choose to be, and you impose YOUR belief systems upon them.

The point of all of this discussion is to allow you the opportunity to view more of your reality, therefore hold a greater understanding of acceptance. By identifying your belief systems and how they are affecting of not only yourselves and each other but of your creatures and of all that you create, you may also view how you are subjecting other elements of your reality to your belief systems also, and the affectingness of these belief systems. You have not quite identified that you even HOLD belief systems in many areas. Therefore, how may you be affecting of certain elements if you do not hold a belief system in this area? How may you widen your awareness if you may not even identify that you hold belief systems? In offering this information, this provides you the opportunity to view more of your belief systems and how they are influencing and affecting of all of your reality that you create.

DREW: Okay, I’ll let it go for now! (Laughter)

VICKI: Wouldn’t this be the same if Drew attempts to alter my reality? I have a choice at that point whether or not to allow that?

ELIAS: Correct.

VICKI: Isn’t it pretty much the same?

ELIAS: Very much the same.

DREW: Except it’s different! (Laughter)

ELIAS: There IS a difference, correct.

DREW: Because you said it IS possible to alter a creature’s reality, but not another individual’s reality.

ELIAS: Correct.

DREW: So there IS a difference, and that seems like a fairly important difference to me.

ELIAS: You are correct, for you may alter a creature’s reality in areas that you may not with another individual; this being for the reason that YOU have created YOUR reality differently, as being essence, in the same manner that you may choose an action for yourself. In like manner to our tentacles, you may create an action for yourself. You may choose to cut off your finger. Your finger is not choosing to be cut off, but you are choosing for your finger. Your creatures are an element of you. You MAY alter their reality. You have altered the reality of your finger if you are cutting it off. You have disengaged it from your physical form. It is not your finger’s choice, and your finger holds consciousness, and you have altered its reality.

VICKI: Would we find that wild animals are probably less compliant with our altering of their reality than our domestic animals?

ELIAS: You are correct. You do not interact objectively to the extent with what you term to be wild animals. Therefore, you allow them more of a freedom to be creating their own reality in the manner that they choose.

DREW: If animals don’t fear death, why, for example, do zebras run when a lion attacks the herd?

ELIAS: There are several reasons for this action. The manner that you have created your creatures in mirrors elements of yourself and the manner that you have created your own physical forms. Within this particular dimension, one of the aspects of your physical creation which also mirrors an aspect of essence is movement. All of your creatures move. You move. Within your physical form, you require movement for its functioning. As you view, if you are not engaging movement for extended periods of your time, your physical form begins to deteriorate. The manner that you have created your creatures in some respects mirrors this, but they do not hold the thought processes that you hold. Therefore, they do not hold the motivation for movement as do you.

In this, look to your creatures. They engage more subjective activity than objective. Look to the behavior of very many of your species of creatures and how much of their physical time they spend sleeping, which they do. They spend MUCH of their time sleeping. Therefore, as they have been created to be subjectively interacting more than objective interaction, you have created a design for movement. Be remembering, this is ONE reason. In this, there is a need for motivation for movement. Your herd animals, which are mainly grazing animals, which are mainly prey animals, spend much of their time framework grazing and sleeping. Your predator animals spend much of their time merely sleeping. Therefore, within the action of movement, it is motivating for your predator to be engaging the action of catching its prey, which serves as physical motion that continues their physical form in its fitness, so to speak. They may not chase a prey that merely stands. There shall be nothing to catch if they are chasing a tree! Therefore, it is a cooperation between the predator and the prey, that one shall receive its motion in pursuit and one shall receive much of its motion in retreat.

DREW: So that whole action of a lion chasing a herd is basically for the exercise?

ELIAS: In many respects, yes.

DREW: Huh!

ELIAS: A lion shall not motivate itself to move very much if it is not in pursuit, and it shall not be in pursuit if it is not feeding itself. A lion may lay about for days and not be consuming and not be moving.

DREW: Interesting!

KAAN: So there is no element of fearfulness while the animal is being chased? The experience of the animal is nothing close to our fear?

ELIAS: No.

VICKI: It’s not??

ELIAS: No. There IS a type of emotional responsiveness, but it is not what you would be understanding in the area of fearfulness. There is a bond of community and family within these creatures and therefore there is an element of emotional involvement, but it is not fear in the manner that you view fear.

KAAN: When we look in the animal’s eyes, there is something we recognize in that base emotion, though. As a fearful person’s eyes will change in a pretty good manner, the animals’ eyes will also change upon danger, in which we can recognize the same base emotion. Now, we do label that fear.

ELIAS: Correct.

KAAN: But in them, that’s not how it is. So, we must be experiencing that base feeling, even though on top of it fear and other belief systems are tagged on. Is that correct?

ELIAS: Correct. (Here, Cathy and Vic start talking at the same time)

VICKI: (To Cathy) Go ahead!

CATHY: Domestic animals, do they have fear?

ELIAS: Domestic animals acquire an element of fear, which is in response to what they learn from you.

CATHY: So I’m correct in my assessment of a certain dog that I believe has been trained through fear, and that’s the only way he knows how to work.

ELIAS: There are some creatures that you interact with which have been domesticated that LEARN fear. They learn this from YOU.

CATHY: Right, and so actually, their motivation to work is fear.

ELIAS: It is an acquired emotion.

CATHY: I understand this. So, I am correct.

ELIAS: Correct.

CATHY: There are a lot of animals that their motivation to work is fear.

ELIAS: Correct.

BOBBI: So could they pick up that fear, not particularly by an interactive experience of fearfulness? I’m thinking particularly of a situation where my cat was out all night. That particular night, I saw a coyote in the backyard. I figured, ‘That’s it, she’s gone.’ She came in the next morning and stayed in the house hiding for the next three days, to me seeming very fearful. Was she picking up on my fearfulness for her, for her safety?

ELIAS: Correct.

BOBBI: Responding to that?

ELIAS: It is not necessarily an action and a response from an event. You believe within your belief systems that if you are harsh with an animal or you are violent with an animal that they are responding fearfully to the action. What they are responding to is you and your projection of fearfulness. You hold the fearfulness of the creature and its ability to be hurtful. Therefore, you rearrange this energy and project it outward to the creature and it assumes this emotion. They hold, as you have stated, the basic element, which is different. The experience of this is different. It is not fear in the manner that you experience fear within emotion, but it may BECOME a learned emotion from its interaction with you.

CATHY: This is a belief system, I know, but I have a real issue with animals that are motivated through fear to work, and so that makes it difficult for me to work one that way, but I have. I have, if that’s the only way I can figure out how to do it in the moment. But is that probably one of the reasons why I’m having a little bit of difficulty, is because I have such a big belief system in that area?

ELIAS: At times.

CATHY: But most of it is probably fear, the fear that I have myself, my fear?

ELIAS: Correct. The fear that YOU hold shall be projected to those creatures that you are very interactive with.

CATHY: When I’m speaking of my fear, I’m speaking of ... because to me in my experience, if I think a dog is going to bite me, I’m not going to push it in any manner, way, shape or form, or else I’m going to have leverage or something to where it can’t get to me. Most of the animals I’ve worked with, I don’t believe I’ve had a fear of them biting me or something like that, within what I’m asking them to do. That part was kind of confusing to me, when you were talking about the projection of fear that way. I’m talking about fear of myself and of my abilities, blah blah blah.

ELIAS: Quite; but other individuals may be interactive with your animals, and their reasoning subjectively for this treatment is that they hold the fear and they project this out to the creature, viewing that this shall be protective of themselves.

CATHY: Well, I’m not really understanding this!

VICKI: I have a question about fear and animals. I’ve had a lot of experiences with dropping a mouse in a snake cage and watching the mouse piss all over itself. If it ain’t scared, what is it?

ELIAS: It is responding in several manners. In one respect it is responding to the energy that YOU project. In another manner it is merely responding physically to the situation, which it is aware of, but its awareness is also influenced by you. Within a natural situation, a snake may come upon a mouse. The mouse shall pay little attention to the snake, for it is NOT fearful. This be the reason that so many mice are eaten by so many snakes! (Grinning) You may also view the experience of another individual who may drop a mouse into a cage with a snake, and the mouse may climb all over the snake. It is not afraid of the snake.

KAAN: Mary had a question: What is the similarity between a creature and a child which makes us approach them in a similar way at times, treat dogs like children or children like dogs in playfulness or our expectation of their behavior and their spontaneity?

ELIAS: The similarity that you view is very simple; this is that children are interacting more subjectively than objectively. They also hold much more subjective awareness than objective awareness for a time frame. In this, they may be more likened to your creatures, for they also are interacting more subjectively than objectively.

A small infant is more comparable to your creatures in their behavior than even a small child. A small infant also spends much of its time framework sleeping and interacting subjectively and responding to what you think of as basic needs, but also holding some emotion and a different type of thought process, for it has not objectively learned language yet.

KAAN: So most of our beliefs hang on with our rational side, which objectifies things which they lack. Is that true?

ELIAS: Not necessarily. Your beliefs are also held subjectively.

KAAN: But those are the basic beliefs that construct this reality, not the later things that are acquired in society and culture. Is that true?

ELIAS: At times, for there are times that you transition into physical focus and you bring with you, so to speak, many belief systems.

KAAN: So an infant would still have those belief systems, but they’re not expressed at that level because it doesn’t have the....

ELIAS: Correct. They are not objectifying, although at times they do not hold these belief systems. It is a matter of choice of the focus.

KAAN: So if they DO hold these belief systems, the infants reacting to OUR beliefs at an early age would be filtered through these belief systems subjectively?

ELIAS: Correct.

VICKI: I have a question about what you guys were talking about, this concept of children and animals. It makes sense to me what you said about infants. That’s been my experience too. Infants DO sleep a lot, just like animals do, and quite often respond in similar manners. To go back to Mary’s question, I was listening to her express her question too. Her experience is that her domestic pets ... she equates their behavior with the behavior of small children. My personal experience is entirely different, and I’m sure each individual can relate a different experience. My question is, isn’t that an individual choice as to how your animals respond to you?

ELIAS: And which animals you draw to yourself. You draw certain animals to yourself in compliance with your belief systems and in compliance of what you choose to be creating.

VICKI: Right. So two different people can go get a dog, say, and they’re going to be picking two completely different personalities depending on their own personal ...

ELIAS: Correct.

VICKI: ... what? Issues? Choices? Belief systems? Desires?

ELIAS: All.

VICKI: All of these things.

ELIAS: And their creatures shall be responding in like manner.

VICKI: Yeah, that makes sense to me.

ELIAS: Michael [Mary] may be drawing to himself creatures that are in compliance with his belief systems and his desires and his choices, and these creatures are in agreement with this. Therefore, if he holds a belief system that his creatures shall be responding as small children, they shall be in agreement with this and comply with this and respond as small children. You may each be very influencing of your creatures in this same manner. They are responding within consciousness to YOUR belief systems.

VICKI: Right, which brings up one other question I have, and I’m sure we’ve all had this experience too, where you select an animal and within a very short period of time ... you don’t keep the animal. You get rid of the animal because it’s behavior is such that it causes you too much conflict. What have you drawn to yourself in those sorts of situations? It’s kind of counter to what we were just talking about.

ELIAS: You have drawn to yourself the opportunity to view that these creatures DO create their reality and may not always be manipulated by you.

VICKI: That makes sense. So when you want to get rid of your children, this would be the same thing, right? (Much laughter)

ELIAS: (Grinning) This would be your choice, although you hold stronger belief systems in THIS area, for you hold the belief systems that many times creatures may be disposable!

VICKI: Hmm! That’s way different!

ELIAS: You do not hold the belief system of disposable children!

VICKI: No, we’re not putting our children to sleep yet!

ELIAS: This is quite true!

SUE: ... Do our domesticated animals feel love for us?

ELIAS: They hold emotion and they do experience affection. They do not experience what YOU term to be love, but they DO experience the emotion of affection.

KAAN: How about fascination?

ELIAS: Yes, they hold fascination.

KAAN: With our reality and interacting with us?

ELIAS: In certain respects, yes.

NORM: ... I have some questions in regard to creatures. The definition of creatures in regard to everything that you’ve been talking about applies to, for example, one-celled animals to multi-celled animals. Also, it occurs to me that the characteristics and personalities of creatures can also be applied to such things as storms, and that the interaction that occurs between storms and individuals is very similar to the action that occurs between creatures and individuals. Am I going too far there?

ELIAS: There is a distinction. You have created these creatures to hold personality.

NORM: Storms don’t hold personality?

ELIAS: You have also created these creatures with choice and emotion. Storms are a projection of emotion, of YOU. They are an action.

NORM: Hmm. And the Earth is almost like a creature?

ELIAS: It also is a projection of you.

NORM: And all of us, of course.

ELIAS: Correct.

NORM: And can be modified by us, and of course is being modified.

ELIAS: Correct.” [session 260, January 18, 1998]

ELIAS: “Very well! Shall we continue our discussion as to your creatures?

RETA: I have something I’d like to contribute to creatures, just as an interesting point. A very dear friend of mine had to put her dog to sleep last week. She’s had him seventeen years. Her little girl is maybe two-and-a-half or three years old, and she was trying to explain to her daughter that he was old and that it was necessary to put him to sleep, and she thought the daughter would be very upset. And the daughter turned to her mom and said, ‘Well, you know, you’ve made him wait so long to go.’ How intuitive for a little girl!

ELIAS: Also, how clear an example of belief systems that are transmitted within very early ages!

CATHY: I would like to know if dogs, or animals in general, have impulses?

ELIAS: Yes. They are interpreted differently than your impulses, for you filter your interpretation of impulses though thoughts and emotion. An animal does not filter through an emotion or a thought, but automatically responds to an impulse.

CATHY: Okay. Last week you said that I don’t think that dogs think. Did I hear that correctly? Is this an underlying belief system that I’m not aware of?

ELIAS: You hold a belief system that they may hold a very limited thought process, but for the most part they respond to learned behavior.

CATHY: Okay. (Pause) Okay, I’ll sit with that for a second! (Elias grins and nods)

KAAN: I have a question for my friend Cynthia, who is working with greenhouses. That’s his job, his profession, and he said that as a part of his job he has to struggle with insects all the time. He’s been putting lots of attention over the years to doing this from a level of consciousness where he doesn’t invite them, and he’d like them to go without eradicating them in more violent ways. He believes that he understands that he does not have belief systems in terms of not inflicting them with something that he thinks is very terrible for them, but he also holds a belief that he has to respect all of consciousness. Therefore, he’d like to find a better way. He asks for your comments on this, on how he can deal with this problem.

ELIAS: This be a situation that many individuals may encounter in dealing with your vegetation within this dimension, for you create conflicting choices. You have created a choice to create these creatures and their natural habitat and their natural food source. Then you create a conflicting creation, that you wish them not to be interacting with their natural habitat! (Smiling)

In this, the individual creates conflict for themselves, although there are certain means within your vegetation that are naturally repelling of these creatures in themselves. In planting certain combinations of plant life, they act as natural repellents for these creatures, which accomplishes the individual’s goal, so to speak, of not creating what he views to be harmfulness to the creatures, but also affects the outcome that he is desiring. Certain vegetation are natural repellents to these creatures, and they in turn shall move to another area and discover a new source for creating their own natural habitat. Express radishes! (Grinning)

RETA: Is not another one marigolds, to prevent tomato worms? Doesn’t that keep the tomato bugs away?

ELIAS: This has become a mass belief system, although the creatures themselves do not always comply with this mass belief system!

CATHY: Okay. One of the base belief systems that I have with animals would be that I believe only certain dogs that are happy and have a good temperament and are willing to work are the ones that should be working in Hollywood, so to speak. Is that one of them?

ELIAS: This would be a strong belief system that you hold.

CATHY: I’m just checking! I’m just identifying here. And another one: Could it be that I go a lot by past experiences of what I’ve had with dogs, and I believe that the same experience is influencing of my reality that I’m creating right now?

ELIAS: Quite.

CATHY: So if I haven’t had the experience of doing something ... I give myself more anxiety and stuff about doing things with animals if I haven’t experienced it before?

ELIAS: For this is unfamiliar.

CATHY: Because it’s unfamiliar. So that’s probably one of the big ones, and I need to be more accepting of myself and trusting of myself when it comes to those situations?

ELIAS: Correct; and recognize how many times, within your relying on your past experiences, so to speak, you limit yourselves. In relying on merely your past experiences, you are also denying many of your choices, for you view things in absolutes.

CATHY: Yes, I do! But I am kind of wider in that area because I don’t have the same attitude I used to have when new, non-experienced trainers come in and pull things off without the experience that I have. I’m a lot more accepting of those kinds of people now.

ELIAS: Correct.

CATHY: That’s kind of a big deal for me! (Somebody applauds)

ELIAS: I am acknowledging! (Grinning)

RON: You ARE wide! (Laughter)

CATHY: Okay! Well, I could ask another one here. I have several! I’m interested in your comment about how animals’ thought processes are different from ours, and this allows them a more vivid dream action. Could you elaborate on that?

ELIAS: You think within your thought process quite objectively. You think in terms of language, and you also think in terms of imagery. Your creatures’ thought processes are more dream-like than are yours, although your dream imagery also is quite objective and is translated to you within imagery and language – words – for this is the process that you have chosen for thoughts. Thoughts are generally words. In this, creatures are more interactive subjectively. They do hold images as thought in similar manner to you – not entirely, but similarly – but without the same type of language. Therefore, their interpretation is different. Also be remembering that they do not hold the belief systems also which are influencing within your thought process.

All of your thoughts are influenced by the belief systems that you hold. Therefore, what you create within your interpretations of subjective activity – what you objectively create – is influenced and filtered through your belief systems, even within your dream state. Although your belief systems are relaxed within your dream state, they ARE interactive. Therefore, they are continuing to be influencing within your dream state also. For a creature, they are not filtering through belief systems. Therefore, they connect to their own type of thought process in a subjective imagery type of manner. The images do not change as being influenced by belief systems. In this manner, their awareness of consciousness is slightly clearer than yours.

CATHY: We always say that if we see a dog whimpering or their feet moving, that means they’re dreaming. That is what they’re doing right at that moment, when they’re carrying on like that?

ELIAS: Correct, although creatures engage in sleep state throughout much of their focus and are interactive within dream state throughout this time. It is merely more obvious at certain times to you.

CATHY: Because of the noise and the movement they’re making.

ELIAS: Correct.

CATHY: ’Cause I notice some do it more than others. I was wondering if animals manifest in groups repeatedly, like some of us do here.

ELIAS: At times, in certain situations; more so with what you term to be untamed or wild animals than with domestic animals.

CATHY: So do domestic animals have a tendency to remanifest with the same people? Like has Caleigh been my dog in another focus, or some other animal?

ELIAS: Many times creatures that you have drawn to yourself within domestic animals do remanifest in conjunction with individuals.

CATHY: Do they have more of a tendency to ... like is a dog going to remanifest as a dog a lot, a domestic dog?

ELIAS: Not necessarily.

CATHY: It’ll be a cat or bird or whatever?

ELIAS: Correct.

SUE: Could I ask, are you aware of the cats as they move through this room during sessions, and are the cats aware of you?

ELIAS: They are aware of the energy. I am aware of their energy but hold little attention in this area, for it is unnecessary for my interaction with them; although at times I have interacted with them, and other creatures that have been presented within this forum.

DREW: If animals aren’t of essence, how do they manifest? You’ve said they are projections of us, but how do they manifest and how do they remanifest if they are a projection of us?

ELIAS: They are consciousness.

DREW: So once projected and created, they then ...?

ELIAS: They hold choice. All of consciousness holds choice.

DREW: So when they disengage, the consciousness ... what’s the unifying subjective ... hmm. When we disengage ... I’d better be careful with my words here. When we disengage, we are part of essence. When they disengage, what are they part of?

ELIAS: Consciousness.

DREW: That part of consciousness which is not essence.

ELIAS: Correct.

DREW: Okay. Does their energy and consciousness disperse or does it hold a personality tone, for example, so that when it remanifests ... in other words, something must sort of – excuse my language – hold it together in a sense, so that if they do remanifest, it’s not just dispersed energy. What’s the unifying element that holds the consciousness together so that an animal could remanifest as that? Is it a personality tone?

ELIAS: No. I am understanding of your inquiry, although it is not the same as what you are thinking within the terms of essence. You look to a focus, or all of essence, and you may apply a personality tone. Therefore, you view within your thought process that there is a structure that binds a certain element of consciousness, that it shall configure itself in one manner and remain in this manner. I shall not dispute this thought process with you. Although it is distorted, it is efficient for your understanding presently.

With a creature, it is energy. Therefore, at the point of disengagement the energy IS dispersed and allowed to re-configure itself in whichever manner it chooses. This would be the choice of the links of consciousness. These links may rearrange themselves within agreement and form together again and create within agreement another creature, joining together with other links of consciousness, but it is not the same action as what you engage within essence.

DREW: Okay, that makes sense to me. Thank you.

ELIAS: You are welcome.

KAAN: Within this context, I came across an idea that therefore a cat, within that energy range, could not turn into a dog in the next manifestation, so to speak; that there is still vibration or a quality that within our context pushes in some way for that creature to manifest with the same type of physiology.

ELIAS: No. This may be the reason that you may view one creature within your focus that shall disengage, and you may encounter another creature of another species that displays many qualities that you notice that seem to be the same as a different creature that you have witnessed and interacted with which has disengaged; for the energy, once dispersed within the links of consciousness, may choose to join in cooperation with other links of consciousness which have been engaged in the manifestation of a different species. Therefore, there is an intermingling.

CATHY: When animals disengage, can they remanifest immediately?

ELIAS: Yes.

CATHY: I just want to be clear on this. Once a dog has chosen to be a dog, he’s probably not going to choose to be a dog again, but he could?

ELIAS: Correct.

CATHY: So it’s a possibility that he could?

ELIAS: Correct.

CATHY: Do they have final focuses?

ELIAS: Not in the manner that you hold a final focus, no.

CATHY: Well, how?

ELIAS: They continue within energy until you choose not to be engaging this dimension, with the exception of certain species choosing collectively to disengage from this particular dimension. This be the action of creating your extinction.

CATHY: So we’d have to uncreate this dimension, and then there wouldn’t be anything left? We can’t do that, can we?

ELIAS: If you choose.

CATHY: Really! Oh, it would like one of those trauma-shift things, right? I guess we could, huh!

ELIAS: You may collectively disengage this dimension if you are so choosing.

CATHY: So....

ELIAS: This particular physical dimension, as I have expressed to you previously, has blinked in and out many times. Therefore, in your physical terms it has existed, and it has not existed, and it has existed again.

DREW: Is that what you mean when you talk about what we call mythological animals having lived at one time? Is it within one of the blinkings of the dimension? Or Atlantis, or those kind of things? Those were in the other blinks of this dimension?

ELIAS: Those are OTHER dimensions, although I have expressed to you that you have created experimentations in forms within this dimension, within this particular blink.

DREW: Within THIS particular blink?

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: Can I just ask a question about the blinking? Are you referring to the very quick ten-to-the-minus fifty-six?

ELIAS: No.

PAUL: This is a different action?

ELIAS: Correct. You as focuses blink in and out very rapidly. Your dimension, your physical reality, your planet, blinks in and out of reality physically in very slow increments, what you would term to be billions of years at a time.

DREW: So in the past when you’ve referred to dragons having existed and unicorns and those kinds of things, those weren’t other experimentations with this dimension? Those were other dimensions?

ELIAS: They were experimentations within this dimension.

DREW: During one of the other, if you will, blinks of this dimension?

ELIAS: Within THIS blink.

DREW: Oh, really!

ELIAS: Correct. They have been inserted into another dimension, for they have not been viewed as efficient within your choice within THIS dimension.

KAAN: So then extinction becomes only the extinction of the form that consciousness takes, that consciousness takes on within our dimension?

ELIAS: I have expressed previously that there are creations within creatures – and also within cultures, within peoples – that choose not to be engaging this dimension any longer. Therefore, they create a movement into another dimension and disengage this dimension completely. Their form continues the same in another dimension and they continue in similar action to what they have created within THIS dimension, but they move into a different dimension.

PAUL: Elias, is this different dimension in Regional Area 1, as we’re describing it?

ELIAS: THIS is Regional Area 1.

PAUL: So this other dimension is ...?

ELIAS: Not! (Laughter)

PAUL: Which Regional Area does it fit within?

ELIAS: It would fit within its own Regional Area 1 of physical dimension, within an entirely different set of Regional Areas.

RETA: So let me ask you about extinction. When we’re always talking about forms of species that are in extinction, and they’re always saying it’s our fault ... in other words, you’re saying it was the choice of that particular creature to become extinct, not necessarily because of the way we behaved toward it?

ELIAS: It IS the choice of the species, yes.

RETA: And it just happens to be that we’re shooting them all out of the area, but that was their choice to become extinct?

ELIAS: You are in cooperation and influencing of their choice, but it is their choice.

RETA: And then when we go to great lengths to get back a species, like the Black Swan, try to get them back, is that another agreement with the species, or are we interfering with their choice?

ELIAS: It is partially an agreement. If the species chooses to be continuing, then your efforts shall be acknowledged and what you term to be successful. But you within your species have attempted to prevent the extinction of certain creatures throughout your history unsuccessfully, for the creatures have chosen to be moving out of this particular physical dimension.

BOBBI: If as a species they decide to move into another dimension, does that mean species from other dimensions can come into this one? Would they?

ELIAS: Not necessarily, for what is presented within this particular dimension is of your creation.

BOBBI: I see. That’s how we’ve created this dimension.

ELIAS: Correct.

BOBBI: I see. So when they find a new species of butterfly or something like that....

ELIAS: This is your creation.

BOBBI: Okay. They haven’t come from somewhere else.

ELIAS: Correct; but once the energy and consciousness has been configured, you are the designer, but the consciousness that is designed and created then holds choice.

BOBBI: So it can ...

ELIAS: Correct.

BOBBI: ... do what it wants from that point. (Elias nods)

RETA: Would that be in the same manner as flowers or vegetation?

ELIAS: Correct.

SUE: If unicorns and dragons once existed physically here, is it possible that someday we will discover unicorn skeletons? Or have all the physical traces of them left this dimension?

ELIAS: There are some artifacts remaining, but very few.

RETA: While we’re talking about their time of existence, perhaps the unicorn, can you give us a time space? A billion years? How far ago in our dimension were they around? (Pause)

ELIAS: In roaming freely and being accepted as a temporary reality, before what you view to be the known age of this planet.

RETA: A long time.

ELIAS: But they also have had remnants which have continued infrequently as near within your history as to six hundred years previous.

RETA: Wow! That’s interesting!

CATHY: Didn’t you say something about artifacts like that, that if we’re not putting energy into it, they’re not going to be around?

ELIAS: Correct. This be why there is very little.

CATHY: Because the mass belief is that there’s no such thing as a unicorn.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: So as soon as the mass belief were to change as to a unicorn, we would start to find artifacts, evidence of their existence?

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: We would literally shift into those probabilities where that existed.

ELIAS: Correct.

RETA: Well, it’s interesting that there is an actual concept of a unicorn. It’s in all of our cultures. It had to be presented some place as a mass belief because it’s so popular.

ELIAS: And a reality! I have expressed to you previously, you look to your mythology as imagination and it is not ... although imagination is reality also! (Grinning)

PAUL: Elias, I have one question. A recent Seth book came out called The Way Toward Health, and in it, Jane was in her hospital bed and she watched a Leonard Nimoy hosted program, Ancient Mysteries or something, and Bigfoot, Sasquatch, Yeti, was covered on that. Seth delivered a couple of pages of material stating that there were two bipedal mammals with us today, basically validating that what we conventionally call Sasquatch or Bigfoot is with us, and I wonder if you could comment on that. I believe they’re out there. Does that mean that they do exist? And another question too: There’s a famous piece of videotape footage showing a female looking at the camera and then walking off. Is that the real deal, or is that a fabrication?

ELIAS: Ah, the real deal! (Grinning and chuckling) More elements exist within your reality, within this dimension, than you realize! It is just merely not presenting itself to you continuously. Yes, these creatures do exist within your physical objective reality, and several other species exist also. Certain creatures that you view to be extinct have not entirely removed themselves from this particular dimension, just as with your creatures that you view to be mythological creatures. Although their reality and existence within this dimension was before the time of your known planet – or what you view to be the known age of your planet – as I have stated, in part they continued throughout your history to the time of about six hundred years ago. Also, within this present now there are continuing creatures that you would view to be prehistoric.

PAUL: Can you give an example of one? A dinosaur?

ELIAS: A mammoth.

DREW: Would the Loch Ness monster be another one?

ELIAS: This would be slightly different. You view this creature, which does exist, to be a remnant of a prehistoric, in your terms, creature, although it is in actuality another creation which would not be considered necessarily in the category of your prehistoric creatures. But the mammoth qualifies.

PAUL: So where is this mammoth roaming?

ELIAS: In your northern regions of your planet presently, nearing to what you presently term to be Iceland.

PAUL: Interesting!

KAAN: How about dragons and giants? They’re still mentioned in very recent history in some cultures.

ELIAS: Quite; for as I have stated, they have existed within this particular dimension and reality.

KAAN: And continuing?

ELIAS: They continue presently within another dimension, for they have created extinction for themselves.

KAAN: Just like unicorns though, you said that they lived long ago, but their remnants are the way that they interact with more recent cultures. Would dragons sort of bleed through or whatever still in some cultures which accept this, and maybe even accept it as an auspicious phenomenon or something else, organizing some social events around it?

ELIAS: Certain individuals may tap into a viewing of the dimension that they have inserted themselves into, but they are not physically bleeding through into this dimension.

RETA: On a Discovery program not too long ago, there was a remote island on which they had found what they would consider to be the closest remnants to a dragon; their features, their body style. I guess they were five or six feet long and they called them dragons, but they had another word for it. But would this be the closest thing we have right now to a dragon? I don’t even know the name of the island at this point.

ELIAS: These creatures that you term to be dragons were much larger than any of these creatures that are focused within your dimension presently.

RETA: When you’re saying larger, are you saying ten or twelve feet?

ELIAS: Extending head to tail, the equivalency of one hundred to one hundred fifty feet.

RETA: Wow!

PAUL: Cool!

RETA: And color-wise, would it be the green, reptile look?

ELIAS: Not necessarily. They have manifest in different species in several different colors.

RETA: With reptile skin?

ELIAS: Some, not all.

JO: Do any of them breathe fire? (Laughter)

ELIAS: (Chuckling) Not actual fire, but have held gaseous masses within their organs internally which created a vaporous smoke, so to speak; not fire.

SUE: Did Saint George actually kill one? (Laughter)

PAUL: Did Saint George actually live? (Elias laughs)

ELIAS: (Humorously) Did Saint George actually live? Yes. And has he actually encountered one of these enormous creatures within what I describe to you as this species? No. But he has encountered a similar species which is not in actuality a dragon and not breathing fire! (Chuckles again)

NORM: The Chinese, the Emperors, considered the concept of the dragon to be imperial, and it’s my understanding that the Chinese people consider the dragon to be good luck. Why is that?

ELIAS: These individuals hold a very strong action of story telling. I am not expressing fictional story, but they have created an art of relaying stories from generation to generation. In this they have taken information that they have witnessed within their reality and they have handed to each generation the stories of the events that they have participated within, unlike individuals within other areas of your planet which connect to the bleed-through ideas of these creatures or may visualize these creatures and view themselves to be creating your modern mythology in dealing with these creatures. They are unfamiliar with them. Therefore, they view them as fearsome and threatening. But this culture, and a few other cultures also, have held a remembrance, much in the fashion of the Milumet family and their intent. They have held this remembrance of interaction without the interference of fearfulness, of speculation. Therefore, their stories are more accurate than your myths within western cultures of these creatures. These creatures have roamed within a time frame that your species has been involved within your planet also.

NORM: So the Chinese people had a subjective remembrance, or objective?

ELIAS: Objective!

NORM: Three thousand BC, or ...?

ELIAS: They have continued, as I have stated, throughout your history to the time of six hundred years ago.

RETA: When you talk about this period of six hundred years ago, what was the big change at that time?

ELIAS: It was merely a choice to be moving into a different dimension.

RETA: But it just happened to be around six hundred years ago? There wasn’t any special event?

ELIAS: You within your focuses began changing and moving into a new creation of your reality.

RETA: A mass event for our focuses at that time?

ELIAS: You began to move in the direction towards your shift now.

RETA: That many years ago. Hmm.

BOBBI: Was that the Renaissance period?

ELIAS: Not quite, but close to this time period, yes.

KAAN: How about the monkey-like species that are mentioned in the Vedic Ramayana scripts, that apparently lived alongside with humans at that time and interacted?

ELIAS: At different times within your history, you have created different creatures that you have interacted with quite intimately. Certain cultures have created interaction with creatures at times even more intimately than you understand within what you view to be your civilized cultures, understanding that these are creations of their own and projections within consciousness, therefore allowing an intimate relationship, knowing that this is of their own manipulation of consciousness and understanding their own ability for interaction with this.

KAAN: Would that be a subjective understanding, or objective?

ELIAS: Objective.

KAAN: So those creatures did not hold essence or were not of essence similar to us?

ELIAS: No.” [session 262, January 25, 1998]

MICHAEL: “I don’t know how old I was, I was 4 or 5 years old, but this dog bit me for no reason. I was not even playing with it. I was doing something under the table, according to other people, and the dog bit me. I had to get stitches and all kinds of stuff. Now, I read in one of the transcripts that sometimes animals react to other focuses that they held.

ELIAS: Correct.

MICHAEL: Was this a case of that? For him attacking me?

ELIAS: Yes. Let me express to you that the consciousness of creatures is quite baffling to most individuals within physical focus, for you lean in the direction of ‘people-izing’ all of your creatures. You assign traits to them that are alike to yourselves, but creatures do not hold the same thought process or emotional involvement that you as individuals hold within your experiences.

Creatures may respond in action to remembrances and hold no emotion in conjunction with this action. They are merely responding to the remembrance, which is held differently from you. As you experience a remembrance, you would term this to be a memory. You are quite aware that you remain within your present now, but you pull to your present now the memory; which you may visualize and hold the remembrance of an event while continuing to hold the awareness of the present now in distinguishing between the two. A creature does not engage in remembrance in this manner. Creatures engage remembrance in the action of simultaneous time. Therefore, in allowing a remembrance, they are in effect within the moment of a different situation. Are you understanding?

MICHAEL: Yes.

ELIAS: Therefore, as the creature is viewing you within your present moment at a very small age and you are not provoking of this creature, it is sparked into a remembrance of another interaction, and it then engages responsiveness to the interaction that it is perceiving within simultaneous time, for its awareness of your perception of linear time has dissipated and it is now occupying its attention with the moment of the remembrance, which is its reality. In this, it is not responding emotionally, but merely in action of what it knows objectively in its own form of communication. Is this clear?

MICHAEL: Yes, very.

ELIAS: Very well.

MICHAEL: Okay then, what might I ask was he responding to? What was he remembering of me when that happened?

ELIAS: This remembrance ... hmm ... is of another time frame in which you as a focus are a young woman, and you possess a pet of another dog. This dog that you possess, in response to you as its owner, is antagonistic, so to speak, to this particular dog, which was also a dog within that focus. Now, mind you, neither of these creatures is exhibiting emotional qualities of their own that are intrinsic to them. The one creature is responding to the energy that you as the focused individual is projecting within your distaste for the other dog. Therefore, the pet that is your dog responds to your energy and appears to be antagonistic to the other dog. In this, the other dog is responsive also, not within emotional quality but merely within communication in its own manner of communicating, and in this it responds in what you think of as being attacking. Creatures display this type of behavior with other creatures, for it communicates to the other creatures that they wish not to continue with this behavior.

MICHAEL: Hmm. That’s interesting. So when we view them to be attacking, or other actions similar, is their way of communicating.

ELIAS: Correct. Just as you may look to your wild creatures, so to speak, and you may view a mother lion and her cubs, and she may be appearing to you agitated, growling, snarling, and even snapping at one of her own young, but this is merely a communication that shall be understood by the small one to be discontinuing the action or the behavior that it has been engaging.

MICHAEL: Okay. Whew! Alright, my next thing about animals is, I was reading the animal consciousness transcript and someone had asked why we don’t find remnants of like unicorns, and that was because the mass belief systems dictate that they don’t exist. So until that belief changes, we won’t find them, correct?

ELIAS: Correct.

MICHAEL: Okay. Then what is the thing with the dinosaurs then? Why are we finding remnants, all kinds of remnants, of them? I mean, I don’t any remembrance right now of being around when dinosaurs were, so how did they end up being found? (Elias smiles)

ELIAS: These creatures are more acceptable to you. They offer you an alignment with your belief systems in the direction of your evolutionary scale. They validate your belief systems in the area of evolution. Therefore, you allow yourselves the continuation of artifacts, that you may piece together your own puzzle of linear time and your evolutionary scale.

I shall be speaking futurely as to this matter also, but for this present now I shall express to you that as I have expressed previously, your species has experimented with many forms throughout millennium, and in this you have not chosen to be exhibiting evidence of many of your experiments in forms within this particular dimension. What you have left for yourselves are what you term to be mythology now. You offer yourselves stories and myths that you view to be purely imagination, which they are reality, but you have also efficiently removed from this officially accepted reality and dimension the evidences of the existences of these experiments within forms in your creation.

They also interrupt your belief systems of science and of religions. Your religions express to you that you as a species have been created in the image of a supreme being. (Humorously) We would not wish for strange creatures to be appearing upon your planet which shall call into question the creative force of that which you believe to be the supreme being!

You also shall not oppose yourselves within your sciences. Within the dictates of the belief systems of your sciences, you believe your planet to be only so many amount of years old, and within that time framework you believe an evolutionary process to have occurred and to be continuing within this present now. I express to you that the evolutionary process is not that which your science dictates and that you have not evolved in the manner to which you believe. You also have not appeared here as divine creations of an external supreme being transplanting you onto this one little planet in all of space! Therefore there are quite enough reasons, as you may view, that you shall not offer yourselves evidences of these creatures or of other manifestations of your own species until you have moved away from your very strong hold upon your religious and scientific belief systems.

MICHAEL: Okay, another animal I wish to question is what we call Sasquatch or Bigfoot.

ELIAS: Correct.

MICHAEL: You said that there still exists in our time framework this species, right?

ELIAS: Yes.

MICHAEL: Okay. I noticed you said many species ...

ELIAS: Correct.

MICHAEL: ... of this animal?

ELIAS: Yes.

MICHAEL: Okay, what do you mean by many? Do you mean like many Bigfoots, or different variations of the form?

ELIAS: In this, there is not one species which is common to them all. There are subsets, just as you have your family species of felines, but there are many species of felines. In this same regard, there are many species of this particular creature and they are not appearing identical to each other, although they hold similarities just as your felines hold similarities, but they also hold unique qualities to each of their own species, and in this same manner, this creature holds many species and its own unique qualities within each one.

MICHAEL: Okay. Are we not finding them or are they not appearing for the same reason that we’re not finding remnants of other species that have chosen to leave?

ELIAS: There are many species of creatures that inhabit your planet that you are not finding, so to speak, in your terms, just as I have expressed. You continue to hold small mammoths upon your planet, but you do not view them. This is partially for the reason that the masses, within their manifestation of energy of mass belief systems, deny the existence of certain species of creatures. Therefore, this is affecting of your ability to be intersecting with these creatures. It also, within the strength of energy of the belief systems, is affecting of the creatures themselves, which creates a situation that they become reclusive in areas, that they shall not be disturbed, and also this adds to their elusiveness, which reinforces your belief systems of the lack of their existence. This may also be said of creatures such as your sea creature within Scotland.

MICHAEL: Loch Ness.

ELIAS: Correct.” [session 279, May 12, 1998]

ROBIN: “Okay! I was wondering if we could talk about dolphins and their connection with humans?

ELIAS: I shall state to you that you have created this species and one other species, of what you term to be your whales, your water mammals, quite interestingly. Now; I shall also state to you that these particular species have been created in a manner that the energy which is provided has been accepted by the species itself and has also been chosen to be moving into an area of almost paralleling essence. These creatures are not of their own essences, but they are the closest physical expression in like manner to the expressed focuses of essence. In this, they move within consciousness into an agreement of probabilities to be creating of essence in themselves.

In this, let me express to you: all of these elements, all of these creatures, are manifestations of you, which are manifestations of essence. Any manifestation of essence, any element of essence, may express a desire to be fragmented, and in this action of fragmentation, this is creating of a new essence. To this point within your particular reality, these expressed elements of essence, your creations, do not express the desire to fragment within themselves, and continue within consciousness to be elements of your expressions, your creations. These particular manifestations move closely into the area of expressing this particular desire.

In this action, if they are choosing this futurely, these particular creatures shall become the first within your particular physical dimension to hold essence of themselves, and in this shall be creating entirely of their reality themselves, and you shall not be creating of their reality with them. They have already developed objectively much more than any of your other creations within this particular dimension.

This also is lent energy to by other dimensions which hold creatures that are focuses of your essences that bear resemblances to these creatures within your seas. Therefore, you also within your focuses of essence lend energy to their choice, and encouragement and acknowledgment of their creation of this particular desire.” [session 287, June 18, 1998]

MARI: “Okay. The first one is, please describe the past-life connection between myself and Daisy, who is my black-and-white female kitty.

ELIAS: Let me express to you that creatures, although they manifest physically and also remanifest, their remanifestation is different from that of essence, for as they choose to be disengaging physical focus they may reconstruct their energy, which shall remanifest within physical focus into a different form, and they do not always manifest with the same individuals in different focuses.

Now; let me explain this situation to you. If an animal is remanifesting and is connecting with an individual that is of the same essence in different focuses, the action that is occurring is that the energy splits, and one aspect of the energy moves in one direction and another aspect of the energy moves into a different direction, for all of your manifestations are occurring simultaneously. Therefore, the same creature that occupies this focus will not be exactly the same creature within another focus holding connection to you.

Now; let me also explain to you that the reason that you feel and notice such immense connections to certain creatures is that you draw yourselves to certain creatures, or you draw certain creatures to yourself, in a manner of speaking, and in this action you draw certain manifestations of creatures that shall complement and move evenly throughout the time framework that you are connected to them in this particular focus. This is an agreement within consciousness, that you draw certain creatures to yourself that shall be helpful to you in consciousness, objectively and subjectively.

In this, in answer to your question, this creature does not hold intense connection to you for the reason that you have manifest within other focuses together, but that you align with each other in this focus very strongly. This creature has chosen to be connecting with you in consciousness within this particular focus to be helpful to you in many different areas.” [session 299, July 19, 1998]

SUE: “First of all, I’d like some information about the death of my cat, Gray, who died back in August. I was wondering if you could tell me why he chose to leave when he did. (Pause)

ELIAS: This creature has chosen to be disengaging and reconstructing energy, and also in agreement partially with yourself in opening a new avenue for yourself.

Now; let me explain. Creatures are not responsible, so to speak, or enacting probabilities which may be occurring. You are designing of the probabilities, but within their choices, they may also be lending energy within agreement with you to certain lines of probabilities that you are moving in the direction of. In this disengagement, this serves as what you may term to be symbolic energy and imagery to you that the creature chooses to be moving through consciousness in expression of reconstructing energy, which opens certain directions of energy to be moving into new probabilities.

In this, there has been an awareness held, within that energy and consciousness of that particular creature, that you are choosing to be moving into a new direction, and one of your elements of imagery which is probable is that you may be moving in the direction of acquiring another feline, which shall also be lending energy to you within your new choices and directions.

You have been moving in a certain direction of probability pool for a time period, but within your choices of probabilities and information that you offer to yourself, you approach a time framework of change, that you may be moving into new probabilities. This movement is not merely subjective, but also shall be presenting itself within objective imagery, that you shall mirror elements of your subjective movement by creating actual movements within objective terms, so to speak, altering elements of your present reality that you have placed yourself within for some time framework.

In this, you move in the direction of creating changes within your objective choices and creations to be more beneficial to your own individual value fulfillment. In this, the creature has lent energy to this movement and has mirrored this movement in agreement with you by altering its reality and reconstructing the energy of its reality.

In other terms, it would be as a mirror image, that the creature creates the situation of altering the entirety of its attention within its energy, and in like manner, you are beginning to move in this type of direction also. Are you understanding?

SUE: Yes, I think so. Before he died, for a month or two before he got sick, I had been thinking that life would be easier if I only had one cat. I’d been sort of ignoring him, and I felt bad about that when he suddenly became sick, almost as if he read that and decided to disengage. Can you comment on that?

ELIAS: This would be an element which is quite common in expression with individuals within physical focus. This is an expression that you automatically move into and is a direct expression of duplicity, for as you move in the direction of guilt – which you do – and assuming personal responsibility for choices that are not your choices, these are influenced by mass belief systems which you all hold underlyingly individually, within your own alignment to mass belief systems. This is quite influencing, and in this you automatically move in the direction of expressing, ‘Oh, I have created a thought, and as resulting of this thought, I have also created the reality for this creature,’ or for another individual.

You may find that this expression is quite common within individuals as they create a thought process in regard to another individual, and subsequently another individual chooses to be disengaging. The first individual holding the thought in this direction automatically moves into the expression of guilt, and holding to the energy that they have created this situation and this choice.

I am expressing to you that although you are quite influencing of the reality within your creatures, they also hold the ability to be creating their own choices. Every element within consciousness creates its own choices. Therefore, I express to you that no individual is entirely creating of the reality of a creature that may be domesticated and in agreement of shared relationship with them.

I have expressed previously that creatures are not holding essence, for they are creations of you, and YOU are essence. Therefore, you are influencing of many of their choices in their creations, but they also hold the choice to be creating whatever action they may be choosing. Their disengagement is entirely their choice. You may view that you are creating the choice for them at certain times, for you assume responsibility in this area, expressing that collectively you are responsible for extinctions, or individually you may be responsible for a creature’s disengagement as you are initiating of that action physically. But in actuality, even within those actions that you may move into of physically choosing – in your thought process – to disengage an animal, a creature, this is merely within agreement. If the creature was not within agreement and choosing not to be disengaging, your effort to disengage that creature would be thwarted, and they would continue within physical focus.

Just as you may move in the direction of what you term to be assaulting another individual, and you may in actuality engage a weapon in such extreme, as a firearm, and you may in actuality use this weapon and engage a bullet to another individual’s head, and if that individual is not choosing to be disengaging, they may be creating of your local news in miraculous recovery of unexplained nature, that they have survived your assault! Creatures hold this same ability. Therefore, it is their choice as to their disengagement, but it is not a result of your actions. This is merely your perception, but in actuality, it is an agreement.

SUE: Okay. I did have to put him to sleep, but that part of it did not really bother me, because for a couple of days before, as he kept getting weaker, I told him that if he continued to get more sick, I would take that as a sign that wanted to be put to sleep. So when I took him to the vet, I did feel that it was the right thing to do because of the way he’d been behaving. He just kept getting worse, and I thought that meant that he was ready to go, so I didn’t feel any guilt about actually doing that. My only problem was with the fact that he’d gotten sick in the first place, and the timing of it, after I’d been feeling that he was a little in the way.

ELIAS: Correct, and this is the element of duplicity, as I have expressed. These elements of this particular belief system of duplicity hold great strength, and although many individuals within your time framework now move in the direction of their thought processes that they do not align with mass belief systems and that they are not affected and that they may be moving outside of mass belief systems, I express to you that underlyingly, these mass belief systems – most especially this belief system of duplicity – are very strong and hold much energy, and you ALL are quite affected by the aspects of that particular belief system regardless of your identification with any objective expressions of religious belief systems. It matters not. You are affected regardless, with these aspects of duplicity.

SUE: I was also a little surprised because I had some idea in my head that Gray was ... I don’t know, sort of providing masculine energy in my life, and affection, and I kind of thought he would stay around until I got involved with a man, (Elias grins) and so it was something of a shock to me when he left before that happened. I guess I was just wrong about thinking that.

ELIAS: Ah, but not entirely, for this also is an element of the agreement. As I have expressed to you, this creature has chosen to be disengaging in agreement with you, in recognition that you are choosing to move into a new line of probabilities and that this is affecting of many different directions within your physical focus.

In this, you HAVE created an element of an agreement with this creature to be providing that type of energy within your space arrangement, and in compliance to this, the expression of energy has been satisfactory, in a respect. It has provided an element of safety and it has provided an element that creates a comfort – in a manner of speaking – with you, and therefore you need not be moving in directions addressing to your own belief systems and aspects of fearfulness – or what you term to be ‘risking,’ which is an aspect of belief systems – and in this there has been a recognition within this creature’s consciousness that as this agreement continued, you would continue to be blocking your own movement in certain directions of your desire.

In this, this is not the only element that this creature has lent energy to in altering your probabilities and changing your direction of movement, but it is one aspect of the choice to be lending energy to you; a recognition that you are choosing a line of probabilities to be addressing to your own held belief systems and fears and allowing yourself to move in new directions, that you may open your awareness, and this shall allow you to move in the direction of fulfilling your desires objectively, and not holding to your ‘comfort zones’ and therefore providing yourself with blocked areas, that you may not allow yourself to move into your risk areas.

Be remembering, this terminology of risk is directly an aspect of belief systems, for in actuality there is no risk of any element within consciousness, for this terminology implies a loss, and you may not lose consciousness!

SUE: Yes, I understand, and it does seem risky to me, and I realize that this is a belief that I hold. So, his leaving sort of opened up a space, possibly, for possibilities I haven’t been open to before?

ELIAS: Correct. You have provided yourself with an enclosure of your own energy within your own space arrangement. You carry this enclosure with you within every physical location that you may move within as an expression, so to speak, of your own design of your own little box of consciousness that you surround yourself with, and you create comfortable elements that you perceive to be supplying all of your needs, so to speak, and therefore you are not motivated to move beyond the walls of this little box.

But within your own offering to yourself of more information and drawing yourself to this information, you also begin to widen your awareness in recognition that these aspects of belief systems may be quite blocking of your own movement.

Therefore, you have engaged this information for a time framework now, and in this you now move in the direction of allowing yourself new freedom, and in this you have opened your own window to be moving outside of this box of consciousness, and this creature has lent energy to that expression of creating the window and also lending energy to your opening of that window, that you may begin to be exploring your own movement, your own abilities, your own freedoms, and that you may explore aspects of the belief systems that you hold, and in this offer yourself more of a liberation within your movement and lessening the constraints that you have placed upon yourself previously.

SUE: I see. Okay. My other cat, China, seems quite happy without him. I was afraid she might miss him, but she doesn’t appear to miss him much at all. Is that correct?

ELIAS: You are correct, and this you may view as an objective validation to you, as it is being expressed quite naturally the understanding within THIS creature that there has been an agreement and that this agreement has been accomplished. Therefore, there is no longing, so to speak, of this remaining creature within physical focus.

Also, let me express to you quite clearly that within YOUR understanding of this agreement subjectively also, you yourself have not lent energy to the expression of the belief system – or the aspect of the belief system – that the other creature shall be pining for that creature which has disengaged. Creatures may be expressing that type of action at times, and that particular expression is directly influenced by the beliefs of the individual that resides with the creature. They hold an expectation that the creature shall be emotionally expressing at the disengagement of its companion, and therefore, in compliance with the belief system of the individual, the creature may incline in this direction and be expressing what appears to be a grieving for the disengagement of another creature, but you have not lent energy to that creation of that particular expression. Therefore, it is not being expressed.

SUE: I see. Actually, I always felt that the two cats tolerated each other as roommates but were not very close emotionally, and so I think I didn’t expect China to be upset. If anything, she seems more affectionate and she seems quite content without him, which is interesting to me because when I first got the second cat, the male cat, I thought that it was for her sake, (Elias grins) and I realize now that it was actually for my own sake, even though at the time I thought it was for her. So I think she’s quite happy enough to be with just me again.

ELIAS: Correct.” [session 338, November 10, 1998]

RICHARD: “I guess I have a question about incarnations or parallel realities. Do humans experience focuses as other species, and specifically dolphins? ‘Cause I had an experience with a powerful hallucinogen at one time, that I was actually remembering of a time when we were all – or I and other people that I was with – dolphins. I mean, it sounds crazy!

But then as I’ve been reading about it, I heard about this tribe in South America, where you mentioned I had a previous focus. It’s an area where there are these pink dolphins that actually are said to be able to shift their body structure. It sounds crazy, but I’ll just throw it out there anyway! They change their appearance and come out of the water basically, and then go back. The tribe that lives there protects these dolphins. If anybody goes anywhere near them trying to harm them, they will kill them, and it’s out of love, not anger.

I’m just very intrigued by this particular species of dolphins. I’m just wondering, ‘cause I really had a close ... I mean, I had an experience where I thought I was breathing ... I mean, I was under the water in a hot tub for five minutes! So it was just because of my belief system, maybe, that I was not needing to breathe air anymore? (Pause) I guess that’s a question! (Laughing)

ELIAS: Very well. This ... you may not be discounting yourself in this in your questioning, and not holding fearfulness with myself that I shall view this as an inconsequential question, for in actuality, this is an interesting question.

Early within the onset of these sessions, I offered information to this particular species, and that species which you term to be whales in this physical dimension. I have expressed that creatures within this dimension do not hold essence, but are created by you, which IS essence, although they are consciousness. But I have also expressed previously that these two particular species of creature within this dimension have moved into an area of assuming essence.

Now; at the time framework that I was discussing this physically with individuals previously, this action had not yet occurred, but was very close, as I was expressing. Within this present now, this is accomplished, that these particular creatures are also an expression of essence, and choosing to be manifest within this dimension NOT in the physical form of your species.

Now; as to the addressment of these particular creatures in this area of South America and your myths surrounding these creatures, these are not myths, they are not stories, and they are not what you term to be imagination.

In the experimentation of manipulating consciousness to be creating of essence, these particular creatures engage the action altering form, allowing the connection of the physical manifestation of essence within this dimension to be holding an accurate understanding and empathic sense of your species and to be creating of a connection physically, a knowing, but also recognizing that the choice is not to be manifest as essence in the form of your species, but to be manifest in this other species.

Now; within this present now, all of the species of this particular creature – dolphins, and also your whales – are manifestations of essence, unlike all of your other creations of creatures within this dimension.

This opens the window for much misunderstanding. Therefore, I shall clarify, for this is not to say that your creatures are lesser than you. They are different, for they are a creation of you. They are not essence. They are your creations, but they also are, in a manner of speaking, a part of you, just as your finger is not your entire body, but it is an element of you. Your dogs or your elephants are an extension of you. They are a creation of yours. Your dolphins and your whales are not. They are their own expression. They are their own essences.

RICHARD: And now, they’re creating their own realities.

ELIAS: Correct.

RICHARD: So then that has come about recently and will be a notable, dramatic change.

ELIAS: Correct.

In this, you have allowed yourself a similar experience in allowing yourself to empathically experience these other manifestations of essence, allowing yourself the experience of the dolphin in like manner to those particular dolphins which have offered themselves the experience of your species.

RICHARD: But when they did that, that experience, that was before they were essence. Wouldn’t that be a creation of our consciousness at that time, that caused them to take on a human form?

ELIAS: No! This has been their choice as consciousness, moving in the direction of creating essence for themselves within consciousness.

In that, they have created their experimentation with form within this dimension. This was an element of their choice, to experiment in their exploration of whether they shall participate within this dimension in similar form to you, or continue to manifest within the form they have chosen but incorporating essence. Therefore, there has been a time framework of experimentation of shifting shape.

Now; within this present now, this continues, but not for the same reason. This continues occasionally as a playful act, for they hold the knowing – unlike yourselves – objectively that they hold the ability to shift shape.

You also hold the ability to be creating this, but you do not offer yourselves the objective knowing of this. Therefore, you do not manifest this.

RICHARD: How? How do we do it?

ELIAS: Ha ha! (Grinning, and laughter)

You allow yourselves to become more familiar with you and your own consciousness, and you allow yourselves to begin to accept and trust – genuinely trust – yourselves, and in this you also open to more of your own communication of essence, and as you allow more of your own communication, you also open yourself to more of your own abilities.

I have expressed from the onset of these sessions, there is no thing that you may not accomplish within physical focus! It is merely your belief systems and your lack of trust within yourselves that prevent you from accomplishing and limit your abilities. Within this very present now, if you are choosing to be moving your physical form through objects of physical matter, you may. It is your choice, but you do not believe this!” [session 346, December 09, 1998]

MIKE: “This thing with the dolphins and whales, I read about it and I’m finding it quite interesting, and I was curious, now that they hold essence, can we as essence hold focuses as that species?

ELIAS: If you are so choosing, yes.

MIKE: So if I wanted to, instead of this being my final focus, I can manifest as a dolphin or a whale?

ELIAS: Yes.

MIKE: Okay. And also I was wondering, in conjunction with that, there are parks that trap these creatures for commercial reasons, such as Sea World and stuff, and I was wondering, are those kinds of parks going to be continuing on with their keeping of these animals, or is something going to happen where these animals are going to be set free, or what?

ELIAS: Within your present probabilities and your creations, this practice shall be most probably, in probabilities, continuing. This is no different of an expression than these similar types of actions that you have engaged within your own species, in caging each other and in subjecting each other to your judgments and your beliefs, and engaging activities as usage with each other as beasts of burden.

There is no difference in the expressions. You choose to be engaging these types of actions for experiences, and the experience is chosen also within the expression of these essences that manifest into these creatures.

MIKE: Okay. As a choice of that specific species, are they influenced ... are they gonna be holding the same choices, in a manner of speaking, as we do, of incorporating belief systems and being affected by our belief systems, or are they gonna incorporate their own and just be affected by their own beliefs?

ELIAS: I express to you, Mikah [Michael], that this is quite astute, and a very good question.

I shall express to you that the beliefs shall be influencing and shall be being incorporated, although let me also express to you that this species – or these manifestations that you term to be this species – now incorporating essence, engages this action of essence within the middle of the expression of the accomplishment of your shift in consciousness.

Now; look to your very small ones within your species, as they are lessening their hold upon these belief systems already, and are already exhibiting qualities of less affiliation and alignment with these established belief systems.

As these essences are incorporating into this shift in consciousness, there is the expression of the acceptance of belief systems. Therefore, the interaction of the belief systems is different.

This be one of the reasons that it matters not that the practice of your aquariums that house some of these creatures – that species or those species – may not discontinue, for it matters not. It is merely a choice of experience, and the belief is not affecting.

MIKE: So, are they going to be exhibiting ... because I know for a long time, scientists have always marveled at their intelligence and whatsuch, but are they going to be exhibiting more qualities that are more of what our scientists term to be more logical and more human?

ELIAS: Not necessarily. They are their own species. Why shall they incorporate actions more similar to your own? You are a different species. You hold different expressions.” [session 388, April 27, 1999]

MIKE: “This whole thing with the dolphins and the whales and their choice to be assuming essence, I’ve been trying to comprehend this within simultaneous time. Does that mean now that every whale and dolphin that we now view as pastly contains essence, or just from the point in linear terms that they chose the experience and forward?

ELIAS: Both.

MIKE: Both? So now, all the ones that we viewed pastly?

ELIAS: Within linear time framework, no. Outside of your linear time framework, yes.

MIKE: Okay. Alright, so basically, just from a point in linear terms, just from a point that they chose and forward?

ELIAS: Within linear terms, within your physical dimension. Outside of linear terms, within simultaneous time and consciousness, it would incorporate all.” [session 398, May 18, 1999]

LESLIE: “Very quickly, some of these are kind of basic questions ’cause I kind of need to see if my building blocks are correct. For instance, my little dog that disengaged [died], did she go back into ... my term would be the pool of consciousness? (Pause)

ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, for the energy has been reconfigured. It has not been remanifest into physical focus once again in this time period yet, but it has been reconfigured and is moving within consciousness nonphysically.

LESLIE: Now, we’re an essence, and so we are who we are who we are. Now that she’s returned to consciousness, is she still who I knew, or has she become part of a whole?

ELIAS: In this, the creature does not hold essence. It is a configuration of energy, which is consciousness, and projected and created into physical form.

Within that physical expression, dependent upon the type of expressed energy that it is configured into – such as a creature – it may hold an aspect of personality which offers it its own unique expression within physical reality, but that particular individuality is a choice of experience that it is within agreement to be creating within certain moments in physical focus, but as an element of consciousness, may not necessarily retain that particular expression of individuality and personality, for it is unnecessary and the energy is reconfigured.

Now; let me also express to you that as the energy reconfigures, it retains memory. Therefore, although it may reconfigure into some other type of expression within consciousness, it continues to hold memory. Therefore, if choosing to be reconfiguring the energy into a remanifestation of another creature, it may hold objective memory of certain experiences that have been created previously, in your terms, within physical focus.

LESLIE: Oh, okay. That helps clarify that.

Now, my current little creature is still barking. Does this have to do with my driving force that we spoke of before?

ELIAS: This is in responsiveness to your energy.

LESLIE: That I’m holding to it?

ELIAS: This little creature is quite responsive to you individually, and therefore is creating of certain behaviors, that it may be expressive with you much more so than with any other individual or situation. In this, the little creature that you interact with presently holds great excitement, in a manner of speaking, in its interaction with you, and also is forcefully requesting your attention in its direction, and therefore it attains your attention in the most efficient manner. You shall pay attention if it is creating much noise! (Grinning)

LESLIE: I know, and he’s so cute! (Elias chuckles) He’s just darling, but he sure does bark! And you’re right, he does want my attention. But he’s wonderful, so I’ll live with it.” (Elias laughs) [session 409, June 02, 1999]

LORRAINE: “Alright, the last thing I want to talk about in the next couple of minutes is my animals. I mean, you must know that I have had seventy-four cats and nine dogs at one point in my life, and now I’m down to three or four dogs and nineteen cats. I guess my beliefs around that were different at the time, where I really believed they needed me and I had to save them and there weren’t enough homes for them and nobody wanted them and all of that. I’m down to what I have now and I’m going to keep them, but I have this guilt thing where I don’t spend a lot of time with them. I could spend more time with them – I could make the time – but I don’t, and I feel very guilty about the little bit of my time and attention that they get, and I’m not able or I’ve not learned at this point how to really communicate with them and get any of their own input.

So I guess my question to you is, how are they doing? Are they upset about this? Is this guilt that I feel ... I’m sure I’m putting that on myself, but that’s my problem with the situation with the animals, and I just want to get some feedback from you on that situation.

ELIAS: I shall express to you that in like manner to many individuals, once again, you are people-izing your creatures.

In this, you are moving in a direction, first of all, [of] placing judgment upon yourself as to your lack of ability to be accomplishing adequately, which reinforces your value meter in its downward swing. I also express to you, in this people-izing of your creatures, you assume great personal responsibility for the creation of the reality of these creatures.

In this, this is your choice to be interactive with creatures, but recognize that these creatures also are creating their reality, and as you do not NEED to be interactive with them, they also do not NEED to be interactive with you.

You are assuming personal responsibility for these creatures. This offers you, conversely, your upswing in your worth-gauge. This allows you the opportunity to view within yourself that you are offering an expression of humanitarianism, and in this, you are creating an honorable deed. You are expressing care for these creatures, but simultaneously, you are not expressing care in an adequate enough manner. Therefore, you also offer yourself the opportunity to deplete the gauge of the value and the worth of self.

(Humorously) For we shall not anticipate that the gauge shall move too high, for this would be entirely unacceptable, for realistically, we hold the awareness that it may only reach a certain point, for this is the reality! You may feel one-quarter full of acceptance of self within your worthiness, and that is all, for beyond this is accepting measurement not affordable to yourself, for you are not worthy of that!

In this, let me express to you, although all of these creatures participate in interaction with you in agreement, you draw them to yourself.

LORRAINE: So how can I stop that? (Laughing)

ELIAS: I express to you, this also moves in the direction of your acceptance of self. You express outwardly this extreme that you need be expressing this nurturing and caring and affection for all of your reality – you must be care-taking of all of your reality – but you are not affording this same expression to self. THIS is the area of neglect.

You need not hold the feeling or the expression of guilt in conjunction with these creatures. They hold the ability quite adequately to be creating their reality and caring for themselves in a much more efficient manner than you afford yourself, for they do not hold the belief systems that you hold and therefore are not influenced in the same manner.

I hold the offering to you of the suggestion that you attempt to be turning a fraction of this concentration of energy that you project to all of your reality outside of yourself in the direction of self – merely a fraction – and you shall be offering a great service and kindness, so to speak, to yourself.

I shall also express to you, as I have expressed to other individuals previously: Guilt and worry – these are, in a manner of speaking, a waste of energy. Of all that you create within your expressions of energy – although in reality there is no actual waste of energy – if we are to designate ANY expression of energy that may be closely associated with a waste of energy, it would be these two expressions that you create within physical focus, guilt and worry, for all that these particular expressions create is a reinforcement of duplicity.

LORRAINE: Okay, alright. Thank you.

ELIAS: You are quite welcome.

Offer to yourself an experimentation. Create the imagination playfully with yourself, and view yourself as a feline, and offer to yourself the same expression that you would be offering to one of these creatures! (Chuckling)

LORRAINE: Okay....

ELIAS: Ha ha ha! And I shall offer encouraging energy to you to be helpful in your expression in this area, and encouraging you in your movement into your acceptance of self.

LORRAINE: Thank you, Elias.

ELIAS: You are very welcome.” [session 452, August 08, 1999]

LORRAINE: “Now I’d like to ask you a little bit about animals. I know that you know that I’m kind of an animal person.

I had a dog recently who passed away, who disengaged on September 10, and I guess I don’t really understand exactly what happens with animals. Does the same thing happen to an animal when it disengages, as a person? Does it go into transition?

I read a book once called “Always, Karen,” and she told her mother after she passed on that one of the things she did on the other side was to help animals pass over. Does that really happen? Do animals need to be helped during the transition period, and if so, was there somebody there for Caesar, helping him to transition?

ELIAS: Let me express to you:

Within the action of what is created with creatures, your creatures do not hold belief systems. Therefore, it is unnecessary for them, within the action of disengagement, to be entering into an action of transition. There is no need for transitioning with creatures, for they need not be shedding belief systems, for they do not hold belief systems within physical focus.

The action of transition is quite purposeful. This action is to be shedding the belief systems which are associated with any particular physical dimension, for within areas of consciousness that are removed from physical dimensions, belief systems are unnecessary.

LORRAINE: So there are areas of consciousness where there are no belief systems, no beliefs at all?

ELIAS: Correct. Belief systems are relative to physical dimensions. But within physical dimensions, there are elements of consciousness which are created, such as your creatures, that do not involve themselves in the alignment with or the participation with belief systems, for it is unnecessary in conjunction with their existence, so to speak.

Therefore, as a creature chooses to be disengaging physical focus, it does not enter the action of transition. In this, the creature, as an element of consciousness, chooses in the moment of disengagement how it shall continue to explore consciousness.

Now; creatures are not essence. I am aware that this may be distressing to you, but let me explain.

LORRAINE: So there’s consciousness that’s not essence.

ELIAS: Yes. In this, within consciousness, there are elements of consciousness that choose to be forming a personality essence. This is an energy configuration of consciousness that creates a specific design, so to speak, of consciousness, and these are termed essences.

Now; I am understanding that this concept is quite difficult within physical understanding, for there is no separation in actuality, but your language is limiting, and therefore it creates difficulties in explanations.

There is no separation within consciousness. Consciousness is consciousness. But there are elements of consciousness that designate themselves, in a manner of speaking, as individual personality essences. These are expressions of consciousness.

LORRAINE: Once they have done that, do they always remain that? Or can they choose not to ... in other words, go back and not be one of those, and be a cat or a dog at some point? Once you’re an essence, are you always essence after that? I guess that’s my question.

ELIAS: I shall express to you that as an essence is created, it does not uncreate itself as essence, although I shall also express to you, this is not an absolute. It is not a situation that it is impossible for this action to occur, but the action occurs quite purposefully in the exploration of becoming.

It is an avenue of consciousness in the exploration of becoming. Therefore, it is unnecessary to be uncreating itself as essence.

LORRAINE: Okay, so once we have this consciousness that’s become essence, is there ... let me think. The consciousness that’s not essence, that you say are creatures, they’re not from consciousness that is essence. So let’s say the consciousness that is creatures, does that consciousness at some point ... or can that consciousness then decide that it wants to pursue this other avenue of essence?

ELIAS: Yes, and in actuality....

LORRAINE: So, my essence could have been a cat. It could have been consciousness at some point that was creatures or whatever, that was doing something else and then pursued this avenue and now is essence, you’re saying? It’s very confusing!

ELIAS: Hypothetically speaking, this is possible, although this is not the situation that has been created.

There are a group of creatures within this particular dimension that have chosen to become essences, which I have expressed previously within recent time framework. Those of your water mammals, your whales and dolphins, these creatures have chosen to be creating of essence within consciousness.

As to the creation of other creatures within this particular dimension, they are creations of yours.

As essence, you manipulate energy within consciousness to be creating of all of the physical elements which are, in your terms, within existence within your physical universe. Therefore, you have also created your creatures.

Now; be understanding, once created, they subsequently hold their own choices. You do not create their reality for them. You merely have created the design and inserted that design into your physical reality.

Now; in this, as these creatures are not essences, they do not hold belief systems. They participate in reality in conjunction with you, and participate in actions in conjunction with your belief systems. Therefore, your belief systems are affecting of them, but they themselves do not hold and align with your belief systems.

Therefore, as they choose to be disengaging – for they also choose this action, just as you choose – what occurs within that moment is the creation of another choice, and in that choice, they may choose to reconfigure the energy of their consciousness to be remanifesting within this dimension if they are so choosing, or they may choose to be reconfiguring the energy of consciousness and participate within another physical dimension in a very different manner, or they may choose to be reconfiguring their energy and creating of any other element within physical dimensions, or to not be manifesting within physical dimensions at all.” [session 485, October 16, 1999]

GUIN: “Elias, I have a question regarding our little creatures, regarding my little creature [dog] that has seizures, and if you can offer me helpfulness on the relationship between the coinkidinks of the seizures and the death of other animals of people that are close to me, and if you could be offering of any information that would be helpful in my conflict with this! (Laughter, and Elias chuckles)

ELIAS: First of all, as you are aware, the physical manifestation within the choice of this creature moves in conjunction with your energy also. You hold an awareness of this already.

(Firmly) This is not bad!

CATHY: No, it’s good! (Laughter)

ELIAS: First of all, you are not inflicting energy upon this creature, and therefore it is subsequently creating these seizures, so to speak. There is no fault, there is no blame, and this is not a bad creation. It is merely an agreement and a responsiveness.

I shall also express to you that the action of a seizure, so to speak, incorporated within a creature is different than the action which is created in an individual of your species, and the physical elements associated with this creation are different.

Some individuals – not all, but some individuals – manifesting this type of creation in seizures experience painfulness physically, which also is in alignment with their individual belief systems that this type of action shall be creating of painfulness physically. Not all individuals that choose to be creating these seizures do experience painfulness in conjunction with the action of these seizures, which also would be influenced by their belief systems.

The creatures do not hold belief systems. Therefore, they also do not incorporate pain in these actions, for they do not associate negative, so to speak, in conjunction with this type of action, and recognize that this is merely a choice that they are creating in conjunction with energy which is expressed by the individuals that they are associating with.

As you are responsive to certain elements within your reality and as you create certain triggers within yourself in conjunction with your experiences, the creature also identifies those triggers that you are experiencing, and the creature creates a triggering mirror action in conjunction with you, and creates an objective expression of the seizures.

(With emphasis) I express to you strongly, this is not bad. I express to you strongly, you are not creating this in the creature. The creature holds a choice, and is creating this action in response – as a choice – to trigger actions.

You allow a triggering action within yourself in emotional situations. You create a triggering action within yourself as you present yourself with emotional situations in conjunction with yourself and with other individuals. You automatically respond. This is the trigger action, and as you automatically respond, hypothetically speaking, there is an action that is created in energy. Hypothetically, the action may be likened to a spark.

You create or draw yourself to situations and experiences which trigger an emotional automatic response within yourself. At times, you are pushing this emotional response and not allowing your expression of it objectively.

In that action, you are diverting your attention. This creates a spark, and the spark – this is a hypothetical example – creates a trigger, or the recognition of a trigger, within the creature, and the creature responds to its trigger and creates the seizure.

Now; you may not objectively be creating a tremendous emotional responsiveness outwardly or objectively each time the creature is creating a seizure, but underlyingly, the trigger within you has been engaged regardless of your choice of how you express this objectively or outwardly. Underlyingly, there is a recognition that you are responding in an automatic type of response. The creature identifies this action, notices the spark, and chooses to be responsive to that in conjunction with you.

Now; understand that previously I have engaged the language or the words of expressing to individuals that the creature that interacts with them may be creating a physical responsiveness or action for them, so to speak. Figuratively speaking, this is correct, and I may express that also to you, but I am altering of the terminology for the reason that those particular words also trigger an automatic response within you in assuming personal responsibility and guilt, (stopping and grinning at Guin, and everybody laughs) in which you express that you hold fault for the choice of the creature; that if the creature is creating an action for you, expressing the turmoil or the writhing that you do not allow yourself to be expressing, your immediate automatic interpretation of that explanation is to be expressing guilt and that you are inflicting an expression upon a creature which is helpless, and this is NOT the situation.

The creature holds an awareness of what it is creating, and has chosen to be engaging this action as a mirror expression. This in actuality, in like manner to many expressions of creatures that participate in relationship with you as individuals, is an expression of helpfulness, in a similar manner to those actions which are expressed through counterpart action.

Now; hear what I am expressing to you! For if you are allowing yourself to view counterpart action, you do not feel guilty for the counterpart action that another individual engages in conjunction to you. They are merely experiencing another action, and in that action, you – in a manner of speaking – reap the benefit of their experience without the actual physical manifestation or creation of those particular experiences within your focus, and you create this same action in like manner in conjunction with other individuals. You create experiences that they choose not to be creating, and they reap the benefit of those experiences through the counterpart action. There is no hurtfulness or harmfulness in this counterpart action, and you do not incorporate guilt or blame in viewing that type of action, but conversely view this action as a beneficial action.

In conjunction with the creature, you may view this also as a type of beneficial action. The creature, in agreement with you, has chosen to mirror what you shall not express, and creates an objective physical expression in extreme of what you choose not to allow to be expressed within yourself.

This also offers you an opportunity to turn your attention and allow yourself to move your perception slightly, recognizing that you are not creating the reality of the creature. It is creating its own reality through its own choices. It is not a victim, and in this, you are not responsible for the choices. You are participating in conjunction with each other. You are participating in your choices together, but you are not creating choices for each other.

I am understanding that within the beliefs of individuals in this physical dimension, as you do hold an underlying knowing that your creatures are a creation of you all and that they are not an element of essence, you translate that knowing objectively into an expression of responsibility, and you also translate that into an expression of objectifying that your creatures are “less than" you are.

You as essence, you as human species, are “more than" your creatures, and many individuals may argue very much with this statement, but this IS what you believe. And as they are “less than,” you need be creating an expression of responsibility that you must be care-taking for them, for they do not hold choices and they do not create their reality. You create it for them.

They DO create their reality. They ARE consciousness. Consciousness is not less than essence. It is all consciousness. They are merely different expressions. They do create their individual choices.

They may not express their manifestation in the same manner that you express your manifestation; they do not hold the same type of thought process that you hold. They do not create their reality quite the same as you create your reality, and they do not hold belief systems as you hold belief systems.

But they DO hold free will and they DO create their choices quite purposefully and quite intentionally, not accidentally and not coincidentally! (Grinning at Guin)

Therefore, as you are triggered by different experiences – disengagements of other individuals, different expressions within yourself and your responses to yourself and to other individuals – the creature chooses to be manifesting a responsiveness, mirroring the trigger action and creating an expression that you do not allow yourself to create.

This creates a difficulty in your interaction with the creature, for as you all hold this belief that creatures are less than and that you need be responsible for and care-taking of, as a creature creates a choice in this type of manner, you translate this into responsibility of your own, and you create guilt.

Therefore, if you are allowing yourself to turn slightly ... and recognize that the reason you incorporate distress or anxiety as the creature creates the seizure is that you feel responsible. You believe that you are creating or inflicting a reality upon the creature. You experience a lack of acceptance within yourself, and in this also, you present yourself your expression of helplessness, and in this helplessness, there is a recognition of the underlying knowing that the creature in actuality does create its own choices, and that you may not create its choices for it.

Even within those choices that you view you are creating a choice for a creature – and there are choices that you incorporate within physical focus of altering certain elements of creatures’ realities, that you are not inquiring of permission from the creature to be altering their reality, and you engage that action – were the creature not in agreement with you, IT WOULD NOT OCCUR. The creature would create a choice to facilitate the action differently, and it would not occur, for they do hold participation and choice in agreement or lack of agreement with you.

(To Vic) And you may express to Michael [Mary] – and we shall not continue, in compliance with his wishes, so to speak (1) – that he is correct in his assessment of his creature’s choice to be creating a choice to not be altering its reality in a manner that it was not in compliance with, and the choice that it engaged was to be disengaging. This is merely a choice, and the creature, without belief systems, views it in no other manner but that it is a choice. It chooses not to participate in certain actions. Therefore, it shall choose to be creating of a different action.

(To Guin) And your creature is creating its actions and manifestations in like manner. It is its choice.

As you allow yourself to identify your own beliefs, as you allow yourself to recognize that your difficulty or your anxiety in viewing the choice of the creature is in actuality a responsiveness to your own beliefs, you may also offer yourself the opportunity to translate this in conjunction with other individuals, for other individuals create choices that you may not like either, and that you may hold an anxiety for in conjunction with their choices, but these are your beliefs, that you shall not engage what they are engaging.

GUIN: Thank you.

ELIAS: You are very welcome. (Smiling)

SUE: Elias, could I ask a quick question about my cat? You know she had asthma for several years, and a couple months ago, it went away. I can see a physical reason for it, a change in the environment that would explain it (2), but I’m wondering if it’s also a reflection of a change in my attitude.

ELIAS: You are correct.

SUE: Okay, thank you. I just wanted to confirm that.” [session 502, November 11, 1999]

CAROLE: “I’ve had several creatures. I currently have a cat named Gurdjieff, and I formerly had cats named Mrs. Robinson and Doctor Watson. Particularly Gurdjieff – I think of Gurdjieff as incredibly special, and I wonder if he’s possibly a part, a fleck of someone’s essence, an essence fleck? I’m wondering why he’s so special. (Pause)

ELIAS: This creature does hold an energy fleck of another creature which has also participated with you in this focus.

CAROLE: Doctor Watson? (Pause)

ELIAS: This is your physical identification of this creature, yes.

CAROLE: Amazing! I thought that might be true!

ELIAS: This creature also holds an energy fleck of another creature within another focus that you have held much interaction with. This would be a configuration of energy which manifests in the form of a horse, within what you identify as recent time framework pastly expressed within your linear time framework.” [session 503, November 13, 1999]

GEORGE: “I’m a total vegetarian because of the way I feel about animals. I don’t like the way they’re treated in slaughterhouses, for example, or under factory farming conditions. I’m appalled and saddened by all of that.

But at the same time, I wonder if my attitude and the stance I’ve taken in my opposition to all of this might not in fact lend energy to the very abuse that I would like to see eradicated. Can you enlighten me on this?

ELIAS: You are correct.

GEORGE: That it could go in that direction?

ELIAS: And does.

GEORGE: And does. So, it would be better to do what then?

ELIAS: It is not a situation of better or worse. It merely is a situation of lending energy to a belief or not lending energy to a belief.

The manner in which you do not lend energy to a belief is to not be placing judgment upon it, and allowing yourself the recognition that all that you create within this physical dimension is a choice, and therefore is not good or bad. It merely is a choice.

As you create a judgment and you express the disdain OR the great affinity for any particular action, you are also lending energy to that very expression.

GEORGE: Okay. Since we’re speaking about animals right now, I understand you have stated that animals are not essence, but are rather creations of essence. Does this establish a situation between humans and animals that possibly permits the present custom, for example, of eating animals – we don’t eat humans – or hunting them as a sport, or experimenting on them in medical laboratories, or using them in cosmetic tests, that kind of thing? I’m wondering if, as a result of the shift, animals will be happier and receive more humane treatment from humans and be granted more rights and more happiness.

ELIAS: This also, I shall express to you, is your choice.

But I shall express to you that within the action of this shift, many elements of your reality shall be altered, and this shall be created as you allow yourselves the recognition that all elements of your reality, regardless of your identification of it, is of consciousness.

Your creatures may not be essence, but they ARE consciousness. Essence is merely an identification of personality and individuality within tone. It is a quality of consciousness, but it is not separated from all of consciousness. Therefore, a creature is you and you are the creature, in the design of consciousness.

As you begin to widen your awareness ... and recognize that all that you create within your reality, you are creating within yourself. All that you do within your physical reality, you are doing with yourself. Therefore, I may express to you, the consumption of a creature is no different than the consumption of a plant or a rock. Your identification of them within your belief systems is different, for you identify certain elements of consciousness as being living and certain elements as not being living.

You also identify and define degrees of livingness, and in this, you define to yourselves different degrees in qualities of life, as you identify it. You identify yourselves as being a much higher quality of life than your creatures. You identify your creatures as being a higher quality of life than your plants, and you identify your plants as being higher than stones or water or air.

All of your reality IS consciousness. Your table is merely a different configuration of consciousness than a cat, for within agreement, there is a choice to be configuring the energy in these different manners and to be creating different experiences.

Now; as you widen your awareness, you also allow yourselves to become more aware of reality, of consciousness, and of what you have created, and in this, as you also become more accepting of your belief systems, you recognize that there is no separation and there are much less differences than you have previously allowed yourselves to be recognizing.

I shall express to you, I have recently offered information in conjunction with the choices of your creatures, and in this, I shall express to you also, you do not create the reality of your creatures.

You have created THEM as a configuration of consciousness initially, but from this point, THEY are creating of their choices and their reality, and in this, they do not hold belief systems in the manner that you hold belief systems. Therefore, their reality through their perception is quite different than your perception of your reality.

(Intently) And I shall express to you, no element of consciousness shall be creating a choice that it does not choose to be creating. No element of action – no choice – is thrust upon any other element of consciousness. This is entirely contrary to the movement of consciousness itself.” [session 504, November 19, 1999]

BOBBI: “I have actually several questions here about dolphins and whales. You had said a while ago that they had made a decision to become essence.

ELIAS: Correct.

BOBBI: This raises a lot of questions in my mind then. If they are essence now, does that mean that we, as essence, can have a focus as a dolphin or a whale? (Pause)

ELIAS: If you are so choosing.

BOBBI: Okay. They are on this planet ... but are they part of this dimension? Is their experience as essence, in that capacity of being a whale, would that be considered part of this dimension?

ELIAS: Yes.

BOBBI: So their experiences are based on emotion and sexual orientation also?

ELIAS: Yes.

BOBBI: Oh, really! I also have questions about when that change occurred, from a group of consciousness to essence. Were new essences formed in that action, or were essences waiting there for that decision and they sort of stepped in, or how did that occur?

ELIAS: New essences have been formed; yes, you are correct.

BOBBI: Oh, really! So that would be a way that essence is created?

ELIAS: Within the action of fragmentation and the development, in a manner of speaking ... this is, of course, figuratively speaking, in relation to nonphysical aspects of consciousness and their translation into an explanation presently.

(Slowly) As essences merge, the element that may be fragmented is an element which desires to be fragmented, holding specific qualities of those essences which it is fragmented of.

Now; be remembering that each new essence, in a manner of speaking, holds all of the qualities of the fragmenting essence, but also creates a type of emphasis upon certain qualities that it chooses to be exploring.

(Slowly) And as essence is consciousness and consciousness is essence, those qualities of essence which are consciousness – which create the manifestations in your physical dimension of these particular creatures – have chosen to be fragmented into their own expression of essence.

Be remembering also, I have expressed to you, your creatures are a creation of you. They are consciousness; they are also a creation of you. They are not essence in themselves. They are a manifestation of you as essence; a projection of consciousness that is designated to specific functions and forms within your physical dimension. But as not essence in themselves, they also do not necessarily align with or manifest the base qualities of this particular physical reality and dimension as you as essence have designed it.

Therefore, a tree does not necessarily manifest its reality incorporating the base elements of expression of emotion and sexuality. YOU identify the tree through elements of sexuality and emotion, but the tree does not necessarily identify itself in this manner, for it is a creation of yours. But it is also an expression of consciousness, and in this, the qualities of that tree in consciousness are held by you as essence.

Now; in the choice of certain expressed qualities of essence, those being the qualities of consciousness that move together and create the physical manifestations of those creatures which you identify as dolphins and whales ... have expressed the desire to be creating new essences, holding those qualities of essence as their particular direction of attention, in a manner of speaking.

And in this, through the mergence of essences, there is an action of fragmentation which occurs, which has thusly created new expressions of essence which are already manifest within your physical dimension as these expressions of dolphins and whales.

BOBBI: I understand. I see what you’re saying. Do I have a focus as a dolphin or a whale? (Pause)

ELIAS: Within this present now, no. But I shall express to you also that within the qualities expressed, in another manner of speaking, yes. For you within your essence do not focus a manifestation of your essence as a dolphin or a whale, but through fragmentation, an aspect of your essence – which combines, in a manner of speaking, with other essences to be creating of a new essence - does focus as both.” [session 556, February 09, 2000]

JOHN: “... I would like to ask you, what is the deal with spiders and me? I have a great fear of spiders, and I thought or had an impression ... I have a focus in Peru that I know of, and I don’t know if I was bitten by a spider in Peru. I’ve seen spiders in my house ever since I was little, and now I’ve moved into a different house and I have spiders. I don’t kill them anymore; I try to catch them and let them go outside. But if you could comment on that?

ELIAS: I may express to you that you hold this incorporation of fear in relation to this particular creature in similarity to many other individuals.

(Humorously) Now; I may offer to you a cosmic explanation (laughter) incorporating other-focus activity in which you have been traumatized by this small creature....

JOHN: Not so small, I don’t think!

ELIAS: (Dramatically) And therefore, this is bleeding through into your present awareness and continues to be a source of conflict ... BUT! (Laughter)

I may express to you, in actuality, this small creature – regardless of your assessment of its size (laughter) – appears quite threatening to many individuals.

Now; this creature creates a reality within your physical dimension which is not objectively understood by you. It also creates a reality which, in a manner of speaking, flies in the face of your beliefs, and how you assess the natural order, in your terms, of how ‘things,’ so to speak, shall be manifest and function within your dimension.

Now; I may express to you, there are some individuals that hold no fear expression of these creatures. There are also some individuals that hold no fear of the creature within your seas that you identify as sharks. But for the most part, you – many, many, many of you – share this fear of these tiny creatures and these immense creatures, and the reason that you hold them as suspect is that you do not understand their function and their creation, and you hold no compassion for these particular creatures.

Now; in this, you hold no empathy – not empathic, but empathy – for either of these creatures. This is an expression of a lack of understanding of experience. It is outside of your design of your experience, and as you have created this separation which creates the illusion that there are entities outside of you that are not a part of you – those being sharks and spiders – in a manner of speaking, you are challenged in the comprehension of their existence within your reality. You view each as holding the potential, regardless of size, to be quite dangerous and to be quite hurtful to you.

In this, as you assess that this is a creature that is holding the potential to be hurtful to you – and has expressed the creation of what you assess to be hurtful to any other creature that it encounters, even its own species – this is quite distasteful and distrustful to you.

Now; let me express to you, the reason it becomes distrustful to you is the belief system of duplicity, and how you view yourself.

These types of creatures create within your perception a threat, for you view in them and their behavior yourselves. But within your beliefs, the behaviors of these creatures are unacceptable. They are destructive. They are hurtful. They are suspicious.

Therefore, as you associate within your perception the similarity of your assessment of these creatures and yourself ... for you are quite influenced through duplicity of discounting yourselves through religious belief systems – of expressing that you are ‘less than,’ that you are suspicious, that you are flawed, that you hold great potential for hurtfulness, that you are the most destructive creature upon your planet.

These are quite strong beliefs that you hold, and you all hold them. They are mass belief systems, and as you continue to associate your viewing of yourself in this manner, you also view these particular creatures in this manner, for they exhibit similar behaviors and actions as do you.

They may, in your physical terms, turn upon their own species. They may inflict harmfulness and even death upon themselves, and not as a merciful murderous act, but in mere function, and you view that you hold this same capability, and you view this to be very, very bad! (Laughter) And as you view it to be very, very bad, you also view these creatures to be very, very bad.

This strikes in you fear, and fear is an expression of perceived threat. As you perceive a threat within your reality, you create the expression of fear.

JOHN: Okay, so that’s why they’ve been popping up around the house lately a little bit more, just to make me notice, or ...?

ELIAS: To be noticing, and to be addressing to your association, and to be recognizing in genuineness the identification of victimhood.

Let me express to you also, another aspect that is reinforcing of your fear and your threat through the lack of understanding of these creatures is that they create behavior without emotion.

These creatures do not create interactions and behaviors within the belief of victim. Even the victim is not a victim. It is merely experiencing. It has engaged interaction with another of its species, and has created a choice to be experiencing – without judgment, without emotion, and without the thought process that you attach to these actions.

This, in a manner of speaking, to an extent, is incomprehensible to you, for you view yourself to be a victim. For you do not afford yourself what the tiny spider affords to itself, in the genuine knowing that it creates its reality in each moment in its entirety, and all that it creates is a choice.

But you do not create your reality in this manner, for you believe that you create certain aspects of your reality, and some aspects of your reality you do not create, and you fall prey and victim to.” [session 704, October 07, 2000]

PAUL: “... So just back to this evolutionary change-in-time idea. Human societies, then, as these outer egos emerged and manipulation in this environment settled down and personality could emerge (Elias nods throughout) – you do distinguish that focuses of essence have emotions, but animals do not have emotions, plants do not have emotions, rocks do not have emotions, they have something.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: They have a feeling tone, and they have an outer ego.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: But that emergent quality has to get to this….

ELIAS: What is emotion?

PAUL: Feeling, sensation.

ELIAS: No. (Pause) Emotion is communication.

PAUL: Ah! (Laughs) I knew that!

ELIAS: That is your in between that you are discussing.

PAUL: Right, right, the mediating [layer or subconscious]….

ELIAS: Emotion is the link; it is a communication avenue between the subjective awareness and the objective awareness.

PAUL: And that’s why….

ELIAS: And it generates a signal, a feeling.

Now; in this, plants and creatures do not incorporate emotion, for it is unnecessary. They do not incorporate the translating mechanism that you incorporate of thought. Therefore, it is unnecessary to be incorporating this type of communication. They do not incorporate impressions or emotion…

PAUL: They do have impulses?

ELIAS: …or imagination. These are three avenues of communication that you incorporate, but they do not, for it is unnecessary. In association with a creature, they do not incorporate belief systems, and therefore they do not incorporate the belief of separation, and therefore they do not manifest the separation of objective and subjective awarenesses. Therefore, there is no necessity for emotion, for emotion is not a reaction, it is not a response, it is not a feeling – it generates a signal of a feeling to alert your attention.

Now; in this, I am not expressing and have not expressed previously that creatures do not express and you interpret their expressions as emotions. But they are not necessarily emotions. There is merely no separation between the objective and subjective awarenesses of a creature or a plant, and therefore it freely expresses what you incorporate as, shall we say, an extra step.

PAUL: From that I wanted to ask about whales and dolphins. (Elias nods throughout) This is a very intriguing part of your information and this emergent quality of consciousness and time. So we have in my lifetime, according to your information, say five, six years, and previous to that the whales and dolphins on this planet did not incorporate essence. (3)

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: Now they did have an outer ego structure in their perception, but they did not have emotion then according to what you just said.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: So that avenue of communication was not active. (Elias nods throughout) There’s something in this Dream Walker layer, inner ego layer, in its creativity and manipulation that – and the efficiency and the balance – that senses this population of form is emergent, it’s getting ready to take that next step, so to speak, and so this avenue of communication suddenly – emotion – arises in their consciousness. Is that accurate?

ELIAS: Yes, and you, in your terms within your lifetime, have allowed yourself to witness what you may term to be the evolution of consciousness…

PAUL: Yeah!

ELIAS: …in choices and in that experimentation in what you term to be development. For these creatures incorporated communication – not emotional communication inwardly, prior to the choice to be incorporated as essence – but developing, in your terms, in choices to begin expressing a type of communication in association with objective awareness, developing a communication between each other objectively.

PAUL: Now when this population hit a critical threshold for this emergence in its tension to manifest hit – what we’ll just call critical mass – was is it a simultaneity in an instant (snaps fingers!), or was it this mass is achieved in a non-, this non-physical, causal area, and so in time, in terms of linear time and sequence, it kind of sprinkles through the populations. Because you have adults, children, through all different developmental cycles in the moment point, in the now, when this threshold is reached, so it’s affecting the pregnant ones, the unborn ones, the young ones, the adolescents, the adults. So how did that…?

ELIAS: All.

PAUL: Was it a simultaneity? (Snaps fingers!)

ELIAS: Yes.

PAUL: It was just a (snaps fingers!), within terms of time, it was a (snaps fingers!) poof.

ELIAS: Yes.

PAUL: And backing up, with human beings, in the populations of early human beings, the same (snaps fingers!) process hit that population in terms of essence manifesting in that form.

ELIAS: In association with what you term to be human beings, your homo sapiens, your species, the moment that there was an emergence of one within your physical reality it was the expression of essence.

PAUL: And did it pull the rest of the population towards essence, the expression of essence, the manifestation of this emotional communication layer that previously did not exist? Did that single individual who manifest that act as a trigger point for the rest of the population?

ELIAS: In a manner of speaking, yes.

PAUL: Okay. I know that’s a tough one.

ELIAS: That was the moment point of the threshold of the Dream Walkers, which had already been in association with your linear time, but not entirely physically manifest – in existence, but not entirely physically manifest. Therefore, at the moment point of the first actual physical matter manifestation of your species was the spark point of the movement of essence – which the Dream Walkers were – the movement of essence into an actual physical manifestation within your physical dimension.

PAUL: All across the population.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: The same way.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: This is a crystal ball question, so you can answer it appropriately, accordingly. There have been other populations that exist too that have this creative tension of emergence to manifest essence. So it’s almost like at times you sense this whole thing is alive, it’s totally alive, yet this structure of focuses of essence, of attention, are not manifest, and yet they yearn towards that, everything yearns towards that in a way?

ELIAS: No.

PAUL: Okay, good.

ELIAS: I am understanding your thought process, but let me clarify. All that exists within your physical reality has been created by you. Therefore all that exists within your reality, your entirety of your universe, is an aspect of you.

PAUL: Mmhm. I understand.

ELIAS: It is a projection of you through your perception.

Now; is it you? No. It is a projection of energy that you create a manifestation in association with, and it is all consciousness, for you are consciousness.

Now; in similar manner to the concept of fragmentation, which I am quite understanding that…

PAUL: (Laughing) … that I don’t understand.

ELIAS: …that none of you understand, but in similar manner to that concept, your creatures of your whales and your dolphins are a projection of you; therefore, they are an aspect of you.

Now; that aspect of you desires to be, in a manner of speaking, fragmented…

PAUL: Ahhhh, OK.

ELIAS: …and therefore be essence.

PAUL: I’ll work on that some more. That’s close, I’m getting close.

ELIAS: It is generated from you. It is not that these creatures have been inhabiting your planet, so to speak, separate and apart from yourself and in one moment have decided, ‘I choose to be essence now.’ No. They are already aspects of you. They in themselves are not essence, but they are consciousness. They merely are not incorporating an energy personality tone as do you. And, therefore, they are not generating other manifestations or other attentions simultaneous to themselves, for they are one of your attentions. And that attention of you, in conjunction with you, expresses a desire to be a personality energy tone. And you, in agreement and in association with your desire, express compliance with that. Therefore, in a manner of speaking, it is a type of fragmentation.

PAUL: Oh, that’s interesting. That’s helpful. That’s a nice bridging concept. And so, there are other populations that are yearning for this similar fragmentation. It’s part of the design of this dimension, (Elias nods) it has to be.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: Interesting. Any predictions – I’m joking! (Elias smiles) – on, you know, like cats and dogs. I mean, you know, god, they’ve got to be getting close. Elephants, chimps, orangutans, there’s so many species – are some of those in the next millennium yearning towards a fragmentation, becoming….

ELIAS: Not within this present now, but….

PAUL: Okay, but who knows, tomorrow.

ELIAS: And this may be quite difficult in actuality to be offering predictions, for you are continuously changing and you continuously incorporate choice. And thus far, in your terms, you are expressing satisfaction with the design of your dimension and the design of what you create. And I am understanding your expression in your inquisitiveness in relation to these creatures that you have mentioned, but also view how very efficiently you incorporate them into your reality and your association with them and your design with them in their reflection of you.

PAUL: Sure, and I go into the political level too in terms of complication: six billion of us manifest now, tremendously complex political situation of all these focuses and attention going through their acorn-sapling-tree development and relating with each other. So to add more populations to that, the probabilities must be, the calculations, whatever involved, it’s tremendously vast. So there’s a pressure to maintain equanimity, I guess, as we go along, and yet, who knows, we get bored, and poof! we go over here, right, and so it goes.

ELIAS: And as you continue, as I have stated previously, you also, in your terms of development, are moving in directions of expansion, which is the nature of consciousness also. And in reflection of that, you choose to be expanding within your physical universe.

PAUL: Right. Now just a couple more questions in this area, I know time is happening and I’ll squeeze in what I can. (Elias chuckles) The whales and dolphins – they map to this outer ego/subconscious/inner ego developmental structure, unique to their species – not human, don’t humanize them…

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: …but they will loosely follow this, this is in the blueprints…

ELIAS: Yes.

PAUL: …in the design.

ELIAS: Yes.

PAUL: It’s inherent in this dimension.

ELIAS: Yes.

PAUL: So as those populations develop and evolve, their social structures – there might be some similarities to human development, because we have millions of years, well, let’s say tens of thousands of years in terms of civilized populations that we can look at in our little framework that we are aware of.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: So these populations of whales and dolphins will follow this general blueprint, and whatever creative choices get made, of course, get made.

ELIAS: Not necessarily in physical expressions.

PAUL: Right, okay.

ELIAS: For they have chosen to be a different species.

PAUL: Species, right.

ELIAS: And they have chosen to be incorporating a different type of environment, which also offers you information in association with this shift, which it is no accident. This has been chosen within this time framework for this offers you an opportunity to view different expressions of essence within one physical dimension, which I have been expressing to all from the onset of this forum, you all occupy the same space arrangement. All physical dimensions occupy the same space arrangement.

In this, there are many essences that do not necessarily choose to be manifest within your physical dimension but are within other dimensions. And in that expression, this choice to be generating a different species within your physical reality which chooses quite different types of realities but incorporates the blueprint of this dimension offers you the opportunity to view different manifestations which are also essence, allowing you to more easily recognize and accept that you also incorporate other focuses of attention in other dimensions which are not similar to yourself and generate quite different realities, but they are also you.

PAUL: That’s a big one. One more general question in this area about the shift. If we can loosely say that this acorn-sapling-tree evolution structure in focuses of essence – human beings, whales, dolphins – goes through what we could just generally call a (Elias nods) preconventional stage, a conventional stage, and a postconventional stage. It’s very general….

ELIAS: I am understanding.

PAUL: Okay, it works for you. And it seems as populations tend to get to the postconventional stages, there’s more potential for a harmony and choices of least conflict or whatever. That make sense? That’s consonant…?

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: So, is part of this shift – and this is coming from this inner ego, Dream Walker, causal source dimension – part of this shift, the nature of this shift, is to somehow get – because the population’s growing – to – accelerate isn’t the right word – but to get people from this conventional to postconventional stage at a younger age? Or to do the opposite and prolong it and to somehow…. What I’m sensing in this shift – and you just brought it up with the fact that there’s no accident with the whales and dolphins in this emergent quality – there’s something emergent in this shift, that’s what I’m trying to get at.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: And does this little three-part thing – preconventional, conventional, postconventional…? How does this shift affect the population moving through that developmental stage? Does it accelerate it to get them… yeah, to the postconventional?

ELIAS: Yes.

PAUL: So postconventional development will happen sooner in large percentages of the population? (4)

ELIAS: Yes.

PAUL: So we could say in this now, in this moment point, if we take a snapshot of all the focuses and where they’re at in that spectrum and just make a map of that, shall we say – which I won’t even pretend to try – it would tend to be very conventional with smaller percentages of the population at postconventional.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: But with this shift something is changing.

ELIAS: It is accelerating.

PAUL: To accelerate the developmental stages to postconventional, and post-post-, (Elias nods throughout) and there’s others up the stream that await us.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: In all their magnificence.

ELIAS: Correct.

PAUL: Excellent.” (Laughs) [session 1246, January 16, 2003]

PAT: “Elias, was there any significance for the area of the world where this happened, why there [i.e. Southeast Asia] and not here? (5)

ELIAS: Yes. The significance is that it would involve more of your world. It would be a physical location that is rich in trade with many, many, many countries. It is also an area in which there is much travel. There is a large influx of individuals from many, many, many other areas of your world. Therefore it would be quite impactful not merely to one country but to many countries, and therefore would be quite noticed.

GEORGE: ... The interesting thing is that almost no animals perished in this whole event.

ELIAS: Quite! Which is quite significant, but not unusual and quite natural. Why do you think that is?

GEORGE: Because we have lost a sense that they still retain?

ELIAS: No, you have not lost those senses. You merely do not pay attention to them, and you do not pay attention to what you are creating within your energy, and you have generated such a separation between yourself and all that you create, which is all of your reality, all of your universe, your planet, your environment, your atmosphere. All that is within your reality – ALL that is within your reality – you are each individually creating, but you generate this belief of separation, which creates a reality of separation of yourself from your environment. Your environment is merely an extension of you.

Your creatures know that and experience that, and your creatures recognize what is churning within their atmosphere and choose not to participate in that action and know that that is being created by your energy. Therefore they flee and they are unharmed. For it is not their energy that is generating this mass event, it is YOUR energy that is creating this mass event. It is unnecessary for your creatures to participate. They are already cooperating; they are already appreciating.

GEORGE: Do they still have the knowingness?

ELIAS: No.

PAT: With that in mind, Elias, with the massive mudslides that we had recently in California, there were a lot of animals that were affected and were covered by the mud, some of them found with their families, almost protecting the families. Why did those creatures choose to be...

ELIAS: That was a different event.

PAT: There’s no correlation between the two?

ELIAS: No. This is your location. I have spoken of this physical location and other locations previously. Individuals dwell and choose to dwell in physical locations that resonate with their energy. You resonate with each other. You generate a similarity of energy, which is what creates your environment.

In this physical location, you generate extremes, and the individuals that dwell in this physical location generate an energy of extremes. It may not appear to you that you are generating extremes, for it is natural and it is what you term to be normal. Therefore, you do not perceive it as extremes, but your energies together create an intensity and your environment reflects that. It is an environment of drama.

PAT: Back to the creatures – how come they didn’t decide to leave?

ELIAS: For the creatures also dwell in this environment and they are connected with you and they are participating with you.

This event was designed to express a message. The creatures in that area already understand the message. They are already experiencing the message. Therefore, there is no need for them to participate in the mass event.

The creatures that dwell in this area, in this location where you dwell, they are a part of your environment; they are a part of you. You are not generating a statement to yourselves continuously. You are merely generating your natural flow of energy, which your environment reflects in extremes and in drama. Which is not bad; you enjoy more excitement than other individuals in other locations. Therefore, this is what you generate and it is reflected in your environment also. Other locations may not necessarily enjoy that type of excitement, and therefore they do not create that.

But the environment, the natural movements or what you term to be disasters or even weather patterns, they are all created by you collectively. They are orchestrated by the individuals collectively that dwell in particular areas.” [session 1695, January 15, 2005]

JIM P: “In my continuing saga, which you’re well aware of, working with my horses and creatures, presently I see a lack of confidence and a feeling that I need more knowledge. I need more expertise in an area of not trusting what I already know in helping one particular horse deliver herself of her creation. I’ve gotten a lot of information here, a lot of insight from what you’re saying about how to once again shift into what I need to project, what I’m projecting myself and what she’s projecting to me, that mirror image of what we need to do about it.

ELIAS: Correct, and in a situation such as this, it is significant to be aware of the energy of what you are interacting with. You are not always interacting with another individual. You may be interacting with a creature.

This is a significant point, for creatures are very similar to your leprechauns, for creatures do not incorporate the beliefs that you do. Therefore, their language is different and they respond to energy immediately. They are eternally present; they are always in the now. In that, they reflect energy very well. They are experts at reflecting energy. For they are very similar to your leprechaun, as they don’t incorporate beliefs. They express no judgment in relation to the energy that you are projecting. If you are projecting an energy of concern, they will receive that energy and express very similarly to your leprechaun: ‘Oh, you want concern? You may have a reason for it.’ They do not distinguish that this is good or bad. They are responding to what you are projecting.

Now; let me also express that creatures also do create their reality and generate their own choices. They are not merely manifestations of reflections of you; although, as I have expressed, they do that very well. But they also generate their own choices, and therefore they can create their own manifestations in relation to their own choices.

In interaction with a creature, it is very beneficial to be aware of the creature’s energy. Let me express to you, viewing energy is very easy. Any individual can view energy physically. You can visually see energy; it surrounds all things. But things that you term to be living, it surrounds more intensely and it surrounds in a larger area. Therefore, it is easier to see. It is merely a matter of practice, initially defocusing your vision slightly and allowing yourself to actually see the energy field. In like manner to humans, if a creature is creating some type of manifestation physically, you can visually see that in their energy field.

Generally speaking, the energy field of a creature, regardless of what type of creature it is, will appear to be pink, for they do not incorporate different associations as humans do with the different energy centers. Therefore, there is little to no fluctuation of color in the energy field of a creature. Whereas, with a human, there can be a considerable fluctuation of color, dependent upon which energy center is being expressed the strongest. There are multiple colors within the energy field of a human.

In humans and creatures, within their energy field if there is a physical manifestation being generated, there will appear to be a darker area in the energy field that you can actually see, and the extension of the energy field in that area that is darker will be recessed. It will not appear uniform with the rest of the energy center. This occurs in humans also, and in actuality, to a degree this occurs in plants, this indentation of energy in the precise area in which the creature is generating a manifestation.

But what may be interesting in relation to energy fields is that if you are allowing yourself to visually see them, you can see your own energy approach another manifestation’s energy, whether it be another human or a creature. If the human or the creature is not willing to accept your energy, your energy will stop and it will not penetrate the other energy. If it is willing to receive, your energy will naturally merge and penetrate and mingle with the other energy.

In this, it is important once again to remind yourself of motivation, expectations, and in this, recognizing and accepting the choice of another individual or of a creature, and to recognize the difference between a reflection and their own choice. For they are such good reflectors, at times that may be somewhat confusing. But if you are paying attention to you, what you are doing, the associations that you are generating and the shockwave that you are projecting, you will generate the ability to distinguish between the choice of the creature or whether it is a reflection of you.

JIM P: Elias, that was great, thank you. So when I look at this mass that she has and I say, ‘Gee, that looks nasty,’ I’m feeding that. So the next time I look at it, it really looks bad.

ELIAS: Yes!

JIM P: So she’s going, ‘Oh, it looks bad? Okay, well, how’s this?’

ELIAS: Yes, precisely.

JIM P: With her, is this more of a co-agreement with her that she’s manifesting this, or is this more of a reflection on my part that she’s assisting?

ELIAS: Both.

JIM P: Thank you so much.

ELIAS: You are very welcome, my friend.” [session 2227, March 17, 2007]


End Notes:

(1) Paul’s note: Mary specifically stated before this session to the entire group that she didn’t wish anyone to ask any questions regarding her dog, Chelsea, who had passed away unexpectedly several days earlier after a sudden illness.

(2) Paul’s note: Sue recently moved to Berkeley, California to pursue a Masters degree program in Library Science.

(3) Paul’s note: in the preceding session, Elias states that whales, dolphins (and porpoises by implication of belonging to the same species) recently took an evolutionary leap and became manifest focuses of essence, just like homo sapiens, though they are a unique species called cetaceans.

Also, the action of fragmentation is something that occurs within causal subjective awareness (the inner ego) and offers further clues to the mechanics of conscious creation and co-creation within those aspects of essence.

Digests: find out more about fragmentation.

(4) Paul’s note: developmental psychologists (e.g., Piaget, Kohlberg, Loevinger, Graves, Gilligan, Cook-Greuter, Beck, Kegan, etc.) have mapped various stages of human growth (or evolution) for over fifty years. In terms of overall development, there is rough consensus that humans develop from what can be generally called preconventional to conventional to postconventional stages in first, second, and third world cultures and are thus universal to homo sapiens on this planet.

These stages include various intelligences or abilities that have been further broken down into subsets, for example, morals, cognition, emotions, sexual, self-needs, self-identity, logical-mathematic, linguistic, musical, etc. Each provides a snapshot of overall personal development that is “necessary but not sufficient.” That is, no single intelligence is the main one, even though many researchers still make the mistake of believing their research shows the most important one, as Piaget did with cognition. It is the view of Wilber’s Integral Psychology, and I agree, that there are many ways of looking at personal development, but each provides a “necessary but not sufficient” snapshot of the total focus personality.

Returning to the stages, then, let’s take a brief look at cognition as it develops through preconventional, conventional, and postconventional stages. Preconventional cognition believes that the moon is literally made out of cheese, or that if I cover my own eyes, then you can’t see me. In other words, it’s impossible for me to take the role of other or walk a mile in someone’s shoes.

Conventional cognition can take the role of other. It also uses early forms of reason and intellect but often reaches conclusions like the Renaissance Archbishop who stated that since the human body has seven orifices, that is why God created seven planets to revolve around the Earth. That is, the human body and outer ego are still the central filters. Perception is still driven by egocentric (self) or ethnocentric (family, tribe, country, etc.) filters.

Postconventional cognition realizes that space-time, and energy-matter aren’t solid or permanent constructs. It also becomes aware that there is an underlying nonphysical domain from which physical manifestation emerges and returns to. That is, I as an individual belong to something far greater than my outer egoic sense of self. Perception thus begins to become worldcentric and universal.

Also, since Elias claims that all species of whale, dolphin, (and porpoise) are now “focuses of essence,” then these basic developmental stages would apply to them as well, acknowledging that their physiological, cultural, social, and geopolitical aqua-differences may include some interesting variations that we aren’t yet aware of. Put another way, since expressions of essence on this planet now include homo sapiens and cetaceans, they will use similar patterns of development laid down by previous generations that rely on the same “blueprints for reality.” But there is no dream-art science research being done yet in this area, because that would include some kind of dream archeology and dream anthropology, for example, that further explores the blueprints in Framework 2 in conjunction with the Framework 1 constructions.

All this to say that it makes sense when Elias suggests that a key outcome the “shift in consciousness” is to move or transform large quantities of the human (and by implication whale, dolphin, and porpoise) populations into postconventional stages of development and beyond. In this context, then, we can develop new scientific research methods to track emergent probable futures and see just how this will be accomplished (given the fact that something like 80% of the focuses in this Now are at preconventional or conventional and the fact that every focus begins at stage 1 – preconventional – and develops from there).

(5) Paul’s note: Pat refers to the events of December 26, 2004. There was an earthquake that registered 9.0 on the Richter scale off the coast of Indonesia, Thailand, Sri Lanka, and eight other countries. A series of tidal waves and aftershocks resulted in more than 260,000 dead and missing people. The devastation was swift and immense. The outpouring of international aid and relief efforts continue. Over two million people’s livelihoods were also impacted in a region that was already struggling to make ends meet. Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim country, was particularly hard hit with over 100,000 confirmed dead to date.

Digests – see also: | absolutes | accepting self | avenues of communication | bleed-through | belief systems; an overview | blinking in and out | blueprints | choices/agreements | counterparts | cultural/natural time | dimension | dis-ease and healing | distortion | disengage (“death”) | Dream Walkers; an overview | essence; an overview | essence families; an overview | essence families; intents | essence tones | “evolution” | fear | feeling tones | focus of essence; an overview | focus of essence; beginning – continuing – final | forum | fragmentation | hamster wheel | imagery | imagination | impulses | intents | “karma” | links of consciousness | mass events | manifestation | mirror action | mergence | noticing self | objective/subjective awareness | perception | probabilities | Regional Area 1 | relationships | remembrance of essence | separation | sexuality; gender, orientation, and preference | shrines | shift in consciousness | time frameworks | transition | triggers | 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