Sunday, September 21, 1997
Session 221 (Group/Castaic) 
“Photons & Slits”
Participants: Mary (Michael), Vicki (Lawrence, Ron (Olivia), Cathy (Shynla), David (Mylo), Norm (Stephen), Reta (Dehl), Drew (Matthew), Bob (Siman), Sue (Catherine), Bobbi (Jale), and a new participant, Laura (Belle).
Elias arrives at 6:47 PM. (Time was fifteen seconds.)
ELIAS: Good evening. We shall on to our game, and then I shall open to your questions ... Stephen! (Grinning at Norm)
RON: Ilda, fictional character, The Old Woman Who Lived In A Shoe.
ELIAS: Acceptable. (Grinning)
VICKI: For Mary: Gramada, quotes, “An idea is of no value until it becomes incarnate and is made an image.”
ELIAS: One point.
VICKI: For Jo: Ilda, sculptures, Donatello’s David.
ELIAS: Acceptable.
VICKI: For Paul: Zuli, artists, Michael Jackson.
ELIAS: Acceptable.
VICKI: For myself: Vold, mythical creatures, fairies.
ELIAS: One point.
CATHY: Vold, sports, football.
ELIAS: One point.
BOBBI: Gramada, directions, north.
ELIAS: (Accessing) Within altering of probabilities, I shall express acceptable. Very good attempt! (Pause)
Very well. (Humorously) We shall on to your questions this evening, as we are postponing our class on “Acceptance 101 Remedial” for future, and we shall be returning to this subject matter futurely, allowing you a time framework to be acclimating and digesting “Acceptance 102” temporarily. (Grinning, and then to Norm) Stephen!
NORM: The question? There are several questions. The question I have is in regard to a scientific experiment and how it relates to consciousness photons, to the blinking that we experience or all dimensions experience, simultaneous time, and the past affecting the future. The experiment was where light was going through two slits, and if you have either slit open you’ll see a pattern behind the slits; where directly behind one slit you would have the brightest pattern that would be on a photographic emulsion, and behind two slits you would see two bright patterns, one behind each slit, and they would be appropriately balanced in-between the two of them. So there would be a difference between what two slits would look like on the photographic emulsion and what one slit would look like on the photographic emulsion. So a physicist by the name of John Wheeler proposed the experiment that you shine the light at the two slits, and you close one of the slits after the photons go through it. And now the question was to all the physicists, what would the pattern look like? Where the photons went through, both slits were open, so a lot of them would think that it would look like the pattern that it would have if both slits had been open, because that’s what the photons experienced. But no indeed, it did not give that kind of a pattern on the emulsion. When it went through, it had two slits open, and when you would turn one of the slits off before the photons hit the photographic emulsion, you would only see the image of one slit.
So now the question is ... and I’m trying to imagine that I’m a photon and I’m conscious and I’m running through these two slits, and the universe is blinking in and out and time is progressing and I’m blinking in and out as a photon, and I blink back in just before I hit the photographic emulsion and I look back and I see that there’s only one slit open now, so I’m going to only make a pattern as if one slit is open now. So it’s also evidently that the past is affecting what the photon is going to do in the future. Am I interpreting it correctly, that if the photon is consciously aware that the one slit got turned off, it then only looks like a pattern of one slit? And then one final question is, if I turn both of the slits off, then there wouldn’t be any photographic emulsion exposure at all? And so, if I turn both of the slits off, would I not see anything?
ELIAS: Correct. (Grinning at Norm)
NORM: I wouldn’t?? Is that a fact?? Incredible!! Incredible!! (Laughing) In other words, the interpretation ... I am the photon. I’m conscious. I turn around and I look and see that the two slits that were open, now one has changed, and that is reality!
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: These slits are closed after the light passes through them?
NORM: That’s right! (Norm is so excited here!)
ELIAS: Correct; although you are not looking back as the photon, for you already know, for you are aware of the simultaneousness of time. The reason that the image does not appear is that you have altered the probability. Therefore, the response of the photon is to become a ghost image. In this, it travels interdimensionally. It is not necessarily blinking out, although you may be viewing this as blinking out, for it is crossing dimensions. Therefore, it no longer travels within this dimension. It automatically moves into another dimension. It does not hold belief systems that it may not cross dimensions! (Grinning)
NORM: (Laughing) And the other, is that like a probable world then? It actually gets exposed to a photographic film?
ELIAS: In another dimension.
NORM: Really?!
ELIAS: It continues its path. (Norm says “Aha!”) It merely has altered its probabilities, and therefore does not materialize within this dimension.
NORM: If I’m going to close both of them, in another dimension ...
ELIAS: They would both be open.
NORM: Incredible!
VICKI: So are you saying that the photon, because it knows what’s happening within the context of this reality, alters its probabilities ...
ELIAS: Correct.
VICKI: ... and continues in another dimension?
ELIAS: Correct. It is compensating for the probabilities that have been initiated by the experimenter.
NORM: I have to look at the actual experiment – I don’t know if they’ve closed both of the slits. So if not, I’m going to propose that experiment! (Laughing) Incredible! Incredible!
ELIAS: (Chuckling) Much fun!
NORM: Simultaneous time ... well, time is such a thing that can be stretched and bent and collapsed and everything.
ELIAS: Quite!
NORM: I know I asked the question once before that if you could look down the axis of time, you could see through all past infinity, and I guess you could turn around and you could look the other way. I’m always working with analogies, and I guess my current analogy is that time is like the distance between two pages of a book. The book can be opened or closed in many, many different ways, such as force or matter changing how far it’s open; and from an essence standpoint it’s as if the book is closed and everything is simultaneous then, and as you open it up, like in this dimension, it is totally linear, meaning the center of the crease of the book being the current time, and say the left sheet being past time and the right sheet being future time, and as you close it they come together. Is that an analogous way of thinking about it? I mean, is it close to a good analogy?
ELIAS: Yes.
NORM: Okay. Thank you! (Norm was like a little kid during this entire exchange – he was very excited!)
DAVID: What is the connection, if there is one – well, I know there is – with the essence families and our chakra centers?
ELIAS: This would be dealing with vibrational tone qualities of color which we shall be entering futurely, for this shall require an entire session.
DAVID: Okay. That’s another one futurely! (Laughter, and Elias chuckles) Okay then, what is the definition of essence selfishness?
ELIAS: This being different from your definition of selfishness, for you hold belief systems that you attach to this word of selfishness. You hold religious belief systems in this area and you attach a negative to this word. In relation to essence, this would be the definition of looking to self first before all else.
DAVID: And this would be okay?
ELIAS: Yes. This would be the point! You are so very distracted within your attention by looking continuously outside of yourselves for your answers and for your directions! In this, the selfishness of essence is the point; to be looking to self for your direction and your answers, and not being dependent upon outside information.
DAVID: So this would be one of my big belief systems personally?
ELIAS: Yes.
DAVID: Okay. So it doesn’t matter if I upset anybody by being me?
ELIAS: This moves in the direction hand-in-hand with expressions of essence. This does not afford you license to be hurtful to another individual or to be not concerned with other individuals and their reality and their belief systems, but to be looking to self first and concerning yourself with self, and not concerning yourself with others first.
DAVID: Or what they think about what I express.
ELIAS: Correct.
DAVID: Okay. Thank you.
DREW: How could you be hurtful to someone else if not by agreement?
ELIAS: Once again, I express to you that you think of these terms very singularly. You filter these through your belief systems immediately, and you automatically think in the terms that you are familiar with. I express to you that all actions are agreements, but not in the manner that you think of agreements. You do not necessarily, within every given situation in consciousness, ask another individual, “May I express this? Are you in agreement for this action?” This is not so. Overall, within essence all things are agreements, but you are creating your probabilities within every moment within the individual focus; and in this, physically-focused, not all actions are within the area of what you think of as agreement. You are in agreement to draw experiences to yourself, but you may not be choosing the individual experiences. You are choosing experiences that you draw to yourself to be gaining your attention, but you are not necessarily choosing the subject matter.
DREW: So we draw a type of experience, but not necessarily the specific experience?
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: Hmm! And that’s true generally, or in all cases, or ...
ELIAS: Not in all cases.
DREW: Well, I won’t pursue that until I have some time to think about it. That raises lots of ...
ELIAS: Within certain situations in extreme, such as actions of violence or extreme joy, you have created within agreement. But within your everyday experiences, you choose your direction of what you wish to be initiating in addressing to belief systems or issues or not, and in this you draw to yourself experiences that shall be beneficial in the direction of probabilities that you have chosen.
DREW: So how could someone be hurtful to someone who doesn’t draw that hurtful experience to them? If they’re not specifically looking for a particular experience, wouldn’t they still be drawing some sort of hurtful experience to them?
ELIAS: Not necessarily, but this does not mean these experiences shall not be beneficial to you. When I express to you that hurtfulness is not acceptable, this does not mean that you do not choose these experiences physically focused as being beneficial, for these situations gain your attention; but within your widening of awareness I offer you these statements, that you may view alternatives to what you are creating within your selectivity of attention.
DREW: Well, this also raises issues of belief systems about what’s hurtful and what’s not, does it not? An unkind word can be considered hurtful, but that’s really a belief system ... or it could be wrapped up in many different things.
ELIAS: This also enters your area of Acceptance 102 and tuning to another individual, holding enough information to be questioning your actions and knowing that you are filtering through your own belief systems and addressing to this, and being accepting and intuitive to another individual.
DREW: Is it possible to be hurtful to someone who is not choosing some sort of hurtful experience? (Pause)
ELIAS: In one respect, yes; in another, no. The other individual may not be choosing a hurtful experience, but they are drawing the experience to themselves for this shall be gaining their attention.
DREW: And so therefore, it’s not possible to be hurtful to someone unless they’re choosing the experience for whatever reason.
ELIAS: In one manner of speaking, correct.
DREW: Okay. It seems like there’s ... well, I’ll give it a week.
RETA: I’m still working on right and wrong and cause and effect and will be for a long time, I suppose, but I’m still trying to get it clear in my mind about responsibility, and cause and effect with responsibility. The analogies I came up with were two. One was building a house of toothpicks. Each individual toothpick is completely responsible for its own weight and its own place, and every other toothpick in that house, as you build it, becomes dependent upon that structure, dependent upon all those in that structure and their willingness to hold together, their willingness to be strong and not fall apart. And then I thought, well, maybe that’s not human enough.
So I changed it to athletes that are building a pyramid on stage, for instance, or going through their athletic sports showing you how they can time things just right. Now, if you have six or eight people running around on a stage building a pyramid, everyone has to know precisely where they should be in a moment, and everyone knows that someone’s depending upon them – their arm or their leg or their sling or whatever it is – and if one of them doesn’t take the responsibility and says “Oh, well,” whether it’s purposefully or not purposefully, the whole thing falls apart. And so I’m thinking about the responsibility that we all take to hold up our individual parts. And when someone isn’t honest enough to say, “I can’t do it” or “I’m weak today” or “I’m sick today,” it will cause a chain reaction that hurts everyone. Now this is cause and effect to me, and I cannot see where I can say, “Oh, it’s just a probability!” I have a difficult time saying that. The person knew they were sick that day or they knew they couldn’t hold up that day. Why didn’t they make people aware? And using Drew’s analogy here a little bit, that could be very hurtful, not that they maybe intentionally wanted it to be, but it could be very, very hurtful to anybody there. I’m having a difficult time trying to say, “Oh, there’s no cause and effect and no right and wrong.” (Pause)
ELIAS: It is merely viewed as cause and effect and right and wrong, as you perceive this to be within your belief systems. In actuality, it is each individual’s choice.
RETA: But if they honestly have said, “I choose to do this ...”
ELIAS: This is a belief system!
RETA: But if I’m expecting someone there to hold me up, and then they ...
ELIAS: This is a belief system!
RETA: Well, I deal with people all the time and I expect them to be honest, because I try to be ...
ELIAS: Which is a belief system!
RETA: Well, I don’t expect them to lie to me!
ELIAS: Which is a belief system! (Laughter)
RETA: I don’t care what you say! I don’t expect people to lie, of course, or make up something ...
ELIAS: I am not expressing this to you, Dehl, to be altering your belief systems!
RETA: True ...
ELIAS: You may hold to your belief systems if you are so choosing. I do not express these things to you to be expressing judgment, for there is no judgment. This essence is accepting of your belief systems. If you are so choosing to hold to them, so be it. You attend this forum to be challenging yourself and to be offering yourself information. Therefore, I offer you information and I address to the belief systems that you hold, for this is your direction and what you are wishing for this essence to be expressing to you. But you also continue to battle with this and be non-accepting of this. This is your choice. You may be holding to your belief systems. It matters not.
RETA: It’s very difficult.
ELIAS: Therefore, hold!
RETA: Well, I’m working on it.
NORM: The way that I do it, and I’d like to have your comments in regard to this, is that in regard to right and wrong and cause and effect, I have to step back and view this creation or this dimension as if it is action by manifestations of many essences, that this action is strictly experience, and that the action is mostly correlated with everyone else. When I was a small boy with many friends, we would play all kinds of games, and the games were like cops ‘n robbers, cowboys and indians, operating doctors and patients, and so on and so forth. And the only way for me to really understand it is to view it from an overview of the purpose and intent of this manifestation of this dimension, that we are only experiencing and having fun with all kinds of action. Is that what you would say is a good paraphrase?
ELIAS: Correct. (To Reta) I am quite understanding that you hold very deep belief systems and that these are difficult areas to be addressing to, but I also express to you that if you are so choosing, it is unnecessary for you to be addressing to these belief systems. It is merely a choice. There is no value judgment placed upon the choices that any of you choose. It matters not. You shall be experiencing what you are choosing to be experiencing. If you are choosing to not be experiencing trauma within the action of this shift, then you shall be choosing to be addressing to your belief systems and your issues, and widening your awareness to open to the action of this shift. If you are not choosing to be engaging these things, then you shall be choosing to be engaging trauma within the action of this shift. Either direction, you shall be accomplishing within the action of this shift. It matters not.
RETA: Okay.
ELIAS: It is merely important of what YOU choose.
NORM: As a focus of an essence I can choose what I desire to do, and if I so choose to have a concept of right and wrong, of morals and ethics, I can live that life and it is perfectly okay. I may not experience everything that I want to. I mean, I don’t necessarily want to shoot and kill anybody and I can feel that I don’t need to have that experience, and I’m perfectly okay in that belief.
ELIAS: Correct.
NORM: And there is no judgment, so ...
ELIAS: Correct.
NORM: ... I’m perfectly fine in believing the way I do, with the morals and the ethics and what I consider right and wrong.
ELIAS: Correct. It matters not.
NORM: It matters not.
CATHY: Does everybody have a fear issue of some sort or another?
ELIAS: For the most part, yes; not every single individual upon the planet, but for the most part, yes.
CATHY: Does everybody have an underlying fear issue that maybe they’re not aware of?
ELIAS: No.
CATHY: Same answer for underlying.
ELIAS: Correct.
CATHY: So when you’re moving through fear issues, such as myself, is accepting it part of moving through?
ELIAS: Absolutely. Accepting this would be “moved through.”
CATHY: Oh. ’Cause I was just thinking about belief systems and issues and trying to figure out more about them. Okay.
DREW: Does this underlying fear that most people have stem from, for the most part, the same root, even though it may manifest itself differently? Does it have anything to do with a fear of connecting with subjective? Does it have to do with being so physically focused and that fear of remembrance and of subjectivity or death? Does it kind of stem from that, and if not, does it stem from some seed?
ELIAS: Yes.
DREW: And am I close?
ELIAS: It is stemming from your basic of fear of life within physical focus, which is unfamiliar to you.
DREW: Which you talked about a couple of weeks ago.
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: And it just manifests in different ways for different people?
ELIAS: Absolutely.
DREW: I’d like to ask a question about ... I hope you don’t get mad at me! (Laughter) I’ve been playing with tarot cards a little bit. (Elias chuckles) Not the Ouija Board! (Laughter) But I’ve been playing with tarot cards a little bit. I feel drawn to them and I bought a deck and I’ve been playing with them a little bit. And what I’m wondering is, when I lay them out and I interpret them to be telling me something about what my future holds, am I interpreting what a probable reality for myself is?
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: Okay. In the act of laying them out and making this interpretation, am I also lending energy to that probable reality?
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: Am I laying out that particular spread because that’s the most probable probable reality? That’s the direction I’m headed?
ELIAS: Correct.
DREW: Okay. And so ...
ELIAS: You are connecting with your first layer of consciousness closest to your objective awareness and your probabilities.
DREW: Okay. So could the argument be made that if I lay out a spread of cards and it shows me a future that I objectively, through my belief systems, think I would prefer not to experience, I would have been better off not to lay out the cards, because in doing so I lent energy to that probable reality?
ELIAS: You may be lending energy to that probable reality, but you also may be altering objectively of that probable reality.
DREW: And is it easier to alter a probable reality knowing what it may be even though you’ve lent energy to it, or would I be better off being ignorant of it?
ELIAS: No. You are moving in the direction of allowing yourself more information, which is also why you attend this forum.
DREW: Another tool.
ELIAS: In this, as you allow yourself more information, you also allow yourself the ability objectively to be more aware of your probabilities. Therefore, you may be altering of these probabilities if you are so choosing.
DREW: Okay. But there is some legitimate insight that can come from these cards?
ELIAS: Yes.
DREW: Interesting! Okay, thank you.
ELIAS: It is offering information to yourself from yourself.
DREW: Right.
DAVID: Why was the belief system created for religious people to believe that people who dabbled in tarot cards were of the devil, so to speak?
ELIAS: For the same reason that you create all of your belief systems; to offer an explanation to yourselves of things you do not understand.
DAVID: So everything that we don’t understand, we automatically throw in a negative context?
ELIAS: Not necessarily, but you do build a belief system around.
DAVID: So if somebody reads a tarot card, say in the fourteenth century, and their ability is creating good things, it scares people?
ELIAS: At times.
DAVID: Okay ...
ELIAS: Individuals are threatened by elements that are unfamiliar to them.
DAVID: Okay.
NORM: I have a question in regard to trying to resolve some of my issues with respect to my ego personality. I love the idea of the fact that I am a focus of an essence, that I’m not totally alone. I have thought all my life that there was just me, my ego, and of course you have related many times here that there has been communication going on. It’s just that I either ignored it or ... I probably ignored it and didn’t think that it was really from anything other than my conscious ego. But I think deep down that I feel that I’m going to lose my driving function of what I have as my personality and my life if I totally accept the fact that I’m truly a focus of essence. I’m trying to change one image that I have, that I’ve had all my life, of myself. I’m trying to get another image. Do you have any comments in regard to that?
ELIAS: (Chuckling) Think to yourself that you are not devaluating yourself within this focus in accepting the vastness of essence. You are enriching yourself with much greater abilities, and the “moreness” of you.
NORM: I’m going to have to re-establish new neurological pathways. I like to tell myself that it feels very good for me to physically say out loud, “I am a focus of Stephen, or my essence.” It’s a method! (Laughing) I mean, will that help my neurological pathways?
ELIAS: They are already being affected.
NORM: By what?
ELIAS: You! Do not be discounting the imagery that you receive within your dream state or the imagery that you receive within your waking state, for it is all attempting to be communicating with you, if you merely pay attention.
NORM: What particular subjects should I be ... I think of so many different things!
ELIAS: All of them!
NORM: All? (Laughing) Okay!
ELIAS: Welcome, Siman! We shall break, and we shall return with your questions once again. (To Bob) Just in time!
BOB: So to speak.
ELIAS: So to speak! (Chuckles)
BREAK 7:31 PM.
RESUME 7:53 PM. (Time was four seconds.)
ELIAS: Continuing.
RETA: I have a dream question. I had a dream the other night about my mom and dad, and in the dream they were very, very old. My dad was in his late seventies when he passed away and went into transition, and my mother was ninety-two. All of a sudden, there they were in their oldness, and my mother was having a baby and she was just traumatized by it. I could see it in her face. At that age, she didn’t want one, especially at that age! And my father was standing there trying to be accepting but also saying, “How can we do this?” And I was there holding her hand and observing and saying, “What can I do to help?” And I woke up. Can you imagine? (Laughter)
ELIAS: (Chuckling) The imagery presented to you is in actuality a connection of these essences, in expression of a readiness to move into the next area of consciousness beyond transition and not being familiar with this new area of consciousness, holding slight reluctance in this for this movement.
You view the action of transition as dealing with your belief systems and shedding of your belief systems, and when this is accomplished you shall blissfully move on trippingly to the next area of consciousness that you are choosing to be occupying. In actuality, you do not move blissfully into the next area any more than you blissfully move into the action of death and transition! (Grinning)
RETA: Oh dear! (Laughter)
ELIAS: Although once you move into the next area of awareness in consciousness, you shall be accepting of this and recognizing the benefit of this to yourself, and you shall regain your excitement; but initially, once again, you move into unfamiliar areas and therefore you are resistant.
RETA: Well, I’m very excited for them if that’s what’s happening, because they were both very nice people and they deserve to go to the next level, (much laughter) but I had no idea it was going to be so traumatic. And now, how is this affecting me?
ELIAS: It is merely an expression in acknowledgment, for your information, that they are moving into another area of consciousness.
RETA: Okay, good!
VICKI: I have a dream question also. I had dream imagery last night that had to do with all of the plumbing in our home being broken and Ron working on it, and when I woke up in the morning, I went to use the sink in the kitchen and realized that the sink wasn’t draining and connected it to the dream imagery.
My first reaction was to think, “Well, that’s interesting. Maybe that was a precognitive dream,” because the sink wasn’t draining hardly at all. A few minutes later, when I finally turned the light on, I realized that the reason the sink wasn’t draining was because the stopper had fallen into the sink and was plugging up the sink. So in effect, I guess I created some imagery right after I woke up that went along with the dream imagery. My question is, I’ve been thinking about this today and it seems like there’s information in there somehow about the dream mission ...
ELIAS: Quite!
VICKI: ... but I’m not real sure what it is.
ELIAS: You are allowing yourself to be connecting subjective and objective creations and imagery. In actuality, you were not creating of actual malfunction as was the imagery within the dream state, but also offering yourself a connection between objective reality and subjective reality which is closer than you have allowed yourself previously. In this, you do not quite understand or trust that your dream imagery is directly affecting of your objective imagery, but you move closer in creating a situation that shall mirror your dream imagery directly, that you may view the correlation of the two and that they are connected.
VICKI: So one of the things to be realizing here would be that your dream imagery is just as affecting of your waking imagery as the other way around?
ELIAS: Correct. You offer yourself this example, for this is objectively easy. There is little interpretation needed.
VICKI: Right.
ELIAS: You are using the same imagery within the dream and within your objective waking state. What you need be looking to is the symbolism within the dream state and how that may be correlated to the objective imagery. The imagery may not be identical, but the meaning is the same; the action is the same. This be your continuing challenge within this dream mission, although I express to you and Michael both that you are moving in this direction and accomplishing well within a small time framework. This mission objectively may have been accomplished within many years of your time framework, but you are moving quickly within your connections to this mission.
VICKI: Okay. Thank you.
ELIAS: Other individuals may incorporate “methods,” (grinning) but some of your methods may be efficient for you in your information to yourselves.
RON: I’d like to go back to the photography thing for a minute. When I was in high school, I had an opportunity to experiment a little bit with Kirlian photography. One of the experiments that we did was, we took a leaf off of a tree and photographed it. Then we took that same leaf, cut a wedge out of it, photographed it again, and the image showed the entire leaf. My question is, did the leaf create that phantom image, or did we out of our desire create the image?
ELIAS: The leaf creates the image within consciousness, for the energy remains.
RON: Okay, so it’s an energy deposit then?
ELIAS: Correct. You have merely removed an object or a section of an object, but the energy remains. Therefore, the image remains.
NORM: Would you be able to take the small leaf and get the entire leaf? (In other words, could you take a picture of the piece of the leaf, and the photograph would show the entire leaf?)
ELIAS: Yes.
VICKI: Good question!
NORM: Regardless of how small?
ELIAS: Correct.
Vic’s note: Here, Ron indicates that they attempted this experiment of photographing the piece of the leaf, and got nothing.
DREW: But then isn’t the energy being doubled in a sense when you cut the piece of the leaf off? If the remaining leaf has the energy, and you take a segment from the leaf and that’s got the energy of the whole leaf, you’ve basically doubled the amount of energy?
ELIAS: No. You are merely removing part of the energy.
DREW: And yet, it remains.
ELIAS: Part.
DREW: Oh, I see. So if you could measure the intensity of the energy, it would be diminished?
ELIAS: Of the part removed, yes; and of the part remaining.
RETA: Ron, did they ever take a picture the other way, of the piece?
RON: Yes.
RETA: And what was there?
RON: Nothing.
RETA: Nothing was there?
RON: It may have been so minute that it wasn’t photographed – it wasn’t picked up by the equipment.
ELIAS: Equipment – that you place such great value upon!
LAURA: Looking back to the dreams, I have a tendency to have incredibly violent, stabbing-type dreams -- very elaborate, you know, big stage, big orchestra, and everything else – trying to murder off something or someone, generally someone. And invariably at the end they say, “Well, it was a nice attempt, but I’m still here. You still have to deal with it.” In terms of interpreting, what different things can you look for in order to know what it is that you’re looking at?
ELIAS: (Grinning) Look to your belief systems, which as with all other individuals are very strong! You may be attempting to murder them off and they remain and express, “Try again,” for you are beginning to offer yourself information that these belief systems are in existence and attempting to be addressing to these. In this, this may not entirely be objectively held in awareness, but the beginnings are subjectively held in awareness. Therefore, the imagery presents itself within your dream state first.
VICKI: So in like manner to what we were just talking about, her dream imagery could be affecting of her accomplishment in objective reality of accepting belief systems?
ELIAS: Correct.
DAVID: I have a question regarding some early transcripts a friend recently gave me of some Edgar Cayce readings, and he was talking about the altars in the Mayan civilization where, “On the altars upon which there were the cleansing of the bodies of individuals by way through the rise of the initiates for the sources of light.” What was he referring to?
ELIAS: I have expressed previously, tread carefully with information that you offer to yourself at times, for much information may be helpful, but much information is also filtered through belief systems. With regard to cultures, there are many belief systems about you in regard to the Mayans and the Incans and the Aztecs and the Egyptians that are not necessarily reality.
DAVID: So coming from Edgar Cayce, who is probably known as one of the top sleeping prophets, I suppose, when it comes from him, what is he actually saying then? Is it just rubbish?
ELIAS: Not necessarily, but I am also not wishing to perpetuate existing belief systems as to these cultures. Be remembering that although this individual tapped much valuable information to be helpful to other individuals within your belief systems, this individual also, while genuinely engaging much subjective activity, also held imagery that was not necessarily what it appeared to be; just as you present yourselves subjective imagery that is not translated identically into your objective awareness. Therefore in this, the individual connects to subjective imagery of belief systems concerning cultures and light bodies that are connected with spirit realms, which are belief systems.
DAVID: So somewhere in there was truth of what he was saying, but it’s coming through belief systems so it’s being fabricated?
ELIAS: Not necessarily fabricated, but it is imagery.
DAVID: So these altars that he was talking about, this cleansing of the bodies by rising of initiates of the source of light, it’s just belief system fantasy? It never really happened?
ELIAS: It is NOT fantasy.
DAVID: Well I know, but you know what I mean! (Laughter)
ELIAS: Therefore, “Please be obliging of this, Elias!”
DAVID: (Laughing) Yes!
ELIAS: As I have stated, it is imagery filtered through belief systems; not that individuals within the culture did not perform acts in actuality, but the interpretation of these acts is the element of the belief systems.
DAVID: So when he also speaks of this particular Mayan civilization, that they discovered these round stones that he describes, they marry very much with the tiles that you speak of, and some of these stones are in museums apparently. He says, “Through these stones, I magnetize influence on these stones,” and individuals were able to speak to the people, offering them the information he was receiving from touching the stones. Are these connected to the tiles?
ELIAS: No; although the imagery is suggestive of these tiles.
DAVID: So he was connecting with the tiles when he was referring to this imagery?
ELIAS: No. He is connecting to the actual stones, which are not the tiles.
DAVID: And did these stones actually do what he said they did?
ELIAS: Yes.
DAVID: And so therefore, they do similar things that these tiles do.
ELIAS: Similar.
DAVID: Okay.
ELIAS: It is imagery that you are now drawing to yourself, in confirmation to yourself that these tiles may also exist.
DAVID: I guess when I read things like Edgar Cayce, although it may come through belief systems I tend to connect with that somewhere in there, there’s an element of truth, in fact. And that’s what I’m trying to sift through when I ask you these things coming from someone like Edgar Cayce.
ELIAS: (Humorously) I am understanding of this. (Laughter)
NORM: Should I think of a belief as consciousness, and a belief system as a gestalt of consciousness? In other words, I create a belief, and it has its own consciousness?
ELIAS: Some.
NORM: Some do and some don’t?
ELIAS: Correct. Some very strongly-held mass belief systems, as I have expressed previously, hold so very much energy, for you en masse have lent so very much energy to them, that figuratively speaking, they may almost be viewed as an entity within themselves.
NORM: Now, my own personal belief systems don’t have that kind of capability. I don’t have to deal with something really powerful.
ELIAS: It is dependent upon what belief system you are choosing to be engaging, for some of your belief systems personally are also mass belief systems.
DREW: But you did say belief systems are “systems,” in that they are masses of energy that essentially exist on their own. Is that not true?
ELIAS: In a figurative manner with mass belief systems.
DREW: Is there a difference between a belief and a belief system for an individual?
ELIAS: No.
DREW: It’s an interchangeable word?
ELIAS: Yes.
DREW: Okay.
VICKI: Speaking of words, pretty consistently lately I’ve had people ask me questions, both after sessions and after reading transcripts, about who you’re referring to when you’re saying the words, “This essence.” Sometimes you’re referring to yourself and sometimes you’re not, and it’s caused quite a bit of confusion.
ELIAS: Are you wishing for “this essence” to be expressing Elias?
VICKI: I think it would be helpful.
ELIAS: Very well. Your request is honored.
VICKI: Thank you. (Pause, during which a few people start talking)
DAVID: I was just going to ask a question. I wanted to know why – I know biologically we probably know why – but why do men, males ... why does baldness affect men more than women? And what’s the cure? (Laughter)
ELIAS: (Grinning) It is affecting physically in what appears to be more male individuals than female individuals because of your belief systems, that you believe that it is more acceptable within males than within females. Therefore, you create this. And what is the cure? You!
DAVID: Can I bottle it?
ELIAS: It is your choice!
DAVID: Just joking! (Laughing)
RETA: I have a more personal question. I have a daughter in New York, Karen, who’s in the throes of decision-making about changing her employment, and as much as I try to send energy to her to make the right decision, that’s about all I can do. Are there any words of advice that I could give her that I haven’t?
ELIAS: No! (Laughter)
BOB: Just tell her which job to take!
ELIAS: I shall be expressing to you once again, Dehl: Within the area of acceptance, the most efficient action that you may be engaging is to NOT be expressing.
RETA: So just send energy to her?
ELIAS: Very good. (Reta sighs)
DREW: I would like to ask why ... I just made this connection a couple of months ago, but I noticed on Sundays I would be kind of grumpy and in a bad mood and in a kind of weird frame of mind, and then made the brilliant connection to the fact that there are sessions on Sunday night. (Laughter)
ELIAS: One point for Matthew!
DREW: What’s that about, other than the fact that I assume there’s some sort of connection with the energy that’s going on? Can you enlighten me? And also, is this frame of mind – if it is connected with the sessions and what’s going on – an opportunity for me to be in a frame of consciousness where I could get some things done?
ELIAS: Yes. This has been expressed by other individuals also. Therefore, you are not alone. Individuals may be experiencing this type of objective imagery and feelings in connection with these sessions, for in connecting with this ... ELIAS ... (Grinning at Vic)
VICKI: Thank you! (Laughter)
ELIAS: ... within the course of these sessions, you are connecting subjectively within this forum, not only objectively. Therefore, the issues and belief systems that you are dealing with are brought to the forefront, and this may be causing uncomfortableness; this being also why we experience individuals choosing to not be continuing within this forum, for they are not wishing to be addressing to these belief systems and issues, and it is unavoidable in this company.
(To Vic, grinning) I did not say “this essence!”
Vic’s note: I can tell right now, he’s gonna milk this one for all it’s worth! Oh well, I still think it’s a good idea.
DREW: And so with respect to, “Is this a good opportunity to explore belief systems?” this would be a frame of consciousness, a frame of mind, since they are brought to the surface for personal reflection and meditation or whatever method, if you will?
ELIAS: Correct.
LAURA: So are you saying that it’s resistance to having to deal with all of this that would create the grumpiness and everything in the morning, and then finally working through it and coming to a meeting and being okay?
ELIAS: Correct.
RETA: I was reading an old transcript this afternoon and you were talking about how we would widen, and you talked about how we would actually heighten all of our objective senses and that we would actually build neurological pathways to widen our awareness?
ELIAS: Opening neurological pathways.
RETA: Opening? Are we doing that?
ELIAS: Yes.
RETA: Oh, that’s good! (Much laughter) There was also talk about, more or less, that we have a great deal of protection with conflict by doing this widening, and I mean the conflict with our lessons last week about engaging other folks, talking about putting yourself in a responsible position. And as you went down some of those lists, you said well, you can give the information and not be responsible. But I remember Mary or Michael went through a lot of times where he was worried about taking responsibility for being in the public and so forth. And in talking with Mary this evening, I found that again, there’s a great deal of conflict going on, and I’m sure it’s at another level because I’m sure Mary and Vicki and all those have come a long ways. And you said something about there will be no conflict if we keep working through it? Is that right? That the group acts as a buffer to help that conflict?
ELIAS: This was in response to a different issue.
RETA: Oh okay, ’cause we certainly all are here to support Michael, Mary.
ELIAS: Michael holds the awareness of this. Be aware that each individual must be moving through their own issues themselves.
RETA: I’m sure that Elias is knowledgeable, but within the next year, my husband and I also may be moving through this conflict, in that we will be more out publicly with our knowledge of the shift and with our knowledge of science and religion, and it will be a conflict. And I would like to have perhaps a reassurance from Elias that we’ll still have you with us and that we’ll be able to work through this and broaden in a big way.
ELIAS: YOU shall be expressing in the direction that you are choosing to be expressing, and creating the choices that YOU choose. As to Elias, I shall be expressing for the duration, as long as the situation exists that individuals are continuing to be asking.
RETA: We’ll be continuing to be asking! It’s a big step. (Pause)
RON: Can we get you to sign this contract? (We all crack up)
ELIAS: (Chuckling) This would be pleasing Michael! (Laughter)
VICKI: I do have a question for Mary, and for myself too. I almost conveniently forgot about this question till recently. But the question is, what belief systems are most influencing of mine and Mary’s interaction and relationship presently that have not been identified by either one of us?
ELIAS: You are not identifying strongly-held belief systems of relationships and what you term to be friendships. You both hold different perceptions of these belief systems and you are not addressing to these belief systems, for within your perception these seem to be surfacely, although they are not. You have each held very strong belief systems in this area throughout your focuses. You hold expectations of the action of friendships in relationships, and you hold designs on behavior which you deem to be acceptable and unacceptable. Therefore, you are not addressing to these belief systems, which are very strong.
There are also other individuals that are adjoined within this situation, for you reinforce your own belief systems with your relationships with other individuals which you deem to be close to you; those individuals within the pyramid, and a few outside of the pyramid. But also, there is an affectingness within the pyramid and the non-acceptance of each other’s creations of each of your individual realities. This issue runs very deep. I have expressed this previously many times, but you are not quite connecting with the interconnectedness of all of these issues and the issue of acceptance, which is much greater than you view.
Also, there is an element of issues concerning control individually and collectively and a struggle within this too, for you each hold belief systems that you hold your control to and are not willing to be relinquishing this. Therefore, you may be addressing to these belief systems and allowing yourselves to be accepting of each other in your creations, and addressing to your individual belief systems which are directly affecting of this forum which you have already identified. It is all very interconnected. The base belief system that you are not viewing, though, is the issue of your expectations regarding relationships as friendships.
VICKI: Okay.
ELIAS: Much crackling going on this evening with your equipment!
RON: I know. I created that!
ELIAS: Very good ... or perhaps I have created that! (Chuckling)
We shall be disengaging this evening, and hopefully we shall be continuing with ongoing material very soon!
DAVID: Do we have an essence name for our friend here?
ELIAS: Belle.
I express to you all this evening a very fond and loving adieu!
Elias departs at 8:32 PM.
Previous session |
Go to the top |
Next session
© 1997 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.