Home

Introduction

Digests

Transcripts

Exercises

Gems

Library

Search

Donate

  Session 1080 (Private/Phone)  

“Puzzle Pieces”

“Expressions of Separation”

Participants: Mary (Michael) and David (Mylo).

Elias arrives at 12:11 PM. (Arrival time is 25 seconds.)

ELIAS: Good morning, Mylo!

DAVID: Hello, stranger! (Elias laughs) How are you this fine day?

ELIAS: As always, and yourself?

DAVID: Very nervous, for some strange reason! (Laughs and Elias laughs)

Elias, I have been collecting many, many, many puzzle pieces lately, and for the sake of me, I haven’t a clue why I’ve been ... it’s like I’ve been rained down upon by all these puzzle pieces that I’ve been quickly and in a fun manner picking them all up and trying to connect them, for some reason.

I’m also connecting with my two friends, Candace and William, and together we’ve been playing a detective game. We’ve quite a lot of things and now I feel I need some feedback from you on all that we’ve collected.

Before I go into that area, I’d like to ask you what has exactly been happening to me these last couple of months in regards what I feel is a major shift within myself?

ELIAS: And shall you not offer your impression?

DAVID: Well, I kind of want to connect it to that dream I had once, where a portal from the subjective opened up, as well as a dream I had where I submerged myself in an airplane into the ocean and feeling quite safe about it, and relating that to sort of submerging myself more and more into subjective areas of consciousness, more so than objective, but almost kind of simultaneously.

ELIAS: Of which they ARE simultaneous. And in this I may express to you, Mylo, you are merely allowing yourself to assimilate the information more clearly and allowing yourself to move with the energy of this shift rather than continuing to force your energy in manners that are not necessarily in harmony with this shift in consciousness, therefore allowing yourself more of an ease in widening your awareness and genuinely assimilating the information that you have offered to yourself, and therefore generating more of a trust of yourself also, which does generate more of an ease and clarity within your focus.

DAVID: It seems also that the more I do open up to more subjective energy that it almost makes it harder to operate in an objective world. I mean, that’s what it feels like. It feels more difficult to become a human being, so to speak, and operate within the design of the objective world as I move into more subjective awareness.

ELIAS: I am understanding what you are expressing, and I may also express to you that this is an action that many individuals generate in relation to your beliefs concerning separation, which extend into every expression within your reality.

In this, you automatically create an association of separation of objective and subjective, and focus your attention in the direction of one or the other, which may create difficulty or even conflict temporarily. For it is not a matter of focusing your attention in one expression or the other, but recognizing that regardless of what you are generating within your focus, the objective and subjective are not creating different directions. They are entirely in harmony with each other and are simultaneously generating the same direction.

Therefore, as you allow yourself to recognize that these two aspects of yourself are merely different expressions of yourself, but they do not move independently of each other, you may also allow yourself to alter your perception in association with separation, recognizing that the expressions of separation are beliefs, and in this that you participate in a physical dimension that incorporates an objective awareness and that your physical reality is generated through the expression of the objective awareness. For perception is an objective instrument, and this is...

DAVID: So, basically, I think that it just means getting acclimated to more of this objective/subjective way of experiencing it.

ELIAS: In balance.

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

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

DAVID: So what am I picking up, then?

ELIAS: A similarity of expressed direction.

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

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

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

ELIAS: Clarify your question.

DAVID: Well, I don’t know, maybe I’m just reading certain information that I’ve drawn myself to throughout many pockets of the transcripts that somehow have indicated that Seth’s essence name was not that, that it was another essence name that was never revealed. Because there was one time when Ron asked you what Seth’s essence name was, and you basically said that we have this information already; however, you would not give it because you didn’t want to upset some certain individuals, which made me think that Seth was not his true essence name. (1)

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

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

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

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

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

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

ELIAS: Yes.

DAVID: Yes?

ELIAS: Yes.

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

ELIAS: You did not change...

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

ELIAS: But this is MY choice.

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

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

DAVID: Moving on a little bit, does this mean when I look at our Game board that all the essences that are lined up at the top that represent the essence families, like yourself and Patel, etcetera, they’re all of the Sumafi family? (2) Was it initially therefore that the Sumafi initiated the idea of creating this physical dimensional reality and then the essence families actually came about? They were created because each essence family personality and action somehow projected from each of those essences, almost like they fragmented a quality of themselves which then turned into a pool of essence families, which we now know as Vold and all the others? Is that correct?

ELIAS: No, this essence family of Sumafi was not initiating or generating the design of this physical dimension.

I may express to you that in your terms initially there were no designations of essence families, but in initiating the design of this physical dimension and the blueprint, essences generated groupings expressing different qualities and directions, so to speak, of exploration, which translate to you as different intents. In this, these groupings chose collectively to be identified as what you now recognize as essence families with a similarity of direction or intent in its preference of exploration in association with this physical dimension. But the family of Sumafi was not initiating this physical design of this physical dimension. (3)

DAVID: I guess that direction of thought originated from my reading that the Sumafis come up with an idea... Say, for example, this connection between Seth and yourself, it appears to us in physical that Seth came first and Elias came afterwards. But in relation to the action of Sumafi, Sumafi creates or initiates something or the idea, Sumari then acts it out, and then the Sumafis come back in and close the chapter, so to speak. Therefore, I’m wondering why I think that Sumafis seem to always do the first thing. You know where I’m going with this?

ELIAS: I am understanding, and I am also understanding the direction of your association; but this also is being expressed in a narrowness of association, for this family of Sumafi is not necessarily continuously initiating of any action and many times is not initiating of a particular action. I may express to you, the essence family of Gramada is much more expressive potentially in initiation of actions.

DAVID: So what is it, the mechanics or ... what’s going on between the Sumafi and the Sumari? They seem to sort of work hand-in-hand quite a lot then.

ELIAS: At times.

DAVID: Oh, just at times.

I’m trying to clear in my thoughts about these chapter focuses. For example, this religious chapter event closing now, at the same time simultaneously another event is starting. So it’s like one closes but at the same time another one starts. I see the Sumafi-Sumari action being involved in that some way. I’m confused.

ELIAS: In relation to chapter focuses, no, not necessarily. What is being inserted in this time framework is a Source Event which involves chapter focuses, but this event is not being directed by or initiated by the Sumafi or the Sumari families, and I may express to you, the Source Event which also involved chapter focuses of the religious era, so to speak, was not being directed by the Sumafi family, either.

Therefore express to myself, what is your association in relation to the expression of these two essence families in association with the ending, so to speak, of the religious chapters and what you view to be a beginning – which is not a beginning but also an ending, so to speak – of the shift chapters?

DAVID: I guess it’s because I view the Sumafis in regards to like being the Seers of the least amount of distortion in relation to the shift, and that this information that you’re delivering, which I feel parallels that of what Seth was delivering, is very instrumental in relation to the insertion of this Shift chapter, so to speak, as well as the closing one of the religious. Somehow, you two, the Sumafi and Sumari, are playing a role in that. I’m sure all of them are, but I can’t quite figure out... That’s why I guess I wanted to talk to you, because I was getting impressions that somehow they’re interrelated and involved. But I guess I was just off base.

ELIAS: I may express to you, Mylo, all of the essence families participate and incorporate an involvement in each of these Source Events and in these chapter focuses, so to speak.

Now; it may appear to you in this present time framework that the expressions of the Sumari and the Sumafi families may be significant. But this is quite expressly associated with your individual experience and your association with your experience within this one focus, for you are noticing and participating with the information of two essences that you define as being instrumental.

Each of these essences, that which you recognize as Seth and myself, are participating in offering information concerning this shift in consciousness but in what you term to be a brief time framework objectively in the offering of information; and as I have expressed many times, that essence and this essence are not the only essences nonphysically expressed which are participating and offering information and energy to the accomplishment of this shift in consciousness. These are merely two essences that you are objectively familiar with individually. There are many, many, many essences that are participating in the insertion of this shift, in the expression of this shift, and in the accomplishment of this shift, and I may express to you, the movement of this shift is being directed, as you are aware, by essences collectively that are expressed of the Vold and the Borledim families.

DAVID: I’d like to ask you quickly a little question with regards to myself, Candace, and William; we’ve really drawn ourselves together quite closely in our everyday life. I feel there’s some kind of reason and dynamic that’s going on with our essences and obviously with the focuses. Can you give me some information in regards for the three of us on this?

ELIAS: And what is your impression?

DAVID: I don’t know, really. I just know that it’s strong and that we seem to be helpful in investigating much. Like all the information I’ve asked you – it’s kind of been off base, based on what you’ve told me, and yet the three of us seemed to click and feel it was very similar to what I’ve expressed to you. It’s a little bit more confusing now, so I’m not sure what dynamic is taking place between the three of us right now.

ELIAS: Let me express to you, Mylo, this type of questioning in association with what you define as a dynamic between yourself and these individuals is a clear example of complicating expressions. For you are attempting to be generating some expression of complication and therefore allowing yourself the action of analyzation in association with this dynamic.

I may express to you that you have drawn yourselves together objectively for you generate an ease in association with each other’s energy expressions and in recognition of a preference of other individuals’ expression of energy. Therefore, what you have created is drawing to yourselves each other’s interactions in relation to your preferences and curiosities that you each generate and explorations that you prefer.

It matters not, at times, whether you may be offering yourselves accurate information, so to speak, in association with thought. But you are allowing yourselves to generate experiences and interactions in association with your preferences and you are also allowing yourselves each, in association with each other, to practice generating directing yourselves. Therefore, it is beneficial.

DAVID: Moving on, I’d like to ask you a question that still confuses me now regarding my very first session with you. In that, I was confused that I seemed to be directing all of my attention and desire in one direction with my music and my creativity. You seemed to give me an answer by saying that I direct my attention over here and the results have something to do with my expectations I look to over here, but my direction and focus should basically be here with this essence, referring to you, in this space arrangement, being at the time in Castaic, and with these individuals of this forum.

Here I am, six years later, still feeling that I’m still doing the same thing – I don’t feel any movement. I mean, I’ve done a lot of movement, obviously, but as far as like... My frustration seems to be the same as it was when I directed my attention in my other endeavors outside of myself, like my music and my creativity. The more I concentrate on this material and the sessions and this forum and say, for example, I think I’m going to the area of my manuscripts, I still feel that I’m, six years later, still in the same position as I was in either other direction, so I’m confused.

ELIAS: For you continue to project your attention outside of yourself, and this is not the point. You continue to generate a very similar type of expression, you are correct, as you incorporated in that time framework. In this, you are generating another absolute association in what I expressed to you in expressing to yourself that you must be concentrating upon this forum and upon myself and the individuals that are also generating an involvement within this forum.

What I am expressing to you is that you have drawn yourself to this forum to offer yourself information to TURN YOUR ATTENTION TO YOU, and not to concern yourself with the choices and behaviors and expressions of other individuals, and to allow yourself to direct you through generating YOUR choices, paying attention to YOUR communications, and offering yourself permission to create what YOU want in trusting of your ability to create that. And the manner in which you accomplish this is to pay attention to YOU, and not to concern yourself with the expressions of other individuals, which you continue to express, projecting your attention to other individuals and allowing other individuals to dictate to you your choices rather than expressing your choices in your own freedom.

Now; I have expressed to you this day, you partially do allow yourself this type of expression in relation to Candace and William. In your preference of their energy expression, you allow yourself more of a freedom of your own expression, and in this, you do not generate the perception of threat in relation to these individuals and you do not view these individuals as different or as authority or as more or as incorporating more trust or more ability or more acceptance or more assimilation of information than yourself.

Now; you do generate that association in relation to other individuals, and thusly you concentrate your attention upon them and you project your attention and concern yourself with their choices rather than your choices, and you generate comparisons and judgment. You allow yourself a respite in relation to Candace and William, for you allow yourself an expression of trust, to an extent, of yourself in your interaction with these individuals, and therefore you generate more of an ease.

Now; this is the reason that I express to you it matters not whether in some situations that you generate with Candace and William your thoughts are accurate or not, or that your translation of your impressions are accurate or not. For what holds more significance is that you are generating an interaction in which you are allowing yourself an expression of freedom of yourself and allowing yourself to objectively recognize that. Therefore, this is significant.

What you translate objectively in association with accuracy of information in this time framework holds much less significance, for the point is that you are offering yourself evidence and examples of allowing yourself the freedom of your expression and not discounting yourself, which thusly you may also allow yourself to generate in relation to individuals that you do not express this with.

DAVID: I’m obviously going to take all that into account, what you’re saying, when I get the cassette and listen more to it.

The only thing that comes to my mind is that I always feel that I’m in a physical world and that I’m operating with the globe and many, many people, and every time I step into that arena to express myself in my talents and in my creativity, that I somehow experience some kind of slap back, which throws me back into mixing with individuals that are calm and peaceful where I’m not going to feel any conflict again. But it’s not to say that I hide – I’m all for going out there – but I can’t seem to fit in. Therefore, I continuously create that I just sit in this little bubble which has become a safe haven. I don’t want to stay in that safe haven, but I feel now, at this stage of my life, that what’s the point to keep repeating and keep getting hit when I venture out into the world again?

ELIAS: You ARE within the world, Mylo; you do not remove yourself from it. What is significant is your association of expressing that you do not fit in, and this is entirely an expression of you and what you generate within your perception. It is directly associated with your lack of acceptance of you, your lack of allowance of yourself to accept the manner in which you naturally express yourself, and to discontinue comparing yourself with the expressions of other individuals and allowing yourself to rest in the comfort of YOUR expression as acceptable in the manner that you choose, and that you project energy in not concerning yourself with other individuals – and this is the point.

DAVID: So, why am I having such conflict in the new job I’ve taken on? From day one to this particular day and to my next going there, I kind of dread it. Because it’s like for some reason I’m not meant to be there, and yet when I think, “Well, if I’m not meant to be there, where am I meant to be?” This is where I get the conflict.

ELIAS: It is not a question of where you are “meant to be” or not to be. It is a matter of your preferences, your allowances, paying attention to yourself, and offering yourself permission to generate and create what you want. But creating what you want objectively intentionally, you within your focus, Mylo, must be moving your attention to yourself to allow yourself to generate an acceptance and a trust.

You do not allow yourself to generate what you genuinely want for you do not trust that you CAN create what you want. For you view that you are one individual within your world and insignificant and that other individuals shall thwart your efforts, and unless you may incorporate some method to allow yourself to fit in with other individuals and their design of reality, the “they” of the world is greater than you and shall always overpower you and override you, and therefore you generate a lack of motivation.

In this discounting of yourself and not trusting of yourself, in a manner of speaking you choose to retreat. But you generate discomfort in the choices that you are incorporating in some expressions – not in all, but in some – for they become obvious expressions to you that you are not allowing yourself to direct yourself and you are not trusting your ability.

DAVID: Well, I can see very clearly all the things you said in that last statement relating to myself objectively, so I know I have... It just appears I’ve got a lot more work to do on myself, which I feel like I’ve been doing for so long now. It’s like, “Oh, God, not MORE!” (Laughs) Anyway...

ELIAS: Perhaps...

DAVID: ...returning to the board Game very quickly, I want to know, all the names under the category of “Game Names,” why they all have the letter “M” in front of them?(2)

ELIAS: For this has been the offering in playfulness of the individuals initially participating and designing of this Game. It is a game!

DAVID: Oh, just a game? You make it sound like it’s so unimportant! I thought life was a game! (Laughs)

ELIAS: It is! Therefore, I am not expressing to you that it does not hold importance. But it is a game and therefore it incorporates playfulness, and this is an expression of the playfulness which continues as a reminder of playfulness and that it is a game, in like manner to your physical participation in this physical dimension. It also is a game of exploration.

DAVID: About a week ago, I had two dreams that were very similar and they had to do with my job. Literally a week later, I physically experienced exactly both of those dreams to where I suddenly overwhelmed myself by realizing that I dreamt what took place a week later. What was going on there?

ELIAS: You chose to generate those probabilities.

DAVID: And actually be aware of them?

ELIAS: Correct.

DAVID: Which, I guess, is also part of the opening, the movement I’ve been experiencing of widening. In other words, is this going to be more of a frequent happening?

ELIAS: If you are so choosing. This is evidence to you of the reality of simultaneousness of time.

DAVID: Right, that’s what I thought. Quite scary sometimes, when you start to experience something like that! (Elias laughs)

I’d like to ask you, what is the difference, or if there is a difference, in the action of when an essence is fragmented as a result of other essences merging to that of an essence fragmenting from just the one essence, if you know what I’m saying.

ELIAS: I am understanding. No, there is not necessarily a difference in the action.

DAVID: So the personalities of the essences, there’s no real noticing of a difference in a person that has been directly fragmented from one essence to that of one fragmented from the merging of essences?

ELIAS: No. The action is the same.

DAVID: Just curious!

Then I guess, finally, I’m exploring more or getting more puzzle pieces with regard to my interaction with astrology, and I was just wondering if I was on the right lines there.

ELIAS: Clarify.

DAVID: Well, meaning that I’m noticing some of the qualities ... for example, astrology is made up of four qualities, air, fire, earth, and water, and somehow I’m relating those to identifying from a birth chart one’s choice of focus or perception, like common to that of thought to that of emotional focus, and somehow I’m getting a clue that in someone’s chart that this is able to identify those, without having to ask you, for example.

ELIAS: I may express to you, those elements may be more closely associated with focus type rather than orientation.

DAVID: Because I’m going to investigate more within my ability of reading the chart. Also, my impression is that the birth chart is kind of like one’s blueprint of indicators of the bag of belief systems that we’ve chosen to play with as the focus entering into this physical focus. Is that kind of on the right lines?

ELIAS: Again, clarify.

DAVID: If I look at someone’s birth chart now, based on how I used to view it, I think I see it differently now. I can look at their chart and I see, for example, when someone has a square configuration or an opposition configuration with planets, that they kind of zone in to me, telling me where the most difficult parts of one’s focuses are going to be manifest within that individual’s life, to that of sort of a trine aspect or a conjunction aspect which is more harmonious. Therefore, it’s like discovering in their blueprint of their astrology map the so-called harder, conflicting belief systems to that of the more ease and harmonious ones, if you know what I’m saying.

ELIAS: Yes, I am understanding. I may express to you, yes, you are offering yourself a different manner in which you may associate with astrological expressions, and this may be beneficial to you and offer you a clearer understanding of yourself and of other individuals. I may also express to you, be aware not to be expressing absolutely in these directions.

DAVID: Well, that’s the trouble, you see. That’s why I find it hard to go into that area, to use it as a career move, because underlyingly I’m so aware that there’s distortion within astrology and reading tarot cards, and for example that I block myself, when other people I know make quite a good living out of this. I don’t go there because I’m aware that I don’t want to distort the information that I pick up because I know how influencing that can be to another individual. And yet other people do it and have no qualms about it and make quite a good living, so there again I stump myself!

ELIAS: I am aware, and this is associated once again with the issue of trust of yourself, and also allowing yourself to recognize that you may be offering information as to what you allow in the expression of your perception and what you may tap into concerning the energy of another individual or information that you offer to yourself in relation to another individual, and merely express the recognition that there are no absolutes. Therefore, what you...

DAVID: Very quickly, since this has never been confirmed and Vicki/Lawrence used to believe it was, is Arthur Conan Doyle a focus of Mylo?

ELIAS: Yes.

DAVID: And the other one, very quickly, I have a very strong connection with the focus of Judy Garland. Is that a focus of Mylo’s or am I just a secondary focus of that?

ELIAS: Observing.

DAVID: Was Judy Garland Sumafi?

ELIAS: No.

DAVID: Sumari?

ELIAS: No.

DAVID: Well, I’m not sure if I’ve got anything left to ask you. Just, I guess, I continue the way I’m continuing, huh? (Chuckles and Elias chuckles)

ELIAS: And practice trust. Ha ha ha!

DAVID: Oh, just very quickly while it’s in my head, the focus of Gail’s boyfriend, Danny, is he thought focused or emotionally focused?

ELIAS: Emotional.

DAVID: And he also wanted to say hi.

ELIAS: And you may extend my greetings also.

DAVID: We will.

Well, Elias, it’s been great to talk to you again. Obviously not often enough, as I used to enjoy those times, and hopefully it will be more often again.

ELIAS: Very well! Very well, my friend. This shall be your choice, and I shall be available. (Chuckles)

DAVID: Is it your choice, too, though?

ELIAS: I am ALWAYS available to you.

DAVID: Well, I’ll connect to that. Great fondness, Elias.

ELIAS: And to you also, my friend. I shall be continuing to offer you encouraging and supportive energy.

DAVID: Thank you very much.

ELIAS: As always, in tremendous affection, au revoir.

DAVID: Au revoir.

Elias departs at 1:12 PM.

Endnotes: