Thursday, July 10, 1997
“A Belief Systems Game”
Participants: Mary (Michael), Vicki (Lawrence), Cathy (Shynla), and David (Mylo). (Also, Margot (Jeselle) and Howard (Bosht)!)
Vic’s note: Margot and Howard asked me to conduct a private session for them, and I agreed. As my esteemed proofreader (MJ) pointed out, it could be confusing if I use my name as the asker of questions. Therefore, even though I asked the questions, I’ll be indicating the names of Margot and Howard, except in those places where I did butt in and ask questions of my own.
Elias arrives at 6:36 PM. (Time was twelve seconds.)
ELIAS: Good afternoon. (Smiling)
VICKI: Good afternoon. This is a little different here. I’m going to do a private session for Margot and Howard, and so I have quite a few questions for them.
MARGOT: Regarding the fact that the essence of the baby can enter the fetus at any time it wishes before birth, would it also be true that it can wait to enter the baby until the baby is two years old, and that if the essence decides not to come in at all, this is the cause of crib death or Infant Death Syndrome? Or is this merely a belief system?
ELIAS: To the question regarding the essence entering the infant and may this essence enter within the time framework which encompasses the first two years of physical manifestation, yes. I have stated previously that this would be the time framework leeway that an essence may be not entirely incorporated within the physical form, although they are partially incorporated. As I have stated to you also previously, your physical form must be in communication with subjective activity. It shall not function for extended time periods without partial incorporation of essence. Therefore, after what you term to be your physical birth, as the physical body must adapt to environment and to manipulation on its own, so to speak, there must be a partial incorporation of essence within the physical form. There is less need for this incorporation within the time period that the physical body resides within the mother, for the subjective communication may be delivered by the mother to the form. Once they are separated physically, the essence entering the small one must be at least partially incorporated with the body consciousness to allow its continuation and the manipulation of movement and functioning.
As to your situation of infants which disengage for unknown reasons to you presently, there are different reasons for this action. This would not be always the situation of the essence choosing not to be completely manifest within the body framework of the small one. I have expressed to you that you may manifest, within your cycle of choosing manifestations in this dimension, for the purpose of sexual orientation experience, but you may not be choosing to be experiencing the entirety of a focus. You may be choosing the experience temporarily and disengaging quite young, some even to the disengagement at birth, which allows or in your terms “counts” as a manifestation.
There are many reasons that small ones, in your terms, may be disengaging at very young ages within infancy. These may be explaining of two, but it may also be a choice in agreement with the parents. The parents may be choosing the experience of gestation and physical birth, and not choosing in agreement to be a parent. Therefore another essence, in cooperation with this agreement, may be choosing to manifest merely for this experience and not continuing within physical focus. There are situations that may be expressed within this same action for the benefit of many individuals and their experience physically, which allows them the opportunity for physical and emotional experience within this action of the small one disengaging quite young.
Therefore, as to the questioning that this one action of unexplained disengagement of these infants being the only explanation or the “real reason” for this action, this would be incorrect. There are many reasons that essences choose within agreements to manifest in all different actions; this being only one.
MARGOT: Is it true that if the essence is going to withdraw from its physical manifestation during young childhood, it usually does so prior to the child’s eighth birthday, when the age of discernment is reached?
ELIAS: This would be a belief system. Children, in your terms, do not usually disengage by this age. It is merely a choice. There are no more children disengaging before this age than there are children that disengage after this age. There is no age of discernment. As I have stated though, each individual does reach a point of decision, in your terms, in which they are choosing to continue their manifestation, moving into their completed objectivity of focus. Some individuals at this point of choosing may be choosing not to be completely incorporating objective focus and may appear, in your society and your belief systems, to be malfunctioning, for they shall not continue within the official guidelines of your reality. They choose to be incorporating more subjective activity, and allowing this to be bleeding through and coexisting with the objective awareness.
There is no one set time period that this action may occur. It is entirely individual. Some individuals within physical focus may choose to be more subjectively aware for longer time periods within physical manifestation. You, in explanation to yourselves, may view this as a slight retardation of development; a child-like quality that continues within certain individuals, in your terms, longer than the average individual. Some may be choosing to incorporate this objective completion, so to speak, quite young, and at very small ages of four or five years of age may be completing this objectivity of focus and disengaging the interaction objectively with their subjective awareness, appearing to you in your terms to be quite advanced. Interestingly, you attach a positive to these children which incorporate the totality of their objective focus at very small ages, and view this to be a tremendous movement forward within their development. You indeed prize this action! In light of our information that we deliver to you, you may reevaluating this idea; in that other children choosing to be allowing more subjective activity, that you view to be “slower” than the other children, incorporate much more ease moving into your shift and also incorporate much more ease within physical focus.
VICKI: Just to throw one of my own questions in here, would this be the case with somebody like Mozart, who wrote symphonies at age five?
VICKI: Well, what’s happening there?
ELIAS: This would be a choice for a different action. This is a continued allowance of subjective bleed-through. It is allowed to manifest in areas that seem to all to be excelling in one area. This is an allowance of the focus to be bleeding through creativity that they hold an affinity with within other focuses, and choosing to be incorporating those actions quite young; therefore allowing themselves the experience of this creativity throughout the entirety of their focus.
MARGOT: I came into contact once with two individuals who were confined to a mental health facility because in spite of the fact that they were mathematical geniuses, they could not function well in general society. I was later told that they were taking earth focuses for the first time, and you have spoken to this a little. Now, when such a mergence occurs before birth while the fetus is in utero, would there still be a problem in adjusting to the merge?
ELIAS: This is a misinterpretation. As I have stated, each individual chooses the experience, within each focus within their intent, which shall motivate them into manifesting the actions that they wish to be creating.
In this, each focus holds the choice as to when they shall or shall not incorporate this point of moving into objective awareness totally. Many individuals choose not to be incorporating this action. You view these individuals to be insane. You view these individuals to be malfunctioning, for you do not understand their choice. They are choosing to be experiencing within physical focus, but not within the confines of the officially accepted reality. Each focus is individual and holds their own reasoning for the choice of this experience. I have expressed to you all many times to be attempting to alter your perceptions in viewing these individuals that you identify as insane, for there is no “insane.” They are not malfunctioning. They are experiencing within the choice of their intent within the individual focus, for that experience. They incorporate many times a choice to be moving into the area of recognition of the powers of intellect, but are also choosing to be incorporating the subjective activity along with examining the magnificence of the creation of intellect.
In actuality, once again within your thought processes you have reversed the viewing of these individuals. You view them as incorrect or malfunctioning or “less than.” In reality, they are incorporating more of a balance of subjective and objective activity within awareness, for you shall also view great geniuses which in your terms you believe to also be a little “off” or crazy; this being that incorporating such focus upon the intellect, which holds tremendous power for creativity, is an element that you do not understand, for it is outside of the official reality. It is, in your terms, an extreme. It is viewed that you may be incorporating in your terms too much intellect, which shall make you crazy, or you shall be insane and “accidentally” incorporate elements of great intellect.
It is not necessarily necessary to balance within an individual focus the intellect with the subjective, although to the masses, whether you are balancing or whether you are not, you shall be viewed basically the same; for the intellect experienced solely to extreme shall be viewed as not normal, and incorporate activity and action and behavior within the individual focus which appears to be unnatural and abnormal, for the intellect holds much more ability than you allow it to express. If the individual focus is choosing to be balanced, they shall appear more insane; for they are also allowing the subjective activity for their own understanding of the action, and the greatness of the intellect and its creativity. Either way, you shall not be accepting of these individuals, for they are choosing to be manifesting outside of your official reality.
MARGOT: Among many metaphysical thinkers, it is held that the reason babies are born with Down’s Syndrome is because they are taking their first manifestation on earth, having their other dimensional focuses on other planets in our galaxy. Is there any truth in this, or is this another belief system?
ELIAS: (Laughing) This is a belief system! This implies to you, once again within the framework of your duplicity, that you do not hold the ability to be manifesting within this dimension adequately merely for the reason that you are manifesting newly, which also is a belief system, for all of your focuses are simultaneous. You only identify one as the first and one as the last, for that experience. They all occur at the same time. Therefore, how may you incorporate less ability to manifest efficiently within any dimension within the context of no experience? Therefore, you are unknowing of what you are creating, but within essence you are knowing of all that you create! You merely choose to be forgetting, within each individual focus within every dimension, for the purity of the experience; but as you choose to enter into a physical dimension, you project the focuses of essence simultaneously.
VICKI: Well, it kind of seems like one of the questions here is, what kind of action, or is there an action that we would experience commonly as being indicative of a first focus? We’ve talked a little bit about action that we may experience in a final focus.
ELIAS: Quite. Presently you may view, within the individuals that you draw yourselves to and are also drawn to you, that you may not be encountering many individuals objectively that may identify themselves as a first focus; for you draw individuals to you and are drawn to individuals which are manifesting within the intent of this shift, and also within the intent of transition, and may be choosing other experiences. This is not to say that there are not many individuals upon your planet that hold this experience. They identify equally to you in a knowing of what they term to be “new-ness.” They feel within them that they hold little experience physically. They shall express that they believe they have not experienced your terminology of “past lives.”
Within any given time period, you may encounter many of these individuals who have chosen within essence to be manifesting into time periods which you perceive to be future. Therefore, within the acceptance of your creation of time frameworks this may be, in linear time frameworks, their “first.” (Pause) You are understanding. This occurs within every time period. You think in linear terms, in successions of moments. Therefore you shall also, for your own purposes within essence, identify one focus in the framework of linear time as the first. The individual focus shall feel this and hold an inner knowing, the same as individuals that hold an inner knowing of final focus.
MARGOT: It seems that health during a focus can depend on three factors--genetic predispositions, specific choices made by the essence while still in utero, and realities created by the individual after birth. Are there any more factors that are affecting of an individual’s health?
ELIAS: It is all choice. All resides within you from your inception. Therefore, it is merely a question of the choices within probabilities that you choose and the experiences that you choose to manifest.
MARGOT: And in this regard, would you speak briefly to two conditions that have affected my health during this focus? I was always a sickly child. I’ve always felt this was because of stress in my childhood home, especially with my mother. I was stuttering by the time I was four, and could seldom utter a full sentence until I was in my teens and began getting away from home. My younger brother and sister also stuttered when they began speaking. There does not seem to be a genetic factor for this in the family. Can you tell me why my essence would either choose a speech disability or why I created that? I took my stuttering far more emotionally, far more personally than did either of my siblings, and determined many times I did not want to live because of the stress of this condition. Why did it become such a issue with me?
ELIAS: This shall present you with an example, that you may manifest the same outward objective action, but different individuals may choose different reasons for this action. One sibling, manifesting this same action, manifests this in objective imagery of not keeping pace with thought processes, so to speak; the thought process moving faster than the verbalization. Therefore, this objective creating is not stressful, although at times may be frustrating. She (Margot) creates this action for this emotional experience. Allow that you are not subject to another individual or their creations. Therefore, you do not “develop a condition” as a result of another individual’s choices and actions. You choose to manifest what you think of as a “condition” in response to the choices that you create within the experiences that you draw yourself to.
This individual chooses many times to be experiencing extreme within the area of emotion. This individual continues this choice within this present now in different actions, also lending at times to extreme emotion. It is a choice within this particular physical focus to be experiencing an intensity of this element of manifestation. In other manifestations, the focuses are not quite as intensely focused upon this particular type of experience; but within curiosity of experiences within this focus, this choice has been made. Therefore, within the officially accepted reality and its framework, explanations are offered and accepted of why this individual manifests this condition--they are unhappy within their family, which is acceptable, and this creation is quite in line with mass belief systems and is also acceptable; therefore, also safe.
VICKI: So am I understanding correctly that this manifestation of stuttering basically was created to initiate emotional experience?
ELIAS: Not to initiate, but as an objective expression within imagery in line with mass belief systems, in response to emotional experience; in difference to the sibling which does not incorporate this same action, therefore manifests similar objective imagery but for different reasons.
MARGOT: When I was about thirty-three, I created chronic asthma, which has always puzzled me. Other than doing that “for the experience,” was there any other underlying reason?
ELIAS: This is an interesting area, for many individuals create this condition. Many individuals create this condition similarly. This also objectively is a response. Just as certain individuals hold energy within physical form in non-allowance of subjective information, or issues or elements that they are not pleased with, this particular condition of asthma is also a very similar action.
The individuals develop this expression and this experience in imagery within their dissatisfaction of conditions that they have chosen to place themselves within. They have confused themselves objectively. They are sending what you may term to be mixed messages to physical form. Subjectively they are choosing experiences which they are complying with objectively, but objectively, within their belief systems and within what they view to be their personal preferences, they are in opposition to what they are creating. They are not pleased with their environment and with the situation that they have involved themselves within with other individuals. They continue the experience, for they do not identify the belief systems which are involved.
Let me explain. Another individual shares this experience quite similarly, which may serve as an example. Sophia’s sibling shares this condition as an objective manifestation of discontentment. This individual is not pleased with the situation which he has created and the environment in which he places himself within, although he also is choosing presently certain experiences and believing that he holds no control for change of these situations and experiences; therefore holding to the experiences within the influence of singular and mass belief systems, but not objectively wishing to be continuing with these experiences. Therefore, conflict is created. This manifests within these individuals in turning inwardly upon themselves. (There is information as to Sophia’s sibling in session 105 dated 7/17/96)
I have expressed to you many times, you do the most injustice to yourselves, much more than any murderer may effect upon any victim!
VICKI: Well, that’s kind of confusing for me, because in my perception this particular individual of Margot doesn’t seem to have that kind of conflict today, but does manifest the condition still.
ELIAS: This individual holds many belief systems continuing, which are creating of conflict within. This may not always be expressed within thought. Conflict may be expressed within physical form and the creation of physical maladies, as we have discussed previously. Therefore, you may be appearing to be quite jovial as an individual, and carefree, and you may be manifesting physical symptoms instead. Emotional individuals create many more physical ailments than do thought individuals.
VICKI: Is there a specific belief system attached to this particular manifestation?
ELIAS: There are several. The individual holds many belief systems of home and family and obligation and responsibility. This is manifest quite objectively. Therefore, in moving into areas of examining belief systems and also expanding awareness, which is not in your terms a new development with this individual, there is a conflict which manifests objectively.
Welcome! (To David, who just arrived)
DAVID: Welcome! (Laughing) Thank you!
MARGOT: It seems that one of two situations can sometimes happen, as the result of reality-creating or belief systems, concerning health. We either understand in creating a certain reality that there are physical risks involved, or we create certain physical problems as a result of a belief system. Would a third factor be that if an activity is not part of our intent, we would find a way to discontinue it? For example, I loved to ride horseback, but when I was fifteen I was thrown and injured my back. I obviously created that last horseback ride knowing that some people have accidents that will limit future activity. Could I have created that because, let’s say, that activity wasn’t in my intent?
ELIAS: It is possible. You shall create many different experiences to be in line with your belief systems, which shall move you in the direction of your intent.
VICKI: So are you saying that this would be true of this activity with this particular individual?
MARGOT: Most women who become pregnant understand that in the temporary shifting of pelvic organs, they may have also created chronic health problems. I had seven ...
ELIAS: (Interrupting) If they are so choosing!
MARGOT: I had seven pregnancies, all of them planned, and so I knowingly created factors that I’ve coped with ever since. Or, if there was no belief system that pregnancies can leave lasting problems, would there be any?
ELIAS: No. Another example of strongly held belief systems within this emotional individual, who is quite adapt at creating physical maladies!
MARGOT: It seems obvious that identical twins would be of the same essence, in some arrangement of fragmenting, etc. But how about fraternal twins? And are triplets, quads, quints, and sextuplets also of the same essence? I was told several years ago that in multiple births there is always one who is the leader, inviting the others to come along. Is there any truth in this?
ELIAS: Once again, this would be the choice of those manifesting.
As to the fragmentation within multiples: Within those choosing to be manifesting identically physically, this is an objective expression in imagery mirroring the action of what you now term to be “cosmic twins.” It is a mirror action into physical focus.
VICKI: So there is a similarity there?
ELIAS: It is not always the case of the manifestations being all, in actuality, fragmented of the same essence. There are different actions here. At times, it may be one essence choosing to be focused in multiples in one focus. In symbolism, it is a mirror image of the action within essence of the cosmic twins. In objective physical reality, it may be chosen as experience for different reasons. At times, it is a direct mirroring of the action of cosmic twins.
VICKI: Well, am I understanding correctly here then, that identical twins are not always of the same essence?
ELIAS: Correct, although they may be. They may be two focuses within the same time period, within the same manifestation, at one time.
VICKI: And so the explanation would apply to both identical and fraternal twins?
ELIAS: Partially; for those which are fraternal twins are not necessarily mirroring the other. They may be in agreement, of two essences choosing to share a common experience.
I shall request a break, and you may continue with your questioning for Jeselle. (Smiling)
VICKI: Thank you.
ELIAS: You are welcome.
BREAK 7:34 PM.
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?
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.
MARGOT: In reference to the description you gave me of non-physical essences merging, as in the case of Patel and Jeselle, is this not a good way to describe the merging that millions of essences did to create our solar system and all of the species?
MARGOT: And this grouping of essences then, the group that created this solar system, would obviously have been the creative force that created our sun and moon, as well as all of the stars?
ELIAS: Yes, which are all of your families.
MARGOT: I have always felt I had a part in the creation of the moon and that this is why I feel more closely attached to the moon’s energy, just as some manifested essences feel more connected to the sun. Is this true?
MARGOT: Is it true that each of us has a particular star that we either created or feel connected to, or is this a metaphysical belief system?
ELIAS: You may experience a feeling of connectedness to this particular body, so to speak, as you may have been involved, not singularly but in cooperation with other essences, in its creation. I have expressed to you that you all have been involved within the creation of all that you know objectively.
MARGOT: Since I began reading the sessions with this forum, I’ve had a difficult time conceptualizing your terminologies of fragment and splinter. Will you tell me if I’ve got it right if I say: “We always-existing essences, having created this universe and all of its species, have been manifesting since before the beginning in all dimensions in this galaxy, and the only way to take up a beginning focus in any of earth’s dimensions is by means of fragmentation, or splintering from an aspect of our own individual essence.”
ELIAS: Incorrect. It is not necessary to be fragmented to be a focus.
MARGOT: And if that is true, then there must have been a seeding of each individual essence as earth was being created, so that there would be an aspect of ourselves already here for us to fragment or splinter from when we began manifesting in earth’s dimensions.
ELIAS: I shall express to Jeselle that she has quite efficiently twisted these concepts into more convolution than do these individuals present! (Laughter) In the terminology used, there has been no seeding! There have been essences in groups, which we identify as families, that are directly connected to the creation of this dimension and physical reality in its entirety--your entire known universe. This is only one universe, which occupies the same space arrangement as all other universes. You are merely aware of this one. There have been, as has been expressed, essences creating this planet and planetary system, which have been identified in relation to the Seers. There have also been essences in the role, “before the beginning,” of the Dream Walkers, but this would not be a seeding or a fragmentation, and is not related to the subject of splintering. This is a function of essence.
Essence is an element of consciousness. It is the personality identification, in individuality, of consciousness. It is not separate. Therefore, there is no “thing” or entity which existed “first” and was creating of all, or seeding of each dimension. There is only consciousness. (Pause)
There are areas of consciousness. There are focuses of consciousness. There are attentions of consciousness. There are identifications of personality; but all is within the whole of consciousness. None is separated. No aspect is greater than any other aspect of consciousness, and no aspect of consciousness existed “before” any other; for there has never been a “beginning.” (Pause)
MARGOT: I have thought a great deal about Vicki’s dream in which she got certain numbers for various people in the group, mine being 36:12. Since you and I have agreed that I am an old soul, thirty-six focuses in this dimension doesn’t seem enough to put me in this category. Or does this classification of “oldness” include all of earth’s dimensional focuses?
ELIAS: And beyond.
VICKI: So all dimensional focuses, period.
ELIAS: Correct. This is an identification quite singular, of only one dimension.
VICKI: And if I understand correctly, we would classify these as numberless?
MARGOT: To this point, I have decided not to remanifest. Since my probable future focuses are already in existence, what happens to them?
ELIAS: This has been referred to previously. In the choice to be creating of what you term to be a final focus--at that point, at the point of disengagement of that final focus--it is the choice of each focus within the physical dimensions of essence to be fragmenting and continuing or not. If not, they shall each be disengaging physical focus in agreement. They are not absorbed into the “cosmic hole” of essence! They are individual, and continue within their becoming and their widening and their experience non-physically. This is the choice of essence. Each focus holds the choice to be fragmenting and continuing within its own experience and being its own essence; but within the choice of not fragmenting, the choice is created in agreement with essence, as an aspect of essence, to be continuing non-physically.
MARGOT: The night before I met Vicki for the first time I dreamed of her, and in describing it to you, you said I was seeing her in another of her focuses. Then Vicki showed me a picture of Melinda, and she looks almost exactly like Vicki did in the dream. Therefore, the three of us wonder if you can explain this to us.
ELIAS: This being merely an exchange of physical appearance within counterpart action within different focuses. You believe that you hold counterpart action with one individual within this particular focus. Therefore, you must also be within the action of counterparts within all focuses. This is not correct. You may exchange counterpart action with different focuses, therefore also adding to your experience.
You may also be choosing to be exchanging of physical appearance of form. Not all of your manifestations are physically identical. You may choose within essence one image, one form that you hold an affinity for and therefore manifest within many focuses in similar form, but not all of your focuses hold the same form; and just as children experience playfulness and fun in exchanging of costume or garb, you also at times choose this action in relation to physical appearance.
VICKI: So does that mean that in that particular focus, there was counterpart action going on between Melinda and I?
ELIAS: Yes, and you physically are appearing in quite similar appearance of form.
MARGOT: When you explained my essence relationship to Patel and only that I am connected to Lowell, I began wondering for the first time about the fragmenting essence which is my origin, as well as who my essence fragmented. Knowing that it isn’t likely that you will be telling me who I am fragmented of without my first doing my homework, (Elias grins and Vic laughs) I have given a lot of thought to the subject and made a list of the essences, living and dead, who have greatly influenced me and to whom I feel somehow mysteriously connected. Can you give me an indication of the nature of my connections to the following? Number one: Am I fragmented of Lowell?
MARGOT: My father in this focus--either I’m fragmented of him or vice versa.
ELIAS: No. (Grinning) A new game! (Laughter) Continue guessing!
VICKI: Those are all the indications she has here on her list. (This is incorrect. I didn’t realize there were more “guesses”)
ELIAS: I shall offer fragmentation of this essence, which shall be in conjunction with Patel and Otha. I shall not express the explanation of this presently, for within the questioning of fragmentation presented already and its convoluted interpretation, this is seeming to be quite pointless! But I offer the name.
MARGOT: Howard and I seem to have a very deep kinship or connection, a strong counterpart action. What would this be exactly? (Pause)
ELIAS: This being that action which you in physical focus identify within your terminology as soul mates; although be expressing not to be attaching more belief systems to this terminology, for use of these words is not the same as delivered by this essence as the definition that you hold within your belief systems.
MARGOT: I have always felt deeply connected to three essences that I recognize as being a single essence: Mary, the mother of Jesus, Isis, and Kwan Yin. Can you amplify on that connection?
ELIAS: (Chuckling) Another belief system! We may be playing The Belief System Game this evening! These are not of the same essence. They are different essences, and they are identifications of individual focuses of different essences. Their manifestation is similar in intent. (Pause, grinning) Although this shall be tweaking of Michael, for he believes Isis is not reality! (Laughing)
MARGOT: I sense a very close connection to an evidently fifth-dimensional entity I know as Sweala, with whom there’s been an energy exchange and who I feel I may be fragmented of.
ELIAS: Not! (Grinning, and we all lose it) This being another focus of this individual’s essence within another dimension. And there is no fifth dimension, for they are not labeled by numbers and they are not above or below each other! They are sideways simultaneously.
MARGOT: Although there have been various times in my life when small shiftings took place, such a major shifting came into my life when I was forty-five that I can compare it only to getting a whole new life. I left both my husband and my church. The catalyst for this great change was the many deep discussions I had with my business mentor and friend, a man named Jack. I have since realized that he was very influencing because we are connected essence-wise. What is the nature of this connection?
ELIAS: (Accessing) This would not be a connection within this dimension of physical focuses. This would be a connection within consciousness within other-dimensional focuses, and also non-physical.
MARGOT: I have been told that some of my fragmentations used my birth middle name of Rose as their middle name, including my grandchild Jennifer Rose. Is this true?
ELIAS: These are not fragmentations. These are focuses. This is a choice. And as I express to you all, the physical words that you use do not always hold the same tone non-physically. Therefore, it is a misconception to identify that as you choose to be attaching physically to the same word, this is not always an indication that you are manifesting a similar tone.
MARGOT: When we talked last and I mentioned my terminology of twin souls, you said that my term was part of a belief system, but “that there is in actuality what you may term as twin souls or essence, but the identification is different.” What would that identification be?
ELIAS: This would be your identification of your cosmic twins; those essences fragmented jointly and choosing to fragment from each other into individual essences from one.
MARGOT: At one time, I received metaphysical teachings about a group of Dream Walkers who were known as the Els. I was told I am connected to them. It was even suggested that I add the name of Ellen to Margot because Ellen carries my vibration in this group. Now, in learning my connection to Patel and that I hold tones of Jeselle, it occurs to me that this might refer to a group of the Dream Walkers. Can you tell me about this?
ELIAS: This is a partial bleed-through of information subjectively held. Each essence family holds many subdivisions, so to speak. They also hold an identification in tone and in naming into your language, as do the main identifications of essence families. They shall hold very similar intent, but with slight variations. This El is not the naming, but it is a beginning for identification of one of these subdivisions of essence family.
MARGOT: I have a concept that when a specific group of essences decides to come together in a focus for a particular purpose, their combined essences form an oversoul, the purpose being for the oversoul to gather the memories or experiences of the group. Is this true?
ELIAS: No. (Grinning and chuckling, and offering no explanation)
MARGOT: I also hold the concept that two or more essences may come together in one physical focus, and that Mozart for example was of three essences and Beethoven of four.
ELIAS: No. (Still grinning and offering no explanation)
MARGOT: In this particular dimension, I am Sumafi aligned with Ilda. In my other dimensional focuses, then I am experiencing all the other families of consciousness, right? Would I also be experiencing all forms of alignment with other families?
ELIAS: Yes. (Again, no explanation)
MARGOT: When you mentioned to Howard that he was in a similar position to that of Dimin ... (Here, Elias starts laughing)
ELIAS: Are you experiencing frustration, Lawrence? (Still laughing)
VICKI: (Cracking up) No ...
ELIAS: Be continuing. Quite amusing!
VICKI: It’s a different kind of experience here! I’ve never done this before! (Meaning conduct an entire session for another person)
ELIAS: You may offer yourself the experience of mergence with another individual’s belief systems!
MARGOT: When you mentioned to Howard that he was in a similar position to that of Dimin, it made me think of a situation in his childhood. He has been told by another entity that the trauma was so great in his childhood home by the time he was two years old that his essence left and did not return until he was six. If there was indeed a blending of his essence at that time with another of his aspects, can you enlarge on that situation?
ELIAS: I may enlarge upon this situation by expressing very incorrect! Misinterpretation. They (Howard and Dimin) share similar experiences in other-dimensional focuses. This individual has not fragmented, within an exchange and mergence within this particular dimension within this particular focus, as has Dimin; and this individual has not chosen at small ages to be disconnecting from focus entirely and leaving and returning, for the physical form would also not be continuing!
VICKI: Well, I kind of get that the implication to this question is that there’s a wondering if there was an exchange.
ELIAS: The exchange being in aspects of focus. This, in difference to Dimin, was an exchange point; as we have expressed previously of your identification of you as one aspect of your focus moving and paralleling, (demonstrating with hand gestures) and another aspect moves into position and exchanges with you. The identification of self remains the same, only slightly altered; for it is all you.
VICKI: So did this action happen to this individual at this time?
MARGOT: I have already mentioned the major shift when I was forty-five. I felt at the time that I was fortified in order to have enough strength of will to make the great lifestyle breaks that I did. Could another aspect of my essence have merged with me at that time?
ELIAS: Yes. (Again, no explanation)
MARGOT: I understand that we spend a period of time after disengaging physical focus in coming into an acceptance of our belief systems. Depending on the strength of the belief systems we hold, this would require either a short period of contemplation or a lengthy one.
ELIAS: No. It is not dependent upon the strength of your belief systems. It is your choice, in your terminology of time framework, of what you are choosing to move through and let go of. It matters not the intensity of the belief systems in time framework. You may be experiencing and letting go of these belief systems regardless of their intensity quite quickly, if you are so choosing. If you are allowing yourself confusion and holding to these belief systems within another belief system that if you hold to these belief systems you shall not be confused, you shall be experiencing in your terms a longer time period, although the time framework is different. Therefore, it appears differently within the consciousness of the focus within transition.
MARGOT: Since some religions place most of their emphasis on what they will do in the afterlife to achieve exaltation, as they term it, that is a major part of that belief system that would require more than a little non-physical contemplation. When non-physical essences struggle with this type of thing and can’t move on, do they get any assistance from some kind of guiding essences or other aspects of themselves?
ELIAS: There is no essence that “can’t move on.” It is unnecessary for assistance, although as I have expressed previously, it may be offered at times to the focuses in transition which believe themselves to be “stuck!” (Grinning, and we all laugh) Therefore, helpfulness may be offered, although it is unnecessary. Eventually, they shall move themselves.
MARGOT: Is remanifestation possible if belief systems are still not resolved?
ELIAS: Absolutely. Resolving is not the point. Within the shift, accepting is the point. Outside of the context of the movement of the shift, it matters not; and you may carry belief systems through focuses. In actuality, you are affecting of other focuses and other focuses are affecting of you simultaneously within the area of belief systems. Therefore, they bleed through to each other.
MARGOT: After we have accepted our belief systems and we move into areas of non-physical awareness and existence, is it then that we can view all of our dimensional focuses?
ELIAS: You may view all of your dimensional focuses presently!
VICKI: This next question you’ve actually answered. It’s a question about whether Margot is thought-focused or emotionally-focused. Her initial perception is she is a thought-focused person.
ELIAS: (Chuckling) Not! (We all crack up)
VICKI: Gosh, I wish she was here! (Laughing)
ELIAS: She shall be appreciating of this interaction!
VICKI: Yes. I shall send her the tape!
MARGOT: Do the thought-focused have more trouble with periods of insomnia than the emotionally-focused? (Cathy is cracking up and Elias is chuckling)
VICKI: Let me finish the question! (Damn kids!)
MARGOT: In this regard, there is a syndrome well-known to people with insomnia. It is often called “jumpy legs,” in which there is an uncomfortable drawing sensation in the lower legs. A metaphysician explained this to me once as being “racing mind/jumping legs.”
ELIAS: Belief system, belief system!
VICKI: So this would have nothing to do with being thought-focused or emotionally-focused then?
ELIAS: No. (Elias was grinning so humorously at this point that it was difficult to maintain any sense of decorum!)
MARGOT: What is the actual source of this night-time discomfort?
ELIAS: This also may be manifest for different reasons. You think that if you manifest the same action, as I have said, that you must be manifesting for the same reason, and you do not. You manifest the same action objectively for it is acceptable, but your reasoning may be quite different individually. Generally--underline--you may look to this belief system and objective imagery in action as a response in rebellion to subjective interaction. (Margot--rebellious???)
VICKI: Okay, now I have some questions for Howard.
ELIAS: Quite fun! We shall continue with our Belief Systems Game!
HOWARD: I have been told ... (Elias begins chuckling) ... that I was the Merlin and that he/it was an angelic essence, the same that built the bridge or helped the focus of the bridge between Orion and Earth. This makes sense to me because magic or shamanistic movement of power between then and now is very real to me. Obviously, me and Orion go back a long way. Can you comment?
ELIAS: Magic is a reality. (Grinning widely) There have been many individuals upon your planet named Merlin. This individual that you focus upon is a story. (Still grinning)
He (Howard) feels this connection and identifies with objectively held belief systems within this present now. These are bleed-throughs in identification and recognition of other-dimensional focuses, which I have expressed previously. They are misinterpretations presently, for you do not hold information of these other-dimensional focuses. You do not allow yourselves the remembrance. Therefore, as this information bleeds through it is an allowance of partial remembrance, and is confused into the belief systems of this dimensional focus; this also being a very similar action objectively held with Dimin. This causes great confusion with these individuals, for they are attempting to be merging different dimensions with different belief systems into one, and they do not fit. Therefore, you create stories.
HOWARD: I wonder if it would be appropriate to ask Elias about my agent. I’ve put “We The Angels” to bed. It’s done. I am asking the publisher for a new estimate, and I am ambivalent about sending a copy to my agent. I don’t think she’s done anything to promote the book. I think that the story is very threatening to her. What does Elias think? Yes or no would be adequate.
ELIAS: (Pause) Express agreement.
HOWARD: Also, since I’m asking questions that are nearly as trivial as another person asked recently, I have another. Is there an archangel named Samuel?
ELIAS: (Interrupting) No. There are essences bearing this naming!
HOWARD: Is he the fifth, the apex of the pyramid, and is the story “We The Angels” his story?
ELIAS: (Sighing humorously) There is an essence holding this name--without the levels--which has been instrumental in inspiration.
HOWARD: If so, he would be the one that led the Orions to Earth via Arcturus. He would also be connected to the Orion that walked liked Turtle Brother. He would also be the Terran/Pleiadian that spoke and said we must adapt. It is not Terra that must adapt, it is us. Any clarification here would be helpful.
ELIAS: Belief systems belief systems belief systems within bleed-through information of other-dimensional belief systems and focuses and etcetera etcetera etcetera! (Grinning, and we all laugh)
HOWARD: This question has to do with The Uninvited. I would like to know the source of the etheric parasite entity that Jade found several years ago. Jade is trying to find the source in order to have a better idea of how to deal with it. He has been able to trace its lineage back to 1000 BC in the Mideast, but no further. The entity itself does not seem to understand what it is doing to humankind, nor where it came from. My question is, where did this entity come from? Is there anything you might be able to share with us regarding this entity, its source, its reason for being, and how to rid ourselves of it? Any help would be appreciated.
ELIAS: It is not an entity. It is an aspect of that essence of which he speaks. The identification of time framework of origin, so to speak, is a connection with that focus, as being an aspect of that particular focus of the same essence. It bleeds through to many of this essence’s focuses as an element or aspect of each of the focuses, in no difference to an aspect of emotion--not a thing, an experience. Therefore, this is not an entity. It is an aspect of the focuses which bleed through back and forth, so to speak, as an indication of an issue within the focuses of this essence to which we speak that is held commonly. This is reinforced within belief systems and further reinforced within mass belief systems, lending energy to the manifestation and at times to physical projection. To be dissolving of this aspect or the affectingness of this aspect, or the rearrangement of energy with this aspect in action, he need merely be recognizing of it, and that it holds no negativity other than what is projected to it within belief systems.
You shall manifest into reality any belief system that you are so choosing. You may create horrendous green monsters before your very eyes, quite solid and real, if you are so choosing to be projecting, and they shall hold reality, for you shall lend this energy within your belief systems. You are, as I have stated many times, magnificent creatures and may create anything you are choosing to be creating, and your belief systems are quite influencing of this action. And as you believe in evil and negativity, you also create this. It is merely a creation of your belief systems, and only holds power within energy as you allow it. No entity. Is this sufficient?
VICKI: To clarify for myself, what we would call our core issues, quite often these are issues that are present in many of our focuses?
ELIAS: Yes, therefore quite reinforced and bleeding through within aspects of essence to each other; this being why you experience such difficulty in the acceptance and moving through issues.
VICKI: I have no difficulty there! (Laughing)
ELIAS: Quite! (Grinning)
VICKI: Well, that was the last question. Thank you very much.
DAVID: May I just ask one question? Is that possible?
ELIAS: If you are choosing.
DAVID: Okay. I have some puzzles that I’m putting together since I’ve met you. I was told not so long ago that one of my lifetimes, my most recent lifetime, was as a writer in England, and as that writer in England--through my writing, through my books--I exposed much of myself, and that I was addicted to opium. I have since learned that you, Elias, were also a writer as such in England in your last lifetime. Is this so?
ELIAS: The identification that you have been given is a slight misinterpretation of information which the individual in actuality was connecting with, merely misinterpreting; you not being in actuality the writer, but many other aspects of the description of this particular focus are correct. You may be challenged now to find your identification, and if you are not finding your identification within that focus and time framework, I shall offer it to you.
DAVID: Was it connected with you?
DAVID: And so you were Oscar Wilde?
DAVID: And I was not Oscar Wilde.
DAVID: Okay, then I must find out who that is! Okay, that clears something up for me. Thank you.
ELIAS: (To Vic) You may be expressing to these individuals great affection and playfulness! (To David) And I challenge you to be investigating your naming of this focus of which you speak. I have offered many identifications and names physically within that same focus, which if you are experiencing too much difficulty I shall offer, but this one I shall challenge you to find yourself!
DAVID: I’ll enjoy the game! (Laughing)
ELIAS: Quite! (Grinning) Very well. (To Cathy) And you may be challenging also Shynla, within your allowance of subjective activity and bleed-throughs. You may accomplish! It is possible!
CATHY: Okay. (Laughing)
ELIAS: Very well. I express to you all quite affectionately this evening, au revoir!
Elias departs at 9:04 PM.
© 1997 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.