Thursday, January 15, 1998
Session 258 (Private) 
“Computer Questions II”
Participants: Mary (Michael), Vicki (Lawrence), and Cathy (Shynla).
Vic’s note: This is the second session we have held to specifically ask questions sent via computer. (The first one was held on 2/24/97) I’m going to use each person’s name as if they were asking the question, although Cathy and I are asking all the questions.
For reference see:
Transcripts: Computer Questions I, session 155, February 24, 1997
Transcripts: Computer Questions III, session 268, March 08, 1998
Transcripts: Computer Questions IV, session 269, March 19, 1998
Elias arrives at 5:05 PM. (Time was twenty-five seconds.)
ELIAS: Good evening. (Smiling)
VICKI: Hi. Cathy and I are going to ask some questions that have piled up for some of our long-distance friends, and I’m going to start with Bruce. This is pretty lengthy, so here goes:
BRUCE: Would you comment further on my status as Sumafi/Sumafi? I know this is a choice of alignment I have made and that its relevance to me is ultimately decided by me, but I am curious about this alignment’s effect on me in an objective sense. Specifically, I have wondered if my intent to understand subjective information with as little distortion as possible carries with it an inherent difficulty for me in accessing this same subjective material; i.e., does my desire to get it clear cause me to block information that I would have difficulty understanding without the props of distorting belief systems?
For instance, a belief in UFOs and visitations or a belief in spirit guides or angels makes some of these concepts that you discuss with us easy for new-agers to accept. They wrap up the ideas in a simple little package, so to speak. More importantly, someone who accepts angels will be able to access angels, so to speak, and through the distorting belief system they will perhaps be able to hear their own inner voice in the guise of angels. Since I have always been unable or unwilling to accept these types of masking ideas for myself, am I in some way handicapped in accessing this information for myself? I’m drawn to the clarity of your presentation, yet find my ability to internalize some of the ideas painfully slow sometimes because of my analytical nature. (Pause, as Elias smiles)
VICKI: I’ll wait on part two.
ELIAS: As to the issue of analyzation and the intent of Sumafi and distortion, and the question of blocking information or not allowing the free flow of information within the guise of the intent of the least amount of distortion, yes, you are blocking.
The natural flow of an individual focus which is aligned or belonging to or both of the Sumafi is not to be so very analytical of information, but to be accepting information which is presented, experiences which are presented, and to be evaluating of these, but not to the extent of what you THINK within your belief systems. You hold belief systems already in the area of belonging to or aligning with the family of Sumafi. You listen to concepts of the least amount of distortion and you automatically develop belief systems in this area: “Reinforcing yourselves in the area of skepticism is good. Analyzation of all things is good. Be not accepting and this is good.” You have developed three belief systems presently in this area connecting with the idea of the family of Sumafi. These are belief systems. This is not the point.
You ARE blocking in this area, for as you are not accepting, you are not allowing a free flow of information and experiences under the guise that they may be wrong. You are placing a value judgment upon experiences and information and evaluating that certain experiences are right, certain information is right, certain information is wrong, certain experiences are wrong. The very nature of the question, with the analogy of the angels, suggests a value judgment, and that individuals are deluding themselves in the guise of false belief systems – which there is no such thing as a false belief system – and therefore in their ignorance are allowing themselves experiences. This is incorrect. Within their trustfulness, within their own intents and their own belief systems, they are allowing for a flow of experience. Individuals that do not trust in themselves and are not accepting of such concepts as aliens or angels shall not be viewing these apparitions, so to speak, for they do not accept this. They are placing a value judgment upon these experiences. Therefore, these experiences shall not speak to them, although they may speak to them if the individual is allowing for the interaction.
I have spoken of many concepts that are difficult for individuals to be understanding, assimilating or connecting to, for they are outside of their own individual belief systems. Each individual accepts what is within the confines of their own belief systems; and within the information of the family of Sumafi, those individuals connecting with the Sumafi family also develop new belief systems and new judgments and become less accepting of information and develop* ideas, opinions, belief systems that this is “better” and reinforcing their own NEW belief systems, viewing themselves to be less distorted for they are more questioning. This is not necessarily correct.
(*Elias used the word “developing” here, which I changed for clarity)
VICKI: Recently Bruce has gone through a period of what I would call retreating that he just seems to be moving out of presently. How does what you just talked about have to do with his retreating?
ELIAS: For in developing these new belief systems connected to the family of Sumafi, there is also judgment placed upon self, which reinforces the duplicity of inadequacy. You do not allow yourselves the experience. Therefore, [as] you reinforce that you are not accomplishing -- you are not “connecting,” in your terms – you are also reinforcing your inadequacy and your own duplicity issues.
VICKI: Regarding Bruce’s Sumafi/Sumafi status, so to speak, I know that since learning about the families I can look back through my life and see a lot of the things I did and understand them better now with the information of the families. I’m curious about the affectingness of having this Sumafi/Sumafi thing going because I realize how much the belonging to the Sumafi family has affected me now that I look back. I’m curious how this affects Bruce.
ELIAS: The alignment is that which you develop conflicts with. It is easily accepted, the underlying intent within the Sumafi family – BELONGING to the Sumafi family -- for you naturally move through your focus aligning with this and not conflicting yourself with it and allowing a free flow; not allowing much thought process to it. It is a natural action that you may view throughout your focus, that you may view certain elements of yourself within certain areas where you have been meticulous or you have been a perfectionist, in your terms; but this is acceptable to you, for you view this only in certain areas, and as other individuals holding different alignments to different families but belonging to the Sumafi family, you are not concentrating upon the Sumafi intent. Your attention moves to the family that you are aligned with. This overshadows, in a manner of speaking, the family that you BELONG to. It is more obvious, the family that you are ALIGNED with.
In aligning with the same family as you also belong to, you create an intensity within the focus, but as with all focuses you also develop belief systems concerning this alignment. You move through your focus and you may not ever know what your alignment with a family is, but you shall develop belief systems about it, for you develop belief systems concerning your behavior and your behavior follows the intent of the family that you align with. You develop belief systems that certain behaviors that you display are good and certain behaviors that you display are bad. You all create these belief systems concerning the families that you align with. You do not hold this conflict with the families that you BELONG to, but with the families that you align with, you do. In this, in holding double -- belonging to and alignment of one family within a focus – the alignment becomes intensified. There is no element to offset the intent. Just as we have spoken within recent sessions of the difference between the interaction of Dream Walkers with individuals BELONGING to a family and the action of individuals ALIGNED with the same family, there are differences in your behaviors within your alignment.
Although you may be belonging to the family of Sumafi and naturally move through the focus holding this underlying intent, ALIGNING with Sumafi you create belief systems and value judgments. You turn these inwardly in alignment with your own issues of duplicity.
Individuals belonging to another family may look to the behavior of an individual aligned with Sumafi and view the qualities of their behavior as good. They are diligent. They are perfectionists. They complete projects. They persevere. They pay attention to detail. The individual aligning with Sumafi may not view these qualities as good. They may view these within themselves, within their own belief systems of duplicity, as tedious and tiresome and irritating and unacceptable.
Therefore, you may view that the alignment may be creating, within the individual’s belief systems, conflict. The key, as always, is acceptance, and also a realization that you are developing belief systems around words such as “distortion.” You automatically place a negative: bad. This is not to say that I am expressing to you that it is not important within the intent of Sumafi to be clear. This be the reason that I use the word distortion, for I am very concerned with clarity, but clarity may come in many ways. One individual’s clarity is no less or to be discounted any more than any other individual’s clarity, in whatever form it is created.
This information is presented to individuals that draw themselves to it for it speaks to them. I do not express to ANY individual, Uriel also, that this is the ONLY information or that this information is absolutely unequivocally “right.” It is presented merely for your clarity, for your understanding, for it speaks to you. Another individual may receive information from an angel or what they believe to be an angel, and it is equally valid.
VICKI: It seems to me that Bruce’s conflict doesn’t really come from the information. It comes from himself.
ELIAS: Absolutely.
VICKI: But I do think I understand the conflict within the alignment of family. I’ve heard you talk to a lot of people about their personal conflict within their alignment of family.
ELIAS: This is quite common. They have no conflict within the family that they are belonging to, but they also are not concentrating upon this. They allow a free flow, a natural occurrence. They are not placing value judgment upon this, but you DO place value judgment upon the family that you align with.
VICKI: Yeah. Okay, he has a part two to this question:
BRUCE: I have also considered that my double Sumafi status has advantages too, again speaking in a purely objective viewpoint. Am I perhaps finding your information easier to accept than many people would because it lacks distortion? And, I am curious about just how undistorted even Elias’ information is. How much distortion is absolutely necessary for we objectively-oriented creatures to even gain a glimpse of how things really operate?
ELIAS: Within the context of the energy exchange and what I present to you or the concepts that I attempt to present to you, there is always an element of distortion, for the energy exchange involves language. Therefore, I may not be presenting to you accurately all of the concepts that I present to you, for you are limited by language. Subjectively, there is NO distortion. Objectively, there is ALWAYS distortion. There is always distortion within language, even among yourselves. You may not entirely present ANY subject or concept or feeling to each other without an element of distortion, for you are dealing with language. You may present any of these to another individual within inner senses and connecting with these and they shall not be distorted, but within language there is ALWAYS an element of distortion.
As to these sessions, I attempt very carefully within your language and words to be the least distorting as possible; the most clear; [to] substitute distortion with clarity. This is not entirely always accomplished, for your language is very limiting objectively, but the attempt is continued to be as clear as possible for your information.
The draw is obvious. The draw to this information, to these sessions, to this forum, to individuals within this forum is a recognition, a subjective knowing of interconnectedness and of the Sumafi family. It is quite understandable that Uriel shall draw himself to this information, for he is Sumafi. Look to the individuals that draw themselves to this information. For the most part, they are Sumafi or are aligned with Sumafi.
VICKI: And that brings another question to my mind. There are individuals, though, that are quite drawn to the information, seem to understand it very well, and are not Sumafi in any regard.
ELIAS: You are correct.
VICKI: What’s happening with those people?
ELIAS: You are not Sumari!
VICKI: Right.
ELIAS: But you have drawn yourself strongly to information of the Sumari.
VICKI: Right.
ELIAS: In like manner, other individuals allowing themselves to be open to their periphery and allowing themselves to widen their awareness in certain areas may draw themselves to this information. It is not a “select group.”
VICKI: I understand that.
ELIAS: But for the most part, individuals that are of the Sumafi or aligning with Sumafi shall draw themselves to this forum more easily. This is not to say that it does speak to other individuals. The information shall speak to anyone that is open to listen.
VICKI: I guess I’ve wondered if some of these people that are not Sumafi perhaps are engaging their periphery a little bit more ...
ELIAS: Correct, as I have stated.
VICKI: Okay, that’s it for Bruce. (To Cathy) Unless you have something in this area?
CATHY: Oh, not that has to do with that. It’s just essence names and connection stuff.
VICKI: Okay, the next question is for a gal named Lisa:
LISA: What do you do after you truly connect with yourself, when you find yourself standing on an amazing threshold? How do we take ourselves further when we have reached a plateau?
ELIAS: (Smiling) Ah, those plateaus! You look to your planks, your bridge extending from your oubliette, and you recognize that there are always more planks before you – there is always more to explore – and you allow yourself to not limit yourself. You allow yourself your own acceptance and trust. You settle into the comfort of your lulling rest period and allow yourself the acceptance of this, and you anticipate your new exploration and adventure knowing that the exploration ALWAYS continues.
Individuals at times also develop belief systems that if they are not continuously objectively in movement, accomplishing within every moment of their cultural time, that they are stagnating or stuck. You move in cycles, just as you move in waves. You allow yourself the rush, and you also allow yourselves the receding. Just as your tides, your waves, crash forward and gently recede, you also within your movements accomplish in this same manner. It is a natural, even flow. It is not to be viewed as a discouragement, or bad, or that you are “stuck.” You are merely flowing within the natural cycle.
You have created your elements within this dimension, such as your tides, to be mirroring yourselves. Look to the elements you have created and their cycles. You have created all of this as a mirror image of yourselves. It offers you much information as to your reality and your existence within this physical dimension. You allow yourselves these times of receding for reflection, for assimilation, and for preparation for movement in what you term to be forward. You all experience this. You all also develop belief systems in this area. You create belief systems upon yourselves and upon each other. You view yourselves to be within this time framework of receding and reflecting and you view yourself to be unproductive or that something is “wrong” with you. You are not accomplishing. You are not moving forward. This be the reason that you are not accepting when I am expressing to you that you ARE accomplishing, and you are viewing yourselves as NOT accomplishing. You are viewing yourselves as being stuck or stagnating or not moving.
In these times, many times I have expressed to many of you that you ARE accomplishing and you ARE moving, and within your little heads – not verbally to me but within your thoughts – you are screaming at me, “Oh yes, Elias! I am accomplishing so very well! I think not!” But you are! This period of receding is no less important, for it is your time for assimilation. (Pause)
VICKI: Okay. For Dale: First, her essence name and families.
ELIAS: Essence name, Jene.
VICKI: With a G?
ELIAS: J.
VICKI: J-E-N-E?
ELIAS: Correct. Essence family, Vold; alignment, Ilda.
VICKI: Hmm. My objective interaction with Dale has been in the very recent past. It’s new, but in a very short period of time this individual has offered me a lot of information and insights. It’s actually been pretty interesting. The only other thing she stated as a question is:
DALE: Truthfully, I can’t come up with a question! Just a very loosely formed, “Tell me something about why we – meaning her and I – met, although it really doesn’t matter.”
ELIAS: The individual is drawing themselves to the information and you are providing it, and you are being provided with information.
VICKI: Quite a bit!
ELIAS: This also may be helpful in examination of your own belief systems, and a challenging to yourself.
VICKI: Okay. I have some questions for Howard.
ELIAS: (Grinning) Ah, yes! You may reserve this comment, but I shall express to you, belief systems belief systems belief systems!
VICKI: Actually, I’m going to start with this one. I really like this question!
HOWARD: Since the thing on my face refuses to go away and Elias suggests that it is a result of old family issues, I would like to ask, which family? I have eight: my mom’s, my dad’s, my former wife’s, my current wife’s, my two children’s, those that I have accepted into my life as friends, and my family of consciousness. I have worked with them all, and the thing is still there.
ELIAS: (Grinning) Family of children and parents.
VICKI: Both children?
ELIAS: Correct.
VICKI: Also for Howard; this is a question about a Native American, I believe, named Chief Joseph who existed in the late 1800’s. His question is:
HOWARD: Did Chief Joseph and his people make it to Canada?
ELIAS: (Grinning) Some of the people, although this is a question of little consequence.
VICKI: How about old Chief Joseph himself?
ELIAS: No.
VICKI: Isn’t it possible that this could be of consequence to Howard in being helpful to him?
ELIAS: No. Bosht is quite fond of distraction ... (grinning)
VICKI: I’ll tell him you said that!
ELIAS: ... and quite adept at accomplishing it! It is quite efficient to be distracting oneself and NOT viewing the individual’s belief systems and issues; therefore the continuation of the creation that he has physically created.
CATHY: Oh, that! Oh my.
VICKI: One last question for Howard. This is a question about an individual, I suppose, named Melchizadek. Now, just to give my own take on part of this, in the poem that Howard wrote which I read, he uses a term called “Founders.” When I initially read this poem, which was quite a while ago, within a loose interpretation it seemed to me that I connected this concept of Founders with the concept of the Dream Walkers. I don’t know how correct I was in that, but that was my loose interpretation. I guess this individual or this name of Melchizadek has come up a lot recently, probably in the metaphysical world, and also, according to Howard, in the Mormon world. He says:
HOWARD: Whenever I hear Melchizadek’s name used in reference to anything mundane, I get really pissed off. It’s irrational how mad I get. I feel like I’ve been insulted. The feeling I get is not rational. If the subject of the Dream Walkers arises, I’d like Melchizadek’s name added to the mix, and I’d be interested in hearing E’s comments.
ELIAS: This would not be a Dream Walker, for in actuality this IS a physically-focused individual within your history. (Pause) Hmmm. You may offer to him that the reason that he may be experiencing what he terms to be an irrational response is that within your biblical history and the focus of this individual, he holds the same focus as a dear friend. Therefore, this may also be considered a bleed-through of sorts.
VICKI: And he’s responding.
ELIAS: Correct.
VICKI: Okay. (To Cathy) Why don’t you go ahead, and I’ll enter my other area after a break?
CATHY: Okay. This would be from Linda. She says:
LINDA: I’ve been trying to find my own way here in the dark, trying to figure out my own stuff, and I was wondering if you could ask Elias to validate something for me. I’m trying to figure out the connection I have with my friend Anthony. It seems so strong. It seems too strong to be just an ordinary friendship, and I believe we’re connected somehow. This may seem to be either a counterpart type of thing or a fragment type of thing. I’m sort of sliding away from the fragment theory, but I’m not sure. Maybe we’ve just been together for many lifetimes. I’m having trouble figuring this one out. Maybe I’m too close to the situation to see it clearly. Also, I’ve been trying to get Anthony’s essence name and I’m only getting an R sound -- you know, “arrr” – and I’m stuck on this one.
ELIAS: Counterpart ... ArTHUR.
CATHY: Ah! Okay:
LINDA: I’ve had a strong feeling about a past lifetime as a pony express rider in the 1800’s. I believe I died from a fall, off a cliff maybe. I’ve had this feeling since childhood and I’m wondering if I’m getting the right information here. (Pause)
ELIAS: Close! A fall, but not from a cliff, so to speak; a hill.
CATHY: Okay, and last but not least:
LINDA: I’m thinking that Anthony is Sumari/Sumari. Is this right?
ELIAS: Sumari/Ilda.
CATHY: Okay. This would be from Leslie. She would like to know her essence name and her family ... if you’re giving that out.
ELIAS: Margaret.
CATHY: (To Vic) Do you know how to spell that, Vic?
VICKI: Yeah.
CATHY: Okay.
ELIAS: Sumari/Milumet.
CATHY: Oh, I’m so surprised! Okay, another question she had was:
LESLIE: Why have I been feeling that my time here is short?
ELIAS: Final focus ... although this is not to indicate that the individual is planning on disengaging soon! (Grinning)
CATHY: Okay. This would be for Sarah:
SARAH: I have a past life impression of my fiancée Aaron and I living as comrade soldiers in either Greece or Rome. Could you mention briefly the location, time and relationship as far as greater issues we are working on, perhaps?
ELIAS: Rome, second century; to your present calendar, BC. (Pause)
CATHY: Okay, and:
SARAH: What experience or information were my mother or cousin hoping to fulfill by creating the accident? Also, was I merely in agreement with it, or did I have a say as well, to fulfill my growth?
ELIAS: This was an agreement with all individuals involved for allowing themselves information as to elements of creating within their realities; each individual being a participant to offer information to themselves and to the others in different capacities as to different aspects of creating and uncreating certain realities, some in physical areas and others in emotional areas. It also has been an opportunity to be offering interconnectedness and supportiveness, which may also hold a healing quality.
CATHY: Okay, thank you.
VICKI: I’d like to throw out a trivia question for myself before we take a break. I’ve had a lot of strong feelings about the fact that when Paul and Jo drive out here, they should have walkie-talkies. This has turned into a deal for me. I’ve even had a couple of dreams about it. So now they finally have walkie-talkies, and I feel okay. What is that imagery representative of?
ELIAS: (Grinning) This would be your imagery to yourself of a fearfulness of lack of communication temporarily.
VICKI: With myself?
ELIAS: Correct.
VICKI: Just in general with everybody?
ELIAS: With these individuals.
VICKI: With these individuals.
ELIAS: Correct.
CATHY: No puter! (Laughing)
VICKI: Oh, really?
ELIAS: Very good! (Grinning)
VICKI: Oh, really! I have tried to figure this out, and I’ve just wondered why it was a big deal to me!
ELIAS: (Grinning) They shall be inaccessible, within your belief systems, temporarily! (Laughter)
VICKI: Hmm! Interesting! (Elias chuckles) Okay.
ELIAS: Very well. We shall break, and you may continue with your questions.
BREAK 6:00 PM.
RESUME 6:33 PM. (Time was seven seconds.)
ELIAS: Continuing.
VICKI: This is for Margot. Again, it’s pretty lengthy, so here goes:
MARGOT: I really thought that I’d accepted and completely neutralized my whole Mormon church thing, but I created something for myself last week that has proved me dead wrong. I got a lung infection, asthma, which is the original conflict with my asthma. It all began when about a month ago, I began receiving calls from the church to check on my wishes regarding my membership status. I’ve been thinking for a long time that I should have my name removed from the church records in Salt Lake City, but I just never got around to doing it. Members who have their names removed understand that they lose all their rights to participation in the hereafter with their earthly family groups. The two had seemed to pose no problems for me since I have not held beliefs in that doctrine for many years. I had delayed taking this action before my parents died as I didn’t want to hurt them any more than I already had by leaving the church, and after they died I’d gone on reasoning in the same manner in regard to the feelings of my children.
After the last phone call from the church, I began having some dreams about the issue, with three main themes. One: with no belief in the church, I was still pretending I was actively involved and I hated doing that. Two: in the dreams, I was always accepting assignments to teach classes, etcetera, but seldom showing up, always having to scramble to get someone to take my place. And three: I was always feeling very guilty over my behavior. By the time I would get up in the morning after each dream, I was very much convinced that I’d spent such a dreadful night simply because I wasn’t getting around to writing the letter, but I still didn’t get the letter written. It was after the last dream that I got so sick with the lung infection, and it was then that I realized I was tangling with a belief system buried so deep within me that I hadn’t known it existed. Objectively, I truly do not believe the Mormon doctrine on eternal families. Subjectively, it seems to have still been concerning me. This understanding was very overwhelming for me, and I felt then that writing the letter was taking a remarkable but dreadful step with heavy consequences. At any rate, I wrote and mailed the letter, and watching it disappear into the mailbox was really a shaky experience. It had become a major step that I hadn’t even known I had to take and it felt awful, like a personal doomsday, like my own apocalypse. I know better than that, but that’s how it felt. I understand that the doomsday feeling was mostly fear of loss of identity, but I’ve had a difficult time understanding some of my other feelings and I hope you can explain them to me.
First, I felt that something moved deep within my core, like the whole of my essence shifted, and I got some interesting dream imagery of this that was comforting and yet a little frightening. The day before the dream we had a heavy snowfall, and I’d been up several times in the night to look out of the window at the beauty. In the dream it was morning, and looking out of the window I saw that even though the landscape looked the same, there had been a deep ground melt, and I saw that all the snow was about to slide off down the mountain in one big whoosh and flood the areas below us. I thought that this was my symbology for the step I had taken, the movement I felt within, but I wondered what would be left of me in the imminent flooding. Can you explain this to me?
Margot’s note: I experienced a wide gamut of emotions when I typed this. By the time I got to the end of that nearly two pages, I was totally embarrassed for having been so damn long-winded! Color me blushing like crazy.
ELIAS: This would be another example of that which we spoke at our last meeting: individuals acquiring this information and developing a new belief system as to methods of dealing with belief systems or for their movement through a belief system, so to speak, as opposed to the acceptance of the belief system. But as you place a judgment upon certain belief systems, you view them as unacceptable. You view objectively that you may not hold certain belief systems any longer and you view this as good; more enlightened. Merely because you do not THINK that you hold a belief system objectively does not mean that you do not hold this belief system underlyingly. Many times these belief systems are so very strong that you do not allow yourselves to view them objectively at all.
You are quite accomplished at camouflaging these belief systems, pushing them away and placing them into the area of shrines where you do not have to view them. In this, you present yourselves at times with information or imagery that is suggestive to you that the belief system is continued to be held, but you reject this. Therefore, you objectively take steps or create methods to be indicating to yourselves the reinforcement that you do NOT hold these belief systems.
You are VERY adept at reinforcing your own objective selves. You are also VERY reinforcing of your objective ideas and belief systems. In this, you ALL hold underlying very strong belief systems that you objectively express you have none of! You attempt to be PROVING this to yourselves – for you are ALWAYS seeking proof within physical focus – that these belief systems are not core underlying belief systems and that your objective awareness is correct. “I do not hold a belief system in religious elements. I have shed this belief system long ago.” I shall very strongly express to you ALL, this is VERY incorrect!
Margot’s note: As I typed, I was in total denial about what he said in the last two paragraphs. After all, I knew I was wrestling with a strong belief system, but I’d accepted it and moved on long ago!
You may not allow yourself objectively to view the belief systems that you hold, but you hold them. Individuals that have not exposed themselves to what you term to be the organizations of religions within their focus hold these religious belief systems equally as strong, for they are mass belief systems and they are reinforced continuously within your societies. It does not matter that you attend a church. It does not matter that you have been indoctrinated with doctrine. Your societies reinforce the religious belief systems. You are continuously exposed and assimilating and holding to these belief systems. You merely do not view them objectively.
Therefore, in this she has accomplished in allowing herself to view that the belief systems continue to exist and are strongly held, but she has also created the same action as Shynla with the animal; attempting to be IGNORING the belief system or turning away from the belief system, and therefore it shall no longer be. This is not ACCEPTING a belief system, for there is a continued judgment placed upon the belief system. In this, she holds this feeling of the imminent deluge.
No THING shall be occurring. The angels and saints shall not excommunicate her from heaven! But she has opened the floodgates for these very core belief systems and has agreed with herself to be dealing with these belief systems; therefore, the onset of the whoosh she has set into motion. Within the probabilities, she has created a situation in opening her own “can of worms.” She has written this letter and she has opened the door. Therefore, she shall be presenting herself objectively with many more of these lurking belief systems, many of which are connected to religious belief systems that ARE still held very strongly.
VICKI: When you use this term “opening a can of worms,” it almost sounds negative.
ELIAS: It is not negative, but within YOUR belief systems and within HER belief systems it may not be very pleasant, which YOU place a negativity on discomfort.
VICKI: Is there a way to accomplish the same action of engaging core belief systems without creating what we term unpleasantness?
ELIAS: Yes, by learning to be accepting of yourself first, for in accepting of yourself first you shall not threaten your identity, and you shall hold the stability and what you would term as the strength to “face on” these very core belief systems and not place judgment upon yourself.
VICKI: It just seems to be such a vague action, this action of accepting oneself.
ELIAS: Not vague at all!
VICKI: Vague as far as DOING it, to us here in physical focus.
ELIAS: Each time you are discounting of yourself, you are not accepting. This may be quite obvious to you. This is an objective action. You need not search for clues. You are not dealing with your elusive subjective activity. This is quite objective!
VICKI: True ...
ELIAS: Your imagery is before you within every moment.
VICKI: It’s also quite automatic.
ELIAS: As you allow it to be.
CATHY: So, is she still having discomfort in her lungs?
VICKI: If I remember correctly, no. She has more questions about this experience, though.
CATHY: I was just wondering if she was, because I didn’t do that. I didn’t create anything physical, but then again I don’t create that much physical stuff that’s real annoying to me.
VICKI: No, I don’t think she’s still having the physical expression. Some questions about this experience; there’s a few here:
MARGOT: Can I relate this more to my transitioning than to the shift in general?
ELIAS: Transitioning.
MARGOT: It came to me also that in removing my name from the church records, I had altered more than one of my own probabilities. I had also altered the probabilities that my children have dearly held, that I’ll be with them in the hereafter, but I don’t quite understand this changing of probabilities. Will you address this for me?
ELIAS: This has been affecting within belief systems, but not within altering probabilities of family, only within their belief systems; which THEY may be choosing to be altering of their probabilities within the confines of their belief systems, but she has not altered their probabilities in this action. She has altered her OWN probabilities in addressing to these core belief systems.
The probabilities were, before this action, in the direction of addressing to belief systems in a manner of speaking more slowly, allowing for more of that which we have spoken this evening: the tide, the flow; the crash in, the recede out. The probabilities have been altered now, within this present now, as to be addressing to many more of these core belief systems more quickly.
VICKI: So if a person takes an action like she took, which she knows will be affecting of her children’s belief systems and cause them some distress, within looking at Acceptance 102, would it be more efficient to not objectively tell a person that you’re taking that sort of an action?
ELIAS: This would be your choice. In some areas, yes, it would be more efficient.
Margot’s note: I definitely did not/do not plan to go into that area. My children will find out little by little, I presume.
CATHY: It would depend on her belief systems in that area, though.
ELIAS: Quite, for you hold belief systems in the area of honesty, that you must be espousing all that you do and think in the name of honesty, but this is NOT in compliance with Acceptance 102 ... and honesty is a belief system also! The efficient direction would be to be thinking of Acceptance 102 and empathically connecting with the other individuals and being accepting of their belief systems and their thought processes and their reality and not being intrusive to this.
VICKI: Well, that’s why I asked the question. You know, putting myself in her shoes and thinking maybe I would choose not to tell my children what I did, because then they wouldn’t tweak out about it.
ELIAS: Quite, and how does it matter? She has created this situation from her own choice, which she has accomplished her choice.
MARGOT: Even though I understand that this whole thing was about my belief systems, I can’t even relate it to anything much having to do with belief systems. What has happened to me is bigger somehow than merely accepting a belief system and neutralizing it and going on. It’s like a got a layer deeper than mere acceptance, but I don’t understand how I could have done that. Can you help me?
ELIAS: Ah, mere acceptance! For this is so very easy for you within the strength of your belief systems! And you may express to Jeselle that if she is believing that she has accepted this belief system, she has created another belief system, for she has NOT accepted this belief system! She has connected to the DEPTHS of acceptance.
VICKI: That’s what she has connected to ...
ELIAS: Quite.
VICKI: ... in that her experience lies outside of her belief systems of acceptance.
ELIAS: Correct.
VICKI: Hmm! Interesting.
MARGOT: The day that all this was hitting me deeply, I was so disconnected that I decided I must be dead, and that the fact that I could look around me and see other people functioning as usual was simply that when we disengage, we take with us into the non-physical our version of the reality in which we are living. I can’t think this is true, however. Was that sense simply a part of transition, or what was happening to me that day?
ELIAS: Within the individual choices, this may be true. An individual very well may create this type of scenario within the initial throes of non-physical transition, within the lack of acceptance of their own belief systems and within the HOLD of their very strong belief systems.
You may be an individual physically focused, expressing you hold no religious belief systems. You do not believe in God – you do not believe in heaven or hell – and at the moment of your death you may find yourself in heaven facing God, for your underlying belief systems lie in this direction and this shall be what you create.
Some individuals are creating of familiarity, or what they think of as familiarity objectively. Therefore, the scene does not change. They view life moving about them as it always has, but with a strange quality to it; but they may be functioning within this quite well for a time, for they are operating within their belief systems and their objective awareness. Therefore, this has been a viewing within the action of transition of the possibilities; another opportunity to view very strong belief systems and their affectingness.
Another individual may hold no religious belief systems in their opinion objectively, but they may view themselves within the strength of their own duplicity as inadequate and bad throughout their focus, and at the moment of their death they may find themselves in this burning place called hell. It is a temporary experience, one that they have created themselves within the strength of their own belief systems, but it is quite possible to be creating this objective imagery and it shall be very real!
CATHY: Is there more of a probability that you will create one of your underlying core belief systems that you may not objectively be aware of?
ELIAS: Yes.
CATHY: Oh boy! Another reason to stick around here for awhile!
ELIAS: You are reinforcing your own fear issues!
CATHY: Okay!
VICKI: I had an experience some years ago where my car spun out on the freeway, and for a short time it was like you just said. Everything seemed to have a different quality and I wondered if I was dead, to the point where I started waving to people on the freeway. When nobody waved back for five or ten minutes, I started to REALLY wonder if I was dead! And I’ve wondered ever since then if that’s an experience that people have.
ELIAS: Yes; offering yourself momentarily information to be viewing the probabilities, more of your periphery outside of your officially accepted reality. In truth, many more individuals experience what you loosely term in this present now as “near-death experiences” than you realize ... than THEY realize. (Grinning)
VICKI: We just don’t define them as such.
ELIAS: Correct.
VICKI: Well, I wouldn’t be one of those people that would have any problem believing I was dead! That certainly won’t happen to me! (We all crack up, including Elias) To continue:
MARGOT: That same day, my tactile senses were all screwed up. Nothing I touched felt the same, and it was kind of unnerving. I also had something or some things moving in my periphery at my eye level and on the floor, but not frightening in any sense of the word. Was this simply my widening process, or is this another part of being in transition?
ELIAS: This would be another element of that which we have just spoken, within the experience.
VICKI: Of things having a different quality?
ELIAS: Correct; viewing non-physical aspects of transition within the confines of your belief systems. Therefore, they also acquire a different quality than you are used to within your objective awareness.
MARGOT: Since I didn’t objectively understand what was going on with the church membership thing and it got my attention only because I got so sick, I am wondering again how I can quit creating something I don’t even know I’m creating! I can plead ignorance or plain stupidity, but how can I see the alligators in my swamp before they bite me in the ass? (Big grin from Elias) Do I have to continue to become seriously ill in order to figure things out?
ELIAS: This would be your choice! You are creating spontaneously within the moment, and you distract yourselves tremendously by focusing upon the future. You look outside of the now and you miss the now, and the now is where you are creating.
MARGOT: In Rob’s session, you listed eight actions of transition which were very helpful to me. In your category of “very strange sensations within your physical form,” I am feeling that something that has been happening to both Howard and me for about the last year is a strange sensation we’re both encountering. Over a period of a few hours, one of us will have what we term a “sinus blowout,” in which there seems to be a major clearing going on. It doesn’t last very long or leave any ill effects. It simply happens. Is our impression correct?
ELIAS: Within the physical affectingness, yes.
VICKI: So they’re having a shared experience there?
ELIAS: Correct.
MARGOT: The spinning sensations that Stella has been experiencing have reminded me of two similar episodes I’ve had in the last three years. Each time, I thought I had some sort of inner ear infection and the doctor prescribed medication that fixed it. Can you tell me if these episodes were actually transitional? Since I have been in transition for such a long time, should I be assuming that all very strange sensations within my physical form are merely transition?
ELIAS: No, but many are. They are the creation of objective imagery in response to the action of transition.
VICKI: And these inner ear infections?
ELIAS: Correct. Not all physical affectingness that she creates is in response to transition. Some are for her own attention, to be addressing to certain belief systems and issues; but in this also, within the time framework of the engagement of transition, it may also be related to transition, for all of the engagements that you choose to focus upon once entering into the action of transition are related to transition, in a manner of speaking.
VICKI: Okay, this last question is completely different and very brief. It’s also from Margot and it’s about her friend Mary Ann, an old friend of hers. Her impression is that this gal is Zuli aligned Ilda, and that she also is engaging the action of transition. Is this correct?
ELIAS: (Accessing) Correct.
VICKI: Regarding transition, one question for myself. If one is engaging the action of transition non-physically and planning to remanifest, are they in a process of accepting belief systems?
ELIAS: Within a remanifestation aspect?
VICKI: Correct.
ELIAS: No.
VICKI: What are they doing? (Pause)
ELIAS: Transitioning for refocus ... some even acquiring belief systems. (Pause)
VICKI: Hmm. I don’t understand.
ELIAS: You may not understand, for you do not understand the experience, for you shall not have the experience, for you are not remanifesting in actuality; and the remanifestation, which is an inadequate term, is already occurring.
VICKI: Could I understand the experience by connecting with another aspect of myself that is having the experience?
ELIAS: It IS possible; not very probable, but it is possible.
VICKI: Hmm. I have one last question. (To Cathy) Do you have any questions?
CATHY: Well, I just have one little quick one. Is the slight uncomfortableness in my lower stomach a counterpart action with Sue?
ELIAS: No.
CATHY: Care to tell me what it is??
ELIAS: It is objective imagery to yourself of energy being held within a lack of acceptance of your own form.
CATHY: Oh! That wouldn’t surprise me in this present now! (Pause)
VICKI: Okay. Well, I’ve had this question for quite a while, but I don’t remember ever asking it. The question is about Mary. For the first year-and-a-half or two years of sessions, I found it pretty easy to talk to Mary about these concepts from all different directions, to explore them from all different directions. But recently, in the last ... well, it’s been going on for a while now and it seems to be accelerating, in my perception. What I interpret is that I can’t really do this any more with Mary because the more time that goes by, the more defensive she gets regarding any discussion of a concept outside of the context of the information as it’s delivered. (Elias smiles and nods knowingly) It’s frustrating for me, but I’m more curious as to why this is happening, and probably even more so, how I can be helpful in that area or understand it better.
ELIAS: Michael is addressing to very strongly-held core belief systems and has been engaged in this action for a time framework, although he has not objectively held an awareness of his own action in this area and has spent much time in diverting his attention and distracting and not completely addressing to the issues, but continues to partially address to these base belief systems. Within this present now, as you may be aware also, he is beginning to allow himself an objective awareness of these belief systems. He is also quite battling in this area. Therefore, he battles himself also.
He wishes no confrontation. He wishes no dispute, for he has not quite reached an area of comfortableness yet within himself. Once he has moved through these issues and learns to be accepting of self, this situation shall change within the probabilities; but as he engages these belief systems more objectively, the situation merely increases.
He is also engaging very strong belief systems of which we have spoken previously. You have inquired to me, “What are the base belief systems that are affecting of myself and Michael?” And I have expressed to you, which neither of you have completely moved into or addressed to within yourselves.
Therefore, you both continue within your own individual battles with your own belief systems within your own selves. You shall be accomplishing, as I have stated previously, but you are battling very strong core belief systems.
VICKI: So in the present now, is it more efficient for me to not be attempting to engage discussion in areas that appear to make Mary defensive?
ELIAS: It is more efficient for you both to be accepting of each other and what you are creating.
VICKI: Well, that’s what I find myself doing whenever these moments come up. I find myself starting to go into old behavior of what I’m used to with Mary and to push the issue, so to speak, or have a conversation about it. But lately, I found myself just shutting up because it seems to be ... it doesn’t seem to accomplish anything. I guess I also ... the only reason I have a question about it is because I hold my own belief systems that to not explore things from all areas is to be cutting yourself off, although this would only apply to me, not to another individual, correct?
ELIAS: Absolutely.
VICKI: And if I’m dealing with an individual who does not care to do this, then shutting up is probably a good thing!
ELIAS: Accepting of the other individual’s creation and position within their reality is the most efficient manner to be directing your attention in.
VICKI: And if I am accepting of that, isn’t shutting up imagery of accepting of that?
ELIAS: At times. You shall know within you what is appropriate and what is not.
VICKI: Yeah. Well, I guess that’s why I brought it up, because sometimes I don’t feel like I know.
ELIAS: If you are connecting empathically, allowing yourself to be engaging your inner senses and connecting with another individual, any individual, you shall offer yourself the information that you seek.
Your crocs that may bite you from behind! (Grinning) They are not behind – they are right before you! You are merely not viewing. It is a matter of acceptance and non-intrusiveness. You shall not be intrusive if you are being accepting.
VICKI: Okay.
CATHY: I’m a little frustrated with my non-acceptance of my physical form thing! (Laughter)
ELIAS: Vessel, vessel, vessel!
CATHY: It’s like, I get what you say. When you look in the mirror you might say yeah, you like what you see, but then you’re thinking no, you don’t, and it’s like ... so what do you do?! (Laughter)
ELIAS: Practice acceptance of self!
CATHY: Oh ... just the way it is.
ELIAS: Quite ... without judgment!
CATHY: Without judgment.
VICKI: It’s frustrating because like I said before, nobody really knows how to do that. I mean, we can sit and talk about it forever!
ELIAS: And we shall! And eventually you shall assimilate and you shall realize how to be creating of this! You ARE learning. You ARE assimilating and you ARE accomplishing. You merely experience frustration, for you view yourselves to not be accomplishing ENOUGH or quickly enough or your periphery is not wide enough, which is all a reinforcement of, “YOU are not good enough and YOU are not acceptable.” As you relax your hold upon your duplicity of self, you also shall discover the ease of your periphery opening automatically.
Once again, within little heads: “Oh sure, Elias! We’ll see if this EVER materializes!” (Laughter) Personal invalidation to you both!
CATHY: Well, I have one comment to make about last Sunday’s session. In my question of exploring belief systems, I learned something from that and it was cool, but it also showed me that in trying to convey this information to somebody else, I’d better get it straight with me first!
ELIAS: Very good!
CATHY: And we’ve been around here longer than anybody!
ELIAS: But do not allow yourself to fall into the trap of Uriel.
CATHY: Oh.
VICKI: What exactly do you mean by that?
ELIAS: Do not deny yourself your experiences within the new belief systems that the least amount of distortion is to be skeptical and non-accepting, and blocking of your own experiences and not sharing information with other individuals for you may distort it! Replace distortion with clarity.
CATHY: I have to say that I didn’t know what to say to that new girl when she came outside on break. I didn’t know what to say to her, so I said nothing.
ELIAS: And what are you reinforcing within this action?
CATHY: Duplicity of myself.
ELIAS: Quite; that you may not be accurate enough.
CATHY: (Sighing heavily) Yeah.
ELIAS: Or you do not hold an understanding of the information which is adequate enough.
VICKI: It’s the stupid thing. (Elias grins and nods)
CATHY: (Laughing) He’s trying so hard not to say that word!
ELIAS: It is unnecessary! YOU may express this to yourselves!
CATHY: Well, I don’t know why we keep doing this, but it must be that inner knowing thing! (Laughter)
ELIAS: (Humorously) Ah, the inner knowing!
VICKI: I doubt it! (Cathy and I are losing it now, really laughing)
ELIAS: Of course! For you are so very “enlightened” and have held interaction with myself for quite some time framework! You are so very blessed! (Laughing) You know more than you think you know!
CATHY: Well, I would say I’m beginning to realize that. Wouldn’t you agree?
ELIAS: I would agree! (Chuckling) Continue with your accomplishing. I am acknowledging of you both. I shall be disengaging this evening, and leaving you to be assimilating and contemplating. To you both this evening, I bid you much affection and a very fond adieu!
Elias departs at 7:28 PM.
Previous session |
Go to the top |
Next session
© 1998 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.