Elias Transcripts – Session 504, November 19, 1999

GEORGE: Common. Okay. May I ask you, I’m deeply interested in the shift of consciousness. I’ve read a lot of the material that’s come out on it from you, of course, and your transcripts, and I was very interested before in what Seth had to say. But none of my close friends seems to be very interested, and I’m so fascinated by it. Can you comment on that? Why would it be that nobody else around me seems to be very interested?

ELIAS: I shall express to you that individuals offer themselves information in many different manners. All of you are participating in this shift in consciousness, although you are not all experiencing the action of it in the same manner.

What I am expressing to you in this is that individuals shall be noticing of differences that are occurring within your reality, and are somewhat accepting of these differences that are occurring presently, but they may not draw themselves to the same type of information that you choose to be drawing yourself to.

This also is dependent upon the objective awareness that each individual allows themselves to be open to. Some individuals are not allowing themselves the objective awareness yet, to the extent that other individuals may be.

Each of you is quite unique and individual, and in this, you each draw to yourselves information which will speak to you most efficiently in conjunction with this shift in consciousness.

GEORGE: I see. I want to ask you, when I asked you for my essence name and family and alignment and orientation, I had that already from another person who asked you about me, and mainly I wanted to verify it, and also I wanted to hear the pronunciation of my essence name. But the information you gave me is all different.

ELIAS: This is not an unusual situation. Let me express to you also, essences are continuously in motion and engaging actions of mergence with other essences, and as this action occurs, many times there are actions created that initiate fragmentation, and as these essences merge together, the fragmenting essence may be a combination of qualities and tones of those essences which are within mergence.

At the particular time framework in which an individual may be inquiring of essence names and families, the particular essence in question may not be experiencing this type of mergence or may not be fragmenting in that moment. Therefore, there is offered the existing essence name and families.

GEORGE: I see.

ELIAS: But within a different time framework, the essence may be engaged in this type of action and it may be affecting of a particular focus. It also may NOT be affecting at times of any particular focus which is being inquired of. Therefore, the essences may be engaging this action, but it is not altering of the essence name or families of the individual within physical focus.

In this situation, the alteration of tone is affecting of the essence that you are.

GEORGE: Then should I consider myself to be the family and alignment you just gave me, and forget about the previous one? Because previously it was Borledim and Milumet, but now it’s Tumold and Ilda.

ELIAS: Correct. This is the action which has been chosen of the essence that you are.

In this, what I am expressing to you is that within your linear time framework previously, you – as you identify yourself as a focus of essence – were the essence offered, and in that, the focus which you identify as you was of that family and aligned with that other family in this focus. As the alteration in tone occurs and the family that the essence is choosing to be belonging to alters, the alignment many times may also be altered.

This may be quite purposeful within THIS time framework more so than other time frameworks within your dimension, for it allows for more of an expression in conjunction with this shift in consciousness.

GEORGE: I see. Actually, I must say, I like the new name, Joffree, because the one I had previously was Vaunette, which I didn’t like at all. It sounded like a French stripper or something!

ELIAS: Ha ha ha ha!

GEORGE: (Laughing, and Elias chuckles) Joffree, I think, is a very nice name. I like that. I’ll keep that one!

ELIAS: Very well! (Chuckling)

GEORGE: (Laughing) Does an obviously masculine or feminine essence name have any sexual meaning? Does it mean that most of your lives have been female-oriented or anything like that?

ELIAS: No, for within essence, this is merely a tone which translates into your language with a seeming lean in the direction of a particular gender, but this is for the reason that you identify all of your reality in this particular dimension in conjunction with gender.

Therefore, as the essence creates a tone of identification, essence does not hold gender. This is relative to physical dimensions and the manifestations within physical dimensions. You, in your interpretation and your translations, identify these tones, which are translated into names, as being male or female.

GEORGE: I see. Okay. About a week ago, you spoke to a friend of mine. His name is Joey, and I think his essence name came out to be something like Aniel or something. You said it rhymed with Daniel. He was wondering about his orientation. I guess he didn’t ask you his orientation. I said I would ask.

ELIAS: Dainel. (Short pause) Orientation in this focus, soft.

GEORGE: Soft. Okay, that’s what he thought he was. Very good.

Okay. Could you comment briefly on my present – or if there is a past – relationship with my partner? My partner I find rather unexpressive, at least in my perception. Is this because I have to learn to accept the situation, experience it, and then maybe I can move on to another ... let’s call it a warmer experience between us? Do I have to do something in particular if I would like to cause this change to manifest in my life, or will it just come about naturally through my desire for it?

ELIAS: I shall initially express to you that these are all choices.

Now; in these choices, each of you hold differences in perception, and therefore you also create your reality, your behaviors, your expressions within this reality differently.

Now; as to your question of whether you shall be affecting an alteration within the relationship, you may be creating alterations within the relationship, but not necessarily to be altering of the expression of your partner.

You may affect certain situations and expressions between the two of you by altering certain expressions within yourself, or sidestepping, in a manner of speaking, within your perception to be altering of your perception, and this shall greatly be altering of your interaction within your relationship.

Many individuals look to expressions of other individuals and express to themselves the want that the other individual shall express differently.

This is an expression that is created from a knowing and a desire within self, a lack of expression within self, and a lack of acceptance in certain areas of self, which is thusly projected outwardly to another individual in the form of an expectation or a want.

And this is a situation that is creating of many conflicts within relationships of individuals, for the element that you do not allow yourselves to view is your own desire and your own want of self first. You merely look to the projection of the want to another individual.

In this, you may, as I have stated, be affecting of the expression in this relationship between the two of you, but the affect[ingness] shall be accomplished in the alteration of YOUR perception and of your outward expression and behavior, not by the expectation that is projected outwardly to the other individual.

This is affected by looking to self, examining those areas of self that are lacking in acceptance and that you are judging and not offering to yourself those qualities that you are desiring within your focus, and in this, as you allow yourself to examine these areas of self and you allow the natural expression of the other individual without expectation, you begin to also allow yourself to view the other individual more genuinely.

GEORGE: I see. Can you give me my partner’s essence name, family, alignment, and orientation? (Pause)

ELIAS: Essence name, Merlo; M-E-R-L-O. (mer-low’) Essence family, Tumold also; alignment in this focus, Vold; orientation, common.

GEORGE: Common, like mine. Well, that’s good. It’s good that we have the same orientation, isn’t it? I mean, from what I understand, that makes it easier to be together and to get along well.

ELIAS: You are correct. It offers you an ease in language, so to speak.

GEORGE: Good. I want to ask you about something else entirely here, although I guess this is going to change now because we’ve changed my family, but I still want to ask the question.

The Christ entity – or the essence, as it’s called – as I understand it, is composed of three individuals: John the Baptist, Jesus, and Paul. And as I understand it, they were of the Milumet family, and Milumet was my alignment before, and the shift of consciousness, with the nine expressions of Rose, is largely brought about by Borledim, as I understand it, and my family was Borledim before. I wonder, is there any connection here between me and this whole ... like the Christ entity and the ... in other words, do I have any connection or relationship, for example, with any of the nine expressions of Rose, or did I have any relationship with the members of the Christ entity?

ELIAS: In physical terms, no. But I shall express to you that all of this that you have offered to yourself, and that of your previous essence family AND alignment within this particular focus, have all served quite purposefully to be offering you a direction of information.

Now; in the movement of fragmentation and the association, so to speak, with this family of Tumold, the information that you have drawn yourself to previously is quite purposeful, for this offers you the opportunity to be examining the beliefs that individuals within physical focus hold, and also the draw that they create and experience to expressions in conjunction with those beliefs, and how this validates to them their expression of self.

Now; let us examine this situation, for all of this is quite purposeful in the action of the fragmentation which has occurred and that you have participated in.

For within essence, the essence that you have become has quite purposefully chosen to be fragmented and has chosen this family of Tumold to be in alignment with the intent of returning elements within this physical dimension to their natural state.

One of the creations that has been affected within this physical dimension which moves all of you away from your natural state is the belief system of duplicity. This belief system holds many aspects and is quite strongly expressed throughout your physical dimension.

Now; in this, you have created collectively a veil of separation, and you seek to be removing this veil in the examination of your belief systems and in the movement in this shift in consciousness.

Now; within physical focus in this particular dimension, you have created an officially accepted reality in which you look to examples of different expressions of consciousness or individuals that offer you a validation of self and of abilities, and therefore you collectively magnate to these examples, and in this expression, you move in the direction of want[ing] to be objectively or physically connected, in your terms, to these examples.

Now; I express to you, as I have expressed previously, all of you are interconnected. There is no separation. Therefore, in one respect, I may express to you that yes, you are connected to these essences and that you do hold interaction with the expressions or the manifestations of these essences, but objectively or physically, you do not. But this does not diminish your interaction or your interconnectedness with these essences, or the affectingness that you contribute to them or that they contribute to you.

Therefore, in altering the essence families within the fragmentation of your essence, you have allowed yourself to move into the intent of restoration of the natural state or order of being of essence within this physical dimension.

And in this, an element of that movement is to be recognizing that this direction of attention which is placed in elevating certain manifestations within your physical dimension and allowing yourself an acquisition of validation or acknowledgment through outside connection, in your terms, is merely a perpetuation of the action of duplicity, which moves contrary to the intent which you now participate within.

Are you understanding thus far?

GEORGE: Well, I think I’m going to have to read over some of it to get it all, but I think I’m getting the basic idea, yes. Does any of this have to do with ... you know, I have hearing difficulties, not on the phone but with people, and I assume that’s an experience I’ve obviously chosen, and I assume this does not necessarily mean I need to prolong it indefinitely, that I can accept the experience and then go on to another experience, maybe an experience of good hearing. Will this come about simply by accepting my present lack of hearing?

ELIAS: This is a tremendous expression that holds involvement in this situation. Yes, you are correct. As you choose not to be physically hearing, you shall create that action.

But this also is quite purposeful and lends to the action of the intent that you engage presently, for in this situation, you have created a purposeful action of limitation in the area of audibly assimilating information.

Now, as you move in the direction of returning elements to their natural state, you may be quite affecting of this situation.

First of all, you may be moving in the direction of recognition within yourself that this creation is not negative and has been quite purposeful, and not to be identifying the reconstruction of hearing as better or good.

GEORGE: Right. It’s just different.

ELIAS: Correct.

GEORGE: Right. That’s why I say, maybe if I accept – once I fully accept the experience of not hearing well – then I can go on to not change or erase that, but simply go on to a different experience.

ELIAS: Quite. It is the recognition that it is an experience and it has been a choice.

GEORGE: Okay. Let me go on to another person. I have a friend, Jeff, who had a stroke, and I’m wondering if you can comment on why he had this stroke, and maybe what will happen now. Will he recover? Because he continues to experience results of that. (Pause)

ELIAS: As always, I shall express to you that this is the choice of the individual.

Within these present probabilities that are being engaged and manifest, this shall continue as an experience that has been chosen, and within this present line of probabilities, there is no choice to be altering of this creation.

This is not to say that the individual may not futurely choose to be altering of that situation and choice and be creating of a different direction, but within this present now, the choice has been enacted, and there is no movement in the direction of alteration of this creation.

As to the reason, so to speak, that this individual has created this particular type of physical creation, the individual chooses to not be participating in certain elements of your officially accepted reality – within the constructs of its limitations – and has chosen to be altering their reality in a manner that creates a situation in which the individual no longer feels responsible for the participation in the officially accepted manner.

Therefore, this creation offers an element of freedom. Although it may appear objectively that it is limiting certain freedoms, certain other areas of this individual’s reality are being allowed to experience more freedom, for there is a lessening of the assuming of responsibility for other individuals, and less of a judgment which is created upon self within the actions of responsibility in conjunction with other individuals.

Now; I shall express to you that this area of personal responsibility has shifted to other expressions, but this offers an opportunity for the individual to view self more clearly and not occupy their attention outside of self as intensely.

GEORGE: Okay, thank you. I have a question about another friend. His name is Jesus, and he has great financial difficulty. I end up at times helping him out financially, and it makes me wonder whether I may somehow be somewhat the cause of his financial difficulties. Is this causing a connection between us?

ELIAS: No. You have established objectively your connection. Your participation in this action is not causing the situation. Your participation in this situation is very much so your choice, and it is in agreement with the other individual, and were you to be discontinuing this action, this also would merely be a choice.

In this, the individual is creating his reality himself. You are merely drawing yourself to a participation within that reality, but you are not creating it.

GEORGE: I see. Okay, thank you very much. I’ll move on to another question. If we accept the idea – and I think we have to – that whatever happens to a person is in accordance with that person’s own personal creation – and I understand that we’re all perfect; we don’t make errors in our creations – is there any room in that situation for assistance to those who suffer?

I mean, I’m wondering, what is the role of compassion in this? Am I, for example, to ignore a starving baby crying out for food because the baby is experiencing what it has chosen to create, which seems cruel to me? I’m not quite sure how to put that all together.

ELIAS: Let me express to you, as I explain to all of you that each individual creates their reality and is creating their value fulfillment – lest they be disengaging entirely within this physical manifestation – I am not expressing to you that each of you is separated from each other, or that you may not be participating with each other, or that you may not be expressing what you identify as compassion for each other.

You shall draw yourselves, all of you, to situations, and shall participate with other individuals as you are creating your individual value fulfillment, and this IS a movement in conjunction with other individuals. This reality has not been created with merely one individual upon your planet!

In this, as you draw yourself to another individual that you view to be in need, so to speak, in your physical terms, you may also assure yourself that the other individual participates in this action also, and is likewise drawing themself to you, and in this creation, you create agreements or you do not create agreements. You create choices in which you shall direct yourself to be participating.

Now; my expression to you all is to be looking to self in ALL of your interactions and recognizing your motivation. I am not expressing to you that compassion or objective helpfulness or offering is bad or incorrect or unnecessary. I am merely expressing to you that you be aware objectively, and allowing yourselves the recognition of your motivation of why you are creating certain behaviors, for the reason that all of these behaviors are affecting of all of your other behaviors and creations within this physical reality.

You may express to yourself within a moment that you are creating an expression of compassion to a small one, as in your example of the baby, and in that situation, you may be within your beliefs acknowledging of yourself, but not examining your motivation for your expression with the baby.

In another moment, you may be experiencing and expressing great conflict which is related to an expression of personal responsibility with another individual.

The two situations may be quite related, but within your perception, they may not. Within your perception objectively, one is associated with good and one is associated with bad.

In this, many individuals inquire quite often to myself and to each other in the direction of examination of why they shall be creating certain expressions within their reality that they view or perceive to be uncomfortable or painful or conflicting, and many of those experiences that they create are merely different angles of the SAME experiences within expressions that they deem to be acceptable and good.

GEORGE: I see. Yes, that makes a lot of sense to me.

I understand that I can have an auditory conversation with you at any time from a full waking state, that it’s a matter of allowance.

ELIAS: You may.

GEORGE: Could you give me further information on this and tell me how I can give you this allowance so it would happen?

ELIAS: This also is an expression of trust and acceptance within self. As you allow yourself to be moving more fully into an expression of trust of self and an expression of acceptance of yourself and your abilities – this is quite important, for many times individuals may be holding a trust within self, but are not offering themselves the acknowledgment of acceptance of their own abilities.

And in this, as you allow yourself the acceptance of your abilities, and you acknowledge to yourself that you do hold the ability to be accessing another essence that you do not visually see or that you are not objectively participating with within your physical dimension, and also offering yourself trust within yourself, that you may be open to more of your reality than you allow yourself to view, and you allow yourself to be relaxing in this acceptance and trust, you shall allow yourself more of an openness ... or a vulnerability, heh heh heh.... (1)

GEORGE: Elias, I could access my own essence this way too, right?

ELIAS: Quite.

GEORGE: Joffree; by just simply allowing myself or accepting myself, trusting myself and my own abilities fully. If I reach that really, not just conceptually, then I will be able to access my own essence.

ELIAS: You are correct.

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

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

ELIAS: You are correct.

GEORGE: That it could go in that direction?

ELIAS: And does.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GEORGE: Okay, thank you very much. I understand that well. I don’t have much time left, so maybe, as a closing remark, I was wondering if you might have some further advice for me, or tell me how you feel I’m doing in general. Am I progressing well or not? Am I widening my perception in the sense of the shift, and that kind of thing?

ELIAS: I shall express to you that you ARE widening your awareness.

As to the assessment of [if] you are doing well enough, you are creating your reality efficiently and perfectly, in tune with your value fulfillment and your intent. (2)

As to an expression that I shall offer to you, I shall express to you to continue to be noticing. Be recognizing of your participation within your relationship in conjunction to your wants; not merely holding your attention in the direction of outside of yourself and your partner’s participation, but be noticing and recognizing of YOUR participation.

GEORGE: Yes.

ELIAS: This may be helpful to you.

GEORGE: Yes, I’m sure it will be. Well, okay then, I think our time has come to an end. I want to thank you very much for talking to me. I’ve enjoyed it immensely.

ELIAS: And I shall anticipate our continued interaction and our next meeting. I offer to you great affection, my friend.

GEORGE: Yes, I express the same to you. Thank you very much.

ELIAS: And I am encouraging of you in your sojourn into awareness.

GEORGE: Thank you.

ELIAS: To you this day in much lovingness, au revoir.

GEORGE: Au revoir. Same to you.

Elias departs at 3:11 PM.

Endnotes:

(1) First, I want to note that I used “heh heh heh” because I’ve never heard Elias chuckle like he did here. Also, an answering machine went off during these two paragraphs, and somebody left a message, but Elias was unfazed in his delivery. Sometimes it seems as though he doesn’t hear auditory interruptions at all.

(2) I have changed one word in the following phrase: “As to the assessment of [if] you are doing well enough ...” It was originally stated, “As to the assessment of how you are doing well enough ...”

Previous session | Go to the top | Next session