The Elias Material - phasing related

[Gandalf]

I came across this site: http://www.eliasforum.org/introduction.html

Elias describes himself as a nonphysically focused “energy personality essence,” or what has been commonly termed a “spirit” or an “entity.” However, he defines the word “essence” as an action rather than an entity. He says that he has experienced many physical lifetimes or “focuses,” but is not physically manifest in this present time framework. Presently, he chooses to focus his awareness in nonphysical areas of consciousness in which he holds the intent of teaching, or more specifically, of offering information within the least amount of distortion.

'Elias' is a channeled source and builds upon the information provided in the past by 'Seth'. The Elias material is more recent than Jane Robert's Seth material but is very interesting. The whole 'Focus' concept is there and you will find that a lot of the information is similar to Robert Monroe's and Frank Kepple's findings, which is interesting since the Elias material was not widely available when Frank was around.

Elias has also divided consciousness into various 'regions' and many other concepts can also be recognised. Elias goes much further than Frank ever did, but this is to be expected as Frank chose only to write about what he had actually experienced himself and he was reluctant to go beyond that.

One point to be made here. The Elias material, like the earlier Seth material, explores the wider reality (ie the astral) from a psychological viewpoint (seeing how Jane Roberts originally trained as a psychologist). The Elias material continues this approach. Monroe and Frank of course, follow more of an engineering approach. Others again prefer a more traditional mystical approach. It really boils down to what approach resonates with you. However, if you keep this in mind then you will find much to interest you in this material, even if the psychological approach is not to your particular liking.

I have found that the Seth material has much in common with what Monroe has discovered, as Frank pointed out himself. The Elias material appears to build on that.

One interesting point that Elias makes is that he is not a 100% reliable source! Because of the distortion involved via him transmitting this information from where he is, to our region of consciousness, there is an inevitable degree of distortion, which is also coloured by the channeled receiver's mind as well as others present. For this reason, he warns people not to treat his every utterance as fact as he doesn't want to be 'responsible for starting another cult'.

Elias has tried his best to provide an extremely detailed guide but he says that ultimately it comes down to personal experience and exploration, pretty much what Monroe and Frank have said in the past. It is actually quite refreshing to hear this honesty from a channeled source!

Check it out and let me know what you think!

[Stookie]

I've read a lot of stuff there before, and your right, it is some great information. I would suggest it to others if they're looking for a good source of new-er info.

[Novice]

I had never heard of him/them before.

Stookie is right...good suff! Thanks for sharing!!

[Gandalf]

The Focus 1 to 4 model is pretty much there, although Elias doesnt spend much time on a description of the region itself, nor many of the other regions in fact. He seems more concerned with the big picture as it were.

Saying that, his description of the expanded consciousness and opportunities available in Focus 4, or what he refers to as 'Region 4'  is quite close to Frank's.

[Mez]

thanks for the link. I've just spent half the morning reading some of it. Its really good and enlightening. Something that stood out to me was how prophecies become actual realities... a person merely taps into focus 3 and recieves information not relavent to this dimension but they make it fit into this dimension and they make their prophecy which is then given attention making it an actual probability... people then believe it which lends great amounts of energy to it and thus it actually manifests! Thats an amazing bit of info.

[Gandalf]

Yeah, most of it is great stuff and seems to agree with much of the findings of monroe and frank.

The only bit I don't really agree with at the moment (but maybe only because i dont quite understand what elias is on about), is the bit about how animals dont incorporate emotions in the same way as we do.

Elias definately views them as sentient beings with their own plans and choices and they do experience what we call love/affection and can express it also.

However he says they dont incorporate emotions as we do and their *expressions* of emotions, ie excited, angry, fearful etc are actually forms of visual communication, to let others around them know what they like or do not like, or what they prefer or do not prefer. We interprete them as emotional responses but they are actually symbolic forms of communication that we interprete as emotions.

I don't buy that one.. Anyone who has observed their pets will know full well that they express a full range of emotion and they express it to each other, not just us. I have seen my dog jumping around the house, out of control and slavering just to get his teeth around an apple!  I dont believe for a moment he is just sending me a visual signal that he would 'prefer an apple'.... the reality is that he is so excited that he cannot even control himself and runs around in circles... (he's a bit manic my dog!).

It is hard to see their behaviour as anything other than the same kind of emotional expression as we would recognise in ourselves.

[Mez]

thats an interesting point but i think i understand where elias is coming from. Look at how humans use emotions... emotions have a huge impact on human behaviour and influence our desicions in a big way. I dont think its the same for animals...take for example a person who holds a grudge... theres a lot of emotion there now do you think animals hold grudges with emotions like we do? I dont think so... im sure animals experience emotions but like elias said they're more a form of outward visual communication... that is they dont internalize there emotions and store them like humans do.

[Gandalf]

Good point!

[Stookie]

Rudolph Steiner says that emotions come out of the astral body. Before this phase of our evolution we had only a lower, animalistic astral body that governs base emotions, mostly tied to basic socialization, food, & sex - in other words, physical survival. Animals today only have this part of the astral body (yet some are planting seeds for their next part of evolution). We still have this, but have also evolved a higher, humanistic part of the astral body where more complicated "human" emotions manifest as language, art, science, religion, etc.

Well, that accompanied with an ego.

Of course I can't confirm any of this myself, I've just studied a lot of Steiner.

[Novice]

Actually it's interesting even at a more fundamental level than that. If you think about it, animals seem to be focused on the present moment all the time. They don't get bogged down with thoughts of things from the past or future -- including all the worry, fear, excitement, etc that goes along with them. If they are threatened by a predator, they run as fast as possible till they're free. Then given a few minutes to calm down, they're fine. Heart rate is back to normal and they're grazing on grass or what have you. If that were to happen to a human, we remained tense/pumped for hours after we're free. And anytime we think about the incident, which we all know we'll do repeatedly, our body responds accordingly. Animals don't replay these events in their minds. What's done is done. They don't carry it with them. I think that's something we can learn from.

Also, unrelated to emotions/animals, I found the content from Elias regarding Jesus and the crucifixion/second coming interesting. Not sure I agree/believe what he describes as the Rose children, but I do believe what he says about the crucifixion not occurring. A few years ago I visited the Akashic Records and asked to see the crucifixion. The helper didn't understand what I meant. I elaborated about Jesus and then he shook his head slightly, with a strange smile, and said they didn't have it. I wasn't convinced the event took place, so was attempting to verify for myself. I hadn't posted this before, because I wasn't sure of the reason for them not having it, but I suspected it was because it never happened. So what Elias said about that event seems to be true based on what I've been able to determine....very interesting.

[Gandalf]

That's interesting, although for me, not very suprising. I never really took any of the biblical stories literally in any case. I see them as mythology and as with other mythology, they are infused with symbolic meaning.

I doubt there ever was one single figure called 'Jesus Christ'. I believe the figure is a composite of several figures as well as being a personification of the core values and ideology of the Christian system, I never took him as a literal figure. So much of the bible story is related to earlier pagan mythology, especially the fixation with 'dying and rising' god types, a common god motif of the ancient near east.

Anyway, without getting into a discussion on the development of Christianity, which belongs in another forum, I think its interesting how much of the Elias material gels with what else I have read, but also how some of it differs. I think that with all channeled information there is some element of doubt due to data contamination, namely the beliefs and ideas held by the channeling individual, as well as others directly involved. Elias is the first to admit this.

[Old Dood]

thats an interesting point but i think i understand where elias is coming from. Look at how humans use emotions... emotions have a huge impact on human behaviour and influence our desicions in a big way. I dont think its the same for animals...take for example a person who holds a grudge... theres a lot of emotion there now do you think animals hold grudges with emotions like we do? I dont think so... im sure animals experience emotions but like elias said they're more a form of outward visual communication... that is they dont internalize there emotions and store them like humans do.

I do not think animals have grudges either.  However, they do have memory.  If someone mistreats them they will NEVER forget. If someone is always kind to them they will 'worship' them.(lack of a better term)

We have a Welsh Cardigan Corgi Dog and it is fun to 'see' how he ticks so to speak.  I noticed he remembers people (and places) by name. He is quite bright and has a good sized vocabulary.  My best friend is his best friend. (it could just be he is male like me and responds to males more then the 2 women in our home)  My friend name is Mark. So if I say "mark that on the calendar" then he hears the word Mark...he is up and ready.  Many times I will pet him at the end of a day and go through the day with him. I will bring up the people he saw that day and he perks his ears up but he doesn't get excited. I always wonder if he is remembering the day as I walk him through it.  He looks at me as 'if' he does.  The very next day if I try this he will get all excited as if someone that I mentioned is coming over to the house.  Sorry, hope I didn't get to far off topic. That part 'perked my ears up'.   I do believe pets for example do have what I call 'Raw Emotions'.  Or...Pure Emotions.
They are straight forward emotions.  More Black and White then we tend to do with ours.  This is why you do not punish a dog for doing something that didn't happen in the NOW.  Like pooping on the carpet while you were gone.  Then again...when ours has done it (when he isn't feeling well) and I come home he will not run up to me all excited like every other day.  He will sit in 'shame' knowing he did something 'bad'.  Or he will come up to me and quietly lick me.(while I am cleaning it all up)  I have learned to simply talk to him and ask him if he is not feeling well and then take him outside.  He 'seems' to understand this tenderness I am showing him.

I went to the website that Gandalf posted.  I haven't had time to read most of it yet. However, could someone explain to me the comparison between Elias and Monroe's experience? I do not even know who Frank is.  Are you speaking of the 'rings' or focus levels?  I have read Monroe's books recently and I am still digesting them.  I guess I am asking for a more simple explanation of it all if that is possible.

Thanks...

[Novice]

Frank has a very good post on phasing that you can find in the Astral FAQ section, below is a link:

http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_the_astral_faq/what_is_phasing_and_how_can_i_do_it-t17413.0.html

Phasing is what Robert Monroe later called his process. It is a seperate method to explore expanded consciousness than an OBE, which is how he first began. Monroe categorizes consciousness into a bunch of focus levels (1-35 I think). Frank read Monroe and based on his own experiences, narrowed the categories into 4 areas instead of 35+.

The Elias material also describes areas of consciousness very similar to what Frank had -- using 4 areas at present. If memory serves, Elias calls them Regions. But if you look up that in the digest section, you'll see 4 regions. His descriptions are consistent with Frank and, once compacted, with Monroe's theory.

Hope that helps!

[Old Dood]

Yes...thanks.  It does help some.

I have also read Cayce's stuff too and he has it in 'Regions' for Afterlife anyways.

I just need to read and read some more.

EDIT:  Just wanted to add that now I know who Frank is.
That was driving me nuts...hehe

[SilverSlider]

I really like his deliver style as well as the content...he comes across as being very sincere & helpful in the transcriptions.

One thing I've always been confused by when people judge channelings, is whether they are legit or not. I'm not sure if it really matters - if you are a discernible reader and the material is bunk, then leave it...even if it's some person completely making things up and claiming the words came from the king of Kartesus 9 circling Polaris, but the material is very very good, who cares?

The only difference I can see is that it's a little more glamorous and exotic if it's a true channeling handing down information from separate entities in other dimensions, times or galaxies.

And I beleive that his all gets at what Gandalf is referring to here: If you actually think and cross check with other sources (including yourself!), you will find out what is true and what isn't, as there probably are fluctuations in all channelings, no matter how pure they claim the contact to be.

I think that with all channeled information there is some element of doubt due to data contamination, namely the beliefs and ideas held by the channeling individual, as well as others directly involved. Elias is the first to admit this.

Though I have to disagree with your last sentence, Gandalf....as much as I hate to bring this up because this group has kind of a bad rap, Mayatnik and his Zeta channeling group as far as I remember *always* told people not to take everything they say as fact, and to check other sources. Actually, the Zeta's themselves repeatedly told readers in various channelings to check for themselves to see if something that they say is true - going as far as giving a technique to check (pendulum), though one could use any divination tool, really.

Good stuff though, I'll have to check it out more when I get back from work.

Edit: Read through some of the stuff - Whoa, so much to read! LOL but one thing that stuck out was like I mentioned before, Elias' delivery; He says "so to speak" often, which I find myself saying (or similar phrases) when explaining things like consciousness and astral projection to friends - in a way sort of validates, for me,  his understanding of these things. I say this because when I use these phrases I have to use illustrations of "basic" understanding to get more abstract ideas across.

Edit2:
"I am not attaching this to Regional Area 2, for within Regional Area 2, just as within your dreams, there are many levels or areas; your language is very limited; in which connections take different paths."

Amen!