Channeled by Serge J. Grandbois and Transcribed by Ellen Gilbert (Kwaa'Ji)
Recorded in Toronto, Canada on May 28, 2006

Roll Call: Serge (Joseph), Mark (Philip), John (Sohars), Myrna (Shara-Leene), Michelle, Andrea (Jarasen), and Lida (Miriam)

[MARK'S NOTES: During a walk AFTER this session I discovered that this session was NOT delivered by Kris, but moreso, by more of the BRAHM energies, which is the Source of Kris' Being. In the future we will refer to any transcripts by this Entity as Brahm.]

(7:46 PM)

KRIS: Now we trust that you are all very comfortable and we thank you for your kind considerations. Over the last few years and the last few months specifically, we have made mention of one thing or another and hopefully many of these SEEDS will now be able to be a fruit. So we wish to bring many of these subjects TOGETHER, perhaps over these next few weeks, just as we have done with the "Secrets of the Ancients" session, which may be continued over the next few weeks.

This particular set of evenings will definitely cross over into the "Secrets of the Ancients" material, as that material may cross over into these discussions, each flowing independently and yet, delicately interlaced, providing many other additional connections. And we do hope that as much as possible, you can follow these discussions over the several evenings they may unfold. So we entitle this set of evenings as "LANGUAGE, GODS, AND MAGIC."

And indeed, that intuitive insight into magical perceptions is fitting, as it is more or less a requirement. This material is in line with previously discussed subjects concerning or accessing your many minds. Now does that make sense?

MARK: Yes, it does.

KRIS: You are all very accustomed to a set definition of LANGUAGE. Is it possible to get a dictionary definition?

MARK: One moment. (Mark goes for a dictionary) "Language: the words, their pronunciation, and the method of combining them used and understood by a considerable community; audible, articulate, meaningful sounds as produced by the actions of vocal organs; a systematic means of communicating ideas or feelings by the use of conventional signs, sounds, gestures or marks having understood meanings; the suggestion by an object, action, or condition of associated ideas or feelings." Is that enough?

KRIS: Indeed. Now to most people language is merely a means of communication. It makes allowances for conveying thoughts, feelings, ideas, emotions, sentiments, and so on and so forth, and as the dictionary described, there are indeed many conventional means to display languages, even those you do not understand because you have not been trained in them, though your own language automatically presupposes the construction of ALL languages by the mere fact that it is.

Language also has to be understood as being an interpretation of yet other ideas, concepts, feelings, sentiments and so on and so forth. And by its very nature, any specific language exists not by specifically what composes it as much by what does NOT compose it, or is not part of its system. And you define again, even on a narrower spectrum very specific rules and regulations to ANY given language, and you do that to exclude what you define as not being part of your language, as well as what composes those words, verbs, adjectives, and so on and so forth, that actually composes the recipe for YOUR language. Does that make sense to you?

MARK: Mind you, those rules are in the process of being broken.

KRIS: Indeed, but they still follow certain syntactical guidelines. And by those very rules and regulations, any language is as much about a form of, or we should say, an ARTFUL form of expression as it is about an artful form of censorship, AUTOMATICALLY! The two go hand-in-hand. Thus, language, whilst it assists in the conveying of ideas and concepts and so on, ALSO is an automatic response of structuring and thus eliminating what does not fit the descriptions of the language, whatever that language happens to be. Does that also make sense?

(Yes)

KRIS: This is important to grasp because the usage of words to convey expressions to communicate those expressions naturally narrows the field of those very communications and expressions and creates a conundrum. And everything that does not happen to fit into the preconceived notions of your specific language is automatically held back, censored, and removed from the complement of the symbolism utilized to create your interpretations and communications. Thus as much as a language, any language, seeks to become an artful expression, it also implies a restriction upon that very artful expression it seeks to communicate. Do you still follow this?

(Yes)

And as any language seeks to refine itself, hones its propensity to communicate and thus goes through various progressive changes, it often loses touch with a broader spectrum of innate qualities, sometimes for the mere sake of rendering the communication in a more direct and thus faster manner. And this is sometimes viewed as "progress" quote unquote, though at times it could be regressive as well, losing and abandoning a much wider spectrum of ideologies that can make up any given base of a language.

At the same time, by paying attention to how you formulate ideas and thoughts and expressions at any level, you can notice how the inner events that become the root stock of languages are also often relegated to the shadows because it might not fit into the preconceived conventions that are often allowed as well as those that are not allowed as part of the package of your communicated expressions.

So language in itself, a beautiful creation serving to refine and enhance artful inner expressions can sometimes also become a trap of sorts in many different ways and by learning to notice how you structure and formulate the very nature of your inner communications, you might be tempted to actually censor part of your own innate expressions because it may not fit into the prerequisites pertaining language structures and syntax and so on and so forth.

And we bring this up specifically because when such processes go unchecked the individual more than enough loses touch with the very foundations upon which language, linguistic structures and syntax are built. And thus loses touch with the deeper nature of his or her Being, themselves, those natures, the very spring from which the rich creative principles of human expression are given birth, those innate streams of consciousness, [that] you may often refer to as the unofficial line of consciousness, is further blocked out by the official, conventional lines of consciousness, further separating the individual from his or her Being, from the ground of his or her Being, creating an artificial schism that eventually can become difficult to reconcile.

Thus, learning to pay attention to how you structure your experiences, even subjective experiences to conform to the contours and the shapes of language itself can teach you a great deal about your nature and how you use those conventions to both recognize and simultaneously ignore reality, ALL of reality, yours specifically. We made an attempt last week to bring this to light in a very gentle manner with a guided visualization leading back to an ancient time, and many people reported inner events, some quite in detail, all marvelous and creative, but all with a certain prejudiced perceptions, making an assumption that something ancient might also be somewhat primitive compared to your modern times. Somewhat less evolved intellectually and emotionally.

And we did try to point this out and we are again pointing it out: that you have formulated your ideas along the modern interpretation, thinking that if something is not modern as you have it in your society, then there is obviously a lack of development in older societies. And we did try to point out that in many areas some of these ancient cultures were as much and sometimes even more sophisticated than your own.

We did try to point out that your culture and civilization was not the first to invent x-rays. They were in use by the ancient Egyptians and ancient Chinese. Obsidian knives, utilized by the Mayans, even for such things as brain surgery, even so many centuries before your invention of the scalpel and laser, allowed the performance of brain surgery on individuals to not only survive, but prosper. And still obsidian blade is sharper than any of your stainless steel scalpels, even those used many centuries ago.

We pointed out that electricity was used even a few thousand years before your recognition of it and many other areas. This only to indicate that you have a bias towards the language and the structure that you use and things, whether inner events or outer events that do not conform to those rules and regulations that belong to the conventions are usually ignored, denied, censored, blocked off, etc.

And as such, you have made yourselves unaware of many other kinds of languages. We are not speaking here of ancient Chinese or modern Cantonese or ancient Acadian or Swahili and so on and so forth. We are talking of completely different kinds of languages. There are biological languages such as the cellular language that you interpret as your physical forms, that physical form, those physical forms that you cherish and recognize as essential for your well-being and participation within physical reality.

Those beautiful physical forms are incredibly complex compositions of a biological language, a symphony of biological languages, coming together to formulate all of the components that are so integral for you to be who you are, physically speaking. That is an interpretation, that body that is yours and at the same time it follows a type of convention all its own. In the sense that you know your body is not also a tree, or a banana. You automatically exclude very specific biological syntax in order to arrive at the unique, bio-physical language that is your body. Does that make sense?

(Yes)

Now, on the one hand, you exercise very distinct and beautiful interpretive discrimination and it is most important because this discrimination, apart from the usual negative connotations attached to the word, this type of discrimination allows you to maintain your uniqueness, both from other unique individuals as well as other forms of life. Thus you know for instance, that you are not a tree stump, nor a car. You are who you know yourself to be, but do you truly know yourself to be who you are outside of that translative language that you utilize to express who you are.

Thus, this is an area that can provide you with powerful, acute, and meaningful alternative interpretations and perceptions about the very nature of your being, about and apart from any pre-conceived notions you may entertain as to what you think you know about yourself. Does this make sense?

(Yes)

Now what is the time?

MYRNA: A quarter after eight.

KRIS: Indeed, we suggest a very small break so that you can gather your language.

(Break Begins at 8:15 PM.)

[MARK’S NOTES: The first part of the break was not recorded, because we were indulging ourselves on Serge’s wonderful Birthday cake. As we were finishing up our morsels of hazelnut almond chocolate delight, a conversation on the session so far began to form. I realized that the recorder was still off and quickly turned it back on, but as Ellen points out, some of it was missed. ]

[ELLEN’S NOTES: First part of discussion during break is mostly inaudible, but Lida refers to communication among the cells in the body. Mark offers that the body as a whole depends upon communication between the organs, but that even the molecules that make up the organs need to communicate.]

MARK: How does heart tissue know its heart tissue? How does lung tissue know its lung tissue? And its purpose and function and so on is part of communication within the whole, throughout the whole.

ANDREA: And if something is not working, those cells are screaming. But [scientists] have also taken some cells away from a person and observed what's happening in that person, and those cells were reflecting what was happening in the body, and yet they were separated.

[Serge tells a similar story about how baby rabbits were separated from their mother, placed in a submarine halfway around the planet and scientists observed that the mother rabbit experienced distress each time the baby rabbits went through distressful situations. Mark offers that it is often reported that human mothers experience the same thing.]

JOHN: I think that what [Kris] is suggesting is that we normally pass that stuff off because it doesn't fit into our normal linguistic....to me he seems to be suggesting that we use language as a way to interpret reality in a way, and that, the structures of language -- while they are very powerful of course -- they also have to have a certain kind of limitation. In other words, the way I often explain it is: in order to say one thing, you have to NOT say everything else. (Chuckles)

MARK: It also becomes very difficult, for instance, I could be talking on the phone to somebody and try to explain this beautiful red couch. If I say "beautiful red couch" to somebody in another part of the world, do you think they could picture it? They could picture A red couch but I can't possibly use words to describe the couch so that somebody who has never seen it knows EXACTLY what it looks like. There are limitations.

ANDREA: Well, you can describe it in more detail, right?

MARK: Yeah, I can, but still nobody is going to really be able to....well...a dream, okay? One of the major reasons people don't write their dreams down is because it's frustrating when they can't get all the details in there because words don't do it justice. And I think that's what he's talking about: the greater part of self doesn't use language. Everything is communicated at the speed of thought and concepts. Words aren't used. So, in a dream, these communications as we see them, the images in our dreams AREN'T the dream!

JOHN: Yes.

MARK: They're OUR interpretations of the dream, so because we're human and on a planet, we'll interpret them by…

ANDREA: … We already filter them by our…

MARK: We filter them through our belief filters and if I'm a Martian having the same dream, I'm going to filter it through my [Martian] belief structures and …

MICHELLE: There's also a feeling language. You can say something to someone, or not say it, and if you're angry at someone and you're not speaking it, they'll [still] get it [that you're angry].

MARK: Yeah, sometimes it's what's NOT said that hurts the most.

JOHN: In a way, it seems to me that he's suggesting that language can be thought as similar to beliefs in the sense that you're not going to get to a point where you don't use language -- the same way that you're not going to throw away a belief -- BUT you can understand that the use of language cuts out as much as it includes, and that there's stuff above and below that that's not limited by the language.

MYRNA: I'm also aware lately of trying to have a conversation with Shara-Leene and feeling very limited in it.

JOHN: Not knowing the language maybe. Is that what you're saying?

MYRNA: I don't know if it's that...I just know that it doesn't go very far....you know, it goes far in an intuitive place, but it does not go far in a language place.

JOHN: Shara-Leene may be???? [John makes an apparently very funny joke here, but it is inaudible.]

(Riotous laughter)

MARK: But I think that in understanding or realizing that we do censor our use of language that we don't get the full interpretation....or, it IS an interpretation. It's not the full-blown thing and once you realize that you can start to look deeper in dreams. But even in the book that we're working on, on dreams, one of the conversations that we've had is, yes, the images, the dramas and all that of a dream, the storylines, are just INTERPRETATIONS and that there are underlying layers, not just one layer, but multiple, endless layers of communications and emotions, emotional attachments and LIVING emotions, DYNAMIC living emotions. So once you start going there and thinking outside the boxes, moving into the different layers…

JOHN: And never mind when you're doing that kind of exploration that you don't quite understand it glyphically, just kind of float around in there and never mind about a linguistic aspect to it.

MARK: Yeah, right.

[There is a short discussion about the intuitive nature of children and also pets and how they communicate, as well as their abilities to sense the impending arrival of their owners, and Kris returns.]

(8:37 PM)

KRIS: [Turning to Mark] Now YOUR later observation concerning our discussion are more in line with our intent. Do you understand?

MARK: Talking about the layers underneath?

KRIS: Indeed, your human languages function both by allowing and disallowing a wide spectrum of subject matters. Does that make sense to you?

(Yes)

That is only the beginning of the show, so to speak. You are accustomed to stringing out your own thoughts as audible words similar to the manner in which you string out your language and that also provides both an exploration AND a censorship simultaneously, making it so that even the very nature of your thoughts is subject to the same conventions, which means that for every thing that you allow into your own mental spheres, you disallow as much or even more information that does not conform to the conventions. Does that make sense?

(Yes)

And you also work along the same lines of your own subjective states that you often express as feelings, sentiments, emotions, etc. And it is said that your verbal language, your thoughts, your dreams, your impressions, your intuitions, your emotions, your feelings, etc. are ALL communications. Very well then, why stop there? If they are a communication, then it means that there is another kind of language at work, correct?

(Yes)

It is a fine thing to parrot information that has been gathered here and there, but a deeper exploration is warranted. Thus, if all of those descriptives, including your physical forms and your physical reality, are communications, then they are, obviously, in that line of logic, the result of a language obviously different from the language that you learned from your childhood, your educational systems, and so on. Does that make sense to you?

(Yes)

Those languages are themselves subject to your censoring processes as you move towards the nature of your conscious perceptions and minds and ego construction. Thus there are many different layers of translations and interpretations to these communications. We are addressing this because the language, or even languages themselves that are the source of all these communications, are non-linear, non-rational, and therefore sometimes seen even as a kind of threat, but very rarely do individuals venture beyond the fences they have so nicely erected around the parameters of their conventionalities. Does this make sense?

(Yes)

What kind of Munchkin land territory exists in those areas? What kind of reality is there possibly waiting to be discovered? Perhaps in some of you there is another kind of Columbus, waiting to sail the high seas to discover new lands of the psyche, new continents of the soul, do you not think?

JOHN: Yeah, I think so.

MYRNA: I love the idea.

KRIS: And hopefully you will not take any of the inhabitants of those lands into slavery.

JOHN: We just want their gold.

(Laughter)

KRIS: All kidding aside, there is much more to be discovered, and we hope to give some assistance along those lines. And knowing that you structure your experiences even, in line with those conventions, can be extremely helpful in discerning what you are doing at those other layers. And we are not here suggesting that these languages are like beliefs, but they will follow the contours of your beliefs. That is how you structure your physical reality, correct?

(Yes)

If you also investigate even your assumptions about your greater nature, even when you may profess disbelief in any kind of organized religions and their definitions of a divine Being, you may be able to determine that you may still be defining your own greater nature along those very definitions, incorporating even many layers of those definitions into your repertoire.

And this may even prevent you from examining that greater nature that is also yours, because it is unknowingly covered over and camouflaged by a type of discriminatory language structures, biased in certain directions, and prevents you from fully exploring that greater nature that is yours. And you do attach very many different kinds of significances towards the languages of religious natures, furthering hampering your own ability to recognize who and what you are, even when you function on the assumption that you might NOT be participating in those interpretations. By the very nature of your language structures, you still operate within those belief systems. Do you follow?

(Yes)

Let this simmer in your minds for awhile and see what conclusions you draw from it. Your own languages over these past centuries have also narrowed many different kinds of fields and presently have become top-heavy with one particular perspective over many others, outweighing even the many other perspectives. And in this we are addressing then, your scientific languages and perspectives.

And this is indeed a tricky subject, because on the one hand, scientific linguistic structures as well as arguments and philosophies and perspectives are often used and described to demystify and UN-magic reality, make reality non-magical, make reality little more than the functions of neuro-chemicals and peptides and proteins and strip it of all of its magical aspects. Prove that the world is nothing but dirt and dust, has no substance and ultimately is dead-ended. There is nothing of value in its ultimate end. Does that make sense to you as well?

MARK: Unfortunately.

JOHN: Yeah.

KRIS: Indeed and such perspectives are often utilized, ironically enough because many scientific minds themselves might be AFRAID that physical reality and nature might ultimately BE magical and the result OF magical processes. And many scientifics might ultimately believe that there is a type of magical atmosphere to nature and reality, but it does not fit in with that world view, with those conventions, so a language is erected to try and communicate that disbelieving a magical perspective of reality is sound and logical and in your best interests! And unfortunately, we disagree!

(Chuckling)

On all counts! As the Roman emperor is wont to do, either thumbs up or thumbs down and for as much as we do respect scientific investigation; its ultimate end, we must give it a thumbs down. [Gesturing thumbs down]

(Laughter)

Especially when in many ways the scientific investigation is to try and prove that reality and existence itself is futile at best, therefore do not venture anywhere, because ultimately in ten billion years, the sun will go super-nova and wipe you all out! So why have hope? Do you understand?

(Yes)

And unfortunately because such perspectives are so strongly rooted in your modern language, it is often difficult for the average individual to recognize their non-average individuality. And the magical, purposeful sense of their existence and the magic language of their Being and the magic of THAT language of their Being communicates. You talk of communications such as dreams and thoughts and emotions and impressions and feelings as being communications, which implies the language which ITSELF is magical, because the magical language of that layer of being is further translated into what you see through your physical senses as the physical world displayed before you.

But because your own language barriers and barricades prevent you, you do not yet see that you might for instance also be the tree, the Earth, the moon, the birds and the butterflies as well as yourself. And of late, you hear things like, "deliberate creation," "conscious creation," "mindful creation," and so on and so forth. And many people are willing to explore the concept, but when it is already explored based upon prejudiced perceptions, then indeed the rate of success may be interesting but still be average. Does this make sense to you?

(Yes)

If you work on an equation, but your foundational numbers are somewhat flawed, then eventually your edifice numbers will collapse. Does this make sense?

(Yes)

We are not saying that what is popular is wrong, but we are saying that it is still superficial. We are saying that many who get on the conscious creation bandwagon hope that since they are unhappy they will create large amounts of finances in order to become happy. They will create the perfect partner in order to become happy. They will create the perfect job or business in order to become happy. And yes, they may attain partial successes but we are ALSO saying that since you began from a state of unhappiness, you will quickly spend your abundant finances. You will ruin your relationships…

(Laughter)

… You will be fired from your job, and you will lose your business! Does that make sense?

(Yes)

Indeed! Because none of these things can make you happy, because at the core you are already unhappy and that unhappiness cannot be masked or painted over regardless of how many pretty colors of paint you put over it, it will eventually blister the paint and come through as a boil of sorts. Do you follow?

(Laughing. Yes)

Now then, what we are suggesting with our original title of there being magic involved, is that indeed, like any good sorcerer, or sorceress, or enchantress, anyone working with magic of sorts has a recipe.

MYRNA: Great!

KRIS: That does not mean we will give you the recipe tonight!

(Laughter)

But it does mean that in a way, you bake a cake as was so lovingly done tonight. You need ingredients, correct?

MYRNA: Is this a "stay tuned"?

KRIS: It may definitely be! Now, (Pause) from our perspective and this IS a critique on prevalent and popular or should we more adequately say "pop" conscious creation practices, is that....we will give three distinct terms. The magic involved is slightly divorced from the source of that magic, therefore ultimately will lead to difficulties and low rates of success primarily because that kind of magic, conscious creation magic in the pop world, focuses on what we will call "MACRO-MAGIC", an immediate desire to project onto the physical world the BIG magical things: big money, big car, big house, big partner, big love life, big job, etcetera etcetera; whilst in truth, the work needs to be done inside.

And it is not sufficient to say, "But yes, they do use their imagination," it is still focused outwardly. Thus we will call the primary essence of magic as "MICRO-MAGIC." And then there is a third magic. There is "META-MAGIC." So we are all dealing with a whole bunch of M&M's here!

(Laughter)

KRIS: That latter one: Meta-Magic, is a perspective that makes ALLOWANCES for magical, even miraculous creations. It is one of the many minds that you CAN have access to and it is one that actually incorporates the belief concept of physical reality. It is an idea atmosphere. Does that make sense to you?

JOHN: Yes, I think so.

MYRNA: I understand the link, but I don't understand.....there's language being used here, but do I get it? No.

KRIS: Now, the physical reality that you express your Being in, is based upon the assumptions in this modern world based upon the assumption that scientific inquiry and investigation and experimentation answers all questions and provides you with the answers that you need, and anything outside of that field is considered inconsequential, of NO importance! WE are of the not-so-humble opinion that your answers are not found within the convention, within the box, but OUTSIDE of that box; even several boxes removed, one of them also being language. The box is what? Four sides, top and bottom, correct?

(Yes)

The box is meant to hold something, but it is also meant to prevent anything else from entering, like language.

MICHELLE: (Inaudible question)

KRIS: To a certain degree indeed. You have very specific mental structures that you work with. For an example, when you read a book in your modern western world, especially in North America, you are taught to read one page after the other, usually you are taught to read from left to right, left to right, left to right, correct?

(Yes)

Yet there are cultures in your world that read right to left, right to left, right to left. And then there are still other cultures that are taught to read differently. They are taught to read up and down, up and down, up and down. So you have three different perspectives in this area, each one excludes the other of course, because then you would read something and become very confused, if it would even be readable, especially if it was in a language that was not your native language, correct?

(Yes)

But what if there were OTHER ways to read? Such as diagonally or even by picking up every other word, or every third letter of each word, and creating a completely different experience?

(Pause)

What is the time?

MARK: 9:10.

KRIS: Indeed then, what we are suggesting to your lovely selves, your lovely magical selves, is for a week or two, to experiment with the limitations of your structures in any manner you wish. For example, physically you know yourself as one individual, as yourself, as yourself, and so on, and you thereby assume that you know what you are not. So we are suggesting that you juggle some of those definitions, tweak them ever so lightly.

For example, how do you know that a part of you may actually not be, or be, the tree that is near your home? Or is it possible that a portion of who and what you are is also experiencing tree, and how would that possibly add to the language of your Being, and thus, add to the definition of who and what you are. You also make a very clear distinction between who and what you are and your dream self. But what if the apparently distinct separateness is not as distinct or separate as you've assumed? Does this make sense?

(Yes)

Any questions?

JOHN: I can't think of any, really. Except I want the recipe now, of course!

(Laughter)

MYRNA: Me too.

KRIS: Indeed. To momentarily go back to our description of Meta-Magic, Micro-Magic and Macro-Magic, we would in the next few sessions enjoy expanding the idea of Micro-Magic and perhaps provide resources and ways to work at it from THAT perspective which would naturally flow toward macro-magic but would not be, the Macro-Magic not be, the only venue available.

MYRNA: I'm reminded when you said that at core we are all unhappy. I'm reminded of something you said at "Heal the Broken Heart." I don't know....somewhere in the same ballpark....but that we hide our hearts....we hide our love behind the wounds in our hearts. Is our unhappiness that you speak about now, related to that?

KRIS: It is indeed, simply because even though many people appear to be happy, there is still an innate yearning for that deeper connection that goes beyond sensory perceptions. Not every single individual on your planet fits in this category, but the majority do. And it is not that because you ARE physical Beings that you are automatically unhappy, but when it has been ingrained into you, even from before birth, that you are somehow or other divorced, separate from the Source of your being, then there are many attempts throughout one's life to dig for this reconnection. Do you follow?

MYRNA: Yes!

KRIS: And when the entire social convention is set up AGAINST that connection, except on very specific terms according to a third party who sets itself up as an authority, that you must do as the third party says, then you still have further divisions. Does that make sense? So we are proposing that you do get in touch with this magical self, this magical perspective and we wish to discuss it further in other evenings. [To Mark:] Therefore, do you wish to ask YOUR question?

MARK: Do I have a question?

KRIS: Or anyone.

JOHN: I have a quick question, Kris. I did the experiment where you're sitting on the amazingly comfortable chair and you're looking at the video screen and various scenes, scenarios from your life, do you recall that exercise?

[John is referring to a recent guided meditation Kris designed for Brian Ferrell.]

KRIS: Indeed.

JOHN: Would that fall into the category of Micro-Magic?

KRIS: Indeed.

JOHN: I thought so. Thank you.

KRIS: Therefore we will leave you to figure out where within you is the magician and the magic.

MYRNA: Do the Sisters fall into Macro or Meta?

KRIS: We would classify it in Meta and Micro.

MYRNA: Yes, yeah, right.

JOHN: Yes, because you use them in the Micro.

KRIS: And in the meantime you can always work on your magician's hat. Very important! No self-respecting magician is without the hat!

(Laughter)

MYRNA: We should all bring a hat!

KRIS: As you wish!

MYRNA: Check out Harry Potter.

KRIS: Now then, we leave you to your lovely magical selves and do feel free to conjure yourselves at any time, as you already do so well.

ALL: Thank you, Kris.

(9:20 PM session ends.)