Often during a communication session an animal will send me a visual. Not a picture, it’s more like a video.
You know how in the movies people have a flashback and they see themselves interacting with other people? The scene always looks in on them from an observer’s perspective rather than through their eyes, which you would expect if it’s a memory.
I am shown a visual of the animal as if I’m watching a scene in a movie. These visuals are always in color and are extremely detailed.
I have no way of knowing whether what they have shown me is literal or figurative. Is it an actual memory or a metaphor, symbolic of something else? I am just the translator and relay what I have heard, seen or felt.
If the visual is literal, things are very straightforward and the message is quite clear. However, more times than not it is figurative. Of course it is because it would be too easy otherwise, right?! As a communicator, this part can be really fun or extremely frustrating. There is no way I can accurately interpret the meaning myself. It requires the owner being open minded and doing a little sleuthing with me so that we can examine the clues and piece together the message.
I cannot emphasize strongly enough how important this step is. When an animal goes to the trouble of sending such detailed messages they want to be heard.
So why am I going on about this? Because people are naturally skeptical about communication. When they get a message that seems to make no sense it is very easy to walk away and decide that it was just so much nonsense. If that happens, they have lost the opportunity to get the very answers they were seeking.
Let me give you an example (details changed for privacy purposes):
Recently I was communicating with Abigail, a dog who had been acting strangely. During our communication Abigail sent me a number of very detailed visuals. I faithfully recorded them to share with her “mom,” Lydia.
Lydia was confused and disappointed as the behaviors in the visuals sounded nothing like Abigail. But she had asked about her previous dog, Jacy, who had transitioned. She wondered whether Abigail was the reincarnation of Jacy?
Abigail did not answer this question directly. But, since Lydia had asked about Jacy, I wondered if perhaps the visuals were from Jacy’s life or symbolic of her life. As it turns out, the behaviors were indeed reminiscent of Jacy.
Why didn’t Abigail simply answer the question about her identity? Perhaps she believed that Lydia needed more than a yes or no answer. The end result was certainly more satisfying than a simple yes or no.
I am very grateful to Lydia who was willing to take the time to work through the message to make sure she got the full answer that Abigail intended and to Abigail for sharing so freely.