Total Pageviews

Thursday, 19 October 2017

Oneness and it's Own Vibrational Signature


Written by Mathew Naismith

Dark is simply an existence of the absence of light as light is simply an existence of the absence of dark, both very different existences have their own vibrational signature, meaning, both existences are based on completely different vibrational frequencies. If I, for example, was to go into the dark from the light, this dark existence would, within myself, feel unpleasant or overwhelming and visa-versa. However, if I was to go into these existences from a natural existence where light and dark exists and is in unison to each other, there would be no unpleasant or overwhelming feelings.

When your own vibrational signature is based on both, in this case, or all other vibrational signatures, meaning that your own vibrational signature is of all other vibrational signatures but harmoniously, other existences based on a certain vibrational signature have no influence or affect on you. If you were to now relate this state to a state of oneness, you wouldn't be wrong or incorrect in my mind. Also, just because a vibrational signature is of all other vibrational signatures, doesn't mean we are of and expressive of these vibrations, it simply means we are of a vibrational signature that incorporates all other vibrational signatures harmoniously.

A true state of oneness is naturally harmonious to all other vibrational signatures and their existences that these vibrational signatures create. The reason for this simply lays in that a neutral vibrational signature is of all other vibrational signatures, there is no separation, only oneness. Only the separation of one vibrational signature to all other vibrational signatures will cause disharmony, this is why a state of true oneness is naturally harmonious.

So when we also become of the dark or the light, we don't become of or expressive of the dark or the light because one negates or neutralises the other, in turn creating a natural state of existence. This neutralisation naturally and automatically creates a vibrational signature that is truly harmonious and at one with all of what is.

Only within this oneness state can a true awareness and creation of unconditional love exist. How many people, while being within and of their own separate vibrational signature, think they are truly aware and expressive of unconditional love? This is while being void of any true state of oneness, usually in total separation from vibrational signatures of the dark. Take these people away from their own vibrational signatures, they are no longer of unconditional love, in actuality they never were because they could only feel unconditional love while under certain conditions.

Say if I was of a true oneness state, which simply means of a particular vibrational signature that is based on all other vibrational signatures. If I was to go outside this state, would this not also mean my own unconditional love has conditions of me staying within this particular vibrational signature? No, once truly of this oneness state, you are of everything already, there is simply nowhere else to go or no other vibrational signature in existences that isn't already a part of you.

Think on this, conditions refer to limitations; dark is limited by the absence of light as light is limited by the absence of dark but a true state of oneness has no such limitations. The reason for this lays in that a true state of oneness has it's own vibrational signature but a signature that isn't separate to all other signatures!!

Something else to think about. If I was of the light or dark, good or bad, yin or yang, this doesn't mean I am not also of both worlds, both vibrational signatures. Yang for example has yin within it as yin has yang within it, at no time is one totally without the other, however, one can be predominantly of one or the other thus giving us a false pretence of being without the other. The illusion is that we believe we are not of all things, only of something's, this is the illusion which has it's own vibrational signature. From this vibrational signature is where realities like our own reality were created.

All creations are naturally finite in nature, they are limited by certain boundaries, for example, the conditioning to certain perceptions is a boundary we often find ourselves attached to. In saying this, everything that isn't created is infinite in nature because it has no limitations as there are no boundaries. Look around you, what is infinite in nature? Energy is infinite in nature to start with, yes, what energy creates can be destroyed but energy itself can't be, energy can only be transformed.

If we simply thought ourselves as being pure energy without form, we would instantly and quite naturally find ourselves within a oneness state. You could say from within this vibrational signature is where everything was created from, it's a point of origin as this point is infinite in nature, it's the origin of all creation. Once form is perceived is when a vibrational signature is created that isn't infinite in nature, this is because all form is finite in nature and quite naturally so. Look at it this way, all what has been created is finite in nature and is fragmented. All that isn't created is infinite in nature and is a true state of oneness. Any consciousness based on the finite will say this is separation, however, any consciousness based on the infinite only sees a connection, the connection being that a oneness state is of all states.

Vibrational signatures simply exist in accordance with the frequencies we express and are of, basically, the kind of frequencies we are created from. A good example of this is growing up poor to growing up rich; the frequencies that create these two vibrational signatures are quite different and are perceived as being quite separate to each other. This is a prime example of a reality based on a finite consciousness. A reality based on an infinite consciousness has no separation between what is poor and what is rich; this is due to the frequencies used to create a vibrational signature. The frequencies used have no sense of separation between rich and poor, only a sense of connectedness therefore oneness.


Is there a difference between rich and poor? A finite based consciousness says yes, an infinite consciousness says no as one relies on the other to exist to start with as of everything. Your own vibrational signature depends on the frequencies you are conditioned to express and are of, either it be finite in nature, infinite in nature or both.....

Tuesday, 10 October 2017

Truer Divinity


Written by Mathew Naismith

It's important to firstly define what humans define as being of divinity and what actually is of divinity. The human definition of divinity is as follow, "Any supernatural being worshipped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force." Seen as there is no need or desire to change anything through control in a true state of divinity, to me, this very human definition of divinity isn't correct within it's entirety.

In a true state of divinity, there is simply no supernatural energy source or force because everything is as one; this however changes for any other state outside of this state of divinity that will, quite naturally, perceive states of divinity as supernatural and controlling. All this means is, any consciousness that has to take control of anything in any sense is not a true depiction of a state of divinity, there is simply no need or desire of taking control in this state.

We are simply conditioned to believe there are supernatural forces, and that taking control of ourselves and the environment around us is supernatural or spiritually connected, a state beyond the human state of consciousness. Only when we start to perceive beyond human perception of divinity, will we truly be of this state in one sense or another in my mind.

Yes, it's quite natural for any consciousness that perceives itself as being of a lesser value or worthiness, to have the perception of supernatural forces or sources above all other forces or sources. There is simply no above or below in this state of divinity, even vibrations have no definitive differentiations, as within this state of divinity there is no subjective definitive conjecturing through participation, only objective observations.

Yes, someone who is empathic, for example, will of course feel a difference within their environment; this is very human as it's very human not to feel like this about our environment, this is simply being human. There is nothing wrong with being human by the way; being human is simply but another way to exist, this is all.

Within this human state as an empath, the vibrations we feel as being out of tune or discordant with our own vibrations is real, this is simply to do with how we are conditioned to perceive therefore feel. Our own perceptions have everything to do with how we feel or what kind of vibrations we are sensitive to.

As we become more of this state of divinity, part of the process is feeling these vibrations in the way we do around us. These vibrations will feel discordant with our own, however, as we become more of this state of true divinity, these feelings simply just fade away. In actuality, within this state you are able to enter into any other state without being affected of influenced by these states. This means you will not feel bad or even good vibrations as their are no subjective definitive conjecturing through participation, only objective observations.

Now, while in this state of divinity, isn't it deliberate self-deception not feel these very real discordant vibrations within other state of existence?

Subjective means, "Taking place within the mind and modified by individual bias". There is simply no bias within this state of divinity to begin with, there is also nothing definitive as there are no limitations. Because there is no bias, there is also no conjecturing for to conjecture is to perceive through suppositions, a state of supposing to a state of guessing while in a state outside a state of divinity. There is simply no state of suppositions within a state of divinity as everything is as one. Within this state, you became more of an observer rather than a participator, this of course doesn't mean you can't try to influence your environment you are existing in, in actuality, this is exactly what you are meant to do in my mind.

Once you get past the process of subjective definitive conjecturing through participation, only then will you stop feeling or not feeling bad or good, negative or positive vibrations, empath or not. Simply recondition your mind from judging or even observing what is or isn't bad or good, negative or positive, it is really this simple.

It's true, every other state, outside this state of divinity, perceives and feels completely different about there environment they are experiencing than in a state of divinity. To a consciousness that is conditioned to perceive in separatist way, comprehending and understanding this state of divinity will be hard to do, this is simply to do with perceiving in separatist ways as good and bad, negative and positive while being subjective and  definitive in our conjecturing through participation.

My advice is, sit back and simply observe your environment while trying not to label everything as good and bad, negative and positive. Yes, this takes a bit of an effort but you simply won't be apart of this state of divinity if you don't do this in my mind. Of course if you don't want or need to be of this state of divinity, even to some degree as I believe I am, you simply don't have to. In saying this, I think it's become more of a need than a desire these days to become of some part of this state of divinity in my mind, as they say, the ball is in our court, what we do with it is up to us.......


Ah, one more thing, this is very important, there is no such thing as a supernatural force, source or phenomena within a state of divinity as everything is indeed observed and perceived as one.

By the way, as of anything I write, there is no plagiarising as has been suggested, unless I use material from another source, in this case I always make reference to the source of material used in my posts.                          

Wednesday, 4 October 2017

Express Being Truly Unlimited


Written by Mathew Naismith

All that truly exists is an unlimited state; anything else from this is an illusion. A perception of a state of being limited.....Mathew G

A state of limited potential and perception simply doesn't exist. While one being, one entity or one energy source is expressing motion, especially to extremes, a state of limitations simply doesn't and can't exist. Even if I was to limit my personal self, consciousness, to certain states void of the ego, motion period, I am still not in a limited state while any other kind of motion is being expressed in and through anything else. Yes, extremes motion also has it's place within an unlimited state, anything else would be limiting.

Consider this, energy itself is unlimited within it's expressions, within it's motion, this means it's also unlimited to what form it takes. Energy itself is infinite in nature, it's not finite. You can't destroy energy, as science has proven, yes, you can transform the form energy takes but you can't destroy the energy that creates form and existence as a whole. I look at it this way, energy is the spirit within all things, it's the life force of all things, of all motion, without this spirit, without energy, all things become limited. Of course this is impossible as there is no such thing as a limited state.

However, we can indeed enter into states of consciousness or non-consciousness where there is a perception of a state of limitations. Within this state, motion seems to not exist therefore energy; it's a state where the spirit within all things simply doesn't exist. Yes, this state also exists because this is how unlimited we are as a whole, there are simply no boundaries, no limitations even within a limited state.

So often I get people stating they are not expressive of the ego or judgment, while at the same time egotism and judgment is expressed to an extreme through certain kinds of other energy sources. If motion is being expressed in any sense from any kind of source, we are ourselves of that motional expression, everything is. Actually, a state void of ego and motion period is as limited as a state can be, also, being expressive of motion to any extreme is limiting. A good example of this is materialism, wealth and power overriding all other motions especially by force and control. Once a motion, an energy source, loses balance between one in favour of the other, a reality of limited potential exists, this of course in turn creates a reality of limitations. Sounds awfully familiar!!

Any energy or non-energy source that is limited in nature will of course be destructive in nature; this includes the so-called ultimate state where there is no ego or motion period. This state is obvious within it's destructiveness to motion period because motion period is unable to exist in this state. We might not think this motionless state isn't destructive when within this state motion is simply non-existent. How many people are trying to say we are only truly of this motionless ultimate state, while within a state of extreme motions? This state is simply destructive in nature to motion even within states of motion by refuting that we are unlimited to all potential, to motion and motionlessness, not just to one potentiality of motionlessness.

This is why I personally love the perception of God, as opposed to a God of man which is limiting and not infinite in nature. The perception of God represents everything without bias or prejudice, within this, there is simply no exclusions based on a particle perception or ideology/philosophy stating we are limited to a certain states of existence. There are simply no limitations to existence or our truer being; it simply doesn't exist as no state of limitations do. Yes, states of limited potential do exist but not really, not when we consider the whole of things, of course to realise this, one must go way outside our own present reality based on it's own limitations. As a whole, states of limitations need to also exist for there to be truly no limitations.

So what does all this mean?

Extremes of any kind are destructive in nature, either it be of motion being destructive to motionless or visa-versa, it's just simply destructive because it's a state that is limited and imbalanced with the rest of what it is. This is why people like me often mention about moderation and balance within all things without any exclusion through bias or prejudice.

Yes, expressing the ego in moderation, expressing motion period in moderation, is actually more spiritual that not tying to be expressive of motion period. The reason for this simply lies within it's own limitlessness, also, at no time is anyone just of one state and not of others, this is an impossibility because these limitations simply don't exist overall but they do exist within their own limitations. This is a true state on unlimited potentiality.


Limited perceptions simply denote an imbalance while unlimited perceptions denote balance. One is naturally destructive to all else, the other constructive to all else, it is what it is by nature.....Mathew G   

Monday, 2 October 2017

Still Hunters and Gatherers!!


Written by Mathew Naismith

I sit here today and wonder; will the human collective consciousness ever evolve from a consciousness of hunting and gathering? The Neanderthalic instincts of hunting and gathering are still well and truly alive today. How many wars are created and countries decimated or invaded to gather up wealth and power through hunting down a quarry for what it possesses?

I am not being critically judgmental here, having the instincts of a Neanderthal isn't bad or good, negative or positive; it's just simply an existence or a consciousness mentality to exist by or not. All I am saying is that we haven't consciously evolved much from a Neanderthalic conscious mentality. Look at it this way, how many of us hunt down knowledge to gather? How many of us hunt down wealth and power for personal possession and accumulation? What do devout religious parishioners do? Hunt down would be parishioners to gather in a flock, this is also no different to multinationals who hunt down anything they are able to gain wealth and power from.

Our mentality today is still primarily ruled by Neanerthalic instincts of accumulation or acquisition through hunting which is another form of searching; the difference today is we often do it for a desire rather than a need!!

A good example of this is devised from a couple of questions as follow. Is the accumulation or gathering knowledge a desire or a need? Seen as knowledge is highly destructive, especially to our environment, and is set up to primarily assist Neandertholic mentalities like multinationals to become wealthier and more powerful, is knowledge a need or a desire unlike awareness? Don't make the mistake and think knowledge and awareness are the same, there not as I will explain.

Everything is separated through knowledge where awareness actually brings everything together as one. We can only accumulate knowledge through acknowledgment of what we are aware of; this takes us to label everything different, however, awareness isn't an accumulation to start with, its just an awareness void of a need to comprehend everything through numerous labels for acknowledgment. Within this kind of mentality, there is simply no separation.

Yes, this isn't easy to comprehend and acknowledge when we are conditioned to be primarily of a Neanderthalic consciousness. Look at it this way; we still look at awareness as being accumulated through knowledge but knowledge of what?  This is the point. There is absolutely nothing new about the knowledge we are using today or the knowledge we will be using, it all comes from the same source and has always existed. When you consider, for a small example, that spectacles and a high tensile steel hammer have been found to be thousands of years old, there is simply nothing new about the knowledge we use today and will use tomorrow. All knowledge simply comes from a single source, a source that is whole in nature unlike knowledge which is naturally divided in nature.   

This singular source is known by many names, God, oneness, the zero point, pure awareness and so on. Taoism doesn't have a name for this point of origin; it's just simply being of the Tao, of God if you like. This very source is the source of all knowledge void of separation, only through hunting down and accumulating knowledge is this source then separated and only through this separation can we experience conflict. This is why there is no conflicts within a pure aware state of consciousness, there is simply no separation, only through hunting and gathering is there separation therefore conflict.

It's really a bit of a con when we are made to believe we need knowledge to become aware. As what has been predicted by numerous sources, the Mayan calendars are a good example of this, we are entering into a major conscious change, I think this means we will no longer need to accumulate knowledge to become aware, we will simply enter a state of consciousness and become aware void of using any kind of Neanderthalic consciousness of hunting and gathering. This kind of consciousness will in the end be of no use to us. 

This universe/dimension is naturally of extreme motions; this energy will of course quite naturally influence any consciousness to be the same within this sphere.

If you take any notice of what any of the great wise and aware people have written, they didn't want to change this sphere or even change what this sphere has created within  it's influence, all they wanted to do is influence this sphere to be more moderate, more balanced, within  this sphere of influence. People like Rumi, Jesus, Confucius, Buddha, Muhammad and Gandhi and so on, are to me the wise and aware. When you read what they actually wrote, you will find they never tried to force change, only to influence a needed change to occur. Notice a needed change as to a desired change especially on a personal level.      

Confucius, for example, was displeased when he passed away, not because he didn't change he's environment, he's sphere of influence, he wasn't pleased because he thought he didn't influence the sphere he was apart of enough to make a real long lasting difference. I think you will also find this with Jesus, in actuality, this was probably the case with many others as well.

The hunter and gatherer will always force a change to occur instead of simply being influential, this is after all is it's nature within a highly motional universe/dimension. However, if we reread the great writings of the wise and aware while thinking in influence instead of change, we would find new messages to be had within these wise and aware writings. The message is of moderation and balance while within a sphere of excessive motions. We are simply not just the hunter and gatherer, we are all much more than this, of course only the true wise aware will want to know this and influence change in moderation and balance, leaving excessive/extreme motions out of their own sphere of activity.   

                                 

Tuesday, 26 September 2017

What Are We Manifesting?


Written by Mathew Naismith

To feel good about oneself and the environment, one must first desist in feeling bad about someone else's self and their environment, otherwise all we would be doing is creating something that feels good on the back of what also feels bad. Look at it this way, if to be exceptionally positive takes an exceptional negative, wouldn't it be better if we didn't have to express an exceptional positive to denounce, overcome or escape from an exceptional negative in the first place? One begets the other; basically, one extreme creates an opposing extreme. Do we really want to create another reality built upon or created from it's opposite? 

So what kind of ideological concepts has our present reality created?

Firstly, I personally don't think it's wise to build or create realities based on their opposing opposites if we really want peace and love on Earth. Basing peace and love on it's opposite is only going to continue the trend of opposing energy forces, basically creating realities that one can't exist without the other or on the back of the other.

Many times have I come across people who have utter disdain for this reality, in turn, they have a desire to manifest a complete opposite of what they have disdain for. Is it wise to create another reality based on it's opposite, in other words create a reality based on conflict and critical judgment? What would our present conflictive realities consciousness want you to do? Be in conflict with it to continue the trend and create yet another reality based on conflict and critical judgment.

So opposing our present conflictive reality is doing exactly what this kind of reality creates, realities primarily based on conflict. Yes, for example, the ideological concepts of light and love don't seem to be within themselves conflictive, even though this kind of ideology was created on the back of a conflictive conscious reality. However, take this kind of energy out of it's protective comforting domain, it's own reality, it fails dismally. Only within it's own domain, within it's own energy, can the ideological concepts of light and love prevail. It's exactly like taking a fish out of the water, it's reality, and put the fish in it's opposing reality, it fails dismally to exist out of the water, it's reality.

Manifesting = Provide evidence for; stand as proof of; show by one's behaviour, attitude, or external attributes or reveal its presence or make an appearance. 

Ideology = An orientation that characterizes the thinking of a group or nation or an imaginary or visionary theorization.


So can we create a reality of light and love without a reality being created on the back of a conflictive reality?

Light simply means awareness and love acceptance of all of what is for what it is, this of course includes realities and the consciousness behind the creation of these realities. It's like a mother loving their child no matter what they do. Because these kinds of ideological concepts are based on disdain and an opposing energy source, it is obvious that ideological concepts, like today's light and love, is not based on awareness or a true sense of love.

A true sense of light and love thrives just as much out of it's own reality as it does in it's own reality, in certain circumstances even more because of the need of this kind of energy source within certain realities or energy flows. A mother/father can be at their best in dire times, way out of their comfort zone, we as a whole are no different. Another good example is nurses/doctors; they are at their best when out of their comfort zone, their normal reality, because that is where they are most needed. People like me are always out of our comfort zone, our own clicky (exclusive) groups and energy fields/realities, where we are most needed. 

Do we really need to get out of our comfort zone, our own reality, to make a difference?

We often believe by staying within our own exclusive group, our own energy field or safe zone, that we can make a difference through manifesting our own energy within our own group or even our own personal domain/reality and make a huge difference. I think if Mother Teresa and Florence Nightingale, for example, stayed within their own exclusive group or energy field/reality, they couldn't have made the difference they did; we at a personal and collective level are no different. What about Gandhi and Nelson Mandela and so on it goes. On a personal level, it would have been best for these people to stay within their own exclusive groups and within their own safe zone on a personal level, they instead saw a need to make real changes way outside their own comfort zone.

You simply cannot manifest a reality or influence a collective consciousness to change it's present reality while within your own comfort zone, your own exclusive group, change has always been manifested while within other energy flows. The reason for this is simple, a group opposing another group while within it's own reality will always be opposed, however, once within an opposing group to your own energy field, this is where one can make the biggest difference, the biggest manifestation.


There is one trick to changing what is within itself though, never demean or have disdain for what you are trying to influence while within that energy field, all this will change is your own energy field. A lot of people today are making this mistake in my mind, trying to change one group manifestation with their own group manifestation while in disdain of the group manifestation they are trying to change. Did Nelson Mandela try to change the colour of white people while at the same time having disdain for white people? All that Nelson Mandela wanted to change is the reality that white South Africans manifested from within. If Nelson Mandela had a huge amount of disdain for white people, instead of only seeing a need for change of what white people had manifested, he simply wouldn't have changed a thing.                  

Friday, 22 September 2017

Bending to the New Winds of Change


Written by Mathew Naismith
When the wind becomes a tree, is when the wind has to bend to the new wind blowing. As all things are governed by natural cycles, so are winds, one day a wind that the trees have to bend to or perish, the next day a tree that has to bend with a new wind blowing. Human existence is no different to the wind and the tree, it's all governed by natural cycles.
Once upon a time the Roman Empire was the wind that everything had to bend to or perish, now it's no more the wind or the trees. Of course we could say that the Catholic Church is the new wind from the Roman Empire era but it still had to bend like a tree to become the wind again as all things do.
Today, China is bending to the winds of the western mind, on the other hand North Korea isn't bending to this wind. Once it was the eastern mind within us all that was the wind, today it's the western mind. All must bend like a tree to this wind to once again become the wind. In regards to the present wind, it too will in the end become a tree or perish, of course if the wind becomes too strong, all will perish including the wind itself.          
The western minded coalition forces are today the wind, it's dominance over all else is felt throughout the world, as of any wind though, it too will have it's day to either bend to the new wind or perish. 
So is the new winds of change going to be of the western or eastern mind? Neither and simultaneously both. Once the eastern and western mind becomes one within us all, neither the western nor eastern mind will predominately dominate over the other, it's as though the yin and yang within us all will become one, whole, with no variations. This doesn't mean that the western mind (yang) and the eastern mind (yin) will no longer exist, it simply means they will be as one.
The strongest and wisest wind isn't the wind that blows everything down, the strongest and wisest wind is the wind that works in unison with the trees......Mathew G  
I thought anyone of the Christian and non-Christian faith might find the following interesting, the article links Christianity with Taoism to some degree.      
There is something formlessly created
Born before Heaven and Earth
So silent! So ethereal!
Independent and changeless
Circulating and ceaseless
It can be regarded as the mother of the world
I do not know its name
Identifying it, I call it “Tao”
– Tao Te Ching Chapter 25
I just thought I would end this post with the following. It is wise to treat everything as being governed by a natural cycle as the wise are aware that one can't possibly overcome these natural cycles in the end, flow with the water, bend with the wind. This is probably why I try to stay away from judging anything negative or positive, what I call a black and white mentality; neither perception is flowing with the water, bending with the wind.    
 A man is born gentle and weak.
At his death he is hard and stiff.
Green plants are tender and filled with sap.
At their death they are withered and dry.

Therefore the stiff and unbending is the disciple of death.
The gentle and yielding is the disciple of life.

Thus an army without flexibility never wins a battle.
A tree that is unbending is easily broken.

The hard and strong will fall.
The soft and weak will overcome.

- Tao Te Ching - Lao Tzu - chapter 76

Thursday, 21 September 2017

A New Wind Blowing


Written by Mathew Naismith

As a tree in balance with the wind will do, it will bend with the wind. As China has done and North Korea hasn't done, China has bent to the wind, the wind of the western mind, however, there is another wind blowing, a wind that the western mind wind must also bend to or pass by.

To put this into perspective, I have inserted a reply I gave to certain people on a forum. Knowing what is and isn't bullying and abuse, it was obvious a fair amount of abuse and bullying was going on, on this forum, I simply related this abuse and bullying holistically to the western mind imbalances and weaknesses. As I stated in the following, this has nothing to do with judgment or ridicule of a singular person or people. If I am to awaken to my own weaknesses and acknowledge them, I must also be fair and honestly look at other people and other groups who are obvious within their own weaknesses, after all, it's all as one. If I can do this void of judging a negative or positive, bad or good, it's simply not judgment but honest observation void of the biases of negative and positive, good and bad.
     
___________________________


This will be my last interaction on here unless I receive a response to this interaction.

The coalition forces are obvious within their dominance, their bullying other cultures into submission, of course to do this; one has to point out the weaknesses within these other cultures while at the same time totally ignoring one's own weaknesses. Bullying of course takes one to go into another cultures or persons domain, this is the same in going onto someone else's post to bully them into submission.

As I have previously given written material to confirm, the western mind will at all cost avoid looking at it's own weaknesses, instead choose to focus on it's strengths. If you look honestly at the coalition forces, are they also not doing this? When you go into other people's countries to bully these people into submission under false pretences, Iraq was a prime example of this, and on top of this pilfer their natural resources, is this not of the western mind void of the balance of the eastern mind?

It is natural for a mind, primarily of the western mind, to become dominating and bully everything that questions it's own weaknesses into submission. When we look at Libya who were well on the way to creating their own monitory system, which showed weaknesses within the western monitory system, it was inevitable that the western mind of the coalition forces were going to act through force. This is psychologically called projective abuse.

What are the similarities between the coalition forces dominance and certain people's reactions on this site?

At no point have these people admitted that they don't like their views put to the question. The fact they don't like my views that quite often put their own views and motives in question, it is obvious of what mind these people are primarily expressing. Of course the western mind, to the bitter end, will not want to look upon it's own weaknesses, instead prefers to look at other people's weakness just like the coalition forces. When I look at other people's weaknesses, I am also looking at my own, however, we must do this but void of bias.

This has nothing to do with judgment or ridicule of a singular person or people. If I am to awaken to my own weaknesses and acknowledge them, I must also be fair and honestly look at other people and other groups who are obvious within their own weaknesses, after all, it's all as one. If I can do this void of judging a negative or positive, bad or good, it's simply not judgment but observation void of the biases of negative and positive, good and bad.

To awaken, one must look at the whole as a whole and observe that whole as one, this means pointing out the weaknesses within the western and eastern mind no matter what form it takes. In saying this, it is virtually impossible for the western mind to do this impartially when void of the balance of the eastern mind gives to the western mind. The western mind, void of the eastern mind, will be naturally dominant and bully everything else that looks at it's weakness to submission.

The current wind is western minded, we must bend to this wind, the Chinese did just that but the North Koreans haven't. There is however a new wind blowing, a wind of both western and eastern origin, within this, there will be balance and the absence of one mind trying to dominate the other mind. Basically, a balanced consciousness void of conflict.


Simply put, there is way too much western minded dominance on this site for me; the deliberate avoidance of looking at one's own weakness is too evident. The new wind blowing is anything but what is expressed here, in my mind anyway, no offence intended.           

Monday, 18 September 2017

Adding Fuel to the Fire


Written by Mathew Naismith

I wrote the following for a forum as it seems a number of people on this forum simply look at imbalances as being faulty or negative. In my view, to judge imbalances and the realities these imbalances create faulty or negative/toxic, is a huge mistake as it only adds fuel to the already existing fire.

____________________________

So how are imbalances not seen as something faulty or negative?

Imbalances are needed to create a chaotic reality, you can't create a chaotic reality out of balance because chaos needs opposing forces to exist; there are simply no opposing forces within a true sense of balance for all works together as one.

A tree that bends with the wind is in balance with the wind. A tree that doesn't bend with the wind is imbalanced with the wind; one isn't opposing, the other is opposing.

What occurs when we oppose a reality, are we like the bending tree or the tree that opposes or is in conflict with the wind?

Bending with the wind entails one to exist within the present reality void of conflict, is critically judging a reality negative or faulty bending with the wind? No, it's the tree that is in conflict with the wind because it won't bend with the wind. Judging imbalances as being faulty/negative is simply feeding the wind more energy by making it more destructive. Soon enough the tree in conflict against the wind will be destroyed creating even more chaos within a reality, not less.

Yes, a strong wind can create a lot more chaos than the strong wind represents in the first place if it meets other opposing forces of energy, our chaotic reality is no different.

So we oppose this chaotic reality by judging it faulty/negative, this is of course in relation to ourselves who we have deemed positive. In this case the positive becomes an opposing force to judged negatives such as imbalances and what realities imbalances create. The tree is no longer bending with the wind and is noticeably opposing the wind thus creating even more chaos, not less.

Now, is love and light or positive thinking the bending tree or an opposing tree to the wind? We would of course say an opposing tree as it's against the wind that we have judged faulty/negative, in actuality by opposing the wind we have given the wind more energy. We have ultimately surrendered our energy to the wind in opposition making the wind more destructive, chaotic. This is simply adding fuel to the fire.

A chaotic reality needs fuel/energy to sustain it's existence, by judging a chaotic reality simply faulty/negative gives it it's fuel it needs, not just to exist but to expand on it's existence. The chaotic reality, the fire, is roaring out of control, it's expanding at a phenomenal rate, why, because we keep feeding the fire the fuel it needs to exist and expand by simply staying rigid, in opposition, to the wind.

So why aren't chaotic realities based on imbalances not faulty/negative? Chaotic realities need imbalances and opposing energy forces to exist, without these, the fire will simply burn itself out for lack of fuel. Is it negative that realities need imbalances to exist? If you think it is negative, all you are doing is giving chaotic realities the energy they need to exist. Imbalances are a positive for chaotic realities to exist, seen as all realities have a right to exist; we must learn to bend with this like the tree to the wind.

The universe is an exceptionally violent destructive chaotic place, but it's also exceptionally harmonious, constructive and peaceful as well. Is all that is violent, destructive and chaotic negative within the universe? So if our chaotic destructive reality is faulty/negative, what is our sun that is a lot more violent, destructive and chaotic? Our reality is what it is, simply a reality we keep adding fuel to and this is exactly why I stay away from judging what is or isn't negative of positive because all I would be doing is adding fuel to the fire.

Love yes, but not in opposition, bend with the wind.......


Supplement: In my younger days, I had a particular experience with a number of entities that fed on fear, all I did is to not be in opposition to them, in effect disallowing the energy they sought to feed off of. I was neither negative nor positive and this is the real trick, I simply stopped feeding their fire by neither being in opposition nor surrendering to their energy.                    

Friday, 15 September 2017

The Mindless Western Mind!!

Written by Mathew Naismith

It was said to me recently in a discussion on the western and eastern mind that the western mind is controlling or maybe even of no mind. Considering that the yang and yin are within each other so is the eastern and western mind, one is never not of the other to one extent or another, it is therefore unlikely that the western mind is of total control and/or mindless. The following replies I gave to other people on this subject will explain this further.

The western mind, being of the greater ego, will of course judge someone like me stating that the western mind is mindless is judgmentally egotistic, however, the eastern mind observes this as simply pointing our an obvious weakness within the western mind itself. In saying this, as the western mind has it's weaknesses, so does the eastern mind. The difference is in that the eastern mind will acknowledge and deal with it's weaknesses, this is different to the western mind that primarily focuses on it's strengths while ignoring it's weaknesses.

_______________________________


Interesting Chinwhisker, this is probably why I relate Christianity and Hinduism, in the raw form, to be of both western and eastern mind, yin and yang, however, I only equate Buddhism to yin, the feminine, the eastern mind.

To me: Eastern mind = yin + feminine + of lesser ego
            Western mind = yang + masculine + of greater ego

A balance brings peace, God's kingdom, where an imbalance brings chaos, man's kingdom.

_______________________________

I also wrote the following reply on questioning the bible and the mindlessness of the western mind. It was interestingly mentioned that the western mind is of control or of no mind.

_______________________________


+Chinwhisker  It's all to do with how one is conditioned to read the bible, however, as I have found out,  prayers have been changed over time to reflect a different stance, is the bible the same?

If one is all ego, can we equate this to no mind? By destroying the very thing one relies on for it's existence to feed it's ego, I would say this is of no mind. 

China has destroyed it's natural environment mainly because of western influence through becoming more westernised.  Yes, I would say it's fair enough to call the western mind mindless.

 _______________________________

Primarily focusing on, for example, positive thinking or love and light, is focusing on our strengths while noticeably ignoring the weaknesses. A good example of this is of children being abused in every way, this is ignored by positive and love and light people because it's too negative or toxic to address. It's a weakness that is plainly ignored. If half the people in the world spoke against this kind of abuse, a lot of children would be saved from abuse, instead, the western mind focuses on itself and it's own strengths, not it's own weaknesses. By ignoring these weaknesses because they are not of love and light or positive, allows these weaknesses to flourish, in actuality that is exactly what is presently occurring.

I should mention here that stating Buddhism is equated to the feminine (yin) and not also the masculine (yang) is in reference to it's philosophies. I believe that Buddhism came about for a need of a philosophy and an awareness to balance out life as a whole that was and still is primarily of the masculine. Even though Buddhism is of a religion as well as of philosophy, Buddhism wasn't meant to be followed or used in the same way as most ideologies. I believe Buddhism should be used in conjunction with other ideologies, not in opposition, a lot of western people following Buddhist philosophies, in my mind, are using Buddhism in opposition to other ideologies, not in conjunction.

It's funny to think it's the eastern part of the western mind that observes these weaknesses as the western mind is unable to. Consider this; can a man (yang) give birth? It's the same as the western mind being unable to address it's weaknesses, it needs the eastern mind to do this. Void of the eastern mind, the western mind can indeed be too controlling and mindless by primarily focusing on the ego, the outer world instead of the inner world or self.

_______________________________

Supplement:


I suppose the way we are looking at past lives is more western than eastern.

At times translation between western and eastern is easy, at other times virtually impossible. I don't think everything eastern can be successfully translated into western and probably visa-versa. Language is one barrier but so is the substance or meaning. Considering that the eastern and western mind looks at things in quite a different way a lot of the times, this figures.

I was talking to a bloke from India about the bhagavad gita, he simply said it's virtually impossible to convert the bhagavad gita to English, you lose too much of it's truer meaning. I don't think western language has as much inner depth and meaning as eastern languages. In saying this, I think the old English language has more depth than today's English; I'm not sure on this though.   

Tuesday, 12 September 2017

The Eastern and Western Mind



Written by Mathew Naismith

As we become more integrated and communicative around the world, I think it's essential we become aware of the differences between how we think in regards to other people of different cultures. At times the difference can be huge and at another times quite simular. Of course with the dominance and control of the western mind on the rest of the world, the differences in how we think is diminishing, sadly, eastern people are thinking more inline with western thinking.

I say sadly because it is obvious from the below information that the western mind is more dominating and controlling, even at the expense of the environment to it's own detriment. You have got to wonder, are more western minded people trying to understand eastern thinking to bring balance and a moderated existence back to the world? I should also mention, just because you are living under a western or eastern influence, you can still think and exist to the contrary depending on the influence one wants to exist under.
_________________________


Extract: The West has consequently developed a materialist science that is focused on the outer world--which it endeavours to control and exploit. In Asia, where most religions have arisen, consciousness has been directed inwardly to understand the essential nature of life.

The Westerners worked longer on the stuff they were told they had aced the first time. The Easterners concentrated on the areas they thought they had botched. Students from the West—where the cult of self-esteem reigns supreme—wanted a tummy rub. Students from the East were more concerned with fixing their blind spots, becoming well-rounded. The Westerners polished up their strengths while the Easterners addressed their weaknesses.


Extract:
§                  Patterns of attention and perception, with Easterners attending more to environments and Westerners attending more to objects, and Easterners being more likely to detect relationships among events than Westerners.
§                  Basic assumptions about the composition of the world, with Easterners seeing substances where Westerners see objects.
§                  Beliefs about controllability of the environment, with Westerners believing in controllability more than Easterners.
§                  Tacit assumptions about stability vs. change, with Westerners seeing stability where Easterners see change.
§                  Preferred patterns of explanation for events, with Westerners focusing on objects and Easterners casting a broader net to include the environment.
§                  Habits of organizing the world, with Westerners preffering categories and Easterners being more likely to emphasize relationships.
§                  Use of formal logical rules, with Westerners being more inclined to use logical rules to understand events than Easterners
§                  Application of dialectical approaches, with Easterners being more inclined to seek the Middle Way when confronted with apparent contradiction and Westerners being more inclined to insist on the correctness of one belief vs. another.


Extract: We can find the most striking difference in Asian and Western way of thinking. When Asian thinking aims for harmony, Western thinking strives for order. This is because the basic philosophy of Western people is based on the concept of liberty, free market economic system or liberalization of economic system. On the other hand, Asians do not give much importance to the aspects of free competition of the economic system. They are concerned more with the equal distribution of income or solidarity in helping each other among their communities, thereby assuring an egalitarian society.


If your also into the philosophical differences of views, you might like the following as well.


Extract:
Broadly, speaking,
Western society strives to
find and prove "the truth",
while
Eastern society accepts the truth as given and
is more interested in finding 
the balance.

Westerners put more stock in individual rights;
Easterners in social responsibly.

                __________________________________

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

This is interesting stuff. I realise more clearly now why the western mind has problems with people like me, we point out where we can become more aware where the western mind only desires to focus on where they are aware.

Another example is standardisation. The western mind tries to standardise everything so everyone standardises when it is obvious the eastern mind doesn't. How many western people standardise spirituality with awareness? Of course to an eastern mind, spirituality and awareness are obvious bed fellows; there is simply no standardisation because there is no expression or motion of control unlike the western mind.

Another example is when the western mind ostracises or has disdain for people for having their own views, especially when these views are pointing out a lack of awareness. To the western mind, pointing out things like this is being critical, to an eastern mind, all one is doing is pointing out where one is lacking awareness. I am often ostracised/blocked on forums by the western mind for pointing out our short falls on my own posts; it's a typical western mind reaction.

Us westerners, in my mind, need to be more aware of our own short falls of the western mind, but of course the western mind only desires to be aware of it's grandeurs, it's strengths not it's weaknesses, this of course is it's weakness. 


I should point out that the eastern mind can be influenced by the western mind to become more of a western mind and visa-versa.   

Sunday, 10 September 2017

Balance Creates Love



Written By Mathew Naismith

To me, a true sense of balance creates love through a natural process in states of balance, the reason I think this is explained in the following post I posted on a forum. Balance/moderation is simply bliss which creates a sense of love of everything void of bias or prejudice. A moderated thought process negates all extremes thus creating a true sense of balance that then creates a true sense of love.

As we go within, extremes have less of an influence over us, the extrication of these extremes are simply replaced with a sense of love. The reason for this is simple; extremes denote imbalances and lust/desire, by becoming less influenced by extremes bring balance which allows a truer sense of love to influence us instead of extremes. Influences from extremes are simply replaced by the influences of love.    

_______________________

This is interesting, is a true state of balance of divine consciousness (spirit) or human consciousness (mind)? 

Considering that humans have always and probably always will express extremes, it is unlikely a true state of balance is of human consciousness; it's probably why human consciousness struggles to maintain some kind of balance in life.

When we presume and perceive that divine consciousness is love and that love is above all else, is this not an expression of an extreme. It's very human to desire the opposite of what one is existing in, especially if one is not physiologically happy with their present environment.

Consider this, is not saying that divine consciousness is primarily of love not stating an absolute? If we took away all the love and hate within the world, all we would be left with is bliss, the reason for this lies within these extreme expressions. There is no true sense of balance within extreme expressions, in one trying to over power the other all the times, a true sense of balance simply can't exist within such an existence.

So why do we perceive that divine consciousness is only of an extreme such as love?

Psychologically looking at this, human nature perceives what it desires to be of, not what it doesn't desire to be of, especially if it has any kind of disdain (contempt) towards it's present environment. It is simply natural for humans to desire something to be what it's not just to escape from its present environment.

It is natural when a state of true balance exists bliss and love are present, however, when a state of imbalance exists, chaos and hate are present and naturally so. So is divine conciseness (spirit) primarily of and expressive of love or balance?  If the spirit within all things was of an extreme, everything would also express and be of extremes but there simply not.

So if everything of the spirit within all things is balance, why isn't everything of balance?  Where you have yin and yang, is where you have balance but you also have imbalance, it's simply a natural law of existence as a whole.

Human represents imbalance where divine consciousness represents balance. To me, we presume too much while collectively in a state of chaos and mayhem. The divine consciousness, unlike ourselves, is not of an extreme of any kind, we simply perceive it to be so because of what we psychologically desire.

As of many Eastern teachings teach, balance/moderation is the key, not love.

“Simplicity, patience, compassion.
These three are your greatest treasures.
Simple in actions and thoughts, you return to the source of being.
Patient with both friends and enemies,
you accord with the way things are.
Compassionate toward yourself,
you reconcile all beings in the world.” 
― 
Lao TzuTao Te Ching

 “Your hand opens and closes, opens and closes. If it were always a fist or always stretched open, you would be paralysed. Your deepest presence is in every small contracting and expanding, the two as beautifully balanced and coordinated as birds' wings.” 
― 
Jalaluddin RumiThe Essential Rumi

You can be still and still moving. Content even in your discontent.

Ram Dass