Saturday, 15 June 2019
Written by Mathew Naismith
Going with the natural flow of life, the natural flow of water, in the absence of control of life, of the water, that we are all presently experiencing and a part of, no matter how much we desire to separate ourselves from this natural flow.
The natural flows actually refers to all motion, the ego, in the absence of a controlling ego. Of course the ego in control often desires to be separate itself from natural flow, to an ego not having the desire of desiring to control the flow of life/water.
There are people, like my wife and I, who simply go with the flow within the present, whatever that flow may be in the absence of a controlling ego. The ego in control doesn't gently flow, it often turns the water, life, into a torrent, recreating a desired flow often in opposition to the natural flow. As of torrents, often a different direction is enforced by the force emitted by desires, desires to enforce a different direction of flow of life/water. This is instead of calming the present waters of life that are often deemed negative, most likely because they don't fulfil our desires or what we demand life to be.
The natural flow of life, the ego, isn't there for our pleasures, it is simply there to experience. Yes, within this natural flow, life won't always be rosy (positive), but the ego in control demands that life must serve it's desires, which means that life has to be always pleasurable to the ego.
People like me simply don't expect or demand of life, of the present flow of water, that we must feel pleasurable all the time. We certainly don't try to separate one part of consciousness from the rest of consciousness so we can fulfil the controlling egos desires.
As of life, human consciousness, presently controlled by the ego in control, we must also go with this flow, while not becoming of what this flow represents, the desire to fulfil our desires at any cost. Would a responsible parent allow their badly behaved child go on being badly behaved to fulfil one's own pleasures? So why ignore the negatives in the present flow of water to fulfil our own desires of demanding to feel good all the time? As the badly behaved child will only become worse in their behaviour when their behaviour is ignored, so will the collective consciousness.
Yes, the natural flow of water isn't always a comfortable temperature, but we really shouldn't demand more of life than what is to fulfil what our ego in control desires. Anything beyond of what the natural flow of what is, is something else than natural.....
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
Written by Mathew
Something different, in a different approach:
Imagine the brain being wired with electrical wires of all sorts of gauges instead of neurons. No brain's wiring is the same as no person is the same; each brain has its own gauge wiring therefore reacts differently to simular circumstances in accordance with the conditioning of the consciousness. Is an enlightened person's brain wiring of the same gauge than that of an average person's brain wiring? This is why an enlightened person can handle any kind of electrical influx or current, be it negative or positive. In all honestly, because the wiring is replaced with a bigger gauge wiring through certain spiritual practices, what was once perceived through the ego to be negative and positive, is no longer negative and positive.
When people tell me or other people how negative and toxic they are, I know from that point what kind of gauge wiring their own brain is wired with.
A person who has suffered any kind of trauma will either end up with a thicker/bigger gauge wiring in the brain, or, the wiring in the brain will become faulty. Once the wiring becomes faulty, any kind of electrical influx beyond of what the wiring can handle will end up failing or become faultier. In the process, the messages sent to the brain via faulty wiring will of course end up faulty or misleading/deceptive. Is not the wiring of the collective consciousness faulty, seen as we are still suffering from our suffering, instead of learning from our suffering?
To suffer from our suffering is to simply judge this suffering negative or toxic, in the process to be avoided because our own wiring in our brain is unable to handle the electrical influx. In all honesty, if the brain is not wired with bigger gauge wiring to cope with the influx being present at the present, I think it's wise to avoid such influxes. However, I think it far wiser replacing our obvious too small of gauge wiring with a bigger gauge wiring. How we rewire our brains neurons makes all the difference. Could a multinational psychologically cope with being poor, with no hope of being anything else? Now, could an enlightened person cope with the same environment or even cope not being enlightened?
So why can an enlightened person cope with any kind of electrical influx in comparison to a multinational or the average person? It is all to do with the way the brain is being reconditioned, which includes rewiring the brain with a bigger gauge wire to handle any circumstance. How many spiritually aware people can handle any kind of circumstance, any kind of electrical influx? The small gauge wiring is simply unable to cope with the present influx, thus the wiring becomes faultier.
Our wiring is faulty from the time we are born, because the collective conscious environment we are born in is wired with inadequate gauge wiring, or, the wiring is faulty through not learning from our suffering. We are naturally born with small gauge wiring. As we evolve or grow up, the process we go through either strengthens our wiring or our wiring isn't replaced with bigger gauge wiring as we evolve personally. Has the collective human conscious wiring evolved at the same rate as our advancing technology? It is as if one part of the collective human conscious brain is rewired with bigger gauge wiring, while the other parts of the brain's wiring is forgotten or simply rejected as not existing.
To a person who's positive is based on rejecting the negatives, in other words egoistically separating one part of the whole consciousness from another for a desired outcome, is of course inline with the collective human consciousness rejecting the part of the brain it desires to not be a part of. How many materialists and/or atheists reject that a consciousness can exist outside of the physical brain? In all honesty, it is the same thing with a lot of spiritually aware people today. See how the collective human consciousness wiring is inadequate of faulty, were a consciousness has not holistically evolved.
An enlightened one's wiring is different, because it's holistically evolved, not in accordance to the ego's desires, but in accordance in the absence of a controlling ego. An enlightened one doesn't take control of a consciousness; it simply is in the absence of the controlling ego. The ego is still present but it no longer has control, in that a desired outcome is always sought, an outcome that usually tantalises the ego and feeds the ego's desires.
Why was I so good at my job working with all kinds of disabilities, even in the absence of professional education in line with my work? My wiring was simply of a bigger gauge wiring as I learnt from my own and other people's suffering. I certainly didn't simply judge anyone's wiring that was faulty as being negative or toxic, therefore ignore the negatives to serve my ego's desired outcome. If you are picking up on negative toxic vibrations, it is wise to first look at your own wiring.
Could I be openly honest with the disabled people I worked with? No, as I knew that their own brains wiring/neurons wouldn't cope with this. Then why am I openly honest on the internet, knowing that many people's wiring will not cope with open minded honesty? My ego is not on the internet to be liked. My ego is on the internet to be expressive of open minded honesty, as this is one of the attributes or practices that can replace faulty inadequate wiring with bigger gauge wiring.
Note: None of the above was read or learnt from other human conscious sources, the above is only of my own thoughts, experiences and conjectures.
Sunday, 9 June 2019
Written by Mathew Naismith
In a dream last night I was walking along in a pleasant environment, when a difference within this environment caught my eye upon a small hill.
Upon this hill was an environment likened to an environment of enlightenment, an environment that was tranquil and untainted by the ego in control. My ego of course saw this environment as being very beautiful.
As I approached this environment, a man within this environment put his hand up to stop me entering this environment. I immediately understood that this environment of enlightenment was not of my human journey at present. My ego, thankfully, gracefully accepted this and that was the end of the dream.
We might think that once we see an enlightened environment, this is what we are to become. Not everything you see and experience, you are supposed to become. We all exist within a dog eat dog reality, where if you allow other people to deter you from your desired goals, your desires won't be met. This is also called a crab mentality, where people walk over other people to acquire a desired outcome. Yes, a lot of people become this reality we exist in at present, but a lot of people don't. Just because we see and even experience an environment/reality, we don't necessarily have to become of that environment/reality.
Could you imagine being of a dog eat dog mentality or a crab mentality and experiencing an enlightened moment, even in a dream? I have simply not become of what the reality I am experiencing at present, as my ego was not disappointed at not being able to enter into an enlightened environment.
The ego often thinks that being enlightened is a better more positive option than being otherwise. Is it not said that all changes must come from within? So if I am no longer within a dog eat dog environment, that I specifically abstain from becoming, how am I to influence change upon such an environment when I am no longer of that environment? Individually, we know that all changes must come from within our own environment personally, so why do we do otherwise in relation to the collective environment?
Make no mistake, no matter what kind of environment you are within or experiencing, just being aware of an enlightened state is influential upon a collective consciousness without doing anything else. Of course being expressive of this state physically or through motion can be more influential but not necessarily. If the influence is based on a personal desired outcome, the outcome of the influence will not be in line with enlightenment, in all honesty, most likely quite the opposite.
Thursday, 6 June 2019
Written by Mathew Naismith
In the midst of mayhem, demure and dauntless provocations, a wise and aware soul is able to make the most of the present; this is instead of trying the make the present something the ego simply desires. Of course what the ego desires often has nothing to do with the present. The ego in control will often separate itself from what it doesn't desire, thus only leaving what the ego in control desires, which is anything but of the present collective consciousness. Simply, an extraction of parts of the present desired consciousness from the undesired parts of a consciousness is implemented. To a lot of people, this extraction or division of a consciousness is living in the present, when in all honesty all this is, is living for the ego in control.
To a wise and aware soul, an enlightened consciousness, whatever the present is, is embraced no matter how of mayhem, demure and dauntless provocations it is. Think of the worst life experience a soul can experience. To an enlightened consciousness, this finite experience is nothing compared to the infinite, a state often referred to as God's consciousness or a state of pure awareness and motionless. Why do people react differently to the same trauma experienced? Often, a person who has gone through far worse trauma, will experience less trauma in the present than a person who has gone through very little trauma in comparison.
Too often people will think the present is of trauma, or of mayhem, demure and dauntless provocations collectively consciously. As an enlightened consciousness thinks no more of a life lived, no matter how good or bad it was, what occurs collectively over time in a finite reality, has no further bearing or relevance, for what a soul experiences is always of the finite. You don't actually experience the infinite like you do the finite, you simply are aware of what the finite represents. Only the ego in control makes any more of this, thus taking a consciousness back into a finite conscious state, in turn creating trauma, often through mayhem, demure and dauntless provocative experiences. As I have stated before, only the ego part of us can be in trauma or become hurt because the ego is only of the finite. The ego, either in control or not, cannot exist within an infinite reality or an infinite state of consciousness, for a consciousness to be aware of everything all at once, is in the absence of the ego in control. The infinite isn't of the absence of the ego, only the ego in control. Of course a consciousness of pure ego is only experienced in the absence of infinite wisdom and awareness.
To an enlightened consciousness, everything is of the present. Only the ego sees an extraction of the undesired for the desired as not being of their personal present, even though the collective present is often something quite different to what the ego in control desires.
So what do many of us do? Try to extract ourselves from the ego as much as possible, thus only being of the infinite. If in any sense you are trying to separate consciousness into parts to serve your ego's desires in this way, you are being more expressive of the finite, as the infinite is of the whole, not only parts of the whole a consciousness only desires to be of within the present. Only the ego in control desires or even needs to extricate itself from the ego. An enlightened consciousness simply desists in the extraction of consciousness, thus allowing one to simply become aware of everything in the absence of the ego's desires.
Try to remember this. If your ego takes control at times, only the ego in control will make a big deal of this. While experiencing the ego, just be aware, especially aware that the ego in control is not about awareness but ignorance.
Supplement: "Oh my God, my life has gone, it's all in the past to never be apart of me again!!"
This is of a finite consciousness, when in all honesty to an infinite consciousness, nothing is lost or gained, everything really does become of the present. Within this state, there are no perceptions of loss or gain, even while one is experiencing finite consciousness. Why do most people meet up with dead relatives after their own demise? Consciousness never dies or no longer exists. There is simply no sense of loss, or gain for that matter. To experience gain or loss is of finite consciousness, not of infinite consciousness. Not an easy view to condition an ego to, this is why certain people will always seem more enlightened than most other people.
Thursday, 30 May 2019
Written by Mathew Naismith
Should we berate or hold our own selves to account, to the negatives, we have expressed in the past? This can be anything from saying the wrong thing that hurt other people, to not being loving enough and even showing disdain through judgement of other people. To be truly positive, or as I say constructive, the answer is too obvious, no, so why do so many people berate and even critically judge the present reality as being negative or even toxic?
To learn from our human ignorance, should we not learn from the past and present reality instead of continually suffer from it? To critically judge anything negative is to suffer from what we should instead be learning from. If I said the wrong thing at the wrong time to someone, is it constructive or positive to berate myself thus suffering from my own ignorance, this is instead of learning from my ignorance?
Once you start learning from ignorance/suffering, either that be indivisibly or collectively, it is impossible to judge this ignorance/suffering as being negative and especially toxic. So why are so many more people expressive of negatives and even toxic expressions in westernised spirituality today? Separation, a separation from what the individual or a group, as opposed to a collective, have deemed negative. As soon as someone expresses this that or the other is negative, especially toxic, I know within myself that they are still suffering from what they should in fact be learning from. In all honesty, anyone truly so-called positive/constructive person can be within any environment and still remain constructively expressional in the absence of any perceived negatives.
So what so many call positive and even spiritual today or of love and light, is of the ignorance of any judged negative or toxic environment, this is while being focused on separating ourselves from judged negatives and toxic environments!! In all honesty to oneself, we, ourselves, create what is negative and of a toxic environment when we persist in suffering from what we should in fact be learning from.
What is of the present is of the past, in that the past is still of the present. If we learnt from the past instead of suffering from the past, there is no way we could critically judged the past, which is of the present still, negative and especially of a toxic environment. The past is still of our present reality because we still haven't learnt to learn from our past, we still call the past that created the present reality negative and even toxic!! Is this in all honesty being constructive/positive? We even call being in the absence of negatives and toxic environments being spiritual, all else not spiritual!! A truly aware soul in the first place has nothing to be in the absence of to be constructive or spiritual to start with.
The question is now, should we stay within an environment that seemingly will always suffer from an environment instead of learning from an environment?
I have personally extracted myself from certain kinds of environments, to assist in environments that wants to learn instead of suffer from an environment. Also, once you have learnt from an environment, move on to another environment even if the environment seems negative to you. In all honesty, if it seems negative to you, you have something to learn from it.
A consciousness that doesn't learn from their environment isn't negative or toxic, just ignorant or unaware of how to learn from an environment, a consciousness simply lost within its own creation........
Sunday, 26 May 2019
Written by Mathew Naismith
An enlightened one (person) is confronted with a positive loving person and a negative hateful person, according to the ego, within their own immediate environment. Neither person is treated any different to the other. So wouldn't the enlightened one feel negative vibrations from the person who is negative and hateful, and positive vibrations from the person who is positive and loving?
If you understand this kind of enlightened consciousness, you will be aware that this kind of consciousness is unable to feel negative or positive vibrations, for all separation of negatives and positives are determined and created by the ego. The only way that any consciousness can feel negative and positive vibrations, is to separate consciousness into parts. Of course the only part of us that does this is the ego. Make no mistake though, only the ego can determine if the ego is negative because of it's separation of consciousness. The main natural attribute of the ego is to separate thus create motion, therefore all that is motion is ego.
Take speeding along in a car, the ego has separated its immediate environment, the vehicle, from the rest of the environment. The perception of speed can only be determined through the separation of one environment from another.
We might then think to get from one point to another we need motion which relates to distance/space therefore time.
Motion is not time but can be determined or influenced by time, however, ego directly relates to motion but motion is not always related to time. Why? I remember hearing about a traveller who stopped in one town in outback
who saw the same exact aboriginal boy in one town than in another hundreds of
kilometres away in the same day. Consciousness, even being of time, isn't
always determined by the factors of distance therefore time, but motion is
always determined or created by the ego. The ego determined to be in one place
one minute and in another place in another minute. Australia
For the enlightened one, a consciousness that is not determined or influenced by time, motion or ego, therefore not of separation, will understandably treat each person as being simply expressive of motion therefore ego.
Is one vibration or motion more pleasant or unpleasant than another? To an enlightened one, all that one is aware of is that one existence is of the ego (motion), and the other of egoless (motionless), all else is simply a perception created by the ego. In saying this, there is still no separation of the ego or egoless consciousness.
How many people today think we all came from a starting point, being it love and light, a state absent of the ego or of some higher state of being? Considering this higher state not to be determined by time/motion, when did the starting point of a lower consciousness begin in a timeless motionless state? As of the egoless self, the ego self has always existed, it's just that the ego can seem more in motion within time. Make no mistake, the ego always desires to be of some kind of higher state of being, and to have only started off from this higher state.
In all honesty, the ego can just as much if not more so be expressional of motion in the absence of time. As what we call physical is not really all that physical compared to other existences, just denser within its motion, within its physicality. When a consciousness is determined by time, the consciousness in this kind of motion naturally becomes denser; giving the experiencer an incorrect perception of what represents a physical existence. All of what is physical within the universe is simply a reflection of what is truly physical, of the ego. Time doesn't determine what is more physical, but motion/ego does. Time simply makes a consciousness denser in motion, not more physical.
Think on this. A mathematician will often visualise a mathematical formula to then express this visualisation in a denser format which is then determined by time, space and distance. An architect or inventor will do the same, thus creating what seemed non-physical into something physical, something that takes up space therefore is determined to be more physical, not just simply denser!!
So why doesn't an enlightened one treat or see a difference in a negative hatful person compared to a positive loving person? As of myself, a very difficult conscious state to truly comprehend to any great extent, probably because of our conscious conditioning to motions determined by time.
Sunday, 19 May 2019
Written by Mathew Naismith
What if I stated that if we were all enlightened beings, not one of us would think twice of experiencing this reality again no matter what our experiences were!! In all honesty, the ego in control would refute this to the bitter end, why? What doesn't serve the control the ego desires to obtain and retain over it's self and its environment, will be dismissed or deemed a negative one must stay away from to gain or retain control. Of course an ego that isn't about obtaining and retaining control is a different matter.
How many of us deem spiritual, physical and mental peek proficiency as an ultimate state of being? What if I stated that being spiritual doesn't mean one is enlightened!! Being spiritual is simply the acknowledgment of a non-material existence from the acknowledgment of a material existence. In truth, Buddha experienced his enlightenment while at he's lowest level of physical and mental proficiency as of many who have become enlightened. Through this enlightenment, one then realises that a balance between the non-material and the material world is a far wiser way to exist, however, to realise this one must first suffer.
In truth, the only part of us suffering is the ego, of course there is also a difference between suffering from the egos suffering and learning from the egos suffering. Enlightenment simply comes from learning from the egos suffering. Enlightenment is simply all about letting go of the ego, especially of the controlling ways of the ego. The more our egos suffer, the more our egos were in control. Yes, this means that everyone's ego will suffer differently, of course on top of this, some ego's will still suffer from it's own suffering through the unwillingness by the ego to let go of it's control. The ego in this case will suffer to the bitter end and quite expectantly in the views of the enlightened.
I should point out that the first line of my post, "What if I stated that if we were all enlightened beings, not one of us would think twice of experiencing this reality again no matter what our experiences were!!", is of my own recollection and awareness. What you become aware of in the absence of a controlling ego is quite amazing. Of course what you become aware of in the absence of an ego altogether would be totally amazing to say the least.
As I ponder about my aimless life wonderings with no intentions or expectations, I realise I am drifting upon a water so clear that my reflection depicts the environment I am adrift upon. In the absence negatives and positives, good and bad, right and wrong, the waters I am adrift upon are so clear.....Mathew G