Total Pageviews

Wednesday, 1 February 2017

Positive Energy Conundrum

Written by Mathew Naismith

I have had a few interesting conversations with various people recently. It's wise to know your own thoughts and perceptions but it's even wiser to know other people's thoughts and perceptions, especially on topics that are sensitive to most people. The arousal of our sensitivity seems to tell us that we are too attached to certain thoughts and perceptions, otherwise we wouldn't allow the discussion of a certain topic to arouse our sensitivity.

It is understandable, while existing in a reality not altogether harmonious, that we will find the discussion on positive energy more appealing. It's not by accident that at a time of conscious change, that our environment will be in disharmony. The present disharmony or negativity expressed in the world at present pushes us towards positive energy more than at any other time. It is as if we need coaching from life forces around us to embrace these positive energies more enthusiastically, probably to the point of being overly anxious in this action. Waite a minute, how can anyone be overly anxious in taking on positive energy in such a disharmonious existence, surely more is better?

Would any of us, who are sensitive, loving, caring, giving and compassionate, keep voting in people who support regimes that murder unarmed women and children to start with? The answer is clearly, no, not if we are truly of these things. Would a person of these traits, sit back within their own positive existence while other people within our environment suffer for the sake of our self-created positive existence? We have become that positive that negatives do not seem to exist any more, or, we ignore anything we deem as negative for the sake of protecting our own positive existence. It would seem we have become that positive, that we blatantly ignore or attack any deemed negativity that looks like threatening our own personal haven.

Now it is often said that any world-changing event has to start with our own change, we change so the ripple effect of this change goes out to the rest of our environment. What kind of ripple effect will this cause when our own personal positive existence comes before anyone else within our environment, actually, at the cost of other people continually suffering because we want to keep our new changed existence safe from any kind of negativity. To be perfectly honest, this is exactly what many of us have done by ignoring negative occurrences in our own environment.

We have gotten to a point where negativity just does not have a place within our new and improved excessively positive existence, an existence that is suppose to have a positive or constructive influence on our environment. When it gets to the point that we insistently and continually sacrifice women and children, for example, for the sake of our own self-maid haven, people like me wonder where the world is truly going.

"Don't mention anything that is negative, all this will do is create more negativity, be as positive as possible."

What the hell are we thinking? I could not think of a more destructive mentality than this, and this is the ripple effect many of us are pushing for at present. "More or extreme is better in relation to positive energy; we can't get enough of this." Allowing people to suffer to keep our safe havens secure from negativity, is not the kind of ripple effect we want to push for; all this will create is disharmony, actually, it's probably why the world is becoming less harmonious and loving, not more.

Would not the so-called elite want us to deliberately ignore the negatives, so we can create and keep our own personal safe haven? Yes of course, they can then do as they like, as they are doing, without having to answer to the people in their little comfort zones, safe havens. "It's too negative to acknowledge what is really going on in the world; I need to protect my safe haven no matter what." These people are not going to sacrifice these safe havens for anyone, this is too obvious.

Yes, be positive but not at the expense and backs of other people.

I would also like to bring up about how love and light is suppose to be the new be and end all, the ultimate answer to our disharmonious existence. I have forgotten how many of these we have had throughout human history.

The expression of love and light is great, as of any positive energy, excessive expressions of love and light will do the opposite. How many people these days treat love and light as a religion to start with? It certainly seems, for a lot of people, that this love and light is the new be and end all at present. So where is the balance in this? So balancing out excessive amounts of love and light in opposition to excessive amounts of hate and dark is balance!! No excessive motion of one or the other like this is a true sense of balance, all this will create is more of the opposite as we are presently experiencing.

In the antediluvian period, there was Atlantis and Lemuria, Lumuria is depicted as love and light, and Atlantis ended up being depicted as hate and dark. Lemuria was more spiritual were Atlantis was more material. Atlantis won over Lemuria in the end, physically anyway. Why should love and light win over today, when love and light of the Lemurian's didn't work over the Atlantean's back in the antediluvian period?

We seem to be making the same mistakes of excessive motion is better to overcome another excessive motion.

What does love and light and spirituality depict? Infinite consciousness, which is less of motion and more of motionlessness.

What does hate and dark and materialism depict? Finite consciousness, which is more of motion than motionless.

In a reality based on motion, which of the above is going to be stronger and more influential over the other? Seen as we exist in a reality based on motion, anything that expresses more motion will win out over the other, however, if a motion is predominantly of motionlessness (spirituality), this motion wouldn't have a chance in dominating or influencing a reality predominantly based on motion. This is exactly why the Atlantean's won out in the end, the Lemurian's ended up expressing excessive motion when all they should have done is express a balance of motion and motionlessness. There is a point were even excessive extreme amounts of motion cannot penetrate or influence a motion in perfect balance with itself and it's environment, the Lemurian's in my mind lost this balance.

We for starter, within our present existence, do not have this to lose because we have not yet obtained this perfect balance ourselves, how the hell is love and light today going to win over then?


As I have mentioned earlier on in this post, this disharmony of excessive positiveness and love and light, has pushed some of us to awaken to what excessive motion creates, we are not pushed to be more positive but more of a neutral being encompassing all of what is negative and positive. Within this action, all negative and positive motions become as one in perfect balance between each other creating perfect harmony. As I also said, this perfect balance is unable to be dominated or influenced in anyway by excessive extremes motions, even within a reality based on motion.

It is wise to free yourself of excessive motion when you are more of infinite consciousness than any other consciousness, if not; your only option is to stick to excessive motion to force change. For the truly aware and wise, this is not an option.  


  1. I understand what you are saying here Mathew, and I agree with you: ppl tend to lock them selves up in their own little corner--"safe haven." This helps them maintain their own perspective that everything is fine and good, but in reality it is only their isolation that keeps them from acknowledging the reality that there is an abundance of negative forces in the world. These ppl have no moral conscience.

    1. Sadly enough they are looking out for #1. Yes, we are suppose to heal and develop ourselves in line with the new consciousness so this flows on to the rest of the world, this doesn't mean we should look after ourselves at the cost of other people's suffering.

      Each to their own I suppose, looking after myself on the backs of other people isn't for me though. It would be nice if we lived in a passive existence but we don't, not yet. These so called negatives don't faze me because I observe them while avoiding becoming a participator.

      I worked with disabled people, it would be like turning my back on the disabled because I thought they were negative, many people see the disabled as something negative.

      The amount of times I've been directly abused is amazing, I can only think of a couple of times I reciprocated only because of their torments. When they dupe me like this it's not a good feeling.

      Anyway Boots, we are on our right path when giving thought to other people in negative situations. I do not vote for any of the main parties these days as they directly or indirectly support these kinds of regimes. I've also sent emails to the prime minister voicing my concern.

      I have created a beautiful serine haven for myself, I wouldn't think twice about sacrificing this for world peace, I actually do this now to a certain extent. I truly don't like conflict but I follow my path. In both my star sign and numerologically I am suppose to avoid conflict at all cost but I can't, not on the backs of others who are indirectly suffering at our hands while we sit within our safe haven.

      If a persons path is to look after #1, I suppose they have to follow that path too.