Wednesday, 20 December 2017
Written by Mathew Naismith
Shine; a simple word with a much deeper inner meaning than the word itself can ever possibly reflect, this is because the word shine to human consciousness is but created therefore perceived. As light and love is a perceived reflection of a far more aware consciousness, what the word shine depicts humanly is but a fragment of it's truer deeper inner meaning.
Inward Perceptions: Human consciousness is unable to become aware beyond of what it is able to perceive, anything beyond these created perceptions can't be perceived by the human consciousness. If there is no comprehension or will of comprehension, how is then one to perceive, in this case beyond what the word shine actually means inwardly. Outwardly, the word shine means to glow or shine as light. The perception of light gives us an outwardly reflection of shining, this is by no way an inwardly reflection.
We perceive light as in opposition or opposing dark. Light means to be aware, like turning on a light in a dark room where's darkness means to be unaware, like turning off the light to a light room. The perception of light and dark, negative and positive, good and bad, are but of outwardly perceptions because they are created and of the outer world or self. It's like the Earth turning around the sun in orbit to the sun; this gives us a created perception of night and day, light and dark. We are simply conditioned to light and dark, positive and negative.
It's handy to look at it this way, all outwardly perceptions are created as all inwardly perceptions are creators, one is of the finite, the other of the infinite.
Outwardly reflections/perceptions = created + separation + finite + light and dark
Inwardly reflections/perceptions = creators + oneness + infinite + nothing and everything as one
When we are only able to perceive the differences between light and dark, this is an outwardly reflection, it's created through the perception of separation. Once you separate energy into different parts, it becomes of the outer world, a created world from the inner world. Outwardly, light and dark, negative and positive, are different because they are separate to each other, this is simply not the case inwardly as everything becomes one.
The World Stage: Recently, we had state elections, the party that was more efficient with their scare campaigning won the day. We were literally threatened that if we voted a certain party in, in our electorate, we would be held accountable. Because people today are conditioned to fear, they not just abided by this but accepted being threatened.
On the world stage, the UN, backed by
control, is doing the exact same thing, holding the world to ransom. You will
be black listed, and no doubt aggressively dealt with, if you don't recognise US Jerusalem as 's new capital. Israel
If today's perception of love and light is so powerful, why are we not just living more in fear but accepting being in fear more than ever?
How many different perceptions of light and love are there? How many different manifestations of numerous perceptions are present at present in the world? What perceived manifestation will win out against all other counteractive manifestations and perceptions?
So why isn't today's love and light working? It's all to do with perceived separation and denial and deliberate ignorance of anything remotely judged as negative/dark. In actuality, anything based on separation will always be a part of what it detests the most, a never ending cycle of separation and counteractive motions.
Acceptance: Firstly, the impotence of acceptance is to realise one doesn't have to become of what one accepts. If I accept this reality as being of a cycle of separation therefore conflict, this doesn't mean I accept this as being who I am or what I am as a whole, it simply means that I accept these cycles of separation as simply being cycles of separation.
Cycles of separation are simply to do with the outer world, our outer selves, accept this as being a part of who you are while at the same time being aware of your inner world or self.
Shine: To shine is to be at one with everything void of separative perceptions, not the obvious separation from a perceived dark/negative.
Imagine for a moment being in a reality or state of consciousness void of the necessity of positive perceptions, there is no negativity therefore no positivity. We would of course perceive this state would only be of light. The trick with light, in relation with awareness, is that the light is also of the dark, how aware are we if we are only aware or desire to be aware of the light? One must be aware of the whole to be truly of the light, to be truly aware of the whole as one, not of separated energies counteracting each other.
I actually perceive a true oneness state as shining, of course we perceive shining as referring to light void of darkness, this simply isn't the case. We are conditioned to separation so shining has to be opposite and separate to dark. Shining is simply the acceptance of everything for what it is, be it of the inner or outer world/self. Yes, we could judge that the outer world is an illusion; this simply gives us a false denial of what we are as a whole, it's also of separation of everything we desire not to be a part of.
I've done this a few times in my life, I shone, even when shining isn't of this kind of separative reality. People couldn't help but stare at me because it's simply not of this kind of reality. To truly shine, one must truly be accepting of all void of being only of what one desires to accept, in saying this, I don't often do this myself as I accept this reality for what it is and myself being a part of this kind of separative reality.
Wednesday, 13 December 2017
Written by Mathew Naismith
The last thing human consciousness wants or desires to be come aware of is how it actually is, especially if the ideology we are using limits us to certain perspectives and perceptions. This is certainly the case if these perspectives and perceptions make us feel good, in actuality, anything that threatens our limited perspectives and perceptions is usually denounced or critically judged as being negative and even toxic. Not sure where oneness fits within this kind of critical separative perception though!!
Until now, human consciousness has been about telling it how it's not, in-effect creating a reality based on deception, including self-deception. Any new constructive conscious change will entail a consciousness to tell it how it is, this will no doubt entail a consciousness to be honest with itself while sacrificing it's present desires. All changes take one to close doors so other doors may open.
We might ask ourselves, why is dishonesty worsening thus creating more conflict?
For any mind to become aware, especially a mind conditioned to 3rd dimensional aspects and spheres, the mind needs to become aware of one to become aware of the other. It's very much inline with closing doors so other doors may open, how can you close a door to something you are not truly aware of? If you are not truly aware of a door and what is behind the door, how can you truly close it? You need to acknowledge the door to be able to understand what is behind the door to know when to close it. Yes, human consciousness collectively is obviously still unable to close the door to deception to open another door to openness and honesty; it's simply not ready to do this on a collective scale.
We might now say that many spiritually aware people are aware of the door to deception and closeness, we now need to consciously move on, evolve.
Within the very present, we are trying to build a reality based on love and light, light simply denotes awareness. Can one truly love and be aware void of acceptances and balance? Considering that a true sense of love can't exist without harmony, which is created from acceptance and balance (moderation), how is creating a reality of love and light void of acceptance and balance true. For starters, how many western minded spiritually aware people accept this reality the way it is?
Acceptance doesn't mean you become apart of what you are accepting, it simply means having an understanding of what you have a comprehension of. Yes, many spiritually aware people comprehend our present reality, but do they truly understand what they have comprehension of? Being that our present reality is based on deception, not many people truly comprehend our present reality, even fewer people understand our reality and even fewer people still accept this kind of reality for what it truly is.
How can you close a door you have no comprehension of therefore any comprehension of when to close the door? Very few of us even comprehend that we are in a reality we can close the door to. The door simply doesn't exist to these people but it exists to a lot of spiritually aware people, however, how many spiritually aware people truly understand the reality behind this kind of door? Considering that many spiritually aware people are trying to create a reality of love and light void of true acceptance, balance and harmony, how truly aware are these people to their present reality? They want to close a door on a reality they have no acceptance or clear understanding of to start with, yes, comprehension but no true understanding in my mind.
Consciousness works in this way, it needs to truly comprehend and understand one kind of consciousness to open a door to another consciousness, in actuality, you can't open a door to another consciousness unless a consciousness truly understands its present consciousness. Comprehending this kind of reality is very different to truly understand this kind of reality, in actuality, any kind of reality. Comprehension is not understanding, compression is simply being aware of something you may or may not understand, especially truly understand. I may comprehend the existence of children, do I understand all these children?
Yes, many of us comprehend the destructive traits of a reality based on deception, but how many of us comprehend and also understand that consciousness is of a cycle of processes. Experiencing a destructive reality is but one of these processes. In truth, this kind of reality is but a very small part of the whole process, a process of experiencing everything we comprehend spiritually through a process. Consciousness is simply of a cycles of processes, being that the cycles of consciousness are of certain processes. What the western mind is presently doing, is discarding certain processes thus trying to break the cycle of evolution. The western mind desires to be of one void of the other.
Being truthful about this kind of reality, which means being open with what is going on within this kind of reality, is the best thing we can do. Discarding anything as simply being negative is the worse thing we can do in my mind, we are simply being ignorant to everything we don't desire therefore deceptive to ourselves and everybody else. Yes, it feels awful being this honest with ourselves at first. One of the best ways of overcoming these feeling is to desist in looking at everything as simply negative or positive, it simply is what it is, a part of a cycle of processes.
Being whole doesn't just mean comprehending what we are as a whole, it also means experiencing (understanding) what we are as a whole. The observer comprehends the experiences of the experiencer where's the experiencer understands what the observer comprehends. The observer and the experiencer (participator) makes up the whole, in-effect, the so-called higher and lower self make up the whole. The higher self, the observer, is not whole void of the participator, the so-called lower self, it takes the whole to be whole, not what we desire to be the whole.
Thursday, 7 December 2017
Written by Mathew Naismith
Imagine interacting with another person in away that your body and mind breaks down into various flashes of light, like sparkles of energy intertwining and interacting with each other. Each sparkle being apart of you shooting off in all directions within someone else's energy field, sounds ridiculous until you personally experience such a thing, also, energy void of form in any sense is pure energy.
It's difficult for human consciousness to perceive ourselves as pure energy without deducing that energy has to be of a form of some kind. Even the perception of being light refers to a form like energy field. Human consciousness is simply unable to comprehend anything beyond some kind of form, however, this is normal and should be accepted as being normal for human consciousness. All impure or unaware consciousnesses have limitations, this is quite natural and normal and of the whole and not separate to the whole.
Consider this though, can pure energy, void of impure energy fields, be able to experience interaction with another being as various flashes of light? If everything was pure energy, this pure energy would be limited to it's own existence. Considering that consciousness as a whole is not limited, in actuality it's infinite in nature, it's unlikely that we would ever be of pure energy, however, this doesn't mean we can't become aware of our pure energy state. This also means we can experience being various flashes of light, of separate energy fields.
My recent experience of flashes of interacting light with another energy field was induced by a very special person, a person who is able to perceive way beyond my own comprehension and understanding. The enjoyment to be able to do this with a person like me was special for both of us.
When someone like me makes reference to impure energy, in other words a consciousness that is limited to certain aspects and fields, this is not a put down. The problem here is, we are conditioned to a higher stature or a higher consciousness being better or more worthy than a lower stature or consciousness. Everything is based on levels, of course the higher the levels are always more desired than lower levels. This limited perception is very human, of a consciousness that is obviously limited to certain aspectual fields.
Consider this, is not a pure aware state not limited to being purely aware of just pure awareness? Actually no, the reason for this lays in that a truly aware state is also aware of it's own unaware states, it's aware of the whole self, not just the parts of the self it desires to be. As each flash or sparkle of light was separate to each other within my experience with another person, it was also whole. For human consciousness to be able to comprehend anything, it has to break it down into separate parts. When you pull a car, an automobile apart, what we have done is simply pull apart something that was whole to once again make it whole again. Even if we pull the car apart to never put it together again, the energy within the car is still whole because it's still energy. Yes, the car is no longer a car but it's still energy.
Being unaware or of an impure consciousness, a consciousness that is not aware of the whole self, is apart of being truly aware, one is not whole without the other. Here we are trying to so desperately reach our higher self when we are already experiencing our higher self, it's just that human consciousness is unable to comprehend this therefore understand this. In saying this, this kind of unawareness, in that a higher stature is always better and more whole, is very much of human perceptions, not of true higher perceptions. To be of a high perception is to also be of a low perception, a perception that is less aware.
What I am trying to say is being unaware is just as important to the whole as being aware. It's like saying that yin is less important that yang within a relationship because this is exactly how a lot of us are perceiving, the aware is far more desired therefore more worthy than being unaware. Being truly of pure awareness, as Buddhism states it, is no less important than being of impure awareness, a state of being less aware.
In saying that unawareness is just as worthy and important to the whole is fine, but when this unawareness becomes destructive unto itself and everything else, a wise consciousness would, in my mind, consider a different course of action. However, being less wise is also no less worthy or important to the whole as being of pure energy. Something else to also consider, you can't experience a pure state of energy, all you can do is become aware of it.
There is simply no motion or form in a state of pure energy, it's the impurity of energy that gives energy motion therefore form. Impurity of energy simply refers to energy flows that interact with each other as separate entities or separate forms of energy. Unawareness simply refers to separated energy flows from our pure energy state. No matter how energy is expressed, it is never truly separate even when in separation; in actuality only within this separation is energy truly whole, as one.
Monday, 4 December 2017
Written by Written by Mathew Naismith
This sounds like a strange topic, not unusual for me though except my topics are usually sound; it's that my perceptions and perspectives can seem strange to a lot of people, way outside the square. In actuality this is a very interesting topic, how many of us are aware of the difference between talking at to talking to each other? How aware are we of when being talked at we are not thinking for ourselves, we in-effect take on someone else's awareness and being.
How many abused are talked at instead of to, of course to be abused one is always being talked at, or more precisely, talked down to. Look at the abuse in the world, how much of it stems from being talked down to, the leaders of the
US, North Korea
are prime examples of this. When you talk down to someone, you are in actuality
talking at them, not to them, however, if you are
conditioned to being talked at and/or of talking at other
people, even if someone is talking to you, you will most often take
this as being talked at instead of to. It's wise to be aware
of this in my mind. Russia
In my mind, for example, leaders like Trump and Hitler talk down to people therefore talk at people instead of to people; this will of course lead to conflict/abuse.
I think at this stage I better insert what incited me to write on this topic. When people are talking to each other rather than at each other, what can develop through conversations like this can be quite unexpected an extraordinary. I have never touched on the topic of talking to instead of at before, never gave it much thought or consideration until now.
This is the funny bit Paul, people ask us what my wife and I do instead of watching TV, the reaction is like, how could you exist without television, Not only this, we then tell them we talk to each other, the next reaction is what do you talk about. When you have partner you can talk with (to), not at, discussion becomes second nature, too many people are talked at not to.
This brings us back to television and most media, it thinks for us, this is very much inline to being talked at rather than to. You and I are talking with (to) each other instead of talking at each other, there is a difference.
My wife and I also joke around with each other a lot, a lot of what we talk about is to do with joking with each other, is the media today a joking matter?
In relation to discussions, people from
are my favourite. You can be
in deep disagreement void of name calling or labelling each other negative or
something bad or wrong in some way. I rarely get this from a western mind as
everything disagreed on is labelled negative, bad or wrong, this simply is not
the case when not talking to each
other instead of at each other. The
western mind seems to be conditioned to talking at instead of talking to
in my mind. India
We must remember, we are all of the western and eastern mind, yin and yang, it's just we are often conditioned to one or the other which denotes an imbalance. Example, children must be talked at as well as to, this of course depends on the circumstances. In relation to my stepdaughter, we would talk at her and tell her to go to her bedroom when naughty; we would then talk to her when a certain amount of time passed.
It's a pleasure talking to someone with an open mind Paul.
How do we know when we are being talked at or down to and/or ourselves talking at or down to other people?
As I mentioned, when in conversation with most other people from
we are often talking to each other even in strong
disagreement. The reason I know this is simple, there is usually no judgment of
a wrong, negative or a bad of some kind, there is also no name calling or any
other kind of abuse. This is usually the case when in conversation with a
person from India
but not always the case, at times the western mind of talking at people takes
over. Being that we all have a western and eastern mind, a yin to the yang,
talking at people is always there. India
As I depicted in my reply to Paul above, badly behaving children often need to be talked at, basically showing where the boundaries are, sadly, too often parents don't follow through with talking to the child afterwards. It can become habitual to talk down (at) children, this is very much a conditioned thing. Harmony after all is to do with balance, being conditioned to only talking at people isn't balance or of a balanced mind, being in harmony with children and the rest of our present environment takes balance.
Now we get to the awkward part, where confusion between being talked at and being a part of a conversation of being talked at can seem like we are ourselves talking at people.
I am often labelled negative by other people even though I don't label people negative or wrong in some way unlike themselves. My writings are also often labelled as talking at people as it's perceived I am telling people something, this is instead of informing people of something. Often, people who label others of talking at people are themselves conditioned to talking at people, it is wise to be aware of this. Also, these people might be quite unaware that they are themselves talking at people; this after all might be what they are conditioned to.
Numerous ideologies are used in away to telling people, talking at people, rather than informing people, talking to people. If we become conditioned to this kind of teachings, we will unknowingly express this kind of teachings. We will also accuse or believe that everyone who disagrees with us is also talking at people; this of course may or may not be the case depending of the judgments of negatives and positives, bad and good, wrong and right and so on.
If you honestly look around, you can see what ideologies and people are talking at people, you can also see when you are yourself talking at and to people. At times, people need to be talked at, at other times people need to be talked to, the trick is balance, not to become too conditioned to one or the other. Within this, be aware that being conditioned to talking at people will lead to conflict, we must also be aware that other people talking at us will create this conflict if we like it or not, the world scene is a prime example of this at present. Just because you are apart of it, doesn't make you of it.....
Saturday, 2 December 2017
Written by Mathew Naismith
This is indeed ironical. I awoke this morning to the understanding of me writing a post about peace and love, being that peace creates a sense of love, not the other way around. Love is simply a natural process of being harmonious. As we quieten the mind, we quieten the disharmony within our mind while at the same time creating a sense of love. Peace/harmony is the key to love.
I wrote the following in a discussion relating to the topic of; what is your core element that determines your way of thinking and being. I wrote faith, in that I have faith that human consciousness will go along with the natural evolution and evolve from it's present consciousness. A lot of people said love but one person simply said peace, I wrote the following in response to this.
1: Indeed peace because how would one truly be of love if disharmonious? Harmony naturally and automatically brings us a true sense of love, love simply isn't the be and end all as it is treated today.
In the sixties it was peace and love, peace brings love, basically, love is part of the natural process of peace, love is only apart of the process as love derives from peace, not the other way around.
This is like today's perception of light which denotes awareness, as of intelligence, what is awareness void of wisdom; the same is with what is love void of a true sense of peace?
We are today so focused on light and love when light and love are determined by base factors like wisdom and peace. How many people today are focused simply on wisdom and peace? I think the sixties had it more correct than we do today in western spirituality.
Stating simply peace is perfect, a true sense of spiritual understanding in my mind.
2: Indeed, peace to one person isn't peace to another person. Is a multinational in financial dire-straights at peace? Is a peaceful person at war at peace?
Of course we could say here that a multinational at peace financially isn't very loving but he is, he loves his wealth as much as a spiritual person loves another person. Even a true sense of love is ambiguous it would seem.
We could say that peace is also ambiguous as the peace and love of a multinational and a spiritual person is different. As a multinational is not at peace with being poor, a spiritual person is not at peace in being materialistic or destructive.
Simply, peace, like love, is ambiguous until it becomes true......
3: Of course, peace simply says it all. I go deep so that others have an opportunity to comprehend and understand a true sense of peace and love. Behind love a true sense of peace/harmony resides.
I handle the environment we presently exist in differently, I don't perceive a negative or a positive, it is what it is, as in it just is, void of anything having to be of one thing or another.
My wife and I haven't watched TV for over 9 years now, I do miss the docs though, not the news. The news these days is only of what they want us to be aware of.
It is obvious I needn't have gone deep with you, sorry for that Paul.
As we become more aware, part of the process of becoming aware is disharmony. We are certainly not going to like or feel comfortable with everything we become aware of; this is until we reach the process of being truly harmonious, not just to the things we desire to be of but to everything.
Humans are more intelligent and aware of their environment than ever, how harmonious is the world today? You see part of the process of becoming more aware is being disharmonious, however, no true sense of love will reside within a reality that is disharmonious.
We then get to a point of process were we only become aware of the things that are harmonious, everything we are disharmonious with are discarded or ignored. You see, when we are harmonious love is able to reside; all we desire at this stage of the process is to be of this love. This is of course quite understandable in regards to our present disharmonious reality.
At this stage of the process we are still in disharmony of the things we have rejected or denounced to simply feel some kind of love. At this stage this is not a true sense of love for there is no true sense of harmony, however, we do feel more loving because we are more at harmony.
The next part of the process entails us to become wiser with our awareness. As of knowledge or intelligence, awareness void of wisdom is only ever going to be half aware for awareness, as of knowledge and intelligence, needs the guidance of wisdom to know how to use and respond to knowledge, intelligence and awareness.
This part of the process then allows us to be in harmony with everything we become aware of, only in this state can a true sense of harmony therefore love reside. I think that harmony and wisdom are the true building blocks to become truly loving, for only in true harmony can a true sense of love reside. Look at it like building a home for love to reside, without a home to reside in, love can never truly be at peace.......