Unlimiting Consciousness

Written by Mathew Naismith

I was asked recently about my thoughts on Buddhism, the following was my reply.  

There are different variants of Buddhism. I don't hold to that one ideology is the answer for everyone for there is never one answer to anything.

Buddhism has its boundaries or doctrines as of any ideology or ism, I am not myself into limiting my consciousness like this. "All else other than the ultimate state of pure awareness or nothingness is an illusion", I don't myself limit my consciousness to these perspectives or perceptions. In saying this, Buddhism teaches one to cope better in an ego created reality, as a lot of ideologies do.

I find that Taoism and Hinduism are far less limiting, of course this depends on how you use these ideologies. I prefer Buddhism to materialism or westernized atheism myself. I should also say that materialism and atheism have their place as well. How many people would have starved to death if it wasn't for materialism? Materialism has given us more soul experiences to be experienced, however, when materialism is abused and misused, it becomes too destructive when not balanced out with the likes of Buddhism or spirituality as a whole.

You see, to me there is never one answer or absolute state.

I wrote the following to someone in relation to the year being an emotional rollercoaster.

It is only as bad as we make it, why give it any more energy that it's worth? Learn from it and move on, of course at times easier said that done. I often look at it this way these days, it is what it is, nothing more, nothing less. As soon as we get into the negatives and positives, it's always more that it should be.

How often do we allow ideologies and isms to limit our consciousness? Probably the same amount we limit our own consciousness to certain specifics like positives and negatives, or, what is real and what is an illusion. Is Buddhism limiting consciousness to certain specifics? As of any ideology or ism, it is the way we use Buddhism that is limiting. As soon as we limit ideologies or isms to certain specifics, we are abusing energy as energy itself is of unlimited potentiality. It is like constricting energy to a certain space where motion is restricted to certain motions only. Often any motion outside these restricted boundaries is usually referred to as something negative and subsequently dealt with. Materialism, like religion or any other ideology, is fine when in balance within the environment that supports materialism. When used out of balance with the natural environment, abuse of energy is created and often accepted by the abusers, in other words we become conditioned to abusing energy through limiting it's potentiality to certain specifics, often to primarily serve the ego.

It is the same old story, if energy doesn't serve the elite, the ego in control, it is dealt with, usually discarded as something negative or illusionary. The elite can be a multinational but it can also be of people who try to be only of an elite or absolute state of being. An elite state of being in Buddhism is egoless, a state of pure awareness or nothingness, the funny thing is, once of this state, perceptions of negatives and positives, what is real and what is not real are absent, everything becomes what it is, nothing more, nothing less.

In a state in the absence of the ego, there is no negative and positive, what is an illusion and what is real, because there is no separation of energy in an egoless state, only through the ego can separation be perceived and put into motion. Look at it like this, as soon as you separate energy, energy becomes of motion, of the ego, of course separation of energy can only be implemented through the ego. This means the separation of energy to what is positive and negative, what is real and what is an illusion, is of the state of ego but a state that has always existed as well.

Once you get an imbalance of ego and egolessness, motion and motionlessness, through separation of energy is when an abuse of energy is often created. How many of us only desire to be of an elite state or status, where all else is discarded in one way or another thus creating a reality of abuse of energy? Who desires to be subservient or inferior to an elite status? The ego in control always desires to be of an elite status thus creating an imbalance in energy as of any separation of energy can. Yes, separate energy but be wise in how you separate energy, try to avoid abusing energy when separating energy. Balance is indeed the key here.  

I am subservient to the environment that is presently supporting my being, I would not have it any other way, accept to balance out my existence with the environment my existence is existing in and my ego (soul) is experiencing. As there is nothing wrong or negative with the ego or even the ego in control, there is nothing wrong with materialism. However, as it is of the way we use ideologies and isms, as soon as we become abusive to energy, we create a reality in line with this abuse. Try to remember, the only part of us that can see a wrong or negative in the ego and materialism, is the ego in control. There isn't even a wrong in being abusive, it's just being excessively abusive in the way we manipulate energy isn't a wise thing to do, not if we want to live in peace and harmony.

In all, it is what it is when we choose to abuse energy, nothing more, nothing less.......               

A Reality of Realities

Written by Mathew Naismith

Within this one specific 3rd dimensional reality, how many realities that are 3rd dimensional experienced? It's insurmountable, now how many realities can be experienced within the whole of existence? It's literally infinite in number; there are no limitations to the realities that can be experienced. This also means that we, even while experiencing a 3rd dimensional reality, can experience other realities that are not 3rd dimensional.

Thích Quảng Đức is a prime example of a 3rd dimensional being, experiencing another reality while still of a 3rd dimensional reality. Thích Quảng Đức was a Buddhist monk who sacrificed himself in 1963 by setting himself alight, this was in protest of the present South Vietnamese regime's harsh treatment of Buddhists at the time. Quảng Đức wasn't the only monk to do this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4LMBhapj44

It is said that these monks where drugged, going by my own experiences, it is most likely that these monks where not drugged.

It was my misfortune, as such, to experience an ongoing painful chronic disorder from an early age. The tasks I performed through my life did not reflect my physical and mental disorder, in actuality most of the times I seemed normal with no noticeable difference to the average person. The majority of my tasks, probably 95% of my tasks, were conducted without drugs, pain killers. Yes, to a certain extent we can become conditioned to a condition that might seem overwhelming to others, this however does not account for chronic disorders.

It's not that the monks didn't feel anything, this is in accordance with my own experiences. They simply nullified or softened the effects of a chronic disorder or experience. This is done by putting oneself into a different reality; certain psychotic drugs do this as well as something as simple as music.

One other thing, I know I go on about this a bit but for a very good reason, stay away from the perceptions of negatives and positives. What would a dark negative energy source desire you to perceive this kind of energy to be? Demonic, toxic and negative, this kind of perception simply promotes this kind of energy; in actuality these perceptions give this kind of energy more energy, not less. Just simply be....... 

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.   

Pure Awareness verses Pure Ego

Written by Mathew Naismith

It's all very simple, strip away the controlling ways of the ego and all you are left with is pure awareness and wisdom, a state known by many as oneness, zero point, God or what ever, it's all of the same state void of the influences of a controlling ego.

For numerous people, the ego calls this state God for a very good reason, how else within an ego controlled reality could the ego comprehend this state of pure awareness and wisdom, a state of complete neutrality, without blowing this state out of all proportion?

The ego justifiably and wisely keeps a connection to this state by doing what the ego does best, inflates everything so it is able to comprehend this state of neutrality, the problem with the ego is when it becomes in total control. When this occurs, any connection or awareness to this neutral state becomes obscured or even unknown. This is atheism at its best but it's not Buddhist atheism, to my knowledge anyway.

Buddhist atheism; simply means there is no inflation or pretentiousness in regards to this neutral state, there is no higher or lower state either even of consciousness, there is simply ego and non-ego, aware and not aware. On the other hand, main stream atheism simply refutes anything not of science and/or of the five senses. Giving that science and the five senses are of pure ego, it's understandable why there are fundamental differences between Buddhist atheism and main stream atheism.

I should be honest here, I do not follow or am I well studied in Buddhism, Taoism or any other ism or ideology; all my awareness comes to me through my own experiences. I should also say that not all experiences are detected through the five senses with people like me either; many of our experiences are undetectable by the ego. Experiences come through awareness; you are just simply aware void of any ego expressions. How often do we become aware through no reason? This is pure awareness. A controlling ego on the other hand does quite the opposite; we can feel all the experiences we like and still know little and still be as unwise as ever.

In saying this, it is important that our ego detects and becomes aware of some of these experiences, after all, all experiences are of the ego as well. If our ego is wise, the ego will learn from these experiences, if not wise, the ego simply won't learn, even after many centuries of learning and experiencing.

So how does the ego become wise? It's not through experiences and/or knowledge, it's simply being aware of the controlling ways of the ego, after all, the ego is simply an unaware state of consciousness. A true teacher in my mind will teach awareness, not knowledge.

Awareness; is not knowledge. As I have stated before in my posts, the reason for this is that knowledge is of motion where awareness is is of motionlessness. The ego often makes the mistake in deceiving us to believe awareness and knowledge are the same when their simply not. All motion is of the ego, this pure awareness in this state of neutrality is simply not of motion.

Now, the reason why this state of pure awareness is also known as nothingness, is to do with there being no motion and a state of total neutrality, this means yin and yang, negative and positive, bad and good, love and hate, etc, or neutralised, they become as one and not separated.

Yin and yang are depicted as separate entities, when in their separate states, they are of the ego, however, when as one, they become this pure awareness, and yes, they are of one, this pure awareness, as they are also of two, pure ego.

The ego has always existed, this of course means yin and yang has also always existed. Only the ego (motion) can create an ego, therefore the ego (yin and yang) has always existed. Also, this state of pure awareness couldn't create the ego for it is not of motion. Another thing to consider, all starting and ending points are creations of the ego, of time and space, it's the ego that creates everything as of the universe itself, it's all created by the ego. Everything has always existed, of course an ego in control simply can't comprehend this and understandably so, there has to be a starting point for the ego. 

However in saying all this, it is wise not to separate pure awareness from pure ego for this within itself is of the ego as of all separations are. As this state of pure awareness is of awareness, so is a state of pure ego no matter how limited the awareness might be in this state, it's still a form of awareness, at times usually of a state void of wisdom when the ego is in total control.                                 

It's wise to be aware that, negatives and positives, love and hate, bad and good, dark and light, yin and yang, are all of the ego, the more we separate everything, the more unaware we will become and of course the more destructive we will be......How obviously destructive is the light to the dark? Light should represents awareness but it simply doesn't in a world controlled by the ego, the light (awareness) simply shouldn't to be destructive to anything but it presently is being expressed in this way.

Pure ego is simply destructive to everything, even eventually of itself, this is it's nemesis and it's nature. Pure awareness on the other hand is constructive to everything because everything is of awareness to one degree or another.    

It is also wise to stay away from the perceptions of higher and lower states or of an ultimate state of being, for all this depicts is pure ego as there is again a depiction of separation within these kinds of perceptions. At no point is this state of pure awareness and neutrality depicted, by the people who are truly aware of this state, as being an ultimate higher state of existence, it's just simply neutral, and yes to the ego, pure bliss and understandably so. 

   The ego can gain that much control, that judging

what is an expression of ego and what is

an expression of awareness is clouded.

Often the ego will judge an expression of

awareness as of what it is of itself, ego!!

~Mathew G~