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.
