Written by Mathew Naismith
I have been participating a lot
recently, even participating in the absence of being aware of my own
observation of my participation. In science, participant observation
is where scientists interact with what is being studied, in other
words being a subjective participant without losing the ability to
observe. In observation bias is expressed which can give a false
perspective of what is being observed, so to avoid this you become
interactive with the participants of what is being observed without
losing the ability to observe.
This works a little differently
spiritually, in that even in participation in the absence of
observation of participation, you are still being observed. It matters
not if you are aware that you are in observation or not, the act of
observation is still in progress. In scientific observation there is
only the awareness of scientific observation, this is the small
picture, the big picture is perceived spiritually, where a far more
aware consciousness beyond most scientific evaluations and acceptance
is in observation. In my own mind it would be silly to discount that
a far more aware and wiser consciousness is not in observation of our
own participation.
Look at it like this, are ants or
insects aware of our observation of them when not in participation
with them? Only in the act of participation of the observer do you
realise you are being observed so yes, in every way we are just like
ants or insects when unaware of being observed. Spirituality gives us
an idea of being observed, in the process giving us a perception of a
bigger picture than that of our own observation. Many of us have
simply made the mistake that we are the observers of participation, in
the process are quite unaware we are ourselves being observed.
So the question is now, what kind of
subjective observation are we under?
Subjective: Taking place within the
mind and modified by individual bias.
Imagine for a moment an observer with a
bias intent, what will eventuate from this action of bias, especially
if the observer is malign, of self-gratifying harmful intent?
When I observe my own participation, a
certain degree of bias is present, however, when I participate in the
absence of my own observation of participation, this bias is no
longer present. You experience first hand what other participants are
experiencing. In the awareness of observation you do interact
differently.
How many people are aware of a malign
observation of human participation? Of course this malign
consciousness is not just in observation either but in full
participation, as we are certainly observing and experiencing today.
So many people are under this kind of observation of participation.
Look at how the authorities are wanting to observe every move you
make, in the process participate in how to influence you in how you
participate right inline with the malign consciousness.
It is really important not to condemn
those most influenced by this kind of consciousness. If you are made
unaware, how is one to know? While in full participation without
becoming what I am participating in, I observed that it is too easy
to stray from being decent to being indecent, in other words being
benign to being malign.
Yes, the malign consciousness makes
itself out to be the stronger more controlling consciousness, in the
process easily manipulating people away from being benign, a
seemingly meek consciousness. The benign is not meek, in fact the
benign is resilient to malign observational participation without
being duped into being destructively controlling. In actuality, being
duped into being malign is exceptionally meek within itself, so the
meek inheriting the Earth seems like the malign!! No, the perceived
meek, the benign, shall inherit the Earth. There is certainly nothing
meek in people staying true to virtues of the benign while under the
full influence of observational and partition of the malign.
Yes, the malign is this influential
through it's controlling ways that all seems to be at the mercy of
the malign. Now, when I simply observe, it is the malign that is
truly at the mercy of the benign, just because the benign is not
controlling, doesn't mean the benign is not present and in full
observation. It is within the realisation of this observation that
people will free themselves from the malign. It is simply of the
awareness of being observed by the benign that will influence how
participators of observation react to being also observed by the
benign. As I often state, many are simply lost within their own
creation, of being observed by the malign. Take no notice of how
people are manipulated in being of the malign, going astray from
being decent, for this observing malign consciousness is highly
deceptive and manipulative.
It is really strange because it looks
as though the malign is shooting itself in the foot, in other words
being self-destructive even though the malign is unaware of this. The
malign is all about deception, even and probably more deceptive unto
itself. As the malign seems to be growing in strength in it's
control, material wealth and observation, the truly benign also
become more resilient. It is the most unintelligent move a so-called
intelligence can enact upon the benign. In a real show of strength,
the malign should be overseeing the benign, interestingly quite the
opposite is occurring.
I know that the Freemasons seem to be
recent, but the root core of Freemasons consciousness goes way back
in ancient times. It would seem when the pharaohs stopped overseeing
the benign, is when the Freemasons root core consciousness stopped
overseeing the benign. The pharaohs themselves saw themselves as
Gods, the all seeing eye, and become the persecutors of the benign
instead of the overseers of the benign. What multinational today does
not see themselves as some kind of demigod or actual God like? Take
away their servants, their commodities, what are they? They are
nothing without their servants, their human commodities, they owe
their own existence to who they see as simply a commodity. Did the
pharaohs end up treating their servants as simply a commodity when
they really owed their own existence to these servants? I believe
this to have occurred as early as the fourth dynasty.
Yes, the benign is of servitude, but
servitude to a consciousness that appreciates this servitude instead
of depreciates this servitude of the benign. In the end this
depreciation of the benign will come down around their ears, in other
words their world will end up destroying itself from within, leaving
the benign to begin a new age in the absence of being ungratefully
subservient to the malign. I think a lot of the benign know this to
be true.