Penalisation for Being Neutral

Written by Mathew Naismith

Imagine separating two dogs that strongly desire to rule over the other, now imagine being the neutral party trying to separate these two strongly opposing dogs......                                

To some people, the following post may seem a little too complicated to understand, I apologise for this, I couldn't simplify what I wrote any further. 

Yes, accept it, we are in an age where people who speak the honest truth are being penalised and even incarcerated for doing so. Even in Australia, journalists are being penalised and incarcerated for speaking the honest truth to a more preferred desired truth.

A desired truth is either of a negative or a positive disposition, depending on a person's desired train of thought of course. On the other hand, honest truths are neither of a negative or a positive, or, of both attributes, usually in balance with each other. Life as a whole is governed by a to-and fro action, if you like, a negative and positive motion. Often being born is deemed as a positive where death is a negative, however, others think that neither birth nor death is negative or positive.

Of course being penalised for being neutral, in other words of honest truth as opposed to desired truths, on the internet is becoming more prominent as well these days. In an age of desired truths, the separation of negatives from positives is most desired. Of course being honest, the separation of energy in any sense is only going to create a desired truth, a truth that sees any neutral state as a threat to its own existence.

So is honest truth, a neutral state of thought, a threat to the existence of desired truths, a mind partial to one side or the other, usually in opposition?

When people like me warn about the effects of being too positive, this is usually deemed to be a negative when all it is, is the honest truth. When there is a deemed opposition, as in negatives to positives, anything not deemed to be of a certain positive is deemed negative. Even when of a negative disposition, anything positive is seen as a threat therefore a negative.

The problem with being neutral, of honest truth, which people from both negative and positive dispositions deem, is that being neutral is deemed to be a huge threat to the existence of both opposing dispositions of negatives and positives. In the camp of both negative and positive camps, the camp of both camps, of a neutral existence of negatives and positives, is deemed to be their biggest threat. Why?

When you get an extreme separation of energy, as is obviously occurring presently, extreme factions see an opposing faction or camp as an enemy to be avoided (penalised) or exterminated (incarcerated). Any neutral camp trying to neutralise the situation is obviously going to be the seen as a huge threat to the extermination or avoidance of the other faction or camp. It is quite obvious that the positive camp desires to wipe out the negative camp and visa-versa. Any camp trying to neutralise this situation is going to be the enemy of both camps. As of my past lives recalled, I wouldn't have it any other way.

If you are of a neutral disposition or camp, trying to neutralise the situation is understandably going to lead to avoidance (penalisation) and/or extermination (incarceration) by either opposing camps or factions of the separation of energy, not the union of energy. Yes, being neutral isn't just to do with being of honest truth, to the best of one's ability, but of a true union of energy, however, neither camp or faction of negative or positive is seen as a threat to the neutral camp or faction. As it is, both camps will see the neutral camp as being its biggest threat, as always.

A scientist in recent years tried to get a job at a lab; he had perfect credentials for the job. At he's last and final interview, he was rejected because in College he wrote a paper that expressed an honest point of view of truth. This is a true story, where a person is penalised for being too honest within their truth in the past.

How many people are penalised on the internet by certain groups, from materialism to immaterialism, for speaking the honest truth as opposed to a desired truth? How often are people penalised for not speaking a certain desired truth in accordance with a certain group's desired truths? From materialist ideology to immaterialist ideology are people of neutral disposition being penalised and/or incarcerated. This is worsening which simply shows that human consciousness is not developing any further from the separation of energy. In truth, human consciousness is separating energy even more, not uniting energy even more.  

As I have learnt from recalling parts of my past lives, any neutral party trying to neutralise the situation will always be seen as a huge threat to both parties, camps or factions. Our mentality of throwing rocks and sticks at each to throwing bombs and missiles at each other shows a clear lack of mental progression. Attacking a neutral party or camp for trying to neutralise the situation, is further proof of our lack of mental progression. However, the existence of neutral parties trying to neutralise the situation shows that human consciousness can still evolve further in mentality and consciousness.

A neutral disposition is unable to speak of everything in negative and positive terminologies. This kind of disposition isn't in opposition to any party, camp or faction, therefore no real threat to any party, camp or faction. However, any party, camp or faction of extreme opposing ideological views, will see a neutral disposition as being their biggest threat therefore a deemed negative to either penalise or incarcerate. I am not myself truly at this stage but I am at least aware.  

A camp of both camps, of both dispositions, in an age of the extreme separation of energy seems like a mistake when trying to separate the two heavily opposing dogs. Wisdom on the other hand sees that the neutral party will become mauled, probably by both dogs, but the outcome of the neutralisation of the dog fight for supremacy over the other is all worth it in the end. As it can be painful in bringing up children, the same is with dealing with life as a whole, but the pain is certainly worth it in the end if a neutral reality, a favourable outcome, was created.                  

Seeing It As It Is

Written by Mathew Naismith

Seeing it as it is, not how I would desire to see it, gets me into a lot of trouble with other people. It is like with love, just because I don't desire to feel the affects of love, in other words lust after what the feelings of love gives to the ego, I am not of love. I simply don't desire to feel the affects of love but allow these feelings to naturally exist, without effort, within certain conscious states. It is natural that within certain conscious states, the ego will experience feelings of love, giving the ego a false ideology that these states are simply of love.

I also don't desire being positive over and above being negative, in all honesty, I simply allow myself to be neutral as much as possible. I have learnt so much from the so-called negatives, way more than from the positives. In all honesty, my ego has learnt from these experiences instead of suffering from these experiences. To me, to suffer from an experience is to counteract a negative experience with a positive experience. This is the same in counteracting hate with love, most often to the same degree or to the same excess. Within this, one to me is still suffering from the collective consciousness experience rather than learning from the collective conscious experience.

How shocking it was practicing in cannibalism or going to see people fight to the death in a Roman arena, but it is alright to deliberately make people ill so you can live/feed off of them. I recently read an article in how doctors who dared find cancer enzymes in vaccines systematically died/murdered. And how many people are fighting for there very existence, not just in wars but materialistically? The whole planet has become an arena that was deliberately created to serve the few materialistically. In all honesty, are we learning from what human consciousness has experienced or are we still suffering from these experiences?

I will always be hated or despised for my honesty; I would rather this than the alternative of course. Simply, self-dishonesty isn't an alternative for people like me, we must see it how it is, not how our egos would desire to see it. As I am not into separation as in black and white people instead of just people, I am not into negatives and positives. Don't' be conned by the controlling ego that desires to separate through perceptions of black and white, negative and positive perceptions, negative and positives are simply perceptions created by the ego. You really don't need to be positive, just not negative, within this you will be able to see everything for what it really is, not how the ego desires to only see it, in black and white, negatives and positives!!

A True Neutral Existence

Written by Mathew Naismith

I will try to explain what it is truly like being neutral in one's own expressions and being. Being neutral isn't about not taking sides, it's about how we take sides.  

https://leroymalouf.pressbooks.com/chapter/the-positive-power-of-being-neutral/

Extract: “Neutrality, a good place to visit, and a strong place to live”

Another way of strengthening your energy, and to stay in knowing and living your purpose, is to get neutral. “By shifting into neutral we get power!”

In my mind, this article explains what being neutral is all about, however, the use of expressions like positive and power therefore control, is not of a neutral being. Firstly, being positive isn't neutral and power or empowerment simply refers to power and control over something else. Usually something that is in opposition to being positive and empowered. Being neutral simply means one is not limited or controlled by fixations or desires. We have simply been conditioned to the feelings that empowerment and being positive give us; of course all this has created is another fixation. Considering that our present reality is chaotic and destructive, fixating ourselves to any kind of empowerment and positiveness makes us feel better in such a reality. The trick to being neutral is not to look at a chaotic destructive reality as being negatives or positive; it's simply a journey that is different to other journeys that are not as chaotic and destructive.

A lot of people have the idea of being neutral that you don't do anything in opposition to anything else, another energy source. In a sense this is true, you don't do anything in opposition to anything else but you can influence change upon another energy source without being in opposition and this is the trick. Trying to influence another energy source from within isn't about being in opposition but about being neutral to that source you are trying to influence. Being neutral is all about staying away from perceptions that create separation and division, for example, negative and positive, black and white, etc.

I would say that using expressions like power and positivenenss in this article, was to attract people who are anything but neutral towards their present environment or reality. I don't myself use expressions like empowerment and positive because I am not into attracting people through their desires and fixations. This might seem silly, especially in regards that a lot of people simply look upon this reality as being negative/toxic. These people are searching for something in opposition to a chaotic destructive reality. I simply try to avoid anything to attract people by using any kind of expression that separates and divides, in a sense, I try to be true to my expressions.

To be honest, a lot of people consort to the following, however, imagine what a totally neutral existence would create. The article above that I have attached to this post gives a brief outline of this.  I have also inserted further reading material at the end of this post that I consort to more.                    

In short, we cannot grow, we cannot achieve authentic discovery, and our eyes cannot be cleansed to the truly beautiful possibilities of life, if we simply live a neutral existence.

- ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS , AMERICAN JOURNALIST

Adjective. The definition of neutral is not taking part in a fight or war or having very little color. An example of neutral is a person who does not take sides in an argument between two friends. An example of neutral is the color tan.

So if I see an obvious coloured person, I have to see them as being tan to be neutral? No, they are coloured but not coloured in opposition or negative in anyway to me being white. Within this perception, you are not deceiving yourself nor are you separating and dividing yourself from anything that is different to you. Let's be honest here, self-deception is an abuse of energy and something that often creates more separation and division. Is seeing an obvious coloured person separation? If I only see a coloured person instead of a human being, yes, most definitely but I don't. How many people only see empowerment and being positive as being the only constructive way to exist? This is exactly like seeing a coloured person as being coloured therefore negative; you focus more on the colour than anything else.

We so often perceive that being positive is good to negative being bad, is this not of the same mentality that white people are positive and black people are negative? Of course it is. Is the sun negative and toxic because it's one of the most violent destructive sources of energy within our solar system? Of course not, this is how a person who is remotely neutral thinks. Why separate the suns violence and destructiveness from mans violence and destructiveness? We often separate being positive to being negative as a positive, we simply focus mainly on a positive being positive and empowering. To be a successful multinational, you have to be positive and empowered. How destructive are multinationals upon our environment?

Let's be honest here with ourselves, most of us are conditioned to focus on the colour of a man, not what the man truly represents, simply another energy source on a different journey of life to ourselves. Our present reality is simply another journey of many other journeys. Being neutral isn't about not taking sides, like taking sides to being neutral to not being neutral, it's about the way we take sides. Being neutral in myself as much as possible isn't of the perception that not being neutral is negative, it's simply seeing that all else from being neutral is not neutral therefore of separation and division. Being of separation and division isn't negative, it's simply a different way to exist and perceive to being neutral. 

The side I have chosen is to be neutral as possible, so even choosing to be neutral is taking sides but it is different in the way we take side to when we are not being neutral. It's by no mistake that the antonym to neutral is negative and/or positive, so to be neutral is taking a side but not in opposition to negatives and positives. It simply comes down to how we take sides, this of course is simply done by not perceiving in negatives and positives being bad or good, wrong and right, etc.  

Further reading

https://artofembracing.com/what-does-being-neutral-really-mean/

Extract: When a pattern is brought to neutral we’re no longer bothered by it. Thinking of the issue no longer evokes a response, positive or negative. We’re no longer polarized. When we think of the issue it’s just neutral.

When we meet a situation that used to trigger us, now it simply informs us, clearly. Now we’re free to express as we’re moved to be in this  moment. We’re freer to make a choice that’s no longer influenced by our patterning. We’re freer to open to our innate knowing and know  how to respond in a manner that’s appropriate for all involved.

https://www.mindbodygreen.com/0-8168/the-neutral-mind-what-it-is-and-how-to-cultivate-it.html

Extract: We constantly evaluate our world throughout our day. We have to; it’s part of human nature and it’s survival. However, too often evaluation becomes judgment. Judgment becomes bias. Bias leads us down the path of whatever emotion is tied to that bias, be it resentment, guilt, or even joy. Sometimes this path takes us to a very narrow space where we can get stuck. But what if we could evaluate without heading down that path of attachment?

  

In the Zone

Written by Mathew Naismith

It's occurred again, a light bulb just went on Raghunath in reference to my interaction with people like you.

Consider this Raghunath. People talk about unconditional love and oneness at the same time avoiding, what they have judged, negative people and situations at all cost. There conditions in life are insurmountable. Get this. I personally know of Catholics who have helped various people of all walks of life including atheists in a big way. Who, between love and light people and Catholics, express fewer conditions?  Who is then able to truly comprehend and understand unconditional love and oneness the most?

I know of Buddhist and Hindus who express far fewer conditions than people of love, light and positivity. I have experienced this first hand, having been on a number of spiritual forums, their conditions to life overall are insurmountable. Look at what group is trying to switch the light bulb off of what they have conditions to the most. What group is trying to separate itself the most from the present reality? You could not become more of the dark if you tried; this is in fear of anything remotely critically judged as being negative and toxic or different to yourself. Being truly of the light is being aware of everything while of the absence of conditions as much a possible. You will notice a lot of these people also criticise religions!!

Conditions are usually created from perceptions of what is judged to be negative and positive, a division in consciousness, therefore energy, in fear of what isn't presently of ourselves. There is of course no true sense of oneness or unconditional love to be had in this. I am simply trying to awaken people to their own darkness, how many people today desire to stay unaware of themselves being of this darkness? People like you make a difference, for you are for turning on the light, not turning it off.  

It's the seeker of light, of awareness, who turns on the light switch, not the person who guides you to that light switch. A true seeker simply refers to a person who seeks to express as fewer conditions as possible, most often seeking to do this unbeknownst to themselves. Less motion expressed is always preferable spiritually.

Also:

I do live in a cave, as such. I live within my own existence by going in, so so beautiful and harmonious. I created this cave, my own reality, by accepting everything for what it is, a consciousness lost within its own creation. Its nobodies fault and no one is to blame, it's simple conditioning over many years. We truly know not what we do, if we did, we couldn't have created such a reality.

When I face up to the worst of it, all I can do is smile but smile in bewilderment, not glee.

You didn't ramble on jim my, you simply expressed the truth within. Be you.

________________________________

I am at times asked how I cope with this reality the way it is in the way I do. My wife and I haven't watched TV (television) for around ten years now; we have simply stopped the endless conditioning of television, the conditioning to what is positive and negative. We are simply being told or conditioned to what is and what isn't negative and positive. We are therefore often conditioned to express more motion, not less. What is a depiction of love? Lust and desire. What is positivity? Control, manipulation and the ostracisation of everything that doesn't give us control. Being in control is positive; not being in control is therefore negative. We are the good guys, they are the bad guys, it's a continuos separation (division) of consciousness. Of course television is but one media outlet that conditions us to express more motion, not less.

I am also asked how I coped and cope with the type of injuries I incurred in my childhood. People, who have incurred an injury half way through their lives, wonder how I copped with my injuries and also coped with my injuries without taking painkillers. Also, some of the work I did in my life was too hard to do for fully able people, people without serious injury.

If I tried to be positive all my life, I simply could not have done what I did; all my energy would have gone into trying to be positive instead of trying to be neutral. Being positive takes an endless amount of energy, it's something that has to be continually fed to stay positive. It takes very little energy to be neutral as there are no conditions to be neutral other than staying away from conditions in the first place. People excessively positive have to feed off of each other, this is why they ostracise anyone who is remotely judged as being negative, now imagine for a moment not having to do this.

You can see how I cope with this reality is simular to how I cope with my injuries and many other challengers in my life; I try to stay away from anything that conditions us to certain conditions. My own life experiences, which are often perceived as being negative by positive thinking people, is enlightening only because of the lack of conditions I put on my life. Now do the same with this reality. Look at this reality as a person trying to cope with a disability instead of a person who is simply negative. When you take away the conditions of negative and positive, you take away the need of excessive counteractive motions.         

I ask myself, what is there to be so excessively positive if the same opposing excess doesn't exist? One excessive naturally creates the other; now imagine a reality of the absence of excesses. Perceptions of negatives and positives are simply perceptions and conditions we have created no more. Only through these perceptions can we create excesses. Don't be deceived for one moment, you don't have to be excessively positive to cope with life as it is, in fact, excessive positiveness doesn't cope, it simply ignores or stays in the dark to cope.......!!

Think on this, are sports people, who experience the zone where everything seems to slow down and they are at their optimum, think they are negative or positive at the time of their experience? They are simply neutral to all around them. 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/emily-hill/what-it-really-means-to-b_b_10300610.html

Extract: According to Csikszentmihalyi, the secret to getting “in the zone” is the Goldilocks principle: not too hot, not too cold. You want to feel inspired, but not overwhelmed. We can apply this to anything (everything!). Your squat weight, your career path, and your sex life: not so much challenge that you burn out, not so little that you get bored.

Note: It's also worth reading what different people feel when in the zone in this article. Imagine a reality where all that exists in this reality is in the zone......!!   

Defining Unconditional Love

Written by Mathew Naismith

In truth, are we becoming more unconditionally loving or less? To answer this we must first define what unconditional love is, I hope the following does just this. I recently found the following in my research on this topic.

_______________________________

http://www.thepowerofoneness.com/blog/what-is-the-difference-between-conditional-love-and-unconditional-love/

Extract: "Conditional love is a polarised emotion, meaning that it has an opposite emotion. The opposite extreme of love is hatred. Conditional love comes from ego and generally focuses on someone (like romantic partner, child, parent, friend) or something (like a house, a car or a job). When we love someone conditionally, we tend to want them to look, act and think in ways that fit our own paradigms and expectations.

Unconditional love is a neutral and has no opposite. The source of unconditional love is Spirit; therefore it is available to everyone without discernment, and there is absolutely nothing we need to do to qualify for it.

_______________________________

Indeed, conditional love has everything to do with fulfilling our desires to feel good or feel better and better, there seems to be no end to fulfilling our ego desires. Are multinationals happy with owning millions of dollars worth of assets? No, it has to be billions and even trillions. Do we not also use spirituality to feel good or better and better? Lets be honest, the feel good industry that serves our desires is growing at an alarming rate. If it doesn't make us feel good, it's a negative, I am flabbergasted (astonished)!!

I am flabbergasted because I can't see how we have evolved any further in consciousness from thousands of years ago. Is trying to escape and/or showing an obvious disdain for humanity a show of unconditional love? If you can face the so-called negatives face on as you do the positives, this is a sign of being unconditional within your consciousness. Unconditional love is a consciousness of the absence of conditions period, how many of us separate what makes us feel good to what doesn't make us feel good? We often do this by judging what is and isn't negative and positive to start with. A separation of consciousness by the ego to fulfilled its desires!! A consciousness of unconditional love has nothing to fulfill, there are no desires therefore nothing to fulfill.  

If people like me were all about feeling good and fulfilling our desires, we wouldn't be telling the truths in the way it actually is, we would instead tell the truth in accordance with ours and other people's desires. I certainly don't desire to tell the truth in the way it is as it doesn't make me feel good or bad and this is where the neutral comes into it. It's a con by the ego, way do we have to feel good or bad, negative or positive? The strange thing with not always trying to feel good by separating consciousness into negatives and positive, bad and good, it does make me feel good by simply being neutral. Being neutral isn't a fulfillment of a desire; it's simply being of a neutral consciousness between what's desired and undesired. Being of a neutral consciousness, a consciousness of the absence of conditions depicts a consciousness of fewer motions. It's understandable that the fewer motions we express, the more truly unconditionally loving our consciousness will be. So many spiritual practices depict just this but are we truly listening?

In a time of insurmountable deception, chaos, mayhem and destruction, it is understandable and natural for the ego to desire to escape from this by any means. Be careful though, is deceiving yourself to an existence of unconditional love, when this existence has insurmountable conditions, not of the deception therefore a creation of this ego controlled existence? It is advisable to never create another existence from the same energy that created the previous existence; this kind of consciousness will never truly evolve in this manner. Any separation of consciousness naturally creates an existence based on deception and self-deception. Separating consciousness by any means will only lead to deception and lies or half truths!!

My advice to any spiritually aware person is to desist in any program, (ideology or ism), which leads to the separation of consciousness into negatives and positives, bad and good, black and white. Try to become more neutral and the more neutral you become, the more unconditionally loving you will become without effort. Are people like me truly unconditionally loving? No, we are of no conditions, this simply means to become unconditionally loving hasn't the conditions of not being of desires as well, just being simply aware is all that is needed, aware of our neutral being/existence. Remember, to try to be the opposite of desire is still of a desire, simply be as neutral as you can be without desiring this state too much. Go with the flow, not against it.......                             

Neutral Territory

Written by Mathew Naismith

I recently had a good friend of ours that we haven't seen for awhile give us a visit.

Before leaving, they asked me if I was happy, my reply was yes but that wasn't quite true. I'm sure they saw/felt through this.

I've endured ongoing chronic pain since I was 6 years old, trying to stay happy and stress free is virtually impossible at times. Long term chronic pain simply plays havoc on the psyche, especially 47 years of it.

On top of this, my right arm/shoulder has literally felt broken recently. Of course my arm has been broken since I was six but it's not often it feels actually broken, even while suffering chronic pain.

I can usually work through the chronic pain and pretty much do as I like within reason, this hasn't been the case in recent days.

My life has been a rollercoaster which has been made worse with being able to zone out in a harmonious state of consciousness, in saying this, if it wasn't for my ability to zone out, I simply wouldn't be here today.

So when I am not happy, does this make me sad/unhappy? Not on your nelly, just because you are not happy at times doesn't mean you are sad. Nothing like neutral territory when physically and psychologically stressed out. Often psychologists will look for neutral territory for their clients, spirituality often does the same; meditation is but one example of this in my mind.