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.
