Infinite and Finite Ideologies /Philosophies

Written by Mathew Naismith

Before considering following an ideology and or philosophy consider this, which one's are limiting and which one aren't. A good example of this is the ego limiting or liberating       physically and through it's ideologies and /or philosophies. Is one set of ideologies and /or philosophies stifling/limiting to all other ideologies and /or philosophies within an ideology/philosophy?

Can an ideology/philosophy be infinite in nature if it has limits within it's ideologies and philosophies? The answer of course is no as all limitations are of the finite and not of the infinite, infinite simply refers to which that is limitless where's finite refers to which that is limited. Do we want to be governed by what is finite or infinite in nature? Considering that human consciousness is limited and that divine consciousness is limitless, we need to make a choice which one we want or even need to be governed by.

Is it wise to be governed entirely by an ideology/philosophy that is infinite in nature while existing in an existence that is governed by finite consciousness?

Infinite consciousness simply means there are no limitations within the expressions of this consciousness; this consciousness therefore is able to be expressed in a finite existence. However, finite consciousness is unable to be expressed within an infinite consciousness because of it's limitations. You simply can't limit yourself to human perspectives within divine consciousness because divine consciousness is divine because it's unlimited (infinite) nature.

I should say when I talk about a divine consciousness, I am talking about a consciousness that is unlimited and infinite in nature, in actuality, divine consciousness is able to create anything and everything because it's not limited.

The following are my replies to other people on a forum, life can be limiting or limitless, this is our choice.

____________________________

I don't faze you do I I Spirit 3, I respect this; you simply just go with the flow within the present, in my mind quite commendable.

Yes, I suppose so, is love and light a creation from it's opposite making the opposite just as worthy as love and light or visa-versa.  I suppose motion works like this, action reaction, push and pull, cause and effect. I was speaking with a Malaysian bloke for some time on and off, he often mentioned the natural flow of the  push and pull effect of motion, my western mind had a hard time comprehending where he was coming from at times but in all it made sense to me.  He basically said all we need to do is get off the treadmill for all motion creates delusions to one extent or another. 

I simply concur, everything is of and comes from spirit/consciousness.

You know how I bag/acknowledge the ways of a black and white mentality, I too express this because how is the ego suppose to become aware if it's not put in a way that the ego can comprehend and understand?  Motion is often of black and white for instance, light and dark dominating each other, however, to get off the treadmill one has to learn the ways of the black and white mentality of the ego, the paradox is, the ego needs a black and white comprehension to do this, to start with, but know when to let go of this black and white mentality as well.

It's indeed all natural but I can see that it might not seem that way as well.

____________________________

Do we need to plan therefore control?  I think the ego needs to plan where our divine self doesn't, what is there to plan when you are everything and are aware of everything?

In my mind, we need to be caring thoughtful of the ego without being controlling, I often think of the ego as my child that needs my loving attention to become aware and adult in it's motions, otherwise it's going to be and act in a self-cantered way like a spoilt brat. I think our present reality shows this.

You don't have to be controlling towards your child, just simply guiding the child through simple awareness. Guiding isn't controlling, it's leading by example, going with the flow of awareness rather than going against the flow of awareness. Control is set to certain specifics of awareness, it's only of the awareness of what can be controlled by the ego, all else is usually discarded or ignored.

The thing with love and light is it's apart of the process that was created by the process itself, the process of the ego being in control. Think of it as a treadmill, the control of the treadmill keeps us in motion but when we get off the treadmill; are we still controlled by the treadmill? We simply got off the process of control. Getting off from one life process creating another life process is the same as getting off from the control of the treadmill; we simply stopped the ego controlling us thus creating yet another process and on it goes.

I think treating the process of love and light as a be and end all is a huge mistake as it's still apart of the process of control. I have spoken to a number of Eastern minded people on this, they all say all we need to do is release ourselves from this control, from this process, to be our whole self. Let's be honest, love and light is still about taking control rather than releasing it. I think the Western mind has a huge problem in comprehending this; it's probably why so many Western minded people are upset with me in what I write, I'm simply seen as a threat to the process of control. 

My stepdaughter Karla has won three world titles in a row now; it's a world record in women's IPSC shooting. We guided Karla rather than controlled Karla.       

I Simply Just Don't Get It!!

Written by Mathew Naismith

If you are not into conflict resolution or learning through and from conflicts, it is unlikely you will like this post.

This post once again pertains to a forum I am presently involved with. In respect, I have only inserted my responses to other people that pertain to a particular post of mine that at this point has over 407 views. It's not big number of views but it does show that a number of people are interested in the topics mentioned in this post.  I replaced names with four ex.'s (XXXX).

___________________________

I am so ignorant sometimes.

I presumed that everyone into spirituality would comprehend and understand how a consciousness void of black and white mentality would perceive everything. There is only one so how would one offend or be offensive? To be offended or offensive takes one to be good (positive) and the other bad (negative). My ego isn't offended by XXXX motions/reactions here but it is annoyed and worried at her persistence to push her own black and white mentality upon me. 

A black and white mentality separates everything from negative to positive, high to low and so on; a consciousness void of a black and white mentality simply doesn't perceive like this, all that is observed is motion of one kind or another.  I don't have a bias or a desire of something higher or lower, the strange thing is I think I never truly did. 

I ignorantly thought everyone would comprehend and understand how this kind of consciousness worked but they don't, I owe everyone, especially XXXX and XXXX, a huge apology.

You ever get the feeling you know something and then something like this occurs and you find you don't?  I am simply flabbergasted at my own ignorance, my humblest apologies, I simply had no idea. Get this though, my wife understands how this kind of consciousness works, I just presumed so would many other spiritually aware people, ignorance certainly isn't bliss.

I'm in a different world and I suppose I always have been, I was ignorant to this as well, my humblest apologies everyone.  And please don't get the idea that my world is higher or lower in stature, it's simply just a different world. Just be aware that the ego often perceives otherwise as it would seem, there is simply no known narcissism expressed here by me.

_______________________

What is inside for one isn't inside for another, the perception there is some absolute truth that everyone is of the same inner being isn't true in my mind. How many different perceptions of the inner self are out there to start with?

Now, which one is right over and above the others? We simply and obviously don't have the same inner perspectives XXXX. Why do you seem to be projecting an absolute here, that all inner perceptions are the same?

Why then push inner perceptions as being the only true one onto others who know different? Lets be truthful here, going onto someone else's post and forcefully projecting your own absolutes of the inner self so much is projecting an absolute.

Some people go in and the only thing they see is light and love when there is so much more, it's literally infinite. To a lot of people who go no further than love and light, these people often perceive only light and love is projected through the inner being, this is simply not the case.  Is the inner being limited to light and love? You would think so, going by my own experiences though, it's literally unlimited, it's infinite in nature.

To me you are limiting the inner being to certain perceptions and perspectives, not everyone has the same inner being so why push your own perceptions of your own inner being onto others.

We want to help people realise what, that our own personal perceptions of the inner being, being the same for everyone, in other words limited to certain set projected perceptions!!

This is exactly what I mean about black and white mentality, it's the same for everyone when it's obviously not, not through the experiences I have had anyway.      

So someone like me has not explored inside, your joking aren't you? Just because my inner beings perceptions are not the same as yours!! This is pretty shallow/limited in my mind XXXX. Everyone's exploration is different, this doesn't mean they haven't explored but you obviously think they haven't because it's not the same as yours!! 

It is obvious I am of a different world to you, XXXX and XXXX; this doesn't mean people like me haven't explored the inner being. We all simply don't express the same inner being perceptions XXXX.

In the future I won't project my own views on other people's posts on here, not that this would have helped in this case, however, I do think the reaction I got here did stem from me saying that love is a motion therefore ego on another post.

XXXX, the inner being isn't as limited as you perceive, it's literally infinite in nature but of course you must find this out for yourself to really know this. Are my own inner projected perceptions of the inner being of everyone else's? Absolutely not, this doesn't mean that others haven't gone within does it? 

You often reflect a black and white mentality XXXX, which one of us out of XXXX and I have not gone in, in accordance with your own inner exploration? 

Can the divine consciousness express disdain, meaning, refuse acknowledgment through contempt?

_____________________________

It wouldn't matter how a person like me expressed themselves, a true love and light person could not themselves express disdain in any sense like I described because distain can only be expressed by an ego in control. The ego simply controls people to express contempt.

Sadly, I have not been on one forum where the owner and other members of the forum have even come close to expressing any kind of divine consciousness, in actuality quite the opposite. I am usually critically judged and labelled some kind of ego maniac or worse or I am simply judged as not being of the inner being, of course as they are.

I am myself not a true love and light person I however express way more love and light than people who claim to be of love and light or of exploring their inner being when it's presumed I haven't. I simply don't have disdain/contempt for anyone; of course the ego is going to see this differently for obvious reasons.

If you are showing any kind of contempt for me at all, it is obvious you are nowhere near being of the divine consciousness or love and light.

I find the reactions I get quite interesting but also saddening. I should also say that there are people who are observers of these forums who are truly of love and light, it's just they don't dare speak up or have no need to speak up.

_______________________________

"I do have a problem with megga ego who

build themselves up by putting others down and can't even see they are doing it."

Is not a megga ego in line with an ego maniac? Not once in knowing XXXX have I critically labelled her an ego maniac or narcissist even though it is obvious she quite often puts herself well above other people like me, after all I am something XXXX noticeably has disdain for and wants to change to her kind of world, as mine is disdainful.

How many people into spirituality these days show an obvious disdain for the perception of God and/or religion. There should be less judgment therefore less disdain but there is a lot more judgment therefore a lot more show of disdain.

God to me represents a true state of oneness because it represents all of what is void of desiring to be of one's desires, this includes what we personally perceive how a divine consciousness would be like. When I mention God or religion, certain people showing obvious disdain for God and religion often try to hang me in some way. The perception of God isn't just pure awareness or nothingness or ego, the perception of God represents everything, this gives the ego an idea of a true sense of oneness in my mind.

In regards to religion, religion is as good or bad as the people of the religion are as of any ideology or philosophy, to people like me it's this simple. People will be people.

In regards to love and light, how old is the perception of love and light? Within my own knowing, it goes way back to the antediluvian times, its not just from some old consciousness, it's ancient, so why didn't it work back in the antediluvian period?

To my knowledge it did to a certain degree but also to my knowledge love and light became yet another be and end all, they simply didn't go on from love and light. It's impossible to limit an infinite consciousness but it's not impossible to limit a perception of a consciousness. Once we have a fixed (limited) perception of a consciousness, the consciousness involved becomes finite in nature.

If even an ounce of God's consciousness directly expressed itself today, it would be hung and labelled some kind of ego maniac or more likely something a lot worse if it didn't express itself in line with other people's fixed perceptions. I simply just don't get it......

______________________

If you are willing to learn through forums at the same time being expressive of your own inner being/world, it is likely you will have to learn through conflicts, especially if your own inner being/world is incomprehensible to other people.

I wonder at times if it's worth it, it's probably why I don't become involved with too many forums these days. Forums are not bad places to learn through but they can be daunting as in intimidating, it's really up to the individual if you are willing or able to learn through forums, especially if your world is incomprehensible to a lot of people. If you are already traumatised, it is advisable to stay away from forums that don't project your kind of inner being/world.

If on the other hand you can observe without becoming a participator of these forums, these forums can be quite enlightening. In saying this, after all this time on and off forums, I still simply don't get it, just maybe because I am participating too much instead of simply observing!!   

The Flow of Motion

 Written by Mathew Naismith       

I am presently active on a forum and I thought I would share a few replies I gave on the topic of ego and narcissism. I didn't insert other people's replies in this case as I simply didn't want to upset people, I also don't usually insert other people's comments from a forum on my posts. 

  __________________________   

An interesting perspective alejo18qd. 

Ego isn't narcissism but can lead to narcissism if the ego is in control. To me, all ego is motion of what is motionless, ego is basically an expression of what Buddhism calls pure awareness or nothingness, meaning, ego is of this motionlessness state expressed as motion.

Motionlessness = egoless

Motion = ego

Narcissism = ego in control. 

Ego is balance because it's neither of what is desired or undesired, only when the ego is in control is the ego of desire to be more than it is or more than what everything else is, for an example, to be more than what a judged old consciousness is, is the ego in control. To desire to be neither is ego and to just be all of what is void of desire is egoless, of motionlessness. 

Pure awareness just doesn't mean being aware of everything, it means being of everything void of bias or desire. Being of everything negates motion therefore ego because once everything is as one, there is no motion because there is no separation, only oneness/motionlessness. Only in separation as in yin and yang is everything of ego, this is until yin and yang become one with each other. 

Yin and yang working together is ego. Yin and yang not working together is egotism/narcissism and yin and yang working as one is egoless/motionless/oneness.

__________________________

Indeed, the so-called old-consciousness is ego but the new consciousness isn't suppose to be but by having and showing disdain for the old consciousness, one is still being exactly what they have disdain for, not just the ego but the ego in control. 

The ego to me simply represents limitations, the more of the ego we become, the more limited we become consciously, of course the more limited we become, the more destructive (hurtful) we become. I think our present reality shows this quite clearly, look upon what we are doing to the Earth and each other. 

So has our controlling ways got something to do with our limitations? I think so for only the ego desires to change everything to it's own desires thus limiting itself only to it's desires. 

To me, the soul is of the ego but I suppose one must experience this first hand to acknowledge this.

__________________________

A good epitome and query to make Tawmeeleus, if it's all an illusion, does it really matter what the ego does?

Speaking from my own perspective I think it does, however, I do realise from other people's/souls perspective it doesn't. I suppose this is why we have different perspectives and perceptions, each person/soul is simply different within it's own motion.

Is the illusion real or not?

Within the very present it's occurring so it's real, it's really not a real illusion that it's fake, it's only an illusion because the ego creates it that way that we are only of the illusion of time/ego, of course people like you and I know different.

Is time measured in day and night an illusion? Day and night obviously exist on planets but not in outer space but this is but one measurement of time. Distance, volume and cycles are also of time for which the universe is governed by.

In my mind is everything of time/ego an illusion as in fake, not real? No, but time/ego can delude us to think this is all we are, this is the illusion.

So does it matter? To people like me, yes. I simply don't have disdain for the ego for the ego is always apart of us as in motion and has always been a part of us. Motion, time and ego have always existed because there is no starting point of time within timelessness for time to start existing, how can time start to exist within nothingness even as an illusion?

I simply look at time/ego as motion that has always existed and has always been apart of us so yes it matters. 

Chosen Path

Written by Mathew Naismith

I've experienced some interesting interactions with other people recently. Are people like me critically judgemental or simply expressing what we observe in the absence of a black and white mentality? It's wise to be aware when people lash out at other people, it's good sign their being controlled by the ego. This reaction of course needs a depiction of one thing in reference to something else, for example, the comparing of a negative in reference to a positive. It's what I call a black and white mentality; it has to be one or the other.

When an ego in control lashes out in critical judgment, this has to be done through a black and white mentality, being that the ego in control is always positive and the critically judged is always negative. How often do people like me critically judge like this, it's simply wrong or right, negative or positive, black or white? Now, how many other people judge through a wrong or right, negative or positive, black or white mentality? It is however natural for the ego in control to turn the tables or the emphasis from itself to anything else threatening it's control and existence, people like me are a prime example of this.             

I will now share a recent post I posted on a forum that is in relation to this topic, I also inserted one of my replies I wrote.   

_______________________

I don't get this, maybe someone on here can assist me with this.

People like me are often critically judged as being narcissistic, negative, egotistical, toxic and so on it goes, for simply expressing our own experiences and observations. People like me usually observe through the absence of a black and white mentality, an ego in control obviously finds this most threatening.

People's egos who judge through a black and white mentality, will often define anyone not of their egos liking narcissistic, negative, egotistical, toxic and so on, how else would anyone critically judge other people in this way?

Through the judgment of a black and white mentality, people like me are supposed to be (judged) narcissistic. Just recently I wrote a post stating first up that I know little of this particular subject, I also often state that a lot of what I write is channelled through me and not from me. I have even stated that what is being channelled through me I know very little about.

I'm also suppose to be (judged) egotistical, a strange egotism when I often express myself in a way that a controlling ego finds threatening, in the process making myself exceptionally unpopular. Just because someone expresses their experiences that questions the control the ego has over us, doesn't make the person egotistical but of course it will to an ego in control.

It's like a drug addict addicted to an addiction, the controlling ego will lash out at anything questioning it's existence and it's control. The controlling ego sees people like me as being a huge threat to it's control, of course the ego in control is going to lash out like this, just like a drug addict.

People like me are also supposed to be (judged) as being judgmentally critical. If I was to judge in accordance with a black and white mentality, of course I would be judgmentally critical. Honestly, I would be exactly like the people who judge people like me so critically through their black and white mentality.

Of course an ego in control is going to lash out like this, it's perfectly natural for an ego in control to lash our in fear of it's own control and existence. In actuality, if people's egos didn't lash out at people like me, I simply wouldn't be following my chosen path in life.

__________________________

My Reply

Making reference to old energy patterns refer to the past, you can't have a perception of time without making reference to the ego as time is motion and all motion is ego.

So, if I was to refer to certain patterns as being old, I am in actuality making reference directly and mainly to the ego. 

Old is in reference to new, a black and white mentality, which can only exist in an ego based reality/existence.  This is exactly how the ego tricks us in thinking the new isn't of the ego when it's just as much if not more of the ego.  There is simply no new or old in relation the divine consciousness, why? The divine consciousness is infinite in nature, not finite, this simply means it's not based on time but timelessness. Because there is no time, the perception of old or new can't exist because the perception of old and new needs a starting point of origin to exist  to start with, there is simply no starting point of origin within the divine consciousness.  In actuality, the divine consciousness isn't above human consciousness, only the ego in control perceives this to be the case. One being over and above another is pure ego, nothing else.     

Also, having any kind of disdain for the old consciousness is egotistical; this includes having disdain for anyone who defends this so-called old consciousness.  In my mind, too many people into spirituality today exist in disdain, this is pure ego for only can the ego express disdain. 

Do people like me truly defend this old consciousness?  When you truly live by the divine, what is old and new, black and white? This kind of consciousness in my mind can't possibility exist within the divine consciousness but many people obviously think it  does.  The ego can be exceptionally deceptive, it's wise to be aware of this, but as always, the ego will at all cost refute what I have stated here, or, it is simply unable to acknowledge what I have stated here. 

 Are people like me narcissistic or egotistical for pointing out the obvious? The ego in control will always say yes, however, the ego that isn't in control will say no for obvious reasons.  Please don't be duped by the ego, it's a tricky little devil but only when in control.   

  

I should point out, when people like me make reference to egotistical in relation to myself or others, this observation isn't of disdain like the ego in control  perceives, it's simply pointing out an obvious that motion is naturally limiting, nothing more. People like me simply don't have disdain for egotism for it's not of the divine consciousness to do so. If to the controlling ego defending old consciousness is ego, people like me are happy to be of the ego in the egos mind, for this shows we are not of the ego but of the divine.  Simply, the ego is a trickster, it will always accuse itself of being of itself, within this, the ego will always be in control.

OK, I see now, acknowledging that the divine consciousness isn't of some higher stature than human consciousness is going to be impossible to imagine.

There is no true separation between the divine consciousness and human consciousness, within this understanding, how can divine consciousness be of a higher stature? Only through ego is everything separated and of levels/separations. 

As I understand it, divine consciousness only observes a difference in motion between itself and human consciousness. Human consciousness is merely seen as limited in nature, it's not judged as being of a lower stature to itself. Yes, the ego will see that a more limited consciousness as being of a lower stature, only can the ego judge in levels like this, this is not the case for the divine consciousness.

So if a consciousness is limited, it's of a lower stature!! Only to the ego in control is this the case, so why an ego in control? The perception of levels is all about control, the control and dominance of a lower level, in other words, control and dominance over a consciousness that is limited.

Divine consciousness simply means a limitless consciousness, an infinite consciousness in nature.   

Releasing Ourselves from Set Standards

Written by Mathew Naismith

I'm sorry for the syntax errors and non-legible grammar of recent; trying to assist the painter is causing a lot of physical and mental discomfort, especially at present. My grammatical coherency isn't fully coherent within it's structuring at present.

To a lot of people, the situation I am in would be judged as being highly negative, the inability to properly structurally form legible posts is debilitating to what I am writing. This of course can be debilitating to the reader by impairing the readers coherency in what I am writing, to a lot of people, this is negative but not to people like me.

When you start reading something that isn't altogether coherent, you decide at that point if to read on or not. If you decide not to read on because of the incoherency in what you are reading, you are simply not meant to read it, it's not for you.

I often read posts and threads that are not altogether structured properly, just because it's not structured properly doesn't mean it isn't insightful. We often judge in accordance inline with the kind of structured coherency expressed, if it's not up to our standards, it becomes non-legible, if it's up to our standards, it's of course legible.

The personal standards we judge everything in accordance with can be highly critical, just because something isn't up to our own personal standards doesn't mean it's negative or bad in someway, it simply means it's not up to our critical personal standards. When we express certain standards, we limit ourselves to these standards, all else other than our own personal standards become unrecognisable.

When we fixate ourselves to certain ideologies, most often all other ideologies become incoherent to us, they simply become an unrecognisable ideology we can't possibly relate to. Within this very action, we have limited ourselves to certain set perspectives and perceptions. I think by doing this we lose our connection with the infinite side of life, of course all we are left with is the finite, a consciousness of limited range and possibilities.

The reason why trauma isn't a big deal or negative for people like me is that trauma is finite in nature. If a consciousness predominantly focuses on the finite, the consciousness involved would naturally become limited within it's range and understanding, and yes, this quite naturally occurs. You will also find that a consciousness that focusing on the finite will judge more negatives within their environment than someone who focuses on the infinite.

Focusing on the infinite instead of the finite allows one to cohere and understand more of their present environment, this includes a reality that is in and creates it's own traumas. How often do we cohere and want to understand anything we have judged as negative when focused on the finite?

This is funny; by focusing on the finite we create standards, however, by focusing on the infinite there are no standards, standards simply don't and can't exist within the infinite. When a consciousness has no set standards, what naturally occurs? Awareness and quite naturally without effort, of course the opposite naturally occurs when we do have set standards. This is understandable because standards mean limitations and the more set our standards become, the more limited our consciousness naturally becomes.

Once our own vibrations are conditioned to certain set standards, we will of course naturally feel that any other vibrations that our own set standards are incoherent towards will feel negative. The reason for this lays in that our own set standards which make everything else not of these standards incoherent, it's this incoherency that gives us bad vibrations.

There are no bad vibrations, this is until our own standards create these vibrations, they simply don't exist until we create them which can only be created if we focus on the finite.

Try to relate the finite with ego, finite existence is ego where's infinite existence is egoless, of course to the ego, infinite existence is hard to comprehend because infinite existence is incoherent to the egos standards. This is due to the egos standards being set to everything relating to the ego, to finite existence, there is nothing beyond ego according to the ego. How many Western minded atheists believe consciousness couldn't exist beyond the physical limits of the brain? This is even after science is proving otherwise!!

To me, finite existence is ego and infinite existence is egoless, the reason for this is that there are no standards within an infinite state of existence. By simply releasing ourselves from our set standards, our limitations set by these standards, infinite existence automatically replaces finite existence.

Look at it this way. You have a clean body of water until the ego pollutes the water. By simply releasing the water from this pollution the water becomes clean again, the water is freed from the limitation that the pollution limited the water to. The water is limited because you can't drink it and nothing can live in it, it is therefore limited and subjected to certain set standards until these standards are lifted. Take away our own set standards, what are we naturally left with? A pure state of existence that isn't hindered by limitations, a state of infinite existence. The ego is naturally limiting and is only able to create finite existences, this is it's natural limitations brought about by it's own set standards.             

What I Am

Written by Mathew Naismith 

Many fear me for I am not what is expected.

I am all of what is but nothing simultaneously.

It is understandably difficult to comprehend me at the best of times.

My power and control is resolute and infinite in nature but at the same time I am neither powerful nor controlling.

What I am is difficult to say for within myself there is no need or desire to know what I am.

I am just being within what is expected but at the same time being what isn't expected.

The ego is of me but not of me simultaneously as I am of motion and motionlessness.

The ego sees me as something grandiose and all powerful; all I see of me is everything but nothing.

To the ego, I am it's higher self. To me, I am no higher than everything I am which is everything.

Is being everything without exception of a higher stature for the ego to aspire to?

Only the ego can answer this for only the ego aspires towards anything when we are already everything. Of course the ego only desires to be what it desires to be which is a very tiny part of everything!!

___________________________

We would simply be lying to ourselves if we said we are not in fear of ourselves, for only the ego is of the ego in fear of itself. The ego expects one thing only, ego, nothing more and nothing less is expected, just simply ego. Fear simply does not exist past the ego, so to be in fear of the unexpected is ego in fear of itself. It's the expected that gives the ego it's fear of the unexpected for only can the ego control what is expected.

Being in a state of pure awareness is being of everything without exception. In this state we are being all of what is but in the process being nothing, only in the perception of the separation of everything can being everything not be of nothing. What happens when yin and yang act as one? Nothing. What then happens when yin and yang act as two? Everything, we are therefore simultaneously everything but nothing because yin and yang always act as one as well as two.

Now how do we, the ego, comprehend that we are everything and nothing at the same time? The ego simply can't comprehend anything beyond the ego, so nothing can't exist for the ego but it does. When you can truly comprehend a state of pure awareness, you are at that point being everything but also nothing for only in separation is there something. There is absolutely no separation within this pure aware state; everything simply becomes nothing, as one instead of two.

Only when we perceive we are everything is when the ego is all powerful and controlling, the ego often aspires to this higher level. However, when we are also able to perceive this everything is also nothing, only at this point are we aware that their no control or power to be had, there is simply no need.

The ego expects to have a need of power and control. The unexpected simply has no need of such things for the ego is unable to control the unexpected, only when the unexpected becomes the expected is there a need for power and control. How do you control nothing? This is why the ego is in fear of itself, for only in ego can fear exist; control and fear simply can't exist without each other and neither can the ego. The ego doesn't actually fear nothingness or the unexpected, it actually fears itself.

So what am I? We are simultaneously everything but nothing, of course the ego will understandably have problems comprehending this as always..........    

Releasing Ourselves from Limitations

Written by Mathew Naismith

This post is a follow on from my last post, Pleasure Centres of the Mind. If your ego didn't like the last post, it is unlikely the ego will like this post. Put simply, the ego doesn't like anything that doesn't' excite the pleasure centre within a reality based on pleasures. Let's be honest with ourselves here, everything, including spirituality these days, is based on positive vibrations as opposed to negative vibrations, in other words what pleases the senses is positive, what doesn't is negative.

This is too obvious for people like me. I have become involved in numerous spiritual based forums in the last 8 (eight) years, too often has spirituality been based purely on what pleases the pleasure centre of the mind, the ego. This of course takes one to ignore and even denounce anything that vaguely threatens what pleases the pleasure centre of the mind. Most of the forums I have been involved in have either removed me from the forum or I removed myself from the forum. When you realise you are upsetting people's ego to no end, there is no point in continuing being involved.

Once our pleasure senses have been tantalised, anything that vaguely threatens this pleasure is denounced or ostracised. What seemed to have occurred is that spirituality is purely based on fear, while at the same time denouncing religion for being based on fear. This has been proven to me over and over again on most of these forums; people literally show fear of their own pleasures being threatened in any sense simply through their own actions. I should also point out I am still involved in certain forums/groups to one degree or another, probably because the people on these forums don't seem to see people like me as a threat.

Are people like me a threat to the control the ego has over other people?

Yes, to the ego, people like me seem to be a threat to it's existence, the truth is, people like me are only a threat to the control the ego has over people, not to the ego own existence. In actuality, only the ego can experience a sensation of being threatened, people like me are not even a threat to the control the ego has over other people, for only the ego can experience threatening sensations. What I am saying is, only can the ego become a threat to itself, this simply occurs when the ego awakes to itself for only the ego can control ego. People like me are not about control but the ego will perceive that we are, especially when the pleasure centre is threatened in any sense.

I have found it quite amusing over my time on these forums, I have also found it saddening that once again so many people are using spirituality to obtain and maintain a certain level of pleasure. This of course takes one to become deliberately unaware of anything that threatens these pleasurable experiences. Firstly, where is the oneness in this and secondly, it is obvious that such blatant ignorance will not lead to a state of pure awareness, pure bliss.

Bliss is not obtained through insurmountable conditions; bliss can only be obtained through putting no conditions on anything and become all of what is.

As I have personally experienced on most forums, you are not allowed to express anything that seems to threaten the control the ego has over the pleasure centre in any sense. So many people are putting more conditions on themselves and others, not less, to protect the control of the ego has over the pleasure centre of the mind. What do these insurmountable conditions denote? Limitations, this simply means we are limiting ourselves more, not less. I suppose this figures as more people these days seem to desire to be more control. How many conditions are there for someone to be in control? The more control we desire, the more conditions there are, of course the more control we experience or desire, the more conditions (limitations) we put on upon ourselves and others around us.

I will put it this way by using our present environment. A lot of people want to limit themselves to the light, of course this takes a lot of conditions (limitations) to obtain this in the first place. Would the Earth be as beautiful as it was if there wasn't a balance, a moderation, of light and dark? Now imagine the light controlling the dark through it's own conditions, it's own limitations, how beautiful would have the Earth been then? How beautiful is the universe with it's insurmountable contrasts of light and dark?  

The light tantalises our pleasure centre when the dark threatens our pleasure centre, but what would the light create void of the dark, the yin void of the yang? The Earth as it was simply couldn't have existed under such conditions, such limitations, and what a shame that would have been for the ego not to have experienced!!