As The Wise Say, Balance Is The Key

Written by Mathew Naismith

Interesting, it was said to me that humans as a whole don't like peace; it certainly seems that way to me as well.

The reason why came to me when this was said to me, peace represents a consciousness of little or no controlling expressions.

The human ego mind feels it always has to be either controlled or controlling, within this, there is no peace, only what control (motion) creates.

___________________________

Why do we refuse to learn from our environment, an environment human existence is reliant on in almost everyway?

Do we not learn from this environment because we think of ourselves as being far more intelligent and/or aware?

Take the sun for instant, too much light emitted from the sun, everything dies. Too little sun emitted from the sun, everything dies.

The right amount of light emitted from the sun, everything flourishes, not just biologically but in everyway including spiritually.

The reason for this is simple, balance that neutralises extremes which in turn allows everything to flourish.

When the wise and ancient teachings teach balance is the key, they are not just talking the talk, as in stating something because it sounds right. They are stating it because it's true, especially in accordance with the present environment.

No matter what environment you find yourself in, it will show you how to exist in a balanced way.

Now, how intelligent and aware are we, in relation to our natural environment, when we are in total ignorance of its expressions of balance?

___________________________

It's too hot, so we bring on another ice age.

It's too cold, so we bring on a continuous heatwave.

Its' too light, so we bring on excessive dark.

It's too dark, so we bring on excessive light.

Our present existence is too chaotically destructive, so we bring on the extreme opposite.

Excessive extreme reactions is what makes human consciousness human, otherwise this consciousness would be something else other than human.

It would seem we don't want to evolve from human consciousness, as it would seem we are too fixated to its extremes.

As extremes denote limitations, any consciousness of extremes is always going to be limited. Free yourself of these extremes and associated limitations and see what develops, you won't be disappointed.  

___________________________

- It is better to rise from life as from a banquet - neither thirsty nor drunken. Aristotle

- Be moderate in order to taste the joys of life in abundance. Epicurus

- They are sick that surfeit with too much, as they that starve with nothing. William Shakespeare

- Your hand opens and closes, opens and closes. If it were always a fist or always stretched open, you would be paralysed. Your deepest presence is in every small contracting and expanding, the two as beautifully balanced and coordinated as birds' wings.

Rumi

- Balance is the key to abundance, an equal amount of abundance pertaining to all things within all things.

~Mathew G~ 

Passive Analogies and Insights

Written by Mathew Naismith

"The pond of life is still and tranquil, this is until the still pond is put into motion by countermanding motions of human differences".......Mathew G

The pond of life: Look upon life as a still pond, it is still, tranquil and clear, this is until the still tranquilness of the pond is disrupted by opposing motions, not necessarily opposing motions to the water but opposition motions on each side of the pond. These opposing motions are likened to, bad and good, negative and positive, light and dark, hate and love and so on. Now imagine that these opposing motions are throwing stones at each other from their side of the pond, as opposing motions naturally do. Of course many of these stones end up in the water as do some of the opposing motions themselves, is the still tranquil pond still clear and calm? 

In the end, the pond ends up not being a pond anymore but a quagmire of embattlement, this is because both opposing forces end up opposing the pond which gave life to all motion to begin with.  It's strange to think, no pond, no motion, even when the pond itself is motionless. It's this motionlessness that gives life and its motion that can take the life of the pond away, but only when motion becomes extreme within its own motion. Opposing motions only see dissimilarities, not also, the way too obvious, similarities.

To people like me, the similarities are obvious, for example, the similarities between dark and light. Both want to control or destroy each other. Both have opposing views. Both know they are more powerful than the other. Both want to become the dominate force. Both are using the same motion but with very slightly dissimilar motives. One's motive is for the collective good of the (I), the other is for the collective good of the collective as a whole. Of course many religions have tried to control the collective by dominating it, this is why love and light should never be used as an opposing force but it clearly is being used in this way.

While existing in a chaotic existence, we perceive that the still tranquil clear pond indicates love and light, thus perceiving love has no opposites; of course what is then the opposite of hate!!

The tranquil still clear pond of life doesn't represent love and light, it represents exactly what it is, still, tranquil and clear; this is all. Because we exist within a chaotic existence, we perceive that the pond is of love and light and quite understandably so. Any kind of tranquilness will feel more loving and of the light while experiencing chaos in any form. The pond doesn't have to be of love and light because it has no opposition, the pond of life isn't in opposition to motion but motion can be in opposition to the pond, to life itself. The pond of life is what it is, motionless except for the life that the pond creates/supports. When the life that the pond creates becomes too expressively of motion, it's quite understandable that this will upset the tranquilness of the pond.

The universe: Now think of how tranquil the pond that the universe exists in was before the universe was created. Yes, I look at what the universe was created in as a pond as well. The universe represents all living form that exists within pond/space itself.

In a pond, a fish is hatched from roe which was conceived through the integration of yin and yang, what is the pond to the fish? The pond is everything to the fish which makes the pond more precious than life itself. Now look at the universe as being this fish, how important is the pond/space to the fish/universe to us? We of course perceived that the universe is far more special than the space that the universe was conceived in, this is very much unlike the fish that sees the pond/space far more special for it gave it its life to begin with. I think one day we will find out how special this seemingly nothingness space that the universe was born into. There is far more to this empty space than we perceive in my mind. 

Fish = universe

Pond = Space

Yes, I also see that the universe was conceived, which comes from the idea that matter and antimatter created the universe through integration of these two motions.

Matter = yang + male

Antimatter = yin + female

I should state here that matter could also be perceived as being female and visa-versa for argument sake.

Oneness, God: So where does the idea of God or oneness fit within all of this? Let's look at the human race; it takes two to create another living energy source, what actually integrates these two energy sources to create another energy source?  Try integrating without consciousness; you need to be consciousness of another energy source, and the right energy source, to integrate to start with, this of course takes a singular source of energy, such as consciousness, to begin with.

You can see where the hidden perception of oneness and a God comes from. I say hidden because our ego minds perceive in a structured way in accordance to our five senses. Our structured perceptions perceive God as a man, Christ as man and not as a consciousness. 

Oneness equals God as God equals consciousness that is seemingly behind all of creation, very simular to humans and the creation of the universe which again took the integration of yin and yang, two different but also indifferent energy sources that were conceived from a consciousness in my mind.

I should state that the analogies and insights used in this post come wholly from and through me, please at no time take them as being absolutely true........          

Ego Mind, A Natural Phenomena

Written by Mathew Naismith

As of many posts I've written in the past have been controversial for a lot of people, this post is no different. It's not that I am trying to be controversial or argumentative, it's just what comes to and through me, I must write it as it is, or, not write it at all which has occurred a number of times before. Actually, this post was nearly one of those times where I thought twice about sharing what came to and through me. 

What is channelled through me is often confirmed by what comes to me afterward, especially when I don't write down what comes through me in the first place. It's like being whispered to by what comes through me, if I don't listen, I am then yelled at by what comes to me. For three day I was not going to write what was coming through me until it got to the stage of repeatedly being yelled at. As the whispers are of the inner environment, the yelling is of the external environment.

Not one of us within this existence wants to be aware of their so-called higher self; this is obvious within their own participation within realities like this one. Even if you got to this so-called higher state, you still wouldn't want to know who you truly are, in actuality, you feel and know that the last thing you want to become aware of or be, is this higher self. All you feel is just being in the present; of course if the ego mind doesn't like the present, it tries to change it. If the ego mind is existing in a destructive existence, it naturally wants to change the environment it's existing in.

Yes, the ego mind is a natural phenomenon with natural tendencies that often has a need to change its environment in accordance with its own desires. We are presently apart of this phenomena, in the very present this is who we are, of course the ego always desires to be more like more aware than present circumstances permit or encourage. On the other hand, the present extremes encourage the ego mind to change its present environment. It's always the ego mind that desires change, the divine mind only lives within the present the way it is, void of control of its environment or desires to be of another environment.

What I am saying is the ego mind is just as worthy as the divine mind in an existence that is hell bent on destroying itself. The divine mind just sits there within this environment where's the ego mind often has a need, as opposed to desire, to change this or their own environment to something more constructive. To put it simply, the ego mind is a natural phenomenon and should be treated in accordance to its natural state. As the divine mind is natural, so is the ego mind, it's wise not to separate these two very natural phenomena's, especially by judging one an illusion and the other not an illusion.

Yes, the ego mind can be extreme within it's delusions but when expressed in less controlling ways, the ego mind can be electrifyingly beautiful and peaceful in accordance with the whole environment. The more control, we express, the more of the delusion we become, in effect, the more the reality becomes an illusion in many people's eyes. The ego mind will see anything that it no longer wants to be apart of as just an illusion, the controlling ego is very tricky like this.

The ego mind desires to be apart of a grander existence, it will convince itself that it is only apart of a grander existence like being of pure awareness, a God, divine spirit, nothingness and so on. If we were created from nothingness or divine spirit like a God for example, why are we experiencing what we are presently experiencing? We are supposed to be fallen angles or of an ego based consciousness, to me they are one of the same. If you truly comprehend this divine egoless higher state, there is no way you could fall from this state. You could say that everything is of God's consciousness; this just doesn't include the divine mind but the ego mind as well.

The divine mind, as well as the ego mind, is of this divine state, it's all a divine state of existence, even when we express states of being unaware. When the ego mind becomes predominantly controlling over its environment, this is when states like this become less of the divine nature, it doesn't mean it's no longer of the divine nature, at no point is this the case. We are in effect of this grandness that our ego mind desires to be, but this also includes this grandness being of the things that are not so grand to the ego mind as well, our present existence is a prime example of this.

An aware state of being is just as worthy as an unaware state of being, there is no separation for one is of the other, its just the ego mind judges one more worthy than the other because one is more grandiose than the other. Instead of just existing in the present, the ego mind desires more, especially if in the present the ego mind has little control, is unaware or simply desires a better existence for itself. 

When we allow the ego mind to convince us that only this grandiose state of divine energy of pure awareness is who we are, we are truly only aware of apart of ourselves as whole self. This is the same when the ego keeps us in an unaware state of existence, in this state we are again only aware of one part of the whole self, becoming aware of the aware and unaware part of oneself is who we are as a whole. We are not just one or the other, w are all of what is, this includes our present state.

I've spoken with a number of people recently that think control is the answer or we are only of this grandiose state of pure awareness. It is obvious that certain people will not be convinced otherwise to their own convictions; I am certainly not trying to do this, I am only expressing a different aspect to life that could be life changing.

The point is; why isn't all this praying for peace and love working?

As I discussed with an 80+ year old yoga teacher last night that's in to all the aspects of yoga, not just the physical exercise, counteracting one extreme with another is giving these extremes we are counteracting against more power because we are putting more emphasis and more energy into these extremes. The ego mind has us convinced light and love is the ultimate answer, it is obvious it's not because man is becoming more destructive, not less. If light and love, for example, is suppose to be so powerful over the dark in the world, it would instantly quell the dark. What is happening instead is the dark is growing, not shrinking obviously because of our counteractions against it. One point to make here, where is the living in the present by expressing extremes to destroy another extreme?

We have allowed the ego mind to control us to the point of thinking that we can only be of something grandiose. As of our present existence, it quite clearly shows people like me that we are of all aspects of the whole self; this also includes not being aware and even being fully controlled by the ego mind. If you truly comprehend our whole being, there is no way we cannot express or be what we are not apart of. The natural tendencies of the ego mind are to convince us otherwise when in a controlling mode. When the ego isn't in this controlling mode, it's something very few of us can comprehend in the present. Like I stated earlier, the ego mind can be electrifyingly beautiful and peaceful, we just need allow our divine mind to give the ego mind a more balanced perspective, void of trying to control or destroy anything else.  

Step By Step

Written by Mathew Naismith

Consider this, how would a truly egoless consciousness exist?

We of course presume that any egoless consciousness would exist in an ethical righteous way; this of course is considering that to be expressional of immorality in any sense, is to be of the ego. To also be egoless, is to also be aware to a much greater extent than a consciousness controlled by the ego, this is because the ego naturally limits a consciousness to certain aspects. The more a consciousness is controlled by the ego, the more limited a consciousness becomes, this is because the ego is only aware of part of oneself instead of the whole self.

An egoless consciousness is aware of the whole self, this includes being aware of its ego self as well without separation, remember, an egoless state of consciousness is of the whole, not just part of the whole self like the ego. This basically means that an egoless consciousness is fully aware, of course being fully aware is also having an awareness of being only partially aware as well. This is difficult to comprehend, how would a fully aware consciousness also be aware of being partially aware or not aware at all?

The ego thinks that to be fully aware is to exist void of the ego period, only in this can a consciousness be fully aware, this of course is the highest pinnacle of existence a consciousness can go. Of course to the ego the higher the better, even when this higher state of consciousness is unaware of its ego self that is limited to a certain conscious awareness.

Being fully aware also takes in being aware of our unaware states of existence; this of course represents the whole self. Take away a state of being fully aware or partially aware; you only have an awareness of part of oneself, not awareness of the whole of oneself.

Another thing to consider, would an egoless consciousness care about being less aware, experiencing an existence that is consciously limited? We are talking about a consciousness that is void of an ego, only an ego-based consciousness would strive to always be of its highest self which is a state of being fully aware. The problem with an ego consciousness trying to strive for this high level is the ego thinks it needs to do this void of an ego. Once the ego is extricated from a consciousness, the go thinks it has reached this higher level of consciousness.

Now the problem with this is at this higher level of consciousness, we are no longer aware of being unaware, of a state of limited consciousness. This state of being unaware of being unaware is to the ego the highest pinnacle of existence, it is a state that is fully aware, even while in this state we are not aware of being unaware anymore. The whole self does not just take in being aware of our aware state but of our unaware state where consciousness is based on the ego. Being also of this so-called higher level of consciousness, we are presently experiencing our lower levels of consciousness, in actuality; we are presently expressing our whole self.

This is not easy to comprehend. To be truly aware, one must also be aware of one's own unaware states of consciousness, I feel this is what we are experiencing at present in the word around us.

How many consciousnesses will the present truly awaken? One-step at a time and take each step as a process as opposed to an absolute be and end all. This now brings us to love and light as one of these steps in our awakening process.      

Love and Light

If I used love and light in some of the beyond human realities I have experienced, I am 110% sure, I would not be here right now. Consider this, how long would a person last, preaching love and light, in apart of the world dominated by extremists? The answer is obvious, not long, also considering my own experiences, love and light is obviously not the ultimate be and end all answer. To be honest, love and light is about control, this is because love and light basically destroys everything else in its path but only if used incorrectly.

Within a true process of awakening, love and light is used to quell all other states of consciousness that are limiting, however, if love and light is used as a be and end all, rather than apart of an awakening process, it becomes but another limitation.         

Once you get past the perceptions of love and light, you only then realise that the feelings of love and light is only a tiny part of the awakening process. Only then do you realise there is no be and end all, ultimate/absolute answer.

After 40+ years of awakening myself, love and light is but a tiny part of the awakening process, it's wise not to treat anything in this process as being a be and end all. It is also wise not to limit yourself in an unlimited consciousness. The trick is; you are only able to comprehend this when you go beyond love and light, only the ego in control perceives a be and end all, it is wise to be aware of this.

Even balance, which is brought about by neutralising extremes or opposites, is not a be and end all. It certainly is not an answer for extremes to stay extreme so it is not the ultimate/absolute answer for there is not one, not for the whole self.

It is obvious that many of us are using love and light as a be and end all. Being that a true sense of love and light is destructive to hate and dark for example, which is likened to switching a light on in a dark room, light and love is controlling. Anything controlling is limited within its controlling domain. Domain of course relates to a particular sort of environment, not the whole environment as in the whole self!!

I at no time did I try to be controlling in these realities I found myself in that were beyond human realities. All I did is release myself of the natural control of these environments upon myself, this is all. No truly aware consciousness wants to harm any part of another consciousness in anyway; actually, this becomes impossible to do in this state.

Yes, my ego mind wants to change our world, but my divine mind is aware that one should not do this in a controlling way. The reason for this is simple, once we express control, we are only expressive of the ego mind, this is why the ego mind has many western minds tricked into thinking control is the answer.

However, the divine mind releases its ego mind from control, from the limitations that control creates for all expressions of control relate to limitations, the ego mind.      

On the Mountain Pinnacle

Written by Mathew Naismith

The pinnacle of success or achievement is so different for each person, one group of people desire a world of material wealth and power; others desire a world of love and light, of course both world desires are controlling over the other. For humans, it always comes to the point that one has to control the other, like the light controlling the dark or the dark controlling the light, to become predominantly the over all power of all. However, there is another choice, a choice of neither one nor the other, a choice of just being. This is likened to an achromatic existence of simplicity where the pinnacle of our outlook is to just be average.

For people like myself, the mountain pinnacle is to be average, to just be and let be, of course to be average takes in our concerns of our environment without also being controlling or destructive to the light or dark. When people like me observe a consciousness struggling to find light in the dark for example, we often give advice without forcing our advice. We simply give different views to the normal point of view; of course, the normal human point of view seems to be always about one controlling the other, or more precisely, one destroying the other within its own presses of control.

To just be and let be, allows us to exist within an average existence of neither one extreme nor another. Within this existence, there is no view of being controlling; it is just simply being void of intentions of being one or the other.

How many of us truly desire to be just average? It is usually a choice of dark and light, good and bad, rich or poor, enlightened or not enlightened, aware or not aware. How many people of light and love desire to be aware of the dark in the world? How many people of the dark, desire to be aware of the love and light in the world? In this case, we cannot let things simply just be, it always has to be a choice of either one or the other. To one or the other, there is no middle ground or neutrality of just being.

The trick is that you do not desire to be average; you just let it be void of trying to take control of anything. To desire is control and of course a control over something else. Desire always indicates control but to have an outlook of just being average is simply just being within any existence. This however does not mean we accept the controlling ways of the dark and light, it simply means we just be void of having the desire to take control over anything. Of course, this also means not taking control of the natural environment as a whole.

People like me, no matter how destructive the light is to the dark and the dark to the light, simply give our views to a simpler more balanced way of existing, of course the light and dark can't accept this kind of neutral existence, where is the control in this kind of  an existence to start with. Within this mentality of dark and light, there has to be control over the other, I often view this kind of mentality as a black and white mentality, there can only be a perception of black and white and one always in control of the other.

Of course, people like me who are neutral and just have an outlook to just be and let be, are aware that a neutral balance existence of black and white is beneficial for the whole environment, in that one not being more predominant over the other. We often have the perception that one has to be predominant over the other.

OK, I am stating we, which some people obviously have a hang-up with, an emotional preoccupation with. What does an emotional preoccupation denote and a control by what human trait? We or us simply means not just the I as in me myself, the divine mind instead of the ego mind, again it's this simple, only a controlling ego desires to make more of this!! This is certainly worth noting at this point.

We often have this perception because to be honest, we are conditioned to this perception from birth that one has to be predominant over the other. How many people are born into a country or world at war? Of course, war/conflicts denote control and dominance by force of one over the other; we are indeed conditioned to perceiving one has to overcome the other. The black has to dominate the white of visa-versa. How many people are born in a family unit where one person or a kind of people are dominating over the other or others?  We are indeed conditioned to this kind of existence but very few of us are conditioned to an existence of just having an outlook of just being average in a neutral existence.

At the human level, my ego mind desires to be more than just average in a chaotic existence; however, my divine mind often states that I am already at the top of the mountain in being just average and just being. To my divine mind, there is no higher pinnacle than to just be and be average; this is because everything else is of the ego mind that desires rather than having an outlook of just being.          

Relationships - Focused Intentions

Written by Mathew Naismith

I am going to get quite personal here, being that relationships are of a personal nature, a nature of focused intentions. Of course if our intention where not focused on the relationship, it would not be personal. Personal to me means to focus our intentions on the other person within the relationship; you cannot truly have a personal relationship with another person if we do not have the right intentions of focus to start with.

In my 53 years, I have had only one girlfriend, my wife, this doesn't mean I did not experience focused intentional relationships with other women, this means to experience focused intentional relationships, one does not have to be of a girl or boyfriend status.

Before and in the early part of my relationship with my wife, I was experiencing intentional relationships with two other women, of course my wife was not my wife at this stage. My wife to be was another intentional relationship that I was experiencing at the time.

What I am talking about here is intentional relationships, not casual relationships, there is a difference. Intentional relationships refer to a relationship that our focus is on the other person on a personal level, this can incorporate lust or desire but this is not our main focus. In an intentional relationship, the focus is on the whole person, not one part of the person, for example, the way they look or smile. The focused intentions are on the whole person as a whole.

One of my intentional relationships was with a woman who loved sex, to the point of experiencing sex with multiple men at the same time; I however was not personally into this kind of experience myself. It became obvious to me though that she never experienced an intentional relationship before.

We were walking down the street one-day and I reached out for her hand to hold while we walked, she looked at me in total amazement. This women was treated as a slut/hussy by other men because her main focus of her relationships was based on sex, nothing else, in this case the whole person no longer existed. This woman was conditioned to accepting relationships that were not focused on the whole person, only part of a person, of course this kind of relationship is anything but based on intentional relationships.

It would seem at no point did any other man try to hold her hand while walking anywhere, mainly because she was labelled a slut/hussy, a person of ill repute. Men, who love sex, are labelled mucho or studs; however, women who love sex are often labelled and treated as sluts/hussies. I knew of this women's main focus but this did not worry me. The rebuttal I received from my family and friends was amazing, how dare I treat a known slut/hussy as a whole person. In my own mind how dare I not, it was this simple, I was not going to allow prejudice, bias or ill judgement to stop me from treating another person as whole being.

You see my main focus was on the whole being, if I was to only focus on parts of the being, I would have judged in accordance with a lot of other people. Being who I am, I focused my intentions on the overall being, which neutralised all other aspects, which then allowed us to experience an intentional relationship together, a relationship constructed around the whole being of a person, not parts of the being.

You certainly know when you experience a true relationship, it's whole, the same goes with our whole self which includes our whole environment, not just parts of the environment we have more desire to experience than other parts of the environment. How many peoepl look at our present environment like a slut/hussy? In doing so, we are missing out on so much because our main focus in on part of the whole, not on the whole.

We should all have a personal intentional focused relationship with our environment just the way it is; instead, we focus on parts of this environment while in disdain of the rest of the environment. Where is our personal intentional focused relationship in this? Of course within this mentality, we are going to be more in ill judgment of our environment, not less.

As I treated my women with respect void of bias or prejudice, I treat my whole environment with the same respect. I take my environment personally on an intentional relationship level, this means I embrace and accept the whole of my environment just the way it is, however, like in any relationship, if the intentions are one sided, it's time to move on or try to amend this situation.

In the end, I moved on from my other intentional relationships to marry my wife to be, I certainly have no regrets, but I also have no regrets in showing these other women in my life what an intentional relationship is like.

Your focused intentions must always be on the whole, only within this can we be whole ourselves and free from separation.   

Divine Mind, Ego Mind

Written by Mathew Naismith

In recent times, it has been stated by other people that we do not all think alike, so stating we and us a lot in my posts, relate to how we think alike when it's obvious we don't. Well, this is not actually quite true, yes, our ego minds do not think alike to other ego minds but the divine mind does. Actually, a lot of ego minds do think alike to some extent, it is that other ego minds can think completely different; for example, the difference in the thinking process between western and eastern thinking can be enormous, I've experienced this first hand many times over myself.

When the ego mind is conditioned to a certain culture, that conditioning reflects on how the ego mind thinks, this of course can be in total contradiction to another mind conditioned to a completely different culture. I think this gives us a good idea of what an ego mind indicates; a mind that is set to certain conditions according to the environment the mind exists in. To go further with this, the ego mind is of motion; this reflection of course refers to the divine mind as being motionless.         

Each motion defines in how the ego mind thinks, for example, if a mind is only conditioned to a certain culture, that mind will only be able to perceive in accordance to that culture. However, the divine mind has no set culture that defines in how the divine mind thinks, yes, each culture has a perception of what is and isn't divine but this perception is ego based. When primarily of the divine mind void of cultural differences and influence of the ego mind, all that is of the divine mind is perceived as being the same. Many of us often call this mind state a state of oneness. It is a state of mind that observes the similarities of everything instead of the dissimilarities, only an ego mind is aware of the dissimilarities. Of course this is to be expected as the ego mind is about separation, not oneness,

You could put two ego minds in the exact same environment and they would most likely think differently, even though it might be ever so slightly. This is due to the ego mind naturally perceiving that all is separate to another. Knowing that all motion is of the ego, being that all egos are of motion, it figures that all motion is going to be perceived as different to other motions. For example, one motion of going up, is going to be seen different to another motion that is going down. Even if all motions are going up, the ego mind will observe that each motion is going up at a different rate of climb. The divine mind does not observe it like this, mainly because the divine mind is not of motion. There is no separation between rates of climb, all the divine mind observes is motion, only the ego mind is able to observe different rates of climb.

If we observe indifferences, this is ego mind. If we observe similarities, this is the divine mind.

Divine mind = similarities (sameness) + egoless + motionless + fearless + true image

Ego mind = dissimilarities (difference) + ego + motion + fearful + abstract image

The divine mind observes motion but the ego mind will try to avoid observing the divine mind, this is because the divine mind is different to the ego mind and is often observed as a threat to the ego mind. The divine mind does not observe the ego mind as a threat, it is only observes the ego mind as a threat to itself, to it's own existence. The last thing the ego mind wants to do is not exist. The ego mind is always in fear where's the divine mind is never in fear.

The divine mind does not observe the differences between itself and the ego mind; all is observed as being of one, this is because only similarities are observed, not dissimilarities. One of the similarities observed by the divine mind is that both divine and ego mind are of a mind or consciousness, there is no true separation. The divine mind also observes motion as a abstract image of it's own divine mind, all is created from the same mind no matter how the abstract image is expressed. Yes, we are all an abstract image of the divine consciousness (mind).             

Let us take closer look at this divine mind. The divine mind is of the divine plan, a plan that has always been in existence, this plan has always been written. Liken this to an architect that draws up house plans for an example. The house plan is motionless once drawn; it's the builder who puts these plans into motion, the architect is the divine mind and the builder is the ego mind. We all represent the builder while in ego mind, however, while in the divine mind, we represent the architect. Of course without the architect, the divine mind, the builder is unable to build.

Divine mind = the architect of creation

Ego mind = the builder of creation

The difference between an architect and the divine mind is that the architect draws up plans while in motion, while of the ego mind, however, the divine mind has no ego mind of motion to draw up plans. You can see why they say it's always been written or there is a divine plan, existence as a whole has always existed but in motionless form. This is why I say the divine mind was not the actual builder of the universe, the ego mind was. Think of a collective ego mind, a collection of ego based minds working together for a common cause, the cause in this case being the building of the universe.

I am not saying the divine mind did not create the universe; I am just saying that the divine mind did not build the universe. No ego-based mind is the true creator; of course it would love to think it is. I honestly think we were of a collective ego consciousness once that built this universe, and many others. While of ego mind, we are the builders but while of the divine mind, we are creators.

This is why I also do not have disdain for the ego mind, it's the builder of the creator, however, like any builder who reads a plan incorrectly or who is incapable of builder from a plan, things often will not go to plan. It is basically not the creators fault for the building not going to plan, the emphasis is on the builders themselves. We might presume that the architect's plans could be wrong and faulty. In an existence build around the ego mind, this is possible. In an existence created around the divine mind, it's an impossibly, I will explain.

Divine mind = pure awareness

Ego mind = partial awareness            

         

In a pure aware state, no plan can be drawn up faulty because of the awareness involved; this of course is different in a state of partial awareness. The funny thing is, the builder sees the architect as being the most important part of the relationship, however, the architect sees that the builder as being the most important part of the relationship. The divine mind and ego mind are an integral part of each other; one without the other or in unison to each other creates nothing. Out of unison to each other, only chaos will be created, very simular to a builder not being able to follow a plan correctly. Are we reading the divine plan that badly or are we just incapable builders?

Please do not take this as gospel or absolute, it is plainly not but it might be a reflection of it.