If You Build It, He Will Come

Written by Mathew Naismith

One of my all time favourite movies is Field of Dreams staring Kevin Costner, of course one of my favourite quotes from the movie is, "If you build it, he will come".  This was in reference to building a baseball field so he's deceased father will return as one of the players.

To me, this quote has reference to the collective consciousness. " If you build it", is in reference to building a constructive consciousness under very trying conditions, very much like the movie when Kevin Costner's character build the field on his farmland which incurred ploughing in part of his crop. This made it hard for him to keep his farm. In a sense, we are ploughing in the old consciousness which is making it hard for us to exist in such a chaotic reality.

Now the second part of the quote is interesting, He will come". You could make reference to this to the second coming of Christ or something simular. I actually think it's more to do with a Buddha/Christ like consciousness cementing in place the consciousness we create. It's not referring that a single consciousness will save us, this must occur collectively.

I think what this basically means is that once we have created a constructive consciousness, this consciousness will be confirmed or reasserted to be of true virtue. Basically, true virtue means to live in truth instead of lies. I do believe we will have conformation of this through the collective consciousness, as one consciousness instead of separate consciousness's. This means conformation is when we become the Buddha/Christ consciousness through our own efforts.

However, for all this to occur, we must start becoming aware of the things going on in the world at present. I was recently sent an article on yet anther cancer cure being suppressed. The following was my response to this.                       

http://humansarefree.com/2015/02/breaking-burzynski-cancer-cure-finally.html

When there are so many known cancer cures out there, why keep on supporting cancer groups that don't support these cures in any sense? They are obviously only looking after their own jobs, this is too obvious.

When a consciousness stoops to the level of living off of sick and dying people, how low can a consciousness go from here? Cannibalism maybe!! Well, in certain parts of the world human meat is being sold in markets, also, living off of sick and dying people is as bad if not worse than cannibalism in my mind. It's certainly a sickening form of cannibalism in my mind, slowly feeding off of sick and dying people. 

It is impossible for human consciousness to go any lower, I certainly don't want to be around if there is a lower level.

Yes, we could just judge this as being negative and ignore it; in actuality the suppression of cancer cures is positive, especially when these suppressions are being shared around instead of ignored because they are negative. We are conditioned to ignore these suppressions, for one reason or another, so that others can feed off of sick and dying people. Building our field, a constructive consciousness, has nothing to do with living and subsequently supporting lies, all this will do is create the same of what the collective human consciousness is presently experiencing.

I would myself like to build a field constructed from truths instead of lies; of course this takes one to become aware as opposed to deliberately staying unaware. If we like to be aware or not, our present collective consciousness fully endorses lies and the feeding off of other people and other consciousness forms.

Being aware of the field we build will help us create a more constructive reality, but we must be aware and willing to face the truth instead of hiding the truth or hiding from the truth.

Note: My actions here are not causing ripples; in actuality they are calming the waters for only through lies can the waters stay murky and unsettled. Any unsettledness is caused by the lies themselves.                  

Beyond the Teacher/Guru

Written by Mathew Naismith

Even though people like me often make reference to well tested ancient teachings, we can't think of anything worse than a consciousness continually relying on these teachings. A true teacher loves nothing more than the student or listener (novice observer) to go beyond their teachings/observations, to evolve into a more aware state of consciousness, only in this has the teacher succeeded in their teachings.

I am not myself one of these teachers or a guru, I am, like many people, a novice observer which basically means I am primarily a student, a learner of observation rather than primarily an observer of participation. I am primarily a channeller, a person who relays messages from non-physical energy sources, this is all. I should also point out that I am not a psychic medium either.

As I have expressed in my last post, I am a whisperer, meaning, a person of some awareness and wisdom, however, the difference between me and the truly wise is my wisdom primarily comes through me in my channellings, this is all. Of course my own life experiences from an early age have given me wisdom, mostly the wisdom to comprehend what is being channelled through me, this is too obvious.

At times, I am simply unable to comprehend what is being channelled through me for various reasons. At times my present personal life intervenes or my ego mind is simply unable or unwilling to comprehend what is being channelled through me. I am certainly no guru as I am not well studied or do I follow any kind of ritualistic practice, I am simply a receiver and sender of messages, obviously from sources way more aware and wiser than myself. However, the ability to comprehend most of what is being channelled through me simply implies that my own abilities, to comprehend beyond normal human consciousness, are evident.

In all, the message is simple. Only when we go beyond these teachings and channellings, can we say we have gone beyond the teachers/gurus. In actuality, the presence of people like me is a poor reflection of how far human consciousness hasn't evolved; people like me should no longer exist, its this simple. Our own existence is an indication that human consciousness is still not listening. The very existence of people like me is a poor reflection of the consciousness being whispered (messaged/channelled) to. We are certainly not a very good sign that a consciousness has and is evolving beyond the teacher, guru, channeller, whisperer etc.  I simply look for the day people like me are no longer needed or exist.   

Note: In reference to what has been mentioned recently, there is no plagiarised content within my posts.        

The Lies of Positive Thinking

Written by Mathew Naismith

This is another interesting read on positive thinking that was sent to me.

http://thepowerofideas.ideapod.com/zen-master-explains-positive-thinking-terrible-advice/

Why “positive thinking” won’t help you out

Osho: “The philosophy of positive thinking means being untruthful; it means being dishonest. It means seeing a certain thing and yet denying what you have seen; it means deceiving yourself and others.”

Henry Ford: But Henry Ford’s logic was clear.

"No. I do not believe in any philosophy of positive thinking."

Consider this; the more positive you are, the more negative everything is that isn't positive to the same level or degree. In actuality, excess passivity creates more negatives, not less; this is another reason why many ancient teachings teach balance. Of course, a true sense of balance isn't the balance of excesses but of moderation, this means there is less of a difference between positive and negative. Within this, neither creates an opposing extreme to itself thus in turn creating less negativity/positively.

Positive thinking is also in line with love and light, how many more negatives are created through excessive perceptions of love and light? How many more people do people of love and light judge as being negative compared to themselves? Considering love and light is based on positive thinking to oppose negative thinking, the dark, it's quite understandable that love and light will create more negatives. This isn't saying that love and light is bad or negative, but love and light can create negatives or be destructive. However, if used in a balanced way, love and light is very constructive, this simply isn't presently occurring in my mind.

To my readers, anything that teaches excessiveness/extremism, avoid at all cost, one excess will always create an opposing excess to the same degree/level, it's wise to be aware of this. Instead, embrace teachings that teach balance and moderation. Even better, condition yourself to not judge everything as a positive or negative, as always considering our preconditioning, this is easier said than done but plausible. 

I keep receiving messages like this and channeled messages saying to moderate the way we use love and light and positive thinking, however, it would seem that we are simply not listening to the whispers. I don't think we should allow it to get to the stage we have to be yelled at though. People like me, and far wiser people like Osho, are the whisperers; please listen to the whisperers who express moderation and balance, the reality that will be created otherwise isn't worth experiencing in my mind.  

One Source of Consciousness

Written by Mathew Niasmith

It's funny how a more advanced science today is in line with ancient teachings, that all things are connected as one. It's all of one source no matter what you call it.

http://curiousmindmagazine.com/scientists-find-everything-energy-reality-isnt-think/

Now imagine trying to separate yourself from this source. The act of trying to separate oneself from this source will of course create realities quite different from a consciousness who is close to the source, or in other words, aware of the source. The more aware we are, the closer to the source we are. The less aware we are, the further from the source we are. It's simply this unawares, this perceived separation, that creates chaotic and destructive realities it would seem to me. 

Humbled

It is said it is good to be humble

However, it is also good to be humbled to

Of course this all depends on the

consciousness experienced at the time!!

~Mathew G~

Beyond The Seeker

Written by Mathew Naismith

This post is certainly not going to be for everyone. Any comprehension beyond the seeker or questioner or human consciousness, is going to be virtually impossible for anyone fixated to one or two processes to becoming further aware. Being aware that the seeker and the euphoric feelings of love are of the starting point of awareness beyond human consciousness, any fixation to these processes will limit a consciousness to human consciousness. When being expressive of a seeker, it is wise to be aware of this, this is unless you are happy being just aware of the seeker.

It’s probably wise at this stage to be aware that the seeker is of motion and that the non-seeker is of motionlessness. Seeker = motion. Non-seeker = motionless.

Human consciousness is basically of the seeker and of a consciousness that often becomes fixated to euphoria’s; it’s these limitations that make human consciousness human. I should point out, at no time try to change this consciousness, in actuality, it’s impossible to change any limited consciousness, of course you only realise this when you observe human consciousness from a more aware conscious perspective.

Human consciousness is part of a process that is needed when of a less aware consciousness to become more aware, for example, ominous or destructive expressions of consciousness are obvious within their lack of awareness, for only in ignorance can a consciousness destroy. Simply look at human consciousness as being one part of an awareness process or a stepping stone.

I stated perspective instead of levels because there are no true levels, only can perceptions of levels exist when perceiving from an unaware state.  An aware state is never seen or perceived as a higher level than an unaware state while of a more aware state, this is because levels relate or depict an unaware consciousness. Also, perceptions of levels relate to limitations and of the participator, however, perspectives relate to limitations but as an observer. The reason perspectives are also limited, even as an observer, is due to perspectives being also ego based, basically, to seek is ego. Perspectives are still of the seeker or measurer even when in observation. 

We might now think that stating that human consciousness is limited, is a limitation within itself. To a non-seeker, human consciousness is but part of the process of becoming more aware, human consciousness isn’t seen to be limited within this state because it’s a part of the process of becoming more aware.  For example, is a wheel of a car limited while not attached to a vehicle?  Yes, the wheel needs to become attached to a vehicle to become less limited.

An unattached consciousness, such as human consciousness, is limited until attached by a process to the whole self. Basically, the wheel is human consciousness and is limited until it’s attached to the whole self, in this case the whole self relates to the vehicle.  Whole self = Vehicle. Human consciousness =Unattached wheels.

The seeker and fixations to euphoria’s is part of the process of becoming more aware, it is wise to see them as wheels to a car, unattached they are limited, attached, they are far less limited.  Human consciousness unattached to its whole self or divine self is limited, this is until it becomes apart of the whole process, very much like wheels of vehicle.

To any unaware consciousness, the seeker is imperative to becoming more aware; however, any fixations to any part of the process will hinder and even negate a consciousness to becoming more aware. In actuality, at times fixations can cause a regression in conscious awareness; this has occurred in human history many times over, the religious Dark Ages are a good example of this.

The non-seeker does not seek, however, part of the process of becoming a non-seeker is to seek; this is why the less aware seeker is never perceived as being of a lower level or value. Each part of the process has its place, even within its own limitations as long as it’s a part of the process and not separated from the process. The seeker doesn’t, or more precisely can’t, comprehend that human consciousness is part of the process where’s the non-seeker can.  Of course from our whole self, we can experience any process, there are no limitations within a non-seeker; this simply means that at no time is a non-seeker limited to just being aware!!

A truly unlimited consciousness means having the ability to become aware or unaware, void of any limitations and the perceptions of one consciousness being of a higher level than another consciousness. 

To a lot of people, what I have written here will seem confusing and/or probably of non-sequential rhetoric, if this is so, it’s not meant for you at this point of the process. If you can imagine being of motion (seeker) and motionless (non-seeker), you are on your way of going beyond the seeker, it’s this simple.

Try to comprehend that you are not just of motion or motionlessness. If any part of the oneness is in motion, you are in motion. If any part of oneness is in motionlessness, you are motionless. At no time is this oneness, which represents everything, ever not of motion or motionless, seeker or non-seeker. At all times you are simultaneously the seeker and the non-seeker, this means at any time you can stop being the seeker by just focusing on the non-seeker, to do this however takes some comprehension of what I have written here.   

The Human Journey

Written by Mathew Naismith

I wasn't going to write this post but some strange things occurred, it is obvious I was meant to write and share this post.

I wrote something recently in relation to our individual path and the human collective journey and shared it, I then received some interesting replies as shown below. I felt I needed to further elaborate on this but I then changed my mind. As soon as I changed my mind, visions of the spiritual love expressed today and the love expressed in the sixties came to me, I soon realised that the love in the sixties was a lot more unconditional than the love expressed today in spirituality. I will explain myself further using the hundredth monkey theory strangely enough.

Each person has an individual path to follow

But also a collective human journey to follow

The paths are different but the journey is the same

For a collective change to occur

Which is more important

The path of the individual ego

Or the journey of humility?

A collective change is simply not about the individual

~Mathew G~

Reply

It's a team effort creating our communities as well as realities.

My Reply

Indeed +Michael Hopkins. A lot of the collective effort makes up our individual paths, religion/spirituality and materialism are but two examples of this.

I think we make the mistake in focusing on the individual self too much when our own paths are mostly determined or created by the collective team effort. Everything that starts at home as individuals is determined by the collective in some way. Too many people think it's the other way around, I suppose that is the controlling ego for you.

It's interesting why people like me are not popular, it is also very sad. We are simply about the collective journey over and above the individual path, this will always be deplorable to an ego in control, including my own ego.

The feeling of love and the kind of love felt is a personal experience, no one person feels love exactly the same but of course the ego will state otherwise. Love is of the individual self therefore of the ego, love is not a collective expression but this love can influence collective expressions through individual expressions. This of course brings us to the hundredth monkey theory where one monkey's expressions are soon expressed by many monkeys.  The question is, can individual expressions have an impact on the collective consciousness?      

https://hilo.hawaii.edu/~ronald/HMP.htm

http://www.wowzone.com/monkey.htm

Love and peace in the sixties was certainly a turning point, love was free and unconditional and peace prevailed over this kind of expressional love. How many loving people protested against war in the sixties? How many loving people protest against war today? War is simply too negative so it's ignored, this is but one example of insurmountable judged negative of today's love that is suppose to be more unconditional!!

Take the hundredth monkey theory. Today expressions of love would look at the dirty potato as being negative and subsequently ignored because it's dirty therefore negative. War was dirty in the sixties, like the potato to the monkey, but war was not judged as being negative therefore avoided at all cost, it was dealt with face on void of fear. Being truly unconditionally loving in the sixties brought about a momentary change, how is a love with insurmountable conditions today going to bring about an everlasting change, especially when the potato is judged as negative (dirty) therefore avoided at all cost?

Simply, the individual self is put above the collective these days, we believe change starts from the individual and goes out, so what do we do, totally ignore the collective because we have judged it negative (dirty).

In relation to the hundredth monkey theory; it wasn't an individual effort that brought change, it was a collective effort that brought change for without the interactions of the other monkeys, washing the dirt (negativity) off of the potato wouldn't have become a collective expression.