Showing posts with label finite. Show all posts
Showing posts with label finite. Show all posts

Monday, 4 September 2017

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.       

Tuesday, 22 August 2017

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.

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 their 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.             

Tuesday, 16 August 2016

The Universe - An Abstract Expression


Written by Mathew Naismith

Before we get into this, it has been asked a number of times where I fit into the scheme of things, what human label do I fall under, my usual reply is that I am spiritually aware to some extent. It would seem I actually fall under the label mystic more than anything as I seem to fit this profile, I was also very heavily involved in mysticism in ancient Egypt in a past life, not long before hieroglyphs depicted light globes and helicopters on the walls of Hathor's temple.

Mysticism to me is like modern day science in that it's about becoming more aware, however, unlike modern day science, mysticism is void of any perceptions that are limiting, the following post is a prime example of this. I am also about the consciousness of mysticism, not the mechanics of mysticism, this basically means I avoid primarily using physical means to obtain an awareness. This is done for a very good reason, the five senses usually limits and hinders conscious awareness.

Now for the universe being but an abstract expression (representation). Firstly, what does this abstract universe represent?

Abstract Universe: This abstract universe represents a consciousness that everything else in existence has been created from, including other consciousness's. We often refer to this consciousness as the source of all creation or God for example, basically once again it's in reference to a consciousness that everything else has been created from, it's truly important to  comprehend this. To me, it's quite understandable why we relate this kind of consciousness to a God.

The abstract representation of this all creative consciousness, could be deemed as an illusion and often is by many, being that this all creative consciousness is real and where everything else has been abstractly copied from and only in part. To explain this better abstract art for instance is a reflection or an expression of parts of a something, this refers that the universe is but one of infinite expressions of this one consciousness.

Abstract art represents certain expressions while other expressions are ignored or not included within an expression (art). This exclusion of other parts changes the reflection of what is being expressed, you might even say this exclusion distorts what is real, however, as of consciousness, this distortion gives a different perspective to what is being expressed which produces a different perception that would otherwise be unknown.

What is real =  infinite + timelessness + reality

What is abstract = finite +time + illusion

Abstract expressions seems to distort reality, basically, giving a false representation of what is real, an illusion of what is real, however, in actually abstract expressions are not about giving a false representation of what is real, instead abstract expressions are about giving a different perspective of what is real while still representing, in part, what is real. What usually occurs is that a consciousness believes or wants to believe that this abstract universe is real in every sense, basically, we have fooled ourselves in believing in an abstract representation being a true representation of who we are as a whole. We have, within ourselves, created an illusion through our beliefs, basically, this abstract universe isn't giving us a false representation of this all creative consciousness, we are.

It's truly this simple, what is real is of the infinite, what isn't real is of the finite, all that time does is give this all creative consciousness a state of existence where the infinite consciousness can be expressed as a finite consciousness. Because the infinite is expressed in time, time can only express the infinite in parts, this automatically gives an abstract impression of the infinite. Time expresses certain expressions while other expressions are excluded, this is because time is of starting and ending points, within time, a consciousness is unable to express a starting and ending point at the same time, they need to be separated or expressed in parts giving a abstract appearance or perception.

It's good to be aware that this abstract universe and everything in it, is based on a real reflection distorted by time, this doesn't make everything in time an illusion unless a consciousness believes that this state is real. How many of us believe that obstruct art is a true depiction of that is real? Not many of us, there is however one thing to be aware of here, most often abstract art will portray a real expression that most people are unaware of or can perceive, could not the universe itself also be doing the same? In timelessness (infinite) we are one thing, in time (finite) we are something else however in stating this, it's wise to be aware that the universe is an abstract copied image of who we truly are as a whole.

Basically, we are talking about two sides of the coin here or yin and yang. the abstract (finite) being the other side of the coin compared to this all creative consciousness.

Yin = abstract + finite

Yang = reality/actual + infinite

Two Sides of the Coin: There are a number of similarities between the two sides of the coin to consider here, yin and yang, finite and infinite. On one hand we have the all creative consciousness that created everything, on the other hand we have consciousness's that emulate this creative consciousness by creating in it's own right, basically once again, creating but in an abstract way. We also have two sides of the coin, however, they are still of the same coin. We might also think one is real and the other isn't, what then depicts real when there is no unreal and visa-versa? Put in another way, what depicts yang without the yin?  

We might think we are thinking too much here, why can't one exist without the other being present?

To think this still takes a thought process to begin with. The point is, the infinite is of timelessness, this also means time has also always existed within this timeless state, in other words the other side of the coin, yin, has also always existed for there is no starting or ending point within timelessness (infinite consciousness). Yin and yang, finite and infinite, time and timelessness, two sides of the coin, have always existed, however, in an abstract universe/reality, one seems to exist without the other. It's like I said about abstract art, usually the emphasis is on certain expressions while ignoring other expressions, this often seems to give a distorted impression of what is real, in actuality what is occurring is that the abstract is an expression of the other side of the coin. Basically, abstract expressions represent an ignorance of one side of the coin to emphasise the other side of the coin more to become aware of the flaws or perfections of the coin as a whole, in other words consciousness as a whole.

Is it possible to experience both side of the coin, meaning, is it possible to be expressive of the finite and the infinite at the same time?

Absolutely, this however takes a consciousness to be aware of both sides of the coin without judging what is worthy and what isn't worthy, in other words a reflection and expression of pure balance.

Now to throw a spanner in the works, meaning, to desist in one conscious perception to become aware of another conscious perception. This all creative consciousness (God) is not just of the infinite, it's also of the finite (the abstract), as it's not just of timelessness, it's also of time, this is why I often call this all creative consciousness pure balance. We so often refer to this creative consciousness as being of one side of the coin and not the other, basically, of yin without the yang but consider this, this creative consciousness doesn't just represent one side of the coin because it is the coin itself. This however doesn't mean that infinite consciousness (God) isn't of infinite consciousness, often when a consciousness is becoming aware of the other side of the coin, it will see this other side of the coin as being some kind of God, this is inevitable. The reason for this is simple, when a consciousness becomes aware of an awareness beyond it's comprehension, it either ignores this awareness or depicts it as a higher consciousness than of itself.


The abstract universe has fragmented consciousness to depict certain expressions of itself while ignoring other expressions, however within this process, consciousness can become highly destructive mainly because it's unaware or deliberately stays ignorant to the other side of the coin thus giving such a consciousness an imbalance way of existing. We can indeed correct this, not just by becoming of one side of the coin, finite or infinite consciousness, but by becoming the coin itself, consciousness as a whole......      

Monday, 4 July 2016

Love - A Possession Deterrent


Written by Mathew Naismith

A true sense of love is a deterrent against any kind of possession, even demonic possession, in actuality, a true sense of love distracts from any conditioning that is brought about by predominantly living by the five senses. It's true that a true sense of love detracts any kind of influence a controlling ego has upon us, love is indeed a very handy shield to acquire in such a chaotic world.

Possession: Predominantly living by the five senses, leaves us open to all sorts of external forces, even demonic. Now demonic isn't just in reference to demon looking creatures either, demonic actually means, 'Extremely evil or cruel; expressive of cruelty or befitting hell". We didn't have a true sense of love for a God or deity for no reason, also, God's and deities gave us an awareness and a connectedness to a more aware and wise consciousness than man's consciousness. We actually protect ourselves against these destructive influences less than we ever have throughout human history. The more predominantly we live by the five sense alone, the more destruction and depravity we will witness.

When the churches become more about opulence and the power of the church than the love of a God or deity, what occurred? The religious Dark Ages come to mind for starters. Today we have CEO's like Nestle CEO Peter Brabeck-Letmathe literally taking water from African mouths and all they can say is, Water required for drinking and basic hygiene is a human right; that's 1.5% of global water withdrawal. I am not of the opinion that the other 98.5% is a human right." Where the water is taken from in Africa by Nestles, the people of that region no longer have a clean source of water!!

T. Boone Pickens, a water speculator and billionaire, stated, "There are people who will buy the water when they need it. And the people who have the water want to sell it. That's the blood and guts of the thing." It would seem it doesn't matter where the water is taken from and who dies from the lack of water so that certain people can become and stay billionaires. If you haven't got a clean reliable water source, you are living in a hellish environment. We are only talking about water here, this is but the tip of the iceberg from these obvious cold-hearted cruel people. This isn't judgment, this is clear cut observation, an awareness.

Now the question is, why are these people bringing hell upon the Earth and all it's inhabitants? For pure profit and control no matter what the cost. What actually entices them to do such a demonic thing? Possession, the offshoot of being possessed by profit and control is but the effect of the cause of the effect, they are, to me, possessed by external forces (cause) because they predominantly live by the five senses. There seems to be no love but the love of money and control (power), this of course isn't a true sense of love but a desire (lust) which brings us to the next topic of this post.

Lust (Desire): I certainly believe that by living predominantly by the five senses, in other word a controlling ego, that this can indeed leave us open to be possessed by external sources. Now what I mean by external sources is just that, we have the inner self  and the outer, the outer self is external to our true being. The outer self is also the only part of ourselves that is able to be possessed as inner self always stays pure from external influences, this is because it's shielded by a true sense of love where the outer self can be left un-shielded against external influences. The inner self being the spirit within all things.

External self = external source + finite + controlling ego + is able to be influenced

Internal self =  internal source + infinite + an ego not in control + is unable to be influenced

Once a consciousness becomes predominantly of the five senses, it automatically becomes of lust and desire thus negating any influence this inner love will have upon a consciousness.   

A consciousness has to create lust and desire for lust and desire to exist, it's not of our truer self (inner self), it has to be created where's our inner self has always existed without being created, even by some God or deity. A true sense of love is of the infinite where's the lust and desire are of the finite, this is why lust and desire are unable to exist within the inner self, ever, only the infinite can exist within the inner self. Yes, it's true, there is good within all things, put in a more precise way, there is the infinite within all things, the spirit.......!!


In all, it would seem a lot of us have stopped shielding ourselves against external influences that will quite automatically influence us to become demonic/cruel and very uncaring about anything but the lust of things. Once our external selves let down the shield protecting us against these external sources of influence, we become the influence itself thus forgetting who we really are. We have forgotten we are of the infinite and have forgotten that the finite is but an external creation as all creations are. The finite is known by many to be just an illusion, I don't myself totally concur with this!!       

Saturday, 21 May 2016

Finite Existence, A Motion Picture



Written by Mathew Naismith

It would seem I've always perceived life, finite existence, likened to a panoramic view with no separation, meaning that there are no segments or separate lives lived, it's one life. As I have written in posts a few years ago now, I don't perceive, for example, reincarnation as depicting separate lives lived, it's more likened to one life lived separated by intermissions or separate scenes like in a lengthy motion picture. I look at all my finite existence as a motion picture, each frame and scene make up this motion picture we call life, we can either perceive this motion picture as a picture in motion separated by scenes, or, observe this motion picture as a motionless panoramic photo/picture.

Finite = motion picture + separatism + motion + participator + time

Infinite = panoramic photo + collective + motionless + observer + timelessness  

Finite existence can give the view or perception of separate lives, you could say this is an illusion as finite existence can delude us to perceive in a separatist way. The question is, is finite existence truly and really about separatism? It's a paradox because the answer is yes and no. Yes, when we perceive through infinite perceptions and no, not when we are perceiving through a finite perception.

Finite existence; refers to an existence of a participator rather than an observer, of course to participate, we need motion or a means to create motion, this is of course is where time comes into it as time is all about motion. To create motion however, you need to first separate this picture into segments or frames, like a movie motion picture, to give it motion, time does this very well.   

Infinite existence; refers to an existence of an observer, the observer observing the whole of life as one frame or as a motionless panoramic photo. It's quite understandable why the observer is more aware and wiser than a participator.              

However, as many people like me have done, you can exist by a finite and infinite existence, this allows one to experience finite existence while at times observing these experiences. What I don't do is separate finite existence from infinite existence, any kind of separation denotes predominant finite perceptions within the act of separating one from the other. This means no matter how traumatising an experience is within finite existences, it's just as accepted, and most importantly, appreciated as an infinite existence experience. You of course can only be appreciative of life traumas when being the observer through an infinite existence, perceiving predominately through finite perceptions will only enhance traumas. 

How does one appreciate traumatising times in one's life?

You don't at the time of the trauma, this act in being unappreciative is also appreciated but only when you observe the whole life, not one segment of frame of life and this is the point. The more we separate life into individual segments, the more dramatic our lives become, how dramatic is a movie motion picture compared to a panoramic photo? Even if the panoramic photo was of a traumatising time, once you put this still picture into motion, it makes the scene a lot more dramatic, our lives in a finite reality are very much like this.

Take a look at the difference between the perceptions of ISIS and consumerist materialism or one religion to another for example, each difference within these group of people denote a different frame or scene within a motion picture. Now observe these differences as one whole picture as if you are watching all of a motion picture all at once as one motionless picture, what you are observing becomes automatically less dramatic.

Do people like myself allow drama and trauma to be a part of their lives?

Absolutely, for to do otherwise would to be predominantly of finite existence through the simple expression of separating one from the other.

Does this mean we should just accept the dramas and traumas in our lives?

It's really up to the individual, however, if you no longer want to be a participator within a finite reality, become the observer by not separating life, as a whole, into different segments. This means stop separating one part of life, no matter how traumatising it is, from other parts of your life, observe your whole existence as one life lived.

As of always, balance is the key, don't try to push something away by pulling something in and expect a more balanced peaceful existence, this just isn't going to occur as human history quite plainly shows us. Any retaliation will create an opposing retaliation, pulling something in to push something out denotes a participator, instead, also become an observer which depicts an infinite existence that will balance out the finite existence. Yes. at times it's a fine balance, at times balancing one extreme with another but note, every extreme will create more drama. Balancing out life with one extreme with another extreme denotes a predominant finite existence. The less of the extreme we express, the more of the infinite we become.

Finite or infinite existence on it's own isn't balance, finite existence is all about drama and trauma where's infinite existence is all about a passive existence, one being seemingly separate to the other. I do find it strange that people who are trying to be of infinite existence, will at times totally separate themselves from finite existence, this action is of course primarily of finite existence, any separation denotes a finite existence.              


A true infinite existence takes one to balance out finite and infinite existences, it's not about separating one from the other. We are so used to perceiving in a motion picture way, we can only perceive by separating one from the other. Each scene is separate to us in finite existences where in infinite existences they are one of the same with no separation from fame to frame, scene to scene as in a motion picture. A true infinite existence is liked to a motionless panoramic picture showing all of what is in one go, this might sound daunting but it's quite the opposite, it's very reassuring and comforting. In effect, finite existence is only this motionless panoramic picture of the infinite put into motion like a motion picture.....  

Thursday, 19 May 2016

The Vastness of Consciousness


Written by Mathew Naismith

If man's consciousness existed for a billion years, it would be like a grain of sand upon a beach compared to consciousness as a whole. This is how vast consciousness is and how small man's consciousness is no matter how long he's consciousness existed for......

Man's consciousness could exist for a trillion years and still be but a grain of sand on a beach compared to infinite consciousness. Put it this way, if we fell asleep for five seconds and awaken from this sleep, how significant would this five seconds be to an average persons life? It wouldn't be, this is a real depiction of man's consciousness as a whole, it's minute compared to our whole being, infinite consciousness itself.     

I will now share a couple of conversations I had with Eddie Lau and Meda Raveendra Reddy Foundation to hopefully get a better depiction of the vastness of consciousness itself.  

Reply:
Delusions from our greed(pulling) and hatred(aversion/pushing) movement at once is the cause of our separations of inner and outer. They are actually one whole truth without boundary when we really see. Whatever we perceive from the outside are the reflections of ourselves when there is no movement at all. The separation/fragmentation begins the moment we moved mentally/physically. We are limitless when we are not.

My Reply:
Utterly so in my mind, boundaries are created when we exist by the finite as opposed to the infinite.

We might perceive that the infinite is more of motion than the finite but this isn't so, the infinite is motionless as it has no purpose to go from one point to another for all points are within the same space......as such.

We often look at the infinite as being more of motion because it's seemingly infinite therefore always of motion, however, there is no actual space within the infinite for motion to exist I feel for there is no need of space and time within the infinite.

The strange thing is, the infinite is only infinite while consciousnesses is being expressed as motion in the finite, it's actually the finite that gives the infinite it's endless boundaries.

As you said, they are one whole truth without boundaries, boundaries are actually an illusion, however, without these boundaries, there is no infinite for the finite and the infinite are one of the same thing.

Boundaries and limitations define the infinite unless we are too caught up in the illusion. Strangely enough, illusions are necessary for us, that's why they exist but we need to be aware of this otherwise the infinite won't exist for us, this is often highly destructive.

An example of this is in the way we use energy, we use energy as a finite source which can be highly destructive. Using energy as a infinite source actually works in the opposite, it's highly constructive. We see energy as being created and destroyed in a reality of the finite, a starting and ending point or origin. An infinite reality sees energy as being always there, this means consciousness within such an infinite reality will only use an energy source that has no starting or ending point of origin, within this, there is no destruction.

Science know you can't destroy energy as energy itself is infinite, however, what energy creates isn't infinite, it's finite, of motion. All motion is of the finite where's all motionlessness is of the infinite.

Return Reply:
We are indeed the energy now transforming from a form to another ceaselessly. 

Reply:
Our outer environment and its consciousness exists every where. But what we can perceive is only what is possible for our consciousness. What is un-consciousness? some thing we are not conscious of it. When we are aware of it, then it becomes part of our consciousness. So, it is our consciousness which I think you are referring to inner conciseness keep on expanding. to say it is infinite, I am not sure if it is the right word to use. May be it is expandable but always have its limits.

My Reply:
Meda Raveendra Reddy Foundation As I will explain in my next post, consciousness refers to motion, all motion is of this expansion, the finite, but is also of the infinite as in forever expanding.

Expansion actually infers finite and infinite for any consciousness to expand, it also needs limitations, boundaries. 

Is therefore motionlessness (timelessness) this un-conscious? 

I think this un-consciousness doesn't exist for it's not of any kind of energy, it can only exist within a consciousness which makes it a creation of consciousness to start with. So yes you are right, this ever expandable (infinite) consciousness has it's limitations. 

The yin can't exist without the yang, does this mean consciousness can't exist without the un-conscious as well? The yin can't exist without the yang for without the yin the yang has nothing to compare it's existence with. Consciously speaking, the un-conscious has to exist to prove that consciousnesses also exists!! A paradox as always but quite comprehensible.



Finite = time + consciousness + space + motion + limitations + energy

Infinite = timelessness + non-consciousness + no space + motionlessness + unlimited + energy

Time and space: It's understandable that time and space are of the finite, what's interesting is that there are numerous, and yes, infinite starting and ending points within time itself, therefore in reality, time is an expression of the infinite as well as the finite.

Non-consciousness: Now the question of an existence of a non-consciousness is questionable, for a non-consciousness to exist, this non-consciousness needs a consciousness to realise this non-consciousness exists in the first place, basically, the yin needs the yang to exist and visa-versa.

Is there a nothingness of non-consciousness? I believe so but it can't be put into words or explained in any sense for it's non-consciousness, to put it into words would be of consciousness, once you do this, you are no longer speaking of a non-consciousness. This non-consciousness is more of a feeling than anything, it's certainly not a knowing for to know denotes a consciousness.

Motion/Motionlessness: Motion is of time and space therefore is of the finite for motion depicts a starting and ending point. Motionlessness however is of no time or space therefore is of the infinite as there is no starting or ending point of existence, no life or death.

Limitation/Unlimited: Because there are starting and ending points in time, these starting and ending points limit a consciousness to the finite. An unlimited consciousness however  is infinite because there are no limitations to a consciousness that has no boundaries unlike a consciousness within time. A state of timelessness allows a consciousness to express itself beyond the boundaries of time void of starting an ending points.                     

Energy; refers to both the infinite and the finite for all expressions in time are due to the infinite. Look at it like this, a motion picture has various frames that make up a motion picture, basically each separate frame of the picture film make up a motion picture by putting each frame into motion in realities of the finite. The infinite doesn't work like this, it sees all of the motion picture film as one frame, a collective picture or one picture, not many. This one picture frame, even though it's motionless, is still a depiction of an energy source otherwise the frame of the picture film wouldn't and couldn't exist.

Finite = separate frames put into motion as one picture film in motion, this can only occur in time based realities.

Infinite = all the separate frames are in one frame which is motionless, there is no motion in the infinite so no motion occurs. This means timelessness is a depiction of one still picture frame while showing the whole collective picture film simultaneously. You can see why an infinite consciousness is so aware, it is aware of the whole picture all of the times.      

Now I've put non-consciousness with energy while stating that this non-consciousness isn't an energy source. The reason for this is to do with the only way to become aware of this non-consciousness, is through the infinite, a state of timelessness, this is the only state that you will become aware of this non-consciousness. The infinite still denotes a consciousness but only through this timeless, motionless consciousness. The infinite and non-consciousness are certainly closely interlinked.

Consciousness as a whole is certainly vast and quite incomprehensible at times because of it's massiveness, the strange thing is, this whole collective consciousness is actually quite minute/tiny for only in motion is anything massive and sizeable, this is because motion expands on this motionless consciousness through it's expressions. Anything of this motionless consciousness expressed, automatically becomes larger but only in time.     



I'm sorry if I haven't explained myself very well here, it's a very difficult topic to comprehend at the best of times.   

Tuesday, 17 May 2016

The Demise of Limitations



Written by Mathew Naismith

The topic of our own limitations keeps coming up, this might seem boring to some people but to me it will never be boring and the reason for this is simple, such topics are a good indication that we are starting to let go of our made up limitations. In my last post,  The Creation of What Is, I mentioned that we often live by our environment, not with, this means we often create a reality based on our external environment. Being that our external environment can be highly destructive, we often create a reality from this instead of creating a reality from our inner self or inner environment. I should point out that our inner environment is infinite unlike our outer environment which is finite.
The reason why certain topics keep coming up is purely based on a need, a need to change the way we presently perceive and comprehend perceptions beyond our own comprehensions. We often limit ourselves to certain perceptions, this is usually brought about by fixating ourselves to certain ideologies and concepts that usually don't allow for a consciousness to evolve, this is were we often forget or are unaware of the difference between finite and the infinite existences. Would a consciousness of infinite existence be able to stagnate it's own consciousness to certain fixated perceptions? This kind of consciousness is quite unable to stagnate it's own consciousness to any kind of limitations but a consciousness of finite existence can and most often does.
Infinite Existence = evolution + open mind + aware + unlimited + inner self or God self
Finite Existence = devolution + closed mind + unaware + limited + outer self or human self
The present reality or environment we are presently living with, is predominantly based on finite existence, we often then live by the same existence instead of just living with this existences, we then inadvertently predominantly create a reality based on a finite existence. Everything within this physical reality is based on a starting and ending point, birth and death, we then base our whole reality on this environment. In accordance to this finite existence, we then think and act as though the only existence there is, is a finite existence. Even though various spiritual practices and beliefs have told us of the infinite self, we still predominantly base our whole reality on a finite existence. Fixating ourselves dogmatically to any ideologies or concepts, is basing our reality predominantly on a finite existence. Being that consciousness itself is infinite, how can we ever limit ourselves to certain ideologies and concepts, no ideology or concept can ever be infinite unless it incorporates all of what consciousness is within infinite existence.
Can we ever truly comprehend infinite existence when we are predominately influenced by a finite reality? While living by this finite reality, we have created all these ideologies and concepts, how much of the infinite consciousness can these ideologies and concepts be? They can't be unless they have been creates by consciousness's living by an infinite existence, however, remembering these same consciousness's are also living within a finite reality, how much  of an influence did the finite reality have on them and their ideologies and concepts?
Is it possible that a consciousness can exist within a reality based on finite existence but still be able to be predominantly influenced by infinite existence?
How could I possibly comprehend the ability to totally live by an infinite existence while living within a finite existence? However the answer is yes, as soon as a consciousness no longer limits itself to finite existences, I think such a consciousness would be able to be predominantly influenced by an infinite existence, this of course takes one to let go of it's present fixations to certain ideologies, concepts and even philosophies. No ideologies or concepts are totally of the infinite, consciousness itself is too unlimited, any limitations denote a finite influence so no ideologies or concepts can ever be totally of the infinite, consciousness itself is too vast and infinite within it's own existence to put into ideologies, concepts or philosophies.
However, while living within a finite reality, the only way to start to comprehend the vastness and limitlessness of infinite existence is through our created ideologies, concepts and philosophies, it's however wise to note that anything we create to comprehend the infinite, is going to be limited within itself.......

One thing to remember, consciousness isn't just of the infinite, it's also of the finite, the yin and yang of consciousness as a whole for a consciousness isn't whole until it's as one!!   

Monday, 11 April 2016

Life.....The Way We Don't See It




Written by Mathew Naismith

Even after a number of infinite connected experiences in my early days, I still displayed a consciousness that was primarily finite based, this was of course due to a continuous conditioning to finite existence, an existence of beginnings and ends. All forms are born and then die, end of story. Being brought up in an atheistic environment also added to this perception of there only being a starting and ending point of everything, point blank, end of story.

However, even though I was primarily conditioned to perceive in finite perspectives, my experiences of a reality of non-physical form also gave me the perception that there is more to life than  finite perspectives. What I was primarily conditioned to perceive, became less of a primary influence on me, this was gradually replaced with a perception that goes way beyond the boundaries and limitations of the finite, an existence purely based on limited perceptions. Any existence based on the finite, has to be limited within it's perceptions as the finite is within itself limiting.

Today, it's strange to me to primarily base an existence purely based on the finite as it's obvious that any existence, based on the finite, is going to be limiting to any consciousness existing within such a reality. It's also strange to me today that any consciousness would consciously do this, in actuality, no aware consciousness is able to consciously base it's existence primarily on the finite purely because such consciousness is aware of how limiting this kind of existence is. 

A finite existence is an unaware existence, does this mean an infinite existence is an aware existence denoting an aware consciousness? 

Finite = unawareness + limited perceptions and even perspectives

Infinite = awareness + unlimited consciousness period

I think the above quite clearly shows that the infinite denotes an awareness, any consciousness aware of the infinite to me, represents some kind of awareness beyond the boundaries of finite perceptions and existence. What have most religions expressed? A belief in a God or God's and Goddesses which symbolically represent infinite existence of other consciousness's, perceptions beyond the boundaries of finite existences, therefore, symbolically giving us an awareness of infinite perceptions and existences.

Today, so many people demonise religion for one reason or another but this isn't, to me,  totally warranted. Yes, certain people within certain religions have acted in contradictory to the beliefs they follow, this doesn't mean, in a big way, that religions have not helped us to understand the infinite self while existing in a finite existence, it's obvious they have, albeit in there own way. I should state her that I have never been or am I religious in anyway, I'm just being unbiased in my opinion and looking at the more constructive points of religion here instead of always focusing on the destructiveness of religions.  

In WWII, there was a Japanese fighter ace who scored around 88 victims, this person was a devout Buddhist. Being that Buddhism is supposed to be a passive religion/philosophy, he's actions seemed totally contradictory to he's beliefs. The point being that religions/philosophies are only a guide, no truly infinite based religion has limitations, if they do, they are no longer primarily of infinite teachings. Yes, even Buddhists can step from a reality based on the infinite to a reality base on the finite for there should never be any limitations set within the beliefs of a truly infinite based religion. In truth, no truly infinite based spiritual teachings should be limited in any way.

Recently, my mother passed on, so many people thought I was cold hearted because I didn't act in a broken hearted way. This perception of me is purely based on finite perceptions, when exactly did my mum truly die? In actuality, my mother is more alive than ever, this aliveness was mainly due to the turbulent life my mother lead. Take away all that trauma for starters, what are you left with? It would feel like utter peace and tranquility, what a life.....

Finite existence is bound by certain perspectives, being that perspectives denote limitations through measuring through certain set perceptions. It was measured or judged that I wasn't acting appropriately, this perception was purely based on finite perceptions.

Now let's look at my actions in an infinite way/perception, my mother is more alive than ever, if not more so, why would I be so upset about this especially considering my mother died from the complications of a long bout of cancer? I'm upset, but, why should I put on an act as if my mother is no more period? I could not be more happy for my mother, period.


Yes, the way we look at life is different, some people primarily perceive through the finite and other people primarily perceive through the infinite, however, there are also other people who perceive in both ways. No matter how we perceive, the way you perceive doesn't make someone else's perception wrong or even right, it's understandably only a different perception based purely on the way we perceive. As of always, it's however much wiser to perceive in more than one way.      

Thursday, 24 December 2015

The Finite - A Fraction of Who We Are


Written by Mathew Naismith

I made a bit of an error in not relating the finite to time in my last two posts, in actuality, the finite self is of time, in other words the finite is time itself, this of course makes the infinite self of timelessness, the eternal self.

Observing Time: In certain ideologies, it's said to be of the ego to desire that the infinite self exists, it's the ego that's wants to be eternal, this isn't actually the case. The finite and the infinite self exist without the ego deeming it so, this is because they are both a part of the  natural process of our whole being.  When you observe everything off time, you are observing through an infinite state of being without question, there is no question if our eternal state of being exists or not, only an ego would question if such a state exists or not!!

It's quite fascinating observing everything of  time, time, therefore the finite self, is observed as being quite a small part of our whole being, this is quite different to being a participator of time instead of an observer. The participator of time observes that time is expansive, it's quite huge in area and volume, however, when you become an observer of time, time is observed as something very small, everything of time is that small it seems nearly insignificant.

Fleeting Moments: Another thing about observing time, is that once you enter into a state of eternalness, you feel that everything experienced in time was but a fleeting moment, basically, it feels as if everything experienced in time took about a 5 minutes in our time to experience. In time, time feels like it's never ending, it goes on and on, however, once you enter into a timeless eternal state, such feelings of  a never ending cycle of time could be deemed as an illusion.

Can a consciousness delude itself in thinking time is all there is and that everything of time and the finite is massive and expansive?

Deluded?: We might think once we observe time, time itself would have to be deemed as being an illusion as time deludes us to think this is all we are  and that time is massive and expansive. In actuality, there is no question of time being an illusion when observing time, only observing time while also participating in time can we deem this to be so. Time can however  delude a consciousness in thinking this is all we are and that time is massive and expansive.

Time naturally influences a consciousness to become deluded, I wouldn't myself deem anything natural as being an illusion even though these natural states of being can cause a consciousness to become deluded. Yes, a deluded state is natural therefore is not, in a truer sense, a delusion or an illusion within itself!!

You can now understand how certain ideologies deem that the infinite, therefore the God self, doesn't exist, time is ego which influences us to become deluded, basically of Godlessness, a separation from our infinite self  which really never occurs. There is no true separation, only a sense of separation. Once a consciousness observes through the Godless finite self, everything of a natural state becomes an illusion and of the ego self.  

Going Home: When you enter into an eternal infinite state, this feels like home and that you never left this state. This basically makes everything experienced  through time and finite states, like being in a dream state, you never departed from your normal state of an infinite state of being. To me, our own dreams in time are not delusions or illusions, they are an extension of ourselves, why do we then deem everything of time and the finite an illusion when they are only an extension of ourselves?

Yes, time and the finite self are but an extension of ourselves, and yes, a very small part of ourselves but none the less a part of ourselves, only the ego would deem otherwise. The perpetual self within time will deem that anything other than it's truer self is an illusion, it will deem that one part of itself is our whole truer self when all of what we experience makes up our whole truer self, this includes our dreams which are but an extension of ourselves.

Special Gifts: We might also think observing time takes a special kind of consciousness to do so, this couldn't be further from the truth for only the ego would deem so. Is walking on water, turning water into wine or healing people by touch a special gift? No, believe it or not these so called special gifts are as natural to us as dreaming and breathing, these abilities are quite common in our infinite eternal state. Just because they are not common in our present state within time and infinite states of consciousness, doesn't mean they are not a natural part of our whole truer being.


Yes, we have deluded ourselves within time of our true abilities, this delusion however is quite natural within time and is but a fleeting moment within our whole eternal existence. The finite is indeed but an extension of ourselves, it's but a fraction of  who we truly are!!                          

Tuesday, 22 December 2015

The Worthiness of the Finite and Infinite


Written by Mathew Naismith

I've been receiving some interesting responses to my last two posts on my blog, the finite and infinite perspectives are certainly giving us different perceptions. On one side, we have the consciousness of science stating that infinite consciousness is a consciousness in delusion. On the other side we have consciousness of spirituality stating that finite consciousness is a consciousness in an illusion......Science minded and spiritually aware people are stating that each other is in a delusional or an illusional state of consciousness!!  

In actuality, both illusions and the delusions exist but not to the extent of the obvious bias being expressed by either side, both the infinite and the finite has it's place, to me this is obvious.          

The following is an interesting reply to my last post.....  



Reply
Hi Mathew I read the blog but still find myself confused at your understanding of truer self and the deception of science and the spiritual nature of the truer self as you put it. I'm not sure what it is you are trying to get across. Do you have a special different understanding of everything compared to the two mentioned above? If so can you explain it so that clarity can be given to that theory. I'm not trying to criticise just would love to see where your thoughts are taking you as it feels a bit off the mark if I'm honest.



My Reply
Finding other people's perceptions questionable, is all about trying to be  aware beyond your own perceptions, this can also include being aware beyond human perceptions at times.  Trying to perceive beyond your own perceptions isn't, to me, being critical Damon, it's quite cool.

Truer Self: Look at your truer self being everything that is infinite, it's a state of being that has no boundaries of the finite, in other words a starting and ending point, it's basically a state of eternalness. In most religions this was portrayed through the knowing of a God and/or Goddesses or anything portraying an eternal aspect. We have always had a connection with our eternal self  through spirituality in one sense or another. It's obvious to me there is something to the infinite self, why would so many people express such  an interest in the infinite if it didn't have some kind of truth about it?  We have obviously felt a connection to the infinite self, our truer or inner self/being.

Science: If I at all portrayed science being of deception, I'm sorry for that, this was not my intentions. Science is of the finite awareness, an awareness based on finite perspectives where's spirituality is based on infinite perspectives. Within any ideology or concept, it's not the ideology or concept that becomes deceptive, it's the people behind such conscious perceptions.

Spirituality = infinite + eternal states of consciousness + infinite awareness 

Science = finite + transitory states of consciousness + finite awareness

It's interesting how general science preconceives that consciousness also dies when the human self dies!!   

Don't be mistaken that these two quite different perspectives don't come together, they often do when a consciousness using such perceptions has no biases/boundaries to contend with. Some of the newer sciences of today use both finite and infinite perspectives as they did before modern day science. I think using both perspectives certainly seems to give us wisdom. This wisdom comes about by perceiving that there are no true boundaries, therefore, there are no preconceptions.

To me, it is obvious why we are lacking wisdom today, we have set up boundaries and biases between infinite and finite conscious perceptions and being. A truly wise person never preconceives what is and isn't, they always stay open to any possibility beyond their own perceptions.

Damon, you yourself have expressed this through querying a perception different to your own......It's not easy staying open to perceptions we have no idea of , only in the wise will we observe this.           
            


Note: The discussion between Damon and myself is still in progress, I will update this post in accordance with our discussion.

Reply 
 
Actually that helped thank you I agree with your explanation   

Monday, 21 December 2015

A Truer Depiction of Our Truer Self


Written by Mathew Naismith 

I had my last post, The creation of the mind, queried in an interesting way which brought forth an even more interesting response from me. Spirituality is indeed about the infinite self more than the finite where's science is quite the opposite in most cases. Science is a good depiction of our finite self where's spirituality is a good depiction of our infinite self, as usual for me, one is neither more or less worthy than the other as both depictions give us a realisation  of our whole truer self as I will explain.

Reply   
Was this just an exercise in talking out loud random thoughts or is there some point to it?

My Reply
There was a point, the point is, the mind is created by conditioned preconceptions, in other words the mind couldn't exist without preconceptions. Our truer selves on the other hand is about conceptions that already exist, there is no true preconceptions within this perception.  

Reply
 "Truer selves" what does that mean?

My Reply
The self that isn't defined by preconceptions, a self that is eternal and not just of a transitory state of existence.    

I will elaborate on this further. Spiritually has always been about the infinite self where's the sciences have been about the opposite, the finite self, this is even the case when searching for the source of all creation.  For example, the depiction of a God or Goddess in spirituality, is a good indication of our connection with the infinite where's general science has always looked at the finite. Everything in general science has a start and end point like when we pass on (die), that is it, there is no more but spirituality looks beyond this perspective.

As science knows today, you can't destroy energy, only the form an energy source has created like our human form for example, however, when the human form dies, everything dies because the human form is known to science to be who we are as a whole. Spirituality looks at this differently, it's the spirit or consciousness that is who we are as a whole, this of course goes on after we die which means a depiction of our truer self goes on, the human self is never known to be who we truly are in spirituality.

What I find strange is that science knows that you can't destroy the fundamental basis of creation, energy itself, all you can do is transform energy, so if all we are in human form is a transformed form of energy, isn't the energy that created human form itself infinite therefore will go on after we die?  

However, even after we die, we are not talking about the truer self here, in this state we are still in a transitory state, a state that is still infinite in most cases. The state we are in depends on our consciousness's perceptions and preconceptions. If a consciousness after the demise of the human self is still perceiving in finite perceptions,  such a consciousness will still express preconceptions. Preconceptions are of course not a true depiction of our truer self because preconceptions work on the expressions of the finite self, not the infinite self.

This is where science makes no logical sense at all, if the building block of all creation is infinite, energy itself,  isn't this building block who we truly are, remembering all transformed forms of energy are just that, a transformation of energy from an infinite source we often call God or the source of all creation itself? 

Now when we die, is it consciousness that transforms or is it the human body? In most cases, the consciousness won't transform into it's truer self, it will stay in a finite state of consciousness. The human form will of course naturally transform into another kind of energy source but the consciousness self can stay the same as if it's still in human form, Ghosts/spirits are a good example of this. This isn't a depiction of our truer self, a depiction of our truer self is the realisation of the infinite within all things. The truer self is the realisation that anything finite is not representative of our true self, only can the realisation of the infinite depict our truer self. 

This however doesn't make the finite expression of self not a part of us, the finite part of ourselves is really only a very small part of our whole self, but, it's still a part of our whole being. The infinite self isn't a depiction of our whole self as we might also perceive, the depiction of the infinite and finite self is representative of our whole truer self no matter how small the finite part of our self is. What we have done in a reality like this one is make the finite our truer self, or, make the infinite self our whole truer self. In actuality in accordance with oneness, the infinite self is our truer self but to me, the whole truer self is representative of both the infinite and infinite self, basically, the whole truer self represents all of what we are expressive of, not what we only want to be known to be expressive of what we are!!  


It will be interesting if the discussion with this person continues.......


Reply
Ok So we're not talking facts based subject matter or science we're talking some kind of  wandering mind hoping to define something you don't understand.
I don't believe in your concept of creation, so I'll struggle to make any sense of the other things you have said here, frankly, with all due respect and I mean you no insult,  it's gibberish nonsense to me.

As for energy when you die that's a very simple thing to answer, no mystery and a quick google search turns up a better worded explanation or two than I can provide so I'll quote you a couple simple explanations I found online:

The energy within your body is largely found in three forms: heat, chemical and electrical. When we die the electrical energy, which is used by nerve cells to transmit signals around the body, dissipates in to heat as the electrical potentials required to maintain it are lost when the body’s cells die. The heat energy trapped within the body dissipates into the atmosphere so that your body cools to the temperature of its surroundings.
The chemical energy is maintained within the chemical bonds of the substances that make up the body. These bonds are broken either by burning during cremation, which releases the energy as heat and light, or through decomposition. The bacteria and other organisms which decompose dead organisms use the energy to grow and develop. So the energy in our bodies gets used to generate new life and will pass on up the food chain potentially to be reincorporated into another human being.


Or maybe this version:
Where the energy goes is dependent really on where you are put after death. If you are buried you are decomposed by micro-organisms in the soil which will break down all the chemical bonds in your body. Chemical bonds are where the energy is stored in your body and the organisms feasting on the body use this energy. Another thing that can happen is the nitrate in your body is fixed in the soil, this is a vital food source for plants. So the energy in the body is used by lots of different organisms and vegetation to continue life – no energy is lost.

Hopefully that takes some of the "mystery" out of the long reply you took time to write, for which incidentally I thank you taking time to do.
Have a great day.


My Reply

Hmmmm....is it you don't understand or I Neil? How much do you understand between the difference of infinite and finite consciousnesses?  I've worked in the welfare arena twice over in my life Neil, I have a good understanding of psychology and please don't be one of those people who say psychology isn't a science!! 

The psychological aspects of finite and  infinite consciousness is well defined, for example, the difference between science perspectives and spiritual perspectives is obvious would you not say? 

Reading the rest of your reply certainly proves my point between the two very distinct perspectives. You yourself within this reply have proven my point. There is no way you are able to perceive in infinite perspectives, anything other than this is of course defined as dribble or gibberish, however, I am not of the same preconception, see what I mean about preconceptions now Neil!! 

Your own preconceptions defines a boundary where's mine doesn't, this however will also physiologically occur with people who can only perceive in infinite perspectives, I find it all quite interesting. 


Reply
I don't believe it's a lack of ability on my part to understand it's more a case of my understanding leads me to believe it's gibberish.
I do not dispute aspects of psychology can be considered scientific but "spirituality" seems personal perspective on life and not scientific conclusion.
I also appreciate that studying how people arrive at some kind of spiritual perspective can be scientifically studied but spirituality itself, there's nothing scientific about it in my opinion.

Now don't even if I were to go along with this whole finite / infinite perspective conversation, (which frankly sounds like a pointless exercise),  I'd still ask the question, what of it?
If it's an exercise in trying to understand another's thought process, fair enough but beyond that?

I'm not sure where you think the scientific explanation of energy I supplied can be considered a "perspective" if that's what you're implying.
If so then it sounds like you are in denial of science and that's probably something worth spending more time considering. (not for me for you ;) )

I suspect at this point the conversation has run it's course for me so apologies if my future replies are not so swift or do not happen.


My Reply

The perception of gibberish is a psychological barrier to start with, it shows that one is unable or unwilling to look beyond their present perceptions. 

You seem to perceive spirituality to be an aspect of the personal self, I don't, for me to perceive so would be yet another barrier to becoming aware of perceptions beyond my own. Most science minded people often make this mistake and so do a lot of spiritually aware people by the way. 

To ask what of it sounds awfully strange to me, especially from anyone who is slightly scientifically minded. Finite and infinite perceptions create the reality we experience, any extremes will obviously create a reality of extremes. Why you don't find this relevant has got me, maybe too many bias psychological barriers is my guess, think on this. 

You obviously see science being more worthy than spirituality, I don't Neil, this is the big difference between you and I, my barriers and biases are minimal.