Monday, 8 January 2018
Written by Mathew Naismith
Personally, I think it's advisable to go along with your own social acceptance mentally and physically. The picture above shows me wearing a thawb/thobe, just because in my culture this kind of dress isn't usually accepted, this doesn't and shouldn't mean I shouldn't wear this kind of dress. It's advisable not to be limited to and by your own culture, all this creates is separative ideologies and concepts therefore realities based on separatism.
Yes, at no time cause distress or show disrespect in one's dress but one, in my mind, should always try to dress to one's own social acceptance. If you go to a black tie event, you wear a black tie. I wore this dress at a market that is one of the biggest markets in our area, at no time did I feel I was being disrespectful or giving people grief. Yes, it was obvious certain people of my own culture were unconfutable and non-accepting of my dress, however, it was they who were giving themselves grief through their limitations in accordance with their own culture, not me.
To atheists of extreme views, all else based on beliefs and faith is socially unacceptable, the same is with religious people of extreme views. In
you're not being a real man in certain social circles if you're not interested
in football, go figure!! So the coalition forces are not at war with real men
because they don't follow football and wear garments like thawb's and kaftans!!
Spiritually, one must sit, eat, think and be a certain way to be spiritual; at no time can one be conflictive, destructive or violent. Light naturally destroys dark, in a sense an unawareness is quite aggressively replaced by awareness. To the light, it may not seem aggressive but to the dark it couldn't be more aggressive. The Earth and the sun can be exceptionally violent and destructive; we can often find ourselves quite insecure and volatile in a natural world/reality. So because the Earth is violent and destructive therefore cause insecurities to ourselves, the Earth and the whole of the universe isn't spiritual!!
To a lot of spiritually aware, it is socially unacceptable for a spiritually aware person to be violent in any sense. Considering that certain spiritualists in
lash out at people and that
in certain Buddhist meditative practices violence is acted out, being limited
to certain accepted non-violent spiritual social beliefs isn't true in
accordance to nature. It's simply not natural to limit oneself to certain set
boundaries within nature, for nature has no limitations. Considering that
consciousness as a whole is infinite in nature, it's funny that we are still
limiting ourselves to certain set social standards, usually in accordance with
the culture we fixate ourselves to. India
A lot of people experience their most enlightening times under duress!!
Spiritual pertains to the non-physical, just because the non-physical is expressed in a physical way, doesn't make what is expressed physically non-spiritual as it's never not spiritual, even when the non-physical is expressed physically. Physical expressions simply mean interaction with different forms of energy sources separated by various differences. Just because I separate one energy source into different energy sources, doesn't make these different energy sources not of energy, then why do we think that by expressing the non-physical physically make it non-spiritual, especially if it's violent!! As energy is always energy, no matter how different the energy becomes, the spiritual is always spiritual, there is always a spiritual, a non-physical state, to the physical.
We are having a physical experience; does this mean we are not of our soul? We are never not of our soul no matter how physically expressive we are, in actuality, try having a physical experience void of a soul or the spiritual. Try mentally creating something physically void of thought, one comes before the other and is always of the other.
We might then think that we are being more spiritual the less physically expressive we are. To people like me, we are being more spiritual being expressive of physicality, not less spiritual. For starters, we are humbling ourselves and we are not allowing our egos to control how humbling we express ourselves physically. Secondly, to be expressive of everything physical, is to be aware of everything physical, in actuality, to be aware of separateness of physicality is to truly be spiritually aware. How truly aware and unlimited, infinite, are we when only aware of what we desire or perceive to only be spiritual?
In all, I simply could not imagine myself being limited physically and mentally to a certain cultural standard, in saying this, being limited to certain set standards like this is also apart of the spiritual journey. I was not accepted by certain people at the market in my dress, however, they too have a right not to be accepting therefore be expressive of their own culture in accordance with their own social acceptance.
It's not what we think, it's what we don't think that creates the problems we have in life!!
Tuesday, 2 January 2018
Written by Mathew Naismith
The magnificence of the world can only be experienced if properly witnessed, all else is but an abstract interpretation of the world........Mathew G
Abstractive: Being abstractive simply means a representation of part of, not a true interpretation or expression of what is as a whole. How can the magnificence of the world be truly experienced if not properly witnessed/observed? An abstractive representation refers to participation rather than observation; this is very much in line with how an abstract artist works. They don't observe in what they paint; they participate in what they paint, in turn, what is represented or expressed is participation rather than observation.
Yes, an abstract artist will observe what they paint, but they will only paint in what they participate in to what they observe. They don't observe in what they paint but paint in participation of what they observe, the observation becomes participation through abstractive representations or expressions. Human consciousness is an abstract artist creating whatever reality that is observed in an abstract way. Abstract = participation rather than observation, you could call this abstractive participation.
So what has abstractive participation got to do with shining spiritually?
Shining; simply refers to being aware to the point of physically expressing awareness void of bias and desire. This means within this state we don't pursue euphoric feelings of love and compassion, we simply allow these feelings to come and go void of trying to hold onto them. If I was to always try to hold and express these feelings, all I would be doing is expressing bias and desire. This is not shining but simply expressing an abstract expression of what is being observed or felt.
Now we might think that pure observation void of participation is shining, this is also simply not the case. Observation void of participation is simply a state void of participation of what is being observed, this kind of state is bias in that participation is absent, usually deliberately so. Also, being the observer is often desired over and above the participator, in actuality in absence of the participator. What is there to observe or become aware of if there is no participation to observe? A pure state of awareness can only be observed if there is also participation.
To be in quietness is the observer. To be in unquietness is the participator. A true form of abstract art is never quiet, however, art that is of the observer and the participator are of, not quietness and unquietness but neutrality, a state that represents observation and participation void of extremes or bias expressions. Bias imbalanced expressions simply create distorted realities, very simular to abstract art. Bias imbalanced expressions are not illusions but distortions; this is why I don't consort to the idea that realities like this one being simply and wholly an illusion.
Spiritual: Reference to the spiritual pertains, not to the sacred or holey but to the non-physical, in actuality, when I make reference to the spiritual, it's never of the sacred or holy.
The perception of sacredness and holiness represents separation, within these kinds of perceptions, we will never be of what we hold as sacred or holey as they will always be separate to us. We are of what we idolise and worship, only in distorted realities is there a perception of separation. Of course distorted realities pertain to a consciousness that is bias therefore of distorted truths. Separation of our sacredness and holiness is simply a distortion of consciousness brought about by distorted truths based on desires, the desire while within a distorted reality, of separate higher consciousnesses to ourselves.
Insecurities: Psychologically, a consciousness that feels entrapped or not of a particular chaotic reality will quite naturally separate itself from the sacred or holy, inturn, creating a distorted view/reality of sacredness and/or holiness. This distortion allows a consciousness in trauma to feel better or even euphoric. It's an in-built defence system within the psyche that automatically activates when a consciousness is in deep trauma or peril. Our own insecurities create numerous distortions within a consciousness, collectively and personally.
Once a consciousness is conditioned to insecurities, the psyche automatically activates a defence mechanism to lesson traumas associated with insecurities. How many new age spiritual people feel insecure/uncomfortable with the present reality? This will of course quite naturally distort consciousness even more, not less. Materialism is the same, it makes us feel happier and /or secure in a world conditioned fear. The trick is to not feel insecure void of separating ourselves from the sacred and /or holy. In my mind, the deemed sacred or holy or materialism should never make us feel more secure, we should already feel secure no matter how distorted the reality we are experiencing is.
Yes, become familiar and aware of the sacred and holy, but not in separation to yourself. All that separation will create is distorted realities based on insecurities. The shining is simply being void of separation and feelings of insecurities.
Thursday, 29 September 2016
Written by Mathew Naismith
I should firstly point out that this post isn't about the clinical representation of immunising but a spiritual one and yes, without us even knowing it, we do indeed immunise ourselves. So what are we unknowingly immunising ourselves against?
We, as humans, clinically immunise ourselves against the effects of viruses that affect us, spiritual immunising is the same, any excessive motion creates destruction, just like a virus. Spiritually aware people basically immunise themselves against excessive motion that is obvious within it's destructiveness. Just like a virus, excessive extreme motion often inundates less motionless motions, this is because this kind of motion is more active. It's like our own immune system, if our immune system is less active than a virus, the virus will most likely inundate the immune system and everything else attached to the immune system. In extreme circumstances, this can indeed cause the demise of a person or a motion. Excessive motion can indeed destroy everything human.
Basically, any excessive motion, especially if it's extreme within it's motion, is a virus or acts just like a virus.
Excessive motion = virus
Don't prejudge me as being negative here, viruses have been around since micro-organisms, they are a natural part of creation, I therefore don't judge viruses as being negative. Yes, as any excessive motion can become, active viruses can indeed be highly destructive. Liken this to Syria at present, the multinationals, with the aid of Israel, is pilfering Syria's oil and gas reserves, this action is highly motional and will only create destruction instead of peace. Like a virus, it's main concern is what it can get out of it's environment for itself. Highly active viruses are anything but peaceful, does this non-peacefulness make these people negative? Not at all because they are a natural part of creation, this would be like going up to a volcano and stating to the volcano, it's bad and negative because it's highly destructive within it's motion.
We are now coming to the main point of the post. There are people who are still immunising themselves against excessive motion and there are people who have already immunised themselves against excessive motion. There are also people who are of this excessive motion that spiritually aware people often immunise themselves against the infection of excessive motions. Also, as of clinical immunising, spiritual immunisation doesn't always work, in serious circumstances, the immunisation can be as deadly or harmful as the viruses, human history reflects this quite well.
The question is, how do you know if you are truly immunised or not infected by excessive motion?
Firstly, you try not to judge through a black and white mentality, meaning, you don't judge what is or isn't negative or positive for an example, you instead observe what is and isn't destructive while remembering not everything that is destructive is negative or bad.
Secondly, you immerse yourself in a true sense of love, this means loving and accepting what is and isn't destructive. Basically, you don't ignore everything you have judged as being negative or bad. Spiritual awareness is about being aware even of excessive extreme motions that are often highly destructive.
Thirdly, you don't participate in extremes, especially when in retaliation to another opposing extreme. This kind of action denotes a virus mentality, a mentality of black and white. It's natural for a truly immunised person to not express this kind of mentality, in actually it's impossible for them to do so.
Now how do you now you are still in the immunisation process, meaning, you are still being immunised against excessive motion/virus?
Point one, you will judge what is and isn't positive even though you are of a self-judged positive person. Even judging yourself positive, especially on a regular basis, denotes a black and white mentality.
Point two, you will most often stay away from what you have judged as negative vibrations. Anyone immune to these highly motional motions, won't be affected by the feelings of excessive motion. Anyone who is truly immunised, will feel a difference but won't judge a difference as negative or positive, this is all due to being immunised against excessive motion because they are seen to be no threat to them. We usually judge a negative or a positive in fear for example. A person in the process of being immunised, will often refer to themselves, and others like themselves, as being positive, being truthful here, this is in fear of being negative.
What about the people who are of excessive motion, how do you know you are of this excessive motion?
Any excessive motion, especially extreme motions, denote a person who is of excessive motion, for example, a person who is predominant within their materialistic motions/expressions void of any attribute that balances out materialism, is obvious within their own motions of being excessive. Spiritually aware people can also be caught up in expressing excessiveness, especially when in counteraction to something opposing them like any judged negative for example.
The question is, are people like me fully immunised?
Absolutely not as people like myself are obvious within their participation in motion. There might not be any expression of excessive motion or counteractive motion, but a high degree of motion is till being expressed.
In all, try to realise that there is nothing wrong in being expressive of a virus, it's a natural part of creation, there is also nothing wrong or right in being immunised against excessive motions either. Yes, we are aware of how excessive motion (virus) can destroy for it's own purpose, there is a better more constructive way to exist, but this doesn't make excessive motions negative or bad in some way. I do know one of these multinationals was a pauper in his previous life, all he is doing now is experiencing the opposite, all be it to an extreme. Before judging, try to look at the big picture.
Don't get me wrong here, I am by no way for excessive motion in any sense, be it spiritually or materialistically, but what is meant to be will be while knowing we do indeed have a choice in the way we exist.
Until human consciousness can evolve from excessive motions, he will keep on experiencing a virus like reality, this is inevitable.........
Until human consciousness can evolve from excessive motions, he will keep on experiencing a virus like reality, this is inevitable.........
Wednesday, 28 January 2015
Written by Mathew Naismith
Extract: Spirituality is a process of personal transformation, either in accordance with traditional religious ideals, or, increasingly, oriented on subjective experience and psychological growth independently of any specific religious context. In a more general sense, it may refer to almost any kind of meaningful activity or blissful experience. There is no single, widely-agreed definition for the concept. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality
Spiritualism is quite different to spirituality, or being spiritual, in that spiritualism is more defined to the actual belief and communication with spirit’s/ghosts, this also includes reincarnation.
Extract: 1. Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit; not material; supernatural: spiritual power.
2. Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul: spiritual guidance; spiritual growth.
3. Not concerned with material or worldly things: led a spiritual life.
4. Of or belonging to a religion; sacred: spiritual practices; spiritual music.
The thing about being spiritual is it’s not supposed to be about material or worldly things but we are often taught to manifest for our own desires, this is brought about by spirituality also being about meaningful activities and blissful experiences. There seems to be also a definable difference here between being spiritually aware and being actually spiritual in oneself. I often defined myself in being spiritually aware, full stop but that actually isn’t the case as for a lot of us who are not focused on our own blissful experiences.
Let’s take a look at sages, shamans, Jesus and Buddha for an example, are they defined as being spiritually aware or spiritual in oneself or both? These people conducted themselves in many meaningful activities and had many blissful experiences; this must make them spiritually aware rather than being spiritual in oneself?
What does it take to manifest for our own desires? Awareness, now what does it take to being spiritual in oneself? A lot more than just being aware, Jesus, Buddha, sages and shamans didn’t become aware overnight, it can take many hours of mental and/or physical pain, and like Jesus, they can take that pain with them to the very end, they are certainly not about manifesting for one’s desires.
I’ve never manifested for my own desires since I’ve become aware some 40 years ago, I’ve actually done the opposite many times over to assist others, in this time all my needs, as opposed to desires, have been met to one degree or another . In this time I have also had many blissful experiences and many not so blissful experiences, I have not once manifested for such experiences blissful or not.
Now you could say people like Jesus and Buddha manifested for their own blissful experiences and yes they would have had many. As you become aware you experience many blissful moments, however, to a person who is being spiritual in oneself, these moments aren’t manifested, they are part of being spiritual in oneself, this also includes experiencing not so blissful moments as well.
These people didn’t just fixate themselves in feeling blissful as they became aware, they experienced everything to do with being spiritual in oneself rather than being spiritually aware. Is there anything wrong in just being spiritually aware? There is nothing wrong in this it’s just not being spiritual in oneself.
Being spiritually aware is just about human development not spiritual development; becoming spiritually aware can help us to become aware of our own spirit, this is until we experience something that’s not so blissful, at this point we choose to only be in bliss. You could imagine if Jesus and Buddha did this, they would have stopped at just being spiritually aware and not gone on to being spiritual within themselves.
Is it worth becoming being spiritual within oneself and should everyone try to become spiritual in this way?
I can experience the most traumatic times and deal with the most obviously destructive people and still come out on top all the times, this is mainly due to realising that everyone has their own path to follow no matter how destructive that might be. This actually answers the second question, “Should everyone try to become spiritual in this way?” Not if these experiences are not a part of your own path. If you are fixated to just feeing bliss, that is your path, there are no right or wrong paths just different experiences.
There is something I feel we need to be aware of though, religion has time and time again made the same mistake in manifesting for it’s own desires which in the long run created even more disharmony. I see so many people today doing the exact same thing, yes it sounds good to manifest for our own desires but it also sounded good when the various religions and churches made it sound good as well. Everything is consciousness and we think we can manipulate it as we like to our own desires; we seem to be forgetting the cause and effect, action reaction, push and pull.
Pulling something in that feel like bliss to push something out that doesn’t feel like bliss is rejection, there is no acceptance here when everything is consciousness including what we are rejecting. You don’t have to pull something in to push something out that is less desirable, this is active intentions. Passive intentions take one to change what seems undesirable to something more constructive, something that is more needed than desired. A more constructive way to exist has become a need not a desire.
Buddha and Jesus felt a need that needed to be met, they didn’t feel a desire, desire would have taken to be of active intentions, pushing and pulling, rejection. They didn’t reject anything; they changed this destructive consciousness within themselves through a need not through a desire. I said within themselves because it’s always within ourselves, we are not a separate consciousness, consciousness is consciousness no matter what, it’s all of the same consciousness, this is why it seems strange to me why so many people reject any part of this conciseness to pull in a more desirable conscious experience .
Like Jesus, Buddha, sages and shaman, all you have to do is change this consciousness not reject it for something more blissful , what you have rejected doesn’t go away, as human history quite plainly shows us, but what we change can last forever if we do it for a need rather than a desire.