Hope In Peace

Written by Mathew

There is a lot of frustration out there in regards to peace, it's so daunting for people like me observing people in distress on relation to peace, will human consciousness ever holistically be at peace? This question isn't actually appropriate because our present perception is based on our present circumstances which is anything but peaceful. Basically, for every hundred people manifesting for peace, you have a thousand other people manifesting for unrest. For starters, literally millions of people within this reality live off of unrest, it's certainly a strange reality were people live off of unrest!! On top of this, you have groups of people and even whole country of people who will do anything to force there way of existing onto others, peace seems utterly hopeless. When you also consider that restless/unhappy people spend more money, you start to realise how many people rely on an unrestful/unsettled existence.     

It's indeed a strange existence, it's seemingly the only way human consciousness know how to exist, this of course isn't true and this is the point to focus on.

Conscious Unrest: Human consciousness has gotten to the point it knows no other way to exist but in unrest. Human consciousness desperately needs assistance to be in peace, this is obvious but this must happen from within human consciousness itself, however, this doesn't mean we only use human consciousness to desist in existing in unrest. Human conscious is too conditioned to relying on unrest to exist by to help itself from within, this is were perceiving beyond human perceptions comes into it's own.

Perceptions are based on present circumstances, can a mentally ill person who's perceptions are based on their present circumstances, assist themselves from within to perceive beyond their present perceptions based on the illness? Certainly not on their own, they always need an external awareness of  perceptions beyond their present circumstances, human consciousness is no different. Any consciousness that is wholly conditioned to live off of unrest, is unable to assist itself from within, it is obvious it needs external influences to perceive beyond the limitations of only being able to exist in an unsettling way.

Wisdom: In ancient times, human consciousness looked up and aspired to anything pertaining to wisdom, today, human consciousness is based on intelligence instead of wisdom, basically, intelligence has replaced wisdom. The strange thing about human intelligence is that it tries to express intelligence void of wisdom. Human consciousness is also unable to exist in any other way but in unrest, it's certainly as strange intelligence that human consciousness expresses. How would a consciousness that is primarily based on unrest, be able to express any true sense of intelligence?

For a consciousness to create unrest, would also have to be of unrest!!

It's wise to be aware that all perceptions are based on a conditioning of a kind, no perception is flawless, this includes any external perceptions we use to assist in helping human consciousness heal from within. In stating this, there are external perceptions to human conditioned perceptions that are a lot more peaceful than human perceptions. Can we heal human consciousness from within void of any kind of perceptions?  Yes and no.

Human Perceptions: Human consciousness is primarily based on perceptions, actually, human consciousness couldn't exist without these perceptions because human consciousness is of perceiving. Try replacing perceptions with non-perceptions. How is a consciousness, that is primarily base on perceiving by the five senses, going to react by replacing it's whole consciousness with another kind of consciousness that is void of perceptions? Such a consciousness couldn't possibly perceive or accept of being replaced altogether. Are we truly supposed to replace one consciousness with another completely different kind of consciousness to start with?

Try replacing a mentally ills person's consciousness with another consciousness that the mentally ills person's consciousness is unable to perceive in the first place, it's just not going to work. A lot of people are trying to do just this on a collective human scale. It's not healing a consciousness by replacing a consciousness with another consciousness altogether, in actuality, any such actions will create more unrest, not less.

A non-perceiving consciousness isn't supposed to replace human consciousness, it's supposed to help balance out human consciousness. It's like balancing out motion with motionlessness, physical life with spirituality, this balancing will, in my mind, assist heal human consciousness within. This doesn't incorporate us to be more positive over an above deemed negative, all this kind of action will cause is disdain for anything deemed negative. It's funny deeming what is and isn't negative or positive, such judgment is still based purely on one's own perceptions at the time!!

Black and White Mentality: I wrote the following just recently.

What judged a negative a negative?

Strangely enough, a positive judging a negative less worthy than itself.

Why then judge a positive and a negative?

Wouldn't life be simpler and more peaceful if we didn't?

I don't judge myself as being positive or negative these day because I know that such a mentality is based on a judged unworthy, I also know it's based on a particular perception, being that no perception is flawless.

Why then judge a positive and a negative is interesting. Human consciousness has  conditioned itself to judge in this way, basically, human consciousness has conditioned itself to a mentality of black and white, it's what I call a black and white mentality, there has to be a wrong and a right, worthy and less worthy.

You should by this point get a pretty good idea how human consciousness has become based on an existence of unrest, there isn't too much balancing out this unrest in human consciousness these days. There is no way that a consciousness this conditioned to unrest, is able to heal itself from within on it's own. You also should be able to get a good idea of what needs to be done to arrest human consciousness from being primarily based on unrest, an awareness of why human consciousness is so restless is a good start.

It's also wise to be aware that human consciousness is what it is, this means any change to human consciousness has to be within it's perceptions otherwise it's no longer human consciousness. Basically, if you can change a consciousness to another kind of consciousness, it's no longer of it's original state of consciousness, it's something else, humans consciousness stays as human consciousness.

This brings us to journeys and paths: Human consciousness is a journey which many paths can be taken, a good example of this is each person has their own path to follow but while on the human journey of experience. Some paths are like the human journey itself, they are of unrest within  their own unique ways, of course the reason why the human journey is unsettled, is due to many paths of this human journey having a path of un-restfulness. If on the other hand most paths within this human journey was at peace, the human journey itself would reflect this peacefulness. Human consciousness isn't naturally unsettled but this unsettledness is part of human consciousness to be able to be expressed but so is peace.

The answer to changing the human journey is to change the path of each of us to something more peaceful. Change the path, you change the way the journey is being experienced, however, has anyone got the right to change, especially forcefully, other people's paths? The answer is of course no but we can influence people to change their path by giving these people a choice of paths. This is of course done by displaying your own path to others so they may now know they have a choice, in the end however, a person has a right to choose or stay with an unsettled path. If in the end this means human consciousness/journey is to stay unsettled in any sense, so be it. This is exactly why no so called true higher consciousness will interfere with the human journey, it has no right, only untrue consciousness's will do this, it's good to be wised up to this.

Any real change to the human  journey itself, must be made by or through a human, this is why it's a good idea to perceive beyond human perceptions. To begin, try not to become too fixated to human ideologies or practices and know when to move or evolve on from these ideologies and practices. Also, move away from the, very human, mentality of black and white, all this mentality does is add to the unrest.             

Looking Beyond Zero Point

Written by Mathew Naismith

Firstly, zero point refers to the point of origin of creation, it's a point where everything is created from. This point is timeless and motionless, there is absolutely no motion within this zero point which is likened to the eye of a cyclone.  I also won't make reference to religion or God in this post, I will however explain how important practices like meditation, preying and chanting are. Even though practices like these are not of the zero point itself, while a consciousness is in motion around zero point, to get back to zero point, even now and again, practices like meditation, praying and chanting seem to be necessary

Zero Point =  Timelessness + peace and tranquillity + perfect balance + oneness, Zen + motionlessness + no conditioning

Everything else = time + chaos + imbalance + separatism/duality + motion + conditioning

Motion: This everything else other than zero point is where our present consciousness is conscious of, this is where our consciousness exists at present. Basically, if you look at a cyclone, our consciousness is presently rotating in motion around the eye of the cyclone. Now we might presume that the eye of an actual cyclone (zero point) doesn't create the cyclone itself, this zero point didn't actually create the cyclone part of the storm itself. You could even say that it's the stormy part of the cyclone that created the eye of the cyclone, in a sense this is quite correct.

The point is, a cyclone isn't a cyclone until an eye of the cyclone is apparent, the cyclone can't exist without an eye being present. Notice I stated that the cyclone made the eye of the cyclone apparent, rather than the eye of the cyclone was created from storms. We often presume that motion has to be the creator, this is the fundamental principles of science, a consciousness conditioned by motion. A consciousness conditioned to motion, will primarily perceive through motions, meaning, everything was created by motion.

Look at this way in relation to a cyclone, motion allows a consciousness of motion to observe the eye of the cyclone, the eye of the cyclone has always been present, it's just motion presents this motionless state to us so we can observe it's existence while in a state of motion. What have various spiritual practices and philosophies tried to show us? The eye of the cyclone, zero point of the creation of everything. 

To a lot of us, this zero point has become obscured, like the cloudy storm rotating in motion around the eye of a cyclone. This obscurity was created because we have become the storm part of the cyclone itself thus forgetting that we are also of the eye of the cyclone. Zero point is no longer apparent to us because we have become the storm itself which has obscured zero point from our vision. This obscurity was created by the very things that was supposed to make zero point apparent to us, various spiritual practices and philosophies. Instead of using these practices and philosophies to bring clarity of zero point, we us them as a crutch thus creating further conditioning. It's this conditioning that obscures, like the clouds of a cyclone, our view of zero point. It's this obscurity that stops us from becoming truly aware of zero point.

Let's take another look at what is in motion around the eye of a cyclone, it's stormy, cloudy, rainy and destructive, basically, the stormy part of the cyclone is imbalanced to the rest of it's environment through it's extreme expressions/motions. Just around the rim of the eye is the most destructive part of the cyclone, as we go out from the eye of the cyclone, the winds of the cyclone become less damaging/chaotic.

Distance and Time: It's interesting to note that motion closest to the eye is more destructive, does this mean that any consciousness that is closest to the zero point, oneness Zen, has more of a connection to this zero point? If we were to perceive through motion which equals time and distance, we would perceive the most destructive consciousness's have more of a connection with zero point. This of course isn't the case because the further outwardly we go from the eye of the cyclone, the calmer it is. Consciously speaking, we presume the further away we get from zero point, the less we are connected, within the assumption, we are mistakenly measuring distance when zero point isn't of distance.

The point of zero has no motion therefore no time or distance, this means the perception of time and distance has no relevance at zero point. Just because a more destructive force is nearer to zero point, doesn't make this destructive consciousness more connected or assimilated to zero point, actually quite the opposite.

The winds of the cyclone are not just more destructive nearer to the rim of the eye, they are more condensed, this represents a boxed in consciousness. The further we go out from the eye of the cyclone, the calmer the winds get and  the less dense it is, this represents a less boxed in consciousness, basically, a freer consciousness simular to zero point or the eye of the cyclone.

It's quite amazing how motion has us conditioned to perceive, we just don't perceive in time, we also perceive in distance. This perception based on motion, makes us believe the closer we are to zero point, the more of the zero point we become when it's quite the opposite.                       

               

Limitlessness: Consciousness is meant to go out from zero point, it's not meant to be restricted or limited in any sense. The further out a consciousness goes out from this zero point, the less limited a consciousness becomes. We might then think that zero point is limited within a certain space like an eye of a cyclone. Again, space represents distance and time therefore limitations, zero point is not limited to any kind of motion/space. Also, does not the eye of the cyclone move around while having a clear view within it's observations? Zero point is the same but on a massive scale, also, because zero point is not of motion, it's able to observe everything that is obscured by motion. The eye of the cyclone just shows a consciousness in motion that zero point exists. Nature is very clever, it has all the answers but we are not listening.

It's also wise to be aware that everything is always of zero point no matter how much of motion it becomes. While in certain states of consciousness, I have met entities that freaked out being linked to zero point in any sense. As conscious forms are in physical form to staying unaware to this connection with zero point, the same is with non-physical forms as well it would seem, if not more so in certain incidences. It would be like the motional part of a cyclone trying to dislodge itself from the eye of the cyclone and still call itself a cyclone. Without the eye of the cyclone, it's not a cyclone, the same is with everything. Without zero point their would be no existence, no motion, time, space and so on, period. 

Chain Reaction: It's quite understandable that any consciousness that becomes fixated to motion, that this consciousness will deny the existence of zero point when zero point represents the motionless part of everything. When a consciousness becomes fixated to any kind of motion, it looks upon motionlessness as an opposing opposite and reacts accordingly. People like myself are a prime example of this, I'm seen as a threat to motion and dealt with accordingly but of course this isn't true, in actuality it's quite the opposite. Any misuse of motion will cause motion to destroy itself, you can destroy motion with excessive expressions of motion. Throughout human history we have had this balance between motion and motionlessness, zero point and motion. Many teachings were about this zero point to one degree or another, take away this connection completely and replace it with motion in it's entirety, all this will cause is a chain reaction.

The strange thing is, after the chain reaction and the destruction of motion as it is, everything would revert back to zero point. To get a good idea of this, imagine this ever expanding universe being sucked back in on itself, there is an actual theory on this being very possible. Everything of motion reverts back to zero point, this however doesn't have to be the case. Any motion that balances itself out with zero point, is able to exist for eternity, it's these imbalances that destroys motion, not people like me. All what people like me try to do, is bring back balance within motion. In all however, if a consciousness of motion wants to destroy itself through excessive motion, so be it, what will be will be but it doesn't have to be that way!! 

In motion, we are meant to use various processes to keep us connected and as balanced as we can to zero point, excessive use of motion, either it be spiritual or material, can and will, in my mind, cause a reaction that will destroy motion as it is. We indeed have a choice and as usual, no choice is wrong or right over the other, they are just journeys we can choose to go on or not as a collective......

Note: Please don't take anything I have stated here as gospel or of absolute truth.         

Zero Point, The Creation Of Everything

Written by Mathew Naismith

Could you imagine everything being created from a nothingness, how could we possibly, within a reality that everything is created from something,  imagine a nothingness creating all that is. This is incomprehensible until we realise what this nothingness, this zero point, actually is.

Because I don't have a problem or a hang-up with religion, I found the following very interesting, as I will explain. The following relates to many other philosophies and ancient texts in that zero relates to a God or to one consciousness. This zero is the point of origin of all things, a depiction of a true sense of oneness and utter tranquility. You could easily relate this zero point to a Zen state of consciousness, you can also relate this zero pint to the eye of a cyclone. Please keep an open mind to the following, you just might be surprised.

________________________

Shunya is a Sanskrit word which denotes “Zero” or “Nullity”. The 743rd nama of Maha Vishnu in Sri Vishnu Sahasranama is “SHUNYA”. I wondered is not extremely odd to call Maha Vishnu a “ZERO”. I have heard and read that He is called “Ekam” the one and only and also He is addressed as “Anantha” the Infinite. But how can one explain hailing Him as “Shunya”, the Nothing?

According to our ancients if Infinity is immeasurable then Zero too is immeasurable. In reality zero is anti-i...

Continue Reading

My Reply

Absolutely Sreeram, Western minded people in particular have a huge problem in comprehending this, there has to be some kind of motion to be so great.

This zero point seems to represent  perfect balance between yin and yang, everything else being a creation from this one point. Motion seems to represent some kind of imbalance between yin and yang and it's this imbalance that  has created everything from this zero point, this is why everything else is of this zero point without being this zero point.

A good example is a cyclone, without it's zero/centre point, can a cyclone exist? This is with everything, nothing can exist without this zero point. The destructive part of the cyclone is destructive because it's of motion, the centre point isn't destructive because of it's lack of motion. We call the centre of the cyclone the eye of the cyclone, in effect, the all seeing eye!!

________________________

Zero: Can modern day mathematics exist without this zero (0) point? This nothingness turns out to be everything, of course being everything how can this nothingness be of nothing, zero point? I think Sreeram explains this quite well, "If we reflect upon it deeply, we can make out “Zero” and “Infinity” to be two extremes of the same unimaginable circle. By the same logic “Anantha” and “Shunya” though seeming to be antonymous, in reality they mean the same thing. So Maha Vishnu is both “Lord Infinity” as well as “Lord Zero”." To get a better idea of this, it's advisable to read the rest of Sreeram's post.

Zero = motionlessness, anything other than this zero = motion. It's likened to mathematics, zero on it's own has no motion, no numerical quantum, it's representative of nothingness. Now give this zero motion by adding a numerical quantum, such as the number one, thus creating something out of seemingly nothing.

It is quite understandable that within a reality or dimension that has been created by this motion, such a consciousness will think everything came from something so we call this nothingness, this zero point, God or oneness for example. This is so we can relate this zero point to something tangible and comprehensible while still existing in a reality created by motion. Motion needs motion for comprehension and that is exactly what we have done by calling this zero point God or oneness or a Zen conscious state.

It is interesting to know that the decimal system was created by a mathematician from India, the importance of the zero was evident, of course in other cultures this zero point is expressed in other ways. 

Cyclone Relative: It seems ludicrous to relate this zero point to a cyclone. As of most kinds of Eastern philosophies, the environment is used often in Eastern philosophy. It's well known in the East that the environment can tell us so much about ourselves and of our origin.

The eye of the cyclone represents zero point, a point represented by motionlessness, tranquillity, its' also all seeing because this eye is not obscured by clouds unlike the surrounding areas of the eye of the cyclone. God, oneness, Zen consciousness, is represented by this zero point because it's all seeing as it's not obscured by motion. Now without the eye of the cyclone, cyclones just can't exist, is this not so with everything?

How was the universe created? The universe was created from a centre point of origin, a point of origin that was perfectly motionless until motion was created from this centre point. We might think from this that the eye of the cyclone was created from motion to begin with which formed the eye of the cyclone, like the universe was formed by motion.

What firstly created motion, before motion ever existed as a form of motion? Nothingness, was not the motion that created the cyclone to begin with nothing? Motion, in certain circumstances as a cyclone, creates an image of what motion was initially created from.

Motion: So what is this motion in a conscious sense? As of all motions, motions are conditioning, this is likened to being physically conditioned to a certain weather be it hot or cold. Try putting an Eskimo in a hot dessert and expect them to feel just like at home in the cold, it's just not going to happen until they become conditioned to the hot climate of the dessert, consciousness in motion is the same.

Motion basically represents a kind of conditioning depending on the motion being expressed, liken this to  hot and cold weather for instance. Consciously, this hot and cold would be represented as religions and non-religions for example, try putting an atheist in an environment of Catholicism or visa-versa, it's obvious what would occur. Take a consciousness out of it's conditioned environment and it will either conform to the new environment or disregard or deny such an environment.

Let's go further to a state of oneness, Zen or zero point, a point of no motion, how would any consciousness conditioned to a certain condition, as an ideology for example, cope with zero conditioned motions? Such a consciousness would find it extremely hard to cope, like an Eskimo in a hot desert but far worse. It is quite understandable that any consciousness fixated to any kind of motion, will find it most difficult in readjusting to such a motionless environment of zero conditioning/ideologies.

This might upset some people who are into meditation, praying or chanting, try to keep an open mind. All these practices are of a conditioning, they were actually created by motion, this means they are part of the conditioning process, however, if used correctly, these practices can dissolve conditionings or anything created by motion.

Let's look at mediation. Meditation is a part of this conditioning meditation is set up to dissolve. If we were one with everything (zero point), would we need to meditate? Even meditation is a part of the conditioning as it's created by the conditioning to dissolve the conditioning that created the need to meditate.

This seems like a vicious cycle but it's not, not when we are aware that practices like this are created by conditionings (motions) in the first place. Within this, these practices can indeed dissolve any conditioning as long as we are able to become detached from these practices in the end. The reality is, this detachment very rarely occurs as these practices become but another be an end all, but another attachment to a conditioning (motion). Any attachment to any kind of motion, is not a true representation of zero point, a point of absolute peace, tranquillity and motionlessness. 

Is Life Harsh?

Life is harsh when you are no longer apart of this harshness

The less of this harshness you become, the harsher it seems

Can we justifiably judge life being so harsh?

Is it as harsh as we now see it is?

It is but it's not

This is like judging a negative

Is it a negative because we now deem it so?

Is it this judgment that makes it so?

Our own harshness on life doesn't make life harsh

It's our own deemed harshness that makes it so harsh

When we deem life so harsh

Is this not still being of this harshness!!

~Mathew G~

PEACE

Written by Mathew Naismith

The following is another attempt of a poem by me, this poem basically tells of why peace is so hard to obtain and keep. This poem was actually inspired by a Google community based primarily on peace. 

The antiquity of peace

as ancient as it is

is still within us all

being so hard to keep

in these days

you wonder

of it's presence

it's still

it's quiet

it's harmonious

it's tranquil

we wonder

is it still their

within

in-depth

as it is

and we still wonder

of it's presence

as it should be

as peace is

stillness

quietness

harmoniousness

tranquilness

this is

peace

as it is

and we still wonder

the presence of peace

this

is as it should be

anything else

is not peace

~Mathew G~

___________________________

Elusive Peace: Peace seems to represent everything that motionlessness or timelessness represents, it's still within it's motionlessness, it's quiet within it's motionlessness, it's harmonious within it's motionlessness and it's tranquil within it's motionlessness. So is peace based on this motionlessness instead of perceived love? 

Love is full of motions because of the emotions behind love, you can't experience love without emotion, try expressing love without causing motion, it's just not going to occur because love is based on emotions which are primarily of motion. Now try expressing a true sense of peace, it's absolutely motionless because this is what peace is primarily based on. Now try finding this peace within a chaotic highly motional dimension, peace seems to not exist anymore because it's motionless, there is so much motion out there that this motionlessness is overwhelmed by excessive extreme motions.

Because we are so desperate to override this highly motional chaos, we will use anything that seems to quell all this motion that is overwhelming peace. We are at present using love, which is highly motional, to quell another highly motional state of existence, basically fighting fire with fire. Fighting fire with fire can be very volatile, especially when the wind turns. What actually occurs when you fight fire with fire? Destruction to save even worse destruction, well, hopefully. Sometimes this is the only way to fight fire but in the end it's the quietness of the fire that actually quells the fire, not fire itself.

Now does this mean we shouldn't use love even in conjunction with peace?

Not at all, it's not the use of love that is giving us problems, it's the way we are using love that is the problem even when used in conjunction with peace.

Peace Creates Love: We first think that peace is created from love when it's the other way around. A good internet friend of mine expressed that inner peace has to be established before a true sense of love can be expressed. It's true, try expressing love when you have no inner peace to start with, any love expressed in this way, can't be possibly true, most often it's proved to be so in the end. Basically, this kind of love is euphoric as it's based on the finite, it's transitory especially when pressed or tested.

Now what about using love in conjunction with peace, even after we have established that it's peace that brings forth love, not the other way around.

Let's firstly look at love and peace, love represents motion, peace represents motionlessness. Considering that all motion is time based, love is of time which means peace is of timelessness as it's of motionlessness. This also means love is of three dimensional aspects while peace is of anything but a three dimensional aspect. We basically have a representation of yin and yang, love and peace.

Love = motion + time + three dimensional + finite + yin

Peace = motionlessness + timelessness + non-third dimensional + infinite + yang

Yes, they represent opposite values to each other, however, they are only opposing opposites when we use them in an imbalanced way. Used in a balanced way, one becomes the other, for this to occur though, we must realise it's peace that creates love, not the other way around. It's obvious many of us are nowhere near realising this, pushing for peace in this way, isn't going to bring peace, this is evident in our present state.

Now what if we used love and peace in a balanced way, will this automatically bring peace and love to the world?

Human Family: No, not when we try to bring love back into a situation that is not peaceful in the first place. Try perceiving the human consciousness (race) as a family unit, this is your family with the surname(last name) of human. Now this family unit is obvious within it's discord, basically, a non-peaceful family unit, as of our own selves that are not at peace. Can we instil love before this family unit is at peace? The answer is no, now consider this, human consciousness is nowhere near at peace but we are still trying to instil love!!

Try instilling love within a family that is in discord, the collective human consciousness as a whole is no different. Certain family members will rebel against such brash actions and justifiably so as is the same with certain members of the human race. Using love and peace in conjunction, doesn't mean we use them at the exact same time either, it means using them in balance overall. We must remember here, it's peace that automatically brings the love back into a family unit, used in unison by the family itself, love and peace within the family becomes infinite.

All we need to do is focus on peace, and love is sure to follow.......Mathew G

Love Brings Peace to the World??

Written by Mathew Naismith

I was recently invited to join a Google community titled, "The Peace Makers", I immediately posted the following. Before I get into this, ask yourself, can you bring the love back within a family in discord before creating peace first?  The world in discord around us is no different.  

________________________

  

I'm not sure what anyone else thinks on here but I think we need to focus more on peace than love. 

Love is too ambiguous because it could also mean the love of greed, love of killing, love of abuse, love of pain. Love, for a lot of people, relates to pain where's peace relates to what it directly states.

Reply

Isn't peace the result of love?

My Reply

Not at all, the need for peace automatically creates love within the action of peace, however, love does not automatically bring peace within itself.

Let's say I love to dominate my wife, where is the peace in that?

Let's say I love being a warrior? Where is the peace in that?

Now, if a husband who loves to dominate, dominate when in peace?

Can a warrior still love being a warrior when in peace?

There are many people in the world who love raping children, what kind of peace has this created?

How many people love the feel of power and controlling others, is this automatically creating peace? Quite the opposite of course.

Don't make the mistake and think this kind of love isn't as passionate as a truer sense of love, in actuality it's more potent and life changing mainly because we exist in a 3rd dimension. This kind of passionate love is about a huge amount of motion, the 3rd dimension is primarily of motion, this is why this kind of passionate love has always dominated us in the 3rd dimension.

Can we sit and just pray for love and peace within a 3rd dimension primarily of motion? The answer to this question is obvious.

To bring peace to the world, we need to stop thinking love will bring peace to the world when only a true sense of peace will bring love to the world.

Please don't be offended by my way of perceiving, it's too obvious to me that love does not automatically bring peace but peace automatically brings love. In all, we need to focus more on peace than love, especially considering love will come automatically in the

expression of the motion of peace.

Reply

The essence of love is peace in it's purest form. Thanks for this thought provoking post.+Mathew Naismith​

My Reply

Very well stated, too many people think the other way around, "the essence of peace is love in it's purest form". There is a huge different especially considering that love within it's motion is ambiguous to say the least. Peace automatically creates love, love does not automatically create peace.                 

Reply

Thank you for the invitation! I am at peace with all things around me through my acceptance of those things around me! 

My Reply

Indeed , it's all about peace bringing love to the world, not love bringing peace to the world especially when we consider that many people have a passionate love of power and money over peace.

________________________

I also posted the following on this community

________________________

What brought around the protesting of the Vietnam war? Most people would state love and then peace when it was the other way around. War brought a need for peace that then created a sense of love, it was a need of peace that automatically created love, not the other way around.

What occurred when the soldiers came home from the Vietnam war, the people who put love before peace abused these soldiers, however, the people who put peace before love, didn't abuse these soldiers, the reason lies in that peace before love, this allows peace to automatically create love. Within this motion, the sense of love is more sincere. These so called loving peaceful people who attacked these soldiers, loved hating war/conflict, of course this love created conflict not peace and love. We are once again making the same old mistakes, how many times have I been attacked by these so called loving people?

________________________

We exist within a dimension that is primarily about motion, this means for any true and real change to take effect, a lot of motion needs to be expressed. We are not going to make any real changes while sitting around praying, chanting, meditating, for love and peace. This would be fine if we existed in a dimension that is far less about motion but we don't.  Consider this, how long would have the Vietnam war continued for if we all just sat around praying for peace? The Vietnam war ended when it did because people of peace and love took action, they expressed a surmountable amount of motion. I used the word surmountable here for a very good reason.

We also have the idea that the one hundred (100) monkey theory will work as well, peace and love starts from one and eventually a hundred, it will then overcome all other motions and expressions. If we were all monkeys this would fine as it did for one monkey starting off cleaning sweet potatoes, but were not, we have a huge amount of controlling egos to contend with. You might have a hundred monkeys that are of peace and love, but in opposition, you also have another thousand monkeys for every hundred monkeys.

Consider this, if all these monkey's did was sit and think/pray of cleaning these potatoes, would have the chain reaction of cleaning these potatoes started? For some reason a self-proclaimed intelligent consciousness thinks it would have!!

However in saying all this, motion creates more motion but it's all to do in how we express motion that makes the difference. Could you imagine if the people protesting about the Vietnam war tried to create peace from love, no amount of this kind of motion would have worked. If it wouldn't have worked then, why would it work now, considering we are still existing in a 3rd dimension that is highly motional?

It's obvious it's not working, how many people are in protest about what is occurring in Palestine at this very moment? Where is the true sense of love here? It just doesn't exist because love is primarily put before peace, basically, love is meant to create peace, it is quite obvious this isn't or going to occur for reasons already mentioned in this post.

How many people in the world were deplored over the Chinese running over their own people in tanks? Basically the whole world, now how many people are deplored about far more horrific events occurring in Palestine but by another conquering race of people? So where is this peace that was created from love, it just doesn't exist because peace naturally creates love, not the other way around.

There is supposed to be all these people talking and expressing unconditional love, it's really a huge laugh and totally fake/false when you consider the outrage of the Chinese incident, that lasted a very short time, compared the what is and has been occurring in Palestine for some years now. How many conditions are put on this so called unconditional love? Insurmountable, this is proven within it's own actions and responses.

    

Now consider this, would this unconditional love be obvious within it's falseness if this love was created from peace in the first place? It's very unlikely because peace isn't ambiguous like love is. Peace has no boundaries or biases but love obviously does, it's peace that creates unconditional love, not love that creates unconditional love, this is very obvious within it's present expressions.

The discussion on this community is continuing, the following is in response from me to further replies from other people.  

________________________

So what you are saying that someone who is not peaceful within, can express a true sense of love to create peace within, very unlikely.

A true sense of love can only be felt when in peace in some sense, it's this peace within that determines the love we express, not the other way around as you are clearly stating.

This is exactly why we see people chopping off heads who have a love of their beliefs, this is a true sense of love if you like to believe it or not. Are you going to judge otherwise? Good luck with this because all this kind of judgement will do is cause more conflict, not less.

Get rid of the peace within side you and see how much love you have left......I worked in the welfare arena twice over in my life, once you bring peace back within a family unit, love usually automatically is recreated but you think otherwise. Try bringing love within a family of discord before creating peace.

Love clearly does not come before peace, this is evident but so many people think otherwise and we wonder why the world is getting worse!!.

________________________

For anyone interested, here is the address for the peace makers Google community. 

 https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/118263141060354233180       

It's an Amazing World/Existence

Written By Mathew Naismith

Looking upon my physical transformation at 52 years of age, all I can feel is total amazement, in actuality, I look upon my whole body and mind and I am totally amazed at my own transition as a whole. You might think I am over stating this but it's one huge WOW factor. My own transition in a reality based on time, is utterly amazing, this is because I am aware that most realities don't consist of experiences of massive transitions like this.

You look upon the Earth and the universe itself, it's amazing how the natural environment goes from one transitional stage to another, the cycles that everything goes through within a universe based on time, is, yes, amazing to say the least. In stating this, human consciousness, after how many centuries, still has very little idea how amazing our environment based on time is. This comprehension of course takes one to realise who they truly are as a whole. OK, time might be an illusion but this doesn't take away how amazing  a reality based on time is, the natural environment that time has created is beyond words.

Have I gone totally loony? It would seem so to a lot of people in even suggesting an assumed illusion is amazing beyond words, it's as if my ego controls me to stay within the illusion created by the ego!!

Firstly, only a controlling ego judges what is and isn't an illusion, a controlling ego doesn't want anything controlling it especially an assumed illusion. Even if the ego created the illusion, it doesn't want to be controlled by this illusion so it creates states of  non-illusion as opposed to states of illusion such a time itself. However, a non-controlling ego reacts differently, this kind of ego is not fearful of being controlled by an illusion or a non-illusion, this kind of ego will naturally react to life, as a whole, as amazing.

We might think what is so amazing about human consciousness being so chaotic and destructive, especially unto itself?

It's amazing that such a self-proclaimed intelligent life form has the belief it's intelligent in accordance with it's technological advancements. It's also amazing that such a self-proclaimed intelligent form believes it can express high intelligence void of wisdom. Take the yin out of the yang, what is naturally created? Destruction, you can't use high levels of technology void of wisdom, in actuality, the use of high technology has to be balanced out by wisdom to avoid self-destruction. It's amazing that such an intelligent form is trying to use high levels of technology void of wisdom and still think it's intelligent!!

Has human consciousness learnt anything from centuries of destruction?

It's utterly amazing that human consciousness has learnt little if anything from it's own past, how could a remotely intelligent form, that has all this experience before it, can still be as it was centuries gone by? It is obvious that no truly intelligent form tries it's hardest not to evolve but that is exactly what human consciousness has accomplished. In the whole scheme of existence, very few remotely intelligent consciousness has accomplished this, this within itself is amazing. Using high levels of technology void of wisdom isn't evolving, our intelligence in relation to technology has risen but our wisdom has obviously fallen. This has occurred before in Earths history when a conscious forms used high technology void of wisdom.

At present,  it seems that human consciousness is being influenced by external consciousness's that impel power, control and dominance. Of course if a more aware and powerful consciousness than human consciousness impels such actions, these actions must be the way to go. Human consciousness is being conditioned to believe there must be a superpower, or more precisely, a master race that is meant to dominate all other races. How often is this exact belief been expressed throughout human or Earths history? It's utterly amazing that a remotely intelligent form can think like this.

The question is now, is there a more dominant consciousness within the universe?

To me, Gaia is consciousness but this kind of consciousness is not actually dominant, it is however about cycles that allow everything within Gaia to evolve. There are however conscious forms that are dominant within the universe, human consciousness certainly hasn't got this on it's own, it would be a bit naive to think this in my mind.

The difference between human consciousness and these other forms of dominating consciousness's, is that these other dominating forms have used wisdom in conjunction with intelligence. It's wise to realise that intelligence doesn't mean intelligence is wisdom.

You could say that wisdom is yin and intelligence is yang, however, as yin and yang, each displays the same attributes as the other. What human consciousness seems to have tried to do, is extract wisdom (yin) from intelligence (yang), of course as of before in Earths history, extracting the yin from the yang or the yang from the yin, naturally and automatically causes a consciousness to destroy itself and it's environment. 

We might then think that this more intelligent dominating external consciousness, from human consciousness, hasn't destroyed itself. Once any consciousness destroys other consciousness's through dominance, it will eventually inadvertently destroy (extract) it's own balance within existence as a whole. It all comes down to dominance and non-dominance, control and non-control, yin and yang. Once one tries to dominate to extract (destroy) the other, all this creates is destruction of the dominant.

What is also amazing is that these deemed negatives, bad, evils, basically in all, pain, when gathered up as a whole, is but a grain of sand on a beach. In all of existence as a whole, pain has the relevance of a grain of sand on a beach, only an imbalanced consciousness believes it to be otherwise.

I came across an insightful poem just recently, the poem is in relation to loving/appreciating the present via the following link.                     

https://plus.google.com/u/0/114192063815014173744/posts/7xsZH8qHb8D

My Reply

Indeed Nicoleta, appreciate the present, this is inline to observing or participating. The participator participates on the past and future where's the observer is observant of the present only. The past and future are always observed as being of the present negating a past and future, strangely enough, the participator negates the present!!

It's interesting to realise that the observer is of timelessness and the participator is of time which gives us a perception of a past and future. It's good to be a participator (time) but utilised without the balance of the observer (timelessness), the participator will always express destruction. Indeed, a worthwhile poem.

_______________________________

The point is to the grain of sand is, the participator will only perceive what they participate in, the participator will primarily perceive the grain of sand or primarily perceive any other grain of sand but the grain of sand representing pain. The observer however will perceive the whole truth in that the observer will perceive all grains of sand void of bias/judgment.

I will put this in another way. I've had an interesting life to say the least, only once in my life can I remember not being in physical pain, this was for a brief part of one day. Of course this pain being created from a chronic injury from the age of six years old, has caused a lot of mental pain as well. The point is, a lot of people trying to avoid the negatives/pain in life, would not have been able to utilise this pain to benefit others who are far more disabled as I have done. Also, would a person who perceives pain as just being negative, desist in taking pain killers like people like myself? I should also state that healing is likened to taking pain killers, however, when healing is exercised in a balanced way, healing most often helps us to become more balanced from an imbalanced state.

Even though pain in the whole of existence is but a grain of sand on a beach, doesn't make this grain of sand irrelevant to the beach itself. Basically, pain helps give our truer self balance, it's a necessity as yang is to yin and yin is to yang, however, the participator within this reality has either primarily perceived this grain of sand of pain or tries to ignore this grain of sand of pain, either way of perceiving creates an imbalance therefore destruction.

I know a lot of Western minded people think I have no idea what I am talking about but I can't emphasise enough on learning to become an observer, especially at present. The observer will give us back balance from an obvious imbalanced state of existence, this existence is of course primarily dominated by being a participator. Continuing to primarily participate to either perceive the pain or anything but the pain, will only create more destruction as any imbalance within a consciousness naturally does. I'm not stating this from some kind of human ideology, this is coming through me, and yes, I am supposed to share what is coming through me but of course not everything that comes through me. It is difficult to know what I am supposed to share or not at times, learning to be an observer is one of the things I need to share, this is made very clear.