True Positive Thinking

Written by Mathew Naismith

True positive thinking; the incapability of detecting negativity in all things!! 

Does this mean a positive thinker is ignorant and ignorant of negativity? Yes, this is one way in looking at it; it’s obvious being ignorant of negativity is more constructive than dwelling on the negatives!!

What on the other hand we didn’t perceive negativity and positivity as being bad or good in the first place but just another way to think and be, we wouldn’t have to be ignorant to anything would we!! All it would be is a choice between thinking and being negative or positive without judging negative or positive as bad or good. The ego of course has a hard time not judging negative and positive as either bad or good, it’s the ego that’s forces us to make such judgments.

Ignorance is the act of not being aware; I think we have been unaware way too long now mainly of how to think and be positive, I just don’t think ignorance is the answer!!

The incapability to detect negativity isn’t really true positive thinking, true positive thinking comes from not allowing our ego to control our judgment of a good and bad but just another way to think and be.  What we deem as negatives and positives is but choices we make through life, it’s not bad or good, it’s just choices we make through life.  So in all don’t allow the controlling factors of the ego to tell you otherwise if you truly want to become a true positive thinker. 

The quote,"True positive thinking; the incapability of detecting negativity in all things', is also in reference to not seeing a bad or good in everything but just a choice. This quote is true if we don't look at postivity as being ignorant of negativity but just a choice we make in life.  

Using the Inner Voice-Tribe Mentality

Written by Mathew Naismith

I should firstly point out what I mean about the inner voice for those who don’t quite get what I am talking about here. The inner voice to me is in relation to when the inner self speaks and speaks of inner wisdom and knowledge; it’s the sprit or what First Nation people in America refer to as the star in English.

East and West Mentalities: Does it matter if one is of eastern or western thinking when trying to become aware of this inner voice again?  To a point it does, when I talk about eastern and western thinking I’m not referring to a race of people or the colour of one’s skin, what I am referring to is the mentality of an ideology/philosophy.  It’s quite obvious western and eastern ideologies and philosophies are different, not within the content itself but within the ideologies of such content.  What I am saying is it’s the way we think about life itself that defines our mentality, for example, does western mentality take in consideration of the tribe of the people before themselves?  How many people within a town or city truly look at themselves as a collective, a tribe of people?  This is why western mentality is more about the self than the tribe, eastern mentality isn’t like this, the tribe comes first and only then is the individual taken into consideration. 

To me western mentality refers to individuality therefore egotism however eastern mentality refers to the tribe (tribe mentality) therefore the collective.  It matters not if we are born in an eastern or western thinking community as we can overcome this through living as an individual or a collective.    

Western mentality isn’t being just about the individual  but also about separateness however this kind of mentality seems to be slowly changing to a more tribe like mentality but it has a long way to go.  Sadly enough though, easterners seem to be taking on this western mentality, losing their own eastern mentality in the mean time for something more physically glamorous rather than spiritually glamorous.  What is happening?

Ego Controlled Mentality: It doesn’t matters what kind of mentality you take on or live your life by, we all have to contend with the ego and it’s controlling ways, this is a never ending battle that should always be fought otherwise the ego will take over completely.  Does tribal mentality have to contend with the controlling factors of the ego?  All the times but they are lucky because any individual who becomes egotistical will know the tribe comes first, western minded mentality lost this bond and it’s loyalty to the tribe long ago.  This allowed the ego to take even more control.

Eastern mentality has also suffered in the east, the Middle East and China are good examples of this, they are losing their fight against the controlling ego for the main reason I feel is because they have lost the importance of the tribe.  This has allowed the ego to fill this void left over from losing this tribe mentality (eastern mentality).  How can we fight the ego when all we are doing is living for ourselves and not the tribe?

Western mentality is also about positive thinking as opposed to negative thinking but how positive is this thinking when we are about ourselves and not the tribe?  How many positive people judge other people as being negative and ostracise them, is this really positive?  Of course not, does this happen with a tribe like mentality?  It can’t for the main reason it’s never about the individual but the tribe itself, the controlling ego just doesn’t play a part when the tribe itself comes first, there is no actual individuality for the ego to be able to gain control. 

Western mentality gives us egotism which allows us to judge that I am positive, this takes judgement to come to this conclusion, I judge you negative therefore I must be positive.  The reason this doesn’t happen in a true tribal situation is there are no negatives and positives to judge each other by, it’s more neutral.  

Middle Eastern Tribes: If we looked over at the Middle East at present, we will find tribes fighting it out, these people are putting their tribe first, in this case the tribes are reprehensive of different religions and factions of religious sects, what is so good about tribal mentality when it obviously creates conflicts?

At first glance these conflicts seem to be due to tribal mentality, to a point that is correct however why are these tribes truly warring with each other? Its’ to do with having different ideological principals to another tribe, what is anyone expressing when they become destructive over principles?  Egotistical, the more we conflict the more the ego takes control and of course the more destructive we become.  Eastern tribes have been warring for thousands of years, what again is so good about tribal mentality when it obviously creates conflicts?

Tribal Mentality: It’s not the tribe itself that I’m trying to portray as something more constructive but the constructiveness of tribal mentality itself, it’s the mentality of being a tribe that is constructive.  What man has done is allowed the ego to take control of these tribes not the tribal members taking control of the ego.   A tribe is formed by many different and varied people coming together as one, no one is exactly the same but the tribal mentality has brought them together.  What we don’t do as a species is look at the whole of mankind as a tribe with different and varied people coming together as one, we are still separate tribes like separate people within a single tribe warring because of our differences which are egoistically controlled.  In a tribe not controlled by ego and judgement, we don’t get this kind of conflict, yes there are conflicts but they are soon dealt with by other tribal members.  

To me having different ideological principles is no different to people being different to each other, we are indeed one tribe, a race of humans warring it out mainly because we are controlled by the controlling factors of the ego. Could you imagine for one moment what it would be like not living in an existence controlled by the ego but living differently to each other under one tribe!!  Yes religion has tried to bring us under one tribe either passively or aggressively giving us this constructive tribal mentality, this hasn’t worked for the main reason each religion (a tribe) has allowed itself to be controlled by the ego.  I should say here that not all religions (tribes) have done this either.  If we truly lived collectively as one tribe, the tribal members wouldn’t become controlled by the ego, any conflicts would be kept rather small.  

Once we see ourselves as one tribe, we will judged each other a lot less and in turn lessen our conflicts, also by seeing ourselves as one tribe we will become a lot less ignorant of each other as we become a lot more accepting of each other.  As I have said in past posts of mine, the controlling factors of the ego can only exist because of our ignorance, once we become more aware, our ignorance becomes a lot less lessening the controlling grip that the ego has on us as a tribe not tribes.  Once we see ourselves as one tribe, the inner voice will return, by seeing ourselves as one tribe is using this inner voice. 

Neutral Thinking and Wisdom

Written by Mathew Naismith

We tend to judge ourselves and others as either positively or negatively thinking at any given time, we give no heart or credence in neutrally thinking which I think is a more natural way to think.  No other animal in nature thinks either positively or negatively, thinking positively or negatively isn’t a natural part of nature or mother Earth, so what makes us so different? The answer is simple, ego; no other living form other than man has a controlling ego. What is this neutral thinking we seem to have lost through the over use of the ego?

Neutral thinking doesn’t need an opposite to exist, positive thinking needs a negative to exist to compare itself with, if there wasn’t a negative to compare with, how would one know one was positive? The same goes with negative thinking, negatives can’t exist without an opposing polarity such as positivity however on the other hand neutral thinking needs no opposite to exist, what does this mean?

When we think of positives we think constructiveness and when we think of negativity we think of destructiveness but what do we think when we are neutrally thinking? Our first thought would be neither because neutral thinking isn’t of judging a negative nor a positive, therefore neutral thinking is of neither of destructive nor constructive thought. This isn’t actually the case with neutral thinking as I will explain.

Take positive thinking, NATO positively thought it could win certain wars but are wars either destructive or constructive? They are both which depends on a lot of factors like who loses or wins a war or who materially benefits from such wars but it is obvious wars are mostly destructive.  You can’t only label positivity with constructiveness; it is obvious positive thinking can be extremely destructive.  Now what if we only used neutral thinking, would wars exist or could wars exist? 

Wars just wouldn’t exist; we wouldn’t contemplate wars, not just because we don’t think negatively or positively but because wars would be seen as being destructive.  Hang on here, how would a person who neutrally thinks judge war as being destructive or not, once you have judged you are not neutral in thought?   A neutral mind isn’t dead or stagnate in thought, it observes what isn’t or is destructive, it’s not judging destructiveness as being negative or bad it’s just an obvious observation of how destructive a war or anything of this nature can be.  You could say a neutral mind is a wise mind, it’s wised up to how even constructiveness can be destructive for example, constructing a house in the bush/forest, what are we destroying while we are being constructive?  This is why a neutral thinking is more natural, it’s aware of nature which we are also a part of.

I would say deciding not to conduct ourselves in wars would be of wisdom, taking on neutral thinking would be the wisest thing we could do because it’s obvious it would mean no more wars  or conducting ourselves in any other kind of destructiveness. 

Neutral thinking does however take us to make certain sacrifices like ridding ourselves of judgment which means we no longer judge ourselves as being positive and others of being negative.  It will take us to rid ourselves of the controlling factors of the ego. This might seem difficult, maybe too difficult but it’s not really, all it will take is to not judge a right or wrong, good or bad, positive or negative period.  It’s really easier than you think, all what you need to do is not judge how difficult it would be to do this in the first place.

It is also advisable not to judge judgement as being bad or negative in some way, ask yourself, is judgment bad or negative while your mind is not in judgment?   If you are truly not in judgement it is neither one thing nor another, it’s just another way to think and exist and it can either be destructive or constructive when only observed and not judged.   In all however we really do need to rid ourselves of judgment and learn to only observe through neutral thinking if we want to become more constructive instead of destructive.   I should also state that neutral thinking connects us more to the inner self for the main reason the inner self isn’t of judgment but of observation.  

Exorcising Judgement and Empath’s

Written by Mathew Naismith

Exorcising, banishing, expelling judgement isn’t an easy process for most of us to achieve mainly because most of us are brought up to judge.  I was brought up with atheistic racialist influences, this gave me judgement towards anything not of these ideologies, anything not of these ideologies would then have to be wrong.  You could then turn this around and judge such an atheistic racialist negative in some way but we are still in judgement and in negative judgement of something else that is in opposition to our own ideologies, in this case an atheistic racialist view/ideology.

It would seem we are not getting anywhere in exorcising judgement in our lives, we are still judging what is wrong in opposition to our own views, is an atheistic racialist wrong and negative in some way? The ego of course would say yes in protection of it’s own views/ideologies, this happens quite a lot. We have a view that an atheistic racialist has to be wrong in some way especially if these views are in opposition to ours.

How would another person who isn’t controlled by the ego answer this question, is an atheistic racialist wrong or negative in some way within their views?  Without the ego telling us there is a right and wrong, the answer would be of course no, an atheistic racialist isn’t wrong and if there is no wrong how would there be a negative or even a positive if we haven’t judged so?  If we have judged someone else being negative, we must have also have judged ourselves as being positive as opposed to someone else being negative!!

We are still not getting anywhere in exorcising judgement in our lives while under the influence of the controlling ego, only while not controlled by the controlling factors of the ego can we exorcise judgment in our lives.  If we are still judging ourselves as being positive, we are also judging others of being negative because to have a positive you need a negative for a positive to be recognised. This seems awfully chaotic and we wonder why this reality is also chaotic, we created such a reality through our own judgmental attitude towards anything in opposition to our own ego views/ideologies.

So in this case we should be really exorcising the ego as the ego is the basis for judgement existing!!  The funny thing is judgement is a good indication of our ignorance which the ego relies solely on to exist, without judgment the ego can no longer take control, you take judgement away you take ignorance away and in turn exorcise ego from our lives.  I haven’t been an atheistic racialist since my early teens because I exorcised judgement out of my life to a certain extent, I no longer saw one ideological principle being right above all other principles. Exorcising judgment automatically takes the controlling effects of the ego out of our lives to the extent of our judgement of a right or wrong, positive or negative.  The more we exorcise judgment out of our lives, the less we judge a right or wrong, positive or negative and the less the ego is in control of our lives.

So for me is being an atheistic racialist wrong or negative? What’s left of my ego says it is but my inner self says no, it’s just another way of thinking through a particular ideology, yes it can be a destructive ideology but am I now going to judge destruction as a negative or positive thing, wrong or right?  If I did this the ego is obviously still in control……

What happens when we judge ourselves as positive? To judge ourselves as positive there has to be a negative and in turn we judge certain people as negative even though we have judged ourselves as being positive. How many times will a person who has judged themselves as being positive stay away from negative people? Would we stay away from the people we have judge negative if we didn’t judge ourselves as being so positive? The strange thing is in most cases not however, being spiritually aware can make us a little bit of an empath , being able to pick up on other people’s vibrations. So we pick up on other people’s vibrations, how do we usually judge them? We judge them negative which is a good indication the ego is still in control no matter how positive we have judged ourselves to be.  So many times have I heard spiritually aware people say they try to stay away from negative people, this is saying the controlling ego is still very prevalent in these people’s lives.

It’s tricky being an empath, we are picking up on vibrations we no longer resonate with so these people feel inharmonious to ourselves, it’s difficult not judging these people as being negative in some way to our own vibrations.  The ego is going to judge anything inharmonious to itself as being negative however the inner self doesn’t judge certain people as being negative who don’t resonate with itself for the main reason it doesn’t also judge itself as being positive.  Positive thinking is great but it’s always in opposition to anything judged as being negative, positive thinking is still all about a controlling ego being in control and in turn creating more chaos.   

If you truly want to exorcise judgement, ego, from your life, it all comes down to not judging yourself as being positive in the first place but a person of neither negative nor positive.  This all comes back to the push and pull effect, judging oneself as positive (pull) is always in opposition to a negative (push), the push and pull effect is of the controlling ego and of course judgment. This interaction between positive (pull) and negative (push) will always create chaos.  

Do we really want too or are able to exorcise judgement, the controlling factors of the ego, from our lives if we have to sacrifice our own judgement of ourselves as being positive?  Are we willing to sacrifice positive thoughts for neutral thoughts so we are then able to exorcise judgment from our lives for good? That is a question we must each answer ourselves individually even though we are a part of a collective.     

Spirituality of Awareness, Love, Light and Wisdom

Written by Mathew Naismith

Sitting back observing myself and others becoming aware, and further aware, gives me a view that spirituality void of any dogmas is of the light, a light within the darkness of ignorance.  Ignorance gives us ego, without ignorance the ego would be of little consequence; the ego certainly wouldn’t be ruling/controlling us without ignorance so why live in a reality based on ignorance especially considering ignorance can be quite destructive?

The reason ignorance is so destructive is this ego creates egotism and the more ignorant we are the more egotistical we become, for example, a lot of white men had slaves who were black. The reason for this is because black people were deemed as inferior to white people, an obvious show of utter ignorance and to own slaves had a lot to do with egotism as well showing ignorance and egotism goes hand in hand.  We can try all we like to take the controlling ego tendencies out of our lives but the controlling ego will always come back if we still live in ignorance as we are still creating an environment for the ego to exist in.  The easiest and surest way to rid ourselves of the controlling factors of the ego is rid ourselves of ignorance; the way to do this is become aware like through spiritual awareness.

Ignorance is related to the controlling ego and all of the ego’s tendencies, ignorance is also related to darkness in not being able to see and feel beyond our own ignorance, our own impeded awareness.  Ignorance is also related to a lack of wisdom, not being able to acknowledge what our own knowledge is destroying and how a lack of wisdom is impeding our common sense.  It makes sense why we are still warring and polluting the very thing we rely on for our own survival, we are still living in ignorance, so what are we living in ignorance of?

As mentioned, wisdom is one of these things we are ignorant too, without wisdom we are unable to use any knowledge sensibly and constructively but this is but one attribute that ignorance obscures from us.  The more aware, void of the controlling factors of the ego we become, the more loving we became and the more of the light we also become.  Wisdom tells us to become aware and while becoming aware we must also become unattached to the controlling factors of the ego, wisdom shows us away to become light and love instead of the darkness and chaos. One way to do this is become aware of our own ignorance first of all and how man has nearly always lived in ignorance. 

Becoming aware will not automatically disperse the ego even though we are no longer ignorant but aware, are we truly aware without being aware of wisdom; we must not just be spiritually aware but spiritually wise.  The only thing that can really dispel ignorance isn’t awareness or knowledge, it’s wisdom, the wisdom in knowing how to use such awareness and knowledge in the first place.  Science is about awareness and knowledge but look at how science is destroying our environment, this isn’t very wise, actually it’s ignorance of the harm of such effects science endeavours has on ourselves and the environment. 

How do we become wise instead of just knowledgeable?  Books are a good source of showing us how to use wisdom, so many of us these days use books, not just to become knowledgeable but wise. Certain literature teaches us to be wise even though we are unaware of this however not all literature will teach us wisdom.  If I was to read literature on Quantum mechanics, would I then be wise or would I just be more knowledgeable about quantum mechanics?  One must take notice if certain literature is teaching us how to use this knowledge wisely not just telling us about a kind of knowledge.  Man has learnt how to split the atom, has he learnt to use it wisely and constructively?  

Literature doesn’t have to be just a source of knowledge but wisdom. If I read literature on someone else’s actual experiences, am I just learning knowledge or am I learning to be wise as well?  I’m learning to be wise as well because I am actually reading about actual experiences, actual experiences are of wisdom.  Can I gain wisdom only through knowledge?  Yes but only to a degree as it’s someone else’s wisdom and knowledge, not our own.  True wisdom comes about by experiencing what we have learnt ourselves through literature not just copying or mimicking someone else’s wisdom, this doesn’t mean we are not learning to be wise through other people’s experiences but to become truly wise we too need to have actual experiences for our own.

Is literature the only way to learn wisdom?  Like I said, our own experiences teach us wisdom which we have learnt through literature but literature isn’t the only way to gain experiences therefore wisdom.  I should also point out not everything we experience ourselves will give us wisdom, how many people go through life who haven’t learnt from their mistakes?  In this case a wise person would learn from others if they are unable to learn for themselves, this can be obtained through literature, other people who have experienced similar mistakes but have learnt from them.  Literature is handy but it’s not the only way to learn wisdom.

Another way to learn wisdom is by becoming connected to inner self or the universal consciousness, this of course again can be learnt through literature or through actual experiences of becoming connected.  Becoming connected without learning how to do this through literature doesn’t suite everyone, in this case these people are best to learn wisdom through literature, through other people’s experiences. At times this connectedness can automatically occur through trauma of some kind or through just being lucky enough to be connected without effort and without learning such things from literature. Learning wisdom to bring us out of our ignorance and into the light of love comes in many forms for us to learn through, once we have begun to become aware and wise, through whatever means, we have begun to dispel ignorance and what ignorance has created, a controlling ego and a reality of chaos.

Awareness and wisdom quite automatically brings us love and light once we start to wisely use what we know, once in the light out of the darkness of ignorance, love becomes a natural phenomenon without effort.  Awareness and wisdom quite automatically creates a reality of love and light where ignorance quite automatically creates an unwise egotistic existence shrouded in darkness and in turn creating a chaotic reality quite automatically.  There is a lot to be said about love and light for they are of awareness and wisdom, awareness and wisdom instinctively creates love and light…….  

Ideological Principles and Dogmatism

Written by Mathew Naismith

Ideology just doesn’t refer to a belief system but any system of thought we take on from science to religion and principles refer to a code or value used in conjunction with an ideology.  What makes an ideology dogmatic? It’s all to do with the code not the ideology itself, many people, especially science minded people sadly enough, will look at the ideology itself being dogmatic instead of looking at the inflexibility of the code attached to such ideologies.  

Now the code itself refers to the program or a certain protocol which can be or not be dogmatic within a certain principle, no matter what ideological principle we take on, it’s totally influenced by this code.  What actually makes this code dogmatic, has it to do with the ideology itself or is it something else?

Dogmatism can and does exist in all ideological principles including science ideologies, many science minded people I have mentioned this too totally refuted such claims to the bitter end thus proving my point.  If anyone thinks their ideological principles are the be and end all, above all other principles, that is dogmatism.  Thinking that their principles can no way be dogmatic in any circumstance is a good indication of dogmatism however again it’s not the ideology that is being used that is dogmatic; it’s to do with the code used with such ideologies not the ideologies themselves.   

In a sense the code is a small program which influences another much larger program such as ideologies for instance; ideologies are just programs we have programmed our minds with which can be infected by a corrupted codes/virus which will make the reprogram/ideology  react quite differently, in this case it’s dogmatism, dogmatism is a virus in any ideology.

What creates such a code?  The belief or knowing that my ideology is more truthful and accurate than any other ideology, it’s the be and end all, in other words it’s our egotistical behaviour which makes up these codes to become dogmatic in the first place which influences such ideologies.

I posted the following interesting question to actual scientists, “If science today couldn’t prove that the earth is spherical that would have to mean the Earth isn’t spherical to a scientist even though it is?”  This was either not answered or it was answered in away without actually giving an answer too such a question.  The reason for this is it obviously points out flaws within certain science logics, the ego just didn’t want to know so the code attached to their science ideological principles clearly shows dogmatism and of course dogmatism refers to egotism.  You can’t be dogmatic without being egotistical as well, so what this is saying is codes, of any ideology, come from being egotistical. Like I have mentioned in recent past posts, egotism is a disease/virus that can influence us quite adversely giving us false impressions about our ideological principles.  

Now to a spiritually aware person all what I have written here is judgmental, I’m judging that ideologies themselves aren’t necessarily dogmatic  even though they seem to be, I’m judging that it’s the corrupted code or principle that can make an ideology seem dogmatic . I’m also judging that egotism is a disease/virus that corrupts our codes/principles. Also this judgment has to be bad in some way but how would anyone not into judgement judge that I am in judgment here unless they are in judgement themselves.

How would anyone know if anyone, including themselves, were in judgment unless they were in judgement themselves?  No one who is truly nonjudgmental can judge themselves or anyone else of being in judgement. If I was truly nonjudgmental myself I wouldn’t know if I was being judgmental or not because I wouldn’t judge so. 

Egotism, I have judged I’m not judgemental so I avoid judgment in myself as well as others when I can, how would any true nonjudgmental person judge when in or not in judgment?   This is egotism which leads to dogmatism which corrupts our ideological principals no matter what they are.  

The Collective Mind and Immunisation

Written by Mathew Naismith

This post is a continuation of my last few posts on the collective traumas and illnesses this collective mind has to cope with.  Firstly, what am I talking about when I talk about the collective and the collective mind?

When I talk about the collective, I’m talking about the human collective mostly, not a higher collective that we are also all apart of which some of us call God or the mind/consciousness of God, the higher collective.  Now when I talk about the collective mind, I’m talking about the mind of the collective like the mind of God accept the human collective mind is to me diseased, mainly by the disease egotism. The higher collective doesn’t have this disease I understand.  

When we meditate, we are in thoughtlessness but does this also mean we are mindless?  What meditation does is make us more aware by thinking through a healthy non-diseased mind which feels like we have stopped thinking altogether but we haven’t. What I believe is happening is we are still thinking but through a healthy mind instead of a diseased mind full of chaos. When we are really sick personally it’s quite a chaotic time, this is the same when the collective mind is sick, it’s quite chaotic so when we are no longer in this chaos we feel, while meditating, that we are in total thoughtlessness but were not. If we are aware of anything including our own existence, we are still of the mind. I believe meditation takes us to this higher consciousness or Gods consciousness; this is why vaccines like meditation, praying, chanting, singing and so on assist to cure us from our diseases like egotism for example.

It’s important to immunise ourselves with the appropriate vaccines that suite our circumstances while being aware of the controlling factors of the ego adversely affecting the vaccine we are using, in other words being aware of egotism influencing our own ideological principles which dilutes the effects of such immunisation processes.  

In my last post I mentioned about how not all people are sick with the collective diseases like egotism because we have, on the individual level, immunised ourselves form such diseases to some extent, however  if we are a part of the collective we must also be sick? No because once we immunise ourselves using meditation for example, we have become of the higher consciousness’s mind, God’s mind, which is what I call a vaccine that immunises us from the collective human conscious diseases.  Once we start to use this higher consciousness that is when we have started using a vaccine to immunise ourselves from human collective diseases as this higher conscious mind isn’t diseased.    

I thought I would finish off my post with the following discussion between a bloke called Jason and myself on my last post titled, Utilising Higher Consciousness.

Jason

You bring forth an intriguing topic my friend. Though I agree that if the Collective has an illness not all will be affected, this for me can only include Aware Beings. You've reached a topic that is dear to me lol, this current state in which we live lost to the truth is the illness that has taken root in the Collective, yet it influences the masses that are "Unconscious". It's this "illness" that will determine our evolution as a species, in one path we open our minds to the universe, in the other we become servants to the technology we've clustered to.

I've often contemplated if this illness within the Collective was "planned out" by those who are in power, I've come to realize that it is not. For our push to grow faster and faster as a society with little regards for those around us is an "unconscious endeavor" that has little use for the future, only the instant self-gratification of the ego.  

I so rarely meet Dark Beings, and for the most part most who make the pretence of being "evil" are really just influenced by other dynamics. It perhaps this "global influence" that interests me more, for this is where I have determined the Collective Illness began.

As always Mathew, Thanks for the great wake up topics! :)

Mathew

Illnesses and diseases like the ego can enhance our immune system however when this disease progresses to the egotistical stage is when it becomes harmful to us even at the soul level I believe.  Our soul is still in mind and like our own minds is venerable to serious diseases, we need to look after the soul a little better than what we are now.

The people in power are living in utter ignorance; they really don’t know what they do.  It’s funny existing in a reality controlled by sick people.

If we didn’t have diseases like the egotism in this reality, this reality would be quite amazing; most of us are quite unaware of this. Actually, being aware of this is part of the cure I believe.

This might sound funny but I remember living in a reality that was disease free which of course meant we were influenced, as opposed to controlled, by the healthy minded not by the sick minded.  

I’m what Aussies call a wombat, someone a bit silly in the head but I don’t mind being who I am, silly in the head or not…….

It’s always a pleasure conversing with you Jason.

Utilising Higher Consciousness

Written by Mathew Naismith

It would seem I need to explain myself a little more in relation to my last post titled, A Collective Psychological Illness.  If the collective has an illness, this doesn’t mean all of us have this illness, what it means is the collective isn’t completely well. As individuals, if we have immunised ourselves from mental diseases, like the controlling factors of the ego for example, we are not ill ourselves but the collective is.  What do I mean by immunising ourselves from such illnesses such as the controlling ego for example?

Before I answer this we must answer another question first, what is so mentally ill about a controlling ego, how does the ego make us psychologically ill at the collective and individual levels?  The ego is delusional, it’s not who we are as a whole and we certainly can’t take these possessions accumulated by the egos with us after we die, the ego is only transitory but it makes us believe it's not.  

Wiki

A delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary. [1] As a pathology, it is distinct from a belief based on false or incomplete information, confabulation, dogma, illusion, or other effects of perception.

Delusions can be quite debilitating psychologically and the more delusional we become the more debilitating and even harmful we can become, war is a good example of how debilitating and even harmful delusions can be.  The ego is a delusion, it’s not who we are as a whole and it’s certainly something that is quite transitory, something we are unable to keep from life to life unless it’s through Karma.  Why do we have karma?  It’s to assist us to overcome such potentially debilitating harmful illnesses brought on by the ego.  The thing with karma is we can’t take personal possessions from life to life, we can take the illness with us but that is all, everything else the ego created is left behind.

Now I have defined what psychological illness the ego is at the collective and individual level, we can now answer the initial question of what I mean by immunising ourselves.  These are tools given to us by psychotherapists like Jesus and Buddha for instance and are tools from a higher consciousness, tools like religion/spirituality itself, praying, chanting, singing, meditation and so on.  These are all tools that we could use to immunise ourselves against the psychological illness of the collective like the ego for example, I also call these tools vaccines!! 

These tools come from a higher consciousness and have been adapted for lower conscious use, what happened though was we allowed ourselves to become too ill with the ego first thus in turn such immunisations just didn’t take, just like when we are immunised as humans against certain diseases, sometimes they don’t take and we fall ill.

It would seem we are not utilising this higher conscious immunising vaccines to their full potential mainly because we are too sick to do so, mostly from the disease ego.  This mental disease I call ego has reduced the full effects of the higher conscious immunising vaccines. I think it’s up to the people who these immunising vaccines worked for to help others that these vaccines didn’t work for to become well again.  

 So how do we coax egotistically ill people to become well again when they refuse to take such vaccines? Be our true selves and be as free from the sicknesses like the ego as much as possible, hopefully our actions will take effect in time. 

A Dissipating Dogma

Written by Mathew Naismith

Recently I’ve been in contrasting conversations with different people of different ideological principles, I am more aware now of the differences of these ideological principles, not actually of the principles themselves but  of the difference between these principles when dogmatism  becomes an influential factor of any ideological principles either that be religious/spiritual or scientific.

I am also more aware of how the people who use spiritual ideological principles are changing, they are becoming less and less dogmatic mainly, I think, because we are more aware these days of the influences of a controlling ego.  Dogmas can’t exist without a controlling ego; the ego is the only human trait that supports dogmas, once you cease using the controlling ego in one’s everyday life, the dogma becomes non-existent quite automatically.  

One of the contrasting conversations I’ve been in recently was about how we will quite automatically take on this new conscious change and how we will drop old skills to take on new skills. One of the old skills we used was dogma to prove our ideological principles, this is one of the old skills that, by the sounds of it, will go, dogmas will no longer have a use in the new consciousness.

I’m going to cheat again and use one of my replies to others to explain myself a little more on this subject.  

Recently I've been in conversations with other science minded people, not quite like myself however, anyway I realise now how influential dogmas are on ideological principles of any kind. The ideological principals of religions and sciences work, it' when we allow ourselves within these principles to became tainted with dogmas, realising dogmas can't exist without controlling ego, is when life becomes chaotic or more chaotic.

My point is I'm becoming less attached to this kind of conscious reality, I'm still accepting of it but it's losing it's appeal.

Living in a reality that has no dogma influences influencing our ideological principles is becoming more and more appealing every day. I do believe this is a part of this automatic process, I have a view that we will just automatically find ourselves in this new consciousness.

Religion and Science-Controlling Ego

Written by Mathew Naismith

Are the ideological principles of science and religion/spirituality flawed? Well actually no not until you bring in dogmatism, once one becomes dogmatic about any such ideological principles that is when flaws start to appear, not in the principles themselves, but in the people who are expressive of such ideological principles.

When we are dogmatic, what are we expressive of, what human trait does dogmatism rely on to exists, it can’t exist without this particular human trait?  Dogmatism can’t exist without a controlling ego, once the ego takes control of us there is a good chance we will become dogmatic within any ideological principle we take on.

Recently I have been in a discussion with science minded people concerning my last post titled Philosophical Views and the Sciences. The response I got was very typical of anyone arguing on behalf of their own ideological principles they abide by in life, in this case the principles where scientific principles. Science isn’t conductive to dogmas and basically how dare I relate religious mentality with science mentality in this way.  The problem was, the more they argued with me the more dogmatic they sounded which was of course proving my point.

I also showed how corrupt science of today is and how some of these scientists will falsify findings to obtain more funding and prestige.  https://explorable.com/scientific-falsification

I also showed how atheists are just as if not more dogmatic than religious/spiritually aware people.  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/dogmatism-and-openness-experience-in-the-non-religious

Like anyone who has an ideological principle that they see is the be and end all, they will defend these principles to the utter end which is exactly what happened, the discussion is still going on.

I thought I would insert one of my responses to a science minded person about the question religion/spirituality doesn’t give evidence so it’s not credible.

I agree, we form a hypothesis /philosophical view takes inductive reasoning but to formulate a non-conjectural outcome of a hypothesis we use deductive reasoning. 

You said there is no evidence, what is evidence to theorist is different to what is evidence to a realist, if we relied totally on a realists deduction we wouldn’t get anywhere because all theories at first can’t be proven so a realist would disclaim theories from the start because there is no solid proof that a theory is fact.  A good scientist is a theorist and a realist but that is obviously not the case for a lot of science minded people these days.

Now let’s look at evidence again between a realist and an idealist (religion), what one calls evidence isn’t evidence to the other and visa-versa, which one is more correct? Someone who is dogmatic will say their ideological principles are, how often do science minded people proclaim their ideological principles are right over all other principles? Is this any different to religious dogmatisms?  Of course not…..

In a thousand years’ time do you honestly think the present scientific principles used today built solely on logics is still going to be in use? Most science minded people will dogmatically say most defiantly negating how science has evolved in human history so far from philosophy and mysticism. Modern day science will keep evolving unless dogma take it’s toll on such progression, quantum physics is a good example of this in how it will evolve. Quantum physics borders on a kind of mysticism at times which is why other dogmatic science minded people refute any claims made by such sciences. I’ve even had dogmatic science minded people try to tell me psychology isn’t a science and of course I proved them incorrect. 

The controlling factors of the ego have infested science minded peoples scientific principles making their science investigations flawed. This is no different to the Dark Ages when religion was infested by the controlling factors of the ego. I showed how simular Dark Age religion and modern day science is within their mentality, this of course didn’t go down to well mainly because of the controlling effects of the ego. 

Spiritual awareness is about awareness and being aware of the connections between dogmatism and ego in any ideological principle.  Spiritually aware people know, once the ego is no longer in control dogmatism just won’t (can’t) exist and what a shame that would be…….not.(:- 

Realisation of a Universal Reality

Written by Mathew Naismith

This is going to sound awfully wacky to a lot of people but I suppose what’s new with me, I’ve got to do what is expected of me of course.  As I become detached from various attachments brought on by our ego dominated reality, my awareness expands beyond this ego conditioning, just like anyone. This post describes what is coming from this expansion of awareness in relation to my past life in ancient Egypt which I became aware of three years ago.  I should say at this point that this life I perceived I had in ancient Egypt was confirmed by a total stranger who I had never conversed with before, Aluna Joy in the US.  

A brief recap: I lived as a lowly priest sometime during the fourth dynasty in an unordinary priesthood, my main function was healer but others in this priesthood were into other science endeavours. I should also mention, there was priestesses as well within our order, none of us religiously payed homage to Gods/goddesses as such because we knew what these Gods and Goddesses actually were.  

We also tried to free the slaves and give all workers better working conditions. When I received these visions of my past life, I thought we were banished for trying to free the slaves and not following the expected protocol of priests and priestesses at that time, which was in part paying homage to the Gods.  For some reason I didn’t realise, at the time of my visions of my past life, that if you don’t pay homage to the Gods/Goddesses you are in turn not paying homage to the Pharaoh and his family’s line. Boy didn’t we push the boundaries….strangely enough I’m still pushing the boundaries in this life.

The next thing I realised was I thought we failed in our endeavour to save humanity from the present brutality and from the forthcoming predicted famine and disease that could have been prevented but I wasn’t quite correct in this assumption.  What dominating human trait do the Pharaoh’s possess and use most often?  We were banished primarily for this reason and the reason for our banishment was ego!!  Because we didn’t pay the expected homage to the Gods/Goddesses/Pharaoh the Pharaoh took offence, we were banished by egotism, this is human history and human reality however it’s not universal reality. What happened in human reality was quite different to what happened in the universal reality so I realised recently. 

What’s the difference between human and universal realities? In our case human reality becomes reality to us by certain events taking place which are usually primarily induced by a particular action/reaction. In our case in this reality actions and reactions are determined by the ego but in the universal reality that isn’t the case. What happened in this universal reality was the slaves were freed, better working conditions were introduced, the Pharaoh’s were no longer deemed as God’s and so forth, in other words the ego was no longer a controlling factor in our lives. This spread right throughout this universal reality which of course didn’t happen in our present human reality.

Why am I calling one reality human and the other universal?  

This universal reality is about balance and the acceptance of all other realties within this universal reality, on the other hand our ego dominated reality is in total denial of any other reality existing, the ego just doesn’t want to know about any other reality but it’s own reality.  The cover up of the antediluvian period and other life forms in this universe is a good example of this denial; this universal reality I’m talking about here doesn’t deny the existence of any other reality or beings/entities, it’s of all that is.

It’s strange to realise our human reality is an offshoot from this universal reality, once a conscious species or a group of species is in denial of anything of the universal reality, it becomes another off shoot reality.  

The outcome of my time in ancient Egypt was different in a human ego dominated reality compared to the universal reality, how could the outcome be different when we are only aware of this human reality, am I also living in this universal reality with a different outcome?  Yes, but of course the ego doesn’t want to know this so it makes us believe we can’t possibly be living out in at least two realities at the same time. We should remember, the way we perceive time isn’t the same in other realities, time isn’t a dominating factor in the universal reality so time doesn’t interfere with it’s workings or the way consciousness reacts to itself.  We honestly perceive way too much in a reality that is primarily dominated by certain fixated perceptions, I have the understanding this doesn’t occur in this universal reality I’m talking about here.  

I realise now we didn’t fail while living my life in ancient Egypt, only in our ego dominated human perception did we fail which counts for what? No wonder I laugh at myself and everything else of this reality so much these days, this reality is really a joke but a joke worth correcting if we are willing enough…….How do we correct it? Firstly by realising we are not conscious of the main reality, (this universal reality), and becoming more familiar with this universal reality I’m talking about here.  By just being aware of a totally more truer reality can change this reality quite dramatically but we have got to really want this and the way to do this is stop the controlling factors of the ego dominating us so much which some of us are doing.  

Once you release the ego you no longer have a problem with the push and pull effect, there is no action reaction; we become accepting of all of what is just like the universal reality I’ve been talking about here. Once we stop reacting we then become a part of the universal reality again, so what happens to this human reality? It becomes no more or other conscious forms will continue to live it out but once you start to have the realisation of a universal reality, you are starting to become a part of this universal reality and no longer a part of this human reality. 

My Views Advocated

Written by Mathew Naismith

A Message from the Hathors and Tom Kenyon

Tom Kenyon January 2, 2005

The Big Island, Hawaii

If any of my readers wondered where I am coming from with a lot of my writings, the following should clear this up to some extent. I should also point out that the following is only an extract from the link address shown below.  

http://www.spiritofra.com/EC_Index.htm

I will say this again because I think it is vital to understand in our current situation:

The future is not a predetermined certainty, but rather a multi-dimensional set of probabilities and possibilities.

The message, below, addresses several areas of concern, most notably climatic and Earth changes, but their take, as in so many things, is quite unique. Essentially they are saying that we are in a very dangerous passage in regard to our physical survival, and that, seemingly unknown to us, we collectively hold a key to our survival—if we will only use it.

The key to which they refer is the act of living in ever-increasing levels of appreciation. They have commented on this to me on numerous occasions. The quasi-science on this (meaning this view is theoretical as opposed to being generally accepted by mainstream science) is that our DNA responds to our emotional state (our feelings) and then emits light and energy-patterns that affect matter. In other words, our DNA somehow affects our external reality through a process of vortex mechanics. I am not going to try to describe this here because most people aren’t interested. You can find research reports on this type of thing by doing an internet search on—DNA and consciousness. Especially check out the work of The Heart Math Institute.

In my own personal experiments with appreciation, I have found that when it is experienced for longer than a few minutes, it often produces a hypnotic-type feeling of bliss, which I equate to an increase in endorphins. At the very least, I think most of us would benefit from regular periods of appreciation/bliss in the course of our day-to-day lives.

The challenge for many persons is how to feel appreciation when there is seemingly no reason for it. I have actually addressed this question in a previous letter, when the Hathors gave a message on the importance of this emotion, about a year ago.

I think we are facing a collective and global intelligence test. If we fail to wake up in time to our power as creator-gods, taking both action and responsibility, knowing that our consciousness affects external events, we will pass into oblivion—much like the dinosaurs of old and integrity in government. We are in a time of immense chaos and transformation. Interestingly, the Chinese word for transformation consists of two ideograms—both danger and opportunity. Unquestionably, we live in dangerous times. I don’t think anyone would deny that. And the evolutionary task, I think, is for each of us to find the opportunities and take the actions to transform ourselves even in the midst of life’s increasing dangers. It would be far easier to contract into ourselves and re-treat from the world, but I think that would be a grave mistake—literally.

To make things ever more daunting, we are living in the midst of a dying world, both literally and figuratively. Just read the latest scientific reports on the condition of the ecosystem, including the melting of the polar ice caps, and it becomes crystal clear what dire shape things are in. But the death of our world also includes the collapse of our modern ways of living because, quite frankly, they are unsustainable. It hurts both the Earth and its inhabitants.

So what will the new world look like on the other side of this metaphorical (or perhaps literal) death? I don’t think anyone really knows for sure.

What the Hathors say is that we collectively hold a key to our own survival and destiny. The question is whether we will wake up in time to use it.

Final Thoughts on Pragmatism

I am a practical person and I don’t usually go for things that are too-pie-in-the-sky, so when the Hathors’ suggested that appreciation is the key for changing destiny, I hesitated.

I mean how many of us will it take living in appreciation to tip the gyroscopic balance of our destiny in favor of our collective survival? And just how many hours a day does it require to be in appreciation to be effective?

To be honest, I can’t sustain a continual state of this emotion for more than a few hours. Something always comes along to blow it. So I find myself having to regroup my mental carnival from time to time in order to re-enter the appreciative state. But when I do, it is well worth the effort. And that may be the main reason for this mental/emotional discipline—it increases wellbeing.

I don’t really know if we can tip the collective scale. I don’t mean to be a pessimist, but it is in my nature. Actually I am a strange bird, an odd mix of optimist and fatalist. I usually reside somewhere in the middle, though something can send me flying to one side or the other, like the pendulum on an old grandfather clock. But usually I just hang somewhere midway between up and down. I am the kind of guy who, when he sees a glass of water, sees it neither half full, nor half empty. It simply is.

And that’s how I see things currently in the world—it just is. Yes, I know that last sentence was technically a grammatical error. I say this for the benefit of those grammarian souls who live just for the opportunity to pounce upon a misplaced participle or whatever. Sometimes we need to abandon the rules in order to make a point. And quite frankly, I think that freedom of expression should take precedence over rules and grammarian dogma—when it is needed. In a similar vein, I think we will collectively need to abandon some of the rules we have been given on how to live a life—like not making waves and pretending that everything is alright and that we can continue to live like we are used to. If we don’t change how we are living on this planet (both in terms of outer action and inner feelings) I suspect that soon we will not have a life worth living.

So what is this isness of our world right now? Chaos. No doubt about it. Things are up in the air all over the place, and life is becoming increasingly surreal as we move closer to that mythic, often hyped, Mayan end-of-the-world-as-we-knew-it party (2012 or thereabouts, though some people are quibbling over the actual date and what it means).

On a bad day (when fatalism reigns supreme in my inner kingdom) I look at the world and wonder, what the—to use a grand old word from the King’s English—f__k is going on. I mean can we humans really be that stupid? Well, evidently yes. And on these glum days I see little hope for any movement up the evolutionary ladder. In fact, when I see the rampant stupidity going on around (and to be honest, sometimes inside) me, I think we will be forever set-back a grade and never graduate from Middle School—or is it Elementary?

Then on those wondrous optimistic days I look at the chaos of the world and know that chaos is actually a highly creative state. Anything can happen. Unpredictable miracles can and do occur (along with horrors, but that’s another story). The point is that we are in a highly volatile time and the course of events can change in a moment’s notice. I pray for this change of course every day, and in my optimistically flavored moments, I see reasons to hope that it shall be so.

@Copyright 2005 Tom Kenyon All Rights Reserved website: www.tomkenyon.com

Note: You may duplicate this information in any format and share it with others so long as you do not alter its content in any way and give credit to Tom Kenyon (including the address of his website and this notice).

I address appreciation and acceptance so often in my posts it’s not funny….well actually it is in a way. The non-appreciation of the ego is only going to cause us more grief and the ego is who we are at present, this is like not appreciating the present when everything stems from the present moment.  We really do in my mind need to show a little more wisdom within our wisdom to change things for the better if that is what we truly want.  Just because we appreciate and accept something doesn’t mean we can’t change it, if it’s destroying more than it creates or it’s destroying everything dear to our existence then we should show a little wisdom and change this destructive course, we are all quite capable. 

The Expressive Ego

Written by Mathew Naismith

Note: I think this post is important for a lot of people to read right through, if you are active on forum sites in particular, this post  just might help you to communicate with others a little better; it’s certainly worth a try anyway.

We can look at the ego and judged it being whatever we want to see it as, but of course to judge the ego to start with is to also be expressive of the ego, it’s like the ego is in judgement of the ego, what else could judge the ego being bad or good?  There is of course is nothing else but the ego!!

Recently I was on a sight, which I have been a member on for a number of years now; that certain people on this site kept saying wrong, this was wrong that was wrong. At one stage, any post or link supporting a post that these people disagreed with was deemed as wrong in any way they could think up. This is the clincher, if anyone mentioned that these people, who were clearly expressive of one of the most destructive ego traits, were making it personal, they denied it and clearly went on about how wrong it was to say that they were being personal.  In turn it wasn’t the people who were being expressive of the word wrong so much that had an ego issue but the people who were on the receiving end of this egotistical expression. What a funny turn around but what was even funnier was the expression of wrong was used while discussing a thread about honesty and dishonesty within spirituality. These people, who were obviously being expressive of one of the most destructive traits of the ego, turned everything around to suite themselves; honesty wasn’t a part of the discussion at all it would seem.  

I believe the ego can be positive and or negative within it’s expressions, it’s really not necessary if you agree with this or not at the moment.  Expressing a wrong in anyone, including yourself, is being expressive of one of the most destructive traits of the ego so in turn all it will do is destroy.  That is exactly what this expression did within this discussion about honesty and dishonesty.

One of the first posts posted, in reply to this thread about honesty and dishonesty within spirituality, was explicitly expressive of the destructive ego expression wrong but also the thread was deemed as being dishonest. Now this reply wasn’t deemed by the repliers of this thread to be personal.  

The ego is of the personal self, it’s not of the collective self, it is personal so any expression of the ego, either it be negative or positive, is obviously personal.  These people, who were so expressive of the destructive trait of the ego, were in total denial of making the conversation personal. We must remember here that the discussion was about honesty and dishonesty, why did these people express so much displeasure in discussing such a topic in the first place and why act so destructively?  

They were in total denial that they were being so expressive of such a destructive trait, in other words they were lying to themselves. This is a good enough reason for the negative destructive ego to go on the defensive, which it did, by expressing itself in the only defensive way it can by being even more expressive of the destructive negative ego. Their ego was in total disagreement with anything they saw as being wrong so they reacted accordingly to their ego trait.

At the same time I was having this discussion on this site, I was having another discussion on another site with another person, and we disagreed with each other’s view. At no time was the expression of wrong, or anything like it, ever expressed between the two of us , the discussion went along quite smoothly but why the difference? These two discussions were still expressive of the ego therefore personal however the big difference was one was being expressive of the negative ego and the other the positive ego. Even though the ego is personal, no matter what, the positive expressive trait of the ego wasn’t personal as such but the negative expressive trait of the ego obviously was.  When a discussion becomes truly personal, that is a good sign that the negative expressive trait of the ego is in control.

Now you could say I am in judgement here, which is of course judged by a lot of people as being bad in some way, ego judging the ego as being bad.  Because the ego can be expressive of either the negative or positive traits of the ego or both, judgment is also of this value, it can also be negative (destructive) or positive (constructive) or of course both.  This is of course because judgement is of the ego.  I might be wrong….whoops, not entirely right in being in judgment of others but at least I’ve been constructive of my expressions.  This is something we have very rarely practiced in human history, using the ego positively instead of negatively.  Why jump the gun and just judge the ego as just being bad when we haven’t experienced and lived in a world mostly influenced by the positive ego?  Before totally judging the ego as just bad, why not give the other side of the ego a chance to prove itself first!!  

Like a Butterfly

Written by Mathew Naismith

A caterpillar will only become aware of it’s truer purpose to life once it nourishes itself on the fruits of life to finally become what it was all along, a butterfly.  While living as a caterpillar, it is ignorant of it’s truer self and purpose to life. The question is, are we the caterpillar or the butterfly?

Some people are caterpillars, some people are butterflies but some are also pupating between these two distinctly different existences, does it matter which one we are and the answer is of course is no because we are all butterflies in a sense.  

Not all caterpillars become butterflies because of life’s ventures; this is no big deal as we will get it next time around.  The reasons some of these caterpillars don’t become butterflies will be because of lack of nourishment, for it’s within our nourishment will we find our truer selves and our truer purpose to life to finally become a butterfly.  It does not matter how we nourish ourselves as along as we nourish ourselves enough to become what we truly are. You could look at nourishing ourselves through life as being awareness building, the more we nourish ourselves on the fruits of life the closer we are becoming aware of our truer selves and our truer purpose to life.  Life itself is nourishment, it’s how we take this nourishment not what nourishment we take that defines if we will pupate into a butterfly or not.  This is in reference to all systems of belief we take on, does it matter as long as we still become aware of our truer selves and our truer purpose to life?

Does it matter if we pray, meditate, eat right, sit right and so on? No because everything in life is nourishment, some of these nourishments will assist us more but in the end it’s how we take these nourishment that matter. If a butterfly nourishes itself on the correct food it will become aware of itself quicker but does it really matter if it takes longer eating less nourishing foods? I suppose it does to the ego but that is all. Judging that we must nourish ourselves in a certain way otherwise we are not doing it right is of the ego and ego is one nourishment that can extensively delay or cancel out the process of becoming a butterfly.

Yesterday I participated in our annual pub crawl in Maryborough QLD Australia; to some people they would judge this as being so and so which again is of the ego.  No I wasn’t drunk at the end of the day, accept on life, but I was tipsy, actually very few people seemed inebriated on the day to any great extent.  Like I said many people judge this as being so and so and again judgment denotes ego and the ego is one nourishment that can extensively delay or cancel out the process of becoming a butterfly. In all does this even matter how we become a butterfly as long as we do in the long or short run? It doesn’t to me.

I thought I would share a few pics from the day. I should also emphasis they don’t call this day a pub crawl anymore but a pub fest which is more socially accepted.