Thursday, 11 July 2019
Written by Mathew Naismith
When I look around our present environment, what I can see is a material re-emergence based on how good the ego feels. In all honesty, this is anything from materialism to spirituality. The accumulation of material/physical wealth isn't just to do with monetary gain and the power this kind of wealth gives us. Material wealth is also to do with how good a wealth makes us feel, for example, excessive compulsive exercising or always lusting after the feeling love gives us.
At no point do people like me expect to feel good all the time, of course if I was to become enlightened, feeling good would simply occur in any circumstance I find myself in, as such. It is completely impractical to think within a natural environment, such as Earth, our solar system, galaxy and universes, to feel good all the time when our main focus is on material wealth. I think if material man, the ego man, could change all the natural cycles to suite their ever lusting desire of material wealth, they would. This is while disregarding all other entities within the universe itself!!
While reading yet another article on a person who was an excessive compulsive exerciser, who nearly lost their own life as their cortisol levels were 20 times higher than normal, you realise stress is a big killer. I have lost count how many health fanatics have died of a heart attack or cancer. The stress exerted to obtain material wealth is often very expensive, if not to you, to someone else or the environment as a whole. Look around at how expensive the collective human conscious ever lusting for material wealth is upon our planet at present.
However, there is another kind of wealth that isn't expensive, in all honesty quite inexpensive except for the ego losing control, immaterial wealth. Yes, enlightenment is of this immaterialism that is stress free to an ego not in control, of course if the ego is in control, a huge amount of stress is exerted but this is transitory and of finite existence. Even a sense of enlightenment, not actual enlightenment, will create a balance in any environment no matter how material/physical the environment is.
So how many of us desire to fleetingly stress out our controlling egos, forgoing the lust for material wealth?
Yes, there is also another re-emergence of wealth, a wealth that is not material but very much immaterial, the material presence of people like me show this. It is simply to give an opportunity for balance between the material and immaterial. An example of this balance can be seen in, for example, Taoism or Hinduism, where the balance of material and immaterial wealth within a natural material environment is exemplified. Actually, a lot of ancient teachings not controlled, therefore distorted, by material wealth are of this balance.
It is important to balance out the material with the immaterial, and visa-versa, in a material environment, especially when the lusting after material wealth has created excessive imbalances in such an environment.
Wednesday, 27 February 2019
Written by Mathew Naismith
I was recently invited to join a group of people, predominantly of Indian origin, on a social media network site who, to me, show a good deal of balance between the eastern and western mind. There caring loving gestures in interaction to each other seemed quite different to when the predominant western mind in people try to interact in the same way. I have interacted on a number of forums where the western minded people don't quite seem as genuine within their caring loving interactions. The difference for this I found quite interesting.
As the following link will illustrate, the western mind sees itself the dominant force of nature, where the eastern mind see itself in harmony between man and nature, of equal equality and value between man and nature. Why do, for example, Hindus express a sacredness to certain animals where the western mind only sees animals as something to use abuse. In saying this, how many pet owners of a western mind show a sacredness to their own beloved pets? Is this the eastern mind in all of us, the eastern harmonious mind seeing other creatures on Earth as no lesser value than themselves?
How many western minded spiritual people put the spiritual world above all other worlds? To the eastern mind, spiritual values are of no lesser value than material values and visa-versa, make no mistake though, a lot of easterners are becoming more western in mind than eastern thus an imbalance is created. As I have spoken to a number of people from India, the concern of their own people becoming more of the western mind is concerning, in that knowing how the western mind puts itself above nature and all else not of itself.
You might then look at the Hindus for example, in how they have so many spiritual festivals. To the western mind, and understandably so, the Hindus seem to be prominently of the spiritual world, there is no balance between the material world and the spiritual world!! The many God's and Goddesses are simply a representation of the many facets of life as a whole. Many deities represent man's own character and psychology. In actuality, Hindu deities represent the material world as well as the spiritual world. You will find this in most eastern spiritual teachings, only if you are not predominantly of the western mind that is.
are also of the eastern mind, you will find the following quite interesting. It
is in relation to a book titled, "East and West: Understanding the Rise of
Friday, 14 December 2018
Written by Mathew Naismith
Viruses often consume and breed to the extent of completely devouring their host until there is nothing left, this is unless balanced out with some kind of anti-virus, natural or not. What occurs when we don't get enough sun or too much sun? The same is with our diet, too much of one type of food is not healthy for us as it is of too little of another food. What about love, can you get too much love? Wouldn't excessive expressions of love create a far healthier environment than we have today?
If you ever heard a plant die you would realise that plants, as of animals, suffer, in actuality even more so as they take a lot longer to die. We often show love and concern of an animal being mistreated or killed to sustain our own healthy environment. Yes, your body and mind is an environment, an environment that needs a well balanced sustainable energy source to stay healthy. Now, imagine expressing love to all living things without exception. Just because most people are unable or unwilling to hear plants slowly die, doesn't mean plants don't suffer to sustain our own healthy environment.
What about over populating the planets environment, to the extent of excessively unbalancing the planets environment until the planets environment is totally unable to sustain this kind of energy abuse. Excessive expressions of love wouldn't just mean we wouldn't eat anything, it would also mean, at the same time, that we would keep on over populating the planets environment, very simular to a mindless unemotional virus. As of unconditional love, where we only express unconditional love to energy sources that are going to feed our type of unconditional love, to become aware of animals suffering and not plants, is of the same kind of abuse of energy. To sustain our energy, a healthy environment, we often overly abuse one energy source in favour of another energy source.
A balanced form of love isn't like this where one energy source is abused in favour of another, all is treated as one. In actuality all is treated as an energy source on equal terms to all sources of energy. Within this, a true sense of balance is sustained which in-effect helps to sustain our own and the planets environment, without being self-deceptive or deliberately ignorant to one source of energy in favour of another source of energy.
The love expressed by tribe's people of the planets environment is a true expression of love, even while using other energy forms to sustain their own energy form. Their love was expressed through appreciation, that a balance between their own environment and the rest of the environment, which they are also apart of, is vital for the health of all energy sources. Remember, you can't destroy energy, you can only transform energy. Of course a healthy environment is all to do with how we transform energy. Abusing energy in an imbalanced way will only create an unhealthy environment for all energy sources. Self-deceptively ignoring the abuse of one energy source in favour of another energy source is simple abuse of energy. To be unaware is one thing, to be purposely ignorant in favour of another energy source is another thing, especially when this kind of abuse is used to sustain our own present energy level.
Yes, it's all to do with the way we transform energy, not that we should abuse one energy source in favour of another energy source. Where is the balance in this kind of abuse of energy? You simply transform energy, while at the same time being appreciative of the energy you are transforming. Everything is energy or if you like everything is of God. Imagine abusing a far more aware and wiser energy source like God, especially in favour of your own energy sustainability over all other energy sources sustainability. Mind boggling isn't it? It's like a mindless virus that is only interested in its own sustainability, sustaining its own healthy environment that is completely based on the abuse of other energy sources.
Yes, love but love in balance with the rest of the environment. In truth, an animal or plant doesn't spiritually mind being transformed, as long as it's not abused while being transformed. The same is with the planet. The planet doesn't mind being transformed, as long as we do it non-abusively as of any energy source or form doesn't. Let's be honest here, energy never stays the same, all energy forms will transform anyway, it is the way energy transforms that makes the difference. If used in a balanced non-abusive way, in other words loved and appreciated, energy as a whole will create a sustainable healthy environment, if not, you will only create a reality we are experiencing today.
Sunday, 11 November 2018
Written by Mathew Naismith
In every step I take towards awakening the ego to its controlling ways, the further away the ego in control gets from me. We will often come across this in our interactions with other people; it feels like one step forward to awaking while the ego in control takes two steps backward away from awakening. I would not bother trying to awaken the ego to its controlling way if the ego not in control didn't want to awaken. You must understand an ego in control, that it can't relate or comprehend awakening and only sees awakening as a threat to its desires therefore survival. This is different for the ego not in control as it simply sees a need for balance, a balance of the controlling ways of the ego, this is all, nothing spectacular or self-serving or self-satisfying.
I received a reply, as below, to one of my replies on the subject of our controlling ways. My reply will hopefully enlighten the ego to its controlling ways and what these ways are creating.
Thanks for sharing. About the westerner's control desire, is it true? As I know, the divorce rate there is high. That means people don't want to be controlled by the marriage and family program. Some tramps choose this life style for freedom, don't they?
Being controlled is different to being controlling. Marriage partners don't want to be controlled but be in control so they divorce. The reason the divorce rate is so high is because they want more control but can't have it in their present relationship. Divorce is one way to gain control, not loose control.
We are all controlled by one thing or another including nature
(性质, Xìngzhì), the western mind in all of us has problem with
this because it desires control, not to be controlled. The
balance between being controlled and being controlling brings
harmony in nature. It's the same with ourselves, the balance
between our western and eastern mind brings harmony to our
mind and our existence.
I am at present trying to influence the Western mind in
Western countries to express less disdain for this human
created reality. I wrote the following just recently.
"Indeed, to judge is to participate, all else is observation. All
participation is of the ego where observation is egoless.
All that can't forgive and can be hurt or offended is the ego in
participation. Participation simply creates ignorance where
observation creates awareness. How can you express disdain for a consciousness lost within
its own creation, lost within its own participation while of the
absence of observation? We no longer truly observe as our
forefathers did, we simply participate to primarily serve
the ego. I am not happy in the way we are abusing energy in every
sense, but how can I have disdain for a consciousness lost
within its own creation? It would be futile to do so, also, I
would be of what I have disdain for. Simply observe and
It's not getting through because the western mind doesn't like
being controlled but to be primarily in control, of course the
only thing in control is the ego for only the ego desires to
control. The tramp is still being controlled but no longer has
desires to take control; a lot of spiritualists do this.
As I also wrote recently," Try to observe your own participation
rather than participating in what you observe. Man is no more
and no less violent and destructive than the natural
environment he lives in. However, as many have proven,
man can be as passive and constructive as the natural
environment, the choice is indeed ours. It is what it is at
In some relationships an imbalance of being controlled is
present. All that the ego wants to do is bring balance back into
their lives; this will at times take the ego not in control to
separate from what is causing an imbalance in their lives.
This is different for an ego in control as the ego in control
wants more control so again separation occurs.
In a reality primarily controlled and influenced by the western
mind, the ego not in control observes that the ego in control
needs balancing out. As a lot of people are doing in
spirituality, separation has become the primary objective.
Seen as the ego not in control only wants to separate itself
from what is causing an imbalance, it's obvious the ego in
control desires total separation, like in a divorce of married
couples, to completely separate (divorce) itself from the
present reality (marriage). The ego not in control doesn't
want to separate itself like this, it simply wants to separate
itself from the imbalances of being controlling or controlled.
How do you obtain balance? One way is to think everything
just is what it is at the time it is. The following might help in
this if you are interested.
Extract: What I realized is that sometimes I put way too much emphasis on trying to figure out what is right and wrong.
What is the right path and what is the wrong path. What is good with the world and what is bad. What I like and what I don’t like. What someone thinks and what they don’t think.
With so much unpredictability in life and chaos at work these days in our uncertain world, what I have learned is that it really doesn’t matter. It really doesn’t matter if we label life as “good” or “bad.” It just is. It is the way it’s supposed to be.
Tuesday, 13 March 2018
Written by Mathew Naismith
Why would I state that optimism is an optimum state? We might think that optimism is a positive mental state to be in, within this perception it's the most favourable and most rewarding state to be in. I actually don't concur (agree) with this on the grounds that optimism is a positive attribute or state of mind, however, optimism is highly constructive without having to be perceived as a positive.
Optimism looks upon human consciousness holistically, this means that optimism looks upon human consciousness in conjunction with the rest of existence. Basically, human consciousness isn't separated from the environment it's a part of where's pessimism separates everything.
Human consciousness can be highly destructive and violent, when taken in reference to the environment that human consciousness exists in, human consciousness is mild within its destructiveness and violence. A good example of this is the sun, being that the sun is one of the most violent destructive energy sources in the universe, not the most destructive and violent though. It's interesting how an optimist and a pessimist perceive the environment as I will explain.
Optimism; Hopefulness and confidence about the future or the success of something
Pessimism; A general disposition to look on the dark side and to expect the worst in all things
Optimum; The best, most favourable or desirable, especially under some restriction
Optimism creates rationality, a sound sense of reasoning, by confidently making reverence to its whole environment in the hope to understand it's own positioning within its existence. This is done without discounting any part of the environment for what ever reason, being it either a positive or negative perception of its environment.
Optimism takes in consideration of both negative and positive reflections, most always looking at the negatives in a favourable way or in reference to other perceived negatives. Reverence isn't made in comparison but in conjunction with. A good example of this is judging human consciousness highly negative and even toxic while excluding making reference to the rest of the environment like the sun.
The point is that optimism doesn't perceive that negatives are simply bad while at the same time making exclusions to these perceived negatives. Optimism optimistically, favourably, looks at everything with the same light, in the same value, void of separation. Perceiving that everything not of my own vibrations, my own reality, is negative or that certain forms of human consciousness are plainly negative and even toxic, is a sign of pessimism, not optimism. Pessimism irrationally looks at certain forms of human consciousness as being negative therefore bad void of making reference to the rest of the environment.
So why isn't optimism of a positive state of mind?
A positive state of mind only takes in and considers the positives while excluding what are perceived to be negative, only the positives of existence are acknowledge. You can't be of a positive mind while including the negatives, the negative state of mind or existence. The negative mind works in the same way by excluding the positives otherwise it's not of a true negative mind.
A mind set to negative or positive thinking creates a state of pessimism, all else not of its own vibrations is excluded. This sounds awfully too familiar today. To a negative mind, the positive mind is highly negative and visa-versa, this is not the same with a balanced mind because a balanced mind creates a state of optimism. Everything is seen in a favourable way through the acceptance of the whole environment the way it is, not just accepting parts of the environment we desire to be of.
Optimism is simply the middle ground between our created and perceived negatives and positives. Let's be honest here, perceptions of negatives and positives are simply perceptions, a creation brought about in the way we perceive either that be optimistically or pessimistically.
Pessimism is of both negative and positives perceptions; pessimism needs an opposing opposite to exist thus we have perceptions and creation of negatives and positives. All of a sudden numerous people are judged as being toxic, excessively negative, how optimistic is this especially in regards to what is being so critically judged and ostracised, not included? To even look at yourself as being of some kind of higher value than judged negatives is quite a dark way to exist.
You could say that optimism is of both negative and positive energy sources working in balance, the thing is the union of negatives and positives in perfect balance negate or neutralise each other. They work as one void of separation as in the perceptions of negatives and positives.
Is it positive and optimistic to refute an obvious occurrence because it's negative? Optimism looks at the negative occurrence and tries to make the best of it, pessimism simply ignores the obvious. You can see how a true state of optimism creates a state of rationality and pessimism creates a state of irrationality. One takes in consideration of the whole picture while the other only takes in what it desires to be of, the small picture.
I really hope I have explained this better, an optimistic view........
Saturday, 10 March 2018
Written by Mathew Naismith
Can positive thinking lead to irrational optimism and self-deceptiveness? As of myself as I will explain latter, I never focused on being positive while experiencing trauma brought about by a chronic injury. Because I did this, I was able to accomplish tasks well beyond the boundaries set up by the mental and physical trauma I was experiencing. Just because one is not being negative doesn't mean one is being positive and visa-versa. This is likened to, just because we are not at war doesn't mean we are at peace, in actuality there is a lot that exists between war and peace, this is the same between negative and positive thinking. I actually prefer to stay away from extreme thinking processes, more is always better isn't true, in actuality moderation and balance is always better in the end.
I find articles like the following always interesting; they often go beyond the way we have been conditioned to think.
Extract: He’s not the only one who’s frustrated with what many see as
relentless push toward positivity and the treatment of happiness as a
commodity. Not only can the happiness industry make us feel bad about
ourselves, as it did with Wilson, critics say, it can topple an economy or
worse, according to Barbara Ehrenreich, author of Bright-Sided: How Positive Thinking Is Undermining America.
Unchecked positive thinking and “irrational optimism” led to the housing market
crash in 2007, she contends. America
Oliver Burkeman, author of The Antidote: Happiness for People Who Can’t Stand Positive Thinking, says that “positive thinking has become a sort of allergy to anything negative. We are constantly on guard against negative thoughts, so that any time we feel pessimistic or bad, we want to reassure ourselves and say everything will be fine. But each time we do that, we inadvertently enforce the notion that if things don’t turn out fine, it would be a total catastrophe.” Rather than bolstering our resilience, he says, positive thinking actually undermines it.
Today I am astounded at what I accomplished in my life, yes, I had to work within the boundaries of trauma but at no time did I see these boundaries as being negative or a positive, they were simply limitations to either overcome or let be. Never ever look at limitations as being negative, they are simply limitations created by circumstance.
We are well and truly conditioned to think if it's not one it has to be the other. I call this a black and white mentality, it's got to be one or the other when in actually most of what is, is neither of just black or white, negative or positive.
Why firstly have a dire need to only focus on the positives? The more negatives we perceive within our environment, the more of a dire need we have to be positive. What if you didn't perceive everything that creates boundaries and limitations as being simply negative, nothing else!! What is occurring to the environment because we have few limitations in the way we impact on the environment? There is no moderation in our pollutants to start with and at the same time there is no moderation, no limitations, to destroying the natural environment through clearing.
How often is our unlimited potential mentioned to us these days which is mostly based on positive thinking, a potential that is not moderate in accordance with its environment? This includes any environment. My environment was to be limited to the traumas I experienced in life even though I went beyond these limitations. When I excessively went beyond these limitations I suffered big time, I in fact compounded my trauma especially when I took no painkillers.
Most of the times I didn't need painkillers, this is because I didn't allow my pain to control me. Just because I didn't allow the pain to control me, to force me to take pain killers, doesn't mean I took control of my pain.
This is the way we are conditioned to think, if you're not allowing pain/trauma to control you, you must have control of the pain/trauma, a black and white mentality. I think anyone who has experienced severe trauma would agree with me, at no time are you in control of the pain/trauma, you just simply try not to allow the pain/trauma to control you. You take pain killer so you think you have control, what enticed you to take painkillers in the first place? Pain, pain is more in control not less when taking painkillers.
This is the same with negative and positive thinking, do you allow the negative thinking to control you to primarily have a dire need to think positive!! In cases like this negative thinking is more in control, not less, we are simply being self-deceptive here.
However, because I didn't take painkillers I now suffer with compounding trauma that can be compounded by various experiences related in some way to my life trauma. Any kind of pain can cause me further trauma beyond of what the pain should, of course this only occurs when I allow any pain to control me. If I took painkiller in sever circumstances in my life, it is unlikely I would now be suffering with compounding trauma. It's to do with moderation, moderating when pain/trauma was going to control me.
A lot of people are today confusing positive thinking with moderation, a balanced mind set in accordance with the environment we are experiencing, any and all environments. Moderation and balance is simply the grey area between negative and positive thinking, there are simply no extremes within this state of mind and being. What you can accomplish within this state of mind is utterly astounding while at the same time existing within certain limitations.
Thursday, 5 October 2017
Written by Mathew Naismith
All that truly exists is an unlimited state; anything else from this is an illusion. A perception of a state of being limited.....Mathew G
A state of limited potential and perception simply doesn't exist. While one being, one entity or one energy source is expressing motion, especially to extremes, a state of limitations simply doesn't and can't exist. Even if I was to limit my personal self, consciousness, to certain states void of the ego, motion period, I am still not in a limited state while any other kind of motion is being expressed in and through anything else. Yes, extremes motion also has it's place within an unlimited state, anything else would be limiting.
Consider this, energy itself is unlimited within it's expressions, within it's motion, this means it's also unlimited to what form it takes. Energy itself is infinite in nature, it's not finite. You can't destroy energy, as science has proven, yes, you can transform the form energy takes but you can't destroy the energy that creates form and existence as a whole. I look at it this way, energy is the spirit within all things, it's the life force of all things, of all motion, without this spirit, without energy, all things become limited. Of course this is impossible as there is no such thing as a limited state.
However, we can indeed enter into states of consciousness or non-consciousness where there is a perception of a state of limitations. Within this state, motion seems to not exist therefore energy; it's a state where the spirit within all things simply doesn't exist. Yes, this state also exists because this is how unlimited we are as a whole, there are simply no boundaries, no limitations even within a limited state.
So often I get people stating they are not expressive of the ego or judgment, while at the same time egotism and judgment is expressed to an extreme through certain kinds of other energy sources. If motion is being expressed in any sense from any kind of source, we are ourselves of that motional expression, everything is. Actually, a state void of ego and motion period is as limited as a state can be, also, being expressive of motion to any extreme is limiting. A good example of this is materialism, wealth and power overriding all other motions especially by force and control. Once a motion, an energy source, loses balance between one in favour of the other, a reality of limited potential exists, this of course inturn creates a reality of limitations. Sounds awfully familiar!!
Any energy or non-energy source that is limited in nature will of course be destructive in nature; this includes the so-called ultimate state where there is no ego or motion period. This state is obvious within it's destructiveness to motion period because motion period is unable to exist in this state. We might not think this motionless state isn't destructive when within this state motion is simply non-existent. How many people are trying to say we are only truly of this motionless ultimate state, while within a state of extreme motions? This state is simply destructive in nature to motion even within states of motion by refuting that we are unlimited to all potential, to motion and motionlessness, not just to one potentiality of motionlessness.
This is why I personally love the perception of God, as opposed to a God of man which is limiting and not infinite in nature. The perception of God represents everything without bias or prejudice, within this, there is simply no exclusions based on a particle perception or ideology/philosophy stating we are limited to a certain states of existence. There are simply no limitations to existence or our truer being; it simply doesn't exist as no state of limitations do. Yes, states of limited potential do exist but not really, not when we consider the whole of things, of course to realise this, one must go way outside our own present reality based on it's own limitations. As a whole, states of limitations need to also exist for there to be truly no limitations.
So what does all this mean?
Extremes of any kind are destructive in nature, either it be of motion being destructive to motionless or visa-versa, it's just simply destructive because it's a state that is limited and imbalanced with the rest of what it is. This is why people like me often mention about moderation and balance within all things without any exclusion through bias or prejudice.
Yes, expressing the ego in moderation, expressing motion period in moderation, is actually more spiritual that not tying to be expressive of motion period. The reason for this simply lies within it's own limitedness, also, at no time is anyone just of one state and not of others, this is an impossibility because these limitations simply don't exist overall but they do exist within their own limitations. This is a true state on unlimited potentiality.
Limited perceptions simply denote an imbalance while unlimited perceptions denote balance. One is naturally destructive to all else, the other constructive to all else, it is what it is by nature.....Mathew G
Tuesday, 19 September 2017
Written by Mathew Naismith
I wrote the following for a forum as it seems a number of people on this forum simply look at imbalances as being faulty or negative. In my view, to judge imbalances and the realities these imbalances create faulty or negative/toxic, is a huge mistake as it only adds fuel to the already existing fire.
So how are imbalances not seen as something faulty or negative?
Imbalances are needed to create a chaotic reality, you can't create a chaotic reality out of balance because chaos needs opposing forces to exist; there are simply no opposing forces within a true sense of balance for all works together as one.
A tree that bends with the wind is in balance with the wind. A tree that doesn't bend with the wind is imbalanced with the wind; one isn't opposing, the other is opposing.
What occurs when we oppose a reality, are we like the bending tree or the tree that opposes or is in conflict with the wind?
Bending with the wind entails one to exist within the present reality void of conflict, is critically judging a reality negative or faulty bending with the wind? No, it's the tree that is in conflict with the wind because it won't bend with the wind. Judging imbalances as being faulty/negative is simply feeding the wind more energy by making it more destructive. Soon enough the tree in conflict against the wind will be destroyed creating even more chaos within a reality, not less.
Yes, a strong wind can create a lot more chaos than the strong wind represents in the first place if it meets other opposing forces of energy, our chaotic reality is no different.
So we oppose this chaotic reality by judging it faulty/negative, this is of course in relation to ourselves who we have deemed positive. In this case the positive becomes an opposing force to judged negatives such as imbalances and what realities imbalances create. The tree is no longer bending with the wind and is noticeably opposing the wind thus creating even more chaos, not less.
Now, is love and light or positive thinking the bending tree or an opposing tree to the wind? We would of course say an opposing tree as it's against the wind that we have judged faulty/negative, in actuality by opposing the wind we have given the wind more energy. We have ultimately surrendered our energy to the wind in opposition making the wind more destructive, chaotic. This is simply adding fuel to the fire.
A chaotic reality needs fuel/energy to sustain it's existence, by judging a chaotic reality simply faulty/negative gives it it's fuel it needs, not just to exist but to expand on it's existence. The chaotic reality, the fire, is roaring out of control, it's expanding at a phenomenal rate, why, because we keep feeding the fire the fuel it needs to exist and expand by simply staying rigid, in opposition, to the wind.
So why aren't chaotic realities based on imbalances not faulty/negative? Chaotic realities need imbalances and opposing energy forces to exist, without these, the fire will simply burn itself out for lack of fuel. Is it negative that realities need imbalances to exist? If you think it is negative, all you are doing is giving chaotic realities the energy they need to exist. Imbalances are a positive for chaotic realities to exist, seen as all realities have a right to exist; we must learn to bend with this like the tree to the wind.
The universe is an exceptionally violent destructive chaotic place, but it's also exceptionally harmonious, constructive and peaceful as well. Is all that is violent, destructive and chaotic negative within the universe? So if our chaotic destructive reality is faulty/negative, what is our sun that is a lot more violent, destructive and chaotic? Our reality is what it is, simply a reality we keep adding fuel to and this is exactly why I stay away from judging what is or isn't negative of positive because all I would be doing is adding fuel to the fire.
Love yes, but not in opposition, bend with the wind.......
Supplement: In my younger days, I had a particular experience with a number of entities that fed on fear, all I did is to not be in opposition to them, in effect disallowing the energy they sought to feed off of. I was neither negative nor positive and this is the real trick, I simply stopped feeding their fire by neither being in opposition nor surrendering to their energy.
Wednesday, 13 September 2017
Written by Mathew Naismith
As we become more integrated and communicative around the world, I think it's essential we become aware of the differences between how we think in regards to other people of different cultures. At times the difference can be huge and at another times quite simular. Of course with the dominance and control of the western mind on the rest of the world, the differences in how we think is diminishing, sadly, eastern people are thinking more inline with western thinking.
I say sadly because it is obvious from the below information that the western mind is more dominating and controlling, even at the expense of the environment to it's own detriment. You have got to wonder, are more western minded people trying to understand eastern thinking to bring balance and a moderated existence back to the world? I should also mention, just because you are living under a western or eastern influence, you can still think and exist to the contrary depending on the influence one wants to exist under.
Extract: The West has consequently developed a materialist science that is focused on the outer world--which it endeavours to control and exploit. In
where most religions have arisen, consciousness has been directed inwardly to
understand the essential nature of life.
The Westerners worked longer on the stuff they were told they had aced the first time. The Easterners concentrated on the areas they thought they had botched. Students from the West—where the cult of self-esteem reigns supreme—wanted a tummy rub. Students from the East were more concerned with fixing their blind spots, becoming well-rounded. The Westerners polished up their strengths while the Easterners addressed their weaknesses.
§ Patterns of attention and perception, with Easterners attending more to environments and Westerners attending more to objects, and Easterners being more likely to detect relationships among events than Westerners.
§ Basic assumptions about the composition of the world, with Easterners seeing substances where Westerners see objects.
§ Beliefs about controllability of the environment, with Westerners believing in controllability more than Easterners.
§ Tacit assumptions about stability vs. change, with Westerners seeing stability where Easterners see change.
§ Preferred patterns of explanation for events, with Westerners focusing on objects and Easterners casting a broader net to include the environment.
§ Habits of organizing the world, with Westerners preffering categories and Easterners being more likely to emphasize relationships.
§ Use of formal logical rules, with Westerners being more inclined to use logical rules to understand events than Easterners
§ Application of dialectical approaches, with Easterners being more inclined to seek the
Middle Way when confronted with apparent
contradiction and Westerners being more inclined to insist on the correctness
of one belief vs. another.
Extract: We can find the most striking difference in Asian and Western way of thinking. When Asian thinking aims for harmony, Western thinking strives for order. This is because the basic philosophy of Western people is based on the concept of liberty, free market economic system or liberalization of economic system. On the other hand, Asians do not give much importance to the aspects of free competition of the economic system. They are concerned more with the equal distribution of income or solidarity in helping each other among their communities, thereby assuring an egalitarian society.
If your also into the philosophical differences of views, you might like the following as well.
Western society strives to
find and prove "the truth",
find and prove "the truth",
Eastern society accepts the truth as given and
is more interested in finding the balance.
is more interested in finding the balance.
Westerners put more stock in individual rights;
Easterners in social responsibly.
This is interesting stuff. I realise more clearly now why the western mind has problems with people like me, we point out where we can become more aware where the western mind only desires to focus on where they are aware.
Another example is standardisation. The western mind tries to standardise everything so everyone standardises when it is obvious the eastern mind doesn't. How many western people standardise spirituality with awareness? Of course to an eastern mind, spirituality and awareness are obvious bed fellows; there is simply no standardisation because there is no expression or motion of control unlike the western mind.
Another example is when the western mind ostracises or has disdain for people for having their own views, especially when these views are pointing out a lack of awareness. To the western mind, pointing out things like this is being critical, to an eastern mind, all one is doing is pointing out where one is lacking awareness. I am often ostracised/blocked on forums by the western mind for pointing out our short falls on my own posts; it's a typical western mind reaction.
Us westerners, in my mind, need to be more aware of our own short falls of the western mind, but of course the western mind only desires to be aware of it's grandeurs, it's strengths not it's weaknesses, this of course is it's weakness.
I should point out that the eastern mind can be influenced by the western mind to become more of a western mind and visa-versa.