Thursday, 22 November 2018
Written by Mathew Naismith
Yes, as of a human experience there is also a soul experience, it is really wise not to separate the human experience from the soul experience. Actually, it is wise not to separate the human or soul experience from any other experience or motion. In other words it is wise not to separate yourself from the environment as a whole; there should be no exclusions no matter what the ego dictates.
Soul: The immaterial part of a person; the actuating cause of an individual life
Actuating refers to motion; which means the soul is the motion behind each person, without the soul there is no actuation therefore motion. So what about the rest of existence that is of motion, does everything of motion have a soul? To answer this we must now look at the spirit.
Spirit: The vital principle or animating force within living things
I actually don't concur with this, that the spirit is just of living things. To me the spirit is of all things, this is the same in that energy is of all things. Spirit = energy which = motion. So what about motionlessness, a state where energy or the spirit within all things is motionless, is not the spirit, therefore energy, apart of a motionless state?
The soul experience, as of the human experience, is simply an experience. The spirit on the other hand isn't an experience but of all of what is as of energy. So no, to answer the first question, not everything has a soul but the soul is still of the spirit. To someone like me, everything is alive. I wrote some time ago about vibrations alive, in that all motion creates vibrations which make all motions alive in one way or another. The ego only comprehends what is alive and what isn't alive in accordance with the egos perception of what is alive and what isn't. It is wise not to listen to the ego which is often bias. Bias of course only creates ignorance, the deliberate unknowingness of something the ego doesn't desire to become aware of, usually in accordance with the souls experiences and human ideologies and isms.
The spirit can be of both motion and motionlessness, there are no limitations to the spirit as of the soul. Yes, soul experiences are indeed infinite in nature, where infinite experiences can be experienced by the soul, however, the soul cannot experience a state of motionlessness for motionlessness is not an experiences. It is simply being or not being, which ever your soul relates to the best.
Now, is this being or not being also of energy therefore spirit? Our egos often perceive that energy has to be of motion to exist therefore motionlessness (just being) is not of the spirit!!
Why do we become more aware or more enlightened as we lesson our motions? It is too obvious that the more of motion or the ego we are not expressive of, the more aware we become. Of course the more motion we express, the less aware be become, this is course includes the soul. This is why this just being or not being, this motionless state, is stated as being of pure awareness. Now if we become more aware the less motion we express, how alive and of energy therefore spirit is this motionless state of just being? When we so-call die, we can have a sense of being more alive, of course if our soul is controlled or primarily of the ego, the soul will have more of a sense of death. A sense of death simply represents the demise of life, a life the soul's ego is attached to, this is why it is wise to be aware of the tricks the ego can play on us, the illusions the ego can create.
My mother so-called died a while back, at no time did my ego mourn her death, even though my ego tried to. My mother was more alive than ever, but only after I helped her out of a dark tunnel. My mother was unable to go on as her life on Earth was still not at ease. My mother was never happy in the way she led her life, so after her bodily demise, my mother had huge regrets. My mother wanted to be forgiven but I didn't do this, I didn't feel I had to for there was nothing to forgive. I said to my mother," It is okay, life is what it is, no more, no less, I have no regrets and neither should you."
What a lot of people forget it is a soul experience, the human experiences dies but life is not about the human experience but the soul experience. You could say that the human experience doesn't matter then as the human experience is simply a vessel for the soul to experience life experiences through. A lot of souls live like this as this is all they know, however, to a soul that is aware, the human experience does matter. Remember, the soul is simply an immaterial part of a person, what we do in life reflects back on the soul in one way or another.
In regards to the soul and the human experience, I am simply humbling myself to the ego, to the human experience of attachments. However, the human ego that is trying to dispel the ego altogether is actually being more of the ego, for only the ego desires to dispel itself so it can no longer humble itself to itself. The egoless self has no desire or need to dispel the ego in any sense; the ego is what it is, no more, no less. To comprehend this you must look at this from a soul perspective, not a human perspective. It is primarily a soul experience, the human experience is simply a vessel for the soul to experience motion (life) through. Humanly, think very carefully what you are conditioning your soul to and yes, the way you lead your life does matter to the soul. Remember, the soul is simply an immaterial part of you, what you materially do reflects back on the soul, make no mistake about it. I suppose to really comprehend this, you must humanly experience some kind of after life experience or at least feel or know there to be a lot more to life than material life.
Tuesday, 23 October 2018
Written by Mathew Naismith
We are simply born with an open mind, all else is a condition of the mind by our environment to think one way or another. I have allowed my step daughter to be and think as she likes, she is now a self-proclaimed atheist. At no point has my wife or I tried to influence her to be and think as we are. I started off my life in an atheistic environment, I am now a............what ever. I am a what ever simply because of the extent of my open mindedness.
We are born with an open mind, this means we are neither a believer of disbeliever of anything as all our beliefs and disbeliefs are determined by our environment. Did I disbelieve in God when I was born? No, as I simply had no comprehension of what beliefs and disbelief were until my environment determined what was a belief and what was a disbelief. My atheistic environment soon determined what was a disbelief. This closed mindedness of what to believe and what to disbelieve limited my acceptance of other people and their views, in other words my consciousness was being limited to certain specifics and certain specifics only. Having experienced certain experiences beyond what atheism dogmatically determined to exist, I found myself drifting away from the exceptionally limiting doctrines of atheism.
I have got myself in a lot of trouble being so open minded, I have lost count how many people have been offended by my open mindedness. To give you an idea of my open mindedness, I don't believe we experience various lives; we experience one life while experiencing different experiences from one life experience to another. It's like a stage play where you act in one play, (one life), while acting (experiencing) different scenes or acts. It's as though I am looking at life through the soul perspective instead of the human perspective, there is no separation as in the perception of individual lives lived. It's one life with different scenes or environments to experience life through.
Looking at life through a soul perspective has conditioned my human mind to not just look at myself as being of a particular colour or culture. I don't see myself as being just of a white Australian. How many people today take offence of another culture pointing out the truths in their own culture? If anyone from another culture was to say how uncivilized we were in
how we treated the Australian Aboriginals. I would agree and not be offended by
such truths. How many people today are offended by this kind of truth,
especially if it's to do with their own culture? These easily offended people's
culture comes first and foremost; now add colour and creed to this. How
offensive is it when a white man is offended by a black mans truth about a
white man? Australia
My own environment of not separating one life experience from another, has allowed me to look beyond my own colour, creed and culture. I once interacted with Australian aboriginals that didn't think much of white people, in the end they couldn't believe I was a white Australian. This was because I didn't firstly see myself as a white Australian of a certain colour and creed, I was simply a soul having an experience. How many
citizens would be offended, especially if an Eastern cultured person, pointed
out that Australians are war mongers for supporting the US in nearly every conflict the has started
or were involved in? Are we spiritual if we continually put our own colour,
creed and culture before the soul experience? In truth, I am a white Australian
at present, should this negate my entire life lived by my soul? To a lot of
people who think they are spiritual it often does. If you are easily offended
by another person from another culture telling the truth about your own
culture, it's likely you are not truly spiritual as being spiritual relates to being
primarily of the soul and/or spirit. If you put your present human self in
anyway before the spirit or soul, you are simply not spiritual. I have lost
count how many self-proclaimed spiritual people have been offended by the truth
I tell, either about my own culture or someone else's culture. Numerous Western
spiritual people were offended by my research and writings on the Eastern and
Western mind, and I am of a Western culture and white!! Look at it this way,
how many new age spiritual people are offended by a simple word or phrase that
they have judged to be negative or toxic? US
How often is the self put before the soul or spirit in a lot of new age spirituality? It's most often about how good I humanly feel, not how good I spiritually feel. A lot of relationships work like this. At first they please each other and make each other feel good until the momentum of making each other feel good all the time diminishes. What do a lot of new age spiritual people do? Try expressing anything they have judged as being negative. You are most often instantly disposed of because this so-called negative doesn't feed their egos and makes them feel good all the time. I did not enter in a relationship with my wife and expect her to make me feel good all the time or even half the time, I certainly don't expect or demand this from life itself.
My relationship with life itself, or if you like with God, Shiva, Allah, Gaia and so on, is not built upon expecting or demanding that life should always be about making me feel good or even positive. Look around you at present, see what expecting or demanding that life makes us feel good all the time is doing. Life itself isn't about feeling good, it's simply about an experience just like the experience I have with my wife, where there are no expectations or demands that we make each other feel good all the time. Today, most ideologies and isms are being misused and abused in this way to simply feed an ever hungry ego in control. This is what I call abuse of energy.
Considering the following information, it's amazing how often I go way outside my comfort zone to experience other people's experiences. At times this makes me feel good, at other times it doesn't make me feel good but life experiences isn't, to me, about feeling good, it's about a soul or spiritual experience. To realise this, one must look through the eyes of the soul or spirit, not through a controlling ego that demands to feel good all the time. What often occurs when the ego in control is fed something that doesn't make it feel good? It's usually labeled negative or toxic!!
Children are born Open-Minded. It’s Vital we don’t Teach them Otherwise.
Extract: Open-mindedness is receptiveness to new ideas. Open-mindedness relates to the way in which people approach the views and knowledge of others, and "incorporate the beliefs that others should be free to express their views and that the value of others’ knowledge should be recognized." "An open-minded person characteristically moves beyond or temporarily sets aside his own doxastic commitments in order to give a fair and impartial hearing to the intellectual opposition."Another closely related definition sees open-mindedness as the "willingness to take a novel viewpoint seriously."
According to Wayne Riggs, open-mindedness springs from an awareness of the inherent fallibility of one's beliefs; hence, open-minded individuals are more inclined to listen to, and seriously consider, alternative viewpoints.
6 Keys to an Open Mind
1. Fight the urge to react in anger when you hear differing opinions
2. Avoid closing yourself off
3. Place yourself out of your comfort zone
4. stay social and make new friends
5. Don't be afraid to ask questions
6. Avoid speculation
Tuesday, 25 September 2018
Written by Mathew Naismith
Everything is of the path of the flow of the water. No matter of what the water, everything else from this is simply a journey to be experienced........MG Naismith
Indeed, what are we doing when we are forcing ourselves to change, forcing our path to be different to what the present reality determines? Are we living in the present while trying to force this change upon our own personal individualistic path? Of course forcing change upon our own path is in hope that this change will engulf the rest of the world, making for a collective path to be what we personally perceive to be right and positive. Have we the right to force change upon another person's path? No, so what right have we to force change upon the collective path to be more like the path we are trying to force upon our own path?
Our present reality is all about forcing one's own path onto others. As it is of this reality to force one's own path onto others, are we any different to this reality if we do the same, in any sense? Forget about changing your own path to be different to the collective path, for all this is of is the reality we are trying to change, the same mentality using different tactics to force change upon a path.
Spiritually, we are not supposed to be about forcing change upon other people's path. If we are not of this reality that is about separation and individualism, why do so many of us force change upon our own path separate and individualised through our own actions from the collective path? To force change upon our own path, is the same in forcing change on other people and the collective path, for there is only one path of many different journeys.
Yes, it is often said that there are many different separate and individualised paths of the same human journey. This human journey is of course different to and separate to other living entities journeys, within this perception, we have separated the human journey from every other journey taken by other species on Earth and even Earth (Gaia) itself. This separation is simply due to us perceiving that we are taking a different path while on the same journey; this is also while separating our own journey from all other journeys as if they are not of the same path. Our human journey is perceived to be different and separate to all other journeys, even though we are of the same path as the universe!! The human path isn't just of the same path than Earths path; it's the same as the universes path while experiencing a different journey while following the same path as everything else.
Look at this way, is experiencing time and space of the universe a path or a journey? Considering that journeys are of travelling from one place to another, therefore an indication of time and space, and that paths refer to an established line of travel or access that journeys are defined by, is not the journey of the path a line of travel or access? The journey is only an indication of the existence of time and space where the path is of time and space and timelessness therefore spaceless. Where is the universe travelling to? The universe is not travelling from one place to another, however, the universe is on a path from creation (birth) to a conclusion or end (death), and so is everything else of this universe no matter what. The universe is defined by time from its journey from creation to its end, while at the same time on a path of simply existing or being like everything else.
Even if we go beyond time and space, meaning that any journey experienced is not governed by time and space, the journey is still governed by a path of existence or consciousness. Cannot some people access a state of timelessness? This state of timelessness is often experienced through practices like meditation where time has no meaning, this is a journey, not a path, that can be experienced through accessing certain states of consciousness. Accessing this state is a line of travel for the consciousness to experience a journey governed by timelessness within time. It matter not what path the journey takes, it's still a path taken by a consciousness to experience. It's the journey that determines the path experienced, not the path that determines the journey experienced. Once you enter into a state of timelessness, there is no journey to be taken but a path of being in a state of timelessness. Everything is governed by the same path while on a different journey. The human experience is not a path onto it's own but one of many journeys.
You will notice that a lot of Eastern literature or philosophy refers to many paths in life, where a lot of Western literature or philosophy refers to a lot of journeys in life. I am not sure if the interpretation of Eastern philosophy into Western ideological perceptions is correct in regards to paths and journeys here. All I can do is define that journeys are only of time, being that journeys are only experienced in time and space. A path of travelling and experience is not defined by travelling from one point to another, like from birth to death; the path is simply a line of travel in what ever state or reality experienced. Simply, paths are not defined by travelling from (A) birth to (b) death but a line of travel taken by a journey experienced.
Yes, there are many journeys to be taken therefore experienced but while on the same path. Paths are only separated and divided by the journeys experienced, in other words only while perceiving through the perceptions of time can we have the perception of many paths. Ask yourself, what defines different paths? The journey experienced along that path, it's therefore the journeys experienced that defines a perceived different path, not the path that defines a different journey. It's the journeys experienced that defines a different separated path to other paths. There is really only one path with many journeys to be experienced.
And here we are, trying to force change on our own and each others paths, when all we need to do is influence a change upon our journeys to become aware. To become aware that it's not the many paths we need to force change upon, but to simply become aware of what we are doing when trying to force change upon what we perceive to be many paths. You simply need to be aware that everything is of the same path but on a different journey that are not separate to the path. The path in time and space simply creates separate journeys to be experienced while still of the path. What is a path without an individual journey? Singular, it's simply the journey that gives us a perception of separate individual paths. Simply think the path to be singular instead of plural, meaning, of many individual paths.
Look at it this way, how many people following the same path of, for example, materialism or spirituality experience a different journey even on the same path? It's the journey experienced that makes a path seem different to all other paths. To people like me, realities primarily governed by time therefore separation and division seem upside down. As I wrote some time ago, it's not the questions that formulate (create) the answers, it's the answers that formulate (create) the questions. Here we are looking for the questions to the answers when we should be looking for the appropriate answers to the questions, in actuality, when the answers simply appear by desisting in our separatist ways, the questions to the answers are no longer relevant.
Simply influence the way we, not you as a separate entity, experience the journey.