The Demise of Limitations

Written by Mathew Naismith

The topic of our own limitations keeps coming up, this might seem boring to some people but to me it will never be boring and the reason for this is simple, such topics are a good indication that we are starting to let go of our made up limitations. In my last post,  The Creation of What Is, I mentioned that we often live by our environment, not with, this means we often create a reality based on our external environment. Being that our external environment can be highly destructive, we often create a reality from this instead of creating a reality from our inner self or inner environment. I should point out that our inner environment is infinite unlike our outer environment which is finite.

The reason why certain topics keep coming up is purely based on a need, a need to change the way we presently perceive and comprehend perceptions beyond our own comprehensions. We often limit ourselves to certain perceptions, this is usually brought about by fixating ourselves to certain ideologies and concepts that usually don't allow for a consciousness to evolve, this is were we often forget or are unaware of the difference between finite and the infinite existences. Would a consciousness of infinite existence be able to stagnate it's own consciousness to certain fixated perceptions? This kind of consciousness is quite unable to stagnate it's own consciousness to any kind of limitations but a consciousness of finite existence can and most often does.

Infinite Existence = evolution + open mind + aware + unlimited + inner self or God self

Finite Existence = devolution + closed mind + unaware + limited + outer self or human self

The present reality or environment we are presently living with, is predominantly based on finite existence, we often then live by the same existence instead of just living with this existences, we then inadvertently predominantly create a reality based on a finite existence. Everything within this physical reality is based on a starting and ending point, birth and death, we then base our whole reality on this environment. In accordance to this finite existence, we then think and act as though the only existence there is, is a finite existence. Even though various spiritual practices and beliefs have told us of the infinite self, we still predominantly base our whole reality on a finite existence. Fixating ourselves dogmatically to any ideologies or concepts, is basing our reality predominantly on a finite existence. Being that consciousness itself is infinite, how can we ever limit ourselves to certain ideologies and concepts, no ideology or concept can ever be infinite unless it incorporates all of what consciousness is within infinite existence.

Can we ever truly comprehend infinite existence when we are predominately influenced by a finite reality? While living by this finite reality, we have created all these ideologies and concepts, how much of the infinite consciousness can these ideologies and concepts be? They can't be unless they have been creates by consciousness's living by an infinite existence, however, remembering these same consciousness's are also living within a finite reality, how much  of an influence did the finite reality have on them and their ideologies and concepts?

Is it possible that a consciousness can exist within a reality based on finite existence but still be able to be predominantly influenced by infinite existence?

How could I possibly comprehend the ability to totally live by an infinite existence while living within a finite existence? However the answer is yes, as soon as a consciousness no longer limits itself to finite existences, I think such a consciousness would be able to be predominantly influenced by an infinite existence, this of course takes one to let go of it's present fixations to certain ideologies, concepts and even philosophies. No ideologies or concepts are totally of the infinite, consciousness itself is too unlimited, any limitations denote a finite influence so no ideologies or concepts can ever be totally of the infinite, consciousness itself is too vast and infinite within it's own existence to put into ideologies, concepts or philosophies.

However, while living within a finite reality, the only way to start to comprehend the vastness and limitlessness of infinite existence is through our created ideologies, concepts and philosophies, it's however wise to note that anything we create to comprehend the infinite, is going to be limited within itself.......

One thing to remember, consciousness isn't just of the infinite, it's also of the finite, the yin and yang of consciousness as a whole for a consciousness isn't whole until it's as one!!   

Life.....The Way We Don't See It

Written by Mathew Naismith

Even after a number of infinite connected experiences in my early days, I still displayed a consciousness that was primarily finite based, this was of course due to a continuous conditioning to finite existence, an existence of beginnings and ends. All forms are born and then die, end of story. Being brought up in an atheistic environment also added to this perception of there only being a starting and ending point of everything, point blank, end of story.

However, even though I was primarily conditioned to perceive in finite perspectives, my experiences of a reality of non-physical form also gave me the perception that there is more to life than  finite perspectives. What I was primarily conditioned to perceive, became less of a primary influence on me, this was gradually replaced with a perception that goes way beyond the boundaries and limitations of the finite, an existence purely based on limited perceptions. Any existence based on the finite, has to be limited within it's perceptions as the finite is within itself limiting.

Today, it's strange to me to primarily base an existence purely based on the finite as it's obvious that any existence, based on the finite, is going to be limiting to any consciousness existing within such a reality. It's also strange to me today that any consciousness would consciously do this, in actuality, no aware consciousness is able to consciously base it's existence primarily on the finite purely because such consciousness is aware of how limiting this kind of existence is. 

A finite existence is an unaware existence, does this mean an infinite existence is an aware existence denoting an aware consciousness? 

Finite = unawareness + limited perceptions and even perspectives

Infinite = awareness + unlimited consciousness period

I think the above quite clearly shows that the infinite denotes an awareness, any consciousness aware of the infinite to me, represents some kind of awareness beyond the boundaries of finite perceptions and existence. What have most religions expressed? A belief in a God or God's and Goddesses which symbolically represent infinite existence of other consciousness's, perceptions beyond the boundaries of finite existences, therefore, symbolically giving us an awareness of infinite perceptions and existences.

Today, so many people demonise religion for one reason or another but this isn't, to me,  totally warranted. Yes, certain people within certain religions have acted in contradictory to the beliefs they follow, this doesn't mean, in a big way, that religions have not helped us to understand the infinite self while existing in a finite existence, it's obvious they have, albeit in there own way. I should state her that I have never been or am I religious in anyway, I'm just being unbiased in my opinion and looking at the more constructive points of religion here instead of always focusing on the destructiveness of religions.  

In WWII, there was a Japanese fighter ace who scored around 88 victims, this person was a devout Buddhist. Being that Buddhism is supposed to be a passive religion/philosophy, he's actions seemed totally contradictory to he's beliefs. The point being that religions/philosophies are only a guide, no truly infinite based religion has limitations, if they do, they are no longer primarily of infinite teachings. Yes, even Buddhists can step from a reality based on the infinite to a reality base on the finite for there should never be any limitations set within the beliefs of a truly infinite based religion. In truth, no truly infinite based spiritual teachings should be limited in any way.

Recently, my mother passed on, so many people thought I was cold hearted because I didn't act in a broken hearted way. This perception of me is purely based on finite perceptions, when exactly did my mum truly die? In actuality, my mother is more alive than ever, this aliveness was mainly due to the turbulent life my mother lead. Take away all that trauma for starters, what are you left with? It would feel like utter peace and tranquility, what a life.....

Finite existence is bound by certain perspectives, being that perspectives denote limitations through measuring through certain set perceptions. It was measured or judged that I wasn't acting appropriately, this perception was purely based on finite perceptions.

Now let's look at my actions in an infinite way/perception, my mother is more alive than ever, if not more so, why would I be so upset about this especially considering my mother died from the complications of a long bout of cancer? I'm upset, but, why should I put on an act as if my mother is no more period? I could not be more happy for my mother, period.

Yes, the way we look at life is different, some people primarily perceive through the finite and other people primarily perceive through the infinite, however, there are also other people who perceive in both ways. No matter how we perceive, the way you perceive doesn't make someone else's perception wrong or even right, it's understandably only a different perception based purely on the way we perceive. As of always, it's however much wiser to perceive in more than one way.      

The Finite - A Fraction of Who We Are

Written by Mathew Naismith

I made a bit of an error in not relating the finite to time in my last two posts, in actuality, the finite self is of time, in other words the finite is time itself, this of course makes the infinite self of timelessness, the eternal self.

Observing Time: In certain ideologies, it's said to be of the ego to desire that the infinite self exists, it's the ego that's wants to be eternal, this isn't actually the case. The finite and the infinite self exist without the ego deeming it so, this is because they are both a part of the  natural process of our whole being.  When you observe everything off time, you are observing through an infinite state of being without question, there is no question if our eternal state of being exists or not, only an ego would question if such a state exists or not!!

It's quite fascinating observing everything of  time, time, therefore the finite self, is observed as being quite a small part of our whole being, this is quite different to being a participator of time instead of an observer. The participator of time observes that time is expansive, it's quite huge in area and volume, however, when you become an observer of time, time is observed as something very small, everything of time is that small it seems nearly insignificant.

Fleeting Moments: Another thing about observing time, is that once you enter into a state of eternalness, you feel that everything experienced in time was but a fleeting moment, basically, it feels as if everything experienced in time took about a 5 minutes in our time to experience. In time, time feels like it's never ending, it goes on and on, however, once you enter into a timeless eternal state, such feelings of  a never ending cycle of time could be deemed as an illusion.

Can a consciousness delude itself in thinking time is all there is and that everything of time and the finite is massive and expansive?

Deluded?: We might think once we observe time, time itself would have to be deemed as being an illusion as time deludes us to think this is all we are  and that time is massive and expansive. In actuality, there is no question of time being an illusion when observing time, only observing time while also participating in time can we deem this to be so. Time can however  delude a consciousness in thinking this is all we are and that time is massive and expansive.

Time naturally influences a consciousness to become deluded, I wouldn't myself deem anything natural as being an illusion even though these natural states of being can cause a consciousness to become deluded. Yes, a deluded state is natural therefore is not, in a truer sense, a delusion or an illusion within itself!!

You can now understand how certain ideologies deem that the infinite, therefore the God self, doesn't exist, time is ego which influences us to become deluded, basically of Godlessness, a separation from our infinite self  which really never occurs. There is no true separation, only a sense of separation. Once a consciousness observes through the Godless finite self, everything of a natural state becomes an illusion and of the ego self.  

Going Home: When you enter into an eternal infinite state, this feels like home and that you never left this state. This basically makes everything experienced  through time and finite states, like being in a dream state, you never departed from your normal state of an infinite state of being. To me, our own dreams in time are not delusions or illusions, they are an extension of ourselves, why do we then deem everything of time and the finite an illusion when they are only an extension of ourselves?

Yes, time and the finite self are but an extension of ourselves, and yes, a very small part of ourselves but none the less a part of ourselves, only the ego would deem otherwise. The perpetual self within time will deem that anything other than it's truer self is an illusion, it will deem that one part of itself is our whole truer self when all of what we experience makes up our whole truer self, this includes our dreams which are but an extension of ourselves.

Special Gifts: We might also think observing time takes a special kind of consciousness to do so, this couldn't be further from the truth for only the ego would deem so. Is walking on water, turning water into wine or healing people by touch a special gift? No, believe it or not these so called special gifts are as natural to us as dreaming and breathing, these abilities are quite common in our infinite eternal state. Just because they are not common in our present state within time and infinite states of consciousness, doesn't mean they are not a natural part of our whole truer being.

Yes, we have deluded ourselves within time of our true abilities, this delusion however is quite natural within time and is but a fleeting moment within our whole eternal existence. The finite is indeed but an extension of ourselves, it's but a fraction of  who we truly are!!                          

The Worthiness of the Finite and Infinite

Written by Mathew Naismith

I've been receiving some interesting responses to my last two posts on my blog, the finite and infinite perspectives are certainly giving us different perceptions. On one side, we have the consciousness of science stating that infinite consciousness is a consciousness in delusion. On the other side we have consciousness of spirituality stating that finite consciousness is a consciousness in an illusion......Science minded and spiritually aware people are stating that each other is in a delusional or an illusional state of consciousness!!  

In actuality, both illusions and the delusions exist but not to the extent of the obvious bias being expressed by either side, both the infinite and the finite has it's place, to me this is obvious.          

The following is an interesting reply to my last post.....  

Reply

Hi Mathew I read the blog but still find myself confused at your understanding of truer self and the deception of science and the spiritual nature of the truer self as you put it. I'm not sure what it is you are trying to get across. Do you have a special different understanding of everything compared to the two mentioned above? If so can you explain it so that clarity can be given to that theory. I'm not trying to criticise just would love to see where your thoughts are taking you as it feels a bit off the mark if I'm honest.

My Reply

Finding other people's perceptions questionable, is all about trying to be  aware beyond your own perceptions, this can also include being aware beyond human perceptions at times.  Trying to perceive beyond your own perceptions isn't, to me, being critical Damon, it's quite cool.

Truer Self: Look at your truer self being everything that is infinite, it's a state of being that has no boundaries of the finite, in other words a starting and ending point, it's basically a state of eternalness. In most religions this was portrayed through the knowing of a God and/or Goddesses or anything portraying an eternal aspect. We have always had a connection with our eternal self  through spirituality in one sense or another. It's obvious to me there is something to the infinite self, why would so many people express such  an interest in the infinite if it didn't have some kind of truth about it?  We have obviously felt a connection to the infinite self, our truer or inner self/being.

Science: If I at all portrayed science being of deception, I'm sorry for that, this was not my intentions. Science is of the finite awareness, an awareness based on finite perspectives where's spirituality is based on infinite perspectives. Within any ideology or concept, it's not the ideology or concept that becomes deceptive, it's the people behind such conscious perceptions.

Spirituality = infinite + eternal states of consciousness + infinite awareness 

Science = finite + transitory states of consciousness + finite awareness

It's interesting how general science preconceives that consciousness also dies when the human self dies!!   

Don't be mistaken that these two quite different perspectives don't come together, they often do when a consciousness using such perceptions has no biases/boundaries to contend with. Some of the newer sciences of today use both finite and infinite perspectives as they did before modern day science. I think using both perspectives certainly seems to give us wisdom. This wisdom comes about by perceiving that there are no true boundaries, therefore, there are no preconceptions.

To me, it is obvious why we are lacking wisdom today, we have set up boundaries and biases between infinite and finite conscious perceptions and being. A truly wise person never preconceives what is and isn't, they always stay open to any possibility beyond their own perceptions.

Damon, you yourself have expressed this through querying a perception different to your own......It's not easy staying open to perceptions we have no idea of , only in the wise will we observe this.           

            

Note: The discussion between Damon and myself is still in progress, I will update this post in accordance with our discussion.

Reply 

 

Actually that helped thank you I agree with your explanation   

A Truer Depiction of Our Truer Self

Written by Mathew Naismith 

I had my last post, The creation of the mind, queried in an interesting way which brought forth an even more interesting response from me. Spirituality is indeed about the infinite self more than the finite where's science is quite the opposite in most cases. Science is a good depiction of our finite self where's spirituality is a good depiction of our infinite self, as usual for me, one is neither more or less worthy than the other as both depictions give us a realisation  of our whole truer self as I will explain.

Reply   

Was this just an exercise in talking out loud random thoughts or is there some point to it?

My Reply

There was a point, the point is, the mind is created by conditioned preconceptions, in other words the mind couldn't exist without preconceptions. Our truer selves on the other hand is about conceptions that already exist, there is no true preconceptions within this perception.  

Reply

 "Truer selves" what does that mean?

My Reply

The self that isn't defined by preconceptions, a self that is eternal and not just of a transitory state of existence.    

I will elaborate on this further. Spiritually has always been about the infinite self where's the sciences have been about the opposite, the finite self, this is even the case when searching for the source of all creation.  For example, the depiction of a God or Goddess in spirituality, is a good indication of our connection with the infinite where's general science has always looked at the finite. Everything in general science has a start and end point like when we pass on (die), that is it, there is no more but spirituality looks beyond this perspective.

As science knows today, you can't destroy energy, only the form an energy source has created like our human form for example, however, when the human form dies, everything dies because the human form is known to science to be who we are as a whole. Spirituality looks at this differently, it's the spirit or consciousness that is who we are as a whole, this of course goes on after we die which means a depiction of our truer self goes on, the human self is never known to be who we truly are in spirituality.

What I find strange is that science knows that you can't destroy the fundamental basis of creation, energy itself, all you can do is transform energy, so if all we are in human form is a transformed form of energy, isn't the energy that created human form itself infinite therefore will go on after we die?  

However, even after we die, we are not talking about the truer self here, in this state we are still in a transitory state, a state that is still infinite in most cases. The state we are in depends on our consciousness's perceptions and preconceptions. If a consciousness after the demise of the human self is still perceiving in finite perceptions,  such a consciousness will still express preconceptions. Preconceptions are of course not a true depiction of our truer self because preconceptions work on the expressions of the finite self, not the infinite self.

This is where science makes no logical sense at all, if the building block of all creation is infinite, energy itself,  isn't this building block who we truly are, remembering all transformed forms of energy are just that, a transformation of energy from an infinite source we often call God or the source of all creation itself? 

Now when we die, is it consciousness that transforms or is it the human body? In most cases, the consciousness won't transform into it's truer self, it will stay in a finite state of consciousness. The human form will of course naturally transform into another kind of energy source but the consciousness self can stay the same as if it's still in human form, Ghosts/spirits are a good example of this. This isn't a depiction of our truer self, a depiction of our truer self is the realisation of the infinite within all things. The truer self is the realisation that anything finite is not representative of our true self, only can the realisation of the infinite depict our truer self. 

This however doesn't make the finite expression of self not a part of us, the finite part of ourselves is really only a very small part of our whole self, but, it's still a part of our whole being. The infinite self isn't a depiction of our whole self as we might also perceive, the depiction of the infinite and finite self is representative of our whole truer self no matter how small the finite part of our self is. What we have done in a reality like this one is make the finite our truer self, or, make the infinite self our whole truer self. In actuality in accordance with oneness, the infinite self is our truer self but to me, the whole truer self is representative of both the infinite and infinite self, basically, the whole truer self represents all of what we are expressive of, not what we only want to be known to be expressive of what we are!!  

It will be interesting if the discussion with this person continues.......

Reply

Ok So we're not talking facts based subject matter or science we're talking some kind of  wandering mind hoping to define something you don't understand.
I don't believe in your concept of creation, so I'll struggle to make any sense of the other things you have said here, frankly, with all due respect and I mean you no insult,  it's gibberish nonsense to me.

As for energy when you die that's a very simple thing to answer, no mystery and a quick google search turns up a better worded explanation or two than I can provide so I'll quote you a couple simple explanations I found online:

The energy within your body is largely found in three forms: heat, chemical and electrical. When we die the electrical energy, which is used by nerve cells to transmit signals around the body, dissipates in to heat as the electrical potentials required to maintain it are lost when the body’s cells die. The heat energy trapped within the body dissipates into the atmosphere so that your body cools to the temperature of its surroundings.
The chemical energy is maintained within the chemical bonds of the substances that make up the body. These bonds are broken either by burning during cremation, which releases the energy as heat and light, or through decomposition. The bacteria and other organisms which decompose dead organisms use the energy to grow and develop. So the energy in our bodies gets used to generate new life and will pass on up the food chain potentially to be reincorporated into another human being.


Or maybe this version:
Where the energy goes is dependent really on where you are put after death. If you are buried you are decomposed by micro-organisms in the soil which will break down all the chemical bonds in your body. Chemical bonds are where the energy is stored in your body and the organisms feasting on the body use this energy. Another thing that can happen is the nitrate in your body is fixed in the soil, this is a vital food source for plants. So the energy in the body is used by lots of different organisms and vegetation to continue life – no energy is lost.

Hopefully that takes some of the "mystery" out of the long reply you took time to write, for which incidentally I thank you taking time to do.
Have a great day.

My Reply

Hmmmm....is it you don't understand or I Neil? How much do you understand between the difference of infinite and finite consciousnesses?  I've worked in the welfare arena twice over in my life Neil, I have a good understanding of psychology and please don't be one of those people who say psychology isn't a science!! 

The psychological aspects of finite and  infinite consciousness is well defined, for example, the difference between science perspectives and spiritual perspectives is obvious would you not say? 

Reading the rest of your reply certainly proves my point between the two very distinct perspectives. You yourself within this reply have proven my point. There is no way you are able to perceive in infinite perspectives, anything other than this is of course defined as dribble or gibberish, however, I am not of the same preconception, see what I mean about preconceptions now Neil!! 

Your own preconceptions defines a boundary where's mine doesn't, this however will also physiologically occur with people who can only perceive in infinite perspectives, I find it all quite interesting. 

Reply

I don't believe it's a lack of ability on my part to understand it's more a case of my understanding leads me to believe it's gibberish.
I do not dispute aspects of psychology can be considered scientific but "spirituality" seems personal perspective on life and not scientific conclusion.
I also appreciate that studying how people arrive at some kind of spiritual perspective can be scientifically studied but spirituality itself, there's nothing scientific about it in my opinion.

Now don't even if I were to go along with this whole finite / infinite perspective conversation, (which frankly sounds like a pointless exercise),  I'd still ask the question, what of it?
If it's an exercise in trying to understand another's thought process, fair enough but beyond that?

I'm not sure where you think the scientific explanation of energy I supplied can be considered a "perspective" if that's what you're implying.
If so then it sounds like you are in denial of science and that's probably something worth spending more time considering. (not for me for you ;) )

I suspect at this point the conversation has run it's course for me so apologies if my future replies are not so swift or do not happen.

My Reply

The perception of gibberish is a psychological barrier to start with, it shows that one is unable or unwilling to look beyond their present perceptions. 

You seem to perceive spirituality to be an aspect of the personal self, I don't, for me to perceive so would be yet another barrier to becoming aware of perceptions beyond my own. Most science minded people often make this mistake and so do a lot of spiritually aware people by the way. 

To ask what of it sounds awfully strange to me, especially from anyone who is slightly scientifically minded. Finite and infinite perceptions create the reality we experience, any extremes will obviously create a reality of extremes. Why you don't find this relevant has got me, maybe too many bias psychological barriers is my guess, think on this. 

You obviously see science being more worthy than spirituality, I don't Neil, this is the big difference between you and I, my barriers and biases are minimal.