The Connection - Peace and Philosophy

Written by Mathew Naismith

Not many people can relate peace to philosophy, what is so peaceful with philosophical debates and seemingly endless questioning?

Self-Discovery: First of all, we know that philosophers like Socrates, Rumi, Confucius, Buddha, were constructive towards peace through better understanding of their environment and self-discovery, but do we also know that Jesus was also a philosopher, actually, everyone is a philosopher in their own right. In saying this, not all philosophers are constructive towards peace and better understanding, only philosophers who use wisdom as a base to their philosophy, rather than just knowledge/intelligence, are constructive towards peace.

I don't know of any philosopher who immediately used wisdom as their base for their philosophical views to start with, this only occurred when in self-discovery through interaction within their environment which gave them a better understanding of their environment. Is it wise not to try to understand your environment and other peoples environment? This is why many of these great philosophers, went out into their own and other people's environment, it's this interaction that seems to have given them wisdom.

This interaction with the environment as a whole, wasn't what actually in the end gave them a true sense of wisdom, it gave them a better insight to the external environment which gave them a sense of wisdom but not true wisdom. As of always, it was their inner self-discovery that gave them a true sense of wisdom, as soon as these people went inward into oneself, it was within this that gave them a true sense of wisdom. Basically as always, the answers are within, the external world is only a guide but it's a guide if used correctly. Incorrectly used, it's a deterrent and a creator of anything but peace.

Inner Peace: No philosopher who is onto self-discovery, fixates themself to a certain philosophical view or a certain type of philosophy being the be an end all. Any true philosopher will instruct you to find your own self-discovery, only in this will you find lasting inner peace.

In regards to Confucius and Socrates, these philosophers didn't truly find this inner peace in the end, this was due to failing to influence their environment enough to make any great difference within their own lifetime, only in the years following their demise did this occur. Finding this inner peace isn't the be and end all, if the environment you are in is in chaos, inner peace becomes but an ephemeral pleasure to be experienced, nothing more. As of any great philosopher, they want to encourage the world towards a better way of existing, sadly enough this isn't always accomplished within one lifetime.

I have the understanding that Jesus died in inner peace, knowing that he will make a difference in people's lives in a huge way for a lot of people, sadly, his teachings were corrupted and misused in various ways. Jesus for starters never wanted to be worshiped!!

Infinite Consciousness: No true philosopher will fixate themselves to any kind of ideological view or philosophical practice, this is because wisdom is infinite therefore so is consciousness as it's forever evolving. You see, philosophy isn't an exact science because, as any true philosopher knows, nothing stays the same and that not everything seems as it is even when proven to be so. Strangely, general science, like many religious practices, is fixated to certain perceptions and perspective, in saying this, other forms of science today seem to be breaking down these limitations.  

The main difference between general science and philosophy, is science is based on finite concepts of knowledge and intelligence, however, true philosophy is based on infinite concepts of wisdom. Knowledge gives us the intelligence to perceive their is nothing but a physical reality, wisdom on the other hand tells us there is more than physical realities, this is because wisdom is infinite, there are no limitations with the expressions of wisdom.  Knowledge relies on the five sense, wisdom relies on all senses, used in balance, each will enhance the other. You can see why human consciousness void of wisdom is limited and is limiting it's own consciousness. A limited consciousness is a consciousness of  ignorance, of cause as always, only in ignorance can a consciousness destroy itself, there is no peace to be found in this.

As of always, any true philosopher will attract a huge amount of ridicule, of course such expressions of ridicule states one is on the right path to a true sense of peace. You see, it's not the philosophy that upsets people, it's people's own reaction to philosophy that upsets themselves. Very few people on Earth like to truly look within themselves, this is exactly what philosophy does, within this, we will find true inner peace, remembering, all the answers are within as always.   

The Rise of Wisdom

Written by Mathew Naismith

For anyone translating this post, the following quote is as above.

If everyone was of wisdom,

there would no conflict for

only can conflict exist in a

consciousness void of wisdom.

Wisdom is seemingly likened to energy except like energy, wisdom can't even be transformed. All energy can be transformed, however, no energy can be destroyed, it's then funny to think wisdom can't even be transformed, is wisdom as I have always said it be to, of the infinite? Yes, you can misinterpret wisdom but you can't transform wisdom, for once wisdom is expressed like energy, it is unable to be transformed for wisdom is of all ages.

It would seem that wisdom doesn't have the same characteristics to energy, wisdom doesn't even seem to be under the same laws and principles of energy. Being that energy is of all expressions (motion), it's strange to think that wisdom, when expressed, doesn't follow the same principles as energy.

When you think on this, is energy that creates certain forms of all ages? No, for an example, did vehicles or horseless motorised carriages exist a thousand years ago? Did the entire universe exist before the big bang? Now consider this, did wisdom?

Even though human consciousness has tried to destroy wisdom, wisdom always prevails. The resurgence of the teachings of Confucius in China, is a good example of this. The same exact form of energy Confucius expressed, still exists as it did in Confucius's time even after it's presumed destruction. The teachings of Confucius weren't even transformed.

Let's also take a look at Buddha and Socrates, these people, as well as Confucius, weren't just expressing philosophy, they were also expressing wisdom. It's important here not to get confused with thinking all philosophy is of wisdom, philosophy can also be based on knowledge/intelligence void of wisdom. The reason why people like these were noticeable compared to numerous other philosophers and mystics, is that their philosophy became primarily based on wisdom. Jesus is another prime example of this and so was Rumi.

It is quite obvious that wisdom itself can't be transformed or destroyed , the philosophy of wisdom is ageless, but what about wisdom existing before the creation of the universe itself.

The following links indicate wisdom existences before the creation of the universe, basically, before consciousness was even expressed.

http://www.whiteagle.org/wisdom-school-public/ancient-wisdom

http://www.j-e-s-u-s.org/english/2003/e030511.htm

Consider this, philosophy is of time, it's of the finite, why does wisdom when expressed in conjunction with wisdom, become indestructible or even transformable? Why also is one philosophy more compelling and memorable than to other forms of philosophy? It seems that one form of philosophy is based on the finite, while other forms are based on the infinite, infinite being of timelessness, a consciousness not of time.

Am I making reference that a philosophy based on wisdom, is beyond a consciousness based on time? Absolutely.....

Take a close look at all these great philosophers, now look at the time they spent in silence. Don't get me wrong here, not everyone who spends time in silence becomes instantly of this infinite wisdom, in actually, people can spend a life time in silence and still not be able to connect with this infinite wisdom. The difference is, once these people dropped pre-perceptions, meaning, detaching themselves from human fixated attachments, they were then able to connect to this infinite wisdom.

No one who is fixated to any kind of  ideology or ism, is truly able to connect to this infinite wisdom, a wisdom that was around before the creation of the universe. Yes, anyone who is knowledgeable is able to recite an already expressed philosophy, but are able to connect to this kind of wisdom. Of course anyone who is fixated to an ideology or ism, will disagree with this as always. The controlling ego just doesn't want to let go of a fixation.

In saying all this, it's wiser to follow an already expressed wisdom than to not express any kind of wisdom at all......Mathew G

Not everyone will be able to connect to this infinite wisdom, motion takes too much of our time to be able to make this kind of connection. Our best bet is to follow an already impressed, established wisdom, in saying this, it's even better when we make our own connection but again, motion often takes up too much of our time to make this connection. In all, we must be appreciative and accepting of the wisdom that has already been expressed as a motion.

It's funny to think that no truly dogmatic forceful ideology or ism likes the presence of a true expression of wisdom, as our past philosophers and mystics have discovered in their own lives. Such an energy force will always try to destroy this kind of wisdom if we don't protect it from such atrocity and lunacy. As I have said for some time now, only in ignorance can a consciousness destroy/destroy itself.

Please once again, do not take anything that I have stated here as gospel or of utter truth. 

Hope In Peace

Written by Mathew

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What judged a negative a negative?

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

Why then judge a positive and a negative?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Looking Beyond Zero Point

Written by Mathew Naismith

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

               

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

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

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

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

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

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

Zero Point, The Creation Of Everything

Written by Mathew Naismith

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

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

________________________

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

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

Continue Reading

My Reply

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

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

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

________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Is Life Harsh?

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

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

Can we justifiably judge life being so harsh?

Is it as harsh as we now see it is?

It is but it's not

This is like judging a negative

Is it a negative because we now deem it so?

Is it this judgment that makes it so?

Our own harshness on life doesn't make life harsh

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

When we deem life so harsh

Is this not still being of this harshness!!

~Mathew G~

PEACE

Written by Mathew Naismith

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

The antiquity of peace

as ancient as it is

is still within us all

being so hard to keep

in these days

you wonder

of it's presence

it's still

it's quiet

it's harmonious

it's tranquil

we wonder

is it still their

within

in-depth

as it is

and we still wonder

of it's presence

as it should be

as peace is

stillness

quietness

harmoniousness

tranquilness

this is

peace

as it is

and we still wonder

the presence of peace

this

is as it should be

anything else

is not peace

~Mathew G~

___________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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