Releasing Ourselves from Set Standards

Written by Mathew Naismith

I'm sorry for the syntax errors and non-legible grammar of recent; trying to assist the painter is causing a lot of physical and mental discomfort, especially at present. My grammatical coherency isn't fully coherent within it's structuring.

To a lot of people, the situation I am in would be judged as being highly negative, the inability to properly structurally form legible posts is debilitating to what I am writing. This of course can be debilitating to the reader by impairing their coherency in what I am writing, to a lot of people, this is negative but not to people like me.

When you start reading something that isn't altogether coherent, you decide at that point if to read on or not. If you decide not to read on because of the incoherency in what you are reading, you are simply not meant to read it, it's not for you.

I often read posts and threads that are not altogether structured properly, just because it's not structured properly doesn't mean it isn't insightful. We often judge in accordance inline with the kind of structured coherency expressed, if it's not up to our standards, it becomes non-legible, if it's up to our standards, it's of course legible.

The personal standards we judge everything in accordance with can be highly critical, just because something isn't up to our own personal standards doesn't mean it's negative or bad in someway, it simply means it's not up to our critical personal standards. When we express certain standards, we limit ourselves to these standards, all else other than our own personal standards become unrecognisable.

When we fixate ourselves to certain ideologies, most often all other ideologies become incoherent to us, they simply become an unrecognisable ideology we can't possibly relate to. Within this very action, we have limited ourselves to certain set perspectives and perceptions. I think by doing this we lose our connection with the infinite side of life, of course all we are left with is the finite, a consciousness of limited range and possibilities.

The reason why trauma isn't a big deal or negative for people like me is that trauma is finite in nature. If a consciousness predominantly focuses on the finite, the consciousness involved would naturally become limited within it's range and understanding, and yes, this quite naturally occurs. You will also find that a consciousness that focusing on the finite will judge more negatives within their environment than someone who focuses on the infinite.

Focusing on the infinite instead of the finite allows one to cohere and understand more of their present environment, this includes a reality that is in and creates it's own traumas. How often do we cohere and want to understand anything we have judged as negative when focused on the finite?

This is funny; by focusing on the finite we create standards, however, by focusing on the infinite there are no standards, standards simply don't and can't exist within the infinite. When a consciousness has no set standards, what naturally occurs? Awareness and quite naturally without effort, of course the opposite naturally occurs when we do have set standards. This is understandable because standards mean limitations and the more set our standards become, the more limited our consciousness naturally becomes.

Once our own vibrations are conditioned to certain set standards, we will of course naturally feel that any other vibrations that our own set standards are incoherent towards will feel negative. The reason for this lays in that our own set standards which make everything else not of these standards incoherent, it's this incoherency that gives us bad vibrations.

There are no bad vibrations, this is until our own standards create these vibrations, they simply don't exist until we create them which can only be created if we focus on the finite.

Try to relate the finite with ego, finite existence is ego where's infinite existence is egoless, of course to the ego, infinite existence is hard to comprehend because infinite existence is incoherent to the egos standards. This is due to the egos standards being set to everything relating to the ego, to finite existence, there is nothing beyond ego according to the ego. How many Western minded atheists believe consciousness couldn't exist beyond the physical limits of the brain? This is even after science is proving otherwise!!

To me, finite existence is ego and infinite existence is egoless, the reason for this is that there are no standards within an infinite state of existence. By simply releasing ourselves from our set standards, our limitations set by these standards, infinite existence automatically replaces finite existence.

Look at it this way. You have a clean body of water until the ego pollutes the water. By simply releasing the water from this pollution the water becomes clean again, the water is freed from the limitation that the pollution limited the water to. The water is limited because you can't drink it and nothing can live in it, it is therefore limited and subjected to certain set standards until these standards are lifted. Take away our own set standards, what are we naturally left with? A pure state of existence that isn't hindered by limitations, a state of infinite existence. The ego is naturally limiting and is only able to create finite existences, this is it's natural limitations brought about by it's own set standards.             

Releasing Ourselves from Limitations

Written by Mathew Naismith

This post is a follow on from my last post, Pleasure Centres of the Mind. If your ego didn't like the last post, it is unlikely the ego will like this post. Put simply, the ego doesn't like anything that doesn't' excite the pleasure centre within a reality based on pleasures. Let's be honest with ourselves here, everything, including spirituality these days, is based on positive vibrations as opposed to negative vibrations, in other words what pleases the senses is positive, what doesn't is negative.

This is too obvious for people like me. I have become involved in numerous spiritual based forums in the last 8 (eight) years, too often has spirituality been based purely on what pleases the pleasure centre of the mind, the ego. This of course takes one to ignore and even denounce anything that vaguely threatens what pleases the pleasure centre of the mind. Most of the forums I have been involved in have either removed me from the forum or I removed myself from the forum. When you realise you are upsetting people's ego to no end, there is no point in continuing being involved.

Once our pleasure senses have been tantalised, anything that vaguely threatens this pleasure is denounced or ostracised. What seemed to have occurred is that spirituality is purely based on fear, while at the same time denouncing religion for being based on fear. This has been proven to me over and over again on most of these forums; people literally show fear of their own pleasures being threatened in any sense simply through their own actions. I should also point out I am still involved in certain forums/groups to one degree or another, probably because the people on these forums don't seem to see people like me as threat.

Are people like me a threat to the control the ego has over other people?

Yes, to the ego, people like me seem to be a threat to it's existence, the truth is, people like me are only a threat to the control the ego has over people, not to the ego own existence. In actuality, only the ego can experience a sensation of being threatened, people like me are not even a threat to the control the ego has over other people, for only the ego can experience threatening sensations. What I am saying is, only can the ego become a threat to itself, this simply occurs when the ego awakes to itself for only the ego can control ego. People like me are not about control but the ego will perceive that we are, especially when the pleasure centre is threatened in any sense.

I have found it quite amusing over my time on these forums, I have also found it saddening that once again so many people are using spirituality to obtain and maintain a certain level of pleasure. This of course takes one to become deliberately unaware of anything that threatens these pleasurable experiences. Firstly, where is the oneness in this and secondly, it is obvious that such blatant ignorance will not lead to a state of pure awareness, pure bliss.

Bliss is not obtained through insurmountable conditions; bliss can only be obtained through putting no conditions on anything and become all of what is.

As I have personally experienced on most forums, you are not allowed to express anything that seems to threaten the control the ego has over the pleasure centre in any sense. So many people are putting more conditions on themselves and others, not less, to protect the control of the ego has over the pleasure centre of the mind. What do these insurmountable conditions denote? Limitations, this simply means we are limiting ourselves more, not less. I suppose this figures as more people these days seem to desire to be more control. How many conditions are there for someone to be in control? The more control we desire, the more conditions there are, of course the more control we experience or desire, the more conditions (limitations) we put on upon ourselves and others around us.

I will put it this way by using our present environment. A lot of people want to limit themselves to the light, of course this takes a lot of conditions (limitations) to obtain this in the first place. Would the Earth be as beautiful as it was if there wasn't a balance, a moderation, of light and dark? Now imagine the light controlling the dark through it's own conditions, it's own limitations, how beautiful would have the Earth been then? How beautiful is the universe with it's insurmountable contrasts of light and dark?  

The light tantalises our pleasure centre when the dark threatens our pleasure centre, but what would the light create void of the dark, the yin void of the yang? The Earth as it was simply couldn't have existed under such conditions, such limitations, and what a shame that would have been for the ego not to have experienced!!  

Pleasure Centres of the Mind

Written by Mathew Naismith

 As the following explains, the pleasure centre is a part of the brain that gives us a feeling of enjoyment; this enjoyment is often referred to by the ego as a positive. Of course we can become so addicted to this enjoyment that we, the ego, will most often refer to everything that isn't of this enjoyment as being negative and even toxic; this is why in Western spirituality that there are more judged negatives at present than ever. Yes, to be honest, a lot of us are in this state.

Let's say we are into light and love or materialism or anything else that excites our pleasure centre. Everything else other than what excites our pleasure centre often becomes negative or we deliberately become ignorant to the things that don't excite our pleasure centre. What people like me write about is often critically judged as being negative and even toxic, mainly because it doesn't excite the pleasure centre, in actuality, awareness often takes away the enjoyment from our pleasure centre. Let's be honest, we are presently just as much if not more focused on what enjoyment our pleasure centre gives us than ever throughout human history.          

http://health.howstuffworks.com/sexual-health/sexuality/brain-during-orgasm2.htm

Extract: You may have heard that the brain has a pleasure center that lets us know when something is enjoyable and reinforces the desire for us to perform the same pleasurable action again. This is also called the reward circuit, which includes all kinds of pleasure, from sex to laughter to certain types of drug use.

How many Western spiritually minded people deliberately ignore everything around them that doesn't give enjoyment to the pleasure centre these days? Now, how often is everything not conducive to the enjoyment of the pleasure centre critically judged as being negative and even toxic?

Let's say I am an empath, a person who feels their environment, is everything that doesn't excite my pleasure centre negative? No, but to a lot of empaths and spiritually aware people this has become the case it would seem. To be truly spiritually aware, of a state that Buddhism calls pure awareness, a state of pure bliss to the ego, everything that doesn't excite the pleasure centre of our mind isn't negative or bad. Just because the feelings we get don't excite our pleasure centre, doesn't mean it's negative, it simply means it doesn't excite our pleasure centre. Of course the pleasure centre being about pleasure, the pleasure centre is often controlled by the ego, not just of the ego but controlled by the ego, it is wise to become aware of this in my mind.

Yes, as of any time in human history, we are controlled by the ego, meaning, the ego is in control of our reality just as much if not more than any other time in human history. Let's be honest with ourselves, it's presently all about exciting our pleasure centre while deliberately staying ignorant to anything that threatens the pleasure centres enjoyment. In actuality, lets' be truthfully honest even more, we are living more in fear than ever in regards to Westernised spirituality.

        

A state of pure awareness means we become aware of everything, not just to the things our pleasure centre desires. If I was to only become aware of the things that excite my pleasure centre, would I be truly and honestly spiritually aware? This state of pure awareness has nothing to do with exciting the pleasure centre, and that everything else that doesn't excite this pleasure centre is negative. Are we truly going to experience the kind of bliss found in this state of absolute pure awareness by only being aware of the things that excite our pleasure centre? There is absolutely no infinite bliss to be found in continually exciting the pleasure centre because the pleasure centre is pure ego, not pure awareness. Yes, we will find that by exciting the pleasure centre we will momentarily feel blissful and happy, of course the ego being the ego, it always desires more and more excitement, more and more pleasure.

Being truly spiritually aware has nothing to do with continually exciting the pleasure centre. Considering that to excite the pleasure centre all the time takes the deliberate ignorance of everything that doesn't excite the pleasure centre, this kind of state has nothing to do with awareness. There is no awareness in this, just pure and utter deliberate ignorance construed by the ego in control to keep the ego amused, happy and excited.

Can this state of pure awareness, a state where there is no separation and where one becomes one with everything void of the limitations of pleasing our pleasure centres, give us feelings of bliss and love? Going by my own experiences, I would say yes, but you must realise, it's only the ego that can feel pleasure, for it's only the ego that needs to feel pleasure to exist. So in all, in our present state of ego, we will feel pleasure, however, it is wise to be aware that it's the ego in control that desires to be only aware of what excites it's pleasure centre, not just of the physical brain but of the non-physical mind as well.

As usual, what I have written here will not excite too many people's pleasure centres, the actual truth about ourselves as a whole rarely does. Please, be aware that a true state of awareness isn't all about pleasing our pleasure centres, of course the ego in control will, as always, state otherwise. Simply, don't allow your pleasure centre, the ego; to control you while becoming truly aware as opposed to partially aware of what pleases the pleasure centre that is apart of  us all. Be aware that (all) pleasures felt are of the ego, also, don't try to control the ego and it's pleasure centre, but don't allow it to control you either.         

Existing by Past and Future Events

Written by Mathew Naismith

This post is obviously going to be a follow on from my last post. In the seven (7) odd years of sharing my insights and changelings through blogs, I have never really touched on (written) this subject before, probably because I seem to exist and create my own reality from the present rather than from past and/or future events. Yes, people like me are guided by past and predicted future events, but we never base our present existence on past and/or future events.

Conditioning: Consider this, why base our present on predicted future events, either constructively or destructively? It's all to do with fear. If we predominantly focus on a predicted bright secure future, we do this out of fear of the present. This makes sense to a fearful person to do this because the present is anything but secure, so to obtain a sense of security, we predominantly focus on a predicted secure future. The same is with focusing on an insecure future, like the end of the world for example; it's all based on fear. So why not just focus on the present and not mention about past or future events? Many of us are simply not aware of what we are doing. Instead of moving away or evolving (ascending) from an existence based on fear, we are escalating further into fear at a phenomenal rate.    

As we are conditioned to time, we are also conditioned to fear, this doesn't mean that time is based on fear though, it means that within time fear can be experienced or not. As time is all about starting and ending points, we can either go with the flow of these starting and ending points, either it be of actual life and death, rich and poor, hungry and satisfied, which is of fearlessness, or we can try to go against the flow which is fearful. I do find that the Western mind is more fearful than the Eastern mind, probably because the Eastern mind from birth was once conditioned to go with the flow where the Western mind is conditioned to go against the flow; of course this is just my opinion.

Western Mind: How many Western minded people take on, become aware of, Eastern practices like living in the present but still predominantly base this present on a predicted future event? When an Eastern mind takes on living within the present, they don't base this on some predicted future event, like so many western minded people obviously do today, they predominately focus on the present while only being guided by the past and future.

Yes, as the world becomes more predominately of the western mind, we will experience more of a reality based on fear. How many people fear looking old today or fear losing some material possessions? Yes, this kind of fear, to one extent or another, has been around forever as the Western mind is not just of Western people, it's of all people. I today relate materialism to the Western mind as most western people are conditioned from birth to materialism, especially these days. Materialism is purely based on fear, the fear of not having enough to the fear of not having it at all.

It is too obvious to people like me that we are presently using the past and the future to create the present instead of using them as a guide. The ironical thing is that the past and the future is unable to exist without the present, everything relies purely on the present, instead of this, we are conditioned to believe everything is created from past and future events. The present is of and created from past and/or future events, in my mind, this simply isn't the case, or more precisely, need not be the case.

Illusion: Is it an illusion that we base the present on past and future events? Seen as everything is of the present, I would say it's an illusion. Consider this, if we base the present on future events like many people are doing today, what then will create this predicted future? The act of becoming aware of a predicted future and living in the present of this predicted future, changes the flow that creates these predicted futures. There are far more predicted (prophesised) future events that haven't happened than have happened, could this be due to the fact we are tampering with these future events therefore changing their flow by simply being aware of them and living the present by them?

In my mind, we need to learn to use the past and future simply as a guide and not to create the present based predominantly on past and especially on future events. Leave the present alone to go with the natural flow of the present, within this, I believe that these prophesised predictions of security, peace and love will materialise, if not, we will change these predictions to anything else but of security, peace and love.

Manifestation: So if we focus on predicted future events of security, peace and love, will this not manifest this within the present? In my mind, absolutely not. The reason for this is simply based on that it's the present that creates everything, not a manifestation of a future event to influence (change) the present. Ask yourself honesty why you are looking for the future to change the present. The answer to this is fear of the insecurities of the present, so we try to manifest a present from a predicted brighter future? This is of course is instead of changing the present itself to something of security, peace and love.

We have not just judged but critically judged the present as something negative, something to have disdain for and fear, within this, we have based the present purely on some kind of favourable predicted future event. We simply don't want to work on the present as it is, it's too negative, so we try to change the present based on a more favourable future event. When everything is created from the very present, this seems a strange thing to do, base the present on future events, in the process, inadvertently changing these future events to something less favourable.

Inadvertently, by predominantly focusing on brighter predicted future events, we are creating the less favourable prophesised predictions instead in my mind. As soon as we base the present in anyway on fear, the outcome of this fear will naturally create something less favourable, in our case this simply means creating the less favourable prophesied predictions within the present.

If we all learnt to just simply be within the now (present), in my mind, all of what is favourably predicted would quite instantly materialise. Take away the effects of what a past and future, negative and positive, black and white, have upon us, all you are left with is the now, yin and yang as one.  

Only Within the Present

Written by Mathew Naismith

This is only my opinion, but be wary of anyone who is primarily focused on the future/past. I had a friend recently present something to me from another person that was supposed to be spectacular. Anyone guiding people while being primarily based on future events, in my mind, should be avoided at all costs, even if this includes ascension symptoms primarily based on future events. You will find that most, if not all, ascension symptoms are primarily based on predicted future events.

Yes, the future and the past will give us ascension symptoms if we are focused on the past and/or future. Now honestly try focusing on the present only, you will find that ascension symptoms simply don't and can't exist within the present. To have any kind of ascension symptom, there has to be a strong acknowledgment and focusing of ourselves of a past and/or future. Of course the more we focus on the now/present, the less symptoms we will have for a very good reason, ascensions symptoms need a past and /or future events to exist. Yes, ascension symptoms do exist because we simply allow a past and future to exist as our primary focus.

I wrote the following to my friend on this matter.

______________________

OK, I am not too concerned about where we are going but how we are getting there which is in relation to the now. I find people like Aluna are more focused on the future than the now. Anyone focused primarily on the future/past, are obviously primarily of the illusion/ego. These people will often use various marketing ploys to keep themselves within the scheme of things, in the limelight.

These people often talk about judgment of others but how often are they themselves in critical judgment of others themselves? I am a good example of her, not just simple judgment but critical judgment. 

Also, why be so worried or focused on the future when the future is already written, secure?  It's a con; the ego has these people in its full control, this is too obvious.

Live within the present for all else is defined by the present only, for everything else but the present is an illusion.......Mathew G

How often are we guided to live within the present? Now, how many of us live by what we preach within living in the now? Too often we are primarily focused on the future which really doesn't exist. Aluna is obvious within being primarily focused on the future. Aluna is making a huge mistake in my mind; this is unless all Aluna desires is an audience.

Look for the people who are primarily focused on the future when the future is supposed to be secure in accordance within their beliefs/predictions. If the future is suppose to be so secure, why not then focus on the present when the future is already written and secure? It simply makes no sense when people like this are primarily focused on a secure future to an insecure present.

The past and future are already written but the present isn't....Mathew G

Consciousness isn't this limited to past and future events Glenys.

Be wary of anyone focusing primarily on the future Glenys. Our ascension symptoms seem to have everything to do with future events with these people, huge mistake in my mind.

Reply

 Ok yep can see your point

______________________

      

Now to a lot of people this might seem unfair or even toxic of me mentioning people who are guiding numerous other people further into the illusion, not away from the illusion. Yes, these people are ascending but ascending further into the illusion of time based realities of past and future events, not away from them. If it's acceptable to lead people further into the illusion, why isn't it accepted to point out how people are being misled? Everything is created from the present, not from some future predicted event and why put so much focus on a future that is secure when the present isn't secure? Would it not make more sense focusing on the present when it's the present that creates everything?   

Consider this, can a past and future exist without the present? Seen as all future and past events where first created from the present at that time, the answer is categorically no. Now, can the present exist without a future or past and the answer is definitely yes, but of course to anyone primarily of time based realities of past and future events, the perceptions of the present being able to exist void of a past and future is going to be incomprehensible, and understandably so.

As I have stated before, time itself has always existed, this also means so has a past and future, however within the present there is no starting or ending points, no past or future. Only within time can anything be created from a starting point including time itself, you simply can't create a starting point within the present without time also being present.

All this means is that time, therefore past and future events, have always existed, however, what we primarily focus on in the present creates the present. If we focus on the past and/or the future, this will be the present. If we focus on the now, the present, this will be the present. So the idea of focusing on a secure future seems to be the way to go as the future then becomes the present. However, while primarily focusing on a secure future, we are not being of the present which creates the future for which we are primarily refocusing on at present.

The illusion is that future events create the present when they simply don't. Many of us are sadly being guided down this very road by others who are simply living for the future instead of the now, the present, which create future perception of future events. Yes, we can exist by creating our present from future events but it's simply not advisable, mainly due to the future is anything but secure and is limited to certain events. Being that time therefore past and future existence is limited by starting and ending points, it's a bit silly to continue to limit our own potential in this way. The present is simply limitless within it's motions where's a past and future is highly limited to certain events, do we won't or need to continue to limit ourselves to time based realities?

Yes, we can continue to delude ourselves in thinking that the future and past create the present when it's always the present that creates everything within it's entirety. No, there is nothing wrong in continuing to seemingly create the present from future events, but is it wise to do this, not just continue to do this but ascend even further into these delusions? 

To my readers, try to avoid anyone guiding other people who have based everything on future events, focus on the now is my best advice here. Security is created within the present, not the future for it's the present that writes the perceptions of the future.  

 The following photo shows my Nephew Jimmy and me approximately 28 years ago. The photo event is of the past but the event itself is always of the now....... 

     

Pure Awareness verses Pure Ego

Written by Mathew Naismith

For only the aware will desist in their destructive ways, all else will continue with being destructive, albeit in a different way, a way that makes us feel even more right while being destructive. As light is destructive to dark, positive to negative, the feminine to the masculine, yin to yang in this case, only that of what the ego desires will survive......in an ego controlled reality.  

Pure awareness; is a state that is motionless, a state that needs no further motion to become aware, for all motion is of ego. Think on this, why have motion when in a pure aware state? Motion simply depicts a state that is unaware, for all motion is of an unaware state and all motionlessness is of an aware state. The more aware we become void of a controlling ego, the more of this pure motionlessness we become, however, at no time can we become of this pure awareness while of the ego in any sense, all we can do is become aware of this pure state.

Pure awareness (nothingness) = motionlessness + aware

Pure ego (creation) = excessive motion + unaware

It is quite understandable why in Buddhism this state is also referred to as nothingness; there is no motion in this state, there is simply no need of motion. Other ideologies of course have their own explanations for this state.

Pure ego; is a state of excessive motions, you could say this state is the yang to the yin, the yin being of pure awareness or visa-versa. The more of this pure ego we become, the more controlled and controlling we become. Think on this, why would a state of pure awareness desire or even need to control anything?   

This state of pure ego is of an excessive while at the same time excluding all else, for example, this state being of all light with no darkness, all positive with no negatives or all materialism with no spiritualty or abstemiousness. It's basically a state of extremes, of course if this state sounds familiar; it's for a very good reason, we are simply becoming more and more of this pure ego.

Yes, the ego has made many of us believe that we are becoming more of this pure awareness, even while all the signs state otherwise like all the expressions of extremism, for example, being expressed in the world today. All motions or expressions of extremism depict a state of consciousness that is more of pure ego than pure awareness.

Spirituality: Until quite recently I didn't get why spirituality today is more of pure ego than pure awareness. All negatives are avoided and/or ignored or shunned and how many people desire to become totally spiritual or of this pure awareness and so on and so on it goes? The desire to become of one or the other, pure awareness or pure ego, depicts extremism. No person who is truly aware of this pure aware state desires to become of this state; the awareness within itself is all that is needed.

In actuality there is no state; it's simply awareness that can be used to balance out excessive motions, a controlling ego, or not. This pure awareness simply becomes a state so that the ego is able to comprehend pure awareness and fair enough too, it's basically using the ego against itself by taking away the controlling ways of the ego.

Realities: As of the universe, all realities are created from ego as it's all of motion. Now the type of reality that can be created can range from pure ego states of love and light (positive) to pure ego states of hate and dark (negative), of course what is positive or negative to one isn't to another and visa-versa. Realities are simply created by the exclusion of what is undesirable, for example, multinationals exclude negatives within their realities like being financially poor or the inability to control. On the other hand, spiritually aware people exclude negatives like being negative and of anything that is deemed dark by them, however, not all realities are created from excluding one from the other.

The ego in control simply desires an ultimate state, as of all deemed ultimate states, they exclude one or the other, basically, the exclusion of what isn't desired. This simply means the exclusion of yin from the yang or visa-versa. I find this funny when the ego still judges these kinds of states as being of oneness; the controlling ego certainly deludes us. Yes, these ultimate states are of oneness but only of the oneness we desire to be apart of, everything else is excluded.

However, as I stated before, not all realities are of the exclusion of one or the other, the yin from the yang. If everything of this reality was in perfect balance between each other, meaning, if yin and yang were in perfect balance between each other, a state of bliss would reside within the reality. Within this state of no exclusions, there would be no desire of an ultimate reality because a pure state of balance would reside. As there are states of pure awareness and pure ego, there are states of pure balance which create realties of pure bliss. There is simply no desires of an ultimate state within realities that don't exclude one from the other but have everything working in unison, basically, one not trying to control or dominate or destroy the other.

We simply don't need, as opposed to desire, to exclude anything to reach a state of pure bliss; all we need to do is become aware of the controlling ego and this state of pure awareness. Of course once we become aware of the ways of a controlling ego, we naturally become aware of this pure awareness. Pure bliss for all is all to do with being aware instead of unaware while under the control of the ego. Ego simply denotes an unaware state that an aware state of being doesn't want to exclude but simply needs to quell when out of control; this is where wisdom comes into it. Wisdom simply gives us an awareness of an out of control ego and the awareness of how to quell this kind of out of control state of existence.

The ego is simply unable to comprehend a true state of awareness for the ego is unable to cope with this kind of awareness. The inability to comprehend is all to do with self-preservation of the ego, what the ego doesn't understand or desire, it will denounce or exclude from it's own awareness. This is natural for the ego to do in a self-preservation mode. An ego in control will also perceive an ultimate state of existence, an existence that can be created, such as our present existence. To a lot of multinationals/materialists, the present reality is an ultimate reality for them. For a lot of spiritually aware people it's love and light or this state of pure awareness or being one with God. The ultimate reality is simply governed by the type of control used by the ego, basically, what the ego excludes to create ultimate realities that are imbalanced.

What is an ultimate reality for one kind of controlling ego isn't for another, this is why pure ego states don't even like to comprehend or are able to comprehend a true balanced state of existence. Even a true balanced state of existence isn't an ultimate reality; it's simply just another form of reality that doesn't exclude one over and above the other. A state of neutrality created, not by force or destroying as in light over dark, but by the invalidation of all opposing forces, a state where extreme expressions are simply unable to exist.

Is a reality created from love and light not also of the invalidation of hate and dark?  No, a reality of love and light is an exclusion of hate and dark, not an invalidation where hate and dark can't exist. How many people of love and light despise (hate) being of anything negative or dark? Also, light is destructive to dark, not a culmination of light and dark working in unison. In a true balanced existence, all works as one for the good of all as a whole without exclusions, a true sense of oneness brought about by being equally of pure awareness as of pure ego.                

Simply become truthfully aware void of the deception of a controlling ego, of course as always, this isn't for everyone. 

For The Children Come First

Written by Mathew Naismith  

Mother's, I need your assistance please.

Do the children make the mother a mother?  Considering a child isn't a child without a mother, is it not the child who makes a mother a mother? Also, is not a mother only a mother when of a child?

Without a child, is not a person only of a person when not of a child, meaning, not influenced by a child maternally?

The reason I query this has to do with how numerous spiritually aware people put themselves first and foremost. For example, it's about themselves feeling good over and above other people who are suppose to be less aware like a child is.

It's funny to think, but it's the less aware child that makes a mother a mother, and of course, the child always comes first for the mother, especially above any personal feel good sensations!! 

Note: If any mother's replies to this, it is likely I will insert their reply in one of my posts for my blog unless otherwise stipulated. Also, names will be excluded unless otherwise stipulated.

____________________________

What is one of the major mistakes of churches? The church comes first and then the hierarchy and then God and maybe the people of the church.

What is a church without it's people? Like a mother, a church is not a church without it's people like a mother is not a mother without a child. Maternally, the unaware child comes first. Now what is occurring in Westernised spirituality today? The mother or the church is still coming first and foremost. The church in this case being ones own personal well being and pleasure/desire. As long as the mother/church is well and feeling good, this will automatically pass onto the child. Of course in this case the child would be lucky to come second, most often other hierarchy of the same awareness level comes second, where does this leave the child that makes the mother/the church?

So what is the aware without the unaware as what is the church without it's people or a mother without a child? As of the true spiritually aware, the unaware comes first, look at people like myself who really put themselves out there because it's not about ourselves and our own well being. It's almost maternal if not maternal, the child comes first.

As within myself, my child, my unaware state, comes first for it needs to be nurtured, not put on a list that it comes second best to all else, particularly in relation to my desires and feel good sensations. Yes, people like me could just sit within our feel good desired states and ignore all these deemed negatives, dark and toxic energies but we don't, for the children come first and foremost.

The child simply represents an unaware state that needs to be nurtured, mothered, for the mother is not a mother without it's children. What is the yin without the yang? Basically, what is the aware self without unaware self? Would we judge our children as toxic or negative and then ignore them because of these judged vibrations? Of course this occurs in certain situations when the maternal mothering instinct isn't present. We are supposed to be one; there is simply no oneness without maternal mothering instincts. Ignoring the child, the people of a church, the unaware self, because we have judged it so in accordance with our own personal level of hierarchy, is not oneness or maternally mothering, it's simply a depiction of an ego in control.

Too many spiritual teachings these days teach to put the self first and foremost, it all starts from you when it's the children that make the mother a mother. We spend all the money and time on our personal selves, when all we need to do is simply put the children first above our own desires and feeling of self-gratifications. If we spend all this time and money on ourselves to feel good, this has to benefit the rest of the world in the long run as this will flow on. Of course while we are doing this, we are neglecting the children by judging them toxic, negative, bad, dark, and on and on it goes. Yes indeed, what many spiritually aware people have expressed has been passed on; the world at present represents this.

Yes, without the mother a child can't be a child, so the mother must also be mothered by these same motherly instincts, but at no point should the mother be put above all else but this is exactly what is occurring in spirituality today to a large extent. Only a perfect balance between the child self and the motherly self can true peace and love reside. Neglecting one over and above the other will create anything but peace and love, only a falsified and fabricated peace and love. One is infinite, the other finite, we are both and not of one or the other as we are the child and the mother, the church and the people, the aware and unaware.

People like me are simply aware that we are just as much of the aware as the unaware, the child and the mother without neglecting one over and above the other.

Did people like Buddha face their own ego or the ego as a whole, as one entity?

Do not the children of a mother naturally quell the ego within the mother?

Focusing all this energy on the self to feel good while at the same time avoiding what is deemed as toxic/negative is pure ego. No, it doesn't start from the self, the (I); it starts from the collective as a whole, as people like Buddha eventually find out.

As not all mothers controlling egos will be quelled, not everyone will be able to face the controlling ego face on without acceptation; the ego has simply too much control, it is wise to be aware of this in my mind.

It is wise the child comes first before the ego.........Mathew G

______________________________

If you are interested, the following replies to my request from mothers are as follow. The mother in all of us has a lot to teach as the child has to learn, but are we willing or ready to listen to child as yet, basically, learning from and through the unaware, something a lot of us critically judge??

              

Mathew....I found the Divine Mother Within.... there is the perfect vibration of mothering within us all.... and I think when that Vibration becomes or is Remembered then One would act in accordance with exactly how Devine Mother would act... there is no room then for egotistical actions... Thank you for asking!!....btw....I have Mothered 13 kids in this life time.

Also

    

Hey so here's my answer.... If so....my answer is this. Spiritually awakened people realize that their children come through them not to them. The spiritually awakened person knows the child has a closer connection to source because of their innocence and lack of cognitive dissonance. The spiritually awakened person knows they are here to guide and also learn from their children. Understanding that there is no right or wrong but an observation of the contrast they see, hear, and feel and then choose the perspective of the person they want to be. Before coming into this physicality the child knows what he or she wishes to experience and will choose the parents that will guide them in experiencing it.

Also

Motherhood makes one whole. As Heath Ledger put it, parenthood is an extension of oneself the knowledge that a small being was borne from the union of two people is a miraculous event; that one's blood runs through the veins of another. One's life changes immediately. However, even if you are not a mother by bearing another, you can still give those qualities to others and feel whole in yourself on a different level.

My Reply

Yes, it's all to do with the maternal instincts; you express this quite often Susan even though you are not an actual mother yourself. Are gay people negative or toxic because they express themselves different to ourselves? Are children toxic because they express themselves different to adults? Same thing in my mind. Once you embrace instead of avoid, you have become the maternal mother.

I certainly appreciate your response here Susan, thank you.

I give thanks to all the mothers within for your participation here, most appreciated, as I needed assistance in expressing deep seated maternal instincts over and above the controlling ways of the controlling ego.