Written by Mathew Naismith
To feel good about
oneself and the environment, one must first desist in feeling bad about someone
else's self and their environment, otherwise all we would be doing is creating
something that feels good on the back of what also feels bad. Look at it this
way, if to be exceptionally positive takes an exceptional negative, wouldn't it
be better if we didn't have to express an exceptional positive to denounce,
overcome or escape from an exceptional negative in the first place? One begets
the other; basically, one extreme creates an opposing extreme.
Do we really want to create another reality built upon or created from it's
opposite?
So what kind of
ideological concepts has our present reality created?
Firstly, I personally
don't think it's wise to build or create realities based on their opposing
opposites if we really want peace and love on Earth. Basing peace and love on
it's opposite is only going to continue the trend of opposing energy forces, basically
creating realities that one can't exist without the other or on the back of the
other.
Many times have I come
across people who have utter disdain for this reality, in turn, they have a
desire to manifest a complete opposite of what they have disdain for. Is it
wise to create another reality based on it's opposite, in other words create a
reality based on conflict and critical judgment? What would our present
conflictive realities consciousness want you to do? Be in conflict with it to
continue the trend and create yet another reality based on conflict and
critical judgment.
So opposing our present
conflictive reality is doing exactly what this kind of reality creates,
realities primarily based on conflict. Yes, for example, the ideological
concepts of light and love don't seem to be within themselves conflictive, even
though this kind of ideology was created on the back of a conflictive conscious
reality. However, take this kind of energy out of it's protective comforting
domain, it's own reality, it fails dismally. Only within it's own domain,
within it's own energy, can the ideological concepts of light and love prevail.
It's exactly like taking a fish out of the water, it's reality, and put the
fish in it's opposing reality, it fails dismally to exist out of the water,
it's reality.
Manifesting = Provide
evidence for; stand as proof of; show by one's behaviour, attitude, or external
attributes or reveal its presence or make an appearance.
Ideology = An
orientation that characterizes the thinking of a group or nation or an
imaginary or visionary theorization.
So can we create a
reality of light and love without a reality being created on the back of a
conflictive reality?
Light simply means
awareness and love acceptance of all of what is for what it is, this of course
includes realities and the consciousness behind the creation of these
realities. It's like a mother loving their child no matter what they do.
Because these kinds of ideological concepts are based on disdain and an
opposing energy source, it is obvious that ideological concepts, like today's
light and love, is not based on awareness or a true sense of love.
A true sense of light
and love thrives just as much out of it's own reality as it does in it's own
reality, in certain circumstances even more because of the need of this kind of
energy source within certain realities or energy flows. A mother/father can be
at their best in dire times, way out of their comfort zone, we as a whole are
no different. Another good example is nurses/doctors; they are at their best
when out of their comfort zone, their normal reality, because that is where
they are most needed. People like me are always out of our comfort zone, our
own clicky (exclusive) groups and energy fields/realities, where we are most
needed.
Do we really need to
get out of our comfort zone, our own reality, to make a difference?
We often believe by
staying within our own exclusive group, our own energy field or safe zone, that
we can make a difference through manifesting our own energy within our own
group or even our own personal domain/reality and make a huge difference. I
think if Mother Teresa and Florence Nightingale, for example, stayed within
their own exclusive group or energy field/reality, they couldn't have made the
difference they did; we at a personal and collective level are no different.
What about Gandhi and Nelson Mandela and so on it goes. On a personal
level, it would have been best for these people to stay within their own
exclusive groups and within their own safe zone on a personal level, they
instead saw a need to make real changes way outside their own comfort zone.
You simply cannot
manifest a reality or influence a collective consciousness to change it's
present reality while within your own comfort zone, your own exclusive group,
change has always been manifested while within other energy flows. The reason
for this is simple, a group opposing another group while within it's own
reality will always be opposed, however, once within an opposing group to your
own energy field, this is where one can make the biggest difference, the
biggest manifestation.
There is one trick to
changing what is within itself though, never demean or have disdain for what
you are trying to influence while within that energy field, all this will
change is your own energy field. A lot of people today are making this mistake
in my mind, trying to change one group manifestation with their own group
manifestation while in disdain of the group manifestation they are trying to
change. Did Nelson Mandela try to change the colour of white people while at
the same time having disdain for white people? All that Nelson Mandela wanted
to change is the reality that white South Africans manifested from within. If
Nelson Mandela had a huge amount of disdain for white people, instead of only
seeing a need for change of what white people had manifested, he simply
wouldn't have changed a
thing.
