Let us consider the situation in the Middle East, where you have seen the civil war in Syria going on for years, and something that is beginning to approach a civil war in Iraq.
First, a prophecy: Unless the moderate people in Islam finally rise up and take a stand against extremism, well then, it will be impossible to stop an escalating conflict that will literally tear the Islamic world apart. And you might think that this will lead to a war against the West, but it will not be a war against the West. For once the cat is out of the bag, so to speak, there will be so much infighting amongst the Islamic nations that they will have very little energy, weapons, and attention left over for fighting against the West, being so concerned about first killing their own brothers. There will be a great fracturing of the Islamic world where entire nations could potentially disappear and dissolve into smaller areas, each ruled by their certain chieftain or warlord who is against all others. Such an upheaval is the potential in the Islamic world that it will literally be like the scorched earth, where entire cities can be destroyed; entire cultures can be almost wiped away.
It has been said before that it is impossible to impose a Western-style democracy on the Middle East. But what needs to dawn on the Western nations is the realization that you cannot treat people in the Middle East the same way you treat each other in the Western world or in the modern, developed world. The entire ideal that you can solve conflict through peaceful negotiations is simply not applicable to the people in the Middle East. What, then, should the Western nations do?
Why man-made problems have no solutions
This is a man-made problem. It is not a problem made in modern times. It is not a problem made by the Western nations, even though there are people in the Islamic nations who are always pointing the finger at the West. The Western nations somehow feel responsible for this situation, but this is a false sense of responsibility.
This is not any way denying that the Western nations have always, at least in the recent century, attempted to influence events in the Middle East. It is not denying that there are huge, international, world corporations that have attempted to influence nations. It is not denying that Western nations want to maintain a steady supply of oil from the Middle East. Yett the Western, democratic nations need to stop feeling responsible for stopping a conflict that they have not created, regardless of the rhetoric coming out of certain Islamist extremists. The Western nations are not responsible for the current misery in the Middle East.
No people on the face of this earth are more divided amongst themselves than the Arab people and the people in the Middle East in general. This is the problem that Islam was meant to address: to stop the fighting amongst the Arab people. But this has not happened. As you can clearly see, Islam has been used to divide Sunni and Shi’a but also other factions. How many other factions are there? For most people it is impossible to even keep track of them, for they morph all the time and change their names and do this and do that.
This division is the problem, this division where you are willing to kill your brothers and sisters indiscriminately in order to further what you see as a desirable end. You may say that it is God’s Will to establish an Islamic state based on Sharia law. You may say that because this end is so important, any means that you deem necessary to accomplish that end are automatically justifiable. You may believe that they are justifiable in the eyes of God and that he will reward you for doing his work on earth, but you are mistaken. And because you are completely mistaken, you become a tool for the forces who oppose God. There is no other way to state this from a sense of realism.
How the West furthers the conflict in the Middle East
The moderate people in Arab nations need to awaken and make their voices heard. Have they done so? They have attempted to do so, but have they yet done so to the point where it has had a major impact on the region? No, they have not. What needs to be questioned is the entire mentality that the ends can justify the means. Then it needs to be seen honestly that Islam, Judaism, Christianity, and other religions and political philosophies have been used to define an end that justifies the means of killing your own brothers and sisters.
This is the very consciousness that needs to be acknowledged and addressed. It is the overcoming of this very consciousness that is the foundation for Western-style democracies. This consciousness has been overcome to a critical degree, or democracies could not have been established and have survived for as long as they have. What the Western world will not recognize is that the progress made in their part of the world has not been made in Islamic nations in the Middle East, and that is why there can be no negotiation on equal terms with such people. What, then, can the West do? Clearly, higher awareness is not encouraging a military intervention like the invasion of Iraq, but what they can do is stop supplying the arms and the credit that enables this fighting to start and to go on, and to go on, and to go on.
How is it possible that a small group of people in a nation like Syria and Iraq suddenly have such an abundant supply of weapons that they can wage a war against an established and well-equipped government with a trained and fairly large army? How is this possible unless they received those weapons from some source outside their own country? This is something that the Western world has not been willing to address openly and honestly.
It is partly because the Western world itself is engaged in supplying arms to various groups around the world because they still have remnants of the consciousness that there are certain ends which justify killing and justifies the supply of weapons to those who are willing to kill. This must end, and the more aware people can do the work and hold the vision that there will be a major exposure of arms dealing around the world, how it is tied to governments even in the West.
In the last few years, even the American nation has been embarrassed by the leak of information. There is no more information that could be leaked, there are mountains of information that could be leaked, and that potentially need to be leaked. The governments themselves are not willing to do the necessary house cleaning and recognize that you cannot, on the one hand, claim to have a free nation with a democratic form of government and at the same time, under the table, be supplying arms to various groups who are not loyal to democratic ideals, but are simply seeking a temporary advantage, and are willing to kill in order to accomplish it.
What has happened time and time again is that democratic nations have made severe karma – and, quite frankly, none have made more severe karma in the democratic world than the United States – by supplying weapons to various groups that have no reverence for life. How long can a democratic government, a democratic form of government, survive if it loses reverence for life, if it sets aside reverence for life in order to achieve some temporary goal?
Why people are willing to kill each other
What is this willingness to kill in order to further some kind of end? It is a perversion of both the expansive of the Father and the contracting force of the Mother. The contracting force makes up the physical realm. This is where things manifest as physical events. So what human beings do is that they look at the situation, as it is right now in the physical octave. Based on what they are experiencing right now, they define a goal. In many cases, there are unpleasant circumstances that cause them pain or other inconveniences, and they want to get away from the pain. Therefore, they formulate a goal based on the temporary circumstances they see right now. This is a perversion of the Mother because the Mother should be in complete alignment with the long-term, timeless goals of the Father. What is the long-term goal of the Father? It is that all human beings on earth are raised in consciousness.
It is not the long-term goal of the Father to establish an Islamic state that covers the entire world, nor is it the long-term goal of God to establish a Christian state that takes over the world. It is the long-term goal of the Father that any circumstance on earth serves the purpose that is the only purpose on earth, namely the raising of consciousness. This is the goal.
Higher awareness does not have a specific physical outcome that is a supreme will. Throughout history, both religions and political philosophies have been used to come up with a definition that says: “This is the overall, supreme, absolute goal for what should or should not happen on earth.” This is the perversion of the Father where you take this idea of an absolute goal and you say: “The establishment of an Islamic State, of a Communist world, of a Christian nation, or even of democratic and free nations around the world is so important that it sets aside the reverence for life.” The Father’s overall, absolute goal for planet earth is that people are allowed to exercise their free will until they have had enough of a certain experience and say: “We want more.”
It is now possible to say, as many people have said over the centuries: “Well then, should we not allow people to do whatever they want without interfering?” This is exactly what you should do; you should not interfere with the internal affairs of a country or a group of people. Of course, in the present situation on earth, it is necessary for you to defend yourself against those other people interfering with you and your nation. Therefore, it is, unfortunately, necessary to have a certain form of defense. This is not saying that this is ultimately justified. It is saying it is necessary in order to prevent a greater calamity, but this is a double-edged sword. It is a very delicate balance.
You are not responsible for how people outplay their minds
The beings of higher awareness are not having a black-and-white judgment of the nations of the earth. There is, again, a long-standing tendency of wanting to have this black-and-white view where you can look at any situation and say: “This is right. This is wrong. Those people are wrong, and we are right. Because we are right, it is justified that we do what is needed to stop those who are wrong.”
It is the will of the beings of higher awareness that free will on earth is allowed to outplay itself. There are certain times where you must stand by and watch while there is such fighting in a nation that it literally tears that nation apart. You can come up with humanitarian concerns and say: “When does it become the international community’s responsibility to go in and stop, for example, the massacres and the torture you have seen in Syria and Iraq?” But you see, again, there are times when the international community must allow these events to outplay themselves, but they should do everything possible to stop the flow of arms into these nations.
This, of course, is not a simple issue, and there is no easy solution. Yet there needs to be a raising of awareness where you recognize that the ends cannot justify the means. This means that, for a modern, democratic nation, it is necessary to recognize that when you have dedicated your nation to a peaceful resolution of conflict, you cannot go in and use force and violence in a nation or an area that has not reached your level of consciousness.
You must stop feeling responsible for those people who are still living in a medieval state of mind and have not yet outplayed it to the point where they have had enough of it and want more. This is the test that the modern nations are facing right now and will be facing potentially for one to two decades. Hopefully, they will rise above this test before it, but if they do not, you will see more and more of these man-made conflicts, problems, and atrocities that will seemingly defy any solution.
Aperversion of the Mother is to be willing to kill in the name of some superior goal. This is one perversion of the Mother, but the other perversion of the Mother is where you take sympathy so far that you try to prevent any kind of suffering. Both of these perversions of the Mother spring from a failure to understand the absolute nature of the Law of Free Will. You do not, according to the Law of Free Will, have the right to forcefully stop other people from exercising their free will. The Omega aspect is that you are not responsible for mitigating or alleviating the suffering caused by people exercising their free will. This is a very difficult test that all of the more aware people have to face.
You cannot be indiscriminately compassionate
Jesus himself faced it because he did come to a state of consciousness, a level of Christ attainment, where he had the ability to heal the physical ailments of any person he encountered. There was not a single person among the tens of thousands of people that Jesus met during his three-year mission that he could not have healed. Jesus was many times moved by compassion of seeing the suffering of other people, wanting to alleviate that suffering by healing the person.
In the beginning of his mission, he did, in several instances, heal people out of pure compassion. It was only later that he came to the realization that there were people who, regardless of how much they were suffering, needed to not be healed. Because only by experiencing the suffering, would they eventually come to the point where they had had enough of experiencing life through this filter of being a victim that is constantly suffering. Only then would they be willing to start taking responsibility for themselves, look at themselves and say: “What is it that I can change in myself?”
So many people who are suffering are constantly looking outside themselves for solutions or alleviation from their suffering. In a universe where free will reigns supreme, your suffering is never caused exclusively by other people. Now, be careful to use discernment here. In a universe where free will reigns supreme, there are many times where you are not in control of the actions of other people, where they come in and use force against you. Nevertheless, what you need to ask yourself is: “What is it in my consciousness that caused me to be magnetized to this situation? There are people in the world who are not being forced by others. So why have I magnetized myself to a situation where I am being forced? What is it I need to learn from this situation? What is it I need to see in myself that is keeping me trapped in these reactionary patterns of reacting against others who are using force against me? What is it in me that is preventing me from being free to live without this oppression?”
How can the more developed nations move out of the quagmire of seeking to solve man-made problems with man-made means? If the more developed democratic nations are to get out of this pattern of feeling that they have to react to everything that is going on in the Middle East and elsewhere, they have to rise in consciousness. They have to ascend to a higher level where they are not pulled into any of these conflicts that are going on around the world. Otherwise, you will bind yourself to doing what the United States did with the invasion in Iraq, which has been generally recognized was a mistake. You cannot continue to do this because there are too many nations that are so far back that there is no way the democratic world has the means or the money to fight all of these battles.
What can you do? You can raise yourself, regardless of what others do. This is the step you can take when you personally are ready to go beyond your present level. What you do is that you look at the situation in the world, and then you look at your reaction to it, and then you make a very critical assessment.
Let us say that you observe your own reactions to certain other people or to what is going on in the world. Let us say, for example, to keep this impersonal that you look at the Islamic extremists who are massacring people deliberately to instill terror. Let us say that you become very upset over this and you say: “This is absolutely wrong! Our government should send in troops or planes to stop this. These people should be killed because they obviously will not stop killing other people.” Note that this is not talking about the outer situation. It is only talking about your reaction.
People are trapped between two opposites
There is a worldwide energetic matrix that causes people to believe the ends can justify the means, and therefore it is justifiable that they use force in order to achieve an end. This is what you see with the people in Iraq. They have completely surrendered their free will to this worldwide matrix. They are feeding their energy into the vortex, and the energy released when they massacre and torture other people is also fed into the vortex. They feel a temporary sense of empowerment by doing what they are doing, but in the end, it depletes them of energy, and they end up feeling lower and lower.
This is one matrix, but it does not exist in isolation. It was created along with another polarity. The one matrix says it is okay to use force and to kill other people to achieve a goal. The opposite matrix says that the first matrix is wrong. The opposite matrix says that the people who are embodying the first matrix must be stopped even with force, if necessary.
Human beings on the individual level and even on the national level, even on the worldly level, have been trapped in the interplay between those two polarities. Some people have become completely blinded and overtaken by the first polarity, and then others have seen the atrocities committed by those people. They have felt the compassion of how wrong this is. This is not saying that it is not wrong. But these people have then reacted by saying: “It is justifiable for us to kill those people who are doing what is wrong.” By doing this, by reacting this way, they simply opened themselves up so they are taken over by the opposite matrix of the first matrix? Now both sides in this conflict are feeding their energies into these vortices.
It has been said that it is so easy to see the faults of others. Jesus talked about seeing the splinter in the eyes of your brother but not seeing the beam in your own eye. Well, what you could actually say is that you are seeing the matrix in the eye of your brother, but you are not seeing the matrix in yourself. Why not?
The reason you see the matrix in your brother is that you are seeing through the perception filter of the matrix in yourself. Because you are seeing through the filter, you cannot see that it is a filter. Therefore, you cannot see the matrix, which can hide behind the filter. Be willing to look at yourself. How many times have you been so good at seeing what other people are doing wrong? How many times have you found yourself come up with arguments: “They are doing this wrong. They shouldn’t be doing this. They should be made to see this, and they should be made to change.”
When you approach other people from this state of mind that they should be made to see what they are doing, how many times have you been successful in changing them? Why is it you cannot convince them that you are right?
It is because they are looking at the situation and their own behavior through the perception filter of their internal matrix. You are thinking that you are looking at it neutrally, that you have the right vision, that you are seeing reality, but you are not. You are looking at the situation through the perception filter of your matrix. Your matrix is not better than the other matrix. They were both created at the same time because they were created as a pair. The reason you can see the faults in the other people is precisely that there is no one who is better at seeing the fault in the opposite matrix than the matrix that you have.
When you have two matrices that were created as a pair, is it not logical that the one matrix can see all the faults in the other matrix and vice versa? You are looking at the situation through the perception filter of one matrix that sees all the faults in the matrix that the other person has. Of course, the other matrix is looking at the situation through the perception filter of that matrix and that matrix can see all the faults in your matrix and the arguments raised by your matrix. Will there ever be a meeting of the minds?
No, because two opposing matrices can never meet. You never have, in the entire history of the universe, seen two opposing matrices who got together and said: “You know what? I think we got this all wrong. Let’s just sit down and agree.” This never happens. But two human beings can do this if each of them – each of them – is willing to transcend their internal matrix. If both transcend their matrix, then there can be a meeting of the minds of the people. Matrices will never meet, but people can because people are more than the matrices. Until they realize this, these dualistic conflicts cannot be overcome. It is therefore preferable for the people who have overcome the dualism, such as many of the democratic nations, to stay out of such dualistic conflicts.