On Life-After-Death and Level Confusion
A topic has come up recently with clients and readers that
has illuminated for me why my explanations of what happens to the ego or the
split-mind when a self seems to die often leads to further questions that I
have not been able to satisfy for others. It is because of what is called in A Course in Miracles “level confusion”.
This means confusing what happens on one level of the mind with what happens on
another.
To explain, I hope more clearly than I have in the past, I
am going to use the language that I feel is more directly descriptive than the
language of ACIM. Here’s a key:
Truth = God
Macro split-mind = Son of God
Micro split-minds = Sons of God
Not-Truth = macro ego
Personal thought system = micro ego
(ACIM does not distinguish between “macro” and “micro” ego
just as it often does not distinguish between “macro” and “micro” Son of God. This
distinction is implied in ACIM by the context of each particular passage.)
Awareness of Truth = Holy Spirit
Undoing = Atonement
Manifest undoers = Teachers of God
The questions I have received have to do with whether individual
perception or awareness and/or personal thought systems exist before a self
(body/personality) is born and after a self dies. The answer is no, but I
always receive push back on this answer, often with quotes or links to other
teachers. I have finally seen more clearly that this is because students
confuse levels of the mind, or the macro split-mind and the micro split-mind.
Micro split-minds begin and end with the body with which they were identified.
But the macro split-mind continues on until it is undone.
Here’s why this answer:
Truth, being All, must think of Its Own opposite. But being
All, Truth cannot have an opposite. So Truth’s opposite, or not-Truth, can only
ever be an idea. And it is an idea that is over as soon as it is thought.
Since Truth is one (the same throughout), formless,
boundless, and timeless, the idea of not-Truth is time-bound, limited, diverse
form – the universe of form. The part of the Mind of Truth where this idea
occurs is the macro split-mind. It seems to be split off from the Mind of Truth,
but it cannot actually be apart from Truth. So Truth is still in the macro
split-mind even as it projects not-Truth, or the universe of form. It is split
between Truth and not-Truth.
Time is the illusion on which all of this illusion of
not-Truth rests. In time it seems that not-Truth, or the universe of form,
began long ago and will be undone in some indefinite future. The unfolding
story of the universe of form is the instant of the idea-of-not-Truth/the-undoing-of-the-idea-of-not-Truth
playing out in time. So the universe of form seems to be the idea of not-Truth
but its unfolding story is actually the undoing
of the idea-of-not-Truth. It is the effect, or expression, of the undoing of
the idea-of-not-Truth.
The macro split-mind projects itself into the universe of
form as billions of seemingly-individual versions of itself, or micro
split-minds. Micro split-minds are also split between Truth and not-Truth, or
the thought system of the Awareness of Truth and the personal thought system.
Each micro split-mind is projected onto a unique body. And the personal thought
system in each mind is what teaches that micro split-mind that it is a self, or
a body and personality with a unique story. Each split-mind seems to be born
into a world of this consciousness which is reinforced by other split-minds
that believe the universe of form to be reality. But since the Truth is in each
micro split-mind, each micro split-mind has the potential to become aware of
Truth. Those that do, to whatever degree, are the overt manifestation of the
Undoing. They are the manifest undoers. Those that do not become aware of Truth
are also part of the Undoing because the undoing of not-Truth is inevitable. Not-Truth
will be undone because it is already undone. But their parts are not overt
manifestations of undoing. They contribute in other ways, for example, as
indirect teachers of those that do become aware of Truth. Or perhaps their lives
cause a future situation in which a manifest undoer will learn. In any case,
everyone is doing their part perfectly because their part is not to cause the Undoing. Their part is the effect of the Undoing that has already
occurred. The story of the Undoing unfolds through their seemingly-individual
story.
So, in time, micro split-minds are “born” and “die” with the
body with which they are identified. Their story in time has a beginning and an
ending. But the story of the universe of form continues on until the macro
split-mind’s Undoing is complete. These are the two levels of mind that
students often confuse. Micro split-minds do not have to attain complete
undoing. They do not have to be “perfected” or completely “healed”. They do not
fail or go on and repeat another “life” if they do not. Each has its own unique
part to play and will play it perfectly. It is the macro split-mind that goes
on until it is undone, its Undoing playing out in time through billions of
stories of micro split-minds.
What does this mean for you, who seem to be a micro
split-mind? The Truth in your mind is Timeless. It does not come into time. It goes
on now outside of the story of time. This is your Eternal Being. The self (body
and personality) and the personal thought system with which you identify will
fall away in time. The benefit for you in getting in touch with Truth, Eternal
Being, the Constant and Unchanging, is the peace that your awareness of It will
bring to you in time. And if you come
to fully see that the universe of form is not real and you attain full awareness
of Truth, your mind will put the self and its body and its thought system
aside, not through “death”, but through transcendence. You are a manifest
undoer and to whatever degree you grow your awareness of Truth is your part to
play in the Undoing. You cannot mess this up and you will not have to repeat
it!
>>>>>
What is your part to play in the
Undoing? How do you know? How are you supposed to live in the world if it is
only an effect? The answers to these (and
other) questions are what I help my clients find. Email me at Liz@acimmentor.com to set up an
appointment. Learn more at www.acimmentor.com.
If you have a question the answer to
which you think will help others email it to me at Liz@acimmentor.com
and indicate that you want it answered in the newsletter/blog.
Comments
Does the macro split mind have awareness? Isn't mind always aware? Isn't that part of what 'mind' means? I am quite attached to the idea that mind means awareness; that which is not aware cannot be mind at all, and thus is non-existent.
I think what we all want to deal with is this: At the death of the body, does awareness simply 'go dark', simply cease? We fear complete non-existence, and in fact we only know of our existence through self-awareness. It would be only the most absurd hypothesis to state that there can be existence without awareness.
I am not attached so much to the idea of awareness of the personal self as I am attached to the idea of aware life, that I am aware life, or simply awareness itself. In fact some would say that awareness itself (not bodies and personal self) IS life.
Are you saying that awareness is an attribute only of the micro level, the micro split mind? But isn't Truth self-aware? In ACIM this is actually referred to as Knowledge and that in the split mind this cannot be understood. It could be that knowledge is not comparable to awareness. I also know that 'consciousness' in ACIM is actually in the domain of the split mind, presumably both micro and macro. So the question that comes to mind: is ACIM's "consciousness" and what we call awareness the same? ACIM seems to call 'consciousness' in the domain of the ego because of the duality implied by the fact that there is a split between the observer and what is observed. But is self-awareness inevitably dual?
But it seems to me that if consciousness is in the split mind at both the micro and macro level, then when the body dies awareness (consciousness) reverts to the macro level and awareness seems to continue at the macro level, though we cannot even imagine what that would be like.
You may be conflating your sense of Existence with awareness (consciousness, perception). Your experience of "I exist" is Eternal. This is what I mean when I say that the Truth in you goes on untouched by the personal experience. This experience of existence, however, is conflated with the self. They seem to be the same thing, but they are not. This is, in fact, what gets sorted out through spiritual practice. Existence (It's not really "your" or "my" existence) is found to be quite apart from self-identification and all that comes with that.
In the process of growing awareness of Truth you do attain the macro split-mind. This is where you stand in detachment from the self and its world. It is from there that you just observe not-Truth. I call this view of not-Truth "the snow globe" because you see it all as one contained idea.
Part A
Liz, we may be tripping up on words. I think that the problem may be that although Helen Schucman was receiving highly spiritual messages, her vocabulary was formed in a materialistic culture and she had a strong commitment to the materialistic scientific enterprise. Thus, she had no background or willingness to recognize that all experience involves awareness. All existence involves awareness. If you were not aware during your revelation, how do you know you had one? It astounds me that we are even having this discussion, but it must be laid to the astounding belief that perception and awareness are the same and do not warrant distinction.
So is the problem is in the words? And because of the word problem, we cannot trust ACIM to speak to us about awareness in a way that makes any sense to us. No, the solution is to realize that there IS a valid distinction between perception and non-dual awareness. It is probably just because either Helen was not aware of the distinction or she was threatened by it in some way and simply blocked it out.
You said: "You may be conflating your sense of Existence with awareness (consciousness, perception)."
Well there are two problems with that. One is that without awareness, how can we even speak of of existence? No one is aware of of a purple elephant living in a cave on the moon. But if no one is aware of it, how can we have a discussion as to whether it exists? All existence entails awareness. Second, as I said, you are conflating awareness with perception. I don't think that ACIM actually conflates awareness with perception. It does equate consciousness with perception, however.
You said: "Your experience of "I exist" is Eternal. This is what I mean when I say that the Truth in you goes on untouched by the personal experience."
The experience of "I exist" is actually known through awareness, as long as we are not talking simply about the words. You know you exist because you are aware. If you weren't aware, you certainly would not know anything at all. There would be no experience. You would not exist. This is the only way I can use these words in a way that makes any sense to me.
You said, "This experience of existence, however, is conflated with the self. They seem to be the same thing, but they are not. "
They CAN be conflated but they need not be, if by existence you mean something close to 'that which has being'. Sometimes "existence" is given a meaning that contrasts with being. A thing exists in time and space, but its being is eternal (per Hegel). However, in common usage being and existence mean the same. That which is, exists. Now, ACIM teaches that the objects of our senses neither exist nor have any being. It makes no distinction between existence and being.
You said: "This is, in fact, what gets sorted out through spiritual practice. Existence (It's not really "your" or "my" existence) is found to be quite apart from self-identification and all that comes with that."
In this we agree completely. However, if we believe that Reality involves a loss of awareness we have a very good reason to be terrified of it and we will certainly avoid spiritual practice! To be without awareness is to be without being, without existence.
You said: "In the process of growing awareness of Truth you do attain the macro split-mind. This is where you stand in detachment from the self and its world. It is from there that you just observe not-Truth. I call this view of not-Truth "the snow globe" because you see it all as one contained idea."
OK. But if you observe not-Truth, are you aware of observing not-Truth? If not, how can you report to these readers that you observed what you say? Obviously you are aware. Thus, I think you have answered the question: are you still aware of when the body is put aside, such as in the death of the body? You are are suggesting that, yes, there is still awareness. But it is not the awareness of a personal self. Yet I don't think you can talk about this intelligibly with your equation of perception and awareness.
"This is the loving message of A Course in Miracles, a self-study course designed to help you undo all of your conscious and unconscious beliefs in separation from God so that you can return to an AWARENESS of your Oneness with God." [emphasis added]
MACIM, I.1.1: "10. Gratitude is due to the miracle as an expression of your Real Identity. You can deny that you are One with God, but you cannot alter this Fact. You need to experience miracles as a means to remind you that you are One with God. When you return to full AWARENESS of God, you will no longer need the miracle."[emphasis added]
I.2.1: "A Revelation unites you directly with God; a miracle extends your AWARENESS of God in your perception. You experience both the Revelation and the miracle in the individual mind, but they do not originate there." [emphasis added]
Hmmmm. "Awareness of God in your perception" For me this entails bringing the awareness of God into perception so that it can be recognized even while you remain a self in your perception. This does not, however, equate perception and awareness. There is the awareness of God and then it is brought into perception where you can remember the experience even is the perception that you are a self.
MACIM 1.3.4: "Your Christ Mind is the awareness that you are One with God, and therefore your Christ Mind is the Atonement."
MACIM 2.2.7: "As you become more and more aware of your Identity in God, your awareness of Oneness will envelop your entire mind, and ensure your sense of security."
I would imagine that this awareness will continue when the body is no longer perceived and when you no longer identify yourself as a personal self and you now experience yourself (are aware of yourself) as the macro split-mind.
Love and peace to everyONE ...
also.. by transcendence, do you mean.. complete-letting-go-of-identification-with? so you, 'who's' mind who no longer says 'i am that' in regard to the self, have transcended the self? rather than i have envisioned transcendence, which has been to mean.. well.. no more awareness at all. revelation then, i guess, i have taken it to mean. is my question there clear?
also, thank for this post, every time i hear yourself or ken discuss this topic, i experience a dropping of a layer of guilt over the 'my dad's' of this world, over those who are not leaning toward truth in awareness. i guess it would be more accurate to say that i experience a dropping of the layer of belief in myself/selves/separation as real?
this: "Time is the illusion on which all of this illusion of not-Truth rests. In time it seems that not-Truth, or the universe of form, began long ago and will be undone in some indefinite future. The unfolding story of the universe of form is the instant of the idea-of-not-Truth/the-undoing-of-the-idea-of-not-Truth playing out in time. So the universe of form seems to be the idea of not-Truth but its unfolding story is actually the undoing of the idea-of-not-Truth. It is the effect, or expression, of the undoing of the idea-of-not-Truth. " is so brilliant! i understand why the door into the world of light in my dream was in the middle of the tunnel now, its wasnt only about NOW being the only time i can choose peace. it was about the nature of time/the illusion itself, im just very much appreciating that clarity right now, thanks! laugh.. well, i guess they are 'linked.' the nature of it and the awareness.
i think can APPLY that logic in this mind, when self attachment and guilt are strong.. ill find out, i guess! in the higher miracle dream i spoke of, i was so angry when i went through the illogical door (obviously it was illogical to the ego) so im a bit worried about backlash, because oh boy the complete irrationality of guilt, given the truth of the sentence im discussing here, simply does contain selves not being real.. not being important or special, it contains their nothingness. oh laugh.. so.. im afraid of the backlash of nothing?? well.. yeah.. and .. well, no, this beautiful truth can be remembered no matter where i seem to be in the process. and it doesnt matter in truth if i do or i dont.. right.. it will show where values lays in any moment. weird, it seems to come down, at this point experientially, to willingness to let go of the emotional aspect of story. which right now, brings a feeling of great joy.. which brings back that question.. what experiences joy!? it must be holy spirit, right? ive thought of holy spirit as.. detached recognition, in some way. and joy doesnt seem detached.
ACIM says (I couldn't find the page right away...) that 'space and time' are only functions/forms of how far away we 'project' THE DREAM ! Space is 'close' - and the time line is just 'farther away'...
Love and peace...
so for example, that last paragraph you wrote
"I.2.1: "A Revelation unites you directly with God; a miracle extends your AWARENESS of God in your perception. You experience both the Revelation and the miracle in the individual mind, but they do not originate there." [emphasis added]
Hmmmm. "Awareness of God in your perception" For me this entails bringing the awareness of God into perception so that it can be recognized even while you remain a self in your perception. This does not, however, equate perception and awareness. There is the awareness of God and then it is brought into perception where you can remember the experience even is the perception that you are a self."
contains the heart of the conflict around this topic in regard to liz' blog (and to kens explanation of the courses teachings for he gives the same explanation of this as liz does. i HIGHLY recommend one of kens talks 'the expereince of ACIM'. you know how sometimes when you hear the one topic discussed in different peoples personal 'languages', it suddenly makes sense?
so.. if you just played with the idea that 'awareness' went with 'youness' and NOT with ISNESS/GOD for a moment, maybe it might become apparent how the the ego tries to mix together ACTUAL existence with what the personal self/ego experiences as awareness/existence. and how this is the source of the conflict around the idea that there is no awareness in god.
i agree (and so does the course! it actually talks about it a LOT, its just that it takes ages for us to to be ready and willing to face it! (and so to stop misinterpreting it)) with what you wrote when you said "However, if we believe that Reality involves a loss of awareness we have a very good reason to be terrified of it and we will certainly avoid spiritual practice! To be without awareness is to be without being, without existence." THIS is the terror the course speaks of. the ego confuses awareness (which is its territory) with existence. and yes, as the course says repeatedly.. this is what we are letting go of. what we think we are DOES have reason to fear its undoing.. but what we actually are is not even aware of any of it. (as acim says.. god is not aware of any of this!) but the other side of that terror is, peace,joy, love, Reality.. actual existence.
id be interested to know if ive got any parts of this arse up, liz. apart from that, i also have no idea if my urge to discuss what became apparent in reading jeremys post re. 'you awareness and god' was from HS or if HS would have responded to this instead "However, if we believe that Reality involves a loss of awareness we have a very good reason to be terrified of it and we will certainly avoid spiritual practice!".
so, taking a leap into possibly being a ding bat ;) and pressing send. i feel arrogant for writing this, liz. am i?
Gratitude and Love, Deb
Hanna, what you wrote was perfect. It hit the nail on head, at least for me! It is exactly what I seemed to need in order to make sense of this whole subject! THANK YOU!!!
And yet, I will have to say that it still leaves me terrified, and that is fine also, as Liz has communicated to me privately it is only my experiences of the higher miracle (Holy Instant) and True Perception that will ultimately allay my fear. But your response has helped me GREATLY to put aside my questions and to return to learning and the practice of peace. And your answer is completely in synch with the Course AND with Liz's experiences. HURRAY!
To your earlier post: There's really no difference between the experience of the macro and micro split-minds. Just points of view. A higher miracle is an awareness that the Truth is true or an awareness that illusion is illusion or both.
Transcend"ing" is rising above the illusion. Transcend"ed" would be, yes, the same experience as Revelation.
Yet I now realize that because of my rather long experience studying the teachings of the East, especially Advaita Vedanta and the modern non-duality teachings (such as Rupert Spira) that I was referring to non-dual awareness, not awareness OF[whatever]. In non-dual teachings awareness is simply the opposite of our notion of an non-living thing with no awareness, like a rock or a cup. So in advaita, 'awareness' is used as simply the innate capacity for knowing. We could also use the word 'knowing' in either a dualistic or a non-dualistic way, so 'knowing' is not inherently a superior word for the Course to use as a characteristic of God. It is just a choice as to how to use words. In non-duality traditions 'awareness' is used in the same way that ACIM uses 'knowing'.
So it comes down to this: the ego is terrified of losing awareness, but in fact when the ego is put aside you have the capacity for knowing, which is virtually the same as the non-duality's knowing, And this knowing, or non-dual awareness, is, of course, the end of all doubt and all fear, because God's knowing is knowing only God, Which IS Certainty and is Life.
i really dont know about the definitions you have described above, as i have not experienced revelation, nor have i studied any teachings other than ACIM's to any great depth at all.
but there is a part in the talk of ken wapnicks i spoke of, (i think im remembering this correctly..) where he is talking about this topic of awareness and being confusion etc, where he is saying how when we, here, speak of awareness we are also speaking about existence and experience.. awareness is experiencing, and this is equated with actual existence. and he then says that in truth, or in revelation, you cant even use the word experience accurately, its simply not applicable, because nothing that we experience outside of direct revelation can help but contain 'the opposite of truths framework of what existence/experiencing is'. but that as there is no way to convey this, we just use these ideas we have of core isness, and whatever language we feel best conveys as much as can be conveyed, until (if) we have direct experiences of truth. then he laughed, cos there he was talking about 'experience of truth' again! but he says all this inaccurate discussion/clarification has the potential to open us to truth anyway, so the inaccuracy doesnt matter. in talking with liz on earlier blogs, i went through a struggle until i realised that no matter if i could or could not pinpoint or define ruth in my expereince as an individual mind in some way.. as in 'oh, THIS is what continues, this is what does not', what truth IS, regardless of my understanding or lack thereof, simply cannot not be, so IT is in my mind , whether i identify it or not.
this stuff still fascinates me, but one thing im sure of in moments of clarity, is that whatever Reality IS, cannot contain loss of anything, so no matter what i come up against in my expereince that feels deeply like core isness that becomes apparent ISNT core isness, 'waking' from that seemingly valuable, cherished, beautiful core isness to whatever actually IS core, real, and valuable, cant really be a loss, no matter how scared it makes me, like you described in your past paragraph. truth is, nothing else can BE, and letting go of what isnt cant be a loss. so like liz reminds me of above.. none of this matters an iota! (bot boy do i enjoy what feels like clarification anyway!) like she also reminds me often, i can speculate about what cant be comprehended (yet?) or i can be where i think i am and work through letting go of my barriers to peace and spend time just being open to whatever Truth is. bottom line for me now, is that i am drawn to knowing as much of truth as is possible, but i also very much value letting go of resistance and guilt in any way that isnt blocking that openness.
when i read youre question 'did i feel arrogant?' i got incredibly uncomfortable, because, no i didnt, and the question to you wasnt an honest one. what i WAS thinking and feeling and reacting to, was the part of my mind that cares if other people think i am arrogant, that cares when people dont like me. i was trying to deflect that possibility of being seen that way by asking you that, by trying to bring a bit of 'oh look at me in my weak, frightened and vulnerable state, please dont judge against me.' this kind of thing is what id like to discuss in our next session.. the 'little dishonesties and white lies' i try to hide behind mainly to protect the way i want to be perceived by people. so.. thanks for the question. i HEAR ya that this doesnt matter either, its.. spinning in the ego, right? but i nonetheless dont wish to be playing out that stuff anymore, it feels.. well, block-y!
Yes, in our experience here in duality, all of our awareness (except for experiences of Revelation) is awareness of illusion, of duality, of what we regard as separate wholes devoid of oneness. So it is easy to conclude that God's awareness has nothing to do with our own experiences in perception. But since 'awareness' is a general term, we certainly have no basis in ACIM to say that God is not aware!
Yes there is a basis for our fear of Truth. I don't think that the basis of this fear is fear of losing awareness. It is the fear of becoming aware of our guilt, a guilt that the ego wants us to believe is real. And when we have long practiced True Perception and have experienced many, many miracle, we will realize fully that there is no guilt. Our awareness will have been cleansed of all desire to 'hide' from this guilt by projecting a world. But awareness, of course is an aspect of mind and Mind. Mind without awareness is virtually a contradiction in terms. It can almost be said that mind is awareness.
Some may disagree with this view, but I am confident that ACIM does not teach that there is loss of awareness as we return to Knowledge. It is just that we are, at that point, aware of nothing but Truth.
However if we were to believe that awakening to Truth is to lose awareness per se, that WOULD be another reason to fear awakening, and the belief that God is not aware is certainly a device of the ego, not a teaching of the Holy Spirit or of ACIM.
The first is sentences from 2 consecutive paragraphs in ACIM.
"The Holy Spirit is in the part of the mind that lies between the ego and the spirit, mediating between them always in favor of the spirit. To the ego this is partiality, and it responds as if it were being sided against. To spirit this is truth, because it knows its fullness and cannot conceive of any part from which it is excluded.
T-7.IX.2. Spirit knows that the *awareness* of all its brothers is included in *its own* [i.e., Spirit's own awareness], as it is included in God. The power of the whole Sonship and of its Creator is therefore spirit's own fullness, rendering its creations equally whole and equal in perfection." [asterisks added for emphasis] ACIM, T-7.IX.1:5-7–2:1-2
Clearly the Course is referring to Spirit, not the Holy Spirit, as it just distinguished the two. What this citation means by "its brothers" is a topic for another time.
Second, as an exercise, do a search on all instances of the word "awareness" in ACIM and try substituting the word "perception" and see if the substitution is a credible in all cases in terms of what is meant, given the context. I think this will lay this question to rest.
In the paragraphs partially quoted above, would 'Spirit's own perception...' work as well as "Spirit's own awareness..."
also, being aware of WHY none of this matters one iota helps to be at least aware of peace while acting out in defence.
I think you may be tripping yourself up when you wrote,"Without awareness how can one even speak of existence."
In the course awareness signifies no existence.
Truth=God
Macro split-mind=Son of God
Micro split-minds=Sons of God
Not-Truth=macro ego
Personal thought system=micro ego.
Truth=God Macro split-mind=Son of God Micro split-minds=Sons of God Not Truth=macro ego Personal thought system=micro ego.
I kept looking and looking at this trying to figure out what you were saying...
Like the 5:57 comment I wrote above. Then I checked it against the original post and saw the problem.