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

Jeremy said…
But does this not mean simply that the 'you' of awareness will no longer be the awareness of the personal self but will revert to be the awareness of the macro Split Mind (the Son of God)?

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.
Jeremy said…
I just watched a Rupert Spira video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBEhtuFa3-Y&feature=em-subs_digest) in which Spira is discussing how certain works of art are able to evoke the a sense of collapse of the separate self, and in this experience we call it 'beauty' or 'love'. If God is Love, by this we can only mean that in the revelation of God we experience the collapse (absence) of the separate self. Spira has always maintained that non-dual awareness is one word to describe infinite Being, or what mystics might call 'God'. All of this would suggest that God is 'self-aware', and that awareness must also be a part of all existence. Our mistake is to say that existence is perception, which is awareness shorn of its wholeness.
ACIM Mentor said…
Jeremy, in ACIM, "awareness", "consciousness", and "perception" are used interchangeably. They imply that there is the perceiver and the perceived. Duality. In Truth, or Knowledge, to know and to be are the same experience. This is Oneness. It is whole and the same throughout. It cannot be described. There is no correlation to Knowledge in perception. Even having had direct Revelation I cannot "explain" It to myself. There's no way to capture Formlessness with form.

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.
Jeremy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jeremy said…
Because of the limitation imposed on reply length I will put this in two parts.

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.
Jeremy said…
Part B

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.
Jeremy said…
Liz, in the Preface to MACIM, you state:
"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.
ACIM Mentor said…
Jeremy, I have no wish to argue with you.
Jeremy said…
One more; I'll stop. I promise!

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.
Bente hove said…
I think you're 'right on the spot' here about what ACIM says...

Love and peace to everyONE ...
hannah said…
so, liz.. i think youre saying that the higher miracle experience is the experience of the macro split-mind? i have been wondering where the experience of joy fits into this undoing picture. because.. well, the one song/one story expereince, was detached from any emotional reaction or any judgement about the individual notes, or the micro stories. there was great love present, but there was also joy. does the macro split mind not fear the undoing??

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.


hannah said…
oh, though!!!! oh, joy! the complete inappropriateness of guilt that is so apparent in this "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." this experience (individuality, form etc) isnt an expression of the opposite of oneness, its the seeming undoing of the idea of it. oh, how very wonderful!!! guilt TRULY cannot ever be appropriate then!!!! laughing! very very happy!

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.
Bente hove said…
Apropos 'time'...
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...
Anonymous said…
Liz I don't know if you ever met Ken Wapnick but I am sure you knew of his frustration with ACIM students and understanding the course. Your article was magnificent. Understanding Oneness in a split mind is difficult until it is felt. Your right about one thing ...with everyone playing their part perfectly undoing is only a matter of time.
hannah said…
hi jeremy! i struggled sooo bad, with all these definitions and concepts, because it did seem completely insane to me to say that awareness was not part of existence. but reading through the quotes you gave here, something became apparent. (thank you!) non of them say 'the awareness of god' or 'gods awareness'. they all say things like 'YOUR awareness of oneness' or 'so that YOU can return to an awareness of god.' the awareness goes with the YOU part, not with the GOD part.

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?
Deb Baczewski said…
What was in need of clarification was accomplished here. Thank you Liz.

Gratitude and Love, Deb
Jeremy said…
Hanna, Hello!

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!
ACIM Mentor said…
Hannah, nothing was arse up and only you can know if you were being arrogant. Did you feel arrogant? In any case, it does not matter one iota if you were!

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.
Jeremy said…
Hannah, I have come to a further realization. It is true, as Liz made clear (and I disputed in error) that ACIM uses the word 'awareness' to mean something akin to 'perception', and perhaps completely interchangeable with it. You made this clear to me.

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.
hannah said…
Jeremy, youre welcome!

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.
hannah said…
Liz, re the experience of macro and micro split minds. ok, well that makes sense i guess, logically. if mind knows only itself, then that must be so, in extension or projection. oh, right e=right, i see the error in my question, i think.. still asking from the point of individuality as having meaning, being so? asking from the perspective that split-ness and levels thus levels of split-ness are so?

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!
Jeremy said…
Hannah, I am not aware of the specific talk given by Ken Wapnick that you refer to. But I have read almost everything that Ken has written; I feel that Ken would say that the Course's use of the word 'awareness' is more or less the common usage in our language. It is a general term that means either knowledge or perception. The term awareness is not one of the items in Ken's Glossary-Index, so that implies that it does not have a special or controversial meaning in ACIM. Although there is every reason to suggest that in our current state we cannot know or understand God's experience, there is nothing at all in the Course that God is not aware! God knows His Creation, and thus he is aware of It.

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.
Kathy said…
I can't help but think of Data fro Star Treck. At will, when he felt a calling, he and others of his species would merge with The Collective. In The Collective, you find complete oneness with one mind. There is no desire for individuality, just the all consuming embrace of unity beyond the not truth perception. The individual awareness shifts to infinitely expanded experience of oneness. There is a complete surrender which can only occur when one is willing to expand to the point of no return to self awareness. Beyond that is an awareness/existence that cannot be described, but being what we are in Truth we cannot resist indefinitely.
Jeremy said…
Two things:

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..."
ACIM Mentor said…
Yes, Hannah, the lack of distinction between the macro-micro split-mind will come in time. It's more of an experience than something that can be conveyed. I guess it would be like saying I can see how the land my house sits on is part of the whole earth despite seeming-boundaries. This micro split-mind is an expression of the macro split-mind despite seeming boundaries.
ACIM Mentor said…
When I come out of Revelation and lately sometimes when I come out of higher miracles, which happen more often now, I am forcefully struck by how nothing in this perception, including everything I teach, has anything to do with Truth at all! There is absolutely no connection or even resemblance between what we seem to experience in this perception and Truth. I know the inevitable question is, So why do you teach? First, it's just what the self is doing and since it's all nothing what does it matter? Second, my spiritual practice is what opened me to experience Truth. But it is like learning to garden because you think that Heaven is a garden but when you get There you find that Heaven is like Jupiter! Of course experiencing this complete disconnect between illusion and Truth is what leads to the experience of forgiveness. This is why I can say to readers like Hannah that "it does not matter one iota" what you do or who you are as a person because it really doesn't matter!
hannah said…
thanks Liz, that helps. question though.. wouldnt things like my caring how others perceive me, and this care leading me to inauthentic action, effectively act as a block to being open to truth somehow? or only if i felt guilty about that? i cant imagine the dishonesty i spoke of being .. compatible with peace somehow.
hannah said…
compatible with experiencing peace i mean. i know you say that peace doesnt come to the self.. but does this mean that you could, for example, be mean to someone, and experience peace? lie and experience peace?
hannah said…
ok, hang on. i think healing guilt would lead to the dropping of those things, cos well.. 99% of the time those choices would arise from defence. and if you are aware of that fact, then maybe yes you could be.. at least, aware of peace? and be mean or lie. but fully experiencing peace comes from awareness or knowledge of truth, and from that guiltless mind space you would never feel the need to attack or defend.

also, being aware of WHY none of this matters one iota helps to be at least aware of peace while acting out in defence.
ACIM Mentor said…
Hannah, you are correct that guilt is why one would be mean, lie, etc. And, yes, guilt is an obstacle to peace. And the willingness to be at peace is the "criteria" for the awareness of Truth. One could have a Holy Instant while still having guilt in their mind (as we all know!) but would not sustain the awareness of Truth for long.
Anonymous said…
Jeremy,

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.
Anonymous said…
liz is this what you mean?

Truth=God
Macro split-mind=Son of God
Micro split-minds=Sons of God
Not-Truth=macro ego
Personal thought system=micro ego.
Anonymous said…
I see. When I pull down "show original post" it reads,
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...
ACIM Mentor said…
Anonymous, I'm confused. Did you find your answer?
Anonymous said…
Yes. On my computer the Show Original Post right above the comments was showing different than the original post. See above. Also the paragraphs were not spaced. I didn't know if it was just my computer or a program problem so I posted it so you can check. At first I was reading the drop down original post and couldn't understand the = section as it showed
Like the 5:57 comment I wrote above. Then I checked it against the original post and saw the problem.
Anonymous said…
Sorry, I'm on pain meds from dentist and am not writing clearly.

Popular posts from this blog

Ask: Can you comment on the satisfaction of accomplishment as a trap?

The Two Spiritual Goals

An Example of Misusing the Specificity of ACIM