ACIM is Not the Ultimate Teaching for Everyone for All Time
Since I’ve come to experience consciousness not like a house with two floors—higher level (Spirit) and lower level (ego)—but more like a plot of land with two distinct houses (Spirit and ego), it has become clear to me how much A Course in Miracles spiritualizes ego. In fact, it is no different from religions. Yes, its foundational ontology is nondualistic and its practice can lead to that awareness, but the way it addresses the reader belies this. What would the Son of God be, if not only Christ? No part of God is lost to God, nor dreams it is lost to God, so no part of God returns to God or awakens to God. Ego embarks on a journey to God that can never be realized because it is an illusion that must fall away. Only ego dreams (oh, how it wishes!) that it is part of God lost to God.
When clients
read or hear this from me, they ask me why the Course doesn’t teach what
I am now experiencing. That is because the Course is not meant to be the
ultimate spiritual teaching for everyone for all time. It does not lay out the
truth perfectly, nor does it describe perfectly what everyone will experience.
There can be no such teaching, because everyone will have their own unique
experience as every life is a unique expression of the Atonement. Each life that expresses spirituality
expresses a unique “individualized curriculum”—a seeming set of lessons—until
one realizes that what is learning is false.
All spiritual
teachings express initially part of the unique expression of the person or
persons that wrote or channeled them, and the Course is a fine example
of this. It is always important to know the time and context in which a
spiritual teaching comes about. Without that knowledge, you will misunderstand
the teaching and you may fall into fundamentalism.
If the Course
had been channeled by me (or you), it would be a different teaching, because my
life, my spiritual process, and my consciousness have not unfolded as Helen
Schucman’s and Bill Thetford’s did. If they were to have come to see what I
have seen, or if it would have been helpful to their unique expression of the
Atonement to read what I have experienced, that would have been in the Course.
If you do not understand that what unfolds for you will be unique, and that it
will not all line up with the Course, you will put yourself in a box,
and perhaps not even see what is unfolding for you.
The value of the
Course is not lost because it cannot be read as the literal truth for everyone
for all time. Its primary value is in leading you to the Teacher within you,
and through that awareness you will manifest your unique part in the Atonement.
The Course is full of important information, truth, wisdom and valuable
practice, perhaps more so when you understand its context. As with all
spiritual teachings.
As ACIM Mentor I
listen for your unique expression of the Atonement, of which the Course
is some part, and which may not resemble mine. I want to help you find your
way, not for you to follow the Course perfectly (what would that be?),
and certainly not to follow me. I want you to use the Course as it was
meant to be used, not as your own specific roadmap, but as a pointer to God’s
Spirit within you and as a general guide, at least for a time, as your own
expression of the Atonement unfolds.
>>>>
If you have a question the answer to which you
feel may be helpful to others, send it to Liz@acimmentor.com and indicate
that you want it answered in this newsletter/blog.
Comments
Robert Perry's interpretation of the Course gives voice in the Complete and Annotated edition finding that "it means what it says". Jon Mundy's expression offers an understanding of it through lens of Mysticism. And, the not to be overlooked favorite of many is Gary Renard's cinematic expression of it.
Which one can be said to be 'valid'? Which ever one finds expression through the self in resonance with one's individualized learning curriculum, transcendent of schools of thought, place, form, and time.
When learning is complete, so is one's individualized curriculum. Can learning retention of the truth teaching in applied expression of its quotes have any less value when the Course itself calls for consistency without exception as the direction of its curriculum?
This Presence, this Spirit, which the Course has gradually and gently revealed to me, at this time still uses ACIM material to provide direction (as well as other sources), but the primary instruction is coming directly from the way It guides me in every encounter and situation that unfolds. In other words, the primary source for instruction has become my moment to moment life.
That which is not-Spirit, ego, continues to rebound and then recede. The difference is that now I have Help and a source of strength in letting it pass through.
Thank you Liz. Again.
(Unknown, thank you! Your description of the three Course approaches was delightful and relevant.)
The Wrench
If I remember correctly, in my early going with the Course I used to read that the purpose of the Course was to save the world! Where did I see that? No matter. The purpose of the Course can hardly be missed. Jesus, as always, wants to save His brothers. In His Course He consistently tells us that this can only be accomplished with our help and participation. Your personal enlightenment is helpful but not required or a goal. The goal and purpose is your brothers the sons of God. Virtually every comment, book, or blog is Not focused on our brothers but follows the Ego teaching of the Course with being "the most spiritual" person you can be. "I Want My Enlightenment!!" What the author of the Course wants is quickly forgotten or never realized at all.
2000 years has made little impression on the egos tricks or on human nature. A course of self aggrandizement gives you just what you ask for. A road more often traveled.
One of the first orders of business for the ego is to undermine spirit, Jesus, or any spiritual connection to the Course.
Jesus is quickly relegated to a minor contributor because he is seen as a man. A male representation of religion. He wrote a 1000 page book (course) for two individuals one who had no real interest in it. Being a human male he could not see what was to come with these two. One would eventually succumb to the teaching, the other would go mad. Bitter proof of the non spiritual nature or purpose of the author. This quickly relegated the books to the 'Self Help' Section of the library. Any mention of the necessity of helping our brothers is quickly lost in our rush to the top.
It may very well be that spirit and ego are on the same plane and interacting. You may be shown things in a way you can understand but not their actual state or the real reason for what is happening.