Re: Andy's Zen story/lovetheworkofbk

March 22, 2006

> > But you will note, this is not something that she trained herself

> > to See. It *happened* to her. It occurred as a result of some

> > Grace. She neither sought it (via the Work, which didn't exist at

> > that time) nor worked for it. It arose, as she tells it, through

> > her, effortlessly.

> Yes, you raise an important point Andy

> As pointed out in ACIM the last step to raise us up to heaven is

> taken by God we CANNOT do it.

*****I would say that EVERY step is taken by God (though the steps

appear to happen through the will of the dreamer....until that belief

is questioned and seen through).

> What is required of the dreamers is a little willingness to

> question the nightmare and find the " happy dream " .

*****Here is where I part company with your paradigm (and that of

ACIM also).

The fundamental understanding is that the dreamer (you and I, and all

apparent individuals) has no independent existence from God (or

Consciousness, or Totality).

The dreamer is a manifestation of God (or whatever you wish to call

that-which-neither-comes-nor-goes: Unicity). Thus the arising as a

thought, " I'll do The Work on this belief, " is not something the

dreamer can choose to have. The " little willingness to question the

nightmare, " when it appears, is not due to the wisdom or insight or

any other quality or attribute of the dreamer. It is all the

movement of God. It is all God's Grace.

And I believe you point to this also. Below is a question I posed to

you yesterday.

You wrote, " If I experience grief or anger it is ONLY because I have

not been vigilant enough to question the thought(s) which caused it. "

And I inquired yesterday, " And why is that? You know, very well, how

effective and useful The Work is. Why does lack of vigilance happen? "

You never answered. ;-)))

Could the answer be that lovetheworkofbk does not get to choose, has

no say in when vigilance happens or doesn't happen? A moment of lack

of attention and poof! caught again. But who has the control over

when attention is present or not present? Is it 'you' or is it IT?

You also stated, " It certainly was NOT necessary for me to suffer, it

was simply the result of my lack of attention. "

I don't disagree. The lack of attention produced a thought that was

unexamined, unquestioned, and suffering arose from that. But I asked

you (again, you never answered it), " With all you know about The

Work, why the lack of attention? "

See? You're side-stepping here.

What I am saying is the INITIAL, original impulse to do The Work, to

question the validity of a disturbing thought (or ANY thought for

that matter) or to engage in meditation, or prayer, is not something

the dreamer, the (apparent) individual can muster up itself.

The dreamer (you and I) simply has NO independence, NO genuine

freedom, because, as you note, we don't control, nor have any say in

the thoughts which arise in consciousness. So, " I'm going to do The

Work on this belief, " when it arises, as a thought, and yet it is

not " our " doing. When that thought arises, and even IF it will

arise, is not up to us.

March 22, 2006

>

> You wrote, " If I experience grief or anger it is ONLY because I

> have not been vigilant enough to question the thought(s) which

> caused it. "

>

> And I inquired yesterday, " And why is that? You know, very well,

> how effective and useful The Work is. Why does lack of vigilance

> happen? "

>

> You never answered. ;-)))

>

> Could the answer be that lovetheworkofbk does not get to choose,

> has no say in when vigilance happens or doesn't happen? A moment

> of lack of attention and poof! caught again. But who has the

> control over when attention is present or not present? Is

> it 'you' or is it IT?

>

Oh ... Andy we are getting into some very heavy stuff here, but

since you ask here is my 2 cents worth.

The " I " does not get to choose anything, but there is a part of the

mind which does constantly make the choice between truth and

illusion. Ken Wapnick has described this part of the mind as

the " decision maker " . When Helen and Bill made the fateful

statement " There must be another way " , that was an expression of the

decision maker in their minds having a little willingness to be open

to God. The result of that decision was as we all know the Course in

Miracles. The choice to do the Work is the result of the decision

maker in the mind choosing another way. Once the choice for truth is

made one cannot go back, although one can delay for a very long

time. So lack of vigilance is only a delaying tactic of the ego,

while the Son still identifies with thought.

> You also stated, " It certainly was NOT necessary for me to suffer,

> it was simply the result of my lack of attention. "

>

> I don't disagree. The lack of attention produced a thought that

> was unexamined, unquestioned, and suffering arose from that. But

> I asked you (again, you never answered it), " With all you know

> about The Work, why the lack of attention? "

>

> See? You're side-stepping here.

LOL ... no side-stepping. There are two voices in the mind the still

small voice of God and the loud raging voice of the ego. Any lack of

attention would be caused by listening to the voice of my ego, not

the voice of love. And who is listening/choosing? Well that would be

the decision maker in my mind.

>

> What I am saying is the INITIAL, original impulse to do The Work,

> to question the validity of a disturbing thought (or ANY thought

> for that matter) or to engage in meditation, or prayer, is not

> something the dreamer, the (apparent) individual can muster up

> itself.

>

> The dreamer (you and I) simply has NO independence, NO genuine

> freedom, because, as you note, we don't control, nor have any say

> in the thoughts which arise in consciousness. So, " I'm going to

> do The Work on this belief, " when it arises, as a thought, and yet

> it is not " our " doing. When that thought arises, and even IF it

> will arise, is not up to us.

>

I must respectfully disagree here. As I understand it the " decision

maker " in the dreamers mind is the one who makes the choice for

truth. If it was any other way then we would be the victim of forces

outside of ourselves. The dreamer was given the freedom to choose

truth or illusion via the decision maker, he was not given the power

to make illusions real.

Have a beautiful day

" Sanity doesn't suffer, ever . . . ever! Sanity doesn't suffer,

ever, ever! Isn't that lovely? " Byron

March 23, 2006

" There are two voices in the mind the still small voice

of God and the loud raging voice of the ego. Any lack of attention

would be caused by listening to the voice of my ego, not the voice of

love. And who is listening/choosing? Well that would be the decision

maker in my mind. "

*****And here is where our disagreement arises. And it's not

resolvable, as far as I can see. It's why there is no attraction for

me in the teachings of ACIM.

Now......I hope I get this right. If not, if I'm misunderstanding,

then please post again and we can continue to clarify for ourselves

and others.

It seems to me that our disagreements stem from the primary split

between the nondual and the dual foolosophies.

I find an attraction and acceptance of the notion of Unicity. From

what you wrote, it seems to me that you see Duality. I see God (or,

in my terminology " Consciousness " ) as The Only Thing There Is. You

see God, on the one hand, and, " the loud raging voice of the ego, " on

the other. In other words, duality.

To be explicit: for me, God is All-Things, and that must, perforce,

include the voice of the ego. Thus, as I see it, the ego, and its

voice, is also God. Everything is God and everything is the " doing "

of God. The world of duality (where you and I seem separate and

differentiated), that world is also part of, an expression of, God.

In sum, there is nothing now or ever, here or anywhere, that has not

been God and God's doing (including the imaginary sense of

separation).

You wrote, " I must respectfully disagree here. As I understand it

the " decision maker " in the dreamers mind is the one who makes the

choice for truth. If it was any other way then we would be the victim

of forces outside of ourselves. The dreamer was given the freedom to

choose truth or illusion via the decision maker, he was not given the

power to make illusions real.

*****And I disagree with you, pleasantly (at last). As I understand

it, the " decision maker " in the dreamer's mind is also God. And yes,

the state of things, as I understand it, can been looked at with the

perspective that we are the " victim of forces outside of ourselves. "

That is certainly an understandable interpretation. Some who accept

the validity of this teaching see it that way; other's don't. It's a

very inidivudal matter (and not our doing anyway). I call that " the

infinite permutations of being. "

To go a bit further, in this understanding I am pointing to, there

really isn't anything " outside " of ourselves. Since God is All-There-

Is, then it stands to reason that we, too, are God, in a manifest

form, arising in the illusory dream of separation. It's ALL

happening, in, by, and through, God. God is All There Is. Thus,

this relative world of phenomenality, where things appear to happen,

where objects appear to be separate from each other, where varying

philosophies arise....this dreamscape....isn't our doing. It happens

through us, not by us. (I like to say " we are the driven, not the

driver. " ) We have as much independent will as a leaf floating down

the stream; the leaf's " thinking " that it will direct the course of

its journey down the stream, that it " chooses " which direction it

will go, is equivalent to the confusion we have when we think we

choose anything, that we are the Author of the script we live out.

From what you wrote, it seems that this is not how you see things and

I am not attempting here to convince you otherwise. I wish you well

in the story that holds you in its grasp (as I hope to feel at peace

in my story).

If I am correct above, in distinguishing how our perspectives differ,

it probably would be useful for those who read our words here to

understand the radical distinction between the understanding

expressed by lovetheworkofbk (duality: God and that-which-is-not-

God), and that presented by Andy (unicity: God-Is-All). To

intelligently evaluate and respond to our words, those who read our

words will be served well if they recognize the contrasting

perspective our of which the words arise. (No reason to add more

confusion to confusion! Hahaha!!)

March 23, 2006

dear Andy,

What confuses me is that The book The Disappearance of the Universe is

about ACIM and he does write about oneness.

I wonder if the Course in Miracles is trying to explain unicity on the

level of duality so we can understand it from that level.

It was written when duality was the main belief.

I dont understand this discussion but i think you might like the

book.. here a few quotes..

page 328 " Your soul is already perfect or otherwise it wouldnt be a

soul....... " EVolution appears to happen, but it's just a dream. Once

your mind has learned all its forgiveness lessons. IT awakens to

spirit, and everything else is gone except heaven. "

page 327 ...(the ego)... " tries to suck you into thinking you have

freedom within the script when the only real freedom you will ever

find is completly outside the whole mess. "

......the Holy Spirit " s script is the forgiveness of all the people

in your life. "

page 328

" Most people think of their soul as being an individual thing because

they can't help but think of themselves as individuals. When that

false belief is gone, then you know that there is really only one

soul.. which is our unlimited oneness as spirit. "

It seems sort of contradictory we are already whole and spirit and yet

we play this game of being individual so we have to get out of it

through forgiveness work which is the work of katie..

I think if you read this book you might find a lot to agree with in

the course. But it may not be something you need anyway.

I must need to read it. though some is over my head.

love,roslyn

" There are two voices in the mind the still small voice

> of God and the loud raging voice of the ego. Any lack of attention

> would be caused by listening to the voice of my ego, not the voice of

> love. And who is listening/choosing? Well that would be the decision

> maker in my mind. "

>

> *****And here is where our disagreement arises. And it's not

> resolvable, as far as I can see. It's why there is no attraction for

> me in the teachings of ACIM.

>

> Now......I hope I get this right. If not, if I'm misunderstanding,

> then please post again and we can continue to clarify for ourselves

> and others.

>

> It seems to me that our disagreements stem from the primary split

> between the nondual and the dual foolosophies.

>

> I find an attraction and acceptance of the notion of Unicity. From

> what you wrote, it seems to me that you see Duality. I see God (or,

> in my terminology " Consciousness " ) as The Only Thing There Is. You

> see God, on the one hand, and, " the loud raging voice of the ego, " on

> the other. In other words, duality.

>

> To be explicit: for me, God is All-Things, and that must, perforce,

> include the voice of the ego. Thus, as I see it, the ego, and its

> voice, is also God. Everything is God and everything is the " doing "

> of God. The world of duality (where you and I seem separate and

> differentiated), that world is also part of, an expression of, God.

> In sum, there is nothing now or ever, here or anywhere, that has not

> been God and God's doing (including the imaginary sense of

> separation).

>

> You wrote, " I must respectfully disagree here. As I understand it

> the " decision maker " in the dreamers mind is the one who makes the

> choice for truth. If it was any other way then we would be the victim

> of forces outside of ourselves. The dreamer was given the freedom to

> choose truth or illusion via the decision maker, he was not given the

> power to make illusions real.

>

> *****And I disagree with you, pleasantly (at last). As I understand

> it, the " decision maker " in the dreamer's mind is also God. And yes,

> the state of things, as I understand it, can been looked at with the

> perspective that we are the " victim of forces outside of ourselves. "

> That is certainly an understandable interpretation. Some who accept

> the validity of this teaching see it that way; other's don't. It's a

> very inidivudal matter (and not our doing anyway). I call that " the

> infinite permutations of being. "

>

> To go a bit further, in this understanding I am pointing to, there

> really isn't anything " outside " of ourselves. Since God is All-There-

> Is, then it stands to reason that we, too, are God, in a manifest

> form, arising in the illusory dream of separation. It's ALL

> happening, in, by, and through, God. God is All There Is. Thus,

> this relative world of phenomenality, where things appear to happen,

> where objects appear to be separate from each other, where varying

> philosophies arise....this dreamscape....isn't our doing. It happens

> through us, not by us. (I like to say " we are the driven, not the

> driver. " ) We have as much independent will as a leaf floating down

> the stream; the leaf's " thinking " that it will direct the course of

> its journey down the stream, that it " chooses " which direction it

> will go, is equivalent to the confusion we have when we think we

> choose anything, that we are the Author of the script we live out.

>

> From what you wrote, it seems that this is not how you see things and

> I am not attempting here to convince you otherwise. I wish you well

> in the story that holds you in its grasp (as I hope to feel at peace

> in my story).

>

> If I am correct above, in distinguishing how our perspectives differ,

> it probably would be useful for those who read our words here to

> understand the radical distinction between the understanding

> expressed by lovetheworkofbk (duality: God and that-which-is-not-

> God), and that presented by Andy (unicity: God-Is-All). To

> intelligently evaluate and respond to our words, those who read our

> words will be served well if they recognize the contrasting

> perspective our of which the words arise. (No reason to add more

> confusion to confusion! Hahaha!!)

>

March 23, 2006

>

> If I am correct above, in distinguishing how our perspectives

> differ, it probably would be useful for those who read our words

> here to understand the radical distinction between the understanding

> expressed by lovetheworkofbk (duality: God and that-which-is-not-

> God), and that presented by Andy (unicity: God-Is-All). To

> intelligently evaluate and respond to our words, those who read our

> words will be served well if they recognize the contrasting

> perspective our of which the words arise. (No reason to add more

> confusion to confusion! Hahaha!!)

>

Andy I think you have misunderstood my position completely! No one

could be more non-dualistic than me, LOL ... except maybe Steve D. The

metaphysics of ACIM is NON-DUALISTIC. The Course begins with the clear

statement " Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.

Herein lies the peace of God " . The Work is also non-dualistic in

approach.

Jesus is well aware that God is all there is. The impossible

separation from God never really happened, but the Son (us) believes

that it did so this dream of separation arose. For the sleeping Son

the ONLY choice remaining is which voice (God or ego) he will listen

to in the dream. There is NOTHING that is not God, but the Son (us)

has forgotten that, and the voice for God (Holy Spirit) is our last

remaining connection to God in the dream. In truth there is no world,

no Holy Spirit, no decision maker, nothing except God, but the Course

in Miralces and the Work meets us where we are in the dream and in the

dream those concepts may be very very helpful.

So I hope this will clear up any misunderstanding about the NON-

DUALISTIC metaphysics of the Course and the Work. Of course no one

understands all this better than Steve D. so maybe he will find a few

more gems to add to this discussion if he has the time.

Have a beautiful day

" Sanity doesn't suffer, ever . . . ever! Sanity doesn't suffer, ever,

ever! Isn't that lovely? " Byron

March 23, 2006

*****Thanks for the education, lovetheworkofbk. I have only a

passing knowledge of ACIM and what you present below fills in some of

the many gaps. I'm sure there's much more.

Andy I think you have misunderstood my position completely! No one

could be more non-dualistic than me, LOL ... except maybe Steve D. The

metaphysics of ACIM is NON-DUALISTIC. The Course begins with the clear

statement " Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.

Herein lies the peace of God " . The Work is also non-dualistic in

approach.

*****The latter I am familiar with and in full agreement. Although

BK presents it as a non-traditional " tool " rather than in its

foolosophical foundation (which is more apparent in " Losing The

Moon " ).

Jesus is well aware that God is all there is. The impossible

separation from God never really happened, but the Son (us) believes

that it did so this dream of separation arose.

*****OK. I'm learning the language. The understanding (Advaita)

that I've been schooled in is similar (the Jesus part being absent of

course).

For the sleeping Son the ONLY choice remaining is which voice (God or

ego) he will listen to in the dream. There is NOTHING that is not

God, but the Son (us) has forgotten that, and the voice for God (Holy

Spirit) is our last remaining connection to God in the dream.

*****Hmmmmm....can we go into this a bit please? If God is all there

is (and I am in full agreement with you), then, at the " root " of the

situation, anything done by a manifesation of God [i.e., the Son (us)

who has been so constructed so as to not Realize the truth],

must also be God's movement. So when the sleeping Son 'chooses'

which voice to listened to, is that not, at the 'root,' God

choosing? When one pulls back far enough to see the Whole Picture,

it appears that there really isn't any choice at all by the sleeping

Son. Whatever voice is elected to be listened to...The sleeping Son

has no say in this, he has no say in the script he is acting out

since he is, in effect, God (in forgotten form). Are you saying that

in the " dream " it *seems* to us that we are doing the choosing

because of our confusion, but that the more Complete Understanding

recognizes that the sense that we are the authors of the choosing

is...at its root, illusory?

In truth there is no world, no Holy Spirit, no decision maker,

nothing except God, but the Course in Miralces and the Work meets us

where we are in the dream and in the dream those concepts may be very

very helpful.

*****This sounds like how you describe The Work (meeting us where we

are). Would you agree that each (apparent) individual is at its own,

specific (and appropriate) " place " in the dream?

March 23, 2006

>

> *****Hmmmmm....can we go into this a bit please? If God is all

> there is (and I am in full agreement with you), then, at

> the " root " of the situation, anything done by a manifesation of

> God [i.e., the Son (us) who has been so constructed so as to not

> Realize the truth], must also be God's movement. So when the

> sleeping Son 'chooses' which voice to listened to, is that not, at

> the 'root,' God choosing? When one pulls back far enough to see

> the Whole Picture, it appears that there really isn't any choice

> at all by the sleeping Son. Whatever voice is elected to be

> listened to...The sleeping Son has no say in this, he has no say

> in the script he is acting out since he is, in effect, God (in

> forgotten form). Are you saying that in the " dream " it *seems* to

> us that we are doing the choosing because of our confusion, but

> that the more Complete Understanding recognizes that the sense

> that we are the authors of the choosing is...at its root, illusory?

>

Is there choice in the dream?

According to Jesus there is.

" the power of decision is your one remaining freedom as a prisoner

of this world. You can decide to see it [the world] right "

(T.12.VII.9:1,2). And later, " Each day, each hour and minute, even

each second, you are deciding between the crucifixion and the

resurrection; between the ego and the Holy Spirit. The ego is the

choice for guilt; the Holy Spirit the choice for guiltlessness. The

power of decision is all that is yours " (T.14.III.4:1,2,3;)

Now I don't think that the " you " he is talking about is the

conventional " I " , but rather the part of our mind which chooses. The

result of that choice is reflected in our feelings of guilt or

forgiveness.

Have a beautiful day

" There's nothing between you and love but unquestioned concepts. "

Byron

March 24, 2006

Dear Lovetheworkofbk,

I knew that you would respond to Andy regarding his misunderstanding of

the Course In Miracles. No Gems come to mind at the moment; however I

do appreciate your confidence in my understanding. What are you doing?

Are you trying to help me believe that I am Special?

Love, Steve D.

March 24, 2006

Is there choice in the dream?

According to Jesus there is.

" the power of decision is your one remaining freedom as a prisoner

of this world. You can decide to see it [the world] right "

(T.12.VII.9:1,2). And later, " Each day, each hour and minute, even

each second, you are deciding between the crucifixion and the

resurrection; between the ego and the Holy Spirit. The ego is the

choice for guilt; the Holy Spirit the choice for guiltlessness. The

power of decision is all that is yours " (T.14.III.4:1,2,3;)

Now I don't think that the " you " he is talking about is the

conventional " I " , but rather the part of our mind which chooses.

*****What " mind " ? What " choice " ? What " ego " ? What " Holy Spirit " ?

There is ONLY God. The dream - and all its contents - are not real.

The minute one posits a " you " - a you that has " one remaining

freedom " - one presents the image of separation, and the illusion is

reinforced. If there is any freedom at all, it arises in God's

domain, not in the realm of imaginary constructions. Is all this

dualistic wordspinning simply the unfortunate (and necessary) result

of using language (which is dualistic) to attempt a description of

That which is not dualistic?

March 26, 2006

>

> Dear Lovetheworkofbk,

>

> I knew that you would respond to Andy regarding his misunderstanding

> of the Course In Miracles. No Gems come to mind at the moment;

> however I do appreciate your confidence in my understanding. What

> are you doing? Are you trying to help me believe that I am

> Special?

>

LOL ... Steve shall we blow everyone's mind with a discussion of

special relationships? Could be fun, but may not be appropriate for a

LWI forum. No attempt to make you more special than anyone else, just

that your the only person I know who has a good grounding in the Work

and ACIM, apart from myself. And no that does not make us special,

just lovers of one path to the truth.

Have a beautiful day

" There's nothing between you and love but unquestioned concepts. "

Byron

March 26, 2006

>

> *****What " mind " ? What " choice " ? What " ego " ? What " Holy Spirit " ?

> There is ONLY God. The dream - and all its contents - are not

> real. The minute one posits a " you " - a you that has " one remaining

> freedom " - one presents the image of separation, and the illusion is

> reinforced. If there is any freedom at all, it arises in God's

> domain, not in the realm of imaginary constructions. Is all this

> dualistic wordspinning simply the unfortunate (and necessary) result

> of using language (which is dualistic) to attempt a description of

> That which is not dualistic?

>

Actually there is ONLY God and the Son of God.

For the dreaming Son, the " mind " , " choice " , " ego " and the " Holy

Spirit " are very useful concepts to help him awaken from the dream.

The Son has identified with the ego thought system and the ONLY way

out of that is to learn that that voice is untrue and there is another

voice the Son can identify with. Andy there is ONLY one choice for the

Son, the ego or the Holy Spirit and that decision is being made every

second of every day in the dream. And I love that this law of the

dream remains in place regardless of whether we believe it or not.

Have a beautiful day

" Sanity doesn't suffer, ever . . . ever! Sanity doesn't suffer, ever,

ever! Isn't that lovely? " Byron

March 26, 2006