Peace: Content and Form - Patton at St. Mihiel

In particular there is one passage in this book which will concern me here, and it is the spiritual experience of George S. Patton on the battlefield at St. Mihiel in WorldWar I. I quote this key passage here, which was taken from Patton's diary (as per Carlo d'Este, Patton, A Genius for War, p. 260):

quote
Patton knew that he was alive but that part of him had died; he was a little bit in both worlds. In his own words: 'I was overwhelmed by a deep feeling of warmth, and peace and comfort, and of love. I knew profoundly death was related to life; how unimportant the change-over was; how everlasting the soul--and the love was all around me, like a subdued light.'
unquote

Many things could be said about this passage, but one of them surely is that choosing the miracle is the choice for Inner Peace, and it may or may not be reflected in the external circumstances. Other famous scenes attesting to the same point would be Sri Ramakrishna dying of stomach cancer, or Jesus being crucified. Those were also examples that could hardly be characterized as "peaceful" in the external sense, yet, as Jesus says emphatically the message of the crucifixion was "Teach only love, for that is what you are." (ACIM:T-6.III.2:4)

Also the famous picture of the Buddha meditating under the Bodhi-tree comes to mind, with demons attacking from all sides, while the seat is empty, indicating that the Buddha is not even there (knows he is not of this world, being in the mind). All of these in their different ways are powerful reminders how the distractions of the world and the ego serve no other purpose but to keep us rooted here, and we have the option to choose "another way" any time we wish. That is the power of the miracle, and to go back to Jesus, speaking in the Course:

Quote
4 The real meaning of the crucifixion lies in the intensity of the assault of some of the Sons of God upon another. 5 This, of course, is impossible, and must be fully understood impossible. 6 Otherwise, I cannot serve as a model for learning.
Unquote (ACIM:T-6.I.3:4-6)

Just like Jesus did not suffer on the cross because he knew he was not his body, in the same way the Buddha did not feel attacked by the demons. In the moment of choosing the miracle Patton could not feel attacked in the midst of the battlefield. And that experience demonstrates that any of us can choose the miracle any time. Curiously, the form of Patton's life would not make us think of him in any capacity as a spiritual teacher, yet he demonstrated again and again being in touch with our spiritual essence in a way that was truly remarkable. No wonder that besides reading his Bible, he was a student of the Bhagavad Gita, and must have accepted in a way like Arjuna that it was his dharma to be the best soldier he knew how to be, and that he did in spades. I always think of that scene on the battlefield as Patton's visit with Krishna.

Any of these stories, images and experiences serve as reminders for us when we feel again that it is impossible to practice what the Course teaches - and that is what the ego wants to teach us all the time with its myriad problems, challenges and distractions - that at any time we can "snap out of it" and choose the miracle.

The Course says:
Quote
Yet there will always be this place of rest to which you can return. 2 And you will be more aware of this quiet center of the storm than all its raging activity. 3 This quiet center, in which you do nothing, will remain with you, giving you rest in the midst of every busy doing on which you are sent. 4 For from this center will you be directed how to use the body sinlessly. 5 It is this center, from which the body is absent, that will keep it so in your awareness of it.
Unquote (ACIM:T-18.VII.8)

On another level there is also a powerful reminder here that while the miracle can result in changes on the level of form, that is not the point. This is one area where the ego has a tendency to hang us up, declaring our forgiveness practice a failure if the form does not change, at which point we should remind ourselves gently but firmly that this is not the point, inner peace is.

Or again, as the Course puts it:
Quote
7 Therefore, seek not to change the world, but choose to change your mind about the world. 8 Perception is a result and not a cause. 9 And that is why order of difficulty in miracles is meaningless. 10 Everything looked upon with vision is healed and holy. 11 Nothing perceived without it means anything. 12 And where there is no meaning, there is chaos.
Unquote (ACIM:T-21.in.1:7-12)

Where is that quiet center? In the NT account (Mt. 6:27-29, 33) Jesus is reported as saying: "Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit to his stature? And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lillies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:... But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you."

Here then are so many reminders that the choice for peace is ours, any time we truly want it. And thus we know deep down that any time we are hanging on to our misery, stubborn like a dog hanging to a bone, it is not the world (demons, etc.) attacking us, but it is that we are not yet ready to truly ask for "another way," it is our ego wanting to be right and making Jesus wrong.

For:
Quote
The secret of salvation is but this: that you are doing this unto yourself. 2 No matter what the form of the attack, this still is true. 3 Whoever takes the role of enemy and of attacker, still is this the truth. 4 Whatever seems to be the cause of any pain and suffering you feel, this is still true. 5 For you would not react at all to figures in a dream you knew that you were dreaming. 6 Let them be as hateful and as vicious as they may, they could have no effect on you unless you failed to recognize it is your dream.
Unquote (ACIM:T-27.VIII.10)

So: unless and until we take up our cross (take responsibility for our life) and decide to follow Jesus, we are choosing the crucifixion, not the resurrection. The only hope for salvation is that we should remember we do have a mind, and we can laugh away the tiny mad idea with by joining with Jesus. The choice is ours. As a final reminder to be gentle with ourselves the Course also says this:

Quote
Do not despair, then, because of limitations. 2 It is your function to escape from them, but not to be without them. 3 If you would be heard by those who suffer, you must speak their language. 4 If you would be a savior, you must understand what needs to be escaped. 5 Salvation is not theoretical. 6 Behold the problem, ask for the answer, and then accept it when it comes. 7 Nor will its coming be long delayed. 8 All the help you can accept will be provided, and not one need you have will not be met. 9 Let us not, then, be too concerned with goals for which you are not ready. 10 God takes you where you are and welcomes you. 11 What more could you desire, when this is all you need?
Unquote (ACIM:M-26.4)

Copyright, © 2005 Rogier F. van Vlissingen. All rights reserved.

The Language of Jesus

Note: by clicking on the title, the reader will find a link to a critical review of the work of George M. Lamsa.

To understand Jesus means to understand the language that he spoke. And to understand the language he spoke we need to be practictioners of his teachings in our own lives, for his words don't come to life - remain empty and meaningless - unless we accept a relationship with him in our own life and try to "follow him," in our own daily life. And like the apostles we will do so with a lot of falling down and getting back up, and learning that nevertheless the only thing we can ever count on in this life is Jesus' forgiveness.

For it is only by following his teaching in our own lives that we will come to gradually understand duality as metaphor, and we will come to appreciate that now as then Jesus teaches only in parables which do not ever reveal themselves to us except in our own personal relationship to our Internal Teacher, so that in looking with him we gradually start seeing content, not form, and finally we should have ears to hear and eyes to see.

The language of Jesus is the language of experience. Historically, Jesus the man spoke Aramaic. But the street language and commercial language of the time was Koinè, a street Greek, because the region was Hellenized. And it is very clear that the oldest and most reliable texts of the NT materials are in Greek and a few cases old Syriac. And the best, most scholarly editions of the NT are those of UBS or Nestlé-Aland (Württembergische Bibelanstalt), which are widely available, and are based on careful text-critical study of the 5000 known manuscripts of the NT materials.

Much has been made about Aramaicisms in the NT Greek. The best known work in that area was by Gustav Dalman in Germany ("Jesus-Jeshua," 1922, "Grammatik des Jüdisch-Palästinischen Aramäisch," 1905-1927, "Orte und Wege Jesu," 1924, "Die Worte Jesu," 1930) in the early 20th century, followed by Matthew Black's "An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts," of 1946. For those of us who are linguistically inclined it may or may not be worthwhile to study such materials. They address the realities of distortions in the Greek accounts resulting from the fact that the actors (Jesus, c.s.) spoke Aramaic. There may be an occasional gem to be found. I have personally studied much of this material in depth many years ago, since I learned both Greek and Hebrew in school and subsequently at least made an attempt to learn enough Aramaic to be able to follow the work of Dalman - relatively easy to do if one also has a strong command of classical Greek.
After a few years of this study I gave up in disgust, realizing that Jesus was not to be found in an archaeological dig under old rubble, but only in my own relationship with him in my life. My finding of A Course in Miracles later in life did more to progress any sense of a relationship with Jesus than any amount of study of Aramaicisms in NT Greek.

The George M. Lamsa material, most notably his translation of the Bible from the Peshitta, make an emotional appeal to the fact that Aramaic was the language of Jesus, and therefore they are presented as more accurate. However, the Peshitta was in fact a 4th century revision of earlier old Syriac manuscripts, so the route went from Greek to old Syriac to Aramaic, and then 1500 years later into English, courtesy of George Lamsa. Greek manuscripts reach back to as early as 100-150 AD. In short, the claims on which Lamsa's bases the authority of his work are emotional and not historically supportable. Now we may still be interested in his work, or the Peshitta materials in general, as much as in any variations of the text. And again, for those who are so inclined there may be a few gems to be found, but for most of it it appears to be a cumbersome detour, and hardly a shortcut.

If you want to go back to the original language as much as possible, there are lovely editions such as "The New Greek-English Interlinear New Testament," 1960, Tyndale House Publishers, Chicago, and based on the now combined UBS/Nestlé-Aland Greek texts, with interlinear English, and the NRSV in the margins. In my personal work I tend to go back to the KJV because of its enormous influence in English (including notably in ACIM), or to other modern translations when the details matter, or even directly to the Greek, if I think it is worthwhile. I doubt that it would be worthwhile to learn Greek for that purpose however.

In terms of understanding Jesus, practicing the Course is more helpful than studying all of this material. However, if one wants to develop a good critical view, the recommendation would be a KJV for historical reasons, a NRSV or NIV for a modern text (with Apocrypha), and Marvin Meyer's Gospel of Thomas, as well as perhaps Hyam Maccoby's "The Mythmaker, Paul and the Invention of Christianity," and then the Course and Disappearance of the Universe to help put it all in perspective.

I believe that what we would end up with is a view in which we must realize that the true tradition of the heart more likely ran via Mary Magdalene than via all the noise makers who left extensive track records. Her quiet near-absence from the historical record speaks volumes. In terms of the extant texts, the sayings gospels and Thomas in particular may have a higher content of actual quotes from Jesus than any of the canonical materials. So there is distortion in terms of the books themselves for no author was perfect, and transcription errors were common, as well as in terms of which materials were chosen for the canonical NT, when it was formulated ca 400 AD under Athanasius (Yes, it was that late!!!). The main distortions in later translations as well as perhaps in some of the original texts, had more than likely to do with the slant in the belief systems of those who produced those texts, and in particular the emerging Pauline theology, which was to become Christianity "proper," but quite evidently had never been taught by Jesus.

Thus the most faithful rendering into English from the best Greek texts will still suffer from the theological slant of the translator, and again from a Course perspective we may end up with a very different word choice in translations than we would if we came from a Christian/Pauline point of view. Which only serves to reemphasize the point that it is our own experiences in attempting to follow Jesus in our lives, and to practice what he teaches, which are the most valuable guidance in translation and understanding. Without that, any of the extant linguistic research is still fairly useless, since it deals only with form, not content, and can be tainted, typically and particularly so if Pauline theology guides the ultimate construction and word choices.

I decided to write about this matter at some length in this place, because this question comes up frequently in various discussion groups, on-line and off-line. It may help some of us find our best avenue to the most reliable and comfortable renditions. For the rest I can only say that intuition should be the best guide, not external authority. And Lamsa's fraudulent emotional claim to legitimacy because Aramaic was the language of Jesus, while ignoring the historically dubious standing of the Peshitta from a text-critical point of view, is an obfuscation and misleading, however sincere his intentions might have been. The eager uptake of his material by successive generations of readers says more about the underlying suspicions of church authority in readers who are looking for a better source, than it says about the scholarly value of Lamsa's work.

In conclusion I might add that e.g. Henry J. van Dyke, in "The Fourth Wise Man," truly translated Jesus' message into modern-day language, and the story reflects an advanced inner understanding of who and what Jesus is. There are numerous Christ legends which similarly reflect a deep understanding of the message. There have always been people who similarly expressed Jesus' teachings in their lives. We translate Jesus whenever we give form to the thought system of the Holy Spirit in our daily lives and in our interactions with people, by expressing the abstract thought of Love in the specifics of our daily lives, and thus "demonstrating that he lives in us," THAT is truly translating the teachings of Jesus. Translating the NT must be done from that frame of reference, but the sad truth is that most often it has only been done from a perspective of book learning and theology (teachings about Jesus), and not from practicing the teachings of Jesus. External authority can only cloud the picture, be it the specious claims of righteousness of the apostolic succession on which the church builds an aura of authority, or the mythical authority of the Peshitta.

I write these lines in deep gratitude to the teachings of Jan Willem Kaiser, who powerfully stated these points in his translation and commentary to the Gospel according to Mark ("Beleving van het Evangelie,"1950).

Copyright, © 2005 Rogier F. van Vlissingen. All rights reserved.

Take up Your Cross and Follow Me

In Mk 8:34 and 10:21 as well as in several places in the other canonical gospels, Jesus is quoted as saying the words in the title.

KJV has it as follows:
Quote
And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Unquote

J.W. Kaiser (JWK) translates this as follows (from the Dutch in "Beleving van het evangelie," 1950):
Quote
And, having called the crowd to himself with his disciples, he said to them:
'If anyone wants to follow me, he should deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me.'
Unquote

In his parallel esoteric interpretation of the text JWK writes as follows:
Quote
The Master calls the many who do not as yet follow him and his disciples to himself with the all too oft forgotten word: that whoever really wants to follow him, should not go the way of self-glorification, but should face the resistance of the values of the world to the full in his soul as it is directed heavenward, and bear it like a cross.
Unquote

Today we can more than ever, with our Course perspective, understand what those words meant to convey: "Take responsibility for your choice for the ego (crucifixion), and follow me." And thus this simple line states a material point of Jesus' teaching of the Atonement, which in the Course is given expression in Chapter 27 as follows:

Quote
The secret of salvation is but this: that you are doing this unto yourself. 2 No matter what the form of the attack, this still is true. 3 Whoever takes the role of enemy and of attacker, still is this the truth. 4 Whatever seems to be the cause of any pain and suffering you feel, this is still true. 5 For you would not react at all to figures in a dream you knew that you were dreaming. 6 Let them be as hateful and as vicious as they may, they could have no effect on you unless you failed to recognize it is your dream.
Unquote (ACIM:T-27.VIII.10)

In other words the point is salvation is only possible if we take responsibility for our choice for the ego, for unless we do, we could not change our mind about it either. Putting these various comments together, it is very clear how and why the "resistance" that we experience is nothing but the thought system of the ego (the world) within us which is our "cross," and that our path in following Jesus is to clear away these "obstacles to love's presence." (Course introduction) Thus the path is in effect the letting go of the ego's values, which the forgiveness process makes possible in helping us see every situation as a classroom in forgiveness, giving us the opportunity to let go of these obstacles within ourselves, which we see in the world outside only because of our split mind, which cannot see within.

In the section "The Message of the Crucifixion," in Chapter 6, the Course discusses the symbolism of the crucifixion as Jesus intended it:

Quote
You have probably reacted for years as if you were being crucified. 2 This is a marked tendency of the separated, who always refuse to consider what they have done to themselves. 3 Projection means anger, anger fosters assault, and assault promotes fear. 4 The real meaning of the crucifixion lies in the intensity of the assault of some of the Sons of God upon another. 5 This, of course, is impossible, and must be fully understood impossible. 6 Otherwise, I cannot serve as a model for learning.
Assault can ultimately be made only on the body. 2 There is little doubt that one body can assault another, and can even destroy it. 3 Yet if destruction itself is impossible, anything that is destructible cannot be real. 4 Its destruction, therefore, does not justify anger. 5 To the extent to which you believe that it does, you are accepting false premises and teaching them to others. 6 The message the crucifixion was intended to teach was that it is not necessary to perceive any form of assault in persecution, because you cannot persecuted. 7 If you respond with anger, you must be equating yourself with the destructible, and are therefore regarding yourself insanely.
I have made it perfectly clear that I am like you and you are like me, but our fundamental equality can be demonstrated only through joint decision. 2 You are free to perceive yourself as persecuted if you choose. 3 When you do choose to react that way, however, you might remember that I was persecuted as the world judges, and did not share this evaluation for myself. 4 And because I did not share it, I did not strengthen it. 5 I therefore offered a different interpretation of attack, and one which I want to share with you. 6 If you will believe it, you will help me teach it.
Unquote (ACIM:T-6.I.3-5)

In other words Jesus is not his body and he is teaching us who he really is, spirit, so we may learn through him who we really are, like him, spirit. So he is asking us to learn with him and become like him, so we don't feel persecuted if we are attacked, on the basis of the fact that the body is not who we are. It becomes even more pointed a few paragraphs down, when he says:

Quote
The message of the crucifixion is perfectly clear:
2 Teach only love, for that is what you are.
Unquote (ACIM:T-6.I.13)

In the early Christian era the words about taking up the cross were misconstrued almost immediately in the context of the profound belief in sacrifice and vicarious salvation which fairly promptly became prominent interpretations, not least thanks to Paul. Thus the misinterpretation of "following Jesus," and taking up our cross, became the "imitatio Christi." i.e. to repeat in form what he experienced in the world, namely the crucifixion, and so Christianity confessed itself in its practices to what it truly is, a religion of form over content, which serves the purpose of validating the reality of the world to its followers - the complete opposite of what Jesus taught. In the next paragraph in "The Message of the Crucifixion," he then proceeds to correct this error of Christianity by emphasizing that we are supposed to join him in the content of his experience, rather than repeat the extreme form that his particular experience took:

Quote
As I have said before, "As you teach so shall you learn." 2 If you react as if you are persecuted, you are teaching persecution. 3 This is not a lesson a Son of God should want to teach if he is to realize his own salvation. 4 Rather, teach your own perfect immunity, which is the truth in you, and realize that it cannot assailed. 5 Do not try to protect it yourself, or you are believing that it is assailable. 6 You are not asked to be crucified, which was part of my own teaching contribution. 7 You are merely asked to follow my example in the face of much less extreme temptations to misperceive, and not to accept them as false justifications for anger. 8 There can be no justification for the unjustifiable. 9 Do not believe there is, and do not teach that there is. 10 Remember always that what you believe you will teach. 11 Believe with me, and we will become equal as teachers.
Unquote (ACIM:T-6.I.6)

Furthermore besides correcting our interpretation of the Crucifixion, mostly in this section of Chapter 6, but which is touched on in many more places in the Course, the Course also makes it clear why the ego HAD to misinterpret the Crucifixion the way it did in a section of Chapter 19, under The Obstacles to Peace. There it is also made clear why we have to forgive Jesus for not being the bitter idol that Christianity made of him.

Quote
I am made welcome in the state of grace, which means you have at last forgiven me. 2 For I became the symbol of your sin, and so I had to die instead of you. 3 To the ego sin means death, and so atonement is achieved through murder. 4 Salvation is looked upon as a way by which the Son of God was killed instead of you. 5 Yet would I offer you my body, you whom I love, its littleness? 6 Or would I teach that bodies cannot keep us apart? 7 Mine was of no greater value than yours; no better means for communication of salvation, but not its Source. 8 No one can die for anyone, and death does not atone for sin. 9 But you can live to show it is not real. 10 The body does appear to be the symbol of sin while you believe that it can get you what you want. 11 While you believe that it can give you pleasure, you will also believe that it can bring you pain. 12 To think you could be satisfied and happy with so little is to hurt yourself, and to limit the happiness that you would have calls upon pain to fill your meager store and make your life complete. 13 This is completion as the ego sees it. 14 For guilt creeps in where happiness has been removed, and substitutes for it. 15 Communion is another kind of completion, which goes beyond guilt, because it goes beyond the body.
Unquote (ACIM:T-19.IV.A.17)

In other words: for the separate self to have its cake and eat it too, Jesus must die for our sins, and the "salvation" the ego sees in this is that it is now real, having been granted a right to exist because of Jesus' sacrifice. Thus the Christian interpretation of the crucifixion makes the world real, therefore makes sin real (we really did separate from God) makes the body real, equates Jesus with the body, and curiously keeps guilt in circulation, for now we can feel good and guilty over Jesus' dying for our shenanigans: after all, death is now real too.

Therefore we have to forgive Jesus at some point for NOT being the magical savior who lets us get away with it, but rather being the very unwelcome (to our ego) teacher of love, who asks that we first take responsibility for OUR choice for the separation, since if we do not first own that choice, we could not change our mind and decide to follow Jesus instead of the ego. The more we do so we can then join with him in demonstrating that he lives in us, or as the Course sums it up, giving very practical and graphical expression to the theme of undoing the crucifixion:

Quote
You will not find peace until you have removed the nails from the hands of God's Son, and taken the last thorn from his forehead. 2 The Love of God surrounds His Son whom the god of crucifixion condemns. 3 Teach not that I died in vain. 4 Teach rather that I did not die by demonstrating that I live in you. 5 For the undoing of the crucifixion of God's Son is the work of the redemption, in which everyone has a part of equal value. 6 God does not judge His guiltless Son. 7 Having given Himself to him, how could it be otherwise?
Unquote (ACIM:T-11.VI.7)

In Chapter 4, The Illusions of the Ego, there is the following statement, which also puts all this in perspective:

Quote
The journey to the cross should be the last "useless journey." 2 Do not dwell upon it, but dismiss it as accomplished. 3 If you can accept it as your own last useless journey, you are also free to join my resurrection. 4 Until you do so your life is indeed wasted. 5 It merely re-enacts the separation, the loss of power, the futile attempts of the ego at reparation, and finally the crucifixion of the body, or death. 6 Such repetitions are endless until they are voluntarily given up. 7 Do not make the pathetic error of "clinging to the old rugged cross." 8 The only message of the crucifixion is that you can overcome the cross. 9 Until then you are free to crucify yourself as often as you choose. 10 This is not the gospel I intended to offer you. 11 We have another journey to undertake, and if you will read these lessons carefully they will help prepare you to undertake it.
Unquote (ACIM:T-4.in.3)

In other words, again, it is purely our choice to be crucified by clinging to the ego's values, or to chose life and join with Jesus in the resurrection. The contrast between these two choices is made very graphical on another level in Chapter 27, in a section called "The Picture of the Crucifixion," by depicting the choice for the ego's favorite role as victim as follows:

Quote
5 The sick are merciless to everyone, and in contagion do they seek to kill. 6 Death seems an easy price, if they can say, "Behold me, brother, at your hand I die." 7 For sickness is the witness to his guilt, and death would prove his errors must be sins. 8 Sickness is but a "little" death; a form of vengeance not yet total.
Unquote (ACIM:T-27.I.4)

... and contrasting it with the choice for life, which Jesus offers us, as follows:

Quote
Into this empty space, from which the goal of sin has been removed, is Heaven free to be remembered. 2 Here its peace can come, and perfect healing take the place of death. 3 The body can become a sign of life, a promise of redemption, and a breath of immortality to those grown sick of breathing in the fetid scent of death. 4 Let it have healing as its purpose. 5 Then will it send forth the message it received, and by its health and loveliness proclaim the truth and value that it represents. 6 Let it receive the power to represent an endless life, forever unattacked. 7 And to your brother let its message be, "Behold me, brother, at your hand I live."
Unquote (ACIM:T-27.I.10)

Copyright, (c) 2005, Rogier F. van Vlissingen. All rights reserved.