Recently I found a comment in a post made by Ingeborg Kuhn on the Yahoo forum on "The Disappearance of the Universe," and it moved me deeply. Inge and I have had dialogues on forum and off for quite a while and I'm always grateful to read her posts, because of her honesty in working with the material, equally in asking her questions as much as in responding to others. Clearly, as so often, the gift is that when someone asks a question, and one is in a position of answering, that is an opportunity to remember the answers which are available to us, but which often times we forget, so it is the gift of the questioner to help us remember the answer, and so it is that in the process that is the Course, Students and Teachers are interchangeable and the same. And we always go this path WITH our brother.
Here now is what Inge wrote:
Quote
AS A SIDE NOTE: WHEN I WENT THROUGH A PERIOD OF SEVERE DOUBT ABOUT THE COURSE
AND RAILED AGAINST IT, THIS MESSAGE CAME IN FROM SEEMINGLY NOWHERE:
"WHAT I TAUGHT OVER 2000 YEARS AGO HAS BEEN MISINTERPRETED AND
MISUNDERSTOOD. THE TIME HAS COME NOW WHEN CORRECTION IS NEEDED AND MY GIFT
TO YOU IS A COURSE IN MIRACLES."
Unquote
Reading it led me to a reflection, which was strongly reinforced also by teaching a recent workshop at The Wellness Center at Riverside Church in NY. To some degree it has been necessary in the early going of the Course to make a clear distinction between the Course and the teachings of Christianity. In a way the cause célèbre of that was perhaps the early (and premature) enthusiasm in Unity Church which led to weaving the Course into the liturgy in many Unity Churches until the church leadership apparently (and correctly) recommended that this should not be done. Ken Wapnick has mentioned in workships speaking to this point with Unity members over the years, in which he set out the clear differences, and why it would not be helpful to mix the two. His books on the topic clearly serve to clarify many of these issues, most specifically his book with Father Clarke "The Course and Christianity: A Dialogue," which is a particularly lovely book, since it is a dialogue between two friends who clearly respect each other's very different views, and who wrote the book exactly to help people clarify the differences, in order to avoid confusion.
However the process of the Course clearly goes beyond this for those who feel it is their path, as manifested in particular in "The Disappearance of the Universe," (DU for short) and soon in Gary Renard's sequel to that book, which is now due September 1st (see www.garyrenard.com). The positive link to the Thomas Gospel as it is represented in DU, puts the emphasis on a direct identity of the pre-Pauline Jesus who we find clearly represented in that Gospel with the Jesus of ACIM. Both are clearly non-dualistic teachers and teachings, which are identical at heart, even if the language is different because it reflects a different time and place. And so it is that in finding this continuity between Jesus then and Jesus now, one would consider that the only discontinuity is the Pauline theology, and the religion it brought about, which calls itself Christianity. This material dovetails nicely with all the places in the Course where Jesus in fact reflects that he has been misunderstood.
It also reminds me of what the Course says of the separation in general:
quote
The cause of pain is separation, not the body, which is only its effect. 2 Yet separation is but empty space, enclosing nothing, doing nothing, and as unsubstantial as the empty place between the ripples that a ship has made in passing by. 3 And covered just as fast, as water rushes in to close the gap, and as the waves in joining cover it. 4 Where is the gap between the waves when they have joined, and covered up the space which seemed to keep them separate for a little while? 5 Where are the grounds for sickness when the minds have joined to close the little gap between them, where the seeds of sickness seemed to grow?
unquote (ACIM:T-28.III.5)
So that, if we come from a Christian background it is helpful to appreciate the differences of the Course teachings from Christianity, in order not to get confused. But once we gain clarity on the identity of Jesus, and the continuity of his teaching, what stays with us is the continuity, and not the temporary deviation.
The next obvious question is perhaps: How bad is it for us to have misunderstood Jesus? And one could rest assured that at least the Jesus of Course would say: "Not bad at all, it's natural, it's no big deal, but it helps if you become aware of it."
Or, as in fact he says in the Course in the fifth article in the Clarification of Terms section, titled "Jesus - Christ" :
quote
Is he the Christ? 2 O yes, along with you. 3 His little life on earth was not enough to teach the mighty lesson that he learned for all of you. 4 He will remain with you to lead you from the hell you made to God. 5 And when you join your will with his, your sight will be his vision, for the eyes of Christ are shared. 6 Walking with him is just as natural as walking with a brother whom you knew since you were born, for such indeed he is. 7 Some bitter idols have been made of him who would be only brother to the world. 8 Forgive him your illusions, and behold how dear a brother he would be to you. 9 For he will set your mind at rest at last and carry it with you unto your God.
unquote (ACIM:C-5.5)
And here it is very clear that it is us who need to forgive him for our preconceived notions (illusions) of him, which is typically the traditional Pauline view of a suffering savior who died for our sins on the Cross, for it is a very guilt-inducing image. The point is that we who are children of the ego, thinking our life is the daily drama of time and space, automatically reinterpret his non-dualistic teaching in a dualistic way, for which Paul was only the protagonist. So the point is not that Paul was wrong but that Paul was our teacher, showing us clearly how we all misunderstand Jesus, and among other things understand the resurrection as being of the body, instead of of the mind as Jesus clearly taught (Thomas) and teaches in the Course (and inside of all of us through his presence in our minds as our Internal Teacher).
Invariably then, when people begin to grasp this, they wonder if they can stay a member of their church, and the answer obviously is that you can indeed, you just can't take the theology as seriously, just as much as you can't take anything seriously in this world once you realize that who you really are is IN this world, but not OF it. The tiny mad idea really was just silly, and not a mortal sin, as the ego makes it out to be, in order to keep us under its whip, and continues to make us tapdance in what we mistakenly call our "life."
Conversely, I might ask myself how or why I could teach a Course workshop in a church. The good news there is that there are lots of churches nowadays who have adjunct facilities for workshops. There is no reason that only the new age conference centers such as the Open Center and the Omega Institute could give workshops that draw hundreds of people. Clearly churches could also do this, if they have the facilities, and thus there could be a broadening of the role of the church. These developments could certainly lead to a broadening of the social relevance of the church, where I could certainly attend a service as I periodically do at St. Barts, sometimes have at Riverside and St. John's the Divine, which is one of my favorite churches in New York City. And so church members could well attend a Course workshop either at their church or elsewhere, and Course students could attend religious services with friends and family, without necessarily buying into the specific religion or theology. As with everything, the only practical difference in what you do lies in who you do it with, with Jesus or the ego.
And thus, as the continuity of Jesus from then till now becomes more apparent to you in your work with the Course, and it becomes clearer and clearer to you that the problem is not if somebody else misunderstood him (be that Paul, or the Christians), but that you yourself misunderstood him, and now you are learning to let him into your life more and more as he is in his eternal reality, then you can happily join with your brothers in whatever celebration or joint activities you choose. And churches indeed in many cases have the facilities where workshops could well be held, and the interest in this material is growing, in the churches and outside of it.
A corollary to these comments is the fact that even people who come to the Course not from a Christian background, will inevitably have to come to grips with the fact that they do believe in the Crucifixion, in terms of content, if not form. The point being that the essential psychological makeup in which we are caught up as children of the ego is that of a victim, and Jesus' dying on the Cross as the world sees it, symbolizes victimhood. Hence the Course tells us, in a passage that is perhaps the Course's equivalent to the Biblical quote of "take up your cross and follow me" :
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.
This single lesson learned will set you free from suffering, whatever form it takes. 2 The Holy Spirit will repeat this one inclusive lesson of deliverance until it has been learned, regardless of the form of suffering that brings you pain. 3 Whatever hurt you bring to Him He will make answer with this very simple truth. 4 For this one answer takes away the cause of every form of sorrow and of pain. 5 The form affects His answer not at all, for He would teach you but the single cause of all of them, no matter what their form. 6 And you will understand that miracles reflect the simple statement, "[I] have done this thing, and it is this I would undo."
Unquote (ACIM:T-27.VIII.10,11)
That is the path of Salvation which Jesus teaches for all time, by which we follow him out of the world of duality and into his Kingdom of non-dualism, in forgiving him more and more for not being the dualistic Jesus we made of him, and learning to listen to the non-dualistic Jesus within, who is calling us to follow him out of the ego's world of conflict, fear, and impermanence.
Copyright, © 2006 Rogier F. van Vlissingen. All rights reserved.
Exploring ACIM in context of Abrahamic tradition.
"Questioning every value that we hold," with new readings of old familar terms
Exploration of biblical lore as metaphor, honoring the spirit of Johan Willem Kaiser, whose work was to lead me to recognize the authorship of the Course.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Monday, April 17, 2006
Judas Revisited - Synchronicity
By clicking on the title to this article you will connect to the National Geographic site on the Judas Gospel. The english text was available there in a PDF format, but today I only find the coptic text. The book however is in all the stores.
The single most critical line may be Jesus speaking to Judas, saying: "For you will sacrifice the man who clothes me."
Which brings to mind an experience Regina Dawn Akers related before just before Easter, in the context of her writing down the paraphrasings of the New Testament text by the Holy Spirit, which she recorded as follows:
quote
Since I have been writing the Holy Spirit’s interpretation of the New Testament, I have experienced intense joy and gratitude for what I am hearing and learning, and I have experienced intense resistance as well. One of the most difficult books for me to write was the Holy Spirit’s retelling of the Book of Mark. I think this was difficult for me because I wanted to know the “truth” about Jesus’ life, and I knew the Holy Spirit was giving me another fictional story.
I once asked the Holy Spirit why it would tell a fictional story through me, and I was guided to a random opening of A Course in Miracles. I opened to the Clarification of Terms, #3, and read these words:
Forgiveness might be called a kind of happy fiction; a way in which the unknowing can bridge the gap between their perception and truth. They cannot go directly from perception to knowledge because they do not think it is their will to do so. . .
And so they need an illusion of help because they are helpless; a Thought of peace because they are in conflict. God knows what His Son needs before he asks. He is not at all concerned with form, but having given the content it is His Will that it be understood. And that suffices. The form adapts itself to need; the content is unchanging, as eternal as its Creator.
After this, I accepted that the revised fictional story of Jesus’ life was being given to me because it included new symbols that are more helpful to us now than the symbols originally given in this story. However, I must confess, Mark remained my least favorite part of the interpretations, and I perceived it as the least useful of all of the interpretations that I was being given.
Since then, my eyes have gradually been opened more and more.
Everything given to us by the Holy Spirit is given for one purpose, the healing of the Son of God. Or, said another way, it is given to lead us from illusion to the remembrance of Truth. A part of that process is, obviously, letting go of illusion. The retelling of the Book of Mark offers wonderful opportunities for letting go of our thoughts and beliefs about illusion.
For example, as I wrote about the early miracles (e.g., the healing of a crippled hand), I experienced resistance. My belief was that the physical miracles did not happen, and now the Holy Spirit had me writing that at least some of them did. Why would he have me write that? Why, to lead me to let go of the world, of course. As long as I hold onto my belief that the miracles did or did not happen, I am holding onto the world.
As long as I hold onto my desire to defend that the miracles did or did not happen, I am holding onto the world. This led me to really look at my beliefs about Jesus’ life. As I opened up to willingness to look at these beliefs, an article found its way to my inbox. This article included a lot of “evidence” to prove that Jesus never walked the earth. He was just a myth, built up by early “Christians” to support a new cult they were making. This article included all of the earlier mythological sources from which the fake personality of Jesus was made. The article, standing on its own, seemed convincing. I felt confusion. I saw doubts. I noticed fear. And then, I remembered forgiveness.
It took about 1/2 day, but I was led to look closely at my beliefs about Jesus and his life.
My key belief seemed to be that if Jesus didn’t live on earth, the Truth isn’t true.
Now look at that - - If “x” didn’t happen within the illusion, then “y” cannot be true.
What the heck does “x” have to do with “y”?
This is when my eyes were opened. I was expecting something within illusion to prove truth to me, instead of forgiving illusion by letting go of it. And if a seeming person named Jesus did walk the earth, even he had to let go of belief in “Jesus” and the “life of Jesus.”
It was then that I realized that holding onto Jesus as a person and having any desire to defend stories about his life as true were ego-maneuvers of holding onto illusion as true. It was then that I let go of Jesus as a person.
This letting go experience happened after I finished writing the Holy Spirit’s interpretation of John and just before beginning the Holy Spirit’s interpretation of Acts. I let go of Jesus! And then, do you know what happened? The Holy Spirit gave him back to me again in Romans, Chapters 6 & 7 as a powerful symbol and guiding light.
http://www.forholyspirit.org/romans.htm#6
You could say that Jesus died and was resurrected in me.
So, with Easter coming up . . . I felt guided to share this story. I am also looking forward to going back and rereading the Holy Spirit’s interpretation of Mark, now that I can read it with openness and a willingness to learn from symbolism that was given to me by our one Holy Spirit.
unquote
In the same time frame an interesting exchange took place on the Dutch Course list (ACIMNed on Yahoo), instigated also by the Judas issues, and culminating in an interesting way in a message of Annelies Ekeler, who is the moderator of that group, and which pertained to Bach's Mattheus Passion. I subsequently translated some of her message and posted it to the ACIM&Abraham list, and I repeat some of that material here with slight modifications:
Apparently there was a TV program in Holland in relation with the new Judas material, in which Johann Sebastian Bach was discussed, and the fact that evidently he very well understood what the real story was. This is not at all surprising, since the insight that the Twelve Apostles were purely a symbol for the whole sonship in it's stumbling attempts of following Jesus out of the Diaspora of this world was evidently around in Bach's day.
Hereby a translation of what Annelies wrote about her experience the program:
quote
[she tuned in to the program just as the narrator mentiond that evidently JS Bach also understood the true message, I am taking some slight liberties with the translation, to make it smoother]
When I just started to read ACIM I developed a sort of revulsion against the Mathheus Passion, to my own surprise, because I only heard the message of suffering played out in it. But the funny part was that the music survived all that in me, so I thought something is not right, the music is right-on, so Bach HAD to have understood, must have been in a connection to Truth, how then can the text be so much of the ego. But in the program yesterday the point was raised that at a certain moment when Jesus is at the table with the twelve apostles, the apostles ask who is the betrayer. In the chorus by sopranos, altos, tenors and bassos, we hear: "Herr, bin ich's?" (Lord, is it me?) This is sung three times by the sopranos, altos, and tenors, and twice by the bassos. ELEVEN times therefore. You would expect that
Judas (the twelfth apostle, a basso), would sing "Herr, bin ich's" a twelfth time, but no, immediately after [the eleventh repetition] the choir starts a Choral, which was alwasy sung by the whole community and which sings: "Ich bin's, ich sollte büssen," etc. So here the collective comes to the fore, that we have collectively assumed the guilt, and it cannot be projected on to one person. And so then my
toughts had obviously been right on, and forgiveness has taken place, and I understand why people like Bach are such a powerful presence in the collective consciousness. They understood and understand the message, and that is recognized by the listener. So now I can listen to the Mattheus Passion all over again, differently.
unquote
On one level I think Judas can be understood as acting out the tendency we all have in our attempts to follow Jesus, or being students of his Course, is asking the ego to sanction it. That is the betrayal by which we shortcircuit ourselves constantly and fail to be true to Jesus, by relapsing into the arms of the ego at just the crucial moment. The message of love which the teaching of the crucifixion and
the resurrection entails, however is that Jesus is not his body, not a form in the world, but he is alive within us as our Inner Teacher, who we may follow on the way home.
On another level, this is the same issue that the body of Jesus, his appearance in the dream, is a symbol we must let go of in the inner process of choosing content over form permanently, which RDA also reported on in her message, quoted above. In that spirit we can understand that gratitude to Judas is in order, for he acts out the mistake we all make of ever again choosing form over content, choosing the crucifixion over the resurrection, until we finally do learn the message of Love, that nothing is ever lost, and moreover that it is us who have to let go of our false reliance on form over content, the world of time and space over the real world which the Holy Spirit holds out to us through His guidance and Vision. Thus the self accusation of "betrayal," is turned into a realization that it was merely the empty form being handed over to demonstrate to us in the resurrection the true meaning of a Kingdom NOT of this world, and of the eternal life of the spirit which is our true home in God.
Again in the same wave of exchanges on various lists, Lucia Constain, a moderator on the DU forum reported her earlier acquaintance with some channeled materials on the true meaning of Judas as follows (on the ACIM&Abraham list 4/14/06) :
quote
"The Christ cannot BE betrayed" In the tradition that Rogier mentions, exposed in the book "The Flight of the Feathered Serpent" (TFOTFS) by Armando Cosani, it is clarified by Judas himself that his role was just as important as Jesus's. Yes, it is around playing the chosen role well, and the Holy Spirit doing with what the ego would use to destroy, something miraculolus. Judas was drunk according to DU. What was he drunk on? According to TFOTFS he was AWAKE, and during the last supper J dipped the bread in the wine, giving it to Judas said: "What you are to do, do it promptly" As he took the wine-soaked bread into his lips his consciousness fell asleep all over again, he forgot himself once more, and as agreed, his heart became darkened so that he could carry out his agreed upon mission. This is why I say "Blessed is He would would lay down His reputation for His Friend, for all eternity." The image of Judas as an evil greedy betrayer would be the root of condemnation for all Jews and was for ages used as the stereotype by which orthodox Christians would accuse and judge the Jewish community. Much hatred has come from all this. But I say onto you "Blessed is He would lay down His reputation for His Friend, for all of time, for when time is over He is One with Me. One cannot lay down his life, as Life is One and it cannot be laid down, but one can risk a mistake perception of onenself for all the illusion of time, and that's is ok, since time will not last long. The Christ cannot BE betrayed. Only Love is true. What Judas did was an act of Love, or an "act of obedience" as revealed in the Gospel of Judas by now. This is why Judas is the one to be mentioned in A Course in Miracles, the one without whom a perfect lesson in Love is incomplete.
unquote
Also on the ACIM&Abraham forum David Fishman reminded us of an earlier post of his going back to a post of November 13, 2005.
quote
In speaking to Rogier last week, I shared with him an AHA that came to me some years ago.... As someone who was brought up Jewish in a mostly Christian society, my early learning from the world's curriculum was that Jesus was not for Jewish people, as he was the center of Christianty, and certainly they were "different religions' as all
religions are different from all others. Part of the belief system we
engage in here.
Yet it was also apparent to me that Jesus was Jewish, not even knowing what a "Christian" was... as practiced by 500 million people worldwide.
Concurrently, I also saw the way that Christians by their talk and actions condemned the Apostle, Judas.
They would name their children and churches after all the other Apostles gladly, even those that denied and doubted Jesus...yet totally condemned the "betrayer" Judas.
Many years later, I was led to ACIM, and after going thru the Original Text book back in 1978, found on Page 87 (page 95 numbered edition, Ch 6, para 15), under Chapter 6, The Lessons of love and the Message of the crucifixion, Jesus speaking very personally in the "first person" of his experience with his own Apostles, and then mentions the only name in 1200 pages of The Course, "Judas"...(Adam which is mentioned is symbolic of all mankind).
It is clear from his Message to us..that he could never have said ..."Thou betrayest me with a kiss"... the famous line that has endured for 2000 years and has turned generations of Christians "to despise Judas as having done the unforgiveable". Betraying the SON of God.
As we read, study and practice ACIM, it is clear why we choose to leave Judas as "unforgiveable"... as he is the symbol of "our own guilt" based on our belief that we "betrayed our Father, Creator, Love, Our Self..and it is this guilt, we would project out onto the "scape goat"... Judas... The Course tells us on every page of its 1200 pages, this is impossible. We cannot betray either God, His Son, or Love, except in our dreams of sleep and forgetfulness.
Jews perceive Jesus the "one to blame" for their centuries of being nomads without a country, and for their persecution as a "hated minority"..that is "responsible for the death of the "Son of God".... again...an impossible dream...which remains intact until finally exposed as the ..."illusion we believe in and by our belief,
strengthens it so it becomes hardened in our minds" ...until we bring it to the Light and expose its fallacy.
Yes... I see it is a mistake of the same level and proportion...
"Jews need to Forgive Jesus...for what he did not do... as Christians need to Forgive Judas...for what he did not do...."
Jews ...do not see Jesus...as ONE with them...their projections on Jesus as he is the "source to blame for their being attacked and discriminated against over the centuries... in a way, a Jew, betrayed them.....of course that is pure projection of the ...idea that we are unloved and outcast... nomads from our Home.
Christians...do not see Judas as ONE with All the Apostles...choosing to name their children and churches after all the Apostles...except Judas, for he has done the "unforgiveable... "betrayal". Betrayal...is what we all "believe we did, as that is the 'source of guilt"...from all who have 'renounced their Creator and Home and Self, in favor of being author of their own will and world.
As it is impossible..yet we believe in it...same as belief in guilt... guilt equates to betrayal... the idea that Jesus used Judas ....as the only person's name used in the 1200 pages of ACIM, outside of Adam, the symbol of mankind... his message to us all... is "betrayal...in any form...is impossible...and if you believe in it...we use it to perpetuate the dream... for it serves only to reinforce our "fearful weak self".
The Son of God when He Identifies with The Strength of God as His Source, and Extends Love... can only Create by Extending His Love....
Those are the thoughts that came to me...many years ago when i came across page 87 in the original unnumbered Text.
unquote
Lastly, again in this time leading up to Easter, our Dutch friends Reint and Gabriela Gaastra-Levin sent a newsletter (in Dutch) on the true meaning of Judas, which also greatly emphasized how much Jesus was grateful to Judas for playing a vital role in the cosmic drama of the Crucifixion, and how he was clearly a dearly beloved disciple, who played a crucial role in the cosmic dramav of the crucifixion.
The emphasis in their story is different, but I feel that the content is very consistent.
Throughout all of these various traditions, perhaps the most important realization is that Judas is an integral part of the sonship and our brother in Christ, and that his role is instrumental in having us learn the true message as Jesus sums it up in the Course: "Teach only love, for that is what you are."
Copyright, © 2006 Rogier F. van Vlissingen. All rights reserved.
The single most critical line may be Jesus speaking to Judas, saying: "For you will sacrifice the man who clothes me."
Which brings to mind an experience Regina Dawn Akers related before just before Easter, in the context of her writing down the paraphrasings of the New Testament text by the Holy Spirit, which she recorded as follows:
quote
Since I have been writing the Holy Spirit’s interpretation of the New Testament, I have experienced intense joy and gratitude for what I am hearing and learning, and I have experienced intense resistance as well. One of the most difficult books for me to write was the Holy Spirit’s retelling of the Book of Mark. I think this was difficult for me because I wanted to know the “truth” about Jesus’ life, and I knew the Holy Spirit was giving me another fictional story.
I once asked the Holy Spirit why it would tell a fictional story through me, and I was guided to a random opening of A Course in Miracles. I opened to the Clarification of Terms, #3, and read these words:
Forgiveness might be called a kind of happy fiction; a way in which the unknowing can bridge the gap between their perception and truth. They cannot go directly from perception to knowledge because they do not think it is their will to do so. . .
And so they need an illusion of help because they are helpless; a Thought of peace because they are in conflict. God knows what His Son needs before he asks. He is not at all concerned with form, but having given the content it is His Will that it be understood. And that suffices. The form adapts itself to need; the content is unchanging, as eternal as its Creator.
After this, I accepted that the revised fictional story of Jesus’ life was being given to me because it included new symbols that are more helpful to us now than the symbols originally given in this story. However, I must confess, Mark remained my least favorite part of the interpretations, and I perceived it as the least useful of all of the interpretations that I was being given.
Since then, my eyes have gradually been opened more and more.
Everything given to us by the Holy Spirit is given for one purpose, the healing of the Son of God. Or, said another way, it is given to lead us from illusion to the remembrance of Truth. A part of that process is, obviously, letting go of illusion. The retelling of the Book of Mark offers wonderful opportunities for letting go of our thoughts and beliefs about illusion.
For example, as I wrote about the early miracles (e.g., the healing of a crippled hand), I experienced resistance. My belief was that the physical miracles did not happen, and now the Holy Spirit had me writing that at least some of them did. Why would he have me write that? Why, to lead me to let go of the world, of course. As long as I hold onto my belief that the miracles did or did not happen, I am holding onto the world.
As long as I hold onto my desire to defend that the miracles did or did not happen, I am holding onto the world. This led me to really look at my beliefs about Jesus’ life. As I opened up to willingness to look at these beliefs, an article found its way to my inbox. This article included a lot of “evidence” to prove that Jesus never walked the earth. He was just a myth, built up by early “Christians” to support a new cult they were making. This article included all of the earlier mythological sources from which the fake personality of Jesus was made. The article, standing on its own, seemed convincing. I felt confusion. I saw doubts. I noticed fear. And then, I remembered forgiveness.
It took about 1/2 day, but I was led to look closely at my beliefs about Jesus and his life.
My key belief seemed to be that if Jesus didn’t live on earth, the Truth isn’t true.
Now look at that - - If “x” didn’t happen within the illusion, then “y” cannot be true.
What the heck does “x” have to do with “y”?
This is when my eyes were opened. I was expecting something within illusion to prove truth to me, instead of forgiving illusion by letting go of it. And if a seeming person named Jesus did walk the earth, even he had to let go of belief in “Jesus” and the “life of Jesus.”
It was then that I realized that holding onto Jesus as a person and having any desire to defend stories about his life as true were ego-maneuvers of holding onto illusion as true. It was then that I let go of Jesus as a person.
This letting go experience happened after I finished writing the Holy Spirit’s interpretation of John and just before beginning the Holy Spirit’s interpretation of Acts. I let go of Jesus! And then, do you know what happened? The Holy Spirit gave him back to me again in Romans, Chapters 6 & 7 as a powerful symbol and guiding light.
http://www.forholyspirit.org/romans.htm#6
You could say that Jesus died and was resurrected in me.
So, with Easter coming up . . . I felt guided to share this story. I am also looking forward to going back and rereading the Holy Spirit’s interpretation of Mark, now that I can read it with openness and a willingness to learn from symbolism that was given to me by our one Holy Spirit.
unquote
In the same time frame an interesting exchange took place on the Dutch Course list (ACIMNed on Yahoo), instigated also by the Judas issues, and culminating in an interesting way in a message of Annelies Ekeler, who is the moderator of that group, and which pertained to Bach's Mattheus Passion. I subsequently translated some of her message and posted it to the ACIM&Abraham list, and I repeat some of that material here with slight modifications:
Apparently there was a TV program in Holland in relation with the new Judas material, in which Johann Sebastian Bach was discussed, and the fact that evidently he very well understood what the real story was. This is not at all surprising, since the insight that the Twelve Apostles were purely a symbol for the whole sonship in it's stumbling attempts of following Jesus out of the Diaspora of this world was evidently around in Bach's day.
Hereby a translation of what Annelies wrote about her experience the program:
quote
[she tuned in to the program just as the narrator mentiond that evidently JS Bach also understood the true message, I am taking some slight liberties with the translation, to make it smoother]
When I just started to read ACIM I developed a sort of revulsion against the Mathheus Passion, to my own surprise, because I only heard the message of suffering played out in it. But the funny part was that the music survived all that in me, so I thought something is not right, the music is right-on, so Bach HAD to have understood, must have been in a connection to Truth, how then can the text be so much of the ego. But in the program yesterday the point was raised that at a certain moment when Jesus is at the table with the twelve apostles, the apostles ask who is the betrayer. In the chorus by sopranos, altos, tenors and bassos, we hear: "Herr, bin ich's?" (Lord, is it me?) This is sung three times by the sopranos, altos, and tenors, and twice by the bassos. ELEVEN times therefore. You would expect that
Judas (the twelfth apostle, a basso), would sing "Herr, bin ich's" a twelfth time, but no, immediately after [the eleventh repetition] the choir starts a Choral, which was alwasy sung by the whole community and which sings: "Ich bin's, ich sollte büssen," etc. So here the collective comes to the fore, that we have collectively assumed the guilt, and it cannot be projected on to one person. And so then my
toughts had obviously been right on, and forgiveness has taken place, and I understand why people like Bach are such a powerful presence in the collective consciousness. They understood and understand the message, and that is recognized by the listener. So now I can listen to the Mattheus Passion all over again, differently.
unquote
On one level I think Judas can be understood as acting out the tendency we all have in our attempts to follow Jesus, or being students of his Course, is asking the ego to sanction it. That is the betrayal by which we shortcircuit ourselves constantly and fail to be true to Jesus, by relapsing into the arms of the ego at just the crucial moment. The message of love which the teaching of the crucifixion and
the resurrection entails, however is that Jesus is not his body, not a form in the world, but he is alive within us as our Inner Teacher, who we may follow on the way home.
On another level, this is the same issue that the body of Jesus, his appearance in the dream, is a symbol we must let go of in the inner process of choosing content over form permanently, which RDA also reported on in her message, quoted above. In that spirit we can understand that gratitude to Judas is in order, for he acts out the mistake we all make of ever again choosing form over content, choosing the crucifixion over the resurrection, until we finally do learn the message of Love, that nothing is ever lost, and moreover that it is us who have to let go of our false reliance on form over content, the world of time and space over the real world which the Holy Spirit holds out to us through His guidance and Vision. Thus the self accusation of "betrayal," is turned into a realization that it was merely the empty form being handed over to demonstrate to us in the resurrection the true meaning of a Kingdom NOT of this world, and of the eternal life of the spirit which is our true home in God.
Again in the same wave of exchanges on various lists, Lucia Constain, a moderator on the DU forum reported her earlier acquaintance with some channeled materials on the true meaning of Judas as follows (on the ACIM&Abraham list 4/14/06) :
quote
"The Christ cannot BE betrayed" In the tradition that Rogier mentions, exposed in the book "The Flight of the Feathered Serpent" (TFOTFS) by Armando Cosani, it is clarified by Judas himself that his role was just as important as Jesus's. Yes, it is around playing the chosen role well, and the Holy Spirit doing with what the ego would use to destroy, something miraculolus. Judas was drunk according to DU. What was he drunk on? According to TFOTFS he was AWAKE, and during the last supper J dipped the bread in the wine, giving it to Judas said: "What you are to do, do it promptly" As he took the wine-soaked bread into his lips his consciousness fell asleep all over again, he forgot himself once more, and as agreed, his heart became darkened so that he could carry out his agreed upon mission. This is why I say "Blessed is He would would lay down His reputation for His Friend, for all eternity." The image of Judas as an evil greedy betrayer would be the root of condemnation for all Jews and was for ages used as the stereotype by which orthodox Christians would accuse and judge the Jewish community. Much hatred has come from all this. But I say onto you "Blessed is He would lay down His reputation for His Friend, for all of time, for when time is over He is One with Me. One cannot lay down his life, as Life is One and it cannot be laid down, but one can risk a mistake perception of onenself for all the illusion of time, and that's is ok, since time will not last long. The Christ cannot BE betrayed. Only Love is true. What Judas did was an act of Love, or an "act of obedience" as revealed in the Gospel of Judas by now. This is why Judas is the one to be mentioned in A Course in Miracles, the one without whom a perfect lesson in Love is incomplete.
unquote
Also on the ACIM&Abraham forum David Fishman reminded us of an earlier post of his going back to a post of November 13, 2005.
quote
In speaking to Rogier last week, I shared with him an AHA that came to me some years ago.... As someone who was brought up Jewish in a mostly Christian society, my early learning from the world's curriculum was that Jesus was not for Jewish people, as he was the center of Christianty, and certainly they were "different religions' as all
religions are different from all others. Part of the belief system we
engage in here.
Yet it was also apparent to me that Jesus was Jewish, not even knowing what a "Christian" was... as practiced by 500 million people worldwide.
Concurrently, I also saw the way that Christians by their talk and actions condemned the Apostle, Judas.
They would name their children and churches after all the other Apostles gladly, even those that denied and doubted Jesus...yet totally condemned the "betrayer" Judas.
Many years later, I was led to ACIM, and after going thru the Original Text book back in 1978, found on Page 87 (page 95 numbered edition, Ch 6, para 15), under Chapter 6, The Lessons of love and the Message of the crucifixion, Jesus speaking very personally in the "first person" of his experience with his own Apostles, and then mentions the only name in 1200 pages of The Course, "Judas"...(Adam which is mentioned is symbolic of all mankind).
It is clear from his Message to us..that he could never have said ..."Thou betrayest me with a kiss"... the famous line that has endured for 2000 years and has turned generations of Christians "to despise Judas as having done the unforgiveable". Betraying the SON of God.
As we read, study and practice ACIM, it is clear why we choose to leave Judas as "unforgiveable"... as he is the symbol of "our own guilt" based on our belief that we "betrayed our Father, Creator, Love, Our Self..and it is this guilt, we would project out onto the "scape goat"... Judas... The Course tells us on every page of its 1200 pages, this is impossible. We cannot betray either God, His Son, or Love, except in our dreams of sleep and forgetfulness.
Jews perceive Jesus the "one to blame" for their centuries of being nomads without a country, and for their persecution as a "hated minority"..that is "responsible for the death of the "Son of God".... again...an impossible dream...which remains intact until finally exposed as the ..."illusion we believe in and by our belief,
strengthens it so it becomes hardened in our minds" ...until we bring it to the Light and expose its fallacy.
Yes... I see it is a mistake of the same level and proportion...
"Jews need to Forgive Jesus...for what he did not do... as Christians need to Forgive Judas...for what he did not do...."
Jews ...do not see Jesus...as ONE with them...their projections on Jesus as he is the "source to blame for their being attacked and discriminated against over the centuries... in a way, a Jew, betrayed them.....of course that is pure projection of the ...idea that we are unloved and outcast... nomads from our Home.
Christians...do not see Judas as ONE with All the Apostles...choosing to name their children and churches after all the Apostles...except Judas, for he has done the "unforgiveable... "betrayal". Betrayal...is what we all "believe we did, as that is the 'source of guilt"...from all who have 'renounced their Creator and Home and Self, in favor of being author of their own will and world.
As it is impossible..yet we believe in it...same as belief in guilt... guilt equates to betrayal... the idea that Jesus used Judas ....as the only person's name used in the 1200 pages of ACIM, outside of Adam, the symbol of mankind... his message to us all... is "betrayal...in any form...is impossible...and if you believe in it...we use it to perpetuate the dream... for it serves only to reinforce our "fearful weak self".
The Son of God when He Identifies with The Strength of God as His Source, and Extends Love... can only Create by Extending His Love....
Those are the thoughts that came to me...many years ago when i came across page 87 in the original unnumbered Text.
unquote
Lastly, again in this time leading up to Easter, our Dutch friends Reint and Gabriela Gaastra-Levin sent a newsletter (in Dutch) on the true meaning of Judas, which also greatly emphasized how much Jesus was grateful to Judas for playing a vital role in the cosmic drama of the Crucifixion, and how he was clearly a dearly beloved disciple, who played a crucial role in the cosmic dramav of the crucifixion.
The emphasis in their story is different, but I feel that the content is very consistent.
Throughout all of these various traditions, perhaps the most important realization is that Judas is an integral part of the sonship and our brother in Christ, and that his role is instrumental in having us learn the true message as Jesus sums it up in the Course: "Teach only love, for that is what you are."
Copyright, © 2006 Rogier F. van Vlissingen. All rights reserved.
Saturday, April 01, 2006
The Apostolic Tradition - or how the Ego puts itself on the Throne
For those of us who forgot our church history there is a link under the title above to a site which explains the concept of the Apostolic Tradition. In my earlier post today: "Taboo: Trump Card of Ego-Obfuscation," I made reference to an important passage in the Course where Jesus points out that the ego system may be fool proof, but it isn't God-proof. We might as well keep that in mind in another April fools' day reflection.
One of the fundamental modes of operation of the ego in creating its own substitute "reality" in order to replace and repress the Memory of Heaven, is the inversion of the relationships between form and content, or more generally cause and effect. We continually see in the history of shifts in perception - think of Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" - how viciously the ego defends itself against anything that challenges its perceptions, and its "truths." Never to be defeated however the ego always insures its own continued relevance by co-opting the new models once they become inevitable in popular opinion. We keep fooling ourselves that this time we've really found the truth, which is an evident manifestation of the fact that none of these truths are ever true, but only another justification of the ego's point of view, which needs to be modified to support the reality of the ego in order to be accepted by the orthodoxy.
Thus the very process of canonizing various newer truths which come to replace old truths in the course of time, entails their reformulation in terms which do not only not threaten or question the ego, but suitably reinforce its hold on power. In other words revolutions never change anything except appearances, which can fool us a while longer.
In light of the above we should go back and review the events of the time of Jesus in Palestine, and the recorded histories about that. The fundamental divisions that arose almost immediately was about the question if his teaching was for Jews or Gentiles, and the only correct answer is of course either both or neither, for he clearly transcended these categories in teaching of a Kingdom NOT of this world. It was Paul and others who followed - and Paul in particular had a pervasive influence on New Testament literature since he wrote before even the canonical Gospels were recorded, who evolved a theology which made the crucifixion central, and the related teachings of the eucharist, and the resurrection (of the body) as a future event.
In other words the way to render Jesus and his teachings harmless, emphasis was put on the life of his body, and the crucifixion, which were hateful events in and of themselves, and not on his teachings of love, which were sort of mangled in the process. The resurrection was re-explained as and event of the body, not of the mind. In the process the emerging mythology proposed Peter as the founder of the Catholic church, and reinterprets Jesus' saying to him that he should become a rock on which his "church" could be built, as about the physical world and actual buildings and congregations. And so Jesus' very universal teachings are turned into specific teachings pertaining to time and place, to some people not others, and another world religion (to be) is born.
Meanwhile in the absence of the teacher, who by interpreting only his bodily, earthly life as real, and not his message, the apostolic tradition is now the vehicle of succession for the substitute teachers, the popes. And the focus is now shifted from Jesus' teachings and the contents of his message to the people who claim to be his authorized representatives, and who legitimize themselves by dint of their very interpretation of his teachings. And so a very worldly process of form now comes to take the place of Jesus' early call to the apostles to "leave" the world and follow him. And again also this should not be (mis)taken literally. As the Course frequently points out it is about our investment in the things of the world, not about doing them or not doing them. The shift which the miracle represents is the birth of a present solution of spirit, of peace, to take the place of a future expectation of salvation, which the world always holds out, and which is by definition always illusory, since it is the child of thinking that the causes of the absence of peace in the present are in the past and therefore by definition are exempted from any real hope of change. Hence the last section of the last Chapter of the Course has the title: "Choose Once Again," for this is the most crucial teaching of the Course, that if we choose for the present, we can make another choice, instead of continuing to act out our role as a victim of our past.
Thus the miracle is the choice for God, and leaves alone the foolish choice for the ego, which we made too long already.
Copyright, © 2006 Rogier F. van Vlissingen. All rights reserved.
One of the fundamental modes of operation of the ego in creating its own substitute "reality" in order to replace and repress the Memory of Heaven, is the inversion of the relationships between form and content, or more generally cause and effect. We continually see in the history of shifts in perception - think of Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" - how viciously the ego defends itself against anything that challenges its perceptions, and its "truths." Never to be defeated however the ego always insures its own continued relevance by co-opting the new models once they become inevitable in popular opinion. We keep fooling ourselves that this time we've really found the truth, which is an evident manifestation of the fact that none of these truths are ever true, but only another justification of the ego's point of view, which needs to be modified to support the reality of the ego in order to be accepted by the orthodoxy.
Thus the very process of canonizing various newer truths which come to replace old truths in the course of time, entails their reformulation in terms which do not only not threaten or question the ego, but suitably reinforce its hold on power. In other words revolutions never change anything except appearances, which can fool us a while longer.
In light of the above we should go back and review the events of the time of Jesus in Palestine, and the recorded histories about that. The fundamental divisions that arose almost immediately was about the question if his teaching was for Jews or Gentiles, and the only correct answer is of course either both or neither, for he clearly transcended these categories in teaching of a Kingdom NOT of this world. It was Paul and others who followed - and Paul in particular had a pervasive influence on New Testament literature since he wrote before even the canonical Gospels were recorded, who evolved a theology which made the crucifixion central, and the related teachings of the eucharist, and the resurrection (of the body) as a future event.
In other words the way to render Jesus and his teachings harmless, emphasis was put on the life of his body, and the crucifixion, which were hateful events in and of themselves, and not on his teachings of love, which were sort of mangled in the process. The resurrection was re-explained as and event of the body, not of the mind. In the process the emerging mythology proposed Peter as the founder of the Catholic church, and reinterprets Jesus' saying to him that he should become a rock on which his "church" could be built, as about the physical world and actual buildings and congregations. And so Jesus' very universal teachings are turned into specific teachings pertaining to time and place, to some people not others, and another world religion (to be) is born.
Meanwhile in the absence of the teacher, who by interpreting only his bodily, earthly life as real, and not his message, the apostolic tradition is now the vehicle of succession for the substitute teachers, the popes. And the focus is now shifted from Jesus' teachings and the contents of his message to the people who claim to be his authorized representatives, and who legitimize themselves by dint of their very interpretation of his teachings. And so a very worldly process of form now comes to take the place of Jesus' early call to the apostles to "leave" the world and follow him. And again also this should not be (mis)taken literally. As the Course frequently points out it is about our investment in the things of the world, not about doing them or not doing them. The shift which the miracle represents is the birth of a present solution of spirit, of peace, to take the place of a future expectation of salvation, which the world always holds out, and which is by definition always illusory, since it is the child of thinking that the causes of the absence of peace in the present are in the past and therefore by definition are exempted from any real hope of change. Hence the last section of the last Chapter of the Course has the title: "Choose Once Again," for this is the most crucial teaching of the Course, that if we choose for the present, we can make another choice, instead of continuing to act out our role as a victim of our past.
Thus the miracle is the choice for God, and leaves alone the foolish choice for the ego, which we made too long already.
Copyright, © 2006 Rogier F. van Vlissingen. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)