Jesus says in the course several times that we have a "sole responsibility". This responsibility is to accept the atonement. And this is usually attached to "for ourselves."

I think this has become one of the most selfishly misinterpreted teachings.

When Jesus mentions this, he ALSO mentions afterwards that once you have accepted atonement, you will now GIVE IT TO OTHERS. Which is not a selfish act. Nor is it exclusive. Nor does it mean you sitting there in isolation having accepted atonement CUT OFF from others, or unable to share it, or unwilling to heal others.

I also think that when he speaks of it being our sole responsibility, he is saying that because we have FREE WILL. Therefore, as the owner of the free will, I have to personally WILL to accept the atonement, and no-one can do this for me. So the responsibility lies SOLELY with me. I have to be willing. That's why it is the ONLY responsibility that lands squarely and solely on MY shoulders and not others. Because I have to exercise my free will. As Jesus says, "no one comes to the atonement except willingly."

Similarly, we have to realize that you cannot RECEIVE atonement WITHOUT giving it, because "atonement is a lesson in sharing." It means that you are aligning yourself with the golden rule and are now identify with your brothers and sharing with them. That in turn means that their interests are now shared with yours and it is your DUTY to fulfill the great crusade to HELP THEM AND HEAL THEM.

"The attraction of light must draw you willingly, and willingness is signified by GIVING."

I think Jesus is pretty clear that he never intended these statements about "sole responsibility" to be interpreted in such a selfish manner, where people THINK it means "I just accept it for myself in isolation and to hell with everyone else." The reason we accept it is SO THAT we become PART OF the atonement (plan) and now have a PROFESSION of atonement, which we do all the time, which involves GIVING TO OTHERS. Solely accept the atonement for yourself SO THAT you can share it!

Jesus's intention was NEVER to suggest that people are to accept atonement for themselves and then HOARD IT and NOT SHARE IT and NOT HELP ANYONE ELSE. In fact, we can interpret it to mean.... I accept atonement for myself because it is my sole responsibility to put myself into a position WHERE I can help others through a service of miracles!

"The sole responsibility of God's teacher is to accept the Atonement for himself. Atonement means correction, or the undoing of errors. When this has been accomplished, the teacher of God becomes a miracle worker by definition."

"The unforgiven HAVE no mercy to bestow upon another. That is why your sole responsibility MUST be to take forgiveness for yourself."

"If the sole responsibility of the miracle-worker is to accept the ATONEMENT, and I assure you that it is, then the responsibility for what is atoned FOR CANNOT be yours."

"The sole responsibility of the miracle worker is to accept Atonement himself. This means that he knows that mind is the only creative level, and that its errors ARE healed by the Atonement. Once he accepts this, HIS mind can only heal. By denying his mind any destructive potential, and reinstating its purely constructive powers, he has placed himself in a position where he can undo the level confusion of others. The message which he then gives to others is the truth that THEIR MINDS are really similarly constructive, and that their own miscreations cannot hurt them."

"The purpose of the Atonement is to restore everything TO you. (That is, to restore the awareness. Later clarification.) You had everything when you were created, just as everyone did." ... "Having been restored to your original state, you naturally become part of the Atonement yourself. You now share MY inability to tolerate the lack of love in yourself and in everyone else, and MUST join the GREAT CRUSADE to correct it. The slogan for this Crusade is "Listen, Learn, and DO."

Let's take a moment to recognize where we are AT, rather than where we think we should be. Although it may be increasingly obvious, in theory, what the truth is, it can be tougher to actually want to experience the reality of that truth. And most of us are still somewhat bound to wanting the things of this world, the body, and our sense of identity which is bound to it.

If we get honest, and put aside the intellectual theory, and look at what we are ACTUALLY doing, where our allegiance actually is, and the ways that we really do WANT things of this world still, we can at least be honest in admitting we don't want to wake up yet. We are resisting it, are unwilling to embrace it fully, and we want something else.

My own intellectual grasp of course metaphysics has become so revealing lately, that it even is starting to "scare" the part of me that does not want to accept it. I can understand how it is true and why it makes sense, but part of me does not want it. Does not believe it. Can't let go of the "something else" that I presently am attached to.

It can be useful though, if you are not willing to accept the truth, to at least admit that you don't want to accept the truth. Even if this doesn't mean you are going to suddenly change your mind and accept it, it at least does allow some light to enter, by "admitting" your present truth. And your present truth is that, while you are earnestly seeking God, you don't really want to be with Him, otherwise you would be.

This just means that we still have some work to do. Our minds still need training. We need to become willing. But generally speaking, moving towards the truth, when you are still bound to the ego, feels like approaching an enemy. It's like going towards something you do not want, something which threatens you, something which you don't trust.

I want to do the whole waking up thing, the miracles, the happiness, the love, but the fact is that right now, where I'm at, there is still a number of ways in which I don't want it. I'm still drawn to the body and the bodies of others. I still do not see with Christ vision. I still am afraid of God. I still avoid healing others. I still have grievances and losses. I still don't entirely trust the Holy Spirit or Jesus. I still want to keep the things of the world. I still believe the world is real. I still am scared by the idea that there is no world. And I still believe I am made of, identified with, stuff of the world which the course says does not exist.

I know that it's a journey, and over time there is progress. I also know that I gradually become more and more willing, and have progressed greatly in developing trust and letting go of fear. But I also know that where I am AT, versus what I understand the truth to be, are two different things. It's actually easier to grasp the metaphysics than it is to live it. And when I feel that my experience is lagging behind my understanding, it becomes frustrating.

This of course produces more guilt, to admit that you don't entirely want to ACTUALLY go there, yet. That you want to keep people imprisoned. That you want to keep suffering. That you still react to dreams as if they are reality. That you don't want to give up certain treasures, idols, experiences, pleasures etc. It makes it seem like you are doing everything you are not supposed to be doing.

I'm just sitting with this today. Just taking a break and being ego. Just acknowledging where I'm at, rather than the pressure of where I think I should be. Jesus reminds me "you are free". You can stay right where you're at if you want to, and when you're ready, he is there to help you move forward again.

"I will help you as much as you will let me."

"It is just because you are not ready to do what you should elect to do that time exists at all."

Sometimes bad things seem to happen. And usually our reaction is to want to get rid of them, stop them, prevent them, fix them.

But we have spiritual lessons to learn. And usually a lesson means that something starts out appearing to be something unwanted and upsetting. It seems like something has gone wrong.

Especially if this wrongness involves someone close to you or someone you're in a special relationship with, or someone you feel protective of or attached to, you'll feel compelled to want to 'take away' the problem.

But whatever it is that's happening, even if it looks bad, typically it is part of a person's 'script', and it is meant to be happening. It is something that was chosen at some point. Because this thing is happening, many things are going to be learned. It may seem painful to learn them, and indeed unwanted. That's in fact the ego resisting awakening.

So bad things happen, people come along to attack and provoke you, things go wrong, and shit hits the fan. This stimuli provokes and triggers stuff in YOU that represents areas of your unconsciousness. Maybe a sense of guilt that you have not released causes you to feel guilty that the person is suffering, and then you try to fix them instead of deal with your guilt. Or maybe the person attacks you such that you feel you cannot love them, and yet, this is your challenge to learn to love them in spite of their attack, as part of your lessons in unconditional love.

Lessons are not usually very pleasant. And the ego has this propensity to try to create and maintain the illusion of a nice, tidy, 'nothing is going wrong' life. This isn't a life where you genuinely are invulnerable or genuinely are experiencing a smooth flow of beautiful divine guidance, but rather a state of 'ignorance' and unconsciousness and specialness where all challenges to the ego's status quo are avoided.

So we develop this reflex reaction of wanting to 'take away' someone's pain, solve someone's problem, fix the situation or restore it to what we think it's supposed to be - i.e. free of anything 'going wrong'. But maybe what we're actually doing, is taking away the person's lesson. And maybe that will keep them asleep. And maybe that's not helpful.

And so this may mean, learning YOUR lessons that are being triggered by the problem you see in someone else. If you are upset, that's your lesson too. Someone else's lesson may be triggering lessons for you. And they might've chosen to experience those problems JUST SO that you will have an opportunity to wake up, by facing your own lessons in response to it. There are people who come into this world with disabilities and so on to 'teach' others to be more loving, patient and understanding, and they can't teach that if their disability is taken away.

So we need to learn our own lessons and that means, learning acceptance, learning to let go, learning unconditional love, etc... that MIGHT include bringing healing to the person through those more aware states of consciousness. Maybe you're meant to learn YOUR lessons in reaction to the other person's apparent difficulty, SO THAT you become able to heal the other person. And maybe if you don't do that, and you focus on fixing them, you won't ACTUALLY be able to help them.

All is not as it seems on the surface.

"The sole responsibility of God's teacher is to accept the Atonement for himself."

The ego is completely against the idea of being responsible for everything.Since ego believes strongly in sin and guilt and the reality of victimhood, it believes that if you take responsibility, YOU are the one who is sinful and guilty and a victimizer.

It wants to avoid this at all costs. It believes that responsibility is condemnation. It sees responsibility as INDUCING GUILT.

But it is vital that we learn to be responsible WITHOUT the sin and guilt and accusation. We are responsible for BELIEVING IN and USING these things, but we are NOT at the effect of these things.

We need to own up to what we have done to ourselves, which we cannot do if we constantly blaming the cause of them on everything and everyone other than ourselves.

But while we believe in sin and guilt being real, we are going to be RELUCTANT to OWN THIS POWER, the power of decision, because it implies that we are the guilty ones.

We have to go through a phase of trying to take responsibility, while also sorting out the fact that the sin and the guilt are not real. And this usually will entail at first a strong ego REACTION to trying to be responsible. As if it's not possible to be responsible WITHOUT inducing guilt.

And when you tell people about how they are responsible for MAKING THEMSELVES SICK, you will often notice that there is an EGO REACTION along the lines of it being "guilt inducing". But this is because we struggle to distinguish between the power and freedom brought about by responsibility, and the EGO'S USE of responsibility for condemnation.

Ego believes that "if you did it", this is SIN. That it proves you are a sinner. And this is a DEFENSE against salvation. It's a way of AVOIDING ever becoming empowered or free from suffering. It's a way to keep the ego and the belief in sin going. So the ego will steer you AWAY from responsibility at all costs, believing that all it does is make you a criminal - which means imprisonment, not freedom.

While you FEAR RESPONSIBILITY, as an ego reaction to the mixing of responsibility with sin, you will not want to own up to the fact that YOU are being self destructive, ALL your suffering is self inflicted, and YOU have the power to STOP IT.

We have to take brave steps to entertain the possibility that we are responsible for everything we experience, which is really a matter of OWNING UP TO CAUSALITY, which really means OWNING YOURSELF. And so you can see that sin and guilt are attempts to disown yourself and to disown responsibility. In a strange way, the ego disowns responsibility by MAKING YOU RESPONSIBLE for something you DIDN'T do.... such as sin.

You have to sort out what it is you are responsible FOR, recognize you are NOT responsible for "really sinning", and therefore become willing to TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY (thus power and causation) WITHOUT the sin and guilt attached.

You ARE responsible for being innocent. You ARE responsible for accepting this innocence, which is accepting atonement for yourself. And you ARE responsible for BEING TRUE to yourself. Which means you are responsible for CAUSATION, and the freedom of choice, and the power of decision. And none of this has anything to do with inducing guilt.

It's difficult to put this into words, but here goes.

To understand letting go, you have to first understand what it means to "hold on". What is it you are doing with your mind?

Before the separation, you knew you were love. After the separation, you believed you were not love, and that your self/love was separate from you. You perceived this as outside of you, disassociated and projected onto others.

You believed other people had stolen your love/self and locked it up inside themselves. You simultaneously valued what seemed to be in them, but wanted to steal it back. You see this as "specialness" which you value highly and is what gives value or reality to illusions - you believe in them. This is all described is "the laws of chaos."

The ego mind then "makes illusions real" and assigns special value to external, separate things. This is idol worship, and part of "seek and do not find." An emphasis on external salvation, believing the body, objects and the world are important, valuing special relationships and so on.

If you place "reality" and "value" outside yourself, you will put something on a pedestal and worship it. For example if you associate a person with their body, you will think their body is part of what's valuable about the person. If you value a car and have a psychological "need" for it, you become attached to and dependent on it as your savior. You see it as having power to do something to or for you, which makes it capable of saving you, makes it able to affect you, and makes you *dependent* on it.

Perceiving an external "cause" of you puts you at the "effect" of that cause. This happens in level confusion and reversal of cause-effect. This external cause now represents your "creator". If it is lost, the cause of you is lost and your savior is lost, and that's symbolic of the idea that God has died.

Your mind in a state of believing in special value, or the reality of external things and people, shifts some of its own sense of identity onto those things. You displace your "self" externally and see it as value/meaning within people and objects. If there were to be a perceived "loss" of those objects or people, you experience it as the loss of your own self.

Now, let's say that you mis-identified that you are a body, and thus saw other people as bodies, and valued them as body-people, and then one of these bodies dies. Because you made the body seem real/valuable, you cannot help but perceive there has been a "real loss" or loss of value. In what you think is reality. This will be experienced as "loss". And this kicks in all kinds of layers of denial, which show up as "stages of grief."

At first, you may not even be able to accept that a loss has happened. It seems pretend, impossible, unreal. You may be what they describe as in shock, but really it's that your mind is still psychologically attached to this external value and even though the valued thing is gone, it still believes in it strongly being there. There is a mismatch between expectation and reality. Really strong belief in specialness can produce very strong denial that a loss has even occurred, and denial that the person died.

If a person can `process` the fact that the person died, they might start to shift perception towards at least acknowledging that "it happened". However, this will at first be a cross between acceptance and denial. The mind still does not WANT to let go of the specialness. It's like the mind forms a "bridge" that connects its psyche to something external like a cord of attachment, which is like "holding on" - like you would with a hand, but using a psychic hand. The mind latches onto the external special thing and doesn't want to let go of it. You can actually FEEL this sense of "attachment" and external connectedness if you are observant.

Acknowledging that a death "happened" is a step in the right direction because it at least admits that, to some degree, the person/value doesn't seem to be there any more. But this also is met with another layer of denial. The denial says, "I do not want to let go". This is partly because the mind in its "belief in" things believes it gives reality TO things, and makes them be there, and gives them value, and so if it will just keep believing in those things, it will "keep them alive". There will be active resistance to actually letting go, and reducing your belief in their specialness means you are trying to destroy them or contribute to the perception that they are lost. To let go, to the ego, seems murderous, which induces guilt.

The mind in this state is not fully conscious because, by projecting specialness outward, it made itself unconscious. To "let go" would have to mean stepping backwards in the mind and getting "behind" the attachment and projection and becoming more aware. This seems insurmountable to a mind that is sleeping, that it needs to somehow tap into a greater awareness that underlies where it's "at". The only way to do that is to actually let go of projection of specialness. But the mind doesn't want to do that yet.

It takes a lot of willingness to "admit the truth" that you do not want to let go. This is because you think, if you let go, the thing will stop existing. If you let go, it will be your responsibility that the thing is lost. If you let go, you will have to admit that there HAS been a loss and that the person isn't there any more. You won't be able to delude yourself that you are maintaining their existence with your belief in them. Admitting that you do not WANT to let go is good because it at least lets in some truth. This is one step away from looking deeper at WHY you don't want to let go.

Not wanting to let go is really a layer of denial which covers up the "fact" that the thing HAS GONE. That there HAS been loss. I struggled with this step a lot in relation to grieving for the loss of someone because I didn't want to admit that I didn't WANT to let go of them. I wanted them to NOT be gone, because I wanted to keep what I valued as special. My letting go would somehow mean they are "even more lost". To admit it removes denial. Once I admitted I wanted to keep them, I was able to move past that to admitting what's underneath - an actual sense of loss - that something HAS been lost and isn't coming back. The ego doesn't like this.

Now, this sense of something being "really lost" is still actually another form of denial, and a layer of delusion, because in truth nothing real can be lost. Real value is not lost. Nothing real can be threatened or die. So if the body dies, it's only a body that is "lost", not the person's immortal spirit. Confusing the two things makes you think there has been a loss of something important. Valuing the body makes you believe ITS loss is important. It's nothing. So in truth, although you have to process the sense of loss, underneath the loss there is a deeper truth: you cannot lose what never existed.

And so at some point you have to realize, the thing you think you couldn't let go of, wasn't even REALLY there to begin with. You were actually letting go of NOTHING, and you stood to GAIN EVERYTHING by letting it go. You thought you'd lost real value, but in the BELIEF in its loss was an illusion of it being lost. Real value isn't special value. And so the loss of the specialness was not actually loss of anything REAL. So there hasn't REALLY been a loss. Getting to that point is what allows you to enter into the "acceptance" state and truly the LETTING GO, which is a state of allowing, surrendering, accepting the truth, and finally "detaching" your mind from its dependence on the illusory external thing. Nothing real can be threatened.

So this letting go thing, it's a process typically, and you go through stages and gradually come to accept that the thing you thought was lost is not really something worth losing. It was not even really valuable to begin with. That's where you become set free from grief and loss and have no more need to grieve. An unwillingness to let go is only based on the belief that you're letting go of something you need, letting go of something special, or letting go of the part of your self/love/salvation that you see as separate from you. All experiences of loss are really experiences reflecting your belief that you have lost yourself and God, which you cannot really do.

You won't let go of something while you think it has special value, or while you think it's real or important. And if it should happen that your ego mind is still valuing it WHILE it is being denied to you - such as when someone dies - your mind WILL experience loss and grief. This is because the mind is still trying to depend on that thing as its salvation and truth, something it values as real, and its absence is experienced as "loss". This loss will induce grieving. Grieving and loss are not NATURAL. You do not need them. But they are generated by a sick mind that believes love is outside of itself and can be threatened.

So it's really all about letting go of psychological attachment, which means your "belief in" the special value of things which don't really exist. Ultimately you are letting go of something that never even existed. You're letting go of holding onto an illusion, which never really had any value other than what you gave it. And in that relinquishing, you are shifting to what is really valuable and accessible - inner love. The re-integration of your self. Letting go of false beliefs by learning to recognize that they ARE false, recognizing them as illusions, and thus giving them no value or credit. Illusions recognized must disappear.

Quite often Jesus says to me, "let them". He is telling me to let go - to allow, to let other people be free, and to stop controlling. That means accepting that they are free to do whatever they want, and it doesn't matter because it's an illusion. They can't really hurt their real self. He has also been telling me "let go" through various waves of grief recently and I just couldn't see to gain the awareness to let go. Not until I could admit that I didn't want to, which opened up the door to a sense of loss, which eventually cleared away to reveal that nothing real had been lost, and thus acceptance and peace returned. Letting go, especially at an emotional level, is hard. It takes willingness, acceptance, admittance, letting go of fake values, removing dependencies, detaching and setting yourself free.

"Miracles are everyone's right, but purification is necessary first."

There are a number of aspects to 'being spiritual' that you do not have to TRY to be. And 'trying' actually works against you.

For example, being present. You can try to be in the 'now' all you want but you will continually be pulled back out of it by your unhealed guilt. So you need to heal that guilt and then you will naturally find yourself in the present without effort. Otherwise you'll be one of these people that is just constantly trying to be present all the time and its a great big effort. You can't be present while you're still attached to an unhealed past.

Another example, you do not have to work at being 'more loving'. To be more loving reinforces the idea that you are not loving enough. You don't need to do that. There's a reason why you think you're not loving/loveable enough and its again got to do with unhealed baggage and faulty perspective. Those are blocks to the *awareness* of love's presence, and those blocks need to be healed and undone.

One the shit is undone, then you are naturally left with an awareness of the presence of love - because IT IS ALREADY THERE. It's not something YOU have to put there, or create, because God has already put it there. And also, realize that just because you are not aware of love does not mean it has gone away, it's just covered up. You are already enough love, even if its hidden from you. So stop trying to be loving and let it be.

Similarly there is not much point trying to be spiritual. That doesn't mean of course you don't have a goal of becoming more aware of your pre-existing spiritual nature, it just means you need more acknowledgment of the spirit that you already are, rather than trying to 'spiritualize' yourself - trying to 'make spiritual'.

Trying to make spiritual is what leads to the spiritual ego, because it reinforces the idea that you are not spiritual. If you're not spiritual, you feel compelled to have to add more spirit. You don't need any more spirit. You ARE spirit. You just need to work on becoming aware of your pre-existing spirit. There's plenty of it already. Don't become more spiritual, because it also makes you un-spiritual, in denial of your existing nature. There's a difference.

This is why the Course doesn't try to teach the meaning of love, but only how to remove the obstacles that make you believe it is not here, or that you are not it. These are all MISTAKES, because a) you are already 100% love, b) you are already 100% spiritual, and c) you are already 100% perfect in God. So you don't need to 'be perfected' or 'become'. You only need to cease the crap that blocks and prevents you from ACKNOWLEDGING what you really are already.

This is all very different than 'adding more' to yourself, or 'attaining' or 'building up' or 'becoming more'. All of those are driven by the ego's idea that you came into existence from some kind of EMPTY VOID, in which you are completely at a loss for love - God having left you in the dirt - so now you have nothing, so now you have to be super-compelled to go seeking for it (where you won't find it). You seek everywhere other than to acknowledge that it was always where God put it, because separation from it has NOT happened. Separation from YOURSELF has not happened, and you are love already. Perfect love. So you have to question the emptiness, it's an ego construct to try to deny that you're already and still as God created you.

So stop the fucking effort of trying to become a better person or better behavior or more spiritual or more loving bla bla bla... you don't need to. And you won't. The more you try to do that the more you will come up empty handed AND create a bunch of bullshit reinforcement in your mind that you're still not good enough. And then you'll be a perfectionist that never is good enough, because you're not willing to UN-DO the false belief that there's not enough love in you already. The idea that you're not already perfectly okay with God is a complete pile of crap.

You're already enough. And you're already you. And God already loves you.

Sometimes in the heat of conversations, people throw forth the "you'd rather be right than happy" quote. Funnily enough this quote is usually given by someone trying to be right. ;-)

Anyway, what is this "being right" thing? It begins when someone believes they are wrong, ie guilty of something. The wrongfulness is projected. You accuse your brother of your own belief in your own sinfulness. And before you know it, you're trying to defend yourself against what appears to be something wrong outside of you. Being right "against" another is actually your split mind trying to be right against itself, by making itself wrong.

There is lack of a desire to admit to doing this, because the "righteousness" is a form of denial, actually an attempt to suppress and cover up the sense of guilt and sin or "wrongfulness" within. To admit that you believe you are wrong seems hurtful. Trying to cover this over with "the face of innocence" seems to allow you to portray yourself as not wrong. And of course this requires finding someone else to put the sin onto. If you look you'll notice you more often project wrongfulness when you're feeling unhappy to begin with.

Those who are right, therefore, believe they are wrong, and are projecting their wrongfulness. When a person admits to this, and goes deeper to realize they are not truly wrong, ie not guilty or sinful, it alleviates the need to project the wrongfulness onto others. And thus the need to be seen as the one who is right or "not guilty" disappears also.

The interesting thing is that when someone is not believing they are wrong, genuinely, they have no problem admitting to being mistaken or wrong. It doesn't matter, because they know they are not wrong, in the psychological sense. They know they are innocent. They don't have any guilt to hide or project. And so there's no need to "be right" to cover it up. They laugh at suggestions they are wrong because they know they are not wrong. But the opposite of being wrong isn't bright right, it's being correct.

When you are correct, you are accurate in your acceptance of what is true. When you are correct, you are not mistaken. In your correctness you are not deceived or in denial or needing to be right or wrong. You are above both righteousness and wrongfulness. In this state, it is possible to be correct on a matter, without necessarily being "right" about it. You can be correct without ego attachment. You can be correct without it entailing some form of guilt projection. And you can be correct without feeling a need to defend an ego position.

Someone pointing out that you are seeming to be right by putting forth something which is correct, is mistaken in their evaluation of what you're doing. There's a distinct difference between presenting something which is truthful and correct, versus presenting it at the same time as having a need to project wrongfulness, or as part of an attack, or to use it as a weapon of guilt. You can be very correct without it entailing any kind of righteousness at all. And of course that means you are not really "attached" to whether this correctness is recognized by or accepted by others at all. It has nothing to do with others, because the inner peace is being projected, not sin.

You can be happy and be correct. You can be happy and assert correctness. You can also be happy and defend a position. It has nothing to do with whether you are psychologically having a bad day or feeling irritable or wanting to blame someone. There is a difference between what is true and what's happening in the mind simultaneous to that truth being presented. You can also be happy and incorrect, without it in any way meaning you are sinful or wrong.

Is this entire post an attempt to be right? Hmmmm. Maybe.

It's "pride month" which is a sort of pro-queer celebration and revenge-quest rolled into one. People should be happy to be who they really are, without the need for any validation from anyone. It's not necessary to have other people treat us in a certain way or agree with us or even respect us. Insecure people depend on others for making themselves okay. Immortal beings laugh in the face of all judgements and opinions. The world doesn't do anything to us and other people do not define who or what we are.

Often I hear things along the lines of - the straight heteronormative people have told us this, done that to us, treated us this way, and so now we're going to be extremely "loud and proud" as a kind of counter-protest. That isn't really pride, it's an ego thing pretending to be pride. If people were really proud of who they are they wouldn't feel a need to go to war over it because they'd know that no-one and nothing can take it away from them. The pride must be pretty fragile and NOT pride if it depends on other people to reinforce it.

So as usual like most things in the world there's a whole lot of special-relationship bullshit and ego dynamics around this. Many of the pride posts I've seen are nothing short of seeking revenge against perceived persecutors. People trying to insist on their 'right to exist' as a special kind of person. People 'fighting' for something. Nothing natural has to be fought for, it's given by God with no strings attached.

If we get into any kind of need to have other people change to see us, accept us, recognize us, validate us, respect us, treat us well, stop abusing us, etc... anything at all, we're saying that we do not want to be fully ourselves, do not not accept ourselves, and are shifting responsibility for that onto someone else. We don't want that, it's not an improvement. We should all be happy and proud of who and what we are on the basis that we are perfect in God and have no need to get love and appreciation from anything outside of us.

I know there has been a lot of history and conflict surrounding this, and yes still a lot of people are horrendous and murderous in their attitudes about queer people. But ultimately we have to be responsible for our own choice of whether to be happy or not. If we give anyone the power to determine that for us then we give power away and are asking to be victimized. And then going on a sassy middle-finger quest to try to pretend not to care, isn't exactly a solid foundation.

We should not be wanting or needing other people to 'treat us well' in order for us to be happy and who we really are. This is the problem with the world, everyone's expecting everyone else to "do to them" what they want, to "make them happy", to "cause them" to be this way or that way, which is "positive victimhood". It's a way of giving away power and hoping that the world will treat you nice. If you need the world to treat you a certain way your entire mental health is pretty fragile.

You are an immortal being, you do not NEED anyone to treat you nice. You are invulnerable, you do not NEED people to validate you or be respectful toward you. Let them be as vicious as they want, it's not supposed to affect you in any way if you are owning who you are. There is no strength in surrounding yourself with only the people that treat you well. You are not 'treated' well or not well. You are the one who chooses everything you experience.

"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."

"It is your thoughts alone that cause you pain. Nothing external to your mind can hurt or injure you in any way. There is no cause beyond yourself that can reach down and bring oppression. No one but yourself affects you. There is nothing in the world which has the power to make you ill or sad, or weak or frail. But it is you who have the power to dominate all things you see by merely recognizing what you are."

There is a very fine line between accepting this world and justifying it.

If I am having sickness, or problems, or negative ego thoughts, then something is wrong. It does not matter whether I am accepting these things or not, or whether I'm trying to be at peace in spite of them or not. If these things are happening, something is not right.

There is a significant group of people in ACIM circles who attempt to become "at peace with" everything that happens here. This includes being at peace with sickness, being at peace with death, being at peace with negative thoughts, being at peace with problems and limitations, etc.

There is something to be said for this because, on the one hand, if I resist or block or control or read-into or project onto or manipulate or become attached to something in the world, I am in the ego for sure. When events happen, if I resist them and don't welcome them, I will fight with them. That's not good. If I cannot allow someone the free will to choose whatever they want to experience, even if that means suffering and death, then I will not allow myself the same freedom of will either.

But... and this is a big but, that does not mean, that the goal of the course is to "be okay with" all of these things, to keep these problems, to maintain sickness, to promote peaceful death, or to continue having attack thoughts that we're "not bothered by".

Yes, I am supposed to let go of the world, let go of controlling it, let go of trying to stop people's choices, let go of not allowing etc. That's all good. But when that is equated with.... well, this means that I should not do anything about the world other than transcend it, then this becomes a problem.

Because now I am going to attempt to keep experiencing ego stuff while pretending that I am not. That's actually an act of denial. If I'm still having sickness in the body, something is wrong in my mind. If I am still dying, something is wrong in my mind. If I am still having problems and limitations, something is wrong in my mind. And if I am still having negative ego thoughts or body identified thoughts, there is still something wrong in my mind.

It is not our task to sort of ... get underneath our negative thoughts, or to .... go in back of our ego judgements.... etc. We are not supposed to be becoming "okay" with problems and sickness and death. In a sense we are... we are not meant to be upset by it, but we are not meant to make it real and we're also not meant to choose it. Choosing sickness is an attack. Choosing death is an attack.

So on the one hand, we're to become "at peace with" whatever happens, but at the same time, that peace MUST include not choosing to make bad stuff happen, otherwise we are intellectualizing the truth.

A mind which is in a state of love does not have attack thoughts. A mind in a state of love does not have a sick body. A mind in a state of love does not go through death. A mind in a state of love does not have problems and limitations. A mind in a state of love does not need to a find a way to be "okay with" intolerable bullshit. It may well BE "okay" with it in a sense, but at the same time, it does not choose it, manifest it, create it, maintain it, or make it a reality.

Exactly who is making the body sick when the mind is awake? Who is responsible for that? You are. And if you are, you are not awake.

Exactly who is making attack thoughts show up in the mind, which you are happily trying to transcend and allow to continue happening? Who is thinking them? You are. If you are having attack thoughts you have an ego.

Exactly who is making the body go through death? Who is bringing about the extreme victimhood conditions which are *required* in order for death to take place? You are. If you are dying, you have an ego.

We have to take total responsibility for everything we are experiencing and expressing and causing to happen, including the undoing of all sickness, death, suffering, and ego thoughts. Only the thoughts I think with God - loving thoughts - are real. All the rest is ego and it must go, otherwise I'm hiding in a corner and thinking hate while pretending to think love.

This includes the kittens and puppies and adorable farm animals and all the wild creatures of the earth, including the human bodies and aliens.

I would like to know if you find it difficult to let go of the idea that these "creatures" are real, that they are "alive", that they were somehow "made by God", or that they even exist, in terms of what the Course says?

For example "there is no world" and "there is no life outside of heaven" and "this is a dream of death" and so on. If this is true, all these things, these forms of matter, these objects which move around as if they are alive, being animated as illusions by the mind, they really do not exist or have "life".

As Jesus says even the human body is not alive. It doesn't really exist, it's not who you are, and it is an illusion. It is made of the idea of separation and death. So really it's more appropriate to say it's a "death form."

So now we have various creatures and plants and trees and so on which at times can appear to be lovely and all that. You can have love for them or be attached to them or want to protect them and save the environment etc. But... it's all an ego trap, right?

Over time my belief that physical objects are "alive" has had to come into question. There's two things being asserted and they can't both be true.

This is a cruel world which God did not create. If you go to youtube and watch some videos of wild animals maming and killing and eating each other, you can see that there is little "love" in that, and God couldn't possibly have created it. So is it life, or are these the creatures of hell?

What God creates lives forever. Is that true of anything in this world in particular? Pretty much nothing. "There is NO LIFE outside of heaven." So this world, which is the idea of being outside of heaven, is not life, right? So what is it? It's an illusion of nothing, depicting an idea of death.

"The world is a picture of the crucifixion of God's son." The whole world. All the matter, all the particles, all the separate things, all the creatures which feast on each other, all the beings that take away and must attack to continue living, and all the humans who must hunt and kill in order to avoid the ego dynamic of starvation.

Is this LIFE? here? ... this world? Is it ALIVE? really? Or is it simply a dream of death, where everything is MADE OF the idea of death and separation, masquerading as life and pretending to be alive? Is it not "the dry and dusty desert where starved and thirsty creatures come to die"? To "come to hate a while, wither and die"? A cruel world which LIFE could not possibly have created, which is part way between life and total death, and thus barely alive at all?

How about "this world holds NOTHING that I want"? Or "A teacher of God will gladly give up all the pleasures of the world"?

There may be some remaining semblance of life here. We cannot actually fully separate ourselves from God and even the illusions we make cannot be fully "outside the laws of God". Even these illusory forms must come from a mind which is alive enough to project them. They may have a little life left, but it isn't much. And it's nothing compared to heaven.

It's a sorry picture. But this world is really not what LIFE is like. It's not HOW life lives. It is not how life FUNCTIONS. It is run by ego laws of death, competition and destruction. We like to stick a bow on it and wrap the dogs in clothes and make little play houses for the cats but hey... they die, right?

Their bodies can't be real. And the humans... their bodies also can't be real.

Immortality is of the soul, which God created, in heaven. That is where life is. That's real life. Eternal life. Life which cannot be changed or killed or hurt in any way. That's reality. That's where the LIFE is.

Forms, all forms, are "the form of error". They are depictions of separateness. Every single one of them. Are they life forms, or are they LIE forms? What is LIFE really?