As we dive deeply into what it means to be an immortal being, something suddenly becomes clear. If we are indeed invulnerable, inpenetrable, eternal, incapable of even being changed, or affected in any way.... then how is it possible that there can be any kind of suffering that is a PART of us?

If we are this PURE LIFE, which is so alive it is completely devoid of all traces of attack and sickness and death, unable to be even modified in any way, completely permanent and absolute, how can it BECOME anything? How can any kind of suffering be something we have in us, or are made of?

Surely this means that if there does seem to be some kind of suffering - an upset feeling, some loss, some guilt, a fear, a sickness, anything at all which is a form of destruction, it cannot be INSIDE of what we are. It can't be modifying the inherent nature and substance of what we are. So it has to be somehow separate or "outside".

If there is for example a feeling of unhappiness, we can't really accurately say "I am unhappy." Because this means I have become unhappiness. I have changed, and so I am not unchangeable, and I have transformed, and I have modified what I am and how I feel - no longer permanently happy, no longer joyful and at peace, but disturbed and upset and defective in some way.

This points to the idea that we IDENTIFY WITH things which cannot be a part of us, and tend to include them in our definition of me, myself, I, what I am, what I have, what I feel, what I experience. As though to say we ARE these things, that they are a part of us. But they can't be.

The ego on the other hand is a sense of confusion in identity, in which our mind has moved away from being PURE LIFE and has gone off the rails. It's believing that there are now qualities and substances and contents to our self that God did not put there. That we have changed and turned into something less than whole, less than pure, less than perfect.

So the ego then has this sort of view of BEING ONE WITH things which are not of God. Being one with illusions, with pain and misery, with sickness and death, with suffering, with the body etc. It regards them as part of itself and tries to wear them - not just like a separate piece of clothing, but like... to be so merged with it that it thinks of it like it is its SELF. That you ARE a body.

The ego view is this smushing together of mind and form, where identity becomes tangled up in the things which are not of God. So now we start to feel like "I feel upset" and "I am in pain" and "I am guilty" and so on. But this can't be true. We cannot BE these things in truth if we are immortal beings. They can't be a PART of our self, included in ourself, part of our nature or condition. They have to be separate things, outside of us, not even "ours" really.

If we then look when ego is flaring up and there is all manner of upset and hurt and emotions and pian coming out, we should do something which seems to most humans would be insane and unhealthy - to separate ourselves from it. To say, I am not suffering, I am not upset, I am not weak, I am not in pain, I am not having this happen to me, I am not these sensations, I am not these thoughts.

Because all of these forms of suffering cannot actually BE - they are not ways of being - they are just illusions and dreams. What we are as immortal beings cannot suffer, cannot have loss, cannot die. What we are cannot even really be unhappy - which is a form of death. We can't have guilt in us because that's like saying there's something wrong with perfection. And we can't in fact really have anything be a part of us that God didn't put there.

So we have to sort out, and be careful, with how we are identifying WITH things that are not of God, even the way we feel and think. As an immortal being you DO NOT have upset feelings. If there seem to be upset feelings, it is ego, and it is driven by a mistaken belief about yourself being not like God. There is no pain in God and none in me. There is no unhappiness in God and none in me.

"Whatever suffers is not part of me." W248

"Whatever suffers is not part of me. What grieves is not myself. What is in pain is but illusion in my mind. What dies was never living in reality, and did but mock the truth about myself. Now I disown self-concepts and deceits and lies about the holy Son of God. Now am I ready to accept him back as God created him, and as he is." UrW248

"No one can suffer loss unless it be his own decision. No one suffers pain except his choice elects this state for him. No one can grieve nor fear nor think him sick unless these are the outcomes that he wants, and no one dies without his own consent. Nothing occurs but represents your wish, and nothing is omitted that you choose. Here is your world, complete in all details. Here is its whole reality for you. And it is only here salvation is." UrW152

"Father, Your holiness is mine. Your Love created me, and made my sinlessness forever part of You. I have no guilt nor sin in me, for there is none in You." UrW235L2

"I am in the likeness of my Creator. I cannot suffer, I cannot experience loss, and I cannot die. I am not a body. I would recognize my reality today. I will worship no idols, nor raise my own self-concepts to replace my Self. I am in the likeness of my Creator. Love created me like Itself." UrW84L2 "I am the holy Son of God Himself.

I cannot suffer; cannot be in pain;

I cannot lose, nor can I fail to do

All that salvation asks." UrW191L7

"I cannot suffer any loss or deprivation or pain because of who I am." UrW58L5

"I cannot be guilty because I am a Son of God." UrW46L6

"The "self" that needs protection is not real. The body, valueless and hardly worth the least defense, need merely be perceived as quite apart from you, and it becomes a healthy, serviceable instrument through which the mind can operate until its usefulness is over. Who would want to keep it when its usefulness is done?" UrW135L9

I found myself in a conversation with Jesus last night about whether or not it's okay to pray for someone if they have not 'given permission'. I wanted to pray for someone to attempt to help them and heal them, but I wondered, what if they did not want this?

I thought about how we're not meant to violate someone's free will and how maybe it would incur some kind of 'karma' if we try to do this. I also thought about ethics and about how everyone has 'rights' and that we're supposed to be respectful and all that.

I seemed to be getting hints from Jesus that it was still okay to pray, and in fact it had been Jesus who initially had suggested to me "pray". Jesus has been trying to get me to experiment more with 'true prayer', since prayer is the medium of miracles, and to learn more how to extend God's miracles to people. But I felt a bit awkward about 'doing a prayer to someone'.

I wondered if it was some kind of manipulation. But somehow it seemed plausible that maybe it was helpful, that maybe anything that truly comes from God is perhaps useful and uplifting and a blessing of some kind.

So then I started wondering about whether in the higher realms there might be some kind of special 'rules' or 'laws' in place which govern this kind of thing, whether I should ask Jesus or God or someone not only IF it's okay to pray for someone, but also what to pray for. It seems at least to make sense to ask for guidance as to what will be helpful, rather than just launch into an ego 'I think this should happen' sort of thing.

Then it started to occur to me that perhaps there is a difference between horizontal and vertical thinking, ie that most of our worries about violating someone's free will are to do with things we would 'do to someone' in a horizontal, ego-logical way, on the level of form and separation... and that perhaps when you go into 'vertical' mode (which is conducive to miracles), you are perhaps transcending that entire scenario... it occurred me to also that everything in this world is basically illusion and part of ego-world laws, and yet in truth, "I am under no laws but God's".

Having spun my wheels around all of this I then turned to Jesus and just asked, why or how is it okay to pray for someone when they haven't asked for it and maybe don't even want it?

In his becoming-increasingly-common fashion, he replied with a single short sentence which cut through absolutely all of the bullshit and confusion like a knife.

"Since when was it a crime to love someone?"

:-)

Praying with God and receiving God's love and extending God's love, which is the 'mechanics' of miracle working, is entirely within the realm of loving people. It's not really 'about' the miracle as such, or the outcome, but really just about loving people. The love that inspires the miracle is important, more than the miracle itself. The miracle is almost a side-effect of love. So with a focus on simply praying as a form of a) thanking God for love, b) receiving love, c) extending love to others, where's the possible harm in that? And if a miracle comes of it, that's fine too... because "miracles are natural expressions of love, when they aren't happening something has gone wrong".

So I focused on love. And I prayed for the person. And I even prayed for the person to receive healing, which may even entail changes in their body. But rather than it seem like an act of control, manipulation, non-acceptance or overstepping boundaries, it simply became an affirmation of truth, an exclamation of the lovability of the person, and a restoration of how God would have things be. In this sense it can only be a blessing. And this made me think of...

"Miracles are the maximal service you can render to another". So if a miracle is the absolute BEST that I can possibly offer to someone, as a natural component of love through prayer, than where is there room in there for doubt or ideas of 'not supposed to' or 'respecting separate will' or whatever. And I guess it boils down to this..... miracles from God's love are ALWAYS a blessing, are ALWAYS welcome, are ALWAYS justified, are ALWAYS allowed (per God's will), and are a kind of 'right' that we each have to bestow upon each other.

We are, in our miracle working, extending God's authority and using that authority to have authority over ILLUSIONS, not so much over the person. The person is NOT the illusion of sickness, the person is NOT the life challenge, the person is NOT what their ego is up to or the lessons they have. So we cannot really do anything TO the person anyway, because they already ARE perfect love in truth. And we are not really in fact healing the real person because the real person needs no healing. All we are doing is calling for love to come in and set a person free from illusions, which is a divine blessing.

Okay so I realize this may sound like potentially a lot of rationalization or justification... but really just clarity. Coming into awareness that we ARE extensions of God's authority, we DO have the ability to give love, Jesus DOES perform miracles as "intercessions for your holiness", and doing this IS allowed and normal and loving, regardless of whether someone asks to be helped or not. Divine help is TRULY HELPFUL. Ego help is the kind of help that has side-effects and boundary-violating properties. There is a difference. Provided we are putting God/Love first, all is well.

It's okay to work miracles for those who are not able to help themselves, and for those who are temporarily weaker, and for those who are temporarily more resistant to love. But you should probably still seek Spiritual guidance as to whether this is in accord with the Plan of Atonement. As Jesus says, indiscriminate miracles are not always helpful, and that you should consult with Him first. I guess that's as good a basis for 'what to do' as any.

It all comes back to that funny old adage ... "what would Jesus do?"

"What is not love is murder.

"If to love oneself is to HEAL oneself, those who are sick do NOT love themselves. Therefore, they are asking for the love that would heal them, but which they are DENYING TO THEMSELVES. If they knew the truth about themselves, they could not be sick."

We are either loving ourselves and others or we are attacking ourselves and others.

It's either love, or a call for love. But it can be difficult to recognize that someone's attack is a call for love. It does not seem to take the form of "please love me" or "I need love". Usually it takes the form of inciting counter-attack, laden with temptation and conflict.

Especially for example if someone is using your name, using attributing words like "you", pointing a physical finger, looking at you in a certain way, or doing something that seems to be affecting you. It all seems to be a way to attempt to say "its about you" or "its your fault" or that they are attacking YOU, not themselves.

Can you recognize that this is them expressing "I need more love because I'm lacking love", when everything they are expressing appears at first to be murderous and unloving? When they seem to present a picture of "I do not love you", which is the same as "I do not want love", how do you see it as a call to be loved?

It's fairly accurate to say that almost everyone on the planet is sick in the mind and body. And that isn't an overestimate.

Anyone who is not being completely loving is not in their right mind. Anyone attacking is not in their right mind. No-one in their right mind would do anything other than love, because they are one with you and to attack you would attack themselves. No sane person would ever treat anyone else in any way other than lovingly. So if someone is not being wholly loving, they are sick.

The problem with this sickness is that the person's mind is in denial, awareness is blocked, and they are unconscious, they don't realize what they are doing otherwise they wouldn't do it.

Only someone who is unaware of the consequences of their attack, an attempt to cause effects in someone else and not themselves, would proceed to do it. It's an attempt to get away with murder, which is the whole ego system of thought - that something is true of another that is different than what applies to you.

So now their mind is denying their own light, they have attacked themselves, they are guilty and sinful and afraid, and now they are acting out. Almost certainly they are projecting onto scapegoats and looking for a target to create an illusion of alleviating their suffering. To try to escape from the responsibility of owning what they are doing to themselves. And by being in denial they do not really seem to want help, though deep down they do.

So what is your role now? Faced with a world full of mentally-ill and physically expressive nut jobs, how do you respond? The Holy Spirit would have you respond with love at all times. He would say, well, these people, they are forgiveable because they literally are not aware of what they are doing. They are insane. No-one sane would act this way and no-one sane would attack a brother. So if they're doing that, they are insane and need help.

The only help that can work is to fix the problem. The problem is the person is blocking love and so seems to be lacking love. What they need therefore is love. Love is the only thing that can be supplied to correct the only thing that's lacking. If someone is not being loving they are believing in a lack or absence of love, and the presence or supply of this love is the only remedy. This is why expressions of love are miraculous and can cure.

So in a way we have to learn, to reframe everything we see happening, and all expressions coming from people. Either they are being christly and loving, in recognition that that is their real self, OR they are being unconscious, lost in the ego, lacking love, are mentally ill and need healing. Being in denial they DO NOT KNOW what they are doing and are mistaken.

If we can remember that people are "not being themselves", that they are "sick" and that they are not aware of what they are doing or why, and if we can remember that they WOULD NOT act this way if they were healed and whole, this makes it easier to not "hold it against them", take it personally, think of it as true or serious, and helps you to stay out of the ego response.

Really this is what forgiveness is about. Faced with an insane attacking ego-driven person, we need to OVERLOOK all of these appearances and remember the person's divinity, which is hidden behind their call for love, which is showing up as a call to be unloved. They seem to WANT to be attacked, they seem to WANT suffering, but this is only because they have rejected the very thing that would give them the sanity to make a wiser choice.

We have to laugh at people's insane behavior because it's not really true of them. This is part of realizing this is just a dream and the nutjobs it's populated with don't even know they are dreaming. No-one in their right mind would deliberately be unloving. Their lack of love is sickness that appears to ask for love to be withheld but is mistaken in that request. What they really want and need is love. And this love has to overlook and shine past all of these obstacles.

Not just for their benefit, but also to keep your own mind sane. Because if you yourself have stopped being loving and have slipped into reactions, counter attacks, taking it personally or seriously, being tempted or distracted to engage their ego, then you now also have joined the ranks of the insane and you yourself now need healing as well.

"You cannot enter into real relationship with any of God's Sons unless you are willing to love them all AND equally."

"Forgiveness recognizes that what you think you brother did has not OCCURRED."

"Only Atonement can be said to cure."

"There is no sin."

While enjoying the innocence and sinlessness of becoming aware that I did not "really" sin, a person began to verbally attack me.

It had absolutely no effect.

I found it interesting to see the complete distinction between who I was and what they were doing to themselves, as though it was completely clear that it couldn't have been about me - because I was not sinful.

The attack did not register, not even slightly, and I did not need to defend myself in order to be invulnerable. It was simply clear that this was not about me at all.

Who would put up defenses if they knew that they couldn't possibly be sinful or guilty, and that no claims against them could ever really be about them?

There was no ego that needed defending - my self was not identified with sin and guilt.

This is why all that we need to do is learn to see the truth and to clearly discern the difference between true and false. When you can clearly see the truth, it is simply obvious that the ego is false, and that it has nothing to do with who you really are. Therefore you are already completely invulnerable without even having to do anything.

This is why nothing real can be threatened.

The Golden Rule states that whatever is true of one Son of God is true of another. Because all of God's children are perfect equals. This means that anything true of you is true of the entire sonship. You are created in the likeness of God and so what is true of God is true of you and all brothers and all creations. This rule, really a law, is always in effect regardless of how awake you are.

What this means is that in this world, when you believe you are guilty, you MUST also believe that everyone else is guilty. This rule is a LAW of God. It cannot be broken. But you can be deceived in believing it is not applying.

We talk a lot about projecting your stuff and then taking it back, as if to say, there is something confined to myself that I am ONLY doing to myself. We talk about being responsible for this self-attack, that all attack is self-made and we're not really attacking anyone else. We also talk about how I am the one who needs forgiveness and so on.

But there is something happening as a result of the Golden Rule. IF I attack myself, I AM attempting to also attack my brother. If I see myself as guilty, I MUST believe the whole sonship is guilty. If I find myself unworthy of love, I will believe everyone is unworthy of love. Whatever I see in my brother is a reflection of my own attitude about myself. Which means if I have attacked myself, I MUST also be attacking them.

This extends also to sickness, because while many believe that "only I am sick" or "the sickness is only in my body", as if separated off from others, the fact is that sickness is a two-sided affair. It arises because you accuse your brother of sin, which is an attack on him. Using the body to attack through, your body becomes sick. Your mind therefore HAS to believe that BOTH you and your brother are sick.

This also plays out on the level of relationship because when you are regarding your brother as being as holy as you are, you are in a holy relationship with them, seeing your own holiness in them. When you separate off, by ceasing to extend your mind to them, a gap forms in between you both, coming between you. It doesn't just separate you off from them, it also separates them off from you. It's a two-sided wall. What applies to you applies to them.

So what we have to realize is, while it's definitely beneficial to look at what we are doing "only to ourselves", we have to remember nothing ever really applies only to ourselves. Which means that if we are indeed in any kind of ego state, having any kind of guilt or sin belief, some aspect of that belief IS directed at our brothers. If we are attacking "only ourselves", we ALSO are attacking others.

This is part of the unhealed healer as well. If I have not received love, and therefore cannot give it, and therefore am unhealed, because I have guilt in me, I am going to have to see that guilt in everyone. And seeing it there, I will perhaps disassociate and think it's someone else's problem that I need to save them from. That blindness, that separation thought, where you think something applies to you and not them, or applies to them and not you, that is always ego. And there is temptation in the whole "it's all my own stuff" approach to not realize that it's not JUST about you as a "separate" mind.

Shifting blame from someone else back onto yourself does not heal it. It's a step in the right direction because it's sort of "coming from you", but WHERE are you? You think you are in a body, separated off from others. Assuming this is true, you will think your attitudes and your self attack are contained within the confines of your body/mind. That its inside you, not outside, and not in another. This is actually a false premise based on the belief that you fundamentally are a separated-off isolated mind-container.

Your mind is not really, ultimately, isolated to your body. That's part of the illusion. Your mind is shared with others, it is IN your brother, and it is everywhere. Your nature is to be an omnipresent spirit, like God. So when you are thinking in terms of, its mine, or its in me, or I am doing it only to myself, that still has isolation and separation in it. It doesn't mean that the problem is confined to the insides of your mind-body association.

It would actually be more accurate to say, the mind that is mine, which is united with my brothers and is everywhere and in all people, is temporarily believing that the entire sonship is under attack. I am temporarily coming between myself and everyone. My attack thoughts are against myself and them. Separation is coming between me and everyone. I am trying to apply unlove to the whole sonship to bring us all down together. My attack is upon the whole Kingdom. I am still thinking the same of everyone else that I think of myself.

So in this we start to realize, that while it's important I own what I'm doing to myself, I have to also realize that included in "what I'm doing" is actually an attempted attack on others as well. "You but accuse your brothers of your own sin" and "it can be but myself I crucify" are helpful in realizing that you are included in what's being attacked, and in fact that you ARE only really doing this to yourself (because your brother cannot be attacked because he's real). But as you crucify yourself, YOU DO attempt to crucify everyone.

This leads to the uncovering of the "second kind of scapegoating". Which is, the aspect of "what I am doing to others". Most often we are reacting to and trying to overcome "what they are doing to me". To blame them for attacking us. But let's say that this form of scapegoating is actually a disguise. It's a way to pretend that YOU are not doing anything TO THEM. That you are not the attacker. While yes, you are actually attacking only yourself, in truth, you ARE trying to attack everyone if you believe in sin. Including God.

And to project this and disown it is an attempt to cover this up and make out that someone else is the attacker and not you. To take back the projected sin means taking back the identification of WHO is doing the attacking, and this attacking is an "act" that comes out of someone and goes toward another. It's not just some lump of sin that sits there idly. It's not a commodity that you shuffle around or displace like "some guilt". We are either actively attacking others or believing they are actively attacking us.

So if we get honest, we're going to find out, that all our attack thoughts are kind of a form of murderousness, toward everything - me, my brothers, the world, and God. If I am projecting guilt in the first place, I am actually trying to attack. When I do not see the real world, I am attacking it. As Jesus says: "You attack the real world every day and every hour and every minute, and yet you are surprised that you cannot see it." and "God offers the world salvation; your judgment would condemn it. and "Peace is impossible to those who look on war. Peace is inevitable to those who offer peace."

So if you look at what sin is all about, it basically is "attack" or attempted attack. Attack thoughts. Judgement. The attempt to separate, push away, deny, reject, unlove, to cause irreversible damage to something in an effort to make it go away, to destroy it. It's part of the ego's murderous thought system. "What is not love is murder" says the same thing. And actually makes it very clear. If we are not being loving, which means to ourselves AND others, per the Golden Rule, we ARE attempting to be murderous towards ourselves AND others.

This is uncomfortable to look at because it reveals that we cannot have ego beliefs in "self attack" going on in our minds WITHOUT believing they also apply to everyone else. Whatever I see in myself I will see in everyone. As I enter into any sin or guilt, I am trying to separate, which means I am attacking both myself and others. As an unhealed healer, I will attempt to heal by attacking, by trying to give what I do not have, and by therefore giving attack as a remedy. And of course this cannot heal. Those who are not healed cannot heal.

So we have to get in touch with this. Look at it. What I'm doing to myself, I am trying to also do to others. What I think applies to me, I also think applies to everyone. Even if in my state of denial and unconsciousness, I am not aware that I think this. Because the ego's states of mind are always an imbalance where you think it applies to me not them, or them not me. That's part of the disassociation, which is the separation idea.

The ego is the denial of the Golden Rule, but denial does not overthrow the law. The law still applies at all times even as the ego does its thing. Everything always applies to everyone. When I think it does not apply to me, it does, but this also doesn't mean that because it applies to me, it doesn't apply to others. Ego is always the temptation to believe something is special or true of me that isn't applying to everyone. And "special forgiveness" of "only myself" is not forgiveness of the sonship.

Transitioning from ego thinking to Holy Spirit thinking entails shifting from the whole "me vs them" to "all of us". Wrong mindedness means I think things do not apply to everyone equally. Right mindedness means I recognize everything applies equally to everyone. So to get to right mindedness I'm going to have to admit along the way that I am actually trying to attack BOTH myself and others. What I'm trying to do to them I am doing to myself. We BOTH need forgiveness. We BOTH need to be recognized as innocent. And I need to learn to stop attacking BOTH of us.

Thinking that you only attack yourself can be a trap. It can disguise and hide the fact that you also think poorly of others. Or that you are secretly attacking them while trying to save them. It can cover up the fact that if you are attacking at all, you are also attacking everyone. Yet recognizing you are attacking everyone can also be a trap, because it can induce more guilt. You shouldn't be trying to "not attack" on the basis that you would feel guilty for doing so. And you don't need to.

All we really need is awareness. In awareness, you know that you are in your brother. There is an automatic vested interest in not attacking them, IF you are aware that you literally cannot do it without attacking yourself. It's the unawareness that you are included in the attack that makes you believe murder is justified and that you can get away with it without experiencing any effects. If you were aware of and not in denial of the Golden Rule, it would leave absolutely no room for attack of any kind, because to attack when you know it's yourself you attack would be insane.

If I am believing in attack I will attack myself and all of creation.

If I am only loving I will love myself and all of creation.

Father let me not attack myself or my brothers today and let us all be joined in complete holiness and unified will that you may resurrect us into your light and heal the entire sonship as one.

"One brother is all brothers. One mind is all minds. Such is the truth."

Lately I feel like I have found a whole new sense of identity, and that I've discovered God.

I have been dwelling on two workbook lessons, 91 and 92. They talk about how I am not a body, and asks therefore, what am I? The focus is put on discovering who I really am if I am a not a limited, separated self, and begins to reinforce the various attributes of what must be my real self.

Then in 92 it builds on this by suggesting that all the attributes of my real self are actually shared with God. That for example God's light is my strength, that I see in God's light, that I share God's mind, that my strength is actually God in me etc.

These to me seem to be a kind of two step leap in identity - 1) That I am not a body and am something above and beyond this level and world, and 2) That all my real attributes are actually PART OF GOD. That my actual self is SHARED with him and everything true of my real self is INHERITED and simultaneously one with him.

That means that to claim my real self, to be not a body or an ego, I actually have to realize that I am part of God himself, that everything I have comes from him, that there is a strength and a power IN me which is actually HIM. That I am host to him, that he is in fact the life and the light in me, and that I can kind of step back into him and merge with him. Even my self, my soul, is actually an extended part of God himself which HE DWELLS IN.

I cannot really explain it but there has been a strange leap in confidence, sense of outward expression, of certainty and fearlessness, which has suddenly erupted as a result of this. It seems like a major shift in who and what I AM, away from "I'll do this all by myself" to "God and I will do this together." A leap from exclusion to inclusion, and from selfishness to sharing.

I've been having some .. bright and clear views of the world, in which it looks quite beautiful, which seems to effortlessly come by affirming that all MY attributes are actually God in me. That I see in his light, think with his mind, that my strength is his, that I forgive with his love, that I SHARE with him. And through this acknowledgement of him in my mind, I leap further to seeing God in everything. And this is also about TRUST.

I have to say that the degree of seeming 'light' that these visions entail is far beyond anything that any other course practice has ever revealed. And it seems so simply accessed through the acknowledgement of God in me, and that my SELF is embedded in him and a part of him. I am an extension of God. Everything I am comes from him and IS HIM!

By opening up to that, which is WITHIN myself, kind of behind myself, all of the sense of happiness and love and power and light and so on just seems to switch on like a lightbulb and flood my perception with 'forgiveness'. This isn't an intellectual exercise or a concept or theory. It's an immersive experience. I am putting myself into God's hands and am seeing myself as united with his attributes. That anything I have is OF him and not of me.

What I am is not just myself. What I am isn't an isolated, fenced-off me. The walls are dropping. What I am is shared with the whole. What I am is given to me by something much larger. And it seems the blessings and gifts of God are FAR FAR FAR in advance of any sense of "me and mine" that I could possibly come up with as a body-identified ego.

It also seems so very simple. Just stepping back and sinking into a sense of self that is made of God himself. Allowing myself to host him. Accepting that I am what he has created me to be. Recognizing not simply that I am some kind of spiritual self, but that I ONLY have what God has PUT in me, and what he has put in me is HIMSELF!

This also leads to the recognition that everyone else, all other children of God, also have God in them. And I am seeing this in the course more and more. To attack another is to attack God because they are host to God. To recognize that they are HOST to God, is to recognize their sacredness and to honor the power of God in them.

I cannot join with another WITHOUT joining with God and the Holy Spirit in them, because all must be included! I can't exclusively join with just one person, to the exclusion of God. God has to be part of the joining because he is the love. And his entire Kingdom must be there as well. To love unconditionally is to love the whole sonship at once.

To be an isolated, separated, exclusive, body-identified self, is to be HOSTAGE to the ego. You can be hostage to the ego or host to God. This is our choice. To host God is to have him be in you and through you, in which all he shares with and gives to you, is given FOR you and FOR others. And thus does it extend beyond yourself alone, because nothing is for yourself alone.

"Would you be hostage to the ego or host to God? You will accept only whom YOU invite. You are free to determine who shall be your guest, and how long he shall remain with you." "I who am host to God AM worthy of Him.

He Who ESTABLISHED His dwelling-place in me created it as He would have it be.

It is not needful that I make it ready for Him, but only that I DO NOT INTERFERE with His plan to RESTORE to me my own AWARENESS of my readiness, which is eternal.

I need ADD nothing to His plan,

But to RECEIVE it, I must be willing NOT to substitute my own IN PLACE of it.""

"You who are host to God, are also host to THEM."

"Thus will He make you ready to acknowledge that you ARE host to God, and hostage to no-one and to nothing."

"For He is Host to God. And you need but invite Him in Who is there ALREADY, by recognizing that His Host is One."

"We asked you once before, "Would you be hostage to the ego or host to God?" Let this question be asked you by the Holy Spirit in you, EVERY time you make a decision. For every decision you make DOES answer this, and invites sorrow or joy, accordingly."

"It is not true that you can make decisions BY yourself, or FOR yourself alone."

"Do not forget you do not answer for yourself alone." "Remember that you learn not for yourself alone, no more than I did."

"The Holy Spirit enables you to PERCEIVE THIS WHOLENESS NOW. You can no more pray for yourselves alone than you can find joy for yourself alone."

"And sight of bodies becomes the sign that sacrifice IS limited, and something still remains for you alone."

"The gifts you have are not for you alone. What He has come to offer you, you now must learn to give."

"It will NOT be for you alone, for therein lay its misery. As its UNholiness kept it as a thing apart, its HOLINESS will become an offering to everyone."

"Atonement is for all, because it is the way to UNDO the belief that ANYTHING is for you ALONE."

"Salvation IS His Will BECAUSE you share it. NOT for you alone, but for the Self which IS the Son of God."

"The ego is the idea of selfishness."

At the very foundation of the entire ego thought system is the idea of selfishness. But more accurately, it is the idea of not sharing. It's an idea of being exclusive, the ownership of something which is considered "yours alone", and inaccessible to others.

"You had everything when you were created, just as everyone did."

God's Kingdom was set up so that everyone has everything. And this goes way beyond the kind of sharing that you experience on a physical level. In Heaven, every being has literally 100% of everything. Everyone has full access, simultaneously, to the totality of all that exists. Even your SELF is shared with everyone, as are all your creations.

This is oneness. And just because one person has full access to everything it does not shut out access to anyone else, there is no limitation, no compromise, no partitioning, no need to only access part of everything, and there is no private ownership. In reality is it possible for everyone to have everything always. You ARE everything always.

The entire idea of the ego is the idea of not sharing in this way. It's the idea of exclusivity. It's an attempt to own some portion of reality that you can call "yours alone", protected and fenced off by some kind of wall (such as the body), so that not only is your prized possession kept isolated inside the walls (such as within the body), but everyone else is also kept outside the walls (such as outside the body).

The desire not to share, is the entire basis of the separation. The ego is built on it. And this means that any attempt to have something for yourself that you want others NOT to have, or anything which is true of you and not true of them, or any sense of inequality of any kind, produces egotism. And this egotism is essentially SELFISHNESS.

The result of this selfishness is that you experience yourself as being fenced into a prison, ie the body. You see yourself as though everything which is "yours" is inside the prison. And everything outside the prison is not yours. In turn, you see that you are the only one allowed access to what is inside the prison walls, meaning that you experience yourself as being entirely alone within its confines.

This leads to the perception of yourself as though you are inside a body, you are the only one inside the body, the body is your private property, no other mind shares your body with you, you are alone and lonely and trapped inside of it, and the body's walls defend your hoard from the rest of the sonship.

This is how most people experience their sense of identity. That they are a single isolated "separated self", living within prison walls, everyone else is "outside" the walls, and nothing is shared across this boundary. The body acts then as a separation device, keeping them out and keeping you in, so that what is yours within is yours alone and your private possession.

"The body is clearly a device for separation"

From here, of course, upon seeing oneself as special, with a deeply rooted selfishness, a desire to be given special favor by God, and seeing oneself as excluded (separated) from sharing the Kingdom (exiled), so-called "relationships" with others take on the form of what we call special relationships. Basically this means that relating to others is always tainted with elements of selfishness, elements of exclusivity, elements of ownership or possession, and attempts to control and manipulate.

You see, a selfish self, ie a self that is "being selfish", has to believe that something is owned by others that it does not have access to. By cutting itself off from sharing it is able to believe in something privately hoarded and exclusive to it, but to do this it MUST also believe that others own something that it is excluded from. So now others are seen as hoarding privately hidden secret "stuff" that the selfish self wants and is jealous of, and so begins the attempts to wrestle it from others through what ultimately becomes attempted control and murder.

This is outlined in the "laws of chaos". Having seen yourself as an excluded, exclusive self, whose value is special and whose importance and truth is unequal to others, you believe other people also have something "special" locked up inside their bodies. And now you will seek to enter into relationship of some manner with them, to try to steal from the inside of their body the secret treasure that you believe should be yours.

So long as you lack what they have, you will feel an emptiness and a compulsion to steal it from them - a sense of "need" or neediness, in which you will make demands of them and place conditions on the relationship. This of course leads to conditional love and various forms of bargaining and betrayal. It can even become violent and lethal if it is strongly perceived that the other has what you significantly lack, is therefore guilty of stealing it from you, that you are justified in any action to retrieve it, and being denied it is a slap in the face that compels revenge.

All elements of this special way of relating stem from the foundation of the whole system of thinking. It all starts with this deeply rooted sense of selfishness, leading to isolation, leading to specialness and special relationships, and ultimately death.

The fundamental ONLY problem therefore is the unwillingness to share. The unwillingness to be equal. The consideration of one's own selfish made-up needs above and beyond the freedom and wishes of others. As you become presented with your own selfishness staring you in the face, you will learn to move past it and to start considering what other people want, on their terms, per their own choice, regardless of any "special interests" that you have. Once their interests become untainted by your selfishness, your interests become shared.

I should comment briefly that being "not selfish" does not in any way mean having no self, nor does it mean self sacrifice, or putting others first and you last, or any other form of inequality. It does not mean getting rid of your identity or individuality. All it means is changing your attitude, so that you are now SHARING EQUALLY with everyone, rather than isolating, excluding, or seeing to "get" something of special value "just for yourself".

"You cannot enter into real relationship with any of God's Sons unless you are willing to love them all AND equally."

Essentially our entire journey to undo the ego is simply to undo our selfishness. We have to look at this. We may be far more selfish than we want to admit to, or in ways that we had not realized. We may be more controlling than we'd like to admit. We may be claiming to put the interests of others first while secretly having needs or wants that depend on others fulfilling us in order for us to be satisfied.

To be not selfish might be what some (with ego thinking) would call the opposite - selflessness - but this can be misleading. We are not aiming here to have no self. We are aiming to SHARE, which some would refer to as joining in holy relationship. To truly think of others interests is to acknowledge that you have no needs that are interfering with being of service to them.

It means allowing and letting go and giving up controlling them. It means seeing them free from the tyranny of your control, dominance, interference, manipulation, selfish neediness, inferiority, superiority, judgement and specialness. The relinquishment of specialness is the relinquishment of selfishness.

This actually restores you to the fullness of your self, because by sharing everything you also share in all of yourself, and share all of yourself with others. You literally tried to steal yourself from God and keep it hidden. We have to open back up to allow God in and to let ourselves be visible and accessible to others, sharing fully with them and extending love with them. This is essentially a reunion with your own soul, in which all God's children share.

"The soul is the idea of self fulness."

What it claims is that if you will not say certain things, or do certain things, other people will be less hurt and less offended and less victimized. And that therefore, this is more loving and supportive.

This is not true.

What is really happening is that we're saying that people are affected by what is happening outside of them, that events and words and people's actions cause them harm, that they are therefore vulnerable, offendable, hurtable. And that therefore, because they are hurtable, we must aim to not hurt them.

But this completely assumes that it's true, normal, and natural for people to be hurtable. People are not hurtable. Someone who believes they are hurtable are in denial of their immortality. They are being a victim. They are scapegoating and blaming. They are putting responsibility for their life and their happiness into the hands of other people, in an attempt to disown themselves, to BE irresponsible, and to MAKE other people guilty.

If what I say offends someone, that's their fault. If what you say offends someone, that's their fault. If you are offended by what someone else says, that's your fault. It means you are secretly and not so obviously being irresponsible, are projecting ownership and blame for your existence onto others, are holding other people accountable for your happiness, are requiring and controlling other people to be a certain way in order to "make your ego happy", which means you are trying to get your way. It is manipulative, deceitful and controlling.

So what actually ends up happening, is that if someone avoids saying a particular word or doing a particular thing in order to not displease you, ie to please you, this is the ego persona at work. The persona tries to get rid of all unpleasant things by chopping out parts of yourself that it disapproves of, which eventually will leave nothing left, and is actually an attempt to destroy you. People pleasing is suicide.

So while on the surface it might seem like, well, we're being kind, we're taking other people's needs into consideration, we're placating, we're being gentle, we're trying to have compassion, we're understanding other people's insecurities, etc... all well and good, but this isn't AS good for people as to get them to be more responsible for their own existence. If it's up to me to change my expressions in order to not offend someone who is particularly touchy about certain subjects, then who really has the problem? Its the person who is touchy about the subject. They're actually playing a victim game, are projecting fault onto me, are trying to get me to change to satisfy their agenda, and they want me to stop being a certain way so that they can be justified in defending their beliefs.

If we're all going to 'get along' harmoniously, it is only going to happen when everyone grows up and takes full responsibility for everything they are experiencing, even if its fear or guilt or offense or hurt or whatever. It's each person's responsibility. And never is your life anyone else's responsibility. And nobody else is to blame for making you upset. If you want that, go ahead... it will make you weak and even more afraid and vulnerable to believe that.

So ultimately "PC" turns you into a victim. It attacks your invulnerability. It assumes that you are affected by the world and that therefore, as part of the world, everyone else has to tone down what they are doing to you. It's entirely based around a victim mentality. It strips people of their power. It actually disempowers people. It also makes everyone be in DENIAL. You are in denial of yourself because you're trying to not show all of yourself to others, and everyone else is in denial because they want to keep pretending you are responsible for their reactions.

It doesn't make people happier, because all it means is you are not being AUTHENTIC or HONEST toward them, and are baby'ing them, and are placating them and putting on a facade for them, likely in order for YOU to "not get hurt" through your own victimhood. So PC is really invented by victims, for victims, to continue victimization, and has NOTHING to do with helping people to be stronger or more powerful or less hurt or more respected. The ego wants to be respected, because it is disrespectful.

Yes if someone is upset, it may be compassionate to comfort and be gentle with them and empathize and help support them. But what is support REALLY? Support means also reminding them that all the reasons they are upset are not real or true, that they are actually victimizing themselves, that they are doing this all to themselves, that they can become much more empowered by owning up to this, and that there is a better way than to see themselves as affected by someone.

Is political correctness love? No. It's an ego agenda of misery and victimization and inescapable vulnerability. It worships suffering, it perpetuates fear, and destroys people.

Suck on that whether you like it or not.

The course speaks from a perspective of Oneness. That means quite literally that you and all other people are ONE person - one mind, one being. It means you SHARE a mind with everyone else. It should be immediately obvious how much that runs contrary to how most people perceive reality.

It doesn't mean you are a little bit joined and a little bit separate. It doesn't mean you can be sort of One but still retain a sense of separate self. It means you are 100%, totally, absolutely, unconditionally, completely the same as, completely equal with, and completely AS ONE with all other people.

In that view, there is actually a whole different ballgame being played which is vastly different to the ballgame of 'duality', which springs up in the ego and makes you perceive others as 'not you'. The only way for you to see yourself as 'separate me' is to distinguish that other people have differences that you do not have, and therefore which prove your inequality, and demonstrate you are not of One mind. It is a huge cover-up.

So in Oneness, the way that you look at a relationship between two people is very different to how you look at relationships with the ego. In Oneness, because you are One, joined, and sharing everything with the WHOLE sonship (not just one individual), everything that you seem to 'do' to other people, or how you view them or perceive them, applies to them, and to everyone else, and to yourself, all at once. There is then no escaping or being able to say, well, I can treat this part of the sonship one way, and I can treat this other part another way, and I can treat myself entirely a third way. In Oneness, everything is shared, there are no private thoughts, and we all access and express the same mind and Identity (Christ 'consciousness').

Another aspect of the Oneness of the Sonship is that, since everything always applies to everyone equally, anything you do applies to everyone and so you can only either separate from everyone simultaneously, or join with everyone simultaneously. If you could visualize that as a vertical ladder, or 'moving vertically' as some people say, to make true progress in awakening you must uncover the sonship's Oneness in 'layers'. So its like you take a blanket off of the entire sonship at once, to reveal a great degree of Oneness that applies to everyone. Or if you choose the ego and you cover things up, you cover up the entire sonship at once with that same blanket. Whatever you apply to one brother applies to all, including yourself.

Now, just because you start applying ACIM or a mindset of Onenss it doesn't mean your mind is fully committed to it right away. It is very conditioned in the ego's 'mind' and a way of perceiving that is very dualistic. Duality basically attempts to fragment the sonship by dividing it up into many parts. Then it says that different rules and values apply to different parts, and that not all parts are the same. This is an attack on Oneness. But we are very steeped in dualistic mindsets and ways of perceiving each other that are very separation-based. Most of the systems in the world are all founded on this idea of separate individuals (as per physical body boundaries). Acting in a body, as a body, leads us to develop a host of distortions and attitudes and perceptual models which are delusional and very blind to Oneness.

So as you start to 'expose' yourself to Oneness, or a thought system of non-duality like with Holy Spirit/ACIM, you gradually start to chisel away at those ways of perceiving and they gradually get 'corrected'. The mind is, effectively, 'healed', because it's belief in separation is a form of suffering. Duality is suffering. So the mind's perception has to be healed so that the way of perceiving dualisti ally can be transformed into a way of perceiving holistically - ie to perceive with Oneness and to see only Oneness.

That takes time. A lot of time. It's a big transformational process. It takes a lot of work and effort and willingness and healing to 'correct' all of the false perceptions and distorted ways of thinking that duality (ego) has assumed are totally normal for a long long time. So usually waking up to Oneness doesn't happen over night. But gradually, slowly, you start to SEE things more from a perspective of Oneness, and with that comes the ability to see things how Jesus sees them - and you realize that ACIM was written FROM a viewpoint of pure and perfect Oneness. Being able to see that makes everything just fall into place and make perfect sense, whereas seeing it through a filter of duality is ... very confusing.

Anyway... Rambling on a bit.. Oneness... as I do unto others I LITERALLY am doing unto myself. As I see others I see myself. I can't wake up and have a happy jolly experience unless I'm willing to allow that experience to include seeing everyone else WITH happiness and joy, and to recognize MYSELF in them. Or more to the point, recognizing that I don't HAVE a self of 'my own' because everyone SHARES IT.

"Anger takes many forms, but it cannot long deceive those who will learn that love brings no guilt at all, and what brings guilt cannot be love and must be anger. All anger is nothing more than an attempt to make someone feel guilty, and this attempt is the only basis the ego accepts for special relationships. Guilt is the only need the ego has, and as long as you identify with it, guilt will remain attractive to you."

"Very simply, the attempt to make guilty is ALWAYS directed against God. For the ego would have you see Him, AND HIM ALONE, as guilty, leaving the Sonship OPEN to attack, and unprotected from it."

If you look, when you are angry or frustrated or even slightly annoyed with someone, while the feeling may be one of "anger", the process is really an attempt to make someone feel guilty, and the purpose is to displace your own guilt onto them. When you look at it as "trying to make them guilty", it's exactly that and only that.

Any attempt to point a finger of blame and say, "you are wrong" or "you did it" or "you shouldn't have done it" or "it was you" etc... is really an attempt to try to force the person to BE guilty, trying to cause guilt in them, trying to enforce guilt upon them and turn them INTO a guilty party. It's therefore a form of attack and a denial of free will.

When you get done being angry with someone you'll notice you were trying to make them guilty. You wanted them to be intensely identified as the sinner. You wanted to be right about this. And you wanted them to admit to their sinfulness. It's like a demand, and "love makes no demands."

What this shows you is that whenever we are angry, we are attacking, and are actively trying to hurt someone through guilt-inducing force. We are trying to convert them into the guilty party and are justifying it and backing it up with all our "reasons why" they actually are guilty.

So that means being angry at someone is not a neutral activity, or an unharmful activity, or a loving activity. It is actually an outright attack for purposes of displacing your own guilt onto another. "You but accuse your brother of your own sins."

In the anger it will always seem like you have amazingly justified reasons as to why you should be angry, because it's very clear why the person IS guilty. They DID seem to do something. They DID make a mistake. They DID hurt you. They DID move your cheese. They WERE abusive. They DID steal from you, or whatever. At least on the level of form.

This gives you a free pass of righteousness. This "righteous anger" is an excuse for making it okay to attack a person. The "justified outrage" passes for some kind of "right" that you have, because the occurrence is so obviously awful, inhumane, unjustified, un-asked for, vicious and the various other forms of what we'd identify as sinful based on appearances. But there is NO forgiveness in that view.

This means if we're not being forgiving we're not being loving, and you can't be loving or forgiving while you are being angry. This is because in the anger you are being unloving and unforgiving toward yourself, have accused yourself of sin and are now attempting to project that onto someone else, taking this wonderful opportunity they presented as a low-hanging fruit that you can easily attach your guilt to.

If someone does actually mess up, if they do attack, if they do something "wrong", this makes it extremely easy for your ego to pounce on them. Because now they've presented you with what seems to be an "actual sin". This makes it easy for you because you don't even have to invent a sin for them, they did it all by themselves. And now you can take this chance to push YOUR sin onto them by NOT forgiving them for theirs. It's a free pass.

There is no such thing as justification for anger. As ACIM says, "Anger is never justified". The justifications are lies, the appearance of sin happening is blindness and judgmental, the feeling of righteousness or deserving is completely unforgiving and a form of attack. Only by overlooking what your brother did can you be forgiving to him and to yourself.

"Forgiveness recognizes that what you thought your brother did has not OCCURRED."

"In this view are all your sins forgiven."