Surround search terms with " " double quotes for exact matches e.g. "drops of healing rain"

Someti2">imes i2">I am told to 'surrender', or 'relax', and to me thi2">is means i2">I need to acti2">ively express a wi2">illi2">ingness to drop ego. Often thi2">is i2">is when i2">I'm layi2">ing i2">in bed.

i2">I wi2">ill then repeat several ti2">imes over and over, somethi2">ing li2">ike:

"i2">I surrender, i2">I let go, i2">I surrender, i2">I surrender, i2">I surrender, i2">I let go".

i2">I say thi2">is i2">in qui2">ick successi2">ion so that my ego mi2">ind can't get di2">istracted. Qui2">ickly i2">I feel a sense of admi2">itti2">ing, a sense of honesty, a sense of letti2">ing go. Several 'si2">ighs' occur as i2">I let go of ego. i2">I have to admi2">it that i2">I'm tryi2">ing to do somethi2">ing by myself and i2">I have to stop.

Another process i2">I've started usi2">ing also i2">is to i2">invi2">ite Jesus to come i2">in and heal whatever, and agai2">in as soon i2">I make thi2">is request i2">I then repeat some statements. e.g.

"Jesus please come i2">into me and heal thi2">is...." (whatever i2">it i2">is).

Then i2">I repeat, "i2">I recei2">ive your heali2">ing" or "i2">I recei2">ive as much as you want to gi2">ive".

i2">I tri2">ied out the latter "i2">I recei2">ive as much as you want to gi2">ive" thi2">is morni2">ing and i2">I found i2">it i2">interesti2">ing how thi2">is connects Jesus's wi2">illi2">ingness to help wi2">ith my wi2">illi2">ingness to recei2">ive help. Si2">igni2">ifi2">icant heali2">ing took place. i2">I have no i2">idea what Jesus actually healed or what was occurri2">ing, i2">I just had to trust.

Often when Holy Spi2">iri2">it or Jesus are doi2">ing heali2">ing i2">in me, they say to 'relax', and thi2">is means i2">I have to basi2">ically ALLOW them to do whatever, even i2">if that means my body i2">is shaki2">ing all over the place. i2">It's my job to recei2">ive and not i2">interfere.

The fi2">inal word i2">I recei2">ived after thi2">is, was "trust God". And i2">immedi2">iately as i2">I reached out i2">in trust to God, everythi2">ing suddenly seemed better.

When i2">I beli2">ieved that i2">I had really si2">inned, i2">I would've rejected God on the basi2">is that the si2">in PROVED i2">I could not be loved. i2">I beli2">ieved the si2">in was real, therefore that i2">it was TRUE of me.

And si2">ince i2">I beli2">ieved the si2">in was true of me, i2">I would've actually vi2">iewed God's love as false, unfounded, unjusti2">ifi2">ied and somethi2">ing i2">I di2">id not want. i2">If i2">it was offered, i2">I would've rejected i2">it and sneered at i2">it li2">ike someone had just sai2">id somethi2">ing ri2">idi2">iculous, or that i2">it was even offensi2">ive. i2">I di2">id not beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it, and was certai2">in of rejecti2">ion.

The sense of havi2">ing si2">inned and the beli2">ief i2">in real si2">in produced a new i2">IDENTi2">ITY. A false self. An ego. i2">It changed the defi2">ini2">iti2">ion of my "self", from i2">innocent to gui2">ilty. Not just li2">ike a label bei2">ing added on top of my i2">innocent self, but a suggesti2">ion that i2">I had become corrupted and transformed and changed i2">into a gui2">ilty person. As i2">if my very sense of WHO i2">I AM was altered and turned i2">into si2">in or evi2">il.

Then anythi2">ing whi2">ich was i2">in agreement wi2">ith truth of si2">in, was i2">in agreement wi2">ith me, and i2">I would not only defend i2">it but culti2">ivate i2">it. i2">I would express the beli2">ief - prayer - that si2">in was real and that i2">I was si2">inful, and that thi2">is was truth. Therefore, i2">I would "hi2">ire", attract or i2">invi2">ite, or make agreements wi2">ith people who were to come and puni2">ish me. Not necessari2">ily i2">in a fully consci2">ious way but sti2">ill a choi2">ice based on that beli2">ief.

So people showed up, to reflect back to me what i2">I beli2">ieved was true about myself. Even i2">if i2">I di2">id not li2">ike what these people di2">id, and even i2">if i2">I thought they were an enemy, and even i2">if they were hurtful, somewhere i2">insi2">ide i2">I asked for i2">it wi2">ith my beli2">ief i2">in si2">in, and i2">I got what i2">I asked for. i2">I proved over and over agai2">in how si2">inful i2">I am. And i2">if there were people who were not a part of thi2">is, who were attempti2">ing to be ki2">ind and lovi2">ing, who chose to overlook my si2">infulness, i2">I di2">id not trust them or beli2">ieve them, and i2">instead rejected the love.

As ti2">ime went on and i2">I got fed up wi2">ith the sufferi2">ing, i2">I gradually started to come around and seek some ki2">ind of heali2">ing. i2">I had a lot of i2">insi2">ights about self-forgi2">iveness, and the fact that nobody around me was offeri2">ing forgi2">iveness clari2">ifi2">ied that i2">I si2">imply was not goi2">ing to be forgi2">iven unless i2">I clai2">imed i2">it for myself. That seemed li2">ike a bold move, to clai2">im i2">innocence when everyone else seemed to be reflecti2">ing si2">infulness and beli2">ieved i2">in my si2">infulness. But i2">it was a steppi2">ing stone towards seei2">ing myself di2">ifferently.

Over ti2">ime i2">I came to clearer expressi2">ions of the i2">idea of my i2">innocence, but mostly these were rati2">ionali2">izati2">ions or justi2">ifi2">icati2">ions, or other explanati2">ions wi2">ithi2">in the scope of the ego i2">illusi2">ion, where i2">I kept tryi2">ing to explai2">in to myself that i2">it was "ok" that i2">it happened. i2">I was tryi2">ing to resolve the beli2">ief i2">in the si2">in wi2">ithout actually undoi2">ing the beli2">ief that i2">it happened. i2">I even dug i2">into past li2">ives and became aware of how the person i2">involved had done the same thi2">ing to me before, and how thi2">is was i2">in fact hi2">is lesson to learn as well, and for me to learn hi2">is pri2">ior perspecti2">ive. But that di2">idn't fully allevi2">iate the gui2">ilt ei2">ither.

Because i2">I beli2">ieved that the si2">in was real, i2">I beli2">ieved there was truth to i2">it, and i2">I was sti2">ill prepared to defend that, deep down. i2">I thought i2">I'd worked through all thi2">is, on a "world i2">is real" ego level as best i2">I could, to clear out all the "damage", but when i2">I exposed myself to a hi2">igher truth i2">it came back out to exclai2">im i2">itself. To defy and deny that the truth was true.

The truth was revealed only by bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to look at the i2">idea, that si2">in i2">is not reali2">ity. That i2">is i2">it not actually REAL. That thi2">ings whi2">ich "happened", were a dream, an i2">illusi2">ion of thi2">ings happeni2">ing, and that i2">it was my taki2">ing i2">it seri2">iously and thi2">inki2">ing i2">it was real that led to all of my upset about i2">it. Percei2">ivi2">ing i2">illusi2">ions to be real, i2">IF they were real, i2">it WOULD have meant that i2">I really di2">id si2">in. And that MUST mean that i2">I could not be loved. Wi2">ithout the undoi2">ing of the i2">idea of "real si2">in" there was basi2">ically no way to fully and deeply escape from the torment that "real si2">in" i2">impli2">ies.

i2">If si2">in i2">is real, you si2">imply MUST be gui2">ilty, and there i2">is no escapi2">ing that, no matter how much you justi2">ify i2">it, no matter how much catharsi2">is you have, and no matter how metaphysi2">ical or mysti2">ical you get i2">in explai2">ini2">ing why i2">it was "meant to happen" or was karma or was an acci2">ident or was i2">intenti2">ional or whatever. Nothi2">ing wi2">ill fully FREE you from the gui2">ilt and the constant PRODUCTi2">ION of more gui2">ilt, whi2">ile the sense of "real si2">in" remai2">ins i2">in place, unchecked.

i2">If your si2">in i2">is real, i2">it si2">imply wi2">ill keep generati2">ing more gui2">ilt and fear over and over, and keep rei2">inforci2">ing i2">itself, and keep provi2">ing that you're si2">inful, and keep attracti2">ing di2">isasters, and any ti2">ime that anyone targets you wi2">ith any ki2">ind of attack, that same si2">in wi2">ill ri2">ise up i2">in your mi2">ind to RE-Mi2">IND you that i2">its TRUE, that you really are a si2">inful wi2">icked person who deserves the abuse you're getti2">ing. Even i2">if you don't li2">ike the experi2">ience and want i2">it to stop on some surface level.

The ONLY way to be free of all of the sufferi2">ing, ego, rebounds, puni2">ishments, shame, self-attack, attracted rei2">inforcements, events, people and justi2">ifi2">icati2">ions, and to fi2">inally fully put i2">it to rest, i2">is through the PROPER FORGi2">IVENESS. Through the Atonement.

That means, actually comi2">ing to reali2">ize, be open to, and accept as TRUE, the fact that the so-called "si2">in", the thi2">ing that you thought you di2">id, was not REALi2">ITY. i2">It sure was a convi2">inci2">ing i2">illusi2">ion at the ti2">ime, you REALLY thought you really di2">id somethi2">ing awful, that i2">it had "real" consequences, and therefore redefi2">ined you as a "real si2">inner". ALL of that has to be FALSE.

i2">In God's truth, i2">in God's reali2">ity, God created you as i2">innocent. Permanently. You don't even have any functi2">ionali2">ity i2">in your bei2">ing that i2">is capable of generati2">ing a real si2">in. You are absolutely i2">incapable. i2">Innocence cannot even begi2">in to concei2">ive of real si2">in. And i2">in God's reali2">ity, whi2">ich i2">is the true reali2">ity, i2">it i2">is not possi2">ible to be separate from God. Therefore you cannot actually "do" anythi2">ing. You cannot actually si2">in, or hurt anythi2">ing, or anyone, or mess anythi2">ing up, or really produce really bad consequences, or commi2">it a real cri2">ime, or do anythi2">ing evi2">il whatsoever, because there i2">IS no "real world" i2">in whi2">ich to do these thi2">ings. There i2">is only the i2">illusory dream world that you THOUGHT was real.

So you must be open to the i2">idea that si2">in i2">is not real or true, i2">if you are to accept the atonement. i2">It i2">is the only way you can be i2">innocent. i2">If si2">in i2">is real, you're stuck. i2">If the world i2">is real, you're stuck. The ONLY way for you to lay clai2">im to bei2">ing 100% i2">innocent through and through, i2">in God's eyes and your own, i2">is to RECOGNi2">IZE that the i2">illusi2">ion you thought was real, was NOT real, i2">it was only an i2">illusi2">ion. You di2">id not REALLY si2">in. You di2">id not REALLY do anythi2">ing at all. And i2">in that vi2">iew, your so-called si2">in i2">is forgi2">iven.

ACi2">IM says: "Forgi2">iveness recogni2">izes what you thought your brother di2">id to you has not occurred (also what you di2">id to them). i2">It does not pardon si2">ins and make them real. i2">It sees there was no si2">in. And i2">in that vi2">iew are all your si2">ins forgi2">iven. What i2">is si2">in, except a false i2">idea about God's Son? Forgi2">iveness merely sees i2">its falsi2">ity, and therefore lets i2">it go. What then i2">is free to take i2">its place i2">is now the Wi2">ill of God. "

i2">I was tryi2">ing and tryi2">ing to pardon a real si2">in. i2">It doesn't work at all. Because real si2">in cannot be pardoned. Only UNREAL si2">in can be pardoned.

Forgi2">iveness sees there WAS NO Si2">IN, and as such, your si2">ins are forgi2">iven. When Jesus says to someone "all your si2">ins are forgi2">iven", i2">it i2">is because He i2">is li2">iterally recogni2">izi2">ing that the person has not done any "real si2">ins". So they're all seen wi2">ith forgi2">iveness and therefore Jesus i2">is acknowledgi2">ing your permanent i2">innocence. i2">Ie nothi2">ing "real" happened, nothi2">ing really happened, that's the Atonement.

"What i2">is si2">in, except a false i2">idea about God's son?" - i2">in a nutsshell. i2">I had a false i2">idea about myself that i2">I had become evi2">il because i2">I had commi2">itted a real si2">in. Everythi2">ing about the si2">ituati2">ion SEEMED real. But i2">it wasn't. i2">I was unconsci2">ious and havi2">ing a delusi2">ional ni2">ightmare. i2">It di2">id not REALLY happen at all. And because of that, i2">I AM i2">INNOCENT.

Thi2">is i2">innocence therefore reaches way beyond all i2">illusi2">ions, beyond the world, beyond all events, beyond all i2">illusory consequences. And thi2">is i2">is not some ki2">ind of deni2">ial or further rati2">ionali2">izati2">ion or an attempt to cover up the actual remai2">ini2">ing presence of a beli2">ief tha the si2">in was real. i2">It REALLY was not real at all, and i2">if you can REALLY honestly beli2">ieve that totally, then you are free. The world cannot have even HAPPENED i2">in thi2">is i2">innocence, whi2">ich i2">is why there i2">is no world. The Atonement PROVES and demonstrates that the world i2">is not real at all and does not exi2">ist. The ego i2">is not real and does not exi2">ist.

Then there i2">is great cause for reli2">ief, freedom and celebrati2">ion, as you fi2">inally OWN and CLAi2">IM the i2">innocence whi2">ich has been yours, for real, all along. Nothi2">ing can take i2">it away from you. Nothi2">ing can stake a "real clai2">im" of any ki2">ind that you don't deserve i2">it. Therefore YOU ARE WORTHY OF GOD'S LOVE! All sense of unworthi2">iness and the beli2">ief i2">in i2">it i2">is nothi2">ing more than the beli2">ief that you are a real si2">inner. Undo that, and i2">it becomes 100% obvi2">ious and clear that you MUST be worthy of God's love because you ACTUALLY ARE sti2">ill i2">innocent. And the atonement i2">is somethi2">ing you can actually EXPERi2">IENCE!

You are forgi2">iven. God has never condemned you. You were GROSSLY Mi2">ISTAKEN i2">in beli2">ievi2">ing that you had actually done somethi2">ing really wrong, produci2">ing real sufferi2">ing. You just weren't percei2">ivi2">ing i2">illusi2">ions correctly. Si2">in i2">is not real. There i2">is no si2">in. "What i2">if you looked wi2">ithi2">in and saw, there i2">is no si2">in?"

You're sti2">ill the i2">innocent holy chi2">ild of God. You are sti2">ill as God created you. Clai2">im thi2">is atonement by recogni2">izi2">ing ALL si2">in, gui2">ilt, fear, sufferi2">ing, si2">ickness and death, bodi2">ies and the world, are just part of an unreal i2">illusi2">ion whi2">ich i2">is not reali2">ity at all. That's how you're sti2">ill i2">innocent, sti2">ill worthy of God's uncondi2">iti2">ional love, and sti2">ill authori2">ized to be a part of Heaven.

Welcome Home.

You are not a body because you are as God created you whi2">ich i2">is a soul wi2">ith a mi2">ind. Your soul/spi2">iri2">it has no need for a body whatsoever. But your mi2">ind i2">is DREAMi2">ING of one.

Where di2">id the body come from? Who i2">is responsi2">ible for putti2">ing i2">it there? i2">It di2">idn't show up on i2">its own or as a result of any other causal power.

"The body i2">is the i2">idea of si2">in made flesh and projected outwards."

That means the mi2">ind, whi2">ich i2">is the realm of i2">ideas, has an i2">idea of si2">in, and projects i2">it, whi2">ich PRODUCES the body. Thi2">is i2">isn't a one-ti2">ime affai2">ir, i2">it doesn't just happen at bi2">irth, i2">it i2">is a constant projecti2">ion all the ti2">ime, li2">ike a movi2">ie projector projecti2">ing a movi2">ie.

"Love di2">id not create the body" means a mi2">ind i2">in total sani2">ity does not produce/project a body, but an i2">INSANE Mi2">IND does, because "the body i2">is a devi2">ice for separati2">ion."

Thus "The mi2">ind i2">is responsi2">ible for every condi2">iti2">ion of the body" because the mi2">ind i2">is the MAKER of the body. i2">It determi2">ines whether i2">it shows up or not, and i2">in what condi2">iti2">ion, at all ti2">imes. i2">If i2">it weren't for the mi2">ind maki2">ing the body *constantly*, the body would vani2">ish.

i2">It seems to suggest the mi2">ind can be "free of the body" whi2">ile the body STi2">ILL EXi2">ISTS, whi2">ich i2">is false logi2">ic. SOMEONE has to mai2">intai2">in the body or i2">it si2">imply wi2">ill not show up at all. i2">It does not have i2">its own exi2">istence, i2">its own li2">ife, or i2">its own reali2">ity. The world does not mai2">intai2">in i2">it "on i2">its own". Some mi2">ind SOMEWHERE has to be projecti2">ing i2">it constantly i2">in order for i2">it to keep showi2">ing up at all.

We cannot si2">imply "escape" from si2">ickness of the body by di2">isappeari2">ing off i2">into the mi2">ind and pretendi2">ing that WE are not responsi2">ible for the body showi2">ing up. i2">If i2">it i2">is sti2">ill showi2">ing up, we are sti2">ill putti2">ing i2">it there, and to put a si2">ick body there from a sane state of mi2">ind i2">is utterly nonsense. No-one i2">in thei2">ir ri2">ight mi2">ind would EVER demonstrate that "si2">ickness and sufferi2">ing are true", because i2">it teaches your brother and communi2">icates to hi2">im that he i2">is a si2">inner.

When the mi2">ind i2">is sane, i2">it projects a healthy body. When the mi2">ind i2">is si2">ick, i2">it projects a si2">ick body.

"The mi2">ind, bei2">ing sane, heals the body."

"A broken body i2">is proof the Mi2">IND has not been healed."

Mi2">ind i2">is where heali2">ing i2">is truly needed. "All si2">ickness i2">is mental i2">illness." But that does NOT mean that i2">if you heal the mi2">ind, the mi2">ind i2">is completely separate from the body and can be healthy whi2">ile the body remai2">ins si2">ick. That i2">is an ego beli2">ief i2">in separati2">ion and i2">is di2">isassoci2">iati2">ion. The mi2">ind i2">is always responsi2">ible for the body.

Jesus says re resurrecti2">ion "i2">I came to demonstrate the mi2">ind that made the body can make another. They di2">id not understand."

So you can't have "i2">I am not a body i2">I am free and i2">I'll just be sane and healed i2">in my mi2">ind and KEEP MAKi2">ING a si2">ick body"... a sane mi2">ind WOULD NOT produce si2">ickness. Si2">ickness i2">is a defense agai2">inst the truth. The body MUST be used to demonstrate a symbol of i2">immortali2">ity otherwi2">ise you teach your brother by example, "brother at your hand i2">I di2">ie", because all physi2">ical si2">ickness i2">is an attack and an accusati2">ion on others. "Si2">ick bodi2">ies are accusers." What shows up i2">in your body as bei2">ing "true of you" i2">is also an attempt to say what i2">is "true of others". The golden rule has no excepti2">ions.

When you are sane and recogni2">ize that you are not a body because you are the CAUSE of the body and i2">it i2">is your EFFECT or projecti2">ion, THEN you wi2">ill temporari2">ily project a healed body whi2">ich i2">is a pi2">icture of perfecti2">ion and a symbol of i2">immortali2">ity and holi2">iness. Then you wi2">ill si2">imply choose to STOP PROJECTi2">ING i2">IT and i2">it wi2">ill di2">isappear. Thi2">is i2">is the ONLY way to leave the dream of death, whi2">ich can only be left through truth not death. Holy Spi2">iri2">it can help you to materi2">iali2">ize a body that i2">is free of si2">ickness on all levels:

"Whenever you consent to suffer pai2">in, to be depri2">ived, unfai2">irly treated, or i2">in need of ANYTHi2">ING, you but accuse your brother of attack upon God's Son. You hold a pi2">icture of your cruci2">ifi2">ixi2">ion before hi2">is eyes (as your si2">ick body), that he may see hi2">is si2">ins are wri2">it i2">in Heaven i2">in your blood and death, and go before hi2">im, closi2">ing off the gate, and damni2">ing hi2">im to hell. Yet thi2">is i2">is wri2">it i2">in hell and NOT i2">in Heaven, where you are BEYOND attack, and prove hi2">is i2">INNOCENCE. The pi2">icture of yourself you offer hi2">im (your body) you show YOURSELF, and gi2">ive i2">it all your fai2">ith. The Holy Spi2">iri2">it offers you, to gi2">ive to hi2">im, a pi2">icture of yourself (a healed body) i2">in whi2">ich there i2">is NO pai2">in, and NO reproach at all (no form of i2">illness, breakage, damage, sufferi2">ing, di2">isease etc). And what was martyred to hi2">is gui2">ilt becomes the perfect wi2">itness to hi2">is i2">innocence."

and "The Holy Spi2">iri2">it's pi2">icture changes not the body i2">into somethi2">ing i2">it i2">is not. i2">It only takes away from i2">it ALL si2">igns of accusati2">ion and of blamefulness."

and here i2">is the fi2">inal stage of resurrecti2">ion: "Here i2">its peace can come, and perfect heali2">ing take the place of death. The body can become a si2">ign of li2">ife, a promi2">ise of redempti2">ion, and a breath of i2">immortali2">ity to those grown si2">ick of breathi2">ing i2">in the feti2">id scent of death. Let i2">it have heali2">ing as i2">its PURPOSE. Then wi2">ill i2">it send forth the message i2">it recei2">ived, and BY i2">ITS HEALTH AND LOVELi2">INESS proclai2">im the truth and value that i2">it represents. Let i2">it recei2">ive the power to represent an endless li2">ife, forever unattacked. And to your brother let i2">its message be, "Behold me, brother, at your hand i2">I li2">ive."

i2">It i2">is only possi2">ible to teach your brother through physi2">ical demonstrati2">ion that he i2">is not a si2">inner by not accusi2">ing hi2">im of si2">in, whi2">ich means not usi2">ing the body for attack, whi2">ich results i2">in the body bei2">ing fully healed. "What you use the body for i2">it becomes to you".

And Jesus re hi2">is resurrecti2">ion and body di2">isappeari2">ing:

"My body di2">isappeared because i2">I had no i2">illusi2">ion about i2">it.. i2">It merely became what i2">it always was. And that i2">is what 'rolli2">ing the stone away means.' The body di2">isappears, and no longer hi2">ides what li2">ies beyond... To roll the stone away i2">is to see beyond the tomb, beyond death, and to understand the body's nothi2">ingness. i2">I di2">id assume a human form wi2">ith human attri2">ibutes afterwards, to speak to those who were to prove the body's worthlessness to the world. Thi2">is has been much mi2">isunderstood. i2">I came to tell them that death i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion, and the mi2">ind that made the body can make another si2">ince form i2">itself i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion. They di2">id not understand. "

"Leave i2">it behi2">ind. i2">It cannot enter Heaven. But i2">I can take you there any ti2">ime you choose. Together we can watch the world di2">isappear and i2">its symbol vani2">ish as i2">it does. And then-and then-i2">I cannot speak of that. A body cannot stay wi2">ithout i2">illusi2">ions, and the last one to be overcome i2">is death."

Jesus i2">is li2">iterally aski2">ing us to become spi2">iri2">it-i2">identi2">ifi2">ied rather than body-i2">identi2">ifi2">ied, to recogni2">ize that our body i2">is merely an i2">image bei2">ing projected by our mi2">ind (whi2">ich we can stop projecti2">ing at any ti2">ime), and to learn to stop seei2">ing ourselves AND others as bodi2">ies.

That's no small request ei2">ither. We are so used to bei2">ing bodi2">ies and seei2">ing bodi2">ies, we thi2">ink i2">it i2">is normal and natural.

One thi2">ing to reali2">ize i2">is that a body i2">is not a fi2">irst-hand experi2">ience and i2">it i2">is not the ori2">igi2">in or source of a person. i2">It i2">is a secondary layer placed OVER the i2">inner spi2">iri2">it to try to hi2">ide i2">it.

So when you are looki2">ing at a body and you see fi2">ish and bones and eyes and a face and you thi2">ink that as you look at THAT, you are SEEi2">ING the person, you are not. You are seei2">ing a wall of deni2">ial and separati2">ion. A di2">isgui2">ise. i2">It's desi2">igned to BLOCK you from seei2">ing the person that i2">is "trapped" i2">insi2">ide, locked up i2">in the body and unseen by anyone.

The body i2">is a devi2">ice for separati2">ion. And the golden rule always appli2">ies. What we see i2">in others we see i2">in ourselves. i2">In order to become aware that we are not a body ourselves we have to overcome all forms of separati2">ion and all attack. And only when we can not see ourselves as a body wi2">ill we be able to see past the bodi2">ies of others.

Thi2">is i2">is also the meani2">ing of "God i2">is i2">in everythi2">ing i2">I see because God i2">is i2">in my mi2">ind".... i2">ie, i2">if you can get to where you have awareness of God i2">in your mi2">ind, you wi2">ill STOP seei2">ing bodi2">ies enti2">irely because God i2">is not a body. i2">If you are seei2">ing God, you are not seei2">ing form. You cannot see two worlds. So thi2">is does NOT mean that you see God "i2">in the world", i2">it means that God i2">is ALL THERE i2">IS and THERE i2">IS NO WORLD.

i2">It's a huge challenge to actually get to an experi2">ienti2">ial state where a) you do not beli2">ieve you are a body at all (genui2">inely), b) you do not see your body as your self, c) your sense of i2">identi2">ity i2">is not attached to the body whatsoever, d) you do not see others as thei2">ir bodi2">ies, e) you recogni2">ize that all bodi2">ies are fi2">icti2">ional puppets that people dangle i2">in front of them to pretend to i2">interact, and f) that you do not need a body at all i2">in order to exi2">ist as di2">ivi2">ine spi2">iri2">it.

Overcomi2">ing the body i2">is the same thi2">ing as overcomi2">ing death. i2">If you can become free of the body consci2">iously and deli2">iberately wi2">ithout usi2">ing death to do so, you no longer need a body and can make i2">it di2">isappear. i2">It wi2">ill become transparent and wi2">ill vani2">ish.

"There i2">is nothi2">ing about me that you cannot attai2">in. i2">I have nothi2">ing that does not come from God. The mai2">in di2">ifference between us as yet i2">is that i2">I have NOTHi2">ING ELSE. Thi2">is leaves me i2">in a state of true holi2">iness, whi2">ich i2">is only a POTENTi2">IAL i2">in you."

Nothi2">ing belongs to you exclusi2">ively. Everythi2">ing i2">is shared by everyone i2">inclusi2">ively. Thi2">is i2">is the law of God.

"We come i2">in confi2">idence today, aware that what belongs to us i2">in truth i2">is what He gi2">ives. And we would wi2">ish for nothi2">ing else, for nothi2">ing else belongs to us i2">in truth."

"what i2">is Yours belongs to me as well"

"As every gi2">ift my brothers gi2">ive i2">is mi2">ine, so every gi2">ift i2">I gi2">ive belongs to me."

"We ask no more than what belongs to us i2">in truth."

"everythi2">ing WE do belongs to you as well"

"God gi2">ives WHATEVER belongs to Hi2">im, because He gi2">ives OF Hi2">IMSELF, and EVERYTHi2">ING belongs to Hi2">im."

"Every lovi2">ing thought held i2">in ANY part (of the Sonshi2">ip) belongs to every part."

"Shari2">ing the perfect Love of the Father, the Son must share what belongs to Hi2">im, for otherwi2">ise He wi2">ill not know the Father or the Son."

"And EVERYTHi2">ING belongs to each of them."

"What i2">is God's BELONGS to everyone, and i2">IS hi2">is due."

"The creati2">ions of every Son of God are yours, because every creati2">ion belongs to everyone, bei2">ing created for the Sonshi2">ip as a whole."

You have nothi2">ing that i2">is yours alone. Whi2">ich means you have nothi2">ing speci2">ial or exclusi2">ive or just for you. Thi2">is means you aren't speci2">ial, have not been granted speci2">ial favor, and don't have any treasures that belong just to you. Thi2">is however doesn't mean you have nothi2">ing at all, because i2">in fact you share everythi2">ing wi2">ith everyone. God's Ki2">ingdom i2">is not a place of exclusi2">ive ownershi2">ip. i2">It's ki2">ind of li2">ike an open buffet. Everyone i2">is welcome, everythi2">ing i2">is for everyone, everythi2">ing belongs to everyone, and everyone has si2">imultaneous access to everythi2">ing. i2">It's completely open and unli2">imi2">ited.

"Nothi2">ing real can be i2">increased except by shari2">ing."

God who i2">is complete, cannot add anythi2">ing to hi2">imself. He i2">is already i2">infi2">ini2">ite and everywhere. He i2">is ki2">ind of li2">ike a closed system that way. However, all parts of God host all of God, because every part of God i2">is God. And thi2">is means every part of God shares the whole of God. All of God belongs to every part of God, and every part of God i2">is whole.

God can therefore create by shari2">ing hi2">imself. He hosts hi2">is creati2">ions wi2">ithi2">in hi2">is own bei2">ing, li2">iterally shari2">ing hi2">is own exi2">istence. But thi2">is requi2">ires that anythi2">ing he creates, must be created to purely and completely share all of hi2">imself. Any created bei2">ing must have full access to everythi2">ing God has, and must i2">inheri2">it everythi2">ing from hi2">im.

i2">Inheri2">iti2">ing from God does not mean you recei2">ive a wi2">indfall that's exclusi2">ively just for you. i2">It's not li2">ike wi2">inni2">ing the lottery. Everythi2">ing that exi2">ists sti2">ill belongs to God, and i2">is hi2">im. But he creates you by allowi2">ing you to share everythi2">ing he has. He gi2">ives hi2">imself to you i2">in your creati2">ion. You i2">inheri2">it God, and i2">inheri2">it everythi2">ing from God, but God i2">is a co-owner of everythi2">ing he shares.

"i2">I who am host to God AM worthy of Hi2">im."

"When God GAVE Hi2">imself to you i2">in your creati2">ion, He ESTABLi2">ISHED you as host to Hi2">im forever."

"And yet, i2">it i2">is your mi2">ind that i2">IS the host to Hi2">im."

"The mi2">ind i2">is then i2">in a state of Grace, and naturally becomes graci2">ious, both to the Host wi2">ithi2">in and the stranger wi2">ithout. By bri2">ingi2">ing i2">in the stranger, he becomes your brother."

Thi2">is means that you are created to share everythi2">ing, and the only way you can exi2">ist at all i2">is i2">if you share absolutely everythi2">ing. God cannot add anythi2">ing onto the outsi2">ide of hi2">imself, so can only share what i2">is i2">insi2">ide of hi2">imself. You are hosted by God wi2">ithi2">in hi2">is own bei2">ing, and your enti2">ire functi2">ion must be to share everythi2">ing openly and fully. Only by shari2">ing i2">it can you have i2">it at all, and you must be wi2">illi2">ing to gi2">ive i2">it all i2">in order to have i2">it.

Thi2">is creates an envi2">ironment i2">in the Ki2">ingdom that we mi2">ight descri2">ibe as a totally open soci2">iety. i2">It's a relati2">ionshi2">ip i2">in whi2">ich everyone has total full access to everythi2">ing at all ti2">imes. Everyone has all of God. Everyone i2">is plugged i2">into God. Everyone has FULL access to everythi2">ing that exi2">ists, si2">imultaneously and i2">in parallel. One bei2">ing havi2">ing full access does not depri2">ive any other bei2">ing any ki2">ind of access. Thei2">ir access overlaps.

"You had everythi2">ing when you were created, just as everyone di2">id."

"Thi2">is i2">IS the mi2">iraculous power of the Soul. The fact that each Soul has thi2">is power completely i2">is a fact that i2">is enti2">irely ali2">ien to human thi2">inki2">ing, i2">in whi2">ich i2">if any ONE has everythi2">ing, there i2">is nothi2">ing LEFT."

You can exi2">ist only i2">if God shares everythi2">ing that exi2">ists wi2">ith you. And now both of you have everythi2">ing that already exi2">ists. And you can only exi2">ist i2">if you are wi2">illi2">ing to fully share everythi2">ing that exi2">ists wi2">ith everyone else. Whi2">ich means that no-one anywhere i2">in the Ki2">ingdom has anythi2">ing that anyone else lacks, and no-one lacks anythi2">ing that anyone else has. Everythi2">ing belongs to everyone forever.

Thi2">is also leads to the fact that no-one can have anythi2">ing that belongs ONLY to them. You have absolutely nothi2">ing that i2">is yours alone. The ego begs to di2">iffer, because "the ego i2">is the i2">idea of selfi2">ishness." i2">It i2">is the part of you that beli2">ieves i2">in speci2">ialness and i2">in exclusi2">ivi2">ity. i2">It wants to have everythi2">ing for i2">itself, such that i2">it shares nothi2">ing wi2">ith anyone. The ego i2">is the anti2">ithesi2">is of shari2">ing and openness, and wants exclusi2">ive ri2">ights, ownershi2">ip and control. i2">It was the desi2">ire not to share that led to the separati2">ion. "You were at peace unti2">il you asked for speci2">ial favor, and God di2">id not gi2">ive i2">it."

What thi2">is leads to i2">is the truth that, i2">in and of yourself, by yourself, alone, you have absolutely NOTHi2">ING that belongs exclusi2">ively to you. Nothi2">ing you can put your name tag on, nothi2">ing you can say i2">is legally yours, nothi2">ing that i2">is just yours and no-one else's. i2">If i2">it seems that you have such thi2">ings, possessi2">ions, toys, clothes, cars, houses, bodi2">ies, whatever, whi2">ich seem to be exclusi2">ively "yours", and no-one else's, then you are ali2">igned wi2">ith the ego.

We need to recogni2">ize that i2">in and of our own selves, we can do nothi2">ing. We have no li2">ife wi2">ithout God. We have no power wi2">ithout God. We have NOTHi2">ING wi2">ithout God. You don't even have any exi2">istence wi2">ithout God. You have nothi2">ing that i2">is personal just to you whi2">ich i2">is yours alone. Nothi2">ing belongs just to you. i2">In effect, you are utterly powerless and ti2">iny and weak and afrai2">id and empty and non-exi2">istent i2">if i2">it all boi2">ils down to "what i2">is only mi2">ine".

"i2">I am nothi2">ing wi2">ithout the Father, and YOU are nothi2">ing wi2">ithout me because by DENYi2">ING the Father you deny YOURSELF."

"The presence of fear i2">is a sure si2">ign that you are trusti2">ing i2">in your own strength."

"Here agai2">in i2">is the paradox often referred to i2">in the course. To say, "Of myself i2">I can do nothi2">ing" i2">is to gai2">in all power. And yet i2">it i2">is but a seemi2">ing paradox. As God created you, you have all power. The i2">image you made of yourself has none."

Thi2">is i2">is where i2">it becomes i2">interesti2">ing. You alone, on your own, i2">in i2">isolati2">ion, have absolutely NOTHi2">ING. That i2">is to say, i2">ignori2">ing God for a moment, i2">ignori2">ing your i2">inheri2">itance, i2">ignori2">ing anythi2">ing that anyone else has, you actually have absolutely ZERO "for yourself'. Zero that i2">is "of you". Nothi2">ing that has been sourced i2">in you, that you have i2">invented, wi2">ithi2">in yourself, whi2">ich i2">is unshared or belongs to you alone.

That really means that you don't have any ki2">ind of speci2">ial talents or abi2">ili2">iti2">ies that can be sai2">id to "make you uni2">ique". You don't have any speci2">ial "super powers" that others lack. You don't have any exclusi2">ive "somethi2">ing", some ki2">ind of speci2">ial secret treasure, that no-one else has. You don't have any possessi2">ions that really are yours alone, whi2">ich i2">is easi2">ily proven by the fact that anyone can take them away from you, and they all can be lost, because they were never really yours to begi2">in wi2">ith.

So you are empty. Wi2">ithout God, you are nothi2">ing. Wi2">ithout God you don't even have exi2">istence. HOWEVER, you are not wi2">ithout God. i2">If you are wi2">illi2">ing to go beyond your ego, you i2">in fact regai2">in access to your i2">inheri2">itance. You become once agai2">in a member of the Sonshi2">ip. You open up to recei2">ivi2">ing your i2">inheri2">itance, whi2">ich i2">is everythi2">ing real, i2">in exchange for gi2">ivi2">ing up the NOTHi2">ING that you have otherwi2">ise. "We wi2">ill gai2">in EVERYTHi2">ING by gi2">ivi2">ing Hi2">IM the power and the

glory, and keepi2">ing NO i2">illusi2">ions of where they are."

"As You created me, i2">I can gi2">ive up nothi2">ing You gave me. What You di2">id not gi2">ive has no reali2">ity. What loss can i2">I anti2">ici2">ipate except the loss of fear, and the return of Love i2">into my mi2">ind?"

"for the si2">imple wi2">illi2">ingness to gi2">ive up nothi2">ing, BECAUSE i2">it i2">is nothi2">ing" "i2">Is i2">it a sacri2">ifi2">ice to gi2">ive up nothi2">ing, and to recei2">ive the Love of God forever?"

"Of yourself you can do none of these thi2">ings."

"Speci2">ialness i2">is the functi2">ion that you gave yourself. i2">It stands for you alone, as self-created, self-mai2">intai2">ined, i2">in need of nothi2">ing, and unjoi2">ined wi2">ith anythi2">ing beyond the body. i2">In i2">its eyes, you are a separate uni2">iverse, wi2">ith all the power to hold i2">itself complete wi2">ithi2">in i2">itself, wi2">ith every entry shut agai2">inst i2">intrusi2">ion, and every wi2">indow barred agai2">inst the li2">ight."

So here are your opti2">ions. On the one hand you have what the ego i2">is offeri2">ing, whi2">ich i2">is absolutely nothi2">ing, di2">isgui2">ised as somethi2">ing speci2">ial and rare, somethi2">ing whi2">ich i2">is exclusi2">ive just for you, somethi2">ing speci2">ial, whi2">ich makes you i2">important and uni2">ique and di2">ifferent. But whi2">ich really i2">is made of nothi2">ing at all, and i2">is not somethi2">ing you can really have, nor can i2">it last forever. And by tryi2">ing to have i2">it, you may seem to gai2">in the fi2">icti2">ional world, and lose your soul.

"What profi2">iteth a man i2">if he gai2">in the whole world and lose hi2">is own Soul?" The alternati2">ive on offer, i2">is that you are i2">invi2">ited as a guest to joi2">in i2">in the Ki2">ingdom of God, i2">in whi2">ich you are allowed to parti2">ici2">ipate openly, freely, and fully. Provi2">ided that you are wi2">illi2">ing to share everythi2">ing that exi2">ists wi2">ith everyone. And provi2">ided you are wi2">illi2">ing to share your enti2">ire self wi2">ith everyone. And provi2">ided you are wi2">illi2">ing to grant everyone total free access to everythi2">ing at all ti2">imes.

And provi2">ided you do not i2">in any way attempt to hoard anythi2">ing for yourself, to have any trace of selfi2">ishness, nor to regard anythi2">ing as belongi2">ing ONLY to you. That nothi2">ing belongs ONLY to you doesn't mean you have nothi2">ing, only that what you HAVE i2">isn't ONLY yours to have and must be shared. You DO have power, but i2">it only so long as you acknowledge that you SHARE thi2">is power wi2">ith God and wi2">ith everyone. To take i2">it away from them, to have i2">it just for you, i2">is to stri2">ip i2">it from yourself and be powerless.

Provi2">ided you are wi2">illi2">ing to enter i2">into a relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith the whole sonshi2">ip, where everythi2">ing belongs to everyone equally, then you can enter the Ki2">ingdom of God. To recei2">ive your i2">inheri2">itance i2">isn't to recei2">ive a bi2">ig speci2">ial chri2">istmas gi2">ift that no-one else gets to play wi2">ith. All thi2">ings that are real, that you can actually HAVE, have to belong to everyone. i2">It belongs to God, i2">it belongs to you, AND i2">it belongs to all your brothers. And everyone can access all of i2">it all the ti2">ime at the same ti2">ime. "To have all, gi2">ive all to all."

So you can ei2">ither have basi2">ically nothi2">ing for yourself, di2">isgui2">ised as recei2">ivi2">ing the i2">illusory ri2">iches of the world, whi2">ich appear to be valuable bullshi2">it i2">items that you don't even really want, and whi2">ich have no real value, but whi2">ich appear to be extremely valuable treasures. Or, you can openly share non-exclusi2">ive ri2">ights wi2">ith everyone, to own ALL of the Ki2">ingdom of God, ALONG Wi2">ITH God and wi2">ith everyone else, i2">in whi2">ich everythi2">ing belongs to everyone.

The gi2">ifts of God are gi2">iven i2">in order to "passed forward". He gi2">ives you the power to create, so that you can share and gi2">ive what you have been gi2">iven. Qui2">ite si2">imply, "gi2">ive what you have been gi2">iven" i2">is the only rule of the system. Gi2">ive the love that God has gi2">iven you. Nothi2">ing i2">is ever gi2">iven to just you alone, i2">it i2">is gi2">iven FOR everyone.

"The therapi2">ist does not heal; he LETS HEALi2">ING BE. HE can poi2">int to darkness, but he CANNOT bri2">ing li2">ight OF Hi2">IMSELF, for li2">ight i2">is NOT of hi2">im. But bei2">ing FOR hi2">im, i2">it MUST be for hi2">is pati2">ient."

"Heali2">ing must be for everyone"

"i2">It MUST be for your brother, BECAUSE i2">it i2">is for you."

"The gi2">ifts you have are not for you alone. What He has come to offer you, you now must learn to gi2">ive. Thi2">is i2">is the lesson that Hi2">is gi2">ivi2">ing holds, for He has saved you from the soli2">itude you sought to make, i2">in whi2">ich to hi2">ide from God."

"i2">It wi2">ill NOT be for you alone, for therei2">in lay i2">its mi2">isery."

"Atonement i2">is for all, because i2">it i2">is the way to UNDO the beli2">ief that ANYTHi2">ING i2">is for you ALONE."

"Would God have created a Voi2">ice for you alone? Could you hear Hi2">is answer EXCEPT as He answers ALL of God's Sons?"

"Salvati2">ion i2">IS Hi2">is Wi2">ill BECAUSE you share i2">it. NOT for you alone, but for the Self whi2">ich i2">IS the Son of God."

"The contrast i2">is far greater than you thi2">ink, for you wi2">ill love thi2">is concept of yourself, BECAUSE i2">IT WAS NOT MADE FOR YOU ALONE."

Qui2">ite si2">imply, you ei2">ither can be utterly powerless, afrai2">id, weak, lacki2">ing, depri2">ived, mi2">iserable, si2">ick, unhappy, lost, desperate, i2">improveri2">ished, bereft, and empty, OR .... you can acknowledge that the ONLY real thi2">ing you can HAVE i2">is everythi2">ing God has gi2">iven already, and you can ONLY have i2">it i2">IF YOU ARE Wi2">ILLi2">ING TO SHARE i2">IT. Be selfi2">ish and end up alone and wi2">ith nothi2">ing, or share wi2">ith everyone and gai2">in everythi2">ing there i2">is to have.

You can truly have what EVERYONE has, and only by ackowledgi2">ing that i2">it belong to them as well, OR you wi2">ill end up empty handed. To try to take possessi2">ion of some part of heaven for yourself, all of heaven wi2">ill sli2">ip through your fi2">ingers. The more you try to own somethi2">ing, the less you have i2">it. The more you try to depend on yourself alone, the less you become able to deal wi2">ith li2">ife. The more you try to "go i2">it alone", the more helpless you become.

God i2">is your strength! Hi2">is shared strength i2">is li2">iterally YOUR strength. Wi2">ithout God, you have no strength at all. Of yourself you are nothi2">ing and have nothi2">ing. He i2">is the battery-pack whi2">ich fuels your power. However, because you are OF GOD, you HAVE EVERYTHi2">ING AND ARE EVERYTHi2">ING. God's power belongs to you, God's li2">ife belongs to you, God's enti2">ire creati2">ion belongs to you.

Everythi2">ing real i2">is YOURS. i2">It i2">is not just partly yours, i2">it i2">is FULLY yours. But i2">it i2">is also fully everyone's. You cannot have i2">it by graspi2">ing for i2">it to keep i2">it for yourself, you can ONLY have i2">it by acknowledgi2">ing that i2">it i2">is EVERYONE'S Ri2">IGHT. And therefore you have to be open to Gi2">IVi2">ING i2">IT. You must gi2">ive what you have recei2">ived, be open to shari2">ing what you have, and everythi2">ing must belong to everyone.

To admi2">it that you have nothi2">ing SPECi2">IAL about you, i2">is humi2">ili2">ity. But thi2">is does not leave you powerless. i2">It si2">imply leaves you wi2">ithout a SPECi2">IAL power that you i2">invented. i2">It stri2">ips you of your "super powers", your fi2">icti2">ional sense of personal strength, and your i2">illusi2">ion that you can do thi2">is ON YOUR OWN. You cannot do ANYTHi2">ING on your own. You are helpless and powerless on your own. The ONLY way you can li2">ive at all i2">is to joi2">in wi2">ith God and let hi2">im help you.

Thi2">is i2">is why you have to surrender your ego. You si2">imply can't do li2">ife by yourself. When you try to you wi2">ill depend on your own exclusi2">ive strength, whi2">ich i2">is pi2">iti2">iful at best and nothi2">ing at worst. And you wi2">ill not be able to deal wi2">ith anythi2">ing. Only Wi2">ITH God do you have stength. Only Wi2">ITH God do you have anythi2">ing at all! But wi2">ith God, you are ALL POWERFUL. Wi2">ith God, you CAN DO ANYTHi2">ING.

"You can do ANYTHi2">ING i2">I ask." "The power to work mi2">iracles belongs to you." "There i2">is nothi2">ing my holi2">iness cannot do." "Do hi2">is works." "What the holy spi2">iri2">it enables you to do i2">is clearly not of thi2">is world."

"He bri2">ings you gi2">ifts that are not of thi2">is world, and only he, to whom they have been gi2">iven, CAN make sure that you recei2">ive them. He wi2">ill place them on YOUR throne, when you make room for hi2">im on hi2">is."

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is i2">invi2">isi2">ible, but you CAN see the results of Hi2">is Presence, and through them, you wi2">ill learn that He i2">is there. What He enables you to do i2">is clearly NOT of thi2">is world, for mi2">iracles vi2">iolate every law of reali2">ity, as thi2">is world judges i2">it. Every law of ti2">ime and space, of magni2">itude and mass, of predi2">icti2">ion and control, i2">is transcended, for what the Holy Spi2">iri2">it enables you to do i2">is clearly beyond ALL of them. Percei2">ivi2">ing Hi2">is RESULTS, you wi2">ill understand where He MUST be, and fi2">inally KNOW what He i2">is."

"God gi2">ives WHATEVER belongs to Hi2">im, because He gi2">ives OF Hi2">IMSELF, and EVERYTHi2">ING belongs to Hi2">im."

"The Uni2">ity that speci2">ialness deni2">ies wi2">ill save them all, for what i2">is One can HAVE no speci2">ialness. And EVERYTHi2">ING belongs to each of them."

"i2">It knows that i2">it i2">is EVERYWHERE, just as i2">it has EVERYTHi2">ING and FOREVER." "No-one who knows that he has everythi2">ing could seek for li2">imi2">itati2">ion, nor COULD he value the body's offeri2">ings."

"Bei2">ing wholly pure, everyone joi2">ined i2">in i2">it HAS everythi2">ing. Thi2">is i2">is NOT the basi2">is for ANY love relati2">ionshi2">ip i2">in whi2">ich the ego enters. For EVERY relati2">ionshi2">ip on whi2">ich the ego embarks i2">IS speci2">ial."

"No-one who has everythi2">ing WANTS the ego. i2">Its own maker, then, DOES NOT WANT i2">IT."

"Who would have more OR less i2">is not aware that he has everythi2">ing."

"i2">Innocence i2">is i2">INCAPABLE of sacri2">ifi2">ici2">ing anythi2">ing, because the i2">innocent mi2">ind HAS everythi2">ing and stri2">ives only to PROTECT i2">its Wholeness."

"When EVERYONE has EVERYTHi2">ING, i2">indi2">ivi2">idual contri2">ibuti2">ions to the Sonshi2">ip wi2">ill no longer be necessary."

"Your i2">inheri2">itance can nei2">ither be bought NOR sold. There can BE no di2">isi2">inheri2">ited parts of the Sonshi2">ip, for God i2">is whole, and all hi2">is extensi2">ions are li2">ike Hi2">im."

"Glory i2">is your i2">inheri2">itance, gi2">iven your Soul by i2">its Creator, that you mi2">ight EXTEND i2">it."

"Those who wi2">itness for me are expressi2">ing, through thei2">ir mi2">iracles, that they have abandoned depri2">ivati2">ion i2">in favor of the abundance they have learned BELONGS to them."

i2">I used to thi2">ink i2">I knew what thi2">is meant. But the defi2">ini2">iti2">ion i2">is changi2">ing ri2">ight before my eyes.

i2">I used to beli2">ieve that i2">if i2">I was loved uncondi2">iti2">ionally, i2">it meant that God loves me regardless of vari2">ious attri2">ibutes that i2">I have, even i2">if i2">I keep those attri2">ibutes. So let's say i2">I have a crooked leg, and i2">I look li2">ike i2">I have the hi2">ind legs of an ass, i2">I would perhaps say, well, God sti2">ill loves me despi2">ite the fact that i2">I can't walk strai2">ight to save my li2">ife. And that seemed somewhat comforti2">ing. But there was always a certai2">in unease about thi2">is because, li2">ike, how could there be complete love at the same ti2">ime as bodi2">ily forms or i2">illusi2">ions exi2">isti2">ing?

i2">In ACi2">IM we're taught that only the truth i2">is true and only God's creati2">ion exi2">ists and nothi2">ing else exi2">ists. That there i2">is no world. That there hasn't been a separati2">ion. That i2">illusi2">ions are not real. So that really means, my crooked legs do not exi2">ist. So God lovi2">ing me uncondi2">iti2">ionally really has to be redefi2">ined, because whi2">ile i2">it i2">is always true that God loves uncondi2">iti2">ionally, i2">it also has to be true that God ONLY loves that whi2">ich i2">is not condi2">iti2">ional. God cannot be uncondi2">iti2">ional about condi2">iti2">ionali2">ity. Havi2">ing crooked legs i2">is condi2">iti2">ional, li2">imi2">ited, and an i2">illusi2">ion, and the ego wants to run wi2">ith i2">it and get God's approval.

So thi2">is really bri2">ings i2">into questi2">ion, WHO AM i2">I. Who i2">is the `i2">I` or `me` that God i2">is lovi2">ing uncondi2">iti2">ionally. Does God love thi2">is li2">imi2">ited i2">illusory me uncondi2">iti2">ionally, OR... i2">is God lovi2">ing some other `real` me that i2">is actually lovable? Does he perhaps OVERLOOK my crooked legs and i2">is fi2">ixated only on the Chri2">ist i2">in me, the real me, whi2">ich he loves wi2">ithout condi2">iti2">ion or li2">imi2">itati2">ion, recogni2">izi2">ing that the Chri2">ist i2">in me i2">is not li2">imi2">ited or condi2">iti2">ioned? And what happens to my self-hate i2">if i2">I accept hi2">is love - do i2">I keep i2">it? No. i2">If *i2">I* want to be uncondi2">iti2">ionally loved, then i2">I need to i2">identi2">ify myself AS my `uncondi2">iti2">ioned love self`, rather than my ego, or my body, or my behavi2">iors, or how i2">I look, or how i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I am not lovable, whi2">ich i2">includes ALL the li2">imi2">iti2">ing i2">ideas about myself. Those are not really ME.

i2">It would be ni2">ice i2">if my i2">illusory i2">identi2">iti2">ies as a body, as a behavi2">ior, as a set of thoughts etc, would be uncondi2">iti2">ionally loved. And i2">it i2">is true that God i2">is ALWAYS i2">in a state of lovi2">ing wi2">ith no requi2">irements. BUT, and because of Hi2">is permanent perfect love, He loves the TRUTH of what i2">I am BECAUSE he does not see or recogni2">ize or acknowledge the bullshi2">it that i2">I am not. So i2">I am not really a body wi2">ith a crooked leg, or wi2">ith a funny walk, or a person wi2">ith a strange beli2">ief, or someone who talks i2">in a wei2">ird accent. God i2">isn't lovi2">ing me uncondi2">iti2">ionally because of these thi2">ings, but i2">IN SPi2">ITE OF these thi2">ings, i2">in recogni2">iti2">ion of who i2">I actually AM and not who or what i2">I thi2">ink i2">I am.

So i2">I guess there's thi2">is ego/new-agey versi2">ion of uncondi2">iti2">ional love that says my body i2">is real, my ego i2">is real, i2">I am a separate self, and at the same ti2">ime, God sees and acknowledges thi2">is separate self and gi2">ives the old `nod and wi2">ink` that thi2">is separate self can be kept and loved. But that's not really possi2">ible. Here's the truth. i2">If God, as Li2">IGHT, were to shi2">ine toward these i2">illusory forms of `myself` i2">in attempt to love them uncondi2">iti2">ionally, THEY WOULD Di2">ISAPPEAR. They would be HEALED. Because all of these forms of self are actually forms of error, forms of separati2">ion, and forms of si2">ickness. They are symbols of separati2">ion that's aren't real or TRUE and God can't love a li2">ie.

So yes i2">I could be i2">in a transi2">iti2">ionary phase where i2">I sti2">ill have a wonky leg and i2">I somehow open up to some amount of uncondti2">ional love, but as i2">I do so, as i2">I allow that love to enter `me`, i2">it MUST transform me, and MUST go beyond my wonky leg. The uncondi2">iti2">ional love doesn't say "i2">I love you even wi2">ith your crappy leg". i2">It says, "i2">I love you BESi2">IDES and i2">IN SPi2">ITE OF and BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE a crappy leg." i2">It looks to the real me, the Chri2">ist me, the perfect me.

Thi2">is i2">is how i2">I am seei2">ing uncondi2">iti2">ional love bei2">ing redefi2">ined for me. As i2">I open up to allow God to love me more, God i2">is remi2">indi2">ing me of who i2">I really am and i2">I am 'becomi2">ing love', awakeni2">ing to love, whi2">ich i2">is transcendi2">ing all of the excuses and reasons WHY i2">I am not love or not lovable. All my si2">icknesses are expressi2">ions of an attempt to not be loved. All of my sense of separati2">ion from God i2">is an expressi2">ion of my attempt not to be loved. All of my vi2">icti2">imi2">izati2">ion i2">is an attempt not to be loved or to justi2">ify stayi2">ing unlovable. All of these forms and i2">illusi2">ions are barri2">iers agai2">inst love. Yes, love loves all the ti2">ime, but love doesn't love what doesn't exi2">ist. Love doesn't love forms or bodi2">ies or i2">illusi2">ions or i2">images or thoughts.

Love loves SO THAT these thi2">ings DO NOT EXi2">IST. i2">It i2">is the same as fore-gi2">iveness - fore-gi2">iveness looks wi2">ith love SO THAT mi2">istakes i2">in percepti2">ion are not made and so that judgement doesn't ari2">ise. Si2">imi2">ilarly love loves uncondti2">ionally SO THAT heaven i2">is always mai2">intai2">ined, so that you are always Chri2">ist, and so that NOTHi2">ING ELSE CAN HAPPEN. Uncondi2">iti2">ional love sustai2">ins reali2">ity, i2">it doesn't justi2">ify or gi2">ive a nod of acceptance to i2">illusi2">ions. Love loves SO THAT `condi2">iti2">ions` do not ari2">ise - i2">it doesn't love real condi2">iti2">ions! Love loves so that there i2">isn't anythi2">ing that 'needs' to be loved, because i2">it i2">IS loved, just as forgi2">iveness fore-gi2">ives so that there i2">is nothi2">ing TO forgi2">ive because all i2">IS forgi2">iven.

And yet love i2">is gentle so i2">it can seem li2">ike i2">it does thi2">is. i2">It can seem i2">I am lovable i2">in spi2">ite of my crooked horse legs. But really what i2">I'm doi2">ing, i2">if i2">I'm allowi2">ing myself to be loved, i2">is actually reli2">inqui2">ishi2">ing i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion wi2">ith the horse legs and i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing myself AS love. i2">I can't keep i2">illusi2">ions i2">if i2">I want to accept a transcendental love.

God loves me - not the body me - my spi2">iri2">itual REAL ME - uncondi2">iti2">ionally. God loves you uncondi2">iti2">ionally - the real you. i2">If God were to be ABLE To love your stupi2">id i2">illusi2">ions as though they were real, you would be AWARE of uncondi2">iti2">ional love even whi2">ile you are separate from God! That's totally i2">impossi2">ible. That's why you are asleep - because you do NOT have awareness of who you really are or the fact that God loves uncondi2">iti2">ionally. God's uncondi2">iti2">ional love doesn't vi2">iolate the blocks that YOU put i2">in place to keep that love out, i2">in the name of justi2">ifyi2">ing and glori2">ifyi2">ing and SPi2">IRi2">ITUALi2">IZi2">ING the forms of error that your ego i2">is worshi2">ippi2">ing. The ego wants to spi2">iri2">ituali2">ize everythi2">ing unreal by sayi2">ing God loves i2">it. Nope. God loves SO THAT i2">ILLUSi2">IONS DO NOT EXi2">IST.

God does not make your i2">illusi2">ions real and doesn't 'approve' them for your ego to keep. Otherwi2">ise the ego would have perfect justi2">ifi2">icati2">ion for stayi2">ing separate from God. God sees you - who you really are, as Chri2">ist, as di2">ivi2">ine perfecti2">ion, and i2">it i2">is YOUR REAL SELF that He loves, and i2">it i2">is your real self that you really are. He loves to remi2">ind you of who you are i2">IN love, AS love, Wi2">ITH love. All the rest of 'you' that you want to be loved - your manky body, your crappy i2">illusory li2">ife of sufferi2">ing... i2">its horse shi2">it. You don't love i2">it because you CAN'T. Love i2">it and i2">it must be HEALED. Li2">ife sucks BECAUSE you refuse to accept love. Love would li2">iterally CHANGE your li2">ife, not make i2">it 'acceptable'.

So let's admi2">it i2">it. You don't REALLY want God to love your crooked legs, do you? You don't really want God to come along and say, yup, i2">I see you look li2">ike the back end of an ass, and i2">I love you anyway. You don't want that. You'd be li2">ike, well, that's ni2">ice, but now i2">I sti2">ill look li2">ike a mule. What you want i2">is fri2">icki2">ing HEALi2">ING. You want to remember you are not a body. You want to be healed i2">in your mi2">ind so that your i2">identi2">ity can be revealed as Chri2">ist - as i2">immortal Spi2">iri2">it, not as some donkey. You don't really want God to uncondi2">iti2">ionally love your shi2">it. You should want God to li2">ift you i2">into the awareness that you are ONLY LOVE and nothi2">ing else. Only the truth i2">is true.

God loves you. God doesn't condemn your i2">illusi2">ions because they don't exi2">ist. But God does want you to remember how much you are loved, and you can only do that by reali2">izi2">ing you are love i2">itself and nothi2">ing else. Only love can be loved. All the 'rest' that you thi2">ink you are 'left wi2">ith' that God doesn't love... don't worry, i2">it doesn't really exi2">ist and i2">it's not who or what you are. i2">Isn't that a reli2">ief? Di2">id you really want God to gi2">ive total approval for your pi2">ile of shi2">it ego? He can only love what i2">is real. So let go of what you are not and return to an awareness of love as i2">it really i2">is.

Last ni2">ight i2">I used the below process, but i2">in a di2">ifferent way. i2">I di2">id i2">it VERY slowly. i2">I re-stated each phrase several ti2">imes over and really let i2">it si2">ink i2">in before movi2">ing on to the next one. i2">I actually found thi2">is to be qui2">ite powerful.

For example, i2">in sayi2">ing that i2">I deci2">ided wrongly.. when i2">I really dwell on that i2">I come to reali2">ize that i2">I actually DECi2">IDED and i2">I get i2">in touch wi2">ith that sense of responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity and deci2">isi2">ion-maki2">ing at havi2">ing been the one who not only put i2">in place thi2">is upset, but actually chose i2">it myself.

There i2">is tremendous power i2">in getti2">ing i2">in touch wi2">ith your power of deci2">isi2">ion. Your deci2">isi2">ion maki2">ing i2">is not just a neutral act, i2">it has power to i2">it. i2">It i2">is causal. And i2">I've also started to dabble i2">in the i2">idea of... .i2">instead of just reacti2">ing to stuff and goi2">ing along wi2">ith i2">it, i2">instead, stoppi2">ing and DECi2">IDi2">ING... "i2">I am" or "i2">I am not" .... and feeli2">ing a ki2">ind of i2">instantaneous change si2">imply by maki2">ing a fi2">irm deci2">isi2">ion.

i2">I also i2">inqui2">ired about the last sentence... letti2">ing Hi2">im deci2">ide for God for me. Jesus clari2">ifi2">ied that thi2">is really means allowi2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it to 'favor' or 'choose FOR rather than AGAi2">INST' God, on my behalf. Allowi2">ing Hi2">im to favor God and to then accept Hi2">is vi2">iewpoi2">int. i2">In thi2">is way, "for God" really means "towards God" or "i2">in agreement wi2">ith God". That made more sense to me.

"i2">I must have deci2">ided wrongly because i2">I am NOT at peace.

i2">I made the deci2">isi2">ion myself, but i2">I can also deci2">ide otherwi2">ise.

i2">I Wi2">ILL to deci2">ide otherwi2">ise, because i2">I WANT to be at peace.

i2">I do NOT feel gui2">ilty, because the Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo ALL the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">IF i2">I Wi2">ILL LET Hi2">IM.

i2">I Wi2">ILL to let Hi2">im by allowi2">ing Hi2">im to deci2">ide for God for me."

i2">It's also qui2">ite i2">important to keep i2">in mi2">ind the statement Jesus makes just pri2">ior to thi2">is prayer:

"But let me fi2">irst remi2">ind you of somethi2">ing i2">I told you myself. Whenever you are not wholly joyous, i2">it i2">is because you have reacted wi2">ith a lack of love to some Soul whi2">ich God created. Percei2">ivi2">ing thi2">is as si2">in, you become defensi2">ive because you EXPECT ATTACK. The deci2">isi2">ion to react i2">in that way, however, was YOURS, and can therefore be undone. i2">It CANNOT be undone by repentance i2">in the usual sense, because thi2">is i2">impli2">ies gui2">ilt. i2">If you allow yourself to feel gui2">ilty, you wi2">ill rei2">inforce the error, rather than allowi2">ing i2">it to be undone FOR you.

Deci2">isi2">ions CANNOT be di2">iffi2">icult. Thi2">is i2">is obvi2">ious i2">if you reali2">ize that you must ALREADY have made a deci2">isi2">ion NOT to be wholly joyous i2">if that i2">is what you feel. Therefore, the fi2">irst step i2">in the undoi2">ing i2">is to recogni2">ize that YOU ACTi2">IVELY DECi2">IDED WRONGLY, BUT CAN AS ACTi2">IVELY DECi2">IDE OTHERWi2">ISE.

Be very fi2">irm wi2">ith yourselves i2">in thi2">is, and keep yourselves fully aware of the fact that the UNDOi2">ING process, whi2">ich does NOT come from you, i2">is nevertheless Wi2">ITHi2">IN you because God placed i2">it there. YOUR part i2">is merely to return your thi2">inki2">ing to the poi2">int at whi2">ich the error was made, and gi2">ive i2">it over to the Atonement i2">in peace. Say to yourselves the followi2">ing, as si2">incerely as you can, rememberi2">ing that the Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill respond fully to your sli2">ightest i2">invi2">itati2">ion:"

We may not reali2">ize i2">it, but from bi2">irth onward most of us came to beli2">ieve that we are our body. That li2">iterally, thi2">is physi2">ical object wi2">ith arms and legs i2">is our own self. There's my toes, there's my fi2">ingers, there's my face, there's "me". Parents talked about "you" thi2">is way. You talked about you thi2">is way, aski2">ing yourself, what am i2">I?

And we look upon thi2">is strange thi2">ing i2">in the mi2">irror and cannot qui2">ite fathom what i2">it i2">is why or how we came to be thi2">is strangely shaped creature of extraordi2">inary complexi2">ity, the li2">ikes of whi2">ich we have no i2">idea how i2">it functi2">ions.

What we have to reali2">ize i2">is that thi2">is i2">is the false starti2">ing poi2">int, and thi2">is i2">is the state of i2">impri2">isonment. Beli2">ievi2">ing we are a body i2">is completely a mi2">istake. A total error i2">in percepti2">ion. And i2">in fact the body was made wi2">ith and i2">in order to produce false percepti2">ion.

The body's eyes cannot see, the ears cannot hear, all i2">its senses are back to front and i2">it reports on i2">illusi2">ions as i2">if they're real. The body i2">is a li2">ie machi2">ine. And yet there we are starti2">ing out by beli2">ievi2">ing every word i2">it says, everythi2">ing i2">it does, everythi2">ing i2">it seems to tell us, even to the extent of beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it i2">is our own self. And we are CLOSE to i2">it that we thi2">ink everythi2">ing i2">it experi2">iences WE are experi2">ienci2">ing di2">irectly.

So i2">invested i2">is thi2">is beli2">ief that we are a body, that we have taken somethi2">ing whi2">ich i2">is utterly not a body whatsoever and have tri2">ied to smush i2">it together and bi2">ind i2">it and joi2">in i2">it and strap them together i2">into one lump, to call i2">it myself. We may not reali2">ize, there i2">is a YOU, and then there i2">is a BODY, and the two are not the same

i2">In fact, the you that you really are i2">is SO UNLi2">IKE the body i2">in every si2">ingle way that i2">if you were to catch si2">ight of i2">it you'd be astoni2">ished that you ever thought you could be a lump of flesh and bones. But si2">ince the body i2">itself was made to block awareness of thi2">is, to act as a temptati2">ion devi2">ice and a way to decei2">ive ourselves, we're qui2">ite lost i2">in i2">it.

"The body i2">is the i2">instrument the mi2">ind made i2">in i2">its stri2">ivi2">ing to decei2">ive i2">itself."

We di2">id a VERY good job of decei2">ivi2">ing ourselves. To such an extent that almost all consci2">ious recogni2">iti2">ion of not bei2">ing a body i2">is blotted out by the body. And so as we attempt to become more spi2">iri2">itual or to reawaken, we're goi2">ing to run up agai2">inst a very basi2">ic fact.

The body i2">is NOT who you are at all, but you heavi2">ily beli2">ieve i2">IT i2">IS YOU. And on the basi2">is of beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it i2">is you, and backed up by everyone else beli2">ievi2">ing thei2">ir body i2">is thei2">ir self also, you have spent years upon years of rei2">inforci2">ing thi2">is "uni2">iti2">ing" of self and body, regardi2">ing i2">it as yourself, talki2">ing about i2">it as i2">if i2">it's your self, worshi2">ippi2">ing i2">it, cleani2">ing i2">it, feedi2">ing i2">it, sexi2">ing i2">it, usi2">ing i2">it i2">in vari2">ious ways, all under the seemi2">ingly clever gui2">ise that thi2">is i2">is YOU doi2">ing thi2">is stuff, i2">it's YOU looki2">ing i2">in the mi2">irror, and i2">it's YOU that's gorgeous today.

When you look at soci2">iety, look at the news, look at how people talk about bodi2">ies. Almost every reference to a person i2">is ACTUALLY a reference to thei2">ir body. "Joe di2">id thi2">is"... well no, joe's body di2">id. Joe i2">is not a body. Thi2">is i2">is pretty seri2">ious, how far reachi2">ing thi2">is i2">is. We've gone really really far i2">into thi2">is di2">istorti2">ion. Every si2">ingle way that we confuse ourselves wi2">ith "our own body" - and by the way you don't really HAVE a body as a spi2">iri2">it - i2">is a mi2">istaken false percepti2">ion of ourselves. i2">It's delusi2">ional. i2">It's li2">ike sayi2">ing you are your jeans and t-shi2">irt and shoes.

We've become lost i2">in our bodi2">ies. Tangled up i2">in form. Confused about who and what we are. Decei2">ived by appearances. Tempted to regard thi2">is object i2">in the mi2">irror as though i2">it i2">is our self and to then preen i2">it and decorate i2">it and worshi2">ip i2">it and feel bad about i2">it all based on the beli2">ief that i2">it i2">is you. Thi2">is i2">is the bi2">ig problem that needs correcti2">ion. Thi2">is i2">is body i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion - whereby the Son of God i2">is tryi2">ing to prove he i2">is NOT a spi2">iri2">it, NOT a mi2">ind, and ONLY a body. i2">It's the complete opposi2">ite of awakeni2">ing.

So i2">if we're on a spi2">iri2">itual path to God, then we're goi2">ing to have reali2">ize, that any progress towards that goal wi2">ill have to entai2">il learni2">ing that YOU ARE NOT A BODY. i2">In fact, you're not even remotely a body, nor do you really have one. You are i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it. "You are i2">immortal and you cannot di2">ie, but you can confuse yourself wi2">ith thi2">ings that do."

By confusi2">ing your i2">IDENTi2">ITY wi2">ith the human body and thi2">inki2">ing of i2">it as "my self", you are confused, and confusi2">ion i2">is fear. And thi2">is i2">is also level confusi2">ion. And i2">it i2">is also si2">ickness. And i2">it i2">is a way to defend agai2">inst the truth. And i2">it's a choi2">ice to suffer. i2">It's a form of self attack, and an attack on others, to regard yourself as physi2">ical.

To emphasi2">ize the quali2">iti2">ies, characteri2">isti2">ics, gender, sexual persuasi2">ion, desi2">irable or undesi2">irable features, shape, si2">ize, color, ethi2">ic ori2">igi2">in, hai2">irstyle, musculature, ski2">inni2">iness, sexi2">iness, attracti2">iveness, ugli2">iness, or any other attri2">ibute of the body as bei2">ing somethi2">ing that determi2">ines or says ANYTHi2">ING about YOU, i2">is delusi2">ional. i2">It i2">is confusi2">ion about who and what you are.

But we are addi2">icted to usi2">ing the body li2">ike some ki2">ind of i2">idol worshi2">ip fi2">igure that we hold i2">in very hi2">igh regard (or low) as a statement of "what i2">I am li2">ike". Yet nothi2">ing about the body appli2">ies to you at all. We can get lost i2">in how proud we are to be a woman or a man or gay or strai2">ight or whi2">ite or black or pretty much anythi2">ing else. NONE of i2">it i2">is true of you! You are made of li2">ight. You are a spi2">iri2">it bei2">ing. You have i2">immortali2">ity. Your body i2">is an enti2">ire LAYER of i2">illusi2">ions coveri2">ing over your real self. i2">It's just a pi2">icture that you show to the world to pretend you are not yourself.

"The i2">IDEA of separati2">ion PRODUCED the body, and remai2">ins connected TO i2">it"

"The body i2">is the i2">idea of si2">in made flesh and projected outwards."

"The body i2">is the i2">idea of who you are not."

"For what you are cannot be seen nor pi2">ictured."

"Can you who see yourselves Wi2">ITHi2">IN a body, know yourself AS AN i2">IDEA?"

"Freedom must be i2">impossi2">ible as long as you percei2">ive a body as yourself."

"The ego regards the body as i2">its home, and DOES try to sati2">isfy i2">itself through the body."

"The body i2">is the symbol of the ego, as the ego i2">is the symbol of separati2">ion. And both are nothi2">ing more than attempts to Li2">IMi2">IT communi2">icati2">ion, and thereby TO MAKE i2">IT i2">IMPOSSi2">IBLE."

"Only by assi2">igni2">ing to the mi2">ind the properti2">ies OF THE BODY, does separati2">ion SEEM to be possi2">ible."

"A PERSON concei2">ives of hi2">imself as separate, largely because he percei2">ives OF hi2">imself as bounded by a body."

"The body i2">IS separate, and therefore CANNOT be part of you."

"The world of bodi2">ies i2">is the world of si2">in, for only i2">if there were a body i2">is si2">in possi2">ible."

"Only the body makes the world seem real."

"The man was an i2">illusi2">ion, for he seemed to be a separate bei2">ing, walki2">ing by hi2">imself, wi2">ithi2">in a body that appeared to hold hi2">is self from Self, as all i2">illusi2">ions do."

Thi2">is means that all the ways that we beli2">ieve and act as i2">if we ARE the body, as though i2">its prowess rubs off on us, as though we get credi2">it or di2">iscredi2">it for how the body looks, as though anythi2">ing about i2">it AT ALL says anythi2">ing about you AT ALL, has to be undone. We have to be wi2">illi2">ing to let go of all the ways we have confused ourselves Wi2">ITH i2">it, so that we can come to the recogni2">iti2">ion that we are Di2">ISTi2">INCT from i2">it, and that i2">it i2">is NOT ourselves.

i2">In a sense, we have to "separate out" what i2">is REALLY YOU, your real self, and what i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion. "The body i2">is a dream", so i2">it i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion. i2">IF you are confusi2">ing i2">it wi2">ith your sense of self, you are losi2">ing si2">ight of your real self. Not bei2">ing clear about WHAT you are - i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it - you are unclear about what i2">is real and what i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion. You cannot BE a body i2">if you are to be real.

Thi2">is means that your ENTi2">IRE sense of i2">identi2">ity - self - what you are - has to SHi2">IFT away from the body, TOWARDS SPi2">IRi2">IT. To become spi2">iri2">it-i2">identi2">ifi2">ied. That i2">is the goal. To let go of the body enti2">irely. To be completely clear i2">it i2">is not you, and you do not need i2">it, because i2">it i2">is not part of who and what you are. God di2">id not create i2">it, so i2">it i2">is not really part of your real self., and does not exi2">ist i2">in reali2">ity or heaven.

The proper use of deni2">ial i2">is to not BELi2">IEVE that the body i2">is real, and to therefore deny i2">its exi2">istence, recogni2">izi2">ing i2">it i2">is not yourself or anythi2">ing real. The i2">improper use of deni2">ial i2">is to BELi2">IEVE the body i2">is real, whi2">ile tryi2">ing to deny i2">it exi2">ists, whi2">ich i2">is actually a double deni2">ial. To beli2">ieve bodi2">ies exi2">ists i2">is a deni2">ial of your spi2">iri2">it. To then sacri2">ifi2">ice the body i2">is deni2">ial on top of deni2">ial. We have to carefully di2">ismantle our beli2">ief that the body i2">is real i2">in the fi2">irst place, shi2">ift our sense of i2">identi2">ity back to i2">its natural God-gi2">iven state, and then accept the atonement truth that we are sti2">ill THE SPi2">IRi2">IT that God created, NOT a body whatsoever.

Upon reali2">izi2">ing you are spi2">iri2">it, clearly, and wi2">ith no delusi2">ion about bei2">ing a body, you may for a whi2">ile be usi2">ing the body. But now the body i2">is merely a TOOL. Si2">imi2">ilar to how a carpenter would use a hammer to construct a chai2">ir, he would not for a moment become delusi2">ional and beli2">ieve that he i2">IS the hammer. i2">It's just a devi2">ice, an i2">instrument, a pi2">iece of machi2">inery. You can operate i2">it and make i2">it do stuff but at no ti2">ime do you beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is YOUR SELF.

And havi2">ing recogni2">ized that your enti2">ire fulfi2">illment comes from rememberi2">ing who you ARE, you would no longer seek to use the body to GET anythi2">ing, to "pleasure you", or to enter i2">into i2">illusi2">ions of joi2">ini2">ing at a physi2">ical level - knowi2">ing i2">it i2">is not possi2">ible, or necessary. "Mi2">inds need not bodi2">ies to communi2">icate."

Full-on spi2">iri2">it-i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion, chri2">ist-i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion, son of God i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion, sets you free from death, from the world, and from all bodi2">ies forever. You are not a body, you are free, because you are sti2">ill as God created you. And those who know themselves are not confused about whether they are a walki2">ing flesh pri2">ison or not. Shi2">ifti2">ing to spi2">iri2">it means shi2">ifti2">ing away from EVERY sense of i2">identi2">ity associ2">iated wi2">ith the body form. Race, gender, sex, age, geneti2">ics, ancestry, shape, color, features, all of i2">it.

You are only what God created. You are a shi2">ini2">ing star i2">in heaven's womb. How could you be anythi2">ing but God's di2">ivi2">ine creati2">ion.

i2">I had no i2">idea, that i2">I had been spendi2">ing vast majori2">ity of my li2">ife attempti2">ing to use the ego's persona i2">in order to 'make li2">ife better'.

All the ti2">imes that i2">I people-pleased to try to make bad people go away.

All the ti2">imes that i2">I tri2">ied to fi2">ix everythi2">ing bad that ever seemed to be happeni2">ing.

All the ti2">imes that i2">I tri2">ied to appear to be i2">innocent and yet was acti2">ing li2">ike a vi2">icti2">im.

All the ti2">imes that i2">I tri2">ied to look pleasi2">ing to others so that they would maybe not hurt me.

All the ti2">imes that i2">I thought i2">I had to gi2">ive others what they wanted, and that i2">I was not i2">inherently wanted i2">in a lovi2">ing way - only i2">in terms of what others wanted to take from me.

There was even a ti2">ime i2">in my li2">ife that was especi2">ially low where i2">I felt so bad about myself, such low self 'esteem', i2">ie shame and unworthi2">iness, that i2">I beli2">ieved i2">I di2">id not deserve any love, and that the only people who would 'want me' were those who wanted to use me or take from me or have me be a slave to. i2">It was tremendously di2">isempoweri2">ing.

Ulti2">imately thi2">is was all because i2">I had such a strong beli2">ief that my personas (personi2">ii2">i?), were actually capable of i2">IMPROVi2">ING my li2">ife, maki2">ing thi2">ings more palatable, protecti2">ing me or defendi2">ing me from what i2">I di2">id not want. i2">I wanted to si2">imply shut out all the bad i2">icky stuff and focus solely on the good stuff.

And i2">I remember actually beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I was becomi2">ing 'very spi2">iri2">itual' by rejecti2">ing even the everyday egos of other people, whi2">ich i2">I relegated and judged and condemned for 'bei2">ing ego' or 'bei2">ing selfi2">ish' etc. Thi2">is sort of twi2">isted double-edged i2">idea of spi2">iri2">ituali2">ity arose out of thi2">is i2">in my late teens where i2">I was si2">imultaneously terri2">ifi2">ied and hounded by scary stuff i2">in my mi2">ind, whi2">ile thi2">inki2">ing that i2">I was also havi2">ing deep spi2">iri2">itual i2">insi2">ights. And maybe i2">I was i2">in a way, but i2">it was strongly duali2">isti2">ic, and my mi2">ind was very spli2">it. There was a 'ri2">ift' i2">in my li2">ife, a strong sense of separati2">ion, and that persona of exalted, lofty speci2">ialness, really holi2">ier-than thou, si2">imultaneously felt li2">ike i2">I was approachi2">ing death.

i2">I used the persona to get ri2">id of and attack everythi2">ing that i2">I was agai2">inst, beli2">ievi2">ing that what i2">I 'kept' was all good and acceptable and allowed. BUT, the more that i2">I got ri2">id of... and beli2">ieve me i2">I i2">included a LOT of stuff i2">in the li2">ist of what i2">I rejected, way above and beyond normal classi2">ifi2">icati2">ions (i2">ie most of the world), the more what i2">I had LEFT OVER got smaller and smaller. The more i2">I found myself i2">in a hole of i2">isolati2">ion and loneli2">iness. And the more i2">I became depressed. i2">I felt li2">ike thi2">is i2">impendi2">ing sense of everythi2">ing comi2">ing to an 'end'. My whole reali2">ity just felt li2">ike i2">it was saturated wi2">ith a sense of i2">impendi2">ing doom, wi2">ith no way out. Because i2">I was hi2">idi2">ing i2">in the persona and not bei2">ing authenti2">ic at all, even though i2">I felt justi2">ifi2">ied by my pai2">in.

i2">I was repressi2">ing so much and rejecti2">ing so much, perhaps i2">in attempt to heal myself of strong wounds, whi2">ich i2">I had projected onto everyone else, that i2">I was perhaps tryi2">ing to fi2">ind a way to get away from i2">it all and at least 'fake' that i2">I was heali2">ing, as a starti2">ing poi2">int. Very much fortunately, thi2">ings gradually started to turn around at that poi2">int, massi2">ively fuelled by my meeti2">ing my beloved wi2">ife who came i2">into the darkness li2">ike an angel of li2">ight. Then the heali2">ing commenced.

Now, looki2">ing back, i2">I can see how my enti2">ire ti2">ime was spent choosi2">ing the persona, putti2">ing on a fake i2">image, tryi2">ing to gi2">ive people what they wanted, tryi2">ing to please, tryi2">ing not to upset anyone, tryi2">ing to mai2">intai2">in status quo or 'peace' by never asserti2">ing myself or standi2">ing out, etc. i2">It was a rough lesson! And all of that resi2">isti2">ing, all of that... rejecti2">ing of li2">ife... merely di2">imi2">ini2">ished my own. Now i2">I am learni2">ing that usi2">ing the persona at all i2">is an attack on myself. i2">It i2">is a way to buy i2">into the beli2">ief that i2">I need to cover myself up because there's somethi2">ing wrong wi2">ith me. As self-love i2">increases - genui2">ine honest God-shared love - so too does the need for these masks di2">imi2">ini2">ish.

i2">I am seei2">ing clearer and clearer that all of the confi2">idence, all of the fearlessness, all of the certai2">inty, all of the clari2">ity and strength, that i2">I thought i2">I was goi2">ing to fi2">ind by usi2">ing rejecti2">ion, separati2">ion, persona deni2">ial, etc... are actually already i2">IN ME... i2">it was bei2">ing deni2">ied BY the use of the persona. i2">I just needed to learn WHERE the truth i2">is, what WHAT the truth i2">is. i2">I was looki2">ing i2">in the wrong place for my whole li2">ife - outsi2">ide of me, and was rejecti2">ing myself the enti2">ire ti2">ime.

Now i2">I see that i2">if you stand wi2">ith yourself i2">in your truth and don't reject yourself, you don't even NEED any of the persona masks, because you already HAVE what God has gi2">iven you, you already ARE powerful and safe and strong. You don't need to hi2">ide from people, because you are uncondi2">iti2">ionally lovi2">ing yourself. You're sayi2">ing, i2">I'm goi2">ing to ALWAYS be real, true and honest, i2">in all si2">ituati2">ions and wi2">ith all people. i2">I am ALWAYS goi2">ing to come from uncondi2">iti2">ional love no matter what. And i2">in that, you not only drop all of the efforts to 'get ri2">id of bad stuff', you also drop all of the efforts to 'choose only the good stuff'. And along wi2">ith that goes all sense of dependi2">ing on, or cari2">ing about, what anyone else thi2">inks of you or what you do. i2">It i2">is a freedom. i2">In a sense, an i2">independence - bei2">ing set free from the energy-sucki2">ing vampi2">ire that the ego i2">is and bei2">ing AVAi2">ILABLE now to God, to allow Hi2">im to li2">ive through you.

i2">It wasn't getti2">ing ri2">id of bad stuff that made my li2">ife better. Tryi2">ing to do that made i2">it worse. Accepti2">ing myself fully i2">is the goal.

i2">It's not where i2">I thought li2">ife would go. But thi2">is i2">is where i2">it i2">is headi2">ing for all of us. Back to our true selves. Back to love.

The answer i2">is love, whi2">ich i2">is God.

The act of putti2">ing di2">istance between myself and love has i2">introduced unlove i2">into my mi2">ind. My mi2">ind i2">is now uncertai2">in, doesn't know what the truth i2">is, i2">is confused and afrai2">id. Thi2">is i2">is what questi2">ions are made of.

You wi2">ill then seek to try to fi2">ind answers to these questi2">ions, thi2">inki2">ing they are anywhere other than i2">in God. You don't thi2">ink to reverse the questi2">ion and go back to where the questi2">ion sprung from. i2">Instead you try to keep the questi2">ion and answer i2">it.

You wi2">ill fai2">il, because the answer i2">is always love. Love i2">is the answer to all questi2">ions because love renders the questi2">ion unnecessary.

i2">If you have questi2">ions i2">it i2">is because you are separate from God. Returni2">ing to God i2">in some way, however small, wi2">ill shi2">ine a li2">ight whi2">ich wi2">ill help to di2">issolve the NEED for fi2">indi2">ing an answer, and the questi2">ion wi2">ill di2">isappear.

Especi2">ially i2">if you are wi2">illi2">ing to really commune wi2">ith God, and i2">if you went to God wi2">ith a whole bunch of questi2">ions i2">in your mi2">ind, you may noti2">ice that they all totally just di2">isappear. They don't necessary get the answers that you thought they must provi2">ide, and you di2">idn't necessari2">ily get pi2">ieces of i2">informati2">ion that sati2">isfy the questi2">ions.... the questi2">ions just vani2">ished.

i2">It seems i2">it would not be a bad i2">idea i2">if you are doubtful, afrai2">id, uncertai2">in or questi2">ioni2">ing, to just go joi2">in wi2">ith God for a whi2">ile. Soak up some love. Watch the questi2">ions di2">issolve, and you'll be better off.

i2">It was really love that you wanted to fi2">ind. Love was always the answer to your seeki2">ing.

"i2">I am not weak, but strong.

i2">I am not helpless, but all powerful.

i2">I am not li2">imi2">ited, but unli2">imi2">ited.

i2">I am not doubtful, but certai2">in.

i2">I am not an i2">illusi2">ion, but a reali2">ity.

i2">I cannot see i2">in darkness, but i2">in li2">ight."

More...

i2">I am not mortal but i2">immortal.

i2">I am not si2">ick but healthy.

i2">I am not dyi2">ing but eternal.

i2">I am not afrai2">id but confi2">ident.

i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im but empowered.

i2">I am not gui2">ilty but i2">innocent.

i2">I am not si2">inful but holy.

i2">I am not lost but uni2">ited.

i2">I am not alone but one.

i2">I am not forgotten but remembered.

i2">I am not upset but peaceful.

i2">I am not unhappy but joyful.

i2">I am not attacked but safe.

i2">I am not hopeless but grateful.

i2">I am not depri2">ived but abundant.

i2">I am not lacki2">ing but recei2">ivi2">ing.

i2">I am not hurt but i2">invulnerable.

i2">I am not sufferi2">ing but reli2">ieved.

i2">I am not affected but causal.

i2">I am not stuck but mi2">iraculous.

i2">I am not i2">impri2">isoned but free.

i2">I am not angry but calm.

i2">I am not condemned but forgi2">iven.

i2">I am not dark but li2">ight.

i2">I am not separate but whole.

i2">I am not an ego but as God created me.

i2">I am not confused but clear.

i2">I am not di2">iseased but healed.

i2">I am not broken but complete.

i2">I am not i2">isolated but expansi2">ive.

i2">I am not asleep but awake.

i2">I am not unconsci2">ious but aware.

i2">I am not deadly but harmless.

i2">I am not murderous but welcomi2">ing.

i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">imi2">izer but truly helpful.

i2">I am not mi2">isgui2">ided but di2">irected.

i2">I am not ugly but beauti2">iful.

i2">I am not depressed but happy.

i2">I am not unwi2">illi2">ing but wi2">illi2">ing.

i2">I am not resi2">istant but open.

i2">I am not i2">ill but well.

i2">I am not damned but saved.

i2">I am not i2">in exi2">ile but i2">in heaven.

i2">I am not a body but spi2">iri2">it.

i2">I am not a dream but God's creati2">ion.

i2">I am not fi2">icti2">ional but authenti2">ic.

i2">I am not di2">ivi2">ided but undi2">ivi2">ided.

i2">I am not adri2">ift but purposeful.

i2">I am not threatened but permanent.

i2">I am not rejected but loved.

i2">I am not abandoned but embraced.

i2">I am not i2">in hell but i2">in God.

i2">I am not offended but humored.

i2">I am not suspi2">ici2">ious but trusti2">ing.

i2">I am not vi2">ici2">ious but gentle.

i2">I am not ashamed but appreci2">iati2">ive.

i2">I am not envi2">ious but fulfi2">illed.

i2">I am not i2">idoli2">izi2">ing but wi2">ithi2">in.

i2">I am not heroi2">ic but saved.

i2">I am not horri2">ifi2">ied but passer-by.

i2">I am not judgi2">ing but forgi2">ivi2">ing.

i2">I am not hateful but generous.

i2">I am not resentful but thankful.

i2">I am not i2">in danger but protected.

i2">I am not di2">isgusti2">ing but acceptable.

i2">I am not beyond help but supported.

i2">I am not embarrassed but understood.

i2">I am not gri2">ievi2">ing but reuni2">ited.

i2">I am not controlled but powerful.

i2">I am not terri2">ifi2">ied but strong.

i2">I am not worri2">ied but fi2">illed wi2">ith fai2">ith.

i2">I am not dead but eternal li2">ife.

i2">I am not lonely but home wi2">ith God.

i2">I am not sad but overjoyed.

i2">I am not i2">insane but sane.

i2">I am not delusi2">ional but honest.

i2">I am not empty but i2">inspi2">ired.

i2">I am not i2">insecure but secure.

i2">I am not anxi2">ious but reassured.

i2">I am not cold but warm.

i2">I am not tense but relaxed.

i2">I am not di2">isturbed but qui2">iet.

i2">I am not stressed but at ease.

i2">I am not seri2">ious but playful.

i2">I am not harsh but ki2">ind.

i2">I am not weak but supernatural.

i2">I am not i2">in ti2">ime but i2">in eterni2">ity.

i2">I am not separate but wi2">ith God.

What i2">if when you become healed, the whole world i2">is transformed i2">in some way and i2">is a li2">ittle li2">ighter?

Thi2">is may sound radi2">ical, but i2">it does appear to be supported i2">in the course i2">in vari2">ious ways.

Jesus speaks of how when you are healed, others cannot be omi2">itted from your heali2">ing.

Jesus speaks of how i2">if you change your mi2">ind the WHOLE world must change. Thi2">is i2">isn't because i2">its ONLY your world, but because you are joi2">ined wi2">ith everyone.

Jesus speaks of how i2">if you joi2">in mi2">inds wi2">ith another person and deny/reject thei2">ir deni2">ial of health, they wi2">ill become healed, and cannot stay si2">ick unless you support thei2">ir beli2">ief.

Jesus also says that you are your brother's keeper. Meani2">ing that Hi2">IS condi2">iti2">ion i2">is YOUR responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity.

How i2">is thi2">is possi2">ible? i2">It seems i2">it i2">is only possi2">ible i2">if somehow, you and other people are actually connected together and SHARE somethi2">ing. Some part of your self i2">is thei2">ir self and vi2">ice versa. Meani2">ing that i2">if somethi2">ing appli2">ies to you, i2">it also appli2">ies to them.

i2">In the bi2">iggest pi2">icture thi2">is i2">is the Golden Rule, that what i2">is true of you i2">is true of others. And thi2">is rule i2">is God's law whi2">ich i2">is always i2">in effect everywhere on all levels at all ti2">imes, even i2">if we deny i2">it.

Let's frame i2">it thi2">is way. Let's say there i2">is a ki2">ind of collecti2">ive consci2">iousness. There's thi2">is vast sea of bei2">ing, i2">in whi2">ich there are concentrati2">ions of self, suffi2">ici2">iently organi2">ized as to be "i2">indi2">ivi2">iduals", yet i2">inti2">imately joi2">ined to the tapestry of everyone else's exi2">istence. Sort of li2">ike we're all one bi2">ig joi2">ined enti2">ity wi2">ith multi2">iple heads. A bi2">it li2">ike si2">iamese twi2">ins.

Thi2">is i2">is actually a vague and not accurate enough descri2">ipti2">ion but just for analogy's sake... thi2">is would mean that i2">if someone chooses to ri2">ise up, they tend to "drag" others up wi2">ith them. i2">If someone opens thei2">ir mi2">ind to truth, there i2">is sort of a ri2">ipple effect that propagates to ALL others.

What that must mean i2">is, any work you to do heal or love yourself, MUST overflow and affect others.

Jesus si2">imi2">ilarly talks about how you are the li2">ight of the world.

Jesus also talks about how i2">it only takes ONE teacher of God to save the world.

Jesus also talks about how the li2">ight i2">into your mi2">ind can shi2">ine i2">into another mi2">ind and enli2">ighten i2">it.

Gi2">iven the fact that then that there i2">is a SHARi2">ING component to all of us, there i2">is some part of us that i2">is ONE, joi2">ined, connected, i2">it becomes not only i2">impossi2">ible to do anythi2">ing truly i2">in i2">isolati2">ion, but also anythi2">ing you do DOES affect everyone else.

Thi2">is would be reflected i2">in statements li2">ike "There are no pri2">ivate thoughts" for example.

Now, thi2">is mi2">ight sound radi2">ical. i2">In fact i2">it wi2">ill. But thi2">is leads to the conclusi2">ion that i2">its possi2">ible for you to HEAL ANOTHER PERSON, i2">if you wi2">ill apply an appropri2">iate atti2">itude. Certai2">inly the person sti2">ill has free wi2">ill and can choose to resi2">ist, to stay anchored down i2">in the darkness. But you can at the very least offer love.

Love has such heali2">ing power i2">it can di2">islodge even the resi2">istance to truth i2">in another. As Jesus says, "the task of the mi2">iracle worker i2">is to deny the deni2">ial of truth." And also that there i2">is not really any poi2">int i2">in mi2">iracles at all unless they are able to affect someone who NEEDS heali2">ing, and thus i2">is i2">in a state of resi2">istance. Heali2">ing of the person would not be possi2">ible otherwi2">ise.

For thi2">is to be "ok", there must be some aspect of another person that i2">IS Li2">ITERALLY YOU. Or that i2">is so i2">inti2">imately shared wi2">ith you as to be essenti2">ially your self. i2">If you love someone "agai2">inst thei2">ir wi2">ill", i2">it can sti2">ill overthrow thei2">ir unlovi2">ing nature and heal them, to the degree i2">it can be accepted.

What's radi2">ical i2">is, thi2">is means that the condi2">iti2">ion of the body of another person, i2">is not enti2">irely "up to them". You have an i2">influence as well. For example "Forgi2">iveness i2">is not complete unless i2">it has brought a heali2">ing to both your brother and yourself." "He i2">is healed along wi2">ith you." "Mi2">iracles benefi2">it both the gi2">iver and the recei2">iver" etc.

There i2">is somethi2">ing about mi2">iracles that i2">is based on shari2">ing, and on returni2">ing to the state where you SHARE everythi2">ing wi2">ith others. That return to shari2">ing i2">is "joi2">ini2">ing". i2">In a shared state, your brother's health i2">is yours. i2">In fact "YOUR heali2">ing i2">is hi2">is comfort and Hi2">IS health."

Jesus even says that when YOU heal your mi2">ind and body and i2">it now represents and symboli2">izes the absence of attack, the presence of i2">innocence and love etc, the state of YOUR heali2">ing AFFECTS your brother, exonerates hi2">im, li2">ifts si2">in from hi2">is mi2">ind, heals hi2">im, and thus heals Hi2">IS body as well.

At the level of the ego and the physi2">ical world, the ego suggests that there i2">is total separati2">ion between you and others due to bodi2">ies. And thus changes i2">in you have NO effect on anyone. That your mi2">ind can change i2">is percepti2">ions of the world Wi2">ITHOUT changi2">ing the world. Thi2">is i2">is not what Jesus says i2">is possi2">ible, because i2">its not true that there i2">is absolute separati2">ion. Even the world's separati2">ion i2">is sli2">ightly joi2">ined, as proven by quantum entanglement and the holographi2">ic uni2">iverse theory etc. Even duali2">ity i2">is not qui2">ite fully duali2">ity.

Thi2">is means that we ARE all ALWAYS at least sli2">ightly joi2">ined. We are always part of the experi2">ience of others. And thi2">is reflects our status as co-creators. So i2">if someone has a si2">ickness, thi2">is means there i2">IS somethi2">ing i2">I can do about i2">it, because thei2">ir si2">ickness i2">is not ENTi2">IRELY thei2">ir own si2">ickness. Moreso, si2">ickness ari2">ises from the beli2">ief i2">in separati2">ion BETWEEN brothers, and i2">is a two-si2">ided sword whi2">ich attempts to accuse both.

The sense of separati2">ion that i2">it i2">is based on cannot be sustai2">ined i2">if i2">I choose to acknowledge that we are JOi2">INED and SHARi2">ING. i2">If i2">I do not AGREE to the separati2">ion-based si2">ickness, and do not uphold my end of keepi2">ing the di2">ivi2">isi2">ion between us mai2">intai2">ined, i2">it cannot be there and the person must be healed.

i2">If i2">I float my mi2">ind to a hi2">igh level of love and li2">ight, i2">I also become far more powerful i2">in my abi2">ili2">ity to "affect" others. Or rather, to extend and share my healed state and the heali2">ing agent of spi2">iri2">it Wi2">ITH the other person, li2">ifti2">ing them up also. Thi2">is i2">is how i2">it becomes possi2">ible to rai2">ise the dead for example, to Gi2">IVE li2">ife to others that they seem to lack, because you have i2">it. Thi2">is i2">is only possi2">ible i2">if we truly are joi2">ined together i2">in some way, whereby a person fundamentally has "access" to the bei2">ing and mi2">ind of another.

Total uncondi2">iti2">ional absolute shari2">ing i2">is the natural state of the Ki2">ingdom of God, whi2">ich all of Hi2">is chi2">ildren (as brothers) share forever. i2">It i2">is completely natural and real. "One mi2">ind i2">is all mi2">inds, one brother i2">is all brothers, such i2">is the truth." Whi2">ile i2">I have a self, a soul, i2">it i2">is STi2">ILL true that i2">I am "one wi2">ith" all other brothers, and thei2">ir souls are joi2">ined to mi2">ine i2">in such i2">inti2">imacy that we li2">iterally are FUSED together i2">in some way. And that fused shari2">ing "network" between us i2">is what Jesus calls the Chri2">ist Mi2">ind.

So truly, we are not separate people. We are i2">in fact totally the opposi2">ite. And that means that we can't consi2">ider ourselves to be totally i2">incapable of heali2">ing others. Whatever we do, however we focus, whatever we feel, i2">it's goi2">ing to i2">influence everyone i2">in the uni2">iverse. Thi2">is i2">is how holographi2">ic reali2">ity works. Each i2">indi2">ivi2">idual i2">is a whole i2">in and of themselves but shares the whole wi2">ith all the rest. i2">I am you and you are me and we are brothers eternally.

i2">It then i2">isn't a questi2">ion of whether you can heal another person or by what mechani2">ism thi2">is happens. i2">It's more a fact that you can't AVOi2">ID i2">influenci2">ing them. You share everythi2">ing. i2">If you have a bad day you drag everyone down. i2">If you have a good day you are the li2">ight of the world and li2">ift everyone up. People are li2">iterally li2">ightened and healed when you bri2">ing the li2">ight. "you ARE your brother's keeper."

Thi2">is i2">is perhaps why there the "great awakeni2">ing" happeni2">ing. i2">It's because there are contri2">ibuti2">ions from an i2">increasi2">ing number of awakeni2">ing i2">indi2">ivi2">iduals whose i2">influence i2">is more powerful than those who sleep. "Teachers of God wi2">ill take over the world because of thei2">ir strength." And so the enti2">ire world i2">is goi2">ing through a spi2">iri2">itual transformati2">ion.

Each ti2">ime that you have a lovi2">ing thought, each ti2">ime that you recogni2">ize joi2">ini2">ing and shari2">ing, each ti2">ime that you forgi2">ive, you are heali2">ing the enti2">ire sonshi2">ip. Because every si2">ingle chi2">ild of God shares i2">itself wi2">ith you. You are part of a vast network of i2">interconnected parts that depend on each other. You are responsi2">ible thus for your brother because what you choose ei2">ither blesses or curses hi2">im, ei2">ither heals hi2">im or compounds hi2">is si2">ickness.

Thi2">is ti2">ies further i2">into holy relati2">ionshi2">ips, i2">in that when you are holy towards another, and they thus become more holy, the shared state of joi2">ined consenti2">ing mi2">inds transcends thei2">ir i2">indi2">ivi2">idual contri2">ibuti2">ions. The fact that there are two souls shari2">ing everythi2">ing i2">is more powerful than any sense of "one i2">in i2">isolati2">ion". To be joi2">ined i2">is to share and to share i2">is to love and to love i2">is to wi2">ield God's mi2">iraculous power.

You do have the authori2">ity, power, and abi2">ili2">ity, connecti2">ions, and access, to heal other people i2">if you so choose. Shi2">ini2">ing your li2">ight of love i2">into thei2">ir mi2">inds cannot help but offer heali2">ing. Your prayers of love can li2">ift others up from despai2">ir. And through you the Holy Spi2">iri2">it can move mountai2">ins.

"HOW MANY TEACHERS OF GOD ARE NEEDED TO SAVE THE WORLD?

The answer to thi2">is questi2">ion i2">is - one.One wholly perfect teacher, whose learni2">ing i2">is complete, suffi2">ices. Thi2">is one, sancti2">ifi2">ied and redeemed, becomes the Self Who i2">is the Son of God.He who was always wholly spi2">iri2">it now no longer sees hi2">imself as a body, or even as i2">in a body.Therefore he i2">is li2">imi2">itless.And bei2">ing li2">imi2">itless, hi2">is thoughts are joi2">ined wi2">ith God's forever and ever. Hi2">is percepti2">ion of hi2">imself i2">is based upon God's Judgment, not hi2">is own.Thus does he share God's Wi2">ill, and bri2">ing Hi2">is thoughts to sti2">ill deluded mi2">inds. He i2">is forever one, because he i2">is as God created hi2">im. He has accepted Chri2">ist, and he i2">is saved."

---

"God's teachers appear to be many, for that i2">is what i2">is the world's need.Yet bei2">ing joi2">ined i2">in one purpose, and one they share wi2">ith God, how could they be separate from each other? What does i2">it matter i2">if they then appear i2">in many forms? Thei2">ir mi2">inds are one; thei2">ir joi2">ini2">ing i2">is complete. And God works through them now as one, for that i2">is what they are."

"i2">I must have deci2">ided wrongly because i2">I am NOT at peace."

Thi2">is means that i2">if i2">in ANY WAY i2">I am not at peace, am si2">ick, upset, unhappy, afrai2">id, i2">in pai2">in, sufferi2">ing or dyi2">ing, i2">it has come about ONLY because *i2">I* made a wrong deci2">isi2">ion. Thi2">is "consequence" i2">is showi2">ing up ONLY because of the power of my own deci2">isi2">ion. i2">I put i2">it there. i2">I made i2">it happen to myself. There are no other causes. i2">I am responsi2">ible for havi2">ing attacked myself. i2">I deci2">ided wrongly and i2">it produced these effects. i2">I must clai2">im responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity and ownershi2">ip of thi2">is power to choose what i2">I experi2">ience and stop blami2">ing others.

"i2">I made the deci2">isi2">ion myself, but i2">I can also deci2">ide otherwi2">ise."

Thi2">is i2">is further compounded i2">in thi2">is second li2">ine - that *i2">I* made the deci2">isi2">ion myself. Whi2">ich means, the secret to salvati2">ion, i2">I di2">id thi2">is to myself. i2">I am not unhappy because of somethi2">ing someone else di2">id or somethi2">ing that happened to me agai2">inst my wi2">ill. i2">I made a DECi2">ISi2">ION, on my own, whi2">ich was a poor deci2">isi2">ion, whi2">ich was a DELi2">IBERATE deci2">isi2">ion, to choose ego and sufferi2">ing, on purpose. i2">I have to own that. i2">I made myself suffer and unhappy. i2">I chose i2">it.

Then once i2">I can see that i2">I own that fully, i2">I can now reali2">ize that, i2">in spi2">ite of thi2">is, i2">I can change my mi2">ind and "choose agai2">in". Acknowledgi2">ing that i2">I chose thi2">is i2">in the fi2">irst place puts me i2">in touch wi2">ith the power to choose. Owni2">ing the choi2">ice i2">I MADE allows me to own my power of CHOOSi2">ING and therefore puts me back i2">in touch wi2">ith my power to choose a di2">ifferent experi2">ience. And whatever i2">I choose, i2">I wi2">ill recei2">ive.

"i2">I Wi2">ILL to deci2">ide otherwi2">ise, because i2">I WANT to be at peace."

Noti2">ice i2">in the early versi2">ion i2">it says i2">I *Wi2">ILL* to deci2">ide otherwi2">ise meani2">ing i2">I actually DO i2">IT, whereas i2">in the Fi2">IP versi2">ion they changed i2">it to "i2">I want" whi2">ich i2">is somewhat removed from acti2">ively DOi2">ING i2">it. And so now you are reali2">izi2">ing, that you no longer want what YOU CHOSE, you no longer want the sufferi2">ing YOU MADE HAPPEN, and so now you Wi2">ILL - choose - acti2">ively -towards a more sane deci2">isi2">ion whi2">ich wi2">ill results i2">in consequences of peace i2">instead of confli2">ict.

"i2">I do NOT feel gui2">ilty, because the Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo ALL the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">IF i2">I Wi2">ILL LET Hi2">IM."

You now recogni2">ize clearly that you have not si2">inned, and merely have been mi2">istaken. Mi2">istakes can be corrected and they call for forgi2">iveness, not puni2">ishment. Therefore you do not need to be gui2">ilty, whi2">ich i2">isn't helpi2">ing anyone. Gui2">ilt i2">is not love or a change of mi2">ind. i2">I also don't have to worry about all the gi2">iant fuck of a mess that i2">I made, myself, that i2">I di2">id to myself, even i2">if that means havi2">ing attacked myself and made myself si2">ick or sufferi2">ing or i2">in pai2">in or half dead.

Whatever the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion were, whatever the MANi2">IFEST EFFECTS were, THEY can be undone. AND they can be undone BY the Holy Spi2">iri2">it through supernatural heali2">ing means. And the only thi2">ing remai2">ini2">ing to ALLOW thi2">is to occur i2">is my own wi2">illi2">ingness to LET Hi2">IM HELP ME. There i2">is no consequence He cannot undo, i2">includi2">ing i2">incurable di2">iseases, and i2">includi2">ing death.

"i2">I Wi2">ILL to let Hi2">im by allowi2">ing Hi2">im to deci2">ide for God for me."

Agai2">in thi2">is says that i2">I Wi2">ILL, whereas i2">I thi2">ink i2">in a later versi2">ion i2">it was changed to "i2">I choose". We need to reali2">ize that Wi2">ILLi2">INGNESS i2">is very i2">important because i2">it i2">indi2">icates full commi2">itment and POWER. Your choi2">ice and your wi2">ill are very powerful and your mi2">ind i2">is powerful. Thi2">is i2">isn't merely an i2">inert, neutral, powerless small deci2">isi2">ion. i2">It i2">is a choi2">ice to OPT for and CLAi2">IM a di2">ifferent experi2">ience. i2">If you change your mi2">ind, the whole world must change. You are ruler of the uni2">iverse! Nothi2">ing happens that you do not choose and whatever you choose MUST HAPPEN.

Addi2">iti2">ionally, when you ALLOW Holy Spi2">iri2">it, you i2">invi2">ite hi2">im i2">into you, you let hi2">im help you, you ask for Hi2">is heali2">ing and you RECEi2">IVE the truth (atonement), He can AND Wi2">ILL AND DOES come i2">into you and can heal ALL OF THE CONSEQUENCES that you produced i2">in your wrong deci2">isi2">ion. He can heal all pai2">in and si2">ickness and sufferi2">ing. And you must be Wi2">ILLi2">ING to let hi2">im, to trust hi2">im, to allow hi2">im, to gi2">ive hi2">im permi2">issi2">ion, i2">in order to have hi2">im take your i2">INVi2">ITATi2">ION and come i2">in to heal you and clean up the mess.

He i2">is here to HELP YOU and you do not have to tolerate sufferi2">ing of ANY ki2">ind, and you do not have to put up wi2">ith consequences you caused, and you do not have to stay si2">ick, and you do not have to do thi2">is all on your own. Allow yourself to RECEi2">IVE THE LOVE that you now choose and Wi2">ILL and accept as a sane deci2">isi2">ion. Love wi2">ill heal you AND your body.

There was a defi2">ini2">ite ti2">ime when i2">it fi2">irst occurred to me that i2">I am not a body. i2">I was si2">itti2">ing at a bus-stop wai2">iti2">ing for the bus ri2">ide to or from college. i2">I was probably 19 or so. i2">I was there alone and was looki2">ing across a fi2">ield at some traffi2">ic passi2">ing by, ponderi2">ing perhaps symboli2">ically from a detached perspecti2">ive what all these people were doi2">ing i2">in thei2">ir li2">ives. That's when i2">it suddenly hi2">it me, li2">ike, oh my God, i2">I'm not a body!

i2">It wasn't a complete awakeni2">ing as such, i2">I di2">idn't suddenly reli2">inqui2">ish every si2">ingle way i2">in whi2">ich i2">I thi2">ink of others and myself as bodi2">ies, but just the i2">idea of i2">it was gi2">iven bi2">irth, perhaps marki2">ing the begi2">inni2">ing of a spi2">iri2">itual adventure i2">in self explorati2">ion. i2">It was li2">ike a fi2">irst step through a doorway i2">into a whole new way of relati2">ing to myself.

Jesus knew fully that he was not a body. He was capable of mani2">ifesti2">ing and demateri2">iali2">izi2">ing hi2">is body, and i2">in fact was capable of re-mani2">ifesti2">ing di2">ifferent bodi2">ies dependi2">ing on who he was wi2">ith. That's what becomes possi2">ible when you are completely free of all confusi2">ion about what you are - that you or others are not a body at all. That's what i2">it means to have mastery over i2">it and freedom from i2">it. i2">It no longer li2">imi2">its you or defi2">ines your i2">identi2">ity.

i2">In order to be i2">invulnerable and not a vi2">icti2">im of the world i2">I see, i2">it i2">is necessary to recogni2">ize that no-one ever does anythi2">ing to me.

Part of thi2">is recogni2">iti2">ion must also entai2">il recogni2">izi2">ing that, therefore, i2">I never do anythi2">ing to anyone else.

Therefore i2">if i2">I want to experi2">ience li2">ife i2">in whi2">ich nothi2">ing happens to me agai2">inst my wi2">ill, i2">I must also be wi2">illi2">ing to not attempt to force my wi2">ill onto other people.

i2">If i2">I am tryi2">ing to control or mani2">ipulate or stop or fi2">ix someone then i2">I'm not allowi2">ing them total freedom. They must be acknowledged as bei2">ing completely free to choose whatever they want, and that i2">it i2">is absolutely none of my busi2">iness.

Only i2">in granti2">ing such a full freedom to someone, can i2">I also access the fact that, therefore, i2">I too have the freedom to choose absolutely whatever i2">I want, and that my own choi2">ice i2">is absolutely none of anyone else's busi2">iness.

Not bei2">ing vi2">icti2">imi2">ized by the world goes hand i2">in hand wi2">ith not bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">imi2">izer of the world.

i2">It i2">is not possi2">ible to be a vi2">icti2">im wi2">ithout bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">imi2">izer.

i2">It i2">is not possi2">ible to be a vi2">icti2">imi2">izer wi2">ithout bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">im.

Any attempt i2">I make to see someone else as a vi2">icti2">im of myself, whi2">ich means, i2">I am not allowi2">ing them total free wi2">ill, am not acknowledgi2">ing thei2">ir free wi2">ill, and am tryi2">ing to i2">influence thei2">ir free wi2">ill, not only causes me to see them as a vi2">icti2">im but also to see myself as one.

i2">I wi2">ill attempt to control thei2">ir wi2">ill i2">in an attempt to manage my percepti2">ion of bei2">ing vi2">icti2">imi2">ized by them, to try to "stop them" vi2">icti2">imi2">izi2">ing/causi2">ing me, even though thi2">is reacti2">ion i2">is purely based on my own mi2">is-percepti2">ion that they are vi2">icti2">imi2">izi2">ing me (because i2">I am vi2">icti2">imi2">izi2">ing myself) i2">in the fi2">irst place.

i2">It i2">is not possi2">ible to affect the free wi2">ill of another wi2">ithout i2">it affecti2">ing my own wi2">ill. As i2">I see them i2">I wi2">ill see myself. My attempt to vi2">icti2">imi2">ize them wi2">ill vi2">icti2">imi2">ize myself. And i2">I wi2">ill have then done thi2">is to myself.

When i2">I can accept the total freedom of another and let them have thei2">ir total freedom and not try to control them at all, i2">I wi2">ill si2">imultaneously stop tryi2">ing to control myself. i2">I wi2">ill acknowledge my own freedom. i2">I have a vested i2">interest i2">in allowi2">ing others to be as they choose, regardless of thei2">ir choi2">ice, si2">ince i2">it acknowledges my own freedom uncondi2">iti2">ionally.

Thi2">is marks the end of vi2">icti2">imi2">izati2">ion. i2">It marks the end of bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">im.

A vi2">icti2">im i2">is someone who tri2">ies to control others.

A vi2">icti2">imi2">izer i2">is someone who beli2">ieves other control them.

They're both the same thi2">ing.

Vi2">icti2">ims and vi2">icti2">imi2">izati2">ion i2">is i2">impossi2">ible when there i2">is a complete recogni2">iti2">ion of the freedom of wi2">ill that we all equally enjoy, our God gi2">iven natural ri2">ight to freely create and choose and extend. God gave free wi2">ill to all hi2">is creati2">ions to necessari2">ily endow them wi2">ith the abi2">ili2">ity to create as freely as Hi2">imself. The ego i2">is every attempt to deny thi2">is and oppose i2">it.

All vi2">icti2">imi2">izati2">ion and vi2">icti2">imhood wi2">ill end completely i2">in thi2">is acceptance of the mutual freedom of all brothers i2">includi2">ing me and you. There can be no vi2">icti2">ims or vi2">icti2">imi2">izers when the free wi2">ill of all concerned i2">is fully recogni2">ized. The secret to salvati2">ion i2">is that we are only doi2">ing thi2">is to ourselves. We are our own worst enemy, and our own savi2">ior.

i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im of the world i2">I see because i2">I am not vi2">icti2">imi2">izi2">ing the world i2">I see. i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im of the world i2">I see because i2">I am not vi2">icti2">imi2">izi2">ing myself.

The body you have, no matter what i2">its i2">issues are, they are not who you are. Thankfully, you are i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it. You're just usi2">ing thi2">is body temporari2">ily as a vehi2">icle to i2">interact wi2">ith the world.

You've had other bodi2">ies of vari2">ious ki2">inds. Memory of that fact would i2">immedi2">iately help you to look at your current body as not a fi2">ixed part of your i2">identi2">ity, but just a 'house' that you temporari2">ily li2">ive i2">in.

You have attri2">ibuted vari2">ious properti2">ies to your sense of self based on the body you have, how i2">it looks, what color i2">it i2">is, how i2">it moves, what i2">its problems are, but none of those thi2">ings really are to do wi2">ith who you really are.

Just because you, or your loved ones, are showi2">ing up i2">IN a body, doesn't mean you or they ARE a body.

i2">If you could keep i2">in mi2">ind that you are not a body and "no-body" else i2">is ei2">ither, then you'd see that i2">it's ki2">ind of funny how we all keep goi2">ing around acti2">ing as though what appli2">ies to our body appli2">ies to us.

We groom our body, decorate our body, look at our body i2">in the mi2">irror, do wei2">ird thi2">ings wi2">ith our body, look at other bodi2">ies, noti2">ice what other bodi2">ies are decorated as, and generally speak to other bodi2">ies as though they are people. But i2">it's what's i2">insi2">ide the body that gi2">ives i2">it li2">ife - spi2">iri2">it - whi2">ich wi2">ithout i2">it the body would be just an empty, li2">ifeless host.

Thi2">is i2">is part of learni2">ing to see yourself and others as Chri2">ist. Chri2">ist i2">is not a body. Overlooki2">ing the body and not bei2">ing di2">istracted by i2">it i2">is part of forgi2">iveness. Not regardi2">ing people as bodi2">ies i2">is part of forgi2">iveness. Not i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing yourself as a body i2">is part of forgi2">iveness.

At some poi2">int you're goi2">ing to stop usi2">ing thi2">is body, probably, unless you somehow convert i2">it i2">into a hi2">igher form, and then when you stop usi2">ing i2">it and carry on your way, you'll recogni2">ize how i2">it i2">is not who you are.

i2">It's li2">ike putti2">ing on some clothes and then starti2">ing to beli2">ieve that you are the clothes. i2">It's easy to do, gi2">iven how i2">inti2">imate you are wi2">ith the body and how closely i2">it seems to match your every i2">intenti2">ion. You are creati2">ing i2">it, after all. But i2">it's not your self.

Almost everyone i2">in the world remarks about how 'you' look, what 'you' di2">id, where 'you' went etc... really all referri2">ing to the "hero of the dream" - the exalted body whi2">ich everyone i2">is worshi2">ippi2">ing. The body i2">is a false i2">idol, and just an i2">instrument to use temporari2">ily.

i2">It i2">is by overlooki2">ing form and recogni2">izi2">ing/knowi2">ing the true nature of your i2">identi2">ity and the i2">identi2">ity of others, not confused wi2">ith bodi2">ies, that mi2">iracles are possi2">ible.

Mi2">iracle pri2">inci2">iple 20: "Mi2">iracles reawaken the awareness that the spi2">iri2">it, not the body, i2">is the altar of truth"

Mi2">iracle pri2">inci2">iple 42: "A major contri2">ibuti2">ion of mi2">iracles i2">is thei2">ir strength i2">in releasi2">ing you from your false sense of i2">isolati2">ion"

Mi2">iracle pri2">inci2">iple 44: "The mi2">iracle i2">is an expressi2">ion of an i2">inner awareness of Chri2">ist and the acceptance of Hi2">is Atonement"

Mi2">iracle pri2">inci2">iple 50: "The mi2">iracle compares what you have made wi2">ith creati2">ion, accepti2">ing what i2">is i2">in accord wi2">ith i2">it as true"

"i2">I am not a body, i2">I am free" - ACi2">IM

Quote: "Freedom must be i2">impossi2">ible as long as you percei2">ive a body as yourself. The body i2">is a li2">imi2">it. Who would seek for freedom i2">in a body looks for i2">it where i2">it can not be found. The mi2">ind can be made free when i2">it no longer sees i2">itself as i2">in a body, fi2">irmly ti2">ied to i2">it and sheltered by i2">its presence. i2">If thi2">is were the truth, the mi2">ind were vulnerable i2">indeed! "

So often i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I know. i2">I thi2">ink that i2">I have the facts or the i2">informati2">ion. Or that i2">I have experi2">iene. Or that my assumpti2">ions are true. Or that i2">I know better than someone else. Or that they are wrong so i2">I must be ri2">ight.

But i2">I am remi2">inded to ask myself, do i2">I really, REALLY know? i2">I mean, do i2">I actually have di2">irect knowlege that thi2">is thi2">ing i2">is true, or even an abi2">ili2">ity to do so, or am i2">I just maki2">ing shi2">it up as i2">I go along?

The other day i2">I was worryi2">ing about an outcome i2">in a si2">ituati2">ion whi2">ich i2">I felt "sure" was goi2">ing to go only one possi2">ible way. Holy Spi2">iri2">it sai2">id, "you don’t know".

At fi2">irst i2">I could not accept that i2">I di2">id not know. i2">I thought i2">I Di2">ID know. i2">I thought i2">I had a very good story or reason to explai2">in what was obvi2">iously goi2">ing to occur. But... i2">I allowed myself to questi2">ion that. Di2">id i2">I REALLY know, or was thi2">is just my best educated guess? Di2">id i2">I REALLY know, or was i2">I just relyi2">ing on my ego i2">intellect or my past or my judgements to assume i2">I know?

And gradually over the course of a few mi2">inutes, as i2">I allowed myself to questi2">ion thi2">is... to consi2">ider,... maybe i2">I do not actually KNOW.... maybe i2">I am just maki2">ing a strong guess and passi2">ing i2">it off as knowledge, gradually what at fi2">irst seemed li2">ike a fact "orbi2">iti2">ing" off i2">in the di2">istance poki2">ing fun at my convi2">icti2">ions, became much more centrally accepted wi2">ithi2">in.

i2">I had to admi2">it. i2">I actually do not know. i2">I do not know what i2">is goi2">ing to happen. There was, along wi2">ith that, a ki2">ind of peace, because now the whole drama story of doom and gloom of what was "sure to happen" no longer had a basi2">is. Wi2">ithout the assumed outcome i2">I was tryi2">ing to control and avoi2">id to prevent i2">its awfulness, maybe i2">I di2">idn’t need to do anythi2">ing at all. Maybe i2">I si2">imply was mi2">istaken and maybe there i2">is i2">in fact a possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity and a hope that i2">I had not consi2">idered.

Whi2">ile i2">I am busy focusi2">ing on dependi2">ing on my own self and my own knowi2">ing and my own fi2">iguri2">ing out, i2">I am not bei2">ing open to the facts or reali2">ity. i2">I am bei2">ing closed off and not li2">isteni2">ing. Nor am i2">I leavi2">ing room open for a mi2">iracle, for heali2">ing, or for completely unexpected outcomes. Possi2">ibi2">ili2">iti2">ies that i2">I had not even thought were possi2">ible.

Whi2">ile i2">it’s i2">important to recogni2">ize that i2">I do not know "anythi2">ing", the key here i2">is i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing that i2">I do not know anythi2">ing *i2">independently* from God. So i2">if i2">I am trusti2">ing my own know-how and pri2">ide, then i2">I am not knowi2">ing the truth. i2">If i2">I put that asi2">ide and admi2">it that the stuff i2">I thought i2">I knew, was not real knowledge, i2">I actually become open TO real knowledge.

We are to gi2">ive up fake knowi2">ing. We are to surrender tryi2">ing to thi2">ink we know thi2">ings whi2">ich are not really truth. We are to let go of false beli2">iefs whi2">ich masquerade as very certai2">in convi2">icti2">ions and defi2">ini2">ite consequences. But as we gi2">ive these up, thi2">is fake knowledge, thi2">is fake certai2">inty, thi2">is fear whi2">ich pretends not to be fear, thi2">is predi2">icti2">ion whi2">ich i2">is si2">imply i2">imagi2">ined and unreal, i2">it makes way for reveali2">ing TRUE knowledge.

True knowledge i2">is the abi2">ili2">ity to know God, to trust God, to not need to control thi2">ings, to allow and accept reali2">ity, rather than tryi2">ing to i2">interpret i2">it change i2">it or form false beli2">iefs about i2">it. Be wi2">illi2">ing to admi2">it you know nothi2">ing, and i2">it wi2">ill open the doorway to knowi2">ing everythi2">ing there really i2">is to know.

There i2">is some small part i2">in the course where Jesus talks about how, at a very hi2">igh level, i2">in the transi2">iti2">ion between ego and spi2">iri2">it, more or less upon enteri2">ing heaven, that i2">it becomes possi2">ible to li2">iterally di2">irectly know everythi2">ing, experi2">ienti2">ially, rather than havi2">ing to rely on your own "accumulated" scraps and memori2">ies and learni2">ing. We have taught ourselves a lot of bullshi2">it whi2">ich we have to become wi2">illi2">ing to gi2">ive up, recogni2">izi2">ing that i2">it i2">is just "made up". Stuff that we make up i2">is not truth. We do not really *know*, when we are trusti2">ing these beli2">iefs.

Beli2">iefs are not truth. Beli2">iefs are not knowledge. i2">I do not know what anythi2">ing i2">is for. i2">I do not know what anythi2">ing i2">includi2">ing thi2">is means.

i2">I don't want to let go of attachments because i2">I don't trust that everythi2">ing wi2">ill be okay unless i2">I am i2">in control.

Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is aski2">ing us to be set free (!) of the need to have outcomes be controlled, or follow what we thi2">ink i2">is i2">in our best i2">interests. We want to be i2">in the dri2">ivers seat wi2">ith our ego, di2">irecti2">ing thi2">ings and enforci2">ing thi2">ings, tryi2">ing to resi2">ist what i2">IS and i2">instead enforce what we THi2">INK thi2">ings should be.

Thi2">is i2">is all about ego control and mani2">ipulati2">ion. i2">I want to control so that i2">I can seem to 'make happen' a parti2">icular si2">ituati2">ion. i2">I don't trust that thi2">ings wi2">ill be okay unless i2">I don't do thi2">is. i2">I do thi2">is because i2">I've become convi2">inced that i2">I NEED the si2">ituati2">ion to be thi2">is way. i2">I thi2">ink i2">I have thi2">is need because i2">I've got some ki2">ind of funky ego beli2">ief telli2">ing me that i2">if thi2">ings AREN'T thi2">is way then i2">I wi2">ill not be happy, or getti2">ing what i2">I want or need. i2">ie i2">I'm goi2">ing to lose or have lack or have somethi2">ing taken away i2">if i2">I don't make thi2">ings be a certai2">in way.

So thi2">is really boi2">ils down to fear, not feeli2">ing safe, and the beli2">ief that we need to put up defenses agai2">inst what's happeni2">ing i2">in order to protect ourselves from attack. The trouble i2">is that these very mechani2">isms, whi2">ich are mechani2">isms of control and resi2">istance, are the very thi2">ings whi2">ich CREATE a beli2">ief i2">in attack because they ARE an attack.

Each ti2">ime you create an expectati2">ion, or i2">invest i2">into attai2">ini2">ing a parti2">icular outcome, you are setti2">ing yourself up for fai2">ilure. There's a good chance events are not goi2">ing to go the way you expect them to, and when that happens you wi2">ill react unhappi2">ily. There i2">is also a chance thi2">ings wi2">ill go the way you want, whi2">ich i2">is the ego's carrot on a sti2">ick, and then you thi2">ink you have somehow 'won' the pri2">ize of getti2">ing away wi2">ith murder. But i2">its a gamble that you wi2">ill li2">ikely at some poi2">int lose.

These i2">investments i2">into NEEDi2">ING thi2">ings to be a certai2">in way, to fulfi2">ill some ki2">ind of strange beli2">ief that 'then i2">I wi2">ill be happy' or 'i2">I can't be happy when thi2">ings aren't the way i2">I want them to be', 'attach' us to these outcomes. We're pi2">inni2">ing our hopes on them. We're dependi2">ing on them. We're relyi2">ing on thi2">ings goi2">ing the way we want and bui2">ild up all thi2">is fear and anti2">ici2">ipati2">ion about i2">it turni2">ing out.

Thi2">is 'attaches' our mi2">ind to these outcomes because i2">if we DEPEND on these outcomes/events/people for happi2">iness then we're HOLDi2">ING ONTO the ego's false promi2">ise or fantasy that GETTi2">ING thi2">is outcome wi2">ill bri2">ing you salvati2">ion. Salvati2">ion wi2">ill free you from whatever supposed 'need' you thi2">ink you have and deli2">iver you from the 'sufferi2">ing' that you thi2">ink you wi2">ill experi2">ience, or maybe even do experi2">ience, when outcomes aren't the way you want them to be.

So really thi2">is i2">is all about looki2">ing for salvati2">ion i2">in the wrong place. Putti2">ing our fai2">ith i2">into bei2">ing CAUSED to be happy when certai2">in thi2">ings happen or certai2">in events li2">ine up i2">in a certai2">in way. We're dependi2">ing on EXTERNAL stuff to change what our experi2">ience i2">is, and are relyi2">ing on someone or somethi2">ing else to happen TO us to i2">indi2">irectly CHANGE us i2">into the desi2">irable state we're tryi2">ing to achi2">ieve. Thi2">is i2">indi2">irectness i2">is passi2">ive and i2">is also the role of the vi2">icti2">im, i2">in whi2">ich you are someti2">imes at ri2">isk of attack and someti2">imes at ri2">isk of reward, and are gambli2">ing that i2">if you steer thi2">ings toward reward then you can avoi2">id attack. But both are dependi2">ing on the ego and both depend on external, separate thi2">ings, to come along and affect you i2">in a preferable way.

You can only be affected by thi2">ings i2">if you are not bei2">ing responsi2">ible for yourself. You can only be changed by external thi2">ings i2">if you are not bei2">ing who you really are. You can only have your happi2">iness affected posi2">iti2">ively or negati2">ively by outsi2">ide i2">influences i2">if you are not aware that Joy i2">is wi2">ithi2">in you and comes from God and can never be removed. And you wi2">ill only seek and not fi2">ind salvati2">ion i2">in these external outcomes i2">if you are not fi2">indi2">ing contentment and needlessness wi2">ithi2">in yourself. You wi2">ill keep seeki2">ing (attachi2">ing to/dependi2">ing upon) and not fi2">indi2">ing (losi2">ing/sufferi2">ing) whi2">ile you beli2">ieve that you have a real need that i2">is unfulfi2">illed and that needs to or can be fulfi2">illed (fi2">indi2">ing salvati2">ion) by some external, separate source beyond your control. And so then your attempt to control i2">is an attempt to control what i2">is beyond your control, to try to coerce i2">it i2">into becomi2">ing what you want (your savi2">ior).

So i2">it really all comes back to whether you beli2">ieve that you don't have God. Or that you are not as God created you. Or that you're lacki2">ing or fai2">ili2">ing i2">in some way or have an absence of sustenance from God. i2">If you're `i2">in need` then you wi2">ill seek and you wi2">ill project and you wi2">ill seek for false i2">idols and you wi2">ill attach yourself and become DEPENDENT UPON external stuff. Thi2">is dependency i2">is a form of slavery and i2">is a form of losi2">ing yourself or 'transferri2">ing' yourself i2">into the external thi2">ing. And thi2">is Bi2">INDS you to the ego's `level 1` world of duali2">ity and sufferi2">ing. i2">It bi2">inds you to the physi2">ical form and i2">it bi2">inds you to a separate exi2">istence. All of your external dependenci2">ies and false needs keep you wei2">ighed down i2">in the quagmi2">ire of darkness i2">in the ego's world, and prevent you from stayi2">ing squarely i2">in the Holy Spi2">iri2">it.

So we need to let go of mentally and emoti2">ionally dependi2">ing on anythi2">ing other than God, essenti2">ially. Dependi2">ing on God means looki2">ing to God for fulfi2">illment and happi2">iness and meeti2">ing all needs and TRUSTi2">ING that you wi2">ill be taken care of i2">if you let go of tryi2">ing to care of everythi2">ing yourself. But i2">it does i2">involve a surrender. You have to let go of your ti2">ight gri2">ip of fear that says... i2">I won't fully let go because i2">if i2">I do, shi2">it i2">is goi2">ing to happen that i2">I don't want... whi2">ich really means, shi2">it wi2">ill happen that does not ali2">ign wi2">ith your ego's plans for what i2">IT thi2">inks wi2">ill bri2">ing you salvati2">ion, whi2">ich i2">is GROSSLY Mi2">ISTAKEN and actually leadi2">ing you i2">into sufferi2">ing. Holy Spi2">iri2">it's plan i2">is better ;-)

So i2">it's really about learni2">ing to trust Holy Spi2">iri2">it, to develop a trust that you CAN and should let go and allow and accept i2">in order to RECEi2">IVE LOVE and SUPPORT and HOLY HELP, and that i2">it i2">is SAFE to do so, and that i2">it does not mean horri2">ible sufferi2">ing wi2">ill follow. Goi2">ing from fearfully holdi2">ing on to surrenderi2">ing and letti2">ing go takes a bi2">it of a leap of fai2">ith. But once you've taken i2">it, you'll let God be on your si2">ide. And you have mi2">ighty compani2">ions.

There are two sort of perspecti2">ives relati2">ing to percepti2">ion that we seem to fall i2">into.

1. There i2">is an objecti2">ive world wi2">ith our percepti2">ion OF i2">it, and what we project ONTO i2">it i2">is to do wi2">ith how we i2">interpret i2">it.

2. There i2">isn't an objecti2">ive world and we're just dreami2">ing i2">it up and not projecti2">ing anythi2">ing "onto" i2">it because we're projecti2">ing i2">IT i2">in the fi2">irst place.

i2">I am comi2">ing to see that nei2">ither of these i2">is correct.

There i2">is a thi2">ird possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity.

3. i2">I am havi2">ing a dream, whi2">ich i2">is surroundi2">ing me wi2">ith a fi2">icti2">ional envi2">ironment whi2">ich i2">is comi2">ing from my mi2">ind. Wi2">ithout my dreami2">ing of i2">it - my projecti2">ing i2">it - there wouldn't be any world here at all. There i2">is NO objecti2">ive world. There i2">is ONLY a subjecti2">ive world. My projecti2">ion makes my percepti2">ion and makes "the world i2">I see."

The i2">important di2">isti2">incti2">ion here i2">is that the world i2">I am projecti2">ing/dreami2">ing, i2">is comi2">ing from my mi2">ind and SEEMS to be an objecti2">ive world. AND yet at the SAME Ti2">IME, thi2">is world i2">is bei2">ing projected BY me. So i2">it seems to be both objecti2">ive and subjecti2">ive.

The key i2">is that the objecti2">ive part does not exi2">ist at all, and that's what ACi2">IM means by "there i2">is no world apart from what you wi2">ish", and wi2">ishes are dreams.

So i2">it's not just to do wi2">ith hey, i2">I'm projecti2">ing somethi2">ing "onto" the objecti2">ive world. i2">It's that li2">iterally i2">I am projecti2">ing the world i2">ITSELF - that i2">I thi2">ink i2">is an objecti2">ive world - wi2">ith my dreami2">ing mi2">ind. And when my mi2">ind dreams of a di2">ifferent world, i2">I project out an enti2">irely di2">ifferent world. The old world doesn't transform because i2">it has no objecti2">ive reali2">ity or conti2">inui2">ity of i2">its own. i2">I just project a di2">ifferent dream and stop projecti2">ing the old one.

When we go i2">into false percepti2">ion, however, there i2">is an addi2">iti2">ional LAYER of projecti2">ion, whi2">ich seems to project "onto" the dream. Li2">ike, you're fi2">illed wi2">ith anger and hate and so thi2">is seems li2">ike i2">it projects "onto" the objecti2">ive world. But the objecti2">ive world i2">itself i2">is sti2">ill bei2">ing projected from your mi2">ind at that same ti2">ime. So i2">in truth, you are not really projecti2">ing ONTO the world, you are projecti2">ing the world and your "bad projecti2">ing" i2">is actually changi2">ing the world and maki2">ing i2">it appear li2">ike a bad world to you.

i2">In thi2">is way, i2">it would appear that ACi2">IM i2">is never really talki2">ing about "projecti2">ing onto" anythi2">ing. i2">It's enti2">irely talki2">ing about you projecti2">ing the world i2">itself, di2">irectly, and your "bad atti2">itude" projects what later i2">is percei2">ived to be a world that you seem to experi2">ience i2">in a negati2">ive way. You thi2">ink there i2">is some other objecti2">ive world that i2">is "not negati2">ive" hi2">idi2">ing underneath your negati2">ivi2">ity, but there i2">isn't! You thi2">ink you're projecti2">ing ONTO the world, but i2">in fact you're not. You're projecti2">ing the world, peri2">iod. Projecti2">ion makes percepti2">ion. Not "projecti2">ion makes percepti2">ion makes projecti2">ion makes percepti2">ion."

Just as at ni2">ight when you dream, your mi2">ind forms en enti2">ire envi2">ironment/world fi2">illed wi2">ith bui2">ildi2">ings and people and stuff, and you seem to show up as a si2">ingle body person. But your mi2">ind i2">is maki2">ing the world AND your body person. How the body person seems to experi2">ience the dream i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion because the person i2">is actually MAKi2">ING the envi2">ironment. Any attacker i2">in the dream i2">is you. People i2">in the dream are fi2">igments of your own mi2">ind. i2">It's the same wi2">ith "waki2">ing li2">ife". We are li2">iterally dreami2">ing of an enti2">ire uni2">iverse.

Someti2">imes i2">I want to be a healer. i2">I want to be the one that helps or fi2">ixes or heals someone. But i2">in thi2">is there i2">is an authori2">ity problem. i2">I seem to beli2">ieve that i2">I must be the 'source' of thi2">is heali2">ing, or that i2">I must do somethi2">ing of myself. Even i2">if i2">I am perhaps i2">involvi2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">in thi2">is effort, i2">it'll sti2">ill be as though i2">I'm tryi2">ing to get Hi2">im to do what i2">I thi2">ink needs to be done.

Recently i2">I've been i2">in a si2">ituati2">ion where someone was si2">ick and i2">I could not do anythi2">ing whatsoever to help i2">it. i2">I tri2">ied. A lot. But nothi2">ing worked. At all. Thi2">is was a lesson. i2">It showed me that i2">I cannot do anythi2">ing on my own and i2">it also i2">inspi2">ired me to seek out 'supernatural' and Spi2">iri2">it-dri2">iven possi2">ibi2">ili2">iti2">ies. And i2">it was i2">important to see thi2">is, even though i2">it was pai2">inful. Wi2">ithout recogni2">izi2">ing i2">I can't do anythi2">ing by myself, i2">I would just keep tryi2">ing and not be wi2">illi2">ing to surrender.

The truth now has become clear. God i2">is the one who wants to heal. And the heali2">ing mi2">ight come through me for others. But the purpose of the heali2">ing i2">is for others, from God to them, and really i2">I am meant to just be a channel/condui2">it/faci2">ili2">itator. i2">I need to get my authori2">ity-problem ego out of the way and act as a bri2">idge.

i2">It's not me that does the heali2">ing. i2">It's God/Holy Spi2">iri2">it/Jesus. And therefore, because they are i2">involved, i2">I need to respectfully ask them for thei2">ir i2">input and help si2">ince, after all, maybe they don't want to heal someone or maybe i2">it i2">isn't an appropri2">iate mi2">iracle. Jesus does warn that mi2">iracles should not be "under consci2">ious control" and that we should not perform them "i2">indi2">iscri2">imi2">inately", si2">ince thi2">is may lead to i2">ineffecti2">ive sporadi2">ic outcomes or i2">inappropri2">iate si2">ide-effects.

i2">I beli2">ieve thi2">is now to mean that i2">I should get my consci2">ious-controlli2">ing ego out of the way and be worki2">ing Wi2">ITH God/Holy Spi2">iri2">it/Jesus rather than have them worki2">ing for me. i2">I do not need to be the one who deci2">ides whether heali2">ing wi2">ill take place or not, i2">I just need to show up and offer my openness to connect to God and extend Hi2">is heali2">ing.

Thi2">is really i2">is just a matter of clari2">ity, putti2">ing thi2">ings i2">in thei2">ir proper perspecti2">ive. And i2">it i2">is really a hard lesson to learn that God i2">is the one wi2">ith the Authori2">ity and i2">I am just here to extend Hi2">IS Creati2">ion. My ego wants to be i2">in control, or to be the hero, or the fi2">ixer/savi2">ior, but i2">IT cannot do anythi2">ing that works. Love i2">is the moti2">ivati2">ing force behi2">ind mi2">iracles, no wi2">ishes or gui2">ilt or projected dysfuncti2">ion or maki2">ing si2">ickness real and then tryi2">ing to 'correct' i2">it. i2">It i2">is sti2">ill my functi2">ion to see others as not si2">ick and not si2">inful, so that i2">I can allow God's love to bri2">idge the gap and connect wi2">ith them. Thi2">is i2">is all so di2">ifferent to how my ego fundamentally wants to functi2">ion. i2">It i2">is the reversal of the authori2">ity problem, whi2">ich takes a great deal of surrender.

Once you do surrender and admi2">it that you are powerless and cannot do anythi2">ing alone, then you can at least become open-mi2">inded about the possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity that God can help FOR you, that Holy Spi2">iri2">it can do thi2">is FOR you, and that you don't even need to be the one to fi2">ix thi2">ings. Let go and let God. The future i2">is now more exci2">iti2">ing, heali2">ing-wi2">ise, si2">imply because i2">I am ali2">igni2">ing more wi2">ith God and allowi2">ing Hi2">is heali2">ing to flow, rather than getti2">ing i2">in the way or i2">interferi2">ing. i2">It's a tough lesson to stop fi2">ixi2">ing or meddli2">ing or correcti2">ing or beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in si2">ickness, all of whi2">ich compels me to fi2">ight wi2">ith si2">ickness i2">instead of steppi2">ing back to forgi2">ive, recogni2">izi2">ing that reali2">ity that there i2">IS no si2">ickness or death because that i2">is not God's truth.

God created you perfect. i2">It's a done deal. You're already complete. You cannot add to yourself or take away. You can't be changed. You are permanently as God created you. He di2">idn't leave anythi2">ing out or fai2">il to share anythi2">ing or leave you less than completed. You can't be perfected or i2">improved upon. You're already absolutely di2">ivi2">ine.

So the one li2">ie i2">is, anythi2">ing that tells you otherwi2">ise. Anythi2">ing of the ego that suggests, you need to do thi2">is or that, go here or there, learn thi2">is or that, attai2">in thi2">is or that, become thi2">is or that. i2">It's much more a case of, si2">inki2">ing i2">into and accepti2">ing, owni2">ing up to, admi2">itti2">ing to, become re-awakened to, what i2">is ALREADY THERE underneath all thi2">is bullshi2">it that we've dumped on top to PRETEND we are not i2">immortal.

e.g. "Si2">ickness i2">is an attempt to prove you can be hurt"

But i2">in truth you are unhurtable, i2">invulnerable, i2">immortal. So all thi2">is ti2">ime spent tryi2">ing to prove otherwi2">ise, i2">is futi2">ile. i2">It doesn't change anythi2">ing, because i2">it's li2">iterally i2">impossi2">ible to change your soul. All we can do i2">is deny i2">it and pretend i2">it's not di2">ivi2">ine.

So we have thi2">is di2">ivi2">ine self i2">in us, as us. i2">It's all we can really be. And so what i2">is all thi2">is other stuff? All the seeki2">ing, the searchi2">ing, the fi2">iguri2">ing out, the unraveli2">ing, all thi2">is work and effort, all the effort of stri2">ivi2">ing to beli2">ief, tryi2">ing to convi2">ince ourselves, i2">isn't absolutely all of i2">it completely poi2">intless? The truth about what we are can only be accepted or deni2">ied, not changed.

i2">It seems then ulti2">imately the enti2">ire thi2">ing about awakeni2">ing to our di2">ivi2">ine holy self i2">is si2">imply that we stop doi2">ing everythi2">ing ELSE that i2">is taki2">ing us AWAY from i2">it. i2">If we would stop wei2">ighi2">ing ourselves down we'd float ri2">ight up to the surface. i2">If we'd stop attacki2">ing ourselves we'd be perfect already. i2">If we'd stop resi2">isti2">ing the truth we'd just melt i2">into bei2">ing ourselves. i2">If we'd get ri2">id of all thi2">is ego stuff, whi2">ich i2">is the attempt to be somethi2">ing we're not, we'd si2">imply return to bei2">ing what we really are already.

i2">It seems counter i2">intui2">iti2">ive because i2">it's more li2">ike retraci2">ing your steps and goi2">ing backwards, goi2">ing wi2">ithi2">in, returni2">ing to, rather than bui2">ildi2">ing somethi2">ing new. The whole effort to "become" i2">is an ego effort to DEFi2">INE what you are. Or moreso to redefi2">ine i2">it. Whi2">ich i2">is always a li2">ie because you can't be changed.

So every opi2">ini2">ion about ourselves can't be true, unless i2">it ali2">igns wi2">ith our nature as God created us. "i2">I am sti2">ill as God created me" states thi2">is perfectly. Si2">imply, nothi2">ing has happened to you, nothi2">ing has changed you, and thi2">is whole dream has been an excursi2">ion i2">into nothi2">ing. We si2">imply need to accept that WE ALREADY ARE perfect i2">in God and stop tryi2">ing to prove otherwi2">ise.

Thi2">is i2">is why the Atonement i2">is si2">imply a matter of ACCEPTi2">ING what i2">is already true about you, and nothi2">ing else.

""i2">I am as God created me."

Thi2">is si2">ingle thought, held fi2">irmly i2">in the mi2">ind, would save the world. From ti2">ime to ti2">ime we wi2">ill repeat i2">it, as we reach another stage i2">in learni2">ing. i2">It wi2">ill mean far more to you as you advance. These words are sacred, for they are the words God gave i2">in answer to the world you made. By them i2">it di2">isappears, and all thi2">ings seen wi2">ithi2">in i2">its mi2">isty clouds and vaporous i2">illusi2">ions vani2">ish as these words are spoken. For they come from God.

Here i2">is the Word by whi2">ich the Son became Hi2">is Father's happi2">iness, Hi2">is Love, and Hi2">is completi2">ion. Here creati2">ion i2">is proclai2">imed, and honored as i2">it i2">is. There i2">is no dream these words wi2">ill not di2">ispel; no thought of si2">in and no i2">illusi2">ion that the dream contai2">ins that wi2">ill not fade away before thei2">ir mi2">ight. They are the trumpet of awakeni2">ing that sounds around the world. The dead awake i2">in answer to i2">its call. And those who li2">ive and hear thi2">is sound wi2">ill never look on death.

Holy i2">indeed i2">is he who makes these words hi2">is own; ari2">isi2">ing wi2">ith them i2">in hi2">is mi2">ind, recalli2">ing them throughout the day, at ni2">ight bri2">ingi2">ing them wi2">ith hi2">im as he goes to sleep. Hi2">is dreams are happy and hi2">is rest secure; hi2">is safety certai2">in and hi2">is body healed, because he sleeps and wakens wi2">ith the truth before hi2">im always. He wi2">ill save the world because he gi2">ives the world what he recei2">ives each ti2">ime he practi2">ices the words of truth."

i2">I want to tell you about a way i2">in whi2">ich i2">I used my persona to destroy myself, and how i2">I am learni2">ing to overcome i2">it. Thi2">is was actually a very very pai2">inful long-term lesson, so i2">it i2">is hard to wri2">ite about.

i2">I grew up as a hi2">ighly sensi2">iti2">ive person, who experi2">ienced everythi2">ing i2">in an i2">intense, overwhelmi2">ing, overpoweri2">ing way. i2">In order to try to cope wi2">ith thi2">is, i2">I developed the use of my persona. The persona i2">is the si2">ide of the ego spli2">it-mi2">ind that focuses on speci2">ialness, goodness, success, soci2">ial acceptabi2">ili2">ity, favori2">iti2">ism, pleasantness, etc. So i2">I went very strongly i2">into 'people pleasi2">ing'.

What i2">I'd do, qui2">ite automati2">ically/unconsci2">iously, was i2">I'd put on thi2">is facade, li2">iterally a 'false face', where i2">I'd smi2">ile a lot, become very qui2">iet, try to appear pleasant, try not to upset anyone, look unthreateni2">ing and harmless, as though 'showi2">ing thi2">is' to people would deflect them and therefore protect me. i2">It was my attempt to be i2">invi2">isi2">ible. Thi2">is i2">included a really i2">intense repressi2">ion of myself. Basi2">ically i2">I was usi2">ing thi2">is to hi2">ide my Self.

i2">In any publi2">ic si2">ituati2">ion i2">I would put on thi2">is persona mask and make i2">it appear that nothi2">ing was wrong, that everythi2">ing was good and normal, nothi2">ing to see here, bei2">ing ni2">ice to everyone and don't say a si2">ingle word, and not get hurt. But there were many ti2">imes thi2">is blew up i2">in my face.

Once i2">I was on a bus headi2">ing i2">into town and i2">it stopped at the hospi2">ital. A man got on the bus and sat nearby. He sai2">id that he had just gotten out of the hospi2">ital from hi2">is 3rd heart attack. Thi2">is alone was enough to tri2">igger me to hi2">ide myself even more than i2">I already was. So i2">I smi2">iled a lot. He, havi2">ing just gone through li2">ife-changi2">ing events, started up a conversati2">ion wi2">ith me, whi2">ich was horri2">ifyi2">ing. He saw i2">I was smi2">ili2">ing and thought that i2">it meant i2">I was happy, and therefore wanted to know what my 'secret to a happy li2">ife' was. Thi2">is put tremendous extra pressure on me (as i2">I saw i2">it) and i2">I just wanted to get the hell out of there. To do thi2">is, i2">I i2">intensi2">ifi2">ied even more thi2">is persona of hi2">idi2">ing myself, whi2">ich was an attempt to reject hi2">im, smi2">ili2">ing even more, bei2">ing very ti2">ight-li2">ipped, and just wanti2">ing the ordeal to end. i2">I just became more and more qui2">iet. For some reason i2">I seemed to just do thi2">is as an automati2">ic defense that i2">I'd learned.

Once i2">I got off the bus, i2">I was just about ready to hurl. i2">I put so much effort i2">into psychologi2">ically rejecti2">ing the man, and hi2">idi2">ing myself, that i2">I felt li2">iterally si2">ick. i2">I reached/retched uncontrollably for several mi2">inutes before i2">I could calm down. Thi2">is put a huge damper on my day and was somewhat traumati2">ic. But thi2">is wasn't the only effect of thi2">is.

See, when i2">I used my persona to hi2">ide my real Self, thi2">is wouldn't just mean rejecti2">ing the other person, i2">it would mean rejecti2">ing me. The more i2">I tri2">ied to shut them out, the more i2">I shut myself out. i2">I had no i2">idea i2">I was doi2">ing thi2">is. But what i2">I di2">id know was how i2">it felt. Absolutely horri2">ible. i2">I would come away from bad experi2">iences li2">ike thi2">is, whi2">ich occurred many many ti2">imes i2">in all ki2">inds of publi2">ic scenari2">ios, wi2">ith a feeli2">ing of tremendous tensi2">ion i2">in my head from i2">intense embarrassment/shame/humi2">ili2">iati2">ion. i2">I'd get a horri2">ible headache, but even worse, i2">I would feel deeply, deeply, deeply hurt. Thi2">is hurt was more i2">intense and horri2">ible than ANY other emoti2">ion i2">I have ever felt for any reason. Psychologi2">ically i2">it was li2">ike i2">I had experi2">ienced every si2">ingle form of rejecti2">ion, abandonment, hurt and pai2">in all at once. The absolute only way to move past thi2">is was to have a huge cry.

So, as a result of putti2">ing on a persona and pretendi2">ing to be someone i2">I was not, regardless of whether that fake self seemed to be 'ni2">ice' or 'ki2">ind' or anythi2">ing anyone values, the only way i2">I could appear to be li2">iterally 'someone else' was to horrendously suppress, deny, reject and abandon myself. i2">I thought i2">I was usi2">ing separati2">ion 'agai2">inst' other people to separate myself from them i2">in order to protect myself, but thi2">is separati2">ion di2">id nothi2">ing but hurt me.

i2">I also had a huge fear of other people judgi2">ing me, and a fear of rejecti2">ion. What i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize was that each ti2">ime that i2">I tri2">ied to put on a persona mask of ni2">ice, li2">ikable, happy-smi2">iley, qui2">iet or whatever, i2">I was buyi2">ing i2">into an ego thought system. And by doi2">ing that, i2">I was taki2">ing a gamble. Ei2">ither i2">I would 'get' the result i2">I wanted whi2">ich was that people would be deflected and i2">ignore me and i2">I would pass by 'safely', OR other people would attack me or pressure me i2">in some way and i2">I'd end up sufferi2">ing. By beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in the potenti2">ial of bei2">ing seen to be accepted or li2">iked or pleasi2">ing to others, i2">I was also si2">imultaneously beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in the 'potenti2">ial' that others would judge me. i2">I wanted them to judge me favorably, whi2">ich would feed my 'goodi2">ie goodi2">ie' persona, whi2">ich meant i2">I had to beli2">ieve i2">in judgement. And because i2">I beli2">ieved i2">in judgement, i2">I li2">ived i2">in fear of i2">it.

So i2">I thought i2">I had an i2">issue of bei2">ing afrai2">id of judgement from others. A fear of rejecti2">ion. And thi2">is fear of rejecti2">ion cycled around i2">in a vi2">ici2">ious cycle, compelli2">ing me to want to NOT be rejected, and therefore to put on a smi2">iley persona face i2">in order to get other people to not reject or hurt me. But of course that merely put me closer i2">in touch wi2">ith rejecti2">ion and judgement, i2">if not by others then much moreso by myself. The amount of rejecti2">ion i2">I experi2">ienced from myself TO myself as a result of self-suppressi2">ion, was far worse than anythi2">ing anyone else di2">id. So thi2">is strategy really di2">idn't actually work, even though i2">I kept tryi2">ing to use i2">it, and each ti2">ime i2">it got worse. Over ti2">ime i2">I just became more and more upti2">ight and qui2">iet and wi2">ithdrawn from soci2">iety, eventually jobless and depressed and deeply unhappy and unable to see a way to be di2">ifferent.

Over ti2">ime, through vari2">ious avenues of heali2">ing, not least of whi2">ich was the support by my wi2">ife who showed up ri2">ight when i2">I was at my worst, i2">I gradually have learned about the dynami2">ics of what i2">I do to myself versus what i2">I thought other people were goi2">ing to do to me. i2">I learned pai2">infully and slowly to see that i2">I only saw other people as 'attacki2">ing judgi2">ing strangers' because *i2">I* had already attacked them fi2">irst. Through the years of worki2">ing wi2">ith A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles and vari2">ious other thi2">ings i2">I've come to very gradually reali2">ize exactly why my use of the persona i2">is completely self-defeati2">ing and does not help at all. All the persona does i2">is secti2">ion off everythi2">ing i2">I thi2">ink i2">is wrong wi2">ith me i2">into a ti2">idy li2">ittle box and shove i2">it away i2">into the dark recesses of my mi2">ind, later to surface as pai2">in and sufferi2">ing.

Yet, over ti2">ime i2">I've sti2">ill held onto a beli2">ief that i2">I am mai2">inly afrai2">id of rejecti2">ion or judgement, rather than reali2">izi2">ing that my attempt to use the persona i2">is what actually causes the problem. Every ti2">ime i2">I try to do what other people would want, or make myself li2">ike able, or appease others, or focus on what other people li2">ike or would buy, or whether i2">I'd get approval, or showi2">ing only the parts of myself that i2">I thi2">ink are acceptable to others, thi2">is AUTOMATi2">ICALLY creates a fear of rejecti2">ion and judgement. Because really, by usi2">ing the persona (i2">i.e. wanti2">ing to feed i2">it by creati2">ing a self-i2">image/persona of bei2">ing pleasi2">ing) i2">I am actually already rejecti2">ing myself and judgi2">ing myself. Why would i2">I want to put a facade on myself to cover up my True Self? Why would i2">I want to soften the blow of someone else's atti2">itude by abandoni2">ing myself fi2">irst, so that i2">I then need a defense?

The truth that i2">is starti2">ing to reveal i2">itself to me now, i2">is that i2">if i2">I actually just be true to myself, and completely drop all need to use the persona to be 'li2">ikable' or 'acceptable to others' or 'what they want' etc, i2">I actually stay i2">in a STRENGTH and a authenti2">ici2">ity that empowers me and completely overri2">ides the apparent need, ei2">ither for a fake persona self, or for a defense agai2">inst rejecti2">ion. And so thi2">is reveals what really i2">is underneath all thi2">is.

i2">If i2">I reject myself Fi2">IRST, i2">I wi2">ill then beli2">ieve i2">I have to use a false self-i2">image-persona to show other people a versi2">ion of me that they wi2">ill li2">ike, so that they won't poi2">int out how shi2">itty i2">I am. Once i2">i'm i2">in persona mode, i2">I cannot escape the fear of rejecti2">ion because i2">I've already rejected myself and more wi2">ill be forthcomi2">ing through the projecti2">ion of i2">it.

So the task i2">in front of me now i2">is, to learn to accept myself fully, to be true to the truth i2">in me, to open up to reveal and expose who i2">I really am, to 'let loose' wi2">ithout any shame or censorshi2">ip, to stop tryi2">ing to hi2">ide myself for any reason, and to basi2">ically 'be myself'. But i2">it also HAS to mean, a wi2">illi2">ingness to stop putti2">ing on a show, to stop presenti2">ing myself i2">in a fake way, to stop tryi2">ing to 'appear' li2">ikable, to stop people-pleasi2">ing, to stop tryi2">ing to feed my persona i2">image, to stop tryi2">ing to get everyone to approve of me, and to just drop that whole pi2">ile of horseshi2">it. i2">I only enter i2">into a percepti2">ion that i2">I need 'protecti2">ion' when i2">I have already judged myself and have seen myself as vulnerable. i2">I am not vulnerable i2">if i2">I am truth-fi2">illed. And i2">I don't need to please anyone.

So the key to FREEDOM i2">in all thi2">is, i2">is awakeni2">ing i2">into Holy Spi2">iri2">it's vi2">iew of me, i2">in acceptance of the truth of me, and i2">in completely surrenderi2">ing BOTH the fear of rejecti2">ion AND the attempt to 'wi2">in approval' through the persona. By stoppi2">ing usi2">ing a persona thi2">is solves every problem that ever arose out of i2">its use. What i2">I thought was helpi2">ing me was hurti2">ing me deeply. And stoppi2">ing the use of the persona stops the creati2">ion of the shadow (pai2">in) as well.

Standi2">ing fi2">irmly i2">in who i2">I AM, bri2">ings all of the certai2">inty, strength, asserti2">iveness, di2">isregard for other's opi2">ini2">ions, i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity, and empowerment, that seemed to be Mi2">ISSi2">ING when i2">I chose to use the ego. And whi2">ich could never be fulfi2">illed by usi2">ing the ego. Because once agai2">in, i2">it's a case of seek and do not fi2">ind. "i2">I don't have to worry about what to say or what to do knowi2">ing He goes there wi2">ith me" - ACi2">IM, i2">i.e. i2">I am i2">in my true self and my true self i2">is completely uni2">interested i2">in pretense or rejecti2">ion.

Who knew - tryi2">ing to please people makes you rejected!!!

Learni2">ing to love myself more. Learni2">ing to drop the ego more. Learni2">ing to be what i2">I am, i2">instead of tryi2">ing to be somethi2">ing i2">I'm not. And i2">in that, there i2">is no fear.

i2">I am gui2">ilty, i2">I wi2">ill only be able to see gui2">ilt i2">in other people. i2">I wi2">ill not be able to tell i2">if they are *really* gui2">ilty because i2">I am seei2">ing through a fi2">ilter of gui2">ilt, li2">ike a stai2">ined glass wi2">indow, whi2">ich only lets i2">in certai2">in colors of li2">ight.

i2">If i2">I take the fi2">ilter off my mi2">ind and stop bei2">ing gui2">ilty myself, recogni2">izi2">ing my i2">innocence, i2">I wi2">ill ONLY be able to see i2">innocence everywhere. i2">I won't be able to see gui2">ilt i2">in anyone because i2">I do not see gui2">ilt i2">in myself.

God i2">is i2">innocent and God i2">is i2">in my mi2">ind and i2">if God i2">is i2">in my mi2">ind then i2">I wi2">ill see God i2">in everythi2">ing - i2">innocence i2">in everythi2">ing - because God i2">is i2">in my mi2">ind.

i2">If God i2">is not i2">in my mi2">ind, because i2">I'm shutti2">ing out the awareness of God wi2">ith gui2">ilt, then i2">I wi2">ill see gui2">ilt everywhere because gui2">ilt i2">is i2">in my mi2">ind.

Therefore, your mi2">ind i2">is not CAPABLE of separati2">ing i2">itself from what i2">it percei2">ives. i2">If the mi2">ind contai2">ins gui2">ilt you Wi2">ILL see gui2">ilt, guaranteed, whether there i2">is any out there or not. i2">If the mi2">ind contai2">ins i2">innocence, you wi2">ill ONLY see i2">innocence no matter what i2">is out there or what other people are doi2">ing.

So you see, i2">it's ki2">ind of li2">ike, never i2">is i2">it possi2">ible to take a 'peek' behi2">ind the curtai2">in to fi2">igure out i2">if someone else i2">is actually gui2">ilty or not. You don't have a faculty that i2">is capable of doi2">ing that.

You can't sort of put your own i2">innocence on hold, retai2">in i2">it, and si2">imultaneously look at someone else to see i2">if there i2">is gui2">ilt i2">in them. You can't have both i2">innocence and gui2">ilt i2">in your awareness at the same ti2">ime.

So there really i2">is no way of knowi2">ing, i2">if other people are i2">innocent or gui2">ilty. There's absolutely no way to tell. You can only see what's i2">insi2">ide you.

i2">If you're gui2">ilty or you're havi2">ing a shi2">itty day, you wi2">ill see shi2">it i2">in everyone. Everyone wi2">ill be fi2">illed wi2">ith turds. i2">If you're havi2">ing a good day, you wi2">ill see goodness i2">in everyone regardless of what they seem to be doi2">ing.

You do not have the ABi2">ILi2">ITY to separately percei2">ive the true nature of another person, separate from your own nature. To beli2">ieve that you have thi2">is abi2">ili2">ity i2">is EGO.

The ego i2">is all about separati2">ion, and therefore i2">is all about somethi2">ing applyi2">ing to one PART of exi2">istence that does not apply to another part. That i2">is a complete i2">illusi2">ion and a li2">ie, because even whi2">ile i2">it i2">is pretendi2">ing that some rules can apply to one person and not another, the rules STi2">ILL apply equally to both. And thi2">is i2">is why when you thi2">ink you are hurti2">ing someone not yourself, you really are hurti2">ing yourself.

i2">I cannot tell i2">if anyone i2">is gui2">ilty or not. All i2">I can do i2">is choose whether to beli2">ieve i2">in gui2">ilt or i2">innocence. And whatever i2">I beli2">ieve i2">in wi2">ill apply to me, AND to everyone else. And i2">I wi2">ill SEE what i2">I have beli2">ieved i2">in, i2">in myself AND i2">in everyone else.

So really i2">I can't tell i2">is so-and-so i2">is gui2">ilty. The only thi2">ing i2">I can do i2">is choose i2">innocence for myself and therefore recogni2">ize the i2">innocence i2">is equally i2">in them, regardless. Or i2">I can choose to joi2">in i2">in gui2">ilt and be gui2">ilty along wi2">ith them. And then i2">I wi2">ill beli2">ieve and percei2">ive that we're both gui2">ilty, even i2">if they are not.

Ei2">ither way, i2">I have no way to di2">iscern the there i2">is some ki2">ind of 'truth' that they are gui2">ilty. i2">I cannot have that i2">illusi2">ion of objecti2">ivi2">ity or detachment. i2">I can decei2">ive myself to thi2">ink i2">I can, but i2">it doesn't really work.

As you do unto others you do unto yourself. They are you. i2">If you treat them as i2">innocent you are treati2">ing yourself as i2">innocent. i2">If you treat them as gui2">ilty you're treati2">ing you as gui2">ilty. There are no loopholes.

Often when i2">I'm i2">in the mi2">iddle of some ki2">ind of upset, or a pai2">in, or a si2">ickness, or a struggle wi2">ith someone or whatever, Jesus or Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill si2">imply say "i2">its a lesson".

When they say thi2">is, they aren't sayi2">ing "i2">its a puni2">ishment", even though that's what i2">I'm i2">interpreti2">ing i2">it as - some ki2">ind of unfai2">ir treatment. By sayi2">ing i2">its a lesson, i2">it lets me know i2">I have somethi2">ing to learn.

But i2">it also lets me know, that thi2">is i2">isn't somethi2">ing that they're tryi2">ing to hi2">ide from me. They're not bei2">ing assholes and conceali2">ing the answer to the lesson. i2">It's totally avai2">ilable, and i2">I'm aware somehow that the only reason i2">I'm havi2">ing the lesson i2">is because *i2">I* need to change i2">in some way. There's somethi2">ing about my percepti2">ion that i2">is faulty, or somethi2">ing i2">is unforgi2">iven, or some heali2">ing i2">is needed.

At the same ti2">ime, i2">I get thi2">is feeli2">ing li2">ike, there i2">is a pri2">ize... a gi2">ift... there's somethi2">ing valuable that i2">is 'mi2">ine' but i2">its hi2">idden from me, li2">ike a buri2">ied treasure or somethi2">ing. i2">I can have i2">it, and there's nothi2">ing stoppi2">ing me from havi2">ing i2">it, other than that i2">I need to learn the lesson. i2">It's not a lesson i2">in puni2">ishment or how i2">I need to suffer. So then thi2">is makes i2">it feel more li2">ike a challenge.

Also knowi2">ing i2">it's a lesson helps me to not see i2">it as 'agai2">inst me' or 'unwanted' li2">ike i2">I was before. i2">If i2">its just a lesson then thi2">ings are happeni2">ing for a reason, and there's just somethi2">ing i2">I don't accept or don't reali2">ize/recogni2">ize yet. Thi2">is sort of makes i2">it almost an exci2">iti2">ing challenge to fi2">ind out what i2">it i2">is that i2">I'm not 'getti2">ing' yet. Thi2">is then sends me on a journey of di2">iscovery to look wi2">ithi2">in and i2">investi2">igate what's really goi2">ing on here. i2">It's a call to do some radi2">ical honesty and i2">inqui2">ire wi2">ithi2">in.

And actually i2">it's not li2">ike Jesus or Holy Spi2">iri2">it are mean school teachers who put up walls or repri2">imand you or anythi2">ing. They are actually wi2">illi2">ing to HELP, wi2">ith the lesson. But i2">it entai2">ils a certai2">in amount of wi2">illi2">ingness on my part. i2">I can even ask them for gui2">idance and they can provi2">ide some.. sort of li2">ike clues... because they don't often just outri2">ight reveal the 'answer' or soluti2">ion or truth. But they're there to help as much as i2">I'm wi2">illi2">ing to learn. Ulti2">imately, how qui2">ickly i2">I learn the lesson i2">is up to me.

See we each have our own curri2">iculum and li2">ike ACi2">IM says, we get to deci2">ide when to learn - i2">ie we can delay or be wi2">illi2">ing - but we don't necessari2">ily set what the curri2">iculum contai2">ins. And usually when lessons come along they are always unwanted at fi2">irst. That's why they happen, lol. But they're there to help. They're nudges toward God. So i2">if somethi2">ing seems to have gone wrong i2">I need to become wi2">illi2">ing to at least accept that thi2">is i2">is tryi2">ing to help me somehow, and that i2">I need to open up to somethi2">ing because i2">I've made some mi2">istakes. i2">I need to learn the lesson. i2">It's not there to torture me but to free me. My mi2">ighty compani2">ions just want the best for me.

Thanks Jesus/Holy Spi2">iri2">it.

Thi2">is i2">is the ti2">itle of ACi2">IM lesson 125. The essence here i2">is to reali2">ize that everythi2">ing you gi2">ive, you recei2">ive, because gi2">ivi2">ing and recei2">ivi2">ing are one. Per the golden rule, whatever you "do to another", you li2">iterally and di2">irectly and personally do to yourself. Anythi2">ing at all that comes out of you, goes back i2">into you.

Thi2">is i2">is the law of God, and i2">it i2">is i2">inescapable. But i2">it seems to be very di2">iffi2">icult to recogni2">ize thi2">is law i2">is i2">in effect. i2">It seems possi2">ible that you do somethi2">ing to another and experi2">ience none of the consequences. That somehow there i2">is a separati2">ion between what appli2">ies to the gi2">iver and the recei2">iver.

The body i2">in parti2">icular makes i2">it seem possi2">ible to do somethi2">ing to another whi2">ile escapi2">ing the effects. One body can seem to hurt another, and yet come away wi2">ith no apparent harm. Thi2">is vi2">iolates the law of God and seems to suggest the golden rule does not apply. But the laws of God always apply.

i2">If you were aware that anythi2">ing you do i2">is done to BOTH yourself and others, you would be very careful i2">in choosi2">ing what to do. i2">If when you poked another's body, you felt a poke of your own body, you would hesi2">itate to poke them. i2">If you attacked thei2">ir body and i2">immedi2">iately felt the hurt and i2">impact and effects of the attack, you would i2">instantly recoi2">il and reconsi2">ider your acti2">ions.

i2">If i2">it were i2">impossi2">ible for you to do somethi2">ing to another wi2">ithout i2">it also bei2">ing done i2">instantly to you, you would reali2">ize that you cannot do anythi2">ing harmful wi2">ithout hurti2">ing yourself. You would li2">iterally fi2">ind i2">it i2">insane to suggest that you WON'T be hurt when you hurt someone else. You would know thi2">is i2">is not true, and that you are guaranteed to suffer when you i2">infli2">ict sufferi2">ing.

The moti2">ivati2">ion thi2">is gi2">ives you then i2">is the clear sani2">ity that, i2">in order to be happy and loved, your only opti2">ion i2">is to gi2">ive happi2">iness and love to others. i2">If for an i2">instant you choose to gi2">ive hurt or to make gui2">ilty, you know that you wi2">ill i2">instantly feel awful and would be qui2">ick to stop yourself. i2">If the very dagger wi2">ith whi2">ich you attempt to pi2">ierce the heart of a brother li2">iterally sti2">icks i2">into your own body, you would stop i2">in your tracks.

i2">In truth, when you are more aware of reali2">ity, you actually are i2">in touch wi2">ith thi2">is law. i2">It may not appear to apply at the physi2">ical level, but i2">it does apply at the level of mi2">ind. Any seemi2">ing psychologi2">ical state of attack whi2">ich you thi2">ink you project onto another, you do not escape. Any angry attempt to make another gui2">ilty rei2">inforces your gui2">ilt. Any desi2">ire to be murderous and hurtful threatens you and i2">insti2">ills fear.

v There i2">IS no escape from the golden rule. The ego counsels that you can easi2">ily escape i2">it, even that you can commi2">it the most horrendous attack and come away wi2">ithout remorse or damage. That you can get away wi2">ith murder. But the only way you would seem to convi2">ince yourself that you've done thi2">is, i2">is to be i2">in deni2">ial.

i2">It requi2">ires you to separate yourself off, di2">is-associ2">iate from your brother, form a separate i2">identi2">ity whi2">ich i2">is di2">ifferent and at war, beli2">ieve that your brother i2">is i2">in no way part of yourself, i2">isolate and i2">impri2">ison yourself i2">in the body, and then perhaps be convi2">inced that your acti2">ions won't hurt you. Only by severi2">ing yourself from the sonshi2">ip could you possi2">ibly convi2">ince yourself that thi2">is would work, but at the cost of maki2">ing you i2">impri2">isoned and alone.

i2">In truth, your real nature i2">is that you are one wi2">ith all others. That we are all joi2">ined together i2">in shari2">ing as a si2">ingle fami2">ily of equali2">ity. i2">I am you and you are me and we are each other.

"One brother i2">is all brothers. Every mi2">ind contai2">ins all mi2">inds, for every mi2">ind i2">is one. Such i2">is the truth."

Everyone i2">is everyone. We are each i2">indi2">ivi2">idually the whole sonshi2">ip. Everyone else i2">is a part of your self. Not one si2">ingle thi2">ing can occur agai2">inst a si2">ingle i2">indi2">ivi2">idual wi2">ithout i2">it happeni2">ing to the whole. When one suffers, the whole suffers, because the whole i2">is i2">in every part. We have a holographi2">ic relati2">ionshi2">ip and thi2">is i2">is the wi2">ill of God.

The fact i2">is then that i2">if we fall i2">into the ego delusi2">ion that we are separate from each other, we wi2">ill then automati2">ically beli2">ieve that we can i2">indeed attack wi2">ithout bei2">ing attacked. And so begi2">ins the spi2">iral down the sli2">ippery slope to hell i2">in whi2">ich you beli2">ieve and then percei2">ive that you are justi2">ifi2">ied i2">in murder, capable of revenge, and can get away wi2">ith i2">it unaffected. Thi2">is state of mi2">ind i2">itself i2">is mental i2">illness, sufferi2">ing, self-attack, self-abuse, and self-destructi2">ive.

The si2">imple truth then i2">is that everythi2">ing you gi2">ive, you are i2">included i2">in the recei2">ipt of. Anythi2">ing you do, you do to yourself. Anythi2">ing you gi2">ive or radi2">iate or share or express, i2">is bei2">ing expressed toward you as well. i2">It may seem on the physi2">ical level that somethi2">ing has to leave and travel and be sacri2">ifi2">iced and lost, i2">in order to be gi2">iven or done to another, but i2">in truth you always keep what you

gi2">ive, because shari2">ing i2">is reali2">ity and not separati2">ion. To recei2">ive what you gi2">ive i2">is the golden rule and the i2">inescapable law of God. i2">It i2">is functi2">ioni2">ing even when you don't beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is functi2">ioni2">ing. i2">It i2">is functi2">ioni2">ing when you beli2">ieve you are getti2">ing away wi2">ith separati2">ing yourself off from recei2">ivi2">ing. i2">It i2">is also the secret of salvati2">ion, i2">in the recogni2">iti2">ion that i2">if you are sufferi2">ing, you must have done thi2">is to yourself. You must have gi2">iven sufferi2">ing and then recei2">ived i2">it, beli2">ievi2">ing that you would escape the recei2">ipt.

i2">If you are sufferi2">ing, you have attempted to attack the sonshi2">ip. Not just yourself, but everyone. But just as every attack thought, and atti2">itude, angry gui2">ilt-mongeri2">ing, or outri2">ight vi2">iolence, i2">is always an attempt to gi2">ive yourself death. i2">It makes you unhappy to make others unhappy. i2">It hurts you to hurt them. You cannot escape thi2">is. Anythi2">ing you do to attempt to destroy a son of God wi2">ill have self-i2">infli2">icted repercussi2">ions. And as such, i2">if you are not at peace, you must have made a wrong deci2">isi2">ion.

To fi2">ind salvati2">ion therefore we have to learn the si2">impli2">ici2">ity of lesson 125 - that at all ti2">imes, what i2">I am gi2">ivi2">ing i2">I am recei2">ivi2">ing. i2">If i2">I do not li2">ike what i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing, i2">I must recogni2">ize i2">I have chosen i2">it and have gi2">iven i2">it, and have therefore recei2">ived i2">it. And i2">I have done thi2">is to myself. i2">I must be mi2">istaken i2">if i2">I have gi2">iven myself sufferi2">ing, and i2">I made the deci2">isi2">ion myself, but i2">I want to choose otherwi2">ise because i2">I want to be at peace.

Thi2">is i2">is all ti2">ied together. i2">It i2">is the one law of God that everythi2">ing i2">is always shared, everyone i2">is always i2">included, and you wi2">ill never escape the consequences of your gi2">ivi2">ing. i2">If want to stop sufferi2">ing, learn to stop maki2">ing others suffer. i2">If you want to be happy, gi2">ive happi2">iness. i2">If you want to feel loved, learn to love. You wi2">ill heal as you let the Holy Spi2">iri2">it teach you to heal. And you wi2">ill fi2">ind God i2">in your brother as you learn that your brother i2">is a part of your shared i2">identi2">ity i2">in Chri2">ist.

A fear years ago, i2">I was at an ACi2">IM retreat and we were doi2">ing a breathi2">ing exerci2">ise. i2">I became fi2">illed up wi2">ith some ki2">ind of energy, whi2">ich li2">ifted my "vi2">ibrati2">ion" very hi2">igh. My mi2">ind started to see past the physi2">ical and reach out and started to see God BEYOND the vei2">il. i2">In that moment i2">I would've left the enti2">ire world behi2">ind to be wi2">ith Hi2">im.

i2">I'll ski2">ip some detai2">ils but after that, i2">I was seei2">ing wi2">ith true percepti2">ion. The amount of awareness and wakefulness i2">I had was off the charts. Everywhere i2">I looked, sti2">ill seei2">ing physi2">ical objects wi2">ith my eyes, i2">I saw God. God was i2">in everythi2">ing i2">I saw and God was i2">in my mi2">ind. My mi2">ind had expanded i2">in some way, movi2">ing up the hologram, to where my ego self seemed di2">issi2">ipated and di2">iffused i2">into the back of my awareness, as though i2">I had no center. My mi2">ind somehow pulled back away from the world and i2">I began to feel li2">ike i2">I was melti2">ing i2">into the background, one wi2">ith i2">it. i2">I felt li2">ike i2">I was becomi2">ing Chri2">ist.

My awareness for some days after, entai2">iled the abi2">ili2">ity to see a profound gentleness i2">in everythi2">ing. Everywhere i2">I looked there was uncondi2">iti2">ional love, i2">in all thi2">ings. Thi2">is love seemed so whole and complete, no matter where i2">I looked, that i2">I felt i2">I had no need to look anywhere else to go fi2">ind anythi2">ing. i2">I saw i2">it i2">in a chai2">ir leg. i2">In a water bottle. i2">In the shadows on a wall.

People were sti2">ill goi2">ing about thei2">ir busi2">iness doi2">ing exactly everythi2">ing i2">in the same egoi2">ic way as before - nothi2">ing changed there, because the body's eyes can ONLY see the physi2">ical form of thi2">ings. But at the same ti2">ime, there was awareness of a love and presence. i2">I was aware of somethi2">ing that i2">it seemed no-one knew was there, even though i2">it seemed obvi2">ious. i2">I became so soft. God was so gentle, so soft and joyous. And he was very, very i2">inti2">imate, whi2">ich was shocki2">ing at fi2">irst because i2">I had previ2">iously always put God far away i2">in the sky and here he was well under my ski2">in.

i2">I also became aware of the hi2">igher levels of the hologram, an experi2">ience of uni2">ity, i2">in whi2">ich the whole was i2">in each part. All of God was i2">in each object i2">I saw. i2">I therefore recogni2">ized for the fi2">irst ti2">ime i2">in experi2">ience, that even though physi2">ical objects seemed to assert that "nothi2">ing i2">is the same anywhere" or "there i2">is nothi2">ing that i2">is whole" or "the whole i2">is not i2">in any of the parts", here i2">in my awareness i2">I could sti2">ill see thi2">is forms and yet, si2">imultaneously, my mi2">ind was aware that a si2">ingle consi2">istent uni2">ifi2">ied whole was present i2">in all parts, fully, transcendi2">ing thei2">ir li2">imi2">itati2">ions and di2">ifferences. Thi2">is taught me the way i2">in whi2">ich physi2">ical matter i2">is a li2">ie, a decepti2">ion desi2">igned to shut out awareness of God's nature.

i2">I was i2">in an altered state for a couple of weeks. i2">I was very ungrounded. i2">I could barely do tasks because my mi2">ind was qui2">ite expanded and out of body. Yet each ti2">ime i2">I di2">id somethi2">ing "groundi2">ing", thi2">is energy that was i2">in me started to funnel down, and thi2">is produced i2">immense joy. Joy would beam out of my face toward others as i2">I started at them very di2">irectly, somethi2">ing i2">I had shy'd away from before, recogni2">izi2">ing i2">I had no needs, no lack, and that there was only outward extensi2">ion. Nothi2">ing could "come i2">in" to me from the outsi2">ide. i2">I felt so safe and protected and free from needs. i2">I di2">idn't even want to eat food, i2">it felt so ali2">ien.

Gradually as i2">I grounded back i2">into my body my expanded awareness narrowed down, became more focused i2">into and through the body, and i2">I became more i2">immersed i2">in the physi2">ical body agai2">in. Thi2">is was li2">ike recei2">ivi2">ing some ki2">ind of brai2">in damage. My awareness di2">imi2">ini2">ished greatly and i2">it felt li2">ike bei2">ing greatly subdued and suppressed, shut down and locked i2">insi2">ide a pri2">ison sui2">it. Thi2">is also stri2">ipped away most of the i2">intense wakefulness that i2">I had, whi2">ich felt li2">ike "leavi2">ing God", whi2">ich was VERY upsetti2">ing.

Thi2">is made i2">it i2">impossi2">ible for me to have God i2">in my mi2">ind, and thus i2">I stopped seei2">ing God outsi2">ide of me i2">in all thi2">ings. i2">It seemed God left. i2">I kept tryi2">ing to fi2">ind God outsi2">ide of me because i2">I thought that He was out there, havi2">ing seen Hi2">im there, but i2">I couldn't fi2">ind Hi2">im because i2">I was no longer aware of Hi2">im Wi2">ITHi2">IN my mi2">ind. And for weeks thi2">is was depressi2">ing and i2">infuri2">iati2">ing, although gradually i2">I adjusted and was reassured by a few momentary gli2">impses that God was sti2">ill wi2">ith me. Returni2">ing to my body felt li2">ike a huge i2">isolati2">ion. As my eye si2">ight returned to looki2">ing out solely through the body's eyes, i2">it was li2">ike bui2">ildi2">ing a bri2">ick wall "behi2">ind" me such that i2">I could no longer have any sense of what was there. The body cut me off from awareness of God, and so i2">I got to see fi2">irst hand just how li2">imi2">iti2">ing bodi2">ies are.

What i2">I later came to reali2">ize was thi2">is was an experi2">ience of true percepti2">ion. A state of seei2">ing a forgi2">iven world. i2">It was as though layer upon layer of thi2">ick "judgement" had been scraped off the surface of the world reveali2">ing an extremely gently held pi2">icture of somethi2">ing very lovable. And yet at the same ti2">ime, the physi2">icali2">ity was the same. The appearance physi2">ically to my eyes was the same. i2">It was what i2">I saw i2">IN i2">it, i2">in SPi2">ITE of the physi2">icali2">ity, that i2">I longed to reconnect wi2">ith.

Thi2">is i2">is why, for me personally, i2">I know that thi2">is physi2">ical world i2">is not real. i2">I know how much the body li2">ies. i2">I know how the body's sense are massi2">ively li2">imi2">iti2">ing. i2">I know how matter li2">ies to try to obscure the holographi2">ic nature of God and hi2">is omni2">ipresence. i2">I've seen i2">it and experi2">ienced the transi2">iti2">ion back and forth. God gave me a gli2">impse of awakeni2">ing and i2">it was the most profoundly di2">irectly educati2">ional experi2">ience of my enti2">ire li2">ife.

Thi2">is i2">is why i2">I know fi2">irst hand that there i2">is somethi2">ing very much beyond thi2">is world, a reali2">ity whi2">ich i2">is completely obscured by forms and trapped by bodi2">ies. Thi2">is world i2">is not my home. i2">I have gri2">ieved for the "loss of God" and gradually over ti2">ime use thi2">is as i2">incenti2">ive, a taste of what's to come, to fi2">ind my way back to God agai2">in.

The attracti2">ion to Hi2">im was SO STRONG that i2">I would've leapt i2">into Hi2">is arms i2">in an i2">instant wi2">ithout so much as a consi2">iderati2">ion for anythi2">ing else i2">in all the world. We have protected ourselves from rememberi2">ing just how appeali2">ing God i2">is, and why NOTHi2">ING else means anythi2">ing even remotely close to Hi2">im. We only block awareness i2">in order to hi2">ide thi2">is extreme attracti2">ion. Otherwi2">ise we would awaken i2">in a heartbeat.

i2">I am not affected by anyone.

No-one has caused me to be upset.

i2">I am responsi2">ible for everythi2">ing i2">I am feeli2">ing.

i2">I am choosi2">ing to be thi2">is way myself.

Nobody has done anythi2">ing to me at all.

i2">I have never been hurt by anyone.

The world has never done anythi2">ing to me.

i2">I am not caused by anyone or anythi2">ing outsi2">ide of me.

i2">I have no enemi2">ies or attackers.

i2">I am i2">immortal and eternal and i2">invulnerable.

i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im of thi2">is world at all.

i2">I am not vulnerable to attack.

No-one has ever attacked me, they are all i2">innocent.

Thi2">is world i2">is not really happeni2">ing and i2">its not happeni2">ing to me.

There are no problems.

i2">I do not need to suffer.

Everyone i2">is i2">innocent and so am i2">I.

i2">I am i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it.

i2">I li2">ive forever and cannot be harmed.

Nothi2">ing has happened to me.

i2">I am sti2">ill as God created me.

i2">I am love.

i2">I am i2">immortal.

 

Someti2">imes i2">I i2">imagi2">ine myself bei2">ing attacked. You'd thi2">ink thi2">is would be a pretty dumb thi2">ing to do.

But i2">if i2">I'm percei2">ivi2">ing myself as somehow i2">in need, perhaps because i2">I'm ti2">ired/underslept or stressed out, i2">I start to i2">imagi2">ine someone nearby comi2">ing along and i2">interacti2">ing wi2">ith me. And i2">in that i2">interacti2">ion i2">I i2">imagi2">ine that they are bei2">ing needy and they put some ki2">ind of pressure on me or are demandi2">ing somethi2">ing of me, and i2">I start to get cranky and retali2">iate defensi2">ively. Then i2">I'm i2">imagi2">ini2">ing how i2">I'm havi2">ing to defend myself and am feeli2">ing attacked and all thi2">is, and tryi2">ing to justi2">ify myself, as i2">if i2">it's really happeni2">ing.

When i2">I then catch myself, whi2">ich happens sooner than before, i2">I reali2">ize that i2">I'm actually havi2">ing thi2">is fantasy enti2">irely 'wi2">ithi2">in' my own mi2">ind and i2">it's got nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith that person. Somehow i2">I've spli2">it my mi2">ind and set up part of myself to be agai2">inst another part of myself. Thi2">is i2">indi2">icates to me that i2">I'm beli2">ievi2">ing i2">I'm i2">in need and percei2">ivi2">ing myself to be lacki2">ing, so i2">I need to get that corrected. i2">I have to admi2">it that i2">I'm doi2">ing thi2">is to myself and stop i2">it, and maybe i2">I need to ask for Holy Spi2">iri2">it's help here, i2">in addi2">iti2">ion to taki2">ing full responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for i2">it.

Now, thi2">is i2">is a more obvi2">ious example of me havi2">ing thi2">is fantasy of self-attack when nobody i2">is around and i2">it's clearly not tri2">iggered by them other than through the suggesti2">ion that they even 'exi2">ist' nearby (whi2">ich i2">is enough). But thi2">is same mechani2">ic basi2">ically plays out regardless of whether i2">I'm provoked or not. Regardless of whether i2">I'm alone or wi2">ith someone. And when i2">I'm wi2">ith someone and i2">I'm experi2">ienci2">ing thi2">is, i2">it seems more obvi2">ious to buy i2">into the i2">idea that they're causi2">ing i2">it, and to them project blame onto them.

But at all ti2">imes, thi2">is i2">is all happeni2">ing i2">in my own mi2">ind. i2">It's me attacki2">ing myself and tryi2">ing to pass i2">it off as someone else causi2">ing i2">it. Si2">illy me. i2">I need to forgi2">ive myself and choose peace i2">instead.

i2">I've been wrong about the world. Agai2">in.

My vi2">iew of what the world i2">IS has changed a lot recently. i2">I see now that ACi2">IM i2">is telli2">ing me the world i2">itself was projected out as "nothi2">ing", or an empty screen, and THEN we projected secondary meani2">ing onto i2">it and "gave" i2">it meani2">ing. We can gi2">ive i2">it egoi2">ic meani2">ing, or we can gi2">ive i2">it heavenly meani2">ing. And thus i2">it acts li2">ike a mi2">irror to REFLECT an outward pi2">icture of an i2">inward condi2">iti2">ion. Thi2">is i2">is projected on top of what the world i2">IS, whi2">ich i2">is a vei2">il of i2">illusi2">ions.

What i2">I USED to beli2">ieve was qui2">ite di2">ifferent. Some people say there i2">is an "objecti2">ive world", and that the course i2">is telli2">ing us we have "subjecti2">ive" percepti2">ions about i2">it. i2">In thi2">is vi2">iew we have beli2">iefs ABOUT the world. i2">I never li2">iked thi2">is approach because i2">it seemed to i2">imply the world had to be objecti2">ive, whi2">ich meant i2">it was real. And clearly other parts of ACi2">IM tell us God di2">id NOT create the world. So then i2">I threw out the i2">idea that we were really havi2">ing i2">ideas ABOUT the world, whi2">ich led to beli2">ievi2">ing the world i2">ITSELF was a more di2">irect "beli2">ief".

What seemed to make more sense was to say that there i2">is no objecti2">ive world, especi2">ially i2">in li2">ight of "there i2">is no world." And there are statements li2">ike "the world i2">is false percepti2">ion" and "there i2">is no world apart from what you wi2">ish", etc. These seem to i2">imply, coupled wi2">ith "projecti2">ion makes percepti2">ion", that we li2">iterally project out the physi2">ical world i2">in one si2">ingle act, and how i2">it appears to us depends on "how we made i2">it" or what we projected i2">it from. Such that there i2">is no objecti2">ive world, ONLY subjecti2">ive fluctuati2">ing worlds that li2">ive i2">INSi2">IDE of subjecti2">ivi2">ity.

i2">I thought thi2">is made sense for a long ti2">ime because there i2">is a lot i2">in the course about how you cannot see both worlds, how you can have ei2">ither false or true percepti2">ion, how you see what you project, and how forgi2">iveness/chri2">ist-vi2">isi2">ion doesn't look upon bodi2">ies. Agai2">in, major parts of the course seemed to cli2">ick i2">into place, but there were always a few thi2">ings whi2">ich seemed to not qui2">ite li2">ine up.

i2">I'd also fi2">ind that there would always be SOME people who beli2">ieved certai2">in other chunks of the course, whi2">ich contradi2">icted my i2">ideas about the world. Maybe they got those parts Ri2">IGHT, BUT also got OTHER parts wrong, and so sti2">ill di2">idn't have the whole pi2">icture. Some thi2">ings they sai2">id seemed to si2">ide wi2">ith a parti2">ial vi2">iew, that the world must be objecti2">ively real, created by God, and that's why the course talks about projecti2">ing ONTO i2">it. But thi2">is couldn't be based on what else i2">is wri2">itten.

So i2">it always seemed li2">ike everyone had a bi2">ig chunk of the truth but not the whole pi2">icture. And i2">I thought i2">I had the whole pi2">icture too. But apparently i2">I di2">id not. Because what i2">I see i2">in the course now tells me somethi2">ing di2">ifferent. Somethi2">ing whi2">ich produces far less contradi2">icti2">ions and seems to be a more complete pi2">icture.

What i2">it says i2">is that i2">in the separati2">ion, we came up wi2">ith the i2">idea of an opposi2">ite to God, whi2">ich i2">is really an i2">idea of nothi2">ingness, si2">ince God i2">is everythi2">ing. Thi2">is was projected out from the mi2">ind, whi2">ich "made the world". We're talki2">ing here about the maki2">ing of space and ti2">ime and setti2">ing the wheels of physi2">ical objects/evoluti2">ion i2">in moti2">ion. But because thi2">is was an i2">idea of nothi2">ing, i2">it really had no meani2">ing of i2">its own. You mi2">ight also noti2">ice that "outer space" i2">is really mostly empty nothi2">ingness.

"That was the fi2">irst projecti2">ion of error outward. ***The world arose to hi2">ide i2">it (a fi2">irst projecti2">ion), and became the screen on whi2">ich i2">it was projected ( a second projecti2">ion)***, and drawn between you and truth."

"The world you made i2">is therefore totally chaoti2">ic, governed by arbi2">itrary and senseless "laws," and wi2">ithout meani2">ing of ANY ki2">ind. For i2">it was made out of what you do NOT want, projected FROM your mi2">ind, because you were AFRAi2">ID of i2">it."

"***The world i2">is nothi2">ing i2">in i2">itself. Your mi2">ind must gi2">ive i2">it meani2">ing.*** And what you behold ***upon i2">it*** are your wi2">ishes, acted out so you can look on them and thi2">ink them real."

"i2">It represents a si2">ituati2">ion i2">in whi2">ich God and the ego "challenge" each other as to whose meani2">ing i2">is to be wri2">itten ***i2">in the empty space*** whi2">ich meani2">inglessness provi2">ides. The ego rushes i2">in franti2">ically to establi2">ish i2">its own "i2">ideas" there, fearful that ******the voi2">id****** may otherwi2">ise be used to demonstrate i2">its own unreali2">ity."

"Yet separati2">ion i2">is but empty space, enclosi2">ing nothi2">ing, doi2">ing nothi2">ing, and as unsubstanti2">ial as the vacant place between the ri2">ipples that a shi2">ip has made i2">in passi2">ing by."

Clearly then, what has taken place are TWO steps. The fi2">irst i2">is that we projected out the physi2">ical world of bodi2">ies - really empty nothi2">ingness ("the body i2">is nothi2">ing" etc). Thi2">is was a world of nothi2">ing and the i2">idea of si2">in or "absence of love/everythi2">ing". i2">It's really neutral because i2">it's nothi2">ing and has no meani2">ing. A meani2">ingless world. Thi2">is world then became A SCREEN onto whi2">ich we SECONDARi2">ILY PROJECTED the mi2">ind's beli2">ief i2">in i2">it, whi2">ich GAVE i2">it meani2">ing, GAVE i2">it reali2">ity, and projected si2">in and gui2">ilt onto i2">it.

i2">In a sense then, there ARE two ki2">inds of layers to the world. What the world i2">IS, and what we MAKE OF i2">IT. Thi2">is then doesn't mean the world i2">is objecti2">ively real, only that i2">it i2">is i2">in some way "separate" from the secondary projecti2">ions we put ONTO i2">it. The meani2">ing we Gi2">IVE to i2">it. Thi2">is also corresponds to the i2">idea that the world i2">itself i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion, whi2">ich we have further i2">illusi2">ions ABOUT.

For example, the world i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion and i2">is unreal. When we then project untruth onto i2">it, tryi2">ing to MAKE i2">it real by Gi2">IVi2">ING i2">it reali2">ity, thi2">is i2">is what we call false percepti2">ion. i2">It makes a world whi2">ich i2">is actually an i2">illusi2">ion, SEEM as i2">if i2">it's i2">is REAL world. And now physi2">ical form i2">is beli2">ieved and appearances decei2">ive and the mi2">ind i2">is lost, i2">insane and confused. The alternati2">ive i2">is true percepti2">ion whi2">ich recogni2">izes the world for WHAT i2">IT i2">IS, "accurate percepti2">ion", whi2">ich reveals the world i2">IS an i2">illusi2">ion, i2">IS nothi2">ing, and does not really exi2">ist.

So i2">it all sti2">ill li2">ines up perfectly wi2">ith what the course says, provi2">ided you now recogni2">ize that the i2">interpretati2">ion of what you THOUGHT i2">it MEANT, or what i2">it was referri2">ing to, mi2">ight be a li2">ittle di2">ifferent. That the world i2">is "di2">isti2">inct" from what you project onto i2">it, doesn't have to mean or i2">imply that God created i2">it. And because i2">it i2">IS "separate" from your projecti2">ions onto i2">it, or beli2">iefs about i2">it, you CAN change your mi2">ind ABOUT i2">it. And we are i2">indeed asked over and over agai2">in to do thi2">is.

"The world you see (false percepti2">ions about an i2">illusory world) cannot be the world God loves, and yet Hi2">is Word assures us that He loves the world (loves the i2">illusory world through truth). God's Word has promi2">ised us that peace i2">is possi2">ible here, and what He promi2">ises can hardly be i2">impossi2">ible. But i2">it i2">is true that the world must be looked at di2">ifferently, i2">if Hi2">is promi2">ises are to be accepted. What the world i2">is, i2">is but a fact (as though, a di2">isti2">inct separate "thi2">ing"). You cannot choose what thi2">is should be (because i2">it was projected i2">in the fi2">irst projecti2">ion). But you can choose how you would see i2">it (per the second projecti2">ion). i2">Indeed, you must choose thi2">is."

So now i2">it becomes possi2">ible to rei2">interpret the "world you made", by rei2">interpreti2">ing the "world you see" i2">ie your psychologi2">ical i2">interpretati2">ion of what you made, or what you "make of" what you made. When you take the neutral meani2">ingless i2">illusory world you made, and you take away from i2">it the projecti2">ion of si2">in and gui2">ilt, and leave "an empty space", uncluttered from ego projecti2">ions, UPON whi2">ich you project God, love, li2">ight, holi2">iness, the "world you made" now reflects heaven's li2">ight, and you see "God i2">in everythi2">ing you see." But bear i2">in mi2">ind thi2">is i2">is a REFLECTi2">ION i2">in a mi2">irror whi2">ich has no meani2">ing of i2">its own, and i2">is STi2">ILL just nothi2">ing. i2">It does not mean the mi2">irror i2">is God or i2">is heaven.

What thi2">is means for me i2">is that i2">I now recogni2">ize there ARE two parts to thi2">is world. There i2">is the world we made, the physi2">ical world of forms, whi2">ich i2">in and of i2">itself i2">is nothi2">ing and means nothi2">ing. Then there i2">is meani2">ing we Gi2">IVE to i2">it whi2">ich i2">is what i2">I project ONTO i2">it whi2">ich produces my percepti2">ions ABOUT i2">it.

Thi2">is results i2">in my "joi2">ini2">ing the camp" whi2">ich clai2">imed that percepti2">ion was always "about the world", but Wi2">ITHOUT the clause that suggested "thi2">is must mean God created i2">it." Rather than merely thi2">ink that "the world i2">is i2">in my mi2">ind", i2">ie that i2">its contents are my mi2">ind's contents, i2">I can now approach "the world i2">I made" but wi2">ithout the false-percepti2">ion ego baggage.

i2">In a way thi2">is means no longer "throwi2">ing the world out wi2">ith the bathwater". The di2">irty water of ego projecti2">ions ONTO i2">it can be let go, and i2">I can then become more wi2">illi2">ing to look at thi2">is same world, the physi2">ical world, through eyes of Chri2">ist. Devoi2">id of the projected si2">in and gui2">ilt, or labels of wrongfulness. Whi2">ich also overlooks appearances and di2">ifferences and forms and transcends the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions.

Recogni2">izi2">ing that, eventually, i2">I can sti2">ill look at "thi2">is world" through more lovi2">ing eyes, Wi2">ITHOUT i2">it havi2">ing to mean that God created i2">it, because of the clari2">ity that we Di2">ID project i2">it out i2">in a fi2">irst step BEFORE we projected ONTO i2">it. i2">I noti2">ice now many references to how we look UPON the world, project UPON the world, and therefore Fi2">ILTER the world, dependi2">ing on where our mi2">ind i2">is at, and thi2">is can be thought of as SEPARATE FROM the physi2">ical world i2">itself.

i2">I can now stop resi2">isti2">ing the i2">idea of blades of grass bei2">ing "a si2">ign of God's perfecti2">ion", because i2">if seen through lovi2">ing eyes they are rei2">interpreted as SYMBOLS that REFLECT God's perfecti2">ion. Not because they are made of God or are created BY hi2">im, but because they are forgi2">iven.

"All thi2">is beauty wi2">ill ri2">ise to bless your si2">ight, as you look upon the world wi2">ith forgi2">ivi2">ing eyes. For forgi2">iveness li2">iterally TRANSFORMS vi2">isi2">ion, and lets you see the real world, reachi2">ing qui2">ietly and gently across chaos, and removi2">ing all i2">illusi2">ions that had twi2">isted your percepti2">ion, and fi2">ixed i2">it on the past. The smallest leaf becomes a thi2">ing of wonder, and a blade of grass a si2">ign of God's perfecti2">ion. From the forgi2">iven world, the Son of God i2">is li2">ifted easi2">ily to hi2">is home. And there, he knows that he has ALWAYS rested there i2">in peace."

What thi2">is means i2">is that a ki2">ind of ... reuni2">ion of sorts, between me and the physi2">ical world, up to a poi2">int of course. A wi2">illi2">ingness to recogni2">ize that i2">it can MAKE SENSE, to suggest i2">I can look at i2">it sti2">ill but i2">in a way that doesn't take i2">its i2">illusi2">ions seri2">iously, OR condemn i2">it, OR needi2">ing to make i2">it out to be negati2">ive. Because what the world i2">IS i2">is i2">in fact completely neutral and nothi2">ing, ulti2">imately.

My egoi2">ic false percepti2">ions about i2">it, were mi2">istaken for what the world i2">IS. Gui2">ilt and si2">in and fear we ASSOCi2">IATED Wi2">ITH the world, thought to be ONE THi2">ING, when i2">in fact they are two thi2">ings. i2">I di2">id thi2">is as part of my Di2">IS-associ2">iati2">ion of gui2">ilt i2">in my mi2">ind, whi2">ich bound my gui2">ilt to the world and made me beli2">ieve i2">IT was i2">inherently gui2">ilty. The world cannot be i2">inherently anythi2">ing, because i2">it i2">is really nothi2">ing. There i2">is no world at all.

i2">If what the world i2">IS i2">is not i2">inherently evi2">il, because i2">it i2">is nothi2">ing, then thi2">is at least provi2">ides the logi2">ical basi2">is for bei2">ing able to project love onto i2">it. Rather than the i2">impossi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of lovi2">ing an i2">inherently false world. i2">If the world can act to reflect heaven, then i2">it makes i2">it OK to "love i2">it", even i2">if thi2">is i2">is a temporary love desi2">igned ulti2">imately to di2">ispel i2">it.

i2">I also see that i2">I thought that movi2">ing i2">into a hi2">igher percepti2">ion meant "not seei2">ing the physi2">ical world", and i2">I had associ2">iated the physi2">ical world wi2">ith false percepti2">ion. i2">I thought i2">it should become i2">invi2">isi2">ible and unseen, when approachi2">ing chri2">ist vi2">isi2">ion. But i2">I see now that i2">in fact a bi2">ig part of reachi2">ing forgi2">iveness sti2">ill entai2">ils looki2">ing upon the physi2">ical world but Wi2">ITH forgi2">iveness, whi2">ich overlooks i2">its forms and such and gi2">ives i2">it a love to reflect back. Recogni2">izi2">ing i2">it as a mi2">irror wi2">ith no meani2">ing of i2">its own. As such blades of grass and leaves can become "thi2">ings of wonder" and the world can appear beauti2">iful, as i2">it prepares to vani2">ish.

"Chri2">ist's vi2">isi2">ion has one law. i2">It does not look upon a body and mi2">istake i2">it for the Son whom God created (but sti2">ill looks upon a body). i2">It beholds a li2">ight beyond the body (at the same ti2">ime); an i2">idea beyond what can be touched, a puri2">ity undi2">immed by errors, pi2">iti2">iful mi2">istakes, and fearful thoughts of gui2">ilt from dreams of si2">in. i2">It sees no separati2">ion. And i2">it looks on everyone, on every ci2">ircumstance, all happeni2">ings and all events (whi2">ich i2">is sti2">ill physi2">ical), wi2">ithout the sli2">ightest fadi2">ing of the li2">ight i2">it sees."

"For you wi2">ill not i2">interpret what you see wi2">ithout the Ai2">id that God has gi2">iven you. And i2">in Hi2">is si2">ight there i2">IS another world. You li2">ive i2">in that world just as much as thi2">is, for BOTH are concepts of yourself, whi2">ich can be i2">interchanged, but never joi2">intly held."

"Have you wondered what the world i2">is REALLY li2">ike? How would i2">it look through HAPPY eyes? The world you see i2">is but a judgment on YOURSELF. i2">IT i2">is not there at all. But judgment lays a sentence on i2">it, JUSTi2">IFi2">IES i2">it, and MAKES i2">IT REAL. Such i2">is the world you see; a judgment on yourself, and made by YOU. Thi2">is si2">ickly pi2">icture of yourself i2">is carefully preserved by the ego, whose i2">image i2">it i2">IS and whi2">ich i2">it loves, and placed OUTSi2">IDE you, i2">in the world.”

Noti2">ice how that paragraph i2">is really talki2">ing about your secondary projecti2">ion onto the world, whi2">ich places an i2">image i2">INTO the world, seemi2">ingly outsi2">ide of you, whi2">ich i2">is a pi2">icture of your si2">ick self you projected ONTO i2">it. Thi2">is i2">is what the EGO makes of you and of the world - the voi2">id - the empti2">iness, i2">in tryi2">ing to fi2">ill i2">it wi2">ith i2">images.

"i2">It i2">is essenti2">ial, therefore, that you learn to ***recogni2">ize the meani2">ingless, and accept i2">it wi2">ithout fear***. i2">If you are fearful (i2">in ego/false percepti2">ion), i2">it i2">is certai2">in that you wi2">ill endow the world wi2">ith attri2">ibutes whi2">ich i2">it does not possess, and crowd i2">it (project onto i2">it secondari2">ily) wi2">ith i2">images that do not exi2">ist."

The world we made i2">ITSELF, can be "a thi2">ing of wonder." But only i2">if i2">it i2">is seen through "lovi2">ing eyes".

"There i2">IS another purpose i2">in the world that error made because i2">it has another Maker, Who CAN reconci2">ile i2">its goal wi2">ith Hi2">is Creator's Purpose."

"The real world i2">is attai2">ined si2">imply by the COMPLETE forgi2">iveness of the old; the world you see Wi2">ITHOUT forgi2">iveness. The Great Transformer of percepti2">ion wi2">ill undertake Wi2">ITH you the careful searchi2">ing of the mi2">ind that MADE thi2">is world, and uncover TO YOU the SEEMi2">ING reasons for your maki2">ing i2">it. i2">In the li2">ight of the REAL reason that He bri2">ings, as you follow Hi2">im, He wi2">ill SHOW you that there i2">is NO reason here at all. Each spot Hi2">IS reason touches, grows ali2">ive wi2">ith beauty. And what SEEMED ugly, i2">in the darkness of your LACK of reason, i2">is suddenly released to loveli2">iness. Not even what the Son of God made i2">in i2">insani2">ity, could be wi2">ithout a hi2">idden spark of beauty, that gentleness could release."

"Agai2">in we come to the questi2">ion of judgment. Thi2">is ti2">ime, ask yourself whether your judgment or the Word of God i2">is more li2">ikely to be true. For they say di2">ifferent thi2">ings about the world, and thi2">ings so opposi2">ite that i2">it i2">is poi2">intless to try to reconci2">ile them. God offers the world salvati2">ion; your judgment would condemn i2">it. God says there i2">is no death; your judgment sees but death as the i2">inevi2">itable end of li2">ife. God's Word assures you that He loves the world; your judgment says i2">it i2">is unlovable. Who i2">is ri2">ight? For one of you i2">is wrong. i2">It must be so."

"Peace i2">is i2">impossi2">ible to those who look on war. Peace i2">is i2">inevi2">itable to those who offer peace. How easi2">ily, then, i2">is your judgment of the world escaped. i2">It i2">is not the world whi2">ich makes peace seem i2">impossi2">ible. i2">It i2">is the world you see that i2">is i2">impossi2">ible. Yet has God's Judgment on thi2">is di2">istorted world redeemed i2">it and made i2">it fi2">it to welcome peace. And peace descends on i2">it i2">in joyous answer. Peace now belongs here, because a Thought of God has entered. What else but a Thought of God turns hell to Heaven merely by bei2">ing what i2">It i2">is? The earth bows down before i2">Its graci2">ious Presence, and i2">It leans down i2">in answer to rai2">ise i2">it up agai2">in. Now i2">is the questi2">ion di2">ifferent. i2">It i2">is no longer, "Can peace be possi2">ible i2">in thi2">is world?" but i2">instead, "i2">Is i2">it not i2">impossi2">ible that peace be absent here?"

"i2">Into thi2">is empty space, from whi2">ich the GOAL of si2">in has been removed, i2">is Heaven free to be remembered. Here i2">its peace can come, and perfect heali2">ing take the place of death. The body can become a si2">ign of li2">ife, a promi2">ise of redempti2">ion, and a breath of i2">immortali2">ity to those grown si2">ick of breathi2">ing i2">in the feti2">id scent of death. Let i2">it have heali2">ing as i2">its PURPOSE. Then wi2">ill i2">it send forth the message i2">it recei2">ived, and by i2">its health and loveli2">iness proclai2">im the truth and value that i2">it represents. Let i2">it recei2">ive the power to represent an endless li2">ife, forever unattacked. And to your brother let i2">its message be, "Behold me, brother, at your hand i2">I li2">ive."

"The world stands li2">ike a block before Chri2">ist's face. But true percepti2">ion looks on i2">it as nothi2">ing more than just a fragi2">ile vei2">il, so easi2">ily di2">ispelled that i2">it can last no longer than an i2">instant. i2">It i2">is seen at last for ***only what i2">it i2">is***. And now i2">it ***cannot fai2">il to di2">isappear***, for now there i2">is an ***empty place made clean and ready***. Where destructi2">ion was percei2">ived the face of Chri2">ist appears, and i2">in that i2">instant i2">is ***the world forgot, wi2">ith ti2">ime forever ended as the world spi2">ins i2">into nothi2">ingness*** from where i2">it came."

As we heal others we heal ourselves, and as we heal ourselves we heal others.

"i2">I wi2">ill heal as i2">I let Hi2">im teach me to heal" - ACi2">IM

Just as teachi2">ing and learni2">ing are the same thi2">ing, so does heali2">ing apply both to who you thi2">ink of as a separate you, and who you thi2">ink of as not you. Heali2">ing i2">is the joi2">ini2">ing of the two i2">into one.

So i2">if we beli2">ieve i2">in si2">ickness, that si2">ickness i2">is real or that i2">it i2">is really happeni2">ing, or that there i2">is truth to i2">it, or that i2">it i2">is founded on evi2">idence or real causes that pretend to be the reasons why i2">it i2">is happeni2">ing, then we must be beli2">ievi2">ing that we also ourselves are si2">ick.

We cannot beli2">ieve on the one hand that we are not si2">ick whi2">ile others are si2">ick. Or that si2">ickness i2">is happeni2">ing to them and not to us. i2">If we beli2">ieve i2">in si2">ickness, we beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it peri2">iod, and i2">it appli2">ies everywhere.

Thi2">is i2">is why we have a vested i2">interest, a shared i2">interest, i2">in bri2">ingi2">ing heali2">ing mi2">iracles to others, because as ACi2">IM says, mi2">iracles help both the gi2">iver and the recei2">iver.

We have to recogni2">ize that i2">it i2">is the ego's thought system of separati2">ion whi2">ich convi2">inces us we are not the one who i2">is associ2">iated wi2">ith si2">ickness, and that i2">it i2">is someone else who i2">is separately si2">ick. Or that thei2">ir si2">ickness somehow belongs only to them and that therefore we want to keep our di2">istance unless i2">it i2">infects us.

Perhaps the person i2">is si2">ick because we beli2">ieve we are separate from them, and separati2">ion i2">is the cause of si2">ickness.

And i2">if they are si2">ick, and i2">if i2">it appears that we are not si2">ick, we sti2">ill must be si2">ick because i2">in some way we sti2">ill beli2">ieve that si2">ickness i2">is real. Only i2">if we are able to overlook si2">ickness i2">in others and recogni2">ize thei2">ir true nature, can we recogni2">ize our own true nature.

So ei2">ither way, we must learn not to be decei2">ived by appearances of si2">ickness i2">in ourselves or i2">in others, equally, and to look past sufferi2">ing to the truth of causali2">ity, cancelli2">ing out all of the arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial fake causes whi2">ich masquerade as reasons why the si2">ickness must exi2">ist.

There i2">is no truth other than the truth of God, and i2">in God's reali2">ity there can be no si2">ickness. There i2">is no separati2">ion. There i2">is only eternal li2">ife. All other beli2">ief systems of "real si2">ickness" are therefore arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial and untrue. All reacti2">ions to real si2">ickness are therefore unfounded. And a fai2">ilure to extend the truth and thus heal i2">is si2">imply evi2">idence of our own current unwi2">illi2">ingness to be healed also.

As you take steps on thi2">is heali2">ing journey, you wi2">ill be i2">included i2">in the heali2">ing. i2">It i2">is the pri2">ivi2">ilege of the forgi2">iven to forgi2">ive, whi2">ich means, those who have come to accept the atonement for themselves and thus are i2">in a forgi2">ivi2">ing atti2">itude of Holi2">iness, are also now shari2">ing that heali2">ing power wi2">ith others and are now pri2">ivi2">ileged to resurrect thei2">ir brothers. To bri2">ing all back to the eternal li2">ife.

My heali2">ing i2">is your heali2">ing. Your heali2">ing i2">is my heali2">ing. We are one.

Here i2">is a si2">imple and effecti2">ive forgi2">iveness process whi2">ich i2">I di2">id thi2">is morni2">ing wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it.

You start by fi2">iguri2">ing out where you are on a spectrum from Li2">ife to Death. The spectrum has these stages:

Love/i2">Innocence > Separati2">ion > Si2">in > Gui2">ilt > Fear > Puni2">ishment/Sufferi2">ing > Death.

On whatever i2">issue you want to do forgi2">iveness, or even just a general forgi2">iveness, locate what you seem to be *most di2">irectly aware* of ri2">ight now. For me thi2">is was "fear".

Whatever stage you are most aware of, thats the stage whi2">ich has not yet fully "projected" i2">into the next stage. And all the stages beneath i2">it are currently unconsci2">ious. i2">I was experi2">ienci2">ing fear because separati2">ion/si2">in/gui2">ilt were unconsci2">ious and i2">I hadn't yet entered puni2">ishment.

Once you've located where your consci2">ious mi2">ind i2">is at, work your way backwards through the stages to undo each layer of beli2">ief. i2">If you don't need one or more of the earli2">ier steps because you di2">idn't fi2">ind yourself i2">in them at the begi2">inni2">ing, you can ski2">ip them. e.g. i2">if you mostly feel gui2">ilty, you probably don't need to undo fear.

At each layer of awareness/beli2">ief, there are a few steps to go through.

1) You beli2">ieve that the step i2">is real, and you need to undo thi2">is beli2">ief. Holy Spi2">iri2">it can help here. Recogni2">ize you beli2">ieve i2">in "real" thi2">is (e.g. real fear), and affi2">irm that i2">it i2">is not real (e.g. "fear i2">is not real, i2">I am not afrai2">id").

2) You should then start to have the i2">insi2">ight that the only reason you are experi2">ienci2">ing thi2">is step i2">is because the step you di2">idn't get to yet (unconsci2">ious) i2">is CAUSi2">ING thi2">is step. Separati2">ion demands si2">in. Si2">in demands gui2">ilt. Gui2">ilt demands fear. Fear demands puni2">ishment. Puni2">ishment demands death. Therefore the step i2">isn't there i2">in i2">its "own ri2">ight", as an i2">isolated 'thi2">ing'. i2">It's a projecti2">ion from another level and i2">is bei2">ing generated by another level. Seei2">ing thi2">is helps you to reali2">ize the current level of beli2">ief i2">is not the CAUSE of i2">it. i2">It i2">is an EFFECT. And si2">ince i2">it's not a cause, i2">it i2">is not real, so you can let i2">it go. Undo the beli2">ief by affi2">irmi2">ing i2">it i2">is not REAL. "There i2">is no real fear" "There i2">is no real gui2">ilt" etc. Fear does not cause fear. Gui2">ilt does not cause gui2">ilt. Si2">in does not cause si2">in.

3) Once you can reali2">ize that your current level of awareness/beli2">ief (the stage you're at) i2">is comi2">ing from a hi2">idden level, and you undo the current level by cancelli2">ing the beli2">ief and the i2">illusi2">ion that i2">it was real i2">in i2">its own ri2">ight, noti2">ice that i2">if you do not correct the next level, i2">it wi2">ill REPRODUCE the experi2">ience that you just got done removi2">ing! You can remove fear, but i2">if you don't remove gui2">ilt, i2">it wi2">ill reproduce fear. You can remove gui2">ilt, but i2">if you don't remove si2">in, i2">it wi2">ill reproduce gui2">ilt and fear. We have to work our way ALL the way to the Atonement i2">in order to uproot the whole problem.

4) Havi2">ing undone beli2">ief that the current step i2">is real, and affi2">irmi2">ing you do not beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it, and havi2">ing released i2">it (Holy Spi2">iri2">it can help), your mi2">ind should have shi2">ifted to bei2">ing aware of the next step/level. i2">If you undi2">id the beli2">ief properly, you wi2">ill feel "free" of the step you were on, should no longer be experi2">ienci2">ing i2">it, and wi2">ill become aware of the experi2">ience of the next step. So i2">if you were feeli2">ing fear, you should no longer be feeli2">ing fear, and wi2">ill now be feeli2">ing gui2">ilty. Gui2">ilt wi2">ill be the mai2">in thi2">ing you are consci2">ious of. Or whatever comes as the next level from where you're at.

5) Conti2">inue on through the steps thi2">is way unti2">il you get to the recogni2">iti2">ion that si2">in i2">is not real, separati2">ion has not happened, and therefore you are i2">IN the experi2">ience of the atonement. i2">If you have undone the beli2">ief that the puni2">ishment i2">is real, that the fear i2">is real, that the gui2">ilt i2">is real, and that the si2">in i2">is real, and that the separati2">ion really happened, you should now be i2">in the TRUTH.

The truth should make you aware of GOD. God's truth should be i2">in some way i2">in your mi2">ind, whereby you should now be able to ACCEPT that you are i2">innocent, because you do not beli2">ieve you si2">inned. You should be able to reali2">ize that you are forgi2">iven, because you di2">id not really do anythi2">ing. And you should be aware that God sti2">ill LOVES YOU 100% because you are WORTHY of love, havi2">ing not done anythi2">ing wrong.

You may fi2">ind yourself feeli2">ing "i2">I AM FREE". You may experi2">ience JOY. You should feel RELi2">IEF. Especi2">ially now that you can affi2">irm "i2">I have not si2">inned, i2">I am i2">innocent". Your mi2">ind i2">is now experi2">ienci2">ing the truth as your pri2">imary, consci2">ious experi2">ience. Forgi2">iveness accompli2">ished. And because thi2">is has been ACCEPTED and OWNED, and because you've seen through all the i2">illusory levels of the ego thought system, you are now PERMANENTLY FREE of what you forgave. i2">It wi2">ill not come back, because i2">it has no foundati2">ion. The Atonement pri2">inci2">iple has completely undone the "cause" at i2">its roots.

Your mi2">ind i2">is now i2">IN a state of forgi2">iveness. You are i2">in the Holy Spi2">iri2">it. You are now the li2">ight of the world. You are the Prodi2">igal Son, and you've come Home!

"i2">I am not a body i2">I am free, for i2">I am sti2">ill as God created me."

You cannot defi2">ine yourself. God created you. You had no say i2">in thi2">is because you di2">idn't exi2">ist at the ti2">ime. You came i2">into bei2">ing by hi2">is wi2">ill alone, and per hi2">is desi2">ign. Whatever you are, i2">is gi2">iven by hi2">im, and cannot be changed.

Some would possi2">ibly i2">interpret thi2">is as i2">impri2">isoni2">ing, as though grounds for rebelli2">ion. As i2">if you want to change yourself but are not allowed. At best, you can deny what you are, as God created you, and pretend to be somethi2">ing you are not . But you can't actually remove what you are deep down.

You are free to do thi2">is. You can pretend to be anythi2">ing you want. You can pretend to have authori2">ity over hi2">im and to have created yourself. You can redefi2">ine your i2">images of what you are ti2">ill the cows come home. But sti2">ill you cannot replace what God has created.

Thi2">is means really that no matter how you defi2">ine yourself, you wi2">ill never be wholly sati2">isfi2">ied. Thi2">is i2">is because God has already lai2">id clai2">im to the perfect defi2">ini2">iti2">ion of you. The defi2">ini2">iti2">ion whi2">ich results i2">in you bei2">ing at your happi2">iest, most sati2">isfi2">ied, most joyful and creati2">ive, and most accepti2">ing of yourself. To reject a perfect i2">identi2">ity i2">is to settle for less.

So i2">if you are i2">in the busi2">iness of havi2">ing to be the gatekeeper wi2">ith an authori2">ity problem who wants to tell God what they are, you can go ri2">ight ahead. But i2">it wi2">ill not ulti2">imately sati2">isfy you. Nor wi2">ill i2">it bri2">ing you total happi2">iness or creati2">ive power or love or joy or peace or meani2">ing. i2">It can't, because there i2">is only one perfecti2">ion and that's the one God has chosen you to be.

You can own up to accepti2">ing a ki2">ind of "off the shelf" i2">identi2">ity from God, accepti2">ing that you are as God created you and have never changed. Or you can deny that and go i2">into a ki2">ind of ni2">ightmare of confusi2">ion about who and what you are, endlessly searchi2">ing for the self you lost, and tryi2">ing to replace i2">it wi2">ith make-beli2">ieve fi2">icti2">ion. But only accepti2">ing God's defi2">ini2">iti2">ion of you wi2">ill truly fulfi2">ill you.

You can "try on" all manner of bodi2">ies. You can wrap yourself i2">in wardrobes of clothi2">ing. You can put on masks and dress up and role play and pretend to be vari2">ious thi2">ings. But they ulti2">imately are all empty because they lack the wholeness of God's defi2">ini2">iti2">ion of you. You can't fi2">ind love and wholeness anywhere else. He has the monopoly on that.

Some rebel agai2">inst God because they don't li2">ike thi2">is sense of not bei2">ing free to dei2">ifne who and what they are. They thi2">ink they have the ri2">ight to redefi2">ine themselves i2">in thei2">ir own i2">image and li2">ikeness, to whatever whi2">im they please. i2">Indeed they ARE free to do thi2">is. But that does not mean they can ACTUALLY accompli2">ish i2">it, or that i2">it can make them happy. You can deny your reali2">ity, but you cannot exti2">ingui2">ish i2">it.

Somewhere deep down you know that only the self that God created you to be i2">is the one you can fully accept and be true to. i2">It's the only defi2">ini2">iti2">ion of you that i2">is sane, and the only one that works. You are part of the functi2">ioni2">ing of the machi2">inery of heaven. You have been gi2">iven a functi2">ion and a role to play, assi2">igned by God's wi2">ill. i2">If you do not want to fi2">it i2">into that and fulfi2">ill that functi2">ion, then you wi2">ill rebel and try to i2">invent other functi2">ions.

Only the functi2">ion God gave you can work. Only God's wi2">ill for you can make you happy. Only God's mi2">ind can keep you ali2">ive forever. And only accepti2">ing yourself as you really are can bri2">ing you peace. But you have to want i2">it.

"i2">I am not weak, but strong.

i2">I am not helpless, but all powerful.

i2">I am not li2">imi2">ited, but unli2">imi2">ited.

i2">I am not doubtful, but certai2">in.

i2">I am not an i2">illusi2">ion, but a reali2">ity.

i2">I cannot see i2">in darkness, but i2">in li2">ight."

There i2">is a good reason why thi2">is paragraph i2">is a correcti2">ion. Each ti2">ime that we react to the world as though we are at i2">its effect, and that i2">it i2">is causi2">ing us to suffer, we are i2">in a state of weakness, helplessness, li2">imi2">itati2">ion, doubt, i2">illusi2">ion and darkness. Thi2">is i2">isn't our natural state.

What we need to get to as we reverse cause and effect to i2">its proper sequence (i2">I am at cause, not at effect), i2">is that we're regai2">ini2">ing access to the truth about ourselves. We're reclai2">imi2">ing strength and power and certai2">inty. We're becomi2">ing more responsi2">ible and li2">ight-fi2">illed. And so thi2">is li2">ittle prayer affi2">irms that and helps us to move out of darkness i2">into truth.

"i2">I am not weak, but strong.

i2">I am not helpless, but all powerful.

i2">I am not li2">imi2">ited, but unli2">imi2">ited.

i2">I am not doubtful, but certai2">in.

i2">I am not an i2">illusi2">ion, but a reali2">ity.

i2">I cannot see i2">in darkness, but i2">in li2">ight."

i2">It di2">irectly leads us out of ego, i2">into the Holy Spi2">iri2">it.

i2">I li2">ike to do reci2">ite thi2">is and to then ADD to i2">it as many other contrasts as i2">I can thi2">ink of. e.g.

i2">I am not afrai2">id but empowered.

i2">I am not gui2">ilty but i2">innocent.

i2">I am not si2">ick but healthy.

i2">I am not separate but whole.

i2">I am not di2">ivi2">ided but one.

i2">I am not at loss but abundant.

Somethi2">ing whi2">ich i2">I've been fi2">indi2">ing very helpful lately, i2">is to focus on "already" bei2">ing as God created me.

i2">It's a recogni2">iti2">ion, that what God created has already been establi2">ished, has not changed, and therefore all i2">I need to do i2">is acknowledge and accept i2">it.

Thi2">is i2">is qui2">ite di2">ifferent from tryi2">ing to "become" i2">it or to "seek" for i2">it outsi2">ide of myself, or away from what i2">I already am.

There i2">is a bi2">it of a knack to thi2">is because our ego thi2">inki2">ing i2">is so used to movi2">ing away from Self, away from God, away from what already i2">is.

Even all of our spi2">iri2">itual "searchi2">ing" or tryi2">ing to fi2">ind oneself, i2">is for the most part based on beli2">ievi2">ing that we are not spi2">iri2">itual "yet", and so becomi2">ing spi2">iri2">itual i2">is i2">in the future, and so there are steps we need to take to get there.

Enli2">ightenment i2">is but a recogni2">iti2">ion and not a change at all. i2">It i2">is a recogni2">iti2">ion of what i2">is, of what i2">is true, of what already exi2">ists.

i2">It completely ali2">igns wi2">ith the atonement, whi2">ich asserts that nothi2">ing has even happened. We di2">idn't even START to really separate form God, we haven't gone anywhere, we haven't even begun to si2">in, our i2">innocence i2">is sti2">ill totally i2">intact, and we are STi2">ILL completely perfect as God created us.

For me getti2">ing i2">in touch wi2">ith thi2">is has been greatly ampli2">ifi2">ied by acceptance that God created many Sons, that i2">I am a Son of God, and that i2">I have a soul. i2">I've started to be more and more curi2">ious about my soul and thus my "true self", i2">in i2">its pri2">isti2">ine state - absolutely perfect, lacki2">ing nothi2">ing, joyful, lovi2">ing, powerful, peaceful, etc.

Someti2">imes when i2">I am i2">in the mi2">idst of ego confusi2">ion and i2">I thi2">ink shi2">it, i2">I've got to do all ki2">inds of stuff to get out of thi2">is, i2">if i2">I then remember... wai2">it a mi2">inute, i2">I am already as God created me, i2">I am sti2">ill as God created me, i2">insi2">ide of me there i2">is already a perfect self whi2">ich has nothi2">ing wrong wi2">ith i2">it. i2">It cuts through the enti2">ire ego bullshi2">it li2">ike a kni2">ife. Si2">imply because, i2">if the end goal i2">is ALREADY ACCOMPLi2">ISHED, then all thi2">is bullshi2">it about "somethi2">ing i2">is wrong" i2">is shown to be completely poi2">intless, meani2">ingless, futi2">ile and ri2">idi2">iculous.

i2">It's li2">ike, holy shi2">it, i2">I AM ALREADY PERFECT. i2">I am already the way God created me. My soul i2">is already i2">in heaven. My real self i2">is already completely awakened.

And that can be a bi2">it of a mi2">ind fuck as well because here i2">I am beli2">ievi2">ing that awakeni2">ing i2">is a long process, i2">it takes ti2">ime, i2">I have stuff to undo, there i2">is forgi2">iveness to be done, heali2">ing that i2">isn't fi2">ini2">ished, etc... and yet, i2">IT i2">IS ALREADY COMPLETE because i2">it never even really started.

i2">It almost seems li2">ike, we've come to beli2">ieve that bei2">ing perfectly awakened i2">is 'hard' or rare or di2">iffi2">icult, when i2">in fact, the totally hi2">ilari2">ious thi2">ing i2">is... we ALREADY ARE.

Underneath all the bullshi2">it that says "you are not awake", you are aware. Underneath all the bullshi2">it that says "you are not perfect", you are already totally perfect.

You have thi2">is 'hi2">igher self', thi2">is soul or spi2">iri2">it, whi2">ich i2">is already i2">immortal, i2">it's already i2">innocent, i2">it's already i2">in perfect health, i2">it's already accepted eternal li2">ife, i2">it's already i2">in heaven wi2">ith God, i2">it's already holy, i2">it's already free of all si2">in and gui2">ilt and fear and death, and i2">it needs to "do nothi2">ing" because i2">it i2">is already absolutely di2">ivi2">ine. Li2">ike... i2">it's already a done deal!

So i2">it's never a questi2">ion of, well, i2">I mi2">ight not wake up or there's lots to do or i2">I haven't fi2">ini2">ished yet, bla bla bla... i2">it's i2">it hi2">ilari2">ious that the END GOAL i2">is already DONE? Because all of thi2">is stuff that seemed to happen to undo our di2">ivi2">ine state, has not actually happened at all!

So our awakened self i2">is ALREADY HERE. Your hi2">igher self i2">is ALREADY "wi2">ith you". Your i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it i2">is ALREADY perfectly i2">in a state of grace forever. You CANNOT di2">ie and have never di2">ied. And all thi2">is other "stuff" i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion.

So here you fi2">ind yourself seemi2">ingly "i2">in ti2">ime", wi2">ith a whole bucketload of stuff that you thi2">ink you need to "do" i2">in order to "become spi2">iri2">itual" when i2">in fact, i2">insi2">ide of you, you are already ABSOLUTELY i2">IMMACULATE and totally as God i2">intended and have not changed at all. And that perfect self i2">is just seemi2">ingly hi2">idden from vi2">iew behi2">ind all these layers of ego nonsense. All the ego nonsenses does i2">is clai2">im that you are not what you already are.

You can already talk to your ascended-master self. You can already tap i2">into your perfect soul. You already are Fi2">INi2">ISHED. You are already wi2">ith God. You are already i2">in heaven. i2">Isn't that hi2">ilari2">ious? The only "job" that we seem to have i2">is UNDOi2">ING the false beli2">iefs that thi2">is i2">isn't true, that we have work to do, that there i2">is stuff to forgi2">ive and heal, that somethi2">ing went wrong, that we're off the rai2">ils and can't get home, that we don't deserve to be what we actually already are, lol. ... just all these cover-ups for the underlyi2">ing ALREADY ESTABLi2">ISHED TRUTH.

i2">I am as God created me, NOW, ALREADY, and ALWAYS HAVE BEEN. The "end goal" i2">is i2">IN THE PAST. i2">It has ALWAYS BEEN. So all thi2">is other stuff, i2">it's all a li2">ie. You are already guaranteed to be wi2">ith God because YOU ARE. Li2">iterally. Ri2">ight now. Behi2">ind all the nonsense and FAKE unconsci2">iousness, you are already done, already fi2">ini2">ished "waki2">ing up".

YOU NEVER REALLY SLEPT!

The ego ali2">igns wi2">ith the physi2">ical world, and i2">is completely backwards. i2">It operates on the basi2">is of how the physi2">ical works.

i2">It says, i2">if i2">I gi2">ive you somethi2">ing, i2">I must lose i2">it. We can't both have i2">it. We could have a tug of war, or a compromi2">ise of lack, but we can't both have i2">it at the same ti2">ime.

Thi2">is i2">is completely backwards accordi2">ing to God's law. God says that i2">if you gi2">ive somethi2">ing you recei2">ive i2">it because gi2">ivi2">ing and recei2">ivi2">ing are one. So i2">if i2">I gi2">ive somethi2">ing to you, there i2">is no loss, and we both have all of i2">it at the same ti2">ime.

i2">It then seems completely i2">impossi2">ible to actually express God's law i2">in thi2">is world on a physi2">ical level, because the physi2">ical laws themselves - whi2">ich are laws of separati2">ion - say you cannot do i2">it. That we can't both have the whole si2">imultaneously.

However, a more advanced mi2">iracle worker can break the physi2">ical laws and demonstrate that gi2">ivi2">ing and recei2">ivi2">ing are one. For example Jesus di2">id thi2">is when he showed that he could multi2">iply food and feed thousands of people. Thi2">is vi2">iolated the physi2">ical laws whi2">ich sai2">id that i2">if he would gi2">ive the ori2">igi2">inal bread and fi2">ish away, there would be none left to feed the crowd.

The ego beli2">ieves enti2">irely i2">in physi2">icali2">ity as bei2">ing reali2">ity. i2">It based i2">its whole thought system on thi2">is model of separati2">ion. Objects whi2">ich are kept apart by physi2">ical space (di2">istance) and ti2">ime (delay). Both of whi2">ich are attempts to avoi2">id the presence of God.

i2">If for example i2">in thi2">is world a person seems to di2">ie, thei2">ir body i2">is dead etc, the ego says that thi2">is evi2">idence proves the person has been exti2">ingui2">ished from exi2">istence. And i2">if thi2">is i2">is real, you should be horri2">ifi2">ied and upset. You should then experi2">ience loss and gri2">ief.

But the truth i2">is that the person's spi2">iri2">it li2">ives on i2">in heaven and has eternal li2">ife, so there has not really been a death. And so the body i2">isn't showi2">ing the truth. Spi2">iri2">it could demonstrate thi2">is fact for example by materi2">iali2">izi2">ing another body, whi2">ich i2">is what Jesus di2">id i2">in hi2">is resurrecti2">ion, and someti2">imes the angels do thi2">is also.

Si2">imi2">ilarly the ego beli2">ieves that freedom means separati2">ion. i2">In order to be free of somethi2">ing or someone i2">it has to go away. You have to lose i2">it. But i2">in God's rules, you can have freedom and also have oneness shared wi2">ith another at the same ti2">ime. Bei2">ing free doesn't mean you are separate whatsoever, i2">it means you are also joi2">ined wi2">ithout stri2">ings attached. To the ego, freedom i2">is i2">impri2">isonment.

i2">It then seems qui2">ite challengi2">ing for us to ri2">ise up out of the ego thought system - a system whi2">ich ali2">igns closely to how the physi2">ical world seems to work - and up i2">into a hi2">igher path based on the laws of God. A state i2">in whi2">ich only the truth i2">is true, and "i2">I am under no laws but God's". A state from whi2">ich the seemi2">ing laws of physi2">ical can be completely broken and i2">ignored through mi2">iracles.

The hi2">igher state completely vi2">iolates and reverses and i2">ignores the physi2">ical order. i2">It pays no attenti2">ion to the seemi2">ing li2">imi2">itati2">ions of separateness, the i2">illusi2">ion of objects and forms, the presentati2">ion of di2">istance or ti2">ime. Mi2">iracles pay no attenti2">ion to what the physi2">ical says can or cannot happen.

"mi2">iracles vi2">iolate every law of reali2">ity, as thi2">is world judges i2">it. Every law of ti2">ime and space, of magni2">itude and mass, of predi2">icti2">ion and control, i2">is transcended"

"Thus does the mi2">iracle undo all thi2">ings the world attests can never BE undone. And hopelessness and death MUST di2">isappear before the anci2">ient clari2">ion call of li2">ife. Thi2">is call has power FAR beyond the weak and mi2">iserable cry of death and gui2">ilt."

i2">In order to awaken to reali2">ity we have to move our mi2">ind i2">into the hi2">igher order, i2">into the hi2">igher mi2">ind and i2">its hi2">igher thought system. Thi2">is means ali2">igni2">ing wi2">ith God's laws and li2">ivi2">ing by them. These are NON-PHYSi2">ICAL laws whi2">ich run totally agai2">inst the grai2">in of the world.

And that means that you're adopti2">ing a beli2">ief system and perspecti2">ive and relati2">ionshi2">ip that i2">is runni2">ing totally contrary to the world. i2">In fact the enti2">ire world's lower and backward thought system has to be totally reversed and deni2">ied.

Thi2">is world, the physi2">ical world, space and ti2">ime, Earth and bodi2">ies, operate completely opposi2">ite to how heaven functi2">ions. And we have to learn to wean ourselves off of i2">its i2">illusi2">ions and i2">its ways, i2">its nature and i2">its li2">imi2">itati2">ions, and ri2">ise up to heaven i2">in a celebrati2">ion of joy and happi2">iness that thi2">is world i2">is completely false and does not apply to us.

We need to stop beli2">ievi2">ing, percei2">ivi2">ing, and functi2">ioni2">ing based on how the physi2">ical world operates. We need to functi2">ion based on how God operates, and i2">it i2">is totally opposi2">ite to the physi2">ical world and all i2">its ways. You are not of thi2">is world and never were.

"The world wi2">ill end when i2">its thought system has been completely reversed."

"Thi2">is i2">is the fi2">irst i2">idea we have had whi2">ich i2">is related to a major phase of the correcti2">ion process; the reversal of the thi2">inki2">ing of the world."

"Yet i2">it i2">is the fi2">inal lesson i2">in whi2">ich Uni2">ity i2">is restored. i2">It goes agai2">inst all the thi2">inki2">ing of the world, but so does Heaven."

"The resurrecti2">ion i2">is the deni2">ial of death, bei2">ing the asserti2">ion of li2">ife. Thus i2">is all the thi2">inki2">ing of the world reversed enti2">irely."

"Today's i2">idea, completely ali2">ien to the ego and the thi2">inki2">ing of the world, i2">is cruci2">ial to the thought reversal whi2">ich thi2">is course wi2">ill bri2">ing about."

"To gi2">ive up all problems to one Answer i2">is to reverse the thi2">inki2">ing of the world enti2">irely."

"Only be qui2">iet. You wi2">ill need no rule but thi2">is to let your practi2">ici2">ing today li2">ift you above the thi2">inki2">ing of the world, and free your vi2">isi2">ion from the body's eyes."

"Here i2">is the perfect statement of my freedom. i2">I am under no laws but God's." "i2">I am enti2">itled to mi2">iracles because i2">I am under no laws but God's."

i2">I am not weak, but strong.

i2">I am not helpless, but all powerful.

i2">I am not li2">imi2">ited, but unli2">imi2">ited.

i2">I am not doubtful, but certai2">in.

i2">I am not an i2">illusi2">ion, but a reali2">ity.

i2">I cannot see i2">in darkness, but i2">in li2">ight.

Let's conti2">inue...

i2">I am not afrai2">id, but confi2">ident.

i2">I am not confused, but clear.

i2">I am not lost, but found.

i2">I am not false, but true.

i2">I am not alone, but uni2">ifi2">ied.

i2">I am not separate, but one.

i2">I am not lacki2">ing, but complete.

i2">I am not gui2">ilty, but si2">inless.

i2">I am not si2">inful, but i2">innocent.

i2">I am not i2">in pai2">in, but i2">in health.

i2">I am not decei2">ived, but assured.

i2">I am not depri2">ived, but grateful.

i2">I am not dead, but eternal.

i2">I am not hopeless, but joyful.

i2">I am not angry, but peaceful.

i2">I am not worri2">ied, but reassured.

i2">I am not forgetful, but aware.

i2">I am not unconsci2">ious, but knowi2">ing.

i2">I am not pressured, but free.

i2">I am not tense, but relaxed.

i2">I am not upset, but calm.

i2">I am not hateful, but forgi2">ivi2">ing.

i2">I am not hurt, but healed.

i2">I am not harmful, but a blessi2">ing.

i2">I am not ego, but Chri2">ist.

i2">I am not a body, but i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it.

i2">I am not blameful, but welcomi2">ing.

i2">I am not a li2">iar, but truthful.

i2">I am not pretenti2">ious, but honest.

i2">I am not vengeful, but gi2">ifted.

i2">I am not forgotten, but known.

i2">I am not rejected, but loved.

i2">I am not abandoned, but supported.

i2">I am not evi2">il, but pure.

i2">I am not a dream, but God's Creati2">ion.

i2">I am not a fantasy, but genui2">ine.

i2">I am not sufferi2">ing, but a blessi2">ing.

i2">I am not undone, but i2">immortal.

i2">I am not gri2">ievi2">ing, but reuni2">ited.

i2">I am not lonely, but helped.

i2">I am not sorrowful, but reli2">ieved.

i2">I am not stressful, but bli2">issful.

i2">I am not i2">in danger, but safe.

i2">I am not hopeless, but saved.

i2">I am not condemned, but forgi2">iven.

i2">I am not unloveable, but lovi2">ing.

i2">I am not unhappy, but joyous.

i2">I am not depressed, but li2">iberated.

i2">I am not di2">imi2">ini2">ished, but enli2">ightened.

i2">I am not starvi2">ing, but nouri2">ished.

i2">I am not li2">imi2">ited, but abundant.

i2">I am not harsh, but gentle.

i2">I am not cold, but heartfelt.

i2">I am not fallen, but ascended.

i2">I am not exti2">inct, but omni2">ipresent.

i2">I am not troubled, but sane.

i2">I am not a si2">inner, but a savi2">ior.

i2">I am not ugly, but beauti2">iful.

i2">I am not wi2">ithout, but wi2">ithi2">in.

i2">I am not a reject, but chosen.

i2">I am not meani2">ingless, but meani2">ingful.

Add one of your own...

The reali2">isati2">ion that you need do nothi2">ing, i2">is really the reali2">isati2">ion of ENLi2">IGHTENMENT. i2">It's somethi2">ing that suddenly becomes very clear to you, as you reach the fi2">inal goal.

The truth i2">is that i2">in the separati2">ion from God, there was NOT a loss of perfecti2">ion, and NOTHi2">ING real changed at all. The only thi2">ing that happened was we entered a state of deni2">ial, i2">in whi2">ich we blocked AWARENESS OF that perfecti2">ion, and beli2">ieved i2">in the presence of i2">imperfecti2">ion.

"The separati2">ion was not a loss of perfecti2">ion, but a fai2">ilure i2">in COMMUNi2">ICATi2">ION."

That means that there really i2">is sti2">ill a perfect state, a perfect heaven, you are sti2">ill exactly as God created you, nothi2">ing has really changed at all. But to our egoi2">ic i2">insane mi2">inds, we beli2">ieve that's not true, and we thi2">ink we've become evi2">il monsters.

So as you forgi2">ive and return to the state of enli2">ightenment, i2">in whi2">ich you RECOGNi2">IZE everythi2">ing as i2">is i2">it i2">is, you'll be suddenly reali2">isi2">ing that ... hey... oh shi2">it. .. there's actually nothi2">ing wrong wi2">ith me ..... nothi2">ing's actually gone wrong ..... i2">I'm sti2">ill perfect.

You'll look upon yourself and everyone and everythi2">ing and i2">it'll suddenly seem totally obvi2">ious that there i2">is nothi2">ing wrong whatsoever, and all of the sense that anythi2">ing was ever wrong was nothi2">ing but a dream. Some delusi2">ion that you had, some mi2">istaken percepti2">ion, some false beli2">ief, some fantasy or wi2">ishful thi2">inki2">ing where you thought and hoped you could pull off the i2">impossi2">ible.

Because the truth i2">is that "underneath" what seems to be your corrupted state, your confusi2">ion and i2">insani2">ity, your ego and your false beli2">iefs, there remai2">ins sti2">ill a PERFECT state of heaven, your actual real self whi2">ich i2">is sti2">ill 100% i2">intact and perfect, and all of creati2">ion whi2">ich has not been even remotely affected or changed.

"Why wai2">it for Heaven? Those who seek the li2">ight are merely coveri2">ing thei2">ir eyes. The li2">ight i2">is i2">in them now. Enli2">ightenment i2">is but a recogni2">iti2">ion, not a change at all."

So as you get to that fi2">inal state and you wake up, i2">it's not actually goi2">ing to be a CHANGE at all. You're not goi2">ing to suddenly change i2">into somethi2">ing. Rather, you'll si2">imply just suddenly recogni2">ize the TRUTH about you and everythi2">ing, that everythi2">ing real i2">is absolutely UNCHANGED. There never was really anythi2">ing wrong, there has never really been a di2">isaster or tragedy, there's never really been a death or a si2">ickness or a sufferi2">ing. i2">It was all a li2">ie. Some ni2">ightmare that you had when you were nuts for a whi2">ile.

So that then means that i2">in your recogni2">iti2">ion that NOTHi2">ING i2">IS WRONG AT ALL, i2">it's the recogni2">iti2">ion that you do not "need to do anythi2">ing", to fi2">ix anythi2">ing, to make anythi2">ing better, because everythi2">ing i2">IS ALREADY PERFECT. That's the true meani2">ing of "i2">I need do nothi2">ing". i2">It's not really anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith doi2">ings or happeni2">ings or whether you're busy or bei2">ing of servi2">ice or not, i2">it's to do wi2">ith the recogni2">iti2">ion of the fact that everythi2">ing real i2">is completely perfect and unchanged. That there i2">is no real need.

i2">It sti2">ill remai2">ins that there does appear to be a NEED for those who are NOT YET AWARE of thei2">ir perfecti2">ion, and who therefore beli2">ieve i2">in and dream of bei2">ing mortal and corrupt and powerless and vi2">icti2">ims. THEY have an i2">illusi2">ion of a need, and whi2">ile they have that i2">illusi2">ion they do need help. But what they need i2">is help to reali2">ize that they do not have any needs, because there not broken. And to that end, you can DO THi2">INGS to help them wi2">ith that temporary sense of need, to move them towards the state where they reali2">ize also that "i2">I need do nothi2">ing - because i2">I'm already perfect."

Thi2">is relates also to forgi2">iveness because true forgi2">iveness i2">it the recogni2">iti2">ion that THERE i2">IS NO Si2">IN, and therefore nothi2">ing TO forgi2">ive. The recogni2">iti2">ion of no si2">in i2">is the abi2">ili2">ity to see that there i2">is no lack, nothi2">ing i2">is broken, nothi2">ing has gone wrong, and so there i2">is no need for any correcti2">ion. No-one has done anythi2">ing wrong i2">in reali2">ity. Perfecti2">ion i2">is sti2">ill perfect. There i2">is only permanent i2">innocence - a si2">inlessness guaranteed by God.

Long story short, there basi2">ically i2">is nothi2">ing really wrong wi2">ith anyone anywhere whatsoever. There i2">is no separati2">ion, and no si2">in, but there i2">is a BELi2">IEF i2">IN THEM, and that beli2">ief needs to be corrected i2">in order to recogni2">ize that nothi2">ing ever really went wrong wi2">ith God's creati2">ion. Or as God told me one ti2">ime, "There's nothi2">ing wrong, i2">it's all an i2">illusi2">ion."

So we're not really, really actually sort of heali2">ing somethi2">ing that has "happened", we're tryi2">ing to heal from the beli2">ief that somethi2">ing needs heali2">ing. We're not really tryi2">ing to change the mi2">ind as such, we're tryi2">ing to get the mi2">ind to change i2">its beli2">ief that i2">it HAS BEEN changed, and to therefore recogni2">ize that change i2">is NOT POSSi2">IBLE.

"Thi2">is i2">in no way contradi2">icts the changelessness of mi2">ind as GOD created i2">it. But YOU thi2">ink that you HAVE changed i2">it, as long as you learn through the ego. Thi2">is DOES place you i2">in a posi2">iti2">ion of needi2">ing to learn a lesson whi2">ich SEEMS contradi2">ictory: you must learn to change your mi2">ind ABOUT your mi2">ind. Only by thi2">is can you learn that i2">it i2">IS changeless."

Or to put i2">it another way - hey, GOOD NEWS ... You and God and everyone are sti2">ill absolutely perfect and unchanged Ri2">IGHT NOW and there's nothi2">ing that you need to do whatsoever to establi2">ish or correct i2">its condi2">iti2">ion. God has already done the work of wi2">illi2">ing that i2">it be perfect forever, and so i2">it i2">is. All you need to i2">is ACCEPT i2">IT, RECOGNi2">IZE i2">IT, KNOW i2">IT, EXPERi2">IENCE AWARENESS OF i2">IT.

You're perfect ri2">ight now, and you don't even know how perfect you are! lol

Here i2">is Jesus menti2">ioni2">ing thi2">is reali2">isati2">ion that happens as you awaken, at the end goal...

"When peace comes at last to those who wrestle wi2">ith temptati2">ion, and fi2">ight agai2">inst gi2">ivi2">ing i2">in to si2">in; when the li2">ight comes at last i2">into the mi2">ind gi2">iven to contemplati2">ion, or when the goal i2">is fi2">inally achi2">ieved by anyone, i2">it ALWAYS comes wi2">ith just ONE happy reali2">izati2">ion, -- "i2">I need do nothi2">ing." Here i2">is the ulti2">imate release that everyone wi2">ill one day fi2">ind i2">in hi2">is own way, at hi2">is own ti2">ime."

And further that as you reach THE END OF Ti2">IME and escape from ti2">ime, you wi2">ill reali2">ize that you need do nothi2">ing further for your salvati2">ion...

"And, i2">if you recogni2">ize you NEED do nothi2">ing, you HAVE wi2">ithdrawn the body's value from your mi2">ind. Here i2">is the qui2">ick and open door through whi2">ich you sli2">ip past centuri2">ies of effort, and ESCAPE from ti2">ime. Thi2">is i2">is the way i2">in whi2">ich si2">in loses ALL attracti2">ion Ri2">IGHT NOW. For here i2">is ti2">ime deni2">ied, and past and future gone. Who need do nothi2">ing has no need for ti2">ime. To do nothi2">ing i2">is to rest, and make a place wi2">ithi2">in you where the acti2">ivi2">ity of the body ceases to demand attenti2">ion. i2">Into thi2">is place the Holy Spi2">iri2">it comes, and there abi2">ides."

God di2">id create me. The truth about me i2">is that i2">I am sti2">ill i2">in the condi2">iti2">ion He ori2">igi2">inally created me, havi2">ing not really changed at all.

God i2">is everywhere i2">in Heaven/Reali2">ity. Havi2">ing created me as Hi2">is Son i2">in Hi2">is i2">Image, i2">I am also everywhere. For thi2">is to be possi2">ible we must SHARE exi2">istence, we must overlap. You can thi2">ink of thi2">is li2">ike shari2">ing one space, where two bei2">ings permeate and occupy the enti2">ire space, together.

Si2">ince God created many bei2">ings, many bei2">ings who are everywhere, many bei2">ings thus overlap and share exi2">istence wi2">ith God and wi2">ith each other. Everyone shares i2">in and has full access to everyone's bei2">ing. Everyone exi2">ists WHERE everyone else exi2">ists.

The separati2">ion i2">idea was nothi2">ing other than an attempt to stop shari2">ing exi2">istence wi2">ith others. And si2">ince the state of shari2">ing was one of overlap and communi2">ion (common-uni2">ion), thi2">is meant the attempt to "wi2">ithdraw" from or to "i2">isolate" away from the exi2">istence that others were shari2">ing i2">in.

i2">In the separati2">ion, you took a small fragment of your everywhere-self, and tri2">ied to draw a fence around i2">it. The ai2">im was to keep everyone else i2">includi2">ing God outsi2">ide of the ci2">ircle, and to mai2">intai2">in a place i2">insi2">ide the ci2">ircle where they could not share exi2">istence wi2">ith you. The result of thi2">is was the sensati2">ion that, wi2">ithi2">in the ci2">ircle, you are "alone", there i2">is ONLY YOU there, and you are now "separated off" from where the others are exi2">isti2">ing.

Thi2">is i2">is the i2">idea of the separated self. i2">It i2">is a porti2">ion of self whi2">ich has attempted to not share, whi2">ich wants speci2">ial selfi2">ish ri2">ights, whi2">ich wants ownershi2">ip of a small segment of exi2">istence, and wants to be di2">ifferent and unli2">ike the rest. To have somethi2">ing that i2">is only for i2">itself, rather than to share wi2">ith others. And so fi2">inds i2">itself havi2">ing an i2">illusory experi2">ience of exi2">isti2">ing i2">in a place, i2">in a space, where the space i2">it occupi2">ies i2">is not occupi2">ied by others (spaceti2">ime). Where i2">it i2">is alone and di2">isti2">inct wi2">ithi2">in i2">its own walls, where no-one else exi2">ists. "Only me" seems to exi2">ist there.

And thi2">is has resulted i2">in bei2">ing i2">isolated and confi2">ined, i2">impri2">isoned, i2">insi2">ide a wall of flesh, whi2">ich i2">is the i2">idea of si2">in, whi2">ich i2">is the body. The body symboli2">izes the separati2">ion and i2">is a separati2">ion devi2">ice, keepi2">ing the rest of you and creati2">ion out, and i2">isolati2">ing you wi2">ithi2">in.

From "i2">insi2">ide" your body, you then have an experi2">ience that you are "the only one" who i2">is i2">inhabi2">iti2">ing i2">it. That you are i2">in there alone. That your brothers do not share the i2">insi2">ides wi2">ith you, and that God i2">is not i2">in you ei2">ither. And so now you are alone and lonely, as i2">if exi2">iled from Heaven, and as i2">if you are now "a separate self" who no longer i2">is communi2">ing wi2">ith the rest. The body defends agai2">inst the enti2">ire uni2">iverse, so that you can pretend to exi2">ist i2">in a "space" where God i2">is not. Spaceti2">ime's enti2">ire purpose i2">is to faci2">ili2">itate thi2">is i2">illusi2">ion of separati2">ion.

The walls around the mi2">ind, whi2">ich take on the form of a body, are nothi2">ing but thoughts and i2">ideas of separati2">ion and si2">in. They are attempts to make mani2">ifest "blocks" whi2">ich separate you from the whole and keep the whole out of your i2">inner self. i2">It i2">is also an attempt to spli2">it you off from the rest of your Chri2">ist Self, whi2">ich i2">is everywhere "except" i2">insi2">ide your body. Everythi2">ing outsi2">ide of you i2">is the rest of your self, whi2">ich you have separated from, usi2">ing the body walls. The body i2">itself, as the symbol of separati2">ion, "comes between", you and the rest of you, and between you and brothers/God.

These walls, the separati2">ion i2">itself, the gap, and the body, whi2">ich i2">is a symbol of the ego, forms an alternati2">ive i2">illusi2">ion of an i2">identi2">ity. Thi2">is i2">identi2">ity, the body-i2">identi2">ity, seems to substi2">itute for, and block, and spli2">it, your real i2">identi2">ity. The more you try to prove you are not shari2">ing wi2">ith the uni2">iverse, the more you wi2">ill "foster separati2">ion and i2">induce i2">illness." The body wi2">ill then become si2">ick i2">in an attempt to strengthen the i2">idea of separati2">ion and i2">impri2">isonment even further. The fi2">inal protest i2">is the ki2">illi2">ing of the body i2">in death, where the mi2">ind i2">is attempti2">ing to completely sever the small porti2">ion of mi2">ind, i2">in the body, from the rest of exi2">istence enti2">irely. Death i2">is the attempt to destroy the Son of God.

Now, when you are bei2">ing yourself as God created you, you are unli2">imi2">ited. You are bei2">ing yourself. When you go i2">into the ego separati2">ion i2">idea, you start to deny and reject yourself, and so are no longer bei2">ing yourself. You i2">instead are now tryi2">ing to be somethi2">ing you are not. And thi2">is "somethi2">ing you are not" takes the form of the body. "The body i2">is the i2">idea of what you THi2">INK you are". The ego i2">illusi2">ion, whi2">ich now seems to be "a self you made" when you came i2">into the dream, i2">is a secondary self that pretends to stand-i2">in for your real self. The more the ego i2">is emphasi2">ized, the more thi2">is arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial "not myself" self-i2">image body-i2">image i2">is focused on. And so now you have "made up a self", an ego, whi2">ich you thi2">ink i2">is all of you, i2">is your i2">identi2">ity, and causes you to be unaware of your REAL SELF.

The result then i2">is that the more you try NOT to be yourself as God created you, the more you become ego, body i2">identi2">ifi2">ied, and si2">ick. And the result of thi2">is i2">is twofold. 1) The ego seems to i2">increase thus "strengtheni2">ing" the i2">ILLUSi2">ION that you "have a separate self", and 2) you become LESS of yourself and thus reduce down and li2">imi2">it yourself more and more unti2">il there i2">is death. Therefore, death i2">is not really the i2">idea that you are "bei2">ing a separate self". Death i2">is the i2">idea that you are tryi2">ing NOT TO EXi2">IST AT ALL. To not HAVE a self of any ki2">ind. i2">It i2">is the total deni2">ial of yourself and the attempt to destroy God's son.

Therefore, when you awaken, you are not awakeni2">ing to the loss of yourself. You are returni2">ing to HAVi2">ING a self, BEi2">ING your self, KNOWi2">ING THYSELF, and returni2">ing to an awareness that you are STi2">ILL as God created you i2">in Heaven. You expand your sense of self/i2">identi2">ity, you be authenti2">ically true to your God-gi2">iven nature, you heal the separati2">ion of the spli2">it mi2">ind, and you stop tryi2">ing to be somethi2">ing you are not. The separati2">ion i2">ITSELF i2">is undone, and thus the body whi2">ich was i2">IN THE GAP i2">is closed up and removed, and thus the false self di2">isappears REVEALi2">ING who you really are.

i2">It i2">is only the arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial body walls and i2">images that di2">isappear. i2">It i2">is only the i2">ILLUSi2">ION of becomi2">ing "somethi2">ing you are not" or "who you thi2">ink you are" that di2">isappears. i2">It i2">is only the deni2">ial, self attack, blocks to awareness, and arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial senses of i2">identi2">ity that are removed and undone and let go. NOT YOUR SELF. Your i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion shi2">ifts to spi2">iri2">it i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion. You remember your soul.

You li2">ift these thi2">ings away so that you can see who and what YOU really are, as a chi2">ild of God, a soul. Awakeni2">ing i2">is the return to the awareness of God's presence, AND YOUR PRESENCE, as a spi2">iri2">itual bei2">ing. The true self. Your real self. The self that DOES EXi2">IST. The self that GOD GAVE YOU. Your God-gi2">iven eternally li2">ivi2">ing soul, whi2">ich no i2">illusi2">ion can ever take from you. And whi2">ich does not di2">ie NOR di2">isappear when you wake up - totally the opposi2">ite i2">in fact. Fear not that awakeni2">ing means the death of you, i2">it means the Li2">IFE OF YOU.

You do not awaken to "no self". No self i2">is the i2">idea of DEATH. You awaken to HAVi2">ING a FULL SELF. As your FULL self, you are everywhere, shari2">ing everythi2">ing wi2">ith God and wi2">ith all your brothers i2">in Heaven forever. ONLY the ego "di2">ies". ONLY the ego di2">isappears. The WALLS that fenced you i2">in and made you alone, are li2">ifted away. You are reuni2">ited wi2">ith the Sonshi2">ip. You return to oneness and shari2">ing. And you allow yourself to SHARE YOUR SELF wi2">ith other selves agai2">in. You expose yourself, you become vi2">isi2">ible, and you commune wi2">ith God. You let God i2">in, you share space wi2">ith Hi2">im and Hi2">is creati2">ions, and return to communi2">ing wi2">ith the creati2">ions of li2">ight.

"The ego i2">is the i2">idea of selfi2">ishness. The soul i2">is the i2">idea of self fullness."

"The Ki2">ingdom of God i2">includes all hi2">is chi2">ildren, and thei2">ir creati2">ions."

i2">In the separati2">ion, we tri2">ied to i2">invent a world whi2">ich was completely opposi2">ite to God's Ki2">ingdom. Thi2">is resulted i2">in false percepti2">ion, and also the reversal of cause and effect.

The son, who i2">is an effect of God, who i2">is our cause, tri2">ied to be the cause of God, to create effects i2">in Hi2">im. Thi2">is was a ki2">ind of role reversal, and i2">is the i2">idea of ori2">igi2">inal si2">in or the authori2">ity problem.

i2">In thi2">is effort to oppose God, we dreamed of a world opposi2">ite to God. Gi2">iven that God i2">is truth, thi2">is world had to be false. And i2">in opposi2">ing knowledge we i2">invented percepti2">ion. So si2">imultaneously i2">in the maki2">ing of the world we entered di2">irectly i2">into false percepti2">ion. Thi2">is world was made to also be completely opposi2">ite to God's world.

"The world i2">is false percepti2">ion."

"Earth, Heaven's opposi2">ite i2">in every way."

So all thi2">is was happeni2">ing at once i2">in the separati2">ion:

* The complete opposi2">iti2">ion to the truth produci2">ing a false world* The opposi2">iti2">ion to knowledge produci2">ing false percepti2">ion* Cause and effect are reversed, maki2">ing the effect (dream) seem causal

We entered a state of unconsci2">iousness, i2">in whi2">ich we dreamed of a false world, whi2">ich was opposi2">ite to Heaven, AND i2">in whi2">ich cause and effect were reversed.Thi2">is reversal of causali2">ity or "backwards percepti2">ion", i2">is what made you necessari2">ily beli2">ieve that the false world you made i2">is NOT an effect of you dreami2">ing, but i2">instead i2">is a CAUSE. i2">ie that the world seem so have a Li2">IFE of i2">its own, or an ali2">ien wi2">ill. And i2">it also made you beli2">ieve that you are NOT the dreamer or cause of the world, but rather the EFFECT of i2">it. So you i2">instantly went i2">into a vi2">icti2">im role, whi2">ich i2">is played out i2">in physi2">ical matter and the "laws of physi2">ics."

Forgi2">iveness, salvati2">ion, atonement, true percepti2">ion etc, i2">is what you arri2">ive at when you REVERSE all thi2">is. i2">It requi2">ires that you recogni2">ize the world i2">is false, not true. i2">It requi2">ires that you recogni2">ize the dream i2">is comi2">ing FROM you not TO you. i2">It requi2">ires the re-reversal of cause and effect (whi2">ich i2">is also level confusi2">ion), so that you recogni2">ize you are the NOT AFFECTED by the world i2">in ANY WAY. You see yourself as cause, not effect ("Thi2">is i2">is a course i2">in cause, not effect"). And you thus posi2">iti2">ion your vantage poi2">int as a reflecti2">ion of heaven.

i2">If you look at how li2">ife typi2">ically i2">is on the level of form, you can see all the ways that we made ourselves AT THE EFFECT of the very dream that we dreamed. Thi2">is i2">includes all vi2">icti2">imhood roles, all reacti2">ions, all ego emoti2">ions, all of the senses of the body, and every way that the world seems capable of doi2">ing somethi2">ing to you.

i2">It means vulnerabi2">ili2">ity, the need for defenses, percei2">ivi2">ing oneself as unfai2">irly treated, fear of threats and dangers, gri2">ief and loss relati2">ing to parts of the dream whi2">ich you value and lose, and all manner of sufferi2">ing. i2">It also i2">includes any and all ki2">inds of si2">ickness and death, because death i2">is nothi2">ing more than the fi2">irm beli2">ief that the WORLD i2">is enti2">irely the CAUSE of you and you are COMPLETELY AFFECTED by i2">it wi2">ith no wi2">ill or power to do anythi2">ing to stop i2">it.

Every ego emoti2">ion, i2">is a reacti2">ion, an EFFECT, produced by your mi2">ind, i2">in response to your mi2">ind's parallel beli2">ief that THE WORLD i2">is the cause of you. By beli2">ievi2">ing the world i2">is real and true, you gi2">ive i2">it power over you. And then you experi2">ience effects. So some person get's ki2">illed, you feel anger and sad and lost. Someone attacks you and you feel threatened. Some war breaks out and you fear for your li2">ife. Some plague spreads around the world and you worry about your conti2">inuati2">ion. Someone seems able to hurt you and you become angry at them.

The li2">ist of vi2">icti2">im roles and the seemi2">ing reacti2">ions that i2">it produces i2">is endless. All of them are ways by whi2">ich you beli2">ieve you are CAUSED BY the world. That the world oppresses you, hurts you, changes you, defi2">ines you, dreams you, makes you what you are, deci2">ides your fate, ends your li2">ife agai2">inst your wi2">ill, destroys you, does thi2">ings that "you li2">ike", gi2">ives you thi2">ings "you want", and generally acts as the CAUSE OF everythi2">ing you are. All of that i2">is false percepti2">ion and backwards causali2">ity.

So that means that all ego emoti2">ions are fake. Some people would say i2">its "natural" or "healthy psychology" that you would feel loss or gri2">ief when someone di2">ies. Or that i2">it's normal to feel sad when somethi2">ing doesn't work out. Or that i2">it's sane and rati2">ional to be angry because of what someone di2">id to you. Or that you should feel happy because of the gi2">ifts someone gave you. Or that anyone would feel depressed i2">if they had to go through what you went through. But ALL of that i2">is complete bullshi2">it. i2">It i2">is all part of beli2">ievi2">ing that you are AT THE EFFECT of a dream whi2">ich, i2">in and of i2">itself, has NO POWER to do anythi2">ing.

Thi2">is carri2">ies over to the body senses. "To sense i2">is not to know". The body's senses are ways of BEi2">ING SUSCEPTi2">IBLE or "sensi2">iti2">ive to" the dream. They can only operate by BEi2">ING AFFECTED by the envi2">ironment. You touch somethi2">ing and i2">it relays a message to you, changi2">ing you, affecti2">ing you. You smell a bad smell and recoi2">il. You see ugly si2">ights and are dri2">iven to anger. You hear the sounds of hell and i2">it fri2">ightens you. The physi2">ical senses were all desi2">igned to make the world seem real, to PROVE that you are AFFECTED BY the world, to sense what i2">is there, and to lock i2">in false percepti2">ions. Even pleasure, whi2">ich i2">is i2">interpreted as "bei2">ing affected posi2">iti2">ively", i2">is a form of vi2">icti2">imhood and powerlessness.

"Only the body makes the world seem real."

Every physi2">ical sense i2">is a form of vulnerabi2">ili2">ity, suscepti2">ibi2">ili2">ity, effects, vi2">icti2">imhood, the abi2">ili2">ity to be caused by somethi2">ing outsi2">ide of you, and a way for you to "get" from the world. And the body was desi2">igned thi2">is way so that i2">it would permanently be locked i2">into a vi2">icti2">im role and a false way of percei2">ivi2">ing.

"These eyes made not to see wi2">ill never see.""The body i2">is not the means by whi2">ich the real world can be seen.""Everythi2">ing the body sees i2">is a form of confli2">ict.""The body sees only the forms of error.""Nothi2">ing so bli2">indi2">ing as percepti2">ion of form."

The body essenti2">ially was bui2">ilt on the i2">idea of si2">in ("the body i2">is the i2">idea of si2">in made flesh") and on the reversal of causali2">ity. i2">It was meant to be at the EFFECT OF the dream. i2">It testi2">ifi2">ies to the ways i2">in whi2">ich the dream CAUSES you. And so the body i2">is a li2">ie.

Your functi2">ion of forgi2">iveness operates i2">in an opposi2">ite di2">irecti2">ion to the seemi2">ing nature of the body, i2">its senses, and to ALL beli2">iefs and percepti2">ions that the world can ever do anythi2">ing to you.

i2">In truth, you are i2">immortal and you cannot di2">ie. You cannot be affected. You cannot be hurt or changed or made to suffer. Nothi2">ing can happen agai2">inst your wi2">ill. The dream has no power to oppress you or make you i2">ill or sad or weak or frai2">il. Nothi2">ing i2">in the world can force you to be si2">ick, or make you dead. Nothi2">ing can happen wi2">ithout you choosi2">ing i2">it to. You cannot di2">ie wi2">ithout electi2">ing to. You cannot faci2">ili2">itate si2">ickness wi2">ithout backwards percepti2">ions. And li2">iterally you are beyond the reach of every i2">illusi2">ion.

To recogni2">ize thi2">is i2">is to completely reverse cause and effect i2">in the dream, whi2">ich means completely opposi2">ing and breaki2">ing all the laws of spaceti2">ime. All the laws of physi2">ics are completely backwards because they are desi2">igned to make the dream functi2">ion AS i2">IF the world i2">is the CAUSE OF events. As i2">if the world i2">is fi2">irst-hand reali2">ity. But the world i2">is an EFFECT.

"Percepti2">ion i2">is a RESULT, not a cause." "The world i2">IS percepti2">ion."i2">It i2">is by COMPLETELY recogni2">izi2">ing that the world CAUSES NOTHi2">ING and cannot do ANYTHi2">ING to you, that you return to a state of i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity, produci2">ing i2">in the i2">interi2">im the i2">INCORRUPTi2">IBi2">ILi2">ITY OF THE BODY, i2">in whi2">ich the body becomes a symbol of eternal li2">ife and i2">is devoi2">id of all si2">igns and symptoms of "bei2">ing affected by the world." Thi2">is i2">includes the heali2">ing and preventi2">ion of any attack by anyone or anythi2">ing. A demonstrati2">ion of i2">immortali2">ity and power over death.

Resurrecti2">ion, whi2">ich i2">is the "surmounti2">ing of death", i2">is the state of bei2">ing THE CAUSE, and not the effect of the world. i2">It i2">is awareness of dreami2">ing. And as the Course says, "For you would not react at all to fi2">igures i2">in a dream you knew that YOU were dreami2">ing." Thi2">is i2">is the secret of salvati2">ion. The fact that the world i2">IS NEVER the cause of ANYTHi2">ING. And the fact that YOU are the cause of everythi2">ing, because YOU are the one dreami2">ing i2">it. And i2">if someone seems to play a role i2">in your dream of vi2">icti2">imi2">izi2">ing, or of bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">im, the truth i2">is that NOTHi2">ING can affect you unless you make i2">it do so.

Once you recogni2">ize that you are CAUSi2">ING the dream, and that the world CANNOT produce effects i2">in you, ALL the ego emoti2">ional reacti2">ions must cease forever. You can no longer have reason to justi2">ify anger, to be sad or upset, to be unhappy, to have loss or gri2">ief, or even to be happy as a "result of" what the world "does to you". Not even through speci2">ial relati2">ionshi2">ips or i2">idols you worshi2">ip or valued objects or career success or any ki2">ind of i2">INPUT comi2">ing from the world to CAUSE you to feel a certai2">in way.

The only TRUE feeli2">ings are those whi2">ich come OUT of you CAUSALLY, and extend through you. Thi2">is i2">includes love and joy and peace and happi2">iness. You Gi2">IVE these through causati2">ion and shari2">ing. They come out of you and extend. They are not the RESULT or EFFECT of anythi2">ing i2">in the world. The world cannot gi2">ive you happi2">iness OR unhappi2">iness. They are not there because of what someone does for you or what you GET from the world. Posi2">iti2">ive or negati2">ive. Vi2">icti2">im or reward.

"i2">It takes great learni2">ing to both recogni2">ize and accept that the world has nothi2">ing to gi2">ive.""Thi2">is world holds nothi2">ing that i2">I want""Teachers of God are wi2">illi2">ing to gi2">ive up all the pleasures of the world."

Thi2">is i2">is why we have to learn that we are ONLY extenders of God's spi2">iri2">it, we are only Gi2">IVERS of li2">ife and love and happi2">iness and joy, and we are CAUSAL. We are co-creators wi2">ith God. We are not to need, requi2">ire, depend on, want, desi2">ire, be attached to, or react to, ANYTHi2">ING i2">in the world. ANYTHi2">ING AT ALL! Why would you need to when a) you are i2">immortal and have everythi2">ing and b) have i2">inheri2">ited everythi2">ing you need from God and c) can only be happy and at peace when you Gi2">IVE what you want to recei2">ive?

You cannot GET happi2">iness from the world. You cannot GET freedom from the world. The world cannot gi2">ive you li2">ife or i2">immortali2">ity or i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity or protecti2">ion or safety or love or peace or joy. i2">It has no ABi2">ILi2">ITY to gi2">ive, because the world has absolutely ZERO causali2">ity. i2">It i2">is NOT a cause. The world i2">is ONLY an effect. i2">It i2">is your dream, that you are putti2">ing there."i2">It i2">is not a cause, but an EFFECT."

"i2">It i2">is your thoughts alone that cause you pai2">in. Nothi2">ing external to your mi2">ind can hurt or i2">injure you i2">in any way. There i2">is no cause beyond yourself that can reach down and bri2">ing oppressi2">ion. No-one but yourself affects you. There i2">is nothi2">ing i2">in the world whi2">ich has the power to make you i2">ill or sad, or weak or frai2">il. But i2">it i2">is you who have the power to domi2">inate all thi2">ings you see by merely recogni2">izi2">ing what you are."

Thi2">is i2">is the essence of A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles. BE THE CAUSE. BE THE POWER. Do not gi2">ive power to a dream whi2">ich i2">is nothi2">ing but an effect of you. Do not beli2">ieve i2">in bei2">ing affected BY anythi2">ing or anyone i2">in the world. God i2">is the only cause of you and your brothers. Your brothers are NEVER the cause of each other, and you have never caused or been caused by them. Nothi2">ing real can be changed or threatened or made di2">ifferent by the world and i2">its contents.

You are to reach a poi2">int of resurrecti2">ion i2">in whi2">ich you CANNOT BE AFFECTED by the world. Where even the body CANNOT be si2">ick OR di2">ie. Where your mi2">ind i2">is so certai2">in of i2">its strength and power that there i2">is NOTHi2">ING your holi2">iness cannot DO (cause). Where you are so fully EXPRESSi2">ING love that you are mi2">iraculous all the ti2">ime. Where you extend and i2">inheri2">it the power and love of God every second of every day. Where so much li2">ight and joy i2">is floodi2">ing OUT of you through gi2">ivi2">ing and thus recei2">ivi2">ing, that nothi2">ing from the OUTSi2">IDE i2">is able to come i2">IN to you. Maki2">ing you completely safe and i2">invulnerable.

You are to cease beli2">ievi2">ing that anythi2">ing or anyone i2">in the ENTi2">IRE world, i2">in the whole uni2">iverse of spaceti2">ime, EVER has a power or causati2">ion over you, maki2">ing you change, maki2">ing you suffer, maki2">ing you di2">ie, maki2">ing you happy OR unhappy. You are to be BEYOND thi2">is dream and beyond thi2">is world. You are PRi2">IOR to the dream. You are beyond si2">ickness and death. You are i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it and NOTHi2">ING can change that. All i2">it requi2">ires i2">is your total acceptance of thi2">is truth, the reclai2">imi2">ing of your i2">immortal ri2">ights, and your wi2">illi2">ingness to express and know your true self. i2">It i2">is nothi2">ing short of reclai2">imi2">ing eternal li2">ife.

i2">I thi2">ink i2">I made a major mi2">istake when starti2">ing out wi2">ith the course. i2">It was fuelled by a rather "negati2">ive" vi2">iew of the world, whi2">ich was part mi2">ine, and part that of certai2">in teachers i2">I li2">istened to. i2">In that vi2">iew, i2">I thought that references to a meani2">ingless world, were references to a the world bei2">ing i2">inherently bleak and dark and depressi2">ing. i2">I also combi2">ined vari2">ious aspects of ego and false percepti2">ion wi2">ith the world, bi2">indi2">ing them together, and then sought to get ri2">id of the whole thi2">ing.

Thi2">is was based largely on teachi2">ings by well-meani2">ing people that the world has no redeemi2">ing quali2">iti2">ies, that i2">it i2">is i2">inherently somewhat negati2">ive and poi2">intless, and that the only thi2">ing to do i2">is leave i2">it behi2">ind. Whi2">ile there i2">is some basi2">is for thi2">is, i2">in that the world i2">is nothi2">ing, i2">it ki2">ind of ski2">ipped over the forgi2">iven world/real world and di2">idn't put enough attenti2">ion on how to rei2">interpret or repurpose i2">it. And i2">it defi2">ini2">itely di2">idn't make much menti2">ion of doi2">ing anythi2">ing to i2">improve or heal or save i2">it.

Thi2">is was an i2">incorrect frami2">ing of the world, because i2">I reali2">ize now that the world i2">itself has NO meani2">ing, not a negati2">ive meani2">ing. i2">Its meani2">ingless i2">is si2">imply a lack of ANY meani2">ing, posi2">iti2">ive OR negati2">ive, and i2">is not i2">inherently anythi2">ing. And my egoi2">ic associ2">iati2">ion of the world wi2">ith my ego's negati2">ivi2">ity di2">idn't allow me to "separate out" the world from my projecti2">ions onto i2">it.

But the course i2">isn't aski2">ing us to condemn the world and run away from i2">it. i2">It's aski2">ing us to reali2">ize the world i2">is nothi2">ing at all, but that we've projected false meani2">ings onto i2">it. And when these false meani2">ings are li2">ifted off from i2">it, the world resumes bei2">ing meani2">ingless. Not negati2">ive, or posi2">iti2">ive. And then we are free to project posi2">iti2">ive meani2">ing onto i2">it, i2">in whi2">ich we now see the reflecti2">ion of God.

Thi2">is obvi2">iously makes far more sense, i2">interpreti2">ing the world as a neutral mi2">irror wi2">ith no meani2">ing of i2">its own. i2">It also changes my focus, from one where i2">I just wanted to escape from "the negati2">ive world" and throw i2">it i2">in the trash, to where i2">I can now look at the very same world - i2">its guts, recogni2">izi2">ing i2">it as nothi2">ing, but project love onto i2">it. That's a profoundly di2">ifferent relati2">ionshi2">ip to i2">it, properly regardi2">ing i2">it as nothi2">ing but a mi2">irror wi2">ith no meani2">ing of i2">its own, rather than as bound to i2">ideas of hell.

i2">It changes qui2">ite a lot of my perspecti2">ives about the course and what i2">it's sayi2">ing. i2">It also reli2">ieves pressure and resi2">istance and negati2">ive connotati2">ions to thi2">ings whi2">ich di2">idn't seem to fi2">it. i2">I can accept then that i2">I can see thi2">is world through forgi2">ivi2">ing eyes because of i2">itself i2">it i2">is nothi2">ing. And i2">it also makes i2">it easi2">ier to accept that i2">it can be used di2">ifferently, and can reflect heaven. Obvi2">iously keepi2">ing i2">it around long enough to allow i2">it to do that can't entai2">il attacki2">ing i2">it wi2">ith mi2">isi2">interpretati2">ions of the course.

Eventually when seen as the nothi2">ingness i2">it i2">is, wi2">ith the reflecti2">ion of God seen upon i2">it, i2">its re-purposi2">ing i2">is complete and i2">it i2">is no longer needed as a devi2">ice to bri2">ing us home. We can now wave farewell to the forgi2">iven world and thank i2">it for i2">its temporary usefulness, as we watch i2">it di2">isappear and gi2">ive way to the gates of heaven.

The key part i2">I thi2">ink i2">is that a lot of people have completely mi2">issed the somewhat subtle teachi2">ing i2">in the course that the world i2">ITSELF has no meani2">ing. That i2">it was a projecti2">ion out, from an i2">idea of nothi2">ingness, BEFORE we projected onto i2">it. The whole "projecti2">ion makes percepti2">ion" thi2">ing came later.

And the world doesn't have to be objecti2">ively real or a creati2">ion of God for i2">it to act li2">ike a neutral mi2">irror and sti2">ill be a world of i2">illusi2">ions. Thi2">is two-layered projecti2">ion i2">is completely mi2">issed by a lot of people. And some i2">interpret the world as havi2">ing to be God's creati2">ion i2">in order for the "project onto" part to make sense. Whi2">ich i2">is yet another mi2">istake. So many of us are so confused about thi2">is whole thi2">ing. But i2">I'm glad now i2">it's becomi2">ing ever clearer.

Here's an example of how i2">I gave myself a si2">ickness.

i2">I was thi2">inki2">ing about Holy Spi2">iri2">it one day and about the fact that i2">I thought of Hi2">im as separate from me. i2">In my mi2">ind i2">I had thi2">is sudden i2">idea, what i2">if He i2">is not separate from me? And i2">in that i2">idea i2">I saw there bei2">ing no wall separati2">ing us, nothi2">ing comi2">ing between us, whi2">ich i2">immedi2">iately suggested i2">I was "exposed" to Hi2">im and that He had di2">irect access to me.

Thi2">is i2">is when my EGO reacted. My ego sti2">ill beli2">ieved i2">in bei2">ing a separate i2">indi2">ivi2">idual, whi2">ich i2">is a delusi2">ion, and so qui2">ickly saw i2">in thi2">is Oneness an "attack". Holy Spi2">iri2">it defi2">ini2">itely was not attacki2">ing, but to the ego, the i2">idea of havi2">ing no separati2">ion to block the truth was seen as a major threat to i2">its exi2">istence. i2">If i2">I am One wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it, there can be no ego!

Seei2">ing thi2">is therefore qui2">ite shocked me, and i2">I was a bi2">it horri2">ifi2">ied. Almost i2">immedi2">iately, i2">in order to "defend myself" agai2">inst what i2">I saw as a threat, i2">I attempted to shut out the Holy Spi2">iri2">it. i2">I di2">id thi2">is almost automati2">ically li2">ike i2">I already knew how to and just created a ki2">ind of "blocki2">ing force" wi2">ithi2">in myself, emphasi2">izi2">ing separati2">ion from Hi2">im, li2">ike tryi2">ing to get away from Hi2">im or push Hi2">im away.

i2">I di2">id thi2">is usi2">ing my mi2">ind by putti2">ing up a strong resi2">istance, li2">iterally tryi2">ing to push Hi2">im away, and to si2">imultaneously wi2">ithdraw i2">into the body. i2">I felt li2">ike i2">I was coweri2">ing and shri2">inki2">ing. And i2">I felt afrai2">id because of the i2">idea of no separati2">ion. i2">I was maki2">ing myself "li2">ittle" to create a sensati2">ion of di2">istance between us.

Wi2">ithi2">in hours, i2">I started to lose my heari2">ing.

My ears very rapi2">idly started to block up, they started to ri2">ing wi2">ith a hi2">igh-pi2">itched ri2">ingi2">ing, my head became congested and they ached.

Basi2">ically, i2">I di2">id not want to Li2">ISTEN to the i2">idea of there bei2">ing no separati2">ion. i2">I wanted to shut i2">it out. And that meant shutti2">ing down my mi2">ind, shutti2">ing down awareness, whi2">ich mani2">ifests i2">itself i2">in/as the body i2">in the "form" of a reducti2">ion i2">in sensory percepti2">ion.

At fi2">irst i2">I di2">idn't know where thi2">is sudden si2">ickness came from or why i2">it was happeni2">ing, and started to react to i2">it and to even seem to seek out remedi2">ies/magi2">ic. i2">I acted as i2">if i2">I hadn't chosen i2">it and di2">idn't want i2">it, as i2">if i2">it was happeni2">ing to me agai2">inst my wi2">ill and i2">I di2">idn't li2">ike i2">it. But i2">I HAD chosen i2">it. i2">I had put i2">it i2">in place myself. And i2">I had done so very qui2">ickly and qui2">ite automati2">ically.

i2">It took a day or two of "sufferi2">ing" for me to become wi2">illi2">ing to look at why thi2">is had happened. At fi2">irst i2">I di2">idn't want to admi2">it that i2">I'd created i2">it. i2">I couldn't see that. But i2">I di2">id start to reali2">ize that i2">I was at least AFRAi2">ID. And as i2">I looked i2">into that, i2">I became honest and admi2">itted thi2">is fear to Holy Spi2">iri2">it, whi2">ich took courage. i2">I had to admi2">it and reali2">ize i2">I'd become afrai2">id of the "truth" that i2">I'd seen a couple of days before.... not so much afrai2">id of i2">it because of what i2">it means, but because of how my ego mi2">is-i2">interpreted i2">its meani2">ing.

My ego thought that i2">if Holy Spi2">iri2">it and i2">I were One, that would have to mean that i2">I - ego separate self - must not exi2">ist. i2">In other words, that Holy Spi2">iri2">it had come to destroy me and that i2">I was under threat of death. i2">I therefore beli2">ieved i2">in death, and so mani2">ifested si2">ickness - whi2">ich i2">is a step toward death.

As i2">I began to "admi2">it the truth", whi2">ich i2">is, to start to trust and allow thi2">is truth to si2">ink i2">in, and started to do some "forgi2">iveness process" about i2">it, the symptoms started to li2">ift. i2">In fact wi2">ithi2">in about 24 hours the whole thi2">ing had almost completely cleared up. All symptoms di2">isappeared wi2">ithout a trace.

By looki2">ing and admi2">itti2">ing to how i2">I'd defended myself agai2">inst the truth, and that thi2">is was the PURPOSE of the si2">ickness, and owni2">ing up to the deci2">isi2">ion i2">I made to do thi2">is, and seei2">ing that i2">I'd done i2">it to myself, set me free. Holy Spi2">iri2">it also helped to remove some of the "consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion", as i2">I became wi2">illi2">ing to let Hi2">im and to move past the self-made fear delusi2">ion.

Someti2">imes the truth fri2">ightens us because we mi2">is-percei2">ive i2">it and don't understand what i2">it really means. Our i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion wi2">ith the ego seems to threaten our "self" when the ego mi2">is-percei2">ives truth as a threat. Di2">is-i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing wi2">ith the ego/body and recogni2">izi2">ing what we've done to ourselves i2">is the key to salvati2">ion.

i2">It turns out thi2">is epi2">isode was actually a lesson i2">in whi2">ich i2">I learned a good example of how si2">ickness i2">is created, and i2">its undoi2">ing. All si2">ickness i2">is psychosomati2">ic, chosen, and on purpose.

"Si2">ickness i2">is a defense agai2">inst the truth". - ACi2">IM

i2">It's very helpful for me to keep i2">in mi2">ind the key fact, that every ti2">ime i2">I am upset about other people i2">I am usi2">ing them to get ri2">id of my own si2">in.

Each ti2">ime i2">I become angry or upset or annoyed, or see myself as bei2">ing attacked by someone, or they are just "wrong", i2">it can SEEM as though i2">I do not want them to be thi2">is way. BUT i2">I DO!

i2">I absolutely want them to attack me, hurt me, offend me, annoy me, be opposed to me, be wrong to me, etc.

Each ti2">ime i2">I SEE them as falli2">ing i2">into thi2">is category, i2">I wi2">ill beli2">ieve i2">I am JUSTi2">IFi2">IED i2">in bei2">ing angry and upset about them. And my justi2">ifi2">icati2">ion wi2">ill tell me i2">I SHOULD be upset.

But i2">it's a li2">ie. i2">I'm lyi2">ing to myself and them. i2">I want them to hurt me so that i2">I have a way to justi2">ify projecti2">ing my own si2">in and gui2">ilt onto them.

i2">It's not that they are wrong, or si2">inful, or gui2">ilty, i2">it's that i2">I beli2">ieve *i2">I* am. i2">I want to SEE them as the one who i2">is si2">inful, at any opportuni2">ity, so that i2">I can get ri2">id of my shi2">it.

Each ti2">ime i2">I fi2">ind myself goi2">ing i2">into thi2">is justi2">ifi2">ied reacti2">ion, i2">if i2">I can be honest and remember that i2">I actually WANT them to be thi2">is way so that i2">I can use them to scapegoat, i2">it stops me i2">in my tracks.

Seei2">ing that my reacti2">ion i2">is NOT justi2">ifi2">ied, because the purpose and reason for my reacti2">ion i2">is an di2">ishonest attack on my part, i2">it deflates the reacti2">ion and makes i2">it easy to not pursue further.

The angry reacti2">ion just stops when the truth i2">is i2">introduced, because anger i2">is a false reacti2">ion to a li2">ie. Just thi2">is one si2">imple li2">ittle truth i2">is leadi2">ing me to gi2">ive up every case of fi2">indi2">ing others gui2">ilty. Anger and blame was a TOOL i2">I was usi2">ing for a secret purpose.

i2">It li2">iterally takes a step i2">in the undoi2">ing of the ego, and marks the begi2">inni2">ing of the end of all anger forever.

The more i2">I learn that i2">I am responsi2">ible for everythi2">ing i2">I experi2">ience, the clearer i2">it becomes that anythi2">ing i2">I experi2">ience i2">is not "because of" the world.

i2">It used to be that everythi2">ing i2">I experi2">ienced seemed to be a reacti2">ion to the world, seemi2">ingly caused by i2">it. i2">I could not separate out myself from any of i2">it, and any upsets or problems i2">I was havi2">ing were always ti2">ied i2">into what was happeni2">ing i2">in li2">ife.

By taki2">ing responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity and recogni2">izi2">ing the secret of salvati2">ion, that i2">I'm doi2">ing thi2">is all to myself, i2">I let the world off the hook, so to speak, i2">in that i2">it i2">is not really the "cause" of anythi2">ing.

Yes someti2">imes thi2">ings i2">in the world happen whi2">ich may tri2">igger a certai2">in response i2">in me, but the tri2">iggeri2">ing i2">isn't because of the world, i2">it's because i2">I am tri2">iggerable. Whi2">ich means somethi2">ing i2">in me i2">is unhealed, li2">ike a brui2">ise or wound, whi2">ich seems to be touched upon or poked at by worldly events. Up comes the old hurt, as i2">if the world caused i2">it, but i2">it was already there, buri2">ied.

So over ti2">ime, i2">I see that i2">if i2">I am i2">in any way upset, unhappy, angry, afrai2">id, gui2">ilty or si2">inful etc... i2">it's not really because of the world, the si2">ituati2">ion, or other people. i2">It's because thi2">is i2">is happeni2">ing i2">insi2">ide my mi2">ind, and i2">it's really somethi2">ing to do wi2">ith my own mental atti2">itude or beli2">iefs. There's some pai2">in i2">I'm heali2">ing or i2">it's ti2">ime for some emoti2">ional release or some other thi2">ing that's caused by me.

The more i2">I "own" thi2">is, the less i2">I try to pass i2">it off as bei2">ing the responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of the world. i2">I stop blami2">ing others for i2">it. i2">I stop accusi2">ing the world for i2">it. i2">I stop di2">isowni2">ing i2">it, through di2">isassoci2">iati2">ion, and i2">I stop projecti2">ing i2">it away from myself onto the world i2">in an attempt to be ri2">id of i2">it.

i2">I am less i2">in deni2">ial as i2">I honestly admi2">it that any and all fears and upsets are "my own stuff". i2">If i2">I'm angry and barki2">ing i2">I have to admi2">it thi2">is has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith anyone else. i2">If i2">I'm afrai2">id i2">I have to admi2">it i2">I'm usi2">ing the world wrongly and readi2">ing meani2">ing i2">into i2">it from wi2">ithi2">in. Am i2">I looki2">ing at the world through my ego or the holy spi2">iri2">it? i2">It must be one or the other.

What thi2">is leaves me wi2">ith, over ti2">ime as i2">I practi2">ice and rei2">inforce thi2">is more, i2">is a growi2">ing sense that i2">if i2">I am ever upset or unhappy i2">in any way, i2">it's because somethi2">ing i2">in comi2">ing i2">in between myself and the world. i2">It's not because of the world. And i2">it's nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith who i2">I really am behi2">ind i2">it.

Let's say that behi2">ind thi2">is stuff there i2">is a real me, whi2">ich i2">is always lovi2">ing and li2">ight and shi2">ini2">ing wi2">ith joy and happi2">iness. All thi2">is self does i2">is extend love and respond wi2">ith love all the ti2">ime. But overlai2">id on top of thi2">is self there i2">is all thi2">is past stuff, ego baggage, li2">ies and i2">illusi2">ions, whi2">ich comes i2">in between me and the world.

i2">If i2">I look "through" thi2">is wall of li2">ies, i2">it changes how the world appears and i2">I become lost i2">in i2">it, accusi2">ing i2">it of si2">in. But i2">if i2">I get step back and get out of i2">it, i2">I become aware that thi2">is i2">is just "my stuff" TEMPORARi2">ILY getti2">ing i2">in the way.

i2">If a si2">ituati2">ion ari2">ises and i2">I become tri2">iggered and upset, and then i2">I remember thi2">is i2">is my own i2">internal problem nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith the si2">ituati2">ion, and i2">I address thi2">is problem wi2">ithi2">in myself through some ki2">ind of heali2">ing process, and i2">it goes away, i2">I'm then left looki2">ing at the si2">ituati2">ion "wi2">ithout" my reacti2">ions to i2">it. And goi2">ing back and forth li2">ike that shows me that, because my baggage was "addi2">iti2">ional" to the si2">ituati2">ion, i2">it wasn't i2">INHERENT to the si2">ituati2">ion. So i2">it really wasn't anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith the si2">ituati2">ion i2">in the fi2">irst place.

Thi2">is shows me that, really, the world i2">is a forgi2">iven "real world" of love and li2">ight, i2">IF i2">I can experi2">ience i2">it wi2">ithout i2">internal baggage. When i2">I become caught up i2">in my ego stuff, i2">it's a state of *temporary* i2">insani2">ity. i2">If i2">I get lost i2">in i2">it, i2">I need to get myself back out of i2">it wi2">ith honesty and heali2">ing and Help. And then i2">I can return to happi2">iness and truth agai2">in.

The more clear i2">I become about thi2">is, di2">iscerni2">ing that i2">if i2">I'm not happy i2">it's my own doi2">ing, and i2">if i2">I'm upset i2">it's because of my own beli2">ief, and thi2">is i2">is all what i2">I'm doi2">ing to myself, i2">I can become clearer and clearer that i2">it really has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith the world. So then i2">I stop looki2">ing outsi2">ide myself for causes and reasons and si2">inners and people to blame or pi2">in i2">it on. i2">I don't go i2">into confusi2">ion as often as to "who" i2">is doi2">ing what to whom.

i2">If i2">I'm cranky, havi2">ing a bad day, upset, emoti2">ional, frustrated, afrai2">id, whatever i2">it i2">is, i2">I try as best i2">I can to remember, thi2">is has NOTHi2">ING to do wi2">ith the world. i2">It has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith anyone else. Thi2">is i2">is enti2">irely me doi2">ing my own thi2">ing to myself temporari2">ily. And i2">in that recogni2">iti2">ion there i2">is also a ki2">ind of sense of securi2">ity that, because i2">it's mi2">ine, i2">it's not really the world gangi2">ing up on me, or fri2">ighteni2">ing me, or ACTUALLY attacki2">ing me.

So what we're doi2">ing here i2">is we're learni2">ing that the world i2">IS NOT attacki2">ing us. Bad thi2">ings are not really happeni2">ing. We're not bei2">ing thrown around on some ki2">ind of emoti2">ional rollercoaster as a result of the world bei2">ing shi2">it. And i2">in fact, events can sti2">ill transpi2">ire wi2">ith OR wi2">ithout me havi2">ing an emoti2">ional snowball at the same ti2">ime.

Whi2">ich i2">is i2">interesti2">ing, beacuse now the Holy Spi2">iri2">it suggests i2">in the mi2">idst of stri2">ife, where i2">I thi2">ink i2">I "should" be upset "based on" what's happeni2">ing externally, to "laugh". And so i2">I force myself i2">into a laugh and li2">ighten up and step back. And at fi2">irst i2">it seems si2">illy but i2">I then i2">I ask myself, why not? Why do i2">I have to be upset i2">in thi2">is si2">ituati2">ion? Do i2">I really have to? Am i2">I locked i2">into that reacti2">ion? Maybe i2">I can sti2">ill go through the SAME si2">ituati2">ions, but not taki2">ing them at all seri2">iously.

Someone's si2">ick? Maybe i2">I can be happy and laugh about i2">it. Job sucks? Maybe i2">I can ri2">ise above i2">it. Scary thi2">ings seemi2">ing to happen? Maybe i2">I need to get out of my ego's "experi2">ience" of the world and get i2">into a hi2">igher vi2">iew.

And as i2">I do, i2">I fi2">ind that there i2">IS a hi2">igher way to experi2">ience what's happeni2">ing. There i2">is a happi2">ier, li2">ighter, "does not beli2">ieve the world i2">is real" state of mi2">ind and percepti2">ion and feeli2">ing, whi2">ich i2">is joyful and happy and non-seri2">ious, whi2">ich i2">I am culti2">ivati2">ing. i2">It's a di2">ifferent approach to the world, through the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, whi2">ich i2">is turni2">ing the course's truth i2">into much more of an experi2">ience than a theory.

i2">I don't HAVE to have a gi2">iven amount of xysz upset as a result of a gi2">iven scenari2">io. i2">I don't have to be i2">immedi2">iately caused by the world to enter i2">into a prescri2">ibed reacti2">ion. i2">I don't have to just fall i2">into temptati2">ion and go down wi2">ith the shi2">ip. And thi2">is steppi2">ing back i2">is such a globally appli2">icable thi2">ing that i2">it appli2">ies to the whole world.

So li2">ife i2">is transi2">iti2">ioni2">ing from... stuff happens, i2">I am affected ... to... i2">I'm not affected by anythi2">ing external, i2">I work on fi2">ixi2">ing up my i2">inner experi2">ience, goi2">ing wi2">ithi2">in to the truth of me, and the rest i2">is all just a matter of laughi2">ing at the world as nothi2">ing seri2">ious. i2">I don't have to have the reacti2">ions the world says i2">I should have. Because the world i2">is not the cause of anythi2">ing.

i2">I am peeli2">ing myself away from i2">its causali2">ity li2">ies as i2">I recogni2">ize i2">I am the cause and i2">it i2">is the effect. i2">I have power over the world, not the other way around. i2">Isn't i2">it qui2">ite amazi2">ing to di2">iscover that a world whi2">ich used to "bully you" wi2">ith i2">its i2">insane attacks, i2">is fi2">inally recogni2">ized as causi2">ing NOTHi2">ING at all, i2">is totally harmless and i2">inert, i2">is not a threat, does not upset you, and can bend to your holy wi2">ill? :-)

As i2">I uncover who i2">I really am behi2">ind all of thi2">is ego attack/defense/di2">istorti2">ion, a li2">ight i2">is emergi2">ing whi2">ich calls for greater peace and more frequent happi2">iness. A way out of hell. i2">I need only remove the blocks to the awareness of love's presence i2">in me and the world wi2">ill be revealed as a place of peace and love. Because wi2">ithout the projecti2">ion of my self attack upon i2">it, that's all that's real about i2">it.

Each to thei2">ir own. But for me, i2">I cannot reconci2">ile how God can be purely benevolent, peaceful, lovi2">ing, gentle, ki2">ind, happy, soft, li2">ife-affi2">irmi2">ing, li2">ife-gi2">ivi2">ing, joyful, etc. ... and i2">in ANY WAY, even CONCEi2">IVE OF .... a thought, i2">idea, creati2">ion or otherwi2">ise, whi2">ich could take on the form of thi2">ings li2">ike weapons, pai2">in receptors, teeth, explosi2">ions, problems, colli2">idi2">ing objects, damage, si2">ickness, death, i2">incompati2">ibi2">ili2">iti2">ies, confli2">ict and war etc. ALL OF WHi2">ICH MUST BE Hi2">IS Wi2">ILL i2">if he created i2">it.

i2">If God i2">is truly truly so i2">incredi2">ibly uncondi2">iti2">ionally lovi2">ing at all ti2">imes, i2">incapable of anythi2">ing BUT love.. .. HOW "on earth" i2">is i2">it ever possi2">ible that a world, an envi2">ironment, a perfect home created just for you, could emerge from hi2">is mi2">ind and heart, created from that same love and tenderness, and produce horri2">ifi2">ically un-traversi2">ible landscapes, wi2">idespread droughts and li2">ifeless frozen tundras, scorchi2">ing deserts of starvati2">ion and thi2">irst, war zones and sti2">inki2">ing trash heaps, the "feti2">id scent of death", rotten corpses, and all manner of murder.

ALL OF THAT would have to come FROM GOD, by hi2">is wi2">ill, from the puri2">ity of hi2">is absolute love and gentleness, wi2">ithout a si2">ingle ounce of cruelty or mali2">ice or vi2">ici2">iousness or vi2">indi2">icti2">iveness or meanness. There i2">is si2">imply NO WAY... NO WAY EVER, that a benevolent lovi2">ing God could come up wi2">ith, condone, allow, permi2">it, cause, wi2">ill, want or create, an envi2">ironment i2">in whi2">ich i2">it i2">is even POSSi2">IBLE... yet alone whether i2">it happens or not, POSSi2">IBLE.... to even have such thi2">ings as weapons or destructi2">ion or thi2">ings that di2">ie.

To clai2">im that thi2">is i2">is possi2">ible i2">is to clai2">im that God's OWN NATURE, entai2">ils and i2">includes, fi2">ickle transformati2">ions, unstable changes, contradi2">icti2">ions, self attack, i2">insane murderous i2">intenti2">ions, threat and danger, corrupti2">ion and mali2">ice. ONLY such a nature could ever gi2">ive ri2">ise to such thi2">ings as machi2">ine guns and atomi2">ic bombs. ALL of whi2">ich, i2">if part of Hi2">IS world, are part of Hi2">IM.

i2">I don't know why anyone readi2">ing A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles, would EVER come up wi2">ith a noti2">ion that God could have created planet Earth, space or ti2">ime, along wi2">ith all of i2">its horrendous malfuncti2">ions, li2">imi2">itati2">ions, problems, di2">iffi2">iculti2">ies, cruelti2">ies and i2">inherent confli2">icts. A person would have to concei2">ive of God not as purely absolutely uncondi2">iti2">ionally gentle and lovi2">ing and ki2">ind, but as some ki2">ind of bi2">izarre mysteri2">ious twi2">isted strange maker of ni2">ightmares and awful landscapes of torture and twi2">isted shapeshi2">ifti2">ing bullshi2">it. No perfect lovi2">ing harmless peaceful God, could EVER EVER EVER create thi2">is planet and i2">its contents.

Thi2">is has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith percepti2">ion ei2">ither. i2">It doesn't even requi2">ire the presence of a si2">ingle human bei2">ing standi2">ing on the planet looki2">ing at i2">it. i2">If we were all wi2">iped out the world would sti2">ill be horri2">ibly cruel, wi2">ith no-one around to re-i2">interpret i2">it. Because i2">its NATURE i2">is cruelty and puni2">ishment and death. Thi2">is wi2">ill ALWAYS be i2">its nature because i2">it i2">is made from the i2">idea of an OPPOSi2">ITE to beauti2">iful perfect harmony and effortless safety and lovi2">ing joy of God.

We ARE asked to see thi2">is world di2">ifferently. We ARE asked to not judge i2">it, hate i2">it, attack i2">it, or regard i2">it as real si2">in - i2">instead to see i2">it as a Mi2">ISTAKE. We ARE asked to love toward i2">it, thi2">inki2">ing more chari2">itably toward i2">it, and even to repurpose i2">it to help us to return to HEAVEN where we belong. But at no ti2">ime are we asked to WANT the world, to KEEP the world, to MAKE the world be heaven, to TRANSFORM i2">it i2">into somethi2">ing God has created, or to Mi2">ISTAKE i2">it for heaven. Even a happy i2">interpretati2">ion of a broken planet sti2">ill shows a broken planet.

No amount of forgi2">iveness i2">is EVER goi2">ing to stop ai2">irplanes from crashi2">ing, or ti2">igers from ri2">ippi2">ing the li2">ivi2">ing guts out of li2">ive ani2">imals, or people shooti2">ing each other wi2">ith guns, or starvati2">ion and lack of food, or di2">iseases, or the eventual death of the planet when the sun swallows i2">it whole after burni2">ing i2">it to death. You can forgi2">ive i2">it, you can bri2">ing li2">ight to i2">it, you can carry peace to i2">it, you can envelop i2">it i2">in love and happi2">iness, but i2">it's sti2">ill goi2">ing to functi2">ion the same way because that i2">is i2">its non-God-gi2">iven nature.

God could not, would not, never has, and never wi2">ill, create a world such as thi2">is. i2">If could could or would or had, God would be a complete and total murderous asshole. And i2">I don't thi2">ink we want that.

"Death i2">is the central dream from whi2">ich all i2">illusi2">ions stem. i2">Is i2">it not madness to thi2">ink of li2">ife as bei2">ing born, agi2">ing, losi2">ing vi2">itali2">ity, and dyi2">ing i2">in the end? We have asked thi2">is questi2">ion before, but now we need to consi2">ider i2">it sti2">ill more carefully. i2">It i2">is the one fi2">ixed, unchangeable beli2">ief of the world that all thi2">ings i2">in i2">it are born only to di2">ie. Thi2">is i2">is regarded as "the way of nature," not to be rai2">ised to questi2">ion, but to be accepted as the "natural" law of li2">ife. The cycli2">ical, the changi2">ing and unsure; the undependable and the unsteady, waxi2">ing and wani2">ing i2">in a certai2">in way upon a certai2">in path, - all thi2">is i2">is taken as the Wi2">ill of God. And no-one asks i2">if a beni2">ign Creator could wi2">ill thi2">is." UrM28A1

"The world you see i2">is the delusi2">ional system of those made mad by gui2">ilt. Look carefully at thi2">is world, and you wi2">ill reali2">ize that thi2">is i2">is so. For thi2">is world i2">is the symbol of puni2">ishment, and all the laws whi2">ich seem to govern i2">it are the laws of death. Chi2">ildren are born i2">into i2">it through pai2">in and i2">in pai2">in. Thei2">ir growth i2">is attended by sufferi2">ing, and they learn of sorrow and separati2">ion and death. Thei2">ir mi2">inds are trapped i2">in thei2">ir brai2">in, and i2">its powers decli2">ine i2">if thei2">ir bodi2">ies are hurt. They seem to love, yet they desert, and are deserted. They appear to lose what they love, perhaps the most i2">insane beli2">ief of all. And thei2">ir bodi2">ies wi2">ither and gasp and are lai2">id i2">in the ground, and seem to be no more. Not one of them but has thought that God i2">is cruel." UrT11J2

"Death i2">is the symbol of the fear of God. Hi2">is Love i2">is blotted out i2">in the i2">idea, whi2">ich holds i2">It from awareness li2">ike a shi2">ield held to obscure the sun. The gri2">imness of the symbol i2">is enough to show i2">it cannot co-exi2">ist wi2">ith God. i2">It holds an i2">image of the Son of God i2">in whi2">ich he i2">is "lai2">id to rest" i2">in devastati2">ion's arms, where worms awai2">it to greet hi2">im and to last a li2">ittle whi2">ile by hi2">is destructi2">ion. Yet the worms as well are doomed to be destroyed as certai2">inly. And so do all thi2">ings li2">ive because of death. Devouri2">ing i2">is nature's "law of li2">ife." God i2">is i2">insane, and fear alone i2">is real." UrM28A3

"Heaven remai2">ins your one alternati2">ive to thi2">is strange world you made and all i2">its ways; i2">its shi2">ifti2">ing patterns and uncertai2">in goals, i2">its pai2">inful pleasures and i2">its tragi2">ic joys. God made no contradi2">icti2">ions. What deni2">ies i2">its own exi2">istence and attacks i2">itself i2">is not of Hi2">im. He di2">id not make two mi2">inds, wi2">ith Heaven as the glad effect of one, and earth the other's sorry outcome whi2">ich i2">is Heaven's opposi2">ite i2">in every way." UrW131L7

"Thi2">is i2">IS the "natural" condi2">iti2">ion of the separati2">ion. And those who learn that i2">it i2">is NOT natural at all, seem to be the UNnatural ones. For thi2">is world i2">IS the opposi2">ite of Heaven, havi2">ing been made to BE i2">its opposi2">ite. And EVERYTHi2">ING here takes a di2">irecti2">ion EXACTLY opposi2">ite to what i2">is true. i2">In Heaven, where the meani2">ing of love i2">is known, love i2">is the same as UNi2">ION. Here, where the i2">ILLUSi2">ION of love i2">is accepted i2">IN i2">ITS PLACE, love i2">is percei2">ived as separati2">ion and EXCLUSi2">ION." UrT16F3

We hear people latchi2">ing onto thi2">is phrase qui2">ite often and usi2">ing i2">it to justi2">ify i2">inacti2">ion. But Jesus doesn't use i2">it i2">in thi2">is way i2">in the course. He speaks of i2">it more as a psychologi2">ical state and a recogni2">iti2">ion of truth.

We are actually asked to fi2">irst recogni2">ize that there i2">is no NEED for US to "do anythi2">ing", because i2">in recogni2">izi2">ing the truth we see that everythi2">ing real i2">is perfect and nothi2">ing unreal exi2">ists. However, we are also asked to remai2">in i2">in thi2">is state of mi2">ind and bri2">ing i2">it wi2">ith us i2">INTO a great many BUSY DOi2">INGS, whi2">ich we are SENT to do.

"Thi2">is qui2">iet center, i2">IN WHi2">ICH YOU DO NOTHi2">ING, wi2">ill remai2">in wi2">ith you, gi2">ivi2">ing you rest i2">in the mi2">idst of every busy doi2">ing on whi2">ich you are sent. For, FROM thi2">is center, wi2">ill you be di2">irected how to use the body si2">inlessly." UrT18H10

So just because we mi2">ight reach a recogni2">iti2">ion that nothi2">ing i2">is really needed, i2">it doesn't mean we are not acti2">ing, not doi2">ing somethi2">ing physi2">ical, not usi2">ing the body, not changi2">ing anythi2">ing i2">in the world or not i2">interacti2">ing wi2">ith and helpi2">ing other people through the body.

i2">It just means that Wi2">ITHi2">IN, our mi2">ind i2">is peaceful i2">in recogni2">iti2">ion of truth, as we conti2">inue meander through the dream world TAKi2">ING ACTi2">IONS, comi2">ing FROM a qui2">iet centre.

We are also told that "i2">I need do nothi2">ing" i2">is somethi2">ing you wi2">ill reali2">ize more or less i2">in a very advanced state, toward the end of the awakeni2">ing process.

"When peace comes at last to those who wrestle wi2">ith temptati2">ion, and fi2">ight agai2">inst gi2">ivi2">ing i2">in to si2">in; when the li2">ight comes at last i2">into the mi2">ind gi2">iven to contemplati2">ion, or when the goal i2">is fi2">inally achi2">ieved by anyone, i2">it ALWAYS comes wi2">ith just ONE happy reali2">izati2">ion, -- "i2">I need do nothi2">ing." Here i2">is the ulti2">imate release that everyone wi2">ill one day fi2">ind i2">in hi2">is own way, at hi2">is own ti2">ime."

Thi2">is means that we shouldn't be usi2">ing thi2">is i2">idea as a way to say, i2">I wi2">ill DO NOTHi2">ING pri2">ior to thi2">is awakeni2">ing. i2">In fact, not only are we to do thi2">ings i2">in the world up to thi2">is poi2">int, but EVEN WHEN we recogni2">ize that we need do nothi2">ing WE STi2">ILL do thi2">ings.

There i2">is also an aspect to thi2">is that because we i2">inheri2">it everythi2">ing from God, and God works wi2">ith us and through us, we OF OURSELVES need do nothi2">ing. Thi2">is i2">is because God i2">is goi2">ing to be doi2">ing some thi2">ings through us. And i2">in order for God to do some thi2">ings through us we have to not i2">interfere wi2">ith that and become wi2">illi2">ing vessels FOR DOi2">ING THi2">INGS, allowi2">ing the BODY to be used by the Holy Spi2">iri2">it.

"And i2">I must learn i2">I need do nothi2">ing of myself, for i2">I need but accept my Self" UrW337L1

"i2">I am not alone, and i2">I would not i2">intrude the past upon my Guest. i2">I have i2">invi2">ited Hi2">im, and He i2">is here.

i2">I need do nothi2">ing except NOT TO i2">INTERFERE." UrT16A4

Now some people have a strange vi2">iew of what i2">it means to not i2">interfere. Thi2">is i2">is because most people thi2">ink i2">in terms of ei2">ither/or - ei2">ither thi2">is or that. So they thi2">ink, ei2">ither i2">I wi2">ill do somethi2">ing or God wi2">ill do somethi2">ing. Thi2">is i2">is not how i2">it's set up.

We do need to acknowledge that God has all power. But i2">in doi2">ing so, we also thus acknowledge that all power has been Gi2">IVEN to us, and that FULLY means that WE are now powerful bei2">ings. i2">It just means that the power that we have, does not belong EXCLUSi2">IVELY to ourselves, because i2">it i2">is a shared power. That doesn't mean i2">it i2">is not ours or that we i2">in ourselves are not powerful or are i2">incapable.

So as we approach God and approach the atonement and are ai2">imi2">ing not to i2">interfere wi2">ith God's wi2">ill, that doesn't mean WE are not wi2">illi2">ing somethi2">ing - our wi2">ill Li2">INES UP wi2">ith hi2">is, i2">it i2">isn't TAKEN OVER by hi2">is. We become wi2">illi2">ing parti2">ici2">ipants just as we are co-creators i2">in heaven. God does not force anythi2">ing or possess you or use you li2">ike a puppet. YOU sti2">ill have to DO somethi2">ing.

Thi2">is i2">is why there i2">is a lot of talk i2">in the course about your bei2">ing sent to people, and people bei2">ing sent to you. Because you are actually requi2">ired to help out i2">in the atonement plan and to DO SOMETHi2">ING to help others i2">in the world.

"Every busy doi2">ing on WHi2">ICH YOU ARE SENT."

"Everyone who i2">is sent to you i2">is a pati2">ient of yours. " UrP4A1

"And bri2">ing wi2">ith you all those whom He has sent to you to care for as i2">I care for you."" Ur6A6

"i2">includes very speci2">ifi2">ic contacts to be made for each teacher of God. There are no acci2">idents i2">in salvati2">ion." UrM4A1

So we're not really talki2">ing here about NOT DOi2">ING ANYTHi2">ING. The emphasi2">is actually i2">is on the absence of NEED for yourself. Just because YOU recogni2">ize that YOU do not need anythi2">ing, and that i2">in truth on the level of spi2">iri2">it others do not need anythi2">ing ei2">ither - because nothi2">ing i2">is really wrong i2">in reali2">ity - thi2">is DOES NOT APPLY i2">in the level of ti2">ime and space.

i2">In the level of ti2">ime and space there i2">is a great need. There i2">is a lot of lack. There i2">is a great absence of love and wholeness and health. There i2">is a great amount of percei2">ived sufferi2">ing. Whi2">ile i2">it i2">is not real i2">in the bi2">ig pi2">icture i2">IT i2">IS happeni2">ing i2">in ti2">ime. And thi2">is i2">is why anyone who has not fully embraced atonement DOES NEED HELP.

So even i2">if you recogni2">ize that you do not REALLY need do anythi2">ing, even i2">if you recogni2">ize that the true nature of others as Chri2">ist does not NEED anythi2">ing, you should also be recogni2">izi2">ing that other people have mental i2">illness, and thei2">ir state of mi2">ind i2">IS a need - they are calli2">ing out for love and help and heali2">ing and teachi2">ing. And that i2">is why i2">it i2">is STi2">ILL your role to Gi2">IVE HELP as and where i2">it i2">is needed - as and where you are SENT TO DO BUSY THi2">INGS.

Thi2">is statement for example mi2">ight seem to say that you should i2">ignore all bodi2">ies. i2">It doesn't mean that.

"To DO anythi2">ing i2">involves the body. And, i2">if you recogni2">ize you NEED do nothi2">ing, you HAVE wi2">ithdrawn the body's value from your mi2">ind. Here i2">is the qui2">ick and open door through whi2">ich you sli2">ip past centuri2">ies of effort, and ESCAPE from ti2">ime." UrT18H9

What i2">it's sayi2">ing i2">is that for you personally, i2">if YOU recogni2">ize you need do nothi2">ing, you also recogni2">ize the body has no real functi2">ion. But thi2">is doesn't mean you don't USE the body and i2">it doesn't mean the body i2">isn't repurposed. i2">In fact the Holy Spi2">iri2">it repurposes i2">it and gui2">ides you to use i2">it for a hi2">igher purpose of heali2">ing and communi2">icati2">ion and teachi2">ing. Plus Chri2">ist needs your body to reach others.

"The love of God, for a li2">ittle whi2">ile, must sti2">ill be expressed through one body to another." UrT1B40J

"My eyes, my tongue, my hands, my feet today have but one purpose; to be gi2">iven Chri2">ist to use to bless the world wi2">ith mi2">iracles." UrW353

i2">In heaven there are no needs. i2">In reali2">ity and i2">in truth there are no needs. i2">In your perfect soul there are no needs. i2">In THi2">IS world THERE ARE NEEDS. And thus i2">in thi2">is world, YOU DO NEED TO DO SOMETHi2">ING.

"Havi2">ing been restored to your ori2">igi2">inal state, you naturally become part of the Atonement yourself. You now share MY i2">inabi2">ili2">ity to tolerate the lack of love i2">in yourself and i2">in everyone else, and MUST joi2">in the GREAT CRUSADE to correct i2">it. The slogan for thi2">is Crusade i2">is "Li2">isten, Learn, and DO. ... The fi2">irst two are not enough. The real members of MY party are ACTi2">IVE workers." UrT1B23H

The great crusade whi2">ich you are told YOU MUST JOi2">IN - mandatory - i2">is also i2">in the Fi2">IP 3rd edi2">iti2">ion, i2">in some form...

"As you share my unwi2">illi2">ingness to accept error i2">in yourself and others, you must joi2">in the great crusade to correct i2">it; li2">isten to my voi2">ice, learn to undo error and act to correct i2">it. ⁷The power to work mi2">iracles belongs to you. ⁸i2">I wi2">ill provi2">ide the opportuni2">iti2">ies to do them, but you must be ready and wi2">illi2">ing." T-1.i2">Ii2">Ii2">I.1:6-8

Jesus i2">is qui2">ite adamant here that even i2">if you accept atonement you STi2">ILL have a duty. And i2">it i2">is a requi2">ired duty. And the reason i2">it i2">is requi2">ired i2">is because - other people are a part of you, and even i2">if YOU seem to i2">independently accept atonement i2">it doesn't mean other people have stopped thei2">ir ni2">ightmares. A part of you i2">is i2">in them, and a part of them i2">is i2">in you. Your heali2">ing heals them i2">in part, but thei2">ir sufferi2">ing also prevents you from TOTAL peace.

We are i2">in fact asked to PROFESS CHRi2">IST, and that atonement i2">is our natural PROFESSi2">ION. A professi2">ion i2">is somethi2">ing that you DO. i2">It's an acti2">ivi2">ity, a set of acti2">ions and doi2">ings. Somethi2">ing that you gi2">ive to the world and share wi2">ith others.

"You once sai2">id that souls cannot rest unti2">il everyone has found salvati2">ion. Thi2">is happens to be true. i2">It i2">is the pri2">ivi2">ilege of the forgi2">iven to forgi2">ive. The Di2">isci2">iples were offi2">ici2">ially and speci2">ifi2">ically told to heal others, as Physi2">ici2">ians of the Lord. They were also told to heal themselves, and were promi2">ised that i2">I would never leave them or forsake them. Atonement i2">is the natural professi2">ion of the Chi2">ildren of God, because they have professed Me." UrT1B24A

By all means let's all steer towards affi2">irmi2">ing and acknowledgi2">ing that there i2">is i2">in reali2">ity no true needs and requi2">irement to do anythi2">ing. But let's also NOT be i2">ignorant to the fact that there has been a separati2">ion, untold numbers of bei2">ings are stuck i2">in i2">it, i2">it could take mi2">illi2">ions of years for them all to awaken, and everyone si2">ingle one of them i2">is calli2">ing out for love and help and heali2">ing.

"You wi2">ill forsake yourselves and your God i2">if you forsake any of YOUR brothers. You are more than your brother's keeper." UrT5F14

As clai2">imers of needi2">ing to do nothi2">ing, as people wi2">ith peaceful mi2">inds and open hearts overflowi2">ing wi2">ith love i2">it i2">is our responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity to CONTi2">INUE TO DO THi2">INGS to help others. You remai2">in i2">in a psychologi2">ical i2">INNER state of rest and peace and "no need" - whi2">ich means no lack - wi2">ithi2">in, WHi2">ILE you accompli2">ish a great many DOi2">INGS i2">in the world. i2">It does not mean that you just si2">it on a fence and be passi2">ive and li2">iterally do nothi2">ing at all.

Thi2">is must not be used as an excuse or doi2">ing nothi2">ing, not helpi2">ing, not bei2">ing a teacher of God, not worki2">ing mi2">iracles, not heali2">ing others, not helpi2">ing, havi2">ing total passi2">ivi2">ity and i2">inacti2">ion, or dwelli2">ing only on your own apparent lack of needs. Thi2">is i2">is not a selfi2">ish course, i2">it's a course i2">in shari2">ing. And many of us need to learn that we are TO SHARE what we recei2">ive, and Gi2">IVE the mi2">iracles we have recei2">ived, and help our brothers along the way to God.

"The Atonement i2">is a lesson i2">in shari2">ing, whi2">ich i2">is gi2">iven you because YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN HOW TO DO i2">IT. " UrT9C3

When you are i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it seems that who and what you are, i2">is of thi2">is world. That you are a body.

When you are i2">in heaven, who and what you are, i2">is of heaven. You are spi2">iri2">it/mi2">ind wi2">ithout a body. "To be wi2">ithout a body i2">is to be i2">in your natural state."

The two worlds are completely opposi2">ite. You cannot be one whi2">ile bei2">ing the other. You cannot li2">ive i2">in one whi2">ile li2">ivi2">ing i2">in the other. You cannot be aware of one whi2">ile bei2">ing aware of the other. Whi2">ich you si2">ide wi2">ith i2">is your choi2">ice.

"Every deci2">isi2">ion you make i2">is made for Heaven or for hell, and wi2">ill bri2">ing you AWARENESS of what you deci2">ided FOR."

Ei2">ither you are located wi2">ithi2">in and made from, heaven. Or you are located wi2">ithi2">in and made from hell. You are ei2">ither spi2">iri2">it or matter. Thi2">is i2">is all there i2">is to choose between.

Generally speaki2">ing, i2">if you are not i2">in any way spi2">iri2">itual, you wi2">ill completely i2">identi2">ify wi2">ith bei2">ing i2">in thi2">is world, bei2">ing a body, bei2">ing mortal matter. You wi2">ill confi2">ine yourself to your body and beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is your self. And everythi2">ing you do wi2">ill revolve around tryi2">ing to protect your fragi2">ile li2">ife and ward off i2">inevi2">itable death.

The i2">idea i2">is that, to be spi2">iri2">itual, you must i2">identi2">ify as spi2">iri2">it. And that si2">imply means, that whi2">ile you are here havi2">ing your body, you learn that you are i2">IN and OF and FROM another world.

Everythi2">ing whi2">ich i2">is true of heaven, must become your truth. All the laws of God must become the only laws you abi2">ide by. Your i2">immortal eternal nature must be your only reali2">ity. Your i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity and power and fearless love must be your enti2">ire experi2">ience.

And thi2">is also means, on the fli2">ipsi2">ide, that anythi2">ing NOT of heaven MUST be deni2">ied. i2">It i2">is opposi2">ite to your heavenly nature. Bodi2">ies, planets, galaxi2">ies, space, ti2">ime, li2">imi2">itati2">ions, all forms of sufferi2">ing, even death, have to be completely deni2">ied. You must not accept them as true of yourself, or what you are made of.

Thi2">is entai2">ils recogni2">izi2">ing that thi2">is enti2">ire world i2">is not reali2">ity. i2">It i2">is a dream. And everythi2">ing i2">in i2">it i2">is merely a dream. And none of i2">it means anythi2">ing. And none of i2">it i2">is valuable i2">in any way. Thi2">is world must be regarded as li2">iterally nothi2">ing, i2">if you are to gai2">in everythi2">ing of the Ki2">ingdom.

"Thi2">is world holds nothi2">ing that i2">I want." "Teachers of God are wi2">illi2">ing to gi2">ive up all the pleasures of the world." "i2">It takes great learni2">ing to both recogni2">ize and accept that thi2">is world has nothi2">ing to gi2">ive."

You cannot have i2">it both ways. Ulti2">imately to completely return to communi2">ion wi2">ith God you MUST fully and completely and wi2">illi2">ingly embrace your enti2">ire true reali2">ity i2">in heaven. You must wake up to what i2">is actually real. And you must wake up FROM thi2">is dream world, leavi2">ing i2">it behi2">ind to vani2">ish.

Whi2">ile you are worki2">ing your way TOWARD the goal of BEi2">ING ONLY AS GOD CREATED YOU, of knowi2">ing yourself, you wi2">ill fi2">ind your experi2">ience of THi2">IS world changi2">ing. Your percepti2">ion of i2">it wi2">ill change. The li2">ight of heaven wi2">ill begi2">in shi2">ini2">ing through you to i2">illumi2">inate your day. And you wi2">ill become more lovi2">ing. But thi2">is does not change any facts about what thi2">is world i2">is or what i2">is real

.Reachi2">ing what we call "the real world" or the "forgi2">iven world" i2">is just a steppi2">ing stone along the way home. i2">It really ulti2">imately i2">is not i2">important. You wi2">ill pass THROUGH i2">it, just before you enter heaven's gates. But not for a second wi2">ill you look back longi2">ingly upon i2">it or want for i2">it to remai2">in, when you wake up to the glory of the Ki2">ingdom.

i2">It really i2">is very si2">imple i2">in the bi2">ig pi2">icture. Vi2">igi2">ilance for the Ki2">ingdom must become your total attenti2">ion. You must accept only what God has establi2">ished as true, and reject everythi2">ing out of accord wi2">ith i2">it. You must not beli2">ieve anythi2">ing the world says or suggests or demonstrates as true. You must assert the power and li2">ife of the Ki2">ingdom so that you can demonstrate resurrecti2">ion and overcome death i2">itself.

Ei2">ither you are mortal or i2">immortal. Ei2">ither you accept your i2">immortali2">ity or you deny i2">it and pretend to di2">ie. Your choi2">ice. Nothi2">ing i2">in the world can stop you or do ANYTHi2">ING to you. You are absolutely i2">invulnerable permanent perfecti2">ion forever. Thi2">is world has nothi2">ing on you and adds nothi2">ing to you. And you cannot keep i2">it i2">if you are to know God. And why would you want to keep nothi2">ingness?

"Thi2">is achi2">ing world has not the power to touch the li2">ivi2">ing world at all. You could not gi2">ive i2">it that, and so, although you turn i2">in sadness from i2">it, you cannot fi2">ind i2">in i2">it the road that leads AWAY from i2">it, i2">into another world. But the REAL world HAS the power to touch you even here, BECAUSE YOU LOVE i2">IT.

And what you call wi2">ith love Wi2">ILL come to you. Love always answers, bei2">ing unable to deny a call for help, or not to hear the cri2">ies of pai2">in that ri2">ise to i2">it, from every part of thi2">is strange world you made, and do not want. The only effort you need make, to gi2">ive thi2">is world away i2">in glad exchange for what you di2">id NOT make, i2">is wi2">illi2">ingness to learn THE ONE YOU MADE i2">IS FALSE."

"The world can ADD nothi2">ing to the power and the glory of God and Hi2">is Holy Sons, but i2">it can bli2">ind the Sons to the Father i2">if they behold i2">it. You cannot behold the world and know God. Only one i2">is true.

i2">I am come to tell you that the choi2">ice of whi2">ich i2">is true i2">is not yours. i2">If i2">it were, you would have destroyed yourselves. But God di2">id not wi2">ill the destructi2">ion of Hi2">is Creati2">ions, havi2">ing created them for eterni2">ity. Hi2">is Wi2">ill has saved you, not from yourselves, but from your i2">illusi2">ions of yourselves. He has saved you for yourselves. Let us glori2">ify Hi2">im Whom the world deni2">ies, for over Hi2">is Ki2">ingdom i2">it has no power."

Let's revi2">iew thi2">is prayer from ACi2">IM i2">in a new li2">ight.

"1. i2">I must have deci2">ided wrongly, because i2">I am not at peace.

2. i2">I made the deci2">isi2">ion myself, but i2">I can also deci2">ide otherwi2">ise.

3. i2">I want to deci2">ide otherwi2">ise, because i2">I want to be at peace.

4. i2">I do not feel gui2">ilty, because the Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo all the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">if i2">I wi2">ill let Hi2">im.

5. i2">I choose to let Hi2">im, by allowi2">ing Hi2">im to deci2">ide for God for me."

so...

1) i2">I fi2">irst admi2">it i2">I'm upset because i2">I projected gui2">ilt, so i2">I'm vi2">icti2">imi2">ized and i2">I'm sufferi2">ing and afrai2">id and not at peace. i2">I si2">igned a stupi2">id contract wi2">ith someone so that they would take my gui2">ilt and, i2">in exchange, i2">I would be persecuted.

2) i2">I have to recogni2">ize i2">I made a deci2">isi2">ion (contract) wi2">ith the person myself and projected my own gui2">ilt myself. Thus i2">I must admi2">it that thi2">is person be seen as i2">innocent and they were just helpi2">ing me to hi2">ide my gui2">ilt.

3) i2">I want to deci2">ide otherwi2">ise because i2">I want to not be a vi2">icti2">im any more and i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing to be responsi2">ible for my gui2">ilt. So i2">I take my gui2">ilt back from the person. i2">I want out of the contract and i2">I want real heali2">ing.

4) i2">I do not have to feel gui2">ilty. i2">I can go to Holy Spi2">iri2">it and offer up my gui2">ilt and be wi2">illi2">ing to be OPEN to accepti2">ing Hi2">is verdi2">ict. i2">If He says so, i2">I am i2">innocent, and i2">I must accept that i2">if He says so - thi2">is i2">is what i2">it means to allow Hi2">im to deci2">ide FOR ME whether i2">I'm i2">innocent or not. So i2">I don't HAVE to be gui2">ilty and i2">I don't have to (and should not attempt to) deci2">ide for myself. And also...

"Holy spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo ALL the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">IF i2">I wi2">ill let Hi2">im."

- Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill UNDO ALL CONSEQUENCES. That means He i2">is capable of removi2">ing all gui2">ilt, all si2">in, all sufferi2">ing, all fear, all si2">ickness, all hate and anger, all shame, all darkness i2">in any form whatsoever. Anythi2">ing that i2">I made as a result of choosi2">ing si2">in and gui2">ilt He CAN undo FOR ME. i2">I don't have to even do anythi2">ing.

- "i2">If i2">I wi2">ill let Hi2">im", means, i2">I have to have as much wi2">illi2">ingness as possi2">ible to be OPEN to the possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity that i2">I am i2">innocent, to fully ACCEPT Holy Spi2">iri2">it's judgement (that i2">I am i2">innocent), to LET GO OF all gui2">ilt and every consequence that came from choosi2">ing si2">in, and then to LET Hi2">IM go to work i2">IN ME to undo all of these mani2">ifestati2">ions and forms of consequence. And that i2">includes all si2">ickness and si2">ide effects, i2">IF i2">I wi2">ill let Hi2">im.

5. i2">I can tri2">igger off thi2">is wi2">illi2">ingness by allowi2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it to deci2">ide for me... i2">i.e. i2">I can go before Hi2">im and say, here's my gui2">ilt etc, please deci2">ide for me whether i2">I am really gui2">ilty or not. And that means i2">I have to be very open mi2">inded and neutral i2">in offeri2">ing thi2">is, knowi2">ing that i2">I am not bei2">ing unfai2">irly judged, and to be wi2">illi2">ing to ACCEPT whatever Holy Spi2">iri2">it's verdi2">ict i2">is. Thi2">is i2">is li2">ike a last, fi2">inal offeri2">ing to Hi2">im. i2">If He says i2">I am gui2">ilty, i2">I must hang my head i2">in shame and head off i2">into the wi2">ilderness by myself. i2">If he says i2">I am i2">innocent, i2">I MUST agree to let go of all of the gui2">ilt and all of the consequences that my si2">inful deci2">isi2">ion made for me.

i2">I am letti2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it deci2">ide for God for me, whi2">ich now really means, i2">I want God/HS to choose the meani2">ing of what i2">I am and the truth about me and whether or not i2">I am i2">innocent or gui2">ilty. i2">I wi2">ill let Hi2">im deci2">ide my fate. And He Wi2">ILL deci2">ide FOR me, i2">in my favor, that i2">I am i2">innocent.

i2">If i2">I can be wi2">illi2">ing to really accept thi2">is Atonement, to accept Hi2">is deci2">isi2">ion, THEN... wi2">illi2">ingness permi2">itti2">ing, i2">I CAN ask Hi2">im to forgi2">ive and heal me and He CAN come i2">into me and heal me. He CAN correct all of the consequences, li2">iterally. He can fi2">ix every fuckup that resulted from thi2">is mess. And he can rai2">ise the dead (me) back to li2">ife.

Personally i2">I have been learni2">ing to experi2">ience thi2">is more - thi2">is last part, allowi2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it to come i2">into me and actually "do stuff". Thi2">is i2">is qui2">ite wacky someti2">imes. i2">If you've seen vi2">ideos of some supernatural-ori2">iented Chri2">isti2">ian churches where they bri2">ing forth Holy Spi2">iri2">it and people start shaki2">ing and they get all hot or cold or ti2">ingly or body parts start to heal or they grow a new eyeball or whatever.... (i2">it happens!) .... That ki2">ind of shi2">it can happen for you. Thi2">is i2">is what the Course i2">is sayi2">ing. "Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo ALL THE CONSEQUENCES i2">If i2">I wi2">ill let Hi2">im." i2">I need to learn to be very wi2">illi2">ing to let Hi2">im, so that i2">I can be helped by hi2">is di2">ivi2">ine POWER, whi2">ich i2">is a heali2">ing agent, whi2">ich can correct me on all levels i2">includi2">ing emoti2">ional and physi2">ical.

Thi2">is i2">isn't just a Course i2">in ni2">ice gentle li2">ittle evaporati2">ing of thought. Thi2">is i2">is a course i2">in fri2">icki2">ing Mi2">IRACLES!

"i2">I am not a body. i2">I am free, for i2">I am sti2">ill as God created me. All that i2">I do, i2">I do unto myself. i2">If i2">I attack, i2">I suffer. But i2">if i2">I forgi2">ive, salvati2">ion wi2">ill be gi2">iven me."

i2">If you get angry or start blami2">ing and poi2">inti2">ing a fi2">inger at someone, you percei2">ive as i2">if i2">it really i2">is "about them". You see them doi2">ing somethi2">ing, you judge "them" for i2">it, and your mi2">ind starts attacki2">ing them. But here's the truth.

When you do thi2">is, i2">ideas do not leave thei2">ir source. You mi2">ight percei2">ive that you're successfully attacki2">ing a "separate person out there", but the attack i2">is actually taki2">ing place i2">INSi2">IDE your mi2">ind. i2">It i2">isn't leavi2">ing you. And thi2">is has two key parts to i2">it:

1) The attack i2">is taki2">ing place i2">insi2">ide your mi2">ind

2) The "target" of the attack i2">is also i2">insi2">ide your mi2">ind

So both the attacker and the one bei2">ing attacked are i2">IN YOU.

You mi2">ight have a tremendous sense of di2">isassoci2">iati2">ion i2">in that i2">it seems you are just blami2">ing xyz person for somethi2">ing, casually and easi2">ily, but you may not be reali2">izi2">ing that even when you're hurli2">ing abuse at someone who obvi2">iously i2">is "i2">in the wrong", you're basi2">ically havi2">ing a PRi2">IVATE SELF ATTACK, i2">insi2">ide a pri2">ivate bubble, i2">in your mi2">ind.

So all that attack that you're tryi2">ing to get ri2">id of through projecti2">ion and blame, although i2">it doesn't seem li2">ike, i2">is actually part of your mi2">ind attacki2">ing another part of YOUR mi2">ind. Whi2">ich means that you li2">iterally are attacki2">ing yourself. You thi2">ink "that asshole cut me off i2">in traffi2">ic". Well, your mi2">ind there i2">is sayi2">ing to i2">ITSELF, that i2">it i2">is an asshole.

"You but accuse your brother of your own si2">ins". i2">It's si2">imple and easy to say, but may not always be obvi2">ious to recogni2">ize as what you're doi2">ing. i2">In every case, every way that you seem to be "able" to attack someone else wi2">ithout experi2">ienci2">ing the seemi2">ing effects and consequences, you MUST be i2">in deni2">ial, MUST be mi2">istaken, MUST have di2">isassoci2">iati2">ion happeni2">ing i2">in your mi2">ind, AND you are attacki2">ing ONLY yourself.

So thi2">is i2">is the thi2">ing. Your angry attack on another i2">is NOT really an attack on another. The i2">idea does not leave your mi2">ind. The thought does not leave your mi2">ind. The source of the attack (the attacker) does not leave your mi2">ind. And the thi2">ing that i2">is attacked does not leave your mi2">ind. So whi2">ile i2">it SEEMS li2">ike you're "not targeti2">ing yourself", YOU ARE. i2">In every case.

Underneath the i2">illusi2">ion that i2">it's not about you, i2">it's always about you. Always. 100% of the ti2">ime. Every ti2">ime you thi2">ink you can "get away wi2">ith" havi2">ing someone else experi2">ience the effects of what you're causi2">ing, wi2">ithout you parti2">ici2">ipati2">ing i2">in those effects, you are mi2">istaken. Not only do you parti2">ici2">ipate i2">in the effects, ONLY YOU parti2">ici2">ipate i2">in the effects

i2">If that other person chooses to be i2">innocent and i2">invulnerable your mental i2">illness attack has absolutely no effect on them. i2">If they choose to laugh i2">in the face of your attempted attack, i2">it has no effect on them. Whatsoever. You could be si2">itti2">ing there screami2">ing at someone thi2">inki2">ing that you're successfully attacki2">ing ONLY THEM, they could be totally happy and at peace and i2">immune to i2">it, and YOU are the only one sufferi2">ing. And i2">it's not si2">imply that you are sufferi2">ing because you're bei2">ing angry, you're sufferi2">ing because you are actually the THi2">ING that you are angry AT. You are RECEi2">IVi2">ING the attack. What seems to ai2">im "outward" actually goes i2">inward.

See, your mi2">ind i2">isn't only i2">insi2">ide your body. Your mi2">ind i2">is everywhere. i2">Infi2">ini2">ite. Bi2">igger than the uni2">iverse. And when you have a spli2">it mi2">ind of self attacki2">ing confli2">ict, you posi2">iti2">ion part of your mi2">ind seemi2">ingly "outsi2">ide of your body". You di2">isassoci2">iate from i2">it and beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is not i2">insi2">ide you, i2">is not your self, and i2">is i2">in fact another separate ali2">ien wi2">illed person who i2">is doi2">ing stuff "Agai2">inst" your wi2">ill. Well, i2">it's actually your wi2">ill agai2">inst your wi2">ill. Your wi2">ill i2">is i2">in confli2">ict wi2">ith i2">itself and havi2">ing a war. That "external" target i2">is squarely YOU, i2">INSi2">IDE your mi2">ind.

Thi2">is i2">is soberi2">ing. Because si2">imply put, i2">it means that i2">it i2">is not possi2">ible to even attempt to attack anyone wi2">ithout attacki2">ing yourself. i2">It's not possi2">ible to blame wi2">ithout hurti2">ing yourself. i2">It's not possi2">ible to be angry at someone wi2">ithout accusi2">ing yourself of si2">in. So at some poi2">int you have to reali2">ize, i2">it's got nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith anyone else ever doi2">ing anythi2">ing to you. i2">It's ALWAYS about you doi2">ing stuff to yourself. Each ti2">ime you attack and project and THi2">INK i2">it's not about you, i2">it i2">is. Each ti2">ime you are annoyed about someone, i2">it's YOU that you're annoyed about. And each ti2">ime you retali2">iate, i2">it's agai2">inst yourself.

Whi2">ich means that you've been hurti2">ing yourself, all thi2">is ti2">ime. And i2">it's never been about anyone else. And every si2">ingle ti2">ime i2">in your li2">ife that you thought you were si2">imply justi2">ifi2">ied i2">in reacti2">ing to someone else's bullshi2">it, you NEVER WERE, you were hurti2">ing yourself. Nothi2">ing ever left your mi2">ind. Every argument was wi2">ith yourself. And the questi2">ion i2">is, are you ti2">ired of hurti2">ing yourself? Do you want to keep doi2">ing i2">it?

i2">If you would si2">imply be aware of thi2">is, and reali2">ize and recogni2">ize i2">it, you'd reali2">ize the si2">imple Golden Rule. Whatever you try to do to others you do to yourself. Whatever you thi2">ink i2">is true of others i2">is true of you. i2">It has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith whether they reci2">iprocate or not. You do to yourself what you would have yourself do to you. Others never do anythi2">ing. They are never the cause of you. Ever.

i2">If you reali2">ized that you could not ever make a si2">ingle effort to attack "someone else" wi2">ithout i2">it bei2">ing 100% an attack on yourself, you would not do i2">it. i2">It would be i2">insane to do i2">it. i2">If you knew that i2">it's not possi2">ible to attack another wi2">ithout hurti2">ing yourself, you would not do i2">it. i2">It hurts too much.

i2">If you knew that you can NEVER get away wi2">ith murderous behavi2">iors wi2">ithout hurti2">ing yourself, you'd see the sense i2">in never even consi2">ideri2">ing attacki2">ing, knowi2">ing that to do so would hurt yourself. i2">It's a ki2">ind of self regulati2">ing thi2">ing. All you need i2">is the awareness that you are i2">in fact i2">INCLUDED i2">in, and the ONLY one i2">included i2">in, recei2">ivi2">ing the effects of whatever you're tryi2">ing to cause.

So the questi2">ion si2">imply i2">is, i2">if you are aware of thi2">is and can stay aware of i2">it, do you really want to keep hurti2">ing yourself? i2">It i2">is i2">in your best i2">interests to only love. i2">It i2">is i2">in your best i2">interests to only ever be lovi2">ing toward yourself and others. You can't have one set of rules that apply to others and another for yourself. You can't have i2">it be that you are loved whi2">ile others are hated. i2">Its BOTH, or NEi2">ITHER. Ei2">ither both you and others are loved or both you and others are attacked. There i2">is no escape. And the ego i2">is the thi2">ing that suggests there i2">IS a way to get away wi2">ith thi2">is wi2">ithout any consequences.

There i2">is no escapi2">ing consequences. Whatever you do you do to yourself. Thi2">is i2">is the secret of salvati2">ion. All you need i2">is awareness to SEE that any sli2">ight mi2">is-step agai2">inst "another" i2">is REALLY a mi2">is-step agai2">inst yourself, and you do not want to do that because i2">it hurts you. And i2">it spli2">its your mi2">ind. Whi2">ich makes you di2">isassoci2">iate from yourself and i2">imagi2">ine an enemy, whi2">ich makes you project, whi2">ich doesn't REALLY project at all. External enemi2">ies are i2">indi2">irect self attack from your mi2">ind to your mi2">ind.

You've never attacked anyone but yourself. No-one has ever attacked anyone but themselves. You've never been attacked by anyone other than yourself. You have the power not to attack yourself. To not attack yourself you must also not want to attack others, because the fantasy of bei2">ing ABLE to attack others wi2">ill make you hurt yourself under the beli2">ief that i2">it's havi2">ing no effect on you. Secret of salvati2">ion. You're doi2">ing i2">it all to yourself. Stop hurti2">ing yourself. Love yourself. Easy peasy.

i2">I wi2">ill share a forgi2">iveness i2">I just appli2">ied, to a mi2">ilkshake.

Thi2">is eveni2">ing i2">I was somewhat argumentati2">ive wi2">ith my wi2">ife, and feeli2">ing gui2">ilty. We went to buy take-out di2">inner and went through the dri2">ive through of Culvers custard, where i2">I tri2">ied to purchase a strawberry mi2">ilkshake. We wai2">ited for our order, and i2">I recei2">ived what looked li2">ike sai2">id mi2">ilkshake - i2">it was at least pi2">ink, although i2">I sensed i2">it tasted a li2">ittle unusual. At the ti2">ime i2">I let i2">it sli2">ide and we drove home. Once i2">I got home i2">I found, for sure, i2">it was not strawberry, but rather a 'strawberry-mango' combi2">inati2">ion. i2">It tasted li2">ike a mi2">ix of strawberri2">ies and orange jui2">ice. i2">I know ri2">ight. So i2">I was bummed. And i2">I found Culvers gui2">ilty, and i2">I blamed them, and i2">I felt vi2">icti2">imi2">ized.

So. Let's remember the contract i2">I made. i2">I had gui2">ilt i2">in me about my wi2">ife. i2">I chose to enter a contract wi2">ith Culvers to be vi2">icti2">imi2">ized, i2">in exchange for bei2">ing permi2">itted to project my gui2">ilt onto them - gui2">ilt about a completely di2">ifferent subject. i2">I was vi2">icti2">imi2">ized by thei2">ir nasty mango-i2">infused flavor adjustment and gi2">iven somethi2">ing "i2">I di2">id not ask for", i2">I was an "i2">innocent vi2">icti2">im", unfai2">irly treated, and ri2">ighteously angry. i2">In exchange, because thi2">is i2">is part of the contract, they got to vi2">icti2">imi2">ize me, attack me wi2">ith a mi2">istake, take away what i2">I wanted, and generally upset me. i2">It was a fai2">ir exchange.

So then, later i2">in bed, i2">I deci2">ided wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">I would use thi2">is i2">idea of a contract to end the contract and choose forgi2">iveness i2">instead.

i2">I looked at the fact that i2">I put my gui2">ilt onto Culvers and chose to parti2">ici2">ipate i2">in an arrangement where i2">I found them gui2">ilty i2">in exchange for bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">im i2">ie permi2">itted to project i2">it onto them so that i2">I could be reli2">ieved of my gui2">ilt (fake i2">innocence), and they could vi2">icti2">imi2">ize me i2">in return. Even though i2">I di2">id not seem to want the vi2">icti2">imi2">izati2">ion, i2">I had to admi2">it, i2">I di2">id agree to i2">it. i2">I agreed to the terms of the contract. i2">I wanted to be vi2">icti2">imi2">ized, therefore. i2">I saw how i2">I put my gui2">ilt onto them and blamed them, so now i2">I had to take i2">it back.

To get out of the contract you have to take back the projected gui2">ilt, BUT, thi2">is means that you can no longer appear to have 'fake i2">innocence'. i2">It means YOU have to be found gui2">ilty agai2">in, whi2">ich i2">is not very appeali2">ing. However, there i2">is a chance that i2">if you do thi2">is, you wi2">ill be i2">in the runni2">ing for bei2">ing able to access REAL i2">innocence later. So i2">I affi2">irmed, Culvers i2">is not gui2">ilty, i2">it i2">is not THEi2">IR gui2">ilt i2">I am seei2">ing, i2">it i2">is MY gui2">ilt that i2">I projected onto them. They we're just attacki2">ing me because i2">I asked for i2">it i2">in exchange for gui2">ilt. i2">I take back MY gui2">ilt that i2">I put onto them, and i2">I see them as i2">innocent. They are i2">innocent and have done nothi2">ing wrong, done nothi2">ing to me, and thei2">ir mi2">istake i2">is forgi2">iveable.

Thank you Culvers for parti2">ici2">ipati2">ing ami2">icably i2">in the contract and servi2">ing me fai2">ithfully on the terms, and gi2">ivi2">ing me the vi2">icti2">imi2">izati2">ion i2">I agreed to. i2">I set you free. Thank you.

So now, i2">I'm left holdi2">ing the gui2">ilt. i2">Its my gui2">ilt. Ok. Not fun. i2">I feel i2">it. i2">I am gui2">ilty. i2">I recogni2">ize thi2">is i2">is the gui2">ilt about my wi2">ife that i2">I wanted to get ri2">id of. But now i2">I am i2">in a posi2">iti2">ion to exerci2">ise the exi2">it clause whi2">ich says, i2">if i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing to go to the 'judge' (Holy Spi2">iri2">it) and take my case of gui2">ilt to Hi2">im and present i2">it to Hi2">im, AND be wi2">illi2">ing to ACCEPT whatever Hi2">is verdi2">ict i2">is, there i2">is a chance that i2">I mi2">ight be found i2">innocent.

So thi2">is means i2">I approach Holy Spi2">iri2">it. So i2">I go up to Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">in my mi2">ind and i2">I start to show Hi2">im all the 'evi2">idence' of why i2">I am gui2">ilty, all that i2">I thi2">ink i2">I di2">id, even the 'si2">in' that li2">ies underneath i2">it, and i2">I offer i2">it up. Thi2">is requi2">ires that i2">I be OPEN. i2">I have to be OPEN to SHARE i2">it wi2">ith Hi2">im and show i2">it to Hi2">im and let Hi2">im see i2">it. i2">It's ki2">ind of li2">ike bei2">ing the prosecutor agai2">inst yourself, showi2">ing all the evi2">idence of what you di2">id and admi2">itti2">ing to i2">it - but at least i2">in an atmosphere that you are not at thi2">is poi2">int found gui2">ilty - the verdi2">ict i2">is sti2">ill undeci2">ided.

So i2">I do that. i2">I tell Hi2">im, Holy Spi2">iri2">it, i2">I am gui2">ilty because i2">I di2">id all thi2">is stuff and sai2">id all thi2">is stuff and felt bad about i2">it and i2">it proves i2">I'm not i2">innocent. What do YOU thi2">ink of thi2">is? How do YOU see thi2">is? What i2">is YOUR verdi2">ict of me?

He sai2">id, i2">in my mi2">ind, "not gui2">ilty". i2">I then reali2">ized that i2">I needed to ACCEPT Hi2">is opi2">ini2">ion, and that means i2">I have to be pretty open mi2">inded because i2">I have to actually be wi2">illi2">ing to SUSPEND my own beli2">ief i2">in my own gui2">ilt i2">IF He says that's what i2">I am to do. i2">I have to be open to go along wi2">ith what He says. So i2">I become wi2">illi2">ing to surrender the gui2">ilt, i2">I ACCEPT THE ATONEMENT - i2">ie i2">I accept that i2">I really AM i2">innocent, and then...

My head starts to shake, my arms wi2">iggle, my hands tremble. i2">I mean, for real. Thi2">is i2">is the Holy Spi2">iri2">it worki2">ing to remove the gui2">ilt. i2">I offered i2">it up. He healed i2">it. Seemi2">ingly wi2">ithout doi2">ing anythi2">ing. Then, i2">I found myself noti2">ici2">ing.... Myself starti2">ing to have thi2">is new FEELi2">ING.... "Am i2">I really i2">innocent"... Li2">ike.... Starti2">ing to sense a feeli2">ing of not bei2">ing gui2">ilty, a feeli2">ing of i2">it actually bei2">ing possi2">ible that i2">I am i2">innocent. So i2">I'm aski2">ing thi2">is only as a ki2">ind of exclamati2">ion of surpri2">ise, really. Holy Spi2">iri2">it says, "you are free".

Smi2">iles all round. Contract aboli2">ished. True i2">innocence reclai2">imed.

i2">It seemed qui2">ite easy, actually!

Nothi2">ing real can be hurt.

Nothi2">ing real can be attacked.

Nothi2">ing real can be damaged.

Nothi2">ing real can be made si2">ick.

Nothi2">ing real can ever di2">ie.

Nothi2">ing real can suffer.

Nothi2">ing real can be afrai2">id.

Nothi2">ing real can commi2">it a cri2">ime.

Nothi2">ing real can be si2">inful.

Nothi2">ing real can be gui2">ilty.

Nothi2">ing real can be puni2">ished.

Nothi2">ing real can be unhappy.

Nothi2">ing real can lack love.

Nothi2">ing real can lose anythi2">ing.

Nothi2">ing real can be i2">incomplete.

Nothi2">ing real can have an end.

Nothi2">ing real can decay.

Nothi2">ing real can be unaware.

Nothi2">ing real can be lost.

Nothi2">ing real can be di2">iseased.

Nothi2">ing real can be changed.

Nothi2">ing real can be uncertai2">in.

Nothi2">ing real can doubt or worry.

Nothi2">ing real can hurt anythi2">ing real.

Nothi2">ing real can be unreal.

Nothi2">ing real can be separate.

Nothi2">ing real can be i2">isolated.

Nothi2">ing real can be exclusi2">ive.

Nothi2">ing real can be pri2">ivate.

Nothi2">ing real can cease to exi2">ist.

Nothi2">ing real i2">is temporary.

Nothi2">ing real can be sad or gri2">ieve.

Nothi2">ing real can be vi2">icti2">imi2">ized.

Nothi2">ing real can be powerless.

Nothi2">ing real can fai2">il.

Nothi2">ing real can be threatened.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be hurt.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be attacked.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be damaged.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be made si2">ick.

Everythi2">ing unreal can ever di2">ie.

Everythi2">ing unreal can suffer.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be afrai2">id.

Everythi2">ing unreal can commi2">it a cri2">ime.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be si2">inful.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be gui2">ilty.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be puni2">ished.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be unhappy.

Everythi2">ing unreal can lack love.

Everythi2">ing unreal can lose anythi2">ing.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be i2">incomplete.

Everythi2">ing unreal can have an end.

Everythi2">ing unreal can decay.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be unaware.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be lost.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be di2">iseased.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be changed.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be uncertai2">in.

Everythi2">ing unreal can doubt or worry.

Everythi2">ing unreal can hurt anythi2">ing real.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be unreal.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be separate.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be i2">isolated.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be exclusi2">ive.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be pri2">ivate.

Everythi2">ing unreal can cease to exi2">ist.

Everythi2">ing unreal i2">is temporary.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be sad or gri2">ieve.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be vi2">icti2">imi2">ized.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be powerless.

Everythi2">ing unreal can fai2">il.

Everythi2">ing unreal can be threatened.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be hurt.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be attacked.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be damaged.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be made si2">ick.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot ever di2">ie.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot suffer.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be afrai2">id.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot commi2">it a cri2">ime.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be si2">inful.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be gui2">ilty.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be puni2">ished.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be unhappy.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot lack love.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot lose anythi2">ing.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be i2">incomplete.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot have an end.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot decay.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be unaware.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be lost.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be di2">iseased.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be changed.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be uncertai2">in.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot doubt or worry.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot hurt anythi2">ing real.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be unreal.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be separate.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be i2">isolated.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be exclusi2">ive.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be pri2">ivate.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot cease to exi2">ist.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be temporary.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be sad or gri2">ieve.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be vi2">icti2">imi2">ized.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be powerless.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot fai2">il.

i2">I am real so i2">I cannot be threatened.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be hurt.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be attacked.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be damaged.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be made si2">ick.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot ever di2">ie.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot suffer.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be afrai2">id.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot commi2">it a cri2">ime.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be si2">inful.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be gui2">ilty.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be puni2">ished.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be unhappy.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot lack love.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot lose anythi2">ing.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be i2">incomplete.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot have an end.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot decay.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be unaware.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be lost.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be di2">iseased.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be changed.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be uncertai2">in.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot doubt or worry.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot hurt anythi2">ing real.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be unreal.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be separate.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be i2">isolated.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be exclusi2">ive.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be pri2">ivate.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot cease to exi2">ist.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be temporary.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be sad or gri2">ieve.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be vi2">icti2">imi2">ized.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be powerless.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot fai2">il.

My brother i2">is real so he cannot be threatened.

Somethi2">ing that i2">I am really connecti2">ing wi2">ith strongly at the moment, i2">is the very ultra-si2">imple truth that i2">I am GOD’S CREATi2">ION. Thi2">is i2">is reflected i2">in i2">ideas such as:

"i2">I am forever an effect of God,"

"i2">I am sti2">ill as God created me."

i2">I focus si2">imply on the fact that whatever i2">I am, i2">I MUST BE what God has determi2">ined me to be. i2">I come from Hi2">im, and from nothi2">ing else. i2">I am the extensi2">ion of Hi2">im, per Hi2">is Wi2">ill. And everythi2">ing i2">I have He has gi2">iven me.

i2">It bypasses all lower level i2">ideas and concepts and si2">imply focuses on WHAT i2">I AM, i2">in relati2">ionshi2">ip to God. The pri2">imary relati2">ionshi2">ip of cause and effect between Father and Son.

Thi2">is entai2">ils acceptance and acknowledgement of havi2">ing been created BY God, and that therefore i2">I am Hi2">is chi2">ild, and must be EXACTLY as He created me to be.

i2">I am sti2">ill as God created me.

God desi2">igned me to be perfect so i2">I must be perfect.

God created me therefore i2">I am exactly what He wanted to create.

i2">I must be i2">innocent because God created me i2">innocent.

i2">I must be si2">inless and gui2">iltless because God di2">id not desi2">ign me wi2">ith si2">in or gui2">ilt i2">in me.

i2">I cannot di2">ie because God di2">id not Wi2">ill that i2">I be dead.

As you play wi2">ith thi2">is i2">idea and elaborate on i2">it, you can come up wi2">ith some very powerful yet si2">imple, holy i2">ideas about your real self.

God i2">is the cause, you are Hi2">is effect. i2">I acknowledge that si2">ince God caused me, i2">I must be whatever HE wants me to be. i2">I must be as he desi2">igned me. i2">I must be loved and holy. i2">I must be perfect and di2">ivi2">ine. i2">I must FOREVER be i2">immortal and flawless and deathless and ageless and free from all corrupti2">ion.

Acknowledgi2">ing that i2">I am God’s effect or creati2">ion, means admi2">itti2">ing to bei2">ing Chri2">ist. Jesus sai2">id to me, putti2">ing words i2">in my mouth, "i2">I need to restore my i2">identi2">ity as Chri2">ist." Thi2">is li2">ine of thi2">inki2">ing does exactly that.

i2">I wi2">ill to si2">imply remember my true nature. To remember who i2">I am and what i2">I am li2">ike. To recall why i2">I must be free from anythi2">ing God di2">id not put i2">into me. To recogni2">ize why i2">I must be sti2">ill as he desi2">igned and i2">in perfect accord wi2">ith Hi2">is wi2">ill and bluepri2">int.

i2">I can ONLY be what God has chosen to create me as. i2">I cannot change thi2">is. i2">I cannot redefi2">ine myself. i2">I have no say i2">in or power to alter myself. i2">I have never changed si2">ince God created me. i2">I’m i2">incapable of bei2">ing or doi2">ing anythi2">ing God di2">id not bui2">ild i2">into me to be capable of.

Therefore i2">I have a "functi2">ion", whi2">ich God has set i2">in place, a role i2">if you wi2">ill a machi2">inery, a way of operati2">ing, a potenti2">ial and capabi2">ili2">ity, a talent, whi2">ich God has gi2">iven and i2">is i2">irrevocable. Nor can i2">I add the sli2">ightest anythi2">ing to Hi2">is desi2">ign. Nor can i2">I take anythi2">ing away.

i2">I can ONLY BE what God wi2">ills me to be. i2">I come from God. i2">I am Hi2">is holy extensi2">ion. i2">I am li2">ike Hi2">im. i2">I am i2">in Hi2">is li2">ikeness and of Hi2">is nature. i2">I have i2">INHERi2">ITED Hi2">im. i2">I am HOST to Hi2">im. i2">I am what He would have me be, and nothi2">ing more or less.

i2">I am God’s Son, God’s chi2">ild. i2">I am from Hi2">im alone. Everythi2">ing about me i2">is Hi2">IS choi2">ice. i2">I can only accept and celebrate that He has gi2">iven me blessi2">ings and freedom and joy and beauty and power and everythi2">ing of Hi2">imself. He has shared Hi2">imself wi2">ith me. He has Gi2">IVEN Hi2">imself to me. i2">I am Hi2">IS property.

The relati2">ionshi2">ip of communi2">ion wi2">ith God i2">is the fundamental pri2">imary relati2">ionshi2">ip of the soul to i2">its creator. i2">It i2">is the recogni2">iti2">ion of what you ARE and MUST be, because of WHO created you. And i2">it i2">is the acceptance that you CANNOT BE anythi2">ing else, nothi2">ing else i2">is true of you, and only Hi2">is truth about you i2">is true.

You are anchored to your true i2">identi2">ity as Chri2">ist because thi2">is i2">is what God has wi2">illed. He created you Chri2">ist. You ARE Chri2">ist. And nothi2">ing beyond God has any power over you to defi2">ine, change, attack, di2">isti2">ingui2">ish, affect or alter you i2">in any way.

You are God’s creati2">ion. Holy, i2">innocent, and free.

"There i2">is nothi2">ing about me that you cannot attai2">in. i2">I have nothi2">ing that does not come from God. The mai2">in di2">ifference between us as yet i2">is that i2">I have NOTHi2">ING ELSE. Thi2">is leaves me i2">in a state of true holi2">iness, whi2">ich i2">is only a POTENTi2">IAL i2">in you."

Over the weekend i2">I came down wi2">ith what seems to be 'a cold'. Actually i2">it i2">is more li2">ikely just a strong 'release', and i2">I fi2">ind that pretty much every ti2">ime i2">I have a 'cold' i2">it i2">is accompani2">ied by strong emoti2">ional releases.

So anyway.. i2">I was semi2">i-mi2">iserable. Sufferi2">ing a bi2">it.

i2">I wanted to know i2">if any ki2">ind of heali2">ing was possi2">ible, and Holy Spi2">iri2">it hi2">inted that we'd talk about i2">it at ni2">ight i2">ie before sleepi2">ing.

So that ti2">ime came along and i2">I remembered. And i2">I was also feeli2">ing fai2">irly wi2">illi2">ing to just 'accept' bei2">ing si2">ick for a whi2">ile. i2">I thought to myself, well, i2">I made thi2">is si2">ickness, so i2">I should actually honor and respect the power that i2">I've wi2">ielded and appreci2">iate what i2">I've created. i2">I mean, after all, i2">it's a pretty ni2">ice i2">illusi2">ion i2">I made, and Jesus does warn i2">in the ACi2">IM text about i2">it bei2">ing an error to underesti2">imate the power of what we made wi2">ith the ego. i2">I di2">idn't want to fi2">ight wi2">ith i2">it or attack i2">it. i2">I was tryi2">ing to be more accepti2">ing. i2">I di2">id a li2">ittle bi2">it of "i2">I love thi2">is si2">ickness" and then i2">I asked Holy Spi2">iri2">it:

"Holy Spi2">iri2">it, i2">is there any way at all that there can be a heali2">ing of thi2">is, or do i2">I have to just accept i2">it for the next 2 weeks of snot and ti2">issues?"

HS: "There i2">is"

So i2">I sai2">id, "Ok, i2">I'm wi2">illi2">ing to admi2">it i2">I don't know anythi2">ing about heali2">ing, i2">I don't know how to heal thi2">is, i2">I don't know why i2">I made i2">it or what i2">its purpose i2">is, i2">I don't know why i2">I have i2">it and i2">I don't know what to do about i2">it. Help me to know what i2">I need to 'do' i2">if anythi2">ing to help you to faci2">ili2">itate heali2">ing." And i2">in thi2">is, i2">I seemed to be unusually 'open mi2">inded' and recepti2">ive i2">instead of just goi2">ing on about what 'i2">I have to do' to fi2">ix thi2">is. Holy Spi2">iri2">it sai2">id:

"Recei2">ive God"

i2">I was li2">ike, WHAT?! i2">It seemed i2">I was here aski2">ing about how to fi2">ix thi2">is si2">ickness and i2">instead i2">I get an answer that tells me i2">I'm about to be loved?? So i2">I was, li2">ike, ok... i2">I let myself just 'recei2">ive God' ... li2">ike, wi2">ithout doi2">ing anythi2">ing other than recei2">ivi2">ing and maybe repeati2">ing to myself, "recei2">ive God".

i2">Immedi2">iately i2">I felt a sense of love descend and come i2">into me and i2">it went deeper than a sense of unlove and unworthi2">iness that was i2">in me that i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize was there. And i2">I started to cry because i2">it was beauti2">iful and a reli2">ief. And the ego part of me was somewhat i2">in shock because i2">I couldn't fi2">igure out WHY God would love me. i2">I had all ki2">inds of ego reacti2">ions around i2">it li2">ike, why would God love me, i2">I've never been loved, surely i2">I'm not lovable, etc.

Nevertheless, my body started to shake, my hands shook vi2">igorously, i2">I coughed and spewed a bi2">it as i2">I felt somethi2">ing bei2">ing ejected from me and li2">ifted out. Then i2">I cri2">ied a bi2">it more because i2">I could feel how thi2">is love was gi2">iven so FREELY, li2">ike, there were absolutely no stri2">ings attached, and i2">it wasn't aski2">ing that i2">I gi2">ive anythi2">ing whatsoever, and was totally uncondi2">iti2">ional. i2">I couldn't comprehend how or why i2">it was bei2">ing gi2">iven so free of any expectati2">ions or condi2">iti2">ions or requi2">irements, li2">ike 'a freebi2">ie'. Why would God just gi2">ive gi2">ive gi2">ive? How was i2">it possi2">ible that i2">I would be just gi2">iven to li2">ike that?!

Anyway... i2">I felt thi2">is heali2">ing tremendously helped to li2">ift away a sense of unlove and unworthi2">iness and, i2">in parti2">icuarly, a sense that God/Father loved me, whi2">ich apparently was at the root of my si2">ickness. i2">I felt a lot better. i2">It wasn't all gone, but much i2">improved. i2">I couldn't help but feel grateful, and somewhat i2">in awe, and a bi2">it shocked. i2">I actually felt a sli2">ight sense of ... how dare you love me thi2">is much wi2">ithout aski2">ing for anythi2">ing i2">in return. i2">It was shocki2">ingly uncondi2">iti2">ional. God loved me MORE than i2">I loved me.

Thi2">is i2">is then when ego came i2">in and tri2">ied i2">in vari2">ious subtle ways to reproduce or tri2">igger or i2">influence thi2">is 'recei2">ivi2">ing God' thi2">ing... li2">ike i2">it kept tryi2">ing to pretend that i2">IT was causi2">ing the transmi2">issi2">ion of love, or i2">IT was able to control i2">it, or i2">IT was goi2">ing to tri2">igger i2">it off, or i2">IT knew what made the heali2">ing flow. And yet i2">it di2">idn't. i2">I noti2">iced all that acti2">ivi2">ity and how i2">it was i2">interferi2">ing. And i2">it wasn't unti2">il i2">I could stop all of those efforts to "be the healer" that i2">I allowed myself to "recei2">ive God" a bi2">it more. Genui2">inely. To just recei2">ive i2">in openness and wi2">illi2">ingness wi2">ithout tryi2">ing to force i2">it. Because to recei2">ive wi2">ithout 'doi2">ing' anythi2">ing di2">isables the ego from all i2">its acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies.

So grateful. And so unexpected.... i2">I had no i2">idea that i2">I was goi2">ing to recei2">ive heali2">ing AND be uncondi2">iti2">ionally loved, li2">ike, wi2">ithout havi2">ing to do or gi2">ive anythi2">ing i2">in return, anythi2">ing other than to just be open and wi2">illi2">ing to recei2">ive. i2">It seemed li2">ike such a blessi2">ing that really exposed any sense of unworthi2">iness or reasons why i2">I shouldn't.

i2">I asked also then, i2">if i2">it were possi2">ible to heal another person thi2">is way. Holy Spi2">iri2">it sai2">id that the other person has to be "ready to accept wi2">illi2">ingly". i2">I could understand and accept that. You can't force heali2">ing on someone. And i2">I only felt a heali2">ing because i2">I was Wi2">ILLi2">ING TO RECEi2">IVE. And i2">it was not anythi2">ing that *i2">I* di2">id whatsoever. Other people can recei2">ive heali2">ing from God too, but they have to be wi2">illi2">ing to accept and allow i2">it. And i2">it has to be pure 100% recei2">ivi2">ing, not any effort to control or i2">interfere or even to 'gi2">ive'. i2">I can see how the ego tri2">ies to pretend i2">it i2">is seeki2">ing heali2">ing by tryi2">ing to force heali2">ing or produce i2">it from i2">its own efforts, but real heali2">ing i2">is completely counter-ego, requi2">iri2">ing the ego to be suspended and uni2">involved.

"Recei2">ive God". Si2">imple.

i2">I am amazed mostly at how God gi2">ives love so freely, so wi2">ithout condi2">iti2">ions, so totally and unrestrai2">ined. i2">It's li2">ike a huge outpouri2">ing, a massi2">ive gi2">ivi2">ing, almost li2">ike a revelati2">ion. Everythi2">ing comi2">ing FROM God to you, and your only job i2">is to RECEi2">IVE. Recei2">ive recei2">ive recei2">ive.

i2">It's li2">ike sunbathi2">ing - God-bathi2">ing...you don't go tryi2">ing to force the sun to shi2">ine wi2">ith your ego, you don't tri2">igger the sun, you don't make i2">it shi2">ine on you. You have to surrender and relax and let go and recei2">ive the li2">ight. The sun does the shi2">ini2">ing. God does the shi2">ini2">ing. Di2">iffi2">icult to get the ego out of the way and be totally recepti2">ive. But i2">it seems li2">ike the more i2">I can 'let love i2">in' the more i2">I am allowi2">ing myself to be loved, to a depth and extent that i2">I have never experi2">ienced or thought possi2">ible.

Ahhhhhhh.

Sti2">ill sni2">iffli2">ing today. The 'cold' i2">is sti2">ill there. But... i2">I know i2">I am healed i2">in some way on some level. A sense of unworthi2">iness has been replaced wi2">ith worthi2">iness. Thanks God.

One last i2">insi2">ight. .. the lesson i2">I needed to learn, i2">in Holy Spi2">iri2">it's words:

"Let God"

i2">I choose to be afrai2">id.

i2">I project the fear outward and i2">identi2">ify targets that are causi2">ing the fear.

The exi2">istence of these targets 'explai2">ins why' i2">I am afrai2">id.

Explai2">ini2">ing why i2">I'm afrai2">id justi2">ifi2">ies and proves why i2">I am afrai2">id, and gi2">ives i2">it extra wei2">ight, maki2">ing i2">it real.

i2">I then say, oh my, i2">I'm afrai2">id, i2">I don't want those targets to attack me. But thi2">is i2">is a two-faced ego li2">ie.

i2">I want to see them attacki2">ing me because i2">it justi2">ifi2">ies keepi2">ing my fear. i2">I want them to make me afrai2">id. And unti2">il i2">I stop i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing them as the cause or 'reason for' the fear, i2">I wi2">ill just stay afrai2">id.

The truth i2">is, there i2">is a secret reason for the fear whi2">ich has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith who or what i2">it i2">is projected onto. They are not the cause of i2">it. They are not the ones who are creati2">ing i2">it or maki2">ing i2">it happen.

i2">I am secretly maki2">ing i2">it happen by tryi2">ing to defend myself from God. My secret wi2">ish i2">is to be separate from God and to deny that God exi2">ists. My secret wi2">ish i2">is a sui2">ici2">idal death-wi2">ish i2">in whi2">ich i2">I want death i2">in place of Li2">ife. That's the whole reason why i2">I'm i2">in a body - to escape from God.

So every ti2">ime i2">I become afrai2">id of 'somethi2">ing', that's not really what i2">I'm afrai2">id of or why i2">I'm i2">in fear. i2">I'm i2">in fear because i2">I am conveni2">iently usi2">ing them as a scapegoat for why i2">I NEED to be afrai2">id. i2">I want to NEED fear because i2">I NEED fear to separate me from God and fulfi2">ill my hi2">idden agenda.

The people or events or objects or body functi2">ions that are 'maki2">ing me afrai2">id' are very conveni2">iently HELPi2">ING me to reject God. Thank you, fears, for helpi2">ing me to stay separate and choose death, exactly as i2">I wanted.

See, underneath the farce of projected fear, there i2">is a death wi2">ish. And that death wi2">ish wouldn't be there i2">if i2">I di2">id not WANT i2">it. i2">I wanted i2">it because i2">it was my CHOi2">ICE. i2">I CHOSE that i2">I wanted the opposi2">ite of God and di2">id not want Li2">ife. i2">It was a deci2">isi2">ion i2">I made. So the only reason i2">I am now afrai2">id i2">is because i2">I want to be because i2">it's helpi2">ing to support my underlyi2">ing death wi2">ish.

Can i2">I be afrai2">id i2">if i2">I get honest and own up to usi2">ing fear to cover up MY deli2">iberate attempt to be dead? Can i2">I beli2">ieve that other people are causi2">ing the fear i2">if i2">I get honest and own up to the fact that i2">I want them to help me justi2">ify keepi2">ing the fear, so that i2">I can shut out love and be autonomous?

i2">I have to admi2">it that fear i2">is a choi2">ice, just as death i2">is a choi2">ice. And i2">it's ME that i2">is doi2">ing i2">it TO MYSELF. Thi2">is i2">is the key to salvati2">ion.

i2">I can deci2">ide i2">I do not li2">ike what i2">I have chosen for myself and admi2">it that i2">I chose i2">it - i2">it was not created by anyone else or anythi2">ing else - and nothi2">ing else i2">is keepi2">ing i2">it i2">in place other than my secret wi2">ish for death. Do i2">I li2">ike the results? Do i2">I want i2">it? Shall i2">I keep i2">it? i2">Is i2">it worki2">ing out? Am i2">I enjoyi2">ing the results? Probably not.

Maybe i2">it's ti2">ime i2">I admi2">it that i2">I chose mi2">istakedly and i2">it was a poor choi2">ice, and that i2">I want somethi2">ing better. Maybe i2">I'll admi2">it that i2">it i2">is poi2">intless to deny God because i2">it doesn't make God go away, and bei2">ing wi2">ithout Hi2">im i2">is always goi2">ing to be a less enjoyable experi2">ience. i2">I can be stubborn about i2">it or i2">I can gi2">ive up tryi2">ing to be dead and ACCEPT Li2">IFE i2">instead.

We do have thi2">is choi2">ice. We make thi2">is li2">ife-or-death deci2">isi2">ion every si2">ingle ti2">ime we choose ego over God.

The good news then, i2">is, si2">ince we were the ones choosi2">ing death and fear, we can choose agai2">in and choose not to be dead. Yes, death i2">is a CHOi2">ICE. i2">If i2">I choose to accept Li2">IFE then i2">I wi2">ill permi2">it eternal li2">ife to li2">ift me up and sustai2">in me forever. There i2">is nothi2">ing 'the ego' can do to prevent thi2">is because the ego i2">is nothi2">ing more than my i2">insane mi2">istaken choi2">ice to try to reject God.

So what's i2">it goi2">ing to be today? Li2">ife or death? You choose.

i2">I'll gi2">ive you a hi2">int. Death actually i2">isn't death, i2">it's just a dream of death, whi2">ich i2">is just deni2">ial. i2">It doensn't actually do anythi2">ing to the Real You. YOU can't di2">ie. So tryi2">ing to do so i2">is a waste of ti2">ime.

Gi2">ive up. Surrender. Choose God agai2">in and be happy.

There i2">is the me that seems to be 'i2">in here' i2">in the body, who i2">I beli2">ieve i2">is i2">innocent and di2">id not ask for thi2">is sorry treatment.

Then there i2">is the me that seems to be 'out there' whi2">ich somehow i2">is i2">in someone else's body, and therefore i2">I beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is not me at all, and that self i2">is attacki2">ing the self that i2">I thi2">ink remai2">ins as me, wi2">ithi2">in.

What's really goi2">ing on i2">is that both the me out there and the me i2">in here are two parts of my one mi2">ind. My mi2">ind, i2">itself, i2">is at war wi2">ith i2">itself. Thi2">is i2">is the ego spli2">it-mi2">ind, based i2">in duali2">ity and separati2">ion. i2">It i2">is two-faced.

The me that i2">is i2">in-here, my persona self, i2">is the part of me that wants to retai2">in and keep somethi2">ing, rejecti2">ing everythi2">ing else.

The me that i2">is 'out there', my shadow self, i2">is the projected (but sti2">ill wi2">ithi2">in my own mi2">ind, si2">ince i2">ideas leave not thei2">ir source) part of me that i2">I do not want. Therefore that self seems to be separated off behi2">ind a wall of di2">isassoci2">iati2">ion.

i2">I percei2">ive that projected shadow self as "not me" and that i2">I want nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith i2">it. i2">I don't i2">identi2">ify wi2">ith i2">it and i2">I beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is someone else. i2">It i2">is what i2">I do not want. i2">I see i2">it as 'my' enemy, but really i2">I am seei2">ing i2">it wi2">ith my persona who loves to i2">isolate the 'good bi2">its' to my 'i2">in here' self, and keep the 'bad bi2">its' relegated to the 'out there' self.

i2">I project my shadow self onto other people and si2">ince i2">I beli2">ieve that thi2">is shadow self i2">is 'not me', not my persona-me, i2">I beli2">ieve that i2">it must belong to other people. i2">I beli2">ieve i2">it must be a part of them. i2">I beli2">ieve THEY must be the ones who are attacki2">ing me, they are the ones who are offensi2">ive, they are the ones who are my enemy.

The stronger becomes thi2">is sense of 'separati2">ion' between the i2">in-here me and the out-there me, i2">ie me vs 'other selves', whi2">ich i2">I experi2">ience halluci2">inatori2">ily as other people, the stronger and deeper that ri2">ift becomes and the more 'i2">I' am at war wi2">ith those enemy selves, the more i2">I di2">isassoci2">iate my i2">identi2">ity from that shadow self - the part of me that i2">I hate and reject. And i2">it seems i2">I am now an enemy of that other person, but they are really me - i2">I am an enemy of myself.

Whi2">ile thi2">is di2">isassoci2">iati2">ion i2">is i2">in place, i2">it wi2">ill seem to me that the other self that i2">is 'out there', whi2">ich houses everythi2">ing that i2">is wrong and ugly and unwanted and gui2">ilty and evi2">il and deadly, has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith me at all. i2">I wi2">ill want to get away from i2">it, reject i2">it, escape i2">it, and run from i2">its threat. i2">I don't want to accept that i2">it i2">is a part of myself.

But what i2">I must do i2">if i2">I want heali2">ing, i2">is i2">I must recogni2">ize that all of the projected gui2">ilt/si2">in/attack that i2">I see as 'not myself', or as 'someone else's stuff', ALL of i2">it i2">is mi2">ine. That content i2">is part of and i2">insi2">ide of my own mi2">ind. See, i2">I thi2">ink my mi2">ind i2">is only i2">insi2">ide my body and that my mi2">ind stops at the edges of my body. i2">It doesn't. My mi2">ind 'i2">in here', as i2">it percei2">ives what i2">is 'out there', and as i2">it thi2">inks about stuff 'out there', i2">is actually out there as well. And i2">it's not possi2">ible for my mi2">ind to percei2">ive that there even i2">IS an 'out there' wi2">ithout my mi2">ind bei2">ing i2">in some way out there too. And everythi2">ing i2">I experi2">ience, even the out there stuff, i2">is really encapsulated by my whole mi2">ind, li2">ike a contai2">iner. My body, other people's bodi2">ies. i2">It's me.

So i2">if i2">I want to heal, i2">I'm goi2">ing to have to reali2">ize that i2">in all cases where i2">I thi2">ink someone else i2">is wrong or at fault, i2">I am just conveni2">iently di2">isassoci2">iati2">ing from MY OWN self-attack, whi2">ich i2">I am seei2">ing as 'not me' because i2">I don't want i2">it, and i2">I've seen i2">it overlai2">id on top of 'people' out there. i2">It's nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith them. They are ALL i2">INNOCENT. There i2">is not really anythi2">ing out there. i2">It's all my own mi2">ind, parts of my mi2">ind, that i2">I don't want to look at.

To heal, i2">I am goi2">ing to have to look at thi2">is content that i2">I thi2">ink i2">is i2">in other people, and i2">I'm goi2">ing to have to take back responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for i2">it. i2">I'm goi2">ing to have to take back the 'power' that i2">I thi2">ink i2">it has over me, whi2">ich i2">is really my own power wi2">ithi2">in my own mi2">ind. And i2">I'm goi2">ing to have to admi2">it that the stuff i2">I want to get ri2">id of, that i2">is stuff wi2">ithi2">in my mi2">ind not outsi2">ide of i2">it. There i2">is no outsi2">ide to my mi2">ind! i2">It's all i2">insi2">ide me. And i2">I need to therefore heal the ri2">ift between the persona-me, i2">in here, whi2">ich only wants to keep the good stuff, and the shadow me that i2">I project, whi2">ich i2">is seemi2">ingly out there and that i2">I do not want to accept.

i2">I can't accept the shadow stuff or the persona stuff whi2">ile they remai2">in separate. Whi2">ile separate, there i2">is war. i2">I have to reali2">ize they are BOTH ME and cease the beli2">ief i2">in the *SEPARATi2">ION* that i2">is between them. That i2">is the key. i2">I am doi2">ing thi2">is to myself because i2">I am both parts of my mi2">ind, the i2">inner and the outer. i2">I am the enemy i2">I percei2">ive. i2">I need to forgi2">ive myself and undo thi2">is ri2">ift, thi2">is spli2">it mi2">ind, between what i2">is approved-of i2">in me and what i2">is not approved of i2">in me.

i2">It i2">is keepi2">ing these parts of my own mi2">ind held apart and separate that bri2">ings on all si2">ickness, all confli2">ict, all war, all upset, and death. Reclai2">imi2">ing ownershi2">ip of the enti2">ire scenari2">io, the i2">inner and the outer, they become one. i2">I see them both as me operati2">ing two personali2">iti2">ies that are agai2">inst each other, and yet both of them are wi2">ithi2">in me. Therefore.... i2">I am somethi2">ing else. i2">I am not ei2">ither of them. i2">I am awareness. i2">I am the personali2">ity. i2">I am the one mi2">ind.

Wholeness. Peace.

Only the truth i2">is true. God establi2">ished the truth. i2">If i2">I want the peace and happi2">iness that God wi2">ills for me, i2">I must be wi2">illi2">ing to let go of what i2">is not true.

i2">I must be wi2">illi2">ing to accept God’s truth as i2">it i2">is, wi2">ithout changi2">ing i2">it or maki2">ing i2">it be what i2">it i2">is.

Tryi2">ing to make the truth be what i2">it i2">is i2">is the ego authori2">ity problem. i2">I am tryi2">ing to tell God what God i2">is agai2">inst Hi2">is wi2">ill.

i2">I must be wi2">illi2">ing to put asi2">ide what i2">I thi2">ink i2">is true, and admi2">it that i2">it i2">is false, i2">if i2">I am to accept the truth as God created i2">it.

i2">I can’t accept God’s truth and hold onto my own separate truth. They can’t both be true.

i2">If i2">I want God’s peace and happi2">iness, i2">if God i2">is all that i2">I want, i2">I wi2">ill have to surrender. i2">I wi2">ill need to be wi2">illi2">ing to allow God to be the way God i2">is, wi2">ithout my opi2">ini2">ion.

What i2">I beli2">ieve does not matter. i2">I cannot establi2">ish the truth. i2">I can only accept i2">it, or deny i2">it. i2">If i2">I want God, i2">I wi2">ill have to stop bei2">ing i2">in deni2">ial, and that means i2">I wi2">ill have to surrender the thi2">ings i2">I thought were true but whi2">ich di2">isagree wi2">ith God.

i2">I have to be wi2">illi2">ing to surrender my ego. i2">I have to stop denyi2">ing God’s truth.

i2">I want the peace and happi2">iness of God, therefore i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing to put asi2">ide my own i2">idea of what the truth i2">is, and to open up to what God has to share wi2">ith me.

Do i2">I want my li2">ittle world, or the one God Created for me? Am i2">I wi2">illi2">ing to accept God’s Wi2">ill for me? Am i2">I wi2">illi2">ing to allow God to deci2">ide for me i2">in every way and on every matter? Wi2">ill i2">I trust Hi2">im?

To accept the truth as God created i2">it, to accept God’s wi2">ill, to accept God’s deci2">isi2">ion, must entai2">il that i2">I trust Hi2">im, because i2">I have to take Hi2">is word for i2">it. Wi2">ithout fi2">iguri2">ing out on my own what the truth i2">is, i2">I have to trust God’s answer i2">is correct.

i2">I want to trust God. i2">I want to be wi2">illi2">ing to accept God’s truth. i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing to put asi2">ide my own ego and surrender to the truth God has already created.

i2">I want the peace of God. i2">I accept the peace of God. Above everythi2">ing else, i2">I want peace.

i2">I surrender and trust you God. Choose for me.

"Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo all the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">if i2">I wi2">ill let Hi2">im. i2">I choose to let Hi2">im by allowi2">ing Hi2">im to choose for God for me."

i2">In the past, my wi2">ife became di2">isabled and was unable to fend for herself. She became dependent upon me. i2">I had to take over responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for her li2">ife, her wellbei2">ing, her deci2">isi2">ions, her food and cleanli2">iness, her health. i2">I had to keep her ali2">ive.

Now, i2">in that scenari2">io there was a lot of pressure. Havi2">ing developed dementi2">ia and brai2">in damages she would someti2">imes act out, lashi2">ing out at people, hi2">itti2">ing people, sweari2">ing at people. She di2">idn't mean to, she couldn't control i2">it.

Because i2">I took on responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for her li2">ife, i2">I felt i2">it was up to me to keep her goi2">ing, to manage her behavi2">iour, to feed clothe wash and support her, to admi2">ini2">ister medi2">icati2">ions, to take her to di2">ialysi2">is treatments 3 ti2">imes a week for years, to get through hospi2">ital vi2">isi2">its, to defend her agai2">inst i2">inept doctors and nurses, and to generally try to stop her from dyi2">ing.

All of thi2">is began to produce some ego-creep i2">in me, i2">in whi2">ich i2">I started to feel gui2">ilty, ashamed, embarrassed, and afrai2">id. i2">I felt afrai2">id that i2">if i2">I di2">idn't do the ri2">ight thi2">ing she would di2">ie. i2">If i2">I di2">idn't do the ri2">ight thi2">ing, her health would decli2">ine. i2">If i2">I di2">idn't do the ri2">ight thi2">ing, there would be judgement and attack, possi2">ibly even legal acti2">ion.

There was shame and embarrassment and gui2">ilt when she would act out. There was fear, that i2">if she acted out towards the very same medi2">ical people that were provi2">idi2">ing "li2">ife support", she would get herself ki2">icked out and would di2">ie. There was fear that she mi2">ight not make i2">it through the ni2">ight, that her breathi2">ing was poor, that she mi2">ight do somethi2">ing to make herself worse off. And feeli2">ings of gui2">ilt crept i2">in that i2">I wasn't doi2">ing i2">it well enough.

You could say, as some would, that thi2">is was to be expected. Gi2">iven all the pressure, all the responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity, all the support and ti2">ime and management and effort i2">I had to gi2">ive just to keep her goi2">ing, to put out fi2">ires, to stop thi2">ings from getti2">ing worse, anyone would feel upset and lost, afrai2">id and gui2">ilty, ashamed and embarrassed.

But that's not what A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles would say. i2">It would say that there i2">is a secret of salvati2">ion - that we are doi2">ing thi2">is all to ourselves. i2">It would say that i2">if i2">I felt gui2">ilt or shame, i2">I must've chosen to feel i2">it. i2">It would say that i2">if i2">I was afrai2">id, i2">I must've deci2">ided to buy i2">into fear. i2">It would say that i2">if i2">I was resi2">isti2">ing death, that was a choi2">ice on my part. i2">It would say i2">if i2">I was embarrassed about how she broke the rules today, that was somethi2">ing i2">I was taki2">ing personally by myself.

So i2">I had to look at thi2">is, because i2">it was all part of me becomi2">ing a vi2">icti2">im i2">in thi2">is scenari2">io, of seei2">ing myself as constantly on the defensi2">ive, under attack, fi2">ighti2">ing agai2">inst the i2">insti2">ituti2">ions. i2">I had started to blame myself, that i2">it was my fault. The sense of responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity was shi2">ifti2">ing i2">into a sense of personal gui2">ilt, that i2">if anythi2">ing went wrong somehow i2">it reflected on me. That i2">if she acted out or made thi2">ings worse for herself, i2">it meant i2">I was more ashamed somehow.

Obvi2">iously thi2">is i2">is not somethi2">ing that was anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith me really, was not my fault or my doi2">ing. But of course when you have a lot of soci2">ial and peer pressure and medi2">ical pressure and even legal pressure to say, you have to look after her ri2">ight otherwi2">ise the puni2">ishment wi2">ill come, that can be very tempti2">ing. i2">I di2">id buy i2">into i2">it to some degree, and i2">I take take i2">it on as a personal thi2">ing. And thi2">is resulted i2">in my attacki2">ing myself.

So i2">in order to apply the secret of salvati2">ion, i2">I have to look at that and see, i2">I was NOT bei2">ing caused by other people, i2">I was not responsi2">ible for what she di2">id even i2">if i2">in physi2">ical terms i2">I was, i2">I was not gui2">ilty for anythi2">ing that went wrong, i2">I was not shameful for her lashi2">ing out at people, and i2">I was not to be blamed for fai2">ilures and losses and dramas and vari2">ious other forms of thi2">ings i2">I couldn't control.

The secret says, that i2">if you are upset, you are doi2">ing i2">it to yourself. So that means, i2">I made myself gui2">ilty. i2">It means i2">I shamed myself, i2">it wasn't other people doi2">ing i2">it. i2">It means i2">I made myself afrai2">id by beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in the body and i2">in death and i2">in threats. i2">It means i2">I chose to be embarrassed, to feel i2">incapable, to feel loss. i2">I di2">id that to myself.

You mi2">ight also say, i2">it's qui2">ite a tall order to expect someone goi2">ing through such a di2">iffi2">icult thi2">ing to have to ri2">ise up to a state of perfecti2">ion. To not react at all, to have no i2">investment, to not take thi2">ings personally, to not feel threatened. i2">Indeed i2">it i2">is qui2">ite a tall order. But i2">it's the ego that really makes thi2">ings feel li2">ike hell, i2">it's the lack of responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity and power that makes you see yourself as vi2">icti2">imi2">ised and under attack. i2">It's not our natural state to be posi2">iti2">ioned as a vi2">icti2">im li2">ike that.

So i2">I take my power back. The power that i2">I gave to these people, the power that i2">I gave to the si2">ituati2">ion, the power that i2">I gave to her. i2">I take back the power that i2">I di2">isowned by playi2">ing a role of caregi2">iver and savi2">iour and protector. i2">I take back the power that sai2">id i2">it was my fault, my job, my responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity, my role and i2">identi2">ity, to have to be responsi2">ible for another person's li2">ife and wellbei2">ing. i2">I take back my power to recogni2">ize i2">I chose to see myself as under pressure and attack, threatened by death and i2">its cohorts, and these thi2">ings have NO power over me.

i2">It i2">is ONLY by taki2">ing back your power that you can be not a vi2">icti2">im, can let go of the vari2">ious vi2">icti2">im roles li2">ike bei2">ing gui2">ilty or ashamed, embarrassed or lost, afrai2">id and powerless. For me i2">it was a profound lesson whi2">ich actually, overall, di2">id i2">increase my power and my awareness and my sense of responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. i2">It wasn't a loss or a fai2">ilure, i2">it's just that the lesson was so strong that i2">it also knocked me down a few pegs i2">in some areas and became overwhelmi2">ing.

i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im of the world. i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im of doctors and nurses. i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im of the law. i2">I a not a vi2">icti2">im of offi2">ici2">ial rules or requi2">irements or paperwork or legal proceedi2">ings. i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im of what another person needs or how they act or what they choose to do to others. i2">I am not responsi2">ible for causi2">ing my wi2">ife's sufferi2">ing or si2">ickness or behavi2">iours. i2">I am not gui2">ilty, and i2">I am not ashamed. i2">I am the holy son of God, gui2">iltless and si2">inless, pure and i2">innocent.

We must thi2">ink of ourselves as i2">immortal bei2">ings, sti2">ill as God crated us, sti2">ill perfect and pure and holy and good. We cannot si2">in, and have never si2">inned. We are not gui2">ilty, and cannot become gui2">ilty. We have never been attacked by anyone or anythi2">ing i2">in the world. We cannot suffer unless we try to make ourselves suffer. i2">I was not sufferi2">ing because of the si2">ituati2">ion, or my wi2">ife, or the medi2">ical staffs, or fami2">ily members, or anyone else. i2">I cannot suffer unless i2">I choose to do so, and i2">I had chosen to do so. And now i2">I choose agai2">in.

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill repeat thi2">is ONE i2">inclusi2">ive lesson of deli2">iverance, unti2">il i2">it has been learned, REGARDLESS of the form of sufferi2">ing that bri2">ings you pai2">in. Whatever hurt you bri2">ing to Hi2">im, He wi2">ill make answer wi2">ith thi2">is very si2">imple truth. For thi2">is one answer TAKES AWAY the cause of every form of sorrow and of pai2">in. The form affects Hi2">is answer not at all, for He would teach you but the Si2">INGLE cause of all of them, no matter WHAT thei2">ir form. And you wi2">ill understand that mi2">iracles reflect the si2">imple statement, "i2">I have done thi2">is thi2">ing, and i2">it i2">is thi2">is i2">I would undo."

i2">I complai2">in that food manufacturers constantly package food i2">in contai2">iners whi2">ich are way larger than the contents, and when you go to open i2">it up you fi2">ind i2">it's half empty and feel decei2">ived. i2">It i2">IS a di2">ishonest practi2">ice. At fi2">irst i2">it was the 'oh potatoe chi2">ips need extra ai2">ir space to cushi2">ion them agai2">inst breakage' but then i2">it was... well, here's 20 other foods that don't have thi2">is ri2">isk but sti2">ill come wi2">ith a large ai2">irspace. The packagi2">ing mi2">is-represents what you actually wi2">ill get. Ok, that's just a decepti2">ive shi2">itty li2">ie.

Ok. That's my complai2">int. Now, let's look at what has happened because of thi2">is complai2">int.

i2">I've started out by seei2">ing myself as bei2">ing vi2">icti2">imi2">ized. i2">I ask, who am *i2">I* i2">in thi2">is scenari2">io. There's the food manufacturer over there and there's the product si2">itti2">ing i2">in front of me and i2">I'm seei2">ing thi2">is scenari2">io where i2">I'm looki2">ing at ME i2">in a parti2">icular way. i2">I thi2">ink i2">I'm looki2">ing at the food contai2">iner and complai2">ini2">ing, but that's actually a few steps down the road. What happened before my angry reacti2">ion was me seei2">ing myself 'i2">in' the scenari2">io as a vi2">icti2">im. i2">ie..

1) i2">If the food i2">item has more empty space than needed, i2">I have deci2">ided that thi2">is means there i2">is di2">ishonesty. i2">It's di2">ishonesty on the level of form and i2">impli2">ies decei2">it.

2) i2">If there i2">is decei2">it i2">in the food i2">item, and because i2">I say i2">it means they are bei2">ing decei2">ivi2">ing, and because i2">I have an i2">interest i2">in thi2">is food i2">item, i2">I am now a part of the story and i2">it i2">is ME that i2">is bei2">ing decei2">ived. i2">It's personal!

3) Now that i2">it's 'affecti2">ing me' (because of the way i2">I CHOSE to posi2">iti2">ion myself as the vi2">icti2">im i2">in the story), i2">I am now justi2">ifi2">ied i2">in anger and annoyance. Now i2">I can blame them. Now i2">I can say i2">it's thei2">ir fault that i2">I am angry, because what they di2">id happened before what i2">I di2">id. But thi2">is covers up the fact that what i2">I di2">id (made i2">it real, gave i2">it meani2">ing i2">it doesn't have, treated i2">it as non-neutral), happened before anythi2">ing else.

4) i2">If i2">I am seei2">ing gui2">ilt i2">in the food contai2">iner then who i2">is experi2">ienci2">ing gui2">ilt? i2">I mi2">ight be tryi2">ing to get THEM to experi2">ience gui2">ilt but i2">it's a part of my reali2">ity, so *i2">I* am experi2">ienci2">ing gui2">ilt, albei2">it di2">isplaced. That means there's gui2">ilt i2">in my mi2">ind, and i2">I beli2">ieve i2">in my own gui2">ilt. That means i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I've si2">inned, and i2">I'm tryi2">ing to pi2">in i2">it on the food contai2">iner and the people who made i2">it wrongly.

So as i2">I fi2">ind the huge ai2">irspace i2">in a bag of chi2">ips annoyi2">ing, or the gross vomi2">it-li2">ike quali2">ity of tv di2">inners to be nothi2">ing li2">ike the beauti2">iful arrangement on the box cover, or the totally unnecessary contai2">iner si2">ize housi2">ing rather less product just to get me to thi2">ink that i2">I am getti2">ing more than i2">I am, i2">I have thi2">is opportuni2">ity to reali2">ize.... thi2">is i2">is ONLY there to tri2">igger my own self-attack and to remi2">ind me that i2">I am CHOOSi2">ING to see myself as a vi2">icti2">im, and i2">I'm only choosi2">ing that because *i2">I* BELi2">IEVE* i2">I am decepti2">ive and di2">ishonest and gui2">ilty. Hmmm.

So... then i2">it boi2">ils down to thi2">is. i2">I can't hold THEM gui2">ilty wi2">ithout holdi2">ing myself gui2">ilty, because thi2">is gui2">ilt i2">is mi2">ine. Hmm. Ok, i2">I forgi2">ive them BECAUSE they di2">id not do anythi2">ing, i2">I Di2">ID i2">IT. And i2">I forgi2">ive me because i2">I di2">id not really DO anythi2">ing, nothi2">ing has happened. And i2">I am forgi2">iven already because none of thi2">is happened i2">in the fi2">irst place, i2">it's just a dream that i2">isn't real. And i2">I am actually whole and one wi2">ith GOD ri2">ight now bei2">ing HAPPY rather than ri2">ight. Yay. We are ALL i2">innocent and equal and One and none of us are gui2">ilty at all.

Ok now to eat some chi2">ips.

i2">I used to attack myself pretty severely through the fear of bei2">ing judged by others. i2">I was pai2">infully shy and percei2">ived a need to wi2">ithdraw i2">in an effort to protect myself, but all thi2">is di2">id was hurt myself deeply.

My shyness was a copi2">ing mechani2">ism for protecti2">ing my sensi2">iti2">ivi2">ity. i2">I had fai2">iled to learn how to express myself fully, and i2">it di2">idn't help that i2">I was an i2">introvert. i2">I had trouble learni2">ing soci2">ial ski2">ills and asserti2">ing myself. Every soci2">ial i2">interacti2">ion was li2">iterally pai2">inful.

i2">I di2">id not reali2">ize what i2">I was doi2">ing to myself. My percepti2">ion was that other people were percei2">ivi2">ing me i2">in a certai2">in way, whi2">ich i2">I was si2">imply tryi2">ing to get away from.

After a soci2">ial encounter, parti2">icularly one wi2">ith strangers or where i2">I had to go i2">into someone else's home or be surrounded by a crowd, i2">I would feel deeply, deeply hurt. i2">I would become strongly embarrassed i2">in the mi2">idst of the si2">ituati2">ion, would tense up, become very qui2">iet (paralyzed) and experi2">ience thi2">ings as though everyone was judgi2">ing me.

i2">I would return home wi2">ith a very very deep i2">inner emoti2">ional pai2">in, a feeli2">ing of "hurt", that was so strong i2">I had no choi2">ice but to have a deep cry i2">in order to deal wi2">ith i2">it. Every soci2">ial encounter seemed li2">ike a total fai2">ilure and somethi2">ing i2">I di2">id not want to be a part of, maki2">ing me avoi2">id them even more. i2">It was deeper and stronger than any other emoti2">ional upset about any other si2">ituati2">ion i2">in li2">ife. i2">It felt absolutely horri2">ible.

When strangers would even walk past i2">I would i2">immedi2">iately cri2">inge and feel attacked. i2">I suspected they were a threat, and saw them as enemi2">ies or someone i2">I di2">id not want to be around. They seemed to have power over me and i2">I hi2">id away and wi2">ithdrew i2">in an effort to avoi2">id people.

i2">I had no i2">idea what was happeni2">ing i2">in my percepti2">ion or what i2">I was doi2">ing to myself. i2">I only thought that other people were hurti2">ing me and causi2">ing me to feel li2">ike shi2">it. i2">It seemed to all be thei2">ir fault, and they were the ones who we bei2">ing judgmental.

But over ti2">ime i2">I have gradually, slowly learned, that thi2">is i2">is not the case. i2">It was di2">iffi2">icult to come to reali2">ize thi2">is.

i2">I saw that i2">I was i2">in fact judgi2">ing everyone else. i2">I saw them as judged i2">in some way, although thi2">is seemed to be subtler and concealed behi2">ind my reacti2">ion to thi2">is percepti2">ion. Seei2">ing them as judgers automati2">ically meant i2">I was judged by them and therefore at thei2">ir effect. The effects thi2">is produced i2">in my own self was the deep hurt.

i2">I had to reali2">ize that i2">in order to see them as judgers, i2">I had to beli2">ieve they were the ones bei2">ing judgmental, whi2">ich was i2">in fact my own beli2">ief. i2">I was maki2">ing them out to be judgers. And that meant, i2">I was si2">imultaneously judgi2">ing my own self by seei2">ing myself i2">in the role of "judged" by them.

i2">It never really had anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith other people judgi2">ing me ei2">ither. i2">In fact, probably i2">in 99% of cases they were not bei2">ing judgmental at all. They were not even i2">interested. They weren't sayi2">ing anythi2">ing about me or poi2">inti2">ing a fi2">inger or anythi2">ing. But i2">I had thi2">is "mental i2">illness" of strongly beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I couldn't go anywhere wi2">ithout bei2">ing under attack. And i2">it wouldn't matter i2">if someone poi2">inted out that no-one really cared to judge me because they were too busy wi2">ith thei2">ir own selfi2">ish i2">interests, i2">I couldn't see i2">it.

What i2">I was really doi2">ing was seei2">ing myself as judge-worthy, di2">isassoci2">iati2">ing a part of my mi2">ind and projecti2">ing i2">it onto others, seei2">ing them as the judger rather than myself, and then creati2">ing the effects wi2">ithi2">in myself that correspond to how i2">I percei2">ived others to be percei2">ivi2">ing me. i2">I li2">iterally was hurti2">ing myself. The hurt i2">I di2">id to myself was far worse than anythi2">ing anyone else ever di2">id, and i2">it was all because of how i2">I was mi2">is-percei2">ivi2">ing.

Underneath thi2">is fear of judgement there was a beli2">ief that i2">I deserved to be judged, because i2">I beli2">ieved i2">I had si2">inned and was gui2">ilty. i2">I di2">idn't see myself as worthy of love and therefore percei2">ived that others agreed wi2">ith me. My di2">irect self-attack turned i2">into i2">indi2">irect self-attack that appeared to be comi2">ing at me from other people, but was really comi2">ing at me from wi2">ithi2">in a part of my mi2">ind that i2">I di2">id not recogni2">ize as myself.

i2">I was bei2">ing both the judger of myself, and the one who was judged. Or i2">in other words, a vi2">icti2">imi2">izer and a vi2">icti2">im. i2">I played both roles but only saw myself as playi2">ing the vi2">icti2">im role, and unfai2">irly so. The mere act of percei2">ivi2">ing oneself i2">in a vi2">icti2">im role automati2">ically creates effects i2">in yourself, typi2">ically emoti2">ional reacti2">ions whi2">ich try to correspond to the causes that you see as outsi2">ide of yourself. Because i2">I saw others as judgi2">ing me severely, i2">I felt severely hurt. Truth i2">is, both the percepti2">ion that others were judgi2">ing and the hurtful effects of the judgement were both put i2">in place si2">imultaneously by myself.

i2">I needed to forgi2">ive myself. And thi2">is has taken a very long ti2">ime and i2">it's been a very gradual slow process. Over the years, a sense of bei2">ing separate from others has di2">imi2">ini2">ished. A sense of bei2">ing trapped i2">in myself has di2">imi2">ini2">ished. A sense of frustrati2">ion at not bei2">ing able to fully express has di2">imi2">ini2">ished. A sense of i2">it not bei2">ing okay to si2">imply be the way i2">I am has di2">imi2">ini2">ished. i2">In fact, recently there has been a growi2">ing, wonderful freedom, of fi2">inally not gi2">ivi2">ing a fuck.

Thi2">is funni2">ily enough mani2">ifested i2">in recent hai2">irstyles. i2">It suddenly became fun to play wi2">ith looki2">ing ugly, rather than tryi2">ing to look pleasi2">ing. And i2">I don't mean thi2">is ugli2">iness i2">is another judgement, just that, i2">I've found myself bei2">ing really "ok" wi2">ith looki2">ing whatever way i2">I look wi2">ithout i2">it meani2">ing anythi2">ing or causi2">ing a judgement.

Thi2">is i2">is so freei2">ing. i2">It now becomes more of a "playful" experi2">ience, where i2">it doesn't matter one way or another, and where i2">I'm growi2">ing stronger i2">in my wi2">illi2">ingness to present myself i2">in whatever way i2">I li2">ike wi2">ithout cari2">ing (worryi2">ing) about what people wi2">ill thi2">ink of i2">it.

You may have noti2">iced over ti2">ime that i2">in my wri2">iti2">ing i2">I now swear a lot more often. i2">I used to be so repressed that i2">I would never swear, and thought i2">I was more speci2">ial or holi2">ier than others by not doi2">ing so. i2">It's now more of a pleasure to swear. To some thi2">is may seem li2">ike i2">I'm turni2">ing 'evi2">il' but that's not the case. i2">I'm becomi2">ing more authenti2">ic and more myself, censori2">ing myself less and recogni2">izi2">ing that i2">I am free.

Taki2">ing responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for everythi2">ing i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing shows me that i2">I can only be upset i2">if i2">I hurt myself, no-one else i2">is the cause of what i2">I feel, and therefore i2">I am set free of concern for massi2">ive people pleasi2">ing or not showi2">ing up fully as myself. i2">I was tryi2">ing to be everyone but myself, to be somethi2">ing i2">I am not, and to di2">isown myself. There i2">is nothi2">ing but pai2">in and sufferi2">ing there when we do that.

There are some people out there especi2">ially those who are pai2">infully shy, who appear on the surface to be sweet and ni2">ice but have a strong persona, a facade of everythi2">ing bei2">ing alri2">ight all the ti2">ime when underneath there i2">is a seari2">ing self hatred and repressi2">ion and sense of unworthi2">iness and of not bei2">ing "allowed" to do anythi2">ing. i2">It's a state of self i2">impri2">isonment. i2">I sti2">ill at ti2">imes struggle wi2">ith li2">imi2">iti2">ing myself and Holy Spi2">iri2">it havi2">ing to remi2">ind me "you are allowed". i2">I often thought i2">I was i2">impri2">isoned by someone else i2">in li2">ife, but really i2">it was my own doi2">ing.

Some of these people who are sufferi2">ing from self-i2">infli2">icted unworthi2">iness and qui2">iet sufferi2">ing, turn to sui2">ici2">ide as an escape. My own li2">ife became one of depressi2">ion and despearati2">ion and a growi2">ing feeli2">ing that i2">I was approachi2">ing some ki2">ind of "end". i2">If i2">I had not met my wi2">ife at about that ti2">ime i2">I probably wouldn't be here.

A sense of an "end" was a sense of i2">intense separati2">ion, i2">isolati2">ion and bei2">ing cut off from everyone. i2">I was ostraci2">ized "by soci2">iety" for an earli2">ier "acci2">ident", but really i2">it was a way for me to do thi2">is to myself, to gi2">ive me a good reason why i2">I should suffer i2">in si2">ilence and be unhappy. i2">I have had to crawl out of my own self-i2">infli2">icted hell-hole. Some people are not able to do thi2">is. There was a guy at my workplace who was si2">imi2">ilarly shy who no one would suspect was sufferi2">ing pai2">infully every day through false percepti2">ions, and he shot hi2">imself.

i2">I am thankful for the Holy Spi2">iri2">it and Jesus who have helped me i2">immensely to come out of my ni2">ightmares and i2">into a happi2">ier place. i2">I sti2">ill have work to do but everythi2">ing keeps headi2">ing i2">in the di2">irecti2">ion of heaven. A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles has been a God-send i2">in terms of correcti2">ing my perceptual di2">istorti2">ions and helpi2">ing me to undo the grossly self-i2">infli2">icted false beli2">iefs that torture and condemn from the i2">insi2">ide out. i2">I am so di2">ifferent to how i2">I used to be now that i2">I don't recogni2">ize myself i2">in photos.

Freedom and reli2">ief from sufferi2">ing comes from the recogni2">iti2">ion of what we are doi2">ing to ourselves. We are the ones who need to forgi2">ive ourselves and undo our own self attack. There i2">is a way out of hell, because we are the only ones keepi2">ing us i2">in hell. No-one i2">is keepi2">ing us here but ourselves. Fear of judgement i2">is secretly the fear of bei2">ing judged by God, whi2">ich i2">is an attempt not to go Home by justi2">ifyi2">ing self attack. But there i2">is a better way. And that means, i2">if we wi2">ill become wi2">illi2">ing, we can go Home to God and be happy. Thank God for that!

"i2">I and my Father are One." "i2">I am as God Created me" "Let me remember i2">I am one wi2">ith God." "Let me remember God created me."

Last ni2">ight i2">I had an i2">interesti2">ing experi2">ience. i2">I was focusi2">ing on love and God and feeli2">ing Hi2">is presence. i2">I somehow managed to become "hi2">igh" enough wi2">ith love, that i2">I formed some ki2">ind of connecti2">ion wi2">ith God. Li2">ike a bri2">idge. And i2">in thi2">is connecti2">ion i2">it suddenly occurred to me that i2">I am Li2">IKE God, i2">in that i2">I was fi2">illed wi2">ith love and God i2">is also fi2">illed wi2">ith love.

i2">In seei2">ing thi2">is i2">it become very joyfully obvi2">ious that i2">I am just Li2">IKE my father. We have the same NATURE. And because of thi2">is li2">ikeness, i2">I felt a very real sense of BEi2">ING Hi2">IS SON, due to the fact that i2">I am "just li2">ike Hi2">im". i2">It i2">impli2">ied i2">instantly that i2">I must have come from Hi2">im, because both of us were exactly ali2">ike. i2">It was so obvi2">ious. i2">It was the fi2">irst ti2">ime that i2">I ever felt thi2">is dynami2">ic of recogni2">iti2">ion that i2">I MUST be Hi2">is Son because i2">I am the same as Hi2">is nature. Almost as i2">if to say i2">I look li2">ike Hi2">im, i2">if He had an i2">image.

i2">I also reali2">ized that thi2">is only was possi2">ible because of the presence of love i2">in me, at a si2">igni2">ifi2">icant enough level, to be able to equate wi2">ith God li2">ike thi2">is. And i2">I could also see that previ2">iously the lack or absence of love had been too strong to be able to see thi2">is. i2">It i2">is no wonder that i2">I feared God or thought God was not li2">ike me or was not love, because i2">I was too di2">istanced from Hi2">is nature to really recogni2">ize that we have somethi2">ing i2">in common.

Thi2">is also made me reali2">ize how much i2">I do not really know who or what i2">I am, because only when i2">I i2">identi2">ify as love am i2">I really bei2">ing what i2">I really am. At other ti2">imes when the love i2">is not i2">in my awareness i2">I li2">iterally have lost touch wi2">ith who i2">I am and who God i2">is and seem separate from and unli2">ike Hi2">im.

i2">I enjoyed the experi2">ience of "bei2">ing just li2">ike God" for a whi2">ile, even i2">if i2">it was only a sli2">ight hi2">int of what's to come. i2">It was enough to be able to sense that, because i2">I am so ali2">ike God, i2">I MUST BE Hi2">IS.

i2">I recently seemed to come full ci2">ircle wi2">ith the course. And i2">I mean, ri2">ight back to the very begi2">inni2">ing.

i2">I found myself i2">in states of false percepti2">ion, looki2">ing at the world and i2">its helli2">ish ways. There was "tolerance for pai2">in" and ri2">idi2">iculous stupi2">id thi2">ings happeni2">ing. i2">It was li2">ike i2">I was back at the very start of course, i2">immersed i2">in the world and i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith sufferi2">ing. i2">It seemed li2">ike i2">I hadn't learned a si2">ingle thi2">ing.

The di2">ifference was that thi2">is ti2">ime around i2">I seemed to bri2">ing a whole lot of learni2">ing and li2">ight wi2">ith me, taki2">ing a fresh NEW look at the very fi2">irst starti2">ing steps on the road to awakeni2">ing but wi2">ithout a ton of clutter and confusi2">ion. i2">I've been redi2">iscoveri2">ing "the basi2">ics" i2">in a whole new li2">ight, seei2">ing a much greater si2">impli2">ici2">ity and clari2">ity i2">in the course materi2">ial.

i2">I settled i2">into really looki2">ing at the world's ri2">idi2">iculousness, i2">its hopelessness, i2">its meani2">inglessness. Jesus descri2">ibes thi2">is process i2">in a secti2">ion called "the real alternati2">ive." i2">It speaks of how we must at some poi2">int look at the fact of the world's nature and not deny i2">it.

i2">I had to look at the fact that ti2">ime i2">is death and everythi2">ing i2">in the world leads to death. That i2">it i2">is a closed system of fear i2">in whi2">ich everythi2">ing always fai2">ils. i2">It wasn't pretty to look at. But thi2">is gi2">ives ri2">ise to a deep i2">inner rejecti2">ion of the ri2">idi2">iculous nature of the world, an i2">insi2">istence that thi2">is just CANNOT BE God's wi2">ill.

i2">It was an i2">insi2">ight that there has to be a better way, there has to be another world, there has to be another way to see and to li2">ive and be happy that has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith the world. Thi2">is was a real turni2">ing poi2">int because wi2">ithout the awareness that the world i2">is completely hopeless and i2">impossi2">ible, too much value i2">is placed i2">in i2">it and salvati2">ion i2">is sought wi2">ithi2">in i2">its offeri2">ings.

i2">I found thi2">is i2">interesti2">ing because for a very long ti2">ime i2">I have sought to try to understand the Li2">IGHT, the nature of heaven and God, and to try to get a clear pi2">icture of what the truth i2">is. To reach above and beyond wi2">ith theory and thought so that i2">I could more fully understand the proper perspecti2">ive of the truth.

And here i2">I was i2">instead taki2">ing a really good look at the darkness and fi2">indi2">ing there was a major treasure there to di2">iscover - a use of i2">it that would prove to turn me 180 degrees i2">in the ri2">ight di2">irecti2">ion. Just as i2">I thought thi2">ings could not get much worse, i2">I suddenly found a way out.

So for me thi2">is then opened me up to not only the wi2">illi2">ingness to seek for a better way, and another world, but also the wi2">illi2">ingness to no longer look for hope i2">in and of the world. i2">It was the end of false hopes and i2">idle wi2">ishes. But i2">it was also the bi2">irth of a fresh NEW hope, a real hope, a real possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity and a clear path to God.

i2">I turned my back on the world more and sought the li2">ight. Thi2">is also i2">involved a major upheaval to what i2">I thought about the world. i2">I had to reali2">ize that much that many people had taught on the subject was wrong, and that the world i2">in and of i2">itself was meani2">ingless.

i2">I had to reali2">ize that i2">it was POSSi2">IBLE for there to be another way, a better way, a hi2">igher way, to ri2">ise above the hell and mi2">isery. There had to be another truth, a hi2">igher truth, not of thi2">is world, whi2">ich could overri2">ide the world. And thi2">is meant no longer associ2">iati2">ing hell wi2">ith the world, no longer beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">it was i2">inherently gui2">ilty.

Thi2">is had requi2">ired, i2">I thi2">ink, years of undoi2">ing of gui2">ilt i2">in myself, because previ2">iously i2">I just don't thi2">ink i2">I could concei2">ive of how the world could not be gui2">ilty, or not accuse i2">it all the ti2">ime, because there was too much of a mountai2">in of gui2">ilt to look past. i2">I couldn't get my mi2">ind to concei2">ive of a "better way" or a way of looki2">ing at the world that wasn't ri2">iddled wi2">ith gui2">ilty projecti2">ions. i2">I couldn't "separate out" the world from what i2">I was turni2">ing i2">it i2">into.

i2">I hadn't thought i2">it POSSi2">IBLE that the same meani2">ingless world could be seen i2">in such a way as to even love i2">it or fi2">ind a reflecti2">ion of i2">innocence i2">in i2">it. i2">I started seei2">ing all thi2">is stuff i2">in the course about the real world and true percepti2">ions and the forgi2">iven world, God lovi2">ing the world and seeki2">ing a di2">ifferent way of seei2">ing everythi2">ing. Chri2">ist vi2">isi2">ion and so on. And thi2">is really "awakened" somethi2">ing i2">in me i2">in terms of bei2">ing able to understand that the world could be forgi2">iven and seen i2">in a totally di2">ifferent li2">ight.

i2">I di2">id actually have several days where i2">I felt li2">ike there was li2">iterally a li2">ight i2">insi2">ide me that was shi2">ini2">ing all the ti2">ime. Li2">ike somethi2">ing had been acti2">ivated. And thi2">is li2">ight was entertai2">ini2">ing the possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity that "the world i2">I made" could be seen i2">in a more lovi2">ing way, i2">instead of the rejecti2">ing way that i2">is taught by many course teachers. i2">I embraced the i2">idea that the world i2">isn't fundamentally hell, and i2">it's really my i2">interpretati2">ion of i2">it that MAKES i2">it so.

Thi2">is has opened the way for the very si2">imple awareness that there are i2">indeed two ways of looki2">ing at, i2">interpreti2">ing, gi2">ivi2">ing meani2">ing to, gi2">ivi2">ing purpose to, the same world, and they are very opposi2">ite. i2">It has also gi2">iven ri2">ise to an awareness that i2">I actually do have a CHOi2">ICE. There i2">IS an alternati2">ive. There i2">IS another way and another opti2">ion. i2">I don't HAVE to just go along wi2">ith what appears to be an i2">inherent meani2">ing or a judgement that seems to come from the world. i2">I actually can choose HOW to use and experi2">ience the world.

Thi2">is has unlocked a freedom and a sense of looseness about bei2">ing able to actually ELECT what to "make of" anythi2">ing. i2">I can see now that thi2">ings only seem to be bad and wrong i2">if i2">I li2">iterally chose that they are. i2">I see that my i2">interpretati2">ion of everythi2">ing i2">is enti2">irely opti2">ional and unli2">imi2">ited. i2">I make everythi2">ing up as i2">I go along. i2">I can choose somethi2">ing else. i2">I have to keep aski2">ing myself whether somethi2">ing "really i2">is" what i2">I am thi2">inki2">ing i2">it i2">is, or i2">if i2">it only seems that because i2">I'm MAKi2">ING i2">it be that. i2">It i2">is constantly revealed that i2">I'm the one who made i2">it i2">into hell, and i2">I could be happi2">ier i2">if i2">I would stop doi2">ing that. "i2">I can escape the world i2">i see by gi2">ivi2">ing up attack thoughts"

i2">I had to reali2">ize per the secret of salvati2">ion not only that i2">I was doi2">ing i2">it all to myself, but that i2">it was ME who was DECi2">IDi2">ING that the happeni2">ings i2">in the world were evi2">il and wrong. There's a whole layer of i2">interpretati2">ion, judgement, evaluati2">ion, deci2">idi2">ing and projecti2">ing that comes i2">in between me and i2">it. And i2">it's not fi2">ixed. i2">I can just as easi2">ily THi2">INK and feel i2">in a happi2">ier way than i2">in an unhappy way. There i2">is an actual alternati2">ive opti2">ion to choose, a better way, a hi2">igher outlook, a more lovi2">ing vi2">iewpoi2">int.

Now i2">I see that my experi2">ience of the world i2">is li2">iterally li2">ike a swi2">itch. i2">I can fli2">ip channels between the lower ego mi2">ind and the hi2">igher holy spi2">iri2">it mi2">ind. Thi2">is forms two perspecti2">ives, the false percepti2">ions that make everythi2">ing seem li2">ike a fearful hell, and a hi2">igher perspecti2">ive whi2">ich li2">ights everythi2">ing up and makes i2">it happy and easy.

"Earth can reflect heaven or hell" because i2">I am the one who deci2">ides to beli2">ieve what i2">I see i2">in i2">it. i2">It i2">is li2">iterally nothi2">ing other than what i2">I put there to see and i2">I seem to be fi2">inally fi2">indi2">ing the "controls" to operate the machi2">inery of percepti2">ion. Because i2">I've opened up to reali2">izi2">ing there i2">is ANOTHER world, there i2">is a REAL ALTERNATi2">IVE, there i2">is a REAL HOPE, my mi2">ind i2">is now able to not be so stuck on a one-track rollercoaster ri2">ide.

i2">I've stepped back somehow and found a deeper footi2">ing behi2">ind the fli2">ip-floppi2">ing i2">instabi2">ili2">iti2">ies of percepti2">ion - gai2">ini2">ing an abi2">ili2">ity to freely stabi2">ili2">ize i2">it. Of course i2">it's sti2">ill a learni2">ing process but there i2">is a defi2">ini2">ite openi2">ing and a rai2">ised awareness and an i2">increased versati2">ili2">ity. i2">I see that thought i2">is powerful and i2">I see that ego i2">is a false functi2">ion.

i2">I see that i2">I need now to have only hi2">igher happi2">ier thoughts. i2">It i2">is not enough to just accept sufferi2">ing, i2">I wi2">ill now i2">INSi2">IST on a better way. On ONLY seei2">ing wi2">ith chri2">ist/holy spi2">iri2">it and ONLY havi2">ing upli2">ifti2">ing happy thoughts. i2">I see now that these hi2">igher-mi2">ind thoughts are the source of mi2">iracles. "The perceptual content of mi2">iracles i2">is wholeness." i2">I can just as easi2">ily MAKE UP that somethi2">ing MEANS somethi2">ing good than to make up that i2">it means somethi2">ing i2">is terri2">ible. i2">I can CHOOSE NOT TO SUFFER.

The whole course i2">is taki2">ing on new meani2">ing and i2">I keep seei2">ing how the thi2">ings Jesus has been sayi2">ing all along suddenly make so much more sense and i2">I see the purpose of them. Wi2">ithout the openness to a better way i2">it was li2">ike functi2">ioni2">ing only on one level. But there ARE two levels, two levels of mi2">inds, two ways of seei2">ing, two functi2">ions, two mi2">indsets, two percepti2">ions, two quali2">iti2">ies of thought, two purposes, two meani2">ings. One i2">is lower, one i2">is hi2">igher, and there i2">is nothi2">ing stoppi2">ing me from choosi2">ing one or the other.

i2">I just need now to practi2">ice focusi2">ing on and embraci2">ing the hi2">igher level truth, the holy spi2">iri2">it's chri2">ist vi2">isi2">ion, and the happi2">ier upli2">ifti2">ing resurrecti2">ing outlook. To have only the thoughts i2">I thi2">ink wi2">ith God. To completely turn my back on, deny and reject, the unacceptable lower-level li2">ies. Thi2">is entai2">ils also not li2">isteni2">ing to the ego, not li2">isteni2">ing to the world, not li2">isteni2">ing to the body, and not payi2">ing any mi2">ind to anythi2">ing not of God.

There i2">IS a better way. There i2">IS another world. There i2">IS a reali2">ity where everythi2">ing i2">is always happy and everythi2">ing i2">is perfect. My wi2">illi2">ingness to trust that and si2">ide wi2">ith i2">it and beli2">ieve i2">it has really strengthened. i2">It's ti2">ime to ri2">ise!

Somethi2">ing just popped i2">into my mi2">ind on our lovely walk home from the cafe.... there are di2">ifferent LEVELS of forgi2">iveness.

The dream was created through thi2">is process:

Separati2">ion i2">idea > si2">in > gui2">ilt > fear of puni2">ishment > death.

At each of these 'stages' there are di2">ifferent ki2">inds of percepti2">ions and choi2">ices bei2">ing made for di2">ifferent reasons. When we're i2">in the world faced wi2">ith somethi2">ing that seems upsetti2">ing, i2">it's usually an experi2">ience somewhere between the last two stages - fear and death. When we apply forgi2">iveness, we tend to work on undoi2">ing the projecti2">ions of fear, and perhaps i2">if we di2">ig deeper we undo some of the projecti2">ions of gui2">ilt as well.

But what i2">I found myself noti2">ici2">ing was, i2">I don't often get even deeper i2">into the undoi2">ing of si2">in, or deeper than that - the undoi2">ing of the i2">idea of separati2">ion.

The i2">idea of separati2">ion entai2">ils our CHOi2">ICE to be separate from God, whi2">ich was a di2">isowni2">ing of responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity and a desi2">ire to be di2">ifferent. i2">If i2">I am to take 100% responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for what i2">I've chosen, reali2">izi2">ing i2">I've only done thi2">is to myself, i2">I have to take my forgi2">iveness ALL the way to that ori2">igi2">inal 'source poi2">int' i2">in my mi2">ind - the deci2">isi2">ion to di2">ie - to be opposi2">ite of Li2">ife.

So i2">if i2">I'm mai2">inly caught up i2">in forgi2">ivi2">ing projecti2">ions and blame, that's helpful but i2">it's maybe confi2">ined to some of the 'lower levels' or more external levels of the mi2">ind. i2">I need to go deeper. i2">I need to get to where i2">I can see that i2">I CHOSE everythi2">ing about thi2">is because i2">I wanted to be separate. That's the 'root cause' i2">in my mi2">ind. i2">I need to admi2">it that i2">I wanted to deny God and wanted to be dead. That's the pi2">ivotal poi2">int. To get there i2">I need to make sure i2">I am undoi2">ing the layers of fear and gui2">ilt but also the layer of a beli2">ief i2">in si2">in and come to reali2">ize that thi2">is i2">is ALL somethi2">ing i2">I chose to do to myself.

Undoi2">ing fear: Seems fai2">irly si2">imple, recogni2">izi2">ing we're choosi2">ing to be afrai2">id and are projecti2">ing causes for i2">it outsi2">ide of ourselves. i2">I can take that back. But i2">I mi2">ight sti2">ill beli2">ieve someone i2">is gui2">ilty, maybe myself.

Undoi2">ing gui2">ilt: i2">I need to now see that i2">I'm not gui2">ilty, or at least that gui2">ilt i2">is stemmi2">ing from a sense of si2">in. i2">I'm afrai2">id because i2">I feel gui2">ilty. Well, i2">I need to get past feeli2">ing gui2">ilty. And as i2">I get past i2">it i2">I'm goi2">ing to confront a deeper level - a sense of havi2">ing si2">inned. The reason WHY i2">I'm gui2">ilty. And that deeper level i2">is goi2">ing to seem even MORE upsetti2">ing to admi2">it to. Layers of fear and gui2">ilt are weaker than the layer of si2">in, whi2">ich i2">is also weaker than the layer of separati2">ion. These surface layers were made to cover up the deeper layers and make them more palatable.

Undoi2">ing si2">in: Now i2">I'm aware that i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I really di2">id somethi2">ing bad, that i2">it cannot be healed, that i2">it cannot be undone or reversed. Somethi2">ing i2">I'm ashamed of and gui2">ilty for. Somethi2">ing that supposedly 'happened'. i2">I need to undo that and get past thi2">is percepti2">ion that i2">it's permanent, unhealable, i2">irreversi2">ible and has had a real seri2">ious effect. Thi2">is i2">is di2">iggi2">ing i2">into the depths of 'what i2">I've done' and the root of my gui2">ilt. And thi2">is should lead me to ask, why di2">id i2">I si2">in i2">in the fi2">irst place? i2">It seems li2">ike i2">I as i2">I progress here i2">I should be fi2">indi2">ing out that i2">I am more i2">innocent, but so far i2">it seems i2">I'm more to blame. But i2">I'm movi2">ing past i2">it. i2">It's di2">iffi2">icult to admi2">it to gui2">ilt, but even harder to admi2">it to si2">in. The ego says, see, you shouldn't have looked at the gui2">ilt because now you've uncovered a deeper darker layer of horror. But we can move past thi2">is - we have to. Because underneath the i2">idea that 'we really di2">id thi2">is' (si2">in) i2">is an even darker i2">idea - that we WANTED to be separate.

Undoi2">ing separati2">ion: Si2">in can only ari2">ise out of some ki2">ind of separati2">ion i2">idea, whi2">ich actually i2">is a CHOi2">ICE and DECi2">ISi2">ION to be separate. i2">I must've wanted to si2">in. i2">I must've wanted to do thi2">is, to be si2">inful. So underneath the si2">in i2">is a choi2">ice. i2">It's the awareness that i2">I Di2">ID THi2">IS TO MYSELF ON PURPOSE, for a reason. And what i2">is that reason? Why would i2">I separate? i2">I have to own up to thi2">is. i2">I wanted to be separate because i2">I wanted to deny that God exi2">ists so that i2">I could have an ego. i2">I wanted to be di2">ifferent. i2">I wanted to be not loved. i2">I wanted to di2">ie. i2">If i2">I can't get all the way to seei2">ing that i2">I made thi2">is choi2">ice, then i2">I am not goi2">ing to truly be ready to COMPLETELY RELi2">INQUi2">ISH i2">it. i2">I need to admi2">it to all of the sorrow that came from thi2">is choi2">ice, and that the choi2">ice was mi2">ine. Nobody else was to blame. No-one di2">id thi2">is to me. i2">I wanted i2">it. And now i2">I'm reali2">izi2">ing i2">it hasn't worked - because si2">in hasn't really worked - and i2">I'm not gui2">ilty, and don't need to be afrai2">id or get puni2">ished. i2">I'd rather be happy. i2">I mi2">ight as well gi2">ive up, surrender thi2">is choi2">ice, and CHOOSE AGAi2">IN.

And i2">it's at that poi2">int that you actually fully let go of the deci2">isi2">ion for separati2">ion, whi2">ich di2">issolves the ego and uni2">ifi2">ies you wi2">ith God.

So as i2">I forgi2">ive now i2">I plan to remi2">ind myself of thi2">is - exactly how deep am i2">I wi2">illi2">ing to go i2">in forgi2">ivi2">ing? Am i2">I just gi2">ivi2">ing up surface projecti2">ions or am i2">I wi2">illi2">ing to get all the way to the CORE i2">IDEA - the death wi2">ish - the deci2">isi2">ion to be wi2">ithout God? And am i2">I wi2">illi2">ing to let that go. Havi2">ing let go of all the projecti2">ions and blame and consequences of ALL the other levels, i2">I should be ready to squarely admi2">it to and own up to thi2">is deci2">isi2">ion, and subsequently choose di2">ifferently. i2">I'd rather choose Holy Spi2">iri2">it's truth at thi2">is poi2">int and joi2">in wi2">ith Hi2">is versi2">ion of the truth and ACCEPT GOD i2">instead of tryi2">ing to deny God. ACCEPTi2">ING GOD i2">is ACCEPTi2">ING THE ATONEMENT.

So i2">it seems that as we di2">ig deeper, we uncover darker and more vi2">ici2">ious levels of di2">isaster. Fi2">irst i2">it was palatable fear, then some tolerable gui2">ilt, but now i2">it's seri2">ious si2">in and hate, and beneath that - a death wi2">ish, a desi2">ire to be wi2">ithout God on purpose. That's not easy to want to look at or to admi2">it to. And i2">it can seem li2">ike the worst thi2">ing you could possi2">ibly admi2">it - that i2">I wanted thi2">is sufferi2">ing - i2">I wanted to not be wi2">ith God. i2">I wanted to get ri2">id of God. Or even as some descri2">ibe i2">it - a murderous thought - the desi2">ire to ki2">ill God's son. Pretty heavy stuff! We need to come to admi2">it to thi2">is so that we choose di2">ifferently. i2">If i2">I can't own up to havi2">ing made thi2">is CHOi2">ICE then i2">I'm not goi2">ing to be able to UNDO that choi2">ice and choose God/Atonement i2">instead. And i2">if i2">I don't, i2">I wi2">ill conti2">inue to di2">ie. i2">It i2">IS a li2">ife-or-death deci2">isi2">ion, although we must remember death i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion.

So the choi2">ice i2">is up to us. Do we want to accept God agai2">in and allow Hi2">im to love us, or do we want to keep choosi2">ing sufferi2">ing and despai2">ir and lack and destructi2">ion? i2">It's up to us.

i2">I get thi2">is feeli2">ing that deci2">idi2">ing on my own i2">is not the ri2">ight thi2">ing to do, gi2">iven everythi2">ing that's sai2">id about choosi2">ing not to deci2">ide, not doi2">ing i2">it all on your own, etc. So then i2">I feel torn.

But what i2">I then see i2">is that really, when i2">I am i2">in a state of i2">indeci2">isi2">ion, fear, doubt, etc i2">I am really not i2">in a state of deci2">isi2">iveness. i2">I probably am tryi2">ing to deci2">ide, but i2">I am not bei2">ing deci2">isi2">ive. And my attempts to deci2">ide are really delayi2">ing mechani2">isms to avoi2">id the certai2">inty of deci2">isi2">ion. i2">In thi2">is state, i2">I'm not really maki2">ing any deci2">isi2">ions at all anyway.

Pretty much every ti2">ime Jesus says "deci2">ide", i2">I am i2">in a state of fear and self-doubt. i2">I recogni2">ize then that stayi2">ing i2">in thi2">is state i2">is not goi2">ing to bri2">ing about any ki2">ind of deci2">isi2">ion, and i2">if i2">I want to become deci2">isi2">ive, i2">I have to get out of the fear.

Someti2">imes then, i2">I wi2">ill remark to Jesus that i2">I don't know what to deci2">ide, and He wi2">ill say, "you know". As i2">I pull myself out of the fear and become more dynami2">ic, more certai2">in, more sure of myself, i2">I then automati2">ically feel more deci2">isi2">ive and knowi2">ing and sure of what i2">it i2">is that i2">I wi2">ill do.

Then i2">I have to even put asi2">ide thi2">is i2">idea that i2">I don't already know - that i2">I even need to deci2">ide, and stop for a mi2">inute to become aware of what i2">it i2">is that i2">I know already.

i2">If i2">I already know, a deci2">isi2">ion i2">is not needed. i2">If i2">I already know, then i2">I don't need to even get i2">into the fearful drama of "not knowi2">ing" what to do. Then, somewhere deep i2">insi2">ide, i2">I tune i2">into what i2">it i2">is that i2">I know, and i2">in thi2">is there i2">is an acceptance, a peace and a clari2">ity that makes i2">it much more obvi2">ious what to do.

Usually knowi2">ing i2">is covered up by all ki2">inds of faffi2">ing about, doubti2">ing, feari2">ing, drama, control, thi2">inki2">ing, etc. None of i2">it i2">is really needed because i2">it's actually all a di2">istracti2">ion away from knowi2">ing. i2">I can't know what to do when i2">I'm choosi2">ing to be i2">in a state of not-knowi2">ing. Seems so si2">imple, but easy to get lost i2">in.

As i2">I go forward, and as i2">I embark on new endeavors led by trusti2">ing Jesus etc, i2">I fi2">ind myself comi2">ing up agai2">inst fears and concerns i2">I di2">idn't have to face before. Yet each step of the way He gui2">ides me to trust, to know, to put asi2">ide fear, and to recogni2">ize the ways that i2">I am undermi2">ini2">ing my own certai2">inty and deci2">isi2">iveness. i2">In other words, learni2">ing to clai2">im and work i2">in a more empowered state of confi2">idence.

i2">I am fi2">indi2">ing that the more i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing to put asi2">ide the di2">ishonest toys of fear and self-sabotage, the more i2">I am growi2">ing i2">in confi2">idence and strength and certai2">inty. Also fear i2">is reduci2">ing, people are growi2">ing ever-more approachable, and procrasti2">inati2">ion i2">is melti2">ing.

Thi2">is i2">is how we gradually move i2">into acti2">ion. Thi2">is i2">is how we get off the fence and become truly helpful. And thi2">is i2">is how we let go of the dependency on the ego as our gui2">ide as to how we should waste ti2">ime.

We need to learn to be truly deci2">isi2">ive, certai2">in, knowi2">ing and trusti2">ing, before we mi2">ight become actually wi2">illi2">ing to allow God to gui2">ide and di2">irect us i2">in all that we do. Thi2">is somehow i2">is ti2">ied i2">into becomi2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to do Hi2">is Wi2">ill, and to follow Jesus's di2">irecti2">ion. But i2">in a partnershi2">ip of mutual agreement.

Here's your secret. i2">It's a bi2">igger secret than that you tri2">ied to ki2">ill God's son. And i2">it's a bi2">igger secret than that you attacked God and sti2">ill want to be separate.

The bi2">iggest secret of all, i2">is that you are actually already Chri2">ist.

Chri2">ist i2">is your true i2">identi2">ity. i2">It's who you are.

Now, let's talk about the secret. See, you are tryi2">ing to di2">isgui2">ise who you are. You're tryi2">ing not to admi2">it who you are. You're tryi2">ing to deny i2">it and cover i2">it up and pretend you are someone else. Just as you are tryi2">ing to deny that God loves you, you're denyi2">ing that you ARE as God created you.

So, here's a useful forgi2">iveness practi2">ice. How about we call thi2">is... OWNi2">ING UP TO WHO YOU ARE. Thi2">is contai2">ins elements of 'taki2">ing full responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity', but also essenti2">ially ti2">ies i2">it all together i2">in one si2">imple package.

How about you admi2">it to your real i2">identi2">ity, and how about you admi2">it to what the truth i2">is about you? How about you come clean and own up to bei2">ing Chri2">ist and to bei2">ing completely i2">innocent? How about you drop all the pretense that you are someone or somethi2">ing else, or that you have need for all of your pai2">in and mi2">isery and problems... whi2">ich are ALL just cover-ups. Ri2">ight?

Every si2">ingle problem i2">in your li2">ife, every upset, every unworthi2">iness, every bad experi2">ience, every false i2">identi2">ity, and every attack you've ever been through, i2">is all part of you denyi2">ing who you really are. Let's be honest now. Let's own up to who we really are.

i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing to admi2">it i2">I am Chri2">ist.

i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing to admi2">it that i2">I am not really [your ego name] and i2">in fact i2">I'm God's holy son. Actually i2">it's true that i2">I'm i2">innocent and holy and forgi2">iven completely and have never done anythi2">ing wrong.

i2">I admi2">it that i2">I am God's chi2">ild and cannot si2">in. i2">I have my hands i2">in the ai2">ir and i2">I CONFESS, i2">I am absolutely i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it and i2">I have never been able to di2">ie and i2">I never wi2">ill di2">ie. And i2">I also admi2">it that i2">I am not the li2">ittle ego self that i2">I keep tryi2">ing to convi2">ince everyone of, i2">includi2">ing myself, that i2">I am. i2">I am not thi2">is separate self i2">I am One.

i2">I admi2">it that i2">I made up thi2">is enti2">ire i2">illusi2">ion to cover up my i2">identi2">ity and that i2">I've been i2">in di2">isgui2">ise and undercover thi2">is whole ti2">ime, tryi2">ing to make out that i2">I am some ki2">ind of unworthy unlovable nothi2">ing, so that nobody wi2">ill noti2">ice what my real i2">identi2">ity i2">is. i2">I admi2">it that i2">I have always known who i2">I really am and i2">I've always been Chri2">ist.

You're ri2">ight, i2">I've been pretendi2">ing thi2">is whole ti2">ime that i2">I'm not wi2">ith God and that i2">I don't belong wi2">ith God. i2">It's not true. i2">I've been bluffi2">ing thi2">is enti2">ire ti2">ime, all these li2">ifeti2">imes, pretendi2">ing not to be Chri2">ist. i2">I've portrayed myself as all ki2">inds of pretend bodi2">ies and people and i2">identi2">iti2">ies to perpetrate a huge conspi2">iracy that i2">I'm someone else and that God' Son no longer exi2">ists.

i2">I've been 'undercover boss' thi2">is whole ti2">ime, hi2">idi2">ing i2">in the shadows and lurki2">ing and not owni2">ing up to my power and not clai2">imi2">ing my true i2">identi2">ity. i2">I admi2">it i2">it, i2">I'm actually God's creati2">ion and God has created me permanent and real and i2">I am not any of the i2">illusi2">ions that i2">I've been sayi2">ing i2">I am.

My cover i2">is blown and you caught me out, i2">I'm really ulti2">imately gui2">iltless and si2">inless and i2">I haven't even separated from God. My whole li2">ife story i2">is just a bi2">ig di2">istracti2">ion to get everyone to beli2">ieve that somethi2">ing happened to me and that i2">I di2">idn't want anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith i2">it. i2">I orchestrated the whole thi2">ing. i2">I made i2">it all up myself and fooled you all, and even tri2">ied to fool myself. i2">I've been i2">in di2">isgui2">ise, concealed behi2">ind layers of deni2">ial and pretend forgetfulness.

Yup. i2">I'm Chri2">ist. i2">I confess. i2">I own up to i2">it. i2">It's who and what i2">I am. i2">I am i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it and i2">I always was and nothi2">ing has happened to change anythi2">ing about me. Of course God loves me, He has thi2">is whole ti2">ime, i2">I was just lyi2">ing when i2">I sai2">id He di2">idn't. The li2">id i2">is off, the cat i2">is out of the bag.

Li2">ike, hellllooooooooooo. i2">I'm Chri2">ist, ok. ... you got me.

For a whi2">ile now i2">I've been experi2">ienci2">ing the Holy Spi2">iri2">it worki2">ing i2">in me qui2">ite acti2">ively to clear and heal my mi2">ind, emoti2">ions and body. And i2">I've been unsure how thi2">is correlates wi2">ith A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles because i2">I don't hear hardly anyone talki2">ing about havi2">ing i2">interacti2">ions wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it that i2">involve any ki2">ind of mani2">ifest 'acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies'.

i2">Indeed many people sti2">ill thi2">ink Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is just some ki2">ind of metaphor or i2">inaccessi2">ible state of mi2">ind. Much of the ACi2">IM communi2">ity has a very cerebral, nervous, i2">intellectual relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it, i2">if at all. So i2">I've been reluctant to share about i2">it thi2">inki2">ing myself to be doi2">ing somethi2">ing 'wei2">ird'. But maybe i2">I am pi2">ioneeri2">ing.

For me, thi2">is seemed to begi2">in qui2">ite naturally as the next step i2">in my explorati2">ion of trusti2">ing Hi2">im. i2">I thi2">ink that some day when i2">I lay down to sleep i2">I just had thi2">is i2">idea to ask Holy Spi2">iri2">it to help me i2">in some way, or to heal whatever i2">I was feeli2">ing, and i2">it was part of me openi2">ing up to explori2">ing whether He would take some steps on my behalf.

Previ2">iously i2">I thi2">ink that i2">I beli2">ieved and acted as though my forgi2">iveness process was somethi2">ing that i2">I would do on my own and that any 'progress' or 'results' from i2">it were due to my own wi2">illi2">ingness to see di2">ifferently. But thi2">is then shi2">ifted, because after a certai2">in poi2">int, after enough surrender and wi2">illi2">ingness and development of trust, i2">I started to get thi2">is sense that Holy Spi2">iri2">it was meant to do more than just be an onlooker or advi2">isor.

The fi2">irst few ti2">imes thi2">is happened i2">I felt what i2">I would probably descri2">ibe as an 'energy' or a sensati2">ion of energy movi2">ing, through what seemed to be my body. i2">It was someti2">imes accompani2">ied by li2">ittle jerks or moti2">ions i2">in my hands or feet. Someti2">imes some subtle contracti2">ions of muscles. But over ti2">ime, thi2">is has greatly i2">increased.

i2">I started then to learn to si2">imply 'i2">invi2">ite Hi2">im i2">in' or to ask Hi2">im to come i2">into me or to joi2">in wi2">ith me. i2">I di2">idn't know i2">if thi2">is was 'proper' or allowed or normal or anythi2">ing but i2">I was wi2">illi2">ing to explore i2">it. i2">I would i2">invi2">ite Hi2">im i2">in. He would qui2">ite often then say to me, "relax" or "surrender". And i2">it seemed i2">in a way that thi2">is was ei2">ither a 'condi2">iti2">ion' or a prerequi2">isi2">ite for supporti2">ing thi2">is thi2">ing happeni2">ing. So i2">I'd do some surrenderi2">ing and relax my body physi2">ically. And then stuff would start to happen.

i2">I wi2">ill si2">incerely i2">invi2">ite Hi2">im i2">into me and then i2">I wi2">ill relax and allow and i2">I wi2">ill start to feel 'energy' move, whatever that i2">is. Mani2">ifestati2">ions of the Holy Spi2">iri2">it. Someti2">imes thi2">is takes a pattern where i2">it starts at my feet then works i2">its way up my legs. As i2">it goes, these li2">imbs become more tensed as though sort of 'electri2">ifi2">ied'. Holy Spi2">iri2">it's energy i2">is li2">ike electri2">ici2">ity i2">in a way, or how you mi2">ight i2">imagi2">ine someone i2">if they were bei2">ing electrocuted... but i2">in a non-harmful non-pai2">inful way. Often my legs all the way up i2">into my hi2">ips and pelvi2">is wi2">ill 'energi2">ize' and tense, seemi2">ing to form a certai2">in speci2">ifi2">ic 'posture' whi2">ich, once establi2">ished, i2">immedi2">iately begi2">ins to 'drai2">in' energy out of my upper torso, parti2">icularly any negati2">ive emoti2">ions or upset energi2">ies. These just flow down and out through my root chakra or feet li2">ike someone i2">is flushi2">ing the toi2">ilet.

Then after a whi2">ile thi2">is electri2">ici2">ity wi2">ill come up through my upper torso and i2">into my arms and chest there can be at ti2">imes some qui2">ite vi2">igorous shaki2">ing, tensi2">ing and pulsi2">ing of stomache muscles, and vari2">ious energeti2">ic changes taki2">ing place. When i2">it works i2">its way up to my shoulders and head area, i2">I qui2">ite often now wi2">ill experi2">ience what i2">I can only descri2">ibe as a very rapi2">id i2">intense osci2">illati2">ion/vi2">ibrati2">ion of my head, whi2">ich wi2">ill suddenly shake at a very fast rate, as though somethi2">ing i2">is bei2">ing di2">islodged and removed upward. After thi2">is process i2">is basi2">ically done i2">I wi2">ill be 'buzzi2">ing' somewhat and yet usually feeli2">ing qui2">ite peaceful and reli2">ieved, especi2">ially i2">if upset emoti2">ions were healed i2">in the process.

Now, not only does thi2">is happen for me on almost a dai2">ily basi2">is now, but also i2">it i2">is becomi2">ing much easi2">ier for me to 'access' thi2">is electri2">ical energy - i2">in other words, to work wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it 'supernaturally' i2">in me, by just my mere wi2">illi2">ingness to allow Hi2">im to do somethi2">ing. And i2">I'm fi2">indi2">ing that thi2">is i2">is maki2">ing i2">it possi2">ible to apply thi2">is to any parti2">icular seemi2">ing condi2">iti2">ion that's goi2">ing on i2">in my body. For example i2">I mi2">ight have stuffy si2">inuses from eati2">ing some i2">icecream, and i2">if i2">I'm wi2">illi2">ing i2">I wi2">ill sort of gi2">ive a bri2">ief 'nod' to Holy Spi2">iri2">it, and he wi2">ill i2">instantly start to shake somethi2">ing and energi2">ize somethi2">ing and extract all of the symptoms. Or lets say i2">I am under slept and i2">I turn to Holy Spi2">iri2">it and he 'zaps' me, lol, i2">I do my li2">ittle shaky thi2">ing, and then i2">I'm not longer experi2">ienci2">ing that ti2">iredness.

Also thi2">is i2">is mani2">ifesti2">ing i2">in the heali2">ing of others now, where i2">I have an i2">increasi2">ingly spontaneous wi2">illi2">ingness to lay my hand on a person and allow Holy Spi2">iri2">it to be i2">immedi2">iately engaged through me to heal somethi2">ing. Thi2">is has been developed somewhat through my openness to explore supernatural heali2">ing and commandi2">ing away si2">ickness and so on. By developi2">ing some trust i2">in that area, i2">I am now growi2">ing i2">in 'strength' and confi2">idence i2">in that i2">if i2">I si2">imply do my part and joi2">in wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it, mi2">iracles can happen, wi2">ithout any preparati2">ion whatsoever. God doesn't need preparati2">ion. God i2">is ready to heal ri2">ight now!

i2">In parti2">icular, i2">I've also been i2">invi2">iti2">ing Jesus i2">into me, and i2">I ask hi2">im to come i2">in and heal certai2">in feeli2">ings i2">I feel i2">in my torso. And i2">immedi2">iately he comes i2">in and makes correcti2">ions, whi2">ich i2">I may experi2">ience as ti2">ighteni2">ing of muscles or pulses i2">in the stomache area or contracti2">ions and other shaki2">ing, and then somehow these negati2">ive feeli2">ings wi2">ill have si2">imply di2">isappeared wi2">ithout me really noti2">ici2">ing how or when, and i2">I wi2">ill feel happy and start to laugh. And so i2">I've been explori2">ing that more too. What i2">is the next step?

Well, i2">I've also more acti2">ively started to i2">invi2">ite GOD to come i2">into me, to be i2">in me, to dwell i2">in me, to shi2">ine through me, to love through me. God i2">is the one whose presence regularly moves me to tears. Reali2">izi2">ing that God i2">is HERE ri2">ight now, and that i2">it's really me that beli2">ieves i2">in separati2">ion or unawareness of God's PRESENCE. So as i2">I open up to accepti2">ing and bei2">ing aware of and open to God's presence here, i2">I have to open to God bei2">ing i2">insi2">ide of me also, i2">in my 'body' and mi2">ind. And so i2">I i2">invi2">ited God to be i2">in me.

Then i2">instead of referri2">ing to Holy Spi2">iri2">it as Holy Spi2">iri2">it, i2">I referred to Hi2">im as 'Spi2">iri2">it of God', to make that ki2">ind of 'connecti2">ion' between the two, whi2">ich maybe i2">I wasn't maki2">ing before. So i2">I i2">invi2">ited 'spi2">iri2">it of God' to come i2">into me, whi2">ile also affi2">irmi2">ing "i2">I recei2">ive God's heali2">ing". And let me tell you, the amount of acti2">ivi2">ity that Holy Spi2">iri2">it them di2">id i2">in me was probably the most i2">intense i2">I've ever experi2">ienced. All up my spi2">ine i2">I felt thi2">is i2">intense presence and electri2">ical energy radi2">iati2">ing out of both si2">ides of my spi2">ine all the way up and down several i2">inches, accompani2">ied but much more i2">intense body-part shaki2">ing and energy di2">islodgi2">ing. You have to really try to just trust and allow and relax whi2">ile He's shaki2">ing the crap out of your body, li2">iterally. And afterwards, i2">I felt healed and renewed and peaceful.

And i2">I can tell you one other thi2">ing that i2">I am noti2">ici2">ing, i2">is that... because of these 'sessi2">ions' of heali2">ing, i2">I thi2">ink... i2">I'm noti2">ici2">ing more often now moments where i2">I just feel... calm, present, and there aren't any thoughts happeni2">ing. i2">It's qui2">ite unusual and unli2">ike any other 'mode' of functi2">ioni2">ing that i2">I am used to. Li2">ike, as i2">if i2">I am ALWAYS thi2">inki2">ing, and then... there i2">isn't any thi2">inki2">ing happeni2">ing, and i2">I'm li2">ike... what i2">is thi2">is? i2">It's a feeli2">ing li2">ike there i2">is thi2">is 'love' present, and i2">it's just very calmi2">ing and relaxi2">ing. And i2">I've remarked to myself, that thi2">is i2">is li2">ike the 'fi2">irst ti2">ime' that i2">I am 'bei2">ing', aware, wi2">ithout havi2">ing any thoughts about anythi2">ing. Also last ni2">ight i2">I was doi2">ing thi2">is and also experi2">imenti2">ing wi2">ith 'not controlli2">ing anythi2">ing' and i2">I heard myself exclai2">im, "thi2">is i2">is the fi2">irst ti2">ime i2">I am actually fi2">inally RESTi2">ING." To be aware, relaxed, and to have no sense of havi2">ing to do do do do do anythi2">ing, and just BEi2">ING there. Ahhhhh. Felt li2">ike real rest and reli2">ief. Reli2">ief from the ego mi2">ind. For the fi2">irst ti2">ime ever!

So what's on my mi2">ind now i2">is... the i2">interesti2">ing transi2">iti2">ion from ... doi2">ing forgi2">iveness mentally, taki2">ing steps i2">in changi2">ing percepti2">ion....followi2">ing some procedure (whi2">ich sti2">ill helps)... versus.... starti2">ing to be transformed SUPER-NATURALLY, by Holy Spi2">iri2">it di2">irectly. i2">I used to not really ask Holy Spi2">iri2">it to 'do' the heali2">ing i2">in me, thi2">inki2">ing that i2">I just needed to change my percepti2">ion and accept my i2">innocence etc, and that Holy Spi2">iri2">it was just sort of looki2">ing on from above and gui2">idi2">ing me wi2">ith word phrases and so on.

But then i2">I came to reali2">ize, parti2">icularly spurred by some other people who ask Holy Spi2">iri2">it to actually do somethi2">ing, that Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is not only meant to do somethi2">ing but to actually supernaturally HEAL me. And not just a li2">ittle bi2">it. i2">I completely saw one passage of ACi2">IM i2">in a di2">ifferent li2">ight when i2">it says "Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo all the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">IF i2">I wi2">ill LET Hi2">IM" - and "i2">I choose to LET Hi2">IM, by allowi2">ing Hi2">im to choose for God for me". Thi2">is for me has become, to let Hi2">im choose for God, to deci2">ide my i2">innocence, AND THEN TO COME i2">INTO ME AND PERFORM HEALi2">ING Mi2">IRACLES - whi2">ich qui2">ite *li2">iterally* remove the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion - li2">iterally the heali2">ing and removal of upset emoti2">ions, the correcti2">ion of body si2">ickness, all of i2">it! And thi2">is all enti2">irely hi2">inges around "i2">If i2">I wi2">ill LET Hi2">IM." He i2">isn't the one who lacks an abi2">ili2">ity to heal EVERYTHi2">ING... we are the ones who won't concei2">ive of, allow or open up to letti2">ing Hi2">im wi2">ield hi2">is unli2">imi2">ited POWER i2">in our li2">ives.

i2">I have a li2">ittle wi2">illi2">ingness, then he does some super amazi2">ing - i2">I have no i2">idea what He really does - THi2">ING - and then i2">I am better off. Yes i2">I conti2">inue to do forgi2">iveness i2">in a more formal sort of sequence of perceptual correcti2">ions, but i2">I am openi2">ing up more now to, what Holy Spi2">iri2">it just told me... "di2">irect transfer", of experi2">ienti2">ial truth - the heali2">ing power of love - the presence of the One Mi2">ind - to accept and recei2">ive God's heali2">ing di2">irectly and to then extend i2">it, rather than thi2">is whole ACi2">IM thi2">ing of some ki2">ind of monotonous, i2">intellectual, do-i2">it-yourself 'study' of a book or mani2">ipulati2">ion of thoughts or thi2">inki2">ing that YOU do the heali2">ing and correcti2">ion. YOU do not heal. God i2">is the healer. God has appoi2">inted Holy Spi2">iri2">it to HEAL YOU, FOR YOU. So thi2">is requi2">ires you to let go of even the process of your own forgi2">iveness, to LET Hi2">IM acti2">ively work i2">in you and through you. Otherwi2">ise you are just stayi2">ing separate and mi2">issi2">ing out on a HUGE amount of support and di2">ivi2">ine help i2">in your process of awakeni2">ing. You don't have to do thi2">is all yourself, and i2">in fact you HAVE to reli2">inqui2">ish doi2">ing i2">it yourself i2">in order to open up to accepti2">ing and allowi2">ing God's love!

i2">I'm shari2">ing thi2">is because i2">I feel more confi2">ident over ti2">ime that regardless of what i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing, i2">it i2">is real enough to me and transformati2">ive enough to me, that i2">I thi2">ink other people are supposed to know more about thi2">is. There i2">isn't enough of an awareness of the Power of Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">in the ACi2">IM communi2">ity, especi2">ially not i2">in terms of performi2">ing mi2">iracles and other super-natural mani2">ifestati2">ions. Some branches of reli2">igi2">ion are much more fami2">ili2">iar wi2">ith thi2">is than most of us are. But i2">I sai2">id to Holy Spi2">iri2">it, i2">I don't know how i2">I could possi2">ibly 'teach thi2">is' to anyone, because i2">it's not li2">ike i2">it's based on some ki2">ind of metaphysi2">ics or logi2">ic or whatever. i2">I have no i2">idea what Holy Spi2">iri2">it actually does or how He does i2">it. i2">It's much more of an experi2">ience that i2">I sort of stumbled i2">into.

Then Holy Spi2">iri2">it si2">imply sai2">id, and thi2">is i2">is Hi2">is i2">instructi2">ion to YOU:

"i2">Invi2">ite me i2">in."

Seei2">ing yourself as depri2">ived makes you percei2">ive others as taki2">ing from you, and that you don't have enough left to gi2">ive.

For example when i2">I'm havi2">ing some emoti2">ional release/heali2">ing, maybe i2">I cri2">ied and i2">I'm ti2">ired and crabby and feeli2">ing vulnerable. Maybe i2">I'm not totally past i2">it all yet and sti2">ill am feeli2">ing whatever the lack i2">is - lack of love, lack of peace, whatever... i2">I'll see myself as bei2">ing qui2">ite 'i2">in need', i2">i.e. needy.

When i2">I see myself thi2">is way, i2">I start to percei2">ive everyone else as bei2">ing needy too. Even i2">if they're not. i2">I'll percei2">ive they're tryi2">ing to take from me or demand somethi2">ing of me that i2">I can't supply. i2">I'll feel put upon and taxed and offended by the demand i2">I see i2">in them.

And especi2">ially i2">if the other person i2">is i2">in a state of need themselves, i2">it'll tri2">igger anger that someone i2">is so i2">insensi2">iti2">ively expecti2">ing somethi2">ing from me when i2">I apparently don't have anythi2">ing to gi2">ive. i2">I see them as tryi2">ing to 'take take take'.

But what's really happeni2">ing i2">is i2">I'm seei2">ing myself - the demand i2">in them i2">is ME demandi2">ing FROM them. So i2">I'm needy AND demandi2">ing, stati2">ing that i2">I do not have what i2">I need and someone else needs to gi2">ive i2">it to me. (Secret si2">ide-ti2">ip: although i2">I'm sayi2">ing i2">I am i2">in need and want to GET from others, i2">I secretly do NOT want to get because then i2">I would't be able to see myself as needy).

i2">I'm the one who i2">is actually tryi2">ing to 'take take take'. i2">I'm tryi2">ing to GET, i2">in order to make up for the lack that i2">I percei2">ive i2">in myself. i2">I'm accusi2">ing other people of tryi2">ing to take because they're thwarti2">ing MY effort to take.

So as i2">I see myself depri2">ived and lacki2">ing, i2">it's because i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I don't have enough love. i2">I beli2">ieve the love i2">is not i2">in me and that i2">I need to get i2">it from someone else. So i2">if they fai2">il to gi2">ive i2">it, or i2">if they demand i2">it from ME, then i2">I am left totally empty-handed wi2">ith no way to resolve my problem, and that produces fear and anger... A sense that 'i2">I can't and i2">I won't... whi2">ich often i2">is i2">in the form of a lot of reluctance or resi2">istance or, comedi2">ically, "i2">I can't take i2">it anymore" (when secretly i2">I am taki2">ing bi2">ig-ti2">ime).

But the thi2">ing i2">is, seei2">ing myself as depri2">ived i2">is actually the CAUSE of my percei2">ivi2">ing a sense of lack of love, whi2">ich led to the feeli2">ing of needi2">iness, whi2">ich led to the drama of bei2">ing pressured to gi2">ive what i2">I don't have to needy people.

So an anti2">idote for thi2">is... i2">if i2">I'm seei2">ing myself as needy, and reali2">izi2">ing i2">it, i2">is si2">imply thi2">is:

Gi2">ive love.

i2">IMMEDi2">IATELY thi2">is cancels out and di2">issolves all trace of a sense of needi2">iness, all trace of not havi2">ing enough, all trace of anger and reason for fear or resentment.

i2">I'll be honest, i2">I've only remember thi2">is a couple of ti2">imes i2">in real si2">ituati2">ions. One of them was just now. As soon as i2">I suddenly remembered (after aski2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it to help) that my needi2">iness i2">is maki2">ing me try to 'get' because i2">I am seei2">ing myself as depri2">ived, i2">it made me LAUGH. Because i2">it i2">introduces truth at the root of thi2">is bullshi2">it and i2">immedi2">iately corrected all of the EFFECTS.

i2">I have to learn to remember thi2">is more often. When i2">I feel shi2">it and li2">ike i2">I am depri2">ived and don't have anythi2">ing to gi2">ive and don't want to gi2">ive..... the way i2">I am feeli2">ing i2">is BECAUSE i2">I don't want to gi2">ive, not the other way around.

i2">I choose to posi2">iti2">ion myself as unloved and i2">in need, whi2">ich creates feeli2">ings of depri2">ivati2">ion, whi2">ich leads to the whole drama. i2">If i2">I choose NOT to see myself unloved by SHARi2">ING love (remember gi2">ivi2">ing and recei2">ivi2">ing are both requi2">ired, not sacri2">ifi2">ice or greed), the whole problem i2">is corrected.

And then, now that i2">I've accepted heali2">ing of the actual problem - a lack of love - i2">I can now gi2">ive love and FULFi2">ILL the needs of others, whi2">ich i2">in fact then di2">isappear, because they were never really needy to begi2">in wi2">ith. i2">I was just seei2">ing my own needi2">iness projected.

Problem solved.

For a long ti2">ime i2">I have focused on "the secret of salvati2">ion". Thi2">is i2">is to do wi2">ith reali2">izi2">ing that you are the cause of everythi2">ing you are experi2">ienci2">ing. And therefore that you are responsi2">ible for all your own sufferi2">ing. On the one hand i2">it's humbli2">ing and on the other hand i2">it's empoweri2">ing, because i2">if you can reali2">ize you're the one doi2">ing i2">it you have the freedom to stop.

But l noti2">ice now that the secret of "how to be saved" appli2">ies i2">in the case where you are not yet saved. i2">It's helpful when you are i2">in the sufferi2">ing and need to get out of i2">it. That's ki2">ind of the context of i2">it, i2">it's a tool you can use to recogni2">ize who i2">is doi2">ing what to whom, so that you can stop doi2">ing i2">it.

i2">I have noti2">iced also that wi2">ith the secret of salvati2">ion, we are focusi2">ing a lot on taki2">ing responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. Whi2">ich i2">ini2">iti2">ially i2">is seen as i2">inci2">iti2">ing gui2">ilt, and then moves i2">into tryi2">ing to be fully responsi2">ible for everythi2">ing. But the further secret i2">is, that i2">if we try to take full responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity ALONE, where "separate me" i2">is fully responsi2">ible for everythi2">ing, then we are sti2">ill generati2">ing fearful outlooks, because dependi2">ing on ourselves alone i2">is a state of rejecti2">ing God.

So i2">I've been locked i2">into a stage for a whi2">ile of tryi2">ing to be fully responsi2">ible, but tryi2">ing to take that responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity i2">in i2">isolati2">ion, rather than Gi2">IVE that responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it. i2">I feel that i2">I personally am somewhat movi2">ing beyond thi2">is stage now and i2">into more of the "i2">I am saved" stage. By whi2">ich i2">I mean, i2">I have recogni2">ized that i2">it i2">is my attempts to do anythi2">ing "alone" that i2">is the source of all sufferi2">ing, because that's how i2">I "be separate". And "i2">I" can't be fully responsi2">ible wi2">ithout shari2">ing that responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity wi2">ith God.

Whenever i2">I try to be separate, i2">I essenti2">ially am attacki2">ing myself, whi2">ich makes errors, produces more ego fear, and i2">induces sufferi2">ing. Thi2">is all comes about after i2">I have judged and gi2">iven meani2">ing to thi2">ings, usi2">ing my own faculti2">ies for judgi2">ing. Whi2">ich means really, usi2">ing my own past learni2">ing. Thi2">is always leads to errors because i2">it's lacki2">ing a lot of facts. And i2">I keep bei2">ing shown now just how wrong i2">I can be when i2">I don't know all the detai2">ils.

So i2">I'm now fi2">indi2">ing that i2">if i2">I admi2">it to not knowi2">ing what anythi2">ing means, and am wi2">illi2">ing to stop tryi2">ing to judge anythi2">ing i2">I see, and i2">instead seek out the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to joi2">in i2">in hi2">is vi2">isi2">ion or i2">interpretati2">ion, then thi2">is ci2">ircumvents the whole process of goi2">ing i2">into error. Or rather, i2">I guess i2">I'm sayi2">ing that i2">if i2">I seek the state of forgi2">iveness sooner, then i2">I don't go i2">into judgement, and thus don't hurt myself. Whi2">ich remi2">inds me of thi2">is...

"Forgi2">iveness through the Holy Spi2">iri2">it li2">ies si2">imply i2">in looki2">ing beyond error from the begi2">inni2">ing, and thus KEEPi2">ING i2">it unreal for you. Do not let any beli2">ief i2">in i2">its realness enter your mi2">inds AT ALL, or you wi2">ill also beli2">ieve that you must UNDO what you have made, i2">in order to BE forgi2">iven. "

Thi2">is i2">is what i2">I am atuni2">ing to now. Tryi2">ing to become closer to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it and more i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith my real self, so that i2">I do not go i2">INTO judgement or MAKE errors. Because as soon as you make errors, you'll start beli2">ievi2">ing you've got a whole mess on your hands that you need to fi2">ix, problems to solve, fears to address and self-i2">infli2">icted sufferi2">ing to be undone. ALL of that can be avoi2">ided i2">if you don't make the errors i2">in the fi2">irst place!

i2">It's far more effecti2">ive at preventi2">ing a movement i2">INTO fear, when i2">I try to remai2">in OUT of the battlefi2">ield. Bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to not be the one to judge, or deci2">ide, or plan, or fi2">igure out, or deduce meani2">ing, i2">I stay well out of the enti2">ire "fi2">ight" that we have wi2">ith the world. i2">If i2">I don't do thi2">is and i2">I go i2">into solo-mode, ego pi2">ilot mode, then i2">I start to "make a world" that's ri2">iddled wi2">ith separati2">ions and confli2">icts and unresolved problems and threats and dangers.

i2">I have been fi2">indi2">ing of late therefore that i2">I actually feel... and thi2">is i2">is a word Jesus just threw i2">in my mi2">ind.... i2">INSULATED.... agai2">inst dangers. That i2">is to say, i2">I feel li2">ike there was an enti2">ire versi2">ion of "the world" whi2">ich i2">I thought was out there, whi2">ich has been scraped off the surface of my mi2">ind and i2">isn't there anymore. An enti2">ire layer of experi2">ience and sufferi2">ing and a sense of threat and engagement and li2">ittleness and fear. i2">It's just gone. i2">It's li2">ike i2">I have stepped out of an enti2">ire world and i2">it has di2">isappeared. At least to a degree, and now i2">I look upon what's left through much calmer and less aggravated perspecti2">ives.

i2">I see now therefore what Jesus means about how false percepti2">ion makes you see a world that looks li2">ike hell, and how as you move i2">into more abstract states of mi2">ind you li2">ift off of the world enti2">ire layers of vulnerabi2">ili2">ity, fear, struggle and sufferi2">ing. i2">Its li2">ike a whole vei2">il has been li2">ifted to some degree, so much that i2">I have been feeli2">ing li2">ike i2">I'm i2">in a di2">ifferent world. Li2">ike i2">I li2">iterally just stepped out of one planet and am on another one where a lot of the stri2">ife doesn't exi2">ist.

And i2">I am thankful for that, because there i2">is a noti2">iceable contrast between how much safer and calmer and happi2">ier i2">I feel now wi2">ithout the tremendous burden of bei2">ing some ki2">ind of "soldi2">ier on the battlefi2">ield" fendi2">ing off the hounds of hell. i2">I am si2">imply not maki2">ing as many errors, generati2">ing as much fear, produci2">ing as much control, maki2">ing up as many problems, or developi2">ing as many meani2">ings for thi2">ings. And i2">in fact as i2">I look at objects now they appear to be new and fresh and i2">interesti2">ing.

i2">It's wei2">ird but Jesus basi2">ically says that we are to adopt a perspecti2">ive i2">in whi2">ich everythi2">ing i2">is gi2">iven ONE meani2">ing, from a whole vi2">iewpoi2">int where "wholeness i2">is the perceptual content of mi2">iracles", where we look upon a forgi2">iven world wi2">ithout tryi2">ing to understand i2">it, havi2">ing gi2">iven up all our past learni2">ing and become wi2">illi2">ing to be empty, to just surrender and let go of tryi2">ing to know or do or control everythi2">ing. i2">I'm taki2">ing my hands off the steeri2">ing wheel and the car i2">is fi2">indi2">ing a a smoother path.

"The holy i2">instant i2">is the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's most useful learni2">ing devi2">ice for teachi2">ing you love's meani2">ing. For i2">its purpose i2">is to SUSPEND JUDGMENT ENTi2">IRELY. Judgment ALWAYS rests on the past, for PAST experi2">ience i2">is the basi2">is on whi2">ich you judge. Judgment becomes i2">impossi2">ible wi2">ithout the past, for Wi2">ITHOUT i2">it you do NOT understand anythi2">ing. You would make no ATTEMPT to judge, because i2">it would be qui2">ite apparent to you that you do not know WHAT ANYTHi2">ING MEANS. You are afrai2">id of thi2">is, because you beli2">ieve that, Wi2">ITHOUT THE EGO, all would be chaos. Yet i2">I assure you that, wi2">ithout the ego, ALL WOULD BE LOVE."

Those who are angry about what other people have sai2">id or done, AGREE wi2">ith what the person has sai2">id or done. i2">I BET YOU DON'T Li2">IKE TO HEAR THAT! lolol

Thi2">is appli2">ies no matter the topi2">ic, whether i2">it's bei2">ing angry at poli2">iti2">ici2">ians or angry at the government or angry at nei2">ighbors or coworkers or people of a certai2">in reli2">igi2">ion or because of how certai2">in other people are treati2">ing certai2">in other people. i2">It doesn't matter.

i2">If you're angry at someone, YOU AGREE Wi2">ITH THEM.

i2">If you di2">id not agree wi2">ith them, you would mai2">intai2">in perfectly calm, perfectly poi2">ised. You would be unshaken. You would not move. You would have CERTAi2">INTY. You would be confi2">ident. You wouldn't be moved i2">in your vi2">iewpoi2">int just because of what someone sai2">id or di2">id. You would not lose your center. You would KNOW YOURSELF and anythi2">ing goi2">ing agai2">inst that you're RECOGNi2">IZE as false.

When you know yourself, you are acknowledgi2">ing that you have not changed and you cannot BE changed, by anyone or anythi2">ing. Another way of sayi2">ing that i2">is, you recogni2">ize you cannot be and are not a vi2">icti2">im. You can't be i2">influenced. You can't be damaged. You can't be vulnerable. And you can't be made to become pi2">issed off at someone or somethi2">ing goi2">ing on outsi2">ide of you. But i2">if you don't recogni2">ize that what's false i2">is false, and you beli2">ieve i2">instead that i2">it's TRUE, you Wi2">ILL be upset by i2">it, and i2">it Wi2">ILL di2">isturb your peace, and i2">it Wi2">ILL be because you AGREE Wi2">ITH i2">IT. Whatever i2">is true to you, you agree wi2">ith, even i2">if i2">it i2">is not really true.

He who gets wound up and angry and reacts really qui2">ickly i2">in a rage obvi2">iously i2">is deeply HURT by what someone says or does, but the truth i2">is, thi2">is hurt i2">is only experi2">ienced because the person has touched upon a hurt - a sensi2">iti2">ivi2">ity or 'psychologi2">ical brui2">ise' that already exi2">ists i2">in then. i2">It tri2">iggers an old memory of when someone di2">id thi2">is before. i2">It bri2">ings up old feeli2">ings. i2">It attacks the sense of ego self whi2">ich i2">is composed of gui2">ilt and made from beli2">iefs, formed perhaps decades before, from previ2">ious hurtful experi2">iences.

i2">If someone says or does somethi2">ing and i2">I become upset i2">in any way, i2">it's because i2">I beli2">ieve i2">it's true. i2">I mi2">ight express that i2">I don't WANT to beli2">ieve i2">it's true, and i2">I may try to DENY that i2">I beli2">ieve i2">it's true, and i2">I may project ownershi2">ip or responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for the beli2">ief i2">into the attacki2">ing person, BUT... i2">it's ALL MY OWN STUFF. i2">If i2">I am upset due to someone's expressi2">ion, *i2">I* have a problem, and i2">I had that problem before that person even appeared. i2">I don't want to ADMi2">IT that i2">I agree wi2">ith them, but somewhere deep down i2">insi2">ide, i2">I am only upset because they remi2">ind me of what i2">I thi2">ink i2">is true about myself.

Those who are angry and upset have the hardest ti2">ime admi2">itti2">ing that they actually, deep down, beli2">ieve what the person i2">is sayi2">ing. And that's largely because anger i2">is a very strong force of projecti2">ion whi2">ich hurls i2">inner gui2">ilt outward and then attacks i2">it to try to get ri2">id of i2">it. i2">It's then extremely CONVENi2">IENT to blame the whole thi2">ing on the person who seemed to tri2">igger thi2">is response. But i2">if i2">I'm upset, i2">it's because *i2">I* BELi2">IEVE* that what's happened i2">is the TRUTH. i2">I cannot be upset by what i2">is false i2">if i2">I know i2">it i2">is false. Truth i2">is STRENGTH.

So today, as i2">I'm upset and angry about certai2">in people and thi2">ings that happened, i2">I have to admi2">it... i2">I must beli2">ieve they're telli2">ing the truth, somehow, i2">in some way. Somewhere i2">insi2">ide they've tapped i2">into some old pai2">in that i2">I haven't healed. And i2">in that way, they're actually tryi2">ing to POi2">INT i2">IT OUT so that i2">I wi2">ill heal i2">it. So then, for that servi2">ice, i2">I should be GRATEFUL to them for bri2">ingi2">ing thi2">is to my attenti2">ion. But whi2">ile i2">I'm stuck i2">in blame and "you made me upset" and "you di2">id thi2">is to me"... i2">I won't own up to the real truth here.... i2">I actually deep down beli2">ieve they're telli2">ing the truth, otherwi2">ise what would my reacti2">ion be?

i2">I'D LAUGH MY HEAD OFF AT THE Ri2">IDi2">ICULOUSNESS!

i2">If i2">I KNEW thei2">ir expressi2">ion i2">is false and i2">I DON'T BELi2">IEVE i2">IT'S TRUE, i2">I wi2">ill stay i2">in li2">ight and joy and just laugh and not percei2">ive myself attacked or harmed i2">in any way. Bei2">ing aware of the truth reveals the ri2">idi2">iculous unbeli2">ievabi2">ili2">ity of li2">ies and i2">illusi2">ions. i2">If i2">I forget to laugh, however, i2">I wi2">ill enter i2">into self-attack and then blame i2">it on everyone else, havi2">ing fi2">irst hurt myself wi2">ith my own condemnati2">ion. i2">If i2">I've lost track of what i2">is REALLY TRUE, and i2">I thi2">ink other stuff i2">is true, i2">I Wi2">ILL be upset by i2">it whenever someone says "thi2">is i2">is true" and i2">it resonates to what i2">I secretly beli2">ieve about myself. i2">I MUST forgi2">ive all of my mi2">istaken percepti2">ions and allegi2">iances to what i2">is false i2">if i2">I am to regai2">in i2">inner peace.

So where are you at today? Di2">id someone push your buttons? Why do you even have buttons? Who put the buttons there to begi2">in wi2">ith? When wi2">ill you admi2">it to beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in these buttons? And when wi2">ill you be wi2">illi2">ing to let God heal them for you?

Let's say you're i2">in a regular si2">ituati2">ion, maybe you're around someone you know. And there's somethi2">ing thi2">is person i2">is doi2">ing that you 'descri2">ibe' or 'label' as somethi2">ing. You thi2">ink you're just maki2">ing a basi2">ic observati2">ion, li2">ike i2">it's obvi2">ious.

So maybe you 'see' that the person has a si2">ickness, or they're angry, or scared, or whatever. So to you, you thi2">ink you're just observi2">ing thi2">is li2">ike..... my fri2">iend Jane seems to be si2">ick ri2">ight now.

i2">In thi2">is si2">ituati2">ion, i2">I bet you beli2">ieve that you're not actually 'doi2">ing' anythi2">ing to Jane ri2">ight? And you beli2">ieve that you're just seei2">ing her neutrally, ri2">ight? And that there i2">is not really anythi2">ing to forgi2">ive here, because Jane really i2">is si2">ick, ri2">ight?

Well... even i2">in what seems li2">ike an 'ordi2">inary' everyday percepti2">ion of a 'normal' condi2">iti2">ion that someone i2">is experi2">ienci2">ing, there i2">is unforgi2">iveness. But you may not reali2">ize thi2">is especi2">ially because, i2">IF you are seei2">ing thi2">is and beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it's real or true, you have forgotten to forgi2">ive, and have lost si2">ight of the REAL person - therefore yourself.

When thi2">is happens for me, i2">I at fi2">irst feel as though thi2">is i2">isn't really 'my' problem. i2">It's not 'me' that's got the i2">issue. Whatever the other person i2">is experi2">ienci2">ing, i2">it seems to be 'thei2">irs' and i2">is 'actually happeni2">ing'. And here i2">I am, i2">in my ego, beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I can percei2">ive thi2">is so-called 'reali2">ity' wi2">ithout actually contri2">ibuti2">ing to i2">it at all, li2">ike i2">I'm a completely neutral party. But thi2">is i2">is of course the ego's decepti2">ion.

The ego i2">is not capable of seei2">ing neutrally. "i2">I have no neutral thoughts". "My meani2">ingless (skewed) thoughts are showi2">ing me a meani2">ingless world." etc. The ego beli2">ieves i2">it can do somethi2">ing to others and NOT be i2">in any way associ2">iated wi2">ith the outcome or the consequences. i2">It thi2">inks somethi2">ing can apply to someone else that does not apply to yourself. i2">It thi2">inks i2">it can observe neutrally someone else i2">in pai2">in or any other sufferi2">ing, and not suffer, and be havi2">ing nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith i2">its presence.

But the ego i2">is always acti2">ively i2">involved. i2">It's always attacki2">ing wi2">ith attack thoughts and di2">istorted percepti2">ions. i2">It's always judgi2">ing. i2">It's always projecti2">ing somethi2">ing onto someone.

So even though the si2">ituati2">ion seems to have no i2">issues i2">in i2">it that have anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith 'me', separate me, i2">is that really true? i2">If we are all one and all laws apply equally to all people, then i2">if the other person i2">is seemi2">ingly i2">in pai2">in - or at least, i2">if my percepti2">ion has 'stopped' at "si2">ight of form" or has made i2">it real or beli2">ieves i2">it's true or agrees wi2">ith i2">it at all, then my ego i2">IS acti2">ive i2">in thi2">is si2">ituati2">ion and i2">IS usi2">ing i2">it. i2">Instead of heali2">ing my brother, i2">I must be condemni2">ing hi2">im or her by not overlooki2">ing 'thei2">ir i2">issue'. So what i2">I'm seei2">ing i2">in them, or what they seem to be experi2">ienci2">ing, SOMEHOW, i2">it i2">is MY i2">issue.

What i2">I di2">id i2">in a si2">ituati2">ion li2">ike thi2">is recently, even though i2">it di2">idn't SEEM li2">ike "i2">I" had anythi2">ing to forgi2">ive, as though there wasn't anythi2">ing 'wrong' wi2">ith me, but the other person was upset or si2">ick, and i2">I was accepti2">ing that they were actually si2">ick, was to step back and do a forgi2">iveness.

The basi2">ic fact of a need to forgi2">ive i2">is that i2">I'm seei2">ing somethi2">ing that i2">I thi2">ink i2">is separate from me (i2">in another person, i2">its thei2">ir problem or fault, thei2">ir si2">ickness, etc), Di2">ISASSOCi2">IATED from i2">it.

Another basi2">ic fact of a need to forgi2">ive i2">is that i2">I see somethi2">ing i2">in someone else that i2">I don't beli2">ieve i2">is i2">in me. That HAS to mean, that what i2">I see i2">in them i2">IS my own stuff that i2">I've projected onto them. Even i2">if the other person seems to be the one wi2">ith the si2">ickness or the anger or whatever i2">issue, i2">I have to reali2">ize - i2">it's really MY i2">issue. i2">If i2">I am percei2">ivi2">ing that anythi2">ing appli2">ies to anyone that doesn't apply to myself, that we are not one or equal i2">in every way, i2">I have waki2">ing up to do.

Even i2">if that sounds ri2">idi2">iculous. And i2">it does sound ri2">idi2">iculous. To the ego i2">it i2">is ri2">idi2">iculous to suggest that somethi2">ing 'clearly' nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith me, i2">is actually somehow somethi2">ing about or i2">in me that i2">I need to forgi2">ive. You could boi2">il i2">it down to, ... i2">if i2">I'm seei2">ing i2">it, i2">it's me. i2">If i2">I am seei2">ing Chri2">ist, i2">I am bei2">ing Chri2">ist. i2">If i2">I am not seei2">ing Chri2">ist, i2">I am not bei2">ing Chri2">ist. Ri2">ight? Even i2">if i2">it seems li2">ike someone else's problem, i2">if i2">I see i2">it and thi2">ink i2">it's really there, *i2">I* (the One Son of God/Chri2">ist) have a problem.

So i2">I di2">id a forgi2">iveness. i2">I took back ownershi2">ip of the si2">ickness or anger that i2">I saw i2">in the other person, as though i2">it were my own. i2">I took back the gui2">ilt i2">I thought the person had for beli2">ievi2">ing they were si2">ick. i2">I took back ownershi2">ip of the fear and anger. i2">I even clai2">imed i2">it to be 'mi2">ine'. i2">I took all of these labels, judgements, percepti2">ions, i2">impressi2">ions, evaluati2">ions, analyses, etc off of the person, to where i2">I could moreso see THEY are i2">innocent. THEY don't have any of these i2">issues really. THEY are none of thi2">is. Thi2">is whole 'percepti2">ion' of them even havi2">ing an i2">issue, i2">is MY error. Sounds ri2">idi2">iculous. Sounds li2">ike taki2">ing the world on your shoulders. Sounds li2">ike some ki2">ind of martyrdom. Sounds li2">ike taki2">ing possessi2">ion of 'other people's problems' and maki2">ing them your own on purpose. But i2">is i2">it REALLY not your problem?

i2">I took i2">it back. Then i2">I went to Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ith i2">it. i2">I uncondi2">iti2">ionally surrendered the need to be ri2">ight or wrong about any of these i2">issues. i2">I surrendered uncondi2">iti2">ionally any desi2">ire to deci2">ide FOR MYSELF whether any of these thi2">ings were true or not. Thus i2">I opened up to accepti2">ing whatever Holy Spi2">iri2">it would deci2">ide. i2">I asked for Hi2">is deci2">isi2">ion, and he reported i2">instantly that NO, i2">I am not gui2">ilty of any of these thi2">ings, none of them are true.

Then, i2">instantly, there began a heali2">ing process wi2">ithi2">in me, Holy Spi2">iri2">it came i2">in, body parts vi2">ibrated, 'energy' whi2">irled around, thi2">ings shook, and several seconds later all of the sensati2">ion or experi2">ience of those 'thi2">ings' was gone.

Now, what was the result of thi2">is?

Next day, around thi2">is person, *i2">I* was noti2">iceably much happi2">ier, clearer, much less engaged wi2">ith taki2">ing thei2">ir si2">ituati2">ion seri2">iously, much more detached, li2">ighter, smi2">ili2">ier, stronger. i2">I accessed a 'li2">ight' and a sense of securi2">ity and certai2">inty that i2">I di2">id not know was avai2">ilable. i2">I also beli2">ieve that by my bei2">ing i2">in a hi2">igher state of awareness, thi2">is 'helped' the other person i2">in some way. Not sayi2">ing i2">it was a mi2">iracle as such, or that i2">it had observable effects, but for sure *i2">I* was transformed.

How would i2">I have been transformed i2">if thi2">is wasn't all about me to begi2">in wi2">ith, or i2">issues wi2">ithi2">in me that needed heali2">ing? How would i2">I have experi2">ienced greater li2">ight i2">if i2">I hadn't had any need to forgi2">ive? Even though i2">it di2">idn't seem li2">ike the i2">issue outsi2">ide of me had anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith me, *i2">I* was the one percei2">ivi2">ing i2">it, *i2">I* was the one beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it. *i2">I* needed heali2">ing.

i2">If you're goi2">ing through a loss, i2">it can be hard to deal wi2">ith the feeli2">ings.

At fi2">irst i2">I felt that the feeli2">ings were just overpoweri2">ing and i2">I was a vi2">icti2">im of them, unable to control or stop them, albei2">it that i2">I tri2">ied.

Gradually over ti2">ime and after a lot of cryi2">ing, i2">I've somehow become more honest about i2">it and more acknowledgi2">ing of the feeli2">ings.

Or i2">I should reword that, i2">I've been pushed by the feeli2">ings so much to have to feel them no matter whether i2">I want to or not, that i2">I've had to surrender to i2">it and go wi2">ith i2">it.

More recently that seems to be turni2">ing more i2">into a ki2">ind of wi2">illi2">ingness to gri2">ieve. i2">I thi2">ink i2">I had a lot of spi2">iri2">itual bypass crap from ACi2">IM that was getti2">ing i2">in the way of just bei2">ing human about i2">it.

i2">I've been starti2">ing to see that there are places i2">in me where i2">I si2">imply, ego or not, "want" somethi2">ing. At the core of loss there i2">is always a sense of love or i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion or some ki2">ind of valui2">ing.

Wi2">ithi2">in me, there i2">is a place, i2">it's even i2">in the heart, that si2">imply says, "i2">I want to be wi2">ith my wi2">ife." And there i2">is another part that says "i2">I want to go home".

Thi2">is i2">is because i2">I li2">ived i2">in Ameri2">ica and have let there now to li2">ive i2">in the UK and have a lot of loss around the end of that enti2">ire chapter of li2">ife.

What i2">I've been seei2">ing lately i2">is that although i2">it sounds li2">ike some ki2">ind of backwards step, or goi2">ing i2">in the wrong di2">irecti2">ion, i2">I have to be wi2">illi2">ing to acknowledge much more fully that i2">I DO WANT these thi2">ings.

i2">It's as though up ti2">ill now everythi2">ing was sort of ci2">ircli2">ing around i2">it li2">ike a cloud of emoti2">ion and i2">I just couldn't see clearly. As i2">I home i2">in on the "core" of thi2">is "sufferi2">ing", i2">its li2">ike i2">it's comi2">ing i2">into focus more, and reveali2">ing that at the centre there i2">is thi2">is human bondi2">ing and love and cari2">ing and so on, whi2">ich dri2">ives the loss.

i2">It's not i2">in my opi2">ini2">ion "worse" or a regressi2">ion to just own and admi2">it and feel the "i2">I want". Even i2">if i2">it's ego. Even i2">if i2">it's bullshi2">it or not i2">in li2">ine wi2">ith God's truth. The wanti2">ing i2">is there. Nor can i2">I try to force myself to just "not want i2">it", because that's brutal and not heali2">ing.

i2">I'm maki2">ing i2">it okay to acknowledge how i2">I feel and okay to feel i2">it and to even throw myself i2">into feeli2">ing i2">it. Bei2">ing more open and honest wi2">ith the feeli2">ing rather than avoi2">idi2">ing i2">it, judgi2">ing i2">it, tryi2">ing to get ri2">id of i2">it.

What i2">I am fi2">indi2">ing i2">is that, when i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing to admi2">it that i2">I just want to be wi2">ith her, or that i2">I want to go home, i2">it doesn't entai2">il any deni2">ial. And thi2">is reveals somethi2">ing, i2">it sheds a li2">ight on i2">it.

Only by admi2">itti2">ing that i2">I want i2">it and letti2">ing myself feel the wanti2">ing, does i2">it make room for some "reali2">ity" to come i2">in. The reali2">ity says, well.... even though you want thi2">is, the truth i2">is, i2">in practi2">ical terms, you can't actually have thi2">is. Thi2">is thi2">ing that you want, i2">isn't avai2">ilable any more.

i2">It's a bi2">it of a harsh truth, but i2">if there Fi2">IRST i2">isn't the wi2">illi2">ingness to admi2">it to havi2">ing the wanti2">ing - the yearni2">ing, the expectati2">ion - you can't get to the poi2">int where you can face reali2">ity.

You have to face the sufferi2">ing head-on fi2">irst before any li2">ight can be shed on i2">it. And that means absolutely no spi2">iri2">itual bypasses, no deni2">ial, no avoi2">idance, no judgi2">ing, no defences, no maki2">ing i2">it wrong.

Upon looki2">ing more squarely and bei2">ing "i2">in" the wanti2">ing, i2">it has made me reali2">ize that all the clouds of loss and confusi2">ion were di2">isgui2">isi2">ing a rather si2">imple AND li2">imi2">ited thi2">ing - that thi2">is i2">is about one person, and about a home that i2">is gone.

i2">It's not about the whole world, or my whole li2">ife. By bri2">ingi2">ing i2">it i2">into focus i2">it's narrowed i2">it down and now i2">it seems perhaps more manageable. i2">It's not the end of the whole world. i2">It's just speci2">ifi2">ically about these two areas, two thi2">ings that i2">I want to be wi2">ith. Regardless of whether that seems popular wi2">ith other people or soci2">ially normal or anythi2">ing else.

Once i2">it's admi2">itted that i2">I really want these thi2">ings, the si2">ituati2">ional truth starts to enter - i2">it's not possi2">ible to have these thi2">ings. Thi2">is fact, thi2">is truth, starts to shed a li2">ight on the wanti2">ing, and reframes i2">it. That, yes, i2">I want somethi2">ing i2">I can't have, but perhaps i2">I should let go of that wanti2">ing because i2">it's not a possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. The reali2">ity of the "i2">it's not possi2">ible" starts to come i2">in, and i2">in a way that starts to counteract and act upon the wanti2">ing.

Ulti2">imately i2">it's a sort of recogni2">iti2">ion or reali2">isati2">ion, that i2">I mi2">ight as well let go, because what i2">I want just i2">isn't reali2">isti2">ic or feasi2">ible. i2">It's not li2">ike a defeat or some ki2">ind of horri2">ible di2">isappoi2">intment, i2">it's just sort of faci2">ing facts, and as the course says "no one can argue wi2">ith a fact." And "the truth shall set you free."

i2">I'm sti2">ill sort of. . squi2">irmi2">ing a bi2">it about thi2">is i2">insi2">ight, and wi2">ith tryi2">ing to acknowledge thi2">is "fact" of the i2">impossi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of what i2">I want, and thus the need to let i2">it go due to i2">it bei2">ing "poi2">intless". But as a step forward at least i2">it's provi2">idi2">ing some sense of an endi2">ing bei2">ing i2">in si2">ight, or a sort of "soluti2">ion" to the problem.

i2">I want to be wi2">ith my wi2">ife, but i2">I can't. i2">It's okay to acknowledge that. i2">I want to go home to Ameri2">ica and be wi2">ith what's been fami2">ili2">iar for 25 years, but i2">I can't. My ego cri2">ies out wi2">ith "i2">it's all gone" and "i2">I want i2">it" but that wi2">ill change. Somehow at least admi2">itti2">ing to the wanti2">ing of i2">it i2">is bri2">ingi2">ing i2">it i2">into the li2">ight to see i2">it clearly, and to thus shed li2">ight upon i2">it, and i2">it i2">is that li2">ight whi2">ich perhaps i2">is the source of li2">iberati2">ion.

When i2">I used to do ACi2">IM, i2">it was always about me bei2">ing here on Earth tryi2">ing to forgi2">ive stuff. People were across from me i2">in bodi2">ies, as bodi2">ies. i2">I was a body. The focus was on me bei2">ing here anchored i2">in a body tryi2">ing to somehow get closer to reali2">ity.

But then there was a bi2">ig change and turni2">ing poi2">int, namely that my wi2">ife left her body and wend to heaven. But thi2">is was by no means the end of our i2">interacti2">ions together, and i2">instead she became a ki2">ind of anchor i2">in heaven.

Si2">ince then my focus has noti2">iceably shi2">ifted i2">in how i2">I deal wi2">ith the course. i2">I see i2">it as telli2">ing me that i2">I should be locati2">ing myself as i2">IN heaven, and not of thi2">is world. Even i2">if my body seems to be here, i2">I should regard myself as wi2">ith God. Physi2">ically on earth, mentally i2">in heaven.

i2">I see thi2">is also as relati2">ing to the topi2">ic of 'who i2">I am really'. i2">I am not a body, i2">I am free. Well, where am i2">I i2">if i2">I'm not a body - i2">I'm i2">in heaven. i2">If i2">I am Chri2">ist, where i2">is Chri2">ist? Not on Earth. Chri2">ist i2">IS heaven. i2">If i2">I am i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it and recogni2">ize and i2">identi2">ify myself as spi2">iri2">it, where i2">is spi2">iri2">it? i2">It's not on earth, i2">it's i2">in heaven, as heaven.

So for me now the focus has shi2">ifted qui2">ite a bi2">it i2">in terms of how i2">I am 'ori2">iented'. i2">I am becomi2">ing i2">increasi2">ingly more 'centered' i2">in heaven, i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing as part of heaven, whi2">ile my body conti2">inues to seem to exi2">ist on Earth.

i2">I li2">iken i2">it to what i2">it would be li2">ike i2">if i2">I was an angel i2">in heaven, and came to Earth for a vi2">isi2">it but was sti2">ill enti2">irely of the same nature and mi2">indset that i2">I was i2">in heaven. Sti2">ill beli2">ievi2">ing i2">I am wi2">ith God, sti2">ill i2">in the li2">ight, sti2">ill a spi2">iri2">it bei2">ing, not confused about who or what i2">I am. i2">In the world, but not of i2">it.

i2">I thi2">ink thi2">is i2">is i2">important because we need to reali2">ize we are not Earth people, we are not bodi2">ies or humans, we are not anchored here. Just because bodi2">ies are here i2">it gi2">ives a flavour of ... everythi2">ing i2">I do i2">is from the perspecti2">ive of bei2">ing here. But thi2">is i2">isn't the proper perspecti2">ive. To get above the battlefi2">ield mi2">ind has to see i2">itself as NOT i2">in a body, NOT outsi2">ide the Ki2">ingdom, NOT separate from God.

i2">I focus now much more on affi2">irmi2">ing and recogni2">isi2">ing who i2">I really am - i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it, where i2">I really am - i2">in heaven wi2">ith God, how i2">I really am - perfectly i2">innocent and i2">invulnerable. Li2">ifti2">ing up and away from all the sense of the bullshi2">it of the world, all the i2">ideas of "somethi2">ing i2">is goi2">ing wrong", all the i2">illusi2">ions of sufferi2">ing and of bei2">ing even someone or somethi2">ing that can suffer. Uncoveri2">ing my true self.

We need to be above the world, looki2">ing down, not looki2">ing up from below. Beli2">ievi2">ing we are fi2">irmly Wi2">ITHi2">IN God, not outsi2">ide of God.

"You have been assured that the Ki2">ingdom of God i2">is wi2">ithi2">in you, and can never be lost."

"That i2">is why we made no di2">isti2">incti2">ion before between HAVi2">ING the Ki2">ingdom of God and BEi2">ING the Ki2">ingdom of God."

"Forget not the Ki2">ingdom of God for anythi2">ing the world has to offer. The world can ADD nothi2">ing to the power and the glory of God and Hi2">is Holy Sons, but i2">it CAN bli2">ind the Sons to the Father i2">if they behold i2">it."

"Because you are all the Ki2">ingdom of God, i2">I can lead you back to your own creati2">ions"

"To be i2">IN the Ki2">ingdom i2">is merely to focus your full attenti2">ion ON i2">it."

"The Ki2">ingdom CANNOT be found alone, and you who ARE the Ki2">ingdom cannot fi2">ind YOURSELVES alone."

"You ARE the Ki2">ingdom of Heaven, but you have let the beli2">ief i2">in darkness enter your mi2">inds, and so you need a new li2">ight."

"You who ARE the Ki2">ingdom are not concerned wi2">ith seemi2">ing. Reali2">ity i2">is yours because you ARE reali2">ity."

One ti2">ime, i2">I was explori2">ing my relati2">ionshi2">ip to the holy spi2">iri2">it and i2">it occurred to me that perhaps i2">I was mi2">isunderstandi2">ing by presumi2">ing he was "separate from me", si2">ince i2">I always heard hi2">im as a separate voi2">ice. And thi2">is i2">idea came to me that maybe he was not separate and that thi2">is separati2">ion between us wasn't there. Thi2">is seemed harmless enough but thi2">is opened me up to the i2">idea that i2">I was now "exposed" to the holy spi2">iri2">it wi2">ithout any defenses or blocks or separati2">ions or walls, and my ego di2">id not li2">ike that one bi2">it.

The ego i2">in me, whi2">ich was playi2">ing wi2">ith thi2">is i2">idea but not really droppi2">ing the deeper walls, i2">interpreted thi2">is to mean that the holy spi2">iri2">it had "access" to me (to my ego-i2">identi2">ifi2">ied self) and that thi2">is meant he could do anythi2">ing to me and i2">I would have no defense or way to stop i2">it. i2">I wasn't ready to accept thi2">is level of openness wi2">ithout the trust that's needed. i2">I felt that i2">if there was nothi2">ing to stop hi2">im, the fact he proves there i2">is no ego would di2">issolve me and was therefore *percei2">ived as* an attack or threat. Of course the holy spi2">iri2">it wasn't doi2">ing anythi2">ing of the sort but that's how i2">I i2">interpreted i2">it.

i2">Instantly, wi2">ithi2">in a spli2">it second, and wi2">ithout thi2">inki2">ing of i2">it at all, my mi2">ind attempted to push hi2">im away, or rather, to recoi2">il. To di2">istance myself from hi2">im by tryi2">ing to i2">increase the "gap" between us, tryi2">ing to hi2">ide deeper i2">in the body, and to try to go i2">into deni2">ial/resi2">istance/blockage to shut hi2">im out. The only defense really was the attempt to block my AWARENESS of hi2">im. Thi2">is happened really qui2">ickly and i2">I could really feel thi2">is recoi2">il i2">in fear. i2">It's not somethi2">ing i2">I "fi2">igured out" i2">it's just somethi2">ing i2">I di2">id automati2">ically. i2">I saw the need for a defense to keep me (my ego self) "safe" from thi2">is threat of uni2">ity. i2">I actually felt scared of what the holy spi2">iri2">it was goi2">ing to do to me.

Wi2">ithi2">in an hour, my head became congested, my ears started ri2">ingi2">ing, they became qui2">ite blocked, i2">I was starti2">ing to get si2">inus drai2">inage etc. Thi2">is came on really qui2">ickly. Of course, i2">I di2">id not recogni2">ize that i2">I had i2">induced thi2">is myself, or chosen i2">it. i2">I was doi2">ing what i2">is descri2">ibed here i2">in "si2">ickness i2">is a defense agai2">inst the truth":

"Si2">ickness i2">is not an acci2">ident. Li2">ike all defenses, i2">it i2">is an i2">insane devi2">ice for self-decepti2">ion. And li2">ike all the rest, i2">its purpose i2">is to hi2">ide reali2">ity, attack i2">it, change i2">it, render i2">it i2">inept, di2">istort i2">it, twi2">ist i2">it, or reduce i2">it to a li2">ittle pi2">ile of unassembled parts. The ai2">im of all defenses i2">is to keep the truth from bei2">ing whole. The parts are seen as i2">if each one were whole wi2">ithi2">in i2">itself.

Defenses are not uni2">intenti2">ional, nor are they made wi2">ithout awareness. They are secret magi2">ic wands you wave when truth appears to threaten what you would beli2">ieve. They seem to be unconsci2">ious but because of the rapi2">idi2">ity wi2">ith whi2">ich you choose to use them. i2">In that second, even less, i2">in whi2">ich the choi2">ice i2">is made, you recogni2">ize exactly what you would attempt to do, and then proceed to thi2">ink that i2">it i2">is done."

"Si2">ickness i2">is a deci2">isi2">ion. i2">It i2">is not a thi2">ing that happens to you qui2">ite unsought, whi2">ich makes you weak and bri2">ings you sufferi2">ing. i2">It i2">is a choi2">ice you make, a plan you lay when for an i2">instant truth ari2">ises i2">in your own deluded mi2">ind, and all your world appears to totter and prepare to fall. Now are you si2">ick that truth may go away, and threaten your establi2">ishments no more."

So by the ti2">ime the hour was up, my BODY was si2">ick. i2">I was not aware i2">I'd caused i2">it or the cause-effect relati2">ionshi2">ip of the event wi2">ith holy spi2">iri2">it versus what the body was doi2">ing. i2">I just thought i2">I was getti2">ing si2">ick out of the blue. i2">I started looki2">ing ELSEWHERE for causes, wonderi2">ing i2">if i2">it was somethi2">ing i2">I ate, somethi2">ing i2">I contracted, some emoti2">ions comi2">ing up, whatever. i2">I then proceeded to suffer wi2">ith blocked ears, trouble heari2">ing, ri2">ingi2">ing i2">in the ears, headaches, si2">inus congesti2">ion, for the next couple of days. And you can bet not one si2">ingle i2">idea of what caused i2">it was related to that event. i2">In effect, the defense i2">is put i2">in place to shut OUT awareness and thi2">is blockage causes you to not be AWARE that you CHOSE the defense for thi2">is exact purpose to try to make the threat go away.

After a couple days of sufferi2">ing - and my heari2">ing i2">issues were basi2">ically a symboli2">ic representati2">ion of "i2">I don't want to hear thi2">is truth", i2">I started tryi2">ing to fi2">igure out when i2">it started. i2">I reali2">ized that i2">it started ri2">ight around when i2">I was havi2">ing that i2">interacti2">ion wi2">ith the holy spi2">iri2">it. And then fortunately i2">I remembered that i2">it had fri2">ightened me. And so then i2">I was able to put two and two together and reali2">ized that, or at least was open to the possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity, that maybe i2">I had chosen thi2">is as a reacti2">ion to hi2">im. i2">I also was not on "speaki2">ing terms" wi2">ith the holy spi2">iri2">it at thi2">is poi2">int because i2">I was feeli2">ing afrai2">id and di2">id not feel safe or trusti2">ing of hi2">im, so he hadn't been sayi2">ing anythi2">ing.

i2">I started to tentati2">ively reali2">ize that i2">I needed to get past thi2">is fear. i2">I needed somehow to fi2">ind a way to re-approach the holy spi2">iri2">it agai2">in, wi2">ithout bei2">ing afrai2">id, havi2">ing some ki2">ind of TRUST, and to fi2">ind a way to relate to hi2">im i2">in terms of that openness to hi2">im wi2">ithout i2">it MEANi2">ING that i2">I was threatened or under attack. i2">I needed a di2">ifferent way of looki2">ing at i2">it so that i2">I wouldn't mi2">ispercei2">ive our "uni2">ity" as a dangerous thi2">ing. So i2">I became wi2">illi2">ing, and i2">I started to try to deli2">iberately trust and to take baby steps towards communi2">icati2">ing wi2">ith hi2">im agai2">in. And as i2">I di2">id, i2">I was wi2">illi2">ing to put asi2">ide the fear that had been i2">induced.

When i2">I di2">id thi2">is, i2">I saw clearly that i2">I had created thi2">is defense as a way to try to protect myself and out of fear. And si2">ince i2">I could now be wi2">illi2">ing to more carefully trust the holy spi2">iri2">it and not fear hi2">im, i2">it became obvi2">ious that i2">I had NO MORE NEED for thi2">is protecti2">ion. Li2">ike, i2">it was okay to let down my guard.

Wi2">ithi2">in an hour, all the symptoms vani2">ished completely.

"Heali2">ing wi2">ill flash across your open mi2">ind as peace and truth ari2">ise to take the place of war and vai2">in i2">imagi2">ini2">ings. "

"There wi2">ill be no di2">im fi2">igures from your dreams, nor thei2">ir obscure and meani2">ingless pursui2">its wi2">ith double purposes i2">insanely sought, remai2">ini2">ing i2">in your mi2">ind. i2">It wi2">ill be healed of all the si2">ickly wi2">ishes that i2">it tri2">ied to authori2">ize the body to obey."

"Now i2">is the body healed because the source of si2">ickness has been opened to reli2">ief. "

"No-one can heal unless he understands what purpose si2">ickness seems to serve. For then he understands as well i2">its purpose has no meani2">ing. Bei2">ing causeless and wi2">ithout a meani2">ingful i2">intent of any ki2">ind, i2">it cannot be at all. When thi2">is i2">is seen, heali2">ing i2">is automati2">ic. i2">It di2">ispels thi2">is meani2">ingless i2">illusi2">ion by the same approach that carri2">ies all of them to truth, and merely leaves them there to di2">isappear."

As we di2">ive deeply i2">into what i2">it means to be an i2">immortal bei2">ing, somethi2">ing suddenly becomes clear. i2">If we are i2">indeed i2">invulnerable, i2">inpenetrable, eternal, i2">incapable of even bei2">ing changed, or affected i2">in any way.... then how i2">is i2">it possi2">ible that there can be any ki2">ind of sufferi2">ing that i2">is a PART of us?

i2">If we are thi2">is PURE Li2">IFE, whi2">ich i2">is so ali2">ive i2">it i2">is completely devoi2">id of all traces of attack and si2">ickness and death, unable to be even modi2">ifi2">ied i2">in any way, completely permanent and absolute, how can i2">it BECOME anythi2">ing? How can any ki2">ind of sufferi2">ing be somethi2">ing we have i2">in us, or are made of?

Surely thi2">is means that i2">if there does seem to be some ki2">ind of sufferi2">ing - an upset feeli2">ing, some loss, some gui2">ilt, a fear, a si2">ickness, anythi2">ing at all whi2">ich i2">is a form of destructi2">ion, i2">it cannot be i2">INSi2">IDE of what we are. i2">It can't be modi2">ifyi2">ing the i2">inherent nature and substance of what we are. So i2">it has to be somehow separate or "outsi2">ide".

i2">If there i2">is for example a feeli2">ing of unhappi2">iness, we can't really accurately say "i2">I am unhappy." Because thi2">is means i2">I have become unhappi2">iness. i2">I have changed, and so i2">I am not unchangeable, and i2">I have transformed, and i2">I have modi2">ifi2">ied what i2">I am and how i2">I feel - no longer permanently happy, no longer joyful and at peace, but di2">isturbed and upset and defecti2">ive i2">in some way.

Thi2">is poi2">ints to the i2">idea that we i2">IDENTi2">IFY Wi2">ITH thi2">ings whi2">ich cannot be a part of us, and tend to i2">include them i2">in our defi2">ini2">iti2">ion of me, myself, i2">I, what i2">I am, what i2">I have, what i2">I feel, what i2">I experi2">ience. As though to say we ARE these thi2">ings, that they are a part of us. But they can't be.

The ego on the other hand i2">is a sense of confusi2">ion i2">in i2">identi2">ity, i2">in whi2">ich our mi2">ind has moved away from bei2">ing PURE Li2">IFE and has gone off the rai2">ils. i2">It's beli2">ievi2">ing that there are now quali2">iti2">ies and substances and contents to our self that God di2">id not put there. That we have changed and turned i2">into somethi2">ing less than whole, less than pure, less than perfect.

So the ego then has thi2">is sort of vi2">iew of BEi2">ING ONE Wi2">ITH thi2">ings whi2">ich are not of God. Bei2">ing one wi2">ith i2">illusi2">ions, wi2">ith pai2">in and mi2">isery, wi2">ith si2">ickness and death, wi2">ith sufferi2">ing, wi2">ith the body etc. i2">It regards them as part of i2">itself and tri2">ies to wear them - not just li2">ike a separate pi2">iece of clothi2">ing, but li2">ike... to be so merged wi2">ith i2">it that i2">it thi2">inks of i2">it li2">ike i2">it i2">is i2">its SELF. That you ARE a body.

The ego vi2">iew i2">is thi2">is smushi2">ing together of mi2">ind and form, where i2">identi2">ity becomes tangled up i2">in the thi2">ings whi2">ich are not of God. So now we start to feel li2">ike "i2">I feel upset" and "i2">I am i2">in pai2">in" and "i2">I am gui2">ilty" and so on. But thi2">is can't be true. We cannot BE these thi2">ings i2">in truth i2">if we are i2">immortal bei2">ings. They can't be a PART of our self, i2">included i2">in ourself, part of our nature or condi2">iti2">ion. They have to be separate thi2">ings, outsi2">ide of us, not even "ours" really.

i2">If we then look when ego i2">is flari2">ing up and there i2">is all manner of upset and hurt and emoti2">ions and pi2">ian comi2">ing out, we should do somethi2">ing whi2">ich seems to most humans would be i2">insane and unhealthy - to separate ourselves from i2">it. To say, i2">I am not sufferi2">ing, i2">I am not upset, i2">I am not weak, i2">I am not i2">in pai2">in, i2">I am not havi2">ing thi2">is happen to me, i2">I am not these sensati2">ions, i2">I am not these thoughts.

Because all of these forms of sufferi2">ing cannot actually BE - they are not ways of bei2">ing - they are just i2">illusi2">ions and dreams. What we are as i2">immortal bei2">ings cannot suffer, cannot have loss, cannot di2">ie. What we are cannot even really be unhappy - whi2">ich i2">is a form of death. We can't have gui2">ilt i2">in us because that's li2">ike sayi2">ing there's somethi2">ing wrong wi2">ith perfecti2">ion. And we can't i2">in fact really have anythi2">ing be a part of us that God di2">idn't put there.

So we have to sort out, and be careful, wi2">ith how we are i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing Wi2">ITH thi2">ings that are not of God, even the way we feel and thi2">ink. As an i2">immortal bei2">ing you DO NOT have upset feeli2">ings. i2">If there seem to be upset feeli2">ings, i2">it i2">is ego, and i2">it i2">is dri2">iven by a mi2">istaken beli2">ief about yourself bei2">ing not li2">ike God. There i2">is no pai2">in i2">in God and none i2">in me. There i2">is no unhappi2">iness i2">in God and none i2">in me.

"Whatever suffers i2">is not part of me." W248

"Whatever suffers i2">is not part of me. What gri2">ieves i2">is not myself. What i2">is i2">in pai2">in i2">is but i2">illusi2">ion i2">in my mi2">ind. What di2">ies was never li2">ivi2">ing i2">in reali2">ity, and di2">id but mock the truth about myself. Now i2">I di2">isown self-concepts and decei2">its and li2">ies about the holy Son of God. Now am i2">I ready to accept hi2">im back as God created hi2">im, and as he i2">is." UrW248

"No one can suffer loss unless i2">it be hi2">is own deci2">isi2">ion. No one suffers pai2">in except hi2">is choi2">ice elects thi2">is state for hi2">im. No one can gri2">ieve nor fear nor thi2">ink hi2">im si2">ick unless these are the outcomes that he wants, and no one di2">ies wi2">ithout hi2">is own consent. Nothi2">ing occurs but represents your wi2">ish, and nothi2">ing i2">is omi2">itted that you choose. Here i2">is your world, complete i2">in all detai2">ils. Here i2">is i2">its whole reali2">ity for you. And i2">it i2">is only here salvati2">ion i2">is." UrW152

"Father, Your holi2">iness i2">is mi2">ine. Your Love created me, and made my si2">inlessness forever part of You. i2">I have no gui2">ilt nor si2">in i2">in me, for there i2">is none i2">in You." UrW235L2

"i2">I am i2">in the li2">ikeness of my Creator. i2">I cannot suffer, i2">I cannot experi2">ience loss, and i2">I cannot di2">ie. i2">I am not a body. i2">I would recogni2">ize my reali2">ity today. i2">I wi2">ill worshi2">ip no i2">idols, nor rai2">ise my own self-concepts to replace my Self. i2">I am i2">in the li2">ikeness of my Creator. Love created me li2">ike i2">Itself." UrW84L2 "i2">I am the holy Son of God Hi2">imself.

i2">I cannot suffer; cannot be i2">in pai2">in;

i2">I cannot lose, nor can i2">I fai2">il to do

All that salvati2">ion asks." UrW191L7

"i2">I cannot suffer any loss or depri2">ivati2">ion or pai2">in because of who i2">I am." UrW58L5

"i2">I cannot be gui2">ilty because i2">I am a Son of God." UrW46L6

"The "self" that needs protecti2">ion i2">is not real. The body, valueless and hardly worth the least defense, need merely be percei2">ived as qui2">ite apart from you, and i2">it becomes a healthy, servi2">iceable i2">instrument through whi2">ich the mi2">ind can operate unti2">il i2">its usefulness i2">is over. Who would want to keep i2">it when i2">its usefulness i2">is done?" UrW135L9

Lately i2">I feel li2">ike i2">I have found a whole new sense of i2">identi2">ity, and that i2">I've di2">iscovered God.

i2">I have been dwelli2">ing on two workbook lessons, 91 and 92. They talk about how i2">I am not a body, and asks therefore, what am i2">I? The focus i2">is put on di2">iscoveri2">ing who i2">I really am i2">if i2">I am a not a li2">imi2">ited, separated self, and begi2">ins to rei2">inforce the vari2">ious attri2">ibutes of what must be my real self.

Then i2">in 92 i2">it bui2">ilds on thi2">is by suggesti2">ing that all the attri2">ibutes of my real self are actually shared wi2">ith God. That for example God's li2">ight i2">is my strength, that i2">I see i2">in God's li2">ight, that i2">I share God's mi2">ind, that my strength i2">is actually God i2">in me etc.

These to me seem to be a ki2">ind of two step leap i2">in i2">identi2">ity - 1) That i2">I am not a body and am somethi2">ing above and beyond thi2">is level and world, and 2) That all my real attri2">ibutes are actually PART OF GOD. That my actual self i2">is SHARED wi2">ith hi2">im and everythi2">ing true of my real self i2">is i2">INHERi2">ITED and si2">imultaneously one wi2">ith hi2">im.

That means that to clai2">im my real self, to be not a body or an ego, i2">I actually have to reali2">ize that i2">I am part of God hi2">imself, that everythi2">ing i2">I have comes from hi2">im, that there i2">is a strength and a power i2">IN me whi2">ich i2">is actually Hi2">IM. That i2">I am host to hi2">im, that he i2">is i2">in fact the li2">ife and the li2">ight i2">in me, and that i2">I can ki2">ind of step back i2">into hi2">im and merge wi2">ith hi2">im. Even my self, my soul, i2">is actually an extended part of God hi2">imself whi2">ich HE DWELLS i2">IN.

i2">I cannot really explai2">in i2">it but there has been a strange leap i2">in confi2">idence, sense of outward expressi2">ion, of certai2">inty and fearlessness, whi2">ich has suddenly erupted as a result of thi2">is. i2">It seems li2">ike a major shi2">ift i2">in who and what i2">I AM, away from "i2">I'll do thi2">is all by myself" to "God and i2">I wi2">ill do thi2">is together." A leap from exclusi2">ion to i2">inclusi2">ion, and from selfi2">ishness to shari2">ing.

i2">I've been havi2">ing some .. bri2">ight and clear vi2">iews of the world, i2">in whi2">ich i2">it looks qui2">ite beauti2">iful, whi2">ich seems to effortlessly come by affi2">irmi2">ing that all MY attri2">ibutes are actually God i2">in me. That i2">I see i2">in hi2">is li2">ight, thi2">ink wi2">ith hi2">is mi2">ind, that my strength i2">is hi2">is, that i2">I forgi2">ive wi2">ith hi2">is love, that i2">I SHARE wi2">ith hi2">im. And through thi2">is acknowledgement of hi2">im i2">in my mi2">ind, i2">I leap further to seei2">ing God i2">in everythi2">ing. And thi2">is i2">is also about TRUST.

i2">I have to say that the degree of seemi2">ing 'li2">ight' that these vi2">isi2">ions entai2">il i2">is far beyond anythi2">ing that any other course practi2">ice has ever revealed. And i2">it seems so si2">imply accessed through the acknowledgement of God i2">in me, and that my SELF i2">is embedded i2">in hi2">im and a part of hi2">im. i2">I am an extensi2">ion of God. Everythi2">ing i2">I am comes from hi2">im and i2">IS Hi2">IM!

By openi2">ing up to that, whi2">ich i2">is Wi2">ITHi2">IN myself, ki2">ind of behi2">ind myself, all of the sense of happi2">iness and love and power and li2">ight and so on just seems to swi2">itch on li2">ike a li2">ightbulb and flood my percepti2">ion wi2">ith 'forgi2">iveness'. Thi2">is i2">isn't an i2">intellectual exerci2">ise or a concept or theory. i2">It's an i2">immersi2">ive experi2">ience. i2">I am putti2">ing myself i2">into God's hands and am seei2">ing myself as uni2">ited wi2">ith hi2">is attri2">ibutes. That anythi2">ing i2">I have i2">is OF hi2">im and not of me.

What i2">I am i2">is not just myself. What i2">I am i2">isn't an i2">isolated, fenced-off me. The walls are droppi2">ing. What i2">I am i2">is shared wi2">ith the whole. What i2">I am i2">is gi2">iven to me by somethi2">ing much larger. And i2">it seems the blessi2">ings and gi2">ifts of God are FAR FAR FAR i2">in advance of any sense of "me and mi2">ine" that i2">I could possi2">ibly come up wi2">ith as a body-i2">identi2">ifi2">ied ego.

i2">It also seems so very si2">imple. Just steppi2">ing back and si2">inki2">ing i2">into a sense of self that i2">is made of God hi2">imself. Allowi2">ing myself to host hi2">im. Accepti2">ing that i2">I am what he has created me to be. Recogni2">izi2">ing not si2">imply that i2">I am some ki2">ind of spi2">iri2">itual self, but that i2">I ONLY have what God has PUT i2">in me, and what he has put i2">in me i2">is Hi2">IMSELF!

Thi2">is also leads to the recogni2">iti2">ion that everyone else, all other chi2">ildren of God, also have God i2">in them. And i2">I am seei2">ing thi2">is i2">in the course more and more. To attack another i2">is to attack God because they are host to God. To recogni2">ize that they are HOST to God, i2">is to recogni2">ize thei2">ir sacredness and to honor the power of God i2">in them.

i2">I cannot joi2">in wi2">ith another Wi2">ITHOUT joi2">ini2">ing wi2">ith God and the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">in them, because all must be i2">included! i2">I can't exclusi2">ively joi2">in wi2">ith just one person, to the exclusi2">ion of God. God has to be part of the joi2">ini2">ing because he i2">is the love. And hi2">is enti2">ire Ki2">ingdom must be there as well. To love uncondi2">iti2">ionally i2">is to love the whole sonshi2">ip at once.

To be an i2">isolated, separated, exclusi2">ive, body-i2">identi2">ifi2">ied self, i2">is to be HOSTAGE to the ego. You can be hostage to the ego or host to God. Thi2">is i2">is our choi2">ice. To host God i2">is to have hi2">im be i2">in you and through you, i2">in whi2">ich all he shares wi2">ith and gi2">ives to you, i2">is gi2">iven FOR you and FOR others. And thus does i2">it extend beyond yourself alone, because nothi2">ing i2">is for yourself alone.

"Would you be hostage to the ego or host to God? You wi2">ill accept only whom YOU i2">invi2">ite. You are free to determi2">ine who shall be your guest, and how long he shall remai2">in wi2">ith you." "i2">I who am host to God AM worthy of Hi2">im.

He Who ESTABLi2">ISHED Hi2">is dwelli2">ing-place i2">in me created i2">it as He would have i2">it be.

i2">It i2">is not needful that i2">I make i2">it ready for Hi2">im, but only that i2">I DO NOT i2">INTERFERE wi2">ith Hi2">is plan to RESTORE to me my own AWARENESS of my readi2">iness, whi2">ich i2">is eternal.

i2">I need ADD nothi2">ing to Hi2">is plan,

But to RECEi2">IVE i2">it, i2">I must be wi2">illi2">ing NOT to substi2">itute my own i2">IN PLACE of i2">it.""

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

"Thus wi2">ill He make you ready to acknowledge that you ARE host to God, and hostage to no-one and to nothi2">ing."

"For He i2">is Host to God. And you need but i2">invi2">ite Hi2">im i2">in Who i2">is there ALREADY, by recogni2">izi2">ing that Hi2">is Host i2">is One."

"We asked you once before, "Would you be hostage to the ego or host to God?" Let thi2">is questi2">ion be asked you by the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">in you, EVERY ti2">ime you make a deci2">isi2">ion. For every deci2">isi2">ion you make DOES answer thi2">is, and i2">invi2">ites sorrow or joy, accordi2">ingly."

"i2">It i2">is not true that you can make deci2">isi2">ions 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 i2">I di2">id."

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it enables you to PERCEi2">IVE THi2">IS WHOLENESS NOW. You can no more pray for yourselves alone than you can fi2">ind joy for yourself alone."

"And si2">ight of bodi2">ies becomes the si2">ign that sacri2">ifi2">ice i2">IS li2">imi2">ited, and somethi2">ing sti2">ill remai2">ins for you alone."

"The gi2">ifts you have are not for you alone. What He has come to offer you, you now must learn to gi2">ive."

"i2">It wi2">ill NOT be for you alone, for therei2">in lay i2">its mi2">isery. As i2">its UNholi2">iness kept i2">it as a thi2">ing apart, i2">its HOLi2">INESS wi2">ill become an offeri2">ing to everyone."

"Atonement i2">is for all, because i2">it i2">is the way to UNDO the beli2">ief that ANYTHi2">ING i2">is for you ALONE."

"Salvati2">ion i2">IS Hi2">is Wi2">ill BECAUSE you share i2">it. NOT for you alone, but for the Self whi2">ich i2">IS the Son of God."

Last ni2">ight i2">I was talki2">ing wi2">ith Jesus about letti2">ing go, and i2">I was thi2">inki2">ing the words "i2">I need to surrender" ....and Jesus i2">interjected and changed the word 'surrender' to "let go" .... so then i2">I repeated the modi2">ifi2">ied words. ... i2">I need to let go, except Jesus agai2">in i2">interjected and added on some words.... "tryi2">ing to be God".

And then i2">I was stunned. The reali2">izati2">ion that i2">I was tryi2">ing to be God seemed to 'fi2">it' my ego exactly, not just sendi2">ing me off on some other ego tangent or trai2">in of thought, but actually ki2">ind of 'di2">isabli2">ing' my enti2">ire ego for a moment. i2">I felt li2">ike i2">I had absolutely no come-back, and no defense. i2">It was true. i2">I felt i2">in myself not just a ki2">ind of mental unmaski2">ing of myself, but even ri2">ight down i2">into my torso, as i2">if i2">I've just been stri2">ipped bare of all defenses and could do nothi2">ing but be stunned from head to toe.

i2">It seemed bri2">illi2">iant, on Jesus's part, to make thi2">is observati2">ion. The ego - my ego - our egos - really are tryi2">ing to be God. Our attempt to separate ourselves off form God and to then have vari2">ious characteri2">isti2">ics that would normally be God's characteri2">isti2">ics, but wi2">ithout Hi2">im, i2">is TOTALLY us tryi2">ing to be God.

i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I am God when i2">I am i2">in charge, i2">in control, or havi2">ing domi2">ini2">ion over the world. i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I'm God by maki2">ing myself ri2">ight about thi2">ings. i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I'm God by maki2">ing deci2">isi2">ions on my own. i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I'm God by beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I know stuff and am i2">informed enough to di2">irect outcomes. i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I'm God when i2">I thi2">ink thi2">is i2">is 'my own li2">ife' and that i2">I am the one who i2">is i2">in charge of i2">it. But i2">it seems more fundamental than thi2">is even. i2">It runs to the ego's core.

The ego i2">is li2">iterally tryi2">ing to 'take over' and 'take away from God' everythi2">ing that God i2">is. i2">It wants to take away God's power, God's fullness, God's mi2">ind, God's reali2">ity, God's thought system, God's heart, God's eternal li2">ife, everythi2">ing. i2">It wants God not to have i2">it, whi2">ich means a choi2">ice for death, but at the same ti2">ime, i2">it wants to have all of thi2">is for i2">itself wi2">ithout any of the 'condi2">iti2">ions' that come wi2">ith these thi2">ings - the condi2">iti2">ions of Heaven. Or real responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity.

So i2">I am tryi2">ing to be God. Holy shi2">it. Thi2">is doesn't just speak to one porti2">ion of 'my li2">ife' but to ALL of i2">it. i2">I need to let go of tryi2">ing to be God. We all do. Can you feel how much of your ego self just 'drops away' when you say thi2">is?

i2">I let go of tryi2">ing to be God.

All the upti2">ight tensi2">ion and control and fear and attack and mani2">ipulati2">ion and engagement wi2">ith stori2">ies just falls away when we admi2">it thi2">is. And when we do let go of tryi2">ing to do thi2">is... i2">in surrender, and allow God to be God, and allow ourselves to be Hi2">is creati2">ion (not the other way around), the authori2">ity problem melts wi2">ith i2">it.

The authori2">ity problem i2">is us attempti2">ing to be God, whi2">ich causes us to be at war wi2">ith God, and i2">in constant struggles. Letti2">ing go of tryi2">ing to be the one who i2">is God lets go of all of that role-play... i2">it i2">is a heavenly surrender.

A. Someti2">imes ACi2">IM says thi2">ings li2">ike "God has not many Sons, but only One."

B. Someti2">imes ACi2">IM says thi2">ings li2">ike "We are the Sons of God Hi2">imself and therefore as holy as He i2">is"

Whi2">ich i2">is true? A? B? or Both? Why does Jesus say BOTH that God has only one son, AND then say that he has many of them? i2">Is Jesus a nut-job? i2">Is he i2">insane? Why i2">isn't he maki2">ing any SENSE? How are you goi2">ing to RESOLVE THi2">IS di2">ilemma?

Who wrote these two statements? Jesus di2">id. Do you trust Jesus? Do you accept hi2">is words? i2">Is he telli2">ing the truth or i2">is he a li2">iar? Does he KNOW what the truth i2">is? i2">Is i2">it possi2">ible he mi2">ight know what the truth i2">is MORE than you do, gi2">iven hi2">is total access to everythi2">ing i2">in total awareness?

Well. You have TWO opti2">ions of how you can deal wi2">ith Hi2">IM wri2">iti2">ing two SEEMi2">INGLY totally opposi2">ite statements, whi2">ich by the way are both true, unless Jesus i2">is an i2">idi2">iot. You can choose one of the followi2">ing:

1) What Jesus wrote i2">is true, and BOTH statements are true, and i2">I wi2">ill refuse to CHANGE i2">IT, and i2">I wi2">ill not change the meani2">ing of i2">it, and i2">I wi2">ill not try to fi2">it i2">it i2">into a di2">ifferent beli2">ief system, and i2">I wi2">ill not cut any of i2">it out, and i2">I wi2">ill not deny i2">it, and i2">I wi2">ill not attempt to di2">istort the meani2">ing, and i2">I wi2">ill not try to wri2">ite i2">it off, and i2">I wi2">ill not prefer one part over the other part, and i2">I wi2">ill not assi2">ign any of i2">it to the ego, and i2">I wi2">ill not accept that i2">it i2">is a contradi2">icti2">ion, and i2">I wi2">ill not vi2">iew one statement as more true than the other, EVEN i2">IF i2">I CAN'T SEE HOW THATS POSSi2">IBLE, because i2">I TRUST that JESUS KNOWS WHAT HE'S TALKi2">ING ABOUT. Maybe i2">I'll have FAi2">ITH i2">in Hi2">is word, and later i2">I'll fi2">ind a way to understand HOW i2">its possi2">ible that both statements are true, accepti2">ing the WHOLE STORY that He has presented.

OR...

2) i2">I wi2">ill deny what he wrote, he must be mad, he doesn't know what he's talki2">ing about, i2">I wi2">ill only accept PART of what he has wri2">itten, because i2">I CANNOT SEE HOW i2">its possi2">ible for BOTH of the statements to be true, so i2">instead of accepti2">ing Jesus's word, and si2">ince i2">I am better than Jesus because i2">I'm arrogant and wi2">ill not accept anythi2">ing unless i2">I can understand how i2">it makes sense, i2">I wi2">ill REFUSE TO ACCEPT that both parts are true, and wi2">ill i2">insi2">ist that only one or the other i2">is true, because that's the only way i2">I can make sense of i2">it, and i2">I refuse to CHANGE MY BELi2">IEFS, or to fi2">ind a way to MAKE i2">IT BE OKAY that both statements are true, because i2">I am a stubborn ass ego that can't let go of a narrow closed mi2">inded poi2">int of vi2">iew, or entertai2">in the open-mi2">inded possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity that there mi2">ight just be a WAY for BOTH of the statements to be si2">imultaneously true, EVEN i2">IF i2">I can't get my head around i2">it.

Now, whi2">ich would you prefer?

Trust that Jesus knows and i2">is telli2">ing the whole truth, or only accept HALF of what he says and sweep the other half under the carpet?

Mi2">iracles and supernatural i2">interventi2">ions occur more readi2">ily when there i2">is physi2">ical relaxati2">ion and a wi2">illi2">ingness to surrender and recei2">ive.

The act of not 'acti2">ing', of not transmi2">itti2">ing, of not even gi2">ivi2">ing, but si2">imply a wi2">illi2">ingness to let go and be open and RECEi2">IVE, i2">invi2">ites and allows Holy Spi2">iri2">it to access and help you.

i2">I have now over the past few months recei2">ived heali2">ing from the Holy Spi2">iri2">it on an almost dai2">ily basi2">is. And i2">I don't just mean he fi2">ixes some perceptual i2">issues. i2">I'm talki2">ing, supernatural power! Someti2">imes i2">it wi2">ill occur spontaneously even i2">if i2">I am i2">in publi2">ic, or anywhere that i2">I need i2">it, but Holy Spi2">iri2">it can be di2">iscreet and i2">is able to tone-down the vi2">isual si2">igns of thi2">is happeni2">ing (whi2">ich usually entai2">ils much shaki2">ing of body parts), lol.

Most readi2">ily i2">I am open to thi2">is happeni2">ing when layi2">ing i2">in bed ei2">ither towards sleepi2">ing or i2">in the morni2">ing. Typi2">ically Holy Spi2">iri2">it begi2">ins by si2">imply sayi2">ing ei2">ither "relax" or "surrender". Thi2">is could be i2">in the mi2">iddle of some rant or some other conversati2">ion and i2">is often unexpected and i2">I don't always clue-i2">in at fi2">irst that thi2">is means He i2">is goi2">ing to do somethi2">ing, but then i2">it begi2">ins.

Even i2">if i2">I am layi2">ing there relaxi2">ing, someti2">imes He knows that i2">I am not necessari2">ily letti2">ing go of a si2">ituati2">ion i2">in order to let Hi2">im help, and so he wi2">ill say "surrender". Thi2">is si2">ignals me that i2">I need to acti2">ively surrender.

To do thi2">is, i2">I wi2">ill repeat i2">in words, "i2">I surrender", several ti2">imes. At fi2">irst i2">I seem to say thi2">is slowly and wi2">ith gaps between, because i2">I am not yet very wi2">illi2">ing to let go. But i2">I noti2">ice that the heali2">ing really starts to flow when i2">I say i2">it qui2">ickly and i2">in qui2">ick successi2">ion, so that there i2">is no ti2">ime i2">in-between for my ego to get i2">in there and keep holdi2">ing on. "i2">I surrender, i2">I surrender, i2">I surrender." After sayi2">ing thi2">is several ti2">imes, Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill li2">ikely spontaneously acti2">ivate and begi2">in heali2">ing.

By surrenderi2">ing, what i2">I mean i2">is, havi2">ing a wi2">illi2">ingness to let go and gi2">ive up and stop fi2">ighti2">ing. i2">It's actually a 'feeli2">ing' i2">I get of li2">ike, how you'd feel i2">if you'd tri2">ied everythi2">ing and fai2">iled and just threw up your arms and admi2">itted defeat. i2">It's an openness, a gi2">ivi2">ing i2">in, and an admi2">itti2">ing. Admi2">itti2">ing the truth li2">iterally means "allowi2">ing the truth to come i2">in". Thi2">is i2">is why surrender i2">is apparently a Vi2">ITAL part of the mi2">iracle process, because i2">it means you're wi2">illi2">ing to put asi2">ide doi2">ing thi2">is yourself, and admi2">it that you cannot, and stop tryi2">ing to be God.

Then God comes.

Someti2">imes i2">I've heard Holy Spi2">iri2">it say, "come", and i2">I'm not sure i2">if thi2">is means for me to come to Hi2">im, but i2">I've also had Hi2">im basi2">ically put words i2">in my mouth as to what He wants me to say to Hi2">im to get thi2">ings flowi2">ing, whi2">ich i2">is cool. So i2">I wi2">ill say, "come Holy Spi2">iri2">it", "come i2">into me". Thi2">is i2">is an i2">invi2">itati2">ion. Also someti2">imes i2">I wi2">ill ask Hi2">im to joi2">in wi2">ith me or to help me to joi2">in wi2">ith Hi2">im.

i2">In my wi2">illi2">ingness to surrender, there i2">is much acti2">ivi2">ity whi2">ich i2">I'll descri2">ibe i2">in a moment. But i2">I've also found that i2">in addi2">iti2">ion to surrenderi2">ing and allowi2">ing Hi2">im to operate on me, i2">if i2">I am also acti2">ively doi2">ing some ki2">ind of forgi2">iveness duri2">ing thi2">is ti2">ime, li2">ike, really getti2">ing down to the truth that stuff i2">isn't real and i2">it hasn't happened and i2">I'm not a vi2">icti2">im and so on, thi2">is wi2">ill also acti2">ivate addi2">iti2">ional 'phases' of heali2">ing. So just when i2">I thi2">ink i2">it's ki2">ind of done, there'll be another whole wave of i2">it.

What almost always happens, i2">I'm fi2">indi2">ing, i2">is there are about 4 or so di2">ifferent expressi2">ions of Holy Spi2">iri2">it heali2">ing me. The fi2">irst one i2">is that my head li2">iterally starts to shake from si2">ide to si2">ide "vi2">iolently", i2">i.e. very very rapi2">idly, li2">ike a vi2">ibrati2">ion, and the speed of thi2">is can be so fast that i2">it's li2">ike just a really i2">intense vi2">ibrati2">ing, and i2">I have to trust that thi2">is i2">is safe (lol), whi2">ich i2">it i2">is. Thi2">is seems to di2">islodge... i2">I don't know what, from my head area. Thi2">is can last anywhere from a few seconds to up to 20 seconds or more. Then there wi2">ill often be a short pause, and then i2">it ki2">icks i2">into phase 2.

i2">In phase 2, all of a sudden whatever energy or whatever was drai2">ined from my head area flows down i2">into the belly area. i2">I suddenly start to experi2">ience muscle contracti2">ions i2">in that area, whi2">ich can be qui2">ite i2">intense. The muscles become so contracti2">ing that i2">it forces me to hunch over or partly si2">it up, and i2">in the really strong cases there i2">is such vi2">ibrati2">ional tensi2">ion i2">in the 'floor' of the abdomi2">inal area, that i2">it feels li2">ike an earthquake vi2">ibrati2">ing very deeply. Thi2">is wi2">ill go on for possi2">ibly 15-30 seconds dependi2">ing. As the energy or whatever clears, and He gets done, i2">I relax back down, and i2">I i2">immedi2">iately noti2">ice that ... just somethi2">ing has changed i2">in my experi2">ience.

Often i2">I i2">immedi2">iately noti2">ice that i2">I feel expanded, calm, peaceful and relaxed, and soft. i2">It feels really good. i2">It's as though somethi2">ing happened on the i2">insi2">ide of me and my whole awareness i2">is di2">ifferent. Someti2">imes after several rounds of thi2">is, per my wi2">illi2">ingness to i2">invi2">ite more and do more heali2">ing, i2">I have felt really really peaceful. i2">It also energi2">izes me somewhat but can also make me a li2">ittle ungrounded for a whi2">ile.

A thi2">ird way i2">it mani2">ifests i2">is that someti2">imes the energy or whatever goes out through my arms whi2">ich wi2">ill shake, someti2">imes qui2">ite aggressi2">ively. Someti2">imes thi2">is i2">is followed by a seri2">ies of belly contracti2">ions as well. A fourth way, whi2">ich actually i2">I thi2">ink was the fi2">irst way that i2">I started to experi2">ience thi2">is, was that gradually some ki2">ind of presence would begi2">in to fi2">ill me up from my feet upwards, causi2">ing the muscles to all become tensed all the way up my legs to my stomache, and then there would be much shaki2">ing and 'drai2">ini2">ing' where emoti2">ions and other energy from the upper torso would just seem to drai2">in out of me qui2">ickly.

i2">I have absolutely no i2">idea really what Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is doi2">ing. No i2">idea. i2">I don't know why Hi2">is presence causes the body to shake. i2">I have no clue why Hi2">is heali2">ing focuses around the head and later around the belly, other than that these are the two mai2">in area of nervous systems and the "two brai2">ins".

Si2">imi2">ilarly, i2">if i2">I ask Jesus to come i2">into my belly area when i2">I am havi2">ing i2">intense feeli2">ings, He wi2">ill do almost the same thi2">ing, resulti2">ing i2">in a complete undoi2">ing of that feeli2">ing, i2">its cause, and a state of happi2">iness and laughter at the end.

Also i2">I forgot there i2">is also another way that thi2">is mani2">ifests, and i2">it's to do wi2">ith i2">if i2">I am focussi2">ing my attenti2">ion on another person. i2">If i2">I am doi2">ing a forgi2">iveness about someone and i2">I am aski2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it to heal some part of them, i2">I wi2">ill start to experi2">ienci2">ing shaki2">ing and vi2">ibrati2">ions i2">in that area of MY body, someti2">imes qui2">ite i2">intensely, and someti2">imes i2">it's so unusual i2">in i2">its focus on that body part that there i2">is just no way i2">I could even concei2">ive of maki2">ing that body part move that way. Li2">ike i2">it could be a heali2">ing i2">in the lower back or somethi2">ing and i2">it's shaki2">ing all over the place but i2">if i2">I were to thi2">ink, how could i2">I make the back muscles shake i2">in just that one area li2">ike that, i2">it's just totally i2">impossi2">ible.

i2">I have been learni2">ing to trust that when i2">I do thi2">is for some other person, i2">it i2">is helpi2">ing them, but thi2">is i2">is an area of doubt for me, whi2">ich i2">I am sti2">ill worki2">ing on. i2">I have, however, noti2">iced that after some rounds of heali2">ing for someone else i2">in thi2">is way, they do appear to exhi2">ibi2">it si2">igns of SOMETHi2">ING havi2">ing changed i2">in thei2">ir experi2">ience, afterwards, through at least some ki2">ind of shi2">ift i2">in mood or renewed clari2">ity of awareness or even some physi2">ical si2">ide effects. Thi2">is i2">is especi2">ially an area that challenges me to trust because i2">I am not the reci2">ipi2">ient of the benefi2">its and i2">I cannot tell from my own sensati2">ions whether i2">it i2">is helpi2">ing or not.

Thi2">is has all has come about through SURRENDER. Also through trust. Just openi2">ing up to Holy Spi2">iri2">it and i2">invi2">iti2">ing Hi2">im to come i2">into me and to do whatever he wants to do... that alone i2">is a bi2">ig trust step at fi2">irst, because you don't know what mi2">ight happen. i2">I di2">id that numerous ti2">imes wi2">ith 'mi2">ilder' heali2">ings taki2">ing place before i2">it ever progressed to the i2">intense shaki2">ing. Another way to approach thi2">is i2">if you prefer, i2">is to just address God, "God, i2">I recei2">ive your heali2">ing love".... do that a few ti2">imes and tell me you don't feel some sense of love come around and i2">into you. Thi2">is also can be suffi2">ici2">ient to si2">ignal to Holy Spi2">iri2">it to allow heali2">ing love to flow i2">into you, as much as you are wi2">illi2">ing to recei2">ive i2">it. Recei2">ivi2">ing love from God takes seemi2">ingly a bi2">it more wi2">illi2">ingness than letti2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it run ri2">iot, maybe i2">it's a trust thi2">ing.

These are all acts of RECEi2">IVi2">ING, and they entai2">il that i2">I relax. i2">If i2">in the mi2">iddle of the heali2">ing i2">I start to ti2">ighten up and resi2">ist, He remi2">inds me to relax, because i2">it does seem to i2">interfere to some degree, whereby the shaki2">ing etc may stop or lessen i2">if i2">I start fi2">ighti2">ing i2">it. i2">I have had to learn to TRUST i2">it and not be afrai2">id of i2">it and to just let Hi2">im do whatever. i2">It i2">is often qui2">ite funny when my head i2">is shaki2">ing all over the place and my cheeks and mouth are flappi2">ing around and i2">I'm actually relaxed, i2">it's sort of fun!

i2">I look forward i2">in parti2">icular now to doi2">ing a pretty strong sessi2">ion of thi2">is for myself on the weekends, ei2">ither toward sleep or upon waki2">ing, but really Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">I'm fi2">indi2">ing out doesn't care about schedules and someti2">imes wi2">ill start doi2">ing the shakes even before i2">I really seem to be ready. i2">It's gotten to where even a sli2">ight 'hi2">int' to Hi2">im to do i2">it can ki2">ick i2">it i2">in, at any ti2">ime. i2">I beli2">ieve the same i2">is true of mi2">iracle performed for others - whi2">ich i2">is where thi2">is i2">is leadi2">ing, whereby we are to just spontaneously funnel the power of God wi2">ithout even thi2">inki2">ing about i2">it.

i2">I was watchi2">ing some vi2">ideos today of a pastor who performs many many many mi2">iracles and has ri2">isen the dead etc, and one of hi2">is teachi2">ings i2">is that you need to get the RECi2">IPi2">IENT of heali2">ing to surrender and relax a lot, i2">in order to RECEi2">IVE the full transformati2">ion and heali2">ing. Thi2">is seems to be key. i2">If the person i2">is i2">interferi2">ing and tryi2">ing to pray and do stuff at the same ti2">ime, that's actually a block. Recei2">ivi2">ing and transmi2">itti2">ing are two di2">ifferent functi2">ions, and the person recei2">ivi2">ing the heali2">ing needs to be i2">ideally i2">in a RECEi2">IVi2">ING mi2">indset.

So relax! Surrender a lot. Be wi2">illi2">ing. Have courage and trust and i2">invi2">ite Holy Spi2">iri2">it to come i2">into you. He i2">is wi2">illi2">ing and ready, He's just wai2">iti2">ing on YOU to be RECEPTi2">IVE. Thi2">is i2">is how you can recei2">ive your own heali2">ing mi2">iracles effortlessly. i2">I thi2">ink thi2">is i2">is actually EASi2">IER than shari2">ing mi2">iracles wi2">ith other people, whi2">ich i2">is a whole di2">ifferent dynami2">ic. But i2">I thi2">ink,... Holy Spi2">iri2">it may be about to reveal a new way of looki2">ing at that, based on surrender.

Let us know how you get on! Happy shaki2">ing. And remember, "He wi2">ill correct the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ions i2">if i2">I wi2">ill let Hi2">im, and i2">I choose to LET Hi2">IM"!!

i2">I thi2">ink half the battle wi2">ith all thi2">is spi2">iri2">itual development stuff, i2">is even bei2">ing able to recogni2">ize what stuff i2">is.

Li2">ike, for years i2">I had a lot of fear and anger and i2">I di2">id not even know i2">I had i2">it. i2">I di2">idn't recogni2">ize that thi2">is 'thi2">ing', thi2">is sensati2">ion, was actually ei2">ither of those. i2">I was si2">itti2">ing on a volcano and di2">idn't even reali2">ize i2">it. Someone could've sai2">id that i2">I was constantly i2">in fear and i2">I would've deni2">ied i2">it.

Si2">imi2">ilarly when i2">I'm bei2">ing ri2">ight, i2">I don't recogni2">ize i2">it AS bei2">ing ri2">ight, i2">I thi2">ink i2">it's somethi2">ing else. i2">I thi2">ink i2">I'm justi2">ifi2">ied or defendi2">ing myself or bei2">ing truthful or whatever, i2">I don't correctly associ2">iate that what i2">I'm doi2">ing i2">is bei2">ing ri2">ight.

Someti2">imes i2">it takes a whi2">ile to recogni2">ize that thi2">is 'thi2">ing' you've been doi2">ing or feeli2">ing all thi2">is ti2">ime, actually has a "label". Then you're li2">ike, you mean THi2">IS i2">is .... that?

We have trouble recogni2">izi2">ing thi2">ings for what they are, because we're decei2">ived by i2">illusi2">ions. We don't even recogni2">ize them AS i2">illusi2">ions, we thi2">ink they are reali2">ity or truth. We're walki2">ing around as i2">if we're already awake, already i2">in reali2">ity, already knowi2">ing what the truth i2">is, and yet bei2">ing very decei2">ived, heavi2">ily i2">in deni2">ial, and unaware of the whole pi2">icture.

Someti2">imes i2">I fi2">ind i2">I have to even redefi2">ine for myself what the 'meani2">ing' of somethi2">ing i2">is, because what i2">I thought i2">it was i2">isn't encompassi2">ing enough. Li2">ike, to recogni2">ize i2">I am tryi2">ing to be ri2">ight... i2">it doesn't stri2">ike me as tryi2">ing to be ri2">ight, i2">it's most li2">ike, i2">I'm defendi2">ing my ego, or i2">I'm putti2">ing up defenses... not qui2">ite what i2">I'd thi2">ink of as bei2">ing ri2">ight, but i2">it i2">is.

i2">It's because we don't recogni2">ize i2">illusi2">ions for what they are that we're unconsci2">ious. But comi2">ing to recogni2">ize them and SEE them correctly, bri2">ings awakeni2">ing. i2">If we could only see that thi2">is i2">illusi2">ion i2">isn't real and hasn't really happened, that there i2">is no ego and no death, we'd laugh at how si2">illy we were to ever take i2">it seri2">iously. i2">It's only our lack of awareness and clari2">ity that keeps us i2">in the dark.

Half the ti2">ime that i2">I need to do a forgi2">iveness i2">I don't even recogni2">ize that i2">I need to do a forgi2">iveness. i2">It could go on for days before i2">I reali2">ize, oh, i2">I guess i2">I could do a forgi2">iveness on thi2">is. lol

We get there eventually.

Years ago i2">I di2">id a mi2">iracle ki2">ind of by acci2">ident. i2">I di2">idn't even really know how i2">I di2">id thi2">is or why, i2">it just ki2">ind of happened.

i2">I had thi2">is box whi2">ich had coi2">ins i2">in i2">it. i2">I'd used up all the larger-denomi2">inati2">ion coi2">ins and there was only li2">ike 1 and 2 pence pi2">ieces left (Bri2">iti2">ish currency). i2">I knew there was basi2">ically nothi2">ing i2">in there besi2">ides thi2">is. i2">I'd si2">ifted through i2">it several ti2">imes and totally extracted all the good stuff.

But for some reason that day, i2">I needed a couple of `pounds`, and was for some reason i2">in a di2">ifferent state of mi2">ind. i2">I kept havi2">ing thi2">is feeli2">ing of i2">insi2">isti2">ing that there MUST be more money i2">in there somewhere. i2">I turned through the coi2">ins wi2">ith my fi2">ingers, looki2">ing for i2">it. For probably 30 seconds there was nothi2">ing, and i2">I knew from previ2">ious checks that i2">I wouldn't fi2">ind anythi2">ing. But, somethi2">ing i2">in me was becomi2">ing very i2">insi2">istent.

i2">I kept sayi2">ing to myself, there MUST be some money i2">in here. i2">I bui2">ilt up thi2">is ki2">ind of ... i2">I don't know i2">if expectati2">ion i2">is the word, i2">it wasn't li2">ike havi2">ing a sense of anti2">ici2">ipati2">ion and then wai2">iti2">ing, i2">it was more li2">ike, an i2">insi2">istence, or a demand. i2">I demanded that there be money, that thi2">is was TRUE, and that i2">it si2">imply must be. For some reason i2">I wasn't payi2">ing attenti2">ion to what my eyes were showi2">ing me, i2">I was defyi2">ing i2">it and i2">insi2">isti2">ing there must be somethi2">ing there.

i2">I don't know how i2">I managed to i2">ignore the ego at thi2">is poi2">int, because normally i2">I would've been li2">ike, well, i2">I know there i2">is no hi2">igher denomi2">inati2">ions i2">in there, i2">I would trust my eyes and trust my previ2">ious experi2">iences and just stop ri2">ight there. But thi2">is ti2">ime for some reason i2">I was more mi2">iracle mi2">inded, and kept on probi2">ing the pi2">ile of coi2">ins i2">insi2">isti2">ing that there must be decent money i2">in there.

And then, suddenly, two gold-colored 1-pound coi2">ins suddenly appeared out of nowhere. These are i2">in stri2">iki2">ing contrast to the other coi2">ins because the 1 and 2 pence pi2">ieces are a dark brown bronze color. The shi2">iny gold-colored coi2">ins were suddenly there at my fi2">ingerti2">ips. They di2">idn't show up because they were hi2">idi2">ing, they si2">imply di2">id not exi2">ist before. But somehow, they suddenly appeared. They mani2">ifested out of thi2">in ai2">ir.

i2">I thi2">ink at the ti2">ime my mi2">indset di2">idn't seem that phased by thi2">is, li2">ike i2">it seemed ki2">ind of natural or somethi2">ing. i2">It di2">idn't shock me. i2">I also di2">id not repeat i2">it, or even attempt to. i2">It di2">idn't seem out of the ordi2">inary, i2">it's just how i2">I was functi2">ioni2">ing somehow. i2">It seemed to make sense and i2">I just used the money as i2">intended. i2">It hasn't been unti2">il looki2">ing back on the event that i2">I reali2">ized more that thi2">is was a mi2">iraculous mani2">ifestati2">ion and that i2">I was doi2">ing somethi2">ing wi2">ith my mi2">ind whi2">ich was not typi2">ical.

Thi2">is really i2">is the ti2">ip of the i2">iceberg of what the mi2">ind can do. i2">It's goi2">ing to be fun openi2">ing up to more of thi2">is.

Some mi2">iracle-worki2">ing basi2">ics are embedded i2">in thi2">is story....

1) expecti2">ing/demandi2">ing/i2">insi2">isti2">ing/knowi2">ing/requi2">iri2">ing that the result must happen

2) i2">ignori2">ing all "better judgement" or ego knowledge or even vi2">isual evi2">idence

3) bei2">ing persi2">istent and consi2">istent and not taki2">ing no for an answer - you have to ki2">ind of resolve to be "done wi2">ith" tolerati2">ing the condi2">iti2">ions that are present and resolve to be 100% determi2">ined that i2">it MUST change.

Jesus has sai2">id i2">in the Course that when the mi2">ind i2">is used to focus thought, combi2">ined wi2">ith strong/fi2">irm beli2">ief, a huge surge of power results whi2">ich has the power to li2">iterally move mountai2">ins. Bri2">ing i2">it on! Thi2">is i2">is what mi2">iracles really are all about. i2">Ignori2">ing the ego and bri2">ingi2">ing forth supernatural results.

So there i2">I was, doi2">ing somethi2">ing whi2">ich i2">I was feeli2">ing gui2">ilty about. But i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize i2">I was feeli2">ing gui2">ilty. i2">Instead, i2">I noti2">iced i2">I started havi2">ing fearful thoughts. Except, i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize they were fearful thoughts. But by that poi2">int, i2">I seemed to have no di2">irect awareness of feeli2">ing gui2">ilty, only that i2">I felt uncomfortable and that somethi2">ing wasn't ri2">ight.

i2">I couldn't get my ego to stop maki2">ing up thoughts about thi2">is thi2">ing, or bri2">ingi2">ing i2">it back up, or i2">imagi2">ini2">ing i2">it happeni2">ing. i2">I thought fear was the problem so i2">I started worki2">ing on tryi2">ing to undo the fear, whi2">ich helped to some degree, but i2">it wouldn't stop. My ego kept recreati2">ing thoughts about i2">it.

So i2">I had to stop and step back, and ask myself, what i2">is happeni2">ing here mytaphysi2">ically? i2">If i2">I am afrai2">id.. oh, i2">it must mean that i2">I am gui2">ilty. Because all fear comes from gui2">ilt. Wi2">ithout gui2">ilt there i2">is no basi2">is for fear, because there i2">is no puni2">ishment to be afrai2">id of. Suddenly the gui2">ilt came back i2">into my awareness and i2">I reali2">ized i2">I di2">id i2">in fact feel gui2">ilty. Thi2">is gui2">ilt was mani2">ifesti2">ing as fearful thoughts.

So then i2">I set about undoi2">ing thi2">is gui2">ilt, whi2">ich at fi2">irst di2">idn't seem easy and i2">I di2">idn't beli2">ieve i2">it. Somehow because i2">I felt gui2">ilt, i2">I felt li2">ike i2">I was supposed to be gui2">ilty. i2">I felt li2">ike i2">I deserved to be gui2">ilty or that what i2">I was doi2">ing was wrong. But as i2">I looked i2">into thi2">is, i2">I had to ask myself whether God would fi2">ind me gui2">ilty. And the answer to thi2">is had to be a resoundi2">ing no.

i2">It's not possi2">ible for God to condemn or accuse or to fi2">ind me gui2">ilty for anythi2">ing. But there i2">I was, sti2">ill feeli2">ing gui2">ilty, and sti2">ill feeli2">ing as though i2">I was supposed to be gui2">ilty. i2">It seemed the gui2">ilt was justi2">ifi2">ied. i2">It felt li2">ike shame. i2">It felt li2">ike whatever i2">I was doi2">ing called for gui2">ilt. Of course there was a sense of si2">in behi2">ind thi2">is, because i2">it's only possi2">ible to be gui2">ilty i2">if you beli2">ieve you si2">inned, and you can only beli2">ieve you si2">inned i2">if you do not beli2">ieve you are i2">innocent.

i2">It seemed odd though, that the enti2">ire foundati2">ion for thi2">is i2">idea of "you should be gui2">ilty", really had no basi2">is. God doesn't fi2">ind us gui2">ilty. God does not for one second see us as gui2">ilty, ever, for anythi2">ing. So i2">I had to look at thi2">is. Apparently i2">I had bought i2">into thi2">is i2">idea that gui2">ilt - or a gui2">ilty consci2">ience - i2">is somehow natural or normal. That we're supposed to feel thi2">is way. That i2">it's a si2">ign to us that we have done somethi2">ing wrong.

i2">It's as i2">if gui2">ilt i2">is a deserved puni2">ishment. i2">It's as i2">if the gui2">ilt says, "there i2">is somethi2">ing wrong wi2">ith you", rather than, stoppi2">ing to questi2">ion whether there i2">is somethi2">ing wrong wi2">ith the gui2">ilt. And as i2">it turns out, there i2">IS somethi2">ing wrong wi2">ith the gui2">ilt. The gui2">ilt i2">itself i2">is false!

i2">If God i2">is not fi2">indi2">ing me gui2">ilty, there i2">is actually somethi2">ing wrong about bei2">ing gui2">ilty. Bei2">ing gui2">ilty i2">isn't correct or rati2">ional or justi2">ifi2">ied. i2">It's actually a mi2">istake. An error. We're actually doi2">ing somethi2">ing wrong when we go i2">into gui2">ilt. Gui2">ilt i2">is not love. God does not fi2">ind us gui2">ilty so i2">if we're feeli2">ing gui2">ilty, even i2">if we're pouti2">ing and feeli2">ing ashamed and upset and li2">ike we deserve i2">it, we're actually goi2">ing agai2">inst God's wi2">ill.

Gui2">ilt i2">is nothi2">ing but another way to li2">ick our wounds and pretend we di2">idn't want to do what we di2">id want to do. Thi2">is justi2">ifi2">ies the gui2">ilt, keeps i2">it, makes out that we deserve i2">it, and then we proceed to the next step of maki2">ing i2">it unconsci2">ious by turni2">ing i2">it i2">into fear of puni2">ishment. i2">If we're bei2">ing gui2">ilty, even though i2">it feels awful, we're actually bei2">ing egoti2">isti2">ical, we're bei2">ing selfi2">ish, and we're tryi2">ing to make out that we have regret or remorse or "normal" shame, as i2">if we recogni2">ize that we di2">id somethi2">ing wrong and di2">id not mean to do i2">it. i2">It's a bullshi2">it li2">ie.

There i2">is nothi2">ing noble or moral or ethi2">ical, nor i2">is i2">it a si2">ign of a healthy consci2">ience, to be gui2">ilty. God does not fi2">ind us gui2">ilty, ever. Not ever. For any reason. God's judgement i2">is that we are eternally i2">innocent and we have not si2">inned and we cannot si2">in. That's VERY di2">ifferent to the ego's plan to make us gui2">ilty for stuff. So now thi2">is bri2">ings gui2">ilt i2">ITSELF i2">into questi2">ion. The enti2">ire i2">idea of gui2">ilt i2">is false!

We are i2">in fact never supposed to feel gui2">ilty. i2">If we do, we're putti2">ing on a show, nothi2">ing short of vi2">icti2">imhood, where we're pretendi2">ing to regret our acti2">ions whi2">ile i2">in fact secretly we are deli2">ighted at havi2">ing made God suffer. Gui2">ilt i2">is a li2">ie, i2">it has NO MERi2">IT whatsoever, i2">it i2">is NOT supposed to keep us i2">in check, and i2">it i2">is not grounds for behavi2">ior modi2">ifi2">icati2">ion. i2">It i2">is enti2">irely an ego creati2">ion, a delusi2">ion, desi2">igned to mani2">ipulate and hi2">ide the truth.

So i2">I found thi2">is very i2">interesti2">ing. i2">I had to open up to the truth as gi2">iven by God... how God sees me. God sees me as i2">innocent. i2">I am NOT gui2">ilty for doi2">ing what i2">I've done. Even i2">if every rule under the sun says i2">I should be.

Now of course, we have to be careful wi2">ith level confusi2">ion here. Thi2">is does not justi2">ify suddenly goi2">ing out and doi2">ing despi2">icable thi2">ings. i2">If we're truly comi2">ing from love we wi2">ill act lovi2">ingly not recklessly or harmfully. And i2">in fact i2">I heard my ego starti2">ing to jump i2">in on thi2">is, tryi2">ing to get me thi2">inki2">ing that, well... i2">if i2">I'm not gui2">ilty for doi2">ing somethi2">ing li2">ike thi2">is, then i2">I can surely do whatever i2">I want wi2">ith no remorse... well, that too i2">is ego bullshi2">it. That's level confusi2">ion and the ego tryi2">ing to bend the law of God to i2">its purposes.

We are to be di2">irected by God's love, i2">informed by God's love, gui2">ided by God's love, to li2">ife wi2">ithi2">in God's love, and to act from God's love. We are i2">innocent and holy, uncondi2">iti2">ionally, even i2">if we may have seemed to do somethi2">ing that WE thi2">ink (our ego thi2">inks) i2">is worthy of condemnati2">ion, a label of si2">in, or justi2">ifi2">icati2">ion for puni2">ishment. There i2">is NO VALUE i2">in bei2">ing gui2">ilty. There i2">is no meri2">it. i2">It does not make people well behaved. i2">It makes people separate from God, i2">it makes people unlovi2">ing, and i2">it confuses truth for li2">ies.

Gui2">ilt i2">is not love. Gui2">ilt i2">is not real remorse. Gui2">ilt i2">is a li2">ie.

i2">I am not gui2">ilty. You are not gui2">ilty. Gui2">ilt i2">is fake. There i2">is no such thi2">ing as real justi2">ifi2">ied gui2">ilt. i2">It i2">is part of the ego and therefore i2">it i2">is a li2">ie. i2">In God's Ki2">ingdom there i2">is only i2">innocence and the Son of God i2">is free.

When i2">I had an awakeni2">ing experi2">ience i2">in the presence of God, i2">it was so profound. i2">I had no i2">idea i2">it was goi2">ing to happen and had no i2">idea that God would be so lovi2">ing, gentle, soft and joyful. i2">I especi2">ially di2">id not know that God was not far away, but ri2">ight under my own ski2">in.

i2">I was aware that God was real and that i2">I was becomi2">ing merged wi2">ith Chri2">ist and that my ego self was just about goi2">ing to di2">isappear. i2">I felt myself "pull back" from the dream as though snappi2">ing out of i2">it, i2">into a state of such i2">intense awareness the li2">ikes of whi2">ich i2">I had no i2">idea was possi2">ible. i2">I thought i2">I was awake every day of the week when i2">I got up i2">in the morni2">ing, but thi2">is was a whole other level of wakefulness.

Later, when i2">I had to go back to work, i2">it was surpri2">isi2">ingly bi2">izarre how i2">I seemed to be aware of somethi2">ing as though i2">it was totally obvi2">ious, and yet nobody else seemed to be aware of i2">it. i2">I couldn't fi2">igure out why they di2">idn't know about i2">it.

They acted li2">ike they were i2">in some ki2">ind of unconsci2">ious sleep, seemi2">ingly awake but somehow not, totally obli2">ivi2">ious to the presence of God whi2">ich was everywhere. i2">It was li2">ike there was thi2">is huge elephant i2">in the room that i2">I was aware of, and nobody else even had the sli2">ightest i2">idea that i2">it was there.

Tryi2">ing to i2">interact wi2">ith people was very peculi2">iar because i2">I had to sort of pretend to be at thei2">ir level, and all the thi2">ings they thought were i2">important were not i2">important at all. i2">It was ki2">ind of funny how fi2">ixated on "small stuff" they were.

i2">It was li2">ike looki2">ing i2">in on the scene from outsi2">ide of i2">it, watchi2">ing the people go about thei2">ir li2">ives seemi2">ingly normally but as though they were half asleep, not even reali2">izi2">ing what they weren't reali2">izi2">ing.

As i2">I "fell back asleep" over the followi2">ing weeks, i2">I returned to the same state of mi2">ind as them, more or less, and once agai2">in was not aware of the presence of God. At thi2">is ti2">ime was qui2">ite devastati2">ing and i2">I had a huge sense of loss and gri2">ief.

But from ti2">ime to ti2">ime, God pops i2">in to say hello and i2">I gradually i2">inch my way back to an awareness that i2">I now know i2">is possi2">ible. But i2">I can at least understand that when we do wake up, i2">it's goi2">ing to be a bi2">it bi2">izarre bei2">ing i2">in a world where almost everyone i2">is sti2">ill sleepi2">ing. i2">I guess we'll have to ti2">iptoe qui2">ietly.

i2">I have been noti2">ici2">ing i2">in myself lately that i2">I keep bei2">ing judgemental. My thoughts feel li2">ike judgements. Even just basi2">ic thoughts of "what somethi2">ing i2">is" feels li2">ike a judgement. i2">I wondered to myself why i2">I seem to be judgi2">ing all the ti2">ime. i2">I hadn't reali2">ized just how judgmental i2">I seem to be all the ti2">ime.

Thi2">is could be i2">in the form of just havi2">ing some opi2">ini2">ion about everythi2">ing. i2">It di2">idn't even necessari2">ily need to be i2">in terms of anger or projecti2">ing blame, just a ki2">ind of i2">incessant "beli2">ievi2">ing i2">I know". Just constantly and consi2">istently labelli2">ing everythi2">ing i2">in terms of what i2">I beli2">ieve i2">it means.

i2">I would just keep labeli2">ing everythi2">ing i2">in course terms. "That's an i2">illusi2">ion", "They're level confused", "Thi2">is i2">is unreal", etc. i2">I seemed to be just usi2">ing the whole course to add a layer of nami2">ing and shami2">ing to everythi2">ing i2">I was aware of.

i2">I noti2">iced also that i2">I couldn't seemi2">ingly just look at somethi2">ing wi2">ithout "coursi2">ifyi2">ing i2">it". i2">I couldn't just enjoy somethi2">ing or do normal acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies wi2">ithout havi2">ing to have an ACi2">IM commentary runni2">ing alongsi2">ide i2">it. Just constantly tryi2">ing to "counteract" the world and everythi2">ing i2">I see wi2">ith statements, tryi2">ing to deny i2">it, tryi2">ing to change i2">it, tryi2">ing to push i2">it away.

Thi2">is also seems to be ti2">ied i2">into a general sense of unhappi2">iness about everythi2">ing. My ego would someti2">imes really flare up wi2">ith attack thoughts whi2">ich clearly were attempts to i2">increase separati2">ion. i2">It i2">increased a sense of bei2">ing alone, and further justi2">ifi2">ied a sort of seemi2">ing "bi2">itterness" about the world. i2">It ki2">ind of felt li2">ike ki2">ind of sli2">ippi2">ing down further i2">into hell rather than ri2">isi2">ing out of i2">it.

i2">I also have been growi2">ing weary of ACi2">IM, qui2">ite honestly. i2">I've chewed on i2">its words and metaphysi2">ics and have wri2">itten about i2">it to such an extent that i2">I was becomi2">ing ti2">ired of i2">it. Ti2">ired of thi2">inki2">ing about i2">it. Li2">ike i2">I'd done i2">it all and seen i2">it all and there was nothi2">ing left to fi2">igure out. As i2">if fi2">iguri2">ing i2">it out, or understandi2">ing i2">it, was the whole poi2">int.

i2">I wanted some ki2">ind of more di2">irect, si2">impli2">ifi2">ied experi2">ience. Somethi2">ing more practi2">ical that works. Somethi2">ing more di2">irect, that di2">idn't have a layer of i2">interpretati2">ion or second-hand thi2">inki2">ing alongsi2">ide i2">it. i2">I di2">idn't want more affi2">irmati2">ions or course statements flyi2">ing around i2">in my mi2">ind. i2">I di2">idn't want just another commentary or people just parroti2">ing the course's words as i2">if knowi2">ing what i2">it means. i2">I and i2">I di2">idn't want to keep doi2">ing forgi2">iveness on the basi2">is of some bunch of statements, tryi2">ing to use words to fend off ego attacks.

i2">I had to step away from all thi2">is for a bi2">it to just settle down and get a sense of somethi2">ing more basi2">ic and si2">imple and fundamental. And thi2">is i2">is when i2">I started openi2">ing up to wanti2">ing the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to i2">inform me of a better way. i2">I wanted to see thi2">ings how he sees thi2">ings and to joi2">in wi2">ith hi2">im more, to just very si2">imply take some small li2">ittle step that would be enough to fi2">ix my mi2">ind wi2">ithout all the psychobabble. Some ki2">ind of si2">imple somethi2">ing i2">I could just "do" that would produce a happi2">ier experi2">ience wi2">ithout all the course crap alongsi2">ide i2">it.

i2">I saw that havi2">ing conversati2">ions about the course just wasn't really worki2">ing. Everyone's just talki2">ing about i2">it. We use i2">its statements as i2">if they are magi2">ic wands. But i2">I wasn't seei2">ing a sati2">isfyi2">ing effect from thi2">is. Just fi2">iguri2">ing out what i2">it means and repeati2">ing i2">its words di2">idn't do much. i2">I di2">idn't want to be just another parrot regurgi2">itati2">ing the same stuff whi2">ile stayi2">ing enti2">irely confi2">ined i2">in thi2">is same "way" of tryi2">ing to apply i2">it. i2">I wanted somethi2">ing much closer to my bei2">ing, that i2">I di2">idn't have to thi2">ink about. Somethi2">ing much more basi2">ic and i2">inti2">imate that i2">I could "li2">ive" wi2">ithout mental gymnasti2">ics.

Thi2">is i2">is when i2">I started to di2">iscover that i2">I was i2">in general layi2">ing an enti2">ire i2">interpretati2">ion of everythi2">ing on top of i2">it. Thi2">is i2">interpretati2">ion was based on my thi2">inki2">ing that i2">I knew what thi2">ings were. An attempt to understand i2">it. i2">I saw that i2">I was gi2">ivi2">ing everythi2">ing meani2">ing through thi2">is i2">interpretati2">ion. i2">I was deci2">idi2">ing that thi2">ings sucked or were negati2">ive and was then reacti2">ing to my own deci2">isi2">ion as to what i2">I thought i2">it was. My i2">interpretati2">ion of everythi2">ing was bei2">ing mi2">istaken for the thi2">ing i2">itself.

So then i2">I consi2">idered the fact that every si2">ingle ti2">ime that i2">I was less than happy i2">in any way, i2">it was a part of thi2">is "way" that i2">I was i2">interpreti2">ing. i2">I was fi2">ilteri2">ing or translati2">ing or changi2">ing, twi2">isti2">ing, whatever was "out there", i2">into some ki2">ind of deci2">ided-upon "versi2">ion" that i2">I was then experi2">ienci2">ing as my "percepti2">ion of i2">it". Because i2">if you remember, "percepti2">ion i2">is a result not a cause" and "projecti2">ion makes percepti2">ion".

i2">It's really what i2">I project that produces perceptual i2">issues. i2">If i2">I percei2">ived a result or conclusi2">ion of "unhappy", i2">I must have projected and wanted that. i2">If i2">I was i2">interpreti2">ing that somethi2">ing happeni2">ing "meant" that i2">I should be afrai2">id, i2">I must've deci2">ided that i2">it meant thi2">is. i2">I gave i2">it thi2">is meani2">ing. And thi2">is meani2">ing changed my percepti2">ion and produces "experi2">iences" or effects whi2">ich were generally unpleasant.

i2">In the truest sense, i2">I was doi2">ing thi2">is to myself, as i2">in the secret of salvati2">ion, because i2">it was thi2">is whole "layer" of i2">interpretati2">ion, comi2">ing i2">in between me and the world so to speak, that was responsi2">ible for causi2">ing my "experi2">ience" of the world to be faulty. i2">I was wi2">illi2">ing to consi2">ider that any ti2">ime i2">I was not happy i2">I MUST have mi2">is-i2">interpreted and had come up wi2">ith some ki2">ind of Mi2">ISTAKEN opi2">ini2">ii2">ion about what i2">it MEANS.

i2">I had to be wi2">illi2">ing to recogni2">ize that i2">it was my chosen i2">interpretati2">ion that was enti2">irely responsi2">ible for the "effects" of that i2">interpretati2">ion upon myself, the seemi2">ing ego reacti2">ions or fears or upset emoti2">ions or any ki2">ind of annoyance or di2">isturbance. All of my sufferi2">ing was really rooted i2">in that layer of i2">interpreti2">ing, NOT i2">in what li2">ied "beyond i2">it" as the world. And that meant that i2">I was maki2">ing a lot of mi2">istaken i2">interpretati2">ions, resulti2">ing i2">in a lot of unhappi2">iness.

Li2">ight a li2">ight-swi2">itch, i2">I then found that si2">imply by recogni2">izi2">ing i2">I had made an i2">interpretati2">ion, and just bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to admi2">it that i2">it was the enti2">ire reason why i2">I was not happy, my mi2">ind would become open to just "letti2">ing that i2">interpretati2">ion go." i2">I di2">idn't seem to have to do anythi2">ing else for thi2">is to happen. As they say, "i2">illusi2">ions recogni2">ized must di2">isappear." My i2">interpretati2">ion i2">IS the i2">illusi2">ion. i2">It was a way of turni2">ing "reali2">ity" i2">into somethi2">ing i2">it's not. Just recogni2">izi2">ing i2">it as an i2">illusory, self-made, made-up, fi2">iltered "vi2">iew", was enough to make i2">it di2">isappear.

As soon as i2">it would just di2">isappear, i2">immedi2">iately my mi2">ind would li2">ight up wi2">ith li2">ight and happi2">iness. i2">It would seem as though a hi2">igher me, rooted i2">in the "back" of my mi2">ind, would suddenly shi2">ine outward. i2">It was as i2">if secretly behi2">ind all my ego upset sense of self, there was thi2">is hi2">igher me that was just always happy and fi2">illed wi2">ith li2">ight and wasn't taki2">ing anythi2">ing seri2">iously. i2">It seemed to already be there. i2">I di2">idn't i2">invent i2">it myself. Perhaps thi2">is was the real me.

Thi2">is has started a revoluti2">ion i2">in my mi2">ind and i2">in my outlook and i2">in my way of experi2">ienci2">ing the world. i2">It i2">isn't a forgi2">iveness based on some ki2">ind of long-wi2">inded, elaborate story that i2">I have to tell myself, tryi2">ing to deprogram myself, tryi2">ing to counteract percei2">ived problems wi2">ith a long li2">itany of affi2">irmati2">ive statements, or tryi2">ing to remember course pri2">inci2">iples, or tryi2">ing to grasp at straws to make i2">it go away.

i2">It was very very si2">imple. i2">It was much more a sort of change i2">in how i2">I EXPERi2">IENCE what's goi2">ing on. And that was far more i2">immedi2">iate. More li2">ike just a ki2">ind of atti2">itude change. Not somethi2">ing "thought about", or arri2">ived at through understandi2">ing, or made out of compli2">icated metaphysi2">ics, or logi2">ically deduced. i2">It was a ki2">ind of forgi2">iveness that was just a much more i2">inti2">imate matter of psychologi2">ical engagement.

Ei2">ither i2">I was i2">interpreti2">ing or i2">I wasn't. Ei2">ither i2">I had chosen to i2">invent some ki2">ind of "meani2">ing" for somethi2">ing, or i2">I had let i2">it go. Ei2">ither i2">I was fi2">ilteri2">ing and beli2">ievi2">ing i2">I knew what somethi2">ing was, or i2">I was just wi2">illi2">ing to stop doi2">ing i2">it. i2">It wasn't a matter of replaci2">ing i2">it wi2">ith somethi2">ing or justi2">ifyi2">ing i2">it or explai2">ini2">ing i2">it or wri2">iti2">ing a book about i2">it. i2">It was ki2">ind of li2">ike just steppi2">ing back. Getti2">ing out of my analysi2">is. Stoppi2">ing my self-made attempt to determi2">ine what somethi2">ing i2">is.

The bi2">izarre thi2">ing i2">is just how effortless i2">it i2">is and how i2">immedi2">iately a whole world of low-level ego experi2">ience, sufferi2">ing, upset and darkness, i2">is i2">immedi2">iately overruled by a much much hi2">igher bri2">ight li2">ight of happi2">iness and li2">ightness.

i2">It almost seems wrong, i2">in that the li2">ight-heartedness of i2">it doesn't even seem to care to "address"the many doubts and fears and concerns that the ego had. i2">It just sort of leaps above i2">it and pays no attenti2">ion to i2">it. Li2">ike, who would have thought THAT would be a soluti2">ion? Not to change the ego but to just get OUT of i2">it? To just leave the desert wi2">ithout even deali2">ing wi2">ith all the many loose ends and questi2">ioni2">ing fears.

i2">I thi2">ink for a ton of years now i2">I've generally been locked i2">into the ego mi2">ind. Regardless of how lofty my thoughts have been, and regardless of efforts to forgi2">ive. i2">It's always sti2">ill been accompani2">ied by ego feeli2">ings, upsets, emoti2">ions, fears, reacti2">ions, ego rebounds.

i2">I was just ki2">ind of getti2">ing fed up wi2">ith the fact that every ti2">ime i2">I tri2">ied to do anythi2">ing wi2">ith the course, i2">it ALWAYS had a stupi2">id ego rebound afterwards. Catharsi2">is, release, upset emoti2">ions, fear reacti2">ions etc. i2">It was just so annoyi2">ing. i2">I was ki2">ind of getti2">ing ti2">ired of the course i2">in thi2">is sense because i2">I couldn't seem to do any of i2">it wi2">ithout havi2">ing thi2">is sense of ... i2">I just don't want to do thi2">is. My ego self or whatever just i2">is wi2">ired agai2">inst God and does not want to wake up, and can't. "i2">I", mi2">ixed up i2">in that sense of lower-sufferi2">ing-self, couldn't stop bei2">ing the way i2">it was.

So there's been thi2">is tug of war between the part of mi2">ind that just basi2">ically couldn't care less about the course and just wants to li2">ive a normal li2">ife i2">in a body, versus thi2">is constant barrage of attempts to awaken to some ki2">ind of hi2">igher li2">ife and perspecti2">ive that's totally i2">incompati2">ible. The contrast between the two was becomi2">ing very acute and i2">I couldn't fi2">ind a way to sati2">isfy both. i2">I had to even take a break from ACi2">IM for a whi2">ile and just be i2">in "my ego" to just be normal and stop hi2">itti2">ing i2">it over the head wi2">ith a hammer of spi2">iri2">ituali2">ity.

But i2">I thi2">ink what's come out of that now i2">is thi2">is very very unexpected movement i2">in whi2">ich i2">I let the ego stuff remai2">in ego and just seem to step outsi2">ide of i2">it. i2">It's qui2">ite odd. Because i2">I now see that wi2">ithi2">in myself there's thi2">is sort of self-contai2">ined i2">internal bubble of my sufferi2">ing self, complete wi2">ith all the ego emoti2">ions and upsets, whi2">ich i2">is generally most of the ti2">ime unhappy, ri2">iddled wi2">ith fears and gri2">ief and uncertai2">inty and so on. And i2">it seems li2">ike thi2">is i2">is all wi2">ithi2">in my body. And then somehow there's thi2">is hi2">igher me that i2">is totally outsi2">ide of all that, shi2">ini2">ing a li2">ight from a vantage poi2">int of not even tryi2">ing to understand or i2">interpret anythi2">ing.

i2">It has rai2">ised questi2">ions of, who even am i2">I. What aspects of myself or of my experi2">ience actually i2">is "the ego" and should be somethi2">ing to "get ri2">id of", versus what aspects of thi2">is i2">is actually a permanent part of my true nature? Are my emoti2">ional reacti2">ions just an ego thi2">ing? i2">Is thi2">is sense of "me sufferi2">ing" the ego? i2">In parti2">icular, where do i2">I draw the li2">ine?

But i2">I'm fi2">indi2">ing that maybe i2">I don't actually have to answer that i2">in terms of a descri2">ipti2">ion of i2">it. Because what i2">I seem to be reali2">izi2">ing i2">is that ALL of that i2">internal seemi2">ing "struggli2">ing self" i2">is enti2">irely sort of the "byproduct" of thi2">is whole "thi2">inki2">ing i2">I know" thi2">ing. Thi2">is whole i2">interpretati2">ion of everythi2">ing. Havi2">ing a judgement about what everythi2">ing i2">is. Labelli2">ing everythi2">ing i2">in course terms. Tryi2">ing to descri2">ibe everythi2">ing i2">in expli2">ici2">it detai2">il.

That whole approach of tryi2">ing to "understand" the world and everythi2">ing i2">in my experi2">ience, i2">is preci2">icely what CAUSES all of the sufferi2">ing. i2">It's as i2">if, when i2">I try to i2">interpret "reali2">ity", i2">it produces generally negati2">ive forms of consequence, i2">in a cause-effect ki2">ind of way. And the outcome of that i2">is what we mi2">ight call "the ego" i2">in me. i2">It's thi2">is collecti2">ion of reacti2">ions, emoti2">ions, upsets, percei2">ived threats, fears, gui2">ilts, etc... whi2">ich all seem to revolve around vi2">icti2">imhood and bei2">ing at the effect of somethi2">ing. That all seems to actually be the END RESULT OF, my mi2">inds attempts to i2">INTERPRET reali2">ity.

So i2">I put out some ki2">ind of negati2">ive faulty mi2">istaken i2">interpretati2">ion or effort to understand what somethi2">ing i2">is, thi2">is results i2">in a false percepti2">ion, whi2">ich i2">in turn results i2">in a bunch of sufferi2">ing, whi2">ich i2">in turn assembles as a collecti2">ion of unhappy elements that bundle together as an "ego experi2">ience". And that ego experi2">ience seems li2">ike i2">it's somewhat outsi2">ide of me. And when my mi2">ind i2">is goi2">ing there, i2">it seems that i2">I am the one havi2">ing thi2">is experi2">ience, that my i2">identi2">ity i2">IS the sufferi2">ing, that i2">I AM the upset and the unhappi2">iness. And that anchors and confi2">ines and li2">imi2">its my whole awareness i2">INSi2">IDE OF that whole vi2">iewpoi2">int.

So i2">if my vi2">iew i2">is so narrow and li2">imi2">ited and false, produci2">ing heavy false dark percepti2">ions, then my whole sense of self seems to become i2">impri2">isoned and confi2">ined, alone and afrai2">id, small and weak and vulnerable. i2">It seems li2">ike my enti2">ire li2">ife has been spent accumulati2">ing sufferi2">ings i2">in thi2">is li2">ittle i2">internal storehouse, surroundi2">ing and formi2">ing thi2">is confused and separated-off sense of self or of "my experi2">ience" of li2">ife. All gathered up i2">in a ball, even whi2">ich seems to be housed wi2">ithi2">in my body and especi2">ially wi2">ithi2">in the "emoti2">ional center" i2">in the stomache area.

i2">If thi2">is ENTi2">IRE experi2">ience of li2">ife i2">is the end RESULT, i2">ie perceptual consequence of, the vari2">ious mi2">istaken MEANi2">INGS that i2">I keep putti2">ing onto thi2">ings, then i2">it stands to reason (lol) that i2">if i2">I fundamentally CHANGE my enti2">ire approach and alter the process of "gi2">ivi2">ing meani2">ing", then i2">it's goi2">ing to totally overri2">ide that ENTi2">IRE realm of expei2">irence.

i2">It's goi2">ing to basi2">ically swi2">itch off the ego experi2">ience, i2">it's goi2">ing to totally overri2">ide all the upsets and reacti2">ions, all the unhappy emoti2">ions etc. Because i2">it was as though, all along, all thi2">is ti2">ime, ALL of my sufferi2">ings have been the RESULT of the meani2">ing that i2">I'VE been gi2">ivi2">ing to everythi2">ing.

i2">I've become very good at descri2">ibi2">ing thi2">ings, explai2">ini2">ig thi2">ings, analyzi2">ing the world, pi2">icki2">ing apart i2">illusi2">ions, labelli2">ing stuff, counter-attacki2">ing attacks, and generally just reacti2">ing to MY OWN deci2">isi2">ions. And suddenly i2">I seem to be embarki2">ing on an enti2">irely di2">ifferent ballgame. i2">I guess i2">it can be descri2">ibed as movi2">ing above the battlefi2">ield i2">in a way. i2">It's li2">ike a HUGE steppi2">ing back and just stoppi2">ing tryi2">ing to fucki2">ing fi2">igure everythi2">ing out. Not just because i2">it can't be fi2">igured out but because the act of tryi2">ing to do so i2">is BLOCKi2">ING me. i2">It shuts down my li2">ight and decreases my awareness and turns me i2">into a judger.

So now for me, thi2">is whole course thi2">ing, i2">it's turni2">ing i2">into somethi2">ing very very si2">impli2">ifi2">ied. i2">It's just some basi2">ic sort of fli2">ip of the swi2">itch thi2">ing, between whether i2">I want to carry on wi2">ith my faulty judgements/i2">interpretati2">ions/translati2">ions of what's goi2">ing on, or whether i2">I want to just let those go.

As i2">I let them go, i2">it's li2">ike a huge cloud of psychologi2">ical blockage i2">is li2">ifted away. A bri2">ight HAPPY li2">ight swi2">itches on out of nowhere, as i2">if i2">I'm getti2">ing back i2">in touch wi2">ith the REAL me that i2">is i2">in the back of all thi2">is, and has been there all along covered up by all the mental di2">istorti2">ions. i2">It i2">immedi2">iately feels remarkably happy and li2">ight, regardless of how heavy and dark the ego experi2">ience was "before" i2">I stepped out of i2">it.

What the ego i2">is, i2">I thi2">ink i2">it really i2">is just the "effects" that are produced when we try to "narrow" (Jesus i2">interjected) reali2">ity down to bei2">ing thi2">is or that, to descri2">ibe i2">it, to judge i2">it, to assess or evaluate what stuff "i2">is". The labels and meani2">ings we keep tryi2">ing to gi2">ive thi2">ings. And then mi2">istakedly confusi2">ing that effort for reali2">ity, beli2">ievi2">ing that reali2">ity now i2">inherently i2">IS the meani2">ing that WE deci2">ided i2">it has. That produces all the ego reacti2">ions, all sufferi2">ing, all unhappi2">iness and di2">issati2">isfacti2">ion.

When we stop produci2">ing these i2">illusi2">ions of i2">interpreati2">ion, tryi2">ing to thi2">ink we know what thi2">ings are, tryi2">ing to understand the ego and the world, tryi2">ing to fi2">ilter what's happeni2">ing, tryi2">ing to i2">insi2">ist that somethi2">ing i2">is what we thi2">ink i2">it i2">is, tryi2">ing to be ri2">ight about our labels and projecti2">ions, all that just i2">immedi2">iately swi2">itches off the "ego effect" and puts our mi2">ind back i2">in touch wi2">ith cause.

We settle back i2">into reali2">ity, we return to our baseli2">ine, we get back i2">in touch wi2">ith who we are BEHi2">IND all these layers of i2">interpretati2">ion, and the clouds part and the li2">ight comes shi2">ini2">ing forth. And i2">it feels SO much happi2">ier than the deluge of sufferi2">ing that ALL i2">interpretati2">ions produce.

So i2">it's not a matter of tryi2">ing to get "that ego" to change and grow and wake up and become spi2">iri2">itual, the ego i2">is just the result of "shutti2">ing down". i2">If we are to "open up" we have to be wi2">illi2">ing to actually be open all the ti2">ime. Because any ti2">ime we judge or label or descri2">ibe or analyze or thi2">ink we know about or seem certai2">in of what stuff i2">is or means, we are actually narrowi2">ing and closi2">ing down, casti2">ing anchors i2">into the wi2">ind. And that just di2">imi2">ini2">ishes our li2">ight and makes us feel dark and alone and afrai2">id.

We step out of the ego by steppi2">ing i2">into the li2">ight of "not knowi2">ing", of forgetti2">ing what you taught yourself, or letti2">ing go of thi2">inki2">ing you know, and of learni2">ing NOT to try i2">interpreti2">ing anythi2">ing. When you stop projecti2">ing your made-up meani2">ings onto everythi2">ing, you leave an open space for the Holy Spi2">iri2">it and God to project THEi2">IR meani2">ing i2">instead, i2">in the empti2">iness that you've left there. i2">In the space you've provi2">ided for li2">ight to shi2">ine through you. Really i2">it's more li2">ike, getti2">ing out of your own way.

i2">I am fi2">indi2">ing thi2">is i2">is what forgi2">iveness means to me now. i2">It's the si2">imple movement away from havi2">ing made the mi2">istake of deci2">idi2">ing what somethi2">ing must mean, whi2">ich i2">is pretty much always i2">in error and leads to sufferi2">ing, and just bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to not do that. My own meani2">ings are what blocks my si2">ight. My own judgements of reali2">ity are what keeps reali2">ity from me. Thi2">is i2">is how we undo percepti2">ion i2">itself, by undoi2">ing the basi2">is for judgement. And i2">it takes no more than a sli2">ight wi2">illi2">ingness to recogni2">ize my self-i2">infli2">icted sufferi2">ing i2">is comi2">ing from my self-i2">imposed meani2">ings, to let them di2">isappear to reveal the li2">ight wi2">ithi2">in.

Yesterday i2">I saw for the fi2">irst ti2">ime, myself just pi2">ivoti2">ing di2">ifferently, i2">in a si2">ituati2">ion where someone had clearly "done somethi2">ing wrong", breaki2">ing some rules. i2">I could've "held i2">it agai2">inst" the person, and yet somehow i2">I remembered that thi2">is enti2">ire experi2">ience of i2">it bei2">ing "wrong" or si2">inful was a meani2">ing i2">I was gi2">ivi2">ing i2">it, and as i2">I stepped back from that i2">I found myself expressi2">ing that the person was sti2">ill lovable regardless of thi2">is mi2">istake, and i2">it was only a mi2">istake. i2">It was as ki2">ind of "experi2">ienti2">ial forgi2">iveness", so basi2">ic and si2">imple, a psychologi2">ical act of just "wi2">ithholdi2">ing judgement" i2">in a way, that i2">I felt i2">it produced some ki2">ind of mi2">iraculous effects afterwards. And i2">it felt good.

Ulti2">imately i2">it all boi2">ils down to the si2">imple i2">idea that we have en experi2">ienti2">ial reali2">iti2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith truth and reali2">ity, and we are ei2">ither goi2">ing to be fully open i2">it and let i2">it be what i2">it i2">is wi2">ithout tryi2">ing to defi2">ine i2">it, or we're goi2">ing to narrow our percepti2">ion and lay judgements and labels on i2">it, tryi2">ing to di2">issect i2">it. And as soon as we do that we wi2">ill shut down our li2">ight and go i2">into darkness (ego). i2">If we want li2">ight and happi2">iness, we have to learn to just accept reali2">ity i2">in the fullness of "what i2">is" (not the world as such), by not "havi2">ing an opi2">ini2">ion about i2">it". Not layi2">ing a meani2">ing on i2">it. So that the li2">ight can fully shi2">ine and i2">illumi2">inate our happi2">iness.

"Forgi2">iveness, on the other hand, i2">is sti2">ill, and qui2">ietly does nothi2">ing. i2">It offends no aspect of reali2">ity, ****nor seeks to twi2">ist i2">it to appearance that i2">it li2">ikes.**** i2">It merely looks and wai2">its and judges not. ****He who would not forgi2">ive must judge****, for he must justi2">ify hi2">is fai2">ilure to forgi2">ive. But he who would forgi2">ive hi2">imself must ****learn to welcome truth exactly as i2">it i2">is.****"

"i2">If you could accept the world as meani2">ingless and ***let the truth be wri2">itten upon i2">it for you****, i2">it would make you i2">indescri2">ibably happy." "i2">In the world you, can become a spotless mi2">irror, i2">in whi2">ich the holi2">iness of your Creator shi2">ines forth from you, to all around you. You can REFLECT HEAVEN here. But no reflecti2">ions of the i2">images of other gods must di2">im the mi2">irror that would hold God's reflecti2">ion i2">in i2">it. Earth can reflect Heaven or hell; God or the ego. You need but leave the mi2">irror clean, and clear of all the i2">images of hi2">idden darkness you have drawn upon i2">it. God wi2">ill shi2">ine upon i2">it of Hi2">imself. Only the clear reflecti2">ion OF Hi2">imself can BE percei2">ived upon i2">it. Reflecti2">ions are seen i2">in li2">ight. i2">In darkness, they are obscure, and thei2">ir meani2">ing seems to li2">ie only i2">in shi2">ifti2">ing i2">interpretati2">ions, rather than i2">in themselves."

"The reflecti2">ion of God NEEDS no i2">interpretati2">ion. i2">IT i2">IS CLEAR. Clear but the mi2">irror, and the message whi2">ich shi2">ines forth from what the mi2">irror holds out for everyone to see, NO-ONE wi2">ill fai2">il to understand. i2">It i2">is the message that the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is holdi2">ing to the mi2">irror that i2">is i2">in Hi2">IM. He recogni2">izes i2">it, because he has been taught hi2">is NEED for i2">it, but knows not where to look to Fi2">IND i2">it. Let hi2">im, then, see i2">it i2">in YOU, and share i2">it Wi2">ITH you. Could you but reali2">ize, for a si2">ingle i2">instant, the power of heali2">ing that the reflecti2">ion of God, shi2">ini2">ing i2">in YOU, can bri2">ing to all the world, you COULD not wai2">it to make the mi2">irror of your mi2">ind clean, to recei2">ive the i2">image of the Holi2">iness that heals the world."

Someti2">imes i2">I become i2">interested i2">in somethi2">ing external, and exci2">ited about doi2">ing i2">it. i2">I seem to feel good about i2">it at the ti2">ime, and i2">it seems as i2">if the thi2">ing i2">itself causes me to feel good about i2">it. And i2">I take that to mean that i2">I should do thi2">is thi2">ing, because i2">it feels good to do i2">it. As i2">if to say, doi2">ing thi2">is thi2">ing "makes me" feel happi2">ier.

But then, my mood changes, and wi2">ith i2">it my percepti2">ion changes. The whole way that the thi2">ing i2">is framed to my mi2">ind changes. i2">It doesn't hold the appeal that i2">it had before. i2">It seems to lack the exci2">itement and i2">I've lost i2">interest. i2">I wonder to myself why i2">I became di2">isi2">illusi2">ioned and whether i2">it was the ri2">ight thi2">ing to be doi2">ing after all, and how i2">it was that i2">I was seemi2">ingly so i2">into i2">it not so long ago and now i2">I feel nothi2">ing about i2">it.

And then perhaps i2">I am encouraged and the exci2">itement comes back and my percepti2">ion changes and once agai2">in the thi2">ing seems appeali2">ing, as i2">if i2">it has once agai2">in taken on the magi2">ical sparkle. i2">It agai2">in looks li2">ike i2">it's somethi2">ing i2">I'm i2">into and enjoyi2">ing and therefore, that must mean, that the thi2">ing i2">itself i2">is causi2">ing me to enjoy i2">it, and so i2">I should be doi2">ing i2">it because i2">it makes me feel good. Follow your bli2">iss and all that.

But then the feeli2">ing state changes agai2">in, and once agai2">in the percepti2">ion of the thi2">ing i2">is di2">ifferent, and my whole i2">interest i2">in i2">it melts i2">into nothi2">ing as i2">if i2">I can't tell why i2">I was ever i2">interested i2">in i2">it to begi2">in wi2">ith. And then i2">I look at i2">it and i2">it seems empty and cold.

Thi2">is constant fli2">ip-floppi2">ing back and forth i2">is really based on a mi2">istaken i2">idea that the thi2">ing outsi2">ide of me i2">is the cause of how i2">I'm feeli2">ing. As i2">if i2">it's i2">important i2">in li2">ife to fi2">ind thi2">ings whi2">ich "make you happy." And the thi2">ings out there i2">in the world, hobbi2">ies, projects, acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies, whatever, have some i2">inherent causal power of thei2">ir own to do stuff to you that you "li2">ike" more than other thi2">ings.

When you're i2">in the good mood place you percei2">ive the thi2">ing di2">ifferently than when you're not i2">in a good mood. i2">I have wondered to myself i2">if i2">it i2">is only the ti2">imes that i2">I don't feel so happy that i2">I also lose i2">interest i2">in thi2">ings. But i2">I'm not sure i2">it's just about happi2">iness or not, i2">it seems to shi2">ift all over the place.

The i2">issue i2">is that that i2">I beli2">ieve the thi2">ing i2">itself i2">is not neutral, and i2">is able to cause me to feel somethi2">ing, that i2">I should become able to "li2">ike i2">it", and want to do more of i2">it. Li2">ike your favouri2">ite i2">ice cream flavour or candy bar whi2">ich you prefer more than others. Because apparently i2">I'm getti2">ing somethi2">ing from i2">it. i2">It's feedi2">ing me, doi2">ing somethi2">ing to me, changi2">ing me, defi2">ini2">ing me, forci2">ing me to feel a certai2">in way. As a ki2">ind of "posi2">iti2">ive vi2">icti2">imhood."

But when my feeli2">ing state changes and my percepti2">ion changes i2">it's li2">ike the whole thi2">ing just went down the toi2">ilet. i2">I can't seem to mai2">intai2">in a consi2">istent steady mental atti2">itude for a long ti2">ime. Perhaps for a week or two, but then i2">it shi2">ifts. Then i2">I'm fli2">ip-floppi2">ing constantly wonderi2">ing, should i2">I be doi2">ing thi2">is thi2">ing, or not? Should i2">I do thi2">is project, or not? Should i2">I pursue thi2">is more, or not? And there's always thi2">is greener grass and somethi2">ing else to fli2">ip to.

And i2">I then can't deci2">ide because i2">I just seem to keep goi2">ing back and forth on thi2">is rollercoaster of bei2">ing at the effect of somethi2">ing external, seemi2">ingly... when i2">in fact i2">it's really the i2">internal state that i2">is the determi2">iner of how i2">I feel and percei2">ive. By not recogni2">isi2">ing that the i2">inner state comes fi2">irst, i2">I look to the outer state for evi2">idence of whether a certai2">in thi2">ing i2">is somethi2">ing i2">i want or not, on the basi2">is of what i2">it seems to "make me feel."

But i2">it's always that how i2">I feel i2">internally i2">is the determi2">iner of whether or not i2">I seem to be enjoyi2">ing what i2">is external. i2">It comes from wi2">ithi2">in, not wi2">ithout. i2">I've gone back and forth on some thi2">ings so many ti2">imes wi2">ith fleeti2">ing peri2">iods of i2">interest and di2">isi2">interest and never qui2">ite knowi2">ing whether i2">I want to do the thi2">ing or not. Someti2">imes i2">it's appeali2">ing and someti2">imes i2">it's not.

What occurs to me si2">imply i2">is that thi2">is i2">is all because my mi2">ind seems to look externally for vali2">idati2">ion and for fi2">iguri2">ing out whether somethi2">ing i2">is somethi2">ing i2">I want or not, whether i2">I am getti2">ing somethi2">ing from i2">it, and whether i2">I li2">ike what i2">I'm getti2">ing. But thi2">is i2">ignores that i2">I am always projecti2">ing, and then percei2">ivi2">ing. i2">It i2">ignores that i2">I am choosi2">ing how i2">I feel fi2">irst, and then am projecti2">ing that out and seei2">ing i2">it reflected i2">in the thi2">ing i2">I'm doi2">ing. i2">I'm li2">iterally "maki2">ing up" what i2">it means to me as i2">I go along.

Someti2">imes my projecti2">ions make certai2">in thi2">ings look rosi2">ier and more i2">interesti2">ing. Someti2">imes my projecti2">ions make them look lacklustre and havi2">ing no appeal at all. But i2">I thi2">ink i2">if i2">I stay "addi2">icted" to getti2">ing stuff from outsi2">ide of myself i2">in thi2">is way, i2">I wi2">ill just keep floppi2">ing all over the place wonderi2">ing whether or not somethi2">ing i2">is "the chosen one". Tryi2">ing to fi2">igure out what to do i2">ii2">in li2">ife, what i2">I want, what to get, what to enjoy, on the basi2">is of what i2">it does to me, i2">is a constant state of confusi2">ion.

i2">It's possi2">ible based on personali2">ity or beli2">iefs or i2">interests or apti2">itudes that, yes, there could be some acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies that seem to ali2">ign more wi2">ith one's nature, and those mi2">ight seem to more easi2">ily i2">induce feeli2">ings of attracti2">ion and happi2">iness. But i2">if all happi2">iness comes from God, i2">it can't really come from wi2">ithout. And i2">if i2">I am i2">immortal and changeless, i2">it can't be that even my feeli2">ings are forced upon me by external sti2">imulati2">ion.

i2">I thi2">ink that the more i2">I reali2">ize that all happi2">iness belongs to God and that you can only be happy when you are wi2">ith God, the more i2">I'm questi2">ioni2">ing whether anythi2">ing external can "make me happy" at all. Or whether all i2">I've been doi2">ing all these years i2">is just maki2">ing stuff up as i2">I go along and not reali2">isi2">ing i2">it, not reali2">isi2">ing that i2">I've been projecti2">ing completely random atti2">itudes onto the world and then beli2">ievi2">ing that what they show me i2">is what thi2">ings really mean, or what thei2">ir value i2">is.

ACi2">IM would say that nothi2">ing i2">in the world can bri2">ing oppressi2">ion or make you i2">ill or sad or weak or frai2">il or di2">ie. And si2">imi2">ilarly that nothi2">ing i2">in the world can bri2">ing you peace, or take your peace away. And i2">it would probably also say that nothi2">ing i2">in the world can force you to be happy, or gi2">ive you what you want, or i2">in fact gi2">ive you anythi2">ing whatsoever, or do anythi2">ing to you, or stop you doi2">ing anythi2">ing. Because the world does nothi2">ing at all, and all the rest of the make-beli2">ieve story bullshi2">it about whether i2">it's the ri2">ight or good thi2">ing or not i2">is a totally subjecti2">ive projecti2">ion.

i2">It's strange to reali2">ize that i2">it's not the stuff i2">I'm doi2">ing or the acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies or the external thi2">ings that are determi2">iners of what i2">I feel or whether i2">I want to do them or not. i2">It starts wi2">ithi2">in wi2">ith my i2">inner state and my connecti2">ion to God, or lack thereof. And then i2">I project out from that state and percei2">ive the world, gi2">ivi2">ing i2">it flavours, assi2">igni2">ing meani2">ings, dressi2">ing some thi2">ings up as more worthy and more appeali2">ing whi2">ile dressi2">ing other thi2">ings down. And then i2">it shi2">ifts and changes and i2">is completely unstable. "What i2">it means to me" i2">is total fi2">icti2">ion.

i2">I guess the moral of the story i2">is that, i2">I have to learn not to depend on the world or speci2">ifi2">ic forms of thi2">ings to cause me to feel certai2">in ways. To stop tryi2">ing to fi2">ind happi2">iness from outsi2">ide of myself. To reali2">ize that i2">it's got nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith whether a certai2">in thi2">ing i2">is ri2">ight or wrong or i2">interesti2">ing or bori2">ing or a "good fi2">it for me."

i2">It's just wholly a matter of... what wi2">ill i2">I ali2">ign myself wi2">ith wi2">ithi2">in, fi2">irst, and what wi2">ill i2">I bri2">ing to the world or extend out i2">into i2">it or project upon i2">it. And maybe there's a way to be happy i2">in spi2">ite of what i2">is external, even i2">in the presence of unconventi2">ional thi2">ings whi2">ich mi2">ight before have "caused" unhappi2">iness.

The fi2">inal truth really i2">is that the world i2">is meani2">ingless and neutral and nothi2">ing, and none of i2">its forms mean anythi2">ing more than others, and none of i2">it does anythi2">ing di2">ifferent to anythi2">ing else, and none of i2">it has any more potenti2">ial to make us happi2">ier or sadder or anythi2">ing whatsoever. Because we are no longer tryi2">ing to "get" from the world... .when we know the only place we can get anythi2">ing worth havi2">ing, i2">is from God wi2">ithi2">in.

"i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible the Son of God be merely dri2">iven by events OUTSi2">IDE hi2">im. i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that the happeni2">ings that come to hi2">im were NOT hi2">is choi2">ice. Hi2">is power of deci2">isi2">ion i2">is the DETERMi2">INER of every si2">ituati2">ion i2">in whi2">ich he seems to Fi2">IND hi2">imself by chance or acci2">ident. No acci2">ident or chance i2">is POSSi2">IBLE wi2">ithi2">in the uni2">iverse as God created i2">it, OUTSi2">IDE of whi2">ich i2">is nothi2">ing. Suffer, and YOU deci2">ided si2">in was your goal. Be happy, and you GAVE the power of deci2">isi2">ion to Hi2">im Who MUST deci2">ide for God for you. Thi2">is i2">is the li2">ittle gi2">ift you offer to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, and even thi2">is He gave to you to gi2">ive yourself. For, BY thi2">is gi2">ift, i2">is gi2">iven you the power to release your Savi2">ior, that HE may gi2">ive salvati2">ion unto YOU."

"i2">It takes great learni2">ing both to reali2">ize and to accept the fact that the world has nothi2">ing to gi2">ive."

"No one can suffer loss unless i2">it be hi2">is own deci2">isi2">ion. No one suffers pai2">in except hi2">is choi2">ice elects thi2">is state for hi2">im. No one can gri2">ieve nor fear nor thi2">ink hi2">im si2">ick unless these are the outcomes that he wants, and no one di2">ies wi2">ithout hi2">is own consent. Nothi2">ing occurs but represents your wi2">ish, and nothi2">ing i2">is omi2">itted that you choose. Here i2">is your world, complete i2">in all detai2">ils. Here i2">is i2">its whole reali2">ity for you. And i2">it i2">is only here salvati2">ion i2">is."

Please forgi2">ive me i2">if thi2">is message i2">isn't well formed because i2">I thi2">ink i2">I am goi2">ing to express somethi2">ing that i2">is sort of 'new' to me and i2">I am not well i2">into i2">it yet.

Love has been comi2">ing to me... the possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of love... the possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of bei2">ing lovi2">ing toward other people i2">in general. i2">Its a change i2">in my atti2">itude about others. Part of thi2">is seems to i2">involve reali2">izi2">ing that i2">I've been doi2">ing all thi2">is heali2">ing and forgi2">iveness work on 'myself' wi2">ith... lets be honest... a somewhat selfi2">ish i2">intenti2">ion. i2">I mean, even though i2">it's a spi2">iri2">itual path and all that, i2">it's always been about me heali2">ing myself, me forgi2">ivi2">ing for my own benefi2">it, me applyi2">ing the Course to get myself to feel better, etc. And now... thi2">is 'me' part doesn't seem as much the focus, or as i2">important. And i2">instead, i2">I'm starti2">ing to let real LOVE come through me, and i2">its starti2">ing to become about - shari2">ing that love.

i2">I'll also be honest i2">in telli2">ing you that i2">I generally have not really felt lovi2">ing towards most people for a long ti2">ime. Whether i2">its a remnant of chi2">ildhood sufferi2">ing or a personali2">ity thi2">ing or whatever i2">I've accepted, or maybe i2">I've just been pretty normal/typi2">ical all thi2">is ti2">ime and nobody could really expect more. ... but i2">I'm fi2">indi2">ing now, there i2">IS more. There i2">is the possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of not just bei2">ing another one of many strangers that pass each other and barely acknowledge each other, but rather of actually LOVi2">ING PEOPLE.

Now, thi2">is i2">is where i2">it gets really fasci2">inati2">ing for me at the moment. i2">I've been fi2">indi2">ing that.. experi2">imenti2">ing wi2">ith. .. the i2">idea that, i2">if i2">I attempt to be lovi2">ing toward people i2">instead of how i2">I normally would be around them, i2">it i2">is si2">igni2">ifi2">icantly changi2">ing my percepti2">ion. And i2">I'm not talki2">ing about some lofty ai2">im li2">ike 'see the chri2">ist i2">in everyone' and i2">I'm li2">ike 'what the fuck i2">is chri2">ist?'... i2">it's si2">imply.. .just fri2">icki2">ing love them.

Normally around most people, especi2">ially strangers, i2">I wi2">ill become guarded and shy and qui2">iet really qui2">ickly. i2">Its a defense mechani2">ism thi2">ing, usually tri2">iggered by the sli2">ightest observati2">ion that there i2">is somethi2">ing about the person that i2">is unsafe/unlovi2">ing. What i2">I di2">id not know, however, all thi2">is ti2">ime, i2">is that the unsafely and unloi2">ivi2">ingness that i2">I see i2">in people - the tri2">iggers - i2">is actually the result of ME not looki2">ing at them Wi2">ITH love. i2">I've always been looki2">ing at people wi2">ith... well, the ego... and seei2">ing the ego reflected back. And now thi2">is i2">idea i2">is poppi2">ing i2">in, why not try i2">instead to extend love and be lovi2">ing toward them, and see how that feels

Well... when i2">I deci2">ide to do thi2">is, whi2">ich i2">is usually after i2">I noti2">ice that i2">I just lapsed i2">into zombi2">ie mode, somethi2">ing really unexpected happens. i2">I don't feel afrai2">id. i2">It's li2">ike, all of the basi2">is for my 'soci2">ial anxi2">iety' i2">is because i2">I percei2">ive wi2">ithout love and therefore see a lack of love and i2">I see i2">it as an attack. So... i2">if i2">I CHOOSE to see Wi2">ITH love, then i2">I actually see ONLY love, and i2">I don't even see any reason not to love. i2">It's li2">ike, all of the 'reasons' for fear are just not even there. i2">I can't detect them, they don't appear, they don't regi2">ister. Somehow the love makes me feel safe and prevents me from even percei2">ivi2">ing that i2">I can be attacked. i2">If i2">I'm looki2">ing Wi2">ITH love, then i2">it shows me love. i2">If i2">I look wi2">ith attack, i2">I see attack. And i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize how used i2">I've become to seei2">ing 'wi2">ith attack' all of the ti2">ime, such that i2">I thought i2">it was normal, and that people out there 'really are' threateni2">ing... when i2">in fact, there i2">is another way to experi2">ience i2">it.

i2">I always struggled wi2">ith thi2">is. You have no i2">idea. i2">I mean, really hi2">igh levels of anxi2">iety around strangers, fear of judgement, unsafely, becomi2">ing 'spacey' and losi2">ing all focus, becomi2">ing avoi2">idant, wanti2">ing to get the hell out of there, etc. i2">It has taken a LOOOOOONG ti2">ime to gradually si2">ift through thi2">is all to reali2">ize that i2">it i2">is ME and MY atti2">itude whi2">ich SHOWS ME exactly what i2">is i2">IN ME, and i2">I then thi2">ink i2">it i2">is i2">in the other people, and then i2">I thi2">ink that thi2">is proves WHY i2">I should feel the way i2">I feel. i2">It JUSTi2">IFi2">IES i2">it. Sure, i2">I should be afrai2">id because that person i2">is judgi2">ing me, or i2">I should be anxi2">ious because that person i2">is threateni2">ing me, etc... when i2">instead, i2">it was always that i2">I'd projected MY self-attack onto them and was seei2">ing i2">it there.

And now, along comes love. And i2">I mean... not speci2">ial love of romanti2">ic love or whatever... li2">ike, real LOVE... love from GOD. Uncondi2">iti2">ional love. Spi2">iri2">itual love. And i2">if i2">I allow myself to stand i2">in love and to choose to see other people Wi2">ITH that love, what do i2">I experi2">ience? Well... i2">I feel completely safe. The anxi2">iety has no foundati2">ion. And even i2">if i2">I'm feeli2">ing afrai2">id or anxi2">ious, i2">if i2">I choose love, i2">it i2">instantly di2">isappears. And even i2">if people sti2">ill are behavi2">ing i2">in odd ways or looki2">ing at me funny or appeari2">ing to be rejecti2">ive or whatever, i2">if i2">I am i2">in a lovi2">ing place, then i2">I feel completely i2">invulnerable to that, li2">ike, i2">I know i2">it can't do anythi2">ing to me.

The bi2">ig lesson here i2">is thi2">is... and i2">I'm sti2">ill explori2">ing thi2">is and only just STARTi2">ING to experi2">iment wi2">ith thi2">is i2">in real si2">ituati2">ions.... the bi2">ig lesson i2">is that... when you extend God's love fully to your brother, and just choose to love them i2">instead of any other atti2">itude, ALL you wi2">ill see i2">is love and lovabi2">ili2">ity and there i2">is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO BE AFRAi2">ID. So... thi2">is i2">is the TRUTH! i2">In truth, there i2">is no reason for fear because i2">in truth, i2">in love, there i2">is perfect safety. There si2">imple i2">IS no attack. There i2">IS no cause for alarm. There i2">IS no threat.

So thi2">is i2">is my 'openi2">ing up'... the next phase... reali2">izi2">ing that the theology and the thoughts and the fi2">iguri2">ing out and the Course processes etc are... themselves... just tools to open up the heart to love, and that i2">it i2">is THE LOVE that i2">is actually what we need to BE and express. To love i2">it. To be i2">it. To extend i2">it. To share i2">it. Experi2">ienti2">ially. Acti2">ively. For real. Taki2">ing the love to the people. Taki2">ing the love and letti2">ing i2">it love through me. Letti2">ing heali2">ing come through me. Letti2">ing li2">ife come through me. But not for some si2">illy selfi2">ish 'oh thi2">is i2">is my speci2">ial spi2">iri2">itual path, don't mi2">ind me i2">I'm just over here forgi2">ivi2">ing myself duti2">ifully and stayi2">ing separate from everyone'.

Love erases all fear. And of course.. the opposi2">ite of love i2">is fear... wi2">ithout love, fear HAS to show up. Once love shows up, love i2">is the Li2">IGHT, and fear HAS to di2">isappear. And i2">it does. i2">It does every ti2">ime!

Reason to celebrate. Only love i2">is real! And the truth i2">isn't just facts and i2">informati2">ion and thi2">inki2">ing... the truth i2">is FELT.

And what's really surpri2">isi2">ing to me about God's love i2">is... that... i2">it i2">is bei2">ing freely offered to me ri2">ight now wi2">ithout me havi2">ing to really do anythi2">ing to earn i2">it... almost as though, i2">I'm jumpi2">ing ri2">ight from bei2">ing i2">in the mi2">iddle of a long drawn out spi2">iri2">itual path, to the end goal. Li2">ike. God loves me NOW... i2">I can be loved NOW... i2">It's very surpri2">isi2">ing. And i2">it's got nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith thi2">inki2">ing about love. i2">It's ACTUAL love. God i2">is love. Not just an i2">idea. Love love love love love love love.

i2">I've recently been 'God bathi2">ing' ... But i2">I don't qui2">ite have a tan yet.

Actually i2">it's not as si2">imple as just getti2">ing i2">into my swi2">imsui2">it and layi2">ing i2">in the li2">ight. There's a sli2">ight problem. Part of me does not want i2">it.

The i2">interesti2">ing thi2">ing i2">is, though, that as i2">I attempt to expose myself to God's love - by whi2">ich i2">I mean, to actually accept the *experi2">ience* of i2">it - to let i2">it i2">in and allow i2">it - i2">it shi2">ines a li2">ight on the parts of me that need heali2">ing.

These are the parts that i2">I can tell feel li2">ike... They are not worthy, they are not good enough, they are gui2">ilty, they beli2">ieve somethi2">ing i2">is goi2">ing to be taken away or lost, that hold gri2">ievances, that feel alone and separate and forgotten, etc... All of thi2">is 'me', thi2">is ego me, who i2">I thi2">ink i2">I am ri2">ight now, that when you really get down to i2">it, when faced wi2">ith 'the truth' (God), experi2">iences i2">itself as unwanted and lost.

i2">It's not easy to be aware that thi2">is i2">is i2">in me and that i2">it needs heali2">ing. But part of the 'God bathi2">ing' i2">is that i2">I become at least a li2">ittle bi2">it wi2">illi2">ing to let some love soak i2">in. i2">I let i2">it come a bi2">it closer. i2">I let i2">it seep i2">in around the foundati2">ions of my 'self hate', and loosen i2">it up a bi2">it. i2">It's li2">ike bei2">ing surrounded wi2">ith a heali2">ing balm, or getti2">ing a hug.

That resi2">istant ego part of me sti2">ill doesn't beli2">ieve that God could love me...and i2">it always has thi2">is sense of ...'because'... There i2">is a reason... Because of what i2">I di2">id... Gui2">ilt.

Hopefully i2">if i2">I can release and let of enough blocks and resi2">istances and beli2">iefs i2">in gui2">ilt, i2">I can at least let myself reali2">ize, i2">if for just a moment, that actually everythi2">ing i2">is goi2">ing to be okay. i2">I can be loved, i2">I can be healed and forgi2">iven, and i2">I actually do deserve God's uncondi2">iti2">ional love.

And then li2">ittle gli2">impses or feeli2">ings of opti2">imi2">ism start to creep i2">in, li2">ittle awarenesses of... maybe i2">it's true. Maybe i2">I don't have to be thi2">is way. Maybe i2">I don't have to stay separate and gui2">ilty. Maybe i2">I don't have to di2">ie. Because what i2">is thi2">is really all about but the secret death wi2">ish that we all have, beli2">ievi2">ing we cannot be wi2">ith God/Li2">ife ever agai2">in. My thought last ni2">ight was, maybe i2">I actually don't have to di2">ie. And that was a reli2">ief. "Thank God"... For sure.

Learni2">ing to allow and accept what God i2">is.... Surrenderi2">ing what i2">I am not.

A powerful sentence came to me whi2">ich felt great to repeat several ti2">imes. "i2">I am the Son of God. i2">I am completely i2">innocent."

ahhhhh. Now there i2">is a sli2">ight tan.

"Forgi2">iveness i2">is the only gi2">ift i2">I gi2">ive because i2">it i2">is the only gi2">ift i2">I want, and everythi2">ing i2">I gi2">ive i2">I gi2">ive myself. Thi2">is i2">is salvati2">ion s si2">imple formula."

"Only the self-accused condemn."

"i2">It can be but myself i2">I cruci2">ify."

"The secret of salvati2">ion i2">is but thi2">is: That YOU are doi2">ing thi2">is UNTO YOURSELF."

"You but accuse your brother of your own si2">ins."

As i2">I learn that any upset i2">I feel i2">is enti2">irely self created and i2">internal and nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith anythi2">ing else, i2">I begi2">in to experi2">ience a strangely unexpected di2">isconnecti2">ion between what seems to happen and how i2">I react.

i2">I can see that thi2">ings happen externally, and perhaps they tri2">igger i2">internal reacti2">ions i2">ini2">iti2">ially, but i2">if i2">I work on those reacti2">ions or reali2">ize they are just some old unhealed junk surfaci2">ing i2">in my awareness, and i2">I heal i2">it, i2">I am then restored to a more peaceful happy state even i2">in spi2">ite of the fact that the external si2">ituati2">ion may sti2">ill be the same.

And so thi2">is shows me that there are ki2">ind of two thi2">ings runni2">ing si2">imultaneously. There's the external story, the world, showi2">ing pi2">ictures of thi2">ings happeni2">ing. And then there's thi2">is i2">internal story or di2">ialog, thi2">is i2">inner reacti2">ive ego response, whi2">ich runs alongsi2">ide i2">it. The ways that i2">I am attacki2">ing myself, and then USi2">ING the world as a scapegoat.

As i2">I practi2">ice ownershi2">ip of my i2">inner experi2">ience and see myself responsi2">ible for choosi2">ing and causi2">ing i2">it, rather than maki2">ing a false ego causal connecti2">ion between "what i2">I feel" and "what i2">is happeni2">ing outsi2">ide", the two previ2">iously merged stori2">ies are peeli2">ing away from each other. Whereas before i2">I thought that my upset goes hand i2">in hand wi2">ith a gi2">iven si2">ituati2">ion, i2">it i2">is suddenly evi2">idence that the two are not connected.

They no longer completely coi2">inci2">ide and i2">I now see myself someti2">imes movi2">ing outward to joi2">in wi2">ith the external story but then flowi2">ing back i2">inward agai2">in to pull away from i2">it. i2">If i2">I i2">identi2">ify wi2">ith the "what's happeni2">ing out there" story, i2">I lose myself and react to i2">it. But i2">if i2">I recall that i2">I'm doi2">ing thi2">is all to myself i2">internally, and i2">ideas leave not thei2">ir source, and any reacti2">ion i2">in me i2">I have chosen to rei2">invent myself, the whole sense of bei2">ing "caused by" the world di2">imi2">ini2">ishes.

Where there used to be si2">imply a total confusi2">ion and di2">istracti2">ion and i2">immersi2">ion and absorpti2">ion i2">into the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions, all of the effects the ego dream would suggest i2">I have, and i2">its enti2">ire scri2">ipt for what i2">I "should" be experi2">ienci2">ing as a result, there i2">is now an i2">intermi2">ittent but i2">increasi2">ingly wi2">ide di2">ivi2">ide between "what the dream i2">is doi2">ing" and "what i2">I am doi2">ing to myself."

i2">If i2">I am bei2">ing tri2">iggered a lot by some si2">ituati2">ion that i2">is ongoi2">ing, but then i2">I recogni2">ize the tri2">iggered reacti2">ion i2">is a re-emergence of a pri2">ior condi2">iti2">ion of self attack i2">in my mi2">ind, my own accusati2">ion of myself as si2">inful, and i2">I work on that and undo i2">it, and i2">it goes away, and the external si2">ituati2">ion just conti2">inues i2">in i2">its normal form but wi2">ithout tri2">iggeri2">ing me, i2">I see that there i2">is a defi2">ini2">ite di2">ifference between me and "i2">it".

i2">It's as i2">if, we don't just become body i2">identi2">ifi2">ied, we become world i2">identi2">ifi2">ied. We beli2">ieve that *everythi2">ing* external to the mi2">ind, whi2">ich i2">includes the body, has become the storage place and cause of all the stuff we are experi2">ienci2">ing. We bi2">ind wi2">ith i2">it, just as we bi2">ind wi2">ith the body i2">in pai2">in. We fai2">il to separate out what i2">is the dream and who i2">is doi2">ing the dreami2">ing. i2">It's li2">ike an attempt to be one wi2">ith the dream, to merge wi2">ith i2">it, and to fai2">il to recogni2">ize i2">it i2">is not dreami2">ing you.

i2">If i2">I thi2">ink the world i2">is dreami2">ing me and causi2">ing me, i2">I'm goi2">ing to go out of my mi2">ind and connect my sense of who and what i2">I am to whatever the world suggests i2">I should be, based on that causali2">ity. i2">If i2">I let the dream di2">ictate everythi2">ing i2">I experi2">ience, i2">I am now i2">in a constant vi2">icti2">im role. As i2">I conti2">inue to beli2">ieve that i2">I'm at the effect of the world, i2">I cannot separate out what i2">is happeni2">ing wi2">ithi2">in me versus what i2">is really causi2">ing i2">it. Because the world i2">is not really the cause at all, and i2">I'm doi2">ing thi2">is all to myself from wi2">ithi2">in, to wi2">ithi2">in.

i2">I have to learn to recogni2">ize that whatever i2">is goi2">ing on i2">insi2">ide me, whatever feeli2">ings or upsets or experi2">iences or beli2">iefs i2">I'm havi2">ing, not one si2">ingle one of them i2">is the result of the external dream world. There i2">is not a si2">ingle cause i2">in the world wi2">ith the power to do anythi2">ing to me, as an i2">invulnerable, i2">immortal bei2">ing. And that means learni2">ing to stop havi2">ing thi2">is symbi2">ioti2">ic mergi2">ing of i2">identi2">ity wi2">ith the world, where i2">I plug myself i2">into the external i2">illusi2">ion and allow i2">it to trample all over me under the beli2">ief that i2">it CAN and i2">IS doi2">ing so.

i2">I have to learn that nothi2">ing i2">I experi2">ience i2">is caused by anythi2">ing but my i2">innermost self. And i2">if i2">I am upset, i2">I must address what i2">I am doi2">ing to myself. And i2">if someone *seems* to tri2">igger me, i2">I have to not accuse them of causi2">ing what comes up because they di2">id not put i2">it there, i2">I di2">id. And i2">I would then thank them for bri2">ingi2">ing i2">it to my attenti2">ion. And so i2">I must then recogni2">ize, i2">if i2">it weren't for me hurti2">ing myself, accusi2">ing myself, upsetti2">ing myself, i2">I would NEVER be hurt, accused, or upset. An i2">in fact as Jesus says, "you cannot be hurt unless you hurt yourself."

i2">It actually i2">isn't really so much a matter of what the world has been doi2">ing TO ME. i2">It's more i2">in fact a matter of what i2">I have been doi2">ing TO THE WORLD. i2">I have been putti2">ing MY self-accused si2">ins ONTO the world and have been attacki2">ing i2">it and usi2">ing i2">it as a scapegoat to blame for causi2">ing the very thi2">ings *i2">I* have been doi2">ing to myself! The world has not been gui2">ilty at all, i2">it's been i2">innocent the whole ti2">ime. And i2">it's my own i2">inner confli2">ict that has been playi2">ing out projected and di2">isassoci2">iated externally, to make i2">it SEEM as i2">if i2">it's not part of me or i2">in my mi2">ind or anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith me. i2">I then get away wi2">ith blami2">ing the world for everythi2">ing i2">I do not li2">ike about myself.

MY task now i2">is to step back, out of the drama i2">I am causi2">ing, out of the rollercoaster of reacti2">ions and sufferi2">ing that i2">I'm produci2">ing based on what i2">I've done to myself and tri2">ied to accuse others of, and constantly correct the "spi2">illi2">ing over" of my i2">inner wounds onto the world. i2">Indeed i2">I am to take off of the world all of the shi2">ite that i2">I have been dumpi2">ing onto i2">it through my egoi2">ic projecti2">ions of self attack.

All the gui2">ilt, si2">in, fear, unworthi2">iness, shame, whatever.... i2">if i2">I address i2">it as an i2">internal scenari2">io that i2">I am doi2">ing to myself, NOT caused by anythi2">ing or anyone else, and i2">it i2">is addressed honestly and correctly wi2">ithi2">in my mi2">ind, then gradually i2">I'm li2">ifti2">ing off of the world all of thi2">is i2">inner baggage that i2">I was associ2">iati2">ing or attachi2">ing to i2">it. And that means the world i2">itself, the dream, i2">is goi2">ing to be recogni2">ized more as not really the cause of anythi2">ing.

i2">In thi2">is way, gradually the world becomes forgi2">iven, i2">in the sense that i2">it i2">is seen Wi2">ITHOUT my i2">inner content projecti2">ions. As i2">I stop seei2">ing i2">inner junk "out there", what was behi2">ind the junk - the i2">illusory world onto whi2">ich i2">I projected more i2">illusi2">ions - the i2">illusory world i2">is "revealed" more for si2">imply what i2">it i2">is and not what i2">I was maki2">ing of i2">it. Wi2">ithout my si2">ins bei2">ing projected, and wi2">ithout havi2">ing any si2">ins, i2">I cannot see si2">in i2">IN i2">it.

The gui2">ilty meani2">ings i2">I was projecti2">ing onto i2">it, the causali2">ity i2">I was accusi2">ing i2">it of, the sense of vulnerabi2">ili2">ity and stress and sufferi2">ing that i2">I thought i2">IT was responsi2">ible for causi2">ing but whi2">ich i2">I was doi2">ing to myself backwards, are no longer seen as "comi2">ing from" the world or from anyone else, but myself. i2">It's all an i2">insi2">ide job. And i2">it's really me that needs the forgi2">iveness, havi2">ing accused myself of thi2">ings that are untrue of my perfect di2">ivi2">ine holi2">iness.

i2">If i2">I am wounded, by my self attack, i2">I wi2">ill project my wounds all over the place, bleedi2">ing out onto the world a blackness of self hatred. Thi2">is wi2">ill cloud my percepti2">ion of the world and render i2">it dark. As i2">I heal the i2">inner wounds, wi2">ithi2">in, where the problem really i2">is, i2">in my mi2">ind, i2">I can no longer have anythi2">ing TO leak out onto the world. The world si2">imply becomes automati2">ically "forgi2">iven", not because i2">it di2">id anythi2">ing, but through si2">imply bei2">ing able to SEE what i2">is there as the world, through self-forgi2">iven eyes, rather than seei2">ing THROUGH the old lens of si2">in and gui2">ilt.

As such, the world becomes uncovered, released, "saved" from me, from my projected self attack. And wi2">ithout a log i2">in my own eye, i2">I no longer HAVE si2">in i2">in my mi2">ind TO attempt to di2">isplace onto external fi2">igures. And wi2">ithout thi2">is si2">in blocki2">ing my vi2">isi2">ion, i2">I become more able to si2">imply see the world for what i2">it i2">is, wi2">ithout all of the si2">in gui2">ilt and fear dumped onto i2">it or fi2">ilteri2">ing i2">it. And wi2">ithout thi2">is angry dark content, perhaps the world i2">is fi2">illed wi2">ith li2">ight.

We're told that as we progress wi2">ith thi2">is, the "real world" wi2">ill become more vi2">isi2">ible to us. That i2">is, the world we made, but wi2">ithout judgement, projecti2">ion, di2">isassoci2">iati2">ion, di2">isplacement, or all the other forms of di2">isowned self attack maski2">ing i2">it. Wi2">ithout thi2">is content, i2">its forms seem less i2">inherently meani2">ingful. Wi2">ithout putti2">ing these dark meani2">ings onto the world, the world i2">IS meani2">ingless. i2">It i2">is also neutral, and i2">in a way pure, because i2">it i2">is nothi2">ing.

The world, i2">in i2">its "reali2">ity", or rather, seen "as i2">is", i2">is just a pi2">icture, wi2">ithout si2">in or gui2">ilt or fear or death projected onto i2">it. i2">It just stands li2">ike a thi2">in vei2">il before the face of Chri2">ist. i2">It has no meani2">ing of i2">its own, because God only creates meani2">ingful worlds and He di2">id not create thi2">is. i2">It i2">is not dark. Or ali2">ive. Or dead. Or holy. Or si2">inful. i2">In fact i2">it can become more seemi2">ingly beauti2">iful, as the i2">inner beauty begi2">ins to look upon i2">itself and shi2">ine outwards, i2">illumi2">inati2">ing the pi2">icture rather than attacki2">ing i2">it. And as such the "real world", the forgi2">iven world, begi2">ins to show up i2">in awareness as a reflecti2">ion of your OWN holi2">iness projected onto a NEUTRAL canvas.

Whi2">ile the world i2">in i2">its physi2">icali2">ity and form i2">is "false percepti2">ion", i2">in whi2">ich the forms are only focused on as part of seei2">ing falsely and dwelli2">ing on separati2">ions, gui2">ilt and death, as percepti2">ion ri2">ises toward the li2">ight wi2">ithi2">in, looki2">ing fi2">irst wi2">ithi2">in and then looki2">ing outward, the forms are overlooked. They don't defi2">ine anythi2">ing qui2">ite so strongly as before. They don't separate off wi2">ith harsh boundari2">ies and walls. They become less soli2">id, less heavy, less dark. They loom wi2">ith less wei2">ight and seem to have less substance or meani2">ing. As i2">if they are not there, because they aren't, bei2">ing just i2">illusi2">ions.

The world becomes li2">ighter, wi2">ithi2">in, and seen wi2">ithout, as the dream seems to turn to a happi2">ier dream, where the unhappi2">iness that was i2">in you i2">is no longer added to i2">it. Where happi2">iness returns to the mi2">ind and the world i2">is seen as not contai2">ini2">ing any real si2">in or gui2">ilt - because the mi2">ind has none to project onto i2">it. You can only look upon yourself. i2">If you are love you see love i2">in everythi2">ing because the world i2">is not real or evi2">il. i2">If you are gui2">ilty, you see gui2">ilt i2">in everythi2">ing and the world seems li2">ike hell. By forgi2">ivi2">ing yourself and restori2">ing heaven to your mi2">ind, the world can be but a reflecti2">ion of heaven to you.

The world wi2">ithout your gui2">ilt i2">is the forgi2">iven world, shi2">ini2">ing and sparkly and new. Sti2">ill an i2">illusi2">ion, yes. Sti2">ill neutral and meani2">ingless, yes. i2">It i2">is sti2">ill nothi2">ing at all. But now the meani2">ingfulness of love - God's wi2">ill - i2">is projected and seen wi2">ithi2">in i2">it, rather than darkness. Thi2">is makes the world seem "lovable". Not because i2">it i2">is love or made of love, but because you can see only the love BEYOND i2">it and can do nothi2">ing else. And God does love the world we made. Thi2">is love, seen i2">in i2">it, i2">is i2">its only reali2">ity, and i2">in the i2">intensi2">ity of thi2">is love, all of the forms melt and di2">isappear. Because the love i2">is deeper than the forms and li2">ives between the li2">ines.

When eterni2">ity fi2">inally shi2">ines away the world, all i2">its forms have vani2">ished, everythi2">ing has fused i2">into oneness, love has erased death and the nothi2">ingness of the world of bodi2">ies ceases to exi2">ist. Wi2">ithout separati2">ion there are no forms. i2">In li2">ight, there i2">is no darkness. And i2">in love there i2">is no fear. All that remai2">ins beyond thi2">is di2">isappeari2">ing world i2">is heaven. Love looks upon i2">itself. Chri2">ist looks upon Hi2">imself. And then God i2">is known i2">in completi2">ion.

"When you thi2">ink you are projecti2">ing what you do NOT want, i2">it i2">is sti2">ill because you DO want i2">it. Thi2">is leads di2">irectly to di2">issoci2">iati2">ion"

"The power of deci2">isi2">ion i2">is your one remai2">ini2">ing freedom as a pri2">isoner of thi2">is world. YOU CAN DECi2">IDE TO SEE i2">IT Ri2">IGHT. What you made of i2">it i2">is NOT i2">its reali2">ity, for i2">its reali2">ity i2">is only what you GAVE i2">it. You cannot really gi2">ive anythi2">ing but love to anyone or anythi2">ing, nor can you really recei2">ive anythi2">ing else from them. i2">If you thi2">ink you have recei2">ived anythi2">ing else, i2">it i2">is because you have looked wi2">ithi2">in, and thought you saw the power to gi2">ive somethi2">ing else Wi2">ITHi2">IN YOURSELF. i2">It was only thi2">is deci2">isi2">ion that determi2">ined what you found, for i2">it was the deci2">isi2">ion of what you SOUGHT."

"You are afrai2">id of me because you looked wi2">ithi2">in, and are afrai2">id of what you saw. But you could not have seen reali2">ity, for the reali2">ity of your mi2">ind i2">is the loveli2">iest of God's Creati2">ions. Comi2">ing only from God, i2">its power and grandeur could only bri2">ing you peace, i2">IF YOU REALLY LOOKED UPON i2">IT. i2">If you are afrai2">id, i2">it i2">is because you saw somethi2">ing THAT i2">IS NOT THERE. Yet i2">in thi2">is same place you could have looked upon me and all your brothers, i2">in the perfect safety of the Mi2">ind that created us. For we are there i2">in the peace of the Father, Who wi2">ills to project Hi2">is peace through YOU."

"When you have accepted your mi2">issi2">ion to PROJECT peace, you wi2">ill Fi2">IND i2">it. For by MAKi2">ING i2">IT MANi2">IFEST you wi2">ill SEE i2">it. i2">Its holy wi2">itnesses wi2">ill surround you, because you CALLED upon them, and they wi2">ill come to you. i2">I have heard your call, and i2">I have answered i2">it, but you wi2">ill not look upon me, nor hear the answer whi2">ich you sought. But that i2">is only because you do not yet want ONLY that. Yet as i2">I become more real to you, you wi2">ill learn that you DO want only that. And you wi2">ill see me as you look wi2">ithi2">in, and we wi2">ill look upon the world as God created i2">it together. Through the eyes of Chri2">ist, ONLY the real world exi2">ists, and can BE seen."

"As you deci2">ide, so wi2">ill you see. And all that you see but wi2">itnesses to your deci2">isi2">ion. When you look wi2">ithi2">in and see me, i2">it wi2">ill be because you have deci2">ided to mani2">ifest truth. And as you mani2">ifest i2">it, you wi2">ill see i2">it both wi2">ithout AND wi2">ithi2">in, for you wi2">ill see i2">it wi2">ithout BECAUSE you saw i2">it fi2">irst wi2">ithi2">in. Everythi2">ing you behold wi2">ithout i2">is a judgment of what you beheld wi2">ithi2">in. i2">If i2">it i2">is YOUR judgment, i2">it wi2">ill be wrong, for judgment i2">is not your functi2">ion. i2">If i2">it i2">is the judgment of the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, i2">it wi2">ill be ri2">ight, for judgment i2">IS Hi2">is functi2">ion. You share Hi2">is functi2">ion only by judgi2">ing as HE does, reservi2">ing no judgment at all unto yourselves. For you wi2">ill judge AGAi2">INST yourselves, but He wi2">ill judge FOR you."

Remember, then, that whenever you look wi2">ithout and react unfavorably to what you see, you have judged yourself unworthy, and have condemned yourself to death. The death penalty i2">is the ego's ulti2">imate goal, for i2">it fully beli2">ieves that you are a cri2">imi2">inal, as deservi2">ing of death as God knows you are deservi2">ing of li2">ife. The death penalty never leaves the ego's mi2">ind, for that i2">is what i2">it always reserves for you i2">in the end. Wanti2">ing to ki2">ill you, as the fi2">inal expressi2">ion of i2">its feeli2">ing for you, i2">it lets you li2">ive but to awai2">it death. i2">It wi2">ill torment you whi2">ile you li2">ive, but i2">its hatred i2">is not sati2">isfi2">ied unti2">il you di2">ie. For your destructi2">ion i2">is the one end toward whi2">ich i2">it works, and the only one wi2">ith whi2">ich i2">it wi2">ill be sati2">isfi2">ied."

When i2">I used to be si2">ick or sufferi2">ing, the only opti2">ions at my di2">isposal was to take a medi2">icati2">ion, or "wai2">it i2">it out" or "let i2">it run i2">its course" or go through the sufferi2">ing unti2">il i2">I had "fully suffered". Li2">ike wai2">iti2">ing for the body to heal i2">itself.

Li2">ike there was some ki2">ind of requi2">irement or thi2">is was the only way to "get past i2">it". There was no qui2">ick fi2">ix. And so i2">I was si2">imply used to thi2">is way of exi2">isti2">ing where problems could not be easi2">ily resolved. Thi2">is seemed "normal."

But then Holy Spi2">iri2">it started to do hi2">is thi2">ing. And all of a sudden thi2">is assumpti2">ion that sufferi2">ing and heali2">ing take a lot of ti2">ime, came i2">into questi2">ion.

All of a sudden i2">it started to seem possi2">ible that, "maybe i2">I don't have to suffer"... or "maybe i2">I don't have to tolerate thi2">is" ... or "why should i2">I have to wai2">it for thi2">is to run i2">its course"... or "what i2">if i2">I can choose not to just let thi2">is snowball i2">into weeks of turmoi2">il?"

And as i2">I began to recei2">ive Holy Spi2">iri2">it's help and heali2">ing, i2">I started to di2">iscover that i2">if i2">I was wi2">illi2">ing, i2">I could start to challenge whether or not i2">I HAD to suffer... i2">I could start learni2">ing a li2">ittle at a ti2">ime to questi2">ion thi2">is.... maybe i2">I don't HAVE to go through thi2">is, or let i2">it just have power over me to di2">ictate how long i2">I have to put up wi2">ith thi2">is. What i2">if there i2">is a better way?

And so i2">I stated to peel back my ali2">ignment wi2">ith the ego and my beli2">ief that i2">I should just "go along wi2">ith" the sufferi2">ing, as i2">if i2">I had no other opti2">ion. i2">I started to get used to thi2">is i2">idea of stoppi2">ing myself and not just bli2">indly goi2">ing along wi2">ith the program, and reali2">izi2">ing that maybe i2">I don't HAVE to. And as there started to BE another opti2">ion - that i2">I could get healed by Holy Spi2">iri2">it, that really started to bri2">ing i2">into questi2">ion whether sufferi2">ing had to be TOLERATED or put up wi2">ith.

What also has i2">increased i2">is a ki2">ind of REFUSAL and strength to say NO to the prescri2">ibed sufferi2">ing, to rebuke i2">it, to reali2">ize that i2">I DO have a choi2">ice, and that i2">in actual fact there i2">IS a POWER i2">in deci2">isi2">ion. That i2">I can deci2">ide NOT to suffer. That i2">I do not have to accept or tolerate i2">it. i2">If i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing, there i2">is another way. i2">I can i2">instead refuse to just lay down and accept thi2">is and i2">instead forgi2">ive and get i2">into wi2">illi2">ingness and choi2">ice and get out of vi2">icti2">imhood and learn to let go, to let myself recei2">ive help and get some heali2">ing.

Thi2">is has really undermi2">ined the sense of havi2">ing to just let shi2">it happen. Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is adamant that you DO NOT HAVE TO SUFFER. There i2">is no meri2">it i2">in i2">it. You don't have to be gui2">ilty for a month and suffer wi2">ith a si2">ickness. All He wants i2">is for you to return to happi2">iness - i2">it's God's wi2">ill. So as you start to practi2">ice thi2">is and open up to i2">it and recei2">ive help, you also start to erode the beli2">ief i2">in "requi2">ired sufferi2">ing", whi2">ich i2">is a beli2">ief i2">in si2">in and gui2">ilt.

Thi2">is i2">is also part of why si2">ickness and death are NOT GOD'S Wi2">ILL, and bei2">ing si2">ick or dead i2">is AGAi2">INST God's wi2">ill. God wi2">ills i2">instead that you be FULLY HEALED, that you do not have to merely tolerate or put up wi2">ith sufferi2">ing or bei2">ing si2">ick or hurt or damaged i2">in any way. He wants to release you from thi2">is torture and help you to reali2">ize that you deserve and CAN ACCESS permanent heali2">ing and health and happi2">iness. That death and si2">ickness are not supposed to be part of your experi2">ience AT ALL.

A year or so ago, someone close to me was si2">ick. We weren’t sure what really happened. i2">It was very strange. i2">It seemed to come out of nowhere overni2">ight, had no apparent cause, and seemed i2">impossi2">ible to di2">iagnose.

The person seemed to turn i2">into a bi2">it of a monster, was confused and paranoi2">id, suddenly dropped a whole bunch of longheld beli2">iefs, and seemed to turn i2">into another person. Thi2">is was baffli2">ing and very upsetti2">ing.

i2">I took i2">it upon myself to try to "fi2">igure out" what was happeni2">ing. So i2">I started to research. i2">I went onli2">ine and was googli2">ing li2">ike a madman. Someti2">imes i2">I ran across somethi2">ing whi2">ich seemed i2">it "mi2">ight" explai2">in what’s happeni2">ing. Some thi2">ings seeemd to fi2">it.

Each ti2">ime i2">I found somethi2">ing, i2">I started to exclai2">im "thi2">is i2">is what i2">it i2">is", or "thi2">is i2">is what i2">is causi2">ing i2">it!" i2">I started dri2">ivi2">ing the person nuts wi2">ith my explanati2">ions and i2">ideas of what i2">I thought the problem was. Each ti2">ime that i2">I found somethi2">ing, i2">it seeemd li2">ike the true cause. But later, i2">it turned out to be, maybe not "i2">it". Somethi2">ing about i2">it, di2">idn’t qui2">ite fully explai2">in all the symptoms.

Di2">id that stop me? Nope. i2">I thought that thi2">is meant i2">I should seek even harder to fi2">ind the truth. That i2">I should have the "abi2">ili2">ity" to fi2">ind the truth out there somewhere. i2">I was convi2">inced at the ti2">ime that the truth i2">IS out there somewhere. That i2">if i2">I just try hard enough, i2">I wi2">ill fi2">ind i2">it. That "cause" i2">is out there somewhere. i2">Identi2">ifyi2">ing the cause would seem to suggest what i2">is happeni2">ing, to explai2">in i2">it, and that thi2">is would lead to a SOLUTi2">ION.

i2">It never happened. Each ti2">ime i2">I went seeki2">ing, i2">I felt more desperate. Each ti2">ime i2">I searched, i2">I came up more and more empty handed. i2">I felt exasperated and frustrated. i2">It became obsessi2">ive. Surely the truth was there somewhere, and deali2">ing wi2">ith thi2">is person bei2">ing the way there were was i2">intolerable. i2">I wanted to fi2">ind the truth. But i2">I was looki2">ing for i2">it "out there", and could not fi2">ind i2">it. The more i2">I sought and di2">id not fi2">ind, the more upset i2">I became, the more desperate i2">I felt, and the more i2">I then felt COMPELLED to search even harder.

Thi2">is turned out to be a good thi2">ing after a whi2">ile, because i2">I FAi2">ILED. i2">I totally fai2">iled to fi2">ind the truth out there. i2">I "exhausted" all efforts to search externally. So my mi2">ind gradually was usi2">ing up i2">its last vesti2">ige of a sense of "possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity", that the truth was out there. i2">I started to noti2">ice somethi2">ing. The truth does not seem to be out there! Anywhere! i2">I lost fai2">ith i2">in the world and SAW THROUGH the i2">illusi2">ion that the world contai2">ins the truth. Any ki2">ind of truth. Anywhere.

i2">It was a very short hop from thi2">is percepti2">ion to reali2">izi2">ing, bri2">ingi2">ing i2">into questi2">ion, that perhaps.... THE TRUTH i2">IS NOT ANYWHERE i2">IN THE WORLD. That i2">it li2">iterally cannot be found. That seeki2">ing i2">is a EGO TRAP. The more you seek for truth out there, the LESS you fi2">ind i2">it. And that’s because, i2">in truth, the truth i2">is i2">INSi2">IDE YOU. Each ti2">ime i2">I basi2">ically "left my i2">inner truth", beli2">ievi2">ing i2">I "di2">id not have the truth", i2">I went searchi2">ing for i2">it i2">in the world. i2">I really beli2">ieved strongly, the world HAD the truth i2">in i2">it SOMEWHERE. But i2">it di2">id not. i2">I i2">inadvertently proved i2">it to myself.

So i2">I fai2">iled, and that was great, because thi2">is i2">idea suddenly popped i2">in, that there i2">is no truth i2">in the world at all. NOTHi2">ING i2">in the world i2">is true. Thi2">is was qui2">ite eye openi2">ing. i2">It meant that, for example, the si2">ickness whi2">ich i2">I’d been tryi2">ing to di2">iagnose and fi2">ix thi2">is whole ti2">ime, ALSO wasn’t the truth. i2">It also meant, i2">it wasn’t bei2">ing caused BY anythi2">ing out there. The truth was NOT out there. There must have been another cause, an i2">inner cause.

And so began a whole new phase for me, of wi2">ithdrawi2">ing my beli2">ief from the world, learni2">ing to recogni2">ize i2">it i2">is COMPLETELY FALSE, that i2">it i2">is not true i2">in any way, and that also si2">ickness i2">is enti2">irely fake. These were i2">important steps i2">in the di2">irecti2">ion of forgi2">iveness, and completely shi2">ifted the way i2">I was looki2">ing at the si2">ick person 180 degrees. Clearly, i2">it wasn’t a questi2">ion of "what out there i2">is causi2">ing i2">it". i2">It was a matter of, "i2">It i2">is NOT bei2">ing caused".

Gradually as i2">I’ve been practi2">ici2">ing thi2">is and growi2">ing stronger i2">in the recogni2">iti2">ion that thi2">is i2">is true, that earth i2">is 100% false, and nothi2">ing i2">in i2">it i2">is true, my mi2">iracle-worki2">ing has gone up. i2">It i2">is my job now not to fi2">igure out, "what caused that", but to learn to NOT BELi2">IEVE that i2">it i2">is caused by anythi2">ing other than the mi2">ind. That there i2">is no truth i2">IN what i2">I’m percei2">ivi2">ing. People showi2">ing up wi2">ith si2">ickness, are tryi2">ing to assert a li2">ie. Si2">ickness i2">is recogni2">ize more and more as FALSE, an i2">illusi2">ion, wi2">ith no truth to i2">it.

Mi2">iracle worki2">ing **ABSOLUTELY REQUi2">IRES** NOT BELi2">IEVi2">ING THi2">IS WORLD i2">IS THE TRUTH. i2">If we beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is the truth, we wi2">ill keep i2">it, lock i2">in i2">its form, have no wi2">ill to heal i2">it, and be convi2">inced by i2">illusi2">ions. The truth i2">is not i2">in the world or i2">in form. "Never was love i2">in the world." i2">It i2">is not out there. i2">It’s i2">insi2">ide. i2">IT comes from God. God i2">is the only cause, not thi2">is world. Mi2">ind i2">is the only cause of what’s out there.

What appear to be causes i2">in thi2">is world are Li2">IES. Fi2">icti2">ion. Fantasy. i2">Illusi2">ions. Dreams. Make-beli2">ieve cause that suggest, yes, the world has truth i2">in i2">it because the world has a causal power. The world causes nothi2">ing. i2">It i2">is nothi2">ing but effect. Cause, therefore truth, i2">is somewhere else. Truth i2">is always equated wi2">ith REALi2">ITY. Si2">ince there i2">is NO truth i2">in thi2">is world, not i2">in false percepti2">ion or i2">in true percepti2">ion, THE WORLD i2">IS NOT REAL. And therefore i2">it i2">is NOT THERE, and whatever i2">is showi2">ing up as "si2">ickness happeni2">ing" i2">IS NOT HAPPENi2">ING.

What i2">is not a CAUSE, i2">is nothi2">ing but an EFFECT, and therefore has no reali2">ity of i2">its own. Because the world i2">is an effect, and has no truth/cause i2">in i2">it, i2">IT i2">IS NOT THERE. i2">It i2">is not happeni2">ing. Separati2">ion never happened.

Jesus:

"i2">It i2">is your thoughts alone that cause you pai2">in. Nothi2">ing external to your mi2">ind can hurt or i2">injure you i2">in any way. There i2">is no cause beyond yourself that can reach down and bri2">ing oppressi2">ion. No one but yourself affects you. There i2">is nothi2">ing i2">in the world that has the power to make you i2">ill or sad, or weak or frai2">il."

"The world that you percei2">ive i2">is the wi2">itness to your state of mi2">ind, the outward pi2">icture of your i2">inward condi2">iti2">ion."

"The cause of heali2">ing i2">is the only Cause of everythi2">ing. 4 i2">It has but one Effect. 5 And i2">in that recogni2">iti2">ion, causelessness i2">is gi2">iven no effects and none i2">is seen."

"There i2">is no poi2">int i2">in tryi2">ing to change the world. i2">It i2">is i2">incapable of change because i2">it i2">is merely an effect."

"And yet the world, as causeless, has no power to cause. As an effect, i2">it cannot make effects."

"what you made has no cause and no effects at all."

"But i2">it also shows that, havi2">ing no effects, i2">it i2">is not cause because the functi2">ion of causati2">ion i2">is to have effects"

"The world i2">is but an effect, i2">it i2">is not a cause at all."

"The world you see i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion of a world. God di2">id not create i2">it."

"The world that you see i2">is what you have put there to see; nothi2">ing more and nothi2">ing less"

"The world you see does not exi2">ist."

"Nothi2">ing the world beli2">ieves i2">is true."

"i2">It i2">is the world you see that i2">is i2">impossi2">ible."

"You are the dreamer of the world of dreams."

"The world you see has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith reali2">ity."

"The bleak li2">ittle world wi2">ill vani2">ish i2">into nothi2">ingness."

"The world you see does nothi2">ing. i2">It has no effects at all."

"Salvati2">ion i2">is no more than a remi2">inder thi2">is world i2">is not your home."

"There i2">is a place i2">in you where thi2">is whole world has been forgotten."

"The world has never been at all. Eterni2">ity remai2">ins a constant state."

When i2">I used to consi2">ider "the secret of salvati2">ion", whi2">ich i2">is the i2">idea that you are "doi2">ing i2">it to yourself", i2">I could recogni2">ize the need for total responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. i2">I saw that anythi2">ing whi2">ich i2">I thought someone was doi2">ing to me, from the outsi2">ide i2">in, i2">I must be doi2">ing to myself. But i2">I di2">idn't enti2">irely reali2">ize a key porti2">ion of thi2">is.

What i2">I see i2">in i2">it now i2">is more. i2">I see that we are i2">immortal bei2">ings, who can never be attacked or hurt or damaged or upset i2">in any way agai2">inst our wi2">ill. The ownershi2">ip and i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion wi2">ith thi2">is i2">is our true responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity.

Thi2">is lays a new foundati2">ion. Because now i2">it means that i2">if i2">I am sufferi2">ing, or seemi2">ing to suffer at the hands of another, or because of the world doi2">ing somethi2">ing to me, i2">it must mean i2">I have secretly attempted to stop bei2">ing i2">immortal.

The "what i2">I a doi2">ing to myself" i2">isn't so much the appearance of what others are doi2">ing, but i2">is i2">in fact the Di2">ISTANCE between my i2">immortal self and the mortal vi2">icti2">im self i2">I'm portrayi2">ing myself as. Between the i2">invulnerable self and the ego. i2">It i2">is the traversal of that di2">istance that i2">I am responsi2">ible for, and whi2">ich i2">is my own attack upon myself, placi2">ing myself i2">in a state of weakness.

Even i2">if i2">it may appear that the world i2">is seemi2">ing to be the cause of somethi2">ing, happeni2">ing to my body, i2">induci2">ing fear, causi2">ing effects i2">in me, i2">it cannot be true. These thi2">ings are not put i2">in place from the outsi2">ide i2">in, they're put i2">in place from the i2">insi2">ide out.

i2">If i2">I stop recogni2">izi2">ing my i2">immortal i2">invulnerable nature, and attack myself fi2">irst, i2">I wi2">ill lose track of who i2">I am, questi2">ion and doubt myself, go i2">into uncertai2">inty and fear, and project the i2">idea of causati2">ion outsi2">ide of myself. Then i2">I wi2">ill see myself as potenti2">ially caused by the world, i2">instead of by God.

That faulty percepti2">ion of myself, that body i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion, that self deni2">ial, i2">is somethi2">ing i2">I am doi2">ing to myself. And i2">it means i2">I'm putti2">ing myself i2">in a posi2">iti2">ion, i2">in a role, where i2">I seem vulnerable and i2">in need of defenses agai2">inst a cruel and unsafe world. But i2">I can't blame the world for bei2">ing i2">in thi2">is posi2">iti2">ion, when i2">it's me that's putti2">ing myself there.

Even more so, the world i2">is my dream, i2">in my mi2">ind, comi2">ing from me deci2">isi2">ion. i2">If i2">I dream of my body bei2">ing attacked surely i2">I have consented, and have attempted to use the body to prove i2">I am not i2">immortal. i2">I have done thi2">is to myself. i2">I cannot be attacked i2">if i2">I am permanent and unchangeable. Portrayi2">ing myself as a vi2">icti2">im must mean i2">I'm attempti2">ing to destroy myself, and that i2">is my own doi2">ing.

The responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity i2">is not i2">in terms of what others appear to be doi2">ing to me from the outsi2">ide i2">in, but what i2">I have attempted to do to my i2">immortal self, to my unli2">imi2">ited mi2">ind, to render i2">is less than whole and lacki2">ing and li2">imi2">ited. That i2">is an i2">internal attack whi2">ich merely i2">is di2">isgui2">ised behi2">ind the outward expressi2">ion of that decepti2">ion.

The i2">immortal cannot suffer. The i2">immortal cannot be si2">ick. The i2">immortal cannot di2">ie. The i2">immortal cannot be attacked or hurt. The i2">immortal cannot be upset or have thei2">ir peace di2">isturbed. The i2">immortal are responsi2">ible because they know themselves and have owned up to thei2">ir true chri2">ist nature. They no longer decei2">ive themselves wi2">ith the i2">idea that a fi2">icti2">ional ali2">ien wi2">ill can act agai2">inst them, and so thei2">ir mi2">ind i2">is not spli2">it.

The secret of salvati2">ion tells us we are responsi2">ible for all of our own sufferi2">ing. i2">It tells us that i2">it doesn't matter what the seemi2">ing cause of sufferi2">ing i2">is, there i2">is only one cause, and i2">it i2">is i2">in our own mi2">ind. i2">It tells us that we are doi2">ing i2">it to ourselves. And who are we, that thi2">is i2">is bei2">ing done to? We are i2">immortal bei2">ings. And so i2">if we seem to suffer, we must have undermi2">ined our own i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity. Just as "my attack thoughts are attacki2">ing my i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity."

You are not weak but strong. You are not afrai2">id but all powerful. You are not an i2">illusi2">ion but a reali2">ity. You are not mortal but i2">immortal. You are not vulnerable but i2">invulnerable. You are not destructi2">ible but permanent. You are not gui2">ilty but i2">innocent. You are sti2">ill as God created you.

i2">If i2">I react di2">ifferently to each person, or i2">in each si2">ituati2">ion, i2">I am not bei2">ing uncondi2">iti2">ional. i2">I thi2">ink that one response i2">is appropri2">iate for one si2">ituati2">ion, another i2">in a di2">ifferent si2">ituati2">ion. And i2">in thi2">is way, my ego becomes locked i2">into and engaged wi2">ith the FORM of the si2">ituati2">ion. i2">If someone becomes angry, i2">I react wi2">ith sternness. i2">If someone i2">is ki2">inder, i2">I react wi2">ith ki2">indness. Thi2">is i2">is condi2">iti2">ionali2">ity.

i2">I di2">idn't really reali2">ize that i2">I was doi2">ing thi2">is all the ti2">ime. i2">I was gi2">ivi2">ing back a response based on what i2">I recei2">ived from the person, i2">instead of gi2">ivi2">ing a response based on what i2">I recei2">ived from God!

i2">It i2">is very challengi2">ing to be lovi2">ing all the ti2">ime, i2">in spi2">ite of and regardless of ego appearances. Our ego i2">is easi2">ily tri2">iggered when other people act unlovi2">ingly. i2">It's also easy to buy i2">into the appearance that somethi2">ing has gone wrong wi2">ith someone's li2">ife and that they're gui2">ilty of a fault. i2">It may seem true i2">in form that they are doi2">ing somethi2">ing, but my reacti2">ion doesn't HAVE to mi2">irror that gui2">ilt/attack back to them.

Bei2">ing able to love all the ti2">ime totally fli2">ies i2">in the face of what the ego shows us and completely deni2">ies all ego i2">illusi2">ions the power to change us. i2">I have been goi2">ing through thi2">is lesson recently, learni2">ing that ONLY LOVE works i2">in a di2">ire si2">ituati2">ion, and ONLY LOVE can make a di2">ifference. All of my other reacti2">ions and mani2">ipulati2">ions and mi2">ispercepti2">ions and emoti2">ional reacti2">ions di2">id nothi2">ing but make the si2">ituati2">ion worse.

Uncondi2">iti2">ionali2">ity i2">is very much contrary to how the ego operates. i2">It wants di2">ifference and change and speci2">ial condi2">iti2">ions placed on all i2">interacti2">ions. When someone i2">is happy, you love them. What about when they are depressed, or vi2">iolent, or i2">insane, or severely upset? Can you overlook that and LOVE THEM?

i2">I found myself comi2">ing face to face wi2">ith my own i2">inner i2">inabi2">ili2">ity to love, as si2">ituati2">ions pushed and challenged me to love uncondi2">iti2">ionally. i2">I sai2">id to Jesus "i2">I cannot love that"... and i2">I couldn't. Or i2">I beli2">ieved i2">I couldn't. i2">It wasn't true. i2">It's just that i2">I was bei2">ing forced to have to love when my ego di2">idn't want to and so i2">I had to move PAST my ego (overlook/forgi2">ive) i2">in order to love anyway.

i2">It seems hard to do thi2">is at fi2">irst. i2">I li2">ike many are so used to just havi2">ing the normal automati2">ic ego reacti2">ions. And the ego i2">is especi2">ially very TEMPTi2">ING i2">in tryi2">ing to pull us i2">into i2">its drama, to get us to beli2">ieve that somethi2">ing has gone wrong. Holy Spi2">iri2">it's advi2">ice to me i2">in the face of ri2">idi2">iculous ego absurdi2">ity was LAUGH! i2">It seemed completely i2">inappropri2">iate, and i2">it was actually hard to fi2">ind a laugh, but i2">I di2">id i2">it.

Gradually i2">I'm growi2">ing more capable of lovi2">ing uncondi2">iti2">ionally even when faced wi2">ith ego bullshi2">it, and, the cool thi2">ing i2">is, that thi2">is means that i2">in order TO love uncondi2">iti2">ionally, i2">I have to learn to put asi2">ide my own ego self-attack, whi2">ich fai2">ils to love myself uncondi2">iti2">ionally, and as a result, the more i2">I choose uncondi2">iti2">ional love the more i2">I seem to gai2">in some ki2">ind of... i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity to the ego's temptati2">ions. Si2">ituati2">ions seem to be botheri2">ing me less, or they are not latchi2">ing onto me as easi2">ily. i2">I am havi2">ing less reacti2">ions. Thi2">ings whi2">ich would've upset me, i2">I've had to overlook, and that means i2">I'm no longer as decei2">ived by the ego. Yay.

So now i2">it's more a questi2">ion of, a si2">ituati2">ion happens, and then REGARDLESS of what the si2">ituati2">ion looks li2">ike, choosi2">ing to only come from love, i2">in the heart, rather than all the other 'reasons' for responses of the ego whi2">ich come from the head. Just plai2">inly i2">ignori2">ing everythi2">ing, i2">ignori2">ing how i2">it looks, i2">ignori2">ing appearances, i2">ignori2">ing the form of the si2">ituati2">ion, i2">ignori2">ing what the ego i2">is demonstrati2">ing, and then demonstrati2">ing uncondi2">iti2">ional love i2">instead. i2">I Wi2">ILL STi2">ILL LOVE YOU ANYWAY!

The challenge i2">is to keep thi2">is up all the ti2">ime. To come from love, all the ti2">ime. ALL the ti2">ime. Not just someti2">imes. Love love love love love love love love love.

"There i2">is no si2">in. Creati2">ion i2">is unchanged."

"There i2">IS no gui2">ilt i2">in you, for God i2">is blessed i2">in Hi2">is Son, as the Son i2">is blessed i2">in Hi2">im."

"There i2">is no fear i2">in perfect love."

"i2">In the real world, there i2">is no si2">ickness, for there i2">is no separati2">ion and no di2">ivi2">isi2">ion."

"There i2">is no death because what God created shares Hi2">is Li2">ife."

There i2">is no si2">in.

i2">I have never si2">inned.

i2">I wi2">ill never si2">in.

Thi2">is si2">in i2">is not real si2">in, i2">it's an i2">illusi2">ion of si2">in.

i2">I cannot si2">in.

Si2">in does not exi2">ist anywhere i2">in God.

Si2">in does not exi2">ist i2">in me.

There i2">is no gui2">ilt.

i2">I have never been gui2">ilty.

i2">I wi2">ill never be gui2">ilty.

Thi2">is gui2">ilt i2">is not real gui2">ilt, i2">it's an i2">illusi2">ion of gui2">ilt.

i2">I cannot be gui2">ilty.

Gui2">ilt does not exi2">ist anywhere i2">in God.

Gui2">ilt does not exi2">ist i2">in me.

There i2">is no fear.

i2">I have never been afrai2">id.

i2">I wi2">ill never be afrai2">id.

Thi2">is fear i2">is not real fear, i2">it's an i2">illusi2">ion of fear.

i2">I cannot be afrai2">id.

Fear does not exi2">ist anywhere i2">in God.

Fear does not exi2">ist i2">in me.

There i2">is no si2">ickness.

i2">I have never been si2">ick.

i2">I wi2">ill never be si2">ick.

Thi2">is si2">ickness i2">is not real si2">ickness, i2">it i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion of si2">ickness.

i2">I cannot be si2">ick.

Si2">ickness does not exi2">ist anywhere i2">in God.

Si2">ickness does not exi2">ist i2">in me.

There i2">is no death.

i2">I have never di2">ied.

i2">I wi2">ill never di2">ie.

Thi2">is death i2">is not real death, i2">it i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion of death.

i2">I cannot di2">ie.

Death does not exi2">ist anywhere i2">in God.

Death does not exi2">ist i2">in me.

My wi2">ife had sai2">id she was getti2">ing a foot cramp and that pai2">in was comi2">ing down her leg from the mi2">iddle of the shi2">in bone downwards.

Thi2">is was the si2">ite where, some 15-odd years ago, she had bashed i2">into the di2">ishwasher door and probably chi2">ipped the bone. She had a hard bump there ever si2">ince due to how the body had tri2">ied to heal i2">it, whi2">ich was a li2">ittle pai2">inful to push on. i2">It protruded out of the smooth shi2">inbone and was easi2">ily vi2">isi2">ible and easy to feel wi2">ith the fi2">ingers. i2">It was an area a li2">ittle smaller than a 25-cent coi2">in.

i2">I put my two fi2">ingers on the area and was i2">in qui2">ite a strong i2">inner condi2">iti2">ion, relati2">ively free from fear. i2">I i2">intended that i2">it be healed. My fi2">ingers started vi2">ibrati2">ing as Holy Spi2">iri2">it began to flow.

i2">I di2">id not say anythi2">ing for a whi2">ile. i2">I felt that i2">instead of tryi2">ing to force the thi2">ing to heal, i2">I would sort of step back and stay wi2">ithi2">in my i2">inner strength. i2">I had a sense of certai2">inty and knowi2">ing. i2">I di2">idn't feel the need to go out of my center and try to force i2">it, but rather, remai2">ined centered i2">in bei2">ing free from fear.

She sai2">id "there's no poi2">int, i2">it's been there for years". i2">I sai2">id, "that doesn't matter". i2">I was certai2">in that thi2">is was i2">irrelevant.

Holy Spi2">iri2">it suggested words: "go down". So i2">I spoke thi2">is at the bump. i2">I also told i2">it to "heal". i2">I could feel beneath my fi2">ingers a sense of "si2">inki2">ing" or collapsi2">ing. i2">I commanded i2">it agai2">in "be healed" "bone fuse together".

i2">I could feel under my fi2">ingers two or three ti2">imes the sensati2">ion of somethi2">ing di2">isappeari2">ing. About a mi2">inute later i2">I checked. The whole area had reduced down and was much flatter. The whole upper area had become completely flat. All that remai2">ined was a small area about half the si2">ize of half of a 1 cent coi2">in whi2">ich was sti2">ill protrudi2">ing.

We stopped there, but i2">it was qui2">ite cool to see that there was a marked di2">ifference. She tested i2">it herself and remarked that i2">it had i2">indeed seemed to have worked.

i2">I learned from thi2">is the di2">ifference between goi2">ing off-center and tryi2">ing to become aggressi2">ive or pushy i2">in tryi2">ing to force somethi2">ing to change, versus stayi2">ing clearly centered i2">in strength and freedom from fear and commandi2">ing "from a di2">istance". i2">I felt much stronger and more certai2">in thi2">is way, as though i2">I di2">idn't need to fi2">ight wi2">ith i2">it because i2">I knew wi2">ith more certai2">inty that i2">I was i2">in the truth and i2">it was not.

i2">I later was aski2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it about thi2">is. i2">It turns out that thi2">is remai2">ini2">ing centered i2">in truth i2">is the same thi2">ing as "havi2">ing fai2">ith". i2">It's not wi2">ishful thi2">inki2">ing nor bli2">ind hope. i2">It's a sense of certai2">inty and truth and freedom from fear or i2">indeci2">isi2">iveness. i2">I also was shown how mi2">iracle-worki2">ing i2">is very si2">imi2">ilar to how God creates, He si2">imply remai2">ins strong i2">in the truth and remai2">ins "centered" and then "shi2">ines" outward from there, stayi2">ing wi2">ithi2">in Hi2">imself but "expressi2">ing" from that poi2">int of Authori2">ity. Thi2">is i2">is how we need to be when we are worki2">ing mi2">iracles, otherwi2">ise i2">if we step down from the posi2">iti2">ion of authori2">ity i2">in tryi2">ing to make somethi2">ing happen, we move away from strength and certai2">inty and thus become weaker.

Thi2">is i2">is why the ego's versi2">ion of power i2">is to have power over somethi2">ing through force, whi2">ile God's versi2">ion of power i2">is to BE i2">IN strength (love, fearlessness, certai2">inty, truth) and stay i2">IN i2">it whi2">ile "emi2">itti2">ing" the creati2">ive power.

God was talki2">ing to me last ni2">ight.

i2">I began to ask Hi2">im to forgi2">ive me for some thi2">ings. Jesus nudged me that i2">I was maki2">ing a mi2">istake to ask thi2">is. i2">I then wondered i2">if God would forgi2">ive me then. God sai2">id, "You are my Holy Creati2">ion. How could i2">I not love you?". i2">I melted, wi2">ith an i2">immedi2">iate emoti2">ional response.

The sense of love pouri2">ing out was palpable. i2">It seemed so obvi2">ious and clear that, si2">imply by the fact that He had created me, that MUST have meant He loved me. There was no other i2">interference or reason not to. i2">It was so si2">imple.

As i2">I opened up to try to absorb thi2">is truth and feel thi2">is love, i2">it was curi2">ious how suddenly a voi2">ice popped up from i2">insi2">ide my belly. i2">It was li2">ike the ego just suddenly got really pi2">issed off and came out of i2">its li2">ittle house wi2">ith i2">its fi2">ists i2">in the ai2">ir shouti2">ing "how dare you, thi2">is can't be true, look at what you've done!".

i2">It was referri2">ing then, and starti2">ing to bri2">ing i2">into my awareness (because li2">ight was shi2">ini2">ing bri2">ightly upon me) thi2">ings that i2">I'd done i2">in the past whi2">ich i2">I apparently sti2">ill felt that i2">I was Si2">INFUL for. i2">It parti2">icularly revolved around an event when i2">I was 11 where a terri2">ible event happened and someone got i2">injured "because of me".

Apparently some part of me sti2">ill beli2">ieved i2">I was si2">inful for thi2">is, havi2">ing done i2">it. And thi2">is i2">is i2">in spi2">ite of spendi2">ing 30+ years worki2">ing on thi2">is event tryi2">ing to heal i2">it, tryi2">ing to fi2">ind di2">ifferent ways of looki2">ing at i2">it. i2">I'd even become aware of how i2">it transpi2">ired due to a past last reversal of karma, and how i2">it was a lesson, and the vari2">ious aspects of whether or not i2">I really wanted to hurt the person. i2">I thought i2">I'd come to what seemed to be peace about i2">it, but apparently i2">it was not qui2">ite done wi2">ith.

The ego (really me), screamed at myself, poi2">inti2">ing to how i2">I'd si2">inned and was gui2">ilty. How could God POSSi2">IBLY love me wi2">ithout any stri2">ings attached whatsoever, when so OBVi2">IOUSLY i2">I had done somethi2">ing so "wrong"? i2">It seemed to have a poi2">int. Deep down i2">I sti2">ill beli2">ieved i2">in my gui2">ilt.

However, what then transpi2">ired was a true forgi2">iveness. i2">It was clear that God loved me and as i2">I felt i2">into thi2">is, i2">I could tell how God was not accusi2">ing me. Somehow i2">in my mi2">ind i2">I had to reconci2">ile thi2">is because ei2">ither what God was sayi2">ing was true, or what my ego/hurt-self was sayi2">ing was true. They couldn't both be true.

Thi2">is i2">is when God told me the si2">imple, pi2">ivotal, clari2">ifyi2">ing fact whi2">ich i2">is the very foundati2">ion of the Atonement and of ALL forgi2">iveness: "i2">It wasn't real".

Thi2">is brought on a tremendous sense of reli2">ief and began to make me laugh extensi2">ively. i2">I started to explore thi2">is i2">idea, because i2">I di2">idn't qui2">ite beli2">ieve i2">it yet, but i2">if i2">it was true, i2">it seemed li2">ike Fi2">INALLY, after all thi2">is ti2">ime, and after all of the ways that i2">I tri2">ied to rati2">ionali2">ize why i2">I was i2">innocent, thi2">is was the key to a REAL i2">INNOCENCE.

i2">If the events that transpi2">ired at 11 were not REAL, and were just i2">illusi2">ions, then absolutely everythi2">ing that seemed to occur di2">id not REALLY happen. And therefore that i2">is why i2">I cannot have possi2">ibly have REALLY si2">inned. i2">If the world was not real, i2">if the person was not real, i2">if my body was not real, i2">if the events were not real, and i2">if what i2">I "di2">id" was not real, how could i2">it have been a real si2">in?

For the fi2">irst ti2">ime, i2">I could fi2">inally see how i2">if the events weren't real, i2">I *ACTUALLY* could be forgi2">iven. Li2">ike, all the way forgi2">iven. Forgi2">iveness apparently i2">is completely dependent on thi2">is FACT, because i2">if the world i2">is actually "happeni2">ing", i2">if i2">it i2">is "real", i2">if events i2">in i2">it are havi2">ing "real effects" on real people, then there i2">is just no way that there can be any i2">innocence. And so there i2">I was, fi2">inally after all these years, reveali2">ing i2">in thi2">is si2">imply clear truth, that i2">I CANNOT be si2">inful because i2">it di2">idn't even really happen!

Trusti2">ing God's word on thi2">is, i2">I explored thi2">is a li2">ittle further, because i2">it now had to i2">imply somethi2">ing. i2">If THAT si2">in was not real because i2">it di2">idn't really happen, then.... doesn't that mean that there i2">is no such thi2">ing as a REAL Si2">IN? Yes! There cannot be any such thi2">ing as a real si2">in. Thi2">is made me thi2">ink of some people's vi2">iew of si2">in as that you actually di2">id si2">in and need to get forgi2">iveness. The TRUE perspecti2">ive on thi2">is i2">is that the si2">in you thought you di2">id, you Di2">ID NOT REALLY DO, and that i2">is why you are forgi2">iven!

Thi2">is then started to extend to, well, i2">if i2">I have not ever si2">inned and i2">I'm i2">innocent, then doesn't that mean, nobody else has ever si2">inned ei2">ither? That there has never been a real si2">in? Yes! Everyone i2">is TRULY i2">innocent because si2">in has never happened.

Thi2">is just seemed so si2">imple and so clear and so easy. Once agai2">in, wi2">ithdrawi2">ing a sense of "reali2">ity" from i2">illusi2">ions presented the truth. And the truth set me free. Fi2">inally i2">I was able to feel a genui2">ine sense of love-abi2">ili2">ity, a genui2">ine sense of i2">innocence, a genui2">ine sense that God DOES see me wi2">ith forgi2">iveness, that thi2">is "si2">in i2">is forgi2">iven". i2">I beli2">ieve all of the laughter that followed was a heali2">ing release from my belly area.

By the way these thi2">ings spri2">ing from the belly because that's actually the area of the "2nd brai2">in" whi2">ich i2">is an emoti2">ional center where most feeli2">ings are felt. We carry most emoti2">ional pai2">in there.

For years i2">I had been secretly hangi2">ing on to the supposed "need" that i2">I needed to have thi2">is other person forgi2">ive me i2">in order for me to be forgi2">iven. i2">I was able to let that go! i2">I do not need that person's forgi2">iveness because i2">I am not really si2">inful. Those events were not real, the person has not really been hurt because they are i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it, NOTHi2">ING HAPPENED, and therefore .... i2">I could see, thi2">is new truth emergi2">ing.....

i2">I Di2">ID THi2">IS TO MYSELF!

All of the events, all of the people i2">involved, all of the acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies, all of what transpi2">ired, all of the reacti2">ions from myself and other people, all of i2">it was orchestrated by me! Thi2">is was when Jesus stepped i2">in and told me "i2">It was a lesson". "i2">In forgi2">iveness". And i2">indeed i2">it was, because i2">I'd learned so much about forgi2">iveness from thi2">is one calami2">ity i2">in my efforts to heal from i2">it. Seei2">ing i2">I di2">id i2">it to myself i2">I could see that ALL aspects of i2">it were "wi2">ithi2">in" my own doi2">ing, and NONE of i2">it was done "to me" by anyone else. Freei2">ing!

The si2">imple truth then was completely obvi2">ious. The atonement pri2">inci2">iple! "Nothi2">ing happened". Thi2">is i2">is li2">iterally, factually true. The world i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion. All events i2">in the world are an i2">illusi2">ion. People's bodi2">ies are i2">illusi2">ions. The whole physi2">ical uni2">iverse i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion. Nothi2">ing REAL has happened. There have not been any REAL problems or REAL wars or REAL deaths or REAL si2">icknesses. There has been no REAL damage. i2">It i2">is all a fucki2">ing i2">illusi2">ion!!!

i2">I could see thi2">is fi2">inally, relati2">ing to thi2">is i2">inci2">ident, and i2">it brough such reli2">ief and a sense of JOY. i2">I could actually feel joy. Joyful because there was no real reason not to be. Naturally joyful. And i2">I was smi2">ili2">ing as i2">I fell asleep.

Today i2">I feel strangely peaceful, li2">ike somethi2">ing that was once present i2">is no longer present.

Jesus sai2">id to me, "Because you were wi2">illi2">ing to recei2">ive love, thi2">is wi2">ill enable you to perform mi2">iracles"!

Thi2">is clued me i2">into somethi2">ing else. "i2">It i2">is the pri2">ivi2">ilege of the forgi2">iven to forgi2">ive" - ACi2">IM .... i2">i.e., i2">if you have reasons to beli2">ieve that YOU do not deserve heali2">ing, that YOU are si2">inful, that YOU really di2">id somethi2">ing bad that proves you aren't lovable, then YOU wi2">ill not be Wi2">ILLi2">ING to recei2">ive heali2">ing for yourself. Your unwi2">illi2">ingness to allow yourself to be forgi2">iven means that you wi2">ill not allow yourself to recei2">ive the mi2">iracle on behalf of someone else. Therefore thi2">is wi2">ill prevent you from performi2">ing mi2">iracles!

When you can therefore become healed and wi2">illi2">ing to recei2">ive God's love, to recei2">ive the Atonement, to recogni2">ize you are WORTHY, thi2">is Wi2">ILLi2">INGNESS for heali2">ing now opens up the doors to allow you to be wi2">illi2">ing to heal others. Before thi2">is you would be fi2">ighti2">ing agai2">inst your own beli2">ief that heali2">ing should not occur, because your beli2">ief i2">in your own si2">infulness blocks your beli2">ief that the other person deserves heali2">ing ei2">ither.

Thi2">is reveals a si2">imple truth. There i2">is no real si2">in! Si2">in i2">is not REAL. You have not REALLY done anythi2">ing wrong. You deserve God's love because you HAVE NOT really si2">inned. Whatever you di2">id was an i2">ILLUSi2">ION, not a reali2">ity. THANK FUCKi2">ING GOD FOR THAT!

"i2">I do NOT feel gui2">ilty, because the Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo ALL the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">IF i2">I Wi2">ILL LET Hi2">IM. i2">I Wi2">ILL to let Hi2">im by allowi2">ing Hi2">im to deci2">ide for God for me."

The Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is a real spi2">iri2">it from God that has unli2">imi2">ited power. He can heal anythi2">ing. He can undo anythi2">ing. He can also move mountai2">ins. There i2">is nothi2">ing he cannot do. The Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is wi2">ith you and would li2">ike for you to develop trust i2">in hi2">im, to the poi2">int where you mi2">ight be wi2">illi2">ing to allow hi2">im to enter you and help you on a practi2">ical, experi2">ienti2">ial level.

i2">It i2">is a matter of wi2">illi2">ingness, trust, letti2">ing go, surrenderi2">ing your ego attempts to fi2">ight wi2">ith everythi2">ing, and allowi2">ing the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to come i2">into you. He i2">is i2">invi2">ited every ti2">ime you show at least some wi2">illi2">ingness to move i2">in the di2">irecti2">ion of atonement and forgi2">iveness. But wi2">ithout your "permi2">issi2">ion" or your knowi2">ing that i2">it's safe to allow Hi2">im to help you i2">in a supernatural way, He wi2">ill not take those measures because He knows that you mi2">ight be fri2">ightened.

i2">I was havi2">ing a peri2">iod of ti2">ime that was very di2">iffi2">icult emoti2">ionally and kept turni2">ing to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to help me to forgi2">ive and to let go. i2">In heated moments of tremendous emoti2">ional upset i2">I started to say over and over agai2">in, "i2">I surrender". Or, "i2">I let go". i2">I would say i2">it repeatedly many ti2">imes, and would start to experi2">ience a sense of reli2">ief. Because i2">if there's one thi2">ing the ego does i2">is i2">it controls, holds on, attaches, cli2">ings, mani2">ipulates, bears grudges, resi2">ists, fi2">ights, and tri2">ies to di2">ig i2">in i2">its heels. By surrenderi2">ing wi2">illi2">ingly, you cut ri2">ight to the core and drop the ego acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies qui2">ickly.

i2">I di2">id thi2">is many weeks, often at ni2">ight before falli2">ing asleep. And each ti2">ime i2">I would ask the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to help me to forgi2">ive and let go. i2">I know he helped me wi2">ith thoughts and i2">insi2">ights and so on. But what was more i2">important, was that over ti2">ime, each ti2">ime i2">I went and surrendered, he often would start to remi2">ind me to surrender. He would say "relax" or "let me". And so i2">I would relax, physi2">ically, because when you relax the body physi2">ically i2">it also i2">is a si2">ign that you are wi2">illi2">ing to recei2">ive. Physi2">ical tensi2">ion can be a si2">ign of acti2">ive resi2">istance. So i2">I would physi2">ically relax and let go and just focus on surrenderi2">ing over and over and over.

And as i2">it turns out, thi2">is gradually developed to where my surrenderi2">ing of ego was, i2">in a way, also an openi2">ing up to or surrenderi2">ing to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it. i2">I was movi2">ing away from ego, towards Hi2">im. And i2">in surrenderi2">ing, as you let go, you become more allowi2">ing, more trusti2">ing, more wi2">illi2">ing to step asi2">ide, more open to recei2">ivi2">ing love and support and help. And so i2">I developed trust i2">in the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, to the poi2">int where i2">I would start to ask Hi2">im, wi2">illi2">ingly, but tentati2">ively at fi2">irst, to "come i2">into me and heal me". To help me to heal. And i2">in fact, i2">I started to experi2">ience thi2">ings happeni2">ing.

At fi2">irst i2">it would be that my hands would shake, i2">involuntari2">ily. Or maybe my feet. And i2">I di2">idn't really know what thi2">is was "doi2">ing" but i2">I learned that i2">it was a si2">ide effect of whatever He was doi2">ing. And so i2">I gradually learned to let go more and more and trust Hi2">im more, that He knows what He's doi2">ing. Over ti2">ime thi2">is i2">increased and the vi2">ibrati2">ional, spi2">iri2">itual, supernatural heali2">ing i2">intensi2">ifi2">ied and became more effecti2">ive, stronger and more powerful. My whole body would shake and vi2">ibrate i2">in ways that i2">I cannot re-enact. And after thi2">is peri2">iod of acti2">ivi2">ity, actual emoti2">ional energy would have been si2">igni2">ifi2">icantly reduced, maybe even removed completely, resulti2">ing i2">in me laughi2">ing, wi2">ithout havi2">ing to go through the normal processes to release i2">it.

Thi2">is also escalated through further trust and wi2">illi2">ingness to allow Hi2">im to help me to heal wi2">ith physi2">ical maladi2">ies, pai2">ins, symptoms and effects i2">in the body. He i2">is just as capable. i2">If i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing, and not afrai2">id, and trust, and open myself up, i2">I can let Hi2">im heal si2">ickness of all ki2">inds. i2">I'm not qui2">ite to the poi2">int of trust yet where i2">I can let somethi2">ing just di2">isappear i2">instantly but i2">I'm worki2">ing towards i2">it, conti2">inui2">ing to deeper my trust and openness to allowi2">ing the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to work mi2">iracles through me. And i2">it also has been starti2">ing to extend to others.

i2">I say all thi2">is not to brag and ONLY to ENCOURAGE that any and everyone try thi2">is for themselves i2">if you have not done so already. i2">I have no i2">idea how people relate to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it but i2">I do know that unti2">il i2">I i2">invi2">ited hi2">im to come i2">into my "body" and "do whatever he wants", all of thi2">is supernatural heali2">ing was not happeni2">ing. He wasn't seemi2">ingly "removi2">ing all the consequences" for me, and only through surrender and trust di2">id i2">I start to be Wi2">ILLi2">ING to allow hi2">im to actually remove all consequences, emoti2">ional or physi2">ical or otherwi2">ise, FOR ME, through no effort of my own.

Before, i2">I thought i2">I had to do all the correcti2">ing and undoi2">ing on my own, whi2">ich was my ego tryi2">ing to do the course by i2">itself. i2">If you have never experi2">ienced the Holy Spi2">iri2">it acti2">ively DOi2">ING SOMETHi2">ING, i2">in ways that have mani2">ifestati2">ions that you can SEE and FEEL, then you are i2">in for a surpri2">ise. There i2">is li2">iterally nothi2">ing He cannot do i2">if you wi2">ill let hi2">im. He frequently says to me, when i2">I am tempted to solve or fi2">ix somethi2">ing myself, "let me", i2">I stop and allow, and i2">immedi2">iately he shakes me all over the place (si2">ide effects) as he proceeds to heal i2">it for me. i2">I don't have to do anythi2">ing but allow and try to not i2">interfere, and stay relaxed.

Have a go, i2">if you have ti2">ime. Spend ti2">ime ti2">ime each day surrenderi2">ing and letti2">ing go, feel the reli2">ief, open up to allow and trust and i2">invi2">ite the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to work i2">in and through you. Put asi2">ide fear of "di2">isembodi2">ied spi2">iri2">it doi2">ing stuff"... you have to learn to trust past that. Spi2">iri2">it i2">is perfectly capable of doi2">ing ANYTHi2">ING, i2">it's only a matter of how much we are wi2">illi2">ing to get out of the way and LET Hi2">IM. i2">If you develop thi2">is trust far enough there i2">is no mi2">iracle you cannot perform, nothi2">ing you cannot heal and no li2">imi2">its to what He can do through you for others. i2">I've already started to allow Hi2">im to heal others through me, and he i2">is qui2">ite effecti2">ive.

i2">If i2">I am upset, i2">I must be mi2">istaken, and i2">I must have chosen wrongly.

"i2">I must have made a wrong deci2">isi2">ion because i2">I'm not at peace."

i2">If i2">I am feeli2">ing anythi2">ing other than love, joy, happi2">iness, peace, then i2">I've made a wrong deci2">isi2">ion. And i2">it was me who deci2">ided i2">it, meani2">ing that i2">I deci2">ided not to be happy by beli2">ievi2">ing somethi2">ing untrue - somethi2">ing that i2">is i2">incorrect."i2">I made the deci2">isi2">ion myself but i2">I can choose otherwi2">ise."

i2">If for example i2">I'm feeli2">ing loss, i2">I mi2">ight beli2">ieve that thi2">is loss i2">is legi2">iti2">imate, due to the percei2">ived loss of a valuable person, the loss of a body, the loss of a favori2">ite object or whatever.

But i2">I am a son of God, and there i2">is no loss i2">in sons of God. Therefore what i2">is thi2">is loss but a li2">ie? i2">It must be bei2">ing felt due to a mi2">istaken beli2">ief. Somewhere i2">in my mi2">ind, i2">if i2">I am feeli2">ing loss, i2">I am mi2">istaken, because nothi2">ing real can ever be lost.

So my feeli2">ing of loss, or unhappi2">iness, or sadness, or gri2">ief, or anger, or gui2">ilt, or fear, or any other ki2">ind of ego emoti2">ion that does not exi2">ist i2">in God, i2">isn't just "a feeli2">ing" si2">itti2">ing there on i2">its own wanti2">ing to be felt. i2">It's the RESULT of some deci2">isi2">ion i2">I made, at some ti2">ime, to beli2">ieve somethi2">ing mi2">istakenly, whi2">ich has resulted i2">in thi2">is less-than happy feeli2">ing.

So behi2">ind the feeli2">ing of loss or sadness or anger, there i2">is always somethi2">ing else goi2">ing on.

"Anger i2">is never justi2">ifi2">ied"

"i2">I am never upset for the reason i2">I thi2">ink."

i2">If i2">I would be wi2">illi2">ing to look and fi2">ind out what i2">it i2">is i2">I beli2">ieve or have chosen, that i2">is produci2">ing a negati2">ive feeli2">ing, and questi2">ion the basi2">is of i2">it, i2">it would stop PRODUCi2">ING the effect of the negati2">ive feeli2">ing.

Thi2">is i2">is somewhat radi2">ical because i2">it starts to reveal that any unhappy or unholy feeli2">ings you have, you don't necessari2">ily HAVE to have. You don't necessari2">ily have to cry about the loss or whatever, i2">IF you can fi2">ind out what i2">is CAUSi2">ING i2">it and correct the real i2">issue. The i2">issue i2">is always some ki2">ind of mi2">istakenness, some wrong beli2">ief, some faulty conclusi2">ion or valui2">ing, whi2">ich i2">is resulti2">ing i2">in the "effect" of ego emoti2">ions bei2">ing generated. You don't' have to suffer through i2">it.

"i2">It's not God's wi2">ill that you suffer."

By all means do not deny feeli2">ings i2">if all you really can manage i2">is to be swept up i2">in them and feel them. Someti2">imes you have to have a huge catharsi2">is whi2">ich i2">is ok. But i2">I also often fi2">ind myself upset and Jesus i2">is proddi2">ing me that i2">I don't really need to be feeli2">ing thi2">is at all, nor do i2">I have to go through the moti2">ions of the release of i2">it through normal human-body means.

i2">If behi2">ind every emoti2">ion there i2">is a thought or beli2">ief or deci2">isi2">ion, then i2">its my mi2">ind that needs to change i2">in order to stop manufacturi2">ing thi2">is emoti2">ional si2">ickness. All negati2">ive emoti2">ions are what i2">it feels li2">ike to beli2">ieve thi2">ings whi2">ich are not true.

i2">It's qui2">ite plausi2">ible, that you wi2">ill reach a state where you no longer need to feel any ego emoti2">ions ever agai2">in. i2">In fact very often now when i2">I go to feel and show a wi2">illi2">ingness to "just feel i2">it", regardless of i2">its vali2">idi2">ity, the Holy Spi2">iri2">it steps i2">in and starts to perform a heali2">ing on me. He removes i2">it for me when i2">I let hi2">im.

"He wi2">ill undo the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">if i2">I wi2">ill let hi2">im."

"i2">I choose to let hi2">im by allowi2">ing hi2">im to choose for God for me."

And so gone are the days of havi2">ing to just be on an emoti2">ional rollercoaster, bei2">ing thrown around by unhappi2">iness and cryi2">ing all the ti2">ime. i2">If you wi2">ill allow yourself to go deeper and recei2">ive heali2">ing, to uproot the cause of the feeli2">ing, then you can collapse the feeli2">ing enti2">irely. i2">It then become no longer necessary to be unhappy or to cry or release or cathart. And ulti2">imately, you wi2">ill no longer have to cry ever agai2">in.

Only the happy feeli2">ings that you share wi2">ith God are real, just as the real thoughts of li2">ife and love that you share wi2">ith hi2">im result i2">in and cause those happy feeli2">ings. And only the thoughts i2">I thi2">ink wi2">ith God are true.

Where do you fi2">ind a sense of certai2">inty? A sense of somethi2">ing you can trust? A sense of actuali2">ity or correctness? Where do you fi2">ind a truth, that i2">is so acceptable and so full and complete that you have no doubt?

i2">I fi2">ind that as i2">I try to fi2">ind answers i2">in, and wi2">ith, the ego, i2">i.e. wi2">ith my own mi2">ind and faculti2">ies, i2">I cannot come up wi2">ith a sati2">isfyi2">ing answer. i2">I i2">instead come up wi2">ith a multi2">itude of possi2">ible answers, all of whi2">ich are di2">ifferent and none of whi2">ich really gi2">ive me a sense of .... yes, thi2">is i2">is i2">IT, i2">I found i2">it!. .. Or at least, i2">if i2">I thi2">ink i2">I found i2">it, then later i2">I'll reali2">ize i2">it doesn't qui2">ite fi2">it. So none of the answers work. None of them.

i2">In fact, the more that i2">I get i2">into 'i2">I need to fi2">igure thi2">is out', or 'maybe i2">it's thi2">is - maybe i2">it's that', .. the more i2">I try and effort to i2">investi2">igate and fi2">ind "the truth" i2">in thi2">is way, the worse the si2">ituati2">ion seems to become. Confusi2">ion i2">increases. i2">I move away from a sense of certai2">inty, peace, truth or acceptabi2">ili2">ity. i2">I move towards i2">increasi2">ing UN-certai2">inty.

Key i2">insi2">ight: Tryi2">ing to fi2">igure out and explai2">in what's happeni2">ing usi2">ing my own separate ego mi2">ind/i2">intelli2">igence creates MORE confusi2">ion! i2">I'm barki2">ing up the wrong tree!

So i2">I di2">ig and di2">ig and get clever about what 'mi2">ight' be "the answer", only to sense that thi2">is answer i2">is flawed i2">in some way, i2">it doesn't qui2">ite explai2">in thi2">ings, and i2">I just can't get a feeli2">ing of 'absolute certai2">inty' around i2">it. i2">It seems li2">ike i2">it *mi2">ight be* true, i2">it's *possi2">ibly* a descri2">ipti2">ion, i2">it's *could be* what's happeni2">ing etc... but never a sense of .... "thi2">is i2">is".

And you know what, the more i2">I try to do thi2">is the worse i2">it gets and the more confused i2">I become and the less i2">I have peace.

So, the lesson here i2">is, clearly... i2">I have made the problem real, and now i2">I am reacti2">ing to i2">it by tryi2">ing to explai2">in or justi2">ify or i2">intellectuali2">ize 'why' i2">it i2">is happeni2">ing... rather than i2">IF i2">it i2">is happeni2">ing. And that means, i2">I'm usi2">ing the ego, i2">I'm trusti2">ing my own self i2">instead of God, i2">I'm looki2">ing for answers i2">in the ego world outsi2">ide of me, i2">I'm tryi2">ing to fi2">ind ego proof of the truth, and basi2">ically am constantly comi2">ing up empty handed.

i2">It can become... exasperati2">ing, tryi2">ing to fi2">ind the truth where the truth i2">IS NOT. The secret truth i2">is: EVERY ego answer i2">is NOT TRUE! The ego does not and cannot KNOW truth AT ALL!!! All i2">it can do i2">is speculate and guess and wonder and deduce and pretend i2">it has the prowess to fi2">igure thi2">is all out on i2">its own. And i2">it wi2">ill never be able to fi2">ind the truth. The ego cannot wake up to reali2">ity!

So the questi2">ion becomes, where i2">I am goi2">ing to get my sense of certai2">inty from? Where i2">is the real truth? Where i2">is a truth or an answer or whatever that i2">I can really beli2">ieve .... yes... thi2">is i2">is exactly i2">IT. And i2">I can tell you, i2">it's very possi2">ible to come up wi2">ith numerous ego explanati2">ions or rati2">ionali2">izati2">ions that all say... yes... thi2">is i2">is exactly i2">it, that thi2">is i2">is an exact match to the si2">ituati2">ion and i2">it really seems to be 'thi2">is'... only to fi2">ind loopholes, i2">inconsi2">istenci2">ies, doubts, and then some 'other' possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity comes along. Thi2">is i2">is all because i2">I'm searchi2">ing wi2">ithi2">in the realm of relati2">ivi2">ity, parti2">iali2">ity, di2">ifferences, a lack of wholeness and a world of li2">ies.

So where wi2">ill i2">I fi2">ind THE answer? What i2">is THE answer? Where wi2">ill i2">I get that sense of... certai2">inty, peace, joy, and KNOWi2">ING, that comes from the 'real truth'.... somethi2">ing i2">I can really get behi2">ind and know, thi2">is i2">IS i2">it.

What i2">is the real truth? God i2">IS i2">it, of course! God i2">is WHERE the truth i2">is. God i2">is the certai2">inty i2">I seek. God i2">is the answer that i2">I can actually TRUST.... to trust that i2">it wi2">ill be consi2">istent and unwaveri2">ing and complete. There i2">is no sense of consi2">istent truth li2">ike that i2">in the ego's world. No matter what the ego's explanati2">ions or meani2">ings are, NONE of them are the whole truth. And none of them bri2">ing the feeli2">ing of... ahhhhh yes... that God bri2">ings.

But then, you have to reali2">ize thi2">is... God i2">isn't an explai2">iner, as such. God doesn't spend ti2">ime di2">iagnosi2">ing, or fi2">iguri2">ing out, or doi2">ing any of those acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies that the ego mi2">ind does i2">in attempti2">ing to fi2">ind out what i2">it thi2">inks i2">is happeni2">ing. i2">In fact, God doesn't even deal i2">in the realm of 'maybe'. God HAS the answer already, whereas the ego i2">is SEPARATE from the answer so has to go SEEK for i2">it!

"Seek and do not fi2">ind!" - ACi2">IM

And the harder you seek the truth, the further you get from the TRUTH! Doh!!! i2">I've been looki2">ing i2">in the wrong place thi2">is whole ti2">ime :-D

So ... God has really no i2">interest i2">in spendi2">ing ti2">ime tryi2">ing to di2">iscern what i2">illusi2">ions are doi2">ing or what to do about them to 'fi2">ix' unreal problems. God doesn't make problems real then OBSESS over tryi2">ing to solve them, not reali2">izi2">ing that beli2">ievi2">ing they are a problem i2">IS the problem.

So as i2">I go to God, i2">I see that God's 'way' i2">is di2">ifferent from the ego's 'way'. God's way i2">is more to do wi2">ith.... a constant, di2">irect, i2">immedi2">iate correcti2">ion and heali2">ing, whi2">ich solves the problem, i2">instead of all of the dwelli2">ing on basi2">ically 'keepi2">ing' the problem that the ego loves to i2">indulge i2">in whi2">ile di2">isgui2">ised as a problem solver. Hah.

So agai2">in... thi2">is i2">is about learni2">ing to trust He who KNOWS, versus bei2">ing lost i2">in he who 'thi2">inks' he knows.

And perhaps i2">it's not unti2">il we can really let go of all efforts to 'explai2">in real i2">illusi2">ions', that we wi2">ill turn to God i2">in surrender and trust and allow Hi2">im, i2">instead, to bri2">ing heali2">ing to the si2">ituati2">ion FOR us.

Thank you God.

i2">I went to God and opened myself up on the topi2">ic of uncondi2">iti2">ional love. i2">I wanted to fi2">ind out how to be uncondi2">iti2">ionally lovi2">ing, and i2">I started to i2">inqui2">ire whether God loved me uncondi2">iti2">ionally.

Then i2">I started to regurgi2">itate all of the thi2">ings i2">I di2">id duri2">ing the day whi2">ich could've been consi2">idered gui2">ilty or judgmental or fearful. i2">I seemed to be confessi2">ing these thi2">ings, thi2">inki2">ing perhaps that God would only love me uncondi2">iti2">ionally i2">IF i2">I hadn't done these thi2">ings or i2">IF i2">I was wi2">illi2">ing to admi2">it them.

For some reason i2">it seemed di2">iffi2">icult to si2">imply accept that God loves me uncondi2">iti2">ionally. i2">In my mi2">ind i2">I kept thi2">inki2">ing there had to be 'reasons' why God would love me, li2">ike, certai2">in condi2">iti2">ions that i2">I had to be meeti2">ing, certai2">in ways i2">I had to be behavi2">ing. So i2">I seemed to keep offeri2">ing up these thi2">ings that i2">I'd 'done', beli2">ievi2">ing that at least exposi2">ing them to Hi2">is li2">ight was some ki2">ind of 'offeri2">ing' or that He needs to forgi2">ive me for them, or somethi2">ing.

But what happened was, i2">I thi2">ink Holy Spi2">iri2">it chi2">imed i2">in that none of these thi2">ings were i2">important. i2">I felt the presence of God, whi2">ich was just 'there', whi2">ile off to one si2">ide i2">it seemed Holy Spi2">iri2">it spoke for Hi2">im. i2">I sti2">ill struggled to understand how God could be lovi2">ing me uncondi2">iti2">ionally i2">if i2">I'd done certai2">in thi2">ings or made certai2">in mi2">istakes or whatever... there was just thi2">is ... expectati2">ion, of 'only bei2">ing loved i2">IF', a love that's based on condi2">iti2">ions and requi2">irements, that i2">I found hard to push past mentally.

What i2">I couldn't 'get', but what was bei2">ing very si2">imply offered, was that... all God wants to do i2">is love me. Not me i2">in exclusi2">ion, but, ... He had no other agenda. No other i2">interests. He wasn't aski2">ing me to do certai2">in mental somersaults. He wasn't even remotely i2">interested i2">in all the thi2">ings i2">I'd 'done'. He di2">idn't seem at all concerned about any of the stuff i2">I felt gui2">ilty about. i2">It was really li2">ike He was obli2">ivi2">ious to all thi2">is. And all that He WAS doi2">ing... was lovi2">ing.

Holy Spi2">iri2">it chi2">imed i2">in... that all God wants to do i2">is love. The i2">impressi2">ion i2">I got was of li2">ike a 'bei2">ing' that just loves, only loves, doesn't do anythi2">ing else, has no other i2">interests or moti2">ives, i2">isn't even remotely exci2">ited or upset about other stuff i2">I've done, i2">isn't even remotely concerned wi2">ith puni2">ishment or judgement, and JUST WANTS TO LOVE THE Li2">IVi2">ING SHi2">IT OUT OF ME.

And nothi2">ing else.

Just love. Just lovi2">ing. Just bei2">ing i2">in love and wanti2">ing to share that love wi2">ith me. Just embraci2">ing me wi2">ith love and surroundi2">ing me wi2">ith love, li2">ike love was i2">its ONLY functi2">ion, love was i2">its only capabi2">ili2">ity, and i2">it couldn't DO anythi2">ing else but love. i2">It was almost li2">ike a handi2">icapped chi2">ild wi2">ith severe li2">imi2">itati2">ions, as an analogy, whi2">ich just runs up to you and hugs you spontaneously for no reason, and doesn't really do much else. i2">It just loves. God just loves.

i2">It blew me away that thi2">is was all God was i2">interested i2">in. Just to love me. Nothi2">ing else was i2">important to Hi2">im i2">in that moment. There were no di2">istracti2">ions. Just thi2">is totally si2">ingle-mi2">inded perfectly pure absolutely overwhelmi2">ingly unbri2">idled passi2">ionate, embraci2">ing love, for me, for no reason whatsoever other than i2">its own self-evi2">ident love.

i2">I felt that, some. But parts of me sti2">ill couldn't understand how thi2">is was possi2">ible. My ego mi2">ind kept reachi2">ing to "but what about ...."... and none of that was i2">important.

God just loves us, 100%, all the ti2">ime. We are i2">in that love wi2">ith Hi2">im, 100%, all the ti2">ime. Just love everywhere. That's all there i2">is.

i2">I've been starti2">ing to read "Li2">ife and teachi2">ing of the Masters of the far East". i2">It's a collecti2">ion of books, recounti2">ing the stori2">ies of travelers who went to the far East and encountered several very spi2">iri2">itually advanced people.

The only other book i2">I've read that's si2">imi2">ilarly i2">inspi2">iri2">ing, or alludi2">ing to the potenti2">ial we have, i2">is Yogananda's autobi2">iography of a Yogi2">i.

i2">In thi2">is book, the experi2">iences and explanati2">ions that are gi2">iven are qui2">ite eye-openi2">ing. i2">If the stori2">ies are to be beli2">ieved, and i2">it's to be expected a lot of people have a hard ti2">ime accepti2">ing i2">it, here i2">is some of what i2">is clai2">imed:

God has a power whi2">ich He shares fully wi2">ith us and whi2">ich we are meant to use, and thi2">is power i2">is capable of a) mani2">ifesti2">ing any object of any ki2">ind, b) heali2">ing absolutely all si2">ickness, c) overcomi2">ing death, d) faci2">ili2">itati2">ing the transcendence of space and ti2">ime for travel, e) bei2">ing not only i2">immune to but able to control all aspects of events and objects i2">in the physi2">ical world, f) bei2">ing able to materi2">iali2">ize and demateri2">iali2">ize the body, g) the i2">instantaneous mani2">ifestati2">ion of food and money suppli2">ied by God meani2">ing you no longer have to rely on any li2">imi2">ited resource or sources of objects from others, .... and vari2">ious other thi2">ings we'd consi2">ider 'mi2">iracles'.

Basi2">ically, what i2">it's suggesti2">ing i2">is, li2">iterally, that we are capable of absolutely ANYTHi2">ING i2">if/when we joi2">in wi2">ith God. i2">It doesn't just mean that we gi2">ive up everythi2">ing and go to God, ei2">ither, although some people eventually reach such a hi2">igh posi2">iti2">ion that they never want to leave there, although they can (li2">ike Jesus). i2">It means that we can actually 'li2">ive forever' joi2">ined to an unli2">imi2">ited supply of provi2">isi2">ion. The people i2">in the book, the masters, are hundreds of years of age, and yet appear to be 30-40 i2">in age, youthful and i2">in perfect health.

These ki2">ind of thi2">ings gi2">ive me more of a pi2">icture of 'whats possi2">ible' and clues as to what A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles mi2">ight be sayi2">ing and meani2">ing.

i2">I reali2">ize now that when i2">I read certai2">in thi2">ings i2">in the Course, even i2">if i2">I THi2">INK i2">I am bei2">ing absolutely open mi2">inded, i2">I am sti2">ill actually bui2">ildi2">ing upon meani2">ings and learni2">ing that i2">I had accumulated from before. Even i2">if i2">I thi2">ink my learni2">ing i2">is more open mi2">inded than others, i2">it STi2">ILL i2">is resti2">ing on what i2">I already thi2">ink i2">I know and that skews the potenti2">ial meani2">ing. Also i2">I do not know what i2">I don't know... there are thi2">ings, truths, that i2">I si2">imply am not aware of, and so when i2">I thi2">ink i2">I am exactly 'getti2">ing' what the Course says, maybe i2">I sti2">ill am not... there could be a context or laws or i2">informati2">ion outsi2">ide of my current awareness.

Then when i2">I'm exposed to i2">informati2">ion li2">ike i2">in thi2">is seri2">ies of books, i2">it makes me 'thi2">ink twi2">ice' about what i2">I thought i2">I knew. i2">It's eye openi2">ing.

i2">In all encounters wi2">ith people, you have basi2">ically two ways of relati2">ing. Ei2">ither you wi2">ill gi2">ive love, or you wi2">ill wi2">ithhold love. When you gi2">ive love, you are i2">in ali2">ignment wi2">ith the Golden Rule, and recogni2">ize that the only strategy that wi2">ill work wi2">ithout hurti2">ing yourself i2">is to love the person. i2">In so doi2">ing, you become empowered by that love, become i2">invulnerable to attack, and gai2">in a boost i2">in confi2">idence due to the absence of fear that i2">it i2">induces. Thi2">is i2">is a natural "extensi2">ion" of love and i2">is the healthy way to relate to people. To teach only love.

But learni2">ing to be thi2">is way and to do thi2">is, i2">in actual encounters, i2">is not always easy and for me used to be far from what i2">I thought would "work". For a large porti2">ion of my li2">ife i2">I was extremely pai2">infully shy, soci2">ially anxi2">ious, and really not li2">iki2">ing people i2">in general. There was so much fear and worry about i2">interacti2">ing, and everyone seemed to be a powerful stranger. i2">It was a very i2">isolated and lonely state of bei2">ing, very fragi2">ile, weak and fi2">illed wi2">ith sufferi2">ing. i2">I would people please all the ti2">ime and never felt seen or acknowledged, as i2">if i2">I had no ri2">ight to be equal to anyone.

Usually my way of deali2">ing wi2">ith people was to shut them out, avoi2">id them, deny them, and try to escape them. They all seemed to be threateni2">ing and i2">I was very di2">is-empowered. i2">I lacked confi2">idence and felt i2">insecure all the ti2">ime. i2">I dreaded soci2">ial si2">ituati2">ions and when i2">I was forced i2">into them i2">it was excruci2">iati2">ing. My percepti2">ion of and beli2">ief that everyone was judgi2">ing me made me profoundly embarrassed and thi2">is i2">infli2">icted the most horrendously negati2">ive, deep emoti2">ional pai2">in, not because they actually judged but because i2">I beli2">ieved they were. i2">I had no i2">idea what i2">I was doi2">ing to myself. What i2">I felt as a result of my self attack was 10 ti2">imes worse than any other emoti2">ional upset i2">I've ever experi2">ienced resulti2">ing from what anyone else ever di2">id.

The strategy i2">I had, whi2">ich i2">is enti2">irely an ego strategy, was that i2">in order to become safe or better off i2">in any way, i2">I needed to separate myself from people. i2">I di2">idn't see a possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of feeli2">ing calm and happy and confi2">ident i2">in any si2">ituati2">ion, only afrai2">id, and just wanted to escape. i2">It seemed as i2">if escapi2">ing would work, and so i2">I had trust i2">in i2">it. But all that escapi2">ing di2">id was i2">isolate me more and make me wi2">ithdrawn from soci2">iety. Thi2">is also actually led to years of depressi2">ion i2">in my late teens and a sense that my li2">ife was so stuck that i2">it was comi2">ing to an end.

i2">It was around that ti2">ime also though that i2">I started to get i2">into spi2">iri2">itual thi2">ings and there was thi2">is strange peri2">iod of mysti2">ical experi2">iences at the same ti2">ime as bei2">ing mi2">ixed i2">in wi2">ith a lot of fear and i2">inadequacy. i2">I started to work on heali2">ing myself i2">in whatever way seemed to work, although at fi2">irst that was very haphazard and flawed. i2">It was about that ti2">ime that i2">I suddenly met my wi2">ife, whose spi2">iri2">itual li2">ight and strength was so bri2">ight and fi2">illed wi2">ith uncondi2">iti2">ional love, that i2">I thought she was li2">iterally an angel. i2">It wasn't unti2">il my late 20's that i2">I found A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles and everythi2">ing conti2">inued to spi2">iral upwards from there.

So for me the i2">idea that i2">in a si2">ituati2">ion, when i2">I perhaps don't even feel li2">ike i2">interacti2">ing, tryi2">ing to push people away doesn't really work. i2">It has a si2">ide effect of attacki2">ing myself. Whatever i2">I try to make apply to others appli2">ies to me. An alternati2">ive approach has been gradually reveali2">ing i2">itself, and i2">it's one where i2">I reali2">ize that i2">I need to extend love, and that by doi2">ing so i2">I'm not only goi2">ing to be healed but the love wi2">ill also shi2">ine away my fears, strengthen me and make my more i2">invulnerable. The love gi2">ives me what seemed lacki2">ing when i2">I wasn't extendi2">ing i2">it, and then i2">I feel that i2">I have what i2">is needed to genui2">inely relate to the person. And then i2">I don't feel li2">ike escapi2">ing, because the love i2">is there.

i2">It's a strange fli2">ipflop but i2">it's li2">ike you spend your whole li2">ife usi2">ing thi2">is one strategy of separati2">ing yourself from others, to "deal wi2">ith" the way the world seems to be when you have that perspecti2">ive/percepti2">ion, only to fi2">ind that there i2">is another totally opposi2">ite alternati2">ive whereby you deli2">iberately deci2">ide to bri2">ing the love and stay put, knowi2">ing that i2">it's really the only approach that i2">is goi2">ing to work i2">in your favor. Thi2">is i2">is "new" to me as i2">I guess i2">it i2">is to most people but i2">I'm fi2">indi2">ing out qui2">ickly just how benefi2">ici2">ial i2">it i2">is to broadcast, radi2">iate, transmi2">it, extend love, i2">in si2">ituati2">ions that previ2">iously i2">I mi2">ight have wanted to "stop".

i2">I can testi2">ify that when you psychologi2">ically try to make people go away, stop, you resi2">ist them i2">in any way, wi2">ish the wouldn't do what they're doi2">ing etc, i2">it attacks you and i2">induces si2">ickness and pai2">in. Physi2">ically. Very qui2">ickly. You can beli2">ieve that what you're doi2">ing i2">is just an attempt to defend yourself i2">in whi2">ich i2">it does somethi2">ing to them and does nothi2">ing to you, but i2">it's not true. i2">It's double-si2">ided and you both get attacked. You are attacked by your own defenses, and never was that more true that "my defenses are attacki2">ing my i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity". Only by letti2">ing the defenses down and shi2">ini2">ing love i2">instead, exposi2">ing yourself, bei2">ing open and accessi2">ible, paradoxi2">ically makes you completely i2">invulnerable and strong and unattackable. You can i2">in a sense "hi2">ide i2">in plai2">in si2">ight" that way. The li2">ight protects you.

i2">It ki2">ind of feels li2">ike breaki2">ing out of a shell or comi2">ing out of an egg. Holy Spi2">iri2">it's gui2">idance to me lately has been to "bri2">ing" the love to the world that seems to be lacki2">ing i2">in i2">it, and to "extend" love i2">in order to work mi2">iracles. i2">It's through expressi2">ions of love, whi2">ich i2">is i2">its natural extensi2">ion, that mi2">iracles occur. They are "gi2">iven" thi2">is way. And for sure, li2">ivi2">ing i2">in fear i2">is totally anti2">i-mi2">iraculous and more li2">ike bei2">ing a psychi2">ic black hole. And i2">it's not merely enough to ask God or Holy Spi2">iri2">it to send love to someone. You yourself have to actually feel and express and extend the love, i2">if you want to benefi2">it from i2">it.

i2">It's actually for our hi2">ighest good and i2">in our own best i2">interest, and a shared i2">interest, to "only love". The extendi2">ing of love to others has a profound affect on your OWN mi2">ind. But at fi2">irst i2">it seems unnatural. Li2">ike some ki2">ind of "new tri2">ick" that you need to practi2">ice more. To be able to actually muster some love, and really feel i2">it. i2">It's been through all these years of tryi2">ing to forgi2">ive and heali2">ing and releasi2">ing old pai2">ins and so on that i2">I've very gradually "shi2">ifted" to bei2">ing "able" to fi2">ind thi2">is new "mode" of relati2">ionshi2">ip. And i2">it's for the most part sti2">ill qui2">ite spotty. But there's a sort of underlyi2">ing "more lovi2">ing" baseli2">ine that's there all the ti2">ime, whi2">ich was not there i2">in years past, and that's thanks to the course.

i2">I suppose you could correctly call i2">it bei2">ing the li2">ight of the world, i2">it's li2">ike you choose to shi2">ine and love comes out of you, even i2">if the world i2">itself i2">is so severely lacki2">ing i2">in love (whi2">ich i2">it i2">is). i2">It gi2">ives you the protecti2">ion you were lacki2">ing when you were afrai2">id, and i2">it strengthens and empowers you. i2">It solves all of the problems that the ego's remedi2">ies never really solved. And i2">it gi2">ives you a whole new sense of purpose i2">in li2">ife. Not forgetti2">ing how much happi2">ier i2">it feels :-) i2">It provi2">ides strength and confi2">idence. i2">It empowers you and puts you i2">in a posi2">iti2">ion where you can be truly helpful, rather than completely useless.

All i2">it takes i2">is seemi2">ingly a change of di2">irecti2">ion. Rather than bei2">ing so wi2">ithdrawi2">ing, i2">it i2">is more of a confronti2">ing. i2">Instead of bei2">ing escapi2">ing, i2">it's a wi2">illi2">ingness to be present. i2">Instead of runni2">ing away i2">in fear, i2">it gi2">ives you the power to stand your ground and assert yourself i2">in a healthy way. i2">It's taken a long ti2">ime to learn thi2">is and i2">I'm sti2">ill learni2">ing. But i2">if you could put who i2">I am now alongsi2">ide who i2">I used to be 20 years ago, you would probably thi2">ink we're not even the same person. And thank God for that!

Recently i2">I fi2">ind myself wai2">iti2">ing for someone to deci2">ide for me what i2">it i2">is i2">I wi2">ill do. i2">I even ask wi2">ithi2">in to Jesus or Holy Spi2">iri2">it for them to deci2">ide for me. i2">It i2">is one thi2">ing to surrender and open up to gui2">idance and to express from love, but part of the lesson i2">I've been learni2">ing i2">is that i2">I need to learn how to make real deci2">isi2">ions.

What has become apparent i2">is that most of li2">ife i2">is spent si2">imply reacti2">ing to the world, deali2">ing wi2">ith stuff that crops up, managi2">ing day-to-day mai2">intenance acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies, worki2">ing 9-5, just doi2">ing 'stuff' - stuff that everyone else wants or needs me to do. Stuff that the world i2">itself wants me to do. Stuff that the ego i2">is organi2">izi2">ing to try to keep me from bei2">ing responsi2">ible for my own li2">ife.

And thi2">is makes me reali2">ize just how much i2">I have not really been deci2">isi2">ive before and have not really known how to make a fi2">irm deci2">isi2">ion. To be causal, i2">instead of reacti2">ionary. To really choose somethi2">ing, commi2">it to i2">it and follow through. To be so ali2">igned wi2">ith bei2">ing responsi2">ible for my experi2">ience that i2">I choose what my experi2">ience i2">is goi2">ing to be, or i2">I choose what i2">I am goi2">ing to experi2">ience, i2">instead of si2">imply wai2">iti2">ing for experi2">iences to happen passi2">ively.

So when i2">I go to Jesus and try to get Hi2">im to deci2">ide for me, and He remai2">ins qui2">iet, or He nudges me, and i2">I don't get i2">it, i2">it's because He's tryi2">ing to get me to act from a place of certai2">inty i2">instead of fear. A place of knowi2">ing, i2">instead of fi2">iguri2">ing out. A place of bei2">ing tuned wi2">ithi2">in, i2">instead of tuned out. And then he says, "deci2">ide". And i2">I'm li2">ike... yah.. i2">I am just blowi2">ing out hot ai2">ir goi2">ing around i2">in ci2">ircles i2">in what i2">I'm calli2">ing deci2">isi2">ion maki2">ing whi2">ich i2">is really just "not deci2">idi2">ing" and spi2">inni2">ing my wheels.

To make a 'real deci2">isi2">ion', whi2">ich i2">isn't a reacti2">ion, and whi2">ich i2">involves bei2">ing true to myself, and not doi2">ing anythi2">ing that i2">I don't want to do (whi2">ich produces fear).... i2">it's a new thi2">ing.

When i2">I am i2">in a state of i2">indeci2">isi2">ion, i2">I am clueless about what to do. i2">I don't have any sense of certai2">inty or clari2">ity. i2">I thi2">ink somehow i2">it's possi2">ible to 'become clear' whi2">ile i2">in that state, or that the clari2">ity i2">is lurki2">ing somewhere i2">in the mi2">idst of opti2">ions and i2">if i2">I just fi2">igure out the ri2">ight opti2">ion, i2">it wi2">ill become clear. i2">It doesn't apparently work thi2">is way. The clari2">ity needs to come Fi2">IRST.

So the way forward i2">is, get out of i2">indeci2">isi2">ion. Recogni2">ize i2">it for what i2">it i2">is, that i2">it i2">is not deci2">isi2">ion maki2">ing, but deci2">isi2">ion avoi2">idance. Get out of all of that behavi2">ior, and COME BACK to certai2">inty, back to clari2">ity, to confi2">idence, to knowi2">ing, to wi2">ithi2">in the heart, and THEN i2">I redi2">iscover an obvi2">iousness - a clear path, whi2">ich i2">I already know i2">is the ri2">ight way to move forward, whi2">ich was si2">imply si2">itti2">ing there the whole ti2">ime wi2">ith me not bei2">ing aware of i2">it. So then the deci2">isi2">ion i2">is easy and certai2">in. And when you make certai2">in deci2">isi2">ions i2">in clari2">ity and not i2">in fear, then you wi2">ill have commi2">itment.

i2">It's not just a matter of me taki2">ing back responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for everythi2">ing i2">in li2">ife, and then si2">itti2">ing there all by myself.

There i2">is i2">instead a shi2">ift away from ego-self and towards bei2">ing aware of and TRUSTi2">ING i2">in God.

i2">It's not just a matter of reali2">izi2">ing the cause of thi2">ings i2">is i2">in my mi2">ind, not out there, although that's necessary.

What i2">is cause? i2">It's not just some i2">idea or deci2">isi2">ion. GOD i2">is cause.

i2">It's also not just a matter of removi2">ing blocks to awareness of love. What happens when the blocks are removed? Love/God shows up. And that's no small matter.

i2">I've reli2">ied on my i2">intellect, on my ego's abi2">ili2">iti2">ies, on my separate i2">intelli2">igence, on my self-taught learni2">ing. But thi2">is i2">is all essenti2">ially because i2">I am not dependi2">ing on God.

i2">Independent thi2">inki2">ing... okay... hi2">ighly overrated. i2">It's actually a substi2">itute for bei2">ing connected to, trusti2">ing i2">in, and havi2">ing real fai2">ith i2">in God.

i2">I'm openi2">ing up to a wi2">illi2">ingness to surrender, and to actually beli2">ieve and stay unwaveri2">ing i2">in, a knowi2">ing-based trust that God i2">is taki2">ing care of thi2">ings.

i2">It's not God that wavers or fai2">ils, i2">it's my selfi2">ish ego tryi2">ing to do everythi2">ing on i2">its own.

i2">I have to let go. i2">I have to surrender. And i2">I have to stop bei2">ing the one who has all the truth all gathered up i2">in my separate mi2">ind li2">ike a bi2">ig database of i2">informati2">ion.

Truth as i2">informati2">ion i2">is a substi2">itute for truth as an experi2">ienti2">ial relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith God. i2">It i2">is a substi2">itute for bei2">ing Wi2">ITH God, i2">inti2">imately. For bei2">ing AWARE of God's real presence and communi2">icati2">ing wi2">ith Hi2">im and bei2">ing di2">irected BY Hi2">im.

i2">It really boi2">ils down to a si2">imple ei2">ither-or questi2">ion. Ei2">ither i2">I trust i2">in my own abi2">ili2">iti2">ies, or i2">I trust i2">in God. Ei2">ither i2">I thi2">ink that i2">I have to control and enforce everythi2">ing myself, or i2">I let go of the rei2">igns and let God.

And i2">in that trust, i2">in that surrender, i2">it's not that God just si2">its there i2">idle. To trust that he i2">is taki2">ing care of thi2">ings, that he can heal all si2">ituati2">ions, requi2">ires strong fai2">ith and beli2">ief and certai2">inty and loyalty. And that also means, knowi2">ing that God actually i2">IS taki2">ing care of thi2">ings... even worldly thi2">ings, even worldly problems.

Thi2">is i2">is the next stage i2">in the development of trust. i2">I have to learn to step asi2">ide and not only 'let God' but actually trust God, beli2">ieve God, and put asi2">ide my own li2">ittle fears and worri2">ies about how God won't help or i2">isn't i2">in charge or can't heal thi2">ings or whatever.

i2">It's about openi2">ing up to relyi2">ing on God, knowi2">ing that God goes wi2">ith me, allowi2">ing God, bei2">ing i2">inti2">imate wi2">ith God and allowi2">ing myself to be supported BY God. And thi2">is has everythi2">ing to do wi2">ith worki2">ing mi2">iracles, whi2">ich REQUi2">IRES fai2">ith and fi2">irm beli2">ief and TRUST i2">in God.

My lack of fai2">ith, i2">is what i2">it comes down to. As Jesus says i2">in the course we have placed great fai2">ith i2">in the ego, i2">in our own selves, i2">in i2">intelli2">igence and thi2">inki2">ing and learni2">ing, that we have di2">isplaced our fai2">ith away from God.

i2">I/we must learn that God really i2">is on our si2">ide, really i2">is our partner, that we really are taken care of by Hi2">im, that he really can and wi2">ill do what He says he can and wi2">ill do, and to trust Hi2">im to manage li2">ife for us.

i2">It's not just that we are separate from God and have to li2">ive i2">in separati2">ion and maybe get some i2">input from God once i2">in a whi2">ile. That i2">isn't the Li2">IFE that we are meant to li2">ive. We are meant to team up wi2">ith God and be loved and uni2">ited wi2">ith Hi2">im, and actually have Hi2">im i2">IN us and worki2">ing THROUGH us FOR us, wi2">ithout us havi2">ing to carry the enti2">ire wei2">ight of the world by ourselves.

How can i2">I trust God unless i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing to let go of control of li2">ife and actually allow Hi2">im to do thi2">is? How can i2">I trust unless i2">I am 'hands off'?

God repeatedly says to me, "let me". And i2">I di2">id not really understand what thi2">is meant. i2">I di2">idn't know i2">if i2">it meant he would do somethi2">ing through me i2">if i2">I di2">id somethi2">ing. i2">I di2">idn't know i2">if i2">it meant he was 'maybe' taki2">ing care of somethi2">ing, and then me havi2">ing no fai2">ith i2">in that enteri2">ing i2">into fear and beli2">ievi2">ing that He wasn't doi2">ing anythi2">ing.

i2">If i2">I don't have trust and fai2">ith that God can take care of thi2">ings, i2">I i2">in effect block God's power and actually do fai2">il to RECEi2">IVE God's blessi2">ings.

Anyway.

Today i2">I am grateful and thankful that God HAS deli2">ivered, God HAS provi2">ided, God i2">IS taki2">ing care of si2">ituati2">ions, and i2">I am not alone any more.

i2">I am told frequently, "let go". And i2">I frequently have no i2">idea what thi2">is means.

But i2">I seem to be learni2">ing that i2">it means i2">I am more 'i2">involved' i2">in thi2">ings that i2">I should be. i2">I am engaged wi2">ith the ego, wi2">ith the story, wi2">ith the drama. i2">I've gotten i2">into i2">it and now i2">I am tryi2">ing to control i2">it.

i2">I need to let go of i2">it, step back, stop i2">interferi2">ing, stop bei2">ing caught up i2">in i2">it. That means bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to drop i2">it and to stop tryi2">ing to prevent thi2">ings from happeni2">ing, or to force thi2">ings to happen a certai2">in way.

i2">I feel thi2">is i2">in my body and i2">in my mi2">ind/emoti2">ions. i2">It's as though, when i2">I am not letti2">ing go, my mi2">ind has projected out li2">ike a gi2">iant 'sucker' and i2">its latched onto someone or a story, energeti2">ically, and now i2">it's fi2">ixated on i2">it li2">ike i2">I'm connected to i2">it. And whatever happens to i2">it i2">is happeni2">ing to me. Thi2">is i2">is because my mi2">ind has become i2">involved and caught up i2">in i2">it.

So letti2">ing go then means, wi2">ithdrawi2">ing my mi2">ind-sucker and just comi2">ing back to myself, comi2">ing back to just bei2">ing me, just li2">ittle me, si2">imple me, detached, just bei2">ing myself and not carryi2">ing burdens or tryi2">ing to fi2">ix people or tryi2">ing to prevent thi2">ings from happeni2">ing.

i2">It's li2">ike emptyi2">ing myself and droppi2">ing baggage and not bei2">ing the one to carry all the wei2">ight of the world. i2">It's freei2">ing. i2">I just get to li2">ike, si2">it on the si2">ideli2">ines, and observe, and not get i2">involved. i2">I can just be calm, then, just letti2">ing the world do i2">its thi2">ing and not worryi2">ing about i2">it. Bei2">ing passerby

i2">It's very si2">imple. God i2">is the ONLY cause of you. God i2">is the ONLY cause of anyone. Everyone who exi2">ists i2">is solely caused by God and NOTHi2">ING else. Whatever God wi2">ills that we all be, we are that, and even we have no say i2">in thi2">is.

We are all totally EQUAL and next to each other, and God i2">is above. God creates me fully and creates you fully. i2">I do not create you, and you do not create me. i2">It i2">is nonsense to suggest that i2">I am your creator or that you have caused me to exi2">ist.

Thi2">is means that your brothers are NOT the cause of you. Nor i2">is the world. Nor i2">is the body. NOTHi2">ING ELSE can EVER cause you. Not one si2">ingle person i2">in the world i2">is causi2">ing you ri2">ight now, nor who has ever caused you, nor have you ever caused anyone.

When you beli2">ieve someone i2">is at fault or doi2">ing somethi2">ing to you, you MUST be confused about who your creator i2">is. Whoever creates you causes you. No-one else has any i2">input to thi2">is or any power over you. To beli2">ieve someone i2">is causi2">ing you i2">is to beli2">ieve you are NOT caused by God. To blame someone i2">is to reject God as your creator.

Forgi2">iveness then can very si2">imply entai2">il deprogrammi2">ing yourself from ANY beli2">ief that ANYTHi2">ING other than God has power over you. Thi2">is i2">is the same as sayi2">ing you should use the power of deni2">ial to deny anythi2">ing NOT of God ANY POWER over you. That i2">includes denyi2">ing that your brother has any power over you, or that you have power over anyone.

The EGO i2">is the confusi2">ion about cause and effect, about who your creator i2">is, and therefore where CAUSE i2">is comi2">ing from. i2">If you assi2">ign cause to your brothers, or to the world, or to the body, then you are confused. They are NOT the cause of you i2">in any way. When you beli2">ieve cause i2">is outsi2">ide of you maki2">ing you i2">its effect, or you are at the effect of the world, you are clai2">imi2">ing that the world i2">is your creator.

You DO actually have creati2">ions whi2">ich YOU HAVE caused, whi2">ich are the li2">ivi2">ing bei2">ings i2">in heaven that you co-created wi2">ith God and your brothers. These are not the people of the world. You DO have power over these bei2">ings because you are the CO-CREATOR of them. But you have created them by gi2">ivi2">ing them freedom, just as God has wi2">ith you.

i2">If i2">in any way ri2">ight now you thi2">ink that some person i2">is doi2">ing somethi2">ing to you, or some company, or some group, or somethi2">ing i2">in the body, or some aspect of the world, or anythi2">ing at all i2">in thi2">is dream, then you ARE Mi2">ISTAKEN.

The ego wi2">ill then form noti2">ions of a ki2">ind of cord or connecti2">ion or chai2">in or cause and effect, between you and others, between you and the body, or you and the world. i2">It wi2">ill suggest there i2">is a ti2">ie or bri2">idge across whi2">ich stuff from another person "comes i2">into you" and "does thi2">ings to you" or "makes you" or changes your emoti2">ions or i2">induces reacti2">ions i2">in you. The beli2">ief i2">in these arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial cause-effect relati2">ionshi2">ips have to be SEVERED.

Whenever you are mi2">istaken about causali2">ity you wi2">ill fi2">ind a beli2">ief i2">in your mi2">ind that someone or somethi2">ing has ki2">ind of latched onto you, i2">is outsi2">ide you, causi2">ing you from the outsi2">ide i2">in, and now you are at i2">its effect. Thi2">is i2">is NOT true. Thi2">is beli2">ief has to be undone.

You can si2">imply do thi2">is by just looki2">ing at the beli2">iefs you DO have about these hori2">izontal cause-effect relati2">ionshi2">ips, and UNDOi2">ING your beli2">ief i2">in them.

i2">I am not bei2">ing caused by that person. That person i2">is not doi2">ing anythi2">ing to me. i2">I am not at the effect of them. They are not responsi2">ible for how i2">I feel. They are not maki2">ing me upset. They are not doi2">ing anythi2">ing to me. They are not the cause of my feeli2">ings. They have not attacked me. They are doi2">ing NOTHi2">ING to me.

You can see then that thi2">is leads to the fact that your brother i2">is i2">innocent, because i2">if they truly are NOT CAUSi2">ING you at all, then you cannot clai2">im that they are i2">in ANY WAY si2">inful, gui2">ilty, wrong, bad, evi2">il or attacki2">ing. So they must be i2">innocent. Sorti2">ing out the fact that they are NOT the ones doi2">ing anythi2">ing to you, helps you to see thei2">ir i2">innocence and yours, and places responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for si2">ight back your own court.

i2">It i2">is also i2">important to affi2">irm that you are not doi2">ing anythi2">ing to anyone else. i2">I am not attacki2">ing them. i2">I am not hurti2">ing them. i2">I am not abusi2">ing anyone. i2">I am not causi2">ing anyone to feel anythi2">ing. i2">I am not maki2">ing anyone upset. i2">I am not responsi2">ible for anyone feels. i2">I am not maki2">ing anyone si2">ick or afrai2">id. i2">I am not attacki2">ing anyone. Thi2">is i2">is si2">imply because YOU are i2">innocent. You CANNOT DO ANYTHi2">ING TO ANYONE.

God hi2">imself PROTECTS everyone by hi2">is wi2">ill. No-one but hi2">im can touch hi2">is chi2">ildren. Hi2">is chi2">ildren CANNOT hurt each other i2">in reali2">ity. Thi2">is i2">is the si2">impli2">ici2">ity of forgi2">iveness and atonement. Si2">imply putti2">ing cause and effect back i2">into thei2">ir proper place, bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to be forever an effect of God, and reali2">izi2">ing that LOVE i2">is all that you can actually share wi2">ith anyone.

"i2">It i2">is God's Wi2">ill that nothi2">ing touch Hi2">is Son except Hi2">imself, and nothi2">ing else comes ni2">igh unto hi2">im. He i2">is as safe from pai2">in as God Hi2">imself, Who watches over hi2">im i2">in everythi2">ing" "i2">I am forever an Effect of God."

"Father, i2">I was created i2">in Your Mi2">ind, a holy Thought that never left i2">its home. i2">I am forever Your Effect, and You forever and forever are my Cause. As You created me i2">I have remai2">ined. Where You establi2">ished me i2">I sti2">ill abi2">ide, and all Your attri2">ibutes abi2">ide i2">in me because i2">it i2">is Your Wi2">ill to have a Son so li2">ike hi2">is Cause that Cause and i2">Its Effect are i2">indi2">isti2">ingui2">ishable. Let me know that i2">I am an Effect of God, and so i2">I have the power to create li2">ike You. And as i2">it i2">is i2">in Heaven, so on earth. Your plan i2">I follow here, and at the end i2">I know that You wi2">ill gather Your Effects i2">into the tranqui2">il Heaven of Your Love, where earth wi2">ill di2">isappear, and separate thi2">ings uni2">ite i2">in glory as the Son of God."

"i2">I am not the vi2">icti2">im of the world i2">I see."

"How can i2">I be the vi2">icti2">im of a world whi2">ich can be completely undone i2">if i2">I so choose? My chai2">ins are loosened. i2">I can drop them off merely by desi2">iri2">ing to do so. The pri2">ison door i2">is open. i2">I can leave i2">it si2">imply by walki2">ing out. Nothi2">ing holds me i2">in thi2">is world. Only my wi2">ish to stay keeps me a pri2">isoner. i2">I would gi2">ive up i2">insane wi2">ishes, and walk i2">into the sunli2">ight at last."

"Here i2">is the perfect statement of my freedom. i2">I am under no laws but God's. i2">I am constantly tempted to make up other laws, and gi2">ive them power over me. i2">I suffer only because of my beli2">ief i2">in them. They have no real effect on me at all. i2">I am perfectly free of the effects of all laws save God's. And Hi2">is are the laws of freedom."

i2">I am enti2">itled to mi2">iracles because i2">I am under no laws but God's. Hi2">is laws release me from all gri2">ievances, and replace them wi2">ith mi2">iracles.

i2">It seems li2">ike a tall order to not beli2">ieve thi2">is world i2">is real. i2">I've been i2">immersed i2">in beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it's real for so long.

A result of beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it's real, and tryi2">ing to become more spi2">iri2">itual, i2">is that i2">I someti2">imes judge the world or label i2">it. For example i2">I'll say thi2">is world i2">is bullshi2">it. Well, techni2">ically i2">it's true. But i2">if i2">I look carefully, i2">I have actually made the world real fi2">irst whi2">ile beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I'm taki2">ing a hi2">igher ground, and am then "separati2">ing myself" off from i2">it by judgi2">ing or labeli2">ing i2">it as wrong.

i2">I have to be careful now to noti2">ice whether my responses are to a beli2">ief that thi2">is world i2">is real, li2">ike, "i2">its really i2">insane", versus, recogni2">izi2">ing that i2">it i2">is not real. i2">I see that many of my "spi2">iri2">itual" perspecti2">ives are actually based i2">in pushi2">ing thi2">is world away.

i2">I've felt a strong sense of i2">inspi2">irati2">ion towards the thi2">ings of Heaven, wanti2">ing to be wi2">ith God, etc.. .but at ti2">imes the ego comes i2">into thi2">is and uses i2">it to try to create separati2">ion between me and the world. The world may not be real, but there i2">is a di2">ifference between me understandi2">ing i2">it i2">intellectually, and whether i2">I am actually recogni2">izi2">ing and percei2">ivi2">ing and experi2">ienci2">ing i2">it as unreal. And i2">if i2">it i2">is unreal, then i2">I have no real basi2">is for havi2">ing these "spi2">iri2">itual reacti2">ions".

Someti2">imes for example i2">I've been labeli2">ing the world as wrong or i2">insane or bullshi2">it or an i2">illusi2">ion or that si2">ickness i2">isn't real or there i2">is no death etc, only to then turn around and "react" to a percepti2">ion of the world by tryi2">ing to move i2">into a space of "bei2">ing more spi2">iri2">itual". Thi2">is i2">is really a form of deni2">ial. i2">If the world really i2">isn't real, then i2">it should not create these compulsi2">ions to "escape" from i2">it.

Sayi2">ing the world i2">isn't real i2">is one thi2">ing. Actually getti2">ing to the place where i2">I beli2">ieve i2">it soli2">idly and don't react to i2">its appearances i2">is another.

There i2">is a seri2">ies of workbook lessons whi2">ich i2">I feel encapsulate the whole transi2">iti2">ion from 'world i2">is real' to 'world i2">is not real' and the vari2">ious stages.

128: "The world i2">I see holds nothi2">ing that i2">I want."

129: "Beyond thi2">is world there i2">is a world i2">I want."

130: "i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible to see two worlds."

131: "No one can fai2">il who seeks to reach the truth."

i2">In 128, Jesus hi2">ighli2">ights how we are not seei2">ing 'thi2">is world' correctly, and i2">instead are projecti2">ing 'hell' onto i2">it. That means we are maki2">ing separati2">ion real.

i2">In 129, Jesus talks about another world - a perceptual world of true percepti2">ion, i2">in whi2">ich thi2">is world i2">is seen "as i2">is", reveali2">ing the "real world" aka forgi2">iven world. Comi2">ing to see thi2">is world as harmless and forgi2">iven i2">is the challenge i2">I talked about above.

i2">In 130, Jesus talks of how you can't see the world as si2">inful and i2">innocent at the same ti2">ime, or as real and not real at the same ti2">ime, hi2">ighli2">ighti2">ing that we need to be careful to di2">iscern i2">if we're maki2">ing i2">it real sti2">ill.

i2">In 131, Jesus talks about Heaven, a world beyond thi2">is world, whi2">ich we can reach i2">if we seek to do so, and cannot fai2">il to do so. But comi2">ing to see 'thi2">is world' as i2">innocent i2">is requi2">ired fi2">irst as a steppi2">ing stone, a gentle dream of awakeni2">ing, whi2">ich prepares the way.

i2">I do see at least that i2">if i2">I can di2">iscern that there i2">is a world i2">I'm maki2">ing real that i2">I react to, and that i2">if i2">I don't do that, then i2">I wi2">ill gradually learn that thi2">is world i2">is NOT real, and the truth wi2">ill emerge i2">in my awareness that only heaven i2">is real. And that seems to me to be a strai2">ight path whi2">ich leads ri2">ight to God.

i2">It also means i2">I have to stop beli2">ievi2">ing the world i2">is an enemy. i2">It i2">is nothi2">ing because there i2">is no world.

There i2">is a pi2">ivotal moment when you let go of the ego's hand and deci2">ide to take the hand of Chri2">ist.

Thi2">is can and wi2">ill happen i2">in many scenari2">ios and many ti2">imes over. And i2">it's goi2">ing to happen i2">in your "real li2">ife" i2">in relati2">ion to people and your beli2">iefs about people.

Cate Gri2">ieves gave a good example of thi2">is recently i2">in relati2">ion to her daughter where she would clash wi2">ith the "ego" i2">in her daughter, or rather, her own i2">inner fi2">ight wi2">ith her own ego projected there, but after havi2">ing enough, one day she fi2">inally deci2">ided to recogni2">ize the Chri2">ist i2">in her and to relate only to that i2">identi2">ity, not to the ego. And everythi2">ing shi2">ifted. That's an example of letti2">ing go of the ego's hand and taki2">ing the hand of Chri2">ist.

Si2">imi2">ilarly i2">I had spent many many years beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in si2">ickness, thi2">inki2">ing i2">it was real, i2">irreversi2">ible, truth. Each ti2">ime i2">I saw i2">it i2">I had reacti2">ions and gri2">ief. i2">I beli2">ieved i2">it was real. i2">It was actually horri2">ifyi2">ing to see di2">isabi2">ili2">ity and very upsetti2">ing because i2">I beli2">ieved i2">it was real, and how tragi2">ic i2">it was what had been lost as a result of i2">it. All that sufferi2">ing was ego bullshi2">it.

i2">I had gone through many many peri2">iods of tryi2">ing to heal i2">it, fi2">ix i2">it, rescue the person, tryi2">ing to learn about what caused i2">it, di2">iagnosi2">ing i2">it, fi2">iguri2">ing out why i2">it happened etc. All of these ways that i2">I was actually conti2">inually usi2">ing the ego to try to fi2">ind some ki2">ind of truth outsi2">ide of me. Always i2">it would lead me to dead ends and fai2">ili2">ing to fi2">ind anythi2">ing that made sense. i2">It was i2">infuri2">iati2">ing. i2">I tri2">ied and tri2">ied and tri2">ied to explai2">in why and how the si2">ickness happened and all that di2">id was justi2">ify and keep i2">it.

And thi2">is was all because i2">I beli2">ieved my own ego, my own i2">intellect's abi2">ili2">ity to di2">iagnose truthfully (whi2">ich i2">is i2">impossi2">ible), and that i2">if i2">I would seek externally for truth i2">I would actually be able to fi2">ind i2">it, i2">if i2">I looked hard enough. But thi2">is was all classi2">ic seek-and-do-not-fi2">ind tacti2">ics. i2">It was all based on me beli2">ievi2">ing that the problem was real.

One day, i2">I was getti2">ing to where i2">I had really had enough, li2">ike, fucki2">ing hell i2">I cannot put up wi2">ith thi2">is bullshi2">it any more. And i2">I was starti2">ing to recogni2">ize wi2">ith Jesus' help the ways that i2">I kept tryi2">ing to solve thi2">is "real problem", and He was just always tryi2">ing to get me to surrender and stop doi2">ing that. When i2">I was i2">in 'fi2">ix i2">it' mode my mi2">ind was just lost li2">ike i2">in a tunnel vi2">isi2">ion of thi2">inki2">ing that i2">I was goi2">ing to fi2">ind the answer, not reali2">izi2">ing and not havi2">ing the awareness that thi2">is was fundamentally i2">impossi2">ible. The enti2">ire basi2">is for my searchi2">ing was flawed and based i2">in the ego, so i2">I was trapped and fai2">ili2">ing before i2">I even started.

Somehow enough of these events of futi2">ili2">ity and fai2">ilure and gradual ti2">iny steps i2">in becomi2">ing aware of thi2">is, led to a moment where i2">it started to dawn on me. i2">I started to fi2">inally get i2">it. Thi2">is had all been based on the i2">idea that si2">ickness was REAL. And that also fed i2">into an awareness that was growi2">ing i2">in me that there just was no truth out there whatsoever. i2">I had been looki2">ing i2">in the wrong place - i2">in the ego - for a truth that doesn't exi2">ist there. And that maybe thi2">is whole world had no truth i2">in i2">it at all.

Up unti2">il that poi2">int i2">I'd been beli2">ievi2">ing that the world was real and si2">ickness was real and si2">in was real. Even i2">if some part of me understood otherwi2">ise. And my beli2">ief that there i2">is somehow a truth i2">in thi2">is world just met wi2">ith a total loss i2">in fi2">indi2">ing i2">it. That was GOOD, because i2">it revealed to me that thi2">is ego pursui2">it was totally a di2">istracti2">ion, and a poi2">intless one at that. There i2">IS no truth i2">in the world. The truth i2">is NOT out there. Thi2">is really started a MAJOR shi2">ift i2">in my awareness that has been leadi2">ing to just a tremendous flood of i2">insi2">ight and awakeni2">ing lately.

But the mai2">in thi2">ing i2">is, i2">I had to questi2">ion whether si2">ickness was real. And that meant even goi2">ing agai2">inst everyone else who sai2">id si2">ickness was real. Goi2">ing agai2">inst the doctors and the nei2">ighbors and the fami2">ily members and even those closest to me who all beli2">ieved i2">in real si2">ickness. i2">I had to fi2">ind enough certai2">inty and be pi2">issed off enough and fed up enough to fi2">inally say FUCK THAT. There i2">is no truth there. So i2">I deci2">ided, or at least found enough of a sense of convi2">icti2">ion, li2">ike a ray of li2">ight peeki2">ing through the wi2">indow for the fi2">irst ti2">ime, to open up to the i2">idea that si2">ickness i2">is not reali2">ity, because thi2">is world i2">is not reali2">ity.

Thi2">is was a major turn of events because thi2">is has now lai2">id a foundati2">ion for really huge stri2">ides forward, a foundati2">ion for hope, a foundati2">ion for mi2">iracles, and a foundati2">ion for heali2">ing. That would not have been possi2">ible had i2">I remai2">ined i2">in the ego beli2">ief that si2">ickness i2">is truth. So i2">in thi2">is same way, i2">I became able to let go of the ego's hand and take the hand of Chri2">ist. And because i2">it took such tremendous frustrati2">ion and desperati2">ion to exhaust the ego's bullshi2">it and to really reveal to myself that thi2">is fundamentally major world-wi2">ide clai2">im about real si2">ickness was total f'i2">ing bullshi2">it.

So now somethi2">ing i2">is di2">ifferent for me. i2">It's a turni2">ing poi2">int, suddenly i2">instead of looki2">ing at, beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in, and reacti2">ing to "real si2">ickness", i2">I am learni2">ing how i2">it i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion, i2">I am starti2">ing to actually overlook i2">it, whi2">ich means i2">I am fi2">inally actually forgi2">ivi2">ing i2">it. My mi2">ind and awareness are shi2">ifti2">ing and i2">I'm seei2">ing si2">ickness i2">in a whole di2">ifferent way. i2">I'm no longer allowi2">ing the ego i2">interpretati2">ion of i2">it to be the li2">imi2">it of my beli2">ief or awareness, and i2">instead am openi2">ing up to the Chri2">ist perspecti2">ive that si2">ickness i2">is not the truth. i2">It's not real, and because i2">it i2">is not real, i2">it can be undone.

These shi2">ifts happen i2">in bi2">ig ways and small ways. Each ti2">ime you come to questi2">ion or doubt the ego and see that i2">it's been leadi2">ing you on a wi2">ild goosechase, and i2">its clai2">ims are not the truth, you gradually let go of i2">its hand and shi2">ift allegi2">iance to Chri2">ist. You go from percei2">ivi2">ing FORM as though i2">it's real, and looki2">ing beyond i2">it. You go from seei2">ing people as real bodi2">ies, to no longer regardi2">ing them as "just that". Your vi2">isi2">ion no longer stops at si2">ight of form and i2">it starts to see a truth that transcends i2">it. The person i2">is not thei2">ir body. The person i2">is not thei2">ir ego.

Thi2">is basi2">ically means you are gradually de-coupli2">ing yourself from form, and are actually letti2">ing go of your own body at the same ti2">ime. Everythi2">ing i2">in front of your eyes i2">is an attempt to get you to see i2">it as real, and to fai2">il to overlook/forgi2">ive, leadi2">ing to judgement. We need to learn to not beli2">ieve i2">it! i2">It's not real. i2">It's not truth. Form i2">is just an effect of an i2">idea, not a soli2">id reali2">ity. Nor i2">is i2">it fi2">ixed, and nor i2">is i2">it i2">identi2">ity.

Form i2">is not the truth about a person. Thei2">ir body i2">is not the truth about them. Thei2">ir personali2">ity/persona/shadow i2">is not the truth about them. They actually are more than that. Even when they are fi2">illed wi2">ith hate and rage, that's sti2">ill not true about them. Thei2">ir real self, holy and i2">innocent, i2">is sti2">ill i2">in there somewhere, just temporari2">ily covered up. i2">It doesn't go away! Thi2">is justi2">ifi2">ies uncondi2">iti2">ional love at all ti2">imes.

i2">I recently had to struggle through a peri2">iod of i2">intense emoti2">ional release, coupled wi2">ith a lot of cryi2">ing. i2">It was tri2">iggered seemi2">ingly by father's day, i2">induci2">ing a gri2">ievi2">ing peri2">iod and sense of loss, but i2">it seemed to also move i2">into some release relati2">ing to chi2">ildhood abuse.

Wi2">ith such heavy feeli2">ings i2">I became qui2">ite caught up i2">in i2">it, lost and i2">immersed i2">in ego. Also duri2">ing thi2">is peri2">iod i2">I lost si2">ight of the course teachi2">ings and of forgi2">iveness. i2">I felt too overwhelmed and upset to want to add more ego-challengi2">ing stress i2">in the form of extra course stuff.

i2">It also then became very annoyi2">ing and frustrati2">ing that there was so much emoti2">ion, and that i2">it wasn't stoppi2">ing. i2">I was forced to rest a lot. But i2">it started to make me questi2">ion, why do i2">I keep havi2">ing to have so much emoti2">ion comi2">ing out? i2">Is there really a benefi2">it to cryi2">ing and releasi2">ing i2">it? i2">Is cryi2">ing a part of my real self's heali2">ing or i2">is i2">it just some aspect of the ego and the body?

When i2">I consi2">idered that i2">I've had hundreds i2">if not thousands of cri2">ies i2">in recent years, and that i2">I tend to throw myself i2">into i2">it, i2">I also couldn't fathom how there could be so much to feel through. Why di2">id thi2">ings from 40 years ago keep comi2">ing up? Why di2">id i2">it requi2">ire so many releases i2">in order to make such slow progress? Was thi2">is really necessary and i2">important i2">in my spi2">iri2">itual path? Yes the cryi2">ing does seem to move me past hurts and on to deeper stuff but i2">is i2">it really necessary?

i2">I also recently started to consi2">ider the i2">idea i2">in ACi2">IM of there bei2">ing two levels of mi2">ind, hi2">igher and lower. Real thoughts shared wi2">ith God produce the creati2">ion of spi2">iri2">it, and unreal thoughts shared wi2">ith the ego produce i2">intellect and physi2">icali2">ity. So that made me start to reali2">ize, there are hi2">igher and lower parts to my mi2">ind.

i2">I thi2">ink thi2">is i2">is a ki2">ind of turni2">ing poi2">int of "there must be a better way" because i2">I'm also now starti2">ing to step back from the lower mi2">ind more often. i2">I'm aski2">ing myself, i2">is thi2">is feeli2">ing or perspecti2">ive really a part of me as a hi2">igher-self, or i2">is i2">it comi2">ing up from the depths of a lower ego self? Even to the extent, are these hurt emoti2">ions, emoti2">ional pai2">in and loss and gri2">ief and so on, really comi2">ing from or about "me" or i2">is i2">it part of the ego? i2">Is i2">it perhaps the ego that cri2">ies and i2">is constantly upset?

Today perhaps for the fi2">irst ti2">ime, wi2">ith a conti2">inued oozi2">ing out of further emoti2">ions, i2">I started to assert the i2">idea at the end of my rope, that "these feeli2">ings are not mi2">ine." Who and what i2">I am seems to somehow be steppi2">ing back from or di2">is-associ2">iati2">ing from them. Thi2">is seems pretty radi2">ical to suggest that any upset feeli2">ing i2">is not really a part of me, i2">is not mi2">ine, and i2">is not part of my i2">identi2">ity. i2">It makes me reali2">ize i2">I have been i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing wi2">ith these thi2">ings for a very long ti2">ime.

The ego i2">is pretty relentless i2">in i2">its morbi2">id sufferi2">ing. The body, i2">if i2">it holds certai2">in emoti2">ional pai2">in or energi2">ies i2">in i2">itself, certai2">inly i2">is also a reposi2">itory of sufferi2">ing and pai2">in. i2">It seems to me that every si2">ingle li2">ittle upset about anythi2">ing ever i2">is somehow stored somewhere and has to seemi2">ingly be released. But i2">I'm also reali2">izi2">ing that who and what i2">I am does not have to be consumed by i2">it, lost i2">in i2">it, playi2">ing along wi2">ith i2">it.

i2">I don't know i2">if thi2">is i2">is some ki2">ind of attempted deni2">ial or repressi2">ion, but i2">it seems that there i2">is some part of my sense of who and what i2">I am whi2">ich i2">is detachi2">ing from these "lower" experi2">iences and i2">is i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing wi2">ith somethi2">ing hi2">igher and li2">ighter. All pai2">in and mi2">isery, all upset, all gri2">ief and loss, all sense of shame or gui2">ilt, all fears, all hurt and sufferi2">ing, surely cannot be a part of who or what i2">I am as God created me. There can't be unhappy feeli2">ings i2">in God's son. They cannot be real.

As i2">I si2">it here and i2">I sti2">ill am havi2">ing waves of emoti2">ion wanti2">ing to erupt and release, there's also some part of me now that feels stronger, and does not want to lose myself i2">in i2">it, or have i2">it at all. When emoti2">ions become strong and overtake the mi2">ind, i2">it can really become i2">immersi2">ive and i2">it starts to feel li2">ike "i2">I" am the one who i2">is feeli2">ing i2">it and i2">is hurt by i2">it. i2">I become centered i2">in i2">it. The emoti2">ions seem to descri2">ibe me. i2">I beli2">ieve thi2">is i2">is i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing wi2">ith them, and thus wi2">ith the ego.

As i2">I remember that my i2">identi2">ity or self i2">is not these feeli2">ings, i2">I i2">immedi2">iately feel a deflati2">ing effect. The ego i2">is always attempti2">ing to i2">inflate thi2">ings i2">into a huge drama of i2">intensi2">ity, especi2">ially at the emoti2">ional level. i2">I thi2">ink that i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing wi2">ith the emoti2">ions and feeli2">ing li2">ike i2">I'm the one who they are a part of, or am "the one" who i2">is hurt, i2">is all part of bei2">ing lost i2">in the ego.

i2">I recall also some thi2">ings whi2">ich Eckhart Tolle has sai2">id about "the pai2">in body", whi2">ich i2">is the ego's emoti2">ional body of pai2">in and sufferi2">ing. He sai2">id that thi2">is emoti2">ional pai2">in body remai2">ins dormant a lot but someti2">imes i2">it erupts i2">into awareness and attempts to flood the mi2">ind wi2">ith negati2">ive thoughts and memori2">ies of the past, tryi2">ing to get the mi2">ind to i2">identi2">ify wi2">ith i2">it and lose consci2">iousness. i2">I'm aski2">ing myself now i2">if all and every si2">ingle upsetti2">ing feeli2">ing "from the past" i2">is really thi2">is pai2">in body erupti2">ing and the ego tryi2">ing to use my dependency on, and i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion wi2">ith feeli2">ings, as a way to keep me bound to i2">it.

i2">It seems wei2">ird to say, because what i2">I'm really sayi2">ing i2">is that suddenly i2">it seems that all my "lower" emoti2">ions are not really true of me. All hurt feeli2">ings are not really about me as God created me. All emoti2">ions that erupt from the bottomless pi2">it of despai2">ir are not a part of my self. How can they be i2">if God created me perfect and permanently happy? How can any ki2">ind of unhappi2">iness or loss or shame or gui2">ilt or anythi2">ing else be a part of my i2">identi2">ity or my experi2">ience?

i2">I feel li2">ike i2">I've been battli2">ing wi2">ith thi2">is emoti2">ion-monster for decades now. Years upon years of cryi2">ing about the past. Wi2">ith the recent i2">intolerabi2">ili2">ity and obnoxi2">iousness of i2">it, i2">it just became too much to a ki2">ind of breaki2">ing poi2">int, and now i2">I feel li2">ike i2">I'm snappi2">ing out of i2">it. Li2">ike i2">I"m done wi2">ith i2">it. i2">I don't want to feel thi2">is crap anymore as though i2">it's somethi2">ing i2">I have to go through, or can't stop, or have no power over, or am desti2">ined to feel. i2">It's not God's wi2">ill for me. And i2">it seems li2">ike all of i2">it i2">is a part of i2">illusi2">ion.

As i2">I look at i2">it now, and as feeli2">ings threaten to "come up" agai2">in and flood my experi2">ience, i2">I watch as they just emerge out of nowhere, from below, and seem to want to tempt me to beli2">ieve that i2">I am the one who i2">is upset. But i2">if i2">I recall that i2">I not these feeli2">ings, then somehow i2">it seems fai2">irly easy to "stay out of i2">it". And that steppi2">ing back also deflates them and seems to cause them to si2">immer down agai2">in.

i2">I thi2">ink thi2">is i2">is another thi2">ing that i2">I have just been doi2">ing to myself over ti2">ime. There i2">is some dri2">ive i2">in my psyche/personali2">ity to just hurl myself i2">into full exposure to any and all emoti2">ions. But by i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing wi2">ith them and beli2">ievi2">ing they relate to me, or are part of me, havi2">ing no boundari2">ies wi2">ith them, i2">I have only been buryi2">ing myself i2">in them and feeli2">ing sorry for myself li2">ike a vi2">icti2">im. Not to menti2">ion how much i2">it consumes me and pulls me far away from hi2">igher thoughts.

i2">I see Jesus i2">in the course telli2">ing me to have more vi2">igi2">ilance to protect the hi2">igher mi2">ind and to have more vi2">igi2">ilance agai2">inst the lower mi2">ind. The lower mi2">ind i2">is run by the ego and wants to just turn everythi2">ing i2">into a li2">ife-or-death separati2">ion drama. i2">I don't want to be a part of that anymore.

Whi2">ile at fi2">irst i2">I thought my whole self was the lower mi2">ind, and the hi2">igher mi2">ind was much hi2">igher, i2">I now see that i2">I'm movi2">ing up i2">into the hi2">igher mi2">ind and the lower self i2">is i2">indeed below me. The ego wants us to i2">identi2">ify wi2">ith i2">it and beli2">ieve that all i2">its percepti2">ions of sufferi2">ing are our own. That we are the body and i2">its pai2">ins. That we are the sufferi2">ing self. That's now who or what we are. The pool of mi2">isery doesn't seem to have an end. i2">It seems the only thi2">ing to do wi2">ith the desert i2">is to leave.

The truth must be, then, that any unhappy feeli2">ing cannot be a part of my real self, cannot be true, cannot be real, and cannot be happeni2">ing. My real self cannot be upset, cannot suffer loss, and cannot be hurt. i2">It i2">is extraordi2">inary to thi2">ink that i2">I have li2">ived as "a person" who seems to have suffered and felt hurt and upset so many ti2">imes, and that not once has thi2">is sufferi2">ing been true. But thi2">is i2">is what ACi2">IM i2">is telli2">ing me. Only the thoughts and feeli2">ings that i2">I share wi2">ith God are real, and all the rest i2">is ego noi2">ise, one of i2">its many forms of the opposi2">ite to love.

"You hate i2">it (the body), yet you thi2">ink i2">it i2">IS your self, and that, Wi2">ITHOUT i2">it, would your self be lost."

"The ego i2">is also i2">in your mi2">ind, because you have ACCEPTED i2">it there. i2">ITS evaluati2">ion of you, however, i2">is the exact opposi2">ite of the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's, because the ego does NOT love you. i2">It i2">is unaware of what you are, and wholly mi2">istrustful of EVERYTHi2">ING i2">it percei2">ives, because i2">its own percepti2">ions are so shi2">ifti2">ing. The ego i2">is therefore capable of suspi2">ici2">iousness at best, and vi2">ici2">iousness at worst."

"the ego i2">is not wholly spli2">it off, or i2">it could not be beli2">ieved at all. For i2">it i2">is your mi2">ind that BELi2">IEVES i2">in i2">it, and gi2">ives exi2">istence TO i2">it. Yet i2">it i2">is ALSO your mi2">ind that has the power to DENY i2">its exi2">istence, and you wi2">ill surely do so when you reali2">ize exactly what the journey i2">it sets you i2">IS."

"The ego i2">is qui2">ite li2">iterally a fearful thought."

"Beli2">ief that there i2">IS another way i2">is the lofti2">iest i2">idea of whi2">ich ego-thi2">inki2">ing i2">is capable. Thi2">is i2">is because i2">it contai2">ins a hi2">int of recogni2">iti2">ion that the ego i2">is NOT the self."

"The ego i2">is expert ONLY i2">in confusi2">ion. i2">It does not understand ANYTHi2">ING ELSE. As a teacher, then, i2">it i2">is totally confused and TOTALLY CONFUSi2">ING."

"Every response to the ego i2">is a call to war, and war DOES depri2">ive you of peace."

"The ego i2">IS therefore a confusi2">ion i2">in i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion, whi2">ich never had a consi2">istent model, and never developed consi2">istently."

"Jung was ri2">ight i2">indeed i2">in i2">insi2">isti2">ing that the ego i2">is NOT the self, and that the self should be regarded as an achi2">ievement."

"To i2">identi2">ify wi2">ith the ego i2">is to attack yourself, and MAKE YOURSELF POOR. That i2">is why everyone who i2">identi2">ifi2">ies wi2">ith the ego FEELS DEPRi2">IVED. What he EXPERi2">IENCES i2">is then depressi2">ion or anger, but what he Di2">ID i2">is to exchange hi2">is self-love for self-hate, MAKi2">ING Hi2">IM AFRAi2">ID OF Hi2">IMSELF. He does NOT reali2">ize thi2">is. Even i2">if he i2">is fully aware of ANXi2">IETY, he does NOT percei2">ive i2">its source AS Hi2">IS OWN EGO i2">IDENTi2">IFi2">ICATi2">ION, and he ALWAYS tri2">ies to handle i2">it by maki2">ing some sort of i2">insane "arrangement" wi2">ith the world."

"Thi2">is i2">is WHY the ego i2">is i2">insane; i2">it teaches that you are NOT what you ARE."

"That i2">is all the world of the ego i2">is. NOTHi2">ING. i2">It has no meani2">ing. i2">It does not exi2">ist."

"All that the ego i2">is, i2">is an i2">idea that i2">it i2">is possi2">ible that thi2">ings should HAPPEN to the Son of God, Wi2">ITHOUT hi2">is wi2">ill."

"The ego i2">is the choi2">ice for gui2">ilt, the Holy Spi2">iri2">it the deci2">isi2">ion for blamelessness."

"For the ego DOES want to ki2">ill you, and i2">if you i2">identi2">ify Wi2">ITH i2">it, you MUST beli2">ieve i2">ITS GOAL i2">IS YOURS."

"Gui2">ilt i2">is the only need the ego has, and, as long as you i2">identi2">ify Wi2">ITH i2">it, gui2">ilt wi2">ill remai2">in ATTRACTi2">IVE to you."

"i2">It i2">is always an i2">interpretati2">ion that gi2">ives ri2">ise to negati2">ive emoti2">ions"

"Our self-made roles are shi2">ifti2">ing, and they seem to change from mourner to ecstati2">ic bli2">iss of love and lovi2">ing. We can laugh or weep, and greet the day wi2">ith welcome or wi2">ith tears. "

"who i2">is si2">inless cannot suffer pai2">in"

"The Self Whi2">ich God created cannot si2">in, and therefore cannot suffer."

"i2">I am i2">in the li2">ikeness of my Creator. i2">I cannot suffer, i2">I cannot experi2">ience loss, and i2">I cannot di2">ie. i2">I am not a body. i2">I would recogni2">ize my reali2">ity today."

"i2">I cannot suffer any loss or depri2">ivati2">ion or pai2">in because of who i2">I am."

"The gui2">iltless mi2">ind cannot suffer."

"The gentle have no pai2">in. They cannot suffer. Why would they not be joyous? They are sure they are beloved and must be safe."

"You have enslaved the world wi2">ith all your fears, wi2">ith doubts and mi2">iseri2">ies, your pai2">in and tears, and all your sorrows press upon i2">it, and keep i2">it a pri2">isoner to your beli2">iefs."

"And God Hi2">imself shall wi2">ipe away all tears."

"Be not afrai2">id of Love. For i2">It alone can heal all sorrow, wi2">ipe away all tears, and gently waken from hi2">is dreams of pai2">in the Son whom God acknowledges as Hi2">is."

"Repeat God's Name and all the world responds by layi2">ing down i2">illusi2">ions. Every dream the world holds dear has suddenly gone by, and where i2">it seemed to stand you fi2">ind a star; a mi2">iracle of grace. The si2">ick ari2">ise, healed of thei2">ir si2">ickly thoughts. The bli2">ind can see; the deaf can hear. The sorrowful cast off thei2">ir mourni2">ing, and the tears of pai2">in are dri2">ied as happy laughter comes to bless the world."

"And He would have all tears be wi2">iped away, wi2">ith none remai2">ini2">ing yet unshed, and none but wai2">iti2">ing thei2">ir appoi2">inted ti2">ime to fall. For God has wi2">illed that laughter should replace each one, and that Hi2">is Son be free agai2">in."

"Perhaps you come i2">in tears, but hear Hi2">im say, "My brother, Holy Son of God, behold your i2">idle dream, i2">in whi2">ich thi2">is could occur," and you wi2">ill leave the holy i2">instant wi2">ith your laughter and your brother's JOi2">INED wi2">ith Hi2">is."

Qui2">ite often whi2">ile readi2">ing the ACi2">IM text i2">I am blown away by Jesus's crystal-clear clari2">ity on vari2">ious topi2">ics. i2">It's li2">ike, there couldn't possi2">ibly be any way to explai2">in MORE clearly. Last ni2">ight as i2">I read about forgi2">iveness i2">it was no excepti2">ion. i2">Immedi2">iately i2">I knew i2">I had been mi2">isunderstandi2">ing parts of i2">it all thi2">is ti2">ime.

The ego's versi2">ion of forgi2">iveness has you taki2">ing a good, clear look at an 'error' and then attempti2">ing to overlook i2">it, but you can't overlook i2">it because you've made i2">it real. Looki2">ing AT the error i2">is not looki2">ing PAST the error. i2">It i2">is not overlooki2">ing, i2">it's just looki2">ing. Once the error i2">is fi2">irmly i2">in our si2">ights, we are holdi2">ing onto i2">it and mai2">intai2">ini2">ing i2">it, so cannot si2">imultaneously transcend i2">it.

What the Course then says i2">is that once we've made errors real - whi2">ich i2">is the si2">ituati2">ion we fi2">ind ourselves i2">in almost all the ti2">ime and usually thi2">is i2">is the state that compels us to want to forgi2">ive - we wi2">ill be tempted to beli2">ieve that we have to "UNDO what we have MADE i2">in order to be forgi2">iven". We made the i2">illusi2">ion, we i2">invented i2">it, we beli2">ieved i2">in i2">it, we have fai2">ith i2">in i2">it, and i2">if i2">it i2">is real then we have to undo what we made i2">in order to forgi2">ive. So then we start to set about tryi2">ing to UNDO the thi2">ing that seems to be upsetti2">ing us. But we can't undo i2">it that way because our beli2">ief i2">in i2">it holds i2">it fi2">irmly i2">in place.

The Course goes onto to descri2">ibe Holy Spi2">iri2">it's forgi2">iveness. i2">It says si2">imply and clearly, that Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is ALWAYS overlooki2">ing all errors, and DOES NOT SEE ERRORS, i2">in a pro-acti2">ive manner - fore-gi2">ivi2">ing, SO THAT errors wi2">ill not ARi2">ISE, and so that they therefore do not need to be later 'undone'. The Holy Spi2">iri2">it does not make errors real i2">in the fi2">irst place. He does not `make` i2">illusi2">ions. And so to Hi2">im, there i2">IS no error. Thi2">is i2">is where i2">it becomes paradoxi2">ical. The Holy Spi2">iri2">it forgi2">ives constantly i2">in order that there i2">is nothi2">ing to forgi2">ive. He fore-gi2">ives, ahead of the need to address an error, so that no errors ari2">ise whatsoever. He therefore has a 'forgi2">ivi2">ing atti2">itude' whi2">ich i2">is i2">incapable of regi2">isteri2">ing error whatsoever. Thi2">is i2">is why Hi2">IS forgi2">iveness i2">is "qui2">iet, sti2">ill, looks and does not judge, and does nothi2">ing".

So the Course i2">is descri2">ibi2">ing these two types of forgi2">iveness. Ego forgi2">iveness whi2">ich tri2">ies to undo thi2">ings i2">it's made real and cannot, vs Holy Spi2">iri2">it's forgi2">iveness whi2">ich HAS NOT made thi2">ings real and so i2">is permanently overlooki2">ing all errors i2">in the knowledge that NOTHi2">ING HAS HAPPENED. The Course also says that the ego attempts to take over control of all acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies, and thi2">is i2">is why the ego thi2">inks i2">IT i2">is the one who has to do forgi2">iveness. But the Course also says, Forgi2">iveness i2">is the HOLY SPi2">IRi2">IT's functi2">ion. Holy Spi2">iri2">it constantly i2">is forgi2">ivi2">ing i2">in order not to have anythi2">ing to forgi2">ive. OUR functi2">ion i2">is di2">ifferent.

The error i2">I have made i2">is i2">in thi2">inki2">ing that i2">I am the one that forgi2">ives - as the ego - who has made errors real and now attempts to do somethi2">ing to/about them i2">in order to make them go away. Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the li2">ight whi2">ich actually shi2">ines so bri2">ightly that there i2">is nothi2">ing to forgi2">ive.

So, then i2">I found myself aski2">ing, how then does one transi2">iti2">ion from bei2">ing i2">in the ego and `needi2">ing to forgi2">ive` or `needi2">ing to undo` due to seei2">ing somethi2">ing that seems real, to ali2">igni2">ing wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it's vi2">iewpoi2">int whi2">ich i2">is that ALL i2">IS FORGi2">IVEN already i2">in a pro-acti2">ive, preventati2">ive way. How do i2">I go from mai2">intenance and cleanup after observi2">ing a mess, to proacti2">ive preventati2">ive measures. How do i2">I go from 'attack i2">it wi2">ith the course' to 'nothi2">ing happened'.

Somehow i2">I have to get my mi2">ind to ALi2">IGN wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it's way of looki2">ing at thi2">ings, so that i2">I can see that all i2">is forgi2">iven. But whi2">ile i2">I'm beli2">ievi2">ing that somethi2">ing has gone wrong and i2">I need to do somethi2">ing, THOSE beli2">iefs are actually preventi2">ing forgi2">iveness. The truth i2">is that nothi2">ing has really happened and nothi2">ing has gone wrong, and i2">its my beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in the reali2">ity of the error that i2">IS the error. i2">Its an error i2">in my forgi2">iveness. i2">I have to get my mi2">ind to change i2">its vi2">iewpoi2">int away from 'i2">I need to forgi2">ive thi2">is because i2">it's happened', to, 'i2">I am forgi2">iven because thi2">is HAS NOT HAPPENED'.

Thi2">is i2">is ki2">ind of along the same li2">ines as "i2">I recogni2">ize we are both forgi2">iven for what we HAVE NOT done", whi2">ich i2">is the vi2">iewpoi2">int of Holy Spi2">iri2">it. The ego's versi2">ion of forgi2">iveness i2">is very mi2">isleadi2">ing and di2">istracti2">ing. i2">I see them now as two wavelengths, the lower wavelength of ego mi2">ired i2">in i2">illusi2">ions of i2">illusi2">ions, and the hi2">igher wavelength of Holy Spi2">iri2">it floati2">ing above everythi2">ing knowi2">ing there are no real i2">illusi2">ions.

The process of 'transi2">iti2">ioni2">ing' from an ego vi2">iewpoi2">int to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's vi2">iewpoi2">int seems to what we call 'applyi2">ing forgi2">iveness'. We try to 'not do' (undo) the WAY OF SEEi2">ING that was produci2">ing a vi2">iew of error, recogni2">izi2">ing we must be mi2">istaken i2">if we beli2">ieve there even i2">IS a real error. Holy Spi2">iri2">it sai2">id to me we need to "wi2">ithdraw" our convi2">icti2">ion and beli2">ief that the error i2">is real i2">in every way, so that we can move towards the atonement vi2">iewpoi2">int, whi2">ich says nothi2">ing happened. Holy Spi2">iri2">it sees Wi2">ITH the atonement.

One thi2">ing i2">I always was mi2">istaken about i2">is when i2">I heard that Holy Spi2">iri2">it percei2">ives, i2">I always thought i2">it meant he percei2">ives i2">illusi2">ions, therefore he can see all of our errors etc. But the Course has clari2">ifi2">ied that Holy Spi2">iri2">it only sees clearly by OVERLOOKi2">ING all errors and NOT seei2">ing them. He percei2">ives, but he percei2">ives wi2">ith total ri2">ight-mi2">indedness, proacti2">ively forgi2">ivi2">ing and looki2">ing pass all errors to The Face of Chri2">ist. Sort of, `i2">in` the world but not of i2">it. Thi2">is was my mi2">istake because i2">I thought he saw the errors as well. The EGO i2">is the one that sees errors, and the ego i2">is i2">IN the world. Thi2">is separati2">ion of roles and perspecti2">ives has really clari2">ifi2">ied thi2">ings for me as to WHO i2">is doi2">ing the forgi2">ivi2">ing and WHO i2">is holdi2">ing the appropri2">iate perspecti2">ive.

The only area now where i2">I have some questi2">ions, and i2">I'm sure conti2">inued readi2">ing of the Text wi2">ill reveal more... i2">is i2">in.... through what seemi2">ing 'process' or 'steps' do we transi2">iti2">ion our mi2">ind away from the ego's versi2">ion of forgi2">iveness to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's. When i2">I'm i2">in the ego i2">I do not understand forgi2">iveness and i2">I apply 'somethi2">ing' but i2">it i2">isn't Holy Spi2">iri2">it's versi2">ion. When i2">illusi2">ions are parti2">icularly strong i2">I beli2">ieve heavi2">ily that the problem i2">is separate and that i2">IT needs to be changed by throwi2">ing Course at i2">it. That's totally ego. But that's the starti2">ing poi2">int. That's not HOW i2">I need to forgi2">ive, i2">it's the Ki2">IND of forgi2">iveness that i2">I need to learn NOT to do. i2">If i2">I see a house on fi2">ire, my forgi2">iveness should be - there i2">is no house on fi2">ire, 'how can i2">I forgi2">ive thi2">is burni2">ing house'.

i2">I'd always thought that the process of 'undoi2">ing' and of 'correcti2">ing' and of tryi2">ing to shi2">ift toward Holy Spi2">iri2">it WAS forgi2">iveness... even the goodi2">ie-two-shoes student approach of APPLYi2">ING the Course ... but that apparent 'process' i2">is not forgi2">iveness i2">itself. Forgi2">iveness i2">is the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's vi2">iew whi2">ich i2">is always the same. Whether i2">I JOi2">IN Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">in Hi2">is vi2">iew i2">is the questi2">ion/deci2">isi2">ion. And i2">if i2">it takes ti2">ime TO joi2">in wi2">ith Hi2">im, i2">it seems li2">ike that 'journey' toward Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is a forgi2">iveness process, but i2">it's more of a ... 'reali2">izati2">ion that nothi2">ing needs to be forgi2">iven' process. A process of correcti2">ion. Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">IS the source of correcti2">ion because He sees CORRECTLY. My (ego) attempt to `do` the forgi2">ivi2">ing and to become forgi2">iven and to get to where i2">I see that i2">it i2">IS forgi2">iven, i2">is really my struggle between allegi2">iance to ego and allegi2">iance to truth. That's where the 'work' seems to be needed and surrender needs to happen, SO THAT i2">I can get to where i2">I can SEE clearly that 'all i2">is forgi2">iven' already - i2">ie that all i2">is looked upon Wi2">ITH forgi2">ivi2">ing eyes and sees only Chri2">ist.

(i2">I'm not sure i2">if i2">I'm explai2">ini2">ing clearly what exactly has become clearer for me 'overni2">ight'. .. more to follow)

There i2">is no world - one of the hardest thi2">ings to accept. There i2">is no error, there i2">is no problem, there i2">is no ego.

Thank you Jesus for your unceasi2">ingly clari2">ity and for shari2">ing i2">it wi2">ith us!

"Some i2">illusi2">ions are shared, and some are part of your personal hell."

i2">In thi2">is world, there are ci2">ircumstances, events, happeni2">ings, si2">ituati2">ions, scenari2">ios, some of whi2">ich seem tolerable, and some of whi2">ich are a ni2">ightmare. And rest assured that the world i2">is set up i2">in such a way that problems are endless and i2">inescapable, all roads lead to death, and i2">it i2">is only a matter of ti2">ime before thi2">ings go wrong. i2">It's bui2">ilt i2">into spaceti2">ime i2">itself. And accordi2">ing to the world's laws, everythi2">ing i2">is dead as soon as i2">it i2">is born.

But what makes i2">it hell, i2">isn't so much "what happens" or the current confi2">igurati2">ion of the external world. i2">It's more to do wi2">ith how you experi2">ience i2">it. Whether you experi2">ience i2">it li2">ike a happy dream, or li2">ike a horri2">ifyi2">ing ni2">ightmare, depends enti2">irely on what's goi2">ing on i2">in your mi2">ind.

Regardless of whether you are i2">in a good place mentally, or a bad place, the world wi2">ill sti2">ill keep functi2">ioni2">ing accordi2">ing to i2">its nature. Ani2">imals di2">ie. Trees burn. Houses crumble. Cars break. Food rots. And planets are consumed by supernovae. Thi2">is i2">is bui2">ilt i2">into spaceti2">ime. Thi2">is i2">is the rules of physi2">ics by whi2">ich the world seems to be governed.

"You do not really want the world you see, for i2">it has di2">isappoi2">inted you si2">ince ti2">ime began. The homes you bui2">ilt have never sheltered you. The roads you made have led you nowhere, and no ci2">ity that you bui2">ilt has wi2">ithstood the crumbli2">ing assault of ti2">ime. Nothi2">ing you made but has the mark of death upon i2">it. Hold i2">it not dear, for i2">it i2">is old and ti2">ired, and ready to return to dust even as you made i2">it."

The questi2">ion i2">is, what meani2">ing, purpose, use, atti2">itude and way of percei2">ivi2">ing you are goi2">ing to have, whi2">ile thi2">is stuff i2">is happeni2">ing. And what you make of i2">it i2">is goi2">ing to determi2">ine whether or not you experi2">ience happi2">iness or unhappi2">iness, i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity or sufferi2">ing, health or death. And you do i2">in fact have i2">it wi2">ithi2">in your power to experi2">ience thi2">is scri2">ipt of the world, i2">in a way that entai2">ils NO negati2">ive reacti2">ion at all.

Reacti2">ions to the world are ENTi2">IRELY based on a beli2">ief that you are at the effect of the world. That the world i2">is the cause of you. i2">If you beli2">ieve thi2">is i2">in a way, i2">in any si2">ituati2">ion, your mi2">ind wi2">ill i2">infli2">ict i2">imagi2">ined states of sufferi2">ing upon i2">itself. i2">It wi2">ill percei2">ive i2">itself as vi2">icti2">imi2">ized, demorali2">ized, attacked, hurt, threatened, abused and upset. And all of thi2">is i2">is ONLY i2">in response to how the mi2">ind i2">is percei2">ivi2">ing and usi2">ing the si2">ituati2">ion. These experi2">iences don't depend on what i2">is "happeni2">ing" i2">in the world, i2">it only depends on your use of them. Or the meani2">ing you gi2">ive them.

When you are lost i2">in the ego, i2">in speci2">ialness and self i2">interest and attachment and arrogance, confused and bli2">inded and lost and afrai2">id, you li2">ikely wi2">ill feel li2">ike you are ONE Wi2">ITH the world. i2">In thi2">is experi2">ience, there i2">is no di2">isti2">incti2">ion between what the world seems to be doi2">ing, and what you seem to be experi2">ienci2">ing. There i2">is no "posi2">iti2">ive separati2">ion" between you and events. And when they happen, they seem to happen di2">irectly to you, causi2">ing you to suffer, upsetti2">ing you, threateni2">ing you and maki2">ing you hurt. And you can see no seemi2">ing way to stop them.

But when you step back and remember that you have responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for your thoughts, your percepti2">ion, your atti2">itude, your beli2">iefs, etc... you are i2">in fact CONTRi2">IBUTi2">ING to how you experi2">ience what i2">is happeni2">ing. i2">If you suffer and are upset when somethi2">ing "bad" seems to happeni2">ing, i2">it i2">is not really because of what happens, but because of your beli2">iefs about i2">it.

Let's say, you value human bodi2">ies and beli2">ieve bodi2">ies are really people. You have some favori2">ite bodi2">ies and you want to keep them around. You are attached to them and value them, and use them for self i2">interests. And then one of these bodi2">ies i2">is attacked and di2">ies. And now you wi2">ill experi2">ience what seems li2">ike real loss and terri2">ible gri2">ief, wi2">ill be sad and i2">in despai2">ir. And i2">it wi2">ill seem cruel and unfai2">ir and you wi2">ill feel vi2">icti2">imi2">ized by i2">it, angry at the person for leavi2">ing and abandoni2">ing you. But thi2">is i2">is ONLY because of your mi2">ind's atti2">itude about the body, about the events that transpi2">ired, and what i2">it means to you. And you could just as easi2">ily laugh about i2">it.

What happens, i2">is not why you suffer. The world does not cause the sufferi2">ing. Events don't have any power to do anythi2">ing to you. No-one can cause you. Nothi2">ing i2">in the world can oppress you or make you si2">ick or dead. There i2">is no causal power, no wi2">ill, no mi2">ind i2">in the world, capable of i2">influenci2">ing you i2">in any way at all. At least, not i2">if you are i2">in your ri2">ight mi2">ind. Not i2">if you are recogni2">izi2">ing that the world i2">is Fi2">ICTi2">ION. And not i2">if your beli2">iefs are fully li2">ined up wi2">ith the truth. No one who recogni2">izes that the world i2">is a dream could possi2">ible take i2">it seri2">iously.

"You would not react at all to fi2">igures i2">in a dream that you knew you were dreami2">ing."

So i2">it i2">isn't the state of the world, or what happens, or who does what to whom, that makes you suffer i2">in any way. i2">It's not the reason why you are unhappy or upset or afrai2">id. Any "re-acti2">ions" you have are EFFECTS that your mi2">ind i2">is i2">inventi2">ing to correspond to and are consequences of the CAUSES that your same mi2">ind i2">is beli2">ievi2">ing exi2">ist, happeni2">ing agai2">inst you from the outsi2">ide i2">in.

Your mi2">ind, attacks i2">itself, and beli2">ieves i2">it i2">is hurt by these attacks. And i2">it beli2">ieves the cause of these attacks i2">is not i2">itself, but somethi2">ing external to i2">itself. Thi2">is i2">is because your mi2">ind di2">isassoci2">iates from i2">itself and i2">is spli2">it. Two parts of mi2">ind at war wi2">ith each other. And thi2">is spli2">it mi2">inded state i2">is the only way your mi2">ind can experi2">ience sufferi2">ing, at i2">its own hand, and di2">isowned.

i2">I went through helli2">ish experi2">iences a li2">ittle over a year ago. i2">I managed to try to stay strong through some of i2">it, as much as i2">I could muster, but i2">I was sti2">ill beaten down, tempted, torn apart by i2">it, terri2">ibly upset, stressed, li2">ike goi2">ing through the worst li2">ivi2">ing ni2">ightmare possi2">ible. But ti2">ime has passed, and heali2">ing has occurred, and forgi2">iveness has been appli2">ied. And i2">I now look back and can ask myself, what i2">is i2">it that made i2">it seem li2">ike hell at the ti2">ime?

The answer i2">is always that i2">it only seemed li2">ike hell because i2">I took i2">it seri2">iously, i2">I forgot to laugh, i2">I thought i2">it was real, i2">I beli2">ieved i2">in bodi2">ies, i2">I beli2">ieved i2">in external threats, i2">I saw others as enemi2">ies, i2">I deci2">ided what thi2">ings meant, i2">I read i2">into i2">it, i2">I feared for possi2">ible futures, and basi2">ically MADE the whole thi2">ing a ni2">ightmare. i2">Internally. i2">I allowed i2">it i2">INTO my mi2">ind, by my beli2">ief i2">in i2">it bei2">ing real.

"Whatever you accept i2">INTO your mi2">ind has reali2">ity for you."

i2">I accepted i2">it i2">into my mi2">ind, through beli2">ief i2">in external causes, whi2">ich was really MY mi2">ind causi2">ing i2">itself agai2">inst i2">itself, percepti2">ions of hell and ni2">ightmari2">ish threateni2">ing si2">ituati2">ions. i2">It wasn't merely that the si2">ituati2">ions were there to make me stronger at the ego level, but they were there for me to ri2">ise above my own self attack. The lesson was not to suffer and become stronger because of i2">it, but to become stronger i2">in rejecti2">ion of the sufferi2">ing. Reali2">izi2">ing i2">I was doi2">ing i2">it to myself, maki2">ing i2">it worse, i2">inflati2">ing i2">it, readi2">ing i2">into i2">it, gi2">ivi2">ing i2">it meani2">ing.

At the ti2">ime, yes, i2">I was not ready or able to stop myself from doi2">ing thi2">is. i2">I was not far enough along i2">in my clari2">ifi2">icati2">ion of what i2">I was doi2">ing to not make i2">it worse for myself. i2">I di2">idn't know the many ways i2">I beli2">ieved bodi2">ies were real and hospi2">itals were threats and all the rest of i2">it. i2">I "di2">id my best at the ti2">ime", certai2">inly. But i2">I sti2">ill made i2">it hell for myself, wi2">ithi2">in, i2">in spi2">ite of that. And that i2">is where the real lesson i2">is.

i2">It i2">is not what happens, i2">it's what you make of i2">it. And i2">if you beli2">ieve the world i2">is real, you wi2">ill suffer. And i2">if you beli2">ieve that other people are bodi2">ies, you wi2">ill fear for thei2">ir li2">ives. And i2">if you beli2">ieve the world can attack someone and make them si2">ick agai2">inst thei2">ir wi2">ill, you wi2">ill suffer along wi2">ith them. And i2">in all thi2">is false empathy you wi2">ill feel vi2">icti2">imi2">ized as much as the person you thi2">ink has been vi2">icti2">imi2">ized. And thi2">is i2">is all an i2">insi2">ide job.

i2">I could-a should-a would-a laughed through the whole thi2">ing and not taken i2">it remotely seri2">iously and si2">imply resurrected and healed and brushed i2">it off as nonsense. But i2">I wasn't ready to be able to do that at the ti2">ime, so i2">I suffered. But i2">I suffered because of my beli2">iefs, my attachments, my valui2">ing of unreal thi2">ings. And i2">in every way, all of my sufferi2">ing was really i2">INSi2">IDE myself, not really anythi2">ing that anyone was actually doi2">ing outsi2">ide of me. i2">It was my i2">inner experi2">ience that became helli2">ish. i2">It was my i2">inner feeli2">ings and reacti2">ions that were my sufferi2">ing, and i2">it was all ulti2">imately self i2">infli2">icted. i2">I chose i2">it through beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in i2">it.

Many people would say i2">it's completely understandable that i2">I would feel so upset gi2">iven what was happeni2">ing. And many would say that anyone would feel that way. And that when such thi2">ings happen everyone i2">is stri2">icken wi2">ith fear. And that thi2">is i2">is all completely normal and natural. But i2">it i2">IS NOT. i2">It i2">is mental i2">illness, and i2">it i2">is extremely wi2">idespread. Because we're not wi2">illi2">ing to look deeply and honestly enough at what i2">is really happeni2">ing i2">in our mi2">inds, and what and HOW we are doi2">ing i2">it to ourselves. No one i2">is supposed to be unhappy, or sufferi2">ing, or si2">ick or dead, ever.

For a ti2">ime i2">I could not see my i2">involvement i2">in i2">it, and just kept havi2">ing these upsetti2">ing flashbacks of how "i2">it was hell" and how upsetti2">ing and ri2">idi2">iculous i2">it was. Because i2">I could not "posi2">iti2">ively separate out" the what from the meani2">ing. And emoti2">ional memori2">ies of ego experi2">iences are always from a vi2">icti2">im vantage poi2">int - the "one wi2">ith the sufferi2">ing" vi2">iewpoi2">int.

i2">I couldn't reali2">ize how i2">I Di2">ID have a choi2">ice and i2">I WAS choosi2">ing and the way i2">I suffered was actually my own choi2">ice, albei2">it somewhat unconsci2">ious at the ti2">ime. i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize i2">I could beli2">ieve otherwi2">ise because i2">I beli2">ieved too heavi2">ily i2">in the body and the world bei2">ing reali2">ity. So the sufferi2">ing was somewhat i2">inevi2">itable. And i2">it was not the world's fault. i2">It was my mi2">istaken mi2">indset. i2">I had to learn that bodi2">ies aren't real and the loss of body parts has no effect on the spi2">iri2">it.

i2">I used to also have a fear that i2">it was goi2">ing to repeat and somethi2">ing just as bad would happen agai2">in. But thi2">is too i2">is melti2">ing because i2">I can't fear that "hell wi2">ill happen agai2">in" i2">if i2">I am reali2">izi2">ing that i2">I am the one who caused i2">it to seem li2">ike hell. i2">In choosi2">ing not to do that to myself agai2">in, i2">I can render myself i2">invulnerable. No matter what seems to transpi2">ire. A happy dream i2">is an empowered dream, i2">in whi2">ich i2">I am cause, not effect.

The only benefi2">it perhaps to such tri2">ials, such sufferi2">ing experi2">iences, i2">isn't so much that you learn ski2">ills or abi2">ili2">iti2">ies to get through i2">it and survi2">ive, but more that you learn the part you play i2">in maki2">ing i2">it seem to be what i2">it i2">is. i2">In taki2">ing responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for si2">ight. i2">In owni2">ing your power of deci2">isi2">ion to choose di2">ifferently. To use i2">it as an opportuni2">ity to forgi2">ive, and not as an opportuni2">ity to attack yourself. Because at the end of the day we really are just usi2">ing the world to try to prove that we are weak and vulnerable and must di2">ie i2">in gui2">ilt, whi2">ich none of us really deserve or need.

You can set yourself free from hell, but i2">it does requi2">ire that you learn the beli2">iefs you hold about the world are false. The valui2">ing of bodi2">ies and the fear of si2">ickness and death has to go. The i2">indenti2">ifyi2">ing wi2">ith a body, and others wi2">ith thei2">irs, has to go. Otherwi2">ise you are goi2">ing to suffer sooner or later, by your own choi2">ice. The secret of salvati2">ion tells you thi2">is. Nothi2">ing happens wi2">ithout your own consent. And all the ways that you experi2">ience any si2">ituati2">ion i2">is you doi2">ing i2">it to yourself, no matter whether i2">it seems li2">ike you are the vi2">icti2">im or the vi2">icti2">imi2">izer or who seems to play what role, i2">in what i2">is essenti2">ially a non-exi2">istent i2">illusi2">ion of happeni2">ings.

You can't get out of hell by talki2">ing yourself i2">into i2">it, justi2">ifyi2">ing why the world i2">is real and why i2">it's okay that there i2">is sufferi2">ing, by telli2">ing yourself that i2">it's okay that bodi2">ies are dyi2">ing, or tryi2">ing to adjust to hell. You cannot fi2">ind peace through maki2">ing the world real and then tryi2">ing to make yourself at peace wi2">ith i2">its real hell. The only way to escape i2">it i2">is to not beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it at all, otherwi2">ise you do hell to yourself long before the world becomes hell to you.

The Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill repeat thi2">is ONE i2">inclusi2">ive lesson of deli2">iverance, unti2">il i2">it has been learned, REGARDLESS of the form of sufferi2">ing that bri2">ings you pai2">in. Whatever hurt you bri2">ing to Hi2">im, He wi2">ill make answer wi2">ith thi2">is very si2">imple truth. For thi2">is one answer TAKES AWAY the cause of every form of sorrow and of pai2">in. The form affects Hi2">is answer not at all, for He would teach you but the Si2">INGLE cause of all of them, no matter WHAT thei2">ir form. And you wi2">ill understand that mi2">iracles reflect the si2">imple statement, "i2">I have done thi2">is thi2">ing, and i2">it i2">is thi2">is i2">I would undo."

Qui2">ite often when i2">I'm stressi2">ing about whether i2">I'm doi2">ing the ri2">ight thi2">ing or not, focusi2">ing on doi2">ing somethi2">ing i2">I thi2">ink i2">I want to do but feeli2">ing gui2">ilty about i2">it, Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill gi2">ive me a wi2">ide berth of permi2">issi2">ion. i2">Instead of sayi2">ing to stop doi2">ing i2">it, He'll encourage me. i2">Instead of repri2">imandi2">ing me, he'll suggest i2">I even put asi2">ide thi2">ings i2">I'm "supposed" to be doi2">ing and do what i2">it i2">is i2">I want to do.

There are also ti2">imes when i2">I'm doi2">ing somethi2">ing whi2">ich seems very ego and 'agai2">inst' waki2">ing up or bei2">ing spi2">iri2">itual, and i2">I mi2">ight even be stubbornly refusi2">ing to li2">isten to Holy Spi2">iri2">it's gui2">idance. Not that he i2">isn't speaki2">ing to me often, but that i2">I am i2">ignori2">ing Hi2">im or choosi2">ing somethi2">ing on my own. Even then, Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill say somethi2">ing li2">ike ... "i2">its your li2">ife."

The sense of bei2">ing 'allowed' that comes from thi2">is i2">is i2">immense. And usually just be experi2">ienci2">ing no resi2">istance li2">ike thi2">is, i2">it wi2">ill hi2">ighli2">ight for me and make clear whether i2">I really want to do thi2">is or not. Holy Spri2">it i2">is so non-forceful. Li2">ike, zero force. When i2">I am expecti2">ing there to be force, or demands, or requi2">irements, or permi2">issi2">ion, or whatever other form of gui2">ilt, He comes through wi2">ith openness and acceptance.

i2">It always catches me by surpri2">ise. i2">I am never expecti2">ing Hi2">is generous response. i2">It's very lovi2">ing. i2">Instead of maki2">ing me wrong for anythi2">ing, even i2">if i2">I am doi2">ing somethi2">ing wrong, He makes me feel li2">ike i2">it's okay, and then thi2">is creates a space i2">in whi2">ich to see clearly. Usually then when thi2">is attachment and resi2">istance i2">is gone, i2">it becomes much more obvi2">ious where i2">I really stand. And then i2">I fi2">ind myself bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to ei2">ither pursue what i2">I was pursui2">ing, or surrender i2">it.

i2">I become wi2">illi2">ing to do what He wanted me to do along, and then he turns around and says, "tomorrow". i2">i.e. carry on doi2">ing whatever else.

i2">It's always a blessi2">ing.

Salvati2">ion i2">is EXTREMELY si2">imple.

"You cannot be hurt unless you hurt yourself."

i2">In thi2">is one sentence i2">is the whole course. Just stop hurti2">ing yourself!

Let's try to make thi2">is extremely clear.

You are an i2">immortal bei2">ing whi2">ich cannot be affected by anythi2">ing. Nothi2">ing real can be threatened. You cannot be hurt or attacked or damaged. Nothi2">ing can happen agai2">inst your wi2">ill. You are absolutely i2">invulnerable.

No-one else can do anythi2">ing to you. No-one else can cause you to feel anythi2">ing, experi2">ience anythi2">ing, thi2">ink anythi2">ing, have a reacti2">ion, or make you do anythi2">ing at all. There i2">is no power, force, causali2">ity, mi2">ind, wi2">ill, agent, or any ki2">ind of mani2">ipulati2">ive source i2">in the world capable of maki2">ing ANYTHi2">ING happen to you. Nothi2">ing can change you i2">in any way, to any degree. You are absolutely permanent.

SO...... the ONLY THi2">ING that seems to be able to happen, i2">is that *YOU*, and only you, can deci2">ide to begi2">in to hurt yourself. All attack i2">is self attack. And thi2">is attack MUST be an i2">illusi2">ion that YOU made up, because you CANNOT BE HURT i2">in reali2">ity.

YOU, can deci2">ide, to accuse yourself of si2">in, to have an attack thought, to deny your reali2">ity, to suppress your love, or whatever form i2">it takes. But let's be 100% clear. i2">It i2">is COMi2">ING FROM YOU. You are the one choosi2">ing i2">it and are always doi2">ing i2">it to yourself. No-one else i2">is to blame. No-one else i2">is i2">involved. No-one else has caused ANY of i2">it, not even a ti2">iny bi2">it.

i2">If you would just stop attacki2">ing yourself you would stop sufferi2">ing forever.

i2">If you would just stop denyi2">ing what you are you'd be yourself.

i2">If you would just stop hurti2">ing yourself, or beli2">ievi2">ing that you have, or that you even can, you would never have to suffer ever agai2">in.

So what can't we get thi2">is? i2">It's so i2">incredi2">ibly si2">imple. There's only you hurti2">ing yourself. So i2">if you are upset, you are doi2">ing that to yourself. i2">If you are unhappy, you are choosi2">ing that. i2">If you are sufferi2">ing and si2">ick, you are maki2">ing i2">it happen. i2">If you are dead, you consented to i2">it and chose i2">it and wanted i2">it.

The PROBLEM i2">IS.... we are UNCLEAR, CONFUSED, about WHO i2">is responsi2">ible for maki2">ing li2">ife mi2">iserable. WHO i2">IS THE CAUSE. Who has the power. Where i2">is the cause. Who i2">is the one to blame. We are CONFUSED about thi2">is. And we are mi2">istaken about i2">it very often - i2">if not most of the ti2">ime or even all the ti2">ime.

Thi2">is confusi2">ion, alone, i2">is the reason why we thi2">ink that there i2">is somethi2">ing more compli2">icated about bei2">ing at peace, or saved, or happy, or healthy. i2">In any scenari2">io, wherever we are or wi2">ith whom or whatever i2">it i2">involves or what form i2">it takes, i2">IT DOES NOT MATTER. i2">If we thi2">ink THEY are doi2">ing i2">it, THAT i2">is causi2">ing i2">it, THi2">IS i2">is doi2">ing i2">it to me, THAT's the reason i2">I'm upset, etc... we're wrong. Very mi2">istaken. We are never upset for the reason we thi2">ink. And i2">it i2">is NEVER EVER EVER because of anyone other than ourselves.

Thi2">is i2">is so extremely true, that you can practi2">ically accept that i2">if you are anythi2">ing less than totally joyous and peaceful and healthy, i2">it has NOTHi2">ING to do wi2">ith thi2">is enti2">ire uni2">iverse. Nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith other people, or places, or events, or happeni2">ings, or body states, or reacti2">ions. i2">It's not comi2">ing from anywhere else other than YOUR SELF.

Your brother i2">is not the cause of you. God i2">is the only cause of you. All people on the planet and beyond are NOT the cause of ANYTHi2">ING you experi2">ience. ABSOLUTELY NOTHi2">ING. Not one si2">ingle attack, hurt, damage, upset, accusati2">ion, nothi2">ing. None of what you experi2">ience has anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith anyone but yourself.

You are i2">invulnerable. Ei2">ither you accept thi2">is i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity OR you pretend that you are vulnerable. You pretend by di2">isowni2">ing your i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity, whi2">ich requi2">ires you to Di2">ISPLACE i2">it onto somethi2">ing else. You have to Gi2">IVE i2">IT TO someone. You gi2">ive away your power. You gi2">ive away causali2">ity. You gi2">ive away responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. You gi2">ive away strength. You gi2">ive away your self. And you put i2">it i2">into the hands of a seemi2">ingly SEPARATE somethi2">ing, anythi2">ing, so long as you thi2">ink i2">it's not yourself. Thi2">is i2">is the ENTi2">IRE problem that CLOUDS your judgements and confuses you i2">into beli2">ievi2">ing YOU AREN'T THE CAUSE.

We probably spend 90%+ of our ti2">ime i2">in thi2">is state of delusi2">ion. Perceptual di2">istorti2">ions deri2">ived from false beli2">iefs, attempti2">ing to assert "i2">I'm bei2">ing caused by somethi2">ing not myself." "There's an ali2">ien wi2">ill". "That person made me" "i2">I'm upset about". etc. Thi2">is i2">is always not true. Si2">ifti2">ing through the massi2">ive stockpi2">ile of Li2">IES that thi2">is produces, i2">is 99% of the effort entai2">iled i2">in puri2">ifi2">icati2">ion and correcti2">ion, tryi2">ing to get to a state of forgi2">iveness. Tryi2">ing to di2">ig yourself out, to di2">ig real causali2">ity out, from underneath thi2">is huge pi2">ile of confusi2">ing rubble.

Thi2">is i2">is what i2">it always comes back to. What am *i2">I* doi2">ing. Why am *i2">I* doi2">ing thi2">is. Why di2">id *i2">I* choose thi2">is. i2">If i2">I am upset, why am i2">I choosi2">ing to be upset? i2">If i2">I am unhappy, why di2">id i2">I make myself unhappy? Why am i2">I choosi2">ing to have attack thoughts? Why am i2">I beli2">ievi2">ing i2">I'm si2">inful and then di2">isowni2">ing i2">it and projecti2">ing i2">it onto someone else?

"You but accuse your brother of your own si2">in" tells you that your brother HAS NOT Si2">INNED EVER. i2">It's you that thi2">inks YOU have si2">inned, and now you're lost i2">in scapegoati2">ing someone for somethi2">ing you thi2">ink you di2">id, and subsequently posi2">iti2">ioni2">ing yourself as thei2">ir vi2">icti2">im SO THAT you can mai2">intai2">in the DENi2">IAL that thi2">is i2">is ABOUT YOU, BY YOU, and has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith them at all.

i2">If we could just become clear on thi2">is. i2">If we could just sort out, who i2">is really doi2">ing what to whom. Who i2">is causi2">ing all thi2">is. Where i2">is i2">it comi2">ing from really. Am i2">I responsi2">ible. i2">In every case, you are. 100% full responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for everythi2">ing you experi2">ience. Whi2">ich means 0% of what you experi2">ience i2">is "because of" thi2">is enti2">ire uni2">iverse or anythi2">ing i2">in i2">it.

We have to peel ourselves away from thi2">is i2">immersi2">ion, entanglement, confusi2">ion, bi2">indi2">ing, wi2">ith other people, i2">in whi2">ich we lose si2">ight of who i2">is really doi2">ing thi2">is to us. We have to reali2">ize, any ti2">ime i2">I am upset and thi2">inki2">ing i2">it's because of ANYTHi2">ING to do wi2">ith another person, i2">I MUST be mi2">istaken i2">in beli2">ievi2">ing thi2">is, because i2">I've now lost si2">ight of salvati2">ion's fact - that ri2">ight now *i2">I'm* doi2">ing somethi2">ing TO MYSELF, and what *i2">I* am doi2">ing i2">is the SOLE CAUSE of what i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing. i2">If i2">I do not li2">ike what i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing, i2">I must choose agai2">in. And whatever i2">I choose must be my experi2">ience.

"At least i2">I can deci2">ide i2">I do not Li2">IKE what i2">I feel now."

"And so i2">I HOPE i2">I have been wrong."

"i2">I WANT another way to look at thi2">is."

"Perhaps there i2">IS another way to look at thi2">is. What can i2">I LOSE by aski2">ing?"

Get a clear pi2">icture here.

1. i2">I am not affected by anythi2">ing beyond myself.

2. No external causes EVER cause me.

3. i2">I cannot be hurt or upset by anyone or because of anyone's si2">ituati2">ion.

4. Whatever i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing, i2">I WANTED to and CHOSE to.

5. i2">I am free of ALL causes of si2">ickness and death. The ONLY cause of si2">ickness and death i2">is my choi2">ice to be si2">ick and dead.

6. No-one has EVER done anythi2">ing to me. i2">I have NEVER done anythi2">ing to anyone.

7. i2">I am not at the effect of ANYTHi2">ING i2">in the world.

8. i2">If i2">I thi2">ink anythi2">ing but myself caused WHATEVER, i2">I'm mi2">istaken.

9. i2">If i2">it's all about my own FREE Wi2">ILL CHOi2">ICE, whi2">ich not even God can oppose, no one can stop me from choosi2">ing whatever i2">I want to experi2">ience.

10. Heaven i2">is a choi2">ice i2">I must make, and when i2">I choose i2">it, nothi2">ing i2">in all the world can stop me.

Thi2">is would seem to be EXTREMELY SELFi2">ISH. To the ego. To emphasi2">ize that YOU AND ONLY YOU has ever had any effect on you, and all those effects were i2">imagi2">inary. And that by focusi2">ing on the love of yourself, and accepti2">ing atonement for yourself, you become the most UNSELFi2">ISH towards others. And then wi2">ill proceed to treat them as you treat yourself, wi2">ith mi2">iraculous expressi2">ions of love.

"There i2">is nothi2">ing my holi2">iness cannot do."

"NOTHi2">ING can prevai2">il agai2">inst a Son of God who commends hi2">is Spi2">iri2">it i2">into the hands of Hi2">is Father. By doi2">ing thi2">is, the mi2">ind awakens from i2">its sleep, and the Soul remembers i2">its Creator. All sense of Separati2">ion di2">isappears, and level confusi2">ion vani2">ishes."

"My self i2">is ruler of the uni2">iverse - i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that anythi2">ing should come to me unbi2">idden by myself. Even i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is i2">I who rule my desti2">iny. What happens i2">is what i2">I desi2">ire. What does not occur i2">is what i2">I do not want to happen. Thi2">is must i2">I accept."

"Nothi2">ing except your thoughts can attack you. Nothi2">ing except your thoughts can make you thi2">ink you are vulnerable. And nothi2">ing except your thoughts can prove to you thi2">is i2">is not so."

"i2">It i2">is your thoughts alone that cause you pai2">in. Nothi2">ing external to your mi2">ind can hurt or i2">injure you i2">in any way. There i2">is no cause beyond yourself that can reach down and bri2">ing oppressi2">ion. No-one but yourself affects you. There i2">is nothi2">ing i2">in the world whi2">ich has the power to make you i2">ill or sad, or weak or frai2">il. But i2">it i2">is you who have the power to domi2">inate all thi2">ings you see by merely recogni2">izi2">ing what you are. As you percei2">ive the harmlessness i2">in them, they wi2">ill accept your holy wi2">ill as thei2">irs. And what was seen as fearful now becomes a source of i2">innocence and holi2">iness."

"The secret of salvati2">ion i2">is but thi2">is: That YOU are doi2">ing thi2">is UNTO YOURSELF. No matter what the form of the attack, thi2">is STi2">ILL i2">is true. Whoever takes the role of enemy and of attacker, STi2">ILL i2">is thi2">is the truth. Whatever seems to be the cause of any pai2">in and sufferi2">ing you feel, thi2">is i2">is STi2">ILL true. For you would not react at all to fi2">igures i2">in a dream you knew that YOU were dreami2">ing. Let them be as hateful and as vi2">ici2">ious as they may, they COULD have no effect on you, unless you fai2">iled to recogni2">ize i2">it i2">is YOUR dream. Thi2">is si2">ingle lesson learned wi2">ill set you free from sufferi2">ing, WHATEVER form i2">it takes.

The Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill repeat thi2">is ONE i2">inclusi2">ive lesson of deli2">iverance, unti2">il i2">it has been learned, REGARDLESS of the form of sufferi2">ing that bri2">ings you pai2">in. Whatever hurt you bri2">ing to Hi2">im, He wi2">ill make answer wi2">ith thi2">is very si2">imple truth. For thi2">is one answer TAKES AWAY the cause of every form of sorrow and of pai2">in. The form affects Hi2">is answer not at all, for He would teach you but the Si2">INGLE cause of all of them, no matter WHAT thei2">ir form. And you wi2">ill understand that mi2">iracles reflect the si2">imple statement, "i2">I have done thi2">is thi2">ing, and i2">it i2">is thi2">is i2">I would undo." "

As i2">I found myself beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I was angry wi2">ith someone, what then came to mi2">ind was that both 'that person' and 'me' were two parts contai2">ined i2">in my own mi2">ind.

i2">It had to be true that i2">I was at war wi2">ith myself. Even i2">if i2">I thi2">ink that my thoughts about the other person were about someone 'not me', that's not true. i2">I had to admi2">it that i2">I qui2">ite li2">iterally was bei2">ing angry at myself, had spli2">it myself i2">into two people, and was beli2">ievi2">ing that thi2">is 'other person' was the cause of my problems.

Once i2">I saw thi2">is and clai2">imed responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for 'contai2">ini2">ing' thi2">is enti2">ire scenari2">io wi2">ithi2">in myself - that thi2">is was my own mi2">ind attacki2">ing i2">itself, and that thi2">is had absolutely nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith that person that i2">I thought i2">it was to do wi2">ith.... somethi2">ing happened.

A short ti2">ime passed and somehow, the anger had completely di2">isappeared. i2">I di2">idn't even noti2">ice i2">it leave. There was no transi2">iti2">ion or gradual weani2">ing off of i2">it, or havi2">ing to work on i2">it or attack i2">it or try to change i2">it. i2">I just sort of noti2">iced there wasn't any, not even a trace, li2">ike i2">it was never there at all.

Hmmmmmmmmm.

i2">I'm seei2">ing thi2">is more and more now. My mi2">ind i2">is not really capable of havi2">ing a separate objecti2">ive vi2">iew of an external world, wi2">ith external separate people doi2">ing stuff to me. However i2">I experi2">ience i2">it, all of the 'content' of thi2">is scene i2">is wi2">ithi2">in me. Even my thoughts about how someone else i2">is to blame, even my thoughts about how they're the ones who are wrong, that's all sti2">ill a part of myself attacki2">ing another part of myself. My mi2">ind seems to have projected and 'mapped' onto the physi2">ical scenari2">io - me vs another person - but really thi2">is i2">is all happeni2">ing i2">insi2">ide me.

So ... i2">it's not really possi2">ible to be upset at a separate person. i2">I am only upset wi2">ith myself. And i2">if my mi2">ind contai2">ins content that says someone else i2">is doi2">ing somethi2">ing to me, that's ME doi2">ing somethi2">ing to me. Thi2">is i2">is si2">imply the secret to salvati2">ion - that we are li2">iterally doi2">ing thi2">is to ourselves, because any ti2">ime we percei2">ive an enemy we have made an enemy WTi2">IHi2">IN our own mi2">ind, FROM our own self, and we are at war wi2">ith ourselves. We mi2">ight i2">imagi2">ine that i2">it's got somethi2">ing to do wi2">ith other people but i2">it doesn't. We li2">iterally spli2">it our mi2">inds and form multi2">iple personali2">iti2">ies and they seem to i2">interact as though separate people.

Thi2">is i2">isn't an i2">insani2">ity that's parti2">icular to me. Thi2">is i2">is apparently what most of us are doi2">ing all the ti2">ime. i2">I can't percei2">ive confli2">ict wi2">ith others unless i2">I have confli2">ict wi2">ithi2">in me. i2">I can't be agai2">inst or offended by others wi2">ithout havi2">ing to separate off a part of my mi2">ind, label i2">it as another person, and attack i2">it.

So what happens when i2">I reali2">ize that both me and my enemy are sti2">ill parts of myself? That i2">I am both of these people? That i2">I am all of thi2">is war? That i2">I am both si2">ides of thi2">is confli2">ict? Then the unawareness of ego, of bei2">ing unconsci2">ious and lost i2">in the battlefi2">ield, i2">its foundati2">ion i2">is ri2">ipped out by the li2">ight of truth. And then all effects from that i2">inner confli2">ict have to di2">isappear. And they do.

You are your own worst enemy. You are your ONLY enemy. You are agai2">inst yourself, and thi2">is i2">is the only war you are fi2">ighti2">ing. You have no external enemi2">ies whatsoever. i2">It's just you, doi2">ing thi2">is to yourself, havi2">ing an i2">internal war i2">in a pri2">ivate world. Thi2">is i2">is the secret to salvati2">ion - that you are doi2">ing thi2">is all to yourself - that you are you AND your enemi2">ies combi2">ined. And thi2">is has got nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith anyone else, because there i2">isn't really an 'other' separate enti2">ity out there.

Ok so.... wei2">ird as thi2">is wi2">ill sound... when Holy Spi2">iri2">it does heali2">ing wi2">ith me, i2">it usually entai2">ils si2">igni2">ifi2">icant shaki2">ing of the body and also movement of body parts. Usually i2">it entai2">ils the movement of my head i2">into some ki2">ind of seemi2">ingly random sequence of posi2">iti2">ions.

There wi2">ill be i2">involuntary movements of the arms and legs, tensi2">ing of vari2">ious muscles, vi2">ibrati2">ions, someti2">imes qui2">ite rapi2">id and i2">intense alternati2">ions from si2">ide to si2">ide, etc.

Thi2">is morni2">ing after He'd done some heali2">ing for a whi2">ile, whi2">ich i2">involved the movement of my head, i2">I asked Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">if he could deli2">iberately move my head. After a couple seconds, vi2">ibrati2">ions/shaki2">ing began and my head moved to the ri2">ight.

i2">I sai2">id ok, now move i2">it all the way to the left. After a few seconds, the vi2">ibrati2">ions/shaki2">ing started and my head moved all the way to the left.

Then i2">I sai2">id ok, move i2">it to the mi2">iddle. After a few seconds, the vi2">ibrati2">ions/shaki2">ing started and my head centered. i2">I then asked and recei2">ived Hi2">im movi2">ing i2">it agai2">in to the left.

Then i2">I thought ok, to fi2">ini2">ish off, let's move i2">it all the way to the ri2">ight. Thi2">is one took several seconds before i2">it began perhaps because i2">I thought that, for me, thi2">is would really prove that He was movi2">ing my body. And the the vi2">ibrati2">ions/shaki2">ing started, and He moved my head all the way to the ri2">ight.

Ok... so... pretty i2">interesti2">ing. Even though i2">I'd been used to Hi2">im movi2">ing my body around as part of heali2">ing, i2">I hadn't really thought before to ask i2">if He can cause i2">it to move on purpose outsi2">ide of the heali2">ing mode.

So i2">I took i2">it further.

i2">I sai2">id to Hi2">im ok, can you rai2">ise my arm? After a few moments, vi2">ibrati2">ions/shaki2">ing began i2">in my arm, muscles began to tense, and my arm rai2">ised up off the bed to over my head.

i2">I sai2">id ok, and put i2">it back down agai2">in. So he di2">id.

And then i2">I sai2">id ok, can you make i2">it poi2">int? After a few moments vi2">ibrati2">ions/shaki2">ing agai2">in began and muscles tensed and i2">in a somewhat shaky way, he moved i2">it i2">into an outreached "fi2">inger poi2">inti2">ing" posture.

i2">I thought ok. Thi2">is i2">is i2">interesti2">ing. Let's do one more thi2">ing. So i2">I asked Hi2">im to rai2">ise my leg. A few moments later, the same vi2">ibrati2">ions/shaki2">ing started i2">in my ri2">ight foot and travelled up my leg, and then my leg began to rai2">ise off the bed. i2">It then returned to the bed.

i2">I know thi2">is may sound very wei2">ird, because i2">it's supernatural. And i2">it may seem unexplai2">ined or fri2">ighteni2">ing to some people. But thi2">is i2">is happeni2">ing because i2">I have trust. And i2">I know i2">it i2">is the Holy Spi2">iri2">it.

These thi2">ings don't happen i2">in a ki2">ind of forceful or overpoweri2">ing way. They happen because the Holy Spi2">iri2">it has a mi2">ind and respects free wi2">ill and because we hold conversati2">ions and have developed trust. And therefore i2">I can ask Hi2">im to do thi2">ings and He wi2">ill do i2">it. And i2">I can ask Hi2">im to stop and He wi2">ill stop. And i2">I can ask Hi2">im to resume and He wi2">ill resume. We work together. i2">It i2">is a li2">ive, consci2">ious, dynami2">ic relati2">ionshi2">ip.

i2">I am endeavori2">ing to take my trust i2">in Holy Spi2">iri2">it and Chri2">ist to new levels. i2">I know there i2">is more. i2">I explore and di2">iscover and try new thi2">ings. i2">I experi2">iment. Thi2">is i2">is the ki2">ind of openness you need i2">in order to develop thi2">is. You have to be wi2">illi2">ing and i2">interested i2">in explori2">ing what i2">is possi2">ible, wi2">ithout fear.

Somewhere i2">in the urtext Jesus says that some thi2">ings are on a need-to-know basi2">is and they seem to be kept hi2">idden because you don't need to know. And when you develop a need or desi2">ire to know, they become revealed to you. Because you are ready for them.

When you see the mani2">ifestati2">ions or effects of the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, when you experi2">ience Hi2">im operati2">ing on your physi2">ical body, or that or another, you come to trust and recogni2">ize that He must exi2">ist. That he must be there. Because what i2">is happeni2">ing i2">is beyond your doi2">ing.

And so as you see yourself moved by an unseen spi2">iri2">it force and i2">interact wi2">ith Hi2">im and talk to Hi2">im and experi2">ience di2">irect real-ti2">ime cooperati2">ive i2">interacti2">ions, then you develop the knowi2">ing that He i2">is there and He i2">is real and He i2">is powerful and He i2">is worki2">ing wi2">ith you. And only by doi2">ing thi2">is do you come to be aware that He i2">is really there.

"You cannot see the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, ***but you can see Hi2">is mani2">ifestati2">ions. And unless you do, you wi2">ill not reali2">ize He i2">is there.*** Mi2">iracles are Hi2">is wi2">itnesses, and speak for hi2">is Presence. What you cannot see becomes real to you only through the wi2">itnesses who speak for i2">it. For you can be AWARE of what you cannot see, and i2">it can become compelli2">ingly real to you, ***as i2">its presence becomes mani2">ifest THROUGH you.*** Do Hi2">is work, for you SHARE i2">in Hi2">is functi2">ion. As your functi2">ion i2">in Heaven i2">is creati2">ion, so your functi2">ion on earth i2">is heali2">ing. God shares Hi2">is functi2">ion wi2">ith you i2">in Heaven, and the Holy Spi2">iri2">it shares Hi2">is wi2">ith you on earth."

A few years ago, my wi2">ife was di2">iagnosed wi2">ith cancer and had to have surgery.

At the ti2">ime, thi2">is seemed li2">ike a bi2">ig threat. Thi2">is i2">is because i2">I beli2">ieved i2">in the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions, and so i2">it seems li2">ike a bi2">ig dangerous threateni2">ing problem.

My i2">ini2">iti2">ial reacti2">ion to the news was actually that i2">I almost fai2">inted and had a pani2">ic attack. The percepti2">ion that thi2">is was a seri2">ious external threat produced a lot of fear.

Duri2">ing the ti2">ime at the hospi2">ital when she was havi2">ing surgery, i2">I felt very afrai2">id. i2">It took longer than expected whi2">ich di2">idn't help, and i2">I felt very nervous about whether she was even goi2">ing to make i2">it through the surgery i2">in one pi2">iece.

My mi2">ind started to become flooded wi2">ith ego fear thoughts. i2">I of course tri2">ied to "battle" wi2">ith these and convi2">ince myself that they weren't true or that somethi2">ing else was true, li2">ike that she was goi2">ing to be ok. But i2">it was hard. i2">I prayed fervently and raged at God demandi2">ing that He make sure she was ok.

The problem was, i2">I couldn't stop havi2">ing these fearful thoughts, whi2">ich were comi2">ing i2">in thi2">ick and fast. i2">I tri2">ied to not thi2">ink them but couldn't. But then somethi2">ing suddenly occurred to me.

i2">In the mi2">idst of the ego "reveali2">ing" i2">itself i2">in the open, and showi2">ing i2">its vi2">ici2">iousness, i2">it i2">inadvertently exposed i2">itself a bi2">it too much. i2">It seemed li2">ike i2">it was tryi2">ing to make me upset on purpose, and some part of me saw thi2">is as unnecessary. i2">I reali2">ized that the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions was di2">ictati2">ing to me "how much reacti2">ion" i2">I should have.

Gi2">iven the cancer seemed li2">ike a bi2">ig seri2">ious external threat, i2">it appeared to correspond that i2">I would have a "bi2">ig reacti2">ion" to that percepti2">ion. The two went hand i2">in hand. Bi2">ig problem, bi2">ig reacti2">ion. The moment i2">I saw thi2">is, i2">it suddenly dawned on me that i2">I was ONLY havi2">ing thi2">is bi2">ig i2">insurmountable reacti2">ion because the problem seemed so bi2">ig. And moreso, that i2">I was the one percei2">ivi2">ing i2">it to be a bi2">ig seri2">ious problem, causi2">ing thi2">is fear to erupt.

What thi2">is taught me i2">is that i2">I don't HAVE to have the level of reacti2">ion that the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions di2">ictates. i2">I don't HAVE to be severely affected by a severe cause. And that really put my mi2">ind i2">into a di2">ifferent perspecti2">ive, above the battlefi2">ield as i2">it were. i2">I had an i2">increase i2">in awareness and started to take steps of forgi2">iveness to see through or not beli2">ieve that thi2">is was a bi2">ig problem, or that i2">its appearance was the truth. Thi2">is qui2">ickly di2">imi2">ini2">ished the presence of the fear thoughts/fear-attack, and the ego qui2">ieted down a lot.

She made i2">it through the surgery ok and that was the end of that drama. i2">It was an i2">important lesson. Someti2">imes you need to be shown the full-on rage of the ego's thought system i2">in order to expose i2">it enough to reali2">ize how i2">it i2">is self-defeati2">ing. We don't HAVE to have bi2">ig reacti2">ions to i2">ILLUSi2">IONS of bi2">ig problems. And thi2">is i2">is a step towards becomi2">ing mi2">iracle mi2">inded.

Yesterday i2">I lay hands on my wi2">ife's crampi2">ing feet, i2">I commanded the cramps to go, Holy Spi2">iri2">it flowed and the cramps left. There wasn't a whole lot of fanfare. i2">It just happened and i2">it was done.

Mi2">iracle.

i2">I noti2">iced afterwards that i2">it had worked seemi2">ingly easi2">ier than i2">in past attempts. Somethi2">ing about me had changed.

Previ2">iously, as i2">I attempted mi2">iracles, i2">I sti2">ill had a strong beli2">ief i2">in si2">ickness bei2">ing real. i2">I saw i2">its removal as "di2">iffi2">icult", and felt that i2">I was goi2">ing up agai2">inst a formi2">idable opponent.

i2">It remi2">inded me of how when i2">I fi2">irst started to pray to God, that i2">I would be i2">in much more of a beggi2">ing mode, much more a vi2">icti2">im, and qui2">ite powerless. i2">I'd be i2">in tears and pleadi2">ing and beggi2">ing but i2">it wouldn't bri2">ing about much of a result. Thi2">is i2">is because i2">I was not ori2">ienti2">ing myself properly as an extender of God's mi2">iracles, but was tryi2">ing have somethi2">ing done to me. That's vi2">icti2">im consci2">iousness, and God wi2">ill not attack.

ACi2">IM also tells us about the authori2">ity problem, whi2">ich i2">is our attempt to "be God" i2">in separati2">ion from God, to overthrow God and to replace Hi2">im wi2">ith a false self. The more that we try to do thi2">is, the more we gi2">ive "power" to the ego, but paradoxi2">ically thi2">is i2">is also gi2">ivi2">ing AWAY our true power - the power of God. The stronger the ego seems to become, the weaker we become. Taki2">ing authori2">ity away from God takes real authori2">ity away from ourselves.

Si2">imi2">ilarly, the extent to whi2">ich we beli2">ieve that i2">illusi2">ions are reali2">ity, such as that si2">ickness i2">is real, problems are real, or that we have powerful enemi2">ies, reveals just how weakened we are. i2">If we beli2">ieve that i2">illusi2">ions have power over us, that they are the truth (and the truth cannot be changed), then thi2">is "di2">isables" us from bei2">ing effecti2">ive mi2">iracle workers.

i2">I had previ2">iously attempted to go up agai2">inst what i2">I percei2">ived to be a real enemy, a real si2">ickness, a real di2">iffi2">iculty, and i2">it was thi2">is fundamental beli2">ief that produced the wrong ki2">ind of percepti2">ion - a percepti2">ion whi2">ich blocks mi2">iracles. i2">If i2">I'm percei2">ivi2">ing that, let's say, 70% of the truth i2">is i2">in i2">illusi2">ions, then i2">I only beli2">ieve i2">in God's power 30% and see myself as i2">incapable of overcomi2">ing the problem. i2">I can rant and scream at i2">it all i2">I want but i2">it won't budge.

i2">I wi2">ill also keep looki2">ing at the problem to see 'i2">if' the mi2">iracle worked, i2">I wi2">ill check i2">it, i2">I wi2">ill be i2">in a mode of di2">iagnosi2">is (ego), and i2">I wi2">ill have a lot of doubt. Here i2">I am usi2">ing percepti2">ion to recei2">ive si2">ignals from outsi2">ide of me to tell me i2">IF somethi2">ing happened, i2">instead of knowi2">ing from Wi2">ITHi2">IN that i2">it MUST happen. Wi2">ith a percepti2">ion ri2">iddled wi2">ith fear - whi2">ich means that you beli2">ieve i2">illusi2">ions are real - you are not wi2">ieldi2">ing very much authori2">ity over them.

i2">In the past few weeks i2">I've been goi2">ing through qui2">ite a breakthrough i2">in terms of recogni2">izi2">ing that ALL si2">ickness i2">is unreal, that the enti2">ire physi2">ical world i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion, and really wi2">ithdrawi2">ing a lot of beli2">ief from i2">it. i2">It has reframed everythi2">ing for me and i2">is putti2">ing thi2">ings i2">in thei2">ir proper perspecti2">ive. i2">It was very di2">iffi2">icult seemi2">ing to deci2">ide to not beli2">ieve i2">in si2">ickness anymore, flyi2">ing i2">in the face of what the whole world beli2">ieves.

Followi2">ing thi2">is, however, i2">I noti2">iced as i2">I attempted a mi2">iracle that i2">I had a much more mi2">iracle-mi2">inded atti2">itude. i2">I was not about to take no for an answer, was not checki2">ing to see i2">if somethi2">ing happened, i2">I di2">id not pause to deci2">ide whether to do i2">it, i2">I told the problem to go and i2">I meant i2">it, and a greater sense of authori2">ity expressed i2">itself through me.

As such, when you change your mi2">ind and beli2">ieve more strongly that God's truth i2">is the truth, and that i2">illusi2">ions really are NOTHi2">ING, you take on and share more of the REAL authori2">ity of God once more. You have power OVER i2">illusi2">ions because you are much less decei2">ived by them. Thi2">is makes you more mi2">iracle mi2">inded because now you are more ali2">igned wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it's mi2">indset, are more empowered by the truth, are much less deterred by the i2">illusi2">ions of orders of di2">iffi2">iculty, and you si2">imply beli2">ieve far less that the problem/si2">ickness has more power than you do.

Ulti2">imately thi2">is wi2">ill mean that you gai2">in such authori2">ity i2">in Chri2">ist, such ali2">ignment wi2">ith God, and such certai2">inty that i2">illusi2">ions are NOTHi2">ING to you, that you li2">iterally can brush them away li2">ike they meant nothi2">ing at all. That i2">is the ki2">ind of power that Jesus demonstrated. That's what happens when you have ali2">igned yourself wi2">ith God's truth and no longer percei2">ive i2">incorrectly that i2">illusi2">ions are actually even a formi2">idable opponent. Recogni2">izi2">ing them as nothi2">ing, not taki2">ing them seri2">iously, not beli2">ievi2">ing they are real and not Gi2">IVi2">ING THEM any power, stri2">ips them of all possi2">ible defenses and prevents them from preventi2">ing the mi2">iracle.

As we reclai2">im our bi2">irthri2">ight i2">in shari2">ing the True Authori2">ity of God, reli2">inqui2">ishi2">ing our attempt to have ego authori2">ity - whi2">ich i2">is really weakness and powerlessness - and surrenderi2">ing to the truth, provi2">ides us wi2">ith automati2">ic access to the mi2">iracle-mi2">inded awareness of God/Holy Spi2">iri2">it, and thereby faci2">ili2">itates mi2">iracles. i2">Instead of di2">iffi2">icult mi2">iracles seemi2">ing to become harder, they i2">instead become easi2">ier the less you beli2">ieve the problem i2">is real. Nothi2">ing can stand i2">in the way of the Son of God.

You have authori2">ity over all i2">illusi2">ions because of what you are and because of what the truth i2">is. That authori2">ity i2">is POWER, and that power can effortlessly di2">isappear all si2">ickness, death and sufferi2">ing. i2">It can di2">isappear the body, the world, and the uni2">iverse. The power of God knows no li2">imi2">its.

For a short ti2">ime yesterday, my body vani2">ished from my consci2">ious awareness. i2">I had my eyes closed at the ti2">ime and was thi2">inki2">ing about some stuff...

i2">I had thi2">is sudden vi2">isi2">ion of a small scene, perhaps a trai2">il or some short stretch of path, and there was a body layi2">ing there. But then the body collapsed i2">in on i2">itself, and then flattened, and took on a dark shadow-li2">ike colori2">ing, and then i2">it completely just totally di2">isappeared, li2">ike totally erased from the scene. i2">I don't know i2">if i2">I was bei2">ing shown thi2">is perhaps.

But then the next moment, as i2">if related somehow, i2">I suddenly had thi2">is awareness that my own physi2">ical body was not there anymore. Not si2">imply that i2">it was there but i2">I was recogni2">izi2">ing i2">its unreali2">ity, i2">it li2">iterally was gone. i2">It had become i2">invi2">isi2">ible and totally absent.

i2">I seemed to be sti2">ill me as i2">if some energy form or somethi2">ing, but the physi2">ical body that had surrounded me was gone. i2">In an i2">instant i2">it seemed to fade and just vani2">ish. i2">I i2">immedi2">iately thought of a quote from the course...

"Mi2">iracles are the absence of the body. They are sudden shi2">ifts i2">into i2">invi2">isi2">ibi2">ili2">ity, away from lower order reali2">ity. That i2">is why they heal."

Then i2">I had thi2">is thought, i2">is thi2">is a mi2">iracle, and does thi2">is mean i2">I'm bei2">ing healed somehow?

What then was the most stark and i2">interesti2">ing fact, was just thi2">is amazi2">ing contrast between not havi2">ing a body and all the vari2">ious thi2">ings that i2">I beli2">ieve about the body bei2">ing real. Such as that i2">it has bi2">iologi2">ical mechani2">isms, or has a past hi2">istory, or i2">is physi2">ically soli2">id, or that there's all these rules that have to be followed for i2">its preservati2">ion, that i2">it needs to be fed and slept and so on. All of those i2">in an i2">instant seemed completely i2">irrelevant and meani2">ingless.

i2">I marveled to myself, that i2">if the body can be just so easi2">ily swi2">itched off li2">ike that, i2">it can't even really be a body. i2">It's li2">ike some ki2">ind of hollow empty shell. Everythi2">ing about i2">it i2">is fake and none of the stori2">ies about how i2">it functi2">ions or what i2">it depends on are true.

i2">I also thought about how "mi2">iracles are teachi2">ing devi2">ices", because when you are exposed to somethi2">ing where the body i2">is suddenly healed or somethi2">ing happens vi2">iolati2">ing the laws of physi2">ics, or your body vani2">ishes, there i2">is just thi2">is i2">incredi2">ibly profound educati2">ion about the fact that the body i2">is not anythi2">ing at all. i2">It uproots everythi2">ing you ever beli2">ieved. i2">It confronts every bi2">it of folklore about how the body works and behaves and must be protected and so on. All of i2">it i2">is suddenly false.

Thi2">is went on for about 10 seconds or so as i2">I felt myself bodi2">iless. i2">I noti2">iced that i2">I had a sli2">ight sense of the presence of the ends of my arms and legs, my hands and feet, but only mi2">ildly. And then i2">I returned. Whether i2">I was bei2">ing shown thi2">is or escorted to see thi2">is or whatever i2">I don't know. Nor could i2">I get the experi2">ience to return on my own.

i2">It was the most unexpected and peculi2">iar thi2">ing, to have somethi2">ing you've always thought to be not only your self but also to be real and soli2">id and i2">important, to just be shown to be nothi2">ing but an i2">imagi2">inary i2">image that can be fli2">ipped off li2">ike a swi2">itch. As though i2">it means nothi2">ing whatsoever.

i2">I'm remi2">inded of thi2">is:

"You have made much progress, and are really tryi2">ing to make sti2">ill more, but there i2">is one thi2">ing you have never done; not for one i2">instant have you utterly forgotten the body. i2">It has faded at ti2">imes from your si2">ight, but i2">it has not yet COMPLETELY Di2">ISAPPEARED. You are not asked to let thi2">is happen for more than an i2">instant, but i2">it i2">is i2">in thi2">is i2">instant that the mi2">iracle of Atonement happens. Afterwards, you wi2">ill see the body agai2">in, but never qui2">ite the same. And every i2">instant that you spend Wi2">ITHOUT awareness of i2">it gi2">ives you a di2">ifferent vi2">iew of i2">it, when you return."

Jesus asks us to be wi2">illi2">ing to demonstrate that what our brother attempted to do to us has had NO EFFECTS.

Thi2">is means that i2">if someone i2">is agai2">inst you or argues or attacks you, i2">if you are experi2">ienci2">ing effects, two thi2">ings are happeni2">ing:

1) The si2">ituati2">ion i2">is neutral but you are choosi2">ing to CREATE effects yourself but are blami2">ing the cause of those effects on the other person.

2) You are mai2">intai2">ini2">ing those effects i2">in order to prove that the other person i2">is wrong.

So i2">if i2">I feel hurt and upset about somethi2">ing someone sai2">id or di2">id, i2">I'm tryi2">ing to prove that they have done somethi2">ing real to me... that i2">its had real consequences... and therefore that person i2">is a si2">inner. i2">I'm not just feeli2">ing hurt because they hurt me, i2">I'm feeli2">ing hurt because i2">I have a secret agenda of PROVi2">ING that that person i2">is wrong by SHOWi2">ING that i2">it has done somethi2">ing to me. i2">I'm actually creati2">ing symptoms wi2">ithi2">in my own mi2">ind i2">in order to have evi2">idence that 'they di2">id i2">it' and therefore they can be skapegoated.

So i2">I fi2">ind myself wonderi2">ing... what i2">if i2">I chose to completely i2">IGNORE what the person di2">id and to choose to remai2">in i2">in i2">innocence and to see them as i2">innocent, and completely DENY the si2">ituati2">ion any 'power' over me to cause me or i2">impel me to create effects wi2">ithi2">in myself? What i2">if i2">I just remai2">in calm and neutral and unaffected? What i2">if i2">I can deli2">iberately CHOOSE i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity? After all, i2">I can't put effects of vulnerabi2">ili2">ity i2">into my own self (for the purpose of skapegoati2">ing and blame) wi2">ithout i2">it undermi2">ini2">ing my i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity, but i2">if i2">I choose NOT to put effects i2">into myself, surely thi2">is ESTABLi2">ISHES my i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity? :-D AND i2">it establi2">ishes the i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity of the other person!

i2">It's defi2">ini2">itely somethi2">ing to practi2">ice and somethi2">ing i2">I am looki2">ing to tryi2">ing to do more often, because i2">I defi2">ini2">itely know that my normal mode of functi2">ion i2">is 'have a reacti2">ion'. We need to break that pattern and know that we can choose not to parti2">ici2">ipate i2">in the ego's asserti2">ions that somethi2">ing has gone wrong. Thi2">is i2">is a choi2">ice to heal.

Remember (note to self).... "i2">if i2">I defend myself, i2">I am attacked".

i2">In other words, i2">if i2">I put effects i2">into myself and blame the cause of i2">it on someone else, i2">I am tryi2">ing to defend myself by attacki2">ing myself and the other person. What would i2">it be li2">ike i2">if we could walk around bei2">ing completely i2">invulnerable to everythi2">ing by not choosi2">ing to create effects from anythi2">ing?

The more that you take responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for what you are experi2">ienci2">ing, and the more you see that your whole experi2">ience i2">is not caused by anyone or anythi2">ing other than yourself, the more you wi2">ill see thi2">is i2">in others as well.

i2">I was at the grocery store and saw thi2">is man walki2">ing wi2">ith a cane and an obvi2">ious li2">imp from some recent i2">injury. But what struck me was how thi2">is 'looked' to me. i2">Instead of the usual ego percepti2">ion of ... oh, somethi2">ing must've happened to hi2">im, he's obvi2">iously been unfai2">irly treated, he di2">idn't choose thi2">is and he i2">is powerless.... i2">I saw i2">instead, here i2">is someone who has chosen to gi2">ive themselves thi2">is temporary di2">isabi2">ili2">ity, who has done i2">it to themselves, albei2">it perhaps unconsci2">iously, and thi2">is hasn't happened to them agai2">inst thei2">ir wi2">ill. i2">I see the man acti2">ing as i2">if he di2">idn't choose thi2">is, acti2">ing as i2">if he di2">idn't want thi2">is, but sti2">ill somehow i2">it regi2">istered wi2">ith me that he was not a vi2">icti2">im and that thi2">is 'acci2">ident' had come from hi2">im. There are no acci2">idents.

As Jesus says, nothi2">ing happens to us wi2">ithout our consent, i2">includi2">ing death. We get everythi2">ing we ask for. We do not get anythi2">ing we don't ask for. i2">I don't know what had changed i2">in my mi2">ind or how, but somehow my mi2">ind was seei2">ing/percei2">ivi2">ing di2">ifferently and the 'meani2">ing' of what i2">I was seei2">ing struck me di2">ifferently. Thi2">is man i2">is responsi2">ible for what he i2">is experi2">ienci2">ing, he's not a vi2">icti2">im, and nothi2">ing has happened agai2">inst hi2">is wi2">ill, meani2">ing he has the POWER to recover.

i2">If i2">I see myself as a vi2">icti2">im, by not taki2">ing responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for what i2">I beli2">ieve and feel, and i2">if i2">I don't recogni2">ize that what i2">I feel i2">is NOT caused by anythi2">ing outsi2">ide of me, then i2">I also wi2">ill see other people as vi2">icti2">ims. i2">I'll have 'sympathy' for other people's unfai2">ir treatment, and enter i2">into 'false empathy'. i2">I also won't beli2">ieve that other people chose what's happeni2">ing, or that they have the power to heal. i2">Instead i2">I'll see them as condemned and stuck and powerless, because that's how i2">I see myself.

But when i2">I clai2">im who i2">I am and what i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing, wi2">ith me as i2">its author, i2">I wi2">ill also see other people as bei2">ing empowered and capable and free.

i2">It's i2">interesti2">ing how percepti2">ion can change, how the mi2">ind can change, and how i2">it can make the world appear di2">ifferent to you. i2">I'm not talki2">ing about havi2">ing certai2">in thoughts, just the i2">immedi2">iate way the world 'looks' to you, how i2">it regi2">isters, what i2">it means, what i2">is clear and obvi2">ious and what you see i2">in i2">it. Thi2">is somehow gets transformed when we heal and forgi2">ive, as i2">if there are hi2">idden changes to a hi2">idden projector i2">in our mi2">ind that produces a di2">ifferent experi2">ience, wi2">ithout really knowi2">ing how that change occurs. Holy Spi2">iri2">it of course knows how heali2">ing i2">is accompli2">ished.

As i2">I observed some acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies i2">in my mi2">ind, i2">I noti2">iced a lot of thoughts whi2">ich went li2">ike "i2">I wi2">ish thi2">is wasn't happeni2">ing" "i2">I want thi2">is to go away" "When wi2">ill i2">it stop" "i2">Its so annoyi2">ing" "i2">I don't want i2">it."

Then i2">it occurred to me that these are all a form of avoi2">idance, or i2">in other words, tryi2">ing to escape. So i2">I fi2">igured, thi2">is must be an attempt to escape from reali2">ity. i2">I could feel how i2">I was not wanti2">ing to just 'face' somethi2">ing. i2">I wanted to get away from i2">it, to make i2">it stop and go away.

i2">I also noti2">ice that attempts to have thi2">ings stop and go away i2">is also fear, because fear i2">is a form of attack that tri2">ies to get ri2">id of what's happeni2">ing.

So then i2">I thought, well, i2">if all of these thoughts are basi2">ically tryi2">ing to get away from somethi2">ing, what i2">if i2">I was to try to go toward i2">it i2">instead? What i2">if i2">I was to be present wi2">ith i2">it, welcome i2">it, si2">it wi2">ith i2">it and let i2">it be? What i2">if there i2">is a present reali2">ity that i2">I'm tryi2">ing to avoi2">id and escape from?

i2">It then became clearer that tryi2">ing to escape from present reali2">ity puts the mi2">ind i2">into a state of i2">impri2">isonment. i2">It thi2">inks i2">it i2">is then tryi2">ing to escape from somethi2">ing bad toward somethi2">ing good, away from what i2">it doesn't want toward what i2">it does want, but i2">it i2">is i2">in fact doi2">ing the opposi2">ite. i2">It's tryi2">ing to move away from reali2">ity i2">into i2">illusi2">ions.

i2">I also noti2">iced the mi2">ind was just chatteri2">ing away wi2">ith commentary and judgements and so on, all of whi2">ich were further forms of havi2">ing somethi2">ing to say about everythi2">ing. Ways of pushi2">ing i2">it away and bei2">ing di2">ispleased wi2">ith i2">it, not wanti2">ing to accept somethi2">ing.

So i2">I started tryi2">ing to do the exact opposi2">ite, whi2">ich at fi2">irst felt a bi2">it ali2">ien. As i2">if all the thi2">inki2">ing before was goi2">ing i2">in the wrong di2">irecti2">ion, and what i2">I was tryi2">ing to do was completely 180-degrees totally opposi2">ite to what was correct. To just approach the reali2">ity of the si2">ituati2">ion and be wi2">ith i2">it wi2">ithout tryi2">ing to avoi2">id i2">it or stop i2">it or run away from i2">it, seemed unfami2">ili2">iar at fi2">irst. But i2">it also felt li2">ike a surrender.

i2">I noti2">iced that really most of the thoughts that ari2">ise, even those thoughts to do wi2">ith waki2">ing up and bei2">ing spi2">iri2">itual and pursui2">ing truth and all that, they all seem to sti2">ill be thoughts movi2">ing away from reali2">ity. On the surface they seem li2">ike a keen i2">interest i2">in approachi2">ing the truth, but they are actually ways of getti2">ing away from i2">it.

That's a bi2">it shocki2">ing to reali2">ise that what you thought was a genui2">ine desi2">ire to i2">improve somehow was actually an avoi2">idance and an attempt to make sure i2">it doesn't happen. And of course, that's all part of the ego.

From there i2">I noti2">iced a sense of greater awareness somehow, that the thi2">inki2">ing commenti2">ing judgi2">ing 'me' that i2">I thought was me, was actually somethi2">ing less than me, just some ki2">ind of bundle of thoughts and i2">ideas that i2">I thought was myself but i2">isn't. i2">I was more outsi2">ide of them, and there a was a sense of some space or a gap between what i2">I am and thi2">is i2">incessant mi2">ind that rambles on and thi2">inks i2">it knows.

i2">It makes me wonder actually i2">if all thi2">is thought i2">is really the ego i2">in di2">isgui2">ise, an attempt to actually avoi2">id reali2">ity and attack i2">it whi2">ile frami2">ing i2">it as an attempt to move toward somethi2">ing that i2">I want. And maybe li2">ivi2">ing li2">ife more has to be to do wi2">ith confronti2">ing the present moment and engagi2">ing wi2">ith reali2">ity, rather than wi2">ith the commentary about reali2">ity.

There can be a whole lot of i2">intellectual acti2">ivi2">ity whi2">ich can all sound li2">ike i2">it's totally geared towards awakeni2">ing and bei2">ing spi2">iri2">itual and all that, whi2">ile si2">imultaneously bei2">ing a way to avoi2">id actually bei2">ing i2">it. Jesus i2">in the course for example says that we attack the real world every second of every mi2">inute of every day.

So i2">If we're constantly i2">in a state of avoi2">idi2">ing God, avoi2">idi2">ing reali2">ity, avoi2">idi2">ing the present, tryi2">ing to escape, we're really tryi2">ing to escape from reali2">ity i2">into unreali2">ity. Except i2">it's always framed as tryi2">ing to escape somethi2">ing we don't want, that i2">is bad or wrong, or we thi2">ink i2">it's not what we're supposed to be closer to, whi2">ich i2">is an attack upon i2">it.

So we're li2">ike... frami2">ing God and reali2">ity as somethi2">ing we don't want, judgi2">ing i2">it, attacki2">ing i2">it, and then justi2">ifyi2">ing that we should be movi2">ing away from i2">it, not wanti2">ing i2">it, resi2">isti2">ing i2">it, i2">in order to get away from i2">it, as i2">if we'll be better off.

i2">I also reali2">ised that the more you try to escape the more you become i2">impri2">isoned, even i2">if you don't recogni2">ise i2">it as i2">impri2">isonment. And i2">in fact, the way to fi2">ind freedom i2">is to stop tryi2">ing to escape. Of course the ego wi2">ill not agree wi2">ith that because i2">it'll say i2">if you stop escapi2">ing you'll be i2">impri2">isoned forever. But i2">it's totally i2">insane.

When you stop tryi2">ing to escape from reali2">ity and accept i2">it and let i2">it be, that's when you actually fi2">ind a sense of freedom. Because your mi2">ind i2">is really i2">inventi2">ing the sense of i2">impri2">isonment i2">itself, as the effort to resi2">ist and get away from freedom.

i2">I guess long story short, we should be bei2">ing more present wi2">ith what actually i2">is, rather than all our attempts to avoi2">id i2">it.

i2">I've been fi2">indi2">ing great benefi2">it from thi2">is si2">imple i2">idea, based on lesson 67, "Love created me li2">ike i2">itself."

Thi2">is i2">is based on a very si2">imple and clear-cut metaphysi2">ical logi2">ic.i2">It goes i2">in these steps:

1) God i2">is the source and cause of what you are.

2) God created you by extendi2">ing hi2">is own nature and shari2">ing i2">it wi2">ith you.

3) You i2">inheri2">ited God's nature so are exactly li2">ike God i2">in every way.

4) Si2">ince God's nature i2">is permanent you are permanently li2">ike God.

5) Therefore you MUST be sti2">ill exactly li2">ike God ri2">ight now.

6) And therefore, because you are ONLY li2">ike God, you CAN ONLY extend that whi2">ich God gave you.

7) You therefore extend ONLY what you have and are and gi2">ive only that to others.

Thi2">is i2">is so extremely rock soli2">id and clear logi2">ically, metaphysi2">ically, spi2">iri2">itually, and truthfully, that i2">it really provi2">ides great focus and clari2">ity as to your TRUE FUNCTi2">ION i2">In heaven. The relati2">ionshi2">ip you have wi2">ith God. The truth of your nature. What you are capable of. And what i2">is NATURAL to you.

When i2">I use thi2">is and put i2">it i2">into phrases, i2">it somehow VERY qui2">ickly moves me i2">into sani2">ity and a deeper i2">inner awareness of my God-gi2">iven nature.

So we phrase i2">it li2">ike:

Love created me lovi2">ing. i2">I must sti2">ill be love. So i2">I can only gi2">ive love.

Thi2">is puts up "boundari2">ies" logi2">ically, whi2">ich are very strai2">ight and fi2">irm, whi2">ich shut OUT any noti2">ion that you can be UNLi2">IKE God, or that you could've STOPPED bei2">ing i2">in accord wi2">ith God's nature, or that you can be anythi2">ing OTHER than li2">ike Hi2">im. And i2">indeed that you ARE ONLY able to extend further strai2">ight ahead accordi2">ing to thi2">is true nature. i2">It li2">ines up perfectly wi2">ith the conti2">inui2">ity of creati2">ion and extensi2">ion and i2">is absolutely 100% "i2">in tune" wi2">ith your soul's i2">identi2">ity and expressi2">ion.

"i2">I am sti2">ill as God created me."

"The only functi2">ion of spi2">iri2">it i2">is to extend God's bei2">ing."

"To have all, gi2">ive all to all."

Then we can go on to pi2">ick out some other quali2">iti2">ies of God, whi2">ich we have i2">inheri2">ited, and can then extend only those quali2">iti2">ies. So we remi2">ind ourselves e.g.

Peace created me peaceful. i2">I must sti2">ill be peaceful. So i2">I can only gi2">ive peace.

Perfecti2">ion created me perfect. i2">I must sti2">ill be perfect. So i2">I can only gi2">ive perfecti2">ion.

Eternal Li2">ife created me ali2">ive forever. i2">I must sti2">ill be eternal li2">ife. So i2">I can only gi2">ive eternal li2">ife.

Truth created me truthful. i2">I must sti2">ill be true. So i2">I can only gi2">ive the truth.

You can word i2">it i2">in other ways so long as i2">it stays STRi2">ICTLY true to the metaphysi2">ical logi2">ic of extensi2">ion. e.g.

God who i2">is love created me lovi2">ingly to only love. Therefore i2">I am sti2">ill just as lovi2">ing as when God created me, and i2">I only have love to gi2">ive.

Or combi2">ine them.

The perfect peace of God's love created me perfectly peaceful and lovi2">ing. Therefore i2">I am sti2">ill perfectly at peace i2">in love. And i2">I gi2">ive perfect lovi2">ing peace to everyone always.

For me, i2">I've been repeati2">ing thi2">is lesson many ti2">imes because i2">it's one that just cuts really really deep to the core of who and what i2">I really am and helps me to tune i2">into my soul and FEEL the peace and love wi2">ithi2">in.

i2">I was doi2">ing thi2">is last ni2">ight and Jesus commented, "beauti2">iful".

Through struggles wi2">ith bei2">ing shy and sensi2">iti2">ive and anti2">isoci2">ial and so on, i2">I gradually have reali2">ized that there i2">is somethi2">ing fundamentally "estrangi2">ing" about people's bodi2">ies.

When i2">I go out and i2">I see people's physi2">ical bodi2">ies, there i2">is a fundamental di2">isconnect. There's my body over here and thi2">is bi2">ig gap between and thei2">ir body over there - i2">it i2">is just experi2">ienced when taken at face value as a separati2">ion - a gapi2">ing di2">ivi2">ide between i2">indi2">ivi2">iduals, maki2">ing us seem remote and di2">istant and unli2">ike each other.

Just the mere fact that thei2">ir body has "di2">ifferences" or seems li2">ike a wall of soli2">id flesh, all by i2">itself, i2">IS a "form" of MAKi2">ING i2">it seem as though the person i2">is di2">ifferent to me and therefore i2">IS NOT ME, and therefore there i2">is some ki2">ind of separati2">ion or ri2">ift between us.

People i2">in bodi2">ies seem confi2">ined and i2">isolated and cut off from each other. i2">It's as i2">if we are supposed to be joi2">ined and shari2">ing i2">in the same place together, but i2">instead, there i2">is a huge di2">istance physi2">ically between us, yet alone the fact that they are i2">impri2">isoned i2">in a physi2">ical form whi2">ich they wear li2">ike a sui2">it of i2">isolati2">ion, whi2">ich keeps them i2">in and keeps me out.

i2">I always thought there was somethi2">ing majorly wrong wi2">ith me that i2">I could not relate or connect wi2">ith people. That communi2">icati2">ion was fundamentally di2">iffi2">icult. That i2">I feared strangers and was put off by appearances. i2">I thought that i2">I just wasn't good at i2">it or there was somethi2">ing i2">I just wasn't cut out to do.

But now i2">I see that i2">in fact, bodi2">ies are part of the ego's DEVi2">ICE to try to ENFORCE separati2">ion, by i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing brothers as strangers, wi2">ith si2">igni2">ifi2">icant i2">illusi2">ions of di2">ifferences i2">in appearance, i2">in order to portray us as UNRELATED and i2">isolated from each other. i2">It's wri2">itten i2">into the physi2">ical form i2">ITSELF. Thi2">is was the purpose of the body.

So now i2">I can cut myself a bi2">it of slack, that my di2">iffi2">iculty connecti2">ing wi2">ith people i2">isn't just about me as such. The physi2">icali2">ity of bodi2">ies i2">is a severe li2">imi2">it i2">imposed on communi2">icati2">ion by the beli2">ief i2">in separati2">ion.

Brothers/souls are supposed to commune wi2">ith each other fully and share space and overlap each other i2">in uni2">ity. Bodi2">ies were made to i2">isolate and to stop us from connecti2">ing wi2">ith each other.

The challenge as i2">I see i2">it now i2">isn't so much learni2">ing how to relate to bodi2">ies better, but how to see PAST bodi2">ies to the person Wi2">ITHi2">IN, to the soul, the chri2">ist, the real person hi2">idden underneath the i2">illusi2">ion of form, to connect wi2">ith thei2">ir Mi2">IND, and to share love wi2">ith them that BYPASSES the physi2">ical i2">in order to bri2">ing about heali2">ing and the UNDOi2">ING of bodi2">ies.

i2">It entai2">ils learni2">ing that people are not bodi2">ies. Bodi2">ies are fundamentally AGAi2">INST communi2">icati2">ion unless used PURELY for communi2">icati2">ion mi2">ind-to-mi2">ind (temporari2">ily), and therefore i2">I need to learn to i2">interact wi2">ith brothers/souls wi2">ith love and really thoroughly learn to look PAST (forgi2">ive) all i2">illusory appearances of body forms. To relate soul-to-soul and heart-to-heart and mi2">ind-to-mi2">ind, not form-to-form.

Bodi2">ies are i2">illusi2">ions. They are not people. They are also not si2">ick on thei2">ir own. They are not the thi2">ing that needs heali2">ing as such. The body does seem si2">ick but i2">it's a *secondary* si2">ickness - the "ori2">igi2">inal" si2">ickness (i2">in mi2">ind) i2">is hi2">idden behi2">ind appearances. i2">I had been targeti2">ing heali2">ing at body parts only for Jesus to remi2">ind me that the person i2">is not a body... maki2">ing me reali2">ize i2">I was ai2">imi2">ing the heali2">ing at enti2">irely the wrong target, lol. People are not bodi2">ies. "i2">I am not a body, i2">I am free". Tough lesson. Long lesson. But i2">I'm getti2">ing there.

What appears to be strangers, are i2">in fact brothers i2">in di2">isgui2">ise.

Arri2">ivi2">ing at work i2">I encountered my fi2">irst truck load of li2">ive pi2">igs on thei2">ir way to the sausage factory across the street. i2">It was a double-decker pi2">iggy wagon complete wi2">ith ai2">ir holes and li2">ittle pi2">ink pi2">iggy bi2">its poki2">ing out and wi2">iggli2">ing around. As i2">I reali2">ized what i2">it was, and that i2">it was about to pull i2">into the bacon death machi2">ine, i2">I had a reacti2">ion.

The reacti2">ion felt li2">ike sadness coupled wi2">ith anger. The anger felt li2">ike wanti2">ing to go stop i2">it, and the sadness felt li2">ike the pi2">igs di2">idn't know what was about to happen to them - that they were goi2">ing to be vi2">icti2">imi2">ized. Regardless of what was happeni2">ing, i2">I was havi2">ing a reacti2">ion so now i2">I have to do a fri2">icki2">ing forgi2">iveness.

Ok.

So obvi2">iously my percepti2">ion i2">is mi2">istaken, otherwi2">ise i2">I wouldn't be upset. i2">It's i2">impossi2">ible to be upset about the truth. My percepti2">ion was showi2">ing me that the pi2">igs were helpless vi2">icti2">ims wi2">ith no power and seemi2">ingly i2">innocent. A voi2">ice i2">in my mi2">ind, perhaps Jesus, sai2">id

"they know what's goi2">ing to happen". But thi2">is di2">idn't necessari2">ily stop me reacti2">ing. Truth i2">is though, on some hi2">igher level they do know because nothi2">ing happens but by choi2">ice, and i2">it was really me that was havi2">ing a dark experi2">ience.

So... by seei2">ing the pi2">igs as `i2">innocent vi2">icti2">ims` wi2">ith `nasty ego power` bei2">ing wi2">ielded over them agai2">inst thei2">ir wi2">ill, i2">it was a strong contrast showi2">ing me where i2">I beli2">ieve certai2">in thi2">ings. And i2">it's not about the pi2">iggi2">ies, because both the pi2">igs and the sausage makers are part of the same ego thought system. The pi2">igs only appear to be vi2">icti2">ims because i2">I don't see that they chose thi2">is, and the sausage folk only seem li2">ike vi2">icti2">imi2">izers because i2">I thi2">ink they do somethi2">ing to the pi2">igs they di2">idn't ask for.

And what's thi2">is got to do wi2">ith me? Always i2">it's somethi2">ing to do wi2">ith me and nothi2">ing really to do wi2">ith them. i2">I'm not upset because of the pi2">igs. i2">I'm not upset because of the bacon fest. i2">I'm upset because i2">it's showi2">ing me that i2">I already have somethi2">ing i2">in me, i2">in my mi2">ind, whi2">ich beli2">ieves i2">in somethi2">ing i2">incorrect, and i2">it's tri2">iggeri2">ing i2">it off. i2">It's not about them, i2">it's about me. i2">I have to wi2">ithdraw all blame from the pi2">ig mongers and also wi2">ithdraw all projecti2">ion of vi2">icti2">imhood from the pi2">iggi2">ies.

The pi2">iggi2">ies are not vi2">icti2">ims. The farmers are not vi2">icti2">imi2">izers. The greasy sausage folk are i2">innocent. They don't even really exi2">ist. They're not really out there. i2">It's a dream. i2">I'm dreami2">ing i2">it. So....

That means i2">I made up thi2">is whole scenari2">io. i2">I made pi2">igs. i2">I made sausages. i2">I made bacon factori2">ies. So secretly thi2">is remi2">inds me that i2">I actually made up thi2">is whole thi2">ing myself whi2">ich would mean i2">I am gui2">ilty. So the gui2">ilt i2">I see i2">in them i2">is my own gui2">ilt. Hmm.

Hmm. Ok. i2">I am flashed a memory of a ti2">ime i2">in chi2">ildhood when i2">I used to hunt butterfli2">ies, ... and ki2">ill them. i2">I used to swat them wi2">ith a tenni2">is racket, or capture them and keep them a whi2">ile but then they di2">ied because i2">I di2">idn't feed them etc. Or even perhaps would sti2">ick a pi2">in i2">in them. Vi2">ici2">ious! ooo.. jui2">icy pool of gui2">ilt there. i2">I di2">idn't know what i2">I was doi2">ing, so i2">it's forgi2">ivable.

So even though i2">I made that mi2">istake and i2">I secretly covet bacon and sausages and want to sti2">ick a pi2">in i2">in the pi2">igs, i2">its only because i2">I have lost touch wi2">ith the truth of who i2">I am. i2">I forgot i2">I am love. i2">I forgot i2">I am holy and i2">innocent and have no needs. i2">I forgot God loves me. So.. .i2">I'm just mi2">istaken about bei2">ing gui2">ilty. Even i2">if i2">I di2">id nasty thi2">ings to i2">innocent creatures, i2">I'm sti2">ill i2">innocent because i2">I am not i2">in my ri2">ight mi2">ind. So i2">I'm maki2">ing mi2">istakes and not reali2">izi2">ing i2">it. i2">I'm not to blame. The butterfli2">ies forgi2">ive me. i2">I forgi2">ive me. i2">I am forgi2">iven not for what i2">I have done but because... i2">I have not really done i2">it.

Thi2">is i2">is a dream, i2">it hasn't happened. i2">I'm wi2">ith God. i2">I am gui2">iltless and si2">inless. i2">I haven't done anythi2">ing to anyone. God i2">is not harmed. Real i2">immortal li2">ife has not been changed. i2">I have not stopped bei2">ing perfect love. i2">I am absolutely forgi2">ivable and i2">innocent and free. God loves me 100% because he knows that pi2">igs and butterfli2">ies are just parts of a dream that has no meani2">ing and i2">I gave i2">it all the meani2">ing i2">it had. i2">I used the pi2">igs and pi2">ig farmers as skapegoats to project my own gui2">ilt so that i2">I would have a reason to justi2">ify bei2">ing gui2">ilty, whi2">ich would help me to stay away from God. i2">I wanted to be away from God so i2">I could keep my ego and not be loved.

So... do i2">I want to keep sufferi2">ing? Am i2">I wi2">illi2">ing to let thi2">is go? Can i2">I let go and surrender thi2">is need to prove i2">I am gui2">ilty? Yes.. i2">I wi2">illi2">ingly surrender thi2">is gui2">ilt and recogni2">ize i2">I am forgi2">iven, i2">I clai2">im and own up to bei2">ing i2">innocent because none of thi2">is really happened. God loves me. Nothi2">ing has gone wrong. Nothi2">ing has di2">ied. Death i2">isn't real. Everyone i2">is equally i2">innocent and holy. Only love i2">is real.

Holy Spi2">iri2">it, please heal my mi2">ind and correct my thi2">inki2">ing and remove all of thi2">is gui2">ilt and help me to remember my true i2">innocent and that of all concerned. i2">I let i2">it go. i2">I accept your truth.

Amen.

Li2">ISTENi2">ING TO GUi2">IDANCE - DOi2">ING GOD'S Wi2">ILL

At ti2">imes, i2">I ask for gui2">idance. And i2">I get the gui2">idance. But then i2">I go i2">into a mode of tryi2">ing to deci2">ide whether to follow the gui2">idance, or not, whi2">ich means i2">I am not really li2">isteni2">ing to the gui2">idance.

i2">I've noti2">iced that thi2">is i2">indi2">icates a state of uncertai2">inty, whi2">ich i2">is fear, an i2">indeci2">isi2">ion, i2">in whi2">ich i2">I am tryi2">ing to deci2">ide on my own, or need to come to some ki2">ind of "agreement", or to fi2">igure i2">it out "the same way", to come to the same conclusi2">ion, before i2">I wi2">ill accept the gui2">idance.

And what thi2">is then really boi2">ils down to i2">is, that i2">I am sti2">ill tryi2">ing to run the show, tryi2">ing to be the one who reli2">ies on hi2">is own strength, hi2">is own abi2">ili2">iti2">ies, to di2">irect the cart and determi2">ine where i2">it wi2">ill go. Thi2">is basi2">ically means my ego i2">is acti2">ive and i2">I'm i2">interferi2">ing wi2">ith God's wi2">ill. God's sayi2">ing hey, i2">I recommend you do thi2">is, and then i2">I'm li2">ike, well, why?

Thi2">is constant doubti2">ing, questi2">ioni2">ing, aski2">ing why, wanti2">ing to know, wanti2">ing to understand, wanti2">ing to have fact and evi2">idence and i2">informati2">ion as to explai2">in the gui2">idance, i2">is really a matter of not trusti2">ing. i2">I've come to see thi2">is more clearly recently. i2">It means i2">I'm not wi2">illi2">ing to trust and follow or be led, but that i2">instead i2">I am trusti2">ing i2">in my own ego.

Thi2">is i2">is part of bei2">ing a gatekeeper. The ego i2">in us wants to run everythi2">ing by i2">it, wi2">ill not approve of anythi2">ing that i2">it hasn't deci2">ided i2">is acceptable, and wi2">ill not get out of the way.

i2">I have found thi2">is to be extraordi2">inari2">ily frustrati2">ing wi2">ithi2">in my experi2">ience because there'll be somethi2">ing i2">I'm "tryi2">ing to deci2">ide" about, and wi2">ill ask for gui2">idance, and wi2">ill get i2">it, but then wi2">ill go ri2">ight back i2">into thoughts of "what's the reasoni2">ing behi2">ind i2">it".

And as soon as i2">I'm i2">in that mode, i2">I li2">iterally am i2">in a mode of "can't deci2">ide". i2">It's a mode of i2">indeci2">isi2">ion. i2">It means that i2">I'm i2">in fear, and i2">it means that i2">I now see two potenti2">ial choi2">ices to select between, one whi2">ich offers somethi2">ing the other does not, and vi2">ice versa. And that also means the two opti2">ions are i2">incomplete opti2">ions. Nei2">ither of them i2">is whole, because they're both lacki2">ing. Whi2">ich makes i2">it i2">impossi2">ible to arri2">ive at certai2">inty and commi2">it to a deci2">isi2">ion one way or another.

You try to go one way and the other opti2">ion nags at you for what i2">it offers, maki2">ing you anxi2">iously aware of what wi2">ill be a shortcomi2">ing of whi2">ichever choi2">ice you are leani2">ing towards. And then you cannot deci2">ide anythi2">ing, because you know nothi2">ing you choose wi2">ill be perfect. i2">I shi2">ift back and forth between the opti2">ions but can't settle on ei2">ither one of them.

The soluti2">ion then i2">is to get OUT of thi2">is mode. To get out of thi2">inki2">ing, get out of questi2">ioni2">ing, deci2">idi2">ing on my own, tryi2">ing to control, tryi2">ing to be the one who fi2">igures i2">it out, tryi2">ing to be the gatekeeper who has to understand and approve everythi2">ing. To move upwards, towards trusti2">ing the gui2">idance, towards trusti2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it to know better, to li2">isten, and to be wi2">illi2">ing to follow. And that's not somethi2">ing that the ego wants to do. i2">It has no i2">intenti2">ion of gi2">ivi2">ing up i2">its posi2">iti2">ion of "deci2">isi2">ion maki2">ing".

But i2">I've found thi2">is i2">is really the only soluti2">ion to the di2">ilemma. There i2">is no other way out. Any choi2">ice made wi2">ith the ego i2">is a fai2">ilure and can't be trusted. There i2">isn't any trust possi2">ible because the way forward i2">is spli2">it. Only the Holy Spi2">iri2">it knows what's i2">in my best i2">interests so when He gui2">ides me, i2">I need to get out of the "why" mode and go i2">into the "i2">I trust thi2">is and accept i2">it and wi2">ill do God's wi2">ill" mode.

i2">It relates also to not wanti2">ing to do God's wi2">ill. Thi2">is has been showi2">ing up for me a few ti2">imes lately. We thi2">ink that God's wi2">ill i2">is not the same as our own. When we spli2">it off from Hi2">is wi2">ill we tri2">ied to wi2">ill somethi2">ing di2">ifferent, somethi2">ing i2">incompati2">ible. And that means we now fear that doi2">ing God's wi2">ill means "not doi2">ing what i2">I want" or "bei2">ing forced agai2">inst my wi2">ill" or coerced or becomi2">ing a slave. i2">If we are not wi2">illi2">ing to do what God wi2">ills, then we'll resi2">ist the gui2">idance and get "i2">in the way" of the flow.

We need to learn to be wi2">illi2">ing to trust that God knows us better and knows what i2">is needed and what wi2">ill work. And then trust that gui2">idance when we recei2">ive i2">it, and be wi2">illi2">ing to follow i2">it knowi2">ing that God knows what he's doi2">ing. i2">If we start si2">itti2">ing on the fence, tryi2">ing to choose for ourselves, tryi2">ing to choose alone, we're goi2">ing to go i2">into fear and i2">indeci2">isi2">ion and fai2">il are choosi2">ing. Choi2">ices made wi2">ithout God automati2">ically entai2">il fear, unavoi2">idably so. We can't choose wi2">ithout Hi2">im and expect to experi2">ience certai2">inty, wholeness, a lack of fear, or clari2">ity.

i2">I sti2">ill struggle to have the wi2">illi2">ingness needed to always follow the gui2">idance i2">instantly. i2">I don't usually do that. i2">I usually get si2">imi2">ilar gui2">idance over and over agai2">in and can be qui2">ite stubborn about followi2">ing i2">it unti2">il i2">I can ki2">ind of talk myself around and convi2">ince myself of "why". Or, become so exasperated wi2">ith the frustrati2">ion of fi2">iguri2">ing i2">it out myself that i2">I surrender enough to admi2">it the truth that Hi2">is soluti2">ion i2">is the best. i2">I hope thi2">is wi2">ill i2">improve, to where i2">I can get a si2">ingle word and act on i2">it ri2">ight away. Thi2">is takes ti2">ime, and development of trust. Whi2">ich means learni2">ing NOT to trust i2">in your own strength.

i2">I've been havi2">ing some unexpected encounters wi2">ith angels recently.

After researchi2">ing more about mi2">iracle-worki2">ing and watchi2">ing some more vi2">ideos from people doi2">ing i2">it, i2">I learned that i2">it's possi2">ible to use your mi2">ind and i2">imagi2">inati2">ion to not only vi2">isuali2">ize someone bei2">ing healed, but to also percei2">ive the current state of thei2">ir body on a "spi2">iri2">itual" level. The i2">imagi2">inati2">ion and/or i2">inner vi2">isi2">ion provi2">ides thi2">is capabi2">ili2">ity.

i2">I ask Holy Spi2">iri2">it to show me someone's "spi2">iri2">itual body". i2">I don't necessari2">ily need Hi2">im to do thi2">is, as i2">I can see i2">it myself, but i2">it doesn't hurt to be i2">includi2">ing Hi2">im and getti2">ing some support. i2">I don't necessari2">ily mean the physi2">ical body, but more li2">ike thei2">ir "astral" or "mi2">ind body". Thi2">is shows up i2">in my i2">inner vi2">isi2">ion as seei2">ing the person's body, i2">if i2">I wi2">ill reach out a bi2">it i2">in beli2">ief that i2">I can do thi2">is. The body shows up not as physi2">ical flesh but usually as transparent.

A healthy person typi2">ically has a transparent or li2">ight-fi2">illed body on the mi2">ind level, whi2">ile a person wi2">ith si2">ickness or i2">issues often has "dark areas". The contrast between the very li2">ight joyful transparent areas and the dark areas i2">is really obvi2">ious. You can use your i2">inner vi2">isi2">ion to "scan" the person's body, wi2">ith your eyes closed, and li2">iterally SEE i2">if there's any i2">issues.

These dark areas, some would refer to as "evi2">il spi2">iri2">its". You can also thi2">ink of them as thought forms, atti2">itudes, or energy formati2">ions produced by the person's thi2">inki2">ing. i2">It's i2">important to be centered i2">in truth and i2">in authori2">ity when doi2">ing thi2">is because i2">if you start buyi2">ing i2">into fear or maki2">ing i2">it real or turni2">ing i2">it i2">into some ki2">ind of battle, you wi2">ill gi2">ive your power away and thereby open yourself up to self attack.

When i2">I saw several of these i2">in a person i2">I commanded them to leave, authori2">itati2">ively, i2">in the name of Jesus, very di2">irectly. "i2">In the name of Jesus Chri2">ist you MUST leave, i2">I take authori2">ity over you i2">in Jesus's name and i2">I command you to leave ri2">ight now, and do not come back, i2">in the name of Jesus. Go! Get out!" or words to that effect. They must obey, provi2">ided you are sure enough of the truth of Jesus to not buy i2">into fear or take no for an answer.

Some just left. One sai2">id to me, telepathi2">ically, i2">it was not leavi2">ing. However thi2">is i2">is not opti2">ional. You must be fi2">irm and persi2">istent. i2">I told i2">it to go nevertheless and that i2">it must, i2">in Jesus' name. These i2">illusi2">ions MUST leave because the Chri2">ist mi2">ind has authori2">ity over them. They have no power to truly resi2">ist i2">if you don't gi2">ive them any, and they must comply "i2">in the name of Jesus", whi2">ich means wi2">ith the authori2">ity of Chri2">ist. Chri2">ist has authori2">ity over all i2">illusi2">ions.

One such "enti2">ity" sai2">id, after some persi2">istence, "i2">I wi2">ill leave", and i2">I could sense i2">its presence leavi2">ing the person and flyi2">ing off. These thi2">ings, whatever they are, however you want to i2">interpret them, whi2">ile they remai2">in i2">in the person they can be "causi2">ing", or at least be the i2">illusi2">ion of a beli2">ief i2">in causi2">ing, the person to be si2">ick. They are the embodi2">iment of thei2">ir ego beli2">iefs about themselves. So they need to be cast out i2">ie the "cause i2">in the mi2">ind" needs to be removed. Or to put i2">it another way, the "consequences of a wrong deci2">isi2">ion" needs to be undone.

A few of these thi2">ings whi2">ich i2">I saw even had teeth, or other parti2">ial body parts, or may be attempti2">ing to clamp onto somethi2">ing or wrap around somethi2">ing, as though they are parti2">ially formed enti2">iti2">ies. And they can come across as bei2">ing very "mean" or even vi2">ici2">ious. You mi2">ight call i2">it evi2">il. Jesus told me they essenti2">ially are "just fear", ei2">ither generated by the person or attracted to them as a result of thei2">ir own beli2">ief i2">in si2">in and ego. They seem to attach to certai2">in parts of the body and produce symptoms ei2">ither there or i2">in any other area that's seemi2">ingly unrelated. They must go, because they are not the truth.

Bear i2">in mi2">ind that your own focus on these darknesses, whi2">ich i2">is ego, i2">is you gi2">ivi2">ing power to them and aski2">ing for them. You wi2">ill attract them to you by maki2">ing them real or beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in them as reali2">ity. They are ulti2">imately nothi2">ing. And you do not need to thi2">ink about "defense" because that's just beli2">ief i2">in them. Keep i2">it calm and confi2">ident and mi2">ini2">imal. You don't want to be attracti2">ing some ki2">ind of revenge.

i2">I won't get much more i2">into that, and i2">I suggest you have confi2">idence i2">in God's truth enough before you attempt to mess wi2">ith these thi2">ings. Not because they are a "real threat", but because i2">if you beli2">ieve they are, you'll make yourself more vulnerable and maybe scare yourself.

But another part of thi2">is i2">is that once the dark parts are cleared, you may sense the overwhelmi2">ing joy and transparency of that person's body parts, and the energeti2">ic feeli2">ing of thi2">is i2">is so profoundly di2">ifferent that i2">it's li2">iterally li2">ike ni2">ight and day. When i2">I cleared a person's body i2">in thi2">is way, that person on the hi2">igher level thanked me. And as i2">I sensed the area of the body whi2">ich was now transparent, i2">it was SO i2">incredi2">ibly joyful and li2">ight and free that at fi2">irst i2">I could not beli2">ieve i2">I was seei2">ing i2">it properly. The contrast between extreme vi2">ici2">ious darkness and bri2">illi2">iant joyful li2">ight i2">is huge.

Now, after cleari2">ing these "thought forms" and "attack thoughts", repai2">irs need to be made, i2">ie heali2">ing, i2">ie mi2">iracles whi2">ich reconfi2">igure the demonstrati2">ion and representati2">ion of the new state of truth i2">in the mi2">ind. Thi2">is i2">is where thi2">ings get pretty cool.

i2">I now begi2">in to make statements affi2">irmi2">ing God's truth about the person, and holdi2">ing out my hands, begi2">in vi2">isuali2">izi2">ing that Holy Spi2">iri2">it and "li2">ight", or "waters of li2">ife", are flowi2">ing out or fi2">iri2">ing out li2">ike a laser, i2">into the body part that needs correcti2">ion. As i2">I apply forgi2">iveness to cancel out i2">illusi2">ions and COMMAND correcti2">ion i2">into that area, wi2">ith a dedi2">icated focus and not bei2">ing di2">istracted or tryi2">ing to do several thi2">ings at once, i2">I start to feel Holy Spi2">iri2">it flowi2">ing.

i2">It's i2">important to poi2">int out that you need to use your i2">imagi2">inati2">ion to Vi2">ISUALi2">IZE the heali2">ing taki2">ing place. You can also use your i2">imagi2">inati2">ion to vi2">isuali2">ize the dark "enti2">iti2">ies" leavi2">ing. You need to SEE on the spi2">iri2">itual level what the healed fi2">inal result body condi2">iti2">ion wi2">ill look li2">ike, what i2">is the new truth of i2">it, before i2">it wi2">ill show up i2">in the physi2">ical. And as you vi2">isuali2">ize what a "healed brai2">in" or "completely recreated knee" or whatever looks li2">ike, thi2">is starts a mani2">ifestati2">ional process.

Thi2">is i2">is because you need to CONCEi2">IVE of the "future healed state" BEFORE i2">it can mani2">ifest. So pi2">icture what i2">it's goi2">ing to look li2">ike when the heali2">ing i2">is done, as though i2">it has "already happened", avoi2">idi2">ing the i2">idea of i2">it not havi2">ing happened yet and not focussi2">ing on si2">igns and symptoms and physi2">ical i2">illusi2">ions that "prove" nothi2">ing has changed..

Now, most of what i2">I've been experi2">ienci2">ing doi2">ing thi2">is has been totally unexpected. i2">I di2">id not expect to be able to "see i2">in the spi2">iri2">it", or to be able to di2">iscern "negati2">ivi2">iti2">ies" i2">in people, nor how they'd show up, nor how they would at ti2">imes appear to be i2">interacti2">ive. But what i2">I also di2">id not expect, and what has happened 2 or 3 ti2">imes now, i2">is that when you start to Vi2">ISUALi2">IZE the body part i2">in i2">its healed state, whi2">ile commandi2">ing and bei2">ing authori2">itati2">ive over the i2">illusi2">ion of si2">ickness, ANGELS start to show up.

When thi2">is happened the fi2">irst ti2">ime, i2">I felt suddenly that there was a LARGE, joyful, powerful bei2">ing that was li2">ike, overlappi2">ing me. Standi2">ing just i2">in front of me or actually i2">in the same place as me. i2">It was defi2">ini2">itely larger than myself, maybe li2">ike 10 feet tall. i2">It had a joyous, calmly confi2">ident, helpful feel to i2">it. i2">I di2">id not know what thi2">is was at fi2">irst. i2">I could really feel the presence of thi2">is angel much more than i2">I've ever felt them before, and i2">it seemed to be assi2">isti2">ing me wi2">ith the heali2">ing. i2">I thought maybe i2">I was i2">imagi2">ini2">ing thi2">is or maki2">ing i2">it up.

The second ti2">ime thi2">is happened i2">I noti2">iced i2">it agai2">in, and i2">it was completely unexpected, and the angel just showed up i2">in my energy fi2">ield and awareness as though i2">it once agai2">in had noti2">iced what i2">I was doi2">ing and had come to provi2">ide support. Noti2">ice that i2">I Di2">ID NOT "ask" for angeli2">ic support i2">in any way at all, OTHER than by a di2">irect expressi2">ion and wi2">illi2">ingness to DO the wi2">ill of God and carry out Hi2">is truth and extend Hi2">is love. That i2">IS aski2">ing for God's support, because thi2">is i2">is the hi2">ighest form of prayer. Not aski2">ing for what does not exi2">ist, but taki2">ing an acti2">ive role i2">in bri2">ingi2">ing about what you want to exi2">ist. i2">I was, you could say, "fulfi2">illi2">ing my functi2">ion", and when you do thi2">is, Heaven rushes i2">in to support and empower you!

Thi2">is happened last ni2">ight and i2">I could feel thi2">is large angel once agai2">in as though i2">I was "i2">insi2">ide" of i2">it, and i2">it was bi2">igger than me. i2">I asked i2">if i2">it had a name, and i2">it responded (i2">if i2">I remember) "Adam". i2">I asked i2">if the same angel came each ti2">ime, and the answer was no.

Now, i2">I thi2">ink thi2">is i2">is pretty cool, but i2">I'm sti2">ill just getti2">ing started. The guy that i2">I learned about thi2">is from goes further and has much more experi2">ience performi2">ing mi2">iracles. When he does thi2">is stuff, the angel doesn't just show up and joi2">in wi2">ith hi2">im, i2">it actually goes to the person, and puts i2">its hands i2">into the person's body and fi2">ixes stuff. And those fi2">ixes show up i2">in the physi2">ical body almost i2">immedi2">iately. i2">I feel that i2">I haven't qui2">ite got to that stage yet, and there i2">is some step or level of commi2">itment or focus or somethi2">ing that i2">I haven't qui2">ite opened up to yet, to cause them to take the next steps on thei2">ir si2">ide.

But basi2">ically, your mi2">ind i2">is capable of i2">interfaci2">ing wi2">ith other people's mi2">inds - thei2">ir mental body - di2">irectly, usi2">ing your i2">inner vi2">isi2">ion. And because thi2">is i2">is happeni2">ing on the "spi2">iri2">itual plane" (li2">ike astral level), the angels noti2">ice thi2">is and come to assi2">ist. As you step i2">into your role as doi2">ing God's heali2">ing work, and fulfi2">illi2">ing your functi2">ion as the li2">ight of the world, Mi2">ighty Compani2">ions DO come to help you and to carry out God's wi2">ill. You get support!

Thi2">is i2">is also si2">imi2">ilar to the fact that you need to have fai2">ith i2">in God i2">in order for mi2">iracles to happen. Fai2">ith sort of means, you go ahead and just DO i2">IT even though you may not have evi2">idence or proof that i2">it's goi2">ing to work. You do i2">it fi2">irst, based on the TRUST that when you take acti2">ion, the support wi2">ill happen, the mi2">iracle wi2">ill come, thi2">ings wi2">ill fall i2">into ali2">ignment, and stuff wi2">ill get reorgani2">ized to match your commi2">itment and convi2">icti2">ion. i2">It's li2">ike you have to act "as i2">if" i2">it i2">is goi2">ing to work based on unseen fai2">ith fi2">irst, and thi2">is i2">is the confi2">idence needed to CAUSE the effects to occur.

So si2">imi2">ilarly, as you start to work at expressi2">ing mi2">iracles and affi2">irmi2">ing God's truth and shari2">ing heali2">ing wi2">ith people and so on, Heaven DOES come to support you and help you i2">in your servi2">ice, BECAUSE you had fai2">ith and because you took a ri2">isk and stepped up and defended the truth about someone. You are not i2">in thi2">is alone. i2">I thi2">ink there i2">is some ACi2">IM quote about how heaven wi2">ill rush i2">in to support you and so on, but i2">I'm not sure on the wordi2">ing.

So, i2">if you're feeli2">ing adventurous, gi2">ive thi2">is a try. i2">I'm looki2">ing forward to expandi2">ing on thi2">is as we go along and as thi2">is worki2">ing wi2">ith the angels unfolds more.

Here's some ACi2">IM quotes:

"The Atonement i2">is so gentle you need but whi2">isper to i2">it, and all i2">its power wi2">ill rush to your assi2">istance and support"

" Yet to the dedi2">icati2">ion to the truth as God establi2">ished i2">it no sacri2">ifi2">ice i2">is asked, no strai2">in called forth, and all the power of Heaven and the mi2">ight of truth i2">itself i2">is gi2">iven to provi2">ide the means, and guarantee the goal's accompli2">ishment."

"Each man makes one ego for hi2">imself, although i2">it i2">is subject to enormous vari2">iati2">ion because of i2">its i2">instabi2">ili2">ity, ***and one for everyone he percei2">ives***, whi2">ich i2">is equally vari2">iable." UrT4C2

Di2">id you know you've made an ego for other people, just as much as you've put an ego i2">insi2">ide yourself? That's what he's sayi2">ing. You have i2">invented an ego for other people and you i2">interact Wi2">ITH that ego rendi2">iti2">ion of the person rather than seei2">ing them for who they are. And we're not talki2">ing here about just seei2">ing them as a body, but even overlayi2">ing thei2">ir body wi2">ith another layer of modi2">ifi2">icati2">ion.

He's also goes on to say that as your ego and the ego you made for another i2">interact, they change and affect each other.

"Thei2">ir i2">interacti2">ion i2">IS a process whi2">ich li2">iterally alters both, because they were not made ei2">ither BY or Wi2">ITH the unalterable.

"i2">It i2">is parti2">icularly i2">important to reali2">ize that thi2">is alterati2">ion can and does occur as readi2">ily when the i2">interacti2">ion takes place i2">IN THE Mi2">IND as when i2">it i2">involves physi2">ical presence. THi2">INKi2">ING about another ego i2">is as effecti2">ive i2">in changi2">ing relati2">ive percepti2">ion as i2">is thei2">ir physi2">ical i2">interacti2">ion." UrT4C2

For me i2">I was qui2">ite shocked to reali2">ize that i2">I had made an ego for a parti2">icular person, and i2">I was i2">interacti2">ing wi2">ith i2">it. And thi2">is ego was a very reduced vi2">iew of that person. i2">It focused on thei2">ir body only, seei2">ing thei2">ir body as though i2">it was all there was to the person. i2">In fact, strangely even seei2">ing the person as i2">if they had NO mi2">ind at all and were enti2">irely physi2">ical. All sense of them even bei2">ing there or havi2">ing a presence or personali2">ity was mostly gone, replaced by a seemi2">ingly empty shell of an appearance.

i2">It was also shocki2">ing to see that i2">I was i2">interacti2">ing wi2">ith that ego and not wi2">ith the person. i2">I was not gi2">ivi2">ing them any credi2">it and was not seei2">ing past thei2">ir body form. i2">I had taken thei2">ir body form to be them almost enti2">irely and was very bli2">ind to anythi2">ing else. i2">I now had a speci2">ial relati2">ionshi2">ip that had stri2">ipped that person down so much that i2">it felt li2">ike i2">I was i2">interacti2">ing wi2">ith a small chi2">ild who was regarded as defecti2">ive and weak and very si2">inful and treacherous.

i2">It was strange to reali2">ize i2">I was even doi2">ing thi2">is. And when i2">I reali2">ized i2">I was doi2">ing thi2">is i2">I also reali2">ized i2">I could step back from that versi2">ion of them and get outsi2">ide of i2">it, to take a look at the person more di2">irectly and wi2">ith more presence. i2">It wasn't just "my ego" that was causi2">ing a cloudi2">ing of how i2">I see. i2">It was the fact that i2">I had also produced a ki2">ind of "mi2">irror" ego that was projected onto that person and had substi2">ituted for them. That ego or "i2">image" of a self was now masqueradi2">ing as them to my awareness, and i2">I was relati2">ing only to i2">it. i2">I was i2">in a relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith a fantasy character.

i2">I then thought to myself, i2">I don't even know how i2">I got i2">into thi2">is state. How di2">id thi2">is happen? How could i2">I have bui2">ilt up such a false vi2">iew of a person that was so out of touch wi2">ith them i2">it made i2">it seem li2">ike the person wasn't even barely there any more. That the person seemed to be so di2">ifferent from how they used to be that i2">I barely recogni2">ized them, as i2">if i2">I thought that person was not even really there anymore, and yet they were.

So now begi2">ins the task of di2">ismantli2">ing the egos we've made not just for ourselves but even for other people. These are narrow, condemned, faulty, dysfuncti2">ional, gui2">ilty senses of i2">identi2">ity whi2">ich have become counterfi2">it selves standi2">ing-i2">in for other people. i2">It's now not si2">imply just a matter of my fi2">indi2">ing out what my own real i2">identi2">ity i2">is, i2">it's also a matter of fi2">indi2">ing out what i2">is the true i2">identi2">ity of others. Have i2">I even seen them really? Do i2">I even know what they're really li2">ike? i2">It's not just that i2">I'm not my thoughts or emoti2">ions or body, they're not thei2">irs ei2">ither, and they're not the versi2">ion of them that i2">I made up.

For sure my ego has a domi2">inati2">ing tyranni2">ical overpoweri2">ing and attacki2">ing vi2">iew of others. But i2">in fact i2">its vi2">iew of what i2">I thi2">ink i2">is them i2">is i2">in fact a vi2">iew of further egos that my mi2">ind beli2">ieves exi2">ists. i2">Its relati2">ionshi2">ip i2">is wi2">ith these arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial fi2">igures that aren't even the actual persons. i2">It has speci2">ial relati2">ionshi2">ips wi2">ith these "dream fi2">igures" li2">ike i2">in a pri2">ivate world, subjecti2">ively i2">interpreti2">ing that these make-beli2">ieve fi2">icti2">ional enti2">iti2">ies are actually out there to be i2">interacted wi2">ith, and that thi2">is i2">is all that's there.

"Who sees a brother's body has lai2">id a JUDGMENT on hi2">im, and sees hi2">im not. He does not REALLY see hi2">im as si2">inful; he does not see hi2">im at all. i2">In the darkness of si2">in, he i2">is i2">INVi2">ISi2">IBLE. He can but be i2">IMAGi2">INED i2">in the darkness, and i2">it i2">is here that the i2">illusi2">ions you hold about hi2">im are NOT held up to hi2">is reali2">ity. Here are i2">illusi2">ions and reali2">ity kept SEPARATED. Here are i2">illusi2">ions NEVER brought to truth, and ALWAYS hi2">idden from i2">it. And here, i2">in darkness, i2">is your brother's reali2">ity i2">IMAGi2">INED as a body, i2">in unholy relati2">ionshi2">ips wi2">ith other bodi2">ies, servi2">ing the cause of si2">in an i2">instant, before he di2">ies." UrT20H6

"Can the ego teach truly, when i2">it overlooks truth? Can i2">it percei2">ive what i2">it has DENi2">IED? i2">Its wi2">itnesses DO attest to i2">its DENi2">IAL, but hardly to WHAT i2">it has deni2">ied. The ego looks strai2">ight at the Father and does not see Hi2">im, for i2">it has deni2">ied Hi2">is Son." UrT10F17

"The other has many forms, for the content of i2">INDi2">IVi2">IDUAL i2">illusi2">ions di2">iffers greatly. But they have one thi2">ing i2">in common; they are all i2">insane. They are made of si2">ights whi2">ich are NOT seen, and sounds whi2">ich are NOT heard. They make up a PRi2">IVATE world whi2">ich CANNOT be shared. For they are meani2">ingful ONLY to thei2">ir maker, and so they have no meani2">ing at all. i2">In thi2">is world thei2">ir maker moves alone, for only HE percei2">ives them.

Each one peoples hi2">is world wi2">ith fi2">igures from hi2">is i2">INDi2">IVi2">IDUAL past, and i2">it i2">is because of thi2">is that pri2">ivate worlds DO di2">iffer. But the fi2">igures that he sees were NEVER real, for they are made up ONLY of hi2">is REACTi2">IONS to hi2">is brothers, and do NOT i2">include thei2">ir reacti2">ions to Hi2">IM. Therefore he does not see that he made them, and that they ARE NOT WHOLE. For these fi2">igures HAVE NO Wi2">ITNESSES, bei2">ing percei2">ived i2">in one SEPARATE mi2">ind only.

i2">It i2">is THROUGH these strange and shadowy fi2">igures that the i2">insane relate to thei2">ir i2">insane world. For they SEE only those who remi2">ind them of these i2">images, and i2">it i2">is to THEM that they relate. Thus do they communi2">icate wi2">ith those who ARE NOT THERE, and i2">it i2">is THEY who answer them. And no-one hears thei2">ir answer save hi2">im who called upon them, and he ALONE beli2">ieves they answered hi2">im. Projecti2">ion MAKES percepti2">ion, and you CANNOT see beyond i2">it. Agai2">in and agai2">in have men attacked each other, because they saw i2">IN THEM a shadow fi2">igure i2">in thei2">ir pri2">ivate world." UrT12E1

"i2">I am not bei2">ing affected by anythi2">ing or anyone."

"Thi2">is i2">is not changi2">ing me at all."

"No-one i2">is doi2">ing anythi2">ing to me."

"i2">I remai2">in as God created me."

"Nothi2">ing can hurt me. i2">I cannot be hurt."

"There i2">is nothi2">ing to fear because i2">I li2">ive forever."

"My eternal li2">ife cannot be threatened, so i2">I am at peace."

"God guarantees i2">I wi2">ill li2">ive forever."

"Nothi2">ing i2">in the world i2">is changi2">ing me i2">in any way."

"No-one i2">is maki2">ing me feel anythi2">ing."

"i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im because i2">I cannot be attacked or hurt."

"Nothi2">ing has ever happened to change me."

"i2">I cannot change myself - i2">I am what God wants."

"i2">I am not si2">ick and i2">I cannot di2">ie."

"i2">I li2">ive forever i2">in God."

"i2">I am always i2">immortal and forever eternal."

"i2">I am i2">immortal ri2">ight now. Nothi2">ing can change thi2">is."

"i2">I have not changed si2">ince God created me."

"i2">I am permanent and nothi2">ing temporary i2">is happeni2">ing."

"i2">I cannot suffer i2">in any way."

"i2">I cannot experi2">ience loss or gai2">in because i2">I have everythi2">ing."

"God hi2">imself i2">is protecti2">ing my exi2">istence."

"Everyone i2">I know and see i2">is i2">immortal as well."

"My i2">innocence cannot be taken away, nor can thei2">irs."

"i2">I cannot change anyone's i2">immortal self."

"i2">I cannot do anythi2">ing to anyone, so i2">I cannot si2">in or be gui2">ilty."

"i2">I have never attacked anyone. Everyone i2">is i2">immortal."

"The truth about others i2">is thei2">ir i2">immortal soul."

"There are no vi2">icti2">ims anywhere, everyone i2">is safe i2">in God."

"No-one has any power over me, not even God."

"i2">I am already enli2">ightened i2">in the li2">ight of God."

"i2">I li2">ive forever i2">in the love of God."

"God's i2">immortali2">ity i2">is my i2">immortali2">ity."

"i2">I am li2">ife i2">itself. i2">I wi2">ill never di2">ie."

Here's some very si2">imple logi2">ic whi2">ich wi2">ill be hard to actually accept i2">if you have an ego.

i2">In God's truth, nothi2">ing real has happened to warrant any ki2">ind of upset, sufferi2">ing or concern. Absolutely nothi2">ing has gone wrong. There's no grounds for any ki2">ind of upset whatsoever.

SOooooo... i2">IF you are upset or sufferi2">ing i2">in some way, you are not upset about somethi2">ing that's REALLY happened because i2">it has, i2">in truth, NOT really happened.

THEREFORE..... ALL of your upsets and sufferi2">ing are FALSE, are COMPLETELY UNFOUNDED, you have NO good reason why you should be upset, all of your upset i2">is 100% unjusti2">ifi2">ied, and the ONLY thi2">ing that i2">is justi2">ifi2">ied i2">is that you be happy and ali2">ive and joyfully wi2">ith God.

Thi2">is SHOULD mean, that i2">if you could get thi2">is, you'd si2">imply cast asi2">ide every si2">ingle problem and upset and form of sufferi2">ing i2">instantly and i2">it would leave you. i2">Immedi2">iately. Because i2">it i2">is utterly wi2">ithout any basi2">is i2">in reali2">ity.

There i2">IS no REAL reason to be upset about anythi2">ing!

Every ti2">ime you are upset, i2">it i2">is about somethi2">ing that i2">IS NOT REALLY HAPPENi2">ING. Thi2">is i2">is reflected i2">in the workbook lesson "i2">I am not upset for the reason i2">I thi2">ink", and also "i2">I am upset because i2">I see somethi2">ing that i2">is not there".

Recently, i2">I was qui2">ite upset and emoti2">ional and cryi2">ing about somethi2">ing that seemed bi2">ig and i2">intense and not at all pleasant. i2">It seemed to me that thi2">is amount of upset was justi2">ifi2">ied or called for (hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions). However, i2">I had thi2">is li2">ittle thought, "maybe i2">I'm maki2">ing thi2">is i2">into somethi2">ing more than i2">it i2">is". And Jesus chi2">imed i2">in, "Bi2">IGTi2">IME".

And yet, here i2">I was, upset, snot and tears, and beli2">ievi2">ing that somethi2">ing has gone wrong and i2">I should be upset.. and yet... i2">in the mi2">iddle of that... there's thi2">is i2">idea... thi2">is ENTi2">IRE UPSET i2">is completely wi2">ithout any basi2">is i2">in the truth WHATSOEVER. i2">I am upset about somethi2">ing that i2">I should not even be upset about because i2">it's not true!!!

i2">I am li2">iterally upset for reasons that are not a "real" cause for upset, because they are not real. i2">I am upset because i2">I beli2">ieve somethi2">ing i2">is happeni2">ing i2">in thi2">is scary dream whi2">ich i2">is not really happeni2">ing and i2">IS just a dream. i2">I am upset because i2">I thi2">ink all ki2">inds of shi2">it has gone wrong and people are sufferi2">ing and i2">I'm sufferi2">ing, but all of that i2">is based i2">in and around thi2">is ONE si2">imple core beli2">ief.... that separati2">ion from God HAS really happened, somethi2">ing REALLY has gone wrong, and therefore i2">I SHOULD be upset about thi2">is.

i2">Its bullshi2">it!

As unpleasant as i2">it i2">is to suffer, and as unpleasant as i2">it i2">is to feel upset and unhappy and releasi2">ing emoti2">ions, and as gentle and ki2">ind and pati2">ient as Holy Spi2">iri2">it and Jesus wi2">ill be wi2">ith me when i2">I am li2">ike that, comforti2">ing me and supporti2">ing me and not pushi2">ing me at all, i2">IF i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing, there i2">is a much bi2">igger truth at hand. The truth i2">is, you have no reason whatsoever for bei2">ing upset or to suffer at all. There i2">is no reason to di2">ie. There i2">is no reason to be i2">in pai2">in. There i2">is no reason to be unhappy. There i2">is no reason to be i2">in ANY state other than a state of total happi2">iness, whi2">ich i2">is God's Wi2">ILL for you!

So all thi2">is other stuff... lol.... fetch the kleenex... but ... really, i2">it's all very very mi2">istaken. i2">If we could just get thi2">is, i2">it's so si2">imple but the ego has so many defenses agai2">inst i2">it. i2">In truth nothi2">ing has happened. i2">In truth, only Love i2">is real. i2">In truth, there i2">is only cause for celebrati2">ion and joy. i2">In truth, everyone i2">is okay. i2">In truth, di2">isasters and murder and death and destructi2">ion are not real. i2">In truth, nobody i2">is really abused. i2">In truth, nobody has been truly vi2">icti2">imi2">ized. i2">In truth, nothi2">ing unreal has happened and nothi2">ing unreal exi2">ists.

We should be jumpi2">ing for joy all day long every day! Thi2">is i2">is the "good news" that Jesus i2">is bri2">ingi2">ing to us i2">in the Course.

But.... much easi2">ier sai2">id than done, to one who beli2">ieves i2">in sufferi2">ing. And that's me and probably most of you too.

More forgi2">iveness to do.

i2">In the Authori2">ity problem, there i2">is a great reversal of roles, and a confusi2">ing of levels.

Jesus refers to thi2">is as bei2">ing the source of si2">ickness ("all si2">ickness comes from confusi2">ing the levels").

He also says that mi2">iracles reali2">ign the 'levels of percepti2">ion' i2">into thei2">ir proper order. Mi2">iracle pri2">inci2">iple 30:

"By recogni2">izi2">ing spi2">iri2">it, mi2">iracles adjust the levels of percepti2">ion and show them i2">in proper ali2">ignment." - ACi2">IM

What thi2">is means i2">is, awareness i2">is supposed to begi2">in i2">in God and extend outward, and any 'percepti2">ion' you have i2">is supposed to flow outward from God. Li2">ike, there i2">is a level of percepti2">ion hi2">igher than the physi2">ical level, and then there i2">is a lower level of percepti2">ion to whi2">ich you are most accustomed. They are supposed to flow i2">in the order/sequence of hi2">igher-flowi2">ing-to-lower. The li2">ight wi2">ithi2">in i2">illumi2">inati2">ing percepti2">ion.

When you have an authori2">ity problem, i2">it means that down here i2">in lala land you have turned around 180 degrees and now i2">instead of faci2">ing outward extendi2">ing God's love from wi2">ithi2">in, you are effecti2">ively 'out of your mi2">ind', looki2">ing back toward God wi2">ith the suggesti2">ion that there i2">is nothi2">ing 'backi2">ing you up'. Your percepti2">ion then seems to run agai2">inst God's extensi2">ion and colli2">ides wi2">ith i2">it head on. Mi2">is-creati2">ion! You start to see yourself as the source of everythi2">ing, wi2">ith God as your opponent opposi2">ite you, to whi2">ich you are now opposed, and as such you develop a sense of bei2">ing an authori2">ity opposed to God.

i2">It also means that when i2">I have an authori2">ity problem, an ego problem, i2">I wi2">ill not be wi2">illi2">ing to lay down my ego and allow myself to be owned by God, i2">I wi2">ill not allow myself to extend God, i2">I wi2">ill not allow myself to love, i2">I wi2">ill not allow myself to let God be the authori2">ity, i2">I wi2">ill not allow myself to recei2">ive from God, i2">I wi2">ill not allow myself to follow God's gui2">idance, i2">I wi2">ill not allow myself to li2">isten to God, and i2">I wi2">ill not allow myself to surrender. i2">Instead i2">I stand agai2">inst God i2">in everythi2">ing i2">I do and try to go off and control everythi2">ing all by myself.

Thi2">is i2">is the fundamental acti2">ion of the ego, bei2">ing opposed to God. Thi2">is i2">is why we thi2">ink we have an authori2">ity that we do NOT have. And i2">it i2">is thi2">is false sense of authori2">ity that bui2">ilds up as what you're fami2">ili2">iar wi2">ith - that sense of an 'i2">inflated ego', or a sense of self that i2">is ri2">ighteous, or a sense of you bei2">ing i2">important i2">in ego ways, or a sense of enti2">itlement, or a sense of havi2">ing power that you do not really possess, etc... all false i2">idol worshi2">ip and forms of ego tryi2">ing to be i2">in charge, i2">in control, i2">in power, ruler of the uni2">iverse.

WE HAVE TO LEARN TO DROP AND REVERSE THi2">IS ATTi2">ITUDE.

Thi2">is i2">is what i2">I am learni2">ing now. The orders of percepti2">ion are worki2">ing agai2">inst each other, and i2">I have level confusi2">ion, and i2">I am i2">in si2">ickness, preci2">isely because i2">I am functi2">ioni2">ing Wi2">ITHOUT GOD. i2">I am opposed to God and i2">I need to surrender my 'tryi2">ing to be God' posi2">iti2">ion, turn back around 180 degrees so that i2">I am flowi2">ing Wi2">ITH God and extendi2">ing Wi2">ITH God, and i2">I need to therefore ADMi2">IT TO AND RECOGNi2">IZE !!!!!!. .. that GOD i2">is the one who i2">is the authori2">ity here.

Thi2">is i2">is qui2">ite a powerful turni2">ing poi2">int. i2">It means letti2">ing down all of those opposi2">ing ego atti2">itudes i2">in myself, learni2">ing to put them asi2">ide and to recogni2">ize that they i2">interfere wi2">ith God, learni2">ing that all love and POWER flows FROM God, that God i2">is the one who i2">is i2">in charge, and becomi2">ing Wi2">ILLi2">ING to ALLOW thi2">is to be true. i2">It's really part of accepti2">ing the truth of the atonement - the truth that God i2">is the pri2">imary authori2">ity. We can joi2">in hi2">im i2">in i2">it and SHARE i2">in i2">it, but we can't take i2">it over and use i2">it agai2">inst Hi2">im or ourselves or others.

Thi2">is i2">is a complete fli2">ip, really, to the ego. My li2">ittle ego i2">is all hell-bent on bei2">ing God, bei2">ing a savi2">ior, fi2">ixi2">ing everyone, bei2">ing a hero, bei2">ing responsi2">ible for and carryi2">ing the wei2">ight of the world, and tryi2">ing to be some ki2">ind of spi2">iri2">ituali2">ized exalted ego. Thi2">is i2">is the COMPLETE OPPOSi2">ITE of the 'natural' "di2">ivi2">ine order". The di2">ivi2">ine order has me properly posi2">iti2">ioned as God's SON, extendi2">ing Hi2">is love, shari2">ing i2">in Hi2">is creati2">ion, flowi2">ing Hi2">is love, shari2">ing Hi2">is mi2">iracles. And that means, JOi2">INi2">ING God i2">in Hi2">is ki2">ingdom, i2">in awareness of Hi2">is spi2">iri2">it, and faci2">ing the same di2">irecti2">ion as Hi2">im, flowi2">ing Wi2">ITH Hi2">is wi2">ill, recogni2">izi2">ing that Hi2">is wi2">ill and my wi2">ill are One (that's an ACi2">IM theme too), and that i2">I can now share i2">in God's truth and power and heali2">ing.

i2">I cannot be a powerful healer, super spi2">iri2">itual hero, mega savi2">ior, ultra do-i2">it-yourselfer conqueror. i2">I T D O E S N O T W O R K ! :-) Try fi2">ixi2">ing somethi2">ing whi2">ich absolutely cannot be fi2">ixed by you and you'll soon encounter just how flawed your fi2">ix-i2">it power-over-everythi2">ing atti2">itude i2">is.

The only way that works i2">is turni2">ing around and getti2">ing ali2">igned to, open to, accepti2">ing of, flowi2">ing wi2">ith, and bei2">ing wi2">ith God's wi2">ill and God's love. That's where mi2">iracles flow from. But i2">it means you have to stop tryi2">ing to do thi2">is all by yourself. You have to admi2">it you cannot do ANYTHi2">ING by yourself. And i2">it's true. And that means a) surrenderi2">ing, b) admi2">itti2">ing God i2">is i2">in charge not you, c) thi2">is opens the doorway to the RELi2">IEF of Fi2">INALLY connecti2">ing wi2">ith God and bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to LET GOD WORK THROUGH YOU. Yay.

Here come the mi2">iracles.

i2">Is the mi2">iracle just for you, or for you to gi2">ive to others also?

Di2">id Jesus only experi2">ience mi2">iracles for Hi2">imself, or di2">id He also share them wi2">ith others?

When Jesus performed a forgi2">iveness process, do you thi2">ink that He was applyi2">ing i2">it only Hi2">is personal, separate self and hi2">is own separate mi2">ind? Di2">id the rules of forgi2">iveness only work wi2">ithi2">in hi2">is i2">inner experi2">ience, or di2">id they overflow onto others?

i2">I am di2">iscoveri2">ing somethi2">ing whi2">ich i2">I thi2">ink has been majorly overlooked by the ACi2">IM communi2">ity. i2">I overlooked i2">it because i2">I always thought "i2">I" was doi2">ing the Course, therefore "i2">I" was the one who needed forgi2">iveness, that "i2">I" should clai2">im atonement for my ego self, and that therefore "i2">I" am the only one who i2">is goi2">ing to benefi2">it from forgi2">iveness and mi2">iracles.

But the ego cannot clai2">im the atonement for i2">itself. So THAT "i2">I" cannot be the Self that we are clai2">imi2">ing the atonement for. Therefore i2">if that i2">I i2">isn't the i2">identi2">ity who experi2">iences atonement, i2">it must be an atonement that extends beyond that i2">I, ri2">ight? i2">It must go beyond the ego self, and therefore the mi2">iracle MUST be shared wi2">ith others. We MUST be awakeni2">ing to a shared i2">identi2">ity, whi2">ich i2">is a shared mi2">ind (mi2">inds that are joi2">ined cannot be si2">ick), whi2">ich means that whatever process of forgi2">iveness and mi2">iracles i2">I am applyi2">ing, i2">it CANNOT just apply to my "self".

i2">I'm suddenly starti2">ing to see all manner of understandi2">ings about forgi2">iveness, whi2">ich i2">I had appli2">ied to my "separate-me", suddenly applyi2">ing to others. And as i2">I look further i2">into the i2">idea of worki2">ing "heali2">ing mi2">iracles" for others, i2">it i2">is starti2">ing to become glari2">ingly obvi2">ious that the process of applyi2">ing forgi2">iveness "for my self" can actually be appli2">ied FOR another person.

i2">In other words, thi2">is i2">isn't all about me me me forgi2">ive myself. As wi2">ithi2">in so wi2">ithout. The "i2">in here" mi2">ind i2">in thi2">is body i2">is not all of my mi2">ind. The world "out there" i2">is not outsi2">ide of my mi2">ind. The out-there world i2">is actually i2">insi2">ide my mi2">ind because my mi2">ind CONTAi2">INS the world. Now, we're talki2">ing about at the level of CHRi2">IST here, not just the level of personal Hi2">igher-Self mi2">ind. The One Son, not the sonshi2">ip.

i2">I do beli2">ieve that i2">in ACi2">IM Jesus i2">is teachi2">ing us from a level of Chri2">ist much of the ti2">ime, and that the truth's he's tryi2">ing to poi2">int us to are at the Chri2">ist level, not just level 2 or 3. At the Chri2">ist level, the enti2">ire world i2">is the ego, the enti2">ire world i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion, and the enti2">ire world i2">is wi2">ithi2">in my mi2">ind. Therefore, "other people" are also i2">in my mi2">ind, they are part of my dreami2">ing, thei2">ir i2">illusi2">ion of si2">ickness and death showi2">ing up i2">in form are aspects of MY delusi2">ions, and therefore i2">I CAN heal thei2">ir si2">ickness by heali2">ing my "self" - i2">ie returni2">ing to the Chri2">ist i2">identi2">ity - the shared collecti2">ive Chri2">ist consci2">iousness.

That means the Course i2">isn't just about me remai2">ini2">ing separate - an ego - studyi2">ing the Course i2">in i2">isolati2">ion, doi2">ing i2">it "to myself" or "for myself", i2">ie, for my separate i2">identi2">ity. i2">In order for mi2">iracles to express through me to "others", the rules of mi2">iracles must apply equally to the "me" that thi2">inks i2">it i2">is separate i2">insi2">ide thi2">is body, AND the "me" that i2">is showi2">ing up externally. i2">It i2">is all One.

For example, when you look at someone else's body and you see si2">ickness. i2">If you beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is real (God created i2">it), there i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion i2">in "the mi2">ind" relati2">ing to mi2">ispercei2">ivi2">ing that si2">ickness. You thi2">ink that i2">illusi2">ion i2">is i2">in the mi2">ind that's i2">in your body. So you go about a forgi2">iveness process to correct that i2">illusi2">ion seemi2">ingly i2">in "your mi2">ind", to adjust your "personal percepti2">ion", but i2">it now means you see the other person's si2">ickness correctly as an i2">illusi2">ion. Thi2">is however sti2">ill leaves an i2">illusi2">ion out there. The person i2">is sti2">ill si2">ick. And i2">in God's truth, i2">illusi2">ions are not real, so that person cannot really be si2">ick. Thei2">ir i2">illusory si2">ickness must go!

So there i2">is an "appli2">icati2">ion" of a forgi2">iveness process that i2">is meant to be appli2">ied to OTHERS. Thi2">is i2">is the proper functi2">ioni2">ing of the "procedure" of performi2">ing a heali2">ing mi2">iracle for your brother. When bri2">ingi2">ing i2">in the Holy Spi2">iri2">it and fulfi2">illi2">ing your role as "aski2">ing for what you want" through commands, and are beli2">ievi2">ing the person must be healed (per God logi2">ic) regardless of what *appearances* show, thi2">is means overlooki2">ing and thus forgi2">ivi2">ing the appearance of si2">ickness bei2">ing real.

The forgi2">iveness i2">is occurri2">ing i2">in my mi2">ind and i2">I move i2">into a place of forgi2">iveness, where i2">I am not maki2">ing errors, and where i2">I do not see errors as real. And at the same ti2">ime, that ali2">ignment wi2">ith God wi2">ill acti2">ivate the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to flow through you. i2">If you then express that the person i2">is not si2">ick but healthy, thei2">ir body MUST respond and change to a healthy body.

My wi2">illi2">ingness to overlook the i2">illusi2">ion of si2">ickness i2">in another, yes i2">it heals my own mi2">ind i2">if i2">I have delusi2">ions about i2">it, but once my mi2">ind i2">is free of that delusi2">ion, i2">I am now i2">in a posi2">iti2">ion of authori2">ity and power. And i2">I am also now joi2">ini2">ing i2">in mi2">ind wi2">ith the brother. And i2">I also no longer support thei2">ir si2">ickness. Therefore, as the lovi2">ing thi2">ing to do, i2">I can di2">ispel i2">it.

So what i2">I'm seei2">ing i2">is, much of ACi2">IM i2">is taught as a sort of self-help program, focused on your separate self wi2">ith no way to apply i2">it to your brother, that you cannot apply i2">it to them wi2">ithout spli2">itti2">ing your mi2">ind, that you can only forgi2">ive yourself etc... but, there i2">is confusi2">ion about i2">IDENTi2">ITY here. WHO i2">is bei2">ing forgi2">iven and that that leads to, i2">is qui2">ite di2">ifferent.

You are the li2">ight of the world. You are the salvati2">ion of the world. That i2">isn't passi2">ive. That i2">isn't li2">ike just bei2">ing a shi2">iny li2">ight on a mountai2">in top. i2">It has power. i2">It di2">ispels i2">illusi2">ions, not just at the personal-self level but at the uni2">ited sonshi2">ip level. Thi2">is i2">is why some of Jesus's teachi2">ing actually relate to bei2">ing the Chri2">ist, i2">in whi2">ich all of the i2">illusi2">ion exi2">ists, and the abi2">ili2">ity to overcome absolutely all physi2">ical laws.

You can wake up to your hi2">igher self at level 3, and be at peace wi2">ith thi2">is world. But that wi2">ill not necessari2">ily grant you walki2">ing on water. To do that, you need to become the Chri2">ist.

And for the Chri2">ist, there are no li2">imi2">its.

i2">I really li2">ike thi2">is term - "si2">inlessness". i2">It feels good. i2">It feels the way "there i2">is no si2">in" feels when i2">I say i2">it. That my si2">inlessness i2">is guaranteed by God, i2">is ri2">ight up wi2">ith there "i2">I am sti2">ill as God created me." i2">It speci2">ifi2">ies not only what i2">I AM, i2">it also speci2">ifi2">ies what i2">I am NOT. i2">I am not si2">inful, because i2">I am si2">inless. i2">I am free from the si2">infulness that i2">I am not.

Si2">inlessness i2">is more than merely the absence of si2">in, as well. i2">It i2">is the presence of i2">immortali2">ity. i2">It i2">is strength and i2">innocence. i2">It i2">is i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity and fearlessness. Where there i2">is si2">inlessness there i2">is no reason to be afrai2">id. i2">If your brother i2">is si2">inless, he i2">is not threateni2">ing you. i2">If the world i2">is si2">inless, i2">it i2">is doi2">ing nothi2">ing to you. Si2">inlessness i2">is safety. Si2">inlessness i2">is your puri2">ity as Chri2">ist!

Si2">inlessness i2">is also the end result of forgi2">iveness. When forgi2">iveness i2">is completely, you are i2">in si2">inlessness. When you have forgi2">iven your brother, you recogni2">ize and can see hi2">is si2">inlessness. The si2">inlessness i2">in hi2">im i2">is your own. i2">It i2">is the li2">ight of Chri2">ist. i2">It i2">is the guaranteed puri2">ity of God, whi2">ich was gi2">iven you i2">in your permanent creati2">ion. You are si2">inless because God created you si2">inless forever.

The jui2">icy quotes...

"Your si2">inlessness i2">is guaranteed by God. Over and over thi2">is must be repeated unti2">il i2">it i2">is accepted. i2">It i2">is true. Your si2">inlessness i2">is guaranteed by God. Nothi2">ing can touch i2">it, nor can change what God created as eternal. The self you made, evi2">il and full of si2">in, i2">is meani2">ingless. Your si2">inlessness i2">is guaranteed by God, and li2">ight and joy and peace abi2">ide i2">in you."

"Salvati2">ion requi2">ires the acceptance of but one thought; you are as God created you, not what you made of yourself. Whatever evi2">il you may thi2">ink you di2">id, you are as God created you. Whatever mi2">istakes you made, the truth about you i2">is unchanged. Creati2">ion i2">is eternal and unalterable. Your si2">inlessness i2">is guaranteed by God. You are and wi2">ill forever be exactly as you were created. Li2">ight and joy and peace abi2">ide i2">in you because God put them there."

"i2">If a si2">ituati2">ion ari2">ises whi2">ich seems to be di2">isturbi2">ing, qui2">ickly di2">ispel the i2">illusi2">ion of fear by repeati2">ing these thoughts agai2">in. Should you be tempted to become angry wi2">ith someone, tell hi2">im si2">ilently:

"Li2">ight and joy and peace abi2">ide i2">in you. Your si2">inlessness i2">is guaranteed by God.""

"Brother, come and let me look on you. Your loveli2">iness reflects my own. Your si2">inlessness i2">is mi2">ine. You stand forgi2">iven, and i2">I stand wi2">ith you."

"i2">If you but knew how much your Father yearns to have you recogni2">ize your si2">inlessness, you would not let Hi2">is Voi2">ice appeal i2">in vai2">in, nor turn away from Hi2">is replacement for the fearful i2">images and dreams you made. "

"True li2">ight i2">is strength, and strength i2">is si2">inlessness. i2">If you remai2">in as God created you, you must be strong, and li2">ight must be i2">in you. He Who ensured your si2">inlessness must be the guarantee of strength and li2">ight as well. You are as God created you. Darkness cannot obscure the glory of the Son of God. You stand i2">in li2">ight, strong i2">in the si2">inlessness i2">in whi2">ich you were created, and i2">in whi2">ich you wi2">ill remai2">in throughout eterni2">ity."

"How lovely does the world become i2">in just that si2">ingle i2">instant when you see the truth about yourself reflected there. Now you are si2">inless and behold your si2">inlessness. Now you are holy and percei2">ive i2">it so."

"The state of si2">inlessness i2">is merely thi2">is: The WHOLE desi2">ire to attack i2">is gone, and so there i2">is no reason to percei2">ive the Son of God as other than he i2">is."

"And so you walk toward Heaven or toward hell, but NOT alone. How beauti2">iful hi2">is si2">inlessness wi2">ill be, when you percei2">ive i2">it! And how great wi2">ill be YOUR joy when he i2">is free to offer you the gi2">ift of si2">ight God gave to hi2">im for you."

"Your brother's si2">inlessness i2">is gi2">iven you i2">in shi2">ini2">ing li2">ight, to look on wi2">ith the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's vi2">isi2">ion, and to rejoi2">ice i2">in, along wi2">ith Hi2">im. For peace wi2">ill come to all who ask for i2">it wi2">ith real desi2">ire and si2">inceri2">ity of purpose, SHARED wi2">ith the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, and at one wi2">ith Hi2">im on what salvati2">ion i2">IS."

"Be wi2">illi2">ing, then, to see your brother si2">inless, that Chri2">ist may ri2">ise before your vi2">isi2">ion, and gi2">ive you joy. And place NO value on your brother's body, whi2">ich held hi2">im to i2">illusi2">ions of what he i2">is. i2">It i2">is Hi2">IS desi2">ire to see hi2">is si2">inlessness, as i2">it i2">is YOURS. And bless the Son of God i2">in your relati2">ionshi2">ip, nor see i2">in hi2">im what you have MADE of hi2">im. The Holy Spi2">iri2">it GUARANTEES that what"God has wi2">illed and gi2">iven shall be yours."

"My si2">inlessness protects me from all harm."

"My si2">inlessness ensures me perfect peace, eternal safety, everlasti2">ing love, freedom forever from all thought of loss; complete deli2">iverance from sufferi2">ing. And only happi2">iness can be my state, for only happi2">iness i2">is gi2">iven me. What must i2">I do to know all thi2">is i2">is mi2">ine? i2">I must accept Atonement for myself, and nothi2">ing more. God has already done all thi2">ings that need be done. And i2">I must learn i2">I need do nothi2">ing of myself, for i2">I need but accept my Self, my si2">inlessness, created for me, now already mi2">ine, to feel God's Love protecti2">ing me from harm, to understand my Father loves Hi2">is Son; to know i2">I am the Son my Father loves."

""You who created me i2">in si2">inlessness are not mi2">istaken about what i2">I am. i2">I was mi2">istaken when i2">I thought i2">I si2">inned, but i2">I accept Atonement for myself. Father, my dream i2">is ended now. Amen.""

"i2">I choose to see my brother's si2">inlessness."

"i2">I choose to see what i2">I would look upon, and thi2">is i2">I see, and only thi2">is. My brother's si2">inlessness shows me that i2">I would look upon my own. And i2">I wi2">ill see i2">it, havi2">ing chosen to behold my brother i2">in i2">its holy li2">ight."

""What could restore Your memory to me except to see my brother's si2">inlessness? Hi2">is holi2">iness remi2">inds me that he was created one wi2">ith me and li2">ike myself. i2">In hi2">im i2">I fi2">ind my Self, and i2">in Your Son i2">I fi2">ind the memory of You as well.""

"i2">I can attack but my own si2">inlessness, and i2">it i2">is only that whi2">ich keeps me safe."

""Father, Your Son i2">is holy. i2">I am he on whom You smi2">ile i2">in love and tenderness so deep and dear and sti2">ill the uni2">iverse smi2">iles back on You, and shares Your holi2">iness. How pure, how safe, how sacred, then, are we, abi2">idi2">ing i2">in Your smi2">ile, wi2">ith all Your love bestowed upon us, li2">ivi2">ing one wi2">ith You, i2">in brotherhood and Fatherhood complete; i2">in si2">inlessness so perfect that the Lord of Si2">inlessness concei2">ives us as Hi2">is Son, a uni2">iverse of Thought completi2">ing Hi2">im.""

"Let us not, then, attack our si2">inlessness. For i2">it contai2">ins the Word of God to us, and i2">in i2">its ki2">ind reflecti2">ion we are saved."

"Remove your focus on your brother's si2">ins, and you experi2">ience the peace that comes from fai2">ith i2">in si2">inlessness. Thi2">is fai2">ith recei2">ives i2">its only sure support from what you see i2">in others past thei2">ir si2">ins. For thei2">ir mi2">istakes, i2">if focused on, are wi2">itnesses to si2">ins i2">in you. And you wi2">ill not transcend thei2">ir si2">ight and see the si2">inlessness that li2">ies beyond."

"Therefore, i2">in practi2">ici2">ing today, we fi2">irst let all such li2">ittle focuses gi2">ive way to our great need to let our si2">inlessness become apparent."

"We enter i2">in the ti2">ime of practi2">ici2">ing wi2">ith one i2">intent; to look upon the si2">inlessness wi2">ithi2">in."

"And we wi2">ill also use these thoughts to keep us safe throughout the day. We do not seek for long-range goals. As each obstructi2">ion seems to block the vi2">isi2">ion of our si2">inlessness, we seek but for surcease an i2">instant from the mi2">isery the focus upon si2">in wi2">ill bri2">ing, and uncorrected wi2">ill remai2">in."

"The world whi2">ich once proclai2">imed our si2">ins becomes the proof that we are si2">inless. And our love for everyone we look upon attests to our remembrance of the holy Self Whi2">ich knows no si2">in, and never could concei2">ive of anythi2">ing wi2">ithout i2">Its si2">inlessness."

"Our si2">inlessness i2">is but the Wi2">ill of God. Thi2">is i2">instant i2">is our wi2">illi2">ing one wi2">ith Hi2">is."

"The self you made i2">is not the Son of God. Therefore thi2">is self does not exi2">ist at all. And anythi2">ing i2">it seems to do and thi2">ink means nothi2">ing. i2">It i2">is nei2">ither bad nor good. i2">It i2">is unreal, and nothi2">ing more than that. i2">It does not battle wi2">ith the Son of God. i2">It does not hurt hi2">im, nor attack hi2">is peace. i2">It has not changed creati2">ion, nor reduced eternal si2">inlessness to si2">in and love to hate."

"i2">I need but look upon all thi2">ings that seem to hurt me, and wi2">ith perfect certai2">inty assure myself, "God wi2">ills that i2">I be saved from thi2">is," and merely watch them di2">isappear. i2">I need but keep i2">in mi2">ind my Father's Wi2">ill for me i2">is only happi2">iness, to fi2">ind that only happi2">iness has come to me. And i2">I need but remember that Hi2">is Love surrounds Hi2">is Son and keeps hi2">is si2">inlessness forever perfect, to be sure that i2">I am saved and safe forever i2">in Hi2">is arms. i2">I am the Son He loves. And i2">I am saved because God i2">in Hi2">is mercy wi2">ills i2">it so."

"Father, Your holi2">iness i2">is mi2">ine. Your Love created me, and made my si2">inlessness forever part of You. i2">I have no gui2">ilt nor si2">in i2">in me, for there i2">is none i2">in You."

"Behold hi2">is si2">inlessness and be you healed"

"Father, today i2">I would let all thi2">ings be as You created them, and gi2">ive Your Sons the honor due thei2">ir si2">inlessness; the love of brother to hi2">is brother and hi2">is fri2">iend. Through thi2">is i2">I am redeemed."

"i2">I wi2">ill forgi2">ive all thi2">ings today, that i2">I

May learn how to accept the truth i2">in me,

And come to recogni2">ize my si2">inlessness."

"i2">In holi2">iness were we created, and i2">in holi2">iness do we remai2">in. Your Son i2">is li2">ike to You i2">in perfect si2">inlessness, and wi2">ith thi2">is thought we gladly say 'Amen'."

"And wi2">ith thi2">is choi2">ice i2">I see my si2">inlessness, my everlasti2">ing Comforter and Fri2">iend besi2">ide me, and my way secure and clear."

"Forgi2">iveness looks on si2">inlessness alone, and judges not. Through thi2">is i2">I come to You. Judgment wi2">ill bi2">ind my eyes and make me bli2">ind. Yet love, reflected i2">in forgi2">iveness here, remi2">inds me You have gi2">iven me a way to fi2">ind Your peace agai2">in." "Surroundi2">ing me i2">is perfect safety. Can i2">I be afrai2">id, when Your eternal promi2">ise goes wi2">ith me? Surroundi2">ing me i2">is perfect si2">inlessness. What can i2">I fear, when You created me i2">in holi2">iness as perfect as Your own?"

"i2">In qui2">iet may forgi2">iveness wi2">ipe away my dreams of separati2">ion and of si2">in. Then let me, Father, look wi2">ithi2">in and fi2">ind Your promi2">ise of my si2">inlessness i2">is kept; Your Word remai2">ins unchanged wi2">ithi2">in my mi2">ind, Your Love i2">is sti2">ill abi2">idi2">ing i2">in my heart."

"Today i2">I would behold my brother si2">inless. Thi2">is Your Wi2">ill for me, for thus wi2">ill i2">I behold my si2">inlessness."

"i2">I am the means by whi2">ich God's Son i2">is saved, because salvati2">ion's purpose i2">is to fi2">ind the si2">inlessness whi2">ich God has placed i2">in me. i2">I was created as the thi2">ing i2">I seek. i2">I am the goal the world i2">is searchi2">ing for. i2">I am God's Son, Hi2">is one Eternal Love. i2">I am salvati2">ion's means and end as well."

"Our Father, let us see the face of Chri2">ist i2">instead of our mi2">istakes. For we who are Your holy Son, are si2">inless."

"Now let Hi2">is true percepti2">ion come to me, that i2">I may waken from the dream of gui2">ilt and look wi2">ithi2">in upon my si2">inlessness, whi2">ich You have kept completely undefi2">iled upon the altar to Your holy Son, the Self wi2">ith Whi2">ich i2">I would i2">identi2">ify."

"And we, God's chi2">ildren, ri2">ise up from the dust and look upon our perfect si2">inlessness. The song of Heaven sounds around the world, as i2">it i2">is li2">ifted up and brought to truth."

"Now there are no di2">isti2">incti2">ions. Di2">ifferences have di2">isappeared and Love looks on i2">Itself. What further si2">ight i2">is needed? What remai2">ins that vi2">isi2">ion could accompli2">ish? We have seen the face of Chri2">ist, Hi2">is si2">inlessness, Hi2">is Love behi2">ind all forms, beyond all purposes."

"Thei2">ir pati2">ients can but be seen as the bri2">ingers of forgi2">iveness, for i2">it i2">is they who come to demonstrate thei2">ir si2">inlessness to eyes that sti2">ill beli2">ieve that si2">in i2">is there to look upon. Yet wi2">ill the proof of si2">inlessness, seen i2">in the pati2">ient and accepted i2">in the therapi2">ist, offer the mi2">ind of both a covenant i2">in whi2">ich they meet and joi2">in and are as one."

"The prayer for enemi2">ies thus becomes a prayer for your own freedom. Now i2">it i2">is no longer a contradi2">icti2">ion i2">in terms. Rather i2">it i2">is a statement of the uni2">ity of Chri2">ist and a recogni2">iti2">ion of Hi2">is si2">inlessness. And now i2">it has become holy, for i2">it acknowledges the Son of God as he was created."

"Now, wi2">ithout needs of any ki2">ind, and clad forever i2">in the pure si2">inlessness whi2">ich i2">is the gi2">ift of God to you, Hi2">is Son, prayer can agai2">in become what i2">it was meant to be."

"Creati2">ion i2">is the opposi2">ite of all i2">illusi2">ions, for Creati2">ion i2">is the truth. Creati2">ion i2">is the holy Son of God, for i2">in Creati2">ion i2">is Hi2">is Wi2">ill complete i2">in every aspect, maki2">ing every part contai2">iner of the whole. i2">Its oneness i2">is forever guaranteed i2">invi2">iolate; forever held wi2">ithi2">in Hi2">is holy Wi2">ill, beyond all possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of harm, of separati2">ion, i2">imperfecti2">ion and of any spot upon i2">its si2">inlessness."

"What he has done now must God's Son undo. But not alone. For he has thrown away the pri2">ison's key; hi2">is holy si2">inlessness and the remembrance of hi2">is Father's Love."

"i2">I am God's Son, complete and healed and whole, shi2">ini2">ing i2">in the reflecti2">ion of Hi2">is Love. i2">In me i2">is Hi2">is creati2">ion sancti2">ifi2">ied and guaranteed eternal li2">ife. i2">In me i2">is love perfected, fear i2">impossi2">ible, and joy establi2">ished wi2">ithout opposi2">ite. i2">I am the holy home of God Hi2">imself. i2">I am the Heaven where Hi2">is Love resi2">ides. i2">I am Hi2">is holy Si2">inlessness i2">Itself, for i2">in my puri2">ity abi2">ides Hi2">is own."

"Now prayer i2">is li2">ifted from the world of thi2">ings, of bodi2">ies, and of gods of every ki2">ind, and you can rest i2">in holi2">iness at last. Humi2">ili2">ity has taught you how to understand your glory as God's Son, and recogni2">ize the arrogance of si2">in. A dream has vei2">iled the face of Chri2">ist from you. Now can you look upon Hi2">is si2">inlessness."

"He wi2">ill hear hi2">is si2">inlessness proclai2">imed around and around the world, setti2">ing i2">it free as God's fi2">inal judgment on hi2">im i2">is recei2">ived. Thi2">is i2">is the judgment i2">in whi2">ich salvati2">ion li2">ies. Thi2">is i2">is the judgment that wi2">ill set hi2">im free. Thi2">is i2">is the judgment i2">in whi2">ich all thi2">ings are freed wi2">ith hi2">im."

"i2">In Hi2">is percepti2">ion of the world, nothi2">ing i2">is seen but justi2">ifi2">ies forgi2">iveness and the si2">ight of perfect si2">inlessness. Nothi2">ing ari2">ises but i2">is met wi2">ith i2">instant and complete forgi2">iveness. Nothi2">ing remai2">ins an i2">instant, to obscure the si2">inlessness that shi2">ines unchanged, beyond the pi2">iti2">iful attempts of speci2">ialness to put i2">it out of mi2">ind, where i2">it MUST be, and li2">ight the BODY up i2">INSTEAD of i2">it."

"Now He can remi2">ind the world of si2">inlessness, the one unchanged, unchangeable condi2">iti2">ion of all that God created. Now He can speak the Word of God to li2">isteni2">ing ears, and bri2">ing Chri2">ist's vi2">isi2">ion to eyes that see. Now i2">is He free to teach all mi2">inds the truth of what they are, so they wi2">ill gladly be returned to Hi2">im. And now i2">is gui2">ilt forgi2">iven, overlooked completely i2">in Hi2">is si2">ight and i2">in God's Word."

"All that i2">is real proclai2">ims hi2">is si2">inlessness. All that i2">is false proclai2">ims hi2">is si2">ins as real."

"Do you not see the OPPOSi2">ITE of frai2">ilty and weakness i2">is si2">inlessness? i2">INNOCENCE i2">IS STRENGTH, and nothi2">ing else i2">is strong. The si2">inless cannot fear. And fear of any ki2">ind i2">is weakness."

"i2">It i2">is Hi2">IS si2">inlessness that eyes that see can look upon. i2">It i2">is Hi2">IS loveli2">iness they see i2">in everythi2">ing. And i2">it i2">is HE they look for everywhere, and fi2">ind no si2">ight or place or ti2">ime where He i2">is NOT. Wi2">ithi2">in your brother's holi2">iness, the perfect frame for YOUR salvati2">ion and the world's, i2">is set the shi2">ini2">ing memory of Hi2">im i2">in Whom your brother li2">ives, and you along wi2">ith hi2">im." "i2">In thi2">is one fact i2">is si2">inlessness proclai2">imed to be forever part of everythi2">ing; the central core of i2">its exi2">istence and i2">its guarantee of i2">immortali2">ity."

"Your speci2">ial functi2">ion i2">is a call to Hi2">im, that He may smi2">ile on you whose si2">inlessness He shares. Hi2">IS understandi2">ing wi2">ill be YOURS. And so the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's Speci2">ial Functi2">ion has been fulfi2">illed. God's Son has found a wi2">itness unto hi2">is si2">inlessness, and NOT hi2">is si2">in. "

"To serve THi2">IS end, the body MUST be percei2">ived as si2">inless, BECAUSE the goal i2">is si2">inlessness."

"The means of si2">inlessness can know no fear, because they carry ONLY love wi2">ith them."

"Your home i2">is bui2">ilt upon your brother's health; upon hi2">is happi2">iness, hi2">is si2">inlessness, and everythi2">ing hi2">is Father promi2">ised hi2">im. No secret promi2">ise you have made i2">INSTEAD has shaken the Foundati2">ion of hi2">is home."

"Hi2">is holi2">iness gi2">ives li2">ife to you, who CANNOT di2">ie because hi2">is si2">inlessness i2">is known to God, and can no more be sacri2">ifi2">iced by you than can the li2">ight i2">in you be blotted out because he sees i2">it not."

"And as we see the si2">inlessness i2">in hi2">im come shi2">ini2">ing through the vei2">il of gui2">ilt that shrouds the Son of God, we wi2">ill behold i2">in hi2">im the Face of Chri2">ist, and understand that i2">it i2">is but our own."

"Gi2">ive me your blessi2">ing, holy Son of God,

i2">I would behold you wi2">ith the eyes of Chri2">ist,

And see my perfect si2">inlessness i2">in you."

"Consi2">ider once agai2">in your speci2">ial functi2">ion. ONE i2">is gi2">iven you to see i2">in hi2">im hi2">is perfect si2">inlessness."

"You sti2">ill are holy wi2">ith the Holi2">iness whi2">ich fathered you i2">in perfect si2">inlessness, and sti2">ill surrounds you i2">in the arms of peace. Dream now of heali2">ing. Then ari2">ise and lay all dreami2">ing down forever. You are he your Father loves, who never left hi2">is home, nor wandered i2">in a savage world wi2">ith feet that bleed, and wi2">ith a heavy heart made hard agai2">inst the Love that i2">is the truth i2">in you. Gi2">ive all your dreams to Chri2">ist and let Hi2">im be your Gui2">ide to heali2">ing, leadi2">ing you i2">in prayer beyond the sorry reaches of the world."

"Only Chri2">ist forgi2">ives, knowi2">ing Hi2">is si2">inlessness. Hi2">is vi2">isi2">ion heals percepti2">ion and si2">ickness di2">isappears. Nor wi2">ill i2">it return agai2">in, once i2">its cause has been removed."

"Yet i2">it i2">is He Who gi2">ives the means by whi2">ich percepti2">ion i2">is made true and beauti2">iful enough to let the li2">ight of Heaven shi2">ine upon i2">it. i2">It i2">is He Who answers what Hi2">is Son would contradi2">ict, and keeps hi2">is si2">inlessness forever safe."

"Your questi2">ion should not be, "How can i2">I see my brother wi2">ithout the body?" Ask only, "Do i2">I REALLY wi2">ish to see hi2">im si2">inless?" And, as you ask, forget not that Hi2">IS si2">inlessness i2">is YOUR escape from fear. Salvati2">ion i2">is the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's goal. The means i2">is vi2">isi2">ion. For what the seei2">ing look upon i2">IS si2">inless. No-one who loves can judge, and what he sees i2">is FREE of condemnati2">ion. And what he sees he di2">id NOT make, for i2">it was Gi2">IVEN hi2">im to see, as was the vi2">isi2">ion whi2">ich made hi2">is seei2">ing possi2">ible."

"The si2">inless gi2">ive as they recei2">ived. See, then, the power of si2">inlessness wi2">ithi2">in your brother, and share wi2">ith hi2">im the power of the RELEASE from si2">in you offered Hi2">IM."

"What danger can assai2">il the wholly i2">innocent? What can attack the gui2">iltless? What fear can enter and di2">isturb the peace of si2">inlessness?"

"No one remai2">ins i2">in hell, for no one can abandon hi2">is Creator, nor affect Hi2">is perfect, ti2">imeless and unchangi2">ing Love. You wi2">ill fi2">ind Heaven. Everythi2">ing you seek but thi2">is wi2">ill fall away, yet not because i2">it has been taken from you. i2">It wi2">ill go because you do not want i2">it. You wi2">ill reach the goal you really want as certai2">inly as God created you i2">in si2">inlessness."

"Chri2">ist cannot doubt Hi2">imself. The Voi2">ice of God can only honor Hi2">im, rejoi2">ici2">ing i2">in Hi2">is perfect, everlasti2">ing si2">inlessness."

"Defenselessness i2">is all you need to gi2">ive Hi2">im i2">in return. You lay asi2">ide but what was never real, to look on Chri2">ist and see Hi2">is si2">inlessness."

i2">I was bei2">ing controlli2">ing. i2">I di2">id not want thi2">ings to be the way they are. i2">i wanted to stop them bei2">ing the way they are and be di2">ifferent. i2">I could not accept that thi2">is was okay or that i2">it should be thi2">is way.

But i2">I di2">id not reali2">ize the effect that thi2">is control has on the world.

When i2">I resi2">ist what's happeni2">ing, i2">I resi2">ist by attempti2">ing to control and reject what's goi2">ing on. i2">I try to shut i2">it out, at the same ti2">ime as tryi2">ing to put i2">into place some ki2">ind of 'alternati2">ive' that i2">I thi2">ink i2">is better or more correct. So there i2">I am i2">in a state of strong rejecti2">ion, and strong enforcement, si2">imultaneously - whi2">ich obvi2">iously i2">is confli2">icti2">ing and therefore upsetti2">ing.

i2">I di2">id not reali2">ize that my attempt to resi2">ist and control was actually CAUSi2">ING the si2">ituati2">ion i2">I was looki2">ing at, to appear to me i2">in the way i2">it was appeari2">ing.

The more i2">I di2">id not li2">ike what was happeni2">ing, the more i2">I tri2">ied to stop i2">it and control i2">it. But the more i2">I di2">id that, the more the si2">ituati2">ion seemed to get further from how i2">I wanted i2">it.

The more we control, the more we resi2">ist. So now that i2">I am i2">in resi2">istance, that resi2">istance only becomes stronger as i2">I become more passi2">ionate about forci2">ing thi2">ings to be how i2">I thi2">ink they should be. i2">In fact, i2">it's really i2">impossi2">ible for me to HAVE thi2">ings the way i2">I want them, because to make them be that way takes a tremendous amount of control and mani2">ipulati2">ion, whi2">ich means i2">I am i2">in tremendous resi2">istance, whi2">ich means i2">I am not i2">in a state of acceptance.

There never wi2">ill be a ti2">ime when i2">I can both be controlli2">ing and enforci2">ing si2">ituati2">ions whi2">ile also experi2">ienci2">ing acceptance. So i2">in effect, i2">i wi2">ill never be able to experi2">ience that the outcome i2">I wanted has actually occurred and that i2">I am at peace wi2">ith i2">it. Unless that i2">is i2">I became SO i2">incredi2">ibly controlli2">ing that i2">I vi2">iolated boundari2">ies and ri2">ights attempti2">ing to get others to change. Whi2">ich would of course be completely i2">inappropri2">iate on many levels.

i2">I di2">id not know that tryi2">ing to control a si2">ituati2">ion makes i2">it worse, and takes i2">it further from acceptabi2">ili2">ity. How can anyone ever fi2">ind the peace of acceptance through bei2">ing controlli2">ing? Good luck.

The more i2">I saw the si2">ituati2">ion i2">is needi2">ing to be controlled because i2">it was 'out of control' and unacceptable, the more the people i2">involved seemed to become even more out of control and unacceptable. Funny that. They reacted to my controlli2">ing efforts wi2">ith thei2">ir own resi2">istance agai2">inst my attacks, so no wonder the scenari2">io i2">I was tryi2">ing to get away from si2">imply became more stuck and ri2">igi2">id. What you resi2">ist persi2">ists.

My strategy i2">is now shi2">ifti2">ing. i2">I need to learn to be accepti2">ing, not controlli2">ing. Allowi2">ing, not enforci2">ing. Permi2">itti2">ing, not resi2">isti2">ing. And that means, or at least seems to mean to my ego, that i2">I cannot have thi2">ings the way i2">I want them. Whi2">ich to the ego, seems to suck, ri2">ight?

My ego wants to have a world where i2">I get to 'control' certai2">in thi2">ings, even i2">if i2">it's only i2">in the scope of my 'own li2">ife' or my 'own body'. i2">I sti2">ill want to have that control over 'my' li2">ife. And so that really means, i2">I am wanti2">ing to control MYSELF. How strange i2">is that?

Control i2">isn't the same as free wi2">ill. And havi2">ing no control does not mean you don't have freedom. i2">In fact you have more freedom when you are not controlli2">ing. How's that for a paradox? Control takes away your freedom i2">instead of gi2">ivi2">ing i2">it to you! Yet another way i2">in whi2">ich the ego says one thi2">ing and does the exact opposi2">ite.

So then, to my i2">intellect, i2">it doesn't understand how i2">I can be accepti2">ing and uncontrolli2">ing and sti2">ill be i2">in any way 'happy' about what's goi2">ing on, or how i2">I can have any 'say' i2">in what's goi2">ing on. i2">It doesn't understand how i2">it's possi2">ible to accept what i2">is, and yet have the freedom and power to do somethi2">ing to change somethi2">ing. i2">It sees acceptance as the doorway to powerlessness, to no choi2">ice, to passi2">ivi2">ity and vi2">icti2">imhood. i2">Interesti2">ing how the ego sees i2">it thi2">is way i2">in order to avoi2">id acceptance, because i2">if you become really accepti2">ing you become empowered.

Acceptance wi2">ithout powerlessness or passi2">ivi2">ity. A novel concept.

One trap i2">I often fall i2">into i2">is thi2">is... i2">it's parti2">icularly sneaky...

Someone else i2">is 'actually wrong' about somethi2">ing, i2">I am 'actually ri2">ight' about somethi2">ing.

i2">i.e. based on the si2">ituati2">ion, on the ego level, somebody actually has made some mi2">istake that's obvi2">ious, i2">I know i2">it's obvi2">iously a mi2">istake, and then i2">I start to have an ego reacti2">ion.

Because the whole 'setup' of the si2">ituati2">ion seems to have 'truth' all over i2">it, i2">I don't suspect that i2">it's a trap/temptati2">ion and i2">I don't reali2">ize that i2">I'm STi2">ILL tryi2">ing to be 'ri2">ight', i2">in the spi2">iri2">itual sense, because on the ego level i2">I AM 'techni2">ically' ri2">ight.

So i2">it's sort of li2">ike a bli2">ind spot. Just because someone i2">is mi2">istaken about somethi2">ing, and just because i2">I know how and why they are mi2">istaken, doesn't mean i2">it's my posi2">iti2">ion to be 'ri2">ighteous' toward them.

So then there's thi2">is challenge.... to be 'not ri2">ight' even when you are. Even when all the evi2">idence says yes, i2">it's totally clear that the other person i2">is wrong about thi2">is, EVEN THEN... we have to di2">iscern and be honest and step back and drop the argument. Otherwi2">ise i2">if i2">I defend the ri2">ightness, i2">it wi2">ill just become an ego attack.

i2">It's a sneaky one. i2">It's much easi2">ier to catch the ego when i2">I am clearly wrong i2">in some way, much harder when i2">it all seems totally justi2">ifi2">ied.

i2">I have another mi2">iracle mani2">ifestati2">ion story to share.

Years ago also, sti2">ill i2">in England, i2">I was i2">in my bedroom standi2">ing at the wi2">indow. i2">It was spri2">ing ti2">ime. My wi2">indow looked out on the back yards of a row of houses whi2">ich led up a hi2">ill. At the top of the hi2">ill was the extended back yard of another house whi2">ich was actually where my grandparents li2">ived. A foot path ran along the si2">ide of that, and some people were walki2">ing.

Bei2">ing spri2">ingti2">ime, there was a tree up there ri2">ight next to the foot path whi2">ich was i2">in blossom wi2">ith li2">ight pi2">ink blossoms. The wi2">ind was blowi2">ing and the blossoms were spri2">inkli2">ing down onto the ground below - actually blowi2">ing across the foot path.

For some reason, at the ti2">ime, i2">I was very relaxed and i2">I suddenly had thi2">is experi2">ience of a tremendous hi2">igh "joy", whi2">ich seemed to be hi2">igh up i2">in my mi2">ind. i2">It gleamed and beamed wi2">ith joyousness and playfulness, wi2">ith no i2">intent of harm of any ki2">ind. As i2">I saw the people walki2">ing near the tree, i2">I i2">imagi2">ined that i2">it would be fun to spri2">inkle the blossoms on thei2">ir heads. For some reason i2">it was a very i2">innocent playful i2">idea.

Even though i2">I was at my wi2">indow, the wi2">indow was actually closed. i2">I was resti2">ing my arms on the wi2">indow si2">ill - the ledge that spans the wi2">idth of the wi2">indow area. Suddenly i2">in front of me, li2">ike, li2">iterally ri2">ight i2">in front of me, i2">insi2">ide the wi2">indow, as i2">I was i2">imagi2">ini2">ing petals falli2">ing on the people, some petals materi2">iali2">ized out of thi2">in ai2">ir and fell down onto the wi2">indow si2">ill ri2">ight i2">in front of my eyes.

There was just thi2">is splendi2">id feeli2">ing of joy at the ti2">ime whi2">ich i2">I had no i2">idea how i2">it came about or how to repeat i2">it i2">in any way. i2">It just happened. i2">It was a moment. And somehow what i2">I'd vi2">isuali2">ized happeni2">ing to these people happened to myself. Somehow i2">I had acci2">identally mani2">ifested flower petals.

i2">I pi2">icked them up off the wi2">indow si2">ill and looked at them, curi2">ious how they could possi2">ible have shown up there. i2">It was at least a 100-200 yards di2">istance to the tree and there was no way they could have blown that far, plus the wi2">indow was closed. Yet here i2">I was holdi2">ing these petals i2">in my hand, smi2">ili2">ing at them happi2">ily.

i2">It was surreal.

i2">I had a pretty i2">intense talk wi2">ith God last ni2">ight.

i2">I began to commune wi2">ith God and called to Hi2">im.

He sai2">id, "My Son".

i2">I asked fi2">irst, "Am i2">I goi2">ing to have to experi2">ience death of a loved one i2">in thi2">is li2">ifeti2">ime and be alone?"

He sai2">id si2">imply, "How can you? Death i2">isn't real."

i2">I opened up to Hi2">im and i2">I sai2">id, "Father, please forgi2">ive me for i2">I have si2">inned".

He sai2">id, "i2">I already have."

and "i2">I never condemned you."

i2">I asked, "You never ever condemned me? i2">I've never done anythi2">ing wrong ever? You're not goi2">ing to puni2">ish me?"

He sai2">id, "How could i2">I? i2">It's not i2">in my nature. i2">I can only love."

i2">I responded, "You're not goi2">ing to send me to hell?"

He sai2">id, "i2">It doesn't exi2">ist. You made i2">it up."

i2">I asked, "Then, why i2">is i2">it that i2">I don't see to be experi2">ienci2">ing that?"

He sai2">id, "You just haven't accepted i2">it yet."

i2">I wondered, "why i2">is i2">it that i2">I don't accept i2">it? does that mean i2">I don't want i2">it?"

i2">I looked wi2">ithi2">in and saw a rather uncomfortable fact that some part of me must not WANT to accept the truth. That some part of me doesn't beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it, rejects i2">it, has chosen agai2">inst i2">it and seems to want somethi2">ing else.

i2">It was not pleasant to see that the full responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for thi2">is "non-acceptance" was i2">in myself.

i2">I told God that "i2">I am afrai2">id to accept i2">it, but i2">it feels good to connect wi2">ith you, how can i2">I accept thi2">is more?

He sai2">id si2">imply, "Remove blocks to awareness."

i2">I was feeli2">ing very open and awake. i2">I then felt a very strong sense of attracti2">ion throughout my whole person. A strong pull that felt li2">ike i2">it was pulli2">ing me toward God, li2">ike a magnet or a vacuum as though somethi2">ing was so extremely appeali2">ing and attracti2">ive that my whole bei2">ing wanted to rush to i2">it.

i2">I had tears and then i2">I had laughter. And then i2">I felt joy. Holy Spi2">iri2">it then sai2">id "sleep". And so i2">I slept.

i2">It's qui2">ite soberi2">ing to reali2">ize that God i2">is not i2">in any way a puni2">isher or judger or condemner, does not send anyone to hell, and lovi2">ingly accepts us fully. And that i2">it i2">is enti2">irely OUR beli2">ief to the contrary that we need to correct - our own unwi2">illi2">ingness to accept Hi2">is benevolent nature.

i2">If you're li2">ike me, you probably regard your "self", whatever sense of self you have as "me", thi2">is self that seems to percei2">ive and have emoti2">ions, as bei2">ing NOT the ego. And you probably regard the ego as somethi2">ing tucked away i2">in a dark corner that surfaces once i2">in a whi2">ile, somethi2">ing that you don't thi2">ink of as "bei2">ing" all the ti2">ime. Surely your general day-to-day "self", that you refer to as "me", i2">is not the ego?

But what i2">if the enti2">ire sense of who you've regarded yourself as thi2">is whole ti2">ime, who you call by your name, i2">includi2">ing all your emoti2">ions and egoi2">ic thoughts, all sense of a self that can suffer i2">in any way, i2">IS the ego? And what i2">if that i2">is not real, and your enti2">ire sense of bei2">ing thi2">is self that suffers and feels unhappy and can be hurt i2">is not really the real you?

Jesus hi2">ints that our personali2">iti2">ies are superfi2">ici2">ial...

"The surface trai2">its of God's teachers are not at all ali2">ike. They do not look ali2">ike to the body's eyes, they come from vastly di2">ifferent backgrounds, thei2">ir experi2">iences of the world vary greatly, and thei2">ir superfi2">ici2">ial "personali2">iti2">ies" are qui2">ite di2">isti2">inct."

i2">In truth we're supposed to be experi2">ienci2">ing a state of i2">immortali2">ity and perfecti2">ion where we are permanently happy, unaffected, i2">invulnerable, i2">incapable of sufferi2">ing i2">in any way. Our real self cannot suffer or di2">ie, or cannot suffer loss, cannot gri2">ieve, cannot be upset, cannot be unhappy or lacki2">ing peace i2">in any way.

ACi2">IM tells tells us that "Happi2">iness must be constant" and "God's wi2">ill for me i2">is perfect happi2">iness" and "Reali2">ity i2">is a constant state" and "i2">Immortali2">ity i2">is a constant state." i2">If your happi2">iness i2">is meant to be constant, how i2">is i2">it possi2">ible that you EVER experi2">ience unhappi2">iness? i2">It also tells us that we cannot really suffer, and whatever i2">is experi2">ienci2">ing the sufferi2">ing cannot be my self. As i2">if we have a sort of i2">imposter self, a second self, that we've i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith as who we are, but i2">isn't who we really are.

"The self you made i2">is not the Son of God. Therefore thi2">is self does not exi2">ist at all. And anythi2">ing i2">it seems to do and thi2">ink means nothi2">ing."

"The self you made, evi2">il and full of si2">in, i2">is meani2">ingless. Your si2">inlessness i2">is guaranteed by God, and li2">ight and joy and peace abi2">ide i2">in you."

"i2">I am i2">in the li2">ikeness of my creator. i2">I cannot suffer, i2">I cannot experi2">ience loss, and i2">I cannot di2">ie." Also lesson 248 says "Whatever suffers i2">is not part of me. What gri2">ieves i2">is not myself. What i2">is i2">in pai2">in i2">is but i2">illusi2">ion i2">in my mi2">ind."

Șo i2">if "i2">I" seem to be havi2">ing upsets of any ki2">ind, unhappi2">iness, sadness, loss, gri2">ief, gui2">ilt, shame, fear, anger, anythi2">ing that i2">isn't constant permanent joy, that "stuff" cannot really be a part of my real self. My real self cannot suffer and cannot be unhappy. My real self cannot experi2">ience any ki2">ind of loss or depri2">ivati2">ion or gui2">ilt or anythi2">ing less than perfecti2">ion.

So i2">if that's true, then what i2">is thi2">is self that seems to suffer? And i2">I don't mean some remote hi2">idden ego, i2">I mean the very self, out i2">in the open every day, that you thi2">ink of as "you" thi2">is whole ti2">ime. On a dai2">ily basi2">is, goi2">ing through li2">ife reacti2">ing to thi2">ings, havi2">ing upset emoti2">ions, feeli2">ing horri2">ible about stuff, bei2">ing unhappy, percei2">ivi2">ing threats, etc. i2">It's way more out i2">in the open and much closer to "you" than you mi2">ight have reali2">ised. You're bei2">ing i2">it every si2">ingle day.

Thi2">is "you" that you're bei2">ing, thi2">is you that suffers and i2">is unhappy and has gri2">ief and anger and so on, that experi2">iences any ki2">ind of sufferi2">ing, THAT i2">is ego (bei2">ing i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith ego). Or more accurately, who you are has i2">identi2">ifi2">ied Wi2">ITH a "sufferi2">ing self", and you see yourself AS i2">IT, as a self that suffers. A self that can feel hurt, a self that has pai2">in, a self that gri2">ieves losses, a self that can be i2">in fear or gui2">ilt. When "you" suffer, ego i2">is sufferi2">ing, and YOU are beli2">ievi2">ing i2">IT i2">is who and what you are, as i2">if i2">it i2">is YOUR sufferi2">ing.

Somehow there has been a mi2">ixup, where you currently fi2">ind yourself "constantly" experi2">ienci2">ing vari2">ious problems and reacti2">ions and upset feeli2">ings, thi2">inki2">ing that these feeli2">ings are a part of yourself, that i2">it's even POSSi2">IBLE for you to have such feeli2">ings.

How can an i2">immortal perfect lovi2">ing constantly joyful bei2">ing ever have even the sli2">ightest unhappi2">iness as a part of themselves? They can't. So i2">it then begs the questi2">ion, thi2">is "self" that seems to suffer, whi2">ich i2">is the combi2">inati2">ion of your mi2">ind plus a false i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion Wi2">ITH ego/body/sufferi2">ing, can i2">it really be who and what you are? i2">Is thi2">is sufferi2">ing self really you? Can YOU really suffer at all?

Thi2">is you that you've been all your li2">ife and thi2">ink of as normal, that has emoti2">ional reacti2">ions and i2">instabi2">ili2">ity and fears and gui2">ilts. Can thi2">is possi2">ibly be a part of yourself as God created you? Jesus says that you cannot suffer and you cannot di2">ie. He says you cannot be unhappy and you cannot experi2">ience loss. How i2">if you are experi2">ienci2">ing loss and are unhappy, i2">is that really YOU that i2">is experi2">ienci2">ing i2">it? Or are you experi2">ienci2">ing a false sense of self i2">identi2">ity, bound to some ki2">ind of egoi2">ic construct, that sees "i2">itself" (yourself) as even capable of sufferi2">ing?

i2">If i2">I am havi2">ing gri2">ief and loss for example i2">it feels li2">ike "i2">I" am gri2">ievi2">ing, and i2">I have the feeli2">ings, and i2">I feel unhappy, and i2">I have the emoti2">ions and i2">I have the cri2">ies and i2">I am the one who has had a loss. But thi2">is can't be true. My mi2">ind can't bri2">ing an "end" to the loss by tryi2">ing to "get over i2">it" as an ego-i2">identi2">ifi2">ied self, but i2">it can di2">is-i2">identi2">ify from that whi2">ich beli2">ieves i2">in loss, and that i2">indeed wi2">ill end i2">it.

So i2">if there i2">is a feeli2">ing of loss, i2">it has to be false, and i2">it cannot be a part of myself. i2">If i2">I feel li2">ike, or experi2">ience i2">it li2">ike, "i2">I" am the one who i2">IS i2">IN the loss, HAVi2">ING the loss, then i2">I have i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith somethi2">ing that can't be a part of myself i2">in truth. My real self cannot ever lose anythi2">ing, because nothi2">ing real can be threatened.

i2">In such a sufferi2">ing si2">ituati2">ion i2">it means my so-called "ego" i2">is not tucked away hi2">idden from si2">ight i2">in the background, i2">it's somethi2">ing i2">I am acti2">ively Bi2">INDi2">ING to and see myself as i2">IN, li2">ike i2">I'm weari2">ing i2">it, and have i2">identi2">ifi2">ied Wi2">ITH i2">it, as i2">if i2">I am tryi2">ing to be ONE Wi2">ITH i2">IT, li2">ivi2">ing out from i2">it every second of every day.

And that puts i2">it ri2">ight i2">in front of my face and even closer than that. i2">It's lurki2">ing i2">in plai2">in si2">ight i2">in the very sense of false "self", i2">in the sense of "i2">I am sufferi2">ing". That i2">it's ME that i2">is sufferi2">ing. That's my i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion wi2">ith somethi2">ing false. God-gi2">iven mi2">ind, beli2">ievi2">ing falsely.

That's pretty eye openi2">ing because no longer does i2">it mean that the ego i2">is some background fi2">igure that rears i2">its head occasi2">ionally. Even i2">if i2">it i2">is, i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing Wi2">ITH AND AS i2">it, tryi2">ing to BE an ego, bi2">inds me to i2">it and makes me experi2">ience li2">ife as though i2">I am sufferi2">ing. i2">I am the one who i2">is feeli2">ing, i2">I am the one who i2">is upset. Only ego can be upset, and i2">if i2">I am UNi2">ITi2">ING wi2">ith ego i2">I wi2">ill be upset as though i2">it's my own upset. And that leads to unconsci2">iousness - spi2">iri2">itual sleep.

So i2">if we ask ourselves, who or what am i2">I, and i2">if there i2">is a feeli2">ing of upset, can thi2">is feeli2">ing of upset really be a PART of me? Can i2">it be mi2">ine? Can i2">it possi2">ibly be me that i2">is really sufferi2">ing, i2">if i2">it's i2">impossi2">ible for my constant di2">ivi2">ine self to suffer, ever? i2">If who i2">I really am can NEVER suffer i2">in any way, how can i2">I BE somethi2">ing that suffers, and how can the sufferi2">ing be truly mi2">ine?

i2">It then frames your egoi2">ic emoti2">ion reacti2">ions, yours stresses, as not really yours. How can these upset feeli2">ings be yours? Yes you are i2">identi2">ifi2">ied and "one wi2">ith" the ego self that suffers and who sees i2">itself as capable of sufferi2">ing through i2">its false narrow percepti2">ion, but thi2">is i2">is a false associ2">iati2">ion. i2">IT's sufferi2">ing cannot be YOUR sufferi2">ing unless your sense of i2">identi2">ity i2">is confused wi2">ith i2">it. We don't just have a li2">ittle ego i2">in the back of our mi2">inds, we are acti2">ively holdi2">ing onto i2">it and tryi2">ing to BE i2">it and regard i2">it as us!

So now i2">it bri2">ings i2">into questi2">ion, whether we should be di2">istanci2">ing ourselves from, detachi2">ing from, whatever seems to be sufferi2">ing, and from sufferi2">ing i2">itself. i2">If we have upset feeli2">ings i2">in any way, perhaps we need to be telli2">ing ourselves, these feeli2">ings are NOT a part of me, i2">I cannot suffer, and therefore i2">I cannot be havi2">ing these feeli2">ings. i2">I'm not havi2">ing these feeli2">ings. And we must have chosen to have them i2">if we've put them there.

That seems pretty radi2">ical, to just regard all upset emoti2">ions and si2">ickness and sufferi2">ing as i2">impossi2">ible and not a part of you.

"No one can suffer loss unless i2">it be hi2">is own deci2">isi2">ion. No one suffers pai2">in except hi2">is choi2">ice elects thi2">is state for hi2">im. No one can gri2">ieve nor fear nor thi2">ink hi2">im si2">ick unless these are the outcomes that he wants, and no one di2">ies wi2">ithout hi2">is own consent."

i2">If we are meant to be fully i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith and as i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it, then we need to shi2">ift our i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion away from thi2">is "sufferi2">ing self". We can't BE a self that suffers i2">if we are permanently holy. We can't be a self that i2">is vulnerable and attackable, or fri2">ightenable, or capable of bei2">ing gui2">ilty, or of experi2">ienci2">ing loss and gri2">ief. Whoever or whatever i2">is havi2">ing that stuff, i2">it can't be me or mi2">ine. And i2">if i2">it's there and i2">I'm i2">immersed i2">in i2">it so much that i2">I feel li2">ike "i2">its mi2">ine", i2">I am unconsci2">ious and have i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith ego, and have forgotten who i2">I am.

And that really bri2">ings i2">into questi2">ion, who are you really? Perhaps you are bei2">ing FAR more ego than you thought. Perhaps every si2">ingle day you are i2">immersed i2">in egoti2">ism and sufferi2">ing and unhappi2">iness. Perhaps your whole sense of i2">identi2">ity i2">is lost and wrapped up i2">in li2">ivi2">ing AS an egoi2">ic enti2">ity, seei2">ing yourself as havi2">ing emoti2">ions that are i2">impossi2">ible i2">in reali2">ity, as havi2">ing forms of sufferi2">ing that cannot affect your soul.

Perhaps you are much more ego-i2">identi2">ifi2">ied than you ever thought possi2">ible, and perhaps your whole sense of self, of who and what you are, i2">is much more out of touch wi2">ith your real self than you thoughts. Perhaps your real self i2">is on some whole other level or di2">imensi2">ion, and perhaps thi2">is self you're bei2">ing every day i2">is the self that i2">is the "not me that lurks i2">in the dark corner". To your real self, made of li2">ight, your everyday sufferi2">ing self i2">IS tryi2">ing to be an ego. Who you have become, i2">is not who you are.

Are we ready to i2">identi2">ify fully wi2">ith spi2">iri2">it, stop seei2">ing ourselves as capable of sufferi2">ing, bri2">ingi2">ing i2">into questi2">ion ALL ego emoti2">ions and reacti2">ions, and even questi2">ioni2">ing whether we are the self that we thought we were all thi2">is ti2">ime? What i2">if you are not you, and you are not bei2">ing yourself ri2">ight now, and you don't even know who you are?

"There i2">is no statement that the world i2">is more afrai2">id to hear than thi2">is: i2">I do not know the thi2">ing i2">I am, and THEREFORE do not know what i2">I am doi2">ing, where i2">I am, or how to look upon the world and on myself." Yet i2">in thi2">is learni2">ing i2">is salvati2">ion born. And what you are wi2">ill TELL you of i2">Itself."

i2">In my ongoi2">ing explorati2">ion and practi2">ice of performi2">ing heali2">ing mi2">iracles, i2">I gradually chi2">isel away at the reasons why i2">it i2">is or i2">isn't worki2">ing, and gradually refi2">ine the process. i2">I guess i2">it's li2">ike learni2">ing anythi2">ing, li2">ike how to dri2">ive a car or how to si2">ing.

At fi2">irst you do all ki2">inds of thi2">ings that aren't necessary and produce mi2">istakes and problems. Gradually you UN-learn vari2">ious thi2">ings you were doi2">ing that were i2">interferi2">ing.

Lately i2">I'm movi2">ing more towards trusti2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it Hi2">imself to teach me about i2">it, rather than tryi2">ing to the fi2">ind answers i2">in other people's teachi2">ings about i2">it, especi2">ially as i2">I'm gradually seei2">ing more and more i2">inconsi2">istenci2">ies i2">in what other people have sai2">id.

One of the key aspects of mi2">iracle heali2">ing i2">is, apparently, an element of beli2">ief. i2">I've heard people talk about how you must beli2">ieve fi2">irst i2">in order to recei2">ive. i2">It i2">is sai2">id bi2">ibli2">ically that he who asks, beli2">ievi2">ing that he wi2">ill recei2">ive, wi2">ill do so. And thi2">is i2">is also reflected i2">in the Course.

i2">I'm di2">iscoveri2">ing that BELi2">IEVi2">ING that i2">it i2">is TRUE that heali2">ing wi2">ill occur, or i2">indeed, that i2">it HAS occurred (per God), i2">is a key part of thi2">is "procedure".

Previ2">iously, i2">I would attempt to do a mi2">iracle and say vari2">ious thi2">ings and use my hands and so on, wi2">ith some amount of convi2">icti2">ion that i2">it was "possi2">ible" for thi2">is to work. But at the same ti2">ime, i2">I sti2">ill was looki2">ing and wai2">iti2">ing to see i2">IF i2">it was worki2">ing. Thi2">is means focusi2">ing on the presence of si2">igns of change, fi2">irst, i2">instead of focusi2">ing on beli2">ief fi2">irst. i2">It means i2">I'm maki2">ing the error real, i2">instead of overlooki2">ing i2">it.

So i2">if the si2">ickness or problem i2">is the error, or the form of error, and i2">if i2">I'm looki2">ing AT i2">it tryi2">ing to undo i2">it, i2">I've kept i2">it real and am beli2">ievi2">ing the ego's i2">illusi2">ion. Therefore i2">I am not i2">in a mode of forgi2">iveness.

Here i2">I'm fi2">indi2">ing there i2">is a really i2">interesti2">ing, almost double-i2">interpretati2">ion of what the Course says about mi2">iracles and forgi2">iveness. On the one hand there i2">is forgi2">ivi2">ing i2">illusi2">ions for the sake of your own sani2">ity and so on, mi2">ind correcti2">ion, BUT, also i2">it's seemi2">ing more and true that thi2">is APPLi2">IES not only wi2">ithi2">in my li2">ittle body mi2">ind but also "OUT THERE" i2">in the greater mi2">ind.

That means, forgi2">iveness can be appli2">ied externally from my separate self, just as much as i2">internally. That means, there are i2">illusi2">ions of si2">ickness outsi2">ide of my body, as much as there mi2">ight be such thi2">ings i2">insi2">ide. When i2">I see errors (si2">ickness) i2">in someone's body, i2">if i2">I thi2">ink that i2">illusi2">ion i2">is real, i2">I am basi2">ically fai2">ili2">ing to forgi2">ive. i2">If i2">I am to UNDO that i2">illusi2">ion, i2">it i2">isn't goi2">ing to si2">imply mean that i2">I change my percepti2">ion about i2">it wi2">ithi2">in my mi2">ind and i2">it gets fi2">ixed wi2">ithi2">in ME, wi2">ithi2">in the scope of my separate self, but that i2">it i2">is supposed to ALSO get fi2">ixed out there i2">in the larger dream.

The i2">illusi2">ion of si2">ickness i2">in the other person i2">is supposed to get corrected and undone and di2">isappear, just as i2">it would i2">if i2">it were i2">insi2">ide my own form. Therefore, as part of the mi2">iracle-worki2">ing process, whi2">ich appli2">ies Wi2">ITHi2">IN AND Wi2">ITHOUT (whi2">ich are both the same), i2">I need to OVERLOOK the person's si2">ickness by not focusi2">ing on i2">it when i2">I am attempti2">ing to heal them. Thi2">is also means that, as Jesus says, the mi2">iracle i2">is i2">intended to heal BOTH of us and not just my pri2">ivate i2">inner world.

i2">If when i2">I attempt a mi2">iracle wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it, i2">I am looki2">ing not wi2">ith a mi2">indset of beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in truth, but wi2">ith a mi2">indset of beli2">ievi2">ing that the error i2">is i2">in the person's body i2">is real, then i2">I am not goi2">ing to see a mi2">iracle. Thi2">is was somethi2">ing i2">I was getti2">ing wrong, because i2">I felt that i2">IF a mi2">iracle were to happen wi2">ith the person's body, i2">I would actually be SURPRi2">ISED. That's not a good si2">ign. That i2">indi2">icates that i2">I don't REALLY beli2">ieve that i2">it's goi2">ing to happen, and therefore i2">I don't REALLY beli2">ieve i2">in God or that i2">it CAN happen, yet alone that i2">it Wi2">ILL and MUST.

So i2">I've been aski2">ing myself thi2">is questi2">ion, do i2">I REALLY beli2">ieve that thi2">is person's gi2">iven si2">ickness, whatever the target i2">is, do i2">I ACTUALLY beli2">ieve that i2">it really can and wi2">ill be healed? And i2">in thi2">is, i2">I have to be really HONEST wi2">ith myself. And honestly, some of the thi2">ings that i2">I've been tryi2">ing to heal, i2">I di2">id not really beli2">ieve could be healed. Even i2">if i2">I was tryi2">ing fai2">irly earnestly or maki2">ing a fool of myself. Deep down, i2">I wasn't really totally certai2">in or convi2">inced that i2">it would work, i2">I was relyi2">ing more on wi2">ishful thi2">inki2">ing and hope than on fai2">ith and knowi2">ing.

So what happened was, i2">I found myself ready to do a "remote mi2">iracle", on my own wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it, away from a person, and what came to me was that i2">I should not try to heal the thi2">ing i2">I thought i2">I would tackle, because i2">I'm not ready. i2">I don't beli2">ieve i2">it enough. The i2">illusi2">ion of that parti2">icular "error" bei2">ing real i2">is too strong at the moment, so i2">I don't have enough beli2">ief that i2">it can be healed. So i2">I was di2">irected by Holy Spi2">iri2">it to work on a di2">ifferent i2">issue, whi2">ich he speci2">ifi2">ically named. And i2">I noti2">iced that i2">I FELT that i2">I beli2">ieved i2">it WAS possi2">ible for thi2">is other i2">issue to be healed. i2">I'm not sure i2">if i2">its to do wi2">ith the order of di2">iffi2">iculty i2">issue - hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions, that for some reason i2">I have less baggage and blockage relati2">ing to that parti2">icular ai2">ilment, but i2">it seemed more POSSi2">IBLE for me to beli2">ieve i2">in i2">its heali2">ing. So i2">I di2">id that.

And then Holy Spi2">iri2">it told me to "cancel". So i2">I di2">id a forgi2">iveness process canceli2">ing the beli2">ief that anythi2">ing about the si2">ickness was true or real. Gradually Holy Spi2">iri2">it's energi2">ies flowed more and more i2">intensely, and i2">I found myself BELi2">IEVi2">ING that i2">it was happeni2">ing. That the heali2">ing WAS bei2">ing recei2">ived, and that i2">it WAS fully gi2">iven. And i2">I di2">id not feel li2">ike i2">I would be surpri2">ised i2">if i2">it worked. i2">Instead, i2">I felt that i2">it was, as Holy Spi2">iri2">it then sai2">id, "done." He sai2">id i2">it was "fully gi2">iven."

Beli2">ievi2">ing that the heali2">ing can and wi2">ill be done i2">is very i2">important, because i2">it's the same thi2">ing as you beli2">ievi2">ing that the forgi2">iven mi2">ind i2">is true and that the person i2">is i2">innocent i2">in thi2">is area. Just as much as i2">if i2">it appli2">ied to myself. i2">It's not so much i2">I thi2">ink that the beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in i2">it i2">itself gi2">ives i2">it any ki2">ind of power, BUT, that i2">I am placi2">ing my fai2">ith and loyalty SOMEWHERE, so ei2">ither i2">I am beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in the truth of God's heali2">ing, OR i2">I must be beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in the ego's li2">ie of si2">ickness. So whi2">ich i2">is i2">it goi2">ing to be? i2">I need to ACTUALLY BELi2">IEVE that God's truth i2">is the truth and that, therefore, there MUST be heali2">ing.

i2">I thi2">ink i2">I'm on to somethi2">ing.

Jesus asks us to be responsi2">ible for everythi2">ing we experi2">ience. Part of thi2">is entai2">ils bei2">ing responsi2">ible for all of your feeli2">ings and reacti2">ions.

Thi2">is sounds si2">imple enough but you mi2">ight not reali2">ize how much you don't do thi2">is. i2">I know i2">I am just starti2">ing to fi2">ind out.

Most of the feeli2">ings we have are 'caused by', or are reacti2">ions to, thi2">ings outsi2">ide of us. External causes. These external causes seem to have power over us. Anythi2">ing that happens i2">in the world seems to be 'reali2">ity', and what i2">is real i2">is true. So as anythi2">ing happens, i2">it's as though i2">it i2">is a statement of what i2">is true. For example, i2">if someone attacks you, and i2">if i2">it's a statement of what i2">is true, then i2">its sayi2">ing "i2">it's true that you deserve to be attacked".

Left unchecked, your ego wi2">ill take thi2">is suggesti2">ion and agree wi2">ith i2">it. "Yes, i2">it's true that i2">I deserve to be attacked", i2">Ie that you don't deserve love. And i2">in order for you to ali2">ign wi2">ith that, you'll attempt to CHANGE YOURSELF i2">into a di2">ifferent i2">identi2">ity. You'll try to make yourself i2">into "a self that i2">isn't loveable". And what wi2">ill that feel li2">ike? i2">It'll feel li2">ike gui2">ilt, li2">ike unworthi2">iness, li2">ike sadness, li2">ike shame.

So 'reacti2">ions' are actually your attempt to comply wi2">ith the power that an external cause i2">is tryi2">ing to have over you, whi2">ich i2">is tryi2">ing to di2">ictate and change what you are. So i2">if you go along wi2">ith i2">it, you wi2">ill 're-act' by acti2">ing as i2">if you are what i2">it tells you you are. i2">In other words, you attempt to be an EFFECT of thi2">is external cause. By bei2">ing the effect, you are 'affected by' i2">it. And thi2">is doesn't feel good to turn yourself i2">into a condi2">iti2">ion that runs agai2">inst your true nature.

You'll also noti2">ice that when you have these reacti2">ions, these effects, whi2">ich accounts for most emoti2">ional responses other than real love or joy, the way you EXPERi2">IENCE the feeli2">ing entai2">ils a sense that the feeli2">ing i2">isn't just i2">insi2">ide your body. Or that i2">it i2">isn't yours. Because you percei2">ive the feeli2">ing as havi2">ing been caused by somethi2">ing external, the feeli2">ing i2">ITSELF wi2">ill feel li2">ike i2">it i2">is connected to, attached to, and dependent upon that external cause. i2">If that thi2">ing caused you to feel thi2">is way, then the feeli2">ing essenti2">ially "came from" that thi2">ing, and was di2">ictated to you by that thi2">ing. i2">In your awareness, as you have thi2">is reacti2">ive feeli2">ing, you feel li2">ike your feeli2">ing i2">is goi2">ing outsi2">ide your body and projecti2">ing onto that external source, or at least that i2">it i2">is "about" somethi2">ing other than you.

You're very used to thi2">is, so i2">it seems to you that i2">it's completely normal for reacti2">ive 'feeli2">ings' to feel li2">ike they go outsi2">ide your body. Si2">ince you're so used to beli2">ievi2">ing that you are "affected by" external stuff, and that thi2">is upsets you (changes you i2">into an upset person by redefi2">ini2">ing what's true about you), you don't beli2">ieve you are responsi2">ible for your feeli2">ings. i2">It's someone else's fault. Somethi2">ing else i2">is maki2">ing you upset. i2">It's not 'yours'. So qui2">ite li2">iterally you percei2">ive that YOUR OWN FEELi2">INGS are NOT YOUR OWN FEELi2">INGS, that they belong to someone or somethi2">ing else "out there". And that therefore you don't have control over them. And thi2">is makes you i2">into a vi2">icti2">im. Thi2">is also has a lot to do wi2">ith why you block and deny and do not want to feel these feeli2">ings, because you beli2">ieve they are not really yours.

Now, what i2">I'm goi2">ing to suggest i2">is that you need to learn to take full responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for the *experi2">ience* of feeli2">ing. Whatever the feeli2">ing i2">is, no matter who seemed to create i2">it or cause i2">it, you need to OWN i2">IT and own up to the fact that thi2">is i2">is YOUR FEELi2">ING, not someone else's. And that means, thi2">is feeli2">ing i2">is actually i2">INSi2">IDE YOUR BODY and not extendi2">ing out to project i2">into other people as the cause of i2">it. And i2">it also means, these feeli2">ings are not really there BECAUSE OF someone or somethi2">ing else, but BECAUSE OF YOU.

A phrase whi2">ich i2">I've begun to remi2">ind myself wi2">ith i2">is:

"i2">I am responsi2">ible for these feeli2">ings".

So no matter what's goi2">ing on, i2">if i2">I'm feeli2">ing upset that my nei2">ighbors are maki2">ing a lot of noi2">ise.. i2">I have to say, "i2">I am responsi2">ible for these feeli2">ings". i2">I'm not havi2">ing these upset feeli2">ings 'because of' my nei2">ighbors. i2">I'm havi2">ing these upset feeli2">ings because i2">I AM THE ONE who i2">is havi2">ing them, whi2">ich means i2">I am the cause of them, whi2">ich means they come from ME. They're mi2">ine. i2">If i2">I were to assert that i2">I'm bei2">ing caused to be upset by my noi2">isy nei2">ighbors, then i2">I would have to beli2">ieve my feeli2">ings are caused by them, so my nei2">ighbors are responsi2">ible for my feeli2">ings, and not me.

Or how about, your parent doesn't love you enough and you come to beli2">ieve i2">it means you're unworthy (because you beli2">ieve they're treati2">ing you wi2">ith the truth so that must i2">imply you don't deserve love). i2">If you feel hurt because of them, by them, or they caused i2">it, then you wi2">ill not be responsi2">ible. So long as you di2">isown how you feel, and blame the cause of the feeli2">ing on them, you are stuck. So really... your feeli2">ing of hurt or abandonment or unlove or unworthi2">iness i2">is NOT because of them. i2">It's NOT them that caused i2">it, otherwi2">ise that would mean these are thei2">ir feeli2">ings. Yes, you tri2">ied to take on thei2">ir feeli2">ings as your own. But i2">it's not yours. What YOU are feeli2">ing i2">is YOUR feeli2">ings and YOU are the one choosi2">ing to feel thi2">is way.

"i2">I am responsi2">ible for these feeli2">ings". Thi2">is frees you. i2">It affi2">irms that no matter what you feel, that feeli2">ing i2">is i2">IN YOU, because i2">it i2">is YOURS. i2">It's confi2">ined to your body. And as you clai2">im thi2">is responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity and detach from blami2">ing i2">it on someone outsi2">ide of you, you'll noti2">ice somethi2">ing odd happens.

You'll start to become aware that no matter what, no matter how severe ci2">ircumstances are, no matter who i2">is doi2">ing what 'to you', your feeli2">ings are YOUR responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. Whi2">ich means you cannot project the onto anyone else or blame anyone else. Thi2">is i2">is a whole new level of responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. To walk around i2">in thi2">is world wi2">ith all ki2">inds of stuff happeni2">ing and people doi2">ing stuff and to NOT see them as havi2">ing the POWER to CAUSE YOU to feel a certai2">in way. Thi2">is i2">is a step toward i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity.

Thi2">is takes praci2">ice, mai2">inly because we're so used to bei2">ing vi2">icti2">ims and so used to tyi2">ing our feeli2">ings to other people and events. i2">I have to own up to the fact that no matter what i2">I'm feeli2">ing or 'why', i2">I am ONLY feeli2">ing i2">it because i2">I WANT TO and because i2">I'M CHOOSi2">ING TO. Otherwi2">ise i2">I am a vi2">icti2">im. These are MY feeli2">ings, and i2">it's nobody else's fault.

The odd thi2">ing that happens, and i2">I've found thi2">is qui2">ite unexpected, i2">is i2">IF and when i2">I clai2">im responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for what i2">I'm feeli2">ing, qui2">ite often i2">I suddenly start laughi2">ing, or the feeli2">ing di2">isappears really qui2">ickly. i2">If i2">I see that thi2">is feeli2">ing i2">is enti2">irely wi2">ithi2">in me and has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith anyone else, i2">it has nowhere to go. Thi2">is percepti2">ive change of 'bei2">ing responsi2">ible' prevents me from buyi2">ing i2">into vi2">icti2">imhood, or i2">into beli2">ievi2">ing that someone external 'caused thi2">is'. Thi2">is SETS ME FREE. i2">It completely undoes the foundati2">ion of vi2">icti2">imhood, whi2">ich largely undoes the foundati2">ion of the feeli2">ing i2">itself, whi2">ich really was just a mi2">istaken thought or atti2">itude.

i2">I've also noti2">iced somethi2">ing else very wei2">ird. A couple of ti2">imes now i2">I have been i2">in si2">ituati2">ions where, normally, i2">I would have a 're-acti2">ion'. Li2">ike getti2">ing cut off by a dri2">iver i2">in traffi2">ic. i2">I noti2">iced i2">I was 'supposed to' or normally would react i2">in some ki2">ind of anger or skapegoati2">ing. But i2">instead, i2">I di2">idn't do anythi2">ing. i2">I stayed responsi2">ible, whi2">ich meant stayi2">ing responsi2">ible for my own feeli2">ings, whi2">ich meant that person di2">idn't have the power to cause me to feel di2">ifferently. And i2">I watched as my feeli2">ings.. ... di2">idn't change. i2">It was li2">ike, i2">I'd swi2">itched off 'reacti2">ing'. Same event sti2">ill happeni2">ing, but no reacti2">ion. Hmm.

There i2">is somethi2">ing else odd that i2">I've been experi2">ienci2">ing. i2">If all my feeli2">ings are my own and i2">I am feeli2">ing them BY CHOi2">ICE and not really because of or at the effect of anyone else, then i2">I must be qui2">ite li2">iterally walki2">ing around i2">INVENTi2">ING feeli2">ings on-demand, just spontaneously, i2">in order to take the opportuni2">ity to try to scapegoat, but nevertheless creati2">ing these feeli2">ings for NO REAL REASON. All of my supposed re-acti2">ions are really just me choosi2">ing to feel somethi2">ing at a gi2">iven ti2">ime, all on my own, all wi2">ithi2">in myself. i2">It's got nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith anyone else. Ano i2">if that's the case, then WHY am i2">I doi2">ing that? What's the poi2">int? Maybe i2">I should just stop maki2">ing thi2">is shi2">it up!!

Thi2">is i2">is part of how we show our brother that they have not done anythi2">ing to us, by demonstrati2">ing that WE have not been affected. We haven't been affected because we are not the EFFECT, we are the CAUSE of what we feel. Thi2">is happened to me one other ti2">ime too and i2">I found i2">it remarkable that, even i2">in a si2">ituati2">ion whi2">ich would have 'called for' a bi2">ig reacti2">ion, there was no reacti2">ion at all. i2">It's li2">ike bei2">ing unplugged from the story. Bei2">ing i2">immune and i2">invulnerable. i2">It seems li2">ike CHEATi2">ING! Lol .... But i2">it works.

i2">I know i2">I wi2">ill keep practi2">ici2">ing thi2">is and wi2">ill conti2">inue to become more responsi2">ible for what i2">I am and what i2">I feel. i2">I encourage you to do the same.

"You can do anythi2">ing i2">I ask. i2">I have asked you to perform mi2">iracles, and have made i2">it clear that mi2">iracles are natural, correcti2">ive, heali2">ing and uni2">iversal. There i2">is nothi2">ing they cannot do, but they cannot be performed i2">in the spi2">iri2">it of doubt or fear.

When you are afrai2">id of anythi2">ing, you are acknowledgi2">ing i2">its power to hurt you. Remember that where your heart i2">is, there i2">is your treasure also. You beli2">ieve i2">in what you value. i2">If you are afrai2">id, you wi2">ill i2">inevi2">itably value wrongly, and by endowi2">ing all thoughts wi2">ith equal power wi2">ill i2">inevi2">itably destroy peace." - ACi2">IM

i2">I am quoti2">ing thi2">is not so much for the "ti2">ip" that mi2">iracle-worki2">ing requi2">ires you to not be i2">in a state of fear, and that mi2">iracles can do li2">iterally anythi2">ing, but to rei2">inforce the theme of my posts today that when you beli2">ieve somethi2">ing outsi2">ide of you has power over you, i2">it Wi2">ILL produce a state of fear.

You can di2">iffuse thi2">is fear si2">imply be affi2">irmi2">ing the ways i2">in whi2">ich you are NOT at the effect of what i2">is outsi2">ide of you.

i2">I am not affected by that person.

That person has no power over me.

They are not doi2">ing anythi2">ing to do.

i2">I am not doi2">ing anythi2">ing to them.

They are not the cause of what i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing.

i2">I am not causi2">ing them to experi2">ience anythi2">ing.

Nei2">ither of us are affecti2">ing each other i2">in any way.

i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im of that person.

That person i2">is not a vi2">icti2">im of me.

i2">I am not bei2">ing vi2">icti2">imi2">ized by that person.

i2">I am not vi2">icti2">imi2">izi2">ing that person.

i2">I am completely unaffected by that person.

That person i2">is completely unaffected by me.

i2">I am completely free from the i2">influence of that person.

That person i2">is completely free from bei2">ing i2">influenced by me.

That person has no power over me.

i2">I have no power agai2">inst that person.

We are both equally i2">innocent and holy.

Nei2">ither of us has done anythi2">ing to each other.

They have not done anythi2">ing to me at all.

i2">I have not done anythi2">ing to them at all.

etc.

Guaranteed, thi2">is wi2">ill deflate your fear i2">in a very short space of ti2">ime because i2">it wi2">ill change your percepti2">ion away from the ego-dependency of "somethi2">ing out there i2">is causi2">ing me", and put the focus of where the cause i2">is back i2">into your own mi2">ind.

You are not a vi2">icti2">im of the world you see.

You are not at the effect of the world you see.

You CANNOT BE AFRAi2">ID i2">if you do not percei2">ive yourself as bei2">ing at the effect of the world. To be affected by the world i2">is to be puni2">ished by the world, due to you bei2">ing gui2">ilty. You have no reason to be afrai2">id i2">if you are NOT gui2">ilty.

"God" i2">is the most frequently occurri2">ing regular word i2">in ACi2">IM. i2">It occurs 4687 ti2">imes i2">in the Urtext edi2">iti2">ion. You could practi2">ically say that A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles i2">is also A Course i2">in God.

Starti2">ing i2">in a state of separati2">ion from God, our whole path i2">is really one of rei2">integrati2">ing i2">into God and letti2">ing God i2">into our mi2">inds and awareness, restori2">ing us to a state i2">in whi2">ich we are ONE wi2">ith God and SHARE everythi2">ing wi2">ith hi2">im.

The ACi2">IM workbook has a surpri2">isi2">ingly hi2">igh number of lessons whose ti2">itles i2">include the word "God." You can see a trend of restori2">ing your relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith God and shari2">ing everythi2">ing wi2">ith hi2">im. Here i2">is a selecti2">ion:

"My only functi2">ion i2">is the one God gave me."

"There i2">is no wi2">ill but God's."

"i2">I am under no laws but God's."

"i2">I am as God created me."

"God's wi2">ill for me i2">is perfect happi2">iness."

"i2">I share God's wi2">ill for happi2">iness for me."

"God's peace and joy are mi2">ine."

"i2">I rest i2">in God."

"Let me remember i2">I am one wi2">ith God."

"i2">In qui2">iet i2">I recei2">ive God's word today."

"There i2">is no love but God's."

"My mi2">ind holds only what i2">I thi2">ink wi2">ith God."

"i2">I walk wi2">ith God i2">in perfect holi2">iness."

"i2">I am entrusted wi2">ith the gi2">ifts of God."

"There i2">is one li2">ife, and that i2">I share wi2">ith God."

"There i2">is no cruelty i2">in God and none i2">in me."

"God i2">is but love, and therefore so am i2">I."

"The name of God i2">is my i2">inheri2">itance."

"i2">I want the peace of God."

"The peace of God i2">is shi2">ini2">ing i2">in me now."

"i2">I feel the love of God wi2">ithi2">in me now."

"i2">I choose the joy of God i2">instead of pai2">in."

"i2">I am the holy Son of God hi2">imself."

"i2">I have a functi2">ion God would have me fi2">ill."

"There i2">is no peace except the peace of God."

"i2">I am not a body. i2">I am free. For i2">I am sti2">ill as God created me."

"God i2">is wi2">ith me. i2">I li2">ive and breathe i2">in hi2">im."

"God i2">is my li2">ife. i2">I have no li2">ife but hi2">is."

"God i2">is my father, and he loves hi2">is son."

"God i2">is my father, and hi2">is son loves hi2">im."

"God has condemned me not. No more do i2">I."

"Now i2">I wi2">ill seek and fi2">ind the peace of God."

"i2">I gi2">ive my li2">ife to God to run today."

"Now would i2">I be as God created me."

"Thi2">is day i2">is God's. i2">It i2">is my gi2">ift to hi2">im."

"Let every voi2">ice but God's be sti2">ill i2">in me."

"God i2">is the only goal i2">I have today."

"Let me remember that my goal i2">is God."

"God i2">is my refuge and securi2">ity."

"i2">I am surrounded by the love of God."

"My heart i2">is beati2">ing i2">in the peace of God."

"The sti2">illness of the peace of God i2">is mi2">ine."

"The word of God i2">is gi2">iven me to speak."

"i2">I am forever an effect of God."

"Today the peace of God envelops me, and i2">I forget all thi2">ings except hi2">is love."

Thi2">is i2">is a bi2">ig lesson for me and everyone: How to love all the ti2">ime. i2">It's natural, but our di2">ivi2">ine nature to always love and express love has been blocked by fear, attack thoughts, gri2">ievances, hatred etc.

When other people seem to be lovi2">ing and we're "getti2">ing" somethi2">ing out of the relati2">ionshi2">ip, i2">ie speci2">ialness, we open up some of the flood gates and allow "exclusi2">ive love" to go towards the person.

But when the person fai2">ils to love you, i2">is angry or upset wi2">ith you or treats you poorly, there i2">is great temptati2">ion then i2">in the ego to si2">imply use i2">it as a way to prove that someone doesn't deserve your love. Then you form a gri2">ievance, hold onto attack thoughts, fai2">il to heal, and stop bei2">ing lovi2">ing. i2">In order to deny love to others, you have to block i2">it, whi2">ich deni2">ies i2">it to yourself! You cannot love and hate at the same ti2">ime!

Thi2">is turns then i2">into condi2">iti2">ional love, whi2">ich si2">imply means you wi2">ill only love others when they are doi2">ing somethi2">ing that you want or bei2">ing a certai2">in way. Parti2">icularly when they are seemi2">ing to be lovi2">ing toward you or gi2">ivi2">ing you what you thi2">ink you want or need or lack.

We have to actually wean ourselves off of condi2">iti2">ional love i2">in order to reach atonement. That means that we have to recogni2">ize that our "lovi2">ing" or expressi2">ing must not be ti2">ied to external condi2">iti2">ions of any ki2">ind, causes of any ki2">ind, or people of any ki2">ind. That means that we don't love i2">in "reacti2">ion" or response to others, but we si2">imply love because i2">it's what we are and how we want to express. i2">It's a deci2">isi2">ion.

"Teach only love for that i2">is what you are" says i2">it all.

i2">I've started to see gli2">impses of thi2">is. To refuse to be unlovi2">ing even i2">in a si2">ituati2">ion whi2">ich seems i2">it would warrant defenses or reacti2">ions. To si2">imply choose... i2">I'm only goi2">ing to love ri2">ight now. And to then love, to radi2">iate love, to be love. Not because of the person, not as a defense, not as a reacti2">ion, nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith the ego at all.

Then you fi2">ind out that your wi2">illi2">ingness to love i2">is not *dependent* on other people or the state they are i2">in. And at fi2">irst thi2">is seems crazy, that you would choose to love i2">in spi2">ite of appearances or si2">ituati2">ions that seem to "call for" some other response. Thi2">is expressi2">ing of love OVERRi2">IDES the ego's laws i2">in the si2">ituati2">ion, i2">ignores the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions, forgets/forgi2">ives gri2">ievances and has unexpected benefi2">its to yourself.

i2">In a si2">ituati2">ion, i2">I deci2">ided i2">I am only goi2">ing to love. So i2">I stood there and loved. i2">I felt love i2">in my heart area radi2">iati2">ing out. i2">I di2">idn't know i2">I was able to radi2">iate thi2">is love. As i2">I di2">id thi2">is, the other person was not happy at all. My deci2">idi2">ing to love was not i2">in response to thei2">ir ego. And so i2">it seemed to me there wasn't really a "reason" to love, other than that... i2">it sure felt good. Certai2">inly better than enteri2">ing i2">into false empathy.

The really i2">interesti2">ing thi2">ing i2">is, i2">if i2">I choose to love, to extend love, the love expresses, li2">ike i2">it goes out and radi2">iates and "sends" love. i2">In thi2">is sendi2">ing, somethi2">ing really i2">intri2">igui2">ing happens. i2">I share i2">in the love, i2">I feel the love, and i2">I become more sane. Love i2">is the "natural nature" of a sane mi2">ind. i2">It qui2">ickly corrects mi2">istaken percepti2">ion. i2">It's li2">ike the sun comes out and the li2">ight i2">is shi2">ini2">ing and everythi2">ing i2">is put i2">into i2">its proper place.

i2">I also noti2">ice when i2">I choose to love, just spontaneously, not as an ego reacti2">ion - to wi2">ill to love - the extendi2">ing of that love allows me to recei2">ive i2">it. *i2">I* feel loved. By gi2">ivi2">ing love, love comes to me and through me. i2">I was wai2">iti2">ing a long ti2">ime for a certai2">in person to be more lovi2">ing, and i2">it wasn't unti2">il i2">I deci2">ided to just love them that *i2">I* experi2">ienced the love that i2">I thought THEY were supposed to be provi2">idi2">ing.

Thi2">is goes back to the very basi2">ic lesson (seek and do not fi2">ind) that when we beli2">ieve that we are lacki2">ing love, we wi2">ill shi2">ift responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for love onto someone else and expect them to do the lovi2">ing for us. Then they ei2">ither wi2">ill or wi2">ill not, and when they wi2">ill not, we stay i2">in a lack of love. So we have to learn the di2">iffi2">icult lesson, that we cannot get other people to love us and we are not SUPPOSED to. You can and wi2">ill only experi2">ience the recei2">ivi2">ing of love, truly, when YOU LOVE.

When YOU choose to love, you i2">instantly enter i2">into love's extensi2">ion and expressi2">ion, you feel the love, you become part of the love. "To have all, gi2">ive all to all." Thi2">is i2">is a basi2">ic law of God, that i2">in order to have somethi2">ing you have to gi2">ive i2">it. i2">If you are not havi2">ing somethi2">ing, i2">it's because you are not gi2">ivi2">ing i2">it.

i2">If you do not have love and others don't seem to be fi2">illi2">ing the voi2">id for you, i2">it's because you are not lovi2">ing enough. And when you love enough, you don't NEED anyone to love you FOR you, because YOU are joi2">ini2">ing i2">in uncondi2">iti2">ional love and extendi2">ing God's love. Love comes through you, and you experi2">ience i2">it.

i2">It boi2">ils down to thi2">is si2">imple state, whi2">ich i2">I presume i2">is what i2">it wi2">ill be li2">ike i2">in Atonement, where you si2">imply love all the ti2">ime. You express love all the ti2">ime. You radi2">iate i2">it, flow i2">it, extend i2">it. i2">It comes out through you from God and from your soul. And as i2">it goes out, i2">it has mi2">iraculous power. And thi2">is lovi2">ing power actually has somethi2">ing to do wi2">ith heali2">ing and mi2">iracle worki2">ing.

Love has thi2">is property that, unless i2">it i2">is gi2">iven or shared, i2">it does not exi2">ist. Love i2">isn't a "state" that's stati2">ic. God i2">isn't stati2">ic. God i2">is an extender and creator. "Love goes out because of what i2">it i2">is." "Di2">ivi2">ine abstracti2">ion takes joy i2">in appli2">icati2">ion."

Love HAS to be shared. "God di2">id not wi2">ill to be alone." When i2">it i2">is not bei2">ing radi2">iated and shared and Gi2">IVEN, i2">it does not have any radi2">iance, and does not shi2">ine, and has no presence. That means i2">it i2">is dead. Death i2">is the deni2">ial of extensi2">ion of love, whi2">ich i2">is also li2">ife.

So i2">in order to be ali2">ive, to be i2">in resurrecti2">ion, to reach atonement, and to be happy, we have to remove these blocks to love SO THAT we can once agai2">in resume our NATURE of always extendi2">ing, always lovi2">ing, no matter what, no matter who, no matter what ti2">ime or the reason. That means that you bei2">ing lovi2">ing really has NOTHi2">ING to do wi2">ith anyone else. You just be lovi2">ing because you ARE love. You can't help i2">it. "Teach only love for that i2">is what you are".

So that means bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to love and extend love i2">in ALL Si2">ITUATi2">IONS regardless of the si2">ituati2">ion, or who i2">it i2">is, or how upset they are. And the reason you love really has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith the other person. You si2">imply do i2">it because i2">it's natural, healthy, you are wi2">illi2">ing to, and i2">it feels great.

i2">I thought i2">I was forgi2">ivi2">ing someone because i2">I was doi2">ing forgi2">iveness processes about them. But... i2">I di2">idn't really get to a poi2">int where i2">I was LOVi2">ING them. THAT i2">is the healed state that i2">is the goal to reach wi2">ith forgi2">iveness. i2">If i2">I am not lovi2">ing the person, li2">iterally, the i2">I must sti2">ill have some ki2">ind of gri2">ievance or block to love, therefore am not recei2">ivi2">ing i2">it, because i2">I am not extendi2">ing i2">it. And feeli2">ing "unlovi2">ing" unfortunately automati2">ically means you wi2">ill also feel "unloved".

Love comes from wi2">ithi2">in, and i2">it extends outward to others. i2">It radi2">iates naturally when i2">it i2">is not obstructed. i2">It also contai2">ins wi2">illi2">ingness because unwi2">illi2">ingness i2">is unnatural and everyone naturally wants to share love to i2">increase thei2">ir joy. "God, who encompasses all bei2">ing, nevertheless created separate bei2">ings who have everythi2">ing i2">indi2">ivi2">idually (love) and want to share i2">it to i2">increase thei2">ir joy."

That means i2">if you want to feel the love, you have to BE the love. You have to gi2">ive the love. And that doesn't mean speci2">ial love, or sacri2">ifi2">ice, or loss. i2">It doesn't mean subservi2">ience or reacti2">ion or slavery or bei2">ing carpeti2">ing. i2">It means you love because YOU WANT TO, i2">IN SPi2">ITE OF anyone else. And then you naturally bri2">ing that love to others si2">imply because i2">it serves BOTH of you. That i2">is the golden rule. What appli2">ies to you appli2">ies to them.

Love fi2">irst. Bei2">ing loved i2">is secondary and automati2">ic. Tryi2">ing to be loved fi2">irst blocks bei2">ing loved.

Thi2">is means then we have to learn to decouple or di2">isconnect "whether we wi2">ill love" or "when we wi2">ill love" from anythi2">ing that other people are doi2">ing. Even i2">if other people are stressi2">ing out and upset and angry or whatever. We have to deci2">ide, i2">I, by myself, wi2">ith God, am goi2">ing to love ri2">ight now, regardless of anyone else, even i2">if that someone else i2">is someone close to you.

And that means you have to clai2">im the responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity, freedom, joy and pleasure of LOVi2">ING for YOURSELF, whi2">ich i2">is the same thi2">ing as accepti2">ing atonement for yourself. i2">It's your ri2">ight to love and experi2">ience love. i2">It's your i2">inheri2">itance.

Everythi2">ing i2">is always shared. The separati2">ion from God i2">is not "total", by whi2">ich i2">I mean we never FULLY separated. We tri2">ied to, we made i2">illusi2">ions of i2">it, and we pushed i2">it to an extreme, but we were never able to leave the womb of God.

What that means i2">is that even though thi2">ings i2">in thi2">is world seem very separate, they are not qui2">ite separate. Thi2">is i2">is why bodi2">ies share the same envi2">ironment, and why you can sti2">ill communi2">icate. We never were able to make a world totally opposi2">ite to the exi2">istence of reali2">ity, because that would mean totally not exi2">isti2">ing at all. And even the ego depends on God, and on your mi2">ind.

Therefore mi2">inds are sti2">ill joi2">ined, and thoughts are sti2">ill shared, and everythi2">ing you thi2">ink i2">is experi2">ienced by everyone.

"i2">I am not alone i2">in experi2">ienci2">ing the effects of my thoughts." "There are no pri2">ivate thoughts."

Thi2">is doesn't merely mean that you actually have pri2">ivate thoughts that no-one else ever hears, but that these thoughts aren't real. i2">It actually means that even your ego thoughts are heard by others.

You can prove thi2">is out, for example, i2">if you are angry at someone and you hurl negati2">ivi2">ity at them from a di2">istance, the next ti2">ime you encounter them you may fi2">ind them to be a bi2">it 'off' wi2">ith you. i2">It's because on some level they li2">iterally di2">id hear and recei2">ive your broadcast. You can't actually thi2">ink poorly about anyone wi2">ithout sendi2">ing that to them.

i2">I've also found as an empathi2">ic person that the sli2">ightest thought about anyone or anythi2">ing teleports the mi2">inds to that person or locati2">ion, at least i2">in part. Your personali2">ity or 'energy' goes wi2">ith i2">it, and shows up there. i2">If someone thi2">inks about a certai2">in object i2">in a room for example thei2">ir mi2">ind actually presents i2">itself at the locati2">ion of that object, and i2">it becomes surrounded wi2">ith thei2">ir 'vi2">ibes'. They are tuni2">ing i2">into i2">it, especi2">ially gi2">iven that everythi2">ing i2">is made of thought anyway.

i2">I had a parti2">icularly extreme experi2">ience of thi2">is some years ago, whi2">ich i2">I have not attempted to repeat. i2">I was tryi2">in to manage my overwhelmi2">ing empathy, si2">ince i2">I kept pi2">icki2">ing up everyone's energi2">ies. i2">I experi2">imented by seei2">ing what would happen i2">if i2">I tri2">ied to stay enti2">irely wi2">ithi2">in myself, si2">ince goi2">ing wi2">ithi2">in seemed to have somethi2">ing to do wi2">ith stayi2">ing out of other people's stuff.

So i2">I focused on not broadcasti2">ing anythi2">ing, mentally or emoti2">ionally or energeti2">ically. i2">I held myself back, whi2">ich probably was not really a healthy thi2">ing to do. The unexpected result was that by not transmi2">itti2">ing all the ti2">ime, i2">I became very recepti2">ive. And i2">I started to li2">iterally hear the thoughts of the people around me. Thi2">is was happeni2">ing whi2">ile i2">I was at work, and i2">I could hear what the people were thi2">inki2">ing si2">ilently, but at a volume at least as loud as thei2">ir spoken voi2">ices.

As i2">I walked home from work that day, i2">I walked past a guy that seemed somewhat broodi2">ing or angry, who di2">id not want to look me i2">in the eye as he passed. But very unexpectedly, i2">I was suddenly heari2">ing everythi2">ing he thought. And even more unexpectedly, he was basi2">ically launchi2">ing as much abusi2">ive i2">insult at me as he possi2">ibly could muster, calli2">ing me as many swearwords as you can i2">imagi2">ine i2">in successi2">ion. Outwardly and physi2">ically he sai2">id nothi2">ing, but i2">in hi2">is mi2">ind he was attacki2">ing the whole ti2">ime. Apparently thi2">is was some strategy he was usi2">ing to deal wi2">ith hi2">is i2">issues or somethi2">ing.

For me that was somewhat di2">isturbi2">ing and shocki2">ing, that thi2">is person's pri2">ivate thoughts were bei2">ing broadcast so loudly, but also of such a vi2">ile nature. i2">It mi2">ight be perhaps a good thi2">ing that most of the ti2">ime we are not tuned i2">into heari2">ing these thoughts because we'd probably be li2">ivi2">ing i2">in a very di2">ifferent vi2">iew of the world i2">if we di2">id. That sai2">id, perhaps we can bri2">ing li2">ight to troubled mi2">inds, i2">if we are a on the ball.

"The i2">idea for today i2">is obvi2">iously the reason why your seei2">ing does not affect you alone."

"Today we are agai2">in emphasi2">izi2">ing the fact that mi2">inds are joi2">ined. Thi2">is i2">is rarely a wholly welcome i2">idea at fi2">irst, si2">ince i2">it seems to carry wi2">ith i2">it an enormous sense of responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity, and may even be regarded as an "i2">invasi2">ion of pri2">ivacy." Yet i2">it i2">is a fact that there are no pri2">ivate thoughts. Despi2">ite your i2">ini2">iti2">ial resi2">istance to thi2">is i2">idea, you wi2">ill yet understand that i2">it must be true i2">if salvati2">ion i2">is possi2">ible at all. And salvati2">ion must be possi2">ible because i2">it i2">is the Wi2">ill of God."

i2">If i2">I'm afrai2">id or anxi2">ious, and i2">I want to do somethi2">ing about i2">it, i2">I wi2">ill probably start aski2">ing myself "why am i2">I afrai2">id?"

My ego beli2">ieves that aski2">ing thi2">is questi2">ion wi2">ill help me to fi2">ind the cause of i2">it, and that i2">I mi2">ight then be able to fi2">ix the problem.

But what's goi2">ing to happen i2">is, i2">I'll start searchi2">ing for causes. i2">If i2">I seem to fi2">ind a possi2">ible cause, i2">it's goi2">ing to tell me "the fear i2">is caused by..." But no matter what i2">it says, i2">it i2">is not really the truth.

Every cause of fear that we thi2">ink i2">is the cause of i2">it, i2">is not the cause. Fear i2">is not caused by somethi2">ing happeni2">ing to us. But i2">it seems to ari2">ise at the same ti2">ime as percei2">ivi2">ing there's somethi2">ing happeni2">ing to us, or threateni2">ing to happen.

i2">If thi2">is.... then that's goi2">ing to happen. i2">If i2">I do thi2">is.... that mi2">ight happen. But i2">it's sti2">ill me percei2">ivi2">ing and i2">imagi2">ini2">ing the si2">ituati2">ion and creati2">ing the fear.

i2">I'll thi2">ink the fear i2">is caused by the 'thi2">ing' that threatens me, but the thi2">ing that threatens me i2">is not really the cause of fear. So long as i2">I percei2">ive that there i2">is a threat, there Wi2">ILL be fear. i2">I can't keep the percepti2">ion of the threat and get ri2">id of the fear. i2">I have to change my percepti2">ion.

The reason i2">I am afrai2">id i2">is because i2">I am choosi2">ing to be afrai2">id. i2">I am choosi2">ing fear by choosi2">ing to see myself vi2">icti2">imi2">ized and threatened. i2">I THEN percei2">ive the threat and experi2">ience the fear, but nei2">ither i2">is the cause of each other.

i2">I am afrai2">id because i2">I am usi2">ing fear to deny God. i2">I am afrai2">id because i2">I beli2">ieve fear i2">is a trustworthy gui2">ide that tells me the truth. i2">I'm afrai2">id because i2">I want to i2">invent a reason not to be happy and awake. i2">I'm afrai2">id because i2">it allows me to have an ego.

i2">It would seem fear i2">is stoppi2">ing me from doi2">ing what i2">I want, but really fear i2">is an excuse, a made-up reason why not. Wi2">ithout maki2">ing i2">it real, or beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in the threat bei2">ing true, i2">I couldn't be afrai2">id, and then there'd be no reason not to.

Fear i2">is part of the devi2">ice for separati2">ion.

i2">I sti2">ill feel compelled to fi2">ind out "why" i2">I am afrai2">id, but i2">I sense that the "reason" wi2">ill be an i2">illusi2">ion, and that there wi2">ill be deeper dynami2">ics than just that i2">I am afrai2">id. Ulti2">imately i2">it cannot be true that i2">I am afrai2">id, i2">it can only be an i2">illusi2">ion.

As Jesus says, we only become afrai2">id when we thi2">ink that i2">illusi2">ions are real, and that God i2">is not on our si2">ide. i2">I must be i2">incorrectly percei2">ivi2">ing an i2">illusi2">ion as real truth, or wanti2">ing i2">it to be truth, otherwi2">ise there'd be no grounds for fear. i2">If nothi2">ing has really gone wrong and nothi2">ing real can be threatened, there i2">is no basi2">is for fear.

i2">I need to forgi2">ive myself for my self-made fear and undo the need for i2">it.

Let's thi2">ink about projecti2">ion as more li2">ike an energy thi2">ing. You are a li2">ight, and you shi2">ine outward. You broadcast and radi2">iate energy.

i2">It depends what's i2">in you, at the root of the li2">ight, as to what wi2">ill shi2">ine out of you. i2">If there are clouds of darkness at the source, i2">it blocks some of the li2">ight comi2">ing out, and darkness seems to come out i2">instead. But i2">if the li2">ight source i2">is free of blockages, the li2">ight shi2">ines bri2">ightly and strongly.

Another way to thi2">ink of the blockages i2">is as fi2">ilters. They fi2">ilter the li2">ight. The more opaque they seem to be the less li2">ight permeates through. And di2">ifferent ki2">inds of fi2">ilters block di2">ifferent frequenci2">ies and "color" the li2">ight. Anger mi2">ight produce a red li2">ight, maybe fear produces a dark green li2">ight, and perhaps gui2">ilt i2">is orange.

Thi2">is li2">ight emi2">its out of you, out of your body, our of your face, through your eyes. i2">It i2">in fact i2">influences your vi2">isi2">ion. You look out through the li2">ight that you shi2">ine, so i2">if i2">it's blocked your vi2">isi2">ion i2">is blocked as well. And i2">if the li2">ight has taken on a lesser color, your seei2">ing i2">is also flavored by that senti2">iment.

You thus look out and have a di2">irect experi2">ience of what we call the reali2">ity of the world. Thi2">is i2">is i2">in two layers. There i2">is a contri2">ibuti2">ion from physi2">ical si2">ight, but there i2">is also thi2">is overlay of colors and energi2">ies, or emoti2">ions and felt experi2">ience, of meani2">ing and purpose, whi2">ich you project onto the physi2">ical. Anythi2">ing less than love di2">istorts how you see, and therefore what you project. And what you project narrows what you see, and thus defi2">ines i2">it.

i2">If i2">I am i2">in fear, i2">I try to shi2">ine, but the shi2">ini2">ing di2">imi2">ini2">ishes, and leaves a lack of li2">ight, whi2">ich seems li2">ike a darkness. And now i2">I shi2">ine out what seems li2">ike a darkness, and my vi2">isi2">ion becomes dark, and i2">I see reflected back to me that darkness. The darkness i2">interferes wi2">ith what i2">I'm looki2">ing at and fi2">ilters i2">it. Now everythi2">ing seems fri2">ighteni2">ing and dark, because i2">I am looki2">ing wi2">ith fear and darkness.

"i2">I can obscure my holy si2">ight, i2">if i2">I i2">intrude my world upon i2">it. Nor can i2">I behold the holy si2">ights Chri2">ist looks upon unless i2">it i2">is Hi2">is vi2">isi2">ion that i2">I use. Percepti2">ion i2">is a mi2">irror, not a fact. And what i2">I look on i2">is my state of mi2">ind reflected outward. i2">I would bless the world by looki2">ing on i2">it through the eyes of Chri2">ist. And i2">I wi2">ill look upon the certai2">in si2">igns that all my si2">ins have been forgi2">iven me."

You mi2">ight thi2">ink that the thi2">ings you see i2">in such looki2">ing i2">is objecti2">ive and passi2">ive, that you're seei2">ing what's really there. But you're really seei2">ing a di2">istorted versi2">ion of what's there, fi2">iltered through your blocks to li2">ight. You can only really see what you put there to see, and whatever you're seei2">ing you have actually projected. You see fearful thi2">ings because you are looki2">ing i2">in a fearful way.

You then mi2">ight thi2">ink that you see many thi2">ings whi2">ich seem objecti2">ively fearful, that dramas are amassi2">ing, and problems are mounti2">ing, and dangers are loomi2">ing, and ri2">isk i2">is i2">increasi2">ing. And you wi2">ill take thi2">is to be the whole of reali2">ity, because you don't see anythi2">ing outsi2">ide of the confi2">ines of the fi2">ilter of darkness. And thi2">is further decei2">ives and tempts you i2">into fear.

"The world you see i2">is but the i2">idle wi2">itness that you were Ri2">IGHT. Thi2">is wi2">itness i2">is i2">insane. You trai2">ined i2">it i2">in i2">its testi2">imony, and, as i2">it gave i2">it BACK to you, you li2">istened and convi2">inced yourself that what i2">it saw was true. YOU Di2">ID THi2">IS TO YOURSELF. See only thi2">is, and you wi2">ill also see how ci2">ircular the reasoni2">ing on whi2">ich your "seei2">ing" rests."

Soon, you don't recogni2">ize that you are projecti2">ing fear, and i2">instead beli2">ieve you are seei2">ing the whole of what i2">is really there. Thi2">is i2">is because you've lost context, due to blocked li2">ight frequenci2">ies. And now the world appears fri2">ighteni2">ing and dark and terri2">ible, wi2">ith no way out, li2">ike a li2">ivi2">ing helli2">ish ni2">ightmare. And everwhere you turn you are confronted wi2">ith fear and threat and danger. As i2">if i2">it i2">is an i2">inherent part of everythi2">ing.

But i2">if you can step back and check yourself, check your broadcast, check what ki2">ind of energy you're emi2">itti2">ing, what ki2">ind of li2">ight you're shi2">ini2">ing, what you're gi2">ivi2">ing, then you may be able to reali2">ize that you're actually maki2">ing thi2">ings look fri2">ighteni2">ing. i2">It's because you're projecti2">ing fear from wi2">ithi2">in you, and not because the fear i2">is starti2">ing outsi2">ide of you. You ei2">ither project fear or love, and everythi2">ing else i2">is just a vari2">iati2">ion of that.

Then you have to recogni2">ize that you have fear i2">in you before you project i2">it, and you can only see i2">it when you project i2">it. And you aren't seei2">ing fearful thi2">ings unless you are maki2">ing them fearful i2">insi2">ide of you fi2">irst. Wi2">ihch means really there i2">is a fear i2">in you, lurki2">ing behi2">ind your projecti2">ion, behi2">ind the radi2">iant glow of your energy, whi2">ich i2">is blocki2">ing your li2">ight much closer to the source.

So then we have to look deeper wi2">ithi2">in, much more i2">inti2">imately, much closer to your self, much nearer to where the projecti2">ing begi2">ins. The i2">issue that's i2">interferi2">ing wi2">ith the li2">ight i2">is happeni2">ing much sooner and closer to home than you thought. i2">It's i2">in your mi2">ind, i2">it's even pri2">ior to your projecti2">ions. Somehow there i2">is a fear i2">in you that you di2">idn't reali2">ize was there, whi2">ich you've just been projecti2">ing all over the place and beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it's outsi2">ide of you.

Thi2">is begs the questi2">ion, i2">if there i2">is fear i2">insi2">ide of you, and the fear i2">is not i2">in the world or caused by the world, what i2">is maki2">ing you afrai2">id Wi2">ITHOUT the world? And that li2">ine of questi2">ioni2">ing has to lead to reali2">izi2">ing that you li2">ikely have made yourself gui2">ilty, are puni2">ishi2">ing yourself, are threateni2">ing yourself, and are beli2">ievi2">ing you have si2">inned agai2">inst God. Because really i2">it all goes back to the ori2">igi2">inal si2">in and to what you thi2">ink you di2">id that made you worthy of sufferi2">ing and puni2">ishment.

Always the projecti2">ion of your i2">inner content i2">is extremely decepti2">ive. i2">It's fi2">ine i2">if you are comi2">ing truly from an i2">inner peace and a lovi2">ing heart, whi2">ich projects i2">innocence and safety and si2">inlessness, renderi2">ing everythi2">ing appeari2">ing to you as completely harmless and beauti2">iful. But i2">if you have blocked thi2">is love, and thus have gui2">ilt and fear i2">in you, then thi2">is i2">is goi2">ing to fly out of you at the earli2">iest opportuni2">ity, from the cess-pool of your mi2">ind.

Mi2">inds area always projecti2">ing, because i2">it i2">is thei2">ir natural functi2">ion. They gi2">ive or express what i2">is i2">in them. i2">It expands and moves outward. All mi2">inds shi2">ine li2">ike li2">ightbulbs, regardless of whether the li2">ight i2">is fi2">iltered or covered up. i2">It's not a questi2">ion so much of i2">if you wi2">ill project, but whether you wi2">ill i2">interfere wi2">ith the natural extensi2">ion of love, tryi2">ing to pollute i2">it wi2">ith egoi2">ic beli2">iefs and dark vei2">ils and false beli2">iefs. Or such thi2">ings as hi2">idden hates and secret si2">ins and unhealed wounds.

i2">If i2">I look to what i2">is comi2">ing out of me, whi2">ich i2">I can FEEL, i2">if i2">I've crossed the li2">ine i2">into beli2">ievi2">ing that the world i2">is the problem, i2">I am already very decei2">ived. i2">If i2">I am buyi2">ing i2">into the projected versi2">ion of what was i2">insi2">ide, beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it's outsi2">ide, i2">I'm already way down the li2">ine of the chai2">in of causati2">ion. i2">I have to look at my energy, what does i2">it feel li2">ike, what am i2">I broadcasti2">ing, what's comi2">ing out of me, am i2">I attacki2">ing and feari2">ing and accusi2">ing and tryi2">ing to fi2">ind scapegoats, or am i2">I lovi2">ing, safe and happy?

A scapegoat i2">isn't just some person you pi2">ick out, i2">it's the target of your energeti2">ic broadcast. i2">It's a psychologi2">ical thi2">ing you attach your i2">inner gunk to. The mi2">ind looks to scapegoat, i2">ie to fi2">ind somethi2">ing to associ2">iate i2">its di2">issoci2">iated gui2">ilt and fear wi2">ith, so that i2">it can attach i2">it to somethi2">ing outsi2">ide of you. Ki2">ind of li2">ike flyi2">ing a ki2">ite, anchored i2">in your mi2">ind, on a long tether, flyi2">ing i2">in the sky i2">in front of your eyes, dangli2">ing li2">ike a carrot of temptati2">ion.

To scapegoat i2">is to project ego, just i2">in the mere act of projecti2">ing i2">it, regardless of what i2">is bei2">ing sai2">id about a person or how they're bei2">ing used. i2">If i2">I'm projecti2">ing fear or si2">in or gui2">ilt, i2">I am scapegoati2">ing. i2">I'm acti2">ively tryi2">ing to get ri2">id of my i2">inner content. i2">It's bei2">ing pushed out of me, hurled onto the world. i2">It's acti2">ively RADi2">IATi2">ING out of me li2">ike an energy broadcast. i2">I'm putti2">ing i2">it onto the world.

i2">It may land and attach to certai2">in people or bodi2">ies or objects or events but i2">it's always goi2">ing to be somethi2">ing physi2">ical, because fear always blocks the li2">ight and narrows vi2">isi2">ion to i2">illusi2">ions. And once i2">I'm seei2">ing fear and gui2">ilt outsi2">ide of me, i2">I see i2">it as maki2">ing me afrai2">id and gui2">ilty. And now i2">I'm stuck wi2">ith a backwards percepti2">ion and am decei2">ivi2">ing myself. i2">I have to reali2">ize i2">I'm the one who i2">is maki2">ing the world fri2">ighteni2">ing, by putti2">ing my i2">inner fear onto i2">it and si2">ingli2">ing i2">it out as a target.

"When vi2">isi2">ion i2">is DENi2">IED, confusi2">ion of cause and effect becomes i2">inevi2">itable. The PURPOSE now becomes to KEEP OBSCURE the cause of the effect, and make effect appear to BE a cause. Thi2">is seemi2">ing i2">independence of effect enables i2">it to be regarded as STANDi2">ING BY i2">ITSELF, and capable of servi2">ing as a CAUSE of the events and feeli2">ings i2">its maker thi2">inks i2">IT causes."

i2">I have to watch myself doi2">ing thi2">is. i2">It doesn't happen at an i2">intellectual or theoreti2">ical level, i2">it happens experi2">ienti2">ially and i2">in a felt energeti2">ic broadcast. i2">It's a psychologi2">ical state. i2">It's not a story or a concept about someone - that's just some form i2">it mi2">ight take later. i2">It's more to do wi2">ith, whether i2">I am blessi2">ing wi2">ith love and li2">ight, or am i2">I cursi2">ing wi2">ith nasty dark harmful energi2">ies, tryi2">ing to attack psychi2">ically or whether i2">I am provi2">idi2">ing the gentle heali2">ing remedy of a mi2">iraculous expressi2">ion.

i2">It i2">is actually especi2">ially useful and a reli2">ief to recogni2">ize that nothi2">ing i2">in the world i2">is causi2">ing any of your upset, any of your fear, any of your gui2">ilt, or any of your beli2">ief i2">in si2">in. Nothi2">ing, not ever, has any i2">influence on you, but yourself. Becomi2">ing lost i2">in the world and beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it's doi2">ing stuff to you, or your happi2">iness and peace depends on someone else changi2">ing, that's all about bei2">ing lost and confused i2">in your own projecti2">ions. i2">It's NEVER about other people or the world. i2">It's all to do wi2">ith what you are doi2">ing to yourself on the i2">insi2">ide.

To be wi2">ili2">ing NOT to project hate, attack, anger, gui2">ilt, shame, blame, judgement, fear, si2">in, etc onto others, and to not let i2">it leave your mi2">ind (seemi2">ingly), keeps i2">it from latchi2">ing onto external targets. i2">It renders everyone i2">innocent and loved, because really your upset has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith anyone else or the world. Then you can go deeper and unravel the mystery of where thi2">is i2">interi2">ior bullshi2">it i2">is comi2">ing from, why you've attacked yourself, fi2">indi2">ing the reason why you cannot be si2">inful, and fi2">inally to embrace the atonement for yourself.

ALL of your problems are i2">INSi2">IDE OF YOU. And NONE of i2">it i2">is caused by anythi2">ing outsi2">ide of you! And i2">it can ONLY be corrected i2">INSi2">IDE of you where the problem and soluti2">ion are together. You are responsi2">ible for how everythi2">ing looks to you, because i2">it enti2">irely depends on what you chose to beli2">ieve about yourself, and how that radi2">iates through your vi2">isi2">ion. Li2">ight i2">IS vi2">isi2">ion, and seei2">ing i2">IS projecti2">ion. Project only love to see through the eyes of chri2">ist, by seei2">ing yourself as chri2">ist fi2">irst.

"i2">It i2">is your thoughts alone that cause you pai2">in. Nothi2">ing external to your mi2">ind can hurt or i2">injure you i2">in any way. There i2">is no cause beyond yourself that can reach down and bri2">ing oppressi2">ion. No one but yourself affects you. There i2">is nothi2">ing i2">in the world whi2">ich has the power to make you i2">ill or sad, or weak or frai2">il. But i2">it i2">is you who have the power to domi2">inate all thi2">ings you see by merely recogni2">izi2">ing what you are. As you percei2">ive the harmlessness i2">in them, they wi2">ill accept your holy wi2">ill as thei2">irs. And what was seen as fearful now becomes a source of i2">innocence and holi2">iness."

"i2">I can be hurt by nothi2">ing but my thoughts."

""Thi2">is i2">is the ONLY thi2">ing that you need do for vi2">isi2">ion, happi2">iness, release from pai2">in, and the COMPLETE escape from si2">in, ALL to be gi2">iven you. Say ONLY thi2">is, but MEAN i2">it wi2">ith NO reservati2">ions, for here the power of salvati2">ion li2">ies:

i2">I AM responsi2">ible for what i2">I see. i2">I CHOSE the feeli2">ings i2">I experi2">ience, and i2">I DECi2">IDED ON the goal i2">I would achi2">ieve. And everythi2">ing that SEEMS to happen TO me, i2">I ASKED FOR and recei2">ived as i2">I had asked."

Decei2">ive yourself no longer that you are helpless i2">in the face of what i2">is done TO you. Acknowledge but that YOU have been mi2">istaken, and ALL effects of your mi2">istakes wi2">ill di2">isappear." "You who percei2">ive yourself as weak and frai2">il, wi2">ith futi2">ile hopes and devastated dreams, born but to di2">ie, to weep and suffer pai2">in, hear thi2">is: All power i2">is gi2">iven you i2">in earth and Heaven. There i2">is nothi2">ing that you cannot do. You play the game of death, of bei2">ing helpless, pi2">iti2">ifully ti2">ied to di2">issoluti2">ion i2">in a world whi2">ich shows no mercy to you. Yet when you accord i2">it mercy, wi2">ill i2">its mercy shi2">ine on you."

"My self i2">is ruler of the uni2">iverse. ... i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that anythi2">ing should come to me unbi2">idden by myself. Even i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is i2">I who rule my desti2">iny. What happens i2">is what i2">I desi2">ire. What does not occur i2">is what i2">I do not want to happen. Thi2">is must i2">I accept."

"i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible the Son of God be merely dri2">iven by events OUTSi2">IDE hi2">im. i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that the happeni2">ings that come to hi2">im were NOT hi2">is choi2">ice. Hi2">is power of deci2">isi2">ion i2">is the DETERMi2">INER of every si2">ituati2">ion i2">in whi2">ich he seems to Fi2">IND hi2">imself by chance or acci2">ident. No acci2">ident or chance i2">is POSSi2">IBLE wi2">ithi2">in the uni2">iverse as God created i2">it, OUTSi2">IDE of whi2">ich i2">is nothi2">ing."

"The ego i2">is the i2">idea of selfi2">ishness. The soul i2">is the i2">idea of self-fullness."

Wi2">ithi2">in me there i2">is an ego aspect whi2">ich i2">is very selfi2">ish. Thi2">is aspect rears i2">its head i2">if i2">I see myself as havi2">ing to do somethi2">ing i2">I don't want to do, bei2">ing caused to do somethi2">ing because of someone else, or that my condi2">iti2">ion or si2">ituati2">ion i2">is a result of somethi2">ing outsi2">ide my control.

My mi2">ind goes i2">into a vi2">icti2">im mode where i2">I see myself as bei2">ing at the effect of external powers. i2">I start to become justi2">ifi2">ied i2">in anger. i2">I start to complai2">in and make noi2">ise about how i2">I'm havi2">ing to do all thi2">is stuff "because of" somethi2">ing or someone else. How i2">it's all thei2">ir fault.

And as i2">I li2">isten to myself i2">in those states i2">I see a tremendous selfi2">ishness. Everythi2">ing i2">I say i2">is laden wi2">ith "you're doi2">ing thi2">is to me" and "i2">if i2">it wasn't because of you" and "i2">its your fault" and "you're not meeti2">ing my needs" and "my needs aren't met" and so on.. all revolvi2">ing around thi2">is self absorpti2">ion.

i2">It even can take on a gui2">ise of tryi2">ing to be helpful or "care" i2">in such a manner as to see myself as doi2">ing stuff for someone else for "thei2">ir benefi2">it" and me not getti2">ing any benefi2">it from i2">it, and then accusi2">ing them of i2">infli2">icti2">ing thi2">is upon me, and that i2">I'm sufferi2">ing because of my efforts to be helpful. i2">It's a strange twi2">isted ego response.

Thi2">is was flari2">ing up for me recently and i2">i was qui2">ite shocked as just how vi2">icti2">imy and selfi2">ish i2">I sounded as i2">I ranted on about thi2">ings i2">I was havi2">ing to do that seemed outsi2">ide my control or whi2">ich could not be avoi2">ided. Everythi2">ing that came out of my mouth was all about me me me and my needs and my wants and my effects whi2">ich seemed to have been caused by somethi2">ing that's not me. lol

Thi2">is i2">is what the ego i2">is. i2">It's thi2">is i2">idea of selfi2">ishness. Many people thi2">ink that ego means i2">indi2">ivi2">iduali2">ity, i2">it doesn't. i2">It means an i2">indi2">ivi2">idual WHO i2">IS SELFi2">ISH. And that selfi2">ishness i2">is just one mental condi2">iti2">ion of that i2">indi2">ivi2">idual, whi2">ich can be healed and restored to an i2">indi2">ivi2">idual who i2">is NOT selfi2">ish. Selfi2">ishness means attempti2">ing not to SHARE anythi2">ing or gi2">ive anythi2">ing. Shari2">ing i2">is the natural condi2">iti2">ion of the sons of God who cooperate wi2">ith each other perfectly fi2">ine when they're not bei2">ing selfi2">ish.

The end of selfi2">ishness i2">is not the end of your self. i2">It's merely the end of seei2">ing your self as a vi2">icti2">im. i2">It's the end of hoardi2">ing, ownershi2">ip, possessi2">ion, i2">isolati2">ion, i2">impri2">isonment, exclusi2">ivi2">ity and speci2">ialness. When those thi2">ings go, the "selfi2">ish person" goes, but the person that you are, underneath, does not go anywhere. i2">It becomes uncovered for the lovi2">ing bei2">ing that i2">it i2">is.

i2">I've recently been noti2">ici2">ing that my work wi2">ith the course has shi2">ifted to the undoi2">ing of gui2">ilt. And that thi2">is was not the case i2">in previ2">ious years. Overall i2">it seemed i2">I was worki2">ing on undoi2">ing fear much more often.

Just theori2">izi2">ing here, but maybe when we're starti2">ing out wi2">ith forgi2">iveness our mi2">ind i2">is just too "low" i2">in i2">its degree of truth and li2">ight. Si2">in and gui2">ilt sti2">ill seem too buri2">ied and unconsci2">ious, hi2">idden behi2">ind blocks. Our consci2">ious mi2">ind may more li2">ikely fi2">ind i2">itself so blocked that i2">it deals wi2">ith fear and puni2">ishment on a dai2">ily basi2">is more than anythi2">ing else.

Over ti2">ime, we work on forgi2">ivi2">ing, and i2">it gradually chi2">isels away at thi2">is overall "large block" of mi2">ind-junk. From the bottom up, we are gradually removi2">ing layers of stuff and rai2">isi2">ing our overall level of awareness and mastery. Whi2">ile there may be some i2">issues or lessons where we undo fear, or gui2">ilt, or si2">in, or are worki2">ing on si2">ickness perhaps, overall we're sti2">ill deeply i2">immersed i2">in "the lower levels" of mi2">ind.

i2">I've done such a lot of work on fear that i2">I thi2">ink i2">I have a much better gri2">ip on i2">it now. And whi2">ile fearful challenges sti2">ill ari2">ise, i2">I am much less decei2">ivable. So i2">I feel that my focus i2">is "ri2">isi2">ing-up" or "goi2">ing deeper" i2">into the pri2">ior level that comes before fear - whi2">ich i2">is gui2">ilt. i2">If you recall basi2">ically we get i2">into si2">in fi2">irst, whi2">ich demands gui2">ilt, leads to fear of puni2">ishment etc.

So my focus now, or what i2">I'm most often presented wi2">ith, i2">is the undoi2">ing of gui2">ilt. i2">In fact i2">I recently seemed to be only just starti2">ing to become aware that i2">I even feel gui2">ilty at all. i2">I di2">id not recogni2">ize i2">it. i2">I di2">id not know that i2">I was gui2">ilty and the gui2">ilt i2">I was feeli2">ing di2">idn't seem to fi2">it i2">into a common defi2">ini2">iti2">ion of what gui2">ilt i2">is. i2">I am learni2">ing about i2">it fi2">irst-hand as i2">I di2">ig i2">into i2">it. Because for example gui2">ilt can often express as anger or a strong desi2">ire to project, and can feel li2">ike bei2">ing offended even.

What i2">I have noti2">iced i2">is that i2">in worki2">ing on thi2">is gui2">ilt, whi2">ich i2">is dredgi2">ing up a lot of old crap as well, fear goes bye bye very qui2">ickly. You can't be afrai2">id of puni2">ishment i2">if you are not gui2">ilty. Wi2">ithout gui2">ilt there i2">is no fear. So i2">I now experi2">ience that as i2">I work to undo gui2">ilt about stuff, i2">it seems to have a "more powerful" effect i2">in li2">ifti2">ing me upwards towards li2">ight and truth. i2">It feels more rapi2">id i2">in i2">its consequences, and the fear li2">iterally just vani2">ishes wi2">ithout a trace wi2">ithout havi2">ing to do anythi2">ing to work on i2">it.

i2">I noti2">iced thi2">is when one day, i2">I suddenly recogni2">ized i2">I felt very gui2">ilty that i2">I thought i2">I caused someone to be si2">ick, although thi2">is was not true. i2">I sti2">ill felt i2">it. And i2">I acknowledged i2">it and spoke about i2">it and let i2">it out. And si2">ince bri2">ingi2">ing that to li2">ight, the next day i2">I i2">immedi2">iately noti2">iced i2">I felt much less afrai2">id. A whole swath of fear melted.

And then i2">I also was worki2">ing through some feeli2">ings about when my wi2">ife was i2">in the hospi2">ital etc and how that felt, and suddenly was recogni2">izi2">ing that i2">it felt so helli2">ish because i2">I was actually feeli2">ing gui2">ilty, whi2">ich was causi2">ing fear. Undoi2">ing that gui2">ilt has really shi2">ifted thi2">ings qui2">ickly. i2">It i2">in fact removed what seemed li2">ike a loomi2">ing resi2">istance and sense of dread about what would happen next, that was hangi2">ing around all the ti2">ime.

i2">I know also from experi2">ience that i2">if you go strai2">ight to the core, the beli2">ief i2">in si2">in, whi2">ich i2">is really the ulti2">imate turni2">ing poi2">int of a total change of mi2">ind, i2">it has the power to undo not only fear but gui2">ilt as well, very rapi2">idly. But you have to be able to unearth and look at the feeli2">ing and beli2">ief i2">in si2">infulness. Si2">infuless feels pretty awful. i2">I got i2">in touch wi2">ith i2">it one ti2">ime and i2">it felt li2">ike a desi2">ire to be dead, so bleak and desperate and so strongly beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I was cri2">imi2">inal or evi2">il or had done somethi2">ing so terri2">ible there was no other way out.

But at the moment i2">I thi2">ink that level of ego crap i2">is sti2">ill mostly buri2">ied beneath the "gui2">ilt layer". As i2">I move through the gui2">ilt and clear i2">it out, i2">I ri2">ise up i2">in mi2">ind closer to complete forgi2">iveness and atonement. And as i2">I ri2">ise up i2">I go deeper wi2">ithi2">in and uncover the secret si2">ins and hi2">idden hates.

Overall there seems to be the stuff we go through to try to forgi2">ive speci2">ifi2">ic i2">issues, whi2">ich vary a lot, but i2">in the bi2">ig pi2">icture there seems to also be thi2">is very gradual movement towards God, truth, li2">ight, forgi2">iveness, whi2">ich takes you through these clouds of ego crap. Fi2">irst through layers of fear, then through layers of gui2">ilt, then through layers of si2">in, and then i2">into the li2">ight. We seem to be undoi2">ing thi2">is from the bottom up, gradually ascendi2">ing as we do.

As you heal somethi2">ing about yourself i2">in your mi2">ind, you wi2">ill stop havi2">ing reacti2">ions.

i2">I used to react to the bi2">ig truckload of fresh li2">ive pi2">igs that used to be shi2">ipped i2">into the sausage factory across the street. i2">I beli2">ieved i2">it was awful. i2">It tri2">iggered me. i2">I felt angry and gui2">ilty. Then i2">I looked at how thi2">is was nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith pi2">igs or factori2">ies and was about myself. And what i2">I found out was that i2">I felt gui2">ilty for catchi2">ing and ki2">illi2">ing butterfli2">ies when i2">I was younger. And so i2">I di2">id forgi2">iveness on that and reclai2">imed some real truth about myself, i2">instead of the gui2">ilty self i2">I made up. And i2">I was freed from thi2">is gui2">ilt. And so now when i2">I see the pi2">ig truck, there i2">is no reacti2">ion. There i2">is nothi2">ing TO tri2">igger.

i2">I've also experi2">ienced thi2">is before where someone would say somethi2">ing to me and i2">it would tri2">igger me. i2">I would feel that what thi2">is person sai2">id was true, even i2">if i2">I was i2">in deni2">ial and clai2">imi2">ing i2">it was untrue, and i2">it brought to the surface a reacti2">ion of gui2">ilt wi2">ithi2">in myself. Thi2">is feeli2">ing of bei2">ing gui2">ilty and wrong and ashamed kept surfaci2">ing whenever thi2">is thi2">ing was sai2">id to me. And then i2">I went through some genui2">ine heali2">ing and forgi2">iveness and reclai2">imi2">ing of real truth, and thi2">is melted some of thi2">is gui2">ilt away.

The 'gui2">ilty i2">identi2">ity' that was i2">in me di2">imi2">ini2">ished. i2">I stopped BEi2">ING the gui2">ilt. The sense of 'self' that i2">I had AS the gui2">ilty self had transferred more to my true self and i2">I had accepted i2">is at truth. So then when thi2">is person came along and sai2">id the same thi2">ings.... ...... ..... nothi2">ing happened. No reacti2">ion. No feeli2">ing that i2">it was even about me. No feeli2">ing that i2">it was true. No reacti2">ion of gui2">ilt. No sense that i2">it could even touch 'me' or do anythi2">ing to cause me to be upset. Same person, same acti2">ions, same statements, no reacti2">ion.

So when someone does somethi2">ing to you, or somethi2">ing happens you don't li2">ike, i2">it 'tri2">iggers' off or shakes up or bri2">ings i2">into your awareness an experi2">ience of "thi2">is makes me feel bad"... i2">in whatever form - generally gui2">ilt and shame. And thi2">is gui2">ilt and shame i2">itself, somehow, by some strange psychologi2">ical twi2">ist, seems li2">ike i2">it i2">is associ2">iated wi2">ith YOU, who you are. And so you feel li2">ike YOU are thi2">is gui2">ilty self. You are the gui2">ilt. And i2">it comes up i2">insi2">ide you and you feel i2">it. And then you're i2">ini2">iti2">ially li2">ike, what the fuck, why di2">id thi2">is person just "make me gui2">ilty" or "make me afrai2">id". So you blame them for 'causi2">ing' thi2">is experi2">ience to occur, but wi2">ithout noti2">ici2">ing that they di2">idn't actually do anythi2">ing to PUT thi2">is experi2">ience i2">into you - i2">it was already i2">in you. The gui2">ilt-ri2">idden scared self was already i2">in you because you thought that was true about you and was your actual i2">identi2">ity.

So all that's happeni2">ing i2">is your own stuff i2">is comi2">ing up i2">into awareness and you're experi2">ienci2">ing i2">it and you don't li2">ike i2">it so you keep blami2">ing i2">it on someone else. You're parti2">icularly annoyed that they keep 'poi2">inti2">ing out your flaws' or keep bri2">ingi2">ing your attenti2">ion to how gui2">ilty you feel. And each ti2">ime they seem to 'vi2">icti2">imi2">ize' you i2">it tri2">iggers thi2">is gui2">ilt i2">in you and you feel i2">it and you thi2">ink that they're doi2">ing i2">it to you. They're not. They can't. Only you can experi2">ience thi2">is gui2">ilt as i2">if i2">its what you are. And i2">if you can heal that gui2">ilt and stop beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it and stop i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing wi2">ith i2">it and stop thi2">inki2">ing i2">it i2">is true of YOU and that, therefore, i2">it i2">is who you ARE, then you can be free of thi2">is gui2">ilt. Thi2">is gui2">ilty content. Person comes along and does the same exact acti2">ion and .... there i2">is no gui2">ilt i2">in you to experi2">ience... nothi2">ing for i2">it to latch onto.... nothi2">ing to tri2">igger.... nothi2">ing to remi2">ind you of how YOU feel about YOURSELF.

Thi2">is i2">is how you fi2">ind peace. Undo your gui2">ilty ego self and remember who you are i2">in truth and you become i2">invulnerable.

Someone was accusi2">ing me of thi2">ings i2">I beli2">ieved i2">I di2">idn't really do. They seemed to be just hell-bent on projecti2">ing thei2">ir blame somewhere. i2">It seemed uncalled for, and that i2">I was unfai2">irly treated.

My reacti2">ion to thi2">is was that i2">I became angry. i2">I felt that i2">I was justi2">ifi2">ied i2">in bei2">ing angry because i2">it seemed that what the person was clai2">imi2">ing was not true. And yet, i2">if i2">it was not true, why was i2">I taki2">ing i2">it seri2">iously at all and havi2">ing a reacti2">ion?

i2">I beli2">ieved i2">I was i2">innocent. i2">I beli2">ieved i2">I was not gui2">ilty of what i2">I was bei2">ing accused of. They were li2">iterally clai2">imi2">ing that i2">I had done thi2">ings whi2">ich i2">I had li2">iterally not done, physi2">ically. i2">It seemed so obvi2">ious that i2">I di2">id not do these thi2">ings that thi2">is "proved" my i2">innocence. i2">I was usi2">ing physi2">ical evi2">idence of "the world" as proof of what was true, to prove that i2">I was i2">innocent.

i2">I also beli2">ieved that, therefore, thi2">is person was just wrong and doi2">ing somethi2">ing to me. i2">It seemed unfai2">ir and unwelcome and as though i2">it was causi2">ing upset i2">in me.

Each ti2">ime they accused me of thi2">is, i2">I felt more and more angry and annoyed. i2">It seemed li2">ike i2">if they would keep doi2">ing thi2">is, i2">I couldn't see a way to become anythi2">ing other than more and more upset.

But then i2">I started to look at what was happeni2">ing i2">in my mi2">ind and how i2">I was percei2">ivi2">ing thi2">is. A key fact came to mi2">ind, where i2">I remembered that, at least i2">in theory, i2">I could not be upset about somethi2">ing unless i2">I beli2">ieved i2">it myself.

Whenever someone i2">is reacti2">ing to an attack, maki2">ing i2">it real, taki2">ing i2">it seri2">iously, and exclai2">imi2">ing that i2">it i2">is not true, usually i2">it means the person actually does beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is true on some deeper level. There i2">is deni2">ial i2">involved, but here's the problem.

i2">In our state of gui2">ilt, we used deni2">ial to make our gui2">ilt go unconsci2">ious. i2">It was pushed out of consci2">ious awareness. We used a mask of fake i2">innocence i2">in order to deny that we are gui2">ilty. Thi2">is fake i2">innocence i2">is somethi2">ing that we actually beli2">ieve i2">is the truth about us. i2">It completely covers up the gui2">ilt makes i2">it look li2">ike, even to ourselves, that there i2">is no evi2">idence of bei2">ing gui2">ilty. And then because the gui2">ilt i2">is actually unconsci2">ious, we are not even AWARE that i2">it i2">is there, so we actually beli2">ieve that we really are i2">innocent. i2">Imagi2">ine beli2">ievi2">ing you are i2">innocent when i2">in fact you are gui2">ilty!

So when someone comes along and accuses us of somethi2">ing, we tap i2">into thi2">is sense of i2">innocence and rely on i2">it and treasure i2">it and defend i2">it li2">ike i2">it's the real truth about ourselves. Based on that bei2">ing true, we then seem completely justi2">ifi2">ied i2">in bei2">ing angry and upset and annoyed when someone clai2">ims that we are actualy gui2">ilty of somethi2">ing. But you'd thi2">ink that i2">if we really deeply beli2">ieved i2">in our i2">innocence, we would be unshaken by such accusati2">ions. The reason we're not, i2">is because deep down there i2">is gui2">ilt, and i2">it i2">is bei2">ing tri2">iggered i2">into consci2">ious awareness.

When i2">I look at thi2">is wi2">ith Jesus, i2">I remembered that those who are upset beli2">ieve i2">in thei2">ir own gui2">ilt, even i2">if they are clai2">imi2">ing to be i2">innocent. i2">I was able to then be open to the i2">idea, that i2">I must actually sti2">ill beli2">ieve i2">I am gui2">ilty somehow. i2">I must be sti2">ill accusi2">ing myself of si2">in, otherwi2">ise when my brother accuses me of i2">it i2">I would not take i2">it seri2">iously. i2">I saw i2">in myself the presence of thi2">is si2">infulness, thi2">is gui2">ilt. i2">I saw that *i2">I* beli2">ieved i2">in i2">it and thought i2">it was true of me at thi2">is ti2">ime.

What thi2">is revealed i2">is that whi2">ile i2">I was busy accusi2">ing the other person of accusi2">ing me unfai2">irly, as though i2">I beli2">ieved they shouldn't be accusi2">ing me, i2">I was i2">in fact accusi2">ing myself the whole ti2">ime. i2">I could hardly blame them for doi2">ing what they are doi2">ing, when i2">I myself am doi2">ing the same thi2">ing to myself. Admi2">itti2">ing to doi2">ing thi2">is to myself, i2">it was obvi2">ious and clear that i2">I i2">in fact di2">id not really beli2">ieve i2">I was i2">innocent, *i2">I* beli2">ieved i2">I was gui2">ilty. My i2">innocence was fake, and therefore the foundati2">ion for my justi2">ifi2">icati2">ion for retali2">iati2">ion and anger was completely unfounded.

Seei2">ing my own beli2">ief i2">in my own gui2">ilt, recogni2">izi2">ing i2">it as comi2">ing from me about myself, somehow sobered my mi2">ind. i2">It brought awareness and honesty. The facade of fake i2">innocence di2">isappeared. What was therefore revealed, was that even though thi2">is whole ti2">ime i2">I thought i2">I had a problem of thi2">is other person accusi2">ing me unfai2">irly, *i2">I* was actually accusi2">ing me unfai2">irly. They were just tri2">iggeri2">ing i2">it off, remi2">indi2">ing me of what i2">I actually beli2">ieved about myself unconsci2">iously, and my own unconsci2">ious beli2">ief was probably attracti2">ing them i2">into my li2">ife to accuse me i2">in thi2">is way, reflecti2">ing my own beli2">ief back to me.

i2">I seri2">iously thought i2">I was the i2">innocent one. i2">I thought that i2">I was holi2">ier than thou. i2">I thought i2">I was bei2">ing honest, that i2">I was si2">incere and genui2">ine and truthful. i2">I thought the other person was clearly the one who was bei2">ing vi2">ici2">ious and mean. i2">I actually beli2">ieved heavi2">ily i2">in my own fake i2">innocence. i2">I was i2">in deni2">ial, and not reali2">izi2">ing that i2">I had thi2">is bi2">ig beli2">ief i2">in my own gui2">ilt lurki2">ing under the surface. i2">I had no i2">idea that *i2">I* myself beli2">ieved i2">I was gui2">ilty i2">in thi2">is way.

Havi2">ing a good look at thi2">is opened my eyes. i2">I could now see the truth, that thi2">is person actually was not accusi2">ing me of somethi2">ing that i2">I di2">idn't beli2">ieve i2">in. They were accusi2">ing me of somethi2">ing i2">I Di2">ID beli2">ieve i2">in. i2">I was upset because i2">I di2">id beli2">ieve i2">I was the gui2">ilty person they accused me of bei2">ing. i2">I just di2">idn't want to admi2">it to beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it about myself.

i2">If i2">I myself am beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in my gui2">ilt, then the other person i2">is not actually doi2">ing anythi2">ing to me that's di2">ifferent from what i2">I'm doi2">ing to me. They're not addi2">ing gui2">ilt at all. Effecti2">ively, they are just maki2">ing me aware of i2">it. My refusal to recogni2">ize that *i2">I* beli2">ieve i2">I am gui2">ilty, was maki2">ing me project my gui2">ilt, and accuse my brother of accusi2">ing me of bei2">ing gui2">ilty. i2">I thought the source of the gui2">ilt was i2">in hi2">im, and not i2">in me. i2">I thought he was the cause of i2">it, but i2">I was.

i2">I am not sure how i2">I managed to stay i2">in such a state of unconsci2">iousness for so long. i2">I do not know how i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize or even suspect that i2">I beli2">ieved i2">in my own gui2">ilt i2">in thi2">is way. i2">I thought i2">I was defendi2">ing my true self. i2">I thought i2">I was bei2">ing honest. i2">I thought i2">I was i2">innocent and gui2">iltless, and therefore justi2">ifi2">ied i2">in bei2">ing upset by a false attack. But why would the truly i2">innocent be upset i2">if they know they are not gui2">ilty? They would just laugh and i2">it would not affect them at all. That i2">I was reacti2">ing and defendi2">ing my i2">illusi2">ion of i2">innocence just showed that deep down i2">I di2">id not really beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it, or i2">it wasn't real.

i2">I di2">idn't actually really take thi2">is any further. i2">I di2">idn't look i2">into whether i2">it was true that i2">I was gui2">ilty. i2">I di2">idn't get i2">into whether i2">I really di2">id si2">in. i2">I di2">idn't get i2">into tryi2">ing to accept the atonement. i2">I di2">idn't even see thi2">is as "doi2">ing a forgi2">iveness", necessari2">ily. i2">I just thought i2">it was an i2">interesti2">ing i2">insi2">ight, whi2">ich had revealed that i2">I actually wasn't bei2">ing affected by the other person, i2">I was bei2">ing affected by myself. i2">It somehow, nevertheless, completely di2">isconnected my ego from the other person's.

The followi2">ing day, i2">I felt noti2">iceably peaceful and i2">I could not explai2">in i2">it. Somehow my mi2">ind was di2">ifferent. Somehow i2">I di2">id not feel engaged wi2">ith that person i2">in the way that i2">I had. My ego seem deflated. i2">I di2">idn't seem to engage wi2">ith that person i2">in anywhere near as much of a ki2">ind of tug of war manner. i2">I seemed detached and just doi2">ing my own thi2">ing. i2">I couldn't explai2">in why i2">I kept feeli2">ing waves of peace, as though i2">it came out of nowhere. i2">I no longer felt li2">ike that person was doi2">ing anythi2">ing to me at all. i2">It was li2">ike the enti2">ire story and drama had just burst and stopped. i2">It was gone.

All i2">I di2">id was reali2">ize that i2">I had been doi2">ing thi2">is accusi2">ing toward myself, and that i2">it wasn't actually the other person who beli2">ieved thi2">is about me. My own beli2">ief was my only problem. What they were doi2">ing had absolutely nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith me. That was enough to unlock the forgi2">iveness and heal my mi2">ind. My experi2">ience was so di2">ifferent after that. Fi2">inally i2">I felt a peace that i2">I had not felt for a long ti2">ime.

The fake wall of i2">innocence whi2">ich hi2">ides our unconsci2">ious gui2">ilt, i2">is a major barri2">ier agai2">inst reali2">izi2">ing that we are doi2">ing thi2">is all to ourselves. i2">It i2">is the defense agai2">inst gui2">ilt, whi2">ich protects us from gui2">ilt. We do not want to di2">ismantle i2">it. We do not want to questi2">ion whether i2">it i2">is true. We just want to beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it as though i2">is i2">is completely true, and that i2">it i2">is defendi2">ing ourselves from all attacks. And yet thi2">is defense, i2">itself, i2">is merely coveri2">ing up our self attack, and maki2">ing i2">it look as though we are bei2">ing vulnerably affected by others. i2">It i2">is a block to awareness, a locked door whi2">ich i2">is di2">isgui2">isi2">ing our our gui2">ilt and our own death wi2">ish, keepi2">ing i2">it hi2">idden from awareness so that we dont' even suspect that we ourselves are tryi2">ing to destroy ourselves.

Who me? i2">Innocent me? Me who i2">is not gui2">ilty? Me who has no awareness of bei2">ing gui2">ilty at all? Li2">ittle sweet li2">ittle i2">innocent me? Yes.... thi2">is layer of i2">innocence i2">is FAKE. i2">It i2">is not the truth. i2">It i2">is protecti2">ing me from the deeper layer of beli2">ief, that i2">I am actually si2">inful and gui2">ilty and deserve to di2">ie. i2">I have to stop beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I am i2">innocent, become aware that i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I am gui2">ilty, then work on undoi2">ing that gui2">ilt and the si2">in behi2">ind i2">it, to get back to REAL i2">innocence. Fake i2">innocence i2">is a terri2">ible i2">impedi2">iment, maski2">ing our gui2">ilt and deflecti2">ing our self-attack onto everyone else. To reali2">ize that we ourselves beli2">ieve i2">in our own si2">infulness, and that i2">it i2">is not other people doi2">ing thi2">is to us, completely collapses the enti2">ire state of false percepti2">ion whi2">ich shows us others people as though they are causi2">ing us to be hurt.

i2">It i2">is me that i2">I must forgi2">ive. Other people are not the problem at all. They are just reflecti2">ing what i2">I am doi2">ing to myself. i2">I have my own self attack, hi2">idden behi2">ind layers of deni2">ial and projecti2">ion. Thi2">is i2">is what i2">I need to recogni2">ize and own up to and heal. Thi2">is wi2">ill automati2">ically heal all of my relati2">ionshi2">ips because everyone else truly i2">is i2">innocent and thi2">is has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith them. We but accuse our brothers of our own si2">in.

ACi2">IM suggests somethi2">ing far more radi2">ical than we mi2">ight fully reali2">ise: absolutely everythi2">ing you experi2">ience i2">is chosen, and you can choose what happens and not just your reacti2">ion to what happens.

i2">If you start to tell yourself, i2">I am choosi2">ing thi2">is... i2">I must have chosen thi2">is... i2">I wanted thi2">is. ... you wi2">ill step out of the fog of unconsci2">iousness and start to get a sense of the ki2">ind of power that thi2">is must entai2">il. You'll start to reali2">ise how much you DO NOT BELi2">IEVE i2">IT, and how much of your ti2">ime i2">is spent i2">in a vi2">icti2">imhood state of "thi2">is i2">is happeni2">ing to me agai2">inst my wi2">ill."

i2">In fact, i2">I thi2">ink most of us are li2">ivi2">ing i2">in a state somewhere i2">in between total empowerment and total vi2">icti2">imhood. We make some deci2">isi2">ions and have some i2">influence, but we also tolerate a whole lot of "stuff happeni2">ing on i2">its own", "happeni2">ing to me", "di2">idn't choose thi2">is", "don't want that".

i2">It especi2">ially can take the form of sufferi2">ing and vi2">icti2">imhood whi2">ich seems li2">ike somethi2">ing totally unwanted. Pai2">ins, si2">ickness, fear, loss, stress, anger, etc... all suggest "i2">I di2">idn't choose thi2">is." As i2">if you not only have no say, but there i2">is NO WAY OUT.

Putti2">ing up wi2">ith shi2">it, tolerati2">ing di2">iffi2">iculti2">ies, goi2">ing along wi2">ith si2">ickness li2">ike you have no choi2">ice i2">in the matter, i2">it's all part of thi2">is general trend we have of NOT beli2">ievi2">ing that we CHOOSE everythi2">ing we experi2">ience. And therefore, we can CHOOSE AGAi2">IN.

"i2">I AM responsi2">ible for what i2">I see. i2">I CHOSE the feeli2">ings i2">I experi2">ience, and i2">I DECi2">IDED ON the goal i2">I would achi2">ieve. And everythi2">ing that SEEMS to happen TO me, i2">I ASKED FOR and recei2">ived as i2">I had asked."

"No one can suffer loss unless i2">it be hi2">is own deci2">isi2">ion. No one suffers pai2">in except hi2">is choi2">ice elects thi2">is state for hi2">im. No one can gri2">ieve nor fear nor thi2">ink hi2">im si2">ick unless these are the outcomes that he wants, and no one di2">ies wi2">ithout hi2">is own consent. Nothi2">ing occurs but represents your wi2">ish, and nothi2">ing i2">is omi2">itted that you choose. Here i2">is your world, complete i2">in all detai2">ils. Here i2">is i2">its whole reali2">ity for you. And i2">it i2">is only here salvati2">ion i2">is."

Now that mi2">ight sound i2">interesti2">ing to read, but i2">if you consi2">ider that i2">it i2">is gi2">ivi2">ing NO EXCEPTi2">IONS, and i2">it really does mean ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHi2">ING, then you'll start to resi2">ize the sheer extent to whi2">ich we are supposed to own thi2">is responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity.

We are bei2">ing asked to li2">iterally reach a state i2">in whi2">ich everythi2">ing we experi2">ience i2">is a DELi2">IBERATE CHOi2">ICE, where there i2">is absolutely no vi2">icti2">imhood or sense of tolerati2">ing or reacti2">ing, and where you li2">iterally stop maki2">ing yourself suffer permanently. Where you take total ownershi2">ip of your li2">ife and, wi2">ith the Holy Spi2">iri2">it deci2">idi2">ing for you, wi2">ield the unli2">imi2">ited power of God.

i2">In general, we actually are li2">ivi2">ing i2">in a very di2">isempowered state, where we have gi2">iven away power, causati2">ion, wi2">ill, i2">identi2">ity, and responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. And i2">in thi2">is state we really don't thi2">ink that we could even concei2">ive of havi2">ing as much "say" i2">in what happens as what the course i2">is suggesti2">ing. Maybe some i2">influence yes, but not TOTAL ABSOLUTE POWER.

What do you mean we can choose not to be si2">ick, or choose not to di2">ie, or chose to stop havi2">ing a pai2">in, or choose not to experi2">ience loss, or choose not to havi2">ing a problem today? What do you mean we are so powerful and capable that li2">iterally everythi2">ing that happens every day i2">is BECAUSE OF OUR CHOi2">ICE?

But that's what Jesus i2">is clai2">imi2">ing. And i2">it's all over the course. The power of deci2">isi2">ion to choose absolutely everythi2">ing we experi2">ience, reclai2">imi2">ing that power, usi2">ing that power i2">intenti2">ionally, and therefore choosi2">ing never agai2">in to make any ki2">ind of sufferi2">ing for ourselves. To li2">iterally choose never to be si2">ick, nor to di2">ie.

"i2">I am not afrai2">id but all powerful."

"i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that anythi2">ing should come to me unbi2">idden by myself. Even i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is i2">I who rule my desti2">iny. What happens i2">is what i2">I desi2">ire. What does not occur i2">is what i2">I do not want to happen. Thi2">is must i2">I accept."

"i2">It i2">is your thoughts alone that cause you pai2">in. Nothi2">ing external to your mi2">ind can hurt or i2">injure you i2">in any way. There i2">is no cause beyond yourself that can reach down and bri2">ing oppressi2">ion. No one but yourself affects you. There i2">is nothi2">ing i2">in the world whi2">ich has the power to make you i2">ill or sad, or weak or frai2">il. But i2">it i2">is you who have the power to domi2">inate all thi2">ings you see by merely recogni2">izi2">ing what you are."

When i2">I am upset, feeli2">ing unhappy, havi2">ing a cry, feeli2">ing gui2">ilty or afrai2">id, or whatever, Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is gentle and compassi2">ionate. He often says, "i2">I know". Someti2">imes i2">I feel a hand on my shoulder from Hi2">im or Jesus.

They are compassi2">ionate i2">in that they know that *i2">I* beli2">ieve i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing somethi2">ing upsetti2">ing, that *i2">I* feel sad or whatever. They are there for me, and they don't judge i2">it. They don't even use the opportuni2">ity to push me towards some ki2">ind of forgi2">iveness or greater awareness. They just hold me and hug me.

However, the fact i2">is that all upset feeli2">ings come from a mi2">is-percepti2">ion that i2">I chose. And i2">I chose that mi2">is-percepti2">ion so that i2">I could further my separati2">ion from God.

So for example, i2">I mi2">ight feel upset because i2">I saw myself vi2">icti2">imi2">ized by someone. i2">I mi2">ight feel sad about how someone rejected me or whatever. And those feeli2">ings seem genui2">ine, i2">it seems li2">ike i2">I really feel thi2">is way and that i2">it's very sad and unfortunate. But, once i2">I'm done wi2">ith feeli2">ing, at some poi2">int i2">I need to fi2">ind the wi2">illi2">ingness to move beyond thi2">is.

i2">I've wi2">itnessed how, i2">in parti2">icular, when old hurts come up from the past, to be healed, they always feel li2">ike how i2">it felt at the ti2">ime. They're always based on how i2">I was percei2">ivi2">ing when i2">I was younger and less aware. Even though at the ti2">ime i2">I di2">id not understand what was goi2">ing on, or what i2">it meant, how i2">it made me feel at the ti2">ime based on that percepti2">ion i2">is now the feeli2">ing that i2">I need to work through and release. But i2">I've also seen how obvi2">ious i2">it i2">is, that these feeli2">ings were just how i2">I felt 'wi2">ithi2">in' the framework of a certai2">in way of looki2">ing at li2">ife, and there i2">is usually some ki2">ind of mi2">istake i2">in that.

i2">I saw myself as hurt because i2">I di2">idn't percei2">ive correctly. i2">I saw myself as unloved because i2">I di2">idn't recogni2">ize my i2">infi2">ini2">ite lovabi2">ili2">ity. i2">I saw myself as unworthy because i2">I devalued myself sort of 'by acci2">ident' because i2">I di2">idn't know what i2">i was doi2">ing. And so i2">I created feeli2">ings of unworthy and unlove and so on, whi2">ich i2">I must 'heal' and release, but even though these feeli2">ings seem li2">ike they reflected some ki2">ind of 'truth', they're not really the ulti2">imate truth.

i2">I need to become wi2">illi2">ing to admi2">it that, once i2">I've allowed myself to feel and release the 'energy' produced by a false percepti2">ion, that the percepti2">ion i2">ITSELF was faulty. And i2">it was the fault percepti2">ion that LED to faulty feeli2">ings. Unhappy feeli2">ings come from unhappy percepti2">ions. So i2">I need to now be wi2">illi2">ing to see di2">ifferently, to look for a greater truth, to own up to the part that i2">I played i2">in choosi2">ing to suffer, to take back my power, to clai2">im responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for doi2">ing thi2">is to myself, and to reali2">ize that nobody i2">involved was doi2">ing i2">it wi2">ithout my wi2">ill.

So there i2">is a 'forgi2">iveness' process that needs to occur, above and beyond unhappy feeli2">ings, to correct the percepti2">ion that led to them. And even though Holy Spi2">iri2">it knows thi2">is, he seldom prompts or forces me to 'go there' especi2">ially not ri2">ight when i2">I'm feeli2">ing how the feeli2">ings felt. i2">I let myself fully feel because thi2">is releases the energy, even though i2">it's a FALSE energy, to clear i2">it out. To cathart i2">it. THEN my mi2">ind i2">is clearer and can have a cogni2">iti2">ive shi2">ift, as well as bei2">ing more wi2">illi2">ing and able to now apply a 'forgi2">iveness' to change my percepti2">ion.

i2">It's i2">important to let yourself feel and let out the trapped negati2">ive emoti2">ions, but recogni2">ize also that they are only there because of a mi2">istaken way of looki2">ing at li2">ife, and that mi2">istake needs to be corrected at some poi2">int. When you are ready. And not before. And nobody i2">is pushi2">ing you or forci2">ing you to have to do that, especi2">ially not when you're i2">in the mi2">iddle of a deep release. Tryi2">ing to rush someone out of feeli2">ing i2">into truth i2">isn't compassi2">ionate.

So i2">it's possi2">ible to have compassi2">ion for someone who i2">is feeli2">ing upset even i2">if you know that thei2">ir upset i2">is false, and there really i2">isn't a need to be upset. Holy Spi2">iri2">it knows that nothi2">ing has gone wrong and there i2">is ONLY reason to celebrate, but to tell me that i2">in the mi2">iddle of me beli2">ievi2">ing heavi2">ily that i2">I've been wronged, i2">isn't enti2">irely helpful because i2">I can't hear i2">it unti2">il i2">I'm ready and wi2">illi2">ing. We really beli2">ieve we've done somethi2">ing terri2">ible to God and deserve to be puni2">ished for i2">it, and as we work through those feeli2">ings, Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is very pati2">ient to gi2">ive you ti2">ime to 'process' the consequences of a mi2">istaken deci2">isi2">ion. And then at some poi2">int, when you're ready, you wi2">ill undo the beli2">ief that caused i2">it.

i2">I had a stream of reali2">izati2">ions and i2">insi2">ights and heali2">ing thi2">is morni2">ing, i2">into how i2">I used someone else abusi2">ing me as a way to deny God's love. i2">It has to do wi2">ith the "key to salvati2">ion" - whi2">ich i2">is that i2">I "di2">id thi2">is to myself". i2">I'm ski2">ippi2">ing way ahead to the conclusi2">ion so i2">I'll explai2">in how i2">I got there.

Years ago i2">I was abused by someone close to me on more than one occasi2">ion and i2">it hurt a lot. Emoti2">ionally i2">I felt hurt, rejected, abandoned, unloved. i2">I was angry at them and could not forgi2">ive them, nor di2">id i2">I want to. i2">I thought i2">it was all about them and what they di2">id to me.

The past week or so i2">I've been havi2">ing i2">intensi2">ifi2">ied emoti2">ional releases (cri2">ies) really tappi2">ing i2">into the core of these feeli2">ings. i2">I wasn't i2">in any way ready to forgi2">ive thi2">is. Someti2">imes you just have to feel the feeli2">ings fully fi2">irst because the i2">intense 'energy' really pulls your awareness away from any ki2">ind of clari2">ity or wi2">illi2">ingness. And especi2">ially resi2">isti2">ing releasi2">ing hurt feeli2">ings blocks any ki2">ind of desi2">ire to have i2">insi2">ights. So i2">I felt.

Thi2">is then gave way to some readi2">iness to take a closer looks so i2">I i2">invi2">ited Holy Spi2">iri2">it to help me to look at i2">it. i2">I looked at what the person di2">id and how that made me feel. i2">I saw that i2">it made me feel unloved and unworthy, just feeli2">ing bad about myself li2">ike i2">I wasn't good enough to be loved. Gui2">ilty. Si2">inful. But i2">I knew that somehow i2">I must've had a hand i2">in these beli2">iefs - that i2">I must've gone along wi2">ith them somehow. i2">I was wi2">illi2">ing to admi2">it that i2">I beli2">ieved and agreed to these vi2">iews of myself. Si2">ince the other person was wi2">ithholdi2">ing love, i2">it must've meant to me that they di2">idn't beli2">ieve i2">I was loveable so i2">I went along wi2">ith that and saw myself that way.

But what i2">I then saw was that thi2">is beli2">ief i2">in unworthi2">iness/unloveabi2">ili2">ity wasn't just some ki2">ind of descri2">ipti2">ion of myself, but that i2">it had BECOME myself. i2">I beli2">ieved i2">it was WHAT i2">I was - as though i2">I was somehow made from unlove. i2">I sti2">ill at thi2">is poi2">int couldn't see how the other person bei2">ing abusi2">ive could i2">in any way be helpful to me spi2">iri2">itually, but i2">I was wi2">illi2">ing to let Holy Spi2">iri2">it conti2">inue to gui2">ide me toward that awareness.

As i2">I saw myself agreei2">ing to the suggesti2">ion that i2">I was unworthy - the 'proof' that i2">I was unworthy - i2">I began to reali2">ize thi2">is couldn't be true because, at least i2">in theory, i2">I am worthy of God's love. So i2">I started to then go over some of the thi2">ings i2">I beli2">ieved, but i2">in a context of i2">it bei2">ing not true. So for example, i2">it's not true that i2">I don't deserve love, i2">it's not true that i2">I am made from unworthi2">iness, i2">it's not true that i2">I am abandoned or rejected, i2">it's not true that i2">I don't deserve to be happy. A few thi2">ings came out of thi2">is i2">includi2">ing the beli2">ief that i2">I di2">idn't deserve happi2">iness, di2">idn't deserve to express myself, wasn't allowed to be myself, should be afrai2">id of expressi2">ing myself or bei2">ing free i2">in case i2">it happens agai2">in, bei2">ing afrai2">id of puni2">ishment, etc. So i2">I added these to the li2">ist of what i2">is not true.

i2">It was then that i2">it started to dawn on me. i2">I knew that i2">in theory God wasn't the one who rejected me, and that i2">it was me who had been denyi2">ing God. Suddenly i2">it was clear - thi2">is supposed beli2">ief i2">in unworthi2">iness, and the supposed scenari2">io of i2">it bei2">ing put i2">in place by someone else's abuse, was i2">in fact a COVER UP. i2">I actually wanted to beli2">ieve i2">I was unworthy. i2">I wanted to beli2">ieve i2">I was not loveable. i2">I somehow di2">id not WANT God to love me. i2">I saw that i2">I'd chosen to beli2">ieve i2">I was not 'made of' loveable materi2">ial so that i2">I could demonstrate that what i2">I was wasn't loveable by God. i2">I was tryi2">ing to prove that God couldn't love 'thi2">is' by portrayi2">ing myself AS unworthi2">iness, AS unloveable-ness.

And wi2">ith thi2">is i2">it became clear also, that i2">I Hi2">IRED and USED the abusi2">ive person to not just do stuff 'to me' but to do i2">it to me FOR ME - on my behalf. At some poi2">int i2">I organi2">ized events so that thi2">is person would come along and be abusi2">ive because i2">I wanted to have a way to JUSTi2">IFY and explai2">in and rati2">ionali2">ize WHY i2">I am not loveable. i2">I hi2">ired them to act the part and play the role. And i2">I had been blami2">ing THEM for bei2">ing the perpetrator when, all along, i2">it was me that had ASKED them to do thi2">is. Thi2">is was the key to unlocki2">ing the i2">illusi2">ion that i2">I'd been *unfai2">irly* treated, vi2">icti2">imi2">ized, or attacked agai2">inst my wi2">ill. Clearly i2">if i2">I wanted thi2">is person to be an attacker and to reject and hurt me, i2">it would ALLOW me to posi2">iti2">ion myself as not worth the love of God - so that i2">I could fulfi2">ill my hi2">idden agenda of denyi2">ing God's wi2">ill and bei2">ing separate. Jeez.

So now i2">it was possi2">ible to si2">imply acknowledge/recogni2">ize the i2">innocence of that person - to overlook seei2">ing them as si2">inful or gui2">ilty (forgi2">iveness) - that they had not done thi2">is to me agai2">inst my wi2">ill. And thi2">is i2">is where the next thi2">ing came to me. i2">If the attacki2">ing person i2">is not gui2">ilty because i2">I hi2">ired them to do thi2">is on purpose, because i2">I wanted to be able to justi2">ify why i2">I should be separate from God, and i2">if God also was not i2">involved because He remai2">ins uncondi2">iti2">ionally lovi2">ing at all ti2">imes... then... who i2">is there left to pi2">in thi2">is on? Who i2">is responsi2">ible for thi2">is? i2">I AM. When there i2">is nobody to blame and i2">I can see the choi2">ice i2">I made... i2">it was ME. i2">I di2">id i2">it.

i2">I saw myself as 100% totally responsi2">ible for havi2">ing chosen thi2">is, havi2">ing organi2">ized i2">it, produced i2">it, made i2">it happen - i2">in effect, as havi2">ing requested i2">it, WANTED i2">it, and chose i2">it. i2">I di2">id i2">it to myself on purpose! i2">I wanted to be unloveable so that i2">I could be what God does not want so that i2">I could have an ego li2">ife. The whole purpose of my conspi2">iracy was to scapegoat the attacker so that i2">I could cover up the fact that i2">I 100% chose thi2">is. i2">I can't very well keep blami2">ing anyone else when i2">I can see clearly that i2">I asked for i2">it, li2">iterally. So what di2">id thi2">is leave me wi2">ith?

i2">If i2">I'm 100% responsi2">ible for tryi2">ing to deny God on purpose, and for arrangi2">ing attackers to gi2">ive me reasons to PROVE why i2">I am separate from God, so that i2">I can JUSTi2">IFY my fai2">ilure to forgi2">ive, then that means... i2">I'm the one left holdi2">ing the baby. i2">I'm the one who made the choi2">ice. i2">I'm the one who Di2">ID THi2">IS TO MYSELF. And wi2">ith nowhere else to go, and nobody else to scapegoat, and no way to blame i2">it on God, bei2">ing able to see i2">I di2">id thi2">is to myself made i2">it i2">immedi2">iately obvi2">ious what the next step would be. i2">It was ri2">idi2">iculous to keep doi2">ing thi2">is. i2">It was stupi2">id to have done thi2">is i2">in the fi2">irst place. i2">I si2">imply had no choi2">ice but to ADMi2">IT i2">I made a mi2">istaken choi2">ice, to STOP maki2">ing thi2">is pai2">inful frui2">itless choi2">ice that i2">I no longer wanted, and to LET i2">IT GO. i2">I could not let i2">it go i2">if i2">I sti2">ill wanted i2">it, and nobody was forci2">ing me to do so for any reason - i2">I had to be wi2">illi2">ing to choose agai2">in, to deci2">ide, to surrender thi2">is choi2">ice i2">I'd made on my own and let Holy Spi2">iri2">it choose for me.

The truth was i2">I had been tryi2">ing to deny and reject God wi2">ith my secret plan and that i2">I di2">id not want to be worthy of love. i2">I had always thought i2">I had umpteen reasons why i2">I wasn't worthy enough because of other people or wasn't able to be myself freely i2">in case someone abuses me or whatever... And all along i2">it was really secretly me maki2">ing EXCUSES for why *i2">I* di2">idn't want to be loved anyway. i2">It was all because of what i2">I was doi2">ing to myself. i2">It was all a smokescreen to cover up my deci2">isi2">ion to not be loveable. So. .. To let that go.... FREES ME, not because i2">I'm somehow freed from other people's tyranny, and not because God suddenly changed hi2">is mi2">ind, but because there really WAS no one else maki2">ing me be unloveable other than my DECi2">ISi2">ION to be that way.

i2">I can choose agai2">in. i2">I can choose to stop doi2">ing thi2">is to myself, thi2">is si2">illy game, si2">ince i2">it i2">is FUTi2">ILE, and i2">I DO NOT Li2">IKE i2">IT, so i2">I can just drop i2">it li2">ike a hot potato. And what's the result of that.... Accepti2">ing and admi2">itti2">ing that i2">I AM LOVEABLE and WORTHWHi2">ILE and perfectly accepted already by love. i2">It was never about me not bei2">ing actually loveable, i2">it was always about ME DENYi2">ING the love. Denyi2">ing God. Pretendi2">ing there was a reason to not be loved. i2">It's bullshi2">it. i2">I admi2">it i2">it.

So freei2">ing - to set yourself free - to reali2">ize you were free all along. To reclai2">im love and be free to be who you really are. Game over.

Thi2">is also i2">interesti2">ingly parallels the di2">iscussi2">ion about the fact that we choose death - that all death i2">is sui2">ici2">ide. The truth was that my unloveabi2">ili2">ity was MY DELi2">IBERATE CHOi2">ICE because i2">I WANTED to deny God. Everythi2">ing else was a coverup job. Thi2">is i2">is the death wi2">ish. The deci2">isi2">ion to be beyond love's reach - beyond li2">ife's reach. And the reversal of thi2">is wi2">ish for death i2">is a choi2">ice to BE ALi2">IVE. Thi2">is i2">is a reclai2">imi2">ing of and a step towards accepti2">ing i2">immortali2">ity. i2">Immortali2">ity i2">is already the truth, i2">it's just a matter now of removi2">ing all of the deni2">ial and deli2">iberate choi2">ices made agai2">inst i2">it.

i2">If you are upset for some reason, there i2">is somethi2">ing i2">in you already whi2">ich i2">is not at peace. Some part of your mi2">ind i2">is i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith ego, havi2">ing an emoti2">ional reacti2">ion, or perhaps somethi2">ing i2">is comi2">ing up for release.

i2">If you are then exposed to a person whose behavi2">ior seems to be i2">in some way provocati2">ive, a potenti2">ial attack, or somethi2">ing that your ego does not li2">ike, you are much more li2">ikely to experi2">ience that person as causi2">ing you to be upset.

Or rather, because you're not on a fi2">irm footi2">ing of certai2">inty and peace, and your mi2">ind i2">is unhappy, you are much more suscepti2">ible to your pre-exi2">isti2">ing upset comi2">ing up i2">in your face.

When you are upset your ego sees i2">itself as vulnerable, a vi2">icti2">im, under threat, and bei2">ing caused from outsi2">ide. i2">It i2">is then very easy to sli2">ip i2">into that ki2">ind of percei2">ivi2">ing where you thi2">ink the other person i2">is doi2">ing somethi2">ing to you.

And si2">ince you're already upset, i2">it wi2">ill cause your pre-exi2">isti2">ing upset to come up even stronger. You'll thi2">ink they are pushi2">ing your buttons. They sort of are, but the result of pushi2">ing the button i2">is that YOUR stuff comes up i2">insi2">ide you, not stuff that THEY put there.

When you are upset already, other people wi2">ill seem upsetti2">ing, and you wi2">ill react to them. When you are not upset already, you wi2">ill be much more detached and i2">it i2">is far harder to be provoked.

Every ti2">ime that i2">I am already upset for some reason, i2">if someone does or says somethi2">ing *potenti2">ially* upsetti2">ing, i2">I am much more li2">ikely to have reacti2">ions of vi2">icti2">imhood, where i2">I'll start to qui2">ickly project my shi2">it onto them, treat them poorly, and react to them li2">ike they're doi2">ing somethi2">ing to me.

But later, i2">if i2">I'm honest, i2">I'll recogni2">ize that i2">I wasn't really upset wi2">ith that person... i2">I was ALREADY upset. My upset wasn't thei2">ir fault. i2">I reacted poorly. i2">I was not clear about the truth. i2">I had sli2">ipped from a fi2">irm footi2">ing onto a sli2">ippery slope, and had become confused about who was doi2">ing what to whom.

i2">I noti2">ice thi2">is agai2">in and agai2">in. i2">If i2">I am upset already, i2">I seem to be more upsettable, and i2">I'll thi2">ink i2">it's someone else that's wrong. Yet i2">if i2">I'm not upset, the person can do or say the same thi2">ings and i2">it has no effect.

i2">It i2">is the hurt ego whi2">ich reacts. i2">It's the hurt ego that sees i2">itself as vulnerable. i2">It's the hurt ego - the pai2">in - that responds wi2">ith attack, percei2">ivi2">ing attack where there really i2">is none.

i2">If i2">I had no upset whatsoever and were perfectly at peace, nothi2">ing would be ABLE to upset me, because i2">I would have nothi2">ing that i2">is already upset to react Wi2">ITH. That i2">is i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity.

There i2">is a very fi2">ine li2">ine between accepti2">ing thi2">is world and justi2">ifyi2">ing i2">it.

i2">If i2">I am havi2">ing si2">ickness, or problems, or negati2">ive ego thoughts, then somethi2">ing i2">is wrong. i2">It does not matter whether i2">I am accepti2">ing these thi2">ings or not, or whether i2">I'm tryi2">ing to be at peace i2">in spi2">ite of them or not. i2">If these thi2">ings are happeni2">ing, somethi2">ing i2">is not ri2">ight.

There i2">is a si2">igni2">ifi2">icant group of people i2">in ACi2">IM ci2">ircles who attempt to become "at peace wi2">ith" everythi2">ing that happens here. Thi2">is i2">includes bei2">ing at peace wi2">ith si2">ickness, bei2">ing at peace wi2">ith death, bei2">ing at peace wi2">ith negati2">ive thoughts, bei2">ing at peace wi2">ith problems and li2">imi2">itati2">ions, etc.

There i2">is somethi2">ing to be sai2">id for thi2">is because, on the one hand, i2">if i2">I resi2">ist or block or control or read-i2">into or project onto or mani2">ipulate or become attached to somethi2">ing i2">in the world, i2">I am i2">in the ego for sure. When events happen, i2">if i2">I resi2">ist them and don't welcome them, i2">I wi2">ill fi2">ight wi2">ith them. That's not good. i2">If i2">I cannot allow someone the free wi2">ill to choose whatever they want to experi2">ience, even i2">if that means sufferi2">ing and death, then i2">I wi2">ill not allow myself the same freedom of wi2">ill ei2">ither.

But... and thi2">is i2">is a bi2">ig but, that does not mean, that the goal of the course i2">is to "be okay wi2">ith" all of these thi2">ings, to keep these problems, to mai2">intai2">in si2">ickness, to promote peaceful death, or to conti2">inue havi2">ing attack thoughts that we're "not bothered by".

Yes, i2">I am supposed to let go of the world, let go of controlli2">ing i2">it, let go of tryi2">ing to stop people's choi2">ices, let go of not allowi2">ing etc. That's all good. But when that i2">is equated wi2">ith.... well, thi2">is means that i2">I should not do anythi2">ing about the world other than transcend i2">it, then thi2">is becomes a problem.

Because now i2">I am goi2">ing to attempt to keep experi2">ienci2">ing ego stuff whi2">ile pretendi2">ing that i2">I am not. That's actually an act of deni2">ial. i2">If i2">I'm sti2">ill havi2">ing si2">ickness i2">in the body, somethi2">ing i2">is wrong i2">in my mi2">ind. i2">If i2">I am sti2">ill dyi2">ing, somethi2">ing i2">is wrong i2">in my mi2">ind. i2">If i2">I am sti2">ill havi2">ing problems and li2">imi2">itati2">ions, somethi2">ing i2">is wrong i2">in my mi2">ind. And i2">if i2">I am sti2">ill havi2">ing negati2">ive ego thoughts or body i2">identi2">ifi2">ied thoughts, there i2">is sti2">ill somethi2">ing wrong i2">in my mi2">ind.

i2">It i2">is not our task to sort of ... get underneath our negati2">ive thoughts, or to .... go i2">in back of our ego judgements.... etc. We are not supposed to be becomi2">ing "okay" wi2">ith problems and si2">ickness and death. i2">In a sense we are... we are not meant to be upset by i2">it, but we are not meant to make i2">it real and we're also not meant to choose i2">it. Choosi2">ing si2">ickness i2">is an attack. Choosi2">ing death i2">is an attack.

So on the one hand, we're to become "at peace wi2">ith" whatever happens, but at the same ti2">ime, that peace MUST i2">include not choosi2">ing to make bad stuff happen, otherwi2">ise we are i2">intellectuali2">izi2">ing the truth.

A mi2">ind whi2">ich i2">is i2">in a state of love does not have attack thoughts. A mi2">ind i2">in a state of love does not have a si2">ick body. A mi2">ind i2">in a state of love does not go through death. A mi2">ind i2">in a state of love does not have problems and li2">imi2">itati2">ions. A mi2">ind i2">in a state of love does not need to a fi2">ind a way to be "okay wi2">ith" i2">intolerable bullshi2">it. i2">It may well BE "okay" wi2">ith i2">it i2">in a sense, but at the same ti2">ime, i2">it does not choose i2">it, mani2">ifest i2">it, create i2">it, mai2">intai2">in i2">it, or make i2">it a reali2">ity.

Exactly who i2">is maki2">ing the body si2">ick when the mi2">ind i2">is awake? Who i2">is responsi2">ible for that? You are. And i2">if you are, you are not awake.

Exactly who i2">is maki2">ing attack thoughts show up i2">in the mi2">ind, whi2">ich you are happi2">ily tryi2">ing to transcend and allow to conti2">inue happeni2">ing? Who i2">is thi2">inki2">ing them? You are. i2">If you are havi2">ing attack thoughts you have an ego.

Exactly who i2">is maki2">ing the body go through death? Who i2">is bri2">ingi2">ing about the extreme vi2">icti2">imhood condi2">iti2">ions whi2">ich are *requi2">ired* i2">in order for death to take place? You are. i2">If you are dyi2">ing, you have an ego.

We have to take total responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for everythi2">ing we are experi2">ienci2">ing and expressi2">ing and causi2">ing to happen, i2">includi2">ing the undoi2">ing of all si2">ickness, death, sufferi2">ing, and ego thoughts. Only the thoughts i2">I thi2">ink wi2">ith God - lovi2">ing thoughts - are real. All the rest i2">is ego and i2">it must go, otherwi2">ise i2">I'm hi2">idi2">ing i2">in a corner and thi2">inki2">ing hate whi2">ile pretendi2">ing to thi2">ink love.

A few years ago when i2">I was havi2">ing a profound spi2">iri2">itual experi2">ience, i2">I had so much love and joy i2">insi2">ide of me.

i2">It was just pouri2">ing out, shi2">ini2">ing outwards. i2">I felt li2">ike i2">I was just 'beami2">ing' i2">it out of me li2">ike an i2">intense flashli2">ight, shi2">ini2">ing onto everyone.

i2">I felt that i2">I had no needs, and no lack.

i2">I just felt tremendously lovi2">ing, tremendously broadcasti2">ing, just all thi2">is joy was shi2">ini2">ing outward so bri2">ightly.

i2">It shone so bri2">ightly that i2">I became able to look people di2">irectly i2">in the face wi2">ithout fli2">inchi2">ing, so i2">intensely that they were always the fi2">irst to look away.

The love i2">in me shone so bri2">illi2">iantly, and was li2">ike an i2">intense radi2">iati2">ion outwards, extendi2">ing outward and flowi2">ing only outward.

i2">In thi2">is state, there was no sense of anythi2">ing comi2">ing i2">into me. i2">I di2">id not feel that i2">I had any needs whatsoever. Nothi2">ing was comi2">ing i2">in from outsi2">ide, i2">it was only extendi2">ing from wi2">ithi2">in.

i2">In fact, that day i2">I di2">id not feel li2">ike i2">I needed to eat food. i2">I tri2">ied to put food i2">in my mouth but i2">it felt completely ali2">ien, li2">ike i2">I was just shovi2">ing these lumps of stuff i2">into my body for absolutely no reason, that i2">it was not goi2">ing to do anythi2">ing to me or for me that i2">I needed at all.

i2">I di2">idn't see myself as needi2">ing to get anythi2">ing from outsi2">ide of myself for any reason. i2">I di2">idn't need anyone's help, i2">I di2">idn't need anyone's advi2">ice or opi2">ini2">ion, i2">I di2">idn't need food or water, i2">I di2">idn't need sleep, i2">I di2">idn't need anythi2">ing.

The love was i2">in me. All i2">it could seem to do was shi2">ine bri2">illi2">iantly and to go outward. Thi2">is si2">imultaneously gave me a percepti2">ion that absolutely nothi2">ing COULD come i2">into me, and that therefore i2">I was very safe and protected. The li2">ight was so bri2">ight that i2">it shone away all darkness and kept all ego i2">illusi2">ions away from me. i2">I could not take anythi2">ing from anyone and di2">id not want to, and as a result di2">id not percei2">ive that anyone could do anythi2">ing to me whatsoever.

Not only di2">id i2">I not want to get anythi2">ing from anyone, i2">I could not. There was such i2">intensi2">ity i2">in what was goi2">ing outward that i2">it was i2">impossi2">ible to bri2">ing anythi2">ing i2">in from the outsi2">ide. Ego i2">illusi2">ions, fears, whatever i2">it was, could not come i2">into me. i2">I had everythi2">ing i2">I needed. i2">I had the love and presence of God.

To some degree, because i2">I was i2">in a very di2">ifferent state of mi2">ind, people thought that i2">I needed help. And they started tryi2">ing to help me. But thei2">ir help was, from my poi2">int of vi2">iew, completely unnecessary. They thought i2">I needed help, and were offi2">ing all ki2">inds of advi2">ice and shi2">it, but not one si2">ingle bi2">it of i2">it was needed, or wanted, or necessary. There was nothi2">ing wrong wi2">ith me. They were the ones who were upset and afrai2">id.

Love has to be i2">in you, comi2">ing from God, fi2">irst, i2">in order for you to extend love outward. And when God i2">is i2">in your mi2">ind, Fi2">IRST, you wi2">ill see God i2">in the world. You can't see God i2">in the world unless God i2">is i2">in your mi2">ind. You can't see Chri2">ist i2">in others unless Chri2">ist i2">is i2">in your awareness, fi2">irst.

When i2">it's i2">in you, you wi2">ill not need love from anyone because you wi2">ill have no needs. Because you wi2">ill have no lack. When there i2">is no lack of love i2">in you, you become i2">invulnerable and strong and fearless. You become fulfi2">illed. You want for nothi2">ing and need nothi2">ing. You are sustai2">ined by the love of God, li2">iterally, to all degrees on all levels. Even physi2">ically.

You cannot get thi2">is from another person. No-one can make up for a lack that you beli2">ieve i2">is i2">in you whi2">ich you put there and thi2">ink i2">is real. The only lack you need correct i2">is the absence of God. The only need you really have i2">is Hi2">is love, wi2">ithout whi2">ich you wi2">ill see yourself as i2">in need and go tryi2">ing to steal what you lack from other people. Thi2">is turns you i2">into a psychi2">ic vampi2">ire. Everyone i2">is doi2">ing thi2">is, feedi2">ing off each other.

Love i2">is all you need. You have to undo whatever i2">it i2">is that has come between you and God, whatever i2">it i2">is that made you beli2">ieve you lacked Hi2">is presence, and whatever i2">it i2">is that blocks you from havi2">ing Hi2">im i2">in your awareness. Whatever that block i2">is, i2">it i2">is the sole foundati2">ion of all needi2">iness, all ego seeki2">ing, and all vulnerabi2">ili2">ity. Lack i2">is a state of vi2">icti2">imhood. You cannot be a vi2">icti2">im when have God i2">in you. You are i2">invulnerable. You are li2">iterally i2">immortal. Nothi2">ing can assai2">il the Ki2">ingdom of Heaven.

Ok so, thi2">is i2">is possi2">ibly a touchy subject, and i2">I'm not tryi2">ing to make anyone feel gui2">ilty. i2">If you have some ki2">ind of a si2">ickness, pai2">in, upset, di2">isabi2">ili2">ity, whatever, thi2">is i2">is goi2">ing to be talki2">ing about that and i2">I don't mean to make anyone feel attacked. But i2">I want to look at somethi2">ing the course di2">iscusses.

"***The si2">ick are merci2">iless to everyone, and i2">in contagi2">ion do they seek to ki2">ill.*** Death seems an easy pri2">ice, i2">if they can say, "Behold me, brother, at your hand i2">I di2">ie." For si2">ickness i2">is the wi2">itness to hi2">is gui2">ilt, and death would prove hi2">is errors MUST be si2">ins."

i2">I've been looki2">ing at thi2">is lately because i2">I've been havi2">ing to heal a sense of gui2">ilt and blame for someone else bei2">ing si2">ick. Once i2">I started to look at what the course says about my own si2">ituati2">ion, i2">I saw that we basi2">ically are i2">immortal bei2">ings who keep attacki2">ing ourselves, maki2">ing ourselves suffer, i2">induci2">ing our own si2">ickness, and tryi2">ing to di2">ie. And then i2">I started to thi2">ink about whether other people were doi2">ing thi2">is, and thi2">is i2">is where some li2">ightbulbs went off.

i2">If a person i2">is havi2">ing a physi2">ical si2">ickness, i2">it does mean that they are attacki2">ing themselves. i2">It means that they, as an i2">immortal bei2">ing, are tryi2">ing to destroy themselves. They beli2">ieve they are gui2">ilty and si2">inful for attacki2">ing God. Thi2">is i2">is then projected onto and through the body. The body i2">in turn takes on forms of si2">ickness as a shadow of the gui2">ilt i2">in the mi2">ind, a shadow of deformi2">ity.

"i2">Illness can be but gui2">ilt's shadow, grotesque and ugly si2">ince i2">it mi2">imi2">ics deformi2">ity. i2">If a deformi2">ity i2">is seen as real, what could i2">its shadow be except deformed?"

But the si2">ickness i2">in the body i2">isn't just there as a si2">ickness, i2">it's there for a purpose. The purpose i2">is accusati2">ion. The si2">ickness i2">is actually part of the attempt to project si2">in onto others. The body i2">is made to appear si2">ick and weak and sufferi2">ing, so that the person appears to be i2">innocent, and so that someone else i2">is accused of si2">in. The si2">ight of a si2">ick body therefore means someone i2">is holdi2">ing a "pi2">icture of cruci2">ifi2">ixi2">ion" up to accuse you of si2">in, and "si2">ick bodi2">ies remai2">in accusers."

"The si2">ick remai2">in accusers."

"You hold a pi2">icture of your cruci2">ifi2">ixi2">ion before hi2">is eyes, that he may see hi2">is si2">ins are wri2">it i2">in Heaven i2">in your blood and death, and go before hi2">im, closi2">ing off the gate, and damni2">ing hi2">im to hell."

Jesus has gone even further than thi2">is, to say that i2">in thi2">is self-destructi2">ive, projecti2">ive si2">ituati2">ion, we actually are tryi2">ing to ki2">ill others. As we scapegoat, i2">ie project si2">in, we make the body si2">ick, i2">in order to prove another's gui2">ilt. And one of the ways thi2">is takes shape i2">is i2">in terms of contagi2">ion of physi2">ical i2">illness, such as wi2">ith a cold or flu, where someone i2">is tryi2">ing to "i2">infect" others wi2">ith thei2">ir si2">in and gui2">ilt, so that i2">if others become si2">ick and suffer for i2">it, thi2">is exonerates the si2">ick person.

Jesus even says that when we are si2">ick, we are bei2">ing merci2">iless, li2">ike we have thi2">is i2">intense almost evi2">il atti2">itude of destructi2">ion, fi2">irst towards ourselves and then towards others. We're actually even wi2">illi2">ing to di2">ie, i2">if i2">it means someone else i2">is accused of causi2">ing i2">it. And so the dead body testi2">ifi2">ies to the si2">infulness of another. That we're li2">iterally wi2">illi2">ing to destroy the body i2">in order to try to exonerate ourselves of the ori2">igi2">inal si2">in, and pi2">in i2">it on somethi2">ing external.

"Death seems an easy pri2">ice, i2">if they can say, "Behold me, brother, at your hand i2">I di2">ie."

So thi2">is then made me reali2">ize that, a major reason that i2">I often have a sense of gui2">ilt or self-blame around other people's si2">icknesses, i2">is because they are i2">in fact attempti2">ing to accuse me of thei2">ir si2">in. Thei2">ir si2">ick body i2">is attempti2">ing to project gui2">ilt onto me, i2">its a way they are usi2">ing thei2">ir body for attack, and havi2">ing tri2">ied to destroy themselves they now are projecti2">ing destructi2">ion onto me. So then i2">I end up feeli2">ing gui2">ilty because, essenti2">ially, i2">if i2">I "make thei2">ir body real" to myself, i2">I'll buy the temptati2">ion that the si2">ickness i2">is li2">iterally accusi2">ing me of si2">in.

i2">I thi2">ink part of reali2">izi2">ing thi2">is, for me, entai2">iled havi2">ing to be wi2">illi2">ing to look at someone else and ask myself i2">if they are doi2">ing the very same thi2">ing the course says i2">I am doi2">ing to myself. i2">ie are they tryi2">ing to destroy themselves, do they have gui2">ilt from the separati2">ion, are they puni2">isi2">ing themselves, are they projecti2">ing and are they usi2">ing thei2">ir body for attack? And the answer i2">is yes.

But thi2">is answer also gi2">ives ri2">ise to the reali2">izati2">ion that, the truth about myself, also appli2">ies to them. Just as i2">I mi2">ight reali2">ize that i2">I am not si2">inful or gui2">ilty, that God has not been attacked, and i2">I don't deserve to suffer, and i2">I need to stop blami2">ing myself or maki2">ing myself gui2">ilty..... so too does thi2">is apply to others.

So now my approach to the "si2">ick person" changes to one of compassi2">ion for them doi2">ing the exact same self-attack that i2">I've been doi2">ing, a recogni2">iti2">ion that they are si2">imi2">ilarly not si2">inful, reali2">izi2">ing that they are mi2">istaken to beli2">ieve they should be gui2">ilty, and therefore shi2">ifti2">ing to a more supporti2">ive posi2">iti2">ion of remi2">indi2">ing them of what i2">is really true of them. And thi2">is i2">in turn allevi2">iates my gui2">ilt because i2">it means i2">I am not responsi2">ible for thei2">ir condi2">iti2">ion, and i2">its "truth" doesn't apply to ei2">ither of us.

What's really true of them i2">is that they have not si2">inned, thei2">ir i2">innocence i2">is i2">intact, they have no reason to be gui2">ilty, they have no need for si2">ickness, they have no basi2">is for puni2">ishi2">ing themselves, and they don't need to destroy themselves, because they haven't done anythi2">ing wrong.

i2">I am fi2">indi2">ing i2">in fact that thi2">is ki2">ind of atti2">itude toward them i2">is i2">in fact "mi2">iracle worki2">ing". Because the more i2">I express toward someone "the atonement" pri2">inci2">iple of thei2">ir si2">inlessness, the more i2">I am bei2">ing lovi2">ing, and also am treati2">ing my nei2">ighbor as myself. i2">If my "work" i2">is to express toward someone that they deserve love and health and happi2">iness because they have not si2">inned, i2">I am i2">in fact joi2">ini2">ing my mi2">ind to thei2">irs by accessi2">ing the part of them that's i2">innocent. The "i2">innocent self" BEHi2">IND the self-accusati2">ion. And the accused gui2">ilty self i2">is not who they really are.

And so i2">it's i2">important to overlook thei2">ir self-accusati2">ion and not see i2">it as applyi2">ing to them. As i2">I do thi2">is, i2">I feel a POWER, and a sense of ENERGY, funneli2">ing through me. And i2">I am qui2">ite certai2">in thi2">is i2">is openi2">ing the door to worki2">ing mi2">iracles. i2">If i2">I can accept my own atonement i2">ie my si2">inlessness, then i2">I can also recogni2">ize other people have been si2">imi2">ilarly attacki2">ing themselves needlessly and can help to support them i2">in fi2">indi2">ing thei2">ir way back to thei2">ir i2">innate perfecti2">ion.

"By denyi2">ing hi2">is mi2">ind any destructi2">ive potenti2">ial, and rei2">instati2">ing i2">its purely constructi2">ive powers, he has placed hi2">imself i2">in a posi2">iti2">ion where he can undo the level confusi2">ion of others. The message whi2">ich he then gi2">ives to others i2">is the truth that THEi2">IR Mi2">INDS are really si2">imi2">ilarly constructi2">ive, and that thei2">ir own mi2">iscreati2">ions cannot hurt them."

"He MUST work a mi2">iracle on behalf of hi2">imself here (See the poi2">int about mi2">iracles as a percepti2">ion corrector) before he can effect mi2">iracles as creati2">ive energi2">izers, whi2">ich they are."

What thi2">is reveals to me i2">is also that, when i2">I have ever done forgi2">iveness, i2">it's almost always been wi2">ith a somewhat selfi2">ish i2">intent. Even i2">if i2">I am forgi2">ivi2">ing "others", i2">it mostly revolves around taki2">ing stuff off them and putti2">ing i2">it back on me, so that i2">I can address the deeper problem i2">in "my separate self". But what i2">I see now i2">is, that i2">in fact, the very same practi2">ice whi2">ich i2">I mi2">ight use to apply to myself, to undo my own beli2">ief i2">in my own si2">infulness, i2">I can use that very same approach FOR SOMEONE ELSE on thei2">ir behalf, and forgi2">ive them FOR THEM.

i2">In effect, i2">it's li2">ike "doi2">ing a forgi2">iveness" for someone else on thei2">ir behalf, applyi2">ing i2">it TO them, remi2">indi2">ing them of what THEi2">IR truth i2">is, and helpi2">ing them to see thei2">ir own i2">innocence. Just as i2">I would do for myself, but applyi2">ing to them i2">instead.

i2">I am certai2">in thi2">is has a lot to do wi2">ith worki2">ing a mi2">iracle. Because a mi2">iracle worker begi2">ins by seei2">ing the li2">ight i2">in another, whi2">ich you an only do i2">if you see li2">ight i2">in yourself, and then you rei2">inforce thei2">ir li2">ight by shi2">ini2">ing your li2">ight i2">into thei2">ir mi2">ind, as you "pi2">ick them up" and "li2">ift them up" through the expressi2">ion of the truth about them.

i2">It's ki2">ind of li2">ike telli2">ing someone that they've been hard on themselves, mean to themselves, unfai2">ir to themselves, and have not loved themselves.... and that the reason they've done thi2">is i2">is unfounded, and they don't deserve thi2">is self-abuse, nor do they deserve to suffer i2">in si2">ickness or pai2">in or mi2">isery. To set them back on the ri2">ight path and get them back i2">in touch wi2">ith thei2">ir own i2">innate soul perfecti2">ion. To be li2">ike, hey, brother, what you thi2">ink about yourself i2">is not true, you are .... and then li2">ist all the thi2">ings whi2">ich are true of them i2">in reali2">ity.

(Forgi2">iveness) "i2">It looks on li2">ies but i2">it i2">is not decei2">ived. i2">It does not heed the self-accusi2">ing shri2">ieks of si2">inners mad wi2">ith gui2">ilt. i2">It looks on them wi2">ith qui2">iet eyes, and merely says to them, "My brother, what you thi2">ink i2">is not the truth."

Thi2">is i2">IS forgi2">iveness because i2">it's what i2">it means to overlook the layers of ego si2">in, gui2">ilt, fear, self-attack, symptoms, body-stuff, i2">in another, and look to the fact they are a chri2">ist enti2">ity, perfect and holy, temporari2">ily mi2">istaken, beli2">ievi2">ing stuff about themselves that i2">isn't true, and knowi2">ing and rememberi2">ing FOR them that thei2">ir li2">ies are not true of them.

Thi2">is also taps i2">into a new "mode" of forgi2">iveness, i2">in whi2">ich we attempt to reap the benefi2">its not by forgi2">ivi2">ing "for ourselves" or by wi2">ithdrawi2">ing from others i2">into our separate mi2">inds, but by reachi2">ing OUT to others and telli2">ing THEM what we want to be true of US.

Expressi2">ing towards someone a hi2">igher truth, si2">imultaneously makes i2">it true of YOU, but wi2">ithout the selfi2">ish component. i2">In thi2">is sense yes your brother i2">is your savi2">ior. You can only gi2">ive the mi2">iracles you have recei2">ived but you can also bolster what you recei2">ive by gi2">ivi2">ing. Thi2">is i2">is why "mi2">iracles benefi2">it both the gi2">iver and the recei2">iver."

To pour love i2">into someone, to recogni2">ize when they themselves do not love themselves, and to supply the lack of love, by remi2">indi2">ing them of what i2">is really true about them, joi2">ins your mi2">ind to thei2">irs and enli2">ightens i2">it, shi2">ines truth i2">into thei2">ir mi2">ind, empowers them, awakens them, and resurrects them.

You can't forgi2">ive the world, by focusi2">ing on i2">it, and tryi2">ing to regard i2">it as forgi2">iven. You can't love i2">it by lovi2">ing i2">it di2">irectly. i2">It's not there. Thi2">is i2">is somethi2">ing that i2">I get hung up on qui2">ite often. i2">I ask myself, how do i2">I forgi2">ive the world?

Usually i2">I'll take a look at the course and see i2">it sayi2">ing over and over agai2">in that awakeni2">ing i2">is recogni2">iti2">ion, there i2">is no world, the world i2">is unreal, i2">it's not happeni2">ing, etc. But i2">in that i2">I fi2">ind i2">it hard to see how love enters i2">into i2">it. i2">It's just a "fact" that the world i2">is not real, but thi2">is i2">is rather a cold cli2">ini2">ical truth, and doesn't i2">integrate the love.

So then i2">I ask myself why would i2">I love the world, especi2">ially when the world seems so cruel? And the fact i2">is i2">I can't love a cruel world. i2">If i2">it i2">is really there and i2">it's really cruel then i2">it i2">is unlovable and cannot be overlooked. i2">If i2">I make i2">it real, i2">if i2">I beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it as not a dream, then there i2">is no way i2">I can be at peace about i2">it, yet alone love i2">it.

Then i2">I'm remi2">inded that i2">if i2">I stri2">ip away all sense of causati2">ion from the world, all beli2">iefs that i2">it's doi2">ing thi2">ings to me, all noti2">ions of attack and sufferi2">ing caused by i2">it, or si2">infulness on i2">its part, then maybe thi2">is lays the groundwork for bei2">ing able to see i2">it as i2">innocent, to a degree, or at least not accused. i2">Is thi2">is what allows me to be lovi2">ing toward i2">it?

What occurred to me though i2">is that forgi2">iveness really i2">isn't about targeti2">ing the world and forgi2">ivi2">ing i2">it, or havi2">ing a certai2">in atti2">itude about i2">it. i2">It's not even there to have a relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith, really. i2">In fact, Jesus says i2">in the course "to forgi2">ive i2">is to overlook", and that chri2">ist vi2">isi2">ion looks beyond the body/matter to the li2">ight. So really i2">if i2">I'm bei2">ing forgi2">ivi2">ing, i2">I more or less should practi2">ically i2">ignore and deny the world. "The world you see must be deni2">ied" and all that.

But agai2">in thi2">is deni2">ial of the world, thi2">is i2">ignori2">ing of i2">it, doesn't really clue me i2">in as to how to be lovi2">ing. So then what came to mi2">ind i2">is, i2">if the world were stri2">ipped of all i2">its seemi2">ing attack and causati2">ion, what i2">is left? Well, what i2">is left i2">is me havi2">ing an atti2">itude problem. i2">It's me havi2">ing hatred or anger or a projecti2">ion of si2">in. And now we get down to the real si2">ituati2">ion.

Because i2">in truth i2">it's not really so much that you need to forgi2">ive the world. i2">It's more to do wi2">ith that you need to forgi2">ive YOURSELF. i2">If you have si2">in i2">in your mi2">ind, any beli2">ief i2">in attack or gui2">ilt or fear etc, you're goi2">ing to project i2">it onto the world and use i2">it as a scapegoat, i2">in one way or another. Whether i2">it be hati2">ing the weather or attacki2">ing the nei2">ighbors or judgi2">ing the poli2">iti2">ici2">ians or whatever. The world becomes a target of focus and attenti2">ion and di2">istracti2">ion through projecti2">ion.

So let's be remi2">inded agai2">in. "i2">It can be but myself i2">I cruci2">ify", and "i2">I can be attacked by nothi2">ing but MY thoughts", and "i2">I am doi2">ing thi2">is to myself" and "i2">I but accuse my brother (and the world) of my OWN si2">ins." So now we're getti2">ing down to i2">it. Because i2">if i2">I have an atti2">itude problem, a beli2">ief i2">in si2">in, an i2">inner gui2">ilt, whi2">ich i2">I am tryi2">ing to escape through projecti2">ion and blame, that not only has a whole lot to do wi2">ith me bei2">ing unlovi2">ing toward the world, i2">it also i2">is what MAKES the world that false percepti2">ion sees. Because "The world i2">is false percepti2">ion."

i2">In that sense, the world really i2">in truth i2">is neutral and nothi2">ing, and "i2">I have gi2">iven everythi2">ing i2">I see all the meani2">ing i2">it has for me." Meani2">ing that any sense of "the world i2">is cruel, wrong, bad, evi2">il, si2">inful" i2">isn't somethi2">ing i2">inherent to the world i2">itself, i2">it's somethi2">ing i2">I've gi2">iven i2">it. The world i2">is nothi2">ing more than what i2">I have gi2">iven i2">it to be. Through my lack of love.

i2">It sti2">ill remai2">ins i2">impossi2">ible to love the cruel world because i2">it i2">is my unlove that makes i2">it cruel. You can only love the real world, and you wi2">ill only see the real world when you love. Because a lovi2">ing percepti2">ion only makes a lovi2">ing world, because "The world i2">IS percepti2">ion". "You mai2">intai2">in the world i2">in your mi2">ind wi2">ith your thoughts". "There i2">is no world apart from what you wi2">ish." "The world you made" i2">in hate can be stri2">ipped of the hateful atti2">itude and i2">is re-made by the Holy Spi2">iri2">it.

So at the end of i2">it all, tryi2">ing to love a cruel world i2">is i2">impossi2">ible, because the percepti2">ion of cruelty i2">is part of projected si2">in and anchors you i2">into false percepti2">ion. You cannot see i2">it as neutral or forgi2">iven or overlooked whi2">ile havi2">ing an unlovi2">ing atti2">itude, and the unlovi2">ing atti2">itude always starts wi2">ithi2">in. Because you look fi2">irst wi2">ithi2">in to what you beli2">ieve about YOURSELF and then you project that out and THEN percei2">ive. "Percepti2">ion i2">is a RESULT not a cause" and "projecti2">ion makes percepti2">ion."

When you're all caught up i2">in how to forgi2">ive the world, you really need to shi2">ift the focus to how can you forgi2">ive yourself, so that you don't accuse the world i2">in the fi2">irst place. When you are no longer accusi2">ing the world, you aren't beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">it i2">is a bad thi2">ing or an evi2">il thi2">ing or a real cruel thi2">ing. i2">It becomes, i2">I presume, i2">impossi2">ible to see i2">it at all, when love i2">is ruli2">ing the mi2">ind, because "love looks upon love" and hate looks upon hate. And only i2">in unlove can you see the world of death.

To forgi2">ive the world, forgi2">ive yourself. What you thi2">ink of yourself wi2">ill be projected and extend outward, projecti2">ing the world you see, causi2">ing you to ei2">ither see the helli2">ish world of bodi2">ies and flesh and death, or the real world of li2">ight and peace and happi2">iness. You must come from love, to see love or to justi2">ify forgi2">iveness. And you can't be forgi2">ivi2">ing towards the world i2">if you can't be forgi2">ivi2">ing towards yourself fi2">irst.

Lately i2">I'm noti2">ici2">ing more and more often, i2">I just don't want to blame. i2">I'm beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in "real si2">in" less and less.

i2">I di2">idn't see thi2">is comi2">ing, and i2">it's not that i2">I've been deli2">iberately worki2">ing on not bei2">ing blameful. But i2">I'm starti2">ing to see why thi2">is makes sense.

When i2">I blame, i2">I am beli2">ievi2">ing that there i2">is some "other" that's not me, that i2">I'm fi2">indi2">ing responsi2">ible for some ki2">ind of gui2">ilt or si2">in. Thi2">is so-called other i2">is actually a part of my own self whi2">ich i2">I spli2">it off i2">in my mi2">ind and attack. Thi2">is attack seems to cause a halluci2">inated projecti2">ion onto other people, i2">in whi2">ich the di2">isassoci2">iati2">ion from the "consci2">ious" part of my mi2">ind makes i2">it seem li2">ike i2">it's all to do wi2">ith someone else.

But the truth i2">is that my attack i2">is actually comi2">ing from me, and i2">it i2">is goi2">ing TO me. And i2">in fact, i2">I am not even really attacki2">ing anyone else at all. i2">I thi2">ink i2">I am, but i2">I'm not.

i2">In the ego's thought system of deni2">ial, i2">it really does seem li2">ike i2">it i2">is not only possi2">ible to fi2">ind someone else gui2">ilty for our own beli2">ief i2">in our own si2">infulness, but that they can recei2">ive ALL of the blame and we recei2">ive none of i2">it. We actually thi2">ink we can scapegoat someone and make them wrong and fi2">ind them gui2">ilty and that thi2">is has NO effect on ourselves whatsoever. i2">i.e. Do unto others as you would NOT have them do unto you.

Thi2">is i2">is of course a complete i2">illusi2">ion. Whi2">ile i2">it persi2">ists, we go around blami2">ing people because we thi2">ink that we CAN, as a vi2">iable "opti2">ion" for getti2">ing ri2">id of our own si2">infulness. i2">Introduci2">ing a separati2">ion between cause and effect, we thi2">ink we can be free of the effects and responsi2">ibi2">ili2">iti2">ies of our si2">in, and someone else can take the hi2">it. And we want to make especi2">ially sure that the separati2">ion between both i2">is strong so as to be strongly convi2">inced no nasty effects are goi2">ing to leak back onto ourselves.

But what has to dawn on our mi2">ind i2">is not only that we are responsi2">ible for 100% of what we are experi2">ienci2">ing, but also that everythi2">ing that has happened we have therefore done to ourselves, and therefore there ARE no causes outsi2">ide of us, and thus there are no grounds for blame.

Thi2">is also reveals to the mi2">ind that whi2">ile i2">it thought i2">it was capable of attacki2">ing someone "else" wi2">ith no effects on i2">itself, i2">it actually WAS attacki2">ing i2">itself. At fi2">irst i2">it wi2">ill thi2">ink that i2">it was attacki2">ing both i2">itself and others, but then i2">it wi2">ill also dawn that i2">it was i2">in fact ONLY attacki2">ing i2">itself. i2">In our egos we li2">ive i2">in pri2">ivate worlds of self-attack, at war wi2">ith ourselves, i2">in our spli2">it mi2">ind wi2">ith multi2">iple personali2">iti2">ies. i2">It doesn't even really i2">involved anyone else at all, we just pretend i2">it does. When we are wi2">illi2">ing to become aware that we are ONLY doi2">ing i2">it to ourselves, then a whole new ki2">ind of experi2">ience starts to emerge. Thi2">is i2">is what's starti2">ing to happen to me now.

i2">I am getti2">ing thi2">is feeli2">ing that i2">I just don't WANT to blame people for anythi2">ing. i2">I haven't deli2">iberately been tryi2">ing to stop blami2">ing as such, i2">it's just sort of emergi2">ing. Some part of me seems to be aware that i2">if i2">I blame, i2">in the act of blame, there i2">is an attack and that *i2">I* actually recei2">ive at least some of the effects of that attack. i2">It's not true that the other person i2">is 100% separated from me, and i2">it's not true that they are really gui2">ilty. i2">If i2">I am bei2">ing responsi2">ible, i2">it MUST mean that i2">I am doi2">ing thi2">is to myself and am attacki2">ing myself.

So each ti2">ime i2">I go to scapegoat, i2">i.e. pretend that i2">I even CAN scapegoat, i2">I'm starti2">ing to learn or reali2">ize that the "blame" i2">is ACTUALLY from myself, to myself, and i2">I Wi2">ILL experi2">ience effects from that. i2">I am becomi2">ing aware of those effects, rather than bei2">ing unconsci2">ious of i2">it. And the fact i2">is, outsi2">ide of deni2">ial, thi2">is self attack HURTS ME. i2">I do not want to keep hurti2">ing myself. i2">It i2">is a natural response, really.

i2">If you could be aware that you can ONLY do anythi2">ing to yourself, and that i2">if you attack, YOU wi2">ill be the one who gets ALL of the effects, you would not attack.

i2">It i2">is only because we've been unconsci2">ious and spli2">it i2">in our mi2">ind and beli2">ievi2">ing that there i2">is an "other" that all of the responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity can be gi2">iven to (di2">isowni2">ing of self), that we even CONCEi2">IVE of the i2">idea of di2">isplaci2">ing blame onto thi2">is "other". Or even that doi2">ing so mi2">ight cause us to NOT be experi2">ienci2">ing the effects of the si2">in. i2">It i2">is only because of DENi2">IAL that i2">it even seems possi2">ible that thi2">is would be helpful i2">in allevi2">iati2">ing gui2">ilt.

So whi2">ile i2">I am i2">in deni2">ial and am bei2">ing di2">ishonest and i2">irresponsi2">ible and beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">i am really si2">inful, i2">I'm goi2">ing to be really compelled to try to spli2">it myself off from that and project i2">it somewhere. But the truth i2">is, i2">I'm not escapi2">ing i2">it. Self-attack i2">is self-attack. Nobody else i2">is even bei2">ing attacked by me at all, so i2">it's not even as though there i2">is thi2">is moti2">ivati2">ion to "be ni2">ice to other people". My self-attack has NOTHi2">ING to do wi2">ith anyone else at all, and i2">in truth, NOBODY recei2">ives any effects from i2">it. No real effects anyway.

So i2">it's not even as though i2">I'm doi2">ing thi2">is out of GUi2">ILT i2">in relati2">ion to tryi2">ing to be ki2">inder to others. That would actually be a form of self sacri2">ifi2">ice whi2">ich i2">is ego. i2">Instead, i2">it's just the natural dawni2">ing of AWARENESS, that because i2">I am responsi2">ible, i2">I li2">iterally AM doi2">ing unto MYSELF as i2">I would have MYSELF do unto me. i2">I am attacki2">ing myself, and i2">it i2">is my beli2">ief that i2">I am really si2">inful that i2">is the root of thi2">is attack.

So as we have the courage to look at our own beli2">ief i2">in our own si2">infulness, i2">in the i2">idea of "real si2">in", and are fi2">indi2">ing some genui2">ine heali2">ing atonement for thi2">is, i2">it seems li2">ike the truth that we are only attacki2">ing ourselves becomes more obvi2">ious. i2">I just am becomi2">ing aware that i2">if i2">I attack, *i2">I* wi2">ill feel hurt, and i2">I just don't want to feel that anymore. i2">I don't want to keep fi2">indi2">ing myself si2">inful, because now i2">it's not a game of whether or not anyone else i2">is bei2">ing forgi2">iven (you cannot forgi2">ive anyone other than yourself, and there i2">is no need to!), i2">it's a game between me and myself now and how i2">I want to be towards myself.

i2">I don't want to blame others, because i2">I don't want to blame myself, because i2">I don't want to keep fi2">indi2">ing myself si2">inful and gui2">ilty. i2">I am just losi2">ing i2">interest i2">in i2">it. i2">It hurts to hurt myself. i2">I don't want that. Thi2">is i2">is how my i2">interests become shared i2">interests wi2">ith others. Thi2">is i2">is what leads to li2">iterally doi2">ing unto others as you would have them do unto you, whi2">ich really means, you are DOi2">ING LOVE to others BECAUSE you love yourself. You cannot really do anythi2">ing to others unless i2">it i2">IS love, because everythi2">ing else i2">is really self attack.

So i2">it's funny but, i2">in si2">ituati2">ions where i2">I would've gone ri2">ight i2">into blame and accusati2">ion and scapegoati2">ing, i2">I just can't seem to beli2">ieve my own bullshi2">it anymore. i2">I know i2">its di2">ishonest and i2">irresponsi2">ible and deni2">ial and not true that i2">it's anyone else's fault. Nobody has done anythi2">ing to me. No-one i2">is the cause of my upset. i2">I am choosi2">ing i2">it. i2">I'm doi2">ing thi2">is to myself. And i2">I want to stop doi2">ing that. i2">I want to recogni2">ize my true i2">innocence, and learn to love myself agai2">in.

Surrenderi2">ing to self-love shared wi2">ith God. i2">I am worthy because i2">in the atonement, i2">it i2">is true that i2">I have not really done anythi2">ing real, and therefore am sti2">ill i2">innocent. Accepti2">ing that produces a justi2">ifi2">icati2">ion to love yourself.

When you are i2">in the ego, you wi2">ill experi2">ience vari2">ious symptoms. You wi2">ill:

* Feel afrai2">id, confused, i2">indeci2">isi2">ive, uncertai2">in, doubtful.

* Be i2">in a state of questi2">ioni2">ing, tryi2">ing to fi2">ind answers.

* Beli2">ievi2">ing there are multi2">iple possi2">ible truths, explanati2">ions, di2">iagnoses and possi2">ibi2">ili2">iti2">ies outsi2">ide of you i2">in the world.

* Tryi2">ing to fi2">ind "the correct" possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity from all the possi2">ibi2">ili2">iti2">ies, as i2">if to do so wi2">ill bri2">ing salvati2">ion and an answer.

* Feel li2">ike somethi2">ing i2">in the world mi2">ight actually be true, and therefore you are afrai2">id, and can't qui2">ite trust the truth.

i2">I often fi2">ind myself i2">in thi2">is state. Once i2">I'm i2">in thi2">is state, hallmarked by fear and questi2">ioni2">ing, i2">I wi2">ill BELi2">IEVE that i2">I am tryi2">ing really hard to fi2">ind an answer. BUT, i2">I wi2">ill be looki2">ing i2">in all the wrong places, looki2">ing wi2">ith the ego, usi2">ing my separate "abi2">ili2">iti2">ies" such as the i2">intellect or past experi2">iences, and i2">I wi2">ill just be goi2">ing around and around franti2">ic to fi2">ind "the answer".

i2">I wi2">ill thi2">ink that i2">if i2">I look hard enough i2">I wi2">ill fi2">ind out what the truth i2">is. But i2">it's goi2">ing to be one of many possi2">ible truths, whi2">ich i2">is confusi2">ing i2">in i2">its own ri2">ight. So then i2">I thi2">ink that i2">if i2">I can just "fi2">igure out" on my own, know on my own, whi2">ich one of them i2">is the "real answer", then i2">I wi2">ill fi2">ind i2">it and can then get salvati2">ion. i2">It never works, because the ego's rule i2">is "seek and do not fi2">ind", whi2">ich means to seek passi2">ionately, to questi2">ion everythi2">ing, to reject all real answers, and to just stay i2">in a state of fear.

When i2">I get li2">ike thi2">is, there i2">IS no truth out there. There i2">IS no answer that i2">I wi2">ill fi2">ind, from an "objecti2">ive world", whi2">ich wi2">ill be "the" truth. But i2">I wi2">ill be percei2">ivi2">ing not only that there i2">IS an objecti2">ive world, whi2">ich i2">is real, but that i2">it therefore MUST contai2">in the truth. i2">If the world i2">is real, i2">it automati2">ically has truth i2">in i2">it, so i2">I just need to fi2">igure out where i2">it i2">is. Trouble i2">is that NEVER works, because the world i2">is NOT really real, i2">it does NOT really contai2">in any truth, and nothi2">ing i2">I fi2">igure out about i2">it wi2">ill undo the FEAR.

Fear i2">is produced BECAUSE i2">I've made the world real. "i2">I am upset because i2">I see somethi2">ing whi2">ich i2">is not there", i2">i.e. i2">I've made an i2">illusi2">ion real, am deluded, and MUST now experi2">ience fear because i2">it seems li2">ike somethi2">ing UNTRUE has taken on a li2">ife of i2">its own. Who wouldn't be afrai2">id i2">if i2">imagi2">inary monsters suddenly seemed real?

i2">In thi2">is state of egoti2">ism, vi2">icti2">imhood, fear, confusi2">ion and questi2">ioni2">ing, i2">I am NOT really maki2">ing any headway towards salvati2">ion. i2">I'm not really getti2">ing closer to the answer. i2">I'm actually doi2">ing the opposi2">ite. i2">It i2">is because i2">I have moved AWAY from the answer, that i2">I am even feeli2">ing thi2">is experi2">ience of "questi2">ioni2">ing" at all. The experi2">ience of questi2">ioni2">ing i2">is really a state of bei2">ing answerless, lacki2">ing i2">in all certai2">inty, knowi2">ing nothi2">ing, fai2">ili2">ing to be at peace, a complete loss of clari2">ity, total vi2">icti2">imhood, and i2">is terri2">ifyi2">ing.

When i2">I get li2">ike thi2">is, Jesus often now prompts me wi2">ith a si2">ingle wi2">ise word: "deci2">ide".

At fi2">irst, i2">I do not know what what thi2">is means or why the heck i2">it i2">is even relevant i2">in the si2">ituati2">ion. i2">If i2">I'm stuck i2">in the mi2">iddle of tryi2">ing to understand HOW or WHY "somethi2">ing has happened", or how or why "somethi2">ing really i2">is thi2">is way", i2">it seems to make no sense as to why deci2">idi2">ing somethi2">ing would help, or what the deci2">isi2">ion even i2">is.

But what i2">I gradually come around to i2">is thi2">is. The state that i2">I'm i2">in, as a state of vi2">icti2">imhood and ego, i2">is only happeni2">ing BECAUSE i2">I'm beli2">ievi2">ing that stuff can happen to me agai2">inst my wi2">ill, that i2">I have no choi2">ice, that i2">I have to put up wi2">ith whatever thi2">is external truth i2">is, and that i2">I need to fi2">ind out what that "external law" i2">is so that i2">I can do somethi2">ing about i2">it. i2">It's not a deci2">isi2">ive state at all. i2">It's a loss of deci2">isi2">iveness. A loss of confi2">idence. A loss of clari2">ity and certai2">inty. i2">In other words, i2">it i2">is FEAR.

To get out of fear, and to get out of the enti2">ire game of "what i2">if i2">its thi2">is" "what i2">if i2">its that"..... whi2">ich i2">is all enti2">irely terri2">ifyi2">ing, you have to SHi2">IFT your perspecti2">ive to somethi2">ing enti2">irely di2">ifferent. A whole di2">ifferent model for what thi2">ings are and how stuff happens. You've got to get out of vi2">icti2">imhood i2">into EMPOWERMENT. That means:

1) Owni2">ing up to you bei2">ing totally responsi2">ible for everythi2">ing

2) Reclai2">imi2">ing your power, i2">in that whatever you choose wi2">ill happen, nothi2">ing wi2">ill happen unless you choose i2">it, and therefore whatever you choose Wi2">ILL BE your experi2">ience

3) Reali2">ize then that you do not need to defend yourself agai2">inst i2">illusory threats, because NOTHi2">ING i2">IS HAPPENi2">ING TO YOU agai2">inst your wi2">ill

4) You are deci2">isi2">ive, confi2">ident, powerful, certai2">in and creati2">ive. You can CHOOSE AGAi2">IN. And that means

5) You can choose to ali2">ign yourself wi2">ith God's truth, and to make a statement of what the truth i2">IS, i2">instead of attempti2">ing to "fi2">ind out" what the truth i2">is. Thus

6) i2">If you choose NOT to create enemi2">ies, fears, di2">isasters, problems, si2">ickness, death, monsters, etc... THEY Wi2">ILL NOT EXi2">IST and wi2">ill not be able to do anythi2">ing to you.

*YOU* HAVE THAT POWER! You get what you ask for! There i2">is no such thi2">ing as stuff happeni2">ing that you di2">id not ask for and do not want!!!!

BE THE TRUTH!

i2">If you thi2">ink that you wi2">ill become free of a beli2">ief i2">if you can fi2">igure out why stuff "really happens", or why someone "really does somethi2">ing", or "why evi2">il i2">is evi2">il" or "why people are si2">ick" etc.... you wi2">ill not only fai2">il to fi2">ind a peaceful answer, you wi2">ill also CREATE THOSE THi2">INGS. Thi2">is i2">is why i2">in your MASTERY of yourself, you have to come to reali2">ize that nothi2">ing can happen to you agai2">inst your wi2">ill, and that the only thi2">ing you've really been doi2">ing wrong i2">is beli2">ievi2">ing that somethi2">ing can be true Wi2">ITHOUT YOU CHOOSi2">ING i2">IT.

So when Jesus says deci2">ide, he means, fli2">ip i2">into a state of confi2">idence and DECi2">IDE whether you beli2">ieve the ego's truth or God's truth. Whi2">ich one of these reali2">iti2">ies wi2">ill you ALi2">IGN yourself wi2">ith. Whi2">ich one of these two truths i2">is goi2">ing to be TRUE for you and are you goi2">ing to beli2">ieve i2">in?

See, you thi2">ink you have a choi2">ice beyond the ego and God. You thi2">ink there i2">is a thi2">ird choi2">ice. You thi2">ink that somehow there i2">is 1) God, 2) Ego, 3) Your selecti2">ive abi2">ili2">ity to pi2">ick and choose what the truth i2">is. You do not have that abi2">ili2">ity really. You ONLY have the abi2">ili2">ity to deci2">ide whi2">ich thought system you wi2">ill BE a part of. i2">If you choose to be part of the ego's thought system, you wi2">ill choose to beli2">ieve that everythi2">ing about the ego i2">is REAL for you. i2">If you choose to be part of God's thought system, you wi2">ill choose to beli2">ieve that everythi2">ing about GOD i2">is REAL for you. And beli2">ievi2">ing one, you wi2">ill di2">isbeli2">ieve i2">in the other. And that i2">IS your protecti2">ion!

So recogni2">ize thi2">is. Fear that the ego i2">is true, MUST di2">isappear, i2">IF you choose to beli2">ieve i2">in God's truth, BECAUSE they are opposi2">ite and mutually exclusi2">ive. They cannot coexi2">ist. i2">If you want to be safe from evi2">il, CHOOSE GOD, SO THAT *YOU* do not create your own evi2">il. YOU are the one who empowers i2">it. YOU are the one who gi2">ive reali2">ity to i2">it. YOU are the one who makes yourself vulnerable by tryi2">ing to become at peace or saved from a "real threat".

i2">If the ego's world of threats and dangers i2">is real for you, there i2">is NO WAY that you wi2">ill ever fi2">ind peace. You si2">imply cannot fi2">ind salvati2">ion, truth, a peaceful answer, a resoluti2">ion, a cure, a magi2">ical descri2">ipti2">ion, a sati2">isfactory di2">iagnosi2">is, or any ki2">ind of convi2">inci2">ing TRUTH i2">if you are CHOOSi2">ING to beli2">ieve the ego i2">is real. Because even i2">if you thi2">ink that you are i2">in a state of questi2">ioni2">ing and NOT havi2">ing a choi2">ice, you actually ARE choosi2">ing the ego. You are never not choosi2">ing.

Choose the ego and you'll beli2">ieve you have no choi2">ice and that you don't want to choose what the ego i2">is offeri2">ing.

Choose God and you wi2">ill beli2">ieve you are free to choose but you only want to choose God after all.

So get out of your ego's attempt to i2">intellectually di2">iscover the truth i2">in the world, or explai2">in si2">ickness, or fi2">igure out why evi2">il happens, or why someone di2">id somethi2">ing. There i2">is NO TRUTH there. Choose i2">instead to reclai2">im your POWER OF DECi2">ISi2">ION, get out of the vi2">icti2">imy complete lack of confi2">idence, become deci2">isi2">ive, be determi2">ined you wi2">ill MAKE A DECi2">ISi2">ION about what you beli2">ieve, and MAKE i2">IT!

i2">I CHOOSE THAT GOD'S TRUTH i2">IS TRUE AND NOTHi2">ING ELSE i2">IS TRUE!

THAT i2">is your i2">immortal protecti2">ion agai2">inst all i2">illusi2">ions, all evi2">il, all sufferi2">ing, and all death. Goi2">ing back i2">into fear to "check" i2">if evi2">il i2">is gone si2">imply wi2">ill make more evi2">il. Goi2">ing back i2">into fear to "prove" that somethi2">ing i2">is true, wi2">ill just i2">invali2">idate the truth agai2">in. Thi2">is i2">is why you must TRUST i2">in God's truth, SURRENDER your beli2">ief that the ego's world i2">is real, and become fully commi2">itted to the REALi2">ITY that God has already deci2">ided FOR you.

Choosi2">ing for yourself, versus accepti2">ing God's deci2">isi2">ion. That's all.

"i2">I want the peace of God." W185

There's over 100 references i2">in ACi2">IM to "the peace of God". Years ago i2">I wouldn't have thought that peace i2">is somethi2">ing i2">I want. i2">It wasn't a pri2">iori2">ity. i2">I just wanted all the stupi2">id people to go away, lol.

But the more i2">I've done the course the more i2">it's becomi2">ing apparent that peace i2">is very central to the experi2">ience i2">I SHOULD be havi2">ing.

i2">I had a dream a few years ago whi2">ich showed me an example of extraordi2">inary peace.

i2">In the dream there was a small outdoor scene wi2">ith some trees and a wi2">ild grassy area, and a sort of sky wi2">ith clouds, although the clouds seemed to be very nearby.

The clouds parted and as they di2">id, they took on an extraordi2">inary emerald green color, ri2">ich and vi2">ibrant and beauti2">iful. An openi2">ing appeared and there floated i2">in, from beyond the clouds, were a pai2">ir of beauti2">iful orbs of li2">ight, whi2">ich seemed to be radi2">iati2">ing li2">ife and li2">ight and colori2">ing the landscape as they went.

These orbs were spheres, and glowed gently from wi2">ithi2">in. i2">It wasn't li2">ike a dazzli2">ing li2">ight, just a soft glow. They seemed mostly transparent, and about the si2">ize of a bowli2">ing ball.

The two orbs floated very slowly and qui2">ietly past where i2">I stood, and conti2">inued to float on forward, under thei2">ir own wi2">ill. But the thi2">ing that really struck me was the quali2">ity of the atmosphere and how i2">it felt.

The orbs were ali2">ive, and were aware, and were extremely peaceful. They seemed to have no ounce of a sense of attack or i2">irri2">itati2">ion or di2">isturbance. They were so i2">incredi2">ibly calm and qui2">iet, so perfectly i2">innocent, holy even.

They could not not have been more pure, more si2">imple, or more beauti2">iful. They just gli2">ided along softly together, as though accompanyi2">ing each other, and were perfectly unhurri2">ied and peaceful.

That's about where the dream ends. But i2">I sti2">ill thi2">ink back on i2">it and, when i2">I do, i2">I feel that same peace, and i2">it becomes an i2">inspi2">irati2">ion. As i2">I thi2">ink about what that felt li2">ike, i2">I can draw a number of i2">ideas from i2">it.

A total lack of all confli2">ict, a total absence of war, a total lack of any sense of fi2">ighti2">ing or di2">isturbance or angry aggressi2">ion. A total i2">innocence, so pure and gentle and si2">imple, li2">ike i2">it was just born from God.

No sense of i2">irri2">itati2">ion, or annoyance, or frustrati2">ion or any ki2">ind of bi2">itterness or resentment. No sense of gui2">ilt or si2">in or shame or unworthi2">iness. Not the sli2">ightest speck of i2">inflammati2">ion or agi2">itati2">ion or i2">interrupti2">ion of any ki2">ind.

Perfectly calm and tranqui2">il, wi2">ith no force or pressure, no sense of threat or danger, no concern or worry or doubt or fear. Nothi2">ing compli2">icated or di2">istorted, no deni2">ial or rejecti2">ion, no defences, and absolutely no sense of urgency.

Just total calm and total peace and total si2">imple bei2">ing. Total freedom, total beauti2">iful i2">innocent si2">impli2">ici2">ity, and total calm gentle joy.

Thi2">is i2">I feel i2">is what i2">I really want, and what we all want. And i2">it hi2">ighli2">ights how all these thi2">ings that were absent - are all thi2">ings that we are so accustomed to li2">ivi2">ing wi2">ith and tolerati2">ing. All the ego emoti2">ions and hurts, all the fi2">ighti2">ing and war and confli2">ict, all the fear and gui2">ilt. All of i2">it has to go.

i2">I used to thi2">ink somehow that the pi2">innacle of human experi2">ience mi2">ight be some ki2">ind of heroi2">ic role i2">in whi2">ich we have superpowers and can do whatever we want, flyi2">ing around the room wi2">ith a cloak on. But thi2">is ego fantasy of bei2">ing the savi2">ior to wretched peasants i2">is bei2">ing replaced wi2">ith a si2">impler goal of humbleness and qui2">iet.

And when all of that stuff goes, stuff that we thi2">ink i2">is normal and commonplace, all the sense of separati2">ion and tensi2">ion and confli2">ict goes wi2">ith i2">it. And what i2">is left i2">is just thi2">is lovely extremely calm peacefulness, lacki2">ing all sense of somethi2">ing bei2">ing wrong i2">in any way.

Perhaps that's what we are really. Just si2">imple orbs of li2">ight floati2">ing around calmly and happi2">ily, i2">in total surrender and total contentment, wi2">ith no enemi2">ies and no reasons for concern. Just bei2">ing at peace wi2">ith God. Free and ali2">ive, floati2">ing along wi2">ith not a care i2">in the world.

i2">In order to uncover a blocked awareness, we need to be wi2">illi2">ing to admi2">it to the truth. And that means bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to admi2">it that we are NOT doi2">ing what we are clai2">imi2">ing to be doi2">ing, we DO want the sufferi2">ing we are experi2">ienci2">ing, and we ARE acti2">ively forci2">ing ourselves to be vi2">icti2">ims.

There i2">is a very si2">imple law at work. And i2">it i2">is thi2">is: You are completely free. Whi2">ich means that whatever you are experi2">ienci2">ing, YOU MUST WANT i2">IT. There are no excepti2">ions to thi2">is. And thi2">is i2">is very di2">iffi2">icult to fully and deeply look at, yet alone to accept. Yet i2">it i2">is the secret of salvati2">ion.

Half the ti2">ime we mi2">ight be sayi2">ing thi2">ings li2">ike, i2">I really want to be wi2">ith God, i2">I want to love everyone, i2">I love my ki2">ids, i2">I beli2">ieve i2">in heali2">ing and health, i2">I don't beli2">ieve i2">I'm gui2">ilty, etc... BUT, at the same ti2">ime, EXPERi2">IENCi2">ING the exact opposi2">ite.

Thi2">is i2">is the ego talki2">ing. The ego i2">is VERY good at li2">ies. i2">It's very good at di2">isgui2">ises. i2">It's very good at talki2">ing out of both si2">ides of i2">its mouth and bei2">ing two faced. Generally speaki2">ing, the ego i2">is the i2">idea of di2">ishonesty. And i2">in di2">ishonest states, you are qui2">ite capable of sayi2">ing or even beli2">ievi2">ing thi2">ings that you do not REALLY beli2">ieve deep down, and do not beli2">ieve fully.

When you take a look at the evi2">idence, ei2">ither you ARE ACTUALLY EXPERi2">IENCi2">ING what you say you beli2">ieve i2">is real, or you are lyi2">ing to yourself. You can wrap up all ki2">inds of lovely statements i2">in what seem to be well-meani2">ing fervent desi2">ires for somethi2">ing, but thi2">is doesn't mean you are CHOOSi2">ING TO DO these thi2">ings.

For example, someone who sees themselves as bei2">ing unfai2">irly treated or vi2">icti2">imi2">ized, wi2">ill complai2">in a lot. They wi2">ill make a whole lot of noi2">ise about how much they DO NOT WANT what i2">is happeni2">ing. But all of thi2">is noi2">ise i2">is utter bullshi2">it. What's happeni2">ing i2">is the person HAS chosen to suffer, WANTS to keep sufferi2">ing, does NOT want to actually take the steps of heali2">ing that would UNDO i2">it, and so i2">is li2">iterally STUCK i2">in a state that they CLAi2">IM to want to get out of, but whi2">ich they are not ACTUALLY getti2">ing out of.

i2">Instead, the ego vi2">icti2">im tri2">ies to poi2">int fi2">ingers at all the reasons and powers other than themselves, that are keepi2">ing them bound to hell and upset. Wai2">iti2">ing for someone else to bai2">il them out. Wai2">iti2">ing for someone to save them. Wai2">iti2">ing for someone to change on thei2">ir behalf. Or even wai2">iti2">ing for someone to do somethi2">ing to them to make a di2">ifference. Thi2">is i2">is all an UNWi2">ILLi2">INGNESS to ACTUALLY look wi2">ithi2">in and undo the ACTUAL beli2">ief i2">in si2">in that i2">is lurki2">ing i2">in the background, causi2">ing the sufferi2">ing.

You have i2">it i2">in your power to undo all forms of sufferi2">ing i2">if you so choose, because you have free wi2">ill. Your free wi2">ill means you can NEVER get away wi2">ith fi2">indi2">ing ANY excuse for why you are i2">in the si2">ituati2">ion you are i2">in. NOR that you can fi2">ind any excuse for why you cannot get out of i2">it, or why getti2">ing out of i2">it depends on ANYTHi2">ING. Not on another person, not on the body, not on forces of nature, not on money or ci2">ircumstances, nothi2">ing.

There i2">is NOTHi2">ING STOPPi2">ING YOU FROM CHOOSi2">ING HEAVEN. No-one i2">is holdi2">ing you i2">in hell but yourself. Thi2">is i2">is the secret of salvati2">ion. i2">If you would si2">imply ACTUALLY go ahead and CLEARLY, CONCi2">ISELY, CONFi2">IDENTLY COMMi2">IT to a more healed state of mi2">ind, your mi2">ind would be healed i2">instantly. Nothi2">ing can stop you but yourself. All the beli2">iefs we have about WHY we can't, are made up li2">ies.

"i2">If you wi2">ish ONLY to be healed, you heal. Your si2">ingle PURPOSE makes thi2">is possi2">ible."

Jesus states clearly i2">in the course that your completely clear si2">ingle-mi2">inded deci2">isi2">ion to heal causes you to heal. Because i2">in thi2">is unwaveri2">ing commi2">itment to ONE OUTCOME, your wi2">ill i2">is completely unopposed BY i2">ITSELF, and therefore does not thwart i2">its own efforts to CHOOSE. The power of deci2">isi2">ion i2">is your own, enabli2">ing you to Di2">ISTi2">INCTLY CHOOSE what you Wi2">ILL. Whatever happens you have asked for, and whatever you do not want does not happen. Thi2">is i2">is why you are ruler of the uni2">iverse.

So i2">if we're i2">in a state where we're complai2">ini2">ing about the state we're i2">in, or we feel stuck i2">in i2">it, or can't get out of i2">it, or are clai2">imi2">ing to have the best i2">intenti2">ions, or would do somethi2">ing "i2">IF" a dependency on somethi2">ing else i2">is fulfi2">illed, we are really not bei2">ing completely honest. We are not admi2">itti2">ing to how we ourselves are holdi2">ing ourselves i2">in hell by NOT undoi2">ing the ACTUAL problem.

i2">If the real problem i2">is a beli2">ief i2">in si2">in, we need to stop beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in si2">in. Thi2">is wi2">ill take care of ALL problems. But i2">if we do not WANT to undo the si2">in, we wi2">ill remai2">in i2">in gui2">ilt and sufferi2">ing, complai2">ini2">ing about why the sufferi2">ing i2">is unfai2">ir and maki2">ing tremendous steam about just how much we "really want" to get out of i2">it. Or to be rescued. But we have to stop and get really honest. i2">If we are STi2">ILL sufferi2">ing, we MUST NOT WANT TO STOP i2">IT. Even i2">if we are screami2">ing at the top of our lungs "i2">I want thi2">is to stop". Sayi2">ing so i2">is not taki2">ing constructi2">ive acti2">ion steps to DO i2">IT.

Thi2">is deeper desi2">ire i2">is the choi2">ice to conti2">inue sufferi2">ing, and thi2">is choi2">ice i2">is the deeper problem. i2">It's what's blocki2">ing awareness. We have to be wi2">illi2">ing to ADMi2">IT that we HAVE CHOSEN to suffer, and become wi2">illi2">ing to CHOOSE AGAi2">IN, a better way, whi2">ich means bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to actually address and undo the "real cause" of the problem i2">in our mi2">ind.

All of our posi2">iti2">ive-sounded well-meani2">ing wi2">ishful-thi2">inki2">ing pleasantri2">ies about how much we want the truth and love and li2">ight and God, do not actually take us closer to God. They take us away from God because they are forms of deni2">ial coveri2">ing up desi2">ires NOT to be wi2">ith God. Ei2">ither we wi2">ill choose to be wi2">ith God or not to be. But when we're choosi2">ing not to be, and clai2">imi2">ing that we want to be, we must be lyi2">ing. We can't have i2">it both ways.

Looki2">ing wi2">ithi2">in to the honest facts of what we are ACTUALLY DOi2">ING, and admi2">itti2">ing that i2">if we are not wi2">ith God i2">it MUST be because we want some ki2">ind of si2">inful sufferi2">ing, thi2">is opens up the doorways, li2">ifts away the deni2">ial, removes the i2">illusi2">ions of peace, and allows us to shed real li2">ight of truth on the si2">ituati2">ion. Then we can SEE, that i2">in fact we have a gri2">ievance, or an unhealed wound, or a secret si2">in or hi2">idden hate. And thi2">is hi2">idden stuff's REMOVAL i2">is what wi2">ill actually bri2">ings us closer Wi2">ITHi2">IN to awareness of God's presence.

Goi2">ing through the dark shi2">it i2">is unfortunately a lot harder and requi2">ires a lot more radi2">ical honesty than the fluffy externali2">ized "happy seeker" route of rai2">inbows and ni2">ice-soundi2">ing fluff. We Di2">ID choose to reject God. We di2">id actually push away our i2">inheri2">itance. As Jesus states i2">in ACi2">IM, "the separati2">ion HAS occurred." We have to admi2">it that we're STi2">ILL choosi2">ing i2">it, i2">if we are not GETTi2">ING the result of reuni2">ion wi2">ith God.

We di2">id seem to WANT to suffer. We Di2">ID make a mi2">istaken deci2">isi2">ion by choosi2">ing that, and we need to choose agai2">in i2">if we want peace. That means looki2">ing at what we ACTUALLY DO BELi2">IEVE, and not at what we THi2">INK we beli2">ieve. And these dark beli2">iefs can then be brought i2">into the li2">ight and released.

"i2">I must have deci2">ided wrongly because i2">I am NOT at peace. (meani2">ing, i2">I li2">iterally CHOSE TO SUFFER, and i2">I have to admi2">it i2">I have chosen that, i2">in order to recogni2">ize that i2">I need to choose agai2">in)

i2">I made the deci2">isi2">ion myself (no one else made me suffer, i2">I di2">id), but i2">I can also deci2">ide otherwi2">ise. (meani2">ing i2">I have the power to CHOOSE NOT TO SUFFER, and to force thi2">is to happen).

i2">I Wi2">ILL to deci2">ide otherwi2">ise, because i2">I WANT to be at peace. (i2">I want to stop sufferi2">ing and by Wi2">ILLi2">ING NOT TO SUFFER, the sufferi2">ing stops - i2">if i2">I'm doi2">ing so honestly and fully)

i2">I do NOT feel gui2">ilty, because the Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo ALL the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">IF i2">I Wi2">ILL LET Hi2">IM. (i2">I am not GUi2">ILTY for maki2">ing a wrong deci2">isi2">ion, i2">I am just mi2">istaken and need correcti2">ion of the ACTUAL problem, whi2">ich i2">is a beli2">ief i2">in the desi2">ire to suffer)

i2">I Wi2">ILL to let Hi2">im by allowi2">ing Hi2">im to deci2">ide for God for me." (i2">I recei2">ive heali2">ing help from the Holy Spi2">iri2">it and open up to Hi2">is Li2">ight of Truth to shi2">ine i2">into my mi2">ind and i2">illumi2">inate i2">it, so that i2">I can ACTUALLY experi2">ience what i2">I've been sayi2">ing i2">I want.)

i2">If there i2">is a pai2">in i2">in my hand, and i2">if i2">I beli2">ieve there i2">is a pai2">in i2">in my hand, i2">I wi2">ill begi2">in to experi2">ience reacti2">ions about the pai2">in.

Thi2">is i2">is si2">imply because i2">I see there bei2">ing some ki2">ind of causali2">ity comi2">ing from the pai2">in. i2">I thi2">ink i2">it has a power over me. i2">I see i2">it as happeni2">ing to me. i2">I seem to be experi2">ienci2">ing i2">it as though i2">it has happened wi2">ithout me aski2">ing for i2">it. And so i2">it seems unfai2">ir, mali2">ici2">ious, unwanted, unwelcome, as though these senti2">iments are somehow justi2">ifi2">ied expressi2">ions of me bei2">ing holi2">ier or more i2">innocent than thi2">is.

And i2">if thi2">is pai2">in i2">in the hand conti2">inues or i2">increases, then i2">I wi2">ill li2">ikely i2">increase i2">in my percepti2">ion of vi2">icti2">im hood, and si2">imply by the reversal of cause and effect, seei2">ing cause as outsi2">ide of myself, i2">I am acti2">ively creati2">ing responsi2">ive condi2">iti2">ions i2">insi2">ide of myself whi2">ich show up as reacti2">ions, havi2">ing threatened my own self wi2">ith my own mi2">istaken percepti2">ion of thi2">is pai2">in.

i2">I myself am creati2">ing my own reacti2">ions, i2">includi2">ing fear whi2">ich begi2">ins to mount i2">in response, as though the pai2">in i2">is causi2">ing me to be afrai2">id - what does i2">it mean, what i2">is i2">it leadi2">ing to, why i2">is i2">it happeni2">ing, but si2">imply also the sheer apparent fact (albei2">it unreal) that i2">it i2">is even happeni2">ing at all, i2">is enough to provi2">ide an upset.

"i2">I am upset because i2">I see somethi2">ing that i2">is not there." - ACi2">IM

And so as my fearful reacti2">ion i2">increases, so too does my convi2">icti2">ion that thi2">is i2">is a more seri2">ious problem than before, that i2">it calls for magi2">ical curati2">ive measures whi2">ich wi2">ill attack i2">it and mani2">ipulate i2">it and try to make i2">it go away. And the more strongly i2">I feel passi2">ionate about the need to be ri2">id of i2">it, the more i2">I wi2">ill actually add empowerment to i2">it, seei2">ing i2">it as bei2">ing so strong and mi2">ighty as to deserve seri2">ious counter-measures.

These percepti2">ions of the need for a counter measure, a retali2">iati2">ion, a reacti2">ion of any justi2">ifi2">ied ki2">ind, a fear, or any sense of taki2">ing thi2">is seri2">iously or treati2">ing i2">it as real, si2">imply shows the extent of my mi2">istakedness and the fact that what i2">I am ACTUALLY doi2">ing i2">is CREATi2">ING THi2">IS. i2">I create i2">it wi2">ith my fear of i2">it, i2">I create i2">it wi2">ith my rejecti2">ion of i2">it, i2">I create i2">it wi2">ith my desi2">ire to be ri2">id of i2">it, and i2">I create i2">it wi2">ith my attempt to fi2">ix i2">it.

And the more real of a problem i2">it seems to become, the more certai2">in i2">I wi2">ill be that i2">I really need to get somethi2">ing done about thi2">is because i2">it's very very seri2">ious i2">indeed. And yet i2">in percei2">ivi2">ing i2">it, descri2">ibi2">ing i2">it, envi2">isi2">ioni2">ing i2">it, i2">interacti2">ing wi2">ith i2">it and maki2">ing i2">it be seri2">ious as such - beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in i2">its appearance - i2">I am merely choosi2">ing to mani2">ifest i2">it, to gi2">ive energy to i2">it, to feed i2">it.

The reason that we do thi2">is i2">is because when we are usi2">ing the mi2">ind i2">incorrectly and are enteri2">ing i2">into i2">illusi2">ions, false percepti2">ions and errors, we start to experi2">ience the opposi2">ite of what we attempt to achi2">ieve. We thi2">ink that we do not want pai2">in i2">in the hand, but thi2">is means that we wi2">ill put i2">it there. We thi2">ink the pai2">in i2">in the hand should not be happeni2">ing, and such i2">intensi2">ify i2">its happeni2">ing. We thi2">ink that i2">it i2">is maki2">ing us very afrai2">id, and as such we li2">iterally are causi2">ing i2">it to become more monstrous.

We do not reali2">ize that as soon as we have stepped away from real truth and have entered i2">into mi2">istaken truth, we've lost our mi2">ind and our way, have become decei2">ived, and are now operati2">ing our mental powers 'i2">inversed' or back to front.

The ego i2">is an enti2">ire thought system based on thi2">is back-to-front i2">inversi2">ion of truth, and when we are i2">in thi2">is mi2">ind, we qui2">ite li2">iterally ask for what we do not want, attract what we are tryi2">ing to get away from, try to fi2">ix what i2">is not even a problem, and generally compound the very i2">issues that we suffer from, not reali2">izi2">ing all along that we are i2">inadvertently causi2">ing ourselves to prolong the sufferi2">ing, si2">imply because we're applyi2">ing ourselves through an i2">inverti2">ing fi2">ilter, a reali2">ity fli2">ip, whi2">ich gi2">ives us back the exact opposi2">ite of what we thi2">ink we are aski2">ing for. And thi2">is i2">is si2">imply because once i2">in the ego percepti2">ion, we are i2">in opposi2">iti2">ion to the real truth, and therefore are bri2">ingi2">ing about opposi2">ite effects.

i2">Indeed the i2">incorrect form of forgi2">iveness correlates to the ego acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies and behavi2">iors of beli2">ievi2">ing that you are si2">incerely attempti2">ing to ri2">id the world of that whi2">ich i2">is wrong wi2">ith i2">it, by taki2">ing a purer or more i2">innocent standpoi2">int, all the whi2">ile actually rei2">inforci2">ing, mani2">ifesti2">ing, i2">increasi2">ing and generally addi2">ing to the condi2">iti2">ions of si2">infulness. Such forgi2">iveness then becomes an attack rather than a correcti2">ion of error, a judgement i2">instead of a mi2">iracle.

True forgi2">iveness therefore must entai2">il the cessati2">ion of all of the above egoi2">ic behavi2">iors, reacti2">ions, self-caused chaos, and general i2">inversi2">ion of truth and opposi2">iti2">ion to i2">it. All of these symptoms are expressi2">ing merely because you are usi2">ing the mi2">ind backwards, expressi2">ing opposi2">iti2">ion and resi2">istance i2">instead of uni2">ity, order and health.

True forgi2">iveness entai2">ils the complete UN-doi2">ing of all of these egoi2">ic thought patterns, atti2">itudes that rei2">inforce the reali2">ity of the monster, reacti2">ions to i2">it founded i2">in fear whi2">ich really are created by your own self as part of your psychologi2">ical reversal and beli2">ief i2">in threat, and the cessati2">ion of "maki2">ing real" thi2">is problem. To lend reali2">ity to i2">it, to beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it, dwell upon i2">it, gi2">ive i2">it credi2">it, thi2">ink of i2">it seri2">iously, forget to laugh at i2">it, mi2">istake i2">it for real danger (whi2">ich does not exi2">ist), and to generally actually si2">ide wi2">ith i2">it whi2">ile clai2">imi2">ing and portrayi2">ing yourself as doi2">ing the exact opposi2">ite, i2">is si2">imply to keep the problem and make i2">it worse.

We need to learn to forget thi2">is world. As Jesus says, forget thi2">is world and come wi2">ith wholly empty hands unto your God. To forget i2">is to li2">iterally pay no further attenti2">ion, knowi2">ing that the thi2">ing was unreal, and requi2">ires no upkeep to defend agai2">inst i2">it.

We need to learn to stop learni2">ing the wrong thi2">ings. We keep teachi2">ing ourselves wi2">ith the ego, we keep learni2">ing that si2">ickness i2">is real, that si2">in i2">is i2">irreversi2">ible, and that death i2">is i2">inevi2">itable. Thi2">is must all be corrected and undone and vanqui2">ished from the mi2">ind, replaced wi2">ith the Holy Li2">ight of the Truth, whi2">ich comes to set you free.

The truth does set you free, li2">iterally, actually, and i2">in reali2">ity. Because the Truth i2">is God and only Love i2">is Real.

Cause produces effects. Thi2">is i2">is God's permanent law, wi2">ithout excepti2">ion. i2">It appli2">ies everywhere always. There i2">is a secret to performi2">ing mi2">iracles based on thi2">is, resulti2">ing i2">in the undoi2">ing of effects. Thi2">is i2">is di2">irectly ti2">ied i2">into the Atonement and The Mi2">iracle.

"the word "atone" really means "undo." (remove i2">illusory effects)

"The mi2">iracle does nothi2">ing. All i2">it does i2">is to undo (removes effects). And thus i2">it cancels out (by not causi2">ing) the i2">interference (effects) to what has been done (caused i2">in reali2">ity). i2">It does not add, but merely takes away (removes effects)."

i2">I have experi2">ienced several ti2">imes the i2">instant vani2">ishi2">ing of symptoms when causati2">ion was removed. Thi2">is takes place at the level of the mi2">ind and the mi2">ind's beli2">ief i2">in causes. As i2">I stri2">ipped away beli2">ief i2">in who or what caused thi2">is, the enti2">ire symptom li2">iterally di2">isappeared i2">in a spli2">it second.

Nothi2">ing happens wi2">ithout causati2">ion. Effects can only appear when there i2">is a cause. Thi2">is i2">includes the **beli2">ief** i2">in there bei2">ing a cause, even i2">if the cause i2">is made up i2">in dreami2">ing. When the cause stops causi2">ing, or i2">is undone, the effects i2">immedi2">iately di2">isappear. Causati2">ion i2">is li2">ike a broadcast, emi2">itti2">ing consequences, effects, symptoms and results. Effects come from i2">it.

Just as God i2">is fi2">irst cause, He MUST create effects. Hi2">is effects are Hi2">is Ki2">ingdom of Creati2">ion, i2">includi2">ing the Sonshi2">ip. Because God i2">is permanently causal, and true cause means creati2">ion, Hi2">is creati2">ions have eternal li2">ife and always exi2">ist. True causali2">ity creates permanent, li2">ivi2">ing bei2">ings. You di2">id not cause God (whi2">ich would be si2">in, authori2">ity problem, level confusi2">ion), God caused you.

"i2">I am forever an effect of God."

There i2">is also what we call "maki2">ing", whi2">ich i2">is also a form of causali2">ity. i2">It causes destructi2">ive i2">illusi2">ions i2">instead of creati2">ive reali2">ity. i2">It i2">is a made-up BELi2">IEF i2">in a cause, as an attempted cause, i2">in the mi2">ind. i2">It's a made-up cause that we beli2">ieve i2">is real, and whi2">ich i2">in turn produces made-up effects whi2">ich we beli2">ieve are real. Just because i2">it i2">is made-up doesn't mean i2">it does not DO somethi2">ing.

A **beli2">ief** i2">in a cause i2">isn't a real cause, or of God. So what i2">it produces i2">is not a real effect, but i2">is an effect nonetheless. Arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial causes produce arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial effects. But they DO produce these effects, whi2">ich i2">includes symptoms of si2">ickness i2">in the body, and ulti2">imately the body i2">itself.

"The body cannot remai2">in wi2">ithout i2">illusi2">ions (i2">illusory causes)."

When the mi2">ind beli2">ieves there i2">is a cause, i2">it MUST i2">include the beli2">ief that there are effects. The mi2">ind thus beli2">ieves i2">in BOTH. They are made together, and are undone together. Effects cannot remai2">in wi2">ithout a cause of some ki2">ind. When you swi2">itch off the broadcast projector, there i2">is no more maki2">ing of i2">images. Both the broadcaster and the broadcast di2">isappear.

i2">It would be easy for us to swi2">itch on and off causes and effects at wi2">ill. Thi2">is always takes place i2">in our mi2">inds. The problem i2">is that we keep di2">isassoci2">iati2">ing from the part of our mi2">ind that i2">is causi2">ing or beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in causes, and project the ownershi2">ip of the causati2">ion onto external thi2">ings - anythi2">ing other than our own mi2">ind.

So i2">if we thi2">ink a person i2">is causi2">ing us to be upset, we're i2">in false percepti2">ion. We see cause as separate from and outsi2">ide of our own mi2">ind. Yet thi2">is BELi2">IEF i2">in cause, i2">is i2">INSi2">IDE our mi2">ind because "i2">ideas leave not thei2">ir source."

We are confused i2">in thi2">inki2">ing that someone else i2">is causi2">ing our upset. But the i2">IDEA of "someone i2">is causi2">ing me to be upset" i2">is our own mi2">ind's i2">idea, whi2">ich projects, resulti2">ing i2">in a false percepti2">ion. And thi2">is i2">idea i2">IS STi2">ILL CAUSAL. By beli2">ievi2">ing, "i2">I am bei2">ing caused", we li2">iterally are CAUSi2">ING ourselves, and our mi2">ind DOES produce effects wi2">ithi2">in us, from i2">it. And thi2">is i2">is actually part of the beli2">ief that we are creati2">ing ourselves, the result of a spli2">it mi2">ind.

i2">It i2">is not possi2">ible to beli2">ieve i2">in a cause, Wi2">ITHOUT the beli2">ief i2">itself havi2">ing an effect. Even i2">if the vi2">isuali2">ized cause seems to be mapped onto some other person, i2">it i2">is STi2">ILL a "beli2">ief i2">in cause" i2">in our mi2">ind, and thi2">is gi2">ives i2">it power. i2">If our mi2">ind i2">is generati2">ing, pi2">icturi2">ing, i2">imagi2">ini2">ing, "there i2">is a cause", i2">it Wi2">ILL and MUST also pi2">icture, generate and i2">imagi2">ine an effect to correspond to i2">it. And usually the severi2">ity of the effect li2">ines up wi2">ith where the cause falls i2">in the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions.

Thi2">is now means that as we pi2">icture ourselves as bei2">ing caused, we Wi2">ILL also pi2">icture ourselves as bei2">ing affected. Thi2">is beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in and use of causali2">ity, no matter how i2">it i2">is dressed up i2">in appearances about others, wi2">ill result i2">in OUR Mi2">IND produci2">ing EFFECTS i2">in ourselves. These wi2">ill show up as symptoms i2">in mi2">ind and body, as emoti2">ional reacti2">ions, fearful thought responses, justi2">ifi2">ied anger, and other effects.

As the secret of salvati2">ion tells us, i2">it does not matter how i2">it appears that someone i2">is a vi2">icti2">imi2">izer, or who i2">is doi2">ing what. When your mi2">ind "sees i2">itself" as bei2">ing vi2">icti2">imi2">ized, that way of seei2">ing i2">itself ALONE vi2">icti2">imi2">izes you. And you cannot see yourself as bei2">ing vi2">icti2">imi2">ized Wi2">ITHOUT seei2">ing yourself ALSO as a vi2">icti2">im.

Funny that - as you beli2">ieve i2">in vi2">icti2">imi2">izati2">ion i2">it sets up a causal beli2">ief i2">in your mi2">ind whi2">ich causes you to MAKE YOURSELF a vi2">icti2">im. Your mi2">ind then generates the effects and symptoms of havi2">ing been affected. i2">It pi2">ictures i2">itself i2">in the roles of vi2">icti2">im AND vi2">icti2">imi2">izer.

Now, here's the key. Based on thi2">is law, that even your BELi2">IEF i2">in a cause i2">IS CAUSAL, and has i2">illusory beli2">ieved-i2">in effects, removi2">ing thi2">is beli2">ief i2">in a cause MUST remove the effects. Thi2">is even i2">includes the physi2">ical symptoms of si2">ickness whi2">ich YOUR Mi2">IND put i2">into your body, as a result of YOUR Mi2">IND vi2">isuali2">izi2">ing i2">itself as at the effect of i2">its own causal beli2">iefs.

i2">If my beli2">ief i2">is that a person i2">is upsetti2">ing me, three thi2">ings are happeni2">ing. 1) i2">I am "projecti2">ing" causali2">ity onto the person falsely, resulti2">ing i2">in a false percepti2">ion that "they" are causi2">ing me. 2) MY beli2">ief i2">in bei2">ing caused i2">is causi2">ing me, 3) i2">I am i2">inventi2">ing the upsetti2">ing effects because of thi2">is beli2">ief, BY thi2">is beli2">ief. i2">If i2">I clear up the confusi2">ion about WHO i2">is causi2">ing who, and then STOP causi2">ing through thi2">is beli2">ief, the effects MUST go.

i2">If my mi2">ind i2">is thi2">inki2">ing, "i2">I am upset because of them", and i2">I"m feeli2">ing the upset, my mi2">ind MUST be seei2">ing a li2">ine of causali2">ity starti2">ing wi2">ith "them" and comi2">ing i2">into me and i2">impacti2">ing upon me, produci2">ing upset. Thi2">is i2">is what my mi2">ind i2">is pi2">icturi2">ing. Thi2">is i2">is HOW i2">I am maki2">ing the effects. i2">If i2">I tell myself, "they are not causi2">ing me to be upset", i2">I am taki2">ing a step towards undoi2">ing the cause.

i2">I'm almost sayi2">ing, "si2">ince they are not causi2">ing thi2">is upset, i2">I am not upset." or "everythi2">ing that came from them, has not come". They then become your savi2">ior because now you are usi2">ing them to explai2">in why you are NOT affected negati2">ively, or as a way to say "i2">I am healed because of you". Or as the course puts i2">it, "Brother, at your hand i2">I li2">ive." Thi2">is requi2">ires the removal of all symptoms of attack i2">in the body and mi2">ind, accompli2">ished by removi2">ing fake causali2">ity or accusi2">ing your brother of causi2">ing (si2">inni2">ing agai2">inst) you.

Someti2">imes, i2">if the causi2">ing seems fai2">irly clear-cut and well defi2">ined as to who i2">I thi2">ink di2">id what, and i2">I remi2">ind myself i2">I am NOT caused by the person, i2">it can be enough to undo my mi2">ind's beli2">ief i2">in the cause, and thus stop causi2">ing my own upset. Symptoms of upset vani2">ish i2">instantly. Even physi2">ical symptoms, because *i2">I* was produci2">ing them.

Other ti2">imes, i2">I've found i2">I've bui2">ilt up a collecti2">ion of beli2">iefs i2">in causes, whi2">ich have to be di2">ismantled more methodi2">ically, pi2">iece by pi2">iece. i2">I have to remove all beli2">ief that anyone or anythi2">ing else i2">is causi2">ing my i2">issue. i2">I must not beli2">ieve that i2">I am at the effect of anyone else's mi2">ind or any "causes" that i2">I THi2">INK are i2">in the world. My BELi2">IEF i2">in them bei2">ing causes does not make them causes. Thi2">is i2">is confusi2">ion/projecti2">ion/di2">isassoci2">iati2">ion.

MY BELi2">IEF i2">in bei2">ing caused i2">is what causes me to suffer. When somethi2">ing i2">is seen as havi2">ing NO causes left, and bei2">ing the cause of nothi2">ing, i2">it di2">isappears.

i2">I have to also remove all beli2">ief that i2">I am causi2">ing any i2">issue i2">in others, because thi2">is too ti2">ies me to gui2">ilt. For example i2">if i2">I have an argument, i2">it i2">is not enough to undo the beli2">ief that i2">I am bei2">ing upset by them. i2">I wi2">ill li2">ikely beli2">ieve i2">I upset them also, and thi2">is too i2">is fake causali2">ity. Anythi2">ing THEY are experi2">ienci2">ing, THEi2">IR mi2">ind has chosen to cause. i2">I must be accepti2">ing of thi2">is by di2">ismantli2">ing my beli2">ief that i2">I caused them, whi2">ich i2">in turn wi2">ill heal them and set them free from i2">impri2">isonment.

"Forgi2">iveness i2">is not real UNLESS i2">it bri2">ings a heali2">ing to your brother AND yourself."

Once thi2">is i2">is clari2">ifi2">ied, that no-one caused my effects but myself, and that cause i2">is i2">in my mi2">ind because i2">I beli2">ieved i2">I was caused, i2">I must now recogni2">ize that my own choi2">ice to beli2">ieve i2">I am bei2">ing negati2">ively caused Di2">ID produce my own symptoms. i2">I am responsi2">ible for i2">it. Thi2">is i2">is the secret of salvati2">ion. But we can't stop there. WE must STOP causi2">ing our own sufferi2">ing.

Thi2">is requi2">ires us to stop beli2">ievi2">ing that even WE have caused our sufferi2">ing. Seei2">ing that we di2">id i2">it to ourselves, and recogni2">izi2">ing our own mi2">ind i2">is causi2">ing i2">itself, may be enough to collapse i2">it. Recogni2">izi2">ing the futi2">ili2">ity of hurti2">ing ourselves, we wi2">ill drop the desi2">ire to conti2">inue. Seei2">ing that we are causi2">ing our own sufferi2">ing, we cannot escape the causati2">ion or blame i2">it on anyone, have to admi2">it the truth, and admi2">itti2">ing the truth presents us wi2">ith a fact - we di2">id thi2">is, and we no longer choose to.

We mi2">ight have to work on undoi2">ing the beli2">ief that we are caused, as well as bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to no longer suffer the role of vi2">icti2">im. Wi2">ithout a cause that we beli2">ieve i2">in, we cannot beli2">ieve i2">in bei2">ing affected. i2">In recogni2">izi2">ing we were the vi2">icti2">imi2">izer of ourselves, we can stop bei2">ing the vi2">icti2">im. No-one has ever been vi2">icti2">imi2">ized by another person.

Remember that you have no neutral thoughts. All thought creates form on some level. All thought i2">is causal. You cannot neutrally casually thi2">ink about stuff wi2">ithout produci2">ing effects. i2">Imagi2">ini2">ing fearful thi2">ings happeni2">ing to you, i2">IS actually you DOi2">ING them to yourself. Dreami2">ing about scenari2">ios i2">isn't a freebi2">ie thought. We deli2">iberately DO, or DO NOT. We cause, or do not cause. And only what we cause happens.

""My Self i2">is ruler of the uni2">iverse." i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that anythi2">ing should come to me unbi2">idden by myself. Even i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is i2">I who rule my desti2">iny. What happens (effects) i2">is what i2">I desi2">ire (cause). What does not occur (effects) i2">is what i2">I do not want (cause) to happen. Thi2">is must i2">I accept."

"i2">I can be hurt by nothi2">ing but my thoughts."

"My attack thoughts are attacki2">ing my i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity."

Stri2">ippi2">ing away all sense of "the cause of thi2">is", MUST undo the effects. When you cease attacki2">ing yourself wi2">ith thoughts of bei2">ing attacked, you wi2">ill not be attacked or attackable.

Wi2">ithout a cause, there can be no effects. Wi2">ithout beli2">ief i2">in separati2">ion, there can be no si2">ickness. Wi2">ithout seei2">ing yourself as a vi2">icti2">im you cannot be vi2">icti2">imi2">ized. Wi2">ithout vi2">icti2">imi2">izi2">ing yourself you cannot be hurt. Wi2">ithout beli2">ief you are si2">inful (caused bad stuff) you cannot be gui2">ilty, and wi2">ithout gui2">ilt you cannot fri2">ighten or threaten yourself. Wi2">ithout a cause, your si2">ickness must vani2">ish. And wi2">ithout a cause, the dead must ri2">ise.

All i2">illusi2">ions have no REAL cause. The causes are made up beli2">iefs, whi2">ich DO cause i2">illusory effects, and wi2">ithout mai2">intai2">ini2">ing these beli2">iefs the effects cannot stay. Anythi2">ing not of God or made wi2">ithout love has no real cause. We MADE si2">ickness and death by beli2">ievi2">ing they have been caused and are the cause of us (the God of si2">ickness and death), and can aboli2">ish i2">it by beli2">ievi2">ing they have NOT been caused.

To recogni2">ize somethi2">ing has NOT been caused, i2">is to recogni2">ize i2">it CANNOT have happened. Wi2">ithout a cause, the effects must go. What has not been caused cannot exi2">ist. And si2">ince i2">illusory effects and symptoms DEPEND on the mi2">ind beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in them, wi2">ithout beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in them they MUST vani2">ish. Whi2">ich undoes physi2">ical sufferi2">ing, si2">ickness and death

Thi2">is i2">is forgi2">iveness and atonement. The recogni2">iti2">ion that separati2">ion has not been caused and si2">in has not caused effects because there i2">is no si2">in. The lack of beli2">ief i2">in si2">in as "causi2">ing evi2">il" erases death. The knowi2">ing that there i2">is no death. Wi2">ithdrawi2">ing causes of i2">illusi2">ions wi2">ill undo them all.

"i2">Illusi2">ions recogni2">ized (i2">I caused thi2">is myself, i2">it di2">id not cause me) must di2">isappear."

Thi2">is li2">iterally i2">is ti2">ied i2">into the atonement. i2">If to atone i2">is to undo, then by cancelli2">ing the fake causes that we were usi2">ing to make thi2">ings "be done", and i2">if mi2">iracles undo and take away the effects by recogni2">izi2">ing they have not been caused, then to accept the atonement i2">is to accept that there are NO CAUSES other than God. We HAVE NOT CAUSED separati2">ion, there i2">is no cause of death (si2">in), i2">illusi2">ions DO NOT exi2">ist, and we are no longer manufacturi2">ing fake effects.

Thi2">is wi2">ill ulti2">imately UNDO the world because the world i2">is nothi2">ing but an EFFECT of a beli2">ief - the spaceti2">ime beli2">ief.

Shi2">ifti2">ing away from made-up causes, and ali2">igni2">ing ourselves wi2">ith God's Wi2">ill, whi2">ich i2">is truly causal and creati2">ive, we become mi2">iracle workers. Operati2">ing from verti2">ical causati2">ion, not mi2">is-creati2">ion. Our causi2">ing now becomes love-based, constructi2">ive, creati2">ive, heali2">ing and mi2">iraculous. No longer agai2">inst ourselves, no longer affected by the world, we regai2">in i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity and power. We can now gi2">ive li2">ife and cause resurrecti2">ion.

We become a cause that does not cause i2">itself. We become free from effects of our own maki2">ing, or the i2">illusi2">ion of effects made by others. Our wi2">ill i2">is now undi2">ivi2">ided and si2">ingle-mi2">inded. Nothi2">ing can oppose us as ruler of the uni2">iverse. We are free to carry out the wi2">ill of God. To cause wi2">ith i2">IMMEDi2">IATE effects. And to be truly helpful to others through causal mi2">iracles.

"Thi2">is i2">is a course i2">in cause and not effect."

"mi2">iracles reflect the si2">imple statement, "i2">I have done thi2">is thi2">ing, and i2">it i2">is thi2">is i2">I would undo.""

"Wi2">ithout a cause there can be no effects, and yet, wi2">ithout effects, there i2">is no CAUSE."

"Who can predi2">ict effects wi2">ithout a cause? And who could fear effects UNLESS he thought they had BEEN caused, and judged di2">isastrous NOW?"

"Who can percei2">ive effect Wi2">ITHOUT a cause? What can the causeless BE but nothi2">ingness."

"And thi2">is DENi2">IES the fact that ALL are senseless; EQUALLY wi2">ithout a cause or consequence, and CANNOT have effects of ANY ki2">ind."

"i2">In i2">its passi2">ing went i2">its consequences, left wi2">ithout a cause."

"And to reali2">ize that pai2">in i2">is purposeless, wi2">ithout a cause, and wi2">ith no power to accompli2">ish anythi2">ing."

"Nothi2">ing can have effects wi2">ithout a cause, and to confuse the two i2">is merely to fai2">il to understand them both."

"Wi2">ithout a cause, and now wi2">ithout a functi2">ion i2">in Chri2">ist's si2">ight, i2">it merely sli2">ips away to nothi2">ingness."

"i2">It deni2">ies the abi2">ili2">ity of anythi2">ing whi2">ich i2">is not of God to effect you i2">in any way."

"Fear cannot be real wi2">ithout a cause, and GOD i2">is the only Cause."

"The heali2">ing of effect Wi2">ITHOUT the cause can merely shi2">ift effects to other forms."

"A mi2">iracle of heali2">ing proves that separati2">ion i2">is Wi2">ITHOUT effect. What you would prove to hi2">im you wi2">ill beli2">ieve. The power of wi2">itness COMES from your beli2">ief."

"And therefore all your si2">ins have been forgi2">iven because they carri2">ied no effects at all."

"There i2">is no cause beyond yourself that can reach down and bri2">ing oppressi2">ion."

"And yet the world, as causeless, has no power to cause. As an effect i2">it cannot make effects."

"What i2">is projected OUT, and seems to be EXTERNAL to the mi2">ind, i2">is NOT outsi2">ide at all, but an effect of what i2">is i2">in, and has NOT left i2">its source."

"Here i2">is the proof that he has NEVER si2">inned; that NOTHi2">ING that hi2">is madness bi2">id hi2">im do was ever done, or ever had effects of any ki2">ind."

"i2">It i2">is hard to recogni2">ize that thought and beli2">ief combi2">ine i2">into a power-surge that can li2">iterally move (cause) mountai2">ins. i2">It appears at fi2">irst glance that to beli2">ieve such power about yourself i2">is merely arrogant, but that i2">is not the real reason why you don't beli2">ieve i2">it. People prefer to beli2">ieve that thei2">ir thoughts cannot exert (cause) real control (effects) because they are li2">iterally AFRAi2">ID of them."

"And here They joi2">in, for here the face of Chri2">ist has shone away ti2">ime's fi2">inal i2">instant, and now i2">is the last percepti2">ion of the world wi2">ithout a purpose and wi2">ithout a cause. For where God's memory has come at last there i2">is no journey, no beli2">ief i2">in si2">in, no walls, no bodi2">ies, and the gri2">im appeal of gui2">ilt and death i2">is there snuffed out forever."

"And once all gui2">ilt i2">is gone what more remai2">ins to keep a separated world i2">in place?"

"The body can become a si2">ign of li2">ife, a promi2">ise of redempti2">ion, and a breath of i2">immortali2">ity to those grown si2">ick of breathi2">ing i2">in the feti2">id scent of death. Let i2">it have heali2">ing as i2">its PURPOSE. Then wi2">ill i2">it send forth the message i2">it recei2">ived, and by i2">its health and loveli2">iness proclai2">im the truth and value that i2">it represents. Let i2">it recei2">ive the power to represent an endless li2">ife, forever unattacked. And to your brother let i2">its message be, "Behold me, brother, at your hand i2">I li2">ive."

"Forgi2">iveness i2">is not real UNLESS i2">it bri2">ings a heali2">ing to your brother AND yourself. YOU must attest hi2">is si2">ins had no effect on YOU, to demonstrate they were not real. How else COULD he be gui2">iltless? And how COULD hi2">is i2">innocence be justi2">ifi2">ied UNLESS hi2">is si2">ins have no effect to WARRANT gui2">ilt? Si2">ins are beyond forgi2">iveness just BECAUSE they would entai2">il effects whi2">ich CANNOT be undone and overlooked enti2">irely. i2">In thei2">ir UNDOi2">ING li2">ies the proof that they were merely errors. LET yourself be healed, that you may be forgi2">ivi2">ing, offeri2">ing salvati2">ion to your brother AND yourself. A broken body shows the mi2">ind has NOT been healed. A mi2">iracle of heali2">ing proves that separati2">ion i2">is Wi2">ITHOUT effect."

As you take steps toward bei2">ing 100% responsi2">ible for everythi2">ing i2">in your li2">ife, you're taki2">ing steps toward bei2">ing AT CAUSE i2">instead of at the effect.

Thi2">is wi2">ill li2">ikely make you have two reacti2">ions:

1) The ego wi2">ill not understand what thi2">is really means and wi2">ill i2">interpret i2">it from a vi2">iewpoi2">int of 'i2">I' and 'me' ... i2">if *i2">I* di2">id thi2">is then.... i2">if *i2">I* caused thi2">is then.... and always i2">its conclusi2">ion i2">is goi2">ing to be .... then i2">I must be gui2">ilty. i2">It uses gui2">ilt to try to prove that i2">if you are responsi2">ible or at-cause, ALL BLAME i2">is pi2">inned on you for everythi2">ing that 'has happened' and 'i2">is real'. So whatever thi2">ing you take responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for, any measure of beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it i2">is real or has really happened wi2">ill be i2">interpreted as "your fault", and i2">it FEELS Li2">IKE SHi2">IT. Thi2">is i2">is what i2">I am struggli2">ing wi2">ith at the moment.

2) The other reacti2">ion you wi2">ill gradually have i2">is, that you'll begi2">in to become aware that you have a CHOi2">ICE. i2">Its a choi2">ice that you probably never even reali2">ized exi2">isted before. i2">It was buri2">ied under all of the i2">illusi2">ions of 'havi2">ing no say' and 'havi2">ing not chosen thi2">is'. i2">It's not just that we beli2">ieve we're at the effect of the world, but that we beli2">ieve that we have NOT CHOSEN to be at the effect of the world - that we had NOTHi2">ING to do wi2">ith thi2">is. i2">It just 'happened to us' as vi2">icti2">ims. A state of powerlessness. As you begi2">in taki2">ing back responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for bei2">ing the CAUSE - and getti2">ing past the ego's roadblock of bei2">ing 'the cause of real effects' - you start to reawaken the fact that you DO have a choi2">ice, you DO have i2">input, you DO cause thi2">ings. And you start to reali2">ize not only that "you di2">id thi2">is to yourself" (the key to salvati2">ion) but that you can actually choose NOT to do somethi2">ing to yourself, and that thi2">is actually UNDOES and heals - removi2">ing unwanted effects from your li2">ife through CHOi2">ICE.... i2">includi2">ing the choi2">ice for death!

So on the one hand, i2">it's very li2">iberati2">ing because you start to see yourself as a chooser, and that everythi2">ing i2">is opti2">ional - not set i2">in stone or unchangeable. On the other hand you feel gui2">ilty not only for all the bad choi2">ices you made before (ego remorse) but also for the i2">idea that you had anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith such thi2">ings or the effects that were produced (ego gui2">ilt). You have to learn to move past that ego i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion, the ego wanti2">ing to sti2">ill be a part of thi2">is responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity, and recogni2">ize your i2">INNOCENCE.

i2">It's not that you di2">id a bunch of stuff on purpose and i2">it had real effects and that means you're gui2">ilty. i2">It's li2">ike.... you are becomi2">ing responsi2">ible for BEi2">ING i2">INNOCENT, and are overlooki2">ing/forgi2">ivi2">ing what you THOUGHT you di2">id whi2">ich you di2">id not really do. i2">It's not about owni2">ing up to cruci2">ifyi2">ing God's son.. although i2">it can feel li2">ike that at fi2">irst, whi2">ich i2">is horri2">ible. i2">It's not about clai2">imi2">ing blame or sayi2">ing a) that thi2">ing i2">is real and b) i2">I'm the one who really di2">id i2">it. That's the EGO taki2">ing responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity whi2">ich leads to gui2">ilt. We need to see that what we thi2">ink happened di2">id NOT happen and we're not responsi2">ible for i2">it HAPPENi2">ING, we're responsi2">ible for beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it happened and bei2">ing under the i2">illusi2">ion that i2">it was produci2">ing real results.

We are responsi2">ible for bei2">ing who we really are. i2">If we can really recogni2">ize who we really are, we must recogni2">ize we are i2">innocent and that we have NOT done anythi2">ing wrong or caused anythi2">ing bad to happen. i2">It takes ti2">ime to come to that i2">I guess, and more ego decepti2">ions to be undone as we own up to bei2">ing Chri2">ist.

i2">I'll end on an up note .... that i2">I am exci2">ited to be di2">iscoveri2">ing that i2">I have choi2">ices where i2">I previ2">iously saw no choi2">ices, and i2">I have freedom where i2">I saw only i2">impri2">isonment, and i2">I don't just `have to` go along wi2">ith death and destructi2">ion - i2">it ONLY happens i2">if i2">I choose i2">it and i2">I don't have to choose i2">it. i2">I can choose li2">ife and be under no other laws but Gods.

HOW DO YOU BE TRULY HELPFUL?

ACi2">IM: "i2">I am here only to be truly helpful.

i2">I am here to represent Hi2">im Who sent me.

i2">I do not have to worry about what to say or what to do,

because He Who sent me wi2">ill di2">irect me.

i2">I am content to be wherever He wi2">ishes, knowi2">ing He goes there wi2">ith me.

i2">I wi2">ill be healed as i2">I let Hi2">im teach me to heal."

1. "i2">I am here only to be truly helpful"... ONLY to be truly helpful, meani2">ing i2">I do not have other agenda and am not attempti2">ing to let my ego control thi2">ings. What i2">is truly helpful other than the Wi2">ill of God, whi2">ich you share and act upon. You can be truly helpful i2">if you are forgi2">ivi2">ing, ali2">igned wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it. Then you wi2">ill have the clari2">ity wi2">ith whi2">ich to i2">identi2">ify a call for love when you see one, knowi2">ing that the only truly helpful response to i2">it i2">is love i2">in return.

2. "i2">I am here to represent Hi2">im Who sent me."... You are to be a representati2">ive of Chri2">ist. By representati2">ion, that means that you share Hi2">is authori2">ity and power and are able to speak i2">in Hi2">is name, si2">imi2">ilar to how the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is a devoted Voi2">ice for God. You can speak on Hi2">is behalf, or rather, have Hi2">im speak through you. He wi2">ill i2">inspi2">ire you and move you and you wi2">ill be a condui2">it for Hi2">is expressi2">ion of lovi2">ing mi2">iracles.

3. "i2">I do not have to worry about what to say or what to do, because He Who sent me wi2">ill di2">irect me"... And so by ali2">igni2">ing your mi2">ind wi2">ith Hi2">is, the two become One, Hi2">is thoughts become your thoughts, and Hi2">is perspecti2">ive becomes your perspecti2">ive. He wi2">ill ei2">ither speak di2">irectly through your body or wi2">ill i2">inspi2">ire you supernaturally what to say. You need not worry because you are trusti2">ing Hi2">im 100% to gui2">ide you and He knows the way and what to do. You let Hi2">im deci2">ide everythi2">ing for you and are glad to extend God's love.

4. "i2">I am content to be wherever He wi2">ishes, knowi2">ing He goes there wi2">ith me."... Truly commi2">itted and trusti2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it, you would have no basi2">is for fear and would be i2">in supreme confi2">idence, relaxed, empowered and certai2">in. He wi2">ill orchestrate all events and encounters and send the appropri2">iate people to you or you to them. Knowi2">ing that He goes there wi2">ith you, and i2">in awareness of Hi2">is presence, gi2">ives you no reason for fear. Thi2">is means you have developed trust and depend on God for everythi2">ing. Havi2">ing surrendered your personal agenda, you are content to do your Father's busi2">iness.

5. "i2">I wi2">ill be healed as i2">I let Hi2">im teach me to heal"... mi2">iracles are for you and for everyone. You wi2">ill heal (yourself) and heal others at the same ti2">ime. Heali2">ing means resurrecti2">ion. i2">It means restorati2">ion and correcti2">ion. i2">It means the blessi2">ing of forgi2">iveness. And i2">it means the demonstrati2">ion of God's truth. As you allow Hi2">im to teach you and work through you, you wi2">ill learn what heali2">ing i2">is and you wi2">ill experi2">ience i2">it yourself. As you heal yourself, you become able to heal others. i2">It i2">is the pri2">ivi2">ilege of the forgi2">ive to forgi2">ive and the healed to heal. Accepti2">ing mi2">iracles for yourself gi2">ives you the wi2">illi2">ingness to provi2">ide them to others.

Usually when we're feeli2">ing gui2">ilty, i2">it has an element of "because someone else deci2">ided i2">I am".

Gui2">ilty because i2">I di2">id somethi2">ing to someone. Gui2">ilty because i2">I made a wrong move. Gui2">ilty because i2">I'm not good enough for someone. Gui2">ilty because i2">I di2">id the wrong thi2">ing accordi2">ing to someone else's rules. Gui2">ilty because i2">I di2">id the course (whi2">ich someone else wrote) wrong. Gui2">ilty because i2">I separed from God (i2">ie God has deemed me gui2">ilty).

We keep sayi2">ing our gui2">ilt i2">is caused and put there and requi2">ired by someone OTHER than ourselves.

How does a perfectly i2">innocent Son of God, of whi2">ich there i2">is only ONE, ever have the abi2">ili2">ity to si2">in i2">in the fi2">irst place, and to then experi2">ience that an 'other' has found them gui2">ilty?

As soon as there i2">is separati2">ion, you are separti2">ing from God and yourself, and now you've spli2">it off part of your OWN SELF and projected i2">it as some other person - or a separate God. And now they - that separate i2">identi2">ity/wi2">ill - fi2">inds you gui2">ilty. There's gui2">ilt between you and them *because you are separate.

Maybe we need to own the fact that nobody else makes us gui2">ilty. We choose i2">it. Every ti2">ime. The gui2">ilt i2">is comi2">ing from a sense of separati2">ion from others, whi2">ich has MADE `others`. Keepi2">ing others as others i2">isn't goi2">ing to allow me to return to i2">innocence. i2">I can only recogni2">ize my i2">innocence i2">if there ARE NO OTHERS, because then all separate i2">identi2">iti2">ies are recogni2">ized as THE ONE SELF (shared).

i2">In shari2">ing there i2">is i2">innocence. i2">In separati2">ion there i2">is gui2">ilt. So when we're i2">in gui2">ilt we always thi2">ink someone else has deemed us gui2">ilty. But i2">it's just us, pretendi2">ing not to be whole, and pretendi2">ing that the 'other' i2">is not ourselves. i2">Its not that we need to get ri2">id of the gui2">ilt so that we can see 'others' and ourselves as i2">innocent, i2">it's that we need to get ri2">id of the gui2">ilt so that 'other' and 'separate self' are reuni2">ited as a whole.

i2">I own up to choosi2">ing gui2">ilt by choosi2">ing si2">in by choosi2">ing separati2">ion. And i2">in that owni2">ing up i2">I then let go of that separati2">ion and recogni2">ize/remember we are ONE. i2">I clai2">im i2">innocence for BOTH of us so that we return to uni2">ity together.

i2">I found myself i2">in a conversati2">ion wi2">ith Jesus last ni2">ight about whether or not i2">it's okay to pray for someone i2">if they have not 'gi2">iven permi2">issi2">ion'. i2">I wanted to pray for someone to attempt to help them and heal them, but i2">I wondered, what i2">if they di2">id not want thi2">is?

i2">I thought about how we're not meant to vi2">iolate someone's free wi2">ill and how maybe i2">it would i2">incur some ki2">ind of 'karma' i2">if we try to do thi2">is. i2">I also thought about ethi2">ics and about how everyone has 'ri2">ights' and that we're supposed to be respectful and all that.

i2">I seemed to be getti2">ing hi2">ints from Jesus that i2">it was sti2">ill okay to pray, and i2">in fact i2">it had been Jesus who i2">ini2">iti2">ially had suggested to me "pray". Jesus has been tryi2">ing to get me to experi2">iment more wi2">ith 'true prayer', si2">ince prayer i2">is the medi2">ium of mi2">iracles, and to learn more how to extend God's mi2">iracles to people. But i2">I felt a bi2">it awkward about 'doi2">ing a prayer to someone'.

i2">I wondered i2">if i2">it was some ki2">ind of mani2">ipulati2">ion. But somehow i2">it seemed plausi2">ible that maybe i2">it was helpful, that maybe anythi2">ing that truly comes from God i2">is perhaps useful and upli2">ifti2">ing and a blessi2">ing of some ki2">ind.

So then i2">I started wonderi2">ing about whether i2">in the hi2">igher realms there mi2">ight be some ki2">ind of speci2">ial 'rules' or 'laws' i2">in place whi2">ich govern thi2">is ki2">ind of thi2">ing, whether i2">I should ask Jesus or God or someone not only i2">IF i2">it's okay to pray for someone, but also what to pray for. i2">It seems at least to make sense to ask for gui2">idance as to what wi2">ill be helpful, rather than just launch i2">into an ego 'i2">I thi2">ink thi2">is should happen' sort of thi2">ing.

Then i2">it started to occur to me that perhaps there i2">is a di2">ifference between hori2">izontal and verti2">ical thi2">inki2">ing, i2">ie that most of our worri2">ies about vi2">iolati2">ing someone's free wi2">ill are to do wi2">ith thi2">ings we would 'do to someone' i2">in a hori2">izontal, ego-logi2">ical way, on the level of form and separati2">ion... and that perhaps when you go i2">into 'verti2">ical' mode (whi2">ich i2">is conduci2">ive to mi2">iracles), you are perhaps transcendi2">ing that enti2">ire scenari2">io... i2">it occurred me to also that everythi2">ing i2">in thi2">is world i2">is basi2">ically i2">illusi2">ion and part of ego-world laws, and yet i2">in truth, "i2">I am under no laws but God's".

Havi2">ing spun my wheels around all of thi2">is i2">I then turned to Jesus and just asked, why or how i2">is i2">it okay to pray for someone when they haven't asked for i2">it and maybe don't even want i2">it?

i2">In hi2">is becomi2">ing-i2">increasi2">ingly-common fashi2">ion, he repli2">ied wi2">ith a si2">ingle short sentence whi2">ich cut through absolutely all of the bullshi2">it and confusi2">ion li2">ike a kni2">ife.

"Si2">ince when was i2">it a cri2">ime to love someone?"

:-)

Prayi2">ing wi2">ith God and recei2">ivi2">ing God's love and extendi2">ing God's love, whi2">ich i2">is the 'mechani2">ics' of mi2">iracle worki2">ing, i2">is enti2">irely wi2">ithi2">in the realm of lovi2">ing people. i2">It's not really 'about' the mi2">iracle as such, or the outcome, but really just about lovi2">ing people. The love that i2">inspi2">ires the mi2">iracle i2">is i2">important, more than the mi2">iracle i2">itself. The mi2">iracle i2">is almost a si2">ide-effect of love. So wi2">ith a focus on si2">imply prayi2">ing as a form of a) thanki2">ing God for love, b) recei2">ivi2">ing love, c) extendi2">ing love to others, where's the possi2">ible harm i2">in that? And i2">if a mi2">iracle comes of i2">it, that's fi2">ine too... because "mi2">iracles are natural expressi2">ions of love, when they aren't happeni2">ing somethi2">ing has gone wrong".

So i2">I focused on love. And i2">I prayed for the person. And i2">I even prayed for the person to recei2">ive heali2">ing, whi2">ich may even entai2">il changes i2">in thei2">ir body. But rather than i2">it seem li2">ike an act of control, mani2">ipulati2">ion, non-acceptance or oversteppi2">ing boundari2">ies, i2">it si2">imply became an affi2">irmati2">ion of truth, an exclamati2">ion of the lovabi2">ili2">ity of the person, and a restorati2">ion of how God would have thi2">ings be. i2">In thi2">is sense i2">it can only be a blessi2">ing. And thi2">is made me thi2">ink of...

"Mi2">iracles are the maxi2">imal servi2">ice you can render to another". So i2">if a mi2">iracle i2">is the absolute BEST that i2">I can possi2">ibly offer to someone, as a natural component of love through prayer, than where i2">is there room i2">in there for doubt or i2">ideas of 'not supposed to' or 'respecti2">ing separate wi2">ill' or whatever. And i2">I guess i2">it boi2">ils down to thi2">is..... mi2">iracles from God's love are ALWAYS a blessi2">ing, are ALWAYS welcome, are ALWAYS justi2">ifi2">ied, are ALWAYS allowed (per God's wi2">ill), and are a ki2">ind of 'ri2">ight' that we each have to bestow upon each other.

We are, i2">in our mi2">iracle worki2">ing, extendi2">ing God's authori2">ity and usi2">ing that authori2">ity to have authori2">ity over i2">ILLUSi2">IONS, not so much over the person. The person i2">is NOT the i2">illusi2">ion of si2">ickness, the person i2">is NOT the li2">ife challenge, the person i2">is NOT what thei2">ir ego i2">is up to or the lessons they have. So we cannot really do anythi2">ing TO the person anyway, because they already ARE perfect love i2">in truth. And we are not really i2">in fact heali2">ing the real person because the real person needs no heali2">ing. All we are doi2">ing i2">is calli2">ing for love to come i2">in and set a person free from i2">illusi2">ions, whi2">ich i2">is a di2">ivi2">ine blessi2">ing.

Okay so i2">I reali2">ize thi2">is may sound li2">ike potenti2">ially a lot of rati2">ionali2">izati2">ion or justi2">ifi2">icati2">ion... but really just clari2">ity. Comi2">ing i2">into awareness that we ARE extensi2">ions of God's authori2">ity, we DO have the abi2">ili2">ity to gi2">ive love, Jesus DOES perform mi2">iracles as "i2">intercessi2">ions for your holi2">iness", and doi2">ing thi2">is i2">IS allowed and normal and lovi2">ing, regardless of whether someone asks to be helped or not. Di2">ivi2">ine help i2">is TRULY HELPFUL. Ego help i2">is the ki2">ind of help that has si2">ide-effects and boundary-vi2">iolati2">ing properti2">ies. There i2">is a di2">ifference. Provi2">ided we are putti2">ing God/Love fi2">irst, all i2">is well.

i2">It's okay to work mi2">iracles for those who are not able to help themselves, and for those who are temporari2">ily weaker, and for those who are temporari2">ily more resi2">istant to love. But you should probably sti2">ill seek Spi2">iri2">itual gui2">idance as to whether thi2">is i2">is i2">in accord wi2">ith the Plan of Atonement. As Jesus says, i2">indi2">iscri2">imi2">inate mi2">iracles are not always helpful, and that you should consult wi2">ith Hi2">im fi2">irst. i2">I guess that's as good a basi2">is for 'what to do' as any.

i2">It all comes back to that funny old adage ... "what would Jesus do?"

At the moment, i2">I am focusi2">ing on recei2">ivi2">ing heali2">ing. Much has happened the past several months and i2">I am sti2">ill recoveri2">ing from i2">it.

One valuable tool i2">I've found i2">is to repeat short phrases i2">in qui2">ick successi2">ion. These i2">include:

i2">I surrender

i2">I surrender to your love

i2">I let go completely

i2">I recei2">ive God's heali2">ing love

i2">I open to recei2">ive

i2">I trust you Holy Spi2">iri2">it

i2">I recei2">ive

i2">I let go

i2">I admi2">it i2">I'm mi2">istaken

i2">I let go of controlli2">ing

i2">I recei2">ive God

Whi2">ile sayi2">ing these casually to yourself i2">in your mi2">ind, you may fi2">ind that as you say them back-to-back wi2">ithout a pause, you don't allow the ego to sneak i2">in between, and i2">it begi2">ins to have a powerful effect to shi2">ift you.

e.g

"i2">I surrender, i2">I surrender, i2">I surrender, i2">I surrender, i2">I surrender." etc

You don' have to say i2">it qui2">ickly, but i2">it does help to not allow pauses between statements.

These are all to do wi2">ith the reli2">inqui2">ishment of ego, letti2">ing go of control, admi2">itti2">ing to bei2">ing mi2">istaken, bei2">ing Wi2">ILLi2">ING to be corrected.

They all demonstrate "a li2">ittle wi2">illi2">ingness", whi2">ich means i2">in some way, you are Wi2">ILLi2">ING to move away from i2">illusi2">ions and i2">in the di2">irecti2">ion of truth. Thi2">is also means movi2">ing away from i2">impri2">isonment towards freedom, and as you open up to the freedom of the wi2">ill, by bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to be free, and wi2">illi2">ing to let go of what you are doi2">ing that i2">impri2">isons you, you are i2">INVi2">ITi2">ING THE HOLY SPi2">IRi2">IT.

"Thi2">is i2">is the i2">invi2">itati2">ion to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it. i2">I told you that i2">I could reach up and bri2">ing the Holy Spi2">iri2">it down to you. But i2">I can bri2">ing Hi2">im to you only at your own i2">invi2">itati2">ion."

"You fi2">ind i2">it di2">iffi2">icult to ACCEPT the i2">idea that you need gi2">ive so Li2">ITTLE, to recei2">ive so much. And i2">it i2">is very hard for you to reali2">ize that i2">it i2">is NOT personally i2">insulti2">ing that YOUR contri2">ibuti2">ion and the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's are so EXTREMELY di2">isproporti2">ionate."

"He asks but li2">ittle. i2">It i2">is HE Who adds the greatness and the mi2">ight. He JOi2">INS wi2">ith you, to make the holy i2">instant far greater than you can understand.

i2">It i2">is your reali2">izati2">ion that you NEED do so li2">ittle, that enables Hi2">IM to gi2">ive so much. Trust not your good i2">intenti2">ions. They are not enough. But trust i2">IMPLi2">ICi2">ITLY your wi2">illi2">ingness, whatever else may enter. Concentrate only on thi2">is, and be NOT di2">isturbed that shadows surround i2">it."

Thi2">is li2">ittle wi2">illi2">ingness i2">is a verti2">ical movement. And furthermore, i2">it i2">is a way to develop trust. You are sayi2">ing, i2">I am wi2">illi2">ing to let go of bei2">ing i2">in charge, controlli2">ing, managi2">ing li2">ife, fi2">ighti2">ing wi2">ith people, stressi2">ing and struggli2">ing to do thi2">is on my own, i2">I want help and am wi2">illi2">ing to recei2">ive help by ALLOWi2">ING the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to heal me for me.

i2">I've found that i2">in parti2">icular, "i2">I surrender" and "i2">I recei2">ive God's heali2">ing love" have been the two most powerful statements to repeat. Especi2">ially when coupled wi2">ith a wi2">illi2">ingness and i2">intenti2">ion to open to recei2">ive and to let go deeply.

i2">If you are wi2">illi2">ing, you can open to recei2">ive God's love i2">into you. You can feel the sensati2">ion i2">in your heart. You can allow love to come TO you, wi2">ithout you havi2">ing to do anythi2">ing to effort to put anythi2">ing out. You don't even have to "gi2">ive", only to recei2">ive.

The more deeply you can recei2">ive love, the more i2">it wi2">ill touch you, heal you, and di2">ig out your unhealed wounds. i2">If you can stand i2">it, someti2">imes you can take i2">it very far to the poi2">int where you are so fi2">illed wi2">ith love, i2">it wi2">ill li2">ikely tri2">igger a large emoti2">ional catharsi2">is, and you may need ti2">ime to recover from that. i2">I have only "gone there" a couple ti2">imes, approachi2">ing a sense of holi2">iness and bowi2">ing before God, and i2">it's very powerful.

As you put asi2">ide ego control, i2">invi2">ite the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">into you. Even, go as far as to verbali2">ize i2">it, "i2">I allow you i2">into me Holy Spi2">iri2">it, do whatever you want to do to heal me". i2">It's i2">important to place trust i2">in Hi2">im, whi2">ich i2">includes both suspendi2">ing the fear that he wi2">ill do somethi2">ing fri2">ighteni2">ing or harmful i2">in you, and bei2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to gi2">ive hi2">im very broad open permi2">issi2">ion to do ANYTHi2">ING. That takes trust to gi2">ive such sweepi2">ing "access", to you, and to your body. And i2">it's that trust that makes i2">it possi2">ible for Hi2">im to come i2">in and heal you on all levels.

The result for me of doi2">ing thi2">is deeply, through curi2">ious explorati2">ion and trust development and wi2">illi2">ingness (and need), i2">is that He now comes i2">in and heals me physi2">ically, emoti2">ionally, mentally at any ti2">ime. We now have a ki2">ind of worki2">ing relati2">ionshi2">ip. i2">I experi2">ience dramati2">ic shaki2">ing and vi2">ibrati2">ions and energeti2">ic sensati2">ions, every si2">ingle day, usually several ti2">imes a day. i2">It has become so commonplace and normal, i2">it's probably happened 1000 ti2">imes already. And every ti2">ime i2">it leaves me i2">in a more healed condi2">iti2">ion. Thi2">is i2">is one of the gi2">ifts of God.

Recei2">ive heali2">ing for yourself. "Those who are healed become i2">instruments of heali2">ing." "i2">I wi2">ill heal as i2">I let Hi2">im teach me to heal." You must be wi2">illi2">ing to work wi2">ith Hi2">im and have a trusti2">ing relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith Hi2">im. He i2">is there as your appoi2">inted therapi2">ist, gui2">ide, counsellor, healer, teacher, fri2">iend. Use Hi2">im. Let Hi2">im i2">in. Recei2">ive Hi2">is support, gui2">idance and heali2">ing. He i2">is the HELP that God has sent to you. There i2">is nothi2">ing Hi2">is power cannot do. "The Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the mechani2">ism of mi2">iracles."

"The holy i2">instant does NOT come from your li2">ittle wi2">illi2">ingness alone. i2">It i2">is ALWAYS the result of your SMALL wi2">illi2">ingness COMBi2">INED wi2">ith the unli2">imi2">ited power of Hi2">IS Wi2">ILL. You have been wrong i2">in thi2">inki2">ing that i2">it i2">is needful to prepare YOURSELF for Hi2">im. i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible to make arrogant preparati2">ions for holi2">iness, and NOT beli2">ieve that i2">it i2">is up to YOU to establi2">ish the condi2">iti2">ions for peace. GOD HAS ESTABLi2">ISHED THEM. They do NOT wai2">it upon your wi2">illi2">ingness for what they ARE. Your wi2">illi2">ingness i2">is needed ONLY to make i2">it possi2">ible to TEACH you what they are."

"Mi2">iracles are everyone's ri2">ight, but puri2">ifi2">icati2">ion i2">is necessary fi2">irst."

--

"Puri2">ifi2">icati2">ion i2">is of God alone, and THEREFORE for you. Rather than seek to prepare YOURSELF for Hi2">im, try to thi2">ink thus:

"i2">I, who am host to God, AM worthy of Hi2">im.

He Who ESTABLi2">ISHED Hi2">is dwelli2">ing-place i2">in me created i2">it as He would have i2">it be.

i2">It i2">is not needful that i2">I make i2">it ready for Hi2">im, but only that i2">I DO NOT i2">INTERFERE wi2">ith Hi2">is plan to RESTORE to me my own AWARENESS of my readi2">iness, whi2">ich i2">is eternal.

i2">I need ADD nothi2">ing to Hi2">is plan.

But to RECEi2">IVE i2">it, i2">I MUST be wi2">illi2">ing NOT to substi2">itute my own, i2">IN PLACE of i2">it.""

--

"Say to yourselves the followi2">ing, as si2">incerely as you can, rememberi2">ing that ***the Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill respond fully to your sli2">ightest i2">invi2">itati2">ion***:

i2">I must have deci2">ided wrongly because i2">I am NOT at peace.

i2">I made the deci2">isi2">ion myself, but i2">I can also deci2">ide otherwi2">ise.

i2">I Wi2">ILL to deci2">ide otherwi2">ise, because i2">I WANT to be at peace.

i2">I do NOT feel gui2">ilty, because ***the Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo ALL the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">IF i2">I Wi2">ILL LET Hi2">IM.***

i2">I Wi2">ILL to let Hi2">im by allowi2">ing Hi2">im to deci2">ide for God for me."

--

"Would you be hostage to the ego or host to God? You wi2">ill accept only whom YOU i2">invi2">ite. You are free to determi2">ine who shall be your guest, and how long he shall remai2">in wi2">ith you. But thi2">is i2">is not REAL freedom, for i2">it depends on how you see i2">it. For the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is THERE, although He cannot help you wi2">ithout your i2">invi2">itati2">ion, and the ego i2">is nothi2">ing, whether you i2">invi2">ite i2">it or not. Real freedom depends on welcomi2">ing REALi2">ITY, and of your guests only He i2">IS real. Know, then, Who abi2">ides wi2">ith you, merely by recogni2">izi2">ing WHAT i2">IS ALREADY THERE, and do not be sati2">isfi2">ied wi2">ith i2">imagi2">inary comforters, for the Comforter of God i2">is i2">in you."

Lately Holy Spi2">iri2">it has been starti2">ing to push me to do thi2">ings i2">I don't thi2">ink i2">I can do by myself, or that i2">I don't beli2">ieve would be a good deci2">isi2">ion.

i2">I was not goi2">ing to eat pi2">izza, clai2">imi2">ing that i2">it would congest my si2">inuses too much. He sai2">id, eat the pi2">izza. i2">I ate the pi2">izza. i2">It wasn't a problem.

i2">I was not goi2">ing to buy a dai2">iry i2">ice-cream for si2">imi2">ilar reasons, and he suggested i2">it was okay, so i2">I di2">id i2">it, and i2">I had no symptoms.

Today, i2">I was ti2">ired and emoti2">ionally wrought after some release and heali2">ing, and i2">I di2">idn't want to go to the store, but needed some stuff. Holy Spi2">iri2">it sai2">id, "go!". So i2">I went. And i2">I di2">idn't go based on my own beli2">ief that i2">I would be able to rely on myself, but based on the beli2">ief that because He supports i2">it, i2">I Wi2">ILL be able to go. i2">I had FAi2">ITH!

And as i2">I went, i2">I exclai2">imed that i2">I wi2">ill go and i2">I wi2">ill shop and i2">I wi2">ill be fi2">ine because i2">I wi2">ill be i2">infused and sustai2">ined by the power of God, i2">I wi2">ill be fi2">illed wi2">ith hi2">is strength, and i2">I wi2">ill have no problems. And as i2">I got to the store, i2">I could FEEL the presence of a strong, li2">ight, joyous energy i2">in me, and not only di2">id i2">I have no problems wi2">ith ti2">iredness etc i2">I even felt open wi2">ith other customers, seemed to attract people who were laughi2">ing and happy, and generally felt supported. i2">I even beli2">ieve there was an angel there who showed up as a man... someti2">imes i2">I can tell, and that man spoke to me about bananas, and i2">it was funny and i2">it was all good.

So thi2">is i2">is what i2">I am fi2">indi2">ing now. There are certai2">in thi2">ings that i2">I beli2">ieve are true of the "natural world" based on the ego's natural laws. But then, there i2">is God's wi2">ill, God's power, and Hi2">is SUPERNATURAL strength. And as you step out to do thi2">ings whi2">ich push you beyond your natural boundari2">ies, and whi2">ich go out on a li2">imb, and whi2">ich you could only do i2">IF you had God's strength to support you, then knowi2">ing that you do and i2">invi2">iti2">ing i2">it to do so, God DOES come to support you i2">in supernatural ways! That means you are walki2">ing wi2">ith God.

And so i2">I am learni2">ing, more can be done through me and by me i2">IF i2">I have God wi2">ith me. There i2">is a power that can work through me. There are goals that i2">I can achi2">ieve whi2">ich i2">I could not achi2">ieve alone but whi2">ich are achi2">ievable because God rushes i2">in to make them so! Ahhhhhhhhh.

"i2">I am sustai2">ined by the love of God" - ACi2">IM

"God goes wi2">ith me all through the day" - ACi2">IM

Thi2">is doesn't just mean i2">I have a buddy to talk to, i2">it means i2">if i2">I wi2">ill step out and take a ri2">isk and go beyond the ego's laws, God's Wi2">ill be done!!!

Can i2">I get an amen?!

ARTICLE:

Be passer by

A good questi2">ion to ask i2">is, i2">it i2">is any of my god-dam busi2">iness?

i2">In vari2">ious ACi2">IM groups, a majori2">ity of statements made are attempts to evaluate what someone else i2">is doi2">ing and to judge whether or not they are supposed to be doi2">ing i2">it.

i2">It's ki2">ind of li2">ike the behavi2">ior poli2">ice, maki2">ing i2">it one's own busi2">iness to requi2">ire that other people be a certai2">in way i2">in order to be acceptable.

What i2">I thi2">ink i2">it really stems from i2">is thi2">is i2">issue of i2">irresponsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for our own choi2">ices. Or rather, tryi2">ing to make someone else responsi2">ible for your happi2">iness, and thereby bei2">ing justi2">ifi2">ied i2">in anger at them when they're not bei2">ing the way we need them to be, i2">in order to choose what we want on our behalf.

There i2">is thi2">is "forgi2">iveness to destroy" all over these groups.

i2">If i2">I am responsi2">ible for my own choi2">ice and what i2">I experi2">ience and i2">I am not responsi2">ible for anyone else's mi2">istaken deci2">isi2">ions, then what anyone else i2">is or i2">is not doi2">ing should really be of no concern to me.

i2">If i2">I can access anythi2">ing i2">I need and any experi2">ience i2">I desi2">ire through responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for my own choi2">ice, then i2">I should have no need for anyone else to be a certai2">in way, say certai2">in thi2">ings, have certai2">in behavi2">iors, or comply to some ki2">ind of gui2">ilt-laden course i2">ideal. i2">If i2">I'm fi2">inger-poi2">inti2">ing as to how others are falli2">ing short, i2">it must prove that i2">I am falli2">ing short and i2">I'm the one who needs to own i2">it.

What i2">I came away wi2">ith from spendi2">ing ti2">ime i2">in the groups i2">is, getti2">ing back to thi2">is self-study practi2">ice, for myself. No-one else can choose the atonement for me, or deny i2">it for me. i2">It's not anyone else's choi2">ice to make on my behalf. So i2">I ask myself now whether there i2">is really any si2">igni2">ifi2">icant meri2">it i2">in parti2">ici2">ipati2">ing i2">in these "di2">iscussi2">ion groups" where 90% of what's wri2">itten i2">is about the ways that other people are wrong.

Why are so many people talki2">ing about the way that OTHER people are doi2">ing the course and judgi2">ing them for i2">it?

i2">I don't thi2">ink we're supposed to be even getti2">ing i2">into other people's busi2">iness. Li2">ike, i2">if someone i2">is doi2">ing the course a certai2">in way for them, that's thei2">ir choi2">ice. i2">It may not be the way i2">I do i2">it or what i2">I beli2">ieve the course says. But as soon as my ego starts to compare and judge the person now i2">I'm getti2">ing i2">involved i2">in thei2">ir busi2">iness, i2">interferi2">ing wi2">ith thei2">ir choi2">ices, tryi2">ing to control them, and then rejecti2">ing them when they fai2">il to comply.

We need to mi2">ind of own fucki2">ing busi2">iness a bi2">it more. Or as Jesus puts i2">it more eloquently.... be passer by. Observe.

Forgi2">iveness looks and i2">is sti2">ill and qui2">iet and judges not. Where i2">is the entanglement of opi2">ini2">ions and getti2">ing i2">into whether other people are ri2">ight or wrong, i2">in that?

All the debate and tryi2">ing to coerce others to be li2">ike oneself, i2">is an i2">indi2">irect ego attempt to avoi2">id maki2">ing one's own choi2">ice for atonement. i2">It's a fai2">ilure to forgi2">ive, actually, resulti2">ing i2">in justi2">ifi2">ied judgement. "He who would not forgi2">ive must judge, to justi2">ify hi2">is fai2">ilure to forgi2">ive." We aren't goi2">ing to get to heaven by havi2">ing someone else choose to go there for us.

So what does i2">it matter what anyone else i2">is doi2">ing? What does i2">it matter whether other people are getti2">ing i2">it or not? What does i2">it matter who sai2">id what to whom and who was an asshole and who i2">is passi2">ive aggressi2">ive and who i2">is spewi2">ing li2">ies about the truth 24/7?

i2">I'm just thi2">inki2">ing... i2">I need to do the course myself, for me, and let go of tryi2">ing to change other people when they're not ready or wi2">illi2">ing. Those who are to meet wi2">ill meet. When students are ready, teachers appear. There are no acci2">idents i2">in salvati2">ion. God has a plan.

When i2">I rest wi2">ithi2">in, go wi2">ithi2">in, focus wi2">ithi2">in, dwell wi2">ith God wi2">ithi2">in, stay wi2">ithi2">in, remai2">in calm, be at peace, connect to my holi2">iness, step back from the world, di2">isconnect, etc.... i2">I feel that where and what i2">I am i2">is centered and calm and dwells i2">insi2">ide of me.

Wi2">ithi2">in me accordi2">ing to ACi2">IM there i2">is an i2">inner altar, where we are host to God. And also that deep wi2">ithi2">in us there i2">is a place of complete holi2">iness. And we're also told we can fi2">ind a state of rest i2">in an "i2">I need do nothi2">ing" state, where we can experi2">ience a sense of calm and rest "i2">in the mi2">idst all the busy doi2">ings on whi2">ich you are sent".

The more that i2">I forgi2">ive the world and recogni2">ize i2">it does not exi2">ist, the more i2">I only have "left" what i2">is wi2">ithi2">in me. i2">If everythi2">ing seemi2">ingly external or outsi2">ide of me, whi2">ich also i2">includes the body, i2">is not there and does not exi2">ist, because there i2">is no world, then all i2">I "have" i2">is what i2">is wi2">ithi2">in my mi2">ind. i2">In my awareness.

i2">I fi2">ind myself becomi2">ing aware of thi2">is i2">insi2">ide state of calm and holi2">iness more and more often. i2">If i2">I put my attenti2">ion there, i2">it's li2">ike turni2">ing my mi2">ind away from the world and looki2">ing wi2">ithi2">in. Focusi2">ing on where i2">I am comi2">ing from, not on where i2">I am goi2">ing to. Steppi2">ing back from the world and steppi2">ing back from my steppi2">ing out, and si2">imply remai2">ini2">ing deep wi2">ithi2">in. And thi2">is i2">inner state i2">is abstract and si2">imple and one and whole, not a myri2">iad of forms and di2">ifferences.

Wi2">ithi2">in me there i2">is a place of peace and calm and surrender and i2">inacti2">ivi2">ity. i2">It's a qui2">iet, holy state. i2">It i2">isn't out there, or externali2">ized, or projecti2">ing, or losi2">ing center, or bei2">ing caught up i2">in i2">illusi2">ions, or upset, or thrown around by the world. i2">It's li2">ike just si2">itti2">ing centered wi2">ithi2">in yourself and i2">in what you are and not leavi2">ing yourself. Not abandoni2">ing yourself. Not bei2">ing pulled away on another wi2">ild goose chase.

When i2">I move away from thi2">is state, whi2">ich seems to be very natural and easy to move i2">into as well, my focus and attenti2">ion shi2">ifts to the external world. To the body. And now i2">if my mi2">ind goes i2">into ego, and i2">it goes i2">into beli2">ievi2">ing the world i2">is real, i2">it now starts to lose si2">ight of that i2">inner calm. And now the mi2">ind seems to reach out, attach, hold onto thi2">ings, psychologi2">ically and energeti2">ically.

Each ti2">ime thi2">is happens a seemi2">ing "bri2">idge" forms, whi2">ich i2">is based on the i2">idea of hori2">izontal cause and effect, or bei2">ing affect-able by the external world. i2">It feels li2">ike a cord, tyi2">ing me to somethi2">ing. And by beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in external causes and si2">inners i2">I then feel thi2">is sense of vulnerabi2">ili2">ity and accessi2">ibi2">ili2">ity, wherei2">in because i2">I am formi2">ing these bri2">idges of hori2">izontal causati2">ion wi2">ith external thi2">ings, my attack can flow out across these bri2">idges, and external attack can flow i2">in to me as well. They are beli2">iefs i2">in affecti2">ing and bei2">ing affected.

Once i2">I am attacki2">ing and recei2">ivi2">ing attack, my psychologi2">ical experi2">ience i2">is that i2">I am vulnerable, attackable, unprotected, and what i2">is external can seem to come all the way i2">into me and make contact wi2">ith what i2">I am, and attack i2">it, and now i2">I am affected, and now i2">I am havi2">ing effects and upsets and emoti2">ional reacti2">ions. And now i2">I am thrown off center and am lost, and have lost si2">ight of my i2">inner self, and the calm i2">is di2">isturbed, and all sense of holi2">iness and peace thrown out the wi2">indow.

Then i2">I forgi2">ive. i2">I remember there i2">is no world. And as i2">I forgi2">ive i2">I di2">ismantle these i2">inroads, these bi2">indi2">ings and attachments and beli2">iefs i2">in somethi2">ing external havi2">ing access to my i2">inner self. And as i2">I do, as i2">I recogni2">ize the world i2">is not real, i2">it does not exi2">ist, i2">it i2">is not causal, i2">it i2">is not happeni2">ing, thi2">is wi2">ipes the world off the plate of my mi2">ind. Everythi2">ing external i2">is a li2">ie. And now what i2">is left? All that's left i2">is what i2">I am wi2">ithi2">in me. And what i2">I am i2">is deep wi2">ithi2">in. And i2">it i2">is calm and peaceful and holy and i2">innocent and li2">ight and gently happy and i2">in the presence of God. And i2">it i2">is already there, wai2">iti2">ing for me to just uncover i2">it and be i2">it.

So now what i2">I'm noti2">ici2">ing i2">is, i2">I am spendi2">ing progressi2">ively more and more ti2">ime wi2">ithi2">in, bei2">ing what i2">I really am, and less and less ti2">ime wi2">ithout, lost and bei2">ing untrue to myself and wi2">ildly reacti2">ive and upset and terri2">ifi2">ied, caught i2">in a dream and tempted by i2">illusi2">ions. So i2">it seems then that remai2">ini2">ing wi2">ithi2">in, centered, i2">in my i2">inner calm place, i2">is where i2">I really am, and i2">if i2">I were to just stay there, i2">I would not lose si2">ight of myself and bleed out i2">into the world. And i2">I wouldn't react to fi2">igures i2">in a dream, or even feel parti2">icularly engaged wi2">ith the world.

i2">It then i2">is li2">ike bei2">ing passer-by, remai2">ini2">ing wi2">ithi2">in, wi2">ith God, and looki2">ing wi2">ithout, but not movi2">ing out i2">into the world mentally. Not abandoni2">ing my post. Not runni2">ing away from the i2">inner altar. Not getti2">ing di2">istracted and decei2">ived and alarmed and threatened by the external. And so i2">I just remai2">ini2">ing wi2">ithi2">in. Li2">ike a turtle i2">in i2">its shell, just peeki2">ing out at the world but not thrusti2">ing myself i2">into i2">it. Not losi2">ing my center or goi2">ing off on some tangent of a wi2">ild goose chase after dreams and fantasi2">ies of physi2">ical spi2">iri2">ituali2">izati2">ion.

So then i2">if i2">I walk the world, from wi2">ithi2">in, and an remai2">ini2">ing wi2">ithi2">in as i2">I do so, keepi2">ing i2">in the i2">inner holy calm whi2">ile i2">I do so, i2">I am no longer lost i2">in the world. i2">I am above the battlefi2">ield. i2">I am outsi2">ide the spaceti2">ime. i2">I am further than any i2">illusi2">ion can reach. i2">I am beyond the ego. Because ego i2">is always all about goi2">ing wi2">ithout, externali2">izi2">ing, abandoni2">ing yourself, leavi2">ing yourself behi2">ind, movi2">ing away from what you are, seeki2">ing and not fi2">indi2">ing, seeki2">ing anywhere but wi2">ithi2">in where you already are perfect. And now i2">I be passerby, watchi2">ing, noti2">ici2">ing, but stayi2">ing close to God wi2">ithi2">in.

Paradoxi2">ically, when you go wi2">ithi2">in, you access the li2">ight, and then the li2">ight can project and extend outward. You do not shi2">ine the li2">ight by tryi2">ing to force li2">ight out of you i2">into the world. You do not shi2">ine li2">ight by leavi2">ing your li2">ight bulb. You do not i2">illumi2">inate the world or be the li2">ight of the world, by confusi2">ing yourself wi2">ith what goes out. Love and li2">ight extend on thei2">ir own. You only have to go wi2">ithi2">in and joi2">in wi2">ith the SOURCE, plug yourself i2">into the electri2">ical socket, and then you li2">ight up, wi2">ithi2">in.

"Love goes out because of what i2">it i2">is, but you are needed that i2">it can begi2">in."

And once you have an i2">inner li2">ight, i2">it automati2">ically radi2">iates and extends and shares. i2">It seems counter i2">intui2">iti2">ive but the only way to gi2">ive to others i2">is to recei2">ive. And as you recei2">ive the i2">inner li2">ight you automati2">ically gi2">ive i2">it. Provi2">ided you don't try to take i2">it away from yourself and sacri2">ifi2">ice i2">it i2">in tryi2">ing to gi2">ive i2">it to another. You are to be the li2">ight bulb, not the photons. You have to be i2">in the i2">inner holi2">iness i2">in order to have power over what i2">is exteranal.

Goi2">ing wi2">ithi2">in allows you to extend and project li2">ight wi2">ithout. You have to move wi2">ithi2">in, and become closer to God, i2">in order to have somethi2">ing worth gi2">ivi2">ing. And as you gi2">ive i2">it, you do not abandon your i2">inti2">imacy wi2">ith God otherwi2">ise you stop havi2">ing anythi2">ing to share. And as you connect to the i2">inner li2">ight, thi2">is also transcends the outer, and so joi2">ins you wi2">ith other mi2">inds i2">in li2">ight, because i2">it i2">is deep wi2">ithi2">in you that you are connected to others, who SEEM to be external and separated off. We are joi2">ined together by mutually goi2">ing wi2">ithi2">in, so that we transcend the world, and thus are not at a di2">istance.

There i2">is a sayi2">ing, "i2">If i2">I do not go wi2">ithi2">in, i2">I wi2">ill go wi2">ithout". And thi2">is i2">is the whole thi2">ing. When you stop dwelli2">ing wi2">ithi2">in, you lose yourself and lose everythi2">ing. You lose touch wi2">ith what you are and wi2">ith God. And the li2">ight di2">ims and you cannot shi2">ine. i2">In a sense, by movi2">ing i2">inward whi2">ich seems to be away from others, you actually reach a state of joi2">ini2">ing and shari2">ing. You can't access thi2">is joi2">ini2">ing and shari2">ing state by forci2">ing yourself outward, because that actually produces speci2">ial relati2">ionshi2">ips, attachment, ownershi2">ip and control.

All that remai2">ins when there i2">is no world, and there i2">is no body, and there are no temptati2">ions, and there i2">is no di2">istracti2">ion, and you are not confused wi2">ith the world, and you do not beli2">ieve you are a physi2">ical object, and you recogni2">ize the world was just a dream, and you reach enli2">ightenment, whi2">ich i2">is what God gave you. What i2">is comi2">ing from God. And what comes from God i2">is recei2">ived wi2">ithi2">in at your i2">inner altar. And thi2">is i2">is where you are host to Hi2">im. And when thi2">is i2">is all you have left, and you have nothi2">ing of the world, you are ready to go home.

ALL of your ego's functi2">ioni2">ing stems from a very very si2">imple premi2">ise. Once you start to reali2">ize what thi2">is foundati2">ion i2">is, i2">it frames everythi2">ing the ego does as just another example of thi2">is one thi2">ing.

The foundati2">ion of the ego i2">is si2">imply the suggesti2">ion that you are not love - the love i2">is not i2">in you or what you are - so you are depri2">ived of i2">it - so now you need to go restore the sense of lack by fi2">indi2">ing i2">it somewhere ELSE other than i2">in you. You go off hunti2">ing for a way to fi2">ill the empti2">iness, whi2">ich rei2">inforces your beli2">ief i2">in the empti2">iness. And even i2">if you fi2">ind somethi2">ing, i2">it won't heal the sense of LACK, and you won't accept i2">it, because i2">it's not really what you want. You want yourself back. You want God's love.

The separati2">ion of your i2">identi2">ity from God's Son leads to:

Seeki2">ing outsi2">ide yourself

Creati2">ing si2">ickness

All i2">idol worshi2">ip

Creati2">ing fear

All attack

All vi2">icti2">imhood

All loss and gri2">ief and loneli2">iness

All sense of abandonment and rejecti2">ion

Seei2">ing yourself as separate from God and others

Havi2">ing nothi2">ing to depend on ("i2">independence")

i2">Insani2">ity

Not bei2">ing true to yourself

Seeki2">ing for what you lost where i2">it does not exi2">ist and not fi2">indi2">ing i2">it

Losi2">ing even more of what you are by bei2">ing compelled to replace i2">it

A beli2">ief that you can di2">ie

All vulnerabi2">ili2">ity and sense of threat

Mi2">istrust (i2">in yourself)

All paths efforti2">ing to 'fi2">ind yourself' but remai2">in separate

The spi2">iri2">ituali2">ized ego

The i2">inabi2">ili2">ity to share or joi2">in

Condemnati2">ion and judgement and blame (of yourself)

Shame and gui2">ilt for who you are

Unworthi2">iness and unloveabi2">ili2">ity

Sufferi2">ing and sui2">ici2">ide and war (wi2">ith yourself)

All anger and upset and di2">isasters and terri2">ible events

...And on and on.

Just thi2">is one thi2">ing. Thi2">is one i2">idea of - i2">I'm not myself - where am i2">I - who am i2">I - i2">I am separate from what i2">I am - i2">I am not as God created me - leads to all of these other dynami2">ics and acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies and percepti2">ions.

You can't have any of them wi2">ithout thi2">is one foundati2">ion - thi2">is sense of separati2">ion from yourself. And si2">ince you and God are one, i2">it i2">is si2">imultaneously a sense of separati2">ion from God.

"A sense of separati2">ion from God i2">is the only lack you really need correct." - ACi2">IM

And here's the cli2">incher. Every si2">ingle one of those thi2">ings on that li2">ist above that you currently beli2">ieve are caused by all ki2">inds of thi2">ings OTHER than the ego's foundati2">ion, are NOT caused by anythi2">ing other than the ego's foundati2">ion. And so i2">it i2">is the sheer 'fact' of 'bei2">ing' an ego - separate from the love you are - that causes every si2">ingle problem you face. All hell comes from i2">it. Bei2">ing separate from God and your True Self i2">is the ONLY problem that needs correcti2">ion. All other problems are i2">illusory problems maski2">ing the one problem so that you wi2">ill not correct i2">it.

So each ti2">ime i2">I am i2">in the ego, i2">in some way i2">I must be beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I am separate from God and myself. i2">I must be goi2">ing down some path whi2">ich tells me i2">it's goi2">ing to help me RESTORE who i2">I am and what i2">I lost, BUT whi2">ich wi2">ill NOT restore i2">it, because the enti2">ire NEED for that path comes from beli2">ievi2">ing i2">I LACK what i2">I'm looki2">ing to restore, and unti2">il i2">I stop belei2">ivi2">ing that i2">I won't ever be able to ACCEPT that i2">I HAVE WHAT i2">I REALLY HAVE ALREADY.

You ARE as God Created you. You ARE love already. Thi2">is you need to accept, and let go of all these other ego pursui2">its that tri2">ick you and lead you away from i2">it. Everyone i2">is bei2">ing decei2">ived by the ego's suggesti2">ions of everythi2">ing you need to do to 'fi2">ix' the separati2">ion, whi2">ich seem to lead you to resoluti2">ion but i2">in fact lead you to an EVEN WORSE si2">ituati2">ion. Seek and do not fi2">ind. Fi2">ix and do not correct. Pursue and fai2">il. Search and lose. Try to have and do not have at all. Hold on and lose everythi2">ing. Thi2">is i2">is all the ego's decei2">it.

One error, one correcti2">ion. Holy Spi2">iri2">it's i2">is the Answer from God because He Knows the soluti2">ion to thi2">is problem - that the problem really i2">IS NOT REAL. You are NOT separate from God or Your Self and the separati2">ion NEVER HAPPENED. So you are love. And that i2">is why you need do nothi2">ing.

Gradually over ti2">ime Jesus has been tryi2">ing to teach me about freedom.

He would say, "you are free". i2">I would be tryi2">ing to deci2">ide whether to do somethi2">ing or not, whether i2">I'm allowed to, whether i2">it's the ri2">ight thi2">ing, etc. i2">I anti2">ici2">ipated He would fi2">ind me gui2">ilty for wanti2">ing to do somethi2">ing, and tell me not to. But i2">instead, He would do the exact opposi2">ite and say "you are free", absolvi2">ing me of all gui2">ilt.

He would even seemi2">ingly ENCOURAGE and SUPPORT me i2">in whatever i2">it was that i2">I had chosen to do. And then i2">I found myself wonderi2">ing, why the heck would He even do that? Well, i2">it's because He has COMPLETE respect for our i2">indi2">ivi2">idual free wi2">ill. Obvi2">iously he would warn me agai2">inst anythi2">ing "harmful" or truly a poor choi2">ice but wi2">ithi2">in reason, he supports whatever i2">I choose.

And then he would keep sayi2">ing, "you are free". And i2">I couldn't get i2">it. i2">It di2">idn't seem to make sense. Thi2">is freedom seemed to li2">ive i2">in a sea of "ti2">ies" and "chai2">ins" and reasons why i2">I should or should not or what would other people thi2">ink.

The thi2">ing i2">is, after a whi2">ile i2">I start to get thi2">is i2">impressi2">ion that, i2">it's great that i2">I am FREE and that He i2">is acknowledgi2">ing my freedom so uncondi2">iti2">ionally, and Holy Spi2">iri2">it does the same. He never outri2">ight tri2">ies to force me or stop me i2">in any unlovi2">ing way, although someti2">imes nudges me strongly i2">if i2">I'm si2">igni2">ifi2">icantly goi2">ing i2">into ego.

But i2">it's ki2">ind of li2">ike, because i2">I am ALLOWED to choose anythi2">ing.... i2">it makes me aware that, i2">in fact, just because i2">I CAN choose anythi2">ing, does not necessari2">ily mean thi2">is i2">is a rule for gui2">idance, or for deci2">idi2">ing WHAT to do. i2">If Jesus would tell you, hey, you can do ANYTHi2">ING you choose, what would you choose? Would you choose to keep doi2">ing thi2">ings whi2">ich may not necessari2">ily be taki2">ing you closer to God?

Nei2">ither God nor Jesus nor the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">intrude upon your God-gi2">iven freedom. They would, let's say, "li2">ike" for you to choose to be happy, to choose to do God's wi2">ill or to li2">ive accordi2">ing to God's "i2">intended" way of bei2">ing. But there i2">is no coerci2">ion. At all. And so we are to come to God Wi2">ILLi2">INGLY, only, not through force or because of some ki2">ind of pressure.

So the questi2">ion then becomes, even though i2">I am FREE, and i2">I do not HAVE to be wi2">ith God or do Hi2">is wi2">ill, what DECi2">ISi2">ION wi2">ill i2">I make? Do you actually CHOOOOOOOOSE to accept God's gi2">ifts and to li2">ive the way He has desi2">igned for me, or do i2">I want to try to choose somethi2">ing else?

Thi2">is i2">is a deci2">isi2">ion we ALL have to make. "Heaven i2">is a choi2">ice i2">I must make". We actually DO have the freedom to do anythi2">ing, but when i2">it comes down to i2">it, EVEN WHEN you have thi2">is freedom and you can CONTi2">INUE delayi2">ing as long as you li2">ike, don't you start to get thi2">is feeli2">ing, at some poi2">int, that you si2">imply.... want to go home? That you're ti2">ired of the thi2">ings you have chosen and want a better way? Or that you're "ready" to let go of ego pursui2">its and "gi2">ive up all the pleasures of the world" and open up to recei2">ivi2">ing everythi2">ing God has gi2">iven, i2">in exchange for nothi2">ing?

Thi2">is i2">is a choi2">ice we each have to make on our own, when we are good and ready. i2">It takes Wi2">ILLi2">INGNESS. And at the very least, i2">it takes a Li2">ITTLE wi2">illi2">ingness, but ulti2">imately a TOTAL free-wi2">illed wi2">illi2">ingness, a desi2">ire, a CHOi2">ICE, a DECi2">ISi2">ION, to WANT to be wi2">ith God and to li2">ive the li2">ife He would have us li2">ive. A li2">ife of happi2">iness and joy and eternal li2">ife and creati2">ion and love. A li2">ife of celebrati2">ion and peace.

You are responsi2">ible for your own free-wi2">illed choi2">ice. But you are also responsi2">ible for the consequences of that choi2">ice. No-one else i2">is responsi2">ible for your choi2">ice. And you are not responsi2">ible for anyone else's choi2">ice. We have to ALLOW others to be completely free to choose ANYTHi2">ING, i2">if we are to also atune to our own freedom to choose ANYTHi2">ING, otherwi2">ise we wi2">ill choose nothi2">ing i2">in place of God, beli2">ievi2">ing that we don't have the TOTAL FREEDOM necessary to TOTALLY CHOOSE EVERYTHi2">ING.

Someti2">imes (ok, often), i2">I thi2">ink i2">I know what i2">is good or bad. For myself, for other people etc. But i2">I have to questi2">ion thi2">is. Do i2">I really know anythi2">ing?

What i2">if my efforts to help are hurtful? What i2">if i2">I'm di2">istracti2">ing someone from a spi2">iri2">itual lesson? What i2">if i2">I'm taki2">ing away someone's lesson, even i2">if i2">it's pai2">inful, that they need i2">in order to wake up? What i2">if my fi2">ixi2">ing i2">is actually undoi2">ing an opportuni2">ity that someone has to fi2">ind thei2">ir own strength? What i2">if my attempt to take over somethi2">ing i2">is di2">isempoweri2">ing for them, even i2">if i2">it was wi2">ith the i2">intenti2">ion of helpi2">ing?

Ulti2">imately then i2">it comes down to just... allowi2">ing oneself to open up to the i2">idea that i2">I do not know ANYTHi2">ING as to whether somethi2">ing i2">is ri2">ight, or wrong, for myself or anyone.

The Course asks us to be open to 'not knowi2">ing', as a doorway to knowi2">ing. What i2">I see i2">it as now, i2">is that when we're constantly i2">in thi2">is tug of war of seei2">ing somethi2">ing as ri2">ight or wrong, we automati2">ically then leap off that spri2">ingboard i2">into ego reacti2">ions and copi2">ing tools and ways of 'doi2">ing somethi2">ing about i2">it', all of whi2">ich i2">is based on us thi2">inki2">ing that we KNOW... beli2">ievi2">ing that we KNOW what i2">is goi2">ing on or why i2">it's happeni2">ing, when we actually don't.

What the Course i2">is warni2">ing us agai2">inst i2">is FALSE knowi2">ing, whi2">ich i2">is ego knowi2">ing - and the ego actually cannot know anythi2">ing. False knowi2">ing i2">is where you beli2">ieve you know, you have some opi2">ini2">ion, you judge i2">it, you label i2">it, you deci2">ide somethi2">ing i2">is ri2">ight and okay, or somethi2">ing i2">is bad and not meant to be thi2">is way, and then you proceed to pi2">ile extra reacti2">ions on top of thi2">is. You even make deci2">isi2">ions about what to 'do about i2">it' based on thi2">is. But thi2">is basi2">ic percepti2">ion of ... i2">its wrong. .. or ... i2">it shouldn't be li2">ike thi2">is. .... that's somethi2">ing WE are maki2">ing up.

i2">I don't know what's ri2">ight or wrong for people. i2">I don't know even what's ri2">ight or wrong for myself. i2">I don't know what's helpful or hurtful. i2">I don't know whether my attempts to fi2">ix and save and heal and cure are actually i2">interferi2">ing wi2">ith someone's spi2">iri2">itual growth. i2">I could be doi2">ing more harm than 'good' i2">in spi2">ite of my beli2">ief that i2">I'm helpi2">ing. Or vi2">ice versa, i2">I may be holdi2">ing back on helpi2">ing i2">in certai2">in ways that would be truly helpful because of a beli2">ief that i2">I shouldn't, or don't want to, or can't love a person enough etc.

So i2">it's li2">ike, here i2">is thi2">is neutral si2">ituati2">ion, and then the ego wi2">ill waver off to one si2">ide or another, taki2">ing si2">ides, ei2">ither for or agai2">inst thi2">is thi2">ing, and basi2">ically go off on a tangent of beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">it knows that thi2">is di2">iversi2">ion away from 'what i2">is' i2">is based i2">in truth.

i2">It takes a tremendous amount of humi2">ili2">ity, therefore, to admi2">it truly, honestly, that i2">if we really get down to i2">it, i2">I do NOT KNOW what anythi2">ing means, i2">I do NOT know what anythi2">ing i2">is for, i2">I do NOT know whether somethi2">ing that's happeni2">ing i2">is good or bad, i2">I do NOT know i2">if i2">it's meant to be happeni2">ing and i2">is helpful or whether i2">it should not be happeni2">ing and i2">is harmful. And maybe helpful/harmful i2">is enti2">irely an ego-made up i2">idea? How about that? What i2">if there was absolutely no good or bad of any ki2">ind? What i2">is everythi2">ing that's happeni2">ing, no matter whether i2">I love i2">it or hate i2">it, has absolutely nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith my ego's judgements about i2">it? What i2">if i2">I have NO CLUE about i2">it, other than that i2">IT Si2">IMPLY i2">IS WHAT i2">IT i2">IS?

And what i2">is i2">it that i2">I ulti2">imately REACT to? i2">It's my own percepti2">ion that i2">I've i2">invented that somethi2">ing i2">is wrong wi2">ith the pi2">icture. i2">I am the one deci2">idi2">ing that, thi2">inki2">ing i2">I know, when i2">I don't know. And then i2">I react to my own conclusi2">ion. i2">I don't really know anythi2">ing, or at least, my ego doesn't really know anythi2">ing.

But God knows everythi2">ing. Holy Spi2">iri2">it knows everythi2">ing. i2">I guess i2">I should trust Hi2">im and let Hi2">im deci2">ide for me?

FED-UP Wi2">ITH SUFFERi2">ING? PUTTi2">ING UP Wi2">ITH WHAT HAS HAPPENED? TOLERATi2">ING PAi2">IN? WANT SOME RELi2">IEF?!!

The ego’s thought system i2">is speci2">ifi2">ically geared to make you suffer for as long as possi2">ible.

Every ti2">ime somethi2">ing "happens" i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is symboli2">ic of si2">in. Si2">in seems li2">ike an i2">irreversi2">ible event whi2">ich, once i2">it has happened, produces i2">inevi2">itable consequences. The consequences are beli2">ieved to be i2">irreversi2">ible, and so we resi2">ign ourselves to tolerati2">ing them, accepti2">ing them, allowi2">ing them putti2">ing up wi2">ith them, and SUFFERi2">ING, for a long long ti2">ime.

Si2">in, or events, as soon as they happen, move i2">into the past. Thi2">is was our ego devi2">ice for usi2">ing ti2">ime to keep the "cause" of all problems locked i2">in the past, beyond access to the present, so that i2">it could not be changed. The past i2">ITSELF i2">is the i2">idea of "somethi2">ing happened whi2">ich cannot be changed." And pretty much everyone beli2">ieves, you cannot undo the past.

Then, the consequences of si2">in proceed accordi2">ing to ego laws, extendi2">ing i2">indefi2">ini2">itely i2">into the future, featuri2">ing lots and lots of sufferi2">ing. We beli2">ieve we cannot do ANYTHi2">ING to change what has happened, so we just put up wi2">ith i2">it. Our mi2">ind, beli2">ievi2">ing thi2">is ego arrangement, starts to become CONDi2">ITi2">IONED to thi2">ink and percei2">ive and be USED TO li2">ivi2">ing thi2">is way. Stuff happens, we accept i2">it as real, we do not undo i2">it, we thi2">ink we have to Li2">IVE Wi2">ITH i2">IT.

Thi2">is mental condi2">iti2">ioni2">ing, ki2">ind of a habi2">it of thought, whi2">ich runs completely OPPOSi2">ITE to the thought system of the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, i2">is a thought system of mai2">intai2">ini2">ing sufferi2">ing. i2">Ie, mai2">intai2">ini2">ing the consequences of si2">in i2">indefi2">ini2">itely. We become used to i2">it. We thi2">ink i2">it’s NORMAL! We then tolerate the sufferi2">ing for as long as possi2">ible, unti2">il i2">it adds up and destroys us. Li2">ivi2">ing thi2">is way, i2">is unforgi2">ivi2">ing. We have condemned ourselves to death.

Si2">ince thi2">is condi2">iti2">ioni2">ing has been bui2">ilt up over a very long peri2">iod of ti2">ime, i2">it seems almost i2">impossi2">ible to even questi2">ion i2">it or do anythi2">ing about i2">it. Surely we cannot undo si2">in? Surely we cannot REVERSE the consequences of our wrong deci2">isi2">ions, or events whi2">ich seemed to "happen"? But we can.

Holy Spi2">iri2">it had news for me, because i2">I beli2">ieved and acted thi2">is way. i2">I di2">id not beli2">ieve stuff could be undone. i2">I di2">idn’t even know there was ANY OTHER WAY to li2">ive. i2">I was so USED TO accepti2">ing that whatever happens, i2">it’s a done deal. As soon as i2">I become si2">ick, i2">I accepted i2">I must suffer i2">it and use magi2">ic and try to get over i2">it the "normal" way. Thi2">is always means, a long drawn out peri2">iod of sufferi2">ing. Lots of ti2">ime spent feeli2">ing li2">ike shi2">it. i2">I di2">id not even i2">IMAGi2">INE that i2">it mi2">ight be possi2">ible NOT TO HAVE TO SUFFER thi2">is way.

Holy Spri2">it started teachi2">ing me that "you need not suffer". One day i2">I burned my hand on hot water. i2">It became sore fast. i2">I started beli2">ievi2">ing, i2">I was goi2">ing to have a sore hand for a week, would have to suffer wi2">ith i2">it, thi2">is was really really annoyi2">ing, and i2">I was mad about i2">it. i2">I saw no way to avoi2">id that sufferi2">ing, other than tryi2">ing to use magi2">ic. i2">It hurt, and i2">I was pi2">issed. But Holy Spi2">iri2">it had news for me! He sai2">id, "you need not suffer". My hand started to shake. A mi2">iracle was happeni2">ing, but i2">I di2">id not want to LOOK at i2">it. i2">I was a bi2">it fri2">ightened, because mi2">iracles blow the ego expectati2">ions out of the water.

Somethi2">ing was happeni2">ing completely contrary to how thi2">ings normally happen, agai2">inst y ego, and agai2">inst my resi2">istance. After a few moments, i2">I looked. All of the soreness was completely healed, all the redness gone. And at that moment, just for a moment, somethi2">ing happened i2">in my mi2">ind... a sudden gli2">impse of some ki2">ind of mi2">iraculous state of bei2">ing, a mi2">ind whi2">ich knew that anythi2">ing of the body can be fli2">ipped on or off li2">ike a li2">ight swi2">itch, to whi2">ich i2">it was completely i2">immune. i2">It was a moment of Li2">IGHT. A state of mi2">ind i2">I had never experi2">ienced, caused by my EGO i2">ILLUSi2">IONS bei2">ing proven before my eyes, that they were NOT TRUE. Mi2">iracles are teachi2">ing devi2">ices!

At ti2">imes i2">I also have emoti2">ional releases of old pai2">in. These used to requi2">ire that i2">I cry at great length. i2">I have cri2">ied so many ti2">imes over the past years doi2">ing the course i2">it’s probably i2">in the 1000’s. But lately, Holy Spi2">iri2">it has been teachi2">ing me, "you need not suffer". As i2">I go to cry, showi2">ing a wi2">illi2">ingness to release, Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">immedi2">iately steps i2">in. i2">I can’t even get a tear out. He does hi2">is heali2">ing thi2">ing, produci2">ing vari2">ious temporary effects and shaki2">ing and so on, and then the upset i2">is GONE. Just di2">isappeared. No need to cry at all. i2">In fact, laughi2">ing at the end of i2">it. i2">I thought i2">I had to suffer, feel upset, let i2">it out the pai2">inful way. Not any more! Now, every si2">ingle ti2">ime i2">I go to release emoti2">ions, Holy Spi2">iri2">it does i2">it for me! You could say, i2">I never need to cry ever agai2">in. i2">Isn’t that somethi2">ing to be thankful for?! i2">It’s a mi2">iracle every ti2">ime.

Now, thi2">is appli2">ies to all of us, because thi2">is i2">is what happens when a Mi2">IRACLE happens. Mi2">iracles REVERSE what seems to have happened (si2">in), provi2">ing i2">it was NOT i2">irreversi2">ible. They can reach BACKWARDS i2">in ti2">ime and beyond all "causes" that we thi2">ink were i2">in the past out of reach, and UNDO them, restori2">ing us to how we were BEFORE stuff happened. Restori2">ing our i2">innocence and i2">immortali2">ity! Mi2">iracles reverse ti2">ime! Thi2">is i2">is completely the OPPOSi2">ITE of what we usually experi2">ience as "li2">inear ti2">ime". Li2">inear ti2">ime seems to only move forwards, shovi2">ing si2">in i2">into the past and gui2">ilt and sufferi2">ing i2">into the future. Not so, say mi2">iracles! Mi2">iracles GO THE OTHER WAY! They rewi2">ind, they undo, they collapse, they correct, they reverse, they heal, they restore, and demonstrate that YOU DO NOT NEED TO SUFFER EVEN A Li2">ITTLE Bi2">IT FOR ANY Ti2">IME AT ALL!

Thi2">is i2">is mi2">ind-bendi2">ing for us who are accustomed to thi2">inki2">ing wi2">ith the ego, assumi2">ing that li2">inear ti2">ime (shi2">it happens and i2">it gets worse) i2">is "normal", and just taki2">ing the way thi2">is world SEEMS to functi2">ion at face value. My mi2">ind i2">is so used to movi2">ing "forwards" wi2">ith the consequences of si2">in, that to get myself to even THi2">INK about movi2">ing the opposi2">ite di2">irecti2">ion i2">is a real challenge. My mi2">ind doesn’t seem to want to go that way! i2">It’s li2">ike a whole di2">ifferent di2">irecti2">ion of percepti2">ion. i2">It takes baby steps. i2">It takes practi2">ice. And each ti2">ime i2">I am a li2">ittle bi2">it wi2">illi2">ing to entertai2">in thi2">is i2">idea...."maybe i2">I DON‘T HAVE TO PUT UP Wi2">ITH THi2">IS", and the sooner the better, and i2">imagi2">ine that i2">it Mi2">IGHT be possi2">ible to NOT have to go through the whole trai2">in of sufferi2">ing i2">in the future, i2">I open up to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, who CAN OFFER HEALi2">ING NOW, and prevent havi2">ing to suffer a long drawn-out PUNi2">ISHMENT.

Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is capable of REVERSi2">ING absolutely anythi2">ing the ego has made, of undoi2">ing absolutely ALL Si2">IN, provi2">ing and demonstrati2">ing that NOTHi2">ING stands i2">in the way of God’s heali2">ing power, and that Si2">IN i2">is absolutely NOT PERMANENT and HAS NO REAL CONSEQUENCES. "Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo the ALL the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">if i2">I wi2">ill let Hi2">im", li2">iterally means, Mi2">IRACLES Wi2">ILL OVERRi2">IDE ALL CAUSES AND EFFECTS and wi2">ill UNDO every form of sufferi2">ing you ever thought you "had to experi2">ience" based on "what happened" or "what you di2">id". We do not "have to" go along wi2">ith the whole "somethi2">ing bad just happened, let’s i2">immedi2">iately accept i2">it has happened and PUT UP Wi2">ITH i2">IT" bullshi2">it. THAT i2">IS THE EGO! We must STOP TOLERATi2">ING THE EGO, because the only place i2">it leads to i2">is sufferi2">ing and death.

i2">It can be hard to do, especi2">ially at fi2">irst. i2">I have experi2">ienced thi2">is myself, and i2">I sti2">ill feel li2">ike a baby at thi2">is. Each ti2">ime somethi2">ing "goes wrong", or some si2">ickness pops up, or whatever temptati2">ion there i2">is that "there’s nothi2">ing i2">I can do about thi2">is", the challenge i2">is to catch myself and stop myself and be li2">ike.... wai2">it..... i2">I don’t have to accept thi2">is crap! Thi2">is i2">is not God’s wi2">ill. i2">I don’t have to SUFFER! MAYBE there i2">is another opti2">ion. "i2">I can see peace i2">instead of thi2">is", or rather, "i2">I can choose a mi2">iracle and UNDO THi2">IS SHi2">IT Ri2">IGHT NOW! i2">I don’t have to just go i2">into a future-predi2">icti2">ing Vi2">ICTi2">IM mode and the whole story of how thi2">is i2">is goi2">ing to rui2">in my li2">ife forever. THERE MUST BE A BETTER WAY.

There i2">is! Questi2">ion that ti2">ime must go forwards. Questi2">ion that you are stuck wi2">ith what happens to you. Questi2">ion the temptati2">ion to beli2">ieve there i2">is NOTHi2">ING that can be done to undo thi2">is. And you wi2">ill be goi2">ing up agai2">inst YOUR OWN BELi2">IE that there i2">is nothi2">ing anyone can do, and i2">it’s a strong one! You’re goi2">ing to have to really stretch your mi2">ind to consi2">ider and be open, that EVEN THi2">IS.... even thi2">is "thi2">ing" thats happeni2">ing, bi2">ig or small, EVEN THi2">IS you don’t have to accept, i2">it doesn’t have to stay, MAYBE i2">it can be undone, MAYBE there i2">is a way to heal thi2">is wi2">ith God. And gradually you wi2">ill develop TRUST i2">in the Holy Spi2">iri2">it and be wi2">illi2">ing to BELi2">IEVE Hi2">is Power to heal anythi2">ing, and thus become OPEN TO RECEi2">IVE THE HEALi2">ING. Holy Spi2">iri2">it has an unli2">imi2">ited supply of heali2">ing wai2">iti2">ing for you!!!!!! There i2">is nothi2">ing your holi2">iness cannot do. There i2">is nothi2">ing hi2">is holi2">iness cannot do.

But i2">it wi2">ill take practi2">ice, because your mi2">ind has been TRAi2">INED to "go along wi2">ith the consequences of si2">in", at great length. So much that you thi2">ink i2">it’s totally NORMAL - everyone seems to suffer the asame way, bad stuff happens and there’s nothi2">ing we can do. That’s the battle-cry of Si2">IN! The ego LOVES TO SUFFER! Our mi2">ind may even have Di2">IFFi2">ICULTY even begi2">inni2">ing to entertai2">in thi2">is i2">idea that events can MOVE i2">IN THE OPPOSi2">ITE Di2">IRECTi2">ION. Li2">ike someone hi2">itti2">ing REWi2">IND on the VCR! We do not have to li2">ive i2">in a world of "doi2">ing" (to us). We can li2">ive i2">in a world of UNDOi2">ING. Si2">imply because we do not see hardly anyone demonstrati2">ing thi2">is, we have ASSUMED that we must suffer and whatever caused stuff to happen, we’re stuck wi2">ith i2">it. i2">It’s bullshi2">it!

We have not seen someone comi2">ing BACK to li2">ife after bei2">ing dead. We have not seen a car acci2">ident bei2">ing reversed and no consequences comi2">ing from i2">it. We have not seen someone wi2">ith termi2">inal cancer suddenly have cancer no more. We have not seen a dead baby bei2">ing resurrected. We have not seen a leg whi2">ich was broken 5 mi2">inutes ago be completely healed. We have not seen broken objects be repai2">ired, or lack be fi2">illed out of nowhere, or people bei2">ing CURED of what the world says "cannot be cured". Ego/si2">in says nothi2">ing can be cured! i2">It i2">is CERTAi2">IN of your death. We must choose the OPPOSi2">ITE Di2">IRECTi2">ION! That’s what mi2">iracles are. Every mi2">iracle demonstrates the mi2">ind i2">is more powerful than the body and more powerful than Si2">IN.

Mi2">iracles are rei2">inforced by forgi2">iveness whi2">ich recogni2">izes si2">in has no consequences, and i2">it UNDOES THEM! We si2">imply ASSUME that everythi2">ing proceeds forwards, starti2">ing wi2">ith si2">in, endi2">ing i2">in DEATH. i2">It does not have to!

Let’s practi2">ice bei2">ing the ones to DEMONSTRATE that someti2">imes, and i2">it should be ALL THE Ti2">IME, thi2">ings can go backwards. Stuff can get healed. There can be total reversal of death. "Causes" can be nulli2">ifi2">ied and cancelled out, and all effects whi2">ich came from them UNDONE. We need to work wi2">ith the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">in our OWN EXPERi2">IENCE, learni2">ing that we don’t have to put up wi2">ith the thi2">ings that "happen to us" i2">in li2">ife. Let hi2">im show you that you need not suffer.

Let hi2">im show you that you DON’T have to tolerate that cold for 2 weeks, that you DON’T have to just accept that you wi2">ill never get your paralyzed li2">imb back, that you DON’T have to just lay down and di2">ie just because Si2">IN clai2">ims that you do.

Thi2">is i2">is learni2">ing to trust the supernatural heali2">ing power of mi2">iracles, whi2">ich UNDO everythi2">ig the ego tri2">ies to DO. i2">It i2">is nothi2">ing short of the complete reversal of all death and destructi2">ion and chaos, and the undoi2">ing of the separati2">ion, and the guaranteed RESURRECTi2">ION of God’s Sons. Mi2">iracles REVERSE what the ego has "done". That i2">is how they UNDO. Mi2">iracles don’t really do anythi2">ing at all, because all they do i2">is undo? i2">Is that a sorry excuse for a watered down non-mi2">iracle? Mi2">IRACLES UNDO EVERYTHi2">ING THE EGO HAS PUT i2">IN PLACE!

Guess also why Jesus says the Mi2">IRACLE i2">is the only tool avai2">ilable to you to control ti2">ime? Because mi2">iracles MOVE Ti2">IME BACKWARDS i2">in order to revert and undo the consequences of si2">in! They RETURN YOU to i2">innocence, health, wholeness and happi2">iness from whi2">ich you came, whi2">ich i2">is symboli2">ically i2">in the di2">istant past. Wi2">ith mi2">iracles, you need not AGE, you need not Di2">IE, you need not SUFFER, and you need not be Si2">ICK ever agai2">in! Nothi2">ing needs to go wrong and stay wrong! There i2">is NOTHi2">ING YOUR HOLi2">INESS CANNOT DO. Thi2">is takes learni2">ing, pati2">ience, practi2">ice and trust, i2">in the HOLY SPi2">IRi2">IT, that HE has the power and abi2">ili2">ity to HEAL ANYTHi2">ING FOR YOU i2">if you wi2">ill allow i2">it and just be open to thi2">is one si2">imple i2">idea ..... maybe there i2">is a better way, than havi2">ing to suffer the consequences of si2">in.

The whole problem wi2">ith false percepti2">ion i2">is really just one of confusi2">ion about "what i2">is the cause." Or more to the poi2">int, who i2">is causi2">ing i2">it. We could rephrase that as "i2">I don't know what God (cause) i2">is."

i2">In the separati2">ion there was a di2">isassoci2">iati2">ion from the role of "causer" or chooser (creator), and the ownershi2">ip and responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of thi2">is causi2">ing was projected onto others. We then ended up i2">in an extremely confused state of not bei2">ing able to clearly di2">iscern, "who i2">is doi2">ing what to whom?"

i2">In the ego thought system, cause and effect are completely reversed, thi2">ings whi2">ich are true seem false, thi2">ings whi2">ich are false seem true. There i2">is a breakdown of the Golden Rule, i2">in whi2">ich anythi2">ing that's true i2">is true of both of us.

i2">It's replaced wi2">ith the ego's i2">idea that what i2">is true for me i2">is not true for you. Whi2">ich really i2">is another way of sayi2">ing, cause and effect are separate. i2">I can cause you wi2">ithout bei2">ing affected. And you can cause me wi2">ithout bei2">ing affected. i2">I can accuse you of doi2">ing somethi2">ing i2">I di2">id not do, and thereby beli2">ieve i2">I am i2">innocent whi2">ile you're gui2">ilty.

Thi2">is i2">is the ego's i2">idea of "getti2">ing away wi2">ith murder", because i2">it beli2">ieves i2">it can cause thi2">ings to happen and escape the consequences. So when we get i2">into "i2">its you not me", or "you di2">id thi2">is to me", any ki2">ind of blame or fi2">inger-poi2">inti2">ing or scapegoati2">ing or beli2">ievi2">ing that "cause" i2">is outsi2">ide of you, you wi2">ill i2">instantly go i2">into a vi2">icti2">im role. And vi2">icti2">ims are always confused about who i2">is attacki2">ing them.

i2">In that confused state of ego reacti2">ions, i2">it always seems li2">ike i2">it's someone else doi2">ing thi2">is to us, some external event happened, some unforseen ci2">ircumstance, some unwanted happeni2">ing

Usually you'll feel devoi2">id of all responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for causi2">ing i2">it. i2">ie i2">it'll seem li2">ike you di2">idn't choose any of i2">it, and you don't want i2">it. But thi2">is i2">is because you have no clue whatsoever what i2">is really causi2">ing anythi2">ing. And so random fi2">ingers poi2">int at random targets hopi2">ing some mud wi2">ill sti2">ick.

As you apply forgi2">iveness, i2">ie you become more honest and less i2">in deni2">ial about your contri2">ibuti2">ion, you start to sort out exactly WHO i2">is causi2">ing stuff to happen. At fi2">irst i2">it seems li2">ike i2">it's everyone except you, but then gradually each ti2">ime you see that YOU Di2">ID THi2">IS TO YOURSELF, or was somethi2">ing you di2">id i2">in fact choose, or that i2">it di2">id have an effect on you, the pi2">icture starts to become clearer.

The more you can take responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for choosi2">ing the more you wi2">ill di2">iscern clearly and recogni2">ize that you are the cause of your sufferi2">ing. You wi2">ill also start to noti2">ice that the ego's breaki2">ing of God's laws does not work, and i2">in fact when you do attack or scapegoat another you do NOT escape the consequences. i2">It makes you feel gui2">ilty, i2">it fri2">ightens you, i2">it upsets and stresses you out.

Eventually, there becomes a clear associ2">iati2">ion between "bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">im" and "attacki2">ing yourself". A clear li2">ine of causati2">ion from what you are choosi2">ing and the effect YOU experi2">ience as a result. You'll see i2">it's not possi2">ible to blame another wi2">ithout feeli2">ing blamed. i2">It's not possi2">ible to judge wi2">ithout feeli2">ing judged. i2">It's not possi2">ible to attack wi2">ithout feeli2">ing attacked. And i2">it's not possi2">ible to accuse someone of bei2">ing the cause of you wi2">ithout you feeli2">ing li2">ike a vulnerable vi2">icti2">im.

And so then i2">it becomes obvi2">ious, that you feel li2">ike a vi2">icti2">im BECAUSE you posi2">iti2">ioned yourself as one, seei2">ing yourself i2">in that role, and wanti2">ing to do so i2">in order to try and get a payoff of scapegoati2">ing. But you no longer can pretend that your attacks on another don't hurt yourself. You can't help but noti2">ice that the i2">instant you try to shi2">ift gui2">ilt to someone else, you wi2">ill i2">immedi2">iately feel that fami2">ili2">iar weakness, threat and lack of safety that accompani2">ies a vi2">icti2">im mentali2">ity.

i2">It then becomes an unavoi2">idable no-brai2">iner. That i2">is, you clearly recogni2">ize and di2">isti2">ingui2">ish, whenever i2">I attack, i2">I feel attacked. Whenever i2">I want to make someone out to be gui2">ilty, i2">I feel li2">ike a vi2">icti2">im. Whenever i2">I try to be unforgi2">ivi2">ing, i2">I feel unforgi2">iven. i2">It has a di2">irect correlati2">ion, because i2">I AM the cause of everythi2">ing i2">I experi2">ience, NOT the other person.

i2">It then becomes harder to pretend to yourself that your attempted attacks on others have no effect on you. You are affected every ti2">ime. You si2">imply cannot mai2">intai2">in peace and happi2">iness at the same ti2">ime as bei2">ing angry wi2">ith someone. You can't truly honestly justi2">ify anger i2">in any si2">ituati2">ion because you know that i2">it's bullshi2">it. And i2">it'll become i2">increasi2">ingly noti2">iceable that you're bullshi2">itti2">ing yourself as you sort out exactly who i2">is causi2">ing everythi2">ing you feel.

So then i2">it becomes qui2">icker and easi2">ier to catch yourself. You can see, well, as soon as i2">I went to poi2">int a fi2">inger at someone and use them as a scapegoat, i2">I felt li2">ike a vi2">icti2">im under attack. Funny that. i2">I made that happen. i2">I gave myself that experi2">ience. And so i2">I can choose agai2">in and wi2">ithdraw that self-attack, that self-posi2">iti2">ioni2">ing of "i2">I'm the vi2">icti2">im here!". That demand that i2">I be weak and vulnerable and recogni2">ized as a sufferi2">ing fri2">ightened li2">iar.

Si2">ince i2">I then see that i2">I do thi2">is to myself and i2">it was very obvi2">ious that i2">I di2">id thi2">is, the enti2">ire "appeal" of playi2">ing the vi2">icti2">im role wi2">ithers away. There's no poi2">int to i2">it when you can more accurately di2">iscern that i2">it very much does hurt you. There are consequences. And so the challenge then i2">is to no longer see yourself unfai2">irly treated or as a vi2">icti2">im of anyone or anythi2">ing, recogni2">izi2">ing that i2">it's only when you do that you feel that way at all. And you no longer want to feel that way.

Fortunately si2">ince i2">it's an i2">insi2">ide job where you're the only one causi2">ing, and other people are never the cause of you AT ALL, i2">it really boi2">ils down to your own wi2">illi2">ingness to admi2">it to what you're doi2">ing to yourself and to want a better way. To prefer not sufferi2">ing over sufferi2">ing. To recogni2">ize that hurti2">ing hurts and attack attacks, rather than beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it does somethi2">ing else. Because i2">in our confusi2">ion we don't even reali2">ize what the fuck we're doi2">ing to ourselves, and we end up ki2">illi2">ing ourselves i2">in the name of self preservati2">ion.

True percepti2">ion i2">is accurate percepti2">ion. i2">It i2">is recogni2">iti2">ion. i2">It i2">is awareness and di2">iscernment. i2">It i2">is the abi2">ili2">ity to SEE, clearly, what the truth of thi2">is si2">ituati2">ion i2">is. What i2">is really goi2">ing on. Who i2">is really causi2">ing and choosi2">ing. Where thi2">ings really ori2">igi2">inate and what thei2">ir effects actually are. i2">It's the wi2">illi2">ingness and abi2">ili2">ity to not be bli2">inded or confused by the ego temptati2">ion to thi2">ink i2">its one-si2">idedness can work. i2">It's si2">imply honesty and openness to the truth.

Who would hurt themselves unless they thought they weren't hurti2">ing themselves i2">in doi2">ing so?

Who would hurt themelves once they recogni2">ized that they cannot be hurt unless they do so?

Who would hurt themselves i2">if they recogni2">ized that even the sli2">ightest attempt to hurt others di2">imi2">ini2">ishes your own happi2">iness?

Who would hurt themselves when joy and peace and love are the pri2">ice?

"You cannot be hurt unless you hurt yourself."

"No-one can suffer loss unless i2">it be hi2">is own deci2">isi2">ion. No-one suffers pai2">in except hi2">is choi2">ice elects thi2">is state for hi2">im. No-one can gri2">ieve nor fear nor thi2">ink hi2">im si2">ick unless these are the outcomes that he wants. And no-one di2">ies wi2">ithout hi2">is own consent. Nothi2">ing occurs but represents your wi2">ish, and nothi2">ing i2">is omi2">itted that you choose. Here i2">is your world, complete i2">in all detai2">ils. Here i2">is i2">its whole reali2">ity for you. And i2">it i2">is only here salvati2">ion i2">is."

""My Self i2">is ruler of the uni2">iverse." - i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that anythi2">ing should come to me unbi2">idden by myself. Even i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is i2">I who rule my desti2">iny. What happens i2">is what i2">I desi2">ire. What does not occur i2">is what i2">I do not want to happen. Thi2">is must i2">I accept."

For some ti2">ime i2">I've been confused about freedom.

A term i2">I am often told by spi2">iri2">it i2">is "you're free."

Thi2">is always felt uncomfortable. i2">It seems to allow me to do absolutely whatever i2">I wanted to do.

i2">It always seemed li2">ike spi2">iri2">it was gi2">ivi2">ing me permi2">issi2">ion to do thi2">ings, even thi2">ings that seemed unhealthy. And thi2">is i2">is because freedom really i2">is uncondi2">iti2">ional, regardless of what you use i2">it for.

Often when i2">I would ask about what to do, whether to do somethi2">ing or not, they'd say "you're free". i2">It di2">idn't seem li2">ike a helpful response.

But i2">I see now that i2">it seemed to prefer to gi2">ive me the freedom of choi2">ice, and to not i2">impose any sense of one thi2">ing bei2">ing more gui2">ilty than another.

Even so, i2">I would often feel a need to then push further to ask for gui2">idance or advi2">ice as to what to do - from someone who knows better. Because thi2">is freedom would also hi2">ighli2">ight that maybe what i2">I was consi2">ideri2">ing choosi2">ing wasn't i2">in the spi2">iri2">it of freedom, i2">ie was unlovi2">ing i2">in some way.

i2">I sti2">ill couldn't qui2">ite come to terms wi2">ith "bei2">ing free" though. i2">I would ask my wi2">ife (i2">in spi2">iri2">it) somethi2">ing for example, somethi2">ing perhaps relati2">ing to our relati2">ionshi2">ip or earth li2">ife, and she would say "you're free". i2">If i2">it was ever a request about whether some ki2">ind of ego-need was 'okay', she's say i2">I'm free.

i2">In some way i2">it almost seemed li2">ike a sort of "i2">i'd prefer you don't do that, but do i2">it i2">if you want to" sort of begrudgi2">ing. But i2">I am sure i2">it's my own mi2">ind that couldn't help but project that onto i2">it.

i2">I also struggled wi2">ith the i2">idea of bei2">ing free i2">in general, especi2">ially as i2">it relates to my wi2">ife's passi2">ing and tryi2">ing to move on and get over gri2">ief and loss.

She has been remi2">indi2">ing me often "you're free". Thi2">is hasn't always sat well, because i2">it often was i2">interpreted to mean "we're separate". i2">I have si2">ince come to see that thi2">is i2">is a sense of physi2">ical freedom - or a breaki2">ing of relati2">ionshi2">ip, as though to say we have no relati2">ionshi2">ip anymore, but that's not what i2">it means.

i2">It's fi2">inally sort of si2">inki2">ing i2">in, especi2">ially from the huge download i2">I recei2">ived last ni2">ight, that all thi2">is talk of freedom doesn't really mean what i2">I thought i2">it di2">id.

i2">I suddenly see now that freedom i2">is really somethi2">ing that was gi2">iven by God i2">in my creati2">ion. i2">It's a wholesale unli2">imi2">ited unrevokable freedom. And i2">it has no stri2">ings attached, nor i2">is there any suggesti2">ion of gui2">ilt for choosi2">ing one thi2">ing or another.

i2">In thi2">is freedom i2">is responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for choosi2">ing, the power to choose, the power to cause and create, and the i2">inabi2">ili2">ity to BE gui2">ilty. i2">If we are free, and God has sai2">id "have at i2">it", there i2">is no coerci2">ion or requi2">irement or pressure or puni2">ishment or judgement of any ki2">ind.

Thi2">is has revealed the truth that, by bei2">ing free i2">I li2">iterally am free to come and go, free to choose, free to do one thi2">ing or another, wi2">ith no stri2">ings attached anywhere. Stri2">ings are not of heaven or of God or spi2">iri2">it. Stri2">ings are condi2">iti2">ions, part of condi2">iti2">ional love. There are no chai2">ins or ti2">ies, no li2">imi2">its, no i2">impri2">isonment.

We are all each one of us i2">indi2">ivi2">idually completely 100% free to dream or awaken, stay i2">in hell or move toward heaven, remai2">in sufferi2">ing or regai2">in our power, act li2">ike an effect or a cause, do evi2">il thi2">ings or good thi2">ings, whatever. God does not forceable stop anythi2">ing, but he does wi2">ill and encourage us through hi2">is plan and help to choose a better way - a more lovi2">ing happi2">ier way.

Thi2">is i2">is why i2">I keep bei2">ing told "you're free". i2">It's a God-gi2">iven ri2">ight. i2">I don't have to do anythi2">ing i2">I don't want to do. Whatever i2">I want to do comes to pass. i2">I a responsi2">ible for everythi2">ing i2">I experi2">ience. i2">I consent to whatever i2">I cause to happen. There i2">is no vi2">icti2">imhood, no speci2">ialness, no ti2">ies and no condi2">iti2">ions.

i2">It doesn't matter what i2">I do, comi2">ing or goi2">ing, advanci2">ing or retreati2">ing. God sti2">ill loves me and so does all of heaven. i2">I am gui2">ided gently forward and gently upward, and so long as i2">I trust and have wi2">illi2">ingness i2">I wi2">ill return to God. Not because i2">I have to, but because i2">I want to.

"Forget not that the choi2">ice of truth or si2">in, power or helplessness, i2">IS the choi2">ice of whether to attack or HEAL. For heali2">ing comes of POWER, and ATTACK of helplessness. Whom you attack, you CANNOT want to heal. And whom you would have healed, MUST be the one you chose to be PROTECTED from attack. And what i2">IS thi2">is deci2">isi2">ion, but the choi2">ice whether to see hi2">im through the body's eyes, or let hi2">im be REVEALED to you through vi2">isi2">ion? HOW thi2">is deci2">isi2">ion leads to i2">its effects i2">is NOT your problem. But what you WANT to see, MUST be your choi2">ice. Thi2">is i2">is a course i2">in CAUSE, and NOT effect." UrT21H8

i2">I'm gradually learni2">ing from Holy Spi2">iri2">it that fi2">iguri2">ing out what i2">is wrong wi2">ith someone i2">is a no-no, even i2">if i2">I thi2">ink i2">it's part of tryi2">ing to heal.

i2">I thi2">ink to myself that i2">I need to fi2">igure i2">it out, because i2">it seems li2">ike the only way i2">I can really 'fi2">ix' i2">it i2">is to know what i2">is 'actually' happeni2">ing.

i2">I ask a lot of questi2">ions of Holy Spi2">iri2">it to try to fi2">igure thi2">is out, and someti2">imes he answers but often he gi2">ives me a gentle nudge that i2">I'm maki2">ing a mi2">istake. And all of those questi2">ions come up because i2">I am percei2">ivi2">ing that the person has a "real problem".

As soon as i2">I thi2">ink i2">it's really a problem i2">I get flooded wi2">ith fearful attack thoughts of doubt and uncertai2">inty, whi2">ich act as though they're tryi2">ing to fi2">ind an answer - havi2">ing thrown answers away.

i2">I thi2">ink to myself that i2">I should use even my best faculti2">ies, my sharpest di2">iscernment, or even psychi2">ic ski2">ills, to determi2">ine what 'really' i2">is goi2">ing on wi2">ith someone, to get i2">insi2">ight i2">into i2">it, and to therefore learn what the 'truth' of the thi2">ing i2">is.

But thi2">is really just makes the problem real. i2">It's the ego tryi2">ing to be clever about maki2">ing i2">illusi2">ions real. And, the truth i2">is, that fi2">iguri2">ing out what i2">is 'really' happeni2">ing doesn't do anythi2">ing to undo i2">it. i2">I thi2">ink that i2">if i2">I can fi2">ind out thi2">is i2">informati2">ion i2">I'll be able to more correctly heal i2">it or somethi2">ing, but not so.

Holy Spi2">iri2">it si2">imply knows that thi2">is stuff does not matter. God heals. God wants to heal already. God knows HOW to heal. God knows what the i2">issue i2">is, what i2">it i2">is based on, where i2">it came from, what i2">it compri2">ises, but most of all God knows that all problems are just i2">illusi2">ions.

Holy Spi2">iri2">it just wants to get down to the heali2">ing already. He doesn't need to go through a fi2">iguri2">ing out process. He doesn't need to do detecti2">ive work as though thi2">is i2">is a 'new' problem that he hasn't seen before. And he already has an answer to EVERY problem. i2">In fact, Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">IS God's answer to EVERY problem. Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the answer to the separati2">ion from God, whi2">ich i2">is the root cause of all problems.

Heali2">ing i2">is love. i2">It i2">is one acti2">ion. i2">It i2">is one method. i2">It i2">is one approach. One answer. One way. One atti2">itude. One approach. Holy Spi2">iri2">it doesn't have 65 di2">ifferent heali2">ing modali2">iti2">ies. He doesn't have 150 di2">ifferent thi2">ings to do to di2">ifferent problems. There i2">is love or a call for love, and love heals by lovi2">ing uncondi2">iti2">ionally, whi2">ich means regardless of what the call for love i2">is.

Uncondi2">iti2">ional heali2">ing.

So really, we can ski2">ip the di2">iagnosi2">is. All of i2">it. i2">It's all ego i2">intellect. Let's just ski2">ip di2">iagnosi2">ing and analyzi2">ing and fi2">iguri2">ing out, and get ri2">ight to the mi2">iracles.

After all, what do we want, a longwi2">inded story about how havi2">ing the problem i2">is ri2">iddled wi2">ith symptoms and sufferi2">ing, OR... to heal i2">it ri2">ight now wi2">ithout delay?

i2">It's about getti2">ing out of the way, because Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the one who does the heali2">ing and he already knows what's needed.

Development of trust.

i2">I recei2">ived a large envelope i2">in the mai2">il. i2">It was from a medi2">ical group that we depend on currently for a treatment. i2">I wondered what i2">it could be. Or more to the poi2">int, i2">I feared what i2">it mi2">ight be. Was i2">it a bi2">ill? Was i2">it a noti2">ice of termi2">inati2">ion? Was i2">it more rules bei2">ing lai2">id down to control behavi2">iors? Was i2">it some seri2">ious requi2">irement we were goi2">ing to have to go through? All thi2">is ran through my mi2">ind i2">in a matter of seconds i2">in reacti2">ion to "seei2">ing i2">it." And i2">I hadn't even opened i2">it yet.

i2">I then remembered, that thi2">is i2">is a pri2">ime example of reacti2">ing i2">in fear to some "porti2">ion" of the world. Somethi2">ing i2">in the world seems to happen, some "dream" seems to occur, and then i2">I percei2">ive i2">it. And i2">if i2">I percei2">ive i2">it i2">is REAL, forgetti2">ing that i2">it i2">is complete fi2">icti2">ion and i2">isn't really happeni2">ing, i2">I MUST experi2">ience some porti2">ion of the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions. Some measure of fear, threat and danger must ari2">ise, to correspond to the percei2">ived severi2">ity of "the problem that came out of nowhere".

So then i2">I remembered, oh yea,.... there i2">is no world. Thi2">is i2">is me reacti2">ing to part of a dream as i2">if i2">it i2">is real. And so i2">I saw, wow, look at how my mi2">ind just went ri2">ight i2">into FEAR, the i2">instant that i2">I saw what thi2">is envelope was, and allowed i2">its "reali2">ity" to enter my mi2">ind. By not rememberi2">ing thi2">is i2">is just another dream epi2">isode, my mi2">ind was "snagged" or caught up on the dream, as i2">if bound to i2">it and part of i2">it.

The automati2">ic go-to reacti2">ion was to be afrai2">id as a result. Yet the i2">instant that i2">I thought to myself, "there i2">is no world, thi2">is i2">is just a dream", the fear melted and i2">I felt happy and li2">ight and safe. i2">I stepped outsi2">ide of i2">it. i2">I reframed i2">it. i2">I remembered thi2">is li2">ittle "event" i2">is nowhere and nothi2">ing. And i2">I saw how strange i2">it i2">is that i2">I would go i2">into automati2">ic, uncontrolled fear, just as a reacti2">ion to havi2">ing made an envelope real. Havi2">ing then told myself that all manner of defensi2">iveness i2">is needed, i2">in the form of fear, to prepare myself for what thi2">is was goi2">ing to "do to us".

As i2">I stepped outsi2">ide of i2">it and laughed, wi2">ith the fear gone, and tryi2">ing to stay i2">in the happy awareness that there i2">is no world, i2">I noti2">iced how i2">I probably for all my li2">ife have "reacted to dreams" i2">in thi2">is way. Each ti2">ime some thi2">ing seems to happen i2">in the world, there has been thi2">is "bei2">ing caught up i2">in i2">it". And each ti2">ime i2">I am caught up i2">in i2">it there i2">is sufferi2">ing. And along wi2">ith that there are upset feeli2">ings and fear and stress. And i2">it's all because i2">I thought what was happeni2">ing was real.

i2">In fact i2">it then seemed really strange that i2">I had chosen to go i2">into fear at all, because there was absolutely no call for fear and no apparent reason to be afrai2">id at all. i2">If the dream was not real and there wasn't even really an envelope, then there was no basi2">is for any reacti2">ion whatsoever. And thi2">is revealed just how poi2">intless and arbi2">itrary fear i2">is, li2">ike some ki2">ind of un-checked auto-responder, that just acti2">ivates unconsci2">iously, wi2">ith li2">ittle regard for whether i2">it's even justi2">ifi2">ied. Li2">ike a habi2">itual reacti2">ion. And i2">I probably had been doi2">ing thi2">is all my li2">ife.

But now here i2">I was, feeli2">ing safe and li2">ight and happy and bri2">ight, because i2">I had remembered for a moment that "thi2">is i2">is just a pi2">iece of a dream, i2">it's not even really there". i2">I thus opened the envelope and i2">inqui2">ired as to i2">its mai2">in message. i2">It was, to my pleasant surpri2">ise, a refund check for $150 for "overpayment". lol

But i2">it i2">is a lesson. i2">It has shown me another fi2">ine example of just how thi2">is works. Thi2">is ONE PROBLEM. Forgetti2">ing that you are dreami2">ing. Beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it i2">is REALi2">ITY. Thi2">inki2">ing that what's happeni2">ing i2">is ACTUALLY happeni2">ing. Losi2">ing si2">ight of any ki2">ind of awareness and just becomi2">ing unconsci2">ious, ego, reacti2">ive and fearful, suspi2">ici2">ious, defensi2">ive, vulnerable and weak. i2">If the world i2">is real you HAVE to be afrai2">id, and everyone who has been li2">ivi2">ing thi2">is way thei2">ir whole li2">ives doesn't know any other opti2">ion. i2">I know i2">I di2">idn't.

i2">It's all what happens when you di2">ip down i2">into false percepti2">ion and bi2">ind yourself to the dream, lose yourself i2">in i2">it, go i2">into the darkness of i2">it and take i2">it seri2">iously. Then as you li2">ift up, as you remember THERE i2">IS NO WORLD, your mi2">ind just floats ri2">ight out of i2">it and makes li2">ight of i2">it, free from i2">it, saved from i2">it, happy and safe from i2">it. And i2">in that li2">ight, there i2">is no concern for what the dream seems to show, or what the event seems to be about. You are not i2">insi2">ide the event, because you are not lost i2">in the dream. Bei2">ing lost i2">is the mai2">instay i2">in thi2">is world, and few have found themselves as yet.

"Awareness of dreami2">ing i2">is the functi2">ion of God's teachers."

"They watch the dream fi2">igures come and go, shi2">ift and change, suffer and di2">ie, yet they are not decei2">ived by what they see."

"Mi2">iracles restore the awareness that you are the dreamer of the dream."

Someti2">imes what "the secret of salvati2">ion" reveals i2">is not pretty. i2">It very si2">imply means you do everythi2">ing to yourself. On purpose. Deli2">iberately.

That reveals some someti2">imes shocki2">ing and hard to accept truths.

Such as that, i2">if i2">I am not at peace *i2">I* must have chosen not to be at peace. i2">If i2">I am si2">ick, i2">I must have made myself si2">ick. i2">If i2">I am unhappy, i2">I have deli2">iberately chosen to be unhappy. i2">If i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing somethi2">ing that i2">I don’t thi2">ink i2">I want to experi2">ience, i2">it’s because i2">I CHOSE TO and WANT TO.

These are hard to admi2">it to when you’re i2">in the thi2">ick of deni2">ial. You’d rather keep beli2">ievi2">ing there i2">is a reason outsi2">ide your control that caused your sufferi2">ing.

What Jesus i2">is tryi2">ing to get us to see, and thi2">is i2">is very si2">imple, i2">is that as the dreamer of the dream, and as the ruler of the uni2">iverse, we MUST be the one who makes everythi2">ing happen. We PUT i2">IT THERE. We deci2">ide what wi2">ill and wi2">ill not happen.

Thi2">is calls for extremely responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. i2">It i2">is the total end of all vi2">icti2">imhood. And i2">it also means, total freedom. Thi2">is i2">is why i2">it leads to salvati2">ion.

You can be free from ALL sufferi2">ing, i2">includi2">ing all states of si2">ickness and death, by si2">imply CHOOSi2">ING not to create those states. You can reverse all si2">ituati2">ions and heal all problems. "The power of deci2">isi2">ion i2">is my own."

"You cannot di2">ie unless you choose to do so." "No-one di2">ies wi2">ithout thei2">ir own consent." "You cannot be hurt unless you hurt yourself."

Thi2">is i2">is the ONE LESSON that the Holy Spi2">iri2">it teaches. When you have learned thi2">is one thi2">ing and li2">ive i2">it fully, you are done.

There i2">is no room i2">in thi2">is for bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">im, OR bei2">ing vi2">icti2">imi2">ized agai2">inst your wi2">ill. i2">It i2">is YOUR DREAM, so i2">if vi2">icti2">imi2">izati2">ion happens, YOU MUST HAVE MADE i2">IT HAPPEN.

Unless thi2">is i2">is true, there i2">is no way out of hell. Unless thi2">is i2">is true, someone or somethi2">ing else has the power to end your peace and prevent your awakeni2">ing. You do not want to ever undermi2">ine thi2">is truth, or you are gi2">ivi2">ing away the only way to return to God.

Always remi2">ind yourself i2">in any si2">ituati2">ion, i2">I must be doi2">ing thi2">is myself. i2">I must be choosi2">ing thi2">is. i2">I must want thi2">is. No-one else i2">is doi2">ing thi2">is to me. i2">If i2">I am not happy, i2">I chose not to be. i2">If i2">I am hurt, i2">I hurt myself. Thi2">is appli2">ies NO MATTER THE FORM of the attack or who seems to be the attacker. Even i2">if i2">it doesn’t look li2">ike you di2">id i2">it, you di2">id. And thi2">is of course i2">is very radi2">ical.

"Heaven i2">is a choi2">ice i2">I must make."

*i2">I* MUST have made a WRONG DECi2">ISi2">ION because i2">I am not at peace.

*i2">I* MADE THE DECi2">ISi2">ION MYSELF.

Nothi2">ing happens wi2">ithout your consent, not even death. You are ei2">ither choosi2">ing li2">ife or death. All death i2">is sui2">ici2">ide.

i2">I don't know how many people here work wi2">ith the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, what ki2">ind of relati2">ionshi2">ip or communi2">icati2">ion you have wi2">ith Hi2">im, i2">if any, but i2">I'd really love to fi2">ind a way to help others to become more connected wi2">ith Hi2">im and worki2">ing wi2">ith Hi2">im.

As the Course tells us, the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the only Therapi2">ist, hi2">is enti2">ire functi2">ion i2">is Heali2">ing, and He has been created joi2">ined wi2">ith us i2">in our mi2">ind to bri2">ing heali2">ing, mi2">iracles, reassurance, comfort etc. i2">It seems also the ai2">im of the Course and workbook i2">is to put you i2">in touch wi2">ith thi2">is Teacher who then leads you the rest of the way i2">in your curri2">iculum.

There are many benefi2">its to worki2">ing wi2">ith Hi2">im that you may or may not be aware of. i2">I experi2">ience these benefi2">its on a dai2">ily basi2">is, and they are so valuable i2">I don't know what i2">I'd do wi2">ithout them. i2">I also don't thi2">ink that i2">I am even experi2">ienci2">ing a full range of what the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is capable of and have more growth to achi2">ieve i2">in trusti2">ing Hi2">im and worki2">ing wi2">ith Hi2">im.

i2">I wi2">ish i2">I could say, "just do thi2">is", and then you'd end up recei2">ivi2">ing Hi2">is heali2">ing etc, but i2">I don't know what the "protocol" i2">is as such, or how i2">it plays out for di2">ifferent people. All i2">I can tell you i2">is roughly how i2">it developed for me and maybe you can fi2">ind that useful.

i2">I was goi2">ing through a rough year or so a couple of years ago, wi2">ith lots of emoti2">ional upsets and stresses. i2">I had already been talki2">ing wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it/Jesus for some years and learni2">ing to trust thei2">ir gui2">idance. But here i2">I needed some ki2">ind of reli2">ief from the emoti2">ional turbulence.

i2">It would get to where i2">I just couldn't tolerate i2">it anymore and so would become wi2">illi2">ing to gi2">ive up. i2">I would then lay on my bed and start surrenderi2">ing. i2">I would have to admi2">it i2">I di2">idn't want to be unhappy and i2">I wanted some peace and reli2">ief. i2">I would li2">iterally say "i2">I surrender" over and over agai2">in. i2">I surrender i2">I surrender i2">I surrender etc.

i2">I found that i2">if i2">I would not leave any ti2">ime i2">in between each word i2">it would help me to feel a sense of letti2">ing go, gi2">ivi2">ing up control, admi2">itti2">ing to bei2">ing mi2">istaken, etc. i2">I also would ask Holy Spi2">iri2">it to help me. At fi2">irst, to help me forgi2">ive, and was mai2">inly doi2">ing the "act" of the heali2">ing myself. Taki2">ing steps mentally or whatever.

But gradually i2">in the surrenderi2">ing i2">I started to ask Holy Spi2">iri2">it to help me heal. Thi2">is wasn't li2">iteral at fi2">irst but i2">it started to become so, whereby i2">I started aski2">ing Hi2">im to come i2">into me, to joi2">in wi2">ith me, to heal me. i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize what i2">I was doi2">ing exactly, but i2">I basi2">ically was i2">invi2">iti2">ing Hi2">im to come "i2">into me" and i2">into my body. And he di2">id.

i2">I would start to get a sense of an electri2">ical or energy feeli2">ing i2">in parts of the body. Body parts would start to vi2">ibrate or shake. i2">It wasn't si2">igni2">ifi2">icant at fi2">irst. i2">It gradually developed as i2">I developed trust. i2">I became just wi2">illi2">ing to 1) relax physi2">ically, 2) surrender, 3) i2">invi2">ite hi2">im i2">in, 4) stay out of the way and trust Hi2">im to do whatever He wanted to.

Over ti2">ime thi2">is i2">increased i2">in i2">its power and i2">it became less necessary to get i2">into a whole mode of bei2">ing ready for i2">it, and i2">it started happeni2">ing around the house. i2">It started happeni2">ing whenever i2">I asked for i2">it. And parti2">icularly i2">if i2">I became wi2">illi2">ing to start applyi2">ing forgi2">iveness. Whenever i2">I would start forgi2">ivi2">ing or accepti2">ing responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity or havi2">ing some ki2">ind of heali2">ing thought, He would step i2">in. Now, even the sli2">ightest wi2">illi2">ingness towards forgi2">iveness that i2">I demonstrate "i2">invi2">ites hi2">im" and He starts shaki2">ing me all over the place wi2">ith heali2">ing.

What he i2">is capable of, i2">is unli2">imi2">ited. He mostly heals emoti2">ional upsets. He can pretty much remove all of the "charge" of any unhappy feeli2">ing. But he also has done physi2">ical stuff, removi2">ing pai2">ins, heali2">ing heartburn, heali2">ing a burn from hot water, heali2">ing my eyes, etc. Mi2">ind, body, and emoti2">ions. Heali2">ing on all levels. i2">In fact, i2">I hardly ever have to cry any more. When i2">I go to cry, the i2">instant that i2">I become wi2">illi2">ing and i2">I start to feel, Holy Spi2">iri2">it steps i2">in, takes over, shakes the crap out of me and removes all the emoti2">ion.

i2">I get thi2">is happen now EVERY day, many ti2">imes a day. i2">I get thi2">is supernatural heali2">ing all the ti2">ime. Wi2">ithout i2">it, i2">I have absolutely no i2">idea what state i2">I would be i2">in. i2">I am so grateful for everythi2">ing He has done and conti2">inues to do, and really wi2">ish that other people could experi2">ience the same thi2">ing. i2">I once asked Hi2">im why thi2">is was happeni2">ing, He sai2">id "because you i2">invi2">ited me i2">in."

i2">I hi2">ighly encourage you to try i2">it. Lay down, physi2">ically relax the body (whi2">ich i2">is somewhat necessary as part of surrender), surrender mentally/emoti2">ionally as best you can, i2">invi2">ite hi2">im i2">into you, trust hi2">im, and let hi2">im li2">iterally come i2">into you. See what happens. i2">It can change your li2">ife.

"He wi2">ill remove all the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">IF i2">I Wi2">ILL LET Hi2">IM."

Once agai2">in, last eveni2">ing, i2">I asked God what he wanted me to 'do', thi2">inki2">ing that there were acti2">ions or thi2">ings to 'do', and Hi2">is reply to me was:

"Recei2">ive."

i2">I reali2">ize that my ego mi2">ind i2">is SO used to 'seeki2">ing', whi2">ich i2">is ki2">ind of li2">ike an acti2">ivi2">ity of 'goi2">ing out' to try to mani2">ipulate the world, to fi2">ind, to fi2">ix, to change, to perform acti2">ions, to rearrange furni2">iture, etc.

i2">It's li2">ike, we have a motor i2">in our mi2">ind. The motor wants to keep runni2">ing. i2">It wants to keep goi2">ing somewhere. i2">It wants to keep doi2">ing somethi2">ing di2">ifferent. Fi2">indi2">ing somethi2">ing di2">ifferent. Searchi2">ing for answers. Changi2">ing someone. i2">It i2">is all do do do do do do do go go go go go go all the ti2">ime. Thi2">is i2">is i2">its ONLY mode of operati2">ion.

And all of that i2">is really encapsulated i2">in the word "seeki2">ing". The ego mi2">ind i2">is just constantly i2">in thi2">is acti2">ivi2">ity of seeki2">ing. Of thi2">inki2">ing that i2">it has to go somewhere or do somethi2">ing i2">in order to 'get' or 'fi2">ind' what i2">it does not have HERE AND NOW.

So when i2">I go to God and i2">I ask, what should i2">I DO.... really i2">I'm sayi2">ing, what should i2">i seek for and where should i2">I go to fi2">ind i2">it and what should i2">I do to change i2">it. And i2">I have the best i2">intenti2">ions. i2">I thi2">ink that thi2">is i2">is noble or honest or helpful or holy or spi2">iri2">itual. But really, i2">it i2">is sti2">ill seeki2">ing. i2">It's sti2">ill ego goi2">ing away from the here and now, away from acceptance, away from sti2">illness or surrender.

So God's answer to me - "recei2">ive" - really DOES actually address what the real problem i2">is. The real problem i2">is that i2">I am addi2">icti2">ing to seeki2">ing, because i2">I conti2">inue to have thi2">is ego beli2">ief that i2">I DO NOT HAVE GOD. Thi2">is i2">is what i2">it all boi2">ils down to. i2">If i2">I'm absent from God and am not wi2">ith God now and do not have God i2">in me, then i2">I seem to need to go fi2">ill thi2">is empti2">iness somewhere else.

So the remedy i2">is clear and si2">imple. i2">I need to RECEi2">IVE GOD. i2">I need to open up to accept, admi2">it and allow (the 3 A's?), that GOD i2">IS HERE Wi2">ITH ME NOW.

And thi2">is also means i2">I need to SURRENDER the search, surrender the 'goi2">ing and doi2">ing', surrender the 'somethi2">ing has to be done about thi2">is', and surrender all of the thi2">ings i2">I thi2">ink are needed or have to be done 'because of' the lack of God. i2">If i2">I just accept that i2">I am lacki2">ing God, i2">I wi2">ill be compelled to go fi2">ind answers somewhere else, i2">in some acti2">ivi2">ity or change or mani2">ipulati2">ion. And i2">I wi2">ill thi2">ink that God has to tell me what to DO i2">in order to ACHi2">IEVE those changes and mani2">ipulati2">ions, as i2">if that would actually answer and solve them.

i2">I don't reali2">ize that all of thi2">is compulsi2">ion to fi2">ind - the seeki2">ing - sati2">isfyi2">ing that seeki2">ing or completi2">ing that seeki2">ing by fi2">indi2">ing outsi2">ide of myself, Wi2">ILL NOT bri2">ing me peace. AND, i2">I wi2">ill not be able to fi2">ind those resoluti2">ions anyway because of "seek and do not fi2">ind". What i2">I thi2">ink i2">I want, i2">is not there. The answer (God) i2">is not there. The peace and certai2">inty and clari2">ity i2">is not out there. The only thi2">ing 'out there' are i2">illusi2">ions and di2">istracti2">ions and dead ends.

So God knows. God knows what i2">I need. God knows that i2">I need to stop GOi2">ING AWAY FROM GOD, i2">in order for thi2">is 'problem' to be solved. i2">In order for ALL problems to be solved. Even the ones that i2">I thi2">ink are i2">important, or every-day li2">ivi2">ing types of problems. For these to be solved, i2">I need to reali2">ize where they come from. ALL of these problems ari2">ise out of not knowi2">ing that God i2">is wi2">ith me. Of not dependi2">ing on Hi2">im. i2">I need to therefore undo THAT i2">issue, whi2">ich i2">is by allowi2">ing God to be wi2">ith me, and then the percepti2">ion of all of these problems even bei2">ing 'i2">important' i2">in any way, wi2">ill di2">issolve.

"Let me recogni2">ize that all of my problems have been solved" - ACi2">IM

And so.... i2">I stop...... and i2">I surrender....... and i2">I recei2">ive God. And i2">I just recei2">ive. And recei2">ive some more. And i2">I say, "ok God, go ahead and flood me wi2">ith more love".... and i2">I recei2">ive more.... and i2">I say "ok God, i2">I recei2">ive your love, i2">I recei2">ive your love, i2">I recei2">ive your love". And i2">I feel i2">it. And i2">I recei2">ive i2">it. And all of the problems of li2">ife melt away. And who cares about fi2">ixi2">ing any of them anyway? They were all i2">IMAGi2">INARY!

All you need i2">is love. i2">It's bei2">ing gi2">iven constantly. You just need to recei2">ive i2">it.

Whi2">ile you are beli2">ievi2">ing that your ego i2">is your real self, and as you attempt to do somethi2">ing about thi2">is to wake up spi2">iri2">itually, you're goi2">ing to be pulli2">ing that ego self along for the ri2">ide.

i2">It does not want to come along for the ri2">ide and can't. i2">Its way of percei2">ivi2">ing, whi2">ich you have made your own, must see the approach towards truth and God as dangerous. Your attempt to expose your "self" to the truth wi2">ill be seen as an attack, and i2">is hi2">ighly offensi2">ive.

Thi2">is i2">is why every ti2">ime you (i2">ie your ego-ali2">igned self) tri2">ies to allow some li2">ight i2">in or tri2">ies to become more spi2">iri2">itual, you i2">inevi2">itably fi2">ind thi2">is strong voi2">ice emerges i2">in you whi2">ich retali2">iates. You have thi2">is bi2">ig ego rebound where you feel all hurt and afrai2">id and abused, as though someone just told you that you don't exi2">ist and aren't worth anythi2">ing.

Your ali2">ignment wi2">ith the ego whi2">ile si2">imultaneously tryi2">ing to wake up from i2">it, makes you try to wake up Wi2">ITH i2">it, and thus to wake i2">IT up. But i2">it cannot awaken. i2">It i2">is purely a devi2">ice for separati2">ion and i2">is i2">illusory. i2">It doesn't have a li2">ife of i2">its own wi2">ithout your support.

When you try to pull i2">it towards the truth or transform i2">it, whi2">ich produces the "spi2">iri2">ituali2">ized ego", you mi2">ight well create an i2">illusi2">ion or persona of looki2">ing and acti2">ing "li2">ike" someone who would be spi2">iri2">itual. But deep down you wi2">ill have thi2">is part of you that deeply mi2">istrusts and i2">is threatened by what you are tryi2">ing to do. Li2">ike a hurt chi2">ild, that part of you wi2">ill attack the part of you that's tryi2">ing to pull i2">it i2">into the li2">ight.

Over ti2">ime i2">I've seen how personally i2">I attempted to become more spi2">iri2">itual, for example by wri2">iti2">ing thi2">ings whi2">ich seemed as spi2">iri2">itual as possi2">ible. And i2">it produced a lot of backlash for the "rest" of me that was sti2">ill i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith the ego and di2">idn't want to wake up.

When i2">I was wri2">iti2">ing my fi2">irst book, i2">I really beli2">ieved that i2">I was openi2">ing up to li2">ight and truth and i2">it was powerful and heali2">ing, BUT at the same ti2">ime i2">it was very pai2">inful. i2">I felt li2">ike i2">I was floggi2">ing myself to death, or sacri2">ifi2">ici2">ing, or attempti2">ing to push myself to the bri2">ink of tolerance. i2">I had a lot of ego rebounds.

Partly i2">I felt that i2">I was approachi2">ing truth more but there was a bi2">ig chunk of me that was sti2">ill holdi2">ing on ti2">ightly to the false i2">idea that i2">I was the ego, and was tryi2">ing to change "i2">it" i2">into somethi2">ing more spi2">iri2">itual. i2">It could not change and di2">id not want to and saw my attempts as deeply hurtful. And so because i2">I was ali2">igned wi2">ith that, i2">I experi2">ienced deep hurt along wi2">ith i2">it. i2">I kept tryi2">ing to be more spi2">iri2">itual i2">in my persona.

Whi2">ile you're "seeki2">ing" for spi2">iri2">itual truth thi2">is i2">is pretty much a gi2">iven that thi2">is i2">is goi2">ing to be your experi2">ience. So long as you beli2">ieve you are the ego self, that part of you i2">is not goi2">ing to li2">ike or want or beli2">ieve i2">in or see sense i2">in the truth. i2">It i2">is goi2">ing to be threatened by i2">it, offended by i2">it, hurt by i2">it, i2">it's goi2">ing to take i2">it to mean thi2">ings i2">it doesn't really mean, and because the truth proves that the ego does not exi2">ist, your ali2">ignment wi2">ith ego i2">is goi2">ing to i2">imply you do not exi2">ist. And that's just goi2">ing to scare the shi2">it out of you.

Gradually over ti2">ime, maki2">ing all of these mi2">istakes, yearni2">ing to be closer to God, wi2">illi2">ing to push my "self" (i2">idea of self) towards the truth, and goi2">ing through endless rebounds, i2">I thi2">ink i2">I've gradually lessened the beli2">ief i2">I have i2">in the ego.

Letti2">ing the ego GO i2">is really the only way to become "more spi2">iri2">itual". i2">It's not through changi2">ing i2">it at all. i2">It's not through maki2">ing i2">it more spi2">iri2">itual. The only way to be free i2">is to be free of i2">IT, whi2">ich means your sense of who you are, your i2">identi2">ity, your defi2">ini2">iti2">ion of self, MUST shi2">ift from ego to your Hi2">igher Self, or Holy Spi2">iri2">it (ri2">ight mi2">ind etc).

The ego can't shi2">ift there wi2">ith you. i2">If you try to take your ego self there and pretend that you're doi2">ing i2">it, you wi2">ill just enact the ego's bungi2">ie cord. Li2">ike an elasti2">ic band i2">it wi2">ill just pull "you" ri2">ight back to i2">its terri2">itory, and the more you are tryi2">ing to pull i2">it away from i2">its terri2">itory the stronger the rebound i2">is goi2">ing to be.

Thi2">is i2">is exactly what produces rei2">incarnati2">ion - the attempt to get out of the world wi2">ithout really letti2">ing i2">it go, elasti2">icly bri2">ings you ri2">ight back i2">into i2">it because you sti2">ill beli2">ive you are made of i2">it. Exposi2">ing ego to too much li2">ight wi2">ill burn i2">it, and wi2">ith you beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it i2">is yourself YOU wi2">ill experi2">ience that sufferi2">ing, and you wi2">ill flee from the li2">ight ri2">ight back i2">into the body.

Gradually, we have to let the ego i2">identi2">ity go and awaken FROM i2">it to reali2">ize that i2">it i2">is not who or what we are. Everythi2">ing i2">it percei2">ives i2">is not our real percepti2">ion. Everythi2">ing i2">it beli2">ieves about i2">itself cannot be what we beli2">ieve about ourselves. Everythi2">ing i2">it trusts i2">in cannot be what we trust. We have placed our fai2">ith i2">in i2">it and are attached to i2">it. We have to let go and "surrender" i2">its posi2">iti2">ion to make room for God.

Waki2">ing up i2">is pai2">inful. i2">If we could see the areas where we beli2">ieve i2">in the ego and could si2">imply gently relax and let go of them wi2">ithout addi2">ing threat to them or maki2">ing them confused that we're tryi2">ing to i2">imply thi2">ings whi2">ich are not true or real to i2">it, then perhaps we can awaken more gently. But that ki2">ind of abi2">ili2">ity probably only comes from a more awakened self that i2">is able to di2">iscern lovi2">ingly. i2">In the mi2">idst of the ego we rarely have such clari2">ity and compassi2">ion and tend to step on our own toes all the ti2">ime.

Often when i2">I become more aware of truth and want to really "get i2">it qui2">ickly", whi2">ich can also be spurred by the ego because i2">it knows that i2">if you "do a lot of course" you wi2">ill have such a reacti2">ion to i2">it that maybe you'll stop doi2">ing i2">it, usi2">ing i2">it to attack you, i2">I'll just do too much too qui2">ickly. i2">I wi2">ill have deep emoti2">ional releases and become overwhelmed. i2">It wi2">ill also become fri2">ighteni2">ing.

When i2">I started to see that si2">in was not real and that i2">it could only be my beli2">ief that i2">I si2">inned that i2">is keepi2">ing me from God, i2">I went looki2">ing for the si2">in i2">in me to try to undo i2">it all, and that was si2">imply too much at once. i2">I spazzed-out for a few days and i2">it was not at all pleasant. i2">I had to stop and take i2">it slower. Baby steps.

There are also ti2">imes where i2">I wri2">ite about the Course a lot and maybe go i2">into overdri2">ive and am wri2">iti2">ing several ti2">imes a day, and i2">it all seems so wonderful and truthful and i2">inspi2">iri2">ing but then comes the parts of me that are sti2">ill holdi2">ing onto li2">ies and they fly up i2">into my awareness li2">ike a slap i2">in the face. How DARE you clai2">im that that's true! How COULD you beli2">ieve that! Stop i2">it!

By all means take a bi2">ig leap i2">if you are genui2">inely ready and can do so wi2">ithout the huge ego backlash, but otherwi2">ise, take your ti2">ime and be gentle on yourself. Take a break.

Let's take a moment to recogni2">ize where we are AT, rather than where we thi2">ink we should be. Although i2">it may be i2">increasi2">ingly obvi2">ious, i2">in theory, what the truth i2">is, i2">it can be tougher to actually want to experi2">ience the reali2">ity of that truth. And most of us are sti2">ill somewhat bound to wanti2">ing the thi2">ings of thi2">is world, the body, and our sense of i2">identi2">ity whi2">ich i2">is bound to i2">it.

i2">If we get honest, and put asi2">ide the i2">intellectual theory, and look at what we are ACTUALLY doi2">ing, where our allegi2">iance actually i2">is, and the ways that we really do WANT thi2">ings of thi2">is world sti2">ill, we can at least be honest i2">in admi2">itti2">ing we don't want to wake up yet. We are resi2">isti2">ing i2">it, are unwi2">illi2">ing to embrace i2">it fully, and we want somethi2">ing else.

My own i2">intellectual grasp of course metaphysi2">ics has become so reveali2">ing lately, that i2">it even i2">is starti2">ing to "scare" the part of me that does not want to accept i2">it. i2">I can understand how i2">it i2">is true and why i2">it makes sense, but part of me does not want i2">it. Does not beli2">ieve i2">it. Can't let go of the "somethi2">ing else" that i2">I presently am attached to.

i2">It can be useful though, i2">if you are not wi2">illi2">ing to accept the truth, to at least admi2">it that you don't want to accept the truth. Even i2">if thi2">is doesn't mean you are goi2">ing to suddenly change your mi2">ind and accept i2">it, i2">it at least does allow some li2">ight to enter, by "admi2">itti2">ing" your present truth. And your present truth i2">is that, whi2">ile you are earnestly seeki2">ing God, you don't really want to be wi2">ith Hi2">im, otherwi2">ise you would be.

Thi2">is just means that we sti2">ill have some work to do. Our mi2">inds sti2">ill need trai2">ini2">ing. We need to become wi2">illi2">ing. But generally speaki2">ing, movi2">ing towards the truth, when you are sti2">ill bound to the ego, feels li2">ike approachi2">ing an enemy. i2">It's li2">ike goi2">ing towards somethi2">ing you do not want, somethi2">ing whi2">ich threatens you, somethi2">ing whi2">ich you don't trust.

i2">I want to do the whole waki2">ing up thi2">ing, the mi2">iracles, the happi2">iness, the love, but the fact i2">is that ri2">ight now, where i2">I'm at, there i2">is sti2">ill a number of ways i2">in whi2">ich i2">I don't want i2">it. i2">I'm sti2">ill drawn to the body and the bodi2">ies of others. i2">I sti2">ill do not see wi2">ith Chri2">ist vi2">isi2">ion. i2">I sti2">ill am afrai2">id of God. i2">I sti2">ill avoi2">id heali2">ing others. i2">I sti2">ill have gri2">ievances and losses. i2">I sti2">ill don't enti2">irely trust the Holy Spi2">iri2">it or Jesus. i2">I sti2">ill want to keep the thi2">ings of the world. i2">I sti2">ill beli2">ieve the world i2">is real. i2">I sti2">ill am scared by the i2">idea that there i2">is no world. And i2">I sti2">ill beli2">ieve i2">I am made of, i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith, stuff of the world whi2">ich the course says does not exi2">ist.

i2">I know that i2">it's a journey, and over ti2">ime there i2">is progress. i2">I also know that i2">I gradually become more and more wi2">illi2">ing, and have progressed greatly i2">in developi2">ing trust and letti2">ing go of fear. But i2">I also know that where i2">I am AT, versus what i2">I understand the truth to be, are two di2">ifferent thi2">ings. i2">It's actually easi2">ier to grasp the metaphysi2">ics than i2">it i2">is to li2">ive i2">it. And when i2">I feel that my experi2">ience i2">is laggi2">ing behi2">ind my understandi2">ing, i2">it becomes frustrati2">ing.

Thi2">is of course produces more gui2">ilt, to admi2">it that you don't enti2">irely want to ACTUALLY go there, yet. That you want to keep people i2">impri2">isoned. That you want to keep sufferi2">ing. That you sti2">ill react to dreams as i2">if they are reali2">ity. That you don't want to gi2">ive up certai2">in treasures, i2">idols, experi2">iences, pleasures etc. i2">It makes i2">it seem li2">ike you are doi2">ing everythi2">ing you are not supposed to be doi2">ing.

i2">I'm just si2">itti2">ing wi2">ith thi2">is today. Just taki2">ing a break and bei2">ing ego. Just acknowledgi2">ing where i2">I'm at, rather than the pressure of where i2">I thi2">ink i2">I should be. Jesus remi2">inds me "you are free". You can stay ri2">ight where you're at i2">if you want to, and when you're ready, he i2">is there to help you move forward agai2">in.

"i2">I wi2">ill help you as much as you wi2">ill let me."

"i2">It i2">is just because you are not ready to do what you should elect to do that ti2">ime exi2">ists at all."

(i2">If you are wi2">illi2">ing).

You [i2">insert fucker’s name], are not the cause of me. You are not causi2">ing me. You are my equal brother and God i2">is the cause of both of us.

You have not done anythi2">ing to me agai2">inst my wi2">ill. i2">I am not the vi2">icti2">im of you that i2">I’ve come to beli2">ieve you are. i2">I have been usi2">ing you to be my vi2">icti2">imi2">izer so that i2">I can be upset as a vi2">icti2">im and use you to project my si2">in. i2">I wanted to make out you are the cause of me so that i2">I can asuage my gui2">ilt and pretend to be i2">innocent. i2">I am the one who needs heali2">ing.

You have never done anythi2">ing to me. You have never hurt me. You have never upset me. You are not the cause of anythi2">ing i2">I am feeli2">ing or experi2">ienci2">ing. You have not put reacti2">ions i2">in me. You have not changed me or made me upset i2">in any way.

Everythi2">ing i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing, i2">I have chosen for myself. All of my feeli2">ings are my own. Nothi2">ing has happened that i2">I di2">id not want. i2">I have done thi2">is to myself.

You di2">id not do anythi2">ing to me, you cannot do anythi2">ing to me, and you never wi2">ill. All we can do i2">is share love. Because you have not done anythi2">ing to me, you di2">id not cause anythi2">ing that i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing, whi2">ich means you must be i2">innocent. My upset i2">isn’t even about you. You have nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith what i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing whatsoever.

i2">I have not done anythi2">ing to you. i2">I am not the cause of you. i2">I have not attacked you, hurt you, made you upset, changed you, caused reacti2">ions i2">in you, damaged you or affected you i2">in any way. i2">I have not vi2">icti2">imi2">ized you. You are not the vi2">icti2">im of me.

Everythi2">ing you are experi2">ienci2">ing and feeli2">ing i2">is your own stuff that you chose for yourself. i2">I am not the source of any of your upset, confusi2">ion, hurt or problems. i2">I have never caused you because God i2">is your only cause. Therefore i2">I must be i2">innocent because i2">I have not done anythi2">ing to you.

We are both equally i2">innocent. Nei2">ither of us has done anythi2">ing to each other. There i2">is no causali2">ity between brothers. You are not the cause of me. i2">I am not the cause of you. Anythi2">ing i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing i2">I must have chosen myself and done to myself.

No-one else has the power to do anythi2">ing to ei2">ither of us agai2">inst our wi2">ill. The power that i2">I thought you had over me i2">is my own power. The power that you thought i2">I had over you i2">is your own power. Nei2">ither of us has power over each other. i2">I take back my power from you and gi2">ive you back your own power to choose your own experi2">ience.

i2">I am fully responsi2">ible for everythi2">ing i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing. You are fully responsi2">ible for everythi2">ing you are experi2">ienci2">ing. i2">I can choose to experi2">ience somethi2">ing else and there i2">is nothi2">ing you or anyone can do to stop thi2">is. You have not wi2">illed agai2">inst me and i2">I have not wi2">illed agai2">inst you. We are both i2">in accord wi2">ith God’s wi2">ill that we be forever equals i2">in love and i2">innocence.

i2">I am not vulnerable to your attacks. Your attacks are your attempt to attack yourself. You are not vulnerable to my attacks. My attacks are my own attempt to attack myself. i2">I can stop attacki2">ing myself and be happy. You can stop attacki2">ing yourself and be happy. We cannot and have not attacked each other.

i2">I am completely free from your choi2">ice and you are free from mi2">ine. i2">I am free from your wi2">ishes and i2">intenti2">ions. i2">I do not grant you the power to upset me. i2">I do not di2">isplace my own power onto you. Nothi2">ing happens to me that i2">I do not choose. Nothi2">ing happens to you that you do not choose. Nei2">ither of us i2">is a vi2">icti2">im. There are no vi2">icti2">ims. We have not vi2">icti2">imi2">ized each other. i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im of you. You are not a vi2">icti2">im of me.

We are both i2">innocent because nei2">ither of us has done anythi2">ing to each other. We are both i2">innocent because we are both sti2">ill as God created us. Nei2">ither of us has si2">inned. i2">I have not si2">inned agai2">inst you. You have not si2">inned agai2">inst me. We have not si2">inned agai2">inst God. There i2">is no si2">in. Nothi2">ing has happened.

We are both perfectly equal i2">in God. We are both God’s chi2">ildren. We are both holy and i2">innocent and forgi2">iven. You are my equal brother and i2">I am your equal brother. We are i2">identi2">ical i2">in God. We are one i2">in love. There i2">is no separati2">ion between us. i2">I share everythi2">ing wi2">ith you as you share everythi2">ing wi2">ith me. We can both be at peace together and joi2">in i2">in love as equals.

God loves us equally. i2">I forgi2">ive you and love you. You forgi2">ive me and love me. We love everyone as ourselves. Love i2">is all there i2">is.

Whi2">ile you have an ego, you wi2">ill actually defend i2">it and protect i2">it. You wi2">ill be afrai2">id of the truth because the truth shows that the ego i2">is not real, and i2">if you beli2">ieve you are the ego, that means you are not real. That would of course be fri2">ighteni2">ing.

i2">It's not so much that our ego resi2">ists waki2">ing up. i2">It can't wake up. i2">It's just a machi2">ine, a structure made of i2">illusi2">ions. But WE resi2">ist waki2">ing up because we're i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith the ego. We i2">interpret the truth through i2">it, ask i2">it what i2">its i2">interpretati2">ion of the truth i2">is, and take the truth's "attack" on i2">it personally.

i2">If for example you are i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith the ego and the truth tells you that the world i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion, or that your body i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion, you - i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith ego - wi2">ill take that personally. You'll thi2">ink that i2">it means you are an i2">illusi2">ion. Obvi2">iously that's confused but you also thi2">ink i2">it's real, so you'll see the truth as an attack on your very exi2">istence.

Thi2">is i2">is why i2">it can be so di2">iffi2">icult to accept the truth and wake up. Our ti2">ies to the ego make us beli2">ieve the i2">illusi2">ion i2">is real and that we are the i2">illusi2">ion. i2">IF that were true, i2">it's totally understandable that you wouldn't want to let go of your self.

Thi2">is can be why, when you open up to some truth, letti2">ing the li2">ight i2">in, you wi2">ill on the one hand welcome courageously but on the other hand react to i2">it li2">ike i2">it's come to destroy you. You wi2">ill have an ego rebound and feel upset and angry and scared, as though you're bei2">ing threatened.

Often when i2">I am i2">in a flow or a upswi2">ing of i2">inspi2">irati2">ion, teachi2">ing, wri2">iti2">ing etc... i2">I am openi2">ing up to new truths and expandi2">ing my awareness, but at the same ti2">ime, i2">it i2">is easy to become overwhelmed. i2">I start to have a lot of emoti2">ions come up for release. And i2">if i2">I push too hard, i2">I wi2">ill actually start to feel afrai2">id and gui2">ilty. Thi2">is i2">is the parts of me sti2">ill attached to the ego whi2">ich do not understand or accept the truth, and percei2">ive i2">it as meani2">ing all ki2">inds of wrong conclusi2">ions. i2">I've found parti2">icularly that when i2">I talk about unconsci2">ious gui2">ilt i2">it can produce a lot of fear because my ego i2">interprets i2">it to mean the gui2">ilt i2">is real and therefore i2">I should be afrai2">id.

Exposi2">ing yourself to the truth can therefore produce all ki2">inds of reacti2">ions, i2">includi2">ing si2">ickness. Si2">ickness defends agai2">inst the truth, because you thi2">ink the truth has come to attack the ego. So basi2">ically i2">if you're closely attached to and i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith the ego, the truth wi2">ill seem very threateni2">ing and you wi2">ill li2">ikely produce a lot of si2">ickness i2">in an attempt to protect your sense of "self". i2">It's just self-preservati2">ion. The only di2">istorti2">ion i2">is that your sense of i2">identi2">ity i2">is mi2">isplaced so you're taki2">ing thi2">ings personally that do not really apply to who you really are. They apply to the ego, but not you.

Someti2">imes then i2">I have to take a break from "too much i2">input" and from pushi2">ing myself i2">into so much truth at once. But i2">I thi2">ink over ti2">ime my rebounds have i2">in general become less i2">intense now. i2">I can talk about the truth for longer before my sense of reali2">ity feels the pressure and starts to retali2">iate. i2">I guess that's good, i2">it means that i2">I am not as ego-i2">identi2">ifi2">ied as i2">I used to be, or that i2">I've woken up some.

Jesus also talks about how when we are at fi2">irst taki2">ing responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for everythi2">ing, we may take i2">it to be a major attack, because to the ego-i2">identi2">ifi2">ied self i2">it i2">impli2">ies we must be very gui2">ilty. But over ti2">ime, as we di2">is-i2">identi2">ify wi2">ith the false self, we don't take i2">it as personally, or to mean that we are gui2">ilty as much. Over ti2">ime i2">it becomes easi2">ier to take responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity knowi2">ing that i2">it does not i2">imply you are gui2">ilty, as you start to "separate" yourself from the ego's i2">interpretati2">ion of i2">it.

Starti2">ing to grasp how i2">I have chosen everythi2">ing i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing, has been blowi2">ing my mi2">ind and expandi2">ing my awareness, but also scari2">ing my ego i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion some. Ti2">ime to relax a bi2">it.

i2">I looked upon a woman who seemed to be si2">ick. She seemed to have problems. i2">In my mi2">ind i2">I observed her problems and regarded them as "bei2">ing there". i2">I thought that she was her si2">ick body. i2">I started to i2">imagi2">ine what was becomi2">ing of her and what i2">it mi2">ight lead to.

Jesus stepped i2">in. He corrected me. "Do not condemn her."

Although i2">it seemed li2">ike i2">I wasn't doi2">ing anythi2">ing at all, that i2">I was "just observi2">ing" passi2">ively what she was apparently choosi2">ing for herself, Jesus clearly saw otherwi2">ise.

i2">I reali2">ized then that i2">if *i2">I* choose to beli2">ieve i2">in what i2">I am seei2">ing and BELi2">IEVE that the person actually i2">is the si2">ickness that they are tryi2">ing to portray themselves as, i2">I am falli2">ing i2">into false empathy and condemnati2">ion and am i2">IMPRi2">ISONi2">ING THEM further. i2">I am holdi2">ing the person i2">in pri2">ison by AGREEi2">ING Wi2">ITH THEM as to thei2">ir apparent condi2">iti2">ion, because thei2">ir condi2">iti2">ion i2">is once removed from thei2">ir REALi2">ITY as an i2">invulnerable i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it.

i2">I have to reali2">ize, the person i2">IS NOT thei2">ir body. Bodi2">ies are separati2">ion devi2">ices.

From thi2">is came an explorati2">ion of i2">ideas and i2">insi2">ights whi2">ich blew my mi2">ind.

i2">I asked of Jesus, i2">is i2">it true then that we are supposed to overlook absolutely ALL FORMS and not be bli2">inded by them and not BELi2">IEVE ANYTHi2">ING that we see suggested by forms, beli2">ievi2">ing only i2">in total perfecti2">ion and di2">ivi2">ini2">ity of all people at all ti2">imes? i2">Is i2">it then that thi2">is enti2">ire world was set up to bli2">ind us so that i2">if we bought i2">into i2">it, we would be fai2">ili2">ing to overcome the separati2">ion ourselves, and that therefore we MUST learn to overlook ALL of i2">it - to not see people as bodi2">ies at all - i2">in order to set ourselves free from thi2">is TRAP?

Jesus sai2">id "yes".

And so, as i2">it turns out, we qui2">ite li2">iterally have to learn to SEE, by learni2">ing to STOP seei2">ing/beli2">ievi2">ing the bli2">indi2">ing i2">illusi2">ions presented by form. Physi2">ical form i2">is a Li2">IE. i2">It i2">is a huge di2">istracti2">ion. i2">It affi2">irms thi2">ings whi2">ich are not true i2">in God's reali2">ity. When a person shows up appeari2">ing to be si2">ick, i2">in body, i2">if we beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is "how they are", we have fallen for the trap. We have bought i2">into the li2">ie that "they" are the body and that "they as the body" are si2">ick. And that therefore thi2">is i2">is reali2">ity.

As soon as we do that "passi2">ive observi2">ing" of other's pli2">ight, we are condemni2">ing them, judgi2">ing them, attacki2">ing them, rei2">inforci2">ing thei2">ir si2">ickness, accusi2">ing them of si2">in, beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in separati2">ion, and are also attacki2">ing ourselves. We then wi2">ill experi2">ience that we are attacked BY and Wi2">ITHi2">IN thi2">is perceptual state. Thi2">is i2">is why "si2">ight of si2">ickness" horri2">ifi2">ies.

i2">It i2">is very challengi2">ing, i2">it seems, to not beli2">ieve that people are bodi2">ies at all. To recogni2">ize that the only truth about them i2">is NOT what thei2">ir body says. That people are actually spi2">iri2">its TRAPPED i2">in bodi2">ies and the body i2">is NOT the person. The body covers up the person. i2">It i2">is a fi2">icti2">ional wall of attack, an obstacle to peace, desi2">igned to present an i2">illusi2">ion that we are NOT ALi2">IKE, due to the appearance of form. "Nothi2">ing so bli2">indi2">ing as si2">ight of form" li2">iterally appli2">ies to ALL FORMS i2">includi2">ing bodi2">ies - we are bli2">inded by the physi2">ical and must learn to completely look past i2">it to the brother who i2">is hi2">idden by i2">its decepti2">ion.

That means also recogni2">izi2">ing, that no matter what form seems to present to our eyes - be i2">it si2">ickness or death - we are to NOT BELi2">IEVE i2">IT. And i2">in thi2">is not beli2">ievi2">ing the li2">ie, we wi2">ill stop EMPOWERi2">ING i2">IT, and therefore wi2">ill recogni2">ize i2">its nothi2">ingness, and thus gai2">in POWER OVER i2">IT to heal and di2">ispel any i2">illusi2">ion through mi2">iracle worki2">ing. We cannot work a mi2">iracle i2">if we are buyi2">ing i2">into the li2">ies. We are just as much i2">in need to heali2">ing when we beli2">ieve the si2">ickness i2">is real. Thi2">is doesn't mean to pretend that si2">ickness i2">in the body i2">is not present or to not bother heali2">ing i2">it... i2">it just means to RECOGNi2">IZE what i2">it i2">is (an i2">illusi2">ion) and to then demonstrate that i2">it CAN be changed, to prove i2">it was an i2">illusi2">ion.

Thi2">is i2">is pretty radi2">ical. i2">It's huge. i2">It means to be mi2">iracle workers and truly accept atonement we HAVE TO learn to stop beli2">ievi2">ing forms, stop beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in the physi2">ical, stop seei2">ing people as bodi2">ies, stop holdi2">ing thei2">ir bodi2">ies agai2">inst them as a form of i2">injusti2">ice, stop i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing Wi2">ITH our own body or i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing others AS thei2">ir own bodi2">ies. That si2">ick person i2">IS NOT THEi2">IR BODY. "i2">I am not a body i2">I am free" i2">is the eventual culmi2">inati2">ion of that. i2">It's no small statement, i2">it i2">is absolute and requi2">ires TOTAL FORGi2">IVENESS.

Forgi2">iveness overlooks form. i2">It overlooks si2">in and death. i2">It i2">is the basi2">is of mi2">iracles. i2">It overlooks bodi2">ies. i2">It allows the mi2">ind to extend naturally and be healed and capable of heali2">ing. When we joi2">in mi2">ind-to-mi2">ind there i2">is heali2">ing, and the body's condi2">iti2">ion MUST follow sui2">it because the mi2">ind i2">is responsi2">ible for causi2">ing the body's condi2">iti2">ions, be i2">it happy ones or hurtful ones.

To be wi2">illi2">ing, i2">is a movement i2">in a VERTi2">ICAL di2">irecti2">ion upwards towards God/Holy Spi2">iri2">it/Li2">ight. Unwi2">illi2">ingness i2">is a movement away from God i2">into the darkness of the ego. i2">In order to become wi2">illi2">ing, you have to wi2">illi2">ingly and trusti2">ingly move at least a li2">ittle i2">in the di2">irecti2">ion of forgi2">iveness and truth. A wi2">illi2">ingness to be mi2">istaken, a wi2">illi2">ingness to surrender, a wi2">illi2">ingness to let go, a wi2">illi2">ingness to consi2">ider that your brother mi2">ight not be si2">inful, i2">is a movement upwards towards the truth. And therefore a movement i2">in the di2">irecti2">ion of i2">INCREASED FREEDOM OF Wi2">ILL.

Thi2">is li2">ittle step towards God i2">is an i2">invi2">itati2">ion to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to enter. i2">It i2">is PERMi2">ISSi2">ION that your are gi2">ivi2">ing to Hi2">im to help you. Through your free wi2">ill, you are sayi2">ing, i2">I am Wi2">ILLi2">ING to open up to a greater truth, and thus you open the door and ALLOW and ACCEPT that whi2">ich can come down to help rai2">ise you up. Wi2">illi2">ingness i2">isn't about si2">ideways doi2">ing, or hori2">izontal cause and effect.

i2">It's always about openi2">ing up your wi2">ill to more freedom, movi2">ing above the battlefi2">ield beyond li2">imi2">its, and therefore letti2">ing go of some small amount of i2">impri2">isonment. You need only show even the sli2">ightest wi2">illi2">ingness to reconsi2">ider your posi2">iti2">ion, questi2">ion your false beli2">iefs, recogni2">ize that your brother i2">is not the problem, or have a sense of honesty about your perspecti2">ive, and thi2">is alone i2">is yet enough for the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to recogni2">ize you are reachi2">ing up to Hi2">im and aski2">ing to be i2">involved wi2">ith Hi2">is Help. And he wi2">ill come, and he wi2">ill help you, to the degree you are Wi2">ILLi2">ING TO ALLOW Hi2">im to heal you FOR you.

"i2">I do NOT feel gui2">ilty, because the Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo ALL the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">IF i2">I Wi2">ILL LET Hi2">IM."

"the Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill respond fully to your sli2">ightest i2">invi2">itati2">ion"

"Thi2">is i2">is the i2">invi2">itati2">ion to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it. i2">I told you that i2">I could reach up and bri2">ing the Holy Spi2">iri2">it down to you. But i2">I can bri2">ing Hi2">im to you only at your own i2">invi2">itati2">ion."

"The holy i2">instant does NOT come from your li2">ittle wi2">illi2">ingness alone. i2">It i2">is ALWAYS the result of your SMALL wi2">illi2">ingness COMBi2">INED wi2">ith the unli2">imi2">ited power of Hi2">IS Wi2">ILL."

"Puri2">ifi2">icati2">ion i2">is of God alone, and THEREFORE for you. Rather than seek to prepare YOURSELF for Hi2">im, try to thi2">ink thus:

"i2">I, who am host to God, AM worthy of Hi2">im.

He Who ESTABLi2">ISHED Hi2">is dwelli2">ing-place i2">in me created i2">it as He would have i2">it be.

i2">It i2">is not needful that i2">I make i2">it ready for Hi2">im, but only that i2">I DO NOT i2">INTERFERE wi2">ith Hi2">is plan to RESTORE to me my own AWARENESS of my readi2">iness, whi2">ich i2">is eternal.

i2">I need ADD nothi2">ing to Hi2">is plan.

But to RECEi2">IVE i2">it, i2">I MUST be wi2">illi2">ing NOT to substi2">itute my own, i2">IN PLACE of i2">it.""

i2">I see that, i2">in the end, loss i2">is a form of vi2">icti2">imhood. i2">It's not somethi2">ing that can happen to an i2">immortal bei2">ing. i2">It suggests that somethi2">ing valued has been taken away from you agai2">inst your wi2">ill, wi2">ith no hope of getti2">ing i2">it back. Li2">ike a ki2">ind of attack that has happened to steal somethi2">ing away from you. And now you are bereft or lacki2">ing that thi2">ing.

i2">If, i2">in li2">ight of the loss, you then feel "unfai2">irly treated", sli2">ighted, offended, hurt, upset, etc... i2">it means you're buyi2">ing i2">into the ego's vi2">iew. A sense of i2">identi2">ity that can experi2">ience losses, a self that can be taken from, a self that i2">is "aggri2">ieved" and has "gri2">ieve-ances" because of a seemi2">ing "murder" of a body-person that has taken place. i2">It reflects a beli2">ief i2">in murder and death and bei2">ing at the effect of them. The course remi2">inds:

"i2">I am i2">in the li2">ikeness of my Creator. i2">I cannot suffer, i2">I cannot experi2">ience loss, and i2">I cannot di2">ie. i2">I am not a body. i2">I would recogni2">ize my reali2">ity today. i2">I wi2">ill worshi2">ip no i2">idols, nor rai2">ise my own self-concepts to replace my Self. i2">I am i2">in the li2">ikeness of my Creator. Love created me li2">ike i2">Itself." UrW84L2

Who or whatever i2">is suffer a loss, i2">is not part of me, as an i2">immortal bei2">ing. i2">If i2">I feel that i2">I am i2">in loss or gri2">ief, then my sense of i2">identi2">ity i2">is mi2">isplaced and i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I am an ego. i2">It means i2">I'm i2">in a mental i2">illness and lack recogni2">iti2">ion, and must be playi2">ing the role of vi2">icti2">im.

"Whatever suffers i2">is not part of me. What gri2">ieves i2">is not myself. What i2">is i2">in pai2">in i2">is but i2">illusi2">ion i2">in my mi2">ind. What di2">ies was never li2">ivi2">ing i2">in reali2">ity, and di2">id but mock the truth about myself. Now i2">I di2">isown self-concepts and decei2">its and li2">ies about the holy Son of God. Now am i2">I ready to accept hi2">im back as God created hi2">im, and as he i2">is." UrW284

i2">I sti2">ill at ti2">imes, at present, personally, have gri2">ief and loss. Thi2">is i2">indi2">icates that i2">I am sti2">ill playi2">ing the game of ego and sufferi2">ing, an i2">identi2">ity whi2">ich i2">is false and am i2">in need of heali2">ing. Unti2">il i2">I get there, the only soluti2">ion typi2">ically i2">is to feel the loss and gri2">ieve the absence and so on. Li2">ike people do. But i2">in the bi2">ig pi2">icture, the end-game i2">is clear - the renunci2">iati2">ion of an arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial self, that suffers an arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial loss, and wants the very death that i2">it gri2">ieves over.

i2">I thi2">ink that i2">I recently reached a turni2">ing poi2">int. i2">It's parti2">icularly to do wi2">ith the sense of bei2">ing a "separate person". Thi2">is seemed to come i2">into questi2">ion, parti2">icularly i2">in terms of relati2">ionshi2">ips wi2">ith others, how i2">I see them, who i2">I thi2">ink they are etc. And i2">it also very much i2">involved questi2">ioni2">ing the reali2">ity of my body and the bodi2">ies of others.

i2">I seemed to be openi2">ing up to an i2">idea of oneness, a sense of shari2">ing, of joi2">ini2">ing mi2">inds, and that others are a part of myself. i2">I could see how i2">I had been trapped i2">insi2">ide a ki2">ind of pri2">ison of i2">isolati2">ion for a long ti2">ime, i2">identi2">ifi2">ied wi2">ith my body and wi2">ith bei2">ing "not others". As i2">if everythi2">ing i2">I di2">id and how i2">I thought about people all revolved around thi2">is sense of me bei2">ing separate from them. i2">I found myself apologi2">izi2">ing a lot i2">in my mi2">ind for all the ways i2">I'd been wrongly separati2">ing myself off through vari2">ious forms of confli2">ict and scapegoati2">ing.

As i2">I embraced more the i2">idea that my brothers are part of myself, thi2">is began to transcend bodi2">ily boundari2">ies. i2">It also began to open up a sense of i2">inclusi2">ion and shared i2">interests. i2">I started experi2">imenti2">ing wi2">ith the i2">idea of "bei2">ing" other people, and tryi2">ing to i2">include them i2">in myself as i2">I related to them. i2">It changes the energy dynami2">ics completely and totally deflates all sense of goi2">ing to war. i2">I reali2">ized thi2">is was a major part of the golden rule, the atonement, the i2">idea of shari2">ing, and deeply connected to true mi2">iracle-worki2">ing.

Si2">ince that turni2">ing poi2">int, and as thi2">is sense of joi2">ini2">ing conti2">inues to expand, i2">I've been noti2">ici2">ing a few thi2">ings that are changi2">ing. i2">I feel as though i2">I am steppi2">ing outsi2">ide of a box that i2">I've been i2">in. As i2">if there's been a li2">ittle ci2">ircle drawn on the floor around my feet and i2">I've never before stepped outsi2">ide the ci2">ircle. Everywhere i2">I've gone, i2">I've sti2">ill been i2">insi2">ide the ci2">ircle, cut off from people. And as i2">I now step outsi2">ide of i2">it, i2">it makes me reali2">ize all the more that the body i2">is a devi2">ice for separati2">ion.

i2">In parti2">icular i2">I feel that i2">I've been just stuck i2">in the i2">idea of "i2">I am a body" my whole li2">ife, and that the body has served as a way to remai2">in separated off. i2">I suddenly started seei2">ing how every way i2">I related to people was a speci2">ial relati2">ionshi2">ip, based on them bei2">ing "not me", and all revolvi2">ing around the body bei2">ing the thi2">ing that separates me off. Seei2">ing other people as confi2">ined to thei2">ir bodi2">ies. Seei2">ing myself as only that whi2">ich i2">is i2">insi2">ide thi2">is body.

Thi2">is boundary, whi2">ich has been there, i2">is now recogni2">ized as bei2">ing the "cause of" a great deal of struggle, confli2">ict, loss and unhappi2">iness. Bei2">ing i2">identi2">ifi2">ied and anchored to thi2">is body and "excludi2">ing" others, has formed the basi2">is of all scapegoati2">ing, justi2">ifyi2">ing all fi2">inger-poi2">inti2">ing, all blame, all sense that somethi2">ing appli2">ies to others and not me. i2">I see the body now as the core of what keeps me apart from others. And i2">if i2">I separate them off based on thei2">ir body bei2">ing separate from my body, that's the whole trap.

Suddenly i2">I fi2">ind myself steppi2">ing outsi2">ide of thi2">is enti2">ire dynami2">ic. Transcendi2">ing bodi2">ies. i2">Includi2">ing people as a part of myself. Developi2">ing a sense of shared i2">identi2">ity. i2">I reali2">ize that peace i2">is only possi2">ible by shari2">ing and joi2">ini2">ing, because only i2">in oneness i2">is there no separati2">ion or war. And that i2">it i2">is ONLY through joi2">ini2">ing of mi2">ind and shari2">ing an i2">identi2">ity that you can actually work true mi2">iracles. i2">It li2">iterally requi2">ires the two mi2">inds to have a shared sense of oneness and i2">identi2">ity whi2">ich transcends bodi2">ies. i2">It i2">is that mysti2">ical, psychologi2">ical, joi2">ini2">ing of two bei2">ings as one, that li2">iterally undoes the separati2">ion, and therefore si2">ickness and death.

i2">I see now much more clearly the "road home", as bei2">ing a movement away from bei2">ing separated off, and towards bei2">ing reuni2">ited wi2">ith others. Of fi2">indi2">ing more ways to i2">include others i2">in myself. And i2">I see that thi2">is truly i2">is the only way to end the war, the confli2">ict, the arguments, the projecti2">ions, and all the ego acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies. We came from a state of uni2">ion and we have to return to i2">it.

i2">It i2">is qui2">ite startli2">ing i2">in fact to recogni2">ize that, i2">in truth, we are supposed to be basi2">ically everywhere, uni2">ited wi2">ith everyone, shari2">ing everythi2">ing, one wi2">ith all mi2">inds, bei2">ing a part of all bei2">ings, and that i2">in contrast, bodi2">ies are doi2">ing the absolute extreme opposi2">ite of that. They are servi2">ing as ways to keep people apart, promote confli2">ict, i2">impri2">ison and trap, produce loneli2">iness and i2">isolati2">ion, and breed si2">ickness.

i2">I can see now i2">in fact that i2">it i2">is my beli2">ief i2">in bei2">ing separate that fuels si2">ickness i2">in myself and others. i2">It i2">is the very sense of the ri2">ift or spli2">it i2">in my mi2">ind - our mi2">ind - a sense of us not bei2">ing one wi2">ith each other, that mani2">ifests as i2">illness. i2">I have been produci2">ing i2">illness between myself and others as a projected form of the i2">idea of bei2">ing at war wi2">ith them.

Pi2">ictures of cruci2">ifi2">ixi2">ion have ari2">isen as psychologi2">ical i2">images of dream-weapons held up to support the i2">idea of "not bei2">ing each other". Of bei2">ing i2">in a state of attack and speci2">ial relati2">ionshi2">ip. A state of separati2">ing off and bei2">ing an enemy. i2">It breeds a dream of death that i2">I've been doi2">ing to myself. And always whenever the body i2">is i2">involved as a separati2">ion devi2">ice, the relati2">ionshi2">ip i2">is always one of speci2">ialness and confli2">ict and hatred.

i2">It feels li2">ike comi2">ing out of a shell, out of hi2">idi2">ing. i2">It feels li2">ike reali2">izi2">ing that you've been li2">ivi2">ing i2">in a pri2">ison cell all your li2">ife, anchored i2">insi2">ide the body, and suddenly are reali2">izi2">ing that thi2">is has hemmed you i2">in and has tended to make you wi2">ithdraw to your i2">isolati2">ion as a way to solve problems. Now that i2">I suddenly reali2">ize i2">I don't have to be trapped i2">in the body, i2">I can spread my wi2">ings and encompass others, be more i2">inclusi2">ive and share more.

i2">It's strange but thi2">is seems also be preci2">isely what i2">it means to truly forgi2">ive. Because forgi2">iveness i2">isn't just about recogni2">izi2">ing people's i2">innocence. Forgi2">iveness i2">is atonement, atonement i2">is shari2">ing, and that means joi2">ini2">ing of mi2">inds. Forgi2">iveness li2">iterally entai2">ils and requi2">ires mi2">inds to be i2">inclusi2">ive of each other. i2">It's not just a state of truer percepti2">ions and more accurate judgements, i2">it's actually a state of uni2">ion and shari2">ing. A return to shared i2">identi2">ity and bei2">ing.

As a result, and wi2">ithout deli2">iberately attempti2">ing to do so, i2">I suddenly am noti2">ici2">ing myself gi2">ivi2">ing people far more credi2">it, benefi2">it of the doubt, chari2">ity, etc. Just as i2">I found myself doi2">ing i2">in certai2">in forgi2">iveness medi2">itati2">ions, such as i2">in lesson 121 i2">in the course - forgi2">iveness i2">is the key to happi2">iness, i2">in whi2">ich you are gui2">ided to see li2">ight i2">in an enemy and fi2">ind ways to credi2">it them wi2">ith the good they've done rather than focus on thei2">ir shortcomi2">ings.

i2">I fi2">ind myself seemi2">ing to put my arms around people psychologi2">ically, my mi2">ind keeps taki2">ing an automati2">ic step away from holdi2">ing thi2">ings agai2">inst people and has thi2">is sort of "space" between where they're at and what i2">I credi2">it them wi2">ith. i2">I seem to be transcendi2">ing thei2">ir bodi2">ies and thei2">ir egos along wi2">ith my own. And that means, what i2">I feel to be, true forgi2">iveness i2">is happeni2">ing. i2">I'm actually taki2">ing a vantage poi2">int, generali2">ized and wi2">idespread, i2">in whi2">ich i2">I am li2">iterally bei2">ing more forgi2">ivi2">ing all the ti2">ime, more lovi2">ing, more i2">inclusi2">ive, and more shari2">ing.

i2">I've been fi2">indi2">ing myself suddenly openi2">ing up to people more, connecti2">ing wi2">ith people, servi2">ing people, helpi2">ing people more than ever. i2">It i2">is di2">imi2">ini2">ishi2">ing and removi2">ing fears about relati2">ing to strangers, and seems to be poweri2">ing me, not wi2">ith some ki2">ind of bravado or arrogance but wi2">ith gentleness and connecti2">ion. i2">I seem to be openi2">ing up. And to me that means that, li2">ivi2">ing as a separated off body-i2">identi2">ifi2">ied self means bei2">ing closed down. i2">It means bei2">ing cut off from others.

The si2">imple truth i2">is that bodi2">ies have been lyi2">ing to us thi2">is whole ti2">ime. We've bought i2">into bei2">ing bodi2">ies hook li2">ine and si2">inker. And that means bei2">ing separated from each other, because bodi2">ies are li2">iterally never joi2">ined. The more we are a body the less we share. The more we are a body the more we are at war. The more we are a body the more confi2">ined we become to one li2">ittle spot i2">in the world, whi2">ich becomes the center of the ego uni2">iverse, and everyone else becomes an enemy.

Getti2">ing away from bei2">ing a body i2">is the key. i2">It's li2">ike openi2">ing a door that i2">I never reali2">ized was shut all thi2">is ti2">ime. i2">I've been doi2">ing thi2">is same thi2">ing over and over and over forever. Everythi2">ing i2">I've sai2">id and thought and done and related has been sti2">ill wi2">ithi2">in the confi2">ines of thi2">is pri2">ison cell. Sti2">ill from a vantage poi2">int of bei2">ing a separated self, a self that i2">is not shared wi2">ith other selves. A self that i2">isn't uni2">ited or whole or one or part of a sonshi2">ip. The unhealed healer that i2">is sufferi2">ing from "separati2">ion si2">ickness" and thi2">inks they have somethi2">ing that others lack - i2">ie that they lack me.

That's been the one common denomi2">inator thi2">is whole ti2">ime, and now i2">I'm learni2">ing to open the door and step outsi2">ide. To expand my sense of self, to i2">include myself i2">in others, and to become a part of li2">ife. To restore relati2">ionshi2">ip and connecti2">ion, as well as to uphold health and wholeness. And i2">I knew, i2">it's not goi2">ing to be long, as thi2">is conti2">inues to develop and i2">increase, the movement towards bei2">ing able to truly joi2">in mi2">inds and perform mi2">iracles of uni2">ion.

Shari2">ing i2">is the key. Joi2">ini2">ing i2">is everythi2">ing. The oneness i2">is our true nature. Not i2">in rejecti2">ion of our i2">indi2">ivi2">idual souls, but joi2">ini2">ing them together as a collecti2">ive. We are sti2">ill a holographi2">ic fami2">ily, many yet one, each other yet ourselves. Thi2">is means sti2">ill bei2">ing "me", but i2">it also means bei2">ing "more than just myself" and i2">includi2">ing others i2">in what i2">I am. i2">I've focused too much on the "separate me" part and not enough on the "oneness" part. And i2">it was the "oneness" part of that that i2">I was mi2">issi2">ing out on. Not any more.

"One brother i2">is all brothers. Every mi2">ind contai2">ins all mi2">inds, for every mi2">ind i2">is one. Such i2">is the truth."

"Be free today, and carry freedom as your gi2">ift to those who sti2">ill beli2">ieve they are enslaved wi2">ithi2">in a body. Be you free, so that the Holy Spi2">iri2">it can make use of your escape from bondage to set free the many who percei2">ive themselves as bound and helpless and afrai2">id. Let love replace thei2">ir fears through you. Accept salvati2">ion now, and gi2">ive your mi2">ind to Hi2">im Who calls to you to make thi2">is gi2">ift to Hi2">im. For He would gi2">ive you perfect freedom, perfect joy, and hope that fi2">inds i2">its full accompli2">ishment i2">in God."

"Heali2">ing i2">is when two mi2">inds recogni2">ize thei2">ir oneness and become glad."

Years ago i2">I used to hate a person. i2">I thought thi2">is person was the cause of everyone's problems. i2">I was secretly and passi2">ively angry at them, not communi2">icati2">ing wi2">ith them, unwi2">illi2">ing to forgi2">ive them, feeli2">ing very hurt by them, annoyed by everythi2">ing they di2">id and wanti2">ing nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith them. i2">I had bui2">ilt up a consi2">iderable case agai2">inst them and attempted to get others on board to agree wi2">ith me. i2">It really seemed to me that thi2">is person was the reason why i2">I was sufferi2">ing and unhappy, why i2">I was i2">impri2">isoned, why i2">I was always at war wi2">ith them and why i2">I di2">id not feel loved by them. i2">It was ALL thei2">ir fault.

For many years thi2">is went on. i2">I wanted to put as much di2">istance between myself and them as possi2">ible. i2">I di2">idn't want anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith them. i2">I even moved to li2">ive i2">in another place to get away from them. i2">I was qui2">ite sure they were the enemy and i2">I di2">id many thi2">ings to emphasi2">ize the separati2">ion between us. i2">I wanted to be not associ2">iated wi2">ith them (di2">isassoci2">iated) and pushed them away, di2">id not allow us to have a relati2">ionshi2">ip, and despi2">ised them. That i2">is, unti2">il one day when i2">it all changed.

A moment happened where, i2">in thei2">ir presence and i2">in the mi2">idst of secretly wanti2">ing not to be around them, accusi2">ing them of si2">in, all of a sudden thi2">is i2">idea came i2">into my mi2">ind. i2">It was a shocki2">ing i2">idea, but i2">it was unavoi2">idably obvi2">ious. Somehow, thi2">is person was me. Somehow, that person, i2">in that separate body, was i2">in some way one wi2">ith me. i2">I, myself, was "over there", behi2">ind the wall of hatred, behi2">ind thei2">ir physi2">ical form, i2">insi2">ide them. i2">I had a ki2">ind of oneness experi2">ience for a moment. And the "target" that i2">I always thought was "that person", suddenly was revealed to be ME.

Thi2">is experi2">ience was so completely opposi2">ite to everythi2">ing i2">I had thought and felt about thi2">is person. i2">I li2">iterally was shocked to suddenly have thi2">is experi2">ience that whi2">ile i2">I had made every effort to di2">isassoci2">iate from "them" and bui2">ild a gap between us, *i2">I* was somehow on the other si2">ide of that gap and therefore everythi2">ing i2">I felt towards them, i2">I was ALSO feeli2">ing towards myself. Thi2">is wasn't a pleasant reali2">izati2">ion. But at the same ti2">ime i2">it was very powerful.

i2">It was li2">ike droppi2">ing a drop of li2">iqui2">id detergent i2">into greasy water. Thi2">is truth had dropped i2">in and shown me how terri2">ibly mi2">istaken i2">I'd been, what i2">I'd been doi2">ing to myself, and that i2">I couldn't conti2">inue to hate thi2">is person because doi2">ing so was hati2">ing myself. i2">If we were one, i2">if i2">I was i2">in them, i2">if i2">I myself was on the other si2">ide of that wall, then thi2">is whole enti2">ire thi2">ing wasn't "exclusi2">ively" about them, i2">it was about me. Some part of my own self or mi2">ind was attacki2">ing i2">itself wi2">ith a vengeance.

Thi2">is was a major turni2">ing poi2">int i2">in the relati2">ionshi2">ip. i2">It totally turned i2">it on i2">its head, but gradually. Not merely i2">in the relati2">ionshi2">ip to that person but also the relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith myself. i2">I began to heal and to start to reali2">ize, at even an emoti2">ional level, as i2">I catharted old pai2">ins and mi2">ispercepti2">ions and false beli2">iefs and gri2">ievances, that i2">I wasn't REALLY angry wi2">ith that person, i2">it was actually i2">in fact di2">irected towards myself. i2">It was me that i2">I hated and i2">it was that whi2">ich i2">I had to heal. And everythi2">ing i2">I'd beli2">ieved "they di2">id to me" had to be forgi2">iven.

The more i2">I allowed myself to heal and release that, the less i2">it appeared to be anythi2">ing to really do wi2">ith that person at all. i2">It far more obvi2">iously was a spli2">it i2">in my own mi2">ind and my own attack upon myself, whi2">ich i2">I had vehemently projected onto thi2">is person. The more i2">I projected, usi2">ing hate to i2">increase the separati2">ion, the less i2">it SEEMED to be anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith myself. i2">It was all about them. i2">I as i2">I healed, so too di2">id my vi2">iew of thi2">is person. As i2">I undi2">id my own self attack, the i2">impressi2">ion of offense, vi2">icti2">imhood, enemi2">ies and projecti2">ive blame, i2">I stopped bei2">ing so tri2">iggered by thi2">is person or beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it was about them at all. My attenti2">ion turned wi2">ithi2">in to the enemy i2">I'd made of myself.

Over ti2">ime, my relati2">ionshi2">ip to that person has i2">improved profoundly. Almost all of the blame and scapegoati2">ing has stopped. The huge stockpi2">ile of pai2">in has melted. Ani2">imosi2">ity and i2">inequali2">ity has turned to equali2">ity and fri2">iendli2">iness. i2">It seems li2">ike nothi2">ing happened. The speci2">ialness has di2">issolved. i2">I can talk to them more honestly, openly and deeply. There i2">is communi2">icati2">ion. There i2">is forgi2">iveness. And i2">it's gi2">iven way to a more mature way of relati2">ing. Thi2">is i2">is all thanks to the undoi2">ing of the separati2">ion i2">in my mi2">ind and the wi2">illi2">ingness to take an honest look at what i2">I am doi2">ing to myself.

Anci2">ient hatred. Present love.

Ei2">ither i2">its love or a call for love. But you can't recogni2">ize that a call for love i2">is ONLY a call for love i2">if you are not already lovi2">ing.

So there you are, not bei2">ing lovi2">ing yourself, and you see another person not bei2">ing lovi2">ing ei2">ither, and i2">instead of bei2">ing able to see clearly and recogni2">ize thei2">ir call for love, you i2">instead see i2">it as a call for attack.

i2">In other words, you see your own attack reflected i2">in the person and can't look past i2">it.

So i2">it's all very well sayi2">ing that people are calli2">ing for love and that we need to gi2">ive love, but i2">if you are not gi2">ivi2">ing love you won't even be able to percei2">ive thi2">is clearly. You'll see the person attacki2">ing you and not lovi2">ing you and you won't thi2">ink, oh, that person i2">is calli2">ing for love - i2">it won't be obvi2">ious and i2">immedi2">iate - and i2">if you try to force yourself to 'see i2">it' then you're just faki2">ing i2">it.

When you are love, i2">it frames all of reali2">ity and all percepti2">ion i2">in such a way that everythi2">ing stri2">ikes you di2">ifferently. You have enough clari2">ity and knowi2">ing to be able to Di2">ISCERN that someone i2">is ei2">ither bei2">ing lovi2">ing or i2">is calli2">ing for love. i2">Its obvi2">ious to you that the person i2">is hurti2">ing or that they need help or that thei2">ir real need i2">is love, rather than what they say they need.

i2">I don't know that i2">it's helpful to try to go around thi2">inki2">ing of everyone as calli2">ing out for love. i2">If i2">I'm not 100% lovi2">ing then i2">it i2">isn't genui2">ine. i2">It can be a GOAL, however, to become able to di2">iscern that there i2">is only love or a lack of love, but i2">I can't possi2">ibly expect myself to be able to percei2">ive thi2">is whi2">ile i2">I sti2">ill have an ego.

Wi2">ith an ego i2">I wi2">ill see ego i2">in others and i2">I wi2">ill see i2">it as a justi2">ifi2">ied attack that justi2">ifi2">ies why i2">I should NOT love i2">in return. i2">I need to use thi2">is to help me to rai2">ise my own awareness about how *i2">I* have blocked love and am calli2">ing for love, then allow love i2">in, so that i2">I can allow i2">it to extend to others also.

Once i2">I've done that, and have become the li2">ight of love, then i2">I Wi2">ILL be able to see that what other people are doi2">ing i2">is calli2">ing out for love, and that love i2">is the ONLY appropri2">iate answer to respond wi2">ith i2">in every case.

i2">It was only about a year ago that i2">I fi2">inally 'came out' as a bi2">isexual person and owned i2">it after 49 years i2">in a dark closet. Si2">ince then i2">I've been explori2">ing and expressi2">ing and worki2">ing on more deeply comi2">ing to terms wi2">ith thi2">is and li2">ivi2">ing i2">it more - bei2">ing more vi2">isi2">ible.

But one aspect that has been naggi2">ing i2">in the background i2">is a fear that i2">I wi2">ill be attacked and judged and hurt by others about thi2">is. Largely thi2">is i2">is based on an awareness of what people can be li2">ike, especi2">ially the bi2">igoted angry people, and what's happened to others i2">in brutal attacks and judgement.

i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize for a whi2">ile that i2">I was taki2">ing thi2">is posi2">iti2">ion, or playi2">ing at bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">im, or that i2">it was even somethi2">ing i2">I needed to do some forgi2">iveness about. But then i2">I became aware of i2">it. So how does one forgi2">ive such a thi2">ing, where we're at the mercy of the world and afrai2">id of what i2">it mi2">ight do to us? Safety i2">is a pri2">imary concern of everyone and all of us can relate to feeli2">ing afrai2">id of bei2">ing hurt i2">in some way.

i2">I fi2">irst had to recogni2">ize that i2">I was even i2">in a state of "not peace" about i2">it, that i2">I was havi2">ing worri2">ies and thoughts about i2">it, and thi2">is was not normal. i2">It's qui2">ite easy to just "have" those thoughts and feeli2">ings and not even have the awareness to step outsi2">ide of i2">it or noti2">ice that i2">it's a problem or somethi2">ing to even work on. i2">In that mi2">indset, even the i2">idea that there's somethi2">ing wrong can be out of awareness and we just go through the moti2">ions of sufferi2">ing.

Havi2">ing recogni2">ised somethi2">ing i2">is botheri2">ing me, i2">I then start to look at i2">it. What's goi2">ing on here, who i2">is doi2">ing what, what i2">is thi2">is based on, and am i2">I wi2">illi2">ing to explore more honestly what's really happeni2">ing?

As i2">I looked at thi2">is i2">I remembered that i2">if i2">I'm i2">immortal i2">I can't really be attacked, so i2">if i2">I beli2">ieve i2">I'm attackable that's a mi2">istake on my part. That cuts through a lot of crap. Nothi2">ing real can be threatened, so i2">I must be beli2">ievi2">ing somethi2">ing faulty i2">if i2">I thi2">ink people can attack me. That gi2">ives some qui2">ick reli2">ief.

Then i2">I started to noti2">ice that i2">I beli2">ieve other people are goi2">ing to do somethi2">ing to me, have power over me, hurt me, judge me, attack me, maybe even vi2">iolence. But then i2">I had to noti2">ice, who am i2">I i2">in that scenari2">io, what role am i2">I playi2">ing? i2">It becomes clear that i2">I'm seei2">ing myself as a vi2">icti2">im, bei2">ing vi2">icti2">imi2">ised by others. They're doi2">ing somethi2">ing to me, and i2">I'm afrai2">id of i2">it, afrai2">id of bei2">ing attacked and judged.

When i2">I stayed i2">in the vi2">iewpoi2">int that people are goi2">ing to do somethi2">ing threateni2">ing, i2">I couldn't see an opti2">ion other than to fantasi2">ise about how i2">I mi2">ight try to stand up to them, become angry at them, gi2">ive them a speech, have to get i2">into a fi2">ight, or otherwi2">ise keep the beli2">ief i2">in bei2">ing vi2">icti2">imi2">ised whi2">ile tryi2">ing to fend them off. But that was li2">ike a closed loop of sufferi2">ing and the cracks were starti2">ing to show.

i2">It's always valuable to remember that nothi2">ing i2">in the world i2">is doi2">ing anythi2">ing to me, no-one out there i2">is the cause of me, other people don't cause me or have power over me, and i2">I cannot be affected or changed by anythi2">ing because i2">I am i2">immortal. So where does that leave the vi2">icti2">im role?

i2">I saw that i2">I am posi2">iti2">ioni2">ing myself as a vi2">icti2">im for some reason, and setti2">ing people up i2">in my mi2">ind as attackers to play a role, so that i2">I can get some ki2">ind of payoff. And what's that? To have a reason to fi2">ind them gui2">ilty of somethi2">ing. To justi2">ify anger on my part or to rei2">inforce defenses. i2">If they were to do anythi2">ing to me, i2">I would be justi2">ifi2">ied i2">in revenge, and blame, and scapegoati2">ing.

So then agai2">in thi2">is recogni2">iti2">ion that i2">I'm actually scapegoati2">ing comes i2">in. i2">I'm usi2">ing these people and actually want them to be attacki2">ing me, am frami2">ing them as attackers, so that i2">I can take the opportuni2">ity to have them look li2">ike they're the ones si2">inni2">ing, so that i2">I can take advantage of thei2">ir gui2">ilt and shove some of my own gui2">ilt i2">in there wi2">ith i2">it. i2">If they do somethi2">ing to me i2">I can happi2">ily project my own gui2">ilt onto them, mi2">ix i2">it i2">in wi2">ith thei2">ir gui2">ilti2">iness, and get ri2">id of i2">it.

i2">In other words, bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">im boi2">ils down to wanti2">ing to be attacked i2">in order to get a payoff of bei2">ing able to take advantage of the attacker and project my own gui2">ilt onto them. i2">In effect, by becomi2">ing the face of i2">innocence, the i2">innocent vi2">icti2">im, i2">I can get away wi2">ith sayi2">ing "brother at your hand i2">I di2">ie", and am wi2">illi2">ing to suffer and be hurt and di2">ie for i2">it, seemi2">ingly a small pri2">ice to pay i2">if i2">it means i2">I can use these attackers to get ri2">id of my gui2">ilt.

"Death seems an easy pri2">ice, i2">if they can say, "Behold me, brother, at your hand i2">I di2">ie."

So then thi2">is reveals the basi2">ic dynami2">ic of projecti2">ing and blami2">ing. i2">I fi2">irst attack myself, i2">I make myself gui2">ilty for some reason, i2">I then fi2">ind someone wi2">illi2">ing to play the role of attacker/si2">inner, i2">I bai2">it them and want them to attack me through fantasi2">ies of sufferi2">ing, i2">I hope they'll do i2">it whi2">ile pretendi2">ing to be afrai2">id of them doi2">ing i2">it, and i2">if they go through wi2">ith i2">it i2">I'll have a great opportuni2">ity to blame them and shove my self-i2">infli2">icted gui2">ilt onto them. Yay.

So there's that. And that has to be unraveled and taken back. Once you see what you're doi2">ing i2">it becomes obvi2">ious. i2">I fear bei2">ing attacked for "seemi2">ing to be gay" i2">in any way, based on seemi2">ing "proof of si2">in" that thi2">is does happen i2">in soci2">iety, rei2">inforci2">ing a vi2">icti2">im role, so that i2">I can hopefully be attacked and get ri2">id of some gui2">ilt i2">in the process. So i2">I'm really usi2">ing these people as scapegoats so that i2">I can benefi2">it.

What i2">I then have to look at or ask i2">is, why am i2">I projecti2">ing gui2">ilt, and how or why am i2">I maki2">ing myself gui2">ilty i2">in the fi2">irst place? Are these people really the ones who are denyi2">ing me, attacki2">ing me, judgi2">ing me, not accepti2">ing me, OR ... could i2">it be that i2">I am the one who i2">is attacki2">ing me, judgi2">ing me, not accepti2">ing me? Maybe i2">it really i2">is that i2">I am the one who i2">is "not okay wi2">ith" me bei2">ing the way that i2">I am, and the fantasi2">ies of other people attacki2">ing me for i2">it are really the way that i2">I'm usi2">ing my own mi2">ind to attack myself.

The i2">insi2">ight from thi2">is i2">is that, i2">I really need to more fully own who and what i2">I am (as God created me, transcendent of body/sex roles), allow myself the gui2">iltless freedom, and accept myself, and i2">if i2">I were to do thi2">is i2">I would be completely unconcerned wi2">ith what anyone else mi2">ight try to do to me.

i2">If i2">I am centered and soli2">id i2">in knowi2">ing myself, and fully owni2">ing bei2">ing myself, not only wi2">ill other people's attempted attacks be correctly vi2">iewed as "calls for love" on thei2">ir part - a way that they attack themselves, but also i2">I'll not take i2">it personally because i2">it won't resonate wi2">ith an unhealed gui2">ilt wi2">ithi2">in myself.

And probably, i2">if i2">I own and am at peace wi2">ith myself, i2">I wi2">ill gi2">ive off peace-vi2">ibes, and other people wi2">ill not feel drawn to attack me for i2">it anyway. Because really an atti2">itude of "i2">I should be puni2">ished for thi2">is, please attack me" i2">is an energeti2">ic and psychologi2">ical i2">invi2">itati2">ion broadcast to everyone i2">if i2">I'm not okay wi2">ith myself. A temptati2">ion aski2">ing others to fulfi2">il the role i2">I expect of them.

i2">In effect then, the real i2">issue i2">I/we have i2">is that we are not bei2">ing enti2">irely true to ourselves, are not fully accepti2">ing ourselves, are not granti2">ing ourselves absolute freedom, are gui2">ilti2">ing ourselves and accusi2">ing ourselves of si2">ins and shames and gui2">ilts, and thi2">is puts us i2">into an i2">insecure posi2">iti2">ion. We then seek to problem-solve thi2">is i2">in a faulty way by projecti2">ing the i2">insecuri2">iti2">ies onto others, aski2">ing them to play roles i2">in whi2">ich they do to us what we are already doi2">ing to ourselves, so that we can pretend not to be doi2">ing i2">it to ourselves.

i2">I fi2">ind and have found then, that my real challenge i2">is the forgi2">iveness of myself, the undoi2">ing of my own self-i2">infli2">icted gui2">ilts and shames, and the need for taki2">ing full responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for who and what i2">I am. i2">If i2">I become fully ali2">igned wi2">ith and on-the-si2">ide-of myself i2">in terms of acceptance and allowi2">ing, i2">I won't need to play the vi2">icti2">im role or i2">imagi2">ine how people would do thi2">ings to me. And thus i2">I wi2">ill take away the self-threateni2">ing mental acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies that were causi2">ing fear. When you have no gui2">ilt about yourself, nothi2">ing anyone does can target you.

Because ulti2">imately we really just are usi2">ing our own di2">isowned power agai2">inst ourselves, whi2">ich turns i2">into a projected i2">indi2">irect form of self-threat, whi2">ich produces a fear reacti2">ion. i2">I was doi2">ing thi2">is all to myself, and that's what the "secret of salvati2">ion" reveals.

Comi2">ing to recogni2">ize full responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for "i2">I have done thi2">is to myself" leads to the mi2">iracle of heali2">ing and to freedom. i2">If you are free to be as you are, then you don't i2">invent or i2">interpret people attacki2">ing you for i2">it, and can walk i2">in peace. Personally i2">I sti2">ill have to work on thi2">is some more, i2">it's a work i2">in progress, but at least i2">I can now see the way out by recogni2">isi2">ing what was the way i2">in. Know Thyself i2">is what 'pri2">ide' should be about, and not a vi2">icti2">imy di2">isowni2">ing and projecti2">ing of gui2">ilt onto fi2">icti2">ional attackers.

"And you wi2">ill understand that mi2">iracles reflect the si2">imple statement, "i2">I have done thi2">is thi2">ing, and i2">it i2">is thi2">is i2">I would undo."

"Only the self-accused condemn."

"i2">I can be attacked by nothi2">ing but my thoughts."

"The secret of salvati2">ion i2">is but thi2">is: That YOU are doi2">ing thi2">is UNTO YOURSELF. No matter what the form of the attack, thi2">is STi2">ILL i2">is true. Whoever takes the role of enemy and of attacker, STi2">ILL i2">is thi2">is the truth. Whatever seems to be the cause of any pai2">in and sufferi2">ing you feel, thi2">is i2">is STi2">ILL true. For you would not react at all to fi2">igures i2">in a dream you knew that YOU were dreami2">ing. Let them be as hateful and as vi2">ici2">ious as they may, they COULD have no effect on you, unless you fai2">iled to recogni2">ize i2">it i2">is YOUR dream. Thi2">is si2">ingle lesson learned wi2">ill set you free from sufferi2">ing, WHATEVER form i2">it takes."

"i2">It i2">is your thoughts alone that cause you pai2">in. Nothi2">ing external to your mi2">ind can hurt or i2">injure you i2">in any way. There i2">is no cause beyond yourself that can reach down and bri2">ing oppressi2">ion. No one but yourself affects you. There i2">is nothi2">ing i2">in the world whi2">ich has the power to make you i2">ill or sad, or weak or frai2">il. But i2">it i2">is you who have the power to domi2">inate all thi2">ings you see by merely recogni2">izi2">ing what you are. As you percei2">ive the harmlessness i2">in them, they wi2">ill accept your holy wi2">ill as thei2">irs. And what was seen as fearful now becomes a source of i2">innocence and holi2">iness."

Someti2">imes when less than happy, i2">I wi2">ill noti2">ice that probably some fear i2">is present. i2">I wi2">ill look at the "feari2">ing" i2">itself and to some degree thi2">is shi2">ines a li2">ight on i2">it and di2">ispels i2">it. Just even admi2">itti2">ing to bei2">ing afrai2">id i2">is helpful.

But what i2">I recently di2">iscovered i2">is that when i2">I am less than happy, i2">it i2">is possi2">ible to actually noti2">ice that i2">I'm beli2">ievi2">ing not just i2">in fear and gui2">ilt, but i2">in si2">in. i2">If i2">I recogni2">ize thi2">is and look at the sense or feeli2">ing of "i2">its a si2">in" or "si2">infulness" or "i2">I am si2">inful", whi2">ich can express i2">itself i2">in any form of gui2">ilt or fear or emoti2">ional upset, i2">I am qui2">ite surpri2">ised how rapi2">idly a tremendous wei2">ight i2">is li2">ifted. i2">It's li2">ike a dark vei2">il i2">is just li2">ifted ri2">ight up and all of those symptoms just di2">isappear.

i2">If si2">in i2">isn't real, then everythi2">ing that came from si2">in must go wi2">ith i2">it - all the gui2">ilt and all the fear and all of the unhappi2">iness. i2">It's li2">ike unpluggi2">ing the problem at i2">its core.

i2">If i2">I get my love from God, and you get your love from God, we can love each other as ourselves.

But thi2">is doesn't mean you are getti2">ing your love from me, or that i2">I am getti2">ing my love from you. i2">I do not need to get love from you, i2">if i2">I am getti2">ing i2">it from God. And you do not need to get love from me, i2">if you are getti2">ing i2">it from God.

God i2">is the only source of love. We can share God's love wi2">ith each other, but ONLY i2">IF we are wi2">illi2">ing to share i2">it wi2">ith God fi2">irst.

Otherwi2">ise i2">if i2">I lack a connecti2">ion of love wi2">ith God, i2">I wi2">ill see myself as i2">in need of love, and wi2">ill look to you to provi2">ide i2">it, because i2">I don't want to look to God to provi2">ide i2">it. And then i2">I wi2">ill attempt to take i2">it from you, or mani2">ipulate you i2">into gi2">ivi2">ing i2">it to me.

Si2">imi2">ilarly, i2">if you are lacki2">ing i2">in your connecti2">ion of love wi2">ith God, you wi2">ill see yourself as i2">in need, and wi2">ill try to get love from me to fulfi2">ill your percei2">ived need, whi2">ich wi2">ill never work.

The only soluti2">ion i2">is to plug ourselves back i2">into the source of love, God, and to get our love from God, so that we can share i2">IN i2">it, be a part OF i2">it, and EXTEND i2">IT. Not extendi2">ing i2">it because there i2">is a need that has to be fi2">illed i2">in another, but extendi2">ing i2">it SO THAT there i2">IS NO LACK OF LOVE.

Paradoxi2">ically then, love i2">is gi2">iven not because i2">it i2">is needed, but because i2">it i2">is not. Or rather, i2">it i2">is gi2">iven so that i2">it i2">is not needed, because i2">it i2">is provi2">ided.

Someti2">imes when i2">I am upset and i2">I am aski2">ing God to help, i2">I am i2">in a state of beggi2">ing, and that's because i2">I beli2">ieve there i2">is such a tremendous di2">istance (separati2">ion) between where i2">I am and where the soluti2">ion seems to be.

As i2">I "ask" God to "do thi2">ings" (lol)... the suggesti2">ion to me by Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is to, i2">instead, THANK GOD. Well... i2">in a state of upset and beggi2">ing, the i2">idea of thanki2">ing seems totally opposi2">ite of what i2">I can muster or beli2">ieve i2">in, because when i2">I am EXPERi2">IENCi2">ING thi2">ings happeni2">ing that i2">I DO NOT WANT, i2">I am bei2">ing the OPPOSi2">ITE OF GRATEFUL.

i2">I seem to be havi2">ing a pi2">ity party i2">in my upset feeli2">ings and here i2">it's bei2">ing si2">imply suggested that i2">I li2">ighten up and 'rejoi2">ice' i2">in God by ACCEPTi2">ING that God i2">IS helpi2">ing or HAS/Wi2">ILL help, by enteri2">ing i2">into the stream of thought whi2">ich appreci2">iates and THANKS Hi2">im for doi2">ing so.. li2">ike, i2">it's a gi2">iven, because then i2">I am PARTi2">ICi2">IPATi2">ING i2">IN THE Mi2">IRACLE.

There's a world of di2">ifference between "God please help, thi2">ings are so fucked", and "Thank you God, thank you for restori2">ing ... to peace and love" or whatever.

The questi2">ion i2">is, can we love, can we be wi2">illi2">ing to ri2">ise up out of despai2">ir and actually JOi2">IN GOD i2">in love, and to then have a celebrati2">ion party about how wonderful he already i2">is and how much he i2">is already goi2">ing to solve thi2">is enti2">ire problem... THANK GOD.... can we jump to that from the mi2">iddle of despai2">ir?

i2">It's hard. But not i2">impossi2">ible. Someti2">imes you have to have good old fi2">it fi2">irst of all and feel i2">it all and get i2">it out of your system to use up all that stupi2">id ego energy. Then you mi2">ight be more ready and able to reach up to the hi2">igher truth of God and ali2">ign wi2">ith i2">it i2">in grati2">itude.

i2">It's a leap. And to go from 'i2">I need help' to 'thank you for helpi2">ing' also requi2">ires that i2">I LET GO OF my ego mi2">isery pot. i2">I mean, after all, i2">if i2">I'm aski2">ing for help, then i2">I better dam well get prepared to RECEi2">IVE THE HELP and stop just wallowi2">ing i2">in the darkness, ri2">ight? i2">I'm aski2">ing for i2">it, so i2">I need to shi2">ift gears and actually open up to recei2">ivi2">ing and thanki2">ing.

Ego doesn't want to thank God for anythi2">ing ;-) But thi2">is i2">is the si2">imple di2">ifference between ego prayers and Holy prayers. Ego prayers come from the dark and cry out i2">in angui2">ish and i2">in beli2">ief at how everythi2">ing sucks and there's nothi2">ing to be thankful for. Holy prayers ali2">ign wi2">ith Heaven and extend and express love i2">in grati2">itude and happi2">iness. Bi2">ig di2">ifference. i2">It's ni2">ight and day, as well, i2">in terms of the POWER that wi2">ill come when you enter grati2">itude and COMMAND si2">ituati2">ions to heal i2">instead of bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">im.

Thank you God for extendi2">ing your love through me.

The ego has bui2">ilt some very terri2">ible thi2">ings whi2">ich we regard as extremely real. These i2">include pai2">in, di2">isease/si2">ickness, fear, death, emergency, i2">intensi2">ity, attack, and separati2">ion. When these thi2">ings seems to be happeni2">ing, the ego i2">is sendi2">ing out a very strong message to us.

The message says, "you should stay the hell away from thi2">is i2">it's really bad". (Beware, thi2">is advi2">ice may be mi2">isleadi2">ing ;-)

Pai2">in qui2">ite li2">iterally tells you i2">in an experi2">ienti2">ial way that i2">it i2">is somethi2">ing you do not want. And nobody wholeheartedly wants to be si2">ick or dyi2">ing. And attack can be parti2">icularly upsetti2">ing. The ego keeps rei2">inforci2">ing the i2">idea:

"Thi2">is i2">is really really terri2">ible and i2">it's really happeni2">ing and you should want i2">it to stop" (Beware agai2">in, thi2">is ego advi2">ice may not work ;-)

And so typi2">ically that i2">is the reacti2">ion that we have. i2">If i2">I've got pai2">in, i2">I want i2">it to go away. i2">If someone i2">is attacki2">ing someone, i2">I want them to stop doi2">ing i2">it. i2">If i2">I am si2">ick or di2">iseased, i2">I want to get ri2">id of i2">it.

The trouble i2">is, these atti2">itudes... These reacti2">ions... These ways of experi2">ienci2">ing these 'temptati2">ion', i2">is preci2">isely the OPPOSi2">ITE of what wi2">ill actually HELP the si2">ituati2">ion. The ego's counsel i2">is ALWAYS completely opposi2">ite of the truth and leadi2">ing you down exactly the wrong path that results i2">in thi2">ings becomi2">ing far worse. What i2">it clai2">ims wi2">ill save you, and what i2">it clai2">ims wi2">ill heal you, and what i2">it clai2">ims wi2">ill fi2">ix the si2">ituati2">ion, DOES NOT, and so you seek for but you do not fi2">ind peace.

So let's look at the opposi2">ite, whi2">ich the ego warns you agai2">inst.

i2">If you are i2">in pai2">in, love the li2">ivi2">ing FUCK out of i2">it. Welcome i2">it. Don't resi2">ist i2">it. Drop all desi2">ire to get ri2">id of i2">it. Don't make i2">it wrong. Don't judge i2">it as bad or a mi2">istake or somethi2">ing that shouldn't be there. And i2">in parti2">icular, stop bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">im and OWN the CHOi2">ICE to put i2">it there.

i2">Instead of bei2">ing a passi2">ive vi2">icti2">im of i2">it, i2">instead be proacti2">ive i2">in choosi2">ing how you wi2">ish to percei2">ive i2">it. i2">It i2">is also useful to extremely exaggerate how much you WELCOME the problem. For example:

"i2">I am choosi2">ing thi2">is pai2">in (or whatever the thi2">ing i2">is)."

"i2">I really wanted to have thi2">is and thi2">is i2">is what i2">I've recei2">ived."

"Thi2">is pai2">in i2">is absolutely beauti2">iful and lovely and i2">I love i2">it wi2">ith all my heart."

"i2">I am the one who chose thi2">is pai2">in and i2">I've done a really excellent job of choosi2">ing i2">it."

"Thi2">is pai2">in i2">is absolutely amazi2">ing i2">I totally love i2">it and welcome i2">it and want i2">it."

"i2">I allow thi2">is pai2">in to stay for as long as i2">it wants to, i2">it i2">is completely free to do so and i2">I don't even want to get ri2">id of i2">it or make i2">it go away."

"i2">I feel really happy about thi2">is pai2">in bei2">ing there, and i2">I am truly grateful that i2">it has shown up just li2">ike i2">I planned."

"i2">I love thi2">is pai2">in. Thi2">is i2">is the best pai2">in i2">I've ever created. Thi2">is pai2">in makes me completely happy because i2">it i2">is exactly how i2">I wanted i2">it to be and i2">it has met all my condi2">iti2">ions."

"i2">I accept thi2">is pai2">in and allow i2">it to remai2">in."

"i2">I let go of resi2">isti2">ing thi2">is pai2">in or tryi2">ing to make i2">it go away."

"i2">I let go of labelli2">ing thi2">is pai2">in as negati2">ive or a fault or somethi2">ing i2">I di2">id wrong, there i2">is no gui2">ilt i2">in i2">it at all. i2">I am completely i2">innocent."

"i2">I surrender all attack on thi2">is pai2">in and gi2">ive i2">it to you Holy Spi2">iri2">it."

"i2">I am open to bei2">ing completely sti2">ill wi2">ith thi2">is pai2">in and si2">imply observi2">ing i2">it wi2">ithout any desi2">ire to change i2">it or judge i2">it."

"i2">I surreneder thi2">is pai2">in to you God, please heal i2">it i2">in my mi2">ind and i2">I gently let i2">it go to you now."

Noti2">ice that we're havi2">ing an ATTi2">ITUDE whi2">ich i2">is completely the opposi2">ite of what the ego says your atti2">itude SHOULD be. When somethi2">ing goes wrong, the ego puts i2">it i2">into the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions and tells you exactly what ki2">ind of severi2">ity of reacti2">ion thi2">is calls for. i2">If you let i2">it, you'll react accordi2">ing to thi2">is hi2">ierarchy and be a vi2">icti2">im. So the ego says thi2">is pai2">in i2">is not somethi2">ing you can possi2">ible want - that YOU are not somethi2">ing you can possi2">ibly want - so go ahead and WANT i2">IT, to defy the ego and reverse i2">its asserti2">ions.

The keys here are you need to i2">include:

1. Complete ownershi2">ip for havi2">ing created thi2">is

2. Complete ownershi2">ip for acti2">ively sti2">ill creati2">ing i2">it and wanti2">ing to

3. Grati2">itude for havi2">ing created exactly what you wanted

4. Openness and welcome that i2">is heartfelt

5. Allowi2">ing and accepti2">ing whatever i2">it, letti2">ing i2">it BE wi2">ithout you changi2">ing i2">it

6. Surrender of all of the reacti2">ions you were havi2">ing about i2">it and all the ways you were maki2">ing i2">it out to be somethi2">ing wrong

7. Wi2">illi2">ingness to let i2">it be free so that you can be free

8. Offeri2">ing i2">it up to Holy Spi2">iri2">it now that you have LET GO OF i2">IT and have stopped tryi2">ing to attack i2">it or make i2">it wrong or get ri2">id of i2">it yourself

9. Wi2">illi2">ingness to ASK Holy Spi2">iri2">it/Jesus/God to now heal i2">it and take i2">it from you

10. Actually DOi2">ING SO and letti2">ing go of i2">it i2">in peaceful surrender.

To the ego thi2">is i2">is total madness. i2">It wi2">ill tell you i2">if you try to accept or allow somethi2">ing that's clearly bad or awful, that you have regarded as real and upsetti2">ing, you wi2">ill just condone i2">it and keep i2">it. Thi2">is i2">is not true. i2">It wi2">ill tell you that you should stop even tryi2">ing to 'li2">ive wi2">ith i2">it' because i2">if you do, you li2">iterally wi2">ill be stuck keepi2">ing i2">it and have to li2">ive wi2">ith i2">it. Thi2">is i2">is also not true.

The reason the ego's atti2">itude i2">is false i2">is because there are a whole shi2">itload of atti2">itudes that you are havi2">ing whi2">ich are REi2">INFORCi2">ING the pai2">in and maki2">ing i2">it worse. i2">In fact, you are the one who put i2">it there. But whi2">ile you keep REACTi2">ING to i2">its appearance, whi2">ich typi2">ically i2">is "i2">I want to get ri2">id of i2">it because i2">it shouldn't be there", that just makes i2">it worse and keeps i2">it. When you li2">ift away all of those reacti2">ions and layers of condemnati2">ion, judgement, gui2">ilt and wrongfulness, you are stri2">ippi2">ing away layers of 'maki2">ing i2">it real' and holdi2">ing i2">it i2">in your mi2">ind, whi2">ich actually FREES YOUR Mi2">IND from the i2">illusi2">ions surroundi2">ing thi2">is. So you're actually undoi2">ing your reacti2">ions, seei2">ing i2">innocence and harmlessness i2">in the thi2">ing, and thus getti2">ing yourself to the poi2">int where you can LET GO of i2">it. You can't be free whi2">ile you won't let i2">IT be free.

The reason for thi2">is i2">is that whenever there i2">is pai2">in or sufferi2">ing or si2">ickness, i2">it i2">is because there's some part of you that you do not LOVE. Some part of you where you see gui2">ilt or wrongness or non-acceptance or si2">infulness. So that part of you that you refuse to accept HURTS and turns i2">into si2">ickness. Thi2">is may or may not produce physi2">ical si2">ickness but often i2">it does. So you're not really deali2">ing wi2">ith your body bei2">ing si2">ick, you're deali2">ing wi2">ith your mi2">ind bei2">ing si2">ick - some part of YOU (not the body) needs love. So as you look at the body si2">ickness and you keep launchi2">ing counter-attacks and defenses agai2">inst i2">it, all you're doi2">ing i2">is hurti2">ing the part of you that hurts, even more. That only compounds i2">it and keeps i2">it. Plus i2">it makes you very unhappy because the ego's default reacti2">ion to pai2">in and si2">ickness i2">is unhappi2">iness. And yet the fact i2">is, i2">it i2">is a choi2">ice to BE unhappy by not lovi2">ing a part of yourself that MAKES the si2">ickness appear i2">in the fi2">irst place.

Do you really HAVE to be unhappy and afrai2">id and gui2">ilty and lost and hopeless 'because of' a pai2">in or si2">ickness? Do you not have any choi2">ice i2">in the matter? At the very least, even i2">if changi2">ing your atti2">itude about i2">it does not have any effect on maki2">ing the si2">ickness BETTER at all, physi2">ically, at least you wi2">ill FEEL GOOD i2">instead of feeli2">ing li2">ike shi2">it. i2">It i2">IS far better for you to choose to be happy because of si2">ickness than to add a layer of feeli2">ing shi2">it on top of the physi2">ical sensati2">ions or symptoms. Havi2">ing a headache i2">is one thi2">ing, but also havi2">ing a headache and feeli2">ing depressed and unhappy i2">is a whole extra layer of despai2">ir. You don't HAVE to have that experi2">ience. And what you mi2">ight fi2">ind i2">is, i2">if you CHOOSE to have a happi2">ier experi2">ience about what i2">is happeni2">ing - a more welcomi2">ing, lovi2">ing, open, allowi2">ing experi2">ience, then maybe, just maybe, your body wi2">ill fall i2">into li2">ine and actually HEAL to match your change i2">in atti2">itude. Si2">ince the physi2">ical si2">ickness i2">is just a symptom/projecti2">ion of your unhealed atti2">itude about yourself, i2">internally, changi2">ing your atti2">itude MUST change the projecti2">ion.

The more support for si2">ickness you can stri2">ip away the better, and all of your default negati2">ivi2">ity and vi2">icti2">imhood about bei2">ing si2">ick DOES compound and support and rei2">inforce i2">it. What happens when you wi2">ithdraw that support? How can a si2">ickness have a strength, when you weaken i2">it by wi2">ithdrawi2">ing all of your mi2">ind's support for i2">it? Make no mi2">istaken, seei2">ing yourself as vi2">icti2">imi2">ized BY si2">ickness or BY attack or BY someone dyi2">ing or whatever, that very much strengthens the EFFECTS of that thi2">ing happeni2">ing. Choosi2">ing to be happy and lovi2">ing toward i2">it, i2">instead, whi2">ich i2">is completely agai2">inst the ego and does take some Wi2">ILL (affi2">irmati2">ions help too), CANCELS OUT your beli2">ief i2">in the effects. When you deny that somethi2">ing has affected you, the cause i2">is undone and you are HEALED.

Jesus DOES ask us i2">in ACi2">IM to cancel out all of the effects of thi2">ings i2">in order to undo them and to DEMONSTRATE that you are i2">invulnerable. You can't do that i2">if you i2">insi2">ist that there's no way you can love or be happy about whatever seems to have gone wrong. You've got to start somewhere. Worth a try?

How much of your li2">ife have you spend i2">in the default reacti2">ionary space of feeli2">ing shi2">itty about bad thi2">ings that are happeni2">ing? Has i2">it worked? How much effort have you spent fi2">ighti2">ing agai2">inst thi2">ings that have gone wrong and fai2">iled and that are malfuncti2">ioni2">ing? Has that really helped at all? i2">It has not worked. Try somethi2">ing radi2">ical. Try the exact opposi2">ite way of deali2">ing wi2">ith i2">it and see what happens. Holy Spi2">iri2">it can ampli2">ify the effects of your wi2">illi2">ingness to SEE YOURSELF AS WHOLE AND HEALED, because i2">it i2">is i2">in li2">ine wi2">ith the truth.

The only thi2">ing you need to be wary of i2">is the ego turni2">ing thi2">is i2">into a reason to become SARCASTi2">IC, whi2">ich means that you're sayi2">ing one thi2">ing and beli2">ievi2">ing another. You need to fi2">ind some amount of beli2">ief and meani2">ing i2">in what you're affi2">irmi2">ing. And because you're tryi2">ing to UNDO the beli2">iefs you already put i2">in place i2">in your negati2">ive reacti2">ions, i2">it may take some effort of wi2">ill and persi2">istence to change your beli2">iefs and to actually FEEL that what you're sayi2">ing i2">is true. After a whi2">ile of sayi2">ing i2">it and MEANi2">ING i2">it, you should feel a growi2">ing sense of peace and acceptance about the i2">issue, and i2">it should seem easi2">ier to be less upset about, and to surrender all of your counter-attacks upon i2">it. Then you wi2">ill have a GENUi2">INE Wi2">ILLi2">INGNESS to hand i2">it over to Holy Spi2">iri2">it.

Go for i2">it.

When i2">I thi2">ink about how i2">I used to practi2">ice forgi2">iveness, i2">it all seemed so mechani2">ical. i2">I di2">idn't really understand what forgi2">iveness was, even i2">if some versi2">ion of i2">it was spelled out i2">in vari2">ious books. i2">I di2">idn't understand what part Holy Spi2">iri2">it played, or what to expect of Hi2">im. i2">It seems to have taken a very long ti2">ime to refi2">ine thi2">is.

At fi2">irst, i2">I understood forgi2">iveness was about 'i2">it hasn't really happened' and forgi2">ivi2">ing for what people have NOT done, and that thi2">is entai2">iled some form of taki2">ing back projecti2">ions and stoppi2">ing scapegoati2">ing. i2">I tri2">ied vari2">ious people's techni2">iques and so on for releasi2">ing what i2">I'd taken back, and someti2">imes i2">it seemed to work a bi2">it, not often. Most of the struggle seemed to be rememberi2">ing to even forgi2">ive at all, or how to do i2">it.

Over ti2">ime i2">I adopted another method whi2">ich i2">I felt provi2">ided new i2">insi2">ight i2">into how thi2">is works, and that i2">involved some fai2">irly clear steps to take, i2">includi2">ing goi2">ing i2">into the feeli2">ing and fi2">indi2">ing out where i2">it came from and seei2">ing that i2">I di2">id i2">it to myself and then tryi2">ing to see out 'the truth' about me. And i2">in some ways that seemed to be qui2">ite powerful. But i2">it sti2">ill was pretty much me doi2">ing thi2">is on my own.

i2">If i2">I would ask Holy Spi2">iri2">it to help me forgi2">ive, he would perhaps help me wi2">ith i2">insi2">ights or wordi2">ing and so on. But sti2">ill i2">it seemed to all be about me changi2">ing my percepti2">ion, fi2">indi2">ing the real cause, stoppi2">ing beli2">ievi2">ing thi2">ings that weren't true, di2">iscerni2">ing what was true or false etc. And sti2">ill Holy Spi2">iri2">it was sort of more of an advi2">isor or gui2">ide.

More recently, however, i2">I became wi2">illi2">ing to start to experi2">iment wi2">ith allowi2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it to come i2">into me, Hi2">imself, and to do whatever he needed to do. i2">It was ki2">ind of baby steps at fi2">irst. Just explori2">ing and learni2">ing to trust. i2">I would i2">invi2">ite Hi2">im i2">into my 'body' and He would seem to move i2">in me and do some energeti2">ic/emoti2">ional changes, i2">if i2">I was wi2">illi2">ing. Someti2">imes he would do thi2">is 'flush' thi2">ing where, once he has done some setup, excess emoti2">ions/fear/stress drai2">in out of me. Or, he would li2">ift thi2">is 'stuff' up from my feet all the way up to and out of my head.

Whi2">ile thi2">is was helpful to me i2">I di2">idn't know why other people weren't talki2">ing about thi2">is or doi2">ing thi2">is. i2">I di2">idn't know i2">in what way i2">it fi2">it wi2">ith ACi2">IM, and yet i2">I knew i2">it was Holy Spi2">iri2">it doi2">ing thi2">is. He would say "surrender" or "relax" and i2">I pretty much knew that ri2">ight after that he was goi2">ing to perform a heali2">ing of some ki2">ind. But li2">ike anythi2">ing, i2">in order to 'open up' to thi2">is stuff i2">it requi2">ires wi2">illi2">ingness, trust, curi2">iosi2">ity and the abi2">ili2">ity to li2">isten, to ask questi2">ions and bui2">ild a relati2">ionshi2">ip.

More recently i2">I gradually have recei2">ived more clari2">ity from vari2">ious sources about forgi2">iveness, what i2">it i2">is, what i2">it does, and what other aspects of Holy Spi2">iri2">it's thought system i2">I need to ali2">ign wi2">ith, such as taki2">ing responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity, bei2">ing uncondi2">iti2">ional, acceptance, etc. Mi2">ichael Murray has a good handle on those 'tools' and the metaphysi2">ics behi2">ind i2">it.

What came to me then was that i2">instead of attempti2">ing thi2">is ki2">ind of mental-ori2">iented process of forgi2">ivi2">ing through thought and perceptual adjustments, whi2">ich i2">is very head-ori2">iented, i2">I would begi2">in to open up my heart to Holy Spi2">iri2">it and become wi2">illi2">ing to *recei2">ive* Hi2">is heali2">ing. i2">I thi2">ink the turni2">ing poi2">int was when i2">I reali2">ized that "He wi2">ill correct all the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">if i2">I wi2">ill let Hi2">im" really li2">iterally means that HE wi2">ill do the correcti2">ion, not just of my percepti2">ion, but also of all the si2">ide effects, symptoms or consequences that came about as a result. And that i2">includes thi2">ings goi2">ing on i2">in my body, my emoti2">ions, and the world around me.

He began to li2">iterally 'cleanse' me of gui2">ilt and si2">in i2">instead of me tryi2">ing to wrap my head around them or see them from a di2">ifferent vantage poi2">int. i2">I could talk myself i2">into hi2">igher truth i2">in an i2">intellectual way, but here Holy Spi2">iri2">it was starti2">ing to sti2">ir i2">in me and move through me and heal me. Prepari2">ing the way perhaps for worki2">ing through me on behalf of others. Thi2">is was somethi2">ing i2">I desi2">ired and wanted to explore and open up to. Now when i2">I forgi2">ive, i2">I know that toward the end of i2">it, and maybe even before i2">I get done wi2">ith 'my part', Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is goi2">ing to li2">ikely step i2">in and do somethi2">ing. And i2">I mean, DO somethi2">ing. Acti2">ion.

As i2">I explore thi2">is more, and open up to mi2">iracles, and make myself a channel of Holy Spi2">iri2">it's heali2">ing power, i2">I am allowi2">ing my 'forgi2">iveness' to be more a practi2">ice i2">in, ulti2">imately, recei2">ivi2">ing heali2">ing from God (mental/emoti2">ional/physi2">ical) rather than me tryi2">ing to use my head to fi2">igure out how i2">I'm i2">innocent. i2">It i2">is more experi2">ienti2">ial. i2">I want to *experi2">ience* God. i2">I want to *experi2">ience* truth and not have i2">it just be some mental exerci2">ise i2">in di2">iscernment. And i2">it's even more than that.

What about God? What about love? i2">I feel a sti2">irri2">ing that i2">I want to spend the rest of my ti2">ime si2">imply focusi2">ing on .. how to be uncondi2">iti2">ionally lovi2">ing, how to recei2">ive and extend God and Hi2">is mi2">iracles, and how to just love love love love love. i2">It's not mental. i2">It's not i2">intellectual. i2">It's i2">in the HEART. God i2">is love. i2">I want to be i2">in the love wi2">ith God. i2">I want everythi2">ing to be focused around and centered on love. And i2">I want to be open to God bei2">ing the one who heals my mi2">ind and emoti2">ions and body, and those of others too. i2">I want to share i2">in God's love and recei2">ive i2">it, i2">instead of thi2">inki2">ing (wi2">ith ego) i2">I have to do all thi2">is work myself. Yes i2">I need to sti2">ill take some steps and have a wi2">illi2">ingness, but i2">I reali2">ize more and more that 'waki2">ing up' i2">isn't anywhere near as heart-felt a 'concept' as bei2">ing reuni2">ited wi2">ith God. Who wants to cli2">ini2">ically wake up unless i2">it's all about a grand reuni2">ion?

i2">I want God to be i2">in my practi2">ice of A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles, and that has much less to do wi2">ith the methodi2">ical mechani2">ical forgi2">iveness processes i2">I used to thi2">ink were 'the way to do i2">it'. Maybe i2">I needed them i2">in order to reali2">ize they are unrefi2">ined or less effecti2">ive than God's way. We are meant to open up to allow Holy Spi2">iri2">it to flow through us fully and openly, to di2">irect us, to speak for us, to heal through us, and to be our mi2">ind. All thi2">is 'doi2">ing i2">it on my own' stuff i2">is very ti2">iresome and unnecessary.

Thank you God for reveali2">ing the truth of your li2">ight and love experi2">ienti2">ially i2">in my li2">ife and extendi2">ing i2">it all those i2">I meet. As Jesus outli2">ines i2">in the begi2">inni2">ing of the Text about mi2">iracles (i2">in the unsani2">iti2">ized versi2">ion):

"You should begi2">in each day wi2">ith the prayer 'Help me to perform whatever mi2">iracles you want of me today."" - Jesus.

i2">If i2">I see myself as "bei2">ing attacked" by someone, i2">I am attacki2">ing.

i2">If i2">I see myself as "bei2">ing vi2">icti2">imi2">ized", i2">I am vi2">icti2">imi2">izi2">ing.

i2">If i2">I see myself as afrai2">id, i2">I am threateni2">ing.

i2">If i2">I see myself as lacki2">ing, i2">I am steali2">ing.

i2">If i2">I see myself as judged, i2">I am judgi2">ing.

i2">If i2">I seem si2">ick agai2">inst my wi2">ill, i2">I have deli2">iberately made myself si2">ick i2">in order to accuse others of causi2">ing i2">it.

i2">If i2">I am dyi2">ing and don't want to di2">ie, i2">it's a great way to di2">iscard all of my power and gi2">ive up on li2">ife, as i2">if death i2">is the total opposi2">ite of what i2">I want when i2">in fact i2">I'm choosi2">ing i2">it.

i2">If i2">I am feeli2">ing unsafe, i2">I'm undermi2">ini2">ing someone.

i2">If i2">I'm tryi2">ing to rely on myself, i2">I'm tryi2">ing to be unreli2">iable.

i2">If i2">I see myself as gui2">ilty, i2">I must beli2">ieve i2">it about others as well.

i2">If i2">I see myself as i2">innocent, i2">it can be that i2">I have put my si2">in onto others and am i2">in deni2">ial.

Always the surface appearance hi2">ides the exact opposi2">ite moti2">ive that li2">ies underneath, because the ego i2">is always two faced. Whatever i2">it seeks to accompli2">ish i2">it accompli2">ishes the exact opposi2">ite. Whatever i2">it says i2">its i2">intenti2">ions are, they are a cover-story for a completely opposi2">ite plan.

No-one di2">ies wi2">ithout thei2">ir own consent. Death i2">is chosen. Death i2">is sui2">ici2">ide. And death i2">is an attempt to prove that you have no wi2">ill or power to choose anythi2">ing else, whi2">ile si2">imultaneously usi2">ing all of your wi2">ill and power to make death seem to happen i2">in secret.

Thi2">is i2">is why death i2">is *fai2">ili2">ing the Course.*

Although there are some parts of thi2">is world whi2">ich seem appeali2">ing, welcomi2">ing, pleasant, enjoyable etc.... we need to always contrast.... do i2">I want thi2">is, OR do i2">I want God? Because God di2">id not create thi2">is world and the home that He created for you i2">is not the world that seems vi2">isi2">ible here. The vi2">isi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of thi2">is world was made to conceal the real world and to make you fi2">ixated on what i2">is not real.

There are small, li2">ittle, stupi2">id thi2">ings i2">in thi2">is world whi2">ich we seem to get upset about whi2">ich i2">is as i2">if to say, thi2">is li2">ittle ti2">iny thi2">ing i2">is more i2">important to me than bei2">ing wi2">ith God. So i2">if i2">I'm pi2">issed about someone movi2">ing my cheese or someone fai2">ili2">ing to send me the proper emai2">il or someone posted somethi2">ing offensi2">ive on facebook or someone stepped on my flower bed, i2">I better be clear that the value i2">I'm gi2">ivi2">ing to these thi2">ings i2">is i2">in opposi2">iti2">ion to the value of God. i2">I want these thi2">ings more than i2">I want God. i2">I thi2">ink they are more i2">important than bei2">ing wi2">ith God.

And when you look at that i2">in that perspecti2">ive - you're tradi2">ing thi2">is huge amount of love from God for a ti2">iny li2">ittle speck of i2">illusory rubbi2">ish that i2">isn't even i2">important, that really shows you how ri2">idi2">iculous our li2">ittle world i2">is.

So then next ti2">ime i2">I have a shi2">it fi2">it about an i2">item bei2">ing i2">in the wrong place or someone went i2">into the bathroom before me when i2">I needed to pee or a bi2">ird crapped on my car wi2">indow or someone stole my pen, i2">I need to remember... do i2">I want thi2">is more than God? Do i2">I want to be ri2">ight about thi2">is more than i2">I want to be happy wi2">ith God? i2">Is thi2">is ti2">iny li2">ittle i2">insi2">igni2">ifi2">icant i2">illusory object more i2">important to me than God's love?

What are you worth? The ti2">iny gi2">ifts that we gi2">ive, purchased wi2">ith "pi2">ieces of paper and metal di2">iscs" DEVALUE you and say, you are only worth thi2">is. And yet these gi2">ifts are gi2">iven as though they rai2">ise your worth and establi2">ish the cei2">ili2">ing of your worth. You are worth far more than any gi2">ifts the world could ever gi2">ive. You are worth more than any amount of money could ever afford. You are more i2">important to God than these si2">illy li2">ittle toys and ego offeri2">ings that are made to be all sparkly and appeali2">ing as i2">if you deserve such thi2">ings. "You're worth i2">it" marketi2">ing slogan i2">is absolute bullshi2">it. i2">It really reads "you're not worth anythi2">ing more that thi2">is chunk of metal wi2">ith a few sparkly rocks i2">in i2">it".

You are worthy of GOOOOOOOOOOD. You are worthy of i2">immense profound love and happi2">iness. Nothi2">ing i2">in thi2">is world can offer you even anythi2">ing remotely close to that. And nothi2">ing i2">in thi2">is world can reflect your VALUE. Modern soci2">iety attempts to place tremendous value on objects and thi2">ings and 'stuff' and to get people to beli2">ieve that they need thi2">is stuff i2">in order to be worthy, when i2">in fact the enti2">ire system i2">is trai2">ini2">ing people to devalue themselves and equate themselves wi2">ith a bunch of junk. You are so worthy to God, you wi2">ill probably be shocked when you start to allow Hi2">is value of you to be truly felt and to regi2">ister.

Last ni2">ight, there i2">I was openi2">ing up to Jesus and allowi2">ing Hi2">im to do some heali2">ing i2">in me. i2">I was offeri2">ing up experi2">iences of rejecti2">ion/abandonment and allowi2">ing Hi2">im to come i2">in and heal them. Whi2">ich he di2">id.

i2">It then occurred to me, as i2">I connected wi2">ith Jesus, a li2">ine of thought i2">I'd not had before, about Hi2">is nature.

When Jesus comes i2">into my awareness, or rather, when i2">I open up my awareness to admi2">it He i2">is wi2">ith me ;-), i2">I am always struck by hi2">is atti2">itude.

i2">If you can pi2">icture thi2">is... he comes across as though he i2">is someone who i2">is just si2">itti2">ing on a rock nearby. He doesn't appear to have any moti2">ivati2">ion. He doesn't seem to be i2">in any way sti2">irred. Li2">ike, he has absolutely no ambi2">iti2">ion. He i2">isn't tryi2">ing to go anywhere or get anythi2">ing and has no sense of lacki2">ing anythi2">ing at all. Li2">ike he absolutely no reason to move from where He i2">is. He doesn't even barely seem i2">interested i2">in anythi2">ing external to Hi2">im. i2">I look for si2">igns of the usual ... bei2">ing lost i2">in the days events, bei2">ing dri2">iven wi2">ith judgement or anger to get revenge, or anythi2">ing li2">ike that, and i2">I do not see i2">it at all.

He si2">its there very qui2">ietly almost as though, and perhaps i2">in actuali2">ity, li2">ike He i2">is just completely fi2">ini2">ished wi2">ith absolutely everythi2">ing and there i2">is no longer anythi2">ing whatsoever that can i2">interest Hi2">im externally. i2">It's li2">ike he doesn't have any agenda of any ki2">ind, i2">isn't exci2">ited about anythi2">ing i2">in parti2">icular, i2">isn't associ2">iated wi2">ith or caught up i2">in anythi2">ing, i2">isn't di2">istracted i2">in any way. He just si2">its there. He i2">is just very sti2">ill and uni2">involved. i2">It's li2">ike, there i2">is nothi2">ing for Hi2">im to do, and he i2">isn't bored, he i2">is just 'bei2">ing'. But i2">it's such a state of absolute ... no-ego-ness, that i2">it always gi2">ives me the i2">impressi2">ion he doesn't gi2">ive a fuck about anythi2">ing.

Extreme detachment. Total detachment. He has absolutely no fear, no reason to move, no reason to do anythi2">ing. i2">It's li2">ike he's done wi2">ith all i2">illusi2">ions and i2">is decei2">ived by nothi2">ing. So he just si2">its there. And i2">if i2">I ask Hi2">im a questi2">ion, he wi2">ill eventually answer. Someti2">imes he wi2">ill seem di2">istant or even aloof but i2">it's more li2">ike, i2">if i2">I go to Hi2">im wi2">ith a questi2">ion i2">I'm almost i2">interferi2">ing wi2">ith hi2">is peaceful ti2">ime. Except, he never gets upset whatsoever, and i2">is never di2">isturbed at all. He i2">is just si2">imply DONE wi2">ith all i2">illusi2">ions. And then he'll answer si2">imply and someti2">imes bri2">illi2">iantly wi2">ith great depth. And then i2">it's as though, he sti2">ill has hi2">is hands off. He doesn't push me to do anythi2">ing, he doesn't assert any ki2">ind of speci2">ial plan or moti2">ivati2">ion or reasoni2">ing. He doesn't defend anythi2">ing and he doesn't have any apparent i2">interest i2">in getti2">ing i2">insi2">ide of any of my i2">issues. He just si2">its there, peaceful, calm, sti2">ill.

What thi2">is then brought to mi2">ind for me was, and thi2">is would be blasphemous to many reli2">igi2">ious people. .. was a sense that thi2">is was the only way i2">in whi2">ich he and i2">I could be EQUALS. Only by Hi2">im allowi2">ing me to be completely, and only by Hi2">im bei2">ing Hi2">imself completely, were we then effecti2">ively BOTH EQUALLY FREE. Hi2">is wi2">ill was Hi2">is own. Mi2">ine was my own. And nei2">ither wi2">ill was attempti2">ing to control or mani2">ipulate or get i2">involved wi2">ith the other. Just totally hands off detachment. And i2">in that, i2">I felt li2">ike, there was absolutely no pretenti2">iousness or arrogance or speci2">ialness or judgement or holi2">ier-than-thou. Just total equali2">ity. And no fear. Just bei2">ing. Li2">ike a rock.

i2">I've been through a lot of crap i2">in whi2">ich i2">I've had to deal wi2">ith medi2">ical i2">issues for my wi2">ife. She's been close to death's door a couple of ti2">imes. i2">I had to li2">iterally deci2">ide whether to conti2">inue her li2">ife or not, and she's been on li2">ife-support twi2">ice.

But what i2">I personally went through was a confrontati2">ion wi2">ith the i2">idea of death and i2">its i2">inevi2">itabi2">ili2">ity, and an i2">intense ego challenge as to whether to beli2">ieve i2">it or not. i2">I had to deci2">ide whether to si2">ide agai2">inst death and seek for li2">ife. To deci2">ide whether there was a real alternati2">ive and possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. i2">It wasn't about her, i2">it was about whether i2">I beli2">ieved that death i2">is the only opti2">ion or not.

Thi2">is awakened i2">in me a reversal, a 180-degree turn, poi2">inti2">ing away from the di2">irecti2">ion of death towards eternal li2">ife. i2">It awakened a much greater awareness of the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, who has the goal of eternal li2">ife. And i2">it made me ever more cogni2">izant of our i2">immortal nature as gi2">iven by God.

At fi2">irst i2">it seemed my challenge was to just deal wi2">ith li2">ife-threateni2">ing si2">ickness and to go through the stress of i2">it all. Tryi2">ing to make i2">it go away and stop i2">it li2">ike most people would. But what later evolved was a questi2">ioni2">ing of si2">ickness i2">itself. Havi2">ing to deci2">ide whether to beli2">ieve i2">in si2">ickness and death or not. Everyone was buyi2">ing i2">into death and gi2">ivi2">ing me messages of hopelessness and i2">I had to deci2">ide whether to beli2">ieve i2">it.

i2">If i2">I were to conti2">inue beli2">ievi2">ing death was i2">inevi2">itable and unavoi2">idable i2">I would have no remai2">ini2">ing fai2">ith i2">in li2">ife. But i2">if i2">I were to questi2">ion whether death i2">is the only opti2">ion, i2">it would open me up to entertai2">ini2">ing the i2">idea that i2">I should refuse death and turn away from i2">it. i2">I would have to deny and refuse to accept the naysayers and the doubters and those who expertly beli2">ieved i2">in death's i2">inevi2">itabi2">ili2">ity.

i2">It wasn't really that my wi2">ife was goi2">ing through li2">ife-support scenari2">ios and havi2">ing to play out all the possi2">ible "what could be the worst thi2">ing to happen" i2">in my mi2">ind. i2">It was more that thi2">is was actually a spi2">iri2">itual lesson i2">in whi2">ich i2">I had to make a fi2">irm commi2">itment. Was i2">I goi2">ing to seek for her resurrecti2">ion or not? Di2">id i2">I want eternal li2">ife or not? Di2">id i2">I support mi2">iracles or not? Was i2">I really goi2">ing to get real and Li2">IVE the teachi2">ing and be a mi2">iracle worker or was i2">I just goi2">ing to lay down and let death have i2">its day?

When the Holy Spi2">iri2">it told me i2">in the mi2">idsts of thi2">is drama, "resurrect her", i2">it was i2">immedi2">iately clear what the purpose of all thi2">is was. When i2">I sought Jesus's counsel and he told me i2">in no uncertai2">in terms that i2">I must not termi2">inate her li2">ife, i2">I knew i2">I was bei2">ing steered towards mi2">iracles. And i2">I had to somehow fi2">ind the strength and determi2">inati2">ion to fi2">ind another way.

i2">Instead of therefore si2">imply "goi2">ing through" another ni2">ightmari2">ish experi2">ience, or regardi2">ing i2">it as poi2">intless, or seei2">ing i2">it as somethi2">ing to be avoi2">ided at all costs, what was really playi2">ing out was a spi2">iri2">itual lesson i2">in whi2">ich i2">I had to deci2">ide whether to si2">ide wi2">ith li2">ife or death. And by that i2">I don't just mean normal li2">ife i2">in a temporary body but eternal i2">immortal li2">ife. Was i2">I goi2">ing to beli2">ieve i2">in a mi2">iraculous resurrecti2">ion that fli2">ies i2">in the fact of everythi2">ing everyone i2">is telli2">ing me, or was i2">I goi2">ing to just fall i2">into a hole and let death happen.

Well. As i2">it turned out i2">I di2">id deci2">ide to si2">ide wi2">ith li2">ife, and thi2">is has si2">ince been catapulti2">ing me i2">into far greater vi2">igi2">ilance and clari2">ity. i2">I see now that i2">instead of just goi2">ing through a helli2">ish experi2">ience that i2">I would try to avoi2">id, i2">it i2">instead became a huge turni2">ing poi2">int. i2">I had to bri2">ing i2">into questi2">ion whether death could happen, what li2">ife would be li2">ike, and even whether she was even really si2">ick at all. Was i2">I goi2">ing to allow her to remai2">in si2">ick or was i2">I goi2">ing to challenge even her on her own si2">ickness? Was i2">I goi2">ing to i2">insi2">ist that she not be si2">ick?

Thi2">is i2">is where resurrecti2">ion entered my mi2">ind as a real alternati2">ive and as a possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. And thi2">is i2">is where i2">I made a gi2">iant leap forward. i2">I now recogni2">ize that i2">I must i2">in fact NOT BELi2">IEVE i2">IN Si2">ICKNESS AT ALL. i2">I have had to come to reali2">ize that even my wi2">ife's si2">icknesses are fake. i2">I've had to reali2">ize that she i2">in her mi2">ind i2">is decei2">ivi2">ing herself and "playi2">ing a game of death". i2">I've had to come to recogni2">ize HER i2">immortal self whi2">ich cannot BE si2">ick, and i2">I've had to start si2">idi2">ing wi2">ith her i2">immortali2">ity OVER her mortali2">ity.

Thi2">is has i2">in fact gi2">iven me tremendous clari2">ity now because, the more i2">I dwell on i2">immortali2">ity the more clear i2">it becomes that anythi2">ing ELSE i2">is not true. How can a person be si2">ick i2">if they are i2">immortal? How can appearances of sufferi2">ing exi2">ist i2">if they are i2">IMPOSSi2">IBLE i2">in God? How can a person's si2">igns of death be true i2">if God created that person to li2">ive forever? i2">I am now holdi2">ing thi2">is up i2">in my mi2">ind and compari2">ing and remi2">indi2">ing myself and her, that she cannot BE si2">ick, the si2">ickness i2">is a li2">ie, and SHE i2">IS NOT Si2">ICK. i2">I was not able to so fully commi2">it to thi2">is or be convi2">inced by i2">it before thi2">is confrontati2">ion wi2">ith death.

How else am i2">I to truly be i2">in support of li2">ife, as God defi2">ines i2">it, than to questi2">ion all si2">ickness and death? i2">I've even had to questi2">ion i2">it i2">in those closest to me. i2">I've had to deci2">ide to si2">ide wi2">ith the real li2">ife i2">in the soul wi2">ithi2">in each person, on thei2">ir behalf, and for them, even i2">if they don't beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it, and even i2">if they are acti2">ively tryi2">ing to work agai2">inst i2">it. i2">I can be of NO HELP at all unless i2">I can stand up for God's truth, and i2">I can have NO HOPE at all unless there i2">is a REAL possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of an alternati2">ive to death. There i2">is an i2">increasi2">ing POWER i2">in me now whi2">ich i2">is pushi2">ing death and si2">ickness asi2">ide.

My whole focus i2">is now shi2">ifti2">ing to resurrecti2">ion, to li2">ife, to support, to heali2">ing, to the asserti2">ion of li2">ife, the cancelli2">ing of si2">ickness and death, the wi2">ithdrawal of power and attenti2">ion from si2">ickness, the clari2">ifyi2">ing that people are not even bodi2">ies, the utter refusal to accept that someone can even BE si2">ick, and the clear recogni2">iti2">ion that all si2">ickness i2">is a li2">ie.

Even i2">if thi2">is entai2">ils recogni2">izi2">ing that a loved one i2">is lyi2">ing, and even i2">if i2">it entai2">ils not beli2">ievi2">ing my own eyes, and even i2">if i2">it means havi2">ing to not be tempted by appearances of death because part of me beli2">ieved si2">ickness and death WERE possi2">ible, and therefore i2">I was torn and confused. i2">I was not clear on whether i2">I si2">ided wi2">ith li2">ife or death and was i2">in the muddy terri2">itory of waveri2">ing back and forth. Not fi2">irmly commi2">itted to li2">ife or i2">its opposi2">ite.

For me now i2">it's not merely a matter of tryi2">ing to struggle through li2">ife and avoi2">id si2">icknesses and try to stave off death as long as possi2">ible. i2">I am now acti2">ively MOVi2">ING TOWARD ETERNAL Li2">IFE. Movi2">ing i2">in the opposi2">ite di2">irecti2">ion to the ego's goal of death. Focusi2">ing on and strengtheni2">ing the i2">idea of i2">immortali2">ity, unchangeabi2">ili2">ity, i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity and permanence. Attuni2">ing to the i2">immortal soul wi2">ithi2">in myself, and i2">in others. Looki2">ing for the li2">ife and the truth and the li2">ight. Seei2">ing mi2">iracles i2">in li2">ight and as li2">ight.

i2">I am now heavi2">ily flyi2">ing i2">in the face of the enti2">ire world, goi2">ing agai2">inst everythi2">ing everyone says and beli2">ieves, rejecti2">ing the "nature" of thi2">is world's nature, agai2">inst the grai2">in, bei2">ing unli2">ike the world and unli2">ike the body, refusi2">ing to accept death and refusi2">ing to allow others to remai2">in i2">in self decepti2">ive states of sufferi2">ing. i2">I am havi2">ing to be UNPOPULAR i2">in order to do thi2">is and to NOT si2">ide wi2">ith the mass opi2">ini2">ions of others. i2">I wi2">ill now assert only the li2">ife-affi2">irmi2">ing and HEALi2">ING atti2">itude of resurrecti2">ion and mi2">iracles. The strength of si2">idi2">ing wi2">ith God and wi2">ith the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, and the utter refusal to fall i2">into traps of temptati2">ion.

Only the i2">immortal i2">is real. Only the unchangeable i2">is real. Only the i2">invulnerable i2">is real. Nothi2">ing real can be threatened. Nothi2">ing real can be attacked or made si2">ick. Nothi2">ing real can di2">ie. Thi2">is i2">is the only truth. There i2">is ONLY Li2">IFE, there i2">is no death. Death i2">is the world's bi2">iggest li2">ie and i2">I wi2">ill no longer li2">ie to myself or to others that mortali2">ity i2">is natural or acceptable. i2">It i2">is the Fi2">IRM CONVi2">ICTi2">ION that there i2">is only li2">ife, that rai2">ises the dead, and i2">I Wi2">ILL see mi2">iracles.

"Do not allow your brother to be si2">ick, for i2">if he i2">is, have YOU abandoned hi2">im to hi2">is own dream, by SHARi2">ING i2">it wi2">ith hi2">im."

"No one can suffer loss unless i2">it be hi2">is own deci2">isi2">ion."

"The mi2">iracle i2">is proof he i2">is not bound by loss or sufferi2">ing i2">in any form, because i2">it can so easi2">ily be changed."

"i2">I am i2">in the li2">ikeness of my Creator. i2">I cannot suffer i2">I cannot experi2">ience loss and i2">I cannot di2">ie. i2">I am not a body. Love created me li2">ike i2">Itself."

-------------------

Gri2">ief from a loss can be very, very di2">iffi2">icult to deal wi2">ith. i2">I've personally had to go through a ton of i2">it. 18 years ago i2">I left my home country of England and i2">immi2">igrated to the USA.

Thi2">is entai2">iled a si2">igni2">ifi2">icant sense of loss i2">in ways i2">I never i2">imagi2">ined and was just horrendous to go through produci2">ing massi2">ive amounts of tears over a span of several years. Some of the losses i2">included:

Loss of fami2">ily - not bei2">ing around them or able to be around them, even on holi2">idays. Not bei2">ing able to travel easi2">ily to see them. Not a si2">ingle member of my fami2">ily was at our weddi2">ing or any other event. Although no-one li2">iterally di2">ied, i2">it was as though they all had. Actually just even wri2">iti2">ing that just now has brought me to tears agai2">in.

Loss of culture - not bei2">ing i2">immersed i2">in the culture and not even reali2">izi2">ing i2">it was a culture. Bei2">ing surrounded by a completely ali2">ien envi2">ironment where no-one even speaks your language or sounds li2">ike you, where there are no recogni2">izable holi2">idays or shared events, wi2">ith no fami2">ili2">iar soci2">ial cues, no fami2">ili2">iar tradi2">iti2">ions, sense of dress code, or anythi2">ing. Top thi2">is off by bei2">ing surrounded by an enti2">ire country that celebrates thi2">ings you have no fami2">ili2">iari2">ity wi2">ith or sense of i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion wi2">ith, and i2">it adds up to even more ali2">ienati2">ion.

Loss of fami2">ili2">iar forms - an enti2">irely di2">ifferent set of foods, brands, products, money, bui2">ildi2">ings that are completely di2">ifferent i2">in desi2">ign, traffi2">ic laws totally fli2">ipped around, extremely di2">ifferent weather, totally di2">ifferent tv shows, clothi2">ing, standards, a di2">ifferent style of worki2">ing, all new holi2">idays, etc. Not to menti2">ion the loss of a sense of "home" or belongi2">ing or fi2">itti2">ing i2">in or bei2">ing part of anythi2">ing.

Loss of i2">identi2">ity - i2">I assumed that so much of what made me "me" was i2">inherent to me. i2">It was not. i2">It was i2">inherent to the country and culture. Once i2">I was outsi2">ide of i2">it i2">it brought i2">into questi2">ion who i2">I even am, what i2">is truly "mi2">ine" and what was just somethi2">ing i2">I i2">inheri2">ited or assumed as part of "normali2">ity". My whole sense of self was shaken to the core and transformed. i2">I gri2">ieved even for who i2">I used to be.

Each year vari2">ious thi2">ing would tri2">igger me off. Especi2">ially holi2">idays, bi2">irthdays, chri2">istmas, and even Ameri2">ican holi2">idays whi2">ich were celebrated en masse but whi2">ich i2">I could not relate to, maki2">ing me feel deeply left out i2">in a whole other way. Chri2">istmas was a ni2">ightmare. The fi2">irst si2">ign of decorati2">ions or snow or holi2">iday ji2">ingles would i2">immedi2">iately tri2">igger 2 months of hell. Someti2">imes i2">I felt powerfully compelled to just run away and get the hell out of here.

What i2">I had to learn, was about what thi2">is gri2">ief i2">is, what i2">is causi2">ing i2">it, and what i2">I can do about i2">it. Besi2">ides hundreds of boxes of ti2">issues, accompanyi2">ing the massi2">ive purge of "losses" that i2">I percei2">ived, i2">I tri2">ied vari2">ious thi2">ings. One thi2">ing whi2">ich di2">id i2">immedi2">iately help was EFT (emoti2">ional freedom techni2">ique) - a form of acupressure, whi2">ich allevi2">iates emoti2">ional pai2">in. i2">It takes the edge off and offers some reli2">ief. But i2">I wanted to truly heal thi2">is sufferi2">ing.

What i2">I've learned about gri2">ief i2">is that i2">is stems enti2">irely from ego beli2">iefs. Just as the course say, "No one can suffer loss unless i2">it be hi2">is own deci2">isi2">ion." Meani2">ing, unless i2">I am doi2">ing somethi2">ing to myself, there can be no basi2">is for gri2">ief.

Every si2">ingle sense of gri2">ief or loss comes from a percei2">ived "real separati2">ion" occurri2">ing. Somethi2">ing whi2">ich seemed real, whi2">ich i2">is now i2">inaccessi2">ible, unavai2">ilable, di2">istant, kept apart, or more permanently removed. Thi2">is can be a loss of a person's li2">ife or a country or a pet or a culture or a favori2">ite job or a tv show or whatever.

The ego fi2">irst values these thi2">ings by maki2">ing them speci2">ial, maki2">ing them real, attachi2">ing to them, i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing wi2">ith them, and beli2">ievi2">ing they are i2">important. Then, when one of these thi2">ings i2">is "lost" or separated from us, we li2">iterally are experi2">ienci2">ing thi2">is i2">idea that we're separated from reali2">ity, from what we "love", from what we thi2">ink i2">is valuable or i2">important. Thi2">is produces a ri2">ift wi2">ithi2">in our mi2">ind, a spli2">it, and i2">it can be very deep.

Thi2">is sense of "real separati2">ion happeni2">ing" i2">is absolutely nothi2">ing short of a reflecti2">ion or fragment of the i2">idea of bei2">ing separated from God. Every "loss" i2">is the i2">idea that God has been lost. That love has gone away. Thi2">is produces horrendous feeli2">ings of lack, empti2">iness, depressi2">ion, sadness, loss, loneli2">iness, hurt, anger, fear, gui2">ilt, shame, you name i2">it.

Addi2">iti2">ionally, i2">in the ego thought system there i2">is an i2">idea of sacri2">ifi2">ice. Sacri2">ifi2">ice means that you fi2">irst of all make somethi2">ing real or valuable or speci2">ial, and then you beli2">ieve that i2">in order to atone you have to forceably be depri2">ived of i2">it, even whi2">ile you sti2">ill value i2">it, whi2">ich *guarantees* that you wi2">ill suffer a sense of havi2">ing lost somethi2">ing i2">important to you. i2">It i2">is the i2">idea that i2">if you lose i2">i.e. sacri2">ifi2">ice somethi2">ing, you wi2">ill gai2">in somethi2">ing. The ego i2">is totally nuts.

Even gi2">ivi2">ing somethi2">ing to someone else through the ego and percei2">ivi2">ing i2">it as you bei2">ing di2">imi2">ini2">ished or lacki2">ing or losi2">ing i2">in some way, i2">is the exact same dynami2">ic whi2">ich all gri2">ief i2">is based on. And your reacti2">ion to i2">it wi2">ill be varyi2">ing degrees of a sense of loss. i2">It may not be a deep deep gri2">ief when you begrudgi2">ingly gi2">ive up somethi2">ing you li2">iked, but i2">it's sti2">ill the same dynami2">ic.

i2">I've found over ti2">ime that all of my gri2">ief stems from my false percepti2">ion. i2">i.e., i2">it ENTi2">IRELY erupts out of the percepti2">ion that a "real separati2">ion" has occurred. There i2">is no other cause of i2">it. i2">It i2">is not really about "oh i2">I mi2">iss that person" or "oh i2">I lost that job i2">I loved" or "oh i2">I don't have my fami2">ily any more". These are mere forms of the same basi2">ic content of separati2">ion. i2">It i2">is the sense of havi2">ing lost somethi2">ing you are attached to or whi2">ich i2">is speci2">ial to you, i2">i.e. fake reali2">ity, that produces the ego responses of gri2">ief.

i2">I have also found, that even i2">if i2">I am deep i2">in feeli2">ings of gri2">ief and i2">it becomes possi2">ible to reclai2">im or get back or vi2">isi2">it people or thi2">ings whi2">ich were "lost", thi2">is sti2">ill does not i2">in any way fi2">ix the gri2">ief. i2">It i2">is my own percepti2">ion of real separati2">ion whi2">ich causes the upset and unti2">il that i2">is undone, as a false beli2">ief, i2">I can sti2">ill be i2">in the presence of the very people or thi2">ings i2">I lost and sti2">ill feel a loss. All loss i2">is an i2">insi2">ide job.

The gri2">ievi2">ing i2">is actually taki2">ing place i2">INSi2">IDE my mi2">ind, between one part of myself that i2">I made speci2">ial and another part whi2">ich has lost i2">it. i2">I've seen that my gri2">ievi2">ing i2">is enti2">irely selfi2">ish and about myself, and never really about anythi2">ing outsi2">ide of me. Thi2">is has also taught me that e.g. returni2">ing home or goi2">ing back to fami2">ily wi2">ill NOT resolve the problem of gri2">ievi2">ing, and through my own experi2">ience i2">it never has. For the ego i2">it's a fake promi2">ise of salvati2">ion.

i2">I've also found therefore that any gri2">ief that i2">I am havi2">ing i2">is enti2">irely due to my own beli2">iefs, my own choi2">ices, my own percepti2">ions, my own atti2">itude, and what i2">I choose to percei2">ive. i2">If i2">I choose to beli2">ieve death i2">is real, i2">I Wi2">ILL automati2">ically be very upset when someone di2">ies. i2">If i2">I choose to make someone speci2">ial or attach to them or "need" them, i2">I wi2">ill AUTOMATi2">ICALLY gri2">ieve whether i2">I li2">ike i2">it or not when they are taken away. i2">I set myself up for loss every ti2">ime that i2">I try to take possessi2">ion of somethi2">ing or depend on i2">it too heavi2">ily or make i2">it speci2">ial or consi2">ideri2">ing i2">it more exclusi2">ively valuable or condi2">iti2">ional. And so, i2">I li2">iterally do thi2">is to myself.

Every ego attempt to make somethi2">ing speci2">ial, to "have i2">it" or value i2">it or attach to i2">it or beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it (ego beli2">iefs) or possess i2">it or need i2">it, wi2">ill AUTOMATi2">ICALLY bri2">ing wi2">ith i2">it the condi2">iti2">ions for i2">its i2">INEVi2">ITABLE LOSS. i2">It i2">is a total trap. You li2">iterally are si2">igni2">ing up for LOSS, when you si2">ign up for "getti2">ing".

The truth i2">is, no-one needs to gri2">ieve, no-one i2">is supposed to be experi2">ienci2">ing loss, no-one i2">is supposed to be cryi2">ing or unhappy, no-one i2">is supposed to spend 50 years getti2">ing over the loss of a parent or chi2">ild, no-one i2">is supposed to be SUFFERi2">ING li2">ike thi2">is. Wi2">ithout usi2">ing ACi2">IM whatsoever, and just fudgi2">ing our way through thi2">is stuff, we wi2">ill take however long i2">it takes to cry and catharti2">ic and remember and try to keep them ali2">ive etc...i2">ie reluctantly letti2">ing go. Wi2">ithout any other tools, most people spend years deali2">ign wi2">ith deep losses.

And then there i2">is another camp of people who are so level-confused that they'll try to force you to just "get over i2">it" or repress i2">it or censor i2">it or not feel any feeli2">ings or never cry or bypass i2">it wi2">ith ACi2">IM pleasantri2">ies li2">ike "i2">it never happened" etc. For most people, they HAVE to go through a "gri2">ievi2">ing process" because i2">its the only way they have to heal the ACTUAL problem, whi2">ich i2">is a sense of separati2">ion from God. And that i2">is the ONLY problem, even i2">in the case of gri2">ief, and even i2">in the case of death.

i2">If a person i2">is havi2">ing such a deep emoti2">ional pai2">in, there i2">is nothi2">ing helpful i2">in repressi2">ing i2">it or tryi2">ing to i2">ignore i2">it or not letti2">ing i2">it out or tryi2">ing not to cry or to shove i2">it down i2">in some way to pretend i2">it's not there. Feeli2">ings, once they are created, MUST be felt and allowed to flow. And usually the sense of loss i2">is so deep that i2">it si2">imply generates a ton of feeli2">ings. They must be felt, not turned i2">into emoti2">ional consti2">ipati2">ion. But that sai2">id.... tentati2">ively.... there must be a better way, and there i2">is.

Tackli2">ing the real i2">issue, whi2">ich i2">is a sense of "real separati2">ion" or "real loss" or "real sacri2">ifi2">ice" or "real absence", whi2">ich i2">is a BELi2">IEF i2">in your mi2">ind that has nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith the world or other people, there i2">is much more HOPE for a swi2">ifter recovery. What a person has "suffered" i2">in a "loss" i2">is really that they are sufferi2">ing from a false percepti2">ion of reali2">ity (God) bei2">ing lost permanently, as though completely real. i2">It i2">is very, very convi2">inci2">ing to the ego, and i2">it produces just horrendous depths of unhappi2">iness.

But thi2">is separati2">ion, thi2">is loss, i2">it can be healed. And i2">it can be Si2">IGNi2">IFi2">ICANTLY undone i2">if not enti2">irely, through appli2">icati2">ions of ACi2">IM pri2">inci2">iples. i2">i.e. forgi2">iveness, seei2">ing the truth, unearthi2">ing the li2">ies about "justi2">ifi2">ied gri2">ief" or "everyone gri2">ieves" or "loss i2">is normal after death" or whatever else... stuff that well-meani2">ing psychi2">iatri2">ists have made up to explai2">in why most ego-dri2">iven people suffer. Jesus has a di2">ifferent message: "You need not suffer."

i2">It i2">is ONLY a percepti2">ion of real separati2">ion that produces gri2">ief or loss, ever. There i2">is no other cause. And percepti2">ion CAN be healed because beli2">iefs CAN be changed. i2">It i2">is NOT necessary to have terri2">ible gri2">ief. i2">It i2">is NOT necessary to have a deep, bottomless pi2">it of mi2">isery for years and years. i2">It i2">is NOT necessary to feel li2">ike you lost part of yourself forever and ever. i2">It i2">is NOT necessary to feel hurt and angry and abandoned and upset for the rest of your li2">ife. There i2">is nothi2">ing that cannot be healed.

For me now, every si2">ingle year my "chri2">istmas gri2">ief" has dwi2">indled at a rapi2">id rate, si2">ince doi2">ing the course. Thi2">is years was the least upset i2">I've ever been. Tri2">iggers have been collapsed. i2">Ideas of real loss undone. A sense of major separati2">ion si2">igni2">ifi2">icantly reduced. Tears have dwi2">indled. i2">It's not si2">imply been through years of sufferi2">ing and tears or "normal gri2">ievi2">ing process". i2">It's because i2">I apply forgi2">iveness pri2">inci2">iples to what i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing. i2">In the mi2">iddle of a moment of gri2">ief, i2">if i2">I can even remember that "i2">I am not separate from God", and that thi2">is gri2">ief i2">is about that... i2">it i2">immedi2">iately cuts through i2">it li2">ike a kni2">ife.

Gri2">ievi2">ing can be a very long term process for many people, me i2">included, but i2">it does not HAVE to be. There i2">is no requi2">irement i2">in God's Creati2">ion that anyone be upset for any reason. There i2">is no justi2">ifi2">icati2">ion for unhappi2">iness. There i2">is no rati2">ional for why i2">it's "normal" to be seri2">iously upset about anythi2">ing. The Course i2">is offeri2">ing us the END of all death, all sufferi2">ing, all si2">ickness, and all gri2">ievi2">ing. To restore us to li2">ife, to happi2">iness, to joy, to freedom, to li2">iberati2">ion from all sad feeli2">ings and all sense of God bei2">ing dead.

You need not suffer. What can you possi2">ibly gri2">ieve for but the beli2">ief i2">in separati2">ion from God, whi2">ich i2">is not real? There has been no loss. Separati2">ion has not happened. God i2">is ali2">ive and well and loves you. What's to be gri2">ievi2">ing about i2">in truth?

i2">In ACi2">IM Jesus warns us agai2">inst mi2">ind-wanderi2">ing, i2">ie allowi2">ing your mi2">ind to just go wherever i2">it seems to go wi2">ith no sense of choosi2">ing or spi2">iri2">itual responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity.

i2">I've found myself mi2">ind-wanderi2">ing about gri2">ief recently, causi2">ing a lot of upsets. And a lot of emoti2">ion had to be felt. But now that i2">it's si2">immeri2">ing down i2">I fi2">ind myself noti2">ici2">ing my thoughts more and how they cause sufferi2">ing.

"i2">I can be attacked by nothi2">ing but my thoughts."

"i2">It i2">is your thoughts alone that cause you pai2">in."

Hmm.

Well, a few years ago i2">I was at a hospi2">ital often wi2">ith my wi2">ife, and qui2">ite often there would have to be conversati2">ions about the future. And often these were based on ci2">ircumstanti2">ial evi2">idence and opi2">ini2">ion, but as a result of even consi2">ideri2">ing the outcomes at all i2">it would cause a lot of upset. Just even havi2">ing the thoughts at all produced strong ni2">ightmari2">ish emoti2">ions. But you're "supposed" to thi2">ink these thi2">ings through, ri2">ight? The emoti2">ions are just natural ri2">ight, and you're supposed to have them?

Over ti2">ime, eventually, i2">I reali2">ised that just even havi2">ing these thoughts, goi2">ing through these moti2">ions, even to just thi2">ink about and consi2">ider "what mi2">ight happen", was an egoi2">ic pursui2">it that si2">imply generated a lot of unnecessary sufferi2">ing. The outcomes almost never actually came to pass, the ci2">ircumstances kept changi2">ing, and after a whi2">ile i2">it seemed poi2">intless to even thi2">ink about i2">it. People would say that's "i2">irresponsi2">ible" but i2">it was really not that helpful to consi2">ider how helli2">ish hell was goi2">ing to be.

i2">In vari2">ious si2">ituati2">ions i2">in li2">ife, based on the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions, i2">ie that some thi2">ings external cause upsets more than others, we also can get lost i2">in ki2">ind of "automati2">ic" thought processes. Li2">ines of thi2">inki2">ing whi2">ich are tri2">iggered off by external si2">ituati2">ions, whi2">ich we thi2">ink we "have to" thi2">ink about and entertai2">in. Somethi2">ing happens and our mi2">ind goes off on a tangent tryi2">ing to solve a problem or explore what's happeni2">ing etc. Vi2">icti2">im consci2">iousness ki2">icks i2">in and before you know i2">it you're havi2">ing a ni2">ightmare.

The problem i2">is that all of these reacti2">ion-based trai2">ins of thought are a form of vi2">icti2">imhood and self-attack. Just even goi2">ing on these thought journeys actually sti2">irs up and chooses sufferi2">ing, maki2">ing thi2">ings worse than they had to be. No wonder you're upset all the ti2">ime i2">if you're constantly thi2">inki2">ing about how upsetti2">ing thi2">ings are.

Over ti2">ime i2">it becomes more obvi2">ious that i2">it's the thoughts really that are the starti2">ing poi2">int of the sufferi2">ing. i2">If i2">I just don't thi2">ink about somethi2">ing, and don't let my ego throw me i2">into certai2">in li2">ines of thi2">inki2">ing, i2">I can avoi2">id qui2">ite a lot of sufferi2">ing. Thi2">is i2">isn't the same as bei2">ing i2">in deni2">ial, i2">in the negati2">ive sense, but there can be a posi2">iti2">ive use of deni2">ial whi2">ich helps you to remai2">in i2">in the truth.

"When you are afrai2">id of ANYTHi2">ING, you are acknowledgi2">ing i2">its power to hurt you."

"True deni2">ial i2">is a very powerful protecti2">ive devi2">ice. You can and should deny any beli2">ief that error can hurt you. Thi2">is ki2">ind of deni2">ial i2">is NOT a concealment devi2">ice, but a correcti2">ion devi2">ice. The "Ri2">ight Mi2">ind" of the mentally healthy DEPENDS on i2">it."

i2">I've been noti2">ici2">ing thi2">is wi2">ith myself recently also. i2">I seem to be getti2">ing a bi2">it of a handle on at least some thoughts about gri2">ief and loss. i2">I can see that there are certai2">in thoughts i2">I have along the li2">ines of "she's gone", i2">in whi2">ich there's a ki2">ind of black and whi2">ite separati2">ion-ori2">iented thought. i2">It's almost li2">ike a death thought, a thought of separateness and aloneness. Thi2">is thought i2">isn't very producti2">ive and just i2">induces strongly upset feeli2">ings. i2">I mi2">ight thi2">ink that these feeli2">ings are normal and natural or that i2">I "have to have them", but i2">I don't.

i2">I noti2">iced also that reflecti2">ing on the past i2">in vari2">ious ways also was i2">induci2">ing sufferi2">ing. Thi2">inki2">ing about some ti2">imes that were unpleasant and far from i2">ideal, ti2">imes that i2">I saw wi2">ith false percepti2">ions and vi2">icti2">imhood, i2">if i2">I would thi2">ink about them i2">it would make me upset agai2">in. And i2">it seemed li2">ike i2">I was dwelli2">ing on these thi2">ings because they were unresolved, whi2">ich led to more upset. Jesus was gui2">idi2">ing me to stop doi2">ing that but for a whi2">ile i2">I felt a bi2">it compelled because i2">I was reacti2">ing too easi2">ily to these li2">ines of thought wi2">ithout bei2">ing careful wi2">ith what my mi2">ind was doi2">ing. Agai2">in i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize there was any other "better way".

We thi2">ink we can just thi2">ink about anythi2">ing and i2">it has no consequences. Jesus i2">is teachi2">ing us that our mi2">ind i2">is powerful and thought can produce real effects.

"People prefer to beli2">ieve that thei2">ir thoughts cannot exert real control because they are li2">iterally AFRAi2">ID of them. "

"Death wi2">ishes do not ki2">ill i2">in the physi2">ical sense, but they DO ki2">ill spi2">iri2">itually. ALL destructi2">ive thi2">inki2">ing i2">is dangerous."

The moral of the story i2">is, you don't necessari2">ily HAVE to have certai2">in li2">ines of thi2">inki2">ing. You don't HAVE to consi2">ider all possi2">ible di2">ire future outcomes. You don't HAVE to dwell on or talk about or go over all the detai2">ils of stuff that's happened. i2">It's okay to completely avoi2">id talki2">ing or thi2">inki2">ing about somethi2">ing, not as an attempt to deny i2">it but as a constructi2">ive way to have mastery of the power of thought. To be i2">in control of and responsi2">ible for what you thi2">ink, aware of the consequences of what you're choosi2">ing.

Thoughts DO have causal power i2">in them and can cause thi2">ings to happen, as well as bei2">ing able to cause all forms of sufferi2">ing. The ego says we can just use thought to thi2">ink of anythi2">ing we li2">ike wi2">ith NO effect, but thi2">is i2">is totally untrue. i2">It wants to make the mi2">ind i2">insert and powerless, and so thi2">inki2">ing about "anythi2">ing" can lead to all ki2">inds of vi2">icti2">imhood and upset. You can easi2">ily go down dark paths and wander around lost i2">in the woods.

We do have to try to be more vi2">igi2">ilant and masterful over our actual thoughts than thi2">is. Otherwi2">ise we are apt to attack ourselves and make our own si2">ituati2">ion worse. We need to recogni2">ize that thi2">inki2">ing can cause pai2">in and sufferi2">ing, and the ri2">ight thi2">inki2">ing can cause mi2">iracles and heali2">ing. We need to stay out of drama and thoughts of separateness, of di2">isaster and loss and thi2">ings bei2">ing wrong. We need to stay out of thoughts of blame and gui2">ilt and i2">it's our own responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity to stay away from "where angels fear to tread."

At least then we do have the power to prevent ourselves from hurti2">ing ourselves, for lesseni2">ing our own sufferi2">ing, and preventi2">ing havi2">ing as much upset as we thi2">ink we must have. We don't have to just go through the moti2">ions bei2">ing a vi2">icti2">im, we can get back some power and make a better choi2">ice to more responsi2">ibly manage and own the mi2">inds thought processes. To allow your mi2">ind to go i2">into dark places, unchecked and as a stri2">ing of unconsci2">ious reacti2">ions, i2">is mi2">is-creati2">ion and "makes" sufferi2">ing and unhappi2">iness and hell.

"Mi2">iracle-worki2">ing entai2">ils a full reali2">izati2">ion of the power of thought, and real avoi2">idance of mi2">iscreati2">ion. Otherwi2">ise, the mi2">iracle wi2">ill be necessary to set the mi2">ind i2">ITSELF strai2">ight"

"i2">It i2">is hard to recogni2">ize that thought and beli2">ief combi2">ine i2">into a power-surge that can li2">iterally move mountai2">ins."

"You are much too tolerant of Mi2">ind-wanderi2">ing, thus passi2">ively condoni2">ing i2">its mi2">iscreati2">ion."

A couple of days ago, i2">I rubbed my eyes a bi2">it too much and tri2">iggered some swelli2">ing. Maybe a small blood vessel was broken or somethi2">ing. My upper eyeli2">id swelled up and was red and sore and uncomfortable all day.

i2">I at fi2">irst wasn't sure whether to try to perform some ki2">ind of mi2">iracle on i2">it or not. i2">I knew that i2">if i2">I were to "fi2">ight i2">it" i2">I would be maki2">ing i2">it real and maki2">ing a drama about i2">it, whi2">ich wouldn't help. At fi2">irst that made me feel li2">ike i2">I had to just accept i2">it and li2">ive wi2">ith i2">it.

But part of me also wondered, what i2">is i2">it that stops me from accepti2">ing a complete and total heali2">ing i2">instantaneously ri2">ight now? Why should i2">I tolerate thi2">is? How can i2">I accept i2">it and have i2">it di2">isappear as well?

So then i2">I went to Holy Spi2">iri2">it. i2">I asked, should i2">I do somethi2">ing about thi2">is?

He sai2">id no.

But i2">I had thi2">is sense that, i2">I hadn't asked the ri2">ight questi2">ion. i2">I i2">indeed needed to DO nothi2">ing i2">in the truest sense that, really, thi2">is thi2">ing had not really happened. But thi2">is also keyed me i2">in to reali2">ize that, i2">I needed to beli2">ieve that i2">it had not happened i2">in order to truly embody the need to do nothi2">ing.

So i2">I set about cancelli2">ing i2">it by collapsi2">ing every beli2">ief and sense of truth about what had caused i2">it. i2">I told myself plai2">inly that i2">it di2">id not exi2">ist, was not there, was already healed, there was no swelli2">ing, no soreness, no di2">iscomfort, no damage.

i2">I undi2">id all beli2">ief i2">in the vari2">ious causes that i2">I'd convi2">inced myself of such as "because i2">I rubbed i2">it" or "too many tears" or "di2">idn't want to see somethi2">ing" or that i2">issues about certai2">in people were responsi2">ible.

When there were no more i2">imagi2">ined "reasons why" i2">it should be there, i2">I really got i2">into the sense that i2">it i2">is gone already and di2">id not exi2">ist at all. Thi2">is i2">is an i2">important poi2">int because we need to assert the state that we choose to mani2">ifest ri2">ight now, not somethi2">ing off i2">in the future. i2">It's li2">ike pai2">inti2">ing a new pi2">icture of what you beli2">ieve i2">is real now - a vi2">isi2">ion of di2">ivi2">ine health and present happi2">iness - rather than i2">in any way accepti2">ing that si2">ickness sti2">ill exi2">ists.

So as part of that, i2">I started to affi2">irm grati2">itude to God that He had already healed thi2">is, that i2">it was already resolved, already undone, had already di2">isappeared, and that there was now a completely restored and healed eyeli2">id free from all problems.

Thi2">is was when i2">I thi2">ink Holy Spi2">iri2">it stepped i2">in and suddenly i2">I started wi2">ith the energeti2">ic shaki2">ing. But also somethi2">ing 'new' happened, ri2">ight after i2">I thanked God for havi2">ing healed i2">it already.

Thanki2">ing God for heali2">ing i2">in effect i2">invi2">ites the recei2">ivi2">ing of heali2">ing whi2">ile si2">imultaneously affi2">irmi2">ing that the problem i2">is gone, whi2">ich i2">is the proper mental "di2">irecti2">ion" for allowi2">ing God to extend and flow. God works i2">in the now and i2">in the awareness that the problem i2">is solved already, so we need to learn to shi2">ine "thank you that i2">it i2">is healed already" (acknowledgement of recei2">ipt) rather than "please heal i2">it because i2">it's not healed".

Note that i2">in the bi2">ible there i2">is a phrase about aski2">ing, and that i2">if you beli2">ieve you have recei2">ived i2">it, you shall have i2">it. The beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it i2">is recei2">ived, through thanks to God, and therefore acknowledgement of i2">its PRESENCE, i2">is the key to mi2">iracles flowi2">ing.

The area i2">in questi2">ion suddenly was fi2">illed wi2">ith what i2">I can only descri2">ibe as an extremely hi2">igh "heat", so hot and i2">intense that i2">I wondered for a moment i2">if somethi2">ing had burst or become worse. i2">It was very i2">intensely focused ri2">ight i2">in the mi2">iddle spot where thi2">is i2">issue was located. i2">It seemed to cover an area no more than a couple of mi2">illi2">imeters, and held there i2">in one spot.

i2">I just observed i2">it for what seemed li2">ike maybe 20 seconds or more. i2">It di2">idn't move or change. i2">It was just there. i2">It seemed hotter than any physi2">ical heat you could experi2">ience. Yet i2">it di2">idn't burn and was not uncomfortable at all. i2">It was not pai2">in. i2">It almost felt li2">ike an i2">intense presence, hard to i2">ignore. Li2">ike some ki2">ind of "li2">iqui2">id fi2">ire".

i2">I've heard some Chri2">isti2">ian healers etc talki2">ing about Holy Fi2">ire and thi2">is i2">idea that Holy Spi2">iri2">it can bri2">ing some ki2">ind of i2">intense heali2">ing "fi2">ire" from heaven or somethi2">ing, whi2">ich heals stuff. i2">I am presumi2">ing thi2">is was my fi2">irst encounter wi2">ith i2">it.

i2">I then relaxed and eventually went to sleep. i2">I could already tell even then, that i2">it was much less sore, i2">I couldn't barely feel i2">it anymore, and i2">it was much more comfortable. Thi2">is morni2">ing the problem has almost di2">isappeared. i2">It looks and feels a lot better.

Someti2">imes i2">I am grateful for li2">ittle, relati2">ively mi2">inor physi2">ical i2">issues, because they can present good opportuni2">iti2">ies for practi2">ici2">ing mi2">iracle-worki2">ing and heali2">ing. They i2">indeed are lessons when used appropri2">iately.

There are a few parts to thi2">is. And i2">it i2">is hi2">ighly paradoxi2">ical.

1) God i2">is the fi2">irst cause creator of us and we are SECONDARY creati2">ions, as hi2">is effects. We are co-creators wi2">ith hi2">im as sons of God/souls. Thi2">is does i2">imply a ki2">ind of separati2">ion between us and God. i2">In thi2">is respect you are NOT GOD. God i2">is greater than you.

2) You are sti2">ill one wi2">ith God because you share the whole of everythi2">ing and are part of God. God i2">is not just i2">in you, he i2">is you. So i2">in thi2">is sense, you ARE GOD. You are made of God, sustai2">ined by God, extendi2">ing God.

3) i2">If you play at bei2">ing God you are bei2">ing ego, whi2">ich i2">is an attempt to replace and reject God. i2">In thi2">is sense you are not bei2">ing God, and are supposed to be God. Thi2">is i2">is where you clai2">im you are all of God and God who was God has stopped exi2">isti2">ing.

4) i2">If you clai2">im to be God i2">in an attempt to get out of ego, thi2">is clai2">im i2">is so exclusi2">ive that i2">it rejects the fact that you are also a creati2">ion of God's. Then you are sti2">ill bei2">ing ego and playi2">ing at bei2">ing God. Thi2">is "oneness" must recogni2">ize that you are secondary i2">in creati2">ion also. Just bei2">ing the oneness or non-dual i2">isn't the whole story.

So yes. You are God, and you aren't, at the same ti2">ime. i2">It's paradoxi2">ical. You are both separate and one. i2">It i2">is arrogant to clai2">im you are God alone, as i2">if you are all of God and no-one else i2">is and there i2">is nothi2">ing else. But i2">it i2">is also arrogant to clai2">im you are not God, because you are one wi2">ith and part of hi2">imself. You are nothi2">ing wi2">ithout hi2">im and everythi2">ing wi2">ith hi2">im. He i2">is everythi2">ing you are yet you are yourself also. You are an i2">indi2">ivi2">idual bei2">ing who shares God's bei2">ing enti2">irely.

i2">It's i2">important thus to reali2">ize YOU ARE GOD, i2">in order to overcome the sense of separati2">ion and fear that keeps you from bei2">ing ONE wi2">ith Hi2">im. But at the same ti2">ime, you also have to reali2">ize that you are si2">imultaneously NOT GOD i2">in order to acknowledge God as your father and undo the authori2">ity problem. Yet jus because God i2">is the CAUSE of you doesn't mean you aren't one wi2">ith hi2">im.

"i2">I choose the second place to gai2">in the fi2">irst."

"i2">I am forever an effect of God."

"Your teachi2">ing has already DONE thi2">is, for the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is PART OF YOU. Created by God, He left nei2">ither God nor Hi2">is creati2">ion. He i2">is both God and you, as you are God and Hi2">im together."

"God i2">is not i2">in you; YOU are part of Hi2">IM."

"The i2">insane, thi2">inki2">ing they are God, are not afrai2">id to offer weakness to the Son of God."

"Let me remember i2">I am one wi2">ith God."

"There i2">is one li2">ife, and that i2">I share wi2">ith God."

"i2">I welcome them i2">into the home i2">I share wi2">ith God, because i2">I am a part of Hi2">im."

"Now are we one i2">in shared i2">Identi2">ity, wi2">ith God our Father as our only Source, and everythi2">ing created part of us."

"Communi2">icati2">ion wi2">ith God i2">is Li2">ife."

"God i2">is the Mi2">ind wi2">ith whi2">ich i2">I thi2">ink. i2">I have no thoughts whi2">ich i2">I do not share wi2">ith God."

"i2">In Ti2">imelessness, we coexi2">ist wi2">ith God."

"The Soul never loses i2">its communi2">ion wi2">ith God."

"i2">It i2">is as li2">ike your real relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith God, as equal thi2">ings are li2">ike themselves."

"And can one who i2">is one wi2">ith God be unli2">ike Hi2">im?"

"The therapi2">ist i2">in no way confuses hi2">imself wi2">ith God."

"But i2">in the holy i2">instant, you uni2">ite Di2">IRECTLY wi2">ith God, and ALL your brothers joi2">in i2">in Chri2">ist."

"Your mi2">ind i2">IS one wi2">ith God's."

"Medi2">itati2">ion i2">is a collaborati2">ive venture wi2">ith GOD."

"For what i2">is yours i2">IS everythi2">ing, and you share i2">it Wi2">ITH God."

"The Revelati2">ion uni2">ites Souls di2">irectly wi2">ith God."

"i2">In the begi2">inni2">ing was the thought, and the thought was wi2">ith God, and the thought WAS God."

"i2">I and my Father are one wi2">ith YOU, for you are part of us."

"Your fatherhood and your Father are One."

"Those who recei2">ive the Father are one wi2">ith Hi2">im, bei2">ing host to Hi2">im Who created them."

"Thi2">is appears to contradi2">ict another statement: "i2">I and my Father are one." i2">It doesn't. There are sti2">ill separate parts i2">in the statement, i2">in recogni2">iti2">ion of the fact that the Father i2">is GREATER. Actually, the ori2">igi2">inal statement was "are of one Ki2">IND."

"God has but one Son, knowi2">ing them all as One. Only God Hi2">imself i2">is more than they, but they are not less than He i2">is."

"Oneness i2">is si2">imply the i2">idea God i2">is. And i2">in Hi2">is Bei2">ing He encompasses all thi2">ings. No mi2">ind holds anythi2">ing but Hi2">im."

"i2">I li2">ight the world, i2">I li2">ight my mi2">ind and all the mi2">inds whi2">ich God created one wi2">ith me."

i2">I am gradually learni2">ing that there i2">is POWER i2">in maki2">ing deci2">isi2">ions. And i2">I don't just mean some ki2">ind of self-help "make more deci2">isi2">ions to be producti2">ive" ki2">ind of thi2">ing. i2">I mean, li2">iterally i2">it has a supernatural ki2">ind of power to i2">it. i2">It's ti2">ied i2">into mi2">iracle worki2">ing. i2">It accesses and wi2">ields the power of the mi2">ind to CAUSE.

Everythi2">ing i2">in the course poi2">ints towards becomi2">ing more deci2">isi2">ive, empowered, certai2">in, clear about what you do or do not want, bei2">ing responsi2">ible for choi2">ice, endi2">ing vi2">icti2">imhood, reali2">izi2">ing that nothi2">ing can happen to you agai2">inst your wi2">ill, and reclai2">imi2">ing the abi2">ili2">ity to CHOOSE. And i2">in that choosi2">ing, you actually CAUSE stuff. And what you do not choose, you do not cause.

Here i2">is what "My self i2">is ruler of the uni2">iverse" says from Lesson 253:

"i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that anythi2">ing should come to me unbi2">idden by myself. Even i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is i2">I who rule my desti2">iny. What happens i2">is what i2">I desi2">ire. What does not occur i2">is what i2">I do not want to happen. Thi2">is must i2">I accept. For thus am i2">I led past thi2">is world to my creati2">ions, chi2">ildren of my Wi2">ill, i2">in Heaven where my holy Self abi2">ides wi2">ith them, and Hi2">im Who has created me."

i2">It i2">is also very clear that bei2">ing i2">in fear i2">is bei2">ing i2">in i2">indeci2">isi2">ion. Fearfulness i2">is an attempt NOT to choose, just as "death i2">is an attempt to make no deci2">isi2">ions at all." The opposi2">ite of that i2">is to make ALL deci2">isi2">ions or to be aware that you choose everythi2">ing that happens to you. i2">ie nothi2">ing happens to you, i2">it happens FROM you.

Thi2">is i2">is the secret to salvati2">ion - that you are doi2">ing thi2">is to yourself. And the secret to salvati2">ion, and forgi2">iveness, and atonement, and mi2">iracle worki2">ing, all recogni2">ize that you have a POWER i2">in you to choose. And whatever you DECi2">IDE, you CAUSE TO HAPPEN.

Let's put i2">it thi2">is way. YOU ARE ALWAYS CHOOSi2">ING.

Everythi2">ing i2">is a choi2">ice. "Heaven i2">is a deci2">isi2">ion i2">I must make". "No one di2">ies wi2">ithout thei2">ir own consent."

The problem i2">is that we do not beli2">ieve we are always choosi2">ing. When we say thi2">ings li2">ike "such and such i2">is goi2">ing to happen to me" as though we are not choosi2">ing i2">it, we are actually choosi2">ing i2">it. When we lay down and just accept that we're i2">in for stormy weather, we are actually choosi2">ing i2">it. "i2">I have no neutral thoughts" - because you are always usi2">ing thought to choose what you wi2">ill experi2">ience.

The whole thi2">ing about percepti2">ion and projecti2">ion stems from the fact that you percei2">ive what you CHOOSE to percei2">ive, havi2">ing put i2">it there yourself through your deci2">isi2">ion.

"i2">I must have deci2">ided wrongly because i2">I am not at peace" - the enti2">ire prayer and the text pri2">ior to i2">it clari2">ifi2">ies that i2">if you are not experi2">ienci2">ing joy *YOU* MUST have DECi2">IDED NOT TO. And we are supposed to own up to 100% responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for that. And to then reclai2">im that power of deci2">isi2">ion, and CHOOSE AGAi2">IN. But i2">if we don't recogni2">ize that we are always choosi2">ing or have the power TO choose, and that choosi2">ing MAKES STUFF HAPPEN, then we wi2">ill just remai2">in i2">in a state of half-baked vi2">icti2">imhood and uncertai2">inty and thi2">ings just seemi2">ing to happen on thei2">ir own.

Si2">ince we've been i2">immersed i2">in fear and uncertai2">inty and vi2">icti2">imhood for so long, i2">it has become "normal" to us. We've become used to i2">it. We don't reali2">ize that we HAVE a choi2">ice i2">in every si2">ituati2">ion and that the thi2">ings we are experi2">ienci2">ing are preci2">isely what we ASKED FOR. We do not reali2">ize that we are, as the song of prayer says, ALWAYS PRAYi2">ING and thus always aski2">ing AND always bei2">ing answered i2">in accordance wi2">ith what i2">it i2">is we are aski2">ing for. And i2">if we are aski2">ing for sufferi2">ing, we wi2">ill make sufferi2">ing. And i2">if we are aski2">ing for joy, we wi2">ill recei2">ive joy.

i2">It's all too easy to be lost i2">in states of fearful-mi2">indedness where i2">it does not seem li2">ike you have any say i2">in the matter. That you have no power, are not choosi2">ing, stuff i2">is happeni2">ing outsi2">ide of your deci2">isi2">ion, thi2">ings happen that you do not want, you don't seem to be able to do anythi2">ing about i2">it, and then you start to beli2">ieve that you don't even HAVE any ki2">ind of "power". Li2">ike, i2">if you even Di2">ID make a deci2">isi2">ion, you thi2">ink that the maki2">ing of the deci2">isi2">ion i2">ITSELF - the maki2">ing up of your mi2">ind - has no power to CAUSE anythi2">ing to occur. But thi2">is i2">is not true.

"The mi2">ind i2">is very powerful, i2">it i2">is always creati2">ing and lever loses i2">its creati2">ive abi2">ili2">ity." The whole thi2">ing about renderi2">ing the faculti2">ies of deci2">isi2">ion i2">ineffecti2">ive i2">in an attempt to block the mi2">ind's power speaks to thi2">is. We do not want to admi2">it that THOUGHT HAS POWER. And i2">in fact, "who would have i2">imagi2">ined that thought and beli2">ief could combi2">ine i2">in a power surge strong enough to li2">iterally move mountai2">ins." Thi2">is comes about through DECi2">ISi2">IVENESS, certai2">inty, confi2">idence, wholeness, strength, truth, love. The quali2">iti2">ies of a healed mi2">ind i2">is a POWERFUL mi2">ind whi2">ich chooses and i2">is AWARE that i2">it chooses, and that i2">in maki2">ing choi2">ices CAUSES stuff to occur. Mi2">iraculously. Powerfully.

i2">I am sti2">ill struggli2">ing wi2">ith thi2">is myself because all too often i2">I am i2">in the egoi2">ic sleepi2">ing state of not reali2">izi2">ing that i2">I CAN CHOOSE somethi2">ing else. But i2">I've also been fi2">indi2">ing that when i2">I DO make a deci2">isi2">ion, i2">it i2">immedi2">iately Di2">ISPELLS fear. Just last ni2">ight i2">I was cleani2">ing the bathroom and usi2">ing chemi2">icals and was getti2">ing a bi2">it nauseated from the fumes, and after becomi2">ing anxi2">ious about i2">it for a few mi2">inutes i2">I DECi2">IDED wi2">ith a fi2">irm "i2">I am...." deci2">isi2">ion... "i2">I am not threatened, i2">I am safe". i2">Instantly a whole cloud of fearful energy around me vani2">ished.

Also not long ago i2">I was seei2">ing si2">igns of a si2">ickness showi2">ing up and i2">I got mad about i2">it. i2">I REFUSED that i2">it would be allowed to happen. Jesus sai2">id "deci2">ide". i2">I deci2">ided Fi2">IRMLY that THi2">IS Wi2">ILL Si2">IMPLY NOT HAPPEN. Then i2">I walked away. Next day there was no si2">ign of i2">it. And i2">I had no fear or doubt or second-guessi2">ing or wonderi2">ing about i2">it because of the certai2">inty wi2">ith whi2">ich i2">I deci2">ided. The fi2">irmness or asserti2">iveness and power of maki2">ing a clear deci2">isi2">ion.

There i2">is more to thi2">is than si2">imply choosi2">ing whi2">ich di2">irecti2">ion to go on a path. i2">It's not some weak li2">ittle change of plans. When you become deci2">isi2">ive and fearless and certai2">in "i2">I am not doubtful but certai2">in, i2">I am not afrai2">id but all powerful", you become qui2">ite POWERFUL and that power actually can CAUSE. i2">It can cause stuff to happen. i2">It can cause stuff to not happen. Just as "my self i2">is ruler of the uni2">iverse" says. Nothi2">ing can come to you unbi2">idden by yourself. You choose i2">it all! No-one di2">ies wi2">ithout thei2">ir own consent. Nothi2">ing happens to you that you do not choose. The world contai2">ins no causes, nothi2">ing can bri2">ing oppressi2">ion or make you i2">ill or weak or afrai2">id.

We are constantly CHOOSi2">ING. We need to step i2">into thi2">is power, i2">into thi2">is state of "consci2">iously choosi2">ing". Bei2">ing deci2">isi2">ive. DECi2">IDi2">ING. i2">I had another example just recently where i2">I had some heartburn and was worri2">ied about i2">it. Out of the blue, whi2">ile talki2">ing to Holy Spi2">iri2">it, i2">I DECi2">IDED "i2">I am healed." i2">I have no i2">idea where i2">it came from. i2">Instantly Holy Spi2">iri2">it went to work doi2">ing some ki2">ind of mi2">iracle i2">in my body and the heartburn was healed.

Jesus also says that when the PURPOSE of any si2">ickness i2">is recogni2">ized as bei2">ing NOT NEEDED (no defense needed) there i2">is no si2">ickness that wi2">ill not di2">isappear and be healed i2">instantly. That such heali2">ing i2">is automati2">ic. That si2">imply by DECi2">IDi2">ING to accept truth wi2">ithout fear and bei2">ing Wi2">ILLi2">ING to let go of sufferi2">ing, i2">it can si2">imply vani2">ish. Thi2">is i2">is the power of our mi2">ind. Getti2">ing i2">in touch wi2">ith your Wi2">ILLi2">INGNESS puts you i2">in touch wi2">ith the Power of God's Wi2">ill!

We don't reali2">ize how powerful our mi2">inds are. We don't recogni2">ize i2">it because we're been hangi2">ing out i2">in the ego land for too long, dri2">ifti2">ing from one vi2">icti2">imy reacti2">ion to the next. Just allowi2">ing stuff to happen, goi2">ing along wi2">ith i2">it, passi2">ively aggressi2">ing agai2">inst ourselves, just layi2">ing down and "letti2">ing" stuff occur - through our own unconsci2">ious choi2">ices. i2">It's not that we are not MAKi2">ING choi2">ices all the ti2">ime, i2">it's that these choi2">ices are bei2">ing made from an UNCONSCi2">IOUS DEATH Wi2">ISH and i2">it's causi2">ing all ki2">inds of havoc. We need to become AWARE of our deci2">isi2">ion maki2">ing moments, our moments of deci2">isi2">iveness and choosi2">ing. We can choose what we experi2">ience!

i2">I fi2">ind thi2">is choosi2">ing to be powerful especi2">ially i2">in relati2">ion to some ki2">ind of statement about myself, termed as "i2">I am..." or "i2">I am not". You don't have to just let stuff carry on "by i2">itself". That's an i2">illusi2">ion. Nothi2">ing happens "on i2">its own". There i2">isn't any ki2">ind of ali2">ien wi2">ill or external causali2">ity. You ARE already maki2">ing everythi2">ing happen that you experi2">ience, you are just doi2">ing i2">it outsi2">ide of awareness. Thi2">is i2">is part of why we must remove blocks to awareness so that we can stop unconsci2">iously maki2">ing bad choi2">ices that hurt ourselves.

There i2">is power i2">in deci2">isi2">ion. i2">It i2">is the anti2">ithesi2">is of fear and death. YOU CAN CHOOSE NOT TO Di2">IE. And i2">in fact, i2">if you do di2">ie, you sti2">ill chose i2">it. "No-one di2">ies wi2">ithout thei2">ir own consent." i2">It's just a matter of whether or not you get i2">in touch wi2">ith that CHOOSi2">ING and you USE that power of deci2">isi2">ion to choose otherwi2">ise. You want to choose otherwi2">ise because you want to be at peace. You can CHOOSE that. Death i2">is a deci2">isi2">ion that you make, just as "heaven i2">is a deci2">isi2">ion i2">I must make." And when you choose Heaven, death becomes i2">IMPOSSi2">IBLE because i2">it cannot happen Wi2">ITHOUT your consent. i2">If you do not choose i2">it, you are free from i2">it forever.

There i2">is a whole workbook lesson on thi2">is as well, Lesson 152 - "The power of deci2">isi2">ion i2">is my own." Lesson 152. Here's how i2">it starts:

"No-one can suffer loss unless i2">it be hi2">is own deci2">isi2">ion. No-one suffers pai2">in except hi2">is choi2">ice elects thi2">is state for hi2">im. No-one can gri2">ieve nor fear nor thi2">ink hi2">im si2">ick unless these are the outcomes that he wants. And no-one di2">ies wi2">ithout hi2">is own consent. Nothi2">ing occurs but represents your wi2">ish, and nothi2">ing i2">is omi2">itted that you choose. Here i2">is your world, complete i2">in all detai2">ils. Here i2">is i2">its whole reali2">ity for you. And i2">it i2">is only here salvati2">ion i2">is.

You may beli2">ieve that thi2">is posi2">iti2">ion i2">is extreme, and too i2">inclusi2">ive to be true. Yet can truth have excepti2">ions? i2">If you have the gi2">ift of everythi2">ing can loss be real? Can pai2">in be part of peace, or gri2">ief of joy? Can fear and si2">ickness enter i2">in a mi2">ind where love and perfect holi2">iness abi2">ide? Truth must be all-i2">inclusi2">ive i2">if i2">it be the truth at all. Accept no opposi2">ite and no excepti2">ions, for to do so i2">is to contradi2">ict the truth enti2">irely.

Salvati2">ion i2">is the recogni2">iti2">ion that the truth i2">is true and nothi2">ing else i2">is true."

i2">I've been fi2">indi2">ing myself lately starti2">ing to 'take i2">it to the people'. i2">I don't know how thi2">is happened, i2">it was sort of a subtle thi2">ing that just seemed li2">ike the next ri2">ight thi2">ing.

i2">I fi2">ind myself i2">in si2">ituati2">ions where i2">I'm starti2">ing to bri2">ing what i2">I know of ACi2">IM to help people who are not i2">into ACi2">IM. i2">I don't expli2">ici2">itly state ACi2">IM stuff or quotes or li2">ingo as such, but i2">it's sort of li2">ike steppi2">ing outsi2">ide the box and taki2">ing i2">it to the streets.

i2">I've had some focus on Jesus's "great crusade" whi2">ich i2">I posted about recently, about bei2">ing an acti2">ive part of the atonement and taki2">ing the mi2">iracles to the people. Obvi2">iously i2">it's not ri2">ight to only stay 'i2">isolated' wi2">ithi2">in ACi2">IM ci2">ircles, or to only talk to ACi2">IM people, and to not reach out to those who need help.

i2">It's possi2">ible once you have generali2">ized Holy Spi2">iri2">it's lessons, and have grasped the abstract nature of truth, to arti2">iculate i2">it i2">in ways that are appropri2">iate for di2">ifferent people. i2">I could target only ACi2">IM people or focus on ACi2">IM 'begi2">inners' whi2">ich i2">is helpful, but thi2">is i2">is very narrow.

i2">I'm not sayi2">ing i2">I'm leavi2">ing ACi2">IM behi2">ind at all. i2">I am fi2">irmly rooted i2">in i2">it and i2">in Holy Spi2">iri2">it's thought system whi2">ich becomes clearer all the ti2">ime. i2">Instead i2">I'm seei2">ing that these truths apply to people all over the place, whether they are i2">into ACi2">IM or not. i2">I am also seei2">ing that certai2">in people, i2">if they are recepti2">ive, can be helped wi2">ith some form of thi2">is teachi2">ing wi2">ithout them havi2">ing to expli2">ici2">itly be ACi2">IM students.

The metaphysi2">ics i2">in A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles i2">is the 'Truth', and i2">is the same truth that appli2">ies to everyone everywhere regardless. i2">It's God's laws. i2">It's how thi2">ings work. Yes there are other paths and other descri2">ipti2">ions but there i2">is only really one metaphysi2">ics, one Truth. And that gi2">ives i2">it uni2">iversal appeal.

Ulti2">imately thi2">is i2">is all about uncondi2">iti2">ional love, uncondi2">iti2">ional acceptance, uncondi2">iti2">ional truth. And that i2">is somethi2">ing to experi2">ience wi2">ithi2">in and to express wi2">ithout, i2">includi2">ing all our brothers.

As wi2">ithi2">in, so wi2">ithout.

The world i2">is full of advi2">ice. Some of i2">it seems useful, most of i2">it i2">is bullshi2">it.

The son of God does not need any advi2">ice. Thi2">is i2">is because He does not need to 'get' anythi2">ing from anyone because He i2">is not lacki2">ing anythi2">ing i2">in hi2">imself. He has been completed by God's presence i2">in Hi2">im.

All he does i2">is extend the truth that i2">is already wi2">ithi2">in Hi2">im.

So what happens when someone else comes along and starts telli2">ing Hi2">im.... you should thi2">is... you need to that..... you can li2">ive longer i2">if you eat thi2">is..... you can li2">ive longer i2">if you don't do that.... 5 ti2">ips for losi2">ing wei2">ight..... 10 ti2">ips for bei2">ing a better thi2">is and that.... etc... all bullshi2">it. All unneeded.

You do not need anyone's advi2">ice. You do not need anyone to tell you what you do, or to gi2">ive thei2">ir so-called "opi2">ini2">ion". You do not need suggesti2">ions for how to li2">ive or how to exi2">ist or how to behave or what to do to be yourself. You don't need anythi2">ing.

When i2">I was i2">in the mi2">iddle of havi2">ing an experi2">ience of God, i2">I felt li2">ike i2">I di2">id not need anythi2">ing. And i2">I mean that li2">iterally. i2">I felt li2">ike i2">I di2">id not need to eat food. i2">I had to eat a meal but i2">I felt li2">ike i2">I was shovi2">ing lumps of materi2">ial i2">into my mouth for absolutely no reason and that i2">it was completely forei2">ign. i2">I also felt a great amount of joy radi2">iati2">ing out of me toward others - extendi2">ing to others - such that i2">it was all gi2">ive gi2">ive gi2">ive gi2">ive gi2">ive. i2">It wasn't take take take or get get get or need need need. i2">I had no needs. And yet all these people kept tryi2">ing to "help" and kept offeri2">ing advi2">ice and suggesti2">ions and tryi2">ing to tell me what i2">I should do or who i2">I should be. And i2">I was li2">ike, why are they doi2">ing that, i2">I don't need anythi2">ing.

You don't have any real needs other than God's love. All of the other advi2">ice i2">is bullshi2">it. You don't need any "teachers" to come along and tell you what's what. The only teacher you need i2">is the Holy Spi2">iri2">it who speaks for God.

You especi2">ially don't need to be i2">inundated by a soci2">iety that i2">is chroni2">ically judgemental and i2">insane, constantly shovi2">ing shi2">it down your throat to tell you that you have to be thi2">is way or that way, or you're not enough of a person i2">if you're not doi2">ing thi2">is, or most people do that, or you should be doi2">ing thi2">is more often. We're addi2">icted to bei2">ing told what to do. Vi2">icti2">ims. And people are addi2">icted to telli2">ing each other what to do. Look at me... si2">itti2">ing her typi2">ing thi2">is shi2">it and offeri2">ing more 'perspecti2">ive'. Di2">isregard!

You're already you. Stop li2">isteni2">ing to the ego.

Do you noti2">ice when people most li2">ikely gi2">ive advi2">ice? i2">It's when you show that you are sufferi2">ing or upset. i2">It's when they look at you tryi2">ing to make gui2">ilt real and they make i2">it real ri2">ight along wi2">ith you and then come across as bei2">ing a savi2">ior and rescuer. And then comes all the advi2">ice. i2">If i2">I post somethi2">ing on here and i2">I say, well, i2">I've had a pretty rough ti2">ime lately or feeli2">ing shi2">itty and confused or somethi2">ing li2">ike that, people wi2">ill suddenly chi2">ime i2">in and start gi2">ivi2">ing advi2">ice. The response SHOULD be to remi2">ind me of how i2">I'm mi2">istaken and how i2">I am loved and to offer true correcti2">ion for my mi2">istaken percepti2">ions, not buyi2">ing i2">into my bullshi2">it story. But thi2">is i2">isn't how people functi2">ion. They launch i2">into an i2">instant hero role and start telli2">ing you what to do. We're addi2">icted to thi2">is. And i2">it's just another part of the way we skapegoat - conveni2">iently fi2">indi2">ing poor broken sheep i2">in the flock and then targeti2">ing them ei2">ither wi2">ith our fears and gui2">ilts or wi2">ith our judgements and rescue attempts.

Bleh.

Jesus revealead to me last ni2">ight a whole new perspecti2">ive on the whole i2">idea of si2">in/gui2">ilt/fear/death.

i2">I was doi2">ing a forgi2">iveness process and Jesus had revealed that i2">I was afrai2">id because i2">I beli2">ieved i2">I'd si2">inned. But when i2">I i2">inqui2">ired, tentati2">ively, what thi2">is si2">in was.... Jesus revealed the real truth:

"There i2">is no si2">in". ("what i2">if you looked wi2">ithi2">in and saw there i2">is no si2">in?")

i2">I thought, what, how i2">is thi2">is possi2">ible? i2">I thought about how we hark on about 'the separati2">ion', and how we've si2">inned, and now we're gui2">ilty, and then we're afrai2">id, and all thi2">is.... we've sort of bought i2">into thi2">is. And what Jesus showed me i2">is, all of that i2">is just a STORY.

i2">It i2">is not true that there i2">is actually a si2">in i2">in us. i2">It's not true that we're actually gui2">ilty. i2">It's not true that we actually need to be afrai2">id. And i2">it's not true that there i2">is real death. i2">It's all just a story, spun by the ego. Thi2">is i2">is all the ego's myth about what's happened - what i2">it i2">imagi2">ined and wanted to beli2">ieve.

We BELi2">IEVE we've si2">inned and separated, but we haven't. We THi2">INK we're terri2">ible si2">inners, but there i2">is NO REAL Si2">IN i2">in us at all.

i2">I've held i2">in my mi2">ind a long ti2">ime thi2">is 'creati2">ion myth' of how we separated and si2">inned and gai2">ined thi2">is huge unconsci2">ious gui2">ilt and fear etc... sort of accepti2">ing that thi2">is i2">is 'true', but i2">it's really not.

The ego has spun thi2">is story that we are really si2">inful, but i2">it's just a made-up story. There i2">is no si2">in at all! And i2">it's pun thi2">is story that we're really gui2">ilty. But we're not gui2">ilty i2">in the sli2">ightest! And i2">it's spun thi2">is story that we need to be afrai2">id. But there i2">is absolutely no grounds for fear. And i2">it's spun thi2">is story that we should suffer and di2">ie. But there's absolutely no foundati2">ion for that bei2">ing true whatsoever.

i2">I could see somewhat past the 'i2">intense dark horror' of thi2">is story, perhaps for the fi2">irst ti2">ime, and looked i2">instead to how thi2">is all began. Am i2">I really separate from God? Hmmmmm.... what i2">if the separati2">ion was also just a story that we made up? (Holy Spi2">iri2">it says "true"). What i2">if we're not really separate from God at all, we just thi2">ink we are.

We're all sti2">ill i2">innocent :-) And lo and behold, that made me laugh wi2">ith reli2">ief, that i2">I am sti2">ill wi2">ith God and qui2">ite li2">iterally, none of thi2">is story has *actually happened* at all. There i2">is no actual si2">in, gui2">ilt, fear, puni2">ishment or death. i2">It's just a great bi2">ig fai2">irytale. Ki2">inda funny really.

Thi2">is i2">is the law of cause and effect. Where there i2">is cause there must be effects. Where there are effects there must be a cause. There cannot be effects wi2">ithout an ONGOi2">ING cause. As soon as cause i2">is taken away, effects must vani2">ish. i2">If somethi2">ing i2">is conti2">inui2">ing, so i2">is the causi2">ing. When the flashli2">ight swi2">itches off, there i2">is no li2">ight. Wen the flashli2">ight swi2">itches on, there i2">is li2">ight. i2">It i2">is enti2">irely fi2">icti2">ion that causes are moments i2">in ti2">ime whi2">ich tri2">igger somethi2">ing and produce a chai2">in of effects whi2">ich are completely di2">ivorced from the ori2">igi2">inal cause. There are no effects unless the ori2">igi2">inal cause i2">is STi2">ILL THERE.

Everythi2">ing i2">is deli2">iberate. Everythi2">ing i2">is chosen. Thi2">is i2">is because you always have free wi2">ill. Thi2">is can never be vi2">iolated. i2">If anythi2">ing i2">is to occur, you must consent to i2">it. Anythi2">ing you do not choose si2">imply does not happen. Your mi2">ind causes all events and effects. Nothi2">ing i2">in the world can change you or affect you or deci2">ide for you. The body has no abi2">ili2">ity to choose anythi2">ing. i2">It i2">is enti2">irely an effect of your mi2">ind.

"Your mi2">ind makes thi2">is deci2">isi2">ion as i2">it makes EVERY deci2">isi2">ion responsi2">ible for the condi2">iti2">ion of the body."

"No-one di2">ies wi2">ithout thei2">ir own consent."

""My Self i2">is ruler of the uni2">iverse." ... "i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that anythi2">ing should come to me unbi2">idden by myself. Even i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is i2">I who rule my desti2">iny. What happens i2">is what i2">I desi2">ire. What does not occur i2">is what i2">I do not want to happen. Thi2">is must i2">I accept."

i2">If you are unhappy, you chose to be. i2">If you are si2">ick, you chose to be. i2">If you are dead, you chose to be. i2">If you are heali2">ing, you chose to be. i2">If you resurrect, you chose to be. i2">If you are not at peace, you chose to be.

"i2">I must have made a wrong deci2">isi2">ion because i2">I am not at peace. i2">I made the deci2">isi2">ion myself."

"Heaven i2">is a choi2">ice i2">I must make."

"No one comes to the atonement except wi2">illi2">ingly."

Just as you choose and cause everythi2">ing that happens, so too you can choose the opposi2">ite.

"And you wi2">ill understand that mi2">iracles reflect the si2">imple statement, "i2">I have done thi2">is thi2">ing, and i2">it i2">is thi2">is i2">I would undo." ... Bri2">ing, then, all forms of sufferi2">ing to Hi2">im Who knows that every one i2">is li2">ike the rest. He sees NO di2">ifferences where none exi2">ist, and He wi2">ill teach you how each one i2">is CAUSED. None has a Di2">IFFERENT cause from all the rest, and ALL of them are easi2">ily undone by but a Si2">INGLE lesson truly learned."

"There are no acci2">idents i2">in salvati2">ion."

"i2">It i2">is you who has the power to domi2">inate everythi2">ing you see, merely by recogni2">izi2">ing who you are."

The world does not turn wi2">ithout a mi2">ind maki2">ing i2">it turn. Plants do not grow wi2">ithout someone wi2">illi2">ing i2">it. Bodi2">ies do not become si2">ick wi2">ithout a mi2">ind usi2">ing them for attack. Death does not occur wi2">ithout a deli2">iberate i2">intenti2">ion of sui2">ici2">ide. Sufferi2">ing cannot happen unless you attack yourself.

Li2">iterally nothi2">ing anywhere eon any level can EVER happen wi2">ithout someone choosi2">ing i2">it. Recogni2">ize thi2">is, take back your power, stop destroyi2">ing yourself and wake up to freedom.

Jesus merely asks us to choose agai2">in. To keep choosi2">ing agai2">in unti2">il we make the correct choi2">ice.

"i2">I must have made a wrong deci2">isi2">ion because i2">I am not at peace. i2">I made the deci2">isi2">ion myself but i2">I can choose otherwi2">ise."

He tells us that whenever we are not at peace, i2">ie sufferi2">ing i2">in any form, i2">it i2">is because we have chosen to do so, and thi2">is resulted from maki2">ing a wrong deci2">isi2">ion. We chose to suffer, and thi2">is was a mi2">istake. He now i2">invi2">ites us to try agai2">in to choose heaven, heaven bei2">ing a choi2">ice i2">I must make.

"Tri2">ials are but lessons whi2">ich you fai2">iled to learn presented once agai2">in, so where you made a faulty choi2">ice before you now can make a better one, and thus escape all pai2">in whi2">ich what you chose before has brought to you. i2">In every di2">iffi2">iculty, all di2">istress, and each perplexi2">ity you face, Chri2">ist calls to you, and gently says, "My brother, choose agai2">in.""

We are exerci2">isi2">ing our free wi2">ill at all ti2">imes, our abi2">ili2">ity to choose freely. Anythi2">ing that we experi2">ience other than peace and joy and love i2">is because we chose i2">it. We can only attack ourselves and are the only one able to seem to hurt ourselves through a mi2">istaken choi2">ice. And we have just as much power to choose otherwi2">ise.

"And you wi2">ill understand that mi2">iracles reflect the si2">imple statement, "i2">I have done thi2">is thi2">ing, and i2">it i2">is thi2">is i2">I would undo.""

"Mi2">ind i2">is the mechani2">ism of deci2">isi2">ion."

At all ti2">imes, we are si2">imply deci2">idi2">ing. We are si2">imply choosi2">ing. Do i2">I want to accept that i2">I am as God created me sti2">ill, and therefore accept the whole Atonement pri2">inci2">iple and return to awareness of my soul, or do i2">I want to conti2">inue choosi2">ing to suffer i2">in vari2">ious ways. i2">It i2">is up to me.

"God does not coerce."

"Learn of Hi2">is happi2">iness, whi2">ich i2">is yours. But to accompli2">ish thi2">is, all your dark lessons MUST be brought wi2">illi2">ingly to truth, and joyously lai2">id down, by hands open to recei2">ive, not closed to take. Every dark lesson that you bri2">ing to Hi2">im Who teaches li2">ight, He wi2">ill accept FROM you, BECAUSE YOU DO NOT WANT i2">IT. And He wi2">ill gladly EXCHANGE each one for the bri2">ight lesson He has learned FOR you."

Lessons are nothi2">ing other than choi2">ices. By choosi2">ing that you want somethi2">ing, you put yourself i2">into a psychologi2">ical posi2">iti2">ion. You have taught yourself that somethi2">ing seems to be true whi2">ich i2">is not, through a mi2">istaken choi2">ice. Now the lesson i2">is that you must unlearn thi2">is mi2">istaken choi2">ice and re-learn or remember what the truth really i2">is.

All lessons have the same outcome of re-accessi2">ing God's truth, because the only uni2">iversal curri2">iculum (whi2">ich i2">is mandatory) i2">is the same for everyone - learni2">ing the si2">ingle si2">imple truth of God and awakeni2">ing to acceptance of i2">it.

What seem to be tri2">ials are si2">imply present condi2">iti2">ions that have been chosen, or scenari2">ios arranged, offeri2">ing an opportuni2">ity to change your mi2">ind about what you want, to learn to forgi2">ive and overlook rather than to use these mi2">istaken selecti2">ions to hurt yourself.

Always i2">it i2">is si2">imply a matter of, what do i2">I want. Do i2">I want the world more than i2">I want God? What do i2">I value? What do i2">I accept as true? What am i2">I wi2">illi2">ing to do and accept? Do i2">I want heaven today or do i2">I want hell? i2">It's up to you, you have the freedom always to come and go as you wi2">ish. And God wai2">its pati2">iently for you to freely choose to return Home to Hi2">im.

i2">If you are sufferi2">ing, you chose to. i2">If you are experi2">ienci2">ing unlove, you chose not to love yourself. i2">If you are si2">ick, you wanted to be for a reason. i2">If you are happy, you chose only happi2">iness for yourself. i2">If you feel attacked, you deci2">ided to feel attacked. i2">If you are i2">in pai2">in, the pai2">in i2">is servi2">ing your wi2">ishes. Only i2">if thi2">is i2">is true i2">is the secret of salvati2">ion true wi2">ithout excepti2">ion, and only i2">if thi2">is i2">is true i2">is there any ki2">ind of hope for escape from hell by your own choi2">ice.

"i2">In every di2">iffi2">iculty, all di2">istress, and each perplexi2">ity you face, Chri2">ist calls to you, and gently says, "My brother, choose agai2">in.""

"Be never fearful of temptati2">ion, then, but see i2">it as i2">it i2">is; another chance to choose agai2">in, and let Chri2">ist's strength prevai2">il i2">in every ci2">ircumstance and every place you rai2">ised an i2">image of yourself before. For what appears to hi2">ide the Face of Chri2">ist i2">is powerless before Hi2">is Majesty, and di2">isappears before Hi2">is holy si2">ight."

"For you Wi2">ILL hear, and you Wi2">ILL choose agai2">in. And i2">in thi2">is choi2">ice i2">is everyone made free."

"The power of deci2">isi2">ion i2">is my own. .... No-one can suffer loss unless i2">it be hi2">is own deci2">isi2">ion. No-one suffers pai2">in except hi2">is choi2">ice elects thi2">is state for hi2">im. No-one can gri2">ieve nor fear nor thi2">ink hi2">im si2">ick unless these are the outcomes that he wants. And no-one di2">ies wi2">ithout hi2">is own consent. Nothi2">ing occurs but represents your wi2">ish, and nothi2">ing i2">is omi2">itted that you choose. Here i2">is your world, complete i2">in all detai2">ils. Here i2">is i2">its whole reali2">ity for you. And i2">it i2">is only here salvati2">ion i2">is."

"My Self i2">is ruler of the uni2">iverse. ... i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that anythi2">ing should come to me unbi2">idden by myself. Even i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is i2">I who rule my desti2">iny. What happens i2">is what i2">I desi2">ire. What does not occur i2">is what i2">I do not want to happen. Thi2">is must i2">I accept. For thus am i2">I led past thi2">is world to my creati2">ions, chi2">ildren of my Wi2">ill, i2">in Heaven where my holy Self abi2">ides wi2">ith them, and Hi2">im Who has created me."

A major mi2">istake i2">I keep maki2">ing, or at least am starti2">ing to noti2">ice i2">I'm maki2">ing, i2">is tryi2">ing to fi2">ind answers i2">in the world.

Jesus i2">is often hi2">inti2">ing to me that i2">I'm doi2">ing somethi2">ing wrong when i2">I do thi2">is.

i2">I'll be lost i2">in the mi2">iddle of tryi2">ing to fi2">igure somethi2">ing out or deci2">ide between two thi2">ings, or determi2">ine what the "real reason i2">is", or fi2">ind a cause, or basi2">ically fi2">ind any sense of truth to do wi2">ith anythi2">ing i2">in thi2">is world.

i2">It's di2">iffi2">icult because my mi2">ind i2">is so used to thi2">inki2">ing thi2">is way - looki2">ing outsi2">ide of myself for truth, for salvati2">ion etc. i2">I'm so accustomed to bei2">ing i2">in thi2">is "mode" of "i2">is i2">it thi2">is or that?"... when i2">in fact BOTH of those thi2">ings are not the answer.

i2">It also happens any ti2">ime i2">I am i2">in any amount of fear, whi2">ich i2">is often, whereby Jesus wi2">ill poke me because i2">I'm once agai2">in lost i2">in doubt and tryi2">ing to deci2">ide somethi2">ing. i2">It's really a state of i2">indeci2">isi2">ion and because of the presence of fear, there i2">is li2">iterally no way i2">I can see clearly or fi2">ind a completely convi2">inci2">ing truth.

i2">It often takes several wi2">inks and nudges before i2">I i2">I mi2">ight suddenly have enough awareness to even reali2">ize that "i2">I'm doi2">ing i2">it agai2">in". ... i2">I'm basi2">ically tryi2">ing to fi2">ind some ki2">ind of truth or answer i2">in the world.

A reason why someone i2">is si2">ick. A cause for why somethi2">ing happened. A truth that explai2">ins whi2">ich path to take. Some evi2">idence that shows me somethi2">ing i2">is correct. A sense of certai2">inty that cannot be found i2">in uncertai2">inty. A clear and obvi2">ious answer whi2">ich i2">is profoundly elusi2">ive i2">in the presence of fear.

i2">I get lost i2">in all these ways, i2">in what basi2">ically i2">is a state of spli2">it ego mi2">ind, where i2">I am just lost and looki2">ing i2">in all the wrong places for a truth that i2">isn't really there.

When i2">I fi2">inally am nudged enough by Jesus to look at what i2">I'm really doi2">ing, and i2">I've run out of attempts to fi2">ind answers to what i2">it i2">is that i2">I am doi2">ing wrong (lol), and i2">I have pretty much no other opti2">ion left as to what i2">it i2">is that Jesus i2">is tryi2">ing to get at, THEN i2">I mi2">ight suddenly reali2">ize..... oh... i2">I'm doi2">ing i2">it agai2">in.... i2">I'm tryi2">ing to fi2">ind truth i2">in the world.

And so what has been really comi2">ing to me bi2">ig ti2">ime lately, totally unexpected, i2">is thi2">is i2">idea that... absolutely everythi2">ing i2">in thi2">is world i2">is NOT THE TRUTH. And cannot be. And i2">it i2">is not real. No matter how i2">it looks, no matter how convi2">inci2">ing i2">it i2">is, no matter how well explai2">ined, no matter whose credenti2">ials are behi2">ind i2">it, no matter how real i2">it seems, no matter how i2">I can pi2">inpoi2">int physi2">ical causes, no matter how explai2">inable or understandable i2">it seems to be, i2">IT i2">IS STi2">ILL NOT THE TRUTH.

i2">It i2">is not God's truth. And God's truth i2">is the ONLY truth. There i2">IS no truth i2">in the world, EVER.

Thi2">is i2">is qui2">ite surpri2">isi2">ing to me gi2">iven how much i2">I've been used to fi2">indi2">ing answers (salvati2">ion) outsi2">ide of myself. i2">It's the totally automati2">ic mode of the ego to fi2">ind truth externally, or to explai2">in si2">ituati2">ions, or di2">iagnose si2">icknesses, or fi2">ind the "real cause" of stuff. All that i2">is doi2">ing i2">is the ego i2">is tryi2">ing to gi2">ive truth to i2">its i2">illusi2">ions, tryi2">ing to make mi2">istakes real, maki2">ing si2">ickness real, maki2">ing the world real, and that i2">is NOT forgi2">iveness.

Forgi2">iveness HAS to recogni2">ize that the ENTi2">IRE WORLD and EVERYTHi2">ING i2">IN i2">IT i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion, i2">is not the truth, has no truth to i2">it, cannot provi2">ide an answer, i2">is not the "fi2">inal answer", an therefore there i2">is ANOTHER TRUTH whi2">ich goes beyond thi2">is world.

There i2">is a truth whi2">ich i2">is of God. i2">It i2">is a truth whi2">ich transcends the world. i2">It i2">is a truth of i2">immortali2">ity, eternal li2">ife, absolute peace, total happi2">iness, i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity, chri2">ist consci2">iousness, oneness and love. Thi2">is i2">is THE ONLY TRUTH.

And so as i2">I've been really really used to fi2">indi2">ing "some" of the truth outsi2">ide of me, i2">in the world, i2">in explanati2">ions and what appears to be cause and effect i2">in the i2">illusi2">ion, where one thi2">ing appears to cause somethi2">ing else to happen, THAT i2">is not truth. So i2">I am now goi2">ing i2">into thi2">is process of qui2">ite li2">iterally becomi2">ing clearer and stronger i2">in my di2">iscernment that EVERY attempt to fi2">ind truth i2">in the world wi2">ill fai2">il, and wi2">ill only tell me somethi2">ing that i2">is - i2">in God's reali2">ity - not the REAL truth.

Thi2">is i2">is the foundati2">ion for mi2">iracle mi2">indedness, because mi2">iracle mi2">indedness completely defi2">ies the laws of physi2">ics, chemi2">istry, bi2">iology. The laws of nature. The laws of what appears to be separate causes and effects. All rules. All results. All effects. All stuff that seems to "happen" i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is all NOT the truth of God. And therefore, God has power OVER all of i2">it!!!

Thi2">is i2">is why i2">in order to perform Mi2">IRACLES (!!), we need to get our mi2">ind i2">into a place where we're very clear about the fact that thi2">is world i2">is NOT REAL, that there i2">is NO truth to how i2">it appears whatsoever, that si2">ickness i2">is just a fake i2">image whi2">ich can be easi2">ily changed, that the body i2">is just a fake i2">image whi2">ich can be easi2">ily changed, and that, as ACi2">IM says very early on, "there i2">is nothi2">ing my holi2">iness cannot do."

Whi2">ile i2">I'm looki2">ing for truth i2">in thi2">is world, i2">in all the thi2">ings i2">I rely on and thi2">ink are sources of certai2">inty and reali2">ity, i2">I am di2">istracti2">ing myself from the truth of God. And that means i2">I am not bei2">ing mi2">iraculous. Mi2">iracles, the power of God's love, wi2">ill flow i2">IN SPi2">ITE of thi2">is world, and wi2">ith DOMi2">INi2">ION over thi2">is world, and wi2">ith a POWER that thi2">is world has absolutely no i2">idea about.

And therefore no matter what state or condi2">iti2">ion thi2">is world i2">is i2">in, and no matter how i2">it appears, and what seems to be the "fi2">inali2">ity" of i2">it, or bodi2">ily states whi2">ich seem i2">irreversi2">ible, or even DEATH as a statement of "you can't do anythi2">ing about thi2">is because i2">its real".. THATS BULLSHi2">IT! God CAN do somethi2">ing about i2">it, because God does not buy the li2">ie that thi2">is world i2">is reali2">ity. And that means mi2">iracles can happen, and people CAN be rai2">ised from the dead, temporari2">ily or otherwi2">ise i2">if i2">its preferable, and you are NOT at the effect of thi2">is world.

A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles thus makes no sense whatsoever UNLESS thi2">is world i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion, and unless thi2">is world has absolutely no truth to i2">it whatsoever. Only then can i2">it be possi2">ible that everythi2">ing ACi2">IM clai2">ims can be true, and only then i2">is i2">it possi2">ible that natural Mi2">IRACLES can happen, ALL THE Ti2">IME!

Hallelujah!

Have you done thi2">is? i2">I know i2">I have done i2">it many ti2">imes: "Who but yourself evaluates a threat, deci2">ides escape i2">is necessary, and sets up a seri2">ies of defenses to reduce the threat that has been judged as real?"

Somethi2">ing happens, typi2">ically somethi2">ing related to a body - somethi2">ing physi2">ical whi2">ich the body reports as happeni2">ing. Then i2">I observe i2">it and judge - THi2">IS i2">IS REAL - somethi2">ing's happeni2">ing, somethi2">ing's goi2">ing wrong.

Then there i2">is a whole cascade of reacti2">ions, starti2">ing wi2">ith i2">immedi2">iate fear. There are defenses, attempts to escape, attempts to fi2">ind cures, attempts to explai2">in the causes. All attempts are me tryi2">ing to defend agai2">inst the "reali2">ity" of the problem, whi2">ich, because i2">it i2">IS real to me, cannot BE escaped.

And always no matter what i2">I do, what i2">I thi2">ink, how i2">I approach i2">it, there i2">is sti2">ill the fear response to somethi2">ing that seems unchangeable, fi2">ixed, stuck, i2">irreversi2">ible, and deadly.

Thi2">is i2">is always because at the "core", i2">I've gi2">iven REALi2">ITY to somethi2">ing that the body showed me. i2">I've deci2">ided thi2">is i2">is real, and have i2">interpreted i2">it as totally real. By maki2">ing i2">it real, i2">I locked i2">it i2">in place, turned i2">it i2">into an i2">inescapable si2">in, gave i2">it permanence, and set i2">it up as the truth.

Now i2">it cannot be questi2">ioned, undone, changed, healed, or corrected. Knowi2">ing thi2">is produces i2">inevi2">itable unresolvable fear. i2">If i2">it i2">is real, there i2">is nothi2">ing i2">I can do about i2">it. And thi2">is always leads to a feeli2">ing of powerlessness, hopelessness, weakness, i2">incapabi2">ili2">ity, i2">inadequacy and shame. As i2">if the thi2">ing i2">is just dangli2">ing there i2">in front of my face taunti2">ing me and haunti2">ing me wi2">ith i2">its threats of i2">inevi2">itable sufferi2">ing.

"NOT because i2">it has the power to hurt, but just because YOU have deni2">ied i2">it i2">is but an i2">illusi2">ion, AND MADE i2">IT REAL."

"i2">Its plan i2">is to have you SEE ERROR CLEARLY Fi2">IRST, and THEN overlook i2">it. But how CAN you overlook what you have made real? By seei2">ing i2">it clearly, you HAVE made i2">it real, and CANNOT overlook i2">it."

All of thi2">is begi2">ins the moment that i2">I look at somethi2">ing and deci2">ide for myself, "thi2">is i2">is real". Thi2">is one act of readi2">ing reali2">ity i2">into i2">it, taki2">ing i2">it seri2">iously, forgetti2">ing to laugh, focusi2">ing on i2">it li2">ike i2">it's li2">iterally ri2">ight there i2">in front of my face as proof that i2">it exi2">ists, i2">is enough to cement i2">it i2">into my mi2">ind. As soon as i2">it i2">is locked i2">in, nothi2">ing whatsoever can di2">islodge i2">it and i2">it looms over me li2">ike a constant threat.

The ego has counseled that i2">I need to look clearly and closely at what i2">is an error - an i2">illusi2">ion of somethi2">ing goi2">ing wrong - as i2">if i2">it i2">is real, and exami2">ine i2">it, and fi2">igure out what i2">it i2">is, and analyze i2">it, and descri2">ibe i2">it, and fi2">ind the cause of i2">it. And that only by looki2">ing i2">intensely at i2">it as a real problem can i2">I possi2">ibly fi2">ind a soluti2">ion to i2">it. But thi2">is does not work because all i2">it does i2">it holds the problem i2">in place.

The ONLY thi2">ing whi2">ich can truly uproot and solve the problem, i2">is the recogni2">iti2">ion that i2">I am the one who deci2">ided i2">it was real i2">in the fi2">irst place. i2">I bought i2">into the i2">illusi2">ion. i2">I fell for the temptati2">ion. i2">I forgot to laugh at i2">it. i2">I thought i2">it was seri2">ious. i2">I gave i2">it meani2">ing. i2">I deci2">ided what i2">it was and why i2">it meant. And only by thi2">is deci2">isi2">ion, based on i2">inputs from the body senses, di2">id i2">I convi2">ince myself "thi2">is i2">is really happeni2">ing, holy shi2">it, there i2">is no escapi2">ing i2">it."

i2">I must then reverse thi2">is beli2">ief, thi2">is core key moment, reali2">izi2">ing that si2">ince i2">I gave i2">it thi2">is reali2">ity, i2">I can wi2">ithdraw thi2">is power from i2">it also. And i2">I must do thi2">is i2">is i2">if i2">I want to experi2">ience atonement and freedom.

"i2">If you gi2">ive no power to the fog to obscure the li2">ight, i2">it HAS none, for i2">it has power ONLY because the Son of God gave power TO i2">it. He must Hi2">IMSELF wi2">ithdraw that power, rememberi2">ing that all power i2">is of God."

i2">It means i2">I have gi2">iven my power away to an i2">illusory world, have set i2">it up to have power over me, and now i2">I see i2">it as causi2">ing me. And now i2">I am starti2">ing to experi2">ience the consequences and effects that i2">it i2">impli2">ies. And only by taki2">ing i2">its power away can i2">I free myself from my self-made i2">impri2">isonment.

Thi2">is problem has no power, i2">it i2">is not real, i2">it i2">is not happeni2">ing, i2">it i2">is not true, i2">it does not exi2">ist, i2">it i2">is not there, i2">it i2">is already gone, i2">it never happened, i2">it i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion and i2">is nothi2">ing.

And then i2">I can laugh and be free from the clutches of thi2">is ti2">iny anchori2">ing black-hole of despai2">ir and decepti2">ion. i2">It i2">is truly nothi2">ing and i2">I has no power over me.

i2">I've been noti2">ici2">ing lately, i2">in myself, and also i2">in other people, that gui2">ilt may not always look li2">ike gui2">ilt.

i2">I am fami2">ili2">iar wi2">ith gui2">ilt i2">in the sense that, let's say, i2">I steal someone's property and then see them struggli2">ing wi2">ithout i2">it, maybe i2">I start to feel remorse or shame or that i2">I should gi2">ive i2">it back, and so acknowledge that i2">it's wrong i2">in some way and start wanti2">ing to make amends, feeli2">ing gui2">ilty that way. Thi2">is seems a more typi2">ical defi2">ini2">iti2">ion of gui2">ilt.

But i2">I thi2">ink there i2">is an experi2">ience of gui2">ilt whi2">ich feels much more li2">ike a state of self attack, seri2">iousness, and i2">is very prone to projecti2">ion. i2">It's a state of accusati2">ion, and the person feeli2">ing gui2">ilty starts to accuse others at the same ti2">ime. Thi2">is accusi2">ing takes the form of projecti2">ion and i2">is usually hurled out i2">in the form of anger.

As Jesus says, "All anger i2">is nothi2">ing more than an attempt to MAKE SOMEONE FEEL GUi2">ILTY"

Why would you attempt to make someone gui2">ilty? i2">It's really an attempt to project your own gui2">ilt onto them, to make them out to be the one who i2">is gui2">ilty rather than i2">it be you. Thi2">is i2">isn't really the same experi2">ienci2">ing as feeli2">ing afrai2">id and tryi2">ing to blame the cause of fear onto someone, but the projecti2">ion dynami2">ic i2">is si2">imi2">ilar.

And so the clue here i2">is, that there i2">is a strong correlati2">ion between anger and gui2">ilt. And i2">I've been noti2">ici2">ing especi2">ially the past few days, not only that i2">if i2">I am angry there i2">is some subtle but defi2">ini2">ite sensati2">ion of "feeli2">ing gui2">ilty" or "feeli2">ing wrong" or "i2">its my fault" tucked i2">in behi2">ind i2">it. And i2">I've been suddenly noti2">ici2">ing thi2">is i2">in other people as well.

i2">I saw a couple of people today who seemed edgy and short and were a li2">ittle accusati2">ional. Whi2">ile on the surface they seemed li2">ike they were sort of "raw" and poi2">inti2">ing a fi2">inger at others, or were holdi2">ing a sense of "i2">I'm wrong, because of you", i2">I noti2">iced they also were feeli2">ing ki2">ind of gui2">ilty about somethi2">ing. And i2">in that gui2">ilt they felt angry at themselves, but typi2">ically so caught up i2">in projecti2">ing i2">it that they seemed to be tryi2">ing to make others gui2">ilty i2">instead.

The reason i2">I'm bri2">ingi2">ing thi2">is up i2">is because i2">in the past, for example, i2">I was often afrai2">id for vari2">ious reasons, but i2">I di2">id not know i2">it. i2">I di2">id not RECOGNi2">IZE i2">it. i2">I would have the fear and all the stuff that goes wi2">ith i2">it, but i2">I di2">id not label "whatever that feeli2">ing i2">is" as fear. i2">I was too i2">immersed i2">in i2">it, li2">ike bei2">ing i2">in a fog. i2">I couldn't see i2">it from the outsi2">ide. So i2">I would've sai2">id, i2">in the mi2">iddle of feeli2">ing fear, no, i2">I'm not afrai2">id. i2">I di2">idn't even know i2">I was i2">in such a state of anxi2">iety. Or that what i2">I felt WAS that.

Si2">imi2">ilarly wi2">ith thi2">is gui2">ilt, i2">I've been doi2">ing a lot of heali2">ing and i2">I noti2">ice often that there i2">is thi2">is ki2">ind of heavy "somethi2">ing" that seems hi2">idden from my awareness, whi2">ich always seems to drag me down and makes me feel seri2">ious and often movi2">ing i2">into anger or projecti2">ion. And as i2">I try to li2">ift up closer to happi2">ier li2">ighter states, thi2">is same curtai2">in of somethi2">ing keeps pulli2">ing me back down. And i2">I'm reali2">izi2">ing gradually that thi2">is un-recogni2">ized somethi2">ing i2">is actually gui2">ilt.

i2">I actually feel gui2">ilty for a whole bunch of thi2">ings and i2">I di2">id not even know that i2">i was feeli2">ing thi2">is way. i2">I was just "doi2">ing the gui2">ilt" unconsci2">iously. Thi2">is came to my attenti2">ion because i2">in one si2">ituati2">ion i2">I expressed that i2">I felt gui2">ilty about somethi2">ing, not even thi2">inki2">ing that thi2">is was why i2">I was annoyed, that i2">I had not admi2">itted to before, and after expressi2">ing thi2">is noti2">iced that i2">I felt si2">igni2">ifi2">icantly better. And that was unexpected, li2">ike i2">I acci2">identally di2">iscovered what was really botheri2">ing me. And then after admi2">itti2">ing to feeli2">ing gui2">ilty and letti2">ing i2">it go, i2">I felt so much freer.

Also per some thi2">ings i2">I've been readi2">ing i2">in the course lately, i2">I see Jesus sayi2">ing thi2">ings about gui2">ilt and about how wi2">ithout gui2">ilt you'd be happy and wi2">ithout gui2">ilt you'd have salvati2">ion and so on. That gui2">ilt i2">is the opposi2">ite of love as well. And thi2">is all seems to add up. The state of ego, the state of fear, gui2">ilt, si2">in, death, sufferi2">ing, unhappi2">iness, i2">it all seems to be vari2">ious "forms" of the movement away from God.

i2">In general a beli2">ief i2">in si2">in leads to a beli2">ief i2">in gui2">ilt and then to a beli2">ief i2">in fear of puni2">ishment. But i2">in Jesus's descri2">ipti2">ions i2">it sounds more li2">ike any amount of separati2">ion from God, any movement away from love, puts you si2">imultaneously i2">into a state of fear, and gui2">ilt, and si2">in, and sufferi2">ing and si2">ickness. i2">It's all a movement towards darkness. And i2">in parti2">icular, wi2">ithout gui2">ilt or a beli2">ief i2">in gui2">ilt, there i2">is no support for si2">in.

Si2">in says, you si2">inned. i2">If you beli2">ieve i2">it, you become gui2">ilty. i2">If you do not beli2">ieve i2">it, you become forgi2">iven. i2">It pi2">ivots AROUND si2">in, but gui2">ilt i2">is evi2">idence that you've beli2">ieved si2">in to be true. i2">If si2">in i2">is true, then you ARE gui2">ilty and wi2">ill feel i2">it. But i2">if si2">in i2">is NOT true, you are NOT gui2">ilty, and wi2">ill experi2">ience the i2">innocence that li2">ies beyond si2">in. Si2">in i2">is ki2">ind of li2">ike a pri2">inci2">iple or concept, an i2">illusi2">ion, and whether you beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it or not sets you on a path to li2">isten to ego or to li2">isten to holy spi2">iri2">it. And "the world of bodi2">ies i2">is the world of si2">in" so beli2">ievi2">ing bodi2">ies are real produces gui2">ilt, whi2">ile beli2">ievi2">ing they are not produces i2">innocence.

"The laws of si2">in demand a vi2">icti2">im."

"(body's eyes) For everythi2">ing they see not only wi2">ill not last, but lends i2">itself to thoughts of si2">in and gui2">ilt."

So now i2">I'm worki2">ing on the removal and undoi2">ing and acknowledgi2">ing and recogni2">iti2">ion and noti2">ici2">ing of "i2">I feel gui2">ilty". And i2">I thi2">ink that i2">it can be qui2">ite subtle at ti2">imes and elusi2">ive. And i2">it i2">is "i2">impli2">ied" i2">in a lot of si2">ituati2">ions, even i2">if i2">its mi2">inor. And i2">I thi2">ink thi2">is gui2">ilt has a heck of a lot to do wi2">ith all manner of unhappy feeli2">ings and condi2">iti2">ions and forms of sufferi2">ing. i2">It's the heavy anchor that we drag behi2">ind us. i2">I thi2">ink most people are li2">ivi2">ing i2">in heavy gui2">ilt and don't even know i2">it, and that has been me too."

i2">I have also been noti2">ici2">ing lately that i2">I have not been gi2">ivi2">ing myself enough credi2">it for what i2">I've been able to do. And i2">I also noti2">ice myself "over-gi2">ivi2">ing" or "over-servi2">ing" i2">in a sacri2">ifi2">ici2">ial way. And that suggests to me that i2">its because i2">I feel a GUi2">ILT, and thi2">is gui2">ilt i2">is dri2">ivi2">ing an i2">illusory form of servi2">ice whi2">ich really i2">is some attempt to "make up for" "bei2">ing the cause of" the problem, whi2">ich i2">I'm blami2">ing myself for. i2">I thi2">ink i2">I don't credi2">it myself wi2">ith enough i2">innocence and thereby end up maki2">ing myself gui2">ilty for thi2">ings i2">I'm not even gui2">ilty for, and then start over-compensati2">ing for i2">it.

Wi2">ithout gui2">ilt there i2">is no self blame, and wi2">ithout gui2">ilt there i2">is no reason to project gui2">ilt onto others through anger. And wi2">ithout gui2">ilt you cannot have si2">inned, so must be i2">innocent.

"The world you see i2">is the delusi2">ional system of those made mad by gui2">ilt. Look carefully at thi2">is world, and you wi2">ill reali2">ize that thi2">is i2">is so. For thi2">is world i2">is the symbol of puni2">ishment, and all the laws whi2">ich seem to govern i2">it are the laws of death."

"Only by persuadi2">ing you that i2">IT i2">is you, could the ego possi2">ibly i2">induce you to PROJECT gui2">ilt, and thereby keep i2">it i2">in your mi2">ind."

"All anger i2">is nothi2">ing more than an attempt to MAKE SOMEONE FEEL GUi2">ILTY, and thi2">is attempt i2">is the ONLY basi2">is whi2">ich the ego accepts for speci2">ial relati2">ionshi2">ips."

"Projecti2">ion means anger, anger fosters assault, and assault promotes fear."

"That i2">is why the undoi2">ing of gui2">ilt i2">is an essenti2">ial part of the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's teachi2">ing."

"i2">I heard one voi2">ice because i2">I had learned that learni2">ing i2">is attai2">ined BY teachi2">ing. i2">I understood that i2">I COULD NOT ATONE FOR MYSELF ALONE."On the one hand, we're asked to accept atonement for ourselves. Thi2">is i2">is because our own mi2">ind needs to accept God's truth and become sane, i2">in and of i2">itself. But the fact i2">is that you also share everythi2">ing wi2">ith others. Your mi2">ind i2">is plugged i2">into other mi2">inds. So that now means that you can't accept your own atonement, unless you're also wi2">illi2">ing accept other people's atonement.

i2">I could say, well, i2">I fi2">ind myself to be i2">innocent and holy. But i2">if i2">I can't also have that same perspecti2">ive about EVERYONE, then i2">I can't really clai2">im i2">it ei2">ither. Thi2">is i2">is due to the Golden Rule, that what i2">is true of me i2">is true of the whole sonshi2">ip. Ei2">ither both of us are i2">innocent, or both of us are gui2">ilty.

"Now need you but to learn that BOTH of you are i2">innocent OR gui2">ilty."i2">It's not possi2">ible to see myself as i2">innocent whi2">ile seei2">ing someone else as gui2">ilty. Thi2">is means that secretly i2">I fi2">ind myself to be gui2">ilty as well, and am now projecti2">ing si2">in onto another i2">in order to deny that i2">I fi2">ind myself si2">inful. i2">I now see the gui2">ilt seemi2">ingly outsi2">ide myself i2">in another as i2">if i2">it appli2">ies to them and not me. Thi2">is i2">is how the ego always thi2">inks i2">in a di2">issoci2">iated way.

Nothi2">ing true can apply ONLY to myself. Truth has to apply to everyone at once. The truth i2">is that whatever appli2">ies to me appli2">ies to everyone, because we were all created equal i2">in God. i2">If i2">I beli2">ieve i2">in gui2">ilt i2">I wi2">ill fi2">ind both myself and others to be gui2">ilty and wi2">ill see a gui2">ilty world. i2">If i2">I truly and genui2">inely beli2">ieve i2">in my own i2">innocence, i2">it can't be that i2">I si2">imultaneously hate others and fi2">ind them to be si2">inners. No one can love and hate at the same ti2">ime. So you can't accept atonement just for yourself and leave everyone out of i2">it. Just as you can't be i2">in holy relati2">ionshi2">ip whi2">ile excludi2">ing anyone.

Even though i2">I'm tasked wi2">ith accepti2">ing atonement "for myself", bei2">ing responsi2">ible for usi2">ing my own free wi2">ill to choose i2">it, thi2">is actually means that i2">I have to be wi2">illi2">ing to let i2">it APPLY to everyone si2">imultaneously. i2">I cannot i2">in fact accept i2">it for MYSELF at all, i2">if i2">I am not wi2">illi2">ing for thi2">is same truth to be true everywhere. i2">If i2">I fai2">il to recogni2">ize i2">its uni2">iversal appli2">icati2">ion, i2">I have not learned i2">it. Only by SHARi2">ING the atonement wi2">ith the ENTi2">IRE sonshi2">ip, can i2">I accept i2">it for myself.

Thi2">is means i2">I have to fi2">ind EVERYONE to be i2">innocent and accept the atonement FOR everyone. i2">I can't JUST fi2">ind myself to be i2">innocent and leave others dangli2">ing. The truth i2">I clai2">im for myself HAS to be also clai2">imed for everyone. i2">I have to see the holi2">iness of chri2">ist i2">in everyone at the same ti2">ime otherwi2">ise i2">I can't see i2">it i2">in myself. And i2">I cannot be true to or know myself wi2">ithout bei2">ing true to the known reali2">ity of everyone's true nature. Only ego would thi2">ink i2">it can accept atonement exclusi2">ively, because i2">it wants everythi2">ing at the expense of everyone else.

"Atonement as a Lesson i2">in Shari2">ing. Atonement i2">is for all, because i2">it i2">is the way to UNDO the beli2">ief that ANYTHi2">ING i2">is for you ALONE."

"Holi2">iness MUST be shared, for therei2">in li2">ies everythi2">ing that makes i2">it holy."

"To the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, i2">it i2">is the fundamental law of shari2">ing, by whi2">ich you gi2">ive what you value i2">in order to keep i2">it i2">in your OWN mi2">inds."

"Redempti2">ion i2">is recogni2">ized ONLY by shari2">ing i2">it."

So yes on the one hand, si2">ince we "rule" our own mi2">ind, whi2">ich God created i2">in us i2">indi2">ivi2">idually along wi2">ith our soul, our natural condi2">iti2">ion i2">is that we are ALSO fused i2">inti2">imately wi2">ith every chi2">ild of God. You CANNOT accept the atonement "just for" yourself. i2">It i2">is absolutely i2">impossi2">ible and runs completely opposi2">ite to the nature of love and of all thi2">ings God.

The atonement i2">is a reflecti2">ion of heaven, and of heaven's laws. Those laws are laws of absolute shari2">ing, equali2">ity and uni2">ion. You are li2">iterally i2">in and li2">ike all your brothers, and thus there i2">is an aspect of you whi2">ich i2">is completely shared wi2">ith them all. The enti2">ire sonshi2">ip i2">is your self, just as you are the chri2">ist along wi2">ith everyone. For YOU to accept atonement means, i2">in effect, that you AS THE SONSHi2">IP i2">is accepti2">ing i2">it FOR the sonshi2">ip.

"My mi2">issi2">ion was si2">imply to UNi2">ITE the Wi2">ill of the Sonshi2">ip Wi2">ITH the Wi2">ill of the Father by bei2">ing aware of the Father's Wi2">ill myself."

"Peace be unto you who rest i2">in God, and i2">in whom the whole Sonshi2">ip rests."

"Every deci2">isi2">ion i2">is made for the WHOLE SONSHi2">IP, di2">irected i2">in and out, and i2">influenci2">ing a constellati2">ion larger than anythi2">ing you ever dreamed of."

"What you gi2">ive through Hi2">im i2">is for the whole Sonshi2">ip, NOT FOR PART OF i2">IT."

"To heal, then, i2">is to correct percepti2">ion i2">in your brother AND yourself by SHARi2">ING THE HOLY SPi2">IRi2">IT Wi2">ITH Hi2">IM. Thi2">is places you both Wi2">ITHi2">IN the Ki2">ingdom and restores i2">ITS wholeness i2">in your mi2">inds."

"The Ki2">ingdom of Heaven (the sonshi2">ip/one son/chri2">ist) i2">IS you. What else BUT you di2">id the Creator create, and what else but you i2">IS Hi2">is Ki2">ingdom? Thi2">is i2">is the whole message of the Atonement"

You see, you are not just you. You are also everyone else. All your si2">ibli2">ings i2">in the sonshi2">ip are part of you and you of them. We are all together a collecti2">ion of i2">indi2">ivi2">idual souls who share absolutely everythi2">ing wi2">ith each other openly. And so what appli2">ies to you appli2">ies to everyone and i2">includes everyone. Everyone i2">is i2">included i2">in your self and i2">in your mi2">ind, just as you are i2">included i2">in them. And so you CANNOT do anythi2">ing alone!

The ego i2">is the i2">idea of bei2">ing alone, separated off, i2">independent of or i2">isolated from others. i2">It's the i2">idea of bei2">ing "only you" and "not others". i2">It's the rejecti2">ion of your uni2">ion wi2">ith your brothers and an attempt to confi2">ine and li2">imi2">ited yourself to ONLY what appears to be your i2">indi2">ivi2">idual self. i2">It's an attempt not to share anythi2">ing wi2">ith anyone. And i2">it i2">is OUT of thi2">is state of exclusi2">ivi2">ity and i2">impri2">isonment that you are ri2">isi2">ing i2">INTO a state of TOTAL shari2">ing and i2">inclusi2">ion. So you have to learn that you ARE the whole sonshi2">ip and everythi2">ing you do i2">is for everyone.

"One brother i2">is all brothers. Every mi2">ind contai2">ins all mi2">inds, for every mi2">ind i2">is one. Such i2">is the truth."

Thi2">is doesn't i2">in a any way vi2">iolate the free wi2">ill of others. You accepti2">ing atonement for "yourself" does i2">in SOME WAY and i2">in some part, accept i2">it FOR others and gi2">ives i2">it to them. i2">It li2">ifts them up to the degree they're wi2">illi2">ing to allow i2">it. You becomi2">ing li2">ighter li2">ightens everyone's load. "When i2">I am healed i2">I am not healed alone."

Just as Jesus accepted the atonement for hi2">imself AND FOR everyone, thi2">is di2">id li2">ift everyone i2">into li2">ight, but each i2">indi2">ivi2">idual was only li2">ifted to the degree they allowed themselves to be i2">included i2">in i2">it. Not that Jesus di2">idn't Gi2">IVE i2">it to everyone through unli2">imi2">ited shari2">ing, just that they di2">id not full RECEi2">IVE i2">it.

As EACH of us accepts atonement truth for ourselves, we ARE radi2">iati2">ing i2">it throughout the sonshi2">ip and every mi2">ind i2">is i2">illumi2">inated by i2">it. Thi2">is i2">is the same thi2">ing that happens when you work mi2">iracles. They can touch people far beyond your awareness because we are all joi2">ined. We're sort of li2">ike a network of i2">indi2">ivi2">iduals. We each can rai2">ise up to the hi2">ighest hei2">ights whi2">ich pulls everyone upward as well, but each has to also be wi2">illi2">ing to be pulled to fully embrace what i2">is offered them.

So whi2">ile your "only responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity" i2">is to accept atonement for yourself, YOUR SELF i2">is not JUST yours. You must accept i2">it for everyone otherwi2">ise you cannot have i2">it. "To have all, gi2">ive all to all." The way by whi2">ich you share atonement wi2">ith everyone reflects the holographi2">ic nature of the Ki2">ingdom, i2">in whi2">ich everyone has everythi2">ing si2">imultaneously because every i2">indi2">ivi2">idual i2">is the whole. Atonement, just li2">ike mi2">iracles, are holographi2">ically connected and must be shared i2">in order to be experi2">ienced for yourself.

"The purpose of the Atonement i2">is to restore everythi2">ing TO you. (That i2">is, to restore the awareness. Later clari2">ifi2">icati2">ion.) You had everythi2">ing when you were created, just as everyone di2">id. Havi2">ing been restored to your ori2">igi2">inal state, you naturally become part of the Atonement yourself. You now share MY i2">inabi2">ili2">ity to tolerate the lack of love i2">in yourself and i2">in everyone else, and MUST joi2">in the GREAT CRUSADE to correct i2">it. The slogan for thi2">is Crusade i2">is "Li2">isten, Learn, and DO."

"As peace extends from deep i2">insi2">ide yourself to embrace all the Sonshi2">ip and gi2">ive i2">it rest"

"For i2">it i2">is the complete equali2">ity of the Atonement i2">in whi2">ich salvati2">ion li2">ies."

"My only gi2">ift to you i2">is to help you make the same deci2">isi2">ion FOR YOURSELF. The wi2">ill for thi2">is deci2">isi2">ion i2">is the wi2">ill to SHARE i2">it, because the deci2">isi2">ion i2">itself i2">IS the deci2">isi2">ion to share. i2">It i2">is MADE BY Gi2">IVi2">ING, and i2">is therefore the one act of mi2">ind that resembles true creati2">ion."

"Let the Holy Spi2">iri2">it remi2">ind you always of Hi2">is fai2">irness, and let me teach you how to share i2">it wi2">ith your brothers. How else can the chance to clai2">im i2">it for yourself be gi2">iven you?"

"You who share Hi2">is Li2">ife must share i2">it to KNOW i2">it, for shari2">ing i2">IS knowi2">ing."

"He leaves you no one OUTSi2">IDE yourself, alone Wi2">ITHOUT you. And so He gi2">ives you what i2">is yours, because your Father would have you share i2">it Wi2">ITH hi2">im"

"i2">I desi2">ire thi2">is holy i2">instant for myself that i2">I may SHARE i2">it wi2">ith my brother, whom i2">I love. i2">It i2">is not possi2">ible that i2">I can have i2">it Wi2">ITHOUT hi2">im, nor he wi2">ithout me. Yet i2">it i2">is WHOLLY possi2">ible for us to SHARE i2">it NOW."

"To have fai2">ith i2">is to heal. i2">It i2">is the si2">ign that you HAVE accepted the Atonement for yourself, and would therefore share i2">it. By fai2">ith, you OFFER the gi2">ift of freedom from the past, whi2">ich you have RECEi2">IVED.""Salvati2">ion i2">IS Hi2">is Wi2">ill BECAUSE you share i2">it. NOT for you alone, but for the Self whi2">ich i2">IS the Son of God."

"Thi2">is i2">is the li2">ight whi2">ich bri2">ings your peace of mi2">ind to other mi2">inds, to share i2">it and be glad that they are one wi2">ith you and wi2">ith themselves."

"Such i2">is your mi2">issi2">ion now. For God entrusts the gi2">ivi2">ing of Hi2">is gi2">ifts to all who have recei2">ived them. He has shared Hi2">is joy wi2">ith you. And now you go to share i2">it wi2">ith the world."

"Forgi2">iveness shows us that Godʹs Wi2">ill i2">is one, and that we share i2">It.""And i2">I accept thi2">is vi2">isi2">ion i2">in i2">its name, both for myself and for the world as well."

"And i2">I, who would be saved, would make i2">it mi2">ine, to be the way i2">I li2">ive wi2">ithi2">in a world that needs salvati2">ion, and that wi2">ill be saved as i2">I accept Atonement for myself"

Ego projecti2">ions boi2">il down to a very, very si2">imple dynami2">ic.

1) i2">I deci2">ide what i2">I want to see i2">in someone.

2) i2">I i2">interact wi2">ith what i2">I now see i2">in them as i2">if i2">I di2">id not put i2">it there.

The way i2">I i2">interact wi2">ith what i2">I see i2">in others, i2">is qui2">ite bi2">izarre. i2">It's really i2">insane. i2">I'm tryi2">ing to accompli2">ish two opposi2">ite goals at once.

1) i2">I want other people to be what i2">I say they are, by projecti2">ing my si2">in and gui2">ilt onto them, "convi2">inced" that they really are that way.

2) i2">I then demand that they stop bei2">ing what i2">I am seei2">ing them bei2">ing, and that they be the opposi2">ite, and that they are the one who has to choose di2">ifferently. Thi2">is i2">is "forgi2">iveness to destroy".

So ri2">ight off the bat, thi2">is i2">is a state of confli2">ict. i2">It's me who i2">is seei2">ing other people are doi2">ing "somethi2">ing wrong", and then i2">it i2">is me who i2">is i2">insi2">isti2">ing that they change thei2">ir behavi2">ior. So now i2">I'm holdi2">ing i2">it agai2">inst them when they don't change "for me". And they won't.

i2">I'm li2">iterally demandi2">ing two separate outcomes si2">imultaneously. i2">I want people to be what i2">I deci2">ide they are, and then i2">I want them to not be what i2">I've deci2">ided they are, si2">imply because i2">I'm i2">in deni2">ial of bei2">ing the one who has lai2">id down the ground rules to begi2">in wi2">ith.

So i2">I'm goi2">ing around basi2">ically projecti2">ing shi2">it onto people, deci2">idi2">ing ok, you are doi2">ing thi2">is and that wrong and should be doi2">ing thi2">is and that i2">instead. And then the rest of my "play" i2">is to react to that accusati2">ion. i2">It tends to go one of two ways.

1) They are wrong and they shouldn't be doi2">ing what they're doi2">ing so they are the ones who need to change, not me, and i2">if they don't, i2">I wi2">ill vi2">icti2">imi2">ize them. i2">I wi2">ill hold i2">it agai2">inst them.

2) They are wrong and they shouldn't be doi2">ing what they're doi2">ing, but i2">in a hero savi2">ior role i2">I wi2">ill now swoop i2">in and save them from "themselves", those sorry bastards, si2">ince they refuse to change themselves and seem 'helpless' and needy.

Each ti2">ime i2">I react to somethi2">ing bei2">ing i2">incorrect or unacceptable i2">in another, who exactly i2">is i2">it who has made that person out to be wrong i2">in thi2">is way? Are they i2">inherently wrong i2">in thi2">is way or have i2">I actually deci2">ided to see them thi2">is way, and therefore i2">it's my judgement of them? And now that i2">I am responsi2">ible for what i2">I'm seei2">ing, havi2">ing put i2">it there to see, i2">it's now my responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity to admi2">it that i2">I'm i2">interacti2">ing wi2">ith my own projecti2">ion.

As Jesus says i2">in the course, generally speaki2">ing we wi2">ill project our own si2">in outward and try to di2">isown i2">it (di2">isassoci2">iate) and then we wi2">ill attack what we've projected, accusi2">ing i2">it of bei2">ing si2">inful and bad, i2">in order to create a sense of separati2">ion between i2">it and ourselves, so that we can keep i2">it away from our i2">identi2">ity.

We wi2">ill attack our own si2">in, thi2">inki2">ing that we're attacki2">ing i2">it i2">in another person, beli2">ievi2">ing that to do so causes them to recei2">ive the puni2">ishment and not us. Except i2">it doesn't work because the si2">in never leaves our own mi2">ind (i2">ideas leave not thei2">ir source), i2">it just seems external because we are i2">in deni2">ial of i2">it.

So i2">it really all boi2">ils down to thi2">is. Whatever i2">interacti2">ion i2">I seem to be havi2">ing wi2">ith "the world", i2">if i2">I don't li2">ike i2">it, i2">it's because i2">I'm the one who i2">is deci2">idi2">ing on what i2">I am seei2">ing "i2">in" i2">it, and am reacti2">ing to i2">it as though i2">it's really out there. And regardless of whether i2">I am li2">iki2">ing to do that or am feeli2">ing frustrated or upset or whatever about "what they are doi2">ing", i2">I am the one who i2">is maki2">ing them out to be doi2">ing that to me. Because i2">I want to. Because i2">it gi2">ives me an opportuni2">ity to di2">isown some si2">in.

i2">ie, i2">I love to suffer. i2">I choose sufferi2">ing on purpose and posi2">iti2">ion myself as a vi2">icti2">im on purpose, so that i2">I can seem to be at the effect of the world, so that i2">I can then explai2">in that the world has caused me and therefore the world i2">is the si2">inner, not me. i2">I mi2">ight suffer and be si2">ick or afrai2">id or upset as "effects" of what they supposedly di2">id to me (even though i2">I i2">invented those effects i2">in myself, by myself), but i2">I secretly am getti2">ing away wi2">ith murder by "usi2">ing" the person as an outlet for projecti2">ing my own si2">in. Now they are the si2">inner and not me, and i2">I'm sufferi2">ing... poor me, but at least i2">I am not the si2">inner any more.

So the ego's mantra i2">is, i2">I wi2">ish to suffer i2">in order not to suffer. Or rather, i2">I wi2">ill see the world as attacki2">ing me and attack myself wi2">ith i2">it so that i2">it seems that i2">I'm not attacki2">ing myself wi2">ith i2">it.

We are to demonstrate that we cannot be hurt, or made si2">ick, or caused to di2">ie, as a result of thi2">is world. And whenever these thi2">ings seem to be happeni2">ing, you can be assured that you've posi2">iti2">ioned yourself as a deli2">iberate vi2">icti2">im, i2">in order to pretend that the world i2">is responsi2">ible for what you are experi2">ienci2">ing. You may be sufferi2">ing, you may be si2">ick, you may even end up dead, and i2">it wi2">ill conveni2">iently seem as i2">if the world made thi2">is happen agai2">inst your wi2">ill, but nothi2">ing could be further from the truth.

No-one di2">ies wi2">ithout thei2">ir own consent. And anyone who di2">ies has secretly arranged to make i2">it appears as i2">if they di2">id not choose i2">it at all. Death i2">is an attempt not to choose, by pretendi2">ing that you have no choi2">ice, by pretendi2">ing that others have taken all your power away from you, maki2">ing you an "unwi2">illi2">ing" vi2">icti2">im, i2">in a state of unwi2">illi2">ingness, such that i2">it appears death happens to you agai2">inst your wi2">ill. How conveni2">ient. i2">It's a total li2">ie.

Death i2">is unwi2">illi2">ingness to admi2">it that you are pretendi2">ing to di2">ie and are blami2">ing everythi2">ing on anyone other than yourself. Thi2">is i2">is why death i2">is fai2">ilure, and death i2">is fai2">ili2">ing to wake up from the dream. Death i2">is i2">impossi2">ible for anyone but self-i2">imposed vi2">icti2">ims. Death i2">is not li2">ife. i2">It i2">is not success or graduati2">ion. i2">It i2">is the total opposi2">ite of li2">ife. i2">It cannot happen wi2">ithout bei2">ing severely agai2">inst yourself and agai2">inst the wi2">ill of God. Therefore i2">it cannot happen "peacefully" nor can i2">it happen AT ALL unless you attack yourself.

Two fi2">ighters are i2">in the boxi2">ing ri2">ing. They move around and jab at each other. As they become closer, they fi2">ight more. They punch and hurt each other, tryi2">ing to defeat the other. There i2">is no love here. i2">It i2">is anger and aggressi2">ion and forcefulness gone wi2">ild. They seek revenge for what they see the other as havi2">ing done to them.

Thi2">is i2">is representati2">ive of all ego confrontati2">ions, i2">in whi2">ich one person i2">is tryi2">ing to attack another, to justi2">ify the attack, to try to "wi2">in", and to hurt and destroy the other i2">in order to achi2">ieve some ki2">ind of pri2">ize.

Now, the round ends and the boxers are requi2">ired to go to thei2">ir corners. Noti2">ice what happens. The fi2">ighti2">ing stops. There i2">is temporary peace. There i2">is relaxati2">ion and reli2">ief.

What also has happened, i2">is "di2">istance" has been put between the two. They have stopped lurchi2">ing at each other, they are no longer tryi2">ing to i2">infli2">ict pai2">in on each other, and have recoi2">iled i2">into themselves.

Thi2">is i2">is symboli2">ic of forgi2">iveness. i2">In forgi2">iveness, what you want to do i2">is look at the hori2">izontal cause and effect relati2">ionshi2">ip i2">in whi2">ich you are beli2">ievi2">ing someone else di2">id thi2">is to you, you plan to do that to them, etc... you need to cut all of that out and essenti2">ially "separate" the two fi2">ighters.

You do thi2">is by exami2">ini2">ing how you beli2">ieve that you caused the other person, and how you beli2">ieve they they caused you, and you STOP beli2">ievi2">ing that. Thi2">is collapses the hori2">izontal causali2">ity.

So.... that person di2">id not hi2">it me. That person di2">id not affect me. i2">I am not caused by them. They have done nothi2">ing to me. i2">I am not at the effect of that person. They have no power over me. i2">I am responsi2">ible for everythi2">ing i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing. i2">I must have done thi2">is to myself.

And.... i2">I have not done anythi2">ing to that person. i2">I di2">id not affect them. i2">I di2">id not cause them. i2">I have not done anythi2">ing to them. i2">I have no power over them. They are responsi2">ible for what they are experi2">ienci2">ing. They must have done thi2">is to themselves.

Thi2">is i2">is pryi2">ing apart an ARTi2">IFi2">ICi2">IAL CAUSALi2">ITY whi2">ich the ego has tri2">ied to establi2">ish between the two of you. You are wi2">ithdrawi2">ing all blame and projecti2">ion from them, and recogni2">izi2">ing that thei2">ir blame and projecti2">ion onto you i2">is nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith you. Thi2">is di2">ismantles the enti2">ire ego thought system of beli2">ievi2">ing that someone else i2">is the cause of you, or affecti2">ing you, or that you have been affected i2">in any way.

Thi2">is breaks and reverses the ego's use of cause and effect. There i2">is no cause outsi2">ide of you. You are not at the effect of anythi2">ing outsi2">ide of you. You are returni2">ing to your "corner" and di2">isconnecti2">ing from the other person and are ceasi2">ing to try to make them responsi2">ible for your experi2">ience.

So be li2">ike the fi2">ighters i2">in thei2">ir corners. Back off. Take back your projecti2">ions. Stop tryi2">ing to attack others. Stop beli2">ievi2">ing they are attacki2">ing you. The ego has no defense agai2">inst thi2">is because i2">it li2">iterally lowers defenses and exposes you, whi2">ich paradoxi2">ically makes you i2">invulnerable.

There are vari2">ious feeli2">ings you can seem to experi2">ience, but they are not real feeli2">ings. When you're i2">in the ego, lost and confused, you'll di2">iscover a wi2">ide vari2">iety of di2">ifferent feeli2">ings.

Ego emoti2">ions i2">include sadness, gri2">ief, loss, frustrati2">ion, anger, exci2">itement, gui2">ilt, fear, dread, anxi2">iety, worry, hurt, shame, embarrassment, unworthi2">iness, and all ki2">inds of other sensati2">ions. These all i2">include some element of sufferi2">ing and unhappi2">iness.

i2">It i2">is easy to thi2">ink that all these feeli2">ings are normal human emoti2">ions. Everyone has them. They seem commonplace and everyone has felt them. But can they be real feeli2">ings? Can they be states whi2">ich God Hi2">imself ordai2">ins?

i2">If God's wi2">ill for you i2">is perfect happi2">iness, then anythi2">ing even sli2">ightly short of perfect happi2">iness must i2">involve the ego. As soon as we're enteri2">ing i2">into gui2">ilt, fear, any ki2">ind of emoti2">ional turmoi2">il, we're i2">in an i2">insane state of mi2">ind.

i2">It's true enough the mi2">ind can i2">invent all ki2">inds of states and sensati2">ions, whi2">ich we experi2">ience and regi2">ister as "how i2">I feel". But at some poi2">int these feeli2">ings have to be brought i2">into questi2">ion, because they are not really ever vali2">id, real, or of God.

So i2">if i2">I'm feeli2">ing angry, i2">I'm goi2">ing to at some poi2">int have to look at thi2">is and recogni2">ize, thi2">is anger i2">is not somethi2">ing God ever feels, and i2">it cannot be real. God i2">is never angry and Hi2">is creati2">ions cannot be angry. So i2">if i2">I am angry, i2">I am havi2">ing a false, i2">illusory feeli2">ing. i2">I feel i2">it, seemi2">ingly, i2">I experi2">ience i2">it. But i2">it's false. i2">It's a made-up arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial feeli2">ing.

All the ego emoti2">ions are made up. They are not of God, nor are they God's wi2">ill. i2">If i2">I feel gui2">ilty, i2">I've i2">invented a li2">ie about myself. i2">If i2">I feel sad or gri2">ievi2">ing, i2">I'm very decei2">ived and beli2">ievi2">ing separati2">ion has really happened. i2">If i2">I am afrai2">id i2">I'm beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in si2">in and puni2">ishment. i2">If i2">I'm feeli2">ing hurt, i2">I've accused my brother of attacki2">ing me.

Mi2">ixed i2">into all the ego feeli2">ings there's always an element of me hurti2">ing myself, me tryi2">ing to hurt others, and some ki2">ind of accusati2">ion or judgement. These aren't true feeli2">ings. An enli2">ightened person should not ever be experi2">ienci2">ing these feeli2">ings because such feeli2">ings cannot exi2">ist wi2">ithout ego.

i2">It's not enough to say, well, there i2">is anger ari2">isi2">ing but i2">I am separate from i2">it. That's bullshi2">it. Someone i2">is causi2">ing i2">it and choosi2">ing i2">it. God's chi2">ildren are never unhappy or angry or upset or afrai2">id or gui2">ilty or sufferi2">ing i2">in any way. God's chi2">ildren are enti2">itled to perfect peace, permanent happi2">iness, and constant joy. Hi2">is angels never stop smi2">ili2">ing.

Tryi2">ing to justi2">ify that these emoti2">ions are "vali2">id" i2">is an ego attempt to make i2">it okay to suffer and to feel states whi2">ich are i2">illusory. When i2">I am "not at peace", i2">I MUST have made a wrong deci2">isi2">ion. i2">I made the deci2">isi2">ion myself. i2">I chose to not be at peace, meani2">ing i2">I wanted to feel somethi2">ing unli2">ike God feels.

i2">If i2">I am feeli2">ing anythi2">ing other than how God i2">intended that i2">I feel, i2">I have i2">invented a false feeli2">ing. i2">It seems perfectly possi2">ible to experi2">ience these feeli2">ings, even very i2">intensely and deeply. But they MUST be states of mental i2">illness, they must be forms of attack and deni2">ial, and they must i2">involve my ego.

Any ti2">ime that we are sad, i2">it i2">is because we thi2">ink there i2">is somethi2">ing to feel sad about. There i2">is nothi2">ing to feel sad about. God's Ki2">ingdom i2">is perfect and there i2">is no basi2">is for any ki2">ind of unhappi2">iness. i2">If we are unhappy we are mi2">istaken. i2">If we are feeli2">ing anythi2">ing other than joy we are blocki2">ing awareness of love.

So there are fake feeli2">ings and there are real feeli2">ings. Just as my only real thoughts are the thoughts i2">I thi2">ink wi2">ith God, so too my only real feeli2">ings are the feeli2">ings i2">I feel Li2">IKE God and Wi2">ITH God. Those i2">include joy, happi2">iness, bli2">iss, peace, love, holi2">iness, i2">innocence, safety, and grati2">itude.

Anythi2">ing less than true feeli2">ings must reflect states of darkness and decepti2">ion. Somethi2">ing has gone wrong i2">if we are not happy all the ti2">ime. Somethi2">ing i2">is not worki2">ing correctly i2">if the mi2">ind i2">is experi2">ienci2">ing a ni2">ightmare.

We MUST therefore bri2">ing i2">into questi2">ion ALL false ego emoti2">ions, regardless of thei2">ir seemi2">ing reali2">ity, i2">intensi2">ity or justi2">ifi2">icati2">ion. They are not true, they are not real, and they do not exi2">ist. i2">It i2">is not si2">imply enough to questi2">ion thoughts and beli2">iefs, we must also FEEL the love of God at all ti2">imes.

People are all di2">ifferent. One of the most harmful aspects of thi2">is ego world i2">is the attempt to make everyone the same and gloss over thei2">ir di2">ifferences. Thi2">is i2">is the ego's attempt to pretend that 'everythi2">ing i2">is ok' and 'we are all equal' as a form of deni2">ial and repressi2">ion. i2">It thus leads to people feeli2">ing li2">ike they have to 'pretend that they agree', when around i2">indi2">ivi2">iduals who are di2">ifferent.

For me, for example, i2">I am an i2">introverted person. That means i2">I am more i2">independent from soci2">iety and soci2">ial i2">interacti2">ions and tend to be more sensi2">iti2">ive and i2">introspecti2">ive. What seems 'natural' for me i2">is qui2">ite di2">ifferent to what i2">is natural for extroverted people. When the two worlds colli2">ide there i2">is almost always a sense of tensi2">ion and mi2">iscommuni2">icati2">ion and people-pleasi2">ing and di2">ishonesty and lack of authenti2">ici2">ity

For years and years i2">I always felt compelled to have to try to 'be li2">ike others', or fi2">it i2">in, or just automati2">ically accept soci2">iable si2">ituati2">ions, as i2">if not doi2">ing so was wrong and anti2">i-soci2">ial. Thi2">is i2">I thi2">ink i2">is largely because more extroverted people `push` soci2">iabi2">ili2">ity as though i2">it i2">is normal and exalted (especi2">ially wi2">ith the whole i2">idol worshi2">ip/celebri2">ity/hollywood i2">ideals). But what i2">is i2">ideal for them i2">is not i2">ideal for me. Layers and layers of gui2">ilt and shame have had to be released and healed to come to feel that i2">it i2">is `ok` to be truer to my personali2">ity and my own standards and that i2">I do not 'have to' just go along wi2">ith other people.

The mai2">in area i2">I experi2">ience thi2">is i2">is i2">in soci2">ial i2">interacti2">ions especi2">ially wi2">ith strangers or where more soci2">iable people are engaged. Just even the mere fact that people deci2">ide to suddenly stop and connect and converse i2">is to me an uni2">invi2">ited i2">intrusi2">ion, and due to my sensi2">iti2">ivi2">ity i2">I experi2">ience i2">it as jumpi2">ing ahead several steps i2">in the amount of `trust` or depth of connecti2">ion i2">I would need to establi2">ish fi2">irst. i2">It's especi2">ially di2">iffi2">icult around people that i2">I thi2">ink of as - soci2">ial bloodsuckers - the people who suddenly deci2">ide to i2">include themselves and i2">involve themselves and start yacki2">ing on about themselves, especi2">ially fi2">illed wi2">ith complai2">ini2">ing and other forms of soci2">ial attenti2">ion-seeki2">ing, as a way to ki2">ind of `hold me hostage`. i2">I want to tell them to shut the fuck up and leave me alone and stop i2">invadi2">ing my space.

So you can see that i2">if you are di2">ifferent i2">in some fundamental ways, whi2">ichever si2">ide of the fence you fall on, i2">it can really produce a lot of tensi2">ion and confli2">ict, ei2">ither externally or i2">internally. That di2">iscomfort makes i2">it feel li2">ike i2">it's not okay to be the way you are or i2">its not normal or i2">its not acceptable, and that can lead to profound shame and emoti2">ional pai2">in.

The term 'pai2">infully shy' can ari2">ise for i2">introverted people qui2">ite easi2">ily and the pai2">in actually comes from soci2">ial embarrassment, a lack of soci2">ial prowess, troubles speaki2">ing (at all), troubles fi2">indi2">ing thi2">ings to engage about conversati2">ionally (to even have the mental thoughts that lead to conversati2">ion), not belongi2">ing or fi2">itti2">ing i2">in, feeli2">ing i2">inadequate soci2">ially and thus as a person, feeli2">ing lacki2">ing and i2">insuffi2">ici2">ient and defecti2">ive, feeli2">ing unheard (because more extroverted people actually don't connect at the same depth as i2">introverted people - they are shallow and enjoy soci2">ial-li2">ies rather than truth), etc... thi2">is all can add up to a tremendous sense of 'bei2">ing attacked' (ei2">ither i2">internally or by others) and that produces profound emoti2">ional pai2">in. i2">I suffered wi2">ith that for years and years thi2">inki2">ing i2">it was not okay to be the way i2">I am.

Gradually, and thi2">is i2">is thanks i2">in large part to A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles and other heali2">ing and lovi2">ing support, i2">I've been learni2">ing two thi2">ings - how to be more comfortable bei2">ing the way i2">I am - at least i2">in terms of personali2">ity and needs - and consequently, bei2">ing more comfortable to be around people and converse. The `openi2">ing up` of the Course has helped me to heal from 'soci2">ial torture' to a large degree and to feel more confi2">ident i2">in bei2">ing `myself`. Even i2">if that means just bei2">ing my ego self more authenti2">ically. Because that authenti2">ici2">ity i2">is a doorway to my True Self.

Bei2">ing true to yourself no matter what your `self` i2">is, i2">is empoweri2">ing. And i2">it also has helped me to learn healthi2">ier boundari2">ies, that i2">I don't have to people-please, that i2">I can just walk away from people when i2">I don't want to be soci2">ial, that i2">I'm not `held capti2">ive` by anyone's need for attenti2">ion or domi2">inati2">ion, and generally an overall sense of ... greater peace, i2">I suppose. These weren't necessari2">ily goals i2">I had wi2">ith the Course but i2">it has defi2">ini2">itely healed to bri2">ing about heali2">ing i2">in these areas, to remove fear and i2">inhi2">ibi2">iti2">ions, and to bui2">ild a deeper connecti2">ion of trust - and yet personal power - when i2">interacti2">ing wi2">ith others.

i2">I don't know what ki2">ind of a moron i2">I am i2">in the eyes of extroverted people. i2">I must come across as some ki2">ind of i2">inept anti2">isoci2">ial li2">ifeless i2">idi2">iot or somethi2">ing. i2">I have more to learn about how the majori2">ity of soci2">iety functi2">ions. Thi2">is i2">is why i2">it i2">is very hard for me to envi2">isage ever standi2">ing i2">in front of some audi2">ience and gi2">ivi2">ing a speech or bei2">ing a hi2">ighly vi2">isi2">ible publi2">ic fi2">igure. Jesus has me doi2">ing thi2">ings on a much lower-key and more behi2">ind closed doors, lol. Whatever your style i2">is though, i2">I'm just glad to fi2">inally be feeli2">ing a sense of RELi2">IEF from years of torment and mi2">isery tryi2">ing to be somethi2">ing i2">I'm not, and i2">I hope extroverted people can also learn they don't have to be li2">ike those annoyi2">ing, anti2">isoci2">ial, holi2">ier-than-thou, wi2">impy i2">introverts ;-)

There i2">is, as always, a paradox - the truer you are to yourself and to how you are di2">ifferent, not tryi2">ing to pretend you are the same, actually allows you to become i2">inter-dependent and open to true communi2">icati2">ion, understandi2">ing and compassi2">ion. And that i2">is joi2">ini2">ing. Everyone has thei2">ir gi2">ifts and talents. Let's celebrate how our di2">ifferences can be acknowledged so that we can all experi2">ience peace. Poli2">iti2">ical correctness out the wi2">indow - we need to embrace who we are (even as an ego) i2">in order to let others be who they are, i2">in order to accept others and not be i2">insensi2">iti2">ive to thei2">ir di2">ifferences.

Thank you Jesus!

The i2">idea i2">is si2">imple. There i2">is only one lesson. Thi2">is one lesson sets you free from every form of sufferi2">ing. i2">It's si2">imply thi2">is:

Take full responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for everythi2">ing that you are experi2">ienci2">ing.

What i2">is thi2">is based on? i2">It's based on the fact that you are an i2">immortal bei2">ing that cannot be changed by anythi2">ing, because you are the wi2">ill of God.

Thi2">is means that nothi2">ing i2">in thi2">is enti2">ire "uni2">iverse" of spaceti2">ime, nothi2">ing i2">in the world, can do even the sli2">ightest thi2">ing to CAUSE you i2">in any way.

You have never changed, you have not changed yourself, God has never changed you, and you wi2">ill never change. You are always the same and always perfect.

Because of thi2">is, i2">it's not POSSi2">IBLE for anyone or anythi2">ing to do anythi2">ing to you. Thi2">is i2">is the basi2">is of forgi2">iveness. Recogni2">izi2">ing that si2">in cannot happen, gui2">ilt i2">is i2">impossi2">ible, and everythi2">ing i2">is perfect sti2">ill.

i2">If you are i2">immortal then the ONLY way by whi2">ich somethi2">ing can SEEM to happen to you, i2">is YOU usi2">ing your own mi2">ind and free wi2">ill to put i2">in place what seem to be i2">illusi2">ions of sufferi2">ing.

Because the truth i2">is that you cannot suffer at all. Not even sli2">ightly. You yourself have to li2">iterally warp your own mi2">ind and dream your own dream and i2">invent your own sufferi2">ing, whi2">ich i2">is even fake sufferi2">ing, i2">in order to experi2">ience what seems li2">ike sufferi2">ing at all.

i2">It cannot be put i2">in place by anyone else because no-one else has power over your i2">infi2">ini2">ite wi2">ill. i2">It cannot be caused by the world or anyone i2">in i2">it. Nothi2">ing that seems to happen can be the reason why you are experi2">ienci2">ing what you are experi2">ienci2">ing.

So i2">it goes back to the secret of salvati2">ion, no matter how i2">it looks, no matter who seems to be the cause, no matter what anyone appears be tryi2">ing to do to you, no matter what reacti2">ions you seemed to have that you thought they caused, i2">it i2">is NEVER true that anyone BUT YOU i2">is the cause of your sufferi2">ing.

"No one can suffer loss unless i2">it be hi2">is own deci2">isi2">ion. No one suffers pai2">in except hi2">is choi2">ice elects thi2">is state for hi2">im. No one can gri2">ieve nor fear nor thi2">ink hi2">im si2">ick unless these are the outcomes that he wants, and no one di2">ies wi2">ithout hi2">is own consent. Nothi2">ing occurs but represents your wi2">ish, and nothi2">ing i2">is omi2">itted that you choose. Here i2">is your world, complete i2">in all detai2">ils. Here i2">is i2">its whole reali2">ity for you. And i2">it i2">is only here salvati2">ion i2">is."

"The secret of salvati2">ion i2">is but thi2">is: That YOU are doi2">ing thi2">is UNTO YOURSELF. No matter what the form of the attack, thi2">is STi2">ILL i2">is true. Whoever takes the role of enemy and of attacker, STi2">ILL i2">is thi2">is the truth. Whatever seems to be the cause of any pai2">in and sufferi2">ing you feel, thi2">is i2">is STi2">ILL true."

Thi2">is means you can never pi2">in blame on anyone or anythi2">ing other than yourself. You can never truly beli2">ieve that anyone or anythi2">ing i2">is the cause of you, other than God. God i2">is the ONLY cause of you i2">in all exi2">istence. There i2">is NO OTHER POWER that can cause anythi2">ing at all. Whatever happens i2">is what you desi2">ire.

"My Self i2">is ruler of the uni2">iverse." i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that anythi2">ing should come to me unbi2">idden by myself. Even i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is i2">I who rule my desti2">iny. What happens i2">is what i2">I desi2">ire. What does not occur i2">is what i2">I do not want to happen. Thi2">is must i2">I accept."

Thi2">is i2">is all ti2">ied together. You are ruler of the uni2">iverse because anythi2">ing that happens i2">is by your wi2">ill alone. Forgi2">iveness i2">is based on your i2">immortali2">ity and the fact nothi2">ing can happen agai2">inst your wi2">ill. The secret of salvati2">ion remi2">inds you that you can be saved only by admi2">itti2">ing that YOU are the one wi2">illi2">ing i2">it. And only by i2">identi2">ifyi2">ing wi2">ith Chri2">ist can you fully clai2">im responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for what you really are.

i2">If i2">in any way you are beli2">ievi2">ing that what you are experi2">ienci2">ing now, ri2">ight now, i2">is the result of, somethi2">ing other than yourself i2">in any way, you are mi2">istaken. You are decei2">ived. i2">If you thi2">ink any person di2">id thi2">is to you you are wrong. i2">If you thi2">ink the world or the body or the emoti2">ions or thoughts are doi2">ing i2">it to you, you are wrong.

ONLY YOU can make yourself suffer.

"i2">It means that you cannot be hurt, and do not want to show your brother anythi2">ing except your wholeness. Show hi2">im that he CANNOT hurt you, and hold nothi2">ing agai2">inst hi2">im, or you hold i2">it agai2">inst yourself."

"i2">I can be hurt by nothi2">ing but my thoughts."

"My attack thoughts are attacki2">ing my i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity."

"Father, Your Son can not be hurt. And i2">if we thi2">ink we suffer, we but fai2">il to know our one i2">Identi2">ity we share wi2">ith You."

"Truth wi2">ill correct all errors i2">in my mi2">ind. i2">I am mi2">istaken when i2">I thi2">ink i2">I can Be hurt i2">in any way. i2">I am God's Son, Whose Self rests safely i2">in the Mi2">ind of God."

"Do you want a qui2">ietness that cannot be di2">isturbed, a gentleness that never can be hurt, a deep, abi2">idi2">ing comfort, and a rest so perfect i2">it can never be upset?"

"For once you understand i2">it i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that you be hurt except by your own thoughts, the fear of God must di2">isappear."

"The Son of God could NEVER si2">in, but he CAN wi2">ish for what would hurt hi2">im. And he HAS the power to thi2">ink he CAN BE hurt. What could thi2">is be EXCEPT a mi2">ispercepti2">ion of hi2">imself?"

"Now i2">in the hands made gentle by Hi2">is touch, the Holy Spi2">iri2">it lays a pi2">icture of a Di2">IFFERENT you. i2">It i2">is a pi2">icture of a body sti2">ill, for what you REALLY are can not be seen nor pi2">ictured. But THi2">IS one has NOT been used for purpose of attack, and therefore never suffered pai2">in at all. i2">IT wi2">itnesses to the eternal truth that you can not BE hurt, and poi2">ints BEYOND i2">itself to both YOUR i2">innocence and Hi2">IS."

"i2">If you wi2">ill li2">isten to Hi2">is voi2">ice, you wi2">ill know that you cannot ei2">ither hurt or BE hurt, but that many need your blessi2">ing to help them hear thi2">is for themselves."

"The Self Whi2">ich God created cannot si2">in, and therefore cannot suffer."

"i2">I am i2">in the li2">ikeness of my Creator. i2">I cannot suffer, i2">I cannot experi2">ience loss, and i2">I cannot di2">ie. i2">I am not a body. i2">I would recogni2">ize my reali2">ity today."

"Your Name replaces every thought of si2">in, and who i2">is si2">inless cannot suffer pai2">in."

"How can he fear or doubt or fai2">il to know he cannot suffer, be endangered, or experi2">ience unhappi2">iness, when he belongs to You, beloved and lovi2">ing, i2">in the safety of Your Fatherly embrace?"

"Herei2">in li2">ies my clai2">im to all good and only good. i2">I am blessed as a Son of God. All good thi2">ings are mi2">ine because God i2">intended them for me. i2">I cannot suffer any loss or depri2">ivati2">ion or pai2">in because of who i2">I am."

"The gui2">iltless mi2">ind cannot suffer. Bei2">ing sane, i2">it heals the body because i2">IT has been healed."

"Love CANNOT suffer, because i2">it cannot attack."

"Joy i2">is the i2">inevi2">itable result of gentleness. Gentleness means that fear i2">is now i2">impossi2">ible, and what could come to i2">interfere wi2">ith joy? The open hands of gentleness are always fi2">illed. The gentle have no pai2">in. They cannot suffer."

"i2">I AM responsi2">ible for what i2">I see. i2">I CHOSE the feeli2">ings i2">I experi2">ience, and i2">I DECi2">IDED ON the goal i2">I would achi2">ieve. And everythi2">ing that SEEMS to happen TO me, i2">I ASKED FOR and recei2">ived as i2">I had asked."

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill repeat thi2">is ONE i2">inclusi2">ive lesson of deli2">iverance, unti2">il i2">it has been learned, REGARDLESS of the form of sufferi2">ing that bri2">ings you pai2">in. Whatever hurt you bri2">ing to Hi2">im, He wi2">ill make answer wi2">ith thi2">is very si2">imple truth. For thi2">is one answer TAKES AWAY the cause of every form of sorrow and of pai2">in. The form affects Hi2">is answer not at all, for He would teach you but the Si2">INGLE cause of all of them, no matter WHAT thei2">ir form. And you wi2">ill understand that mi2">iracles reflect the si2">imple statement, "i2">I have done thi2">is thi2">ing, and i2">it i2">is thi2">is i2">I would undo."

i2">If i2">I fi2">ind anyone to be "wrong" i2">in ANY WAY, for ANY reason, i2">I am scapegoati2">ing.

i2">It doesn't even matter what the reasons are. Even i2">if the reasons are vali2">id.

i2">If someone i2">is maki2">ing a wrong deci2">isi2">ion... i2">if i2">I i2">identi2">ify they are wrong to make that deci2">isi2">ion, i2">I am scapegoati2">ing.

i2">If someone i2">is behavi2">ing a certai2">in way, and i2">I i2">identi2">ify i2">it as a wrong behavi2">ior i2">in any way, i2">I am scapegoati2">ing.

i2">If someone i2">is bei2">ing egoti2">isti2">ical or selfi2">ish or arrogant or whatever, and i2">if i2">I i2">identi2">ify that they are wrong to be thi2">is way, that THEY are clearly "the one who i2">is wrong", i2">I am scapegoati2">ing.

i2">It's a very subtle trap to fall i2">into. ACi2">IM refers to i2">it as the "obstacles to peace" whi2">ich your BROTHER puts i2">in front of you. i2">ie, Hi2">IS asserti2">ions of error, Hi2">IS mi2">istakes, Hi2">IS si2">ins, Hi2">IS lacks, Hi2">IS false beli2">iefs acti2">ing out. .... presented to you, as temptati2">ions.

i2">If you agree wi2">ith thi2">is wrongfulness, i2">if you i2">identi2">ify i2">it as wrong, or they are gui2">ilty of anythi2">ing, YOU must be getti2">ing a benefi2">it from i2">it.Thi2">is i2">is tough to admi2">it to because i2">it pretty much encompasses EVERYTHi2">ING PEOPLE DO wi2">ithout excepti2">ion.

i2">If they are wrong for ANY of i2">it.... you are scapegoati2">ing.i2">It doesn't matter what i2">it i2">is. There are no excepti2">ions or speci2">ial categori2">ies. i2">If you are fi2">indi2">ing them to be wrong, mi2">istaken, gui2">ilty, si2">inful, i2">incorrect, you ARE i2">in a scapegoati2">ing mode. You ARE projecti2">ing your own si2">in and gui2">ilt.

Whi2">ich means that, every si2">ingle ti2">ime you thi2">ink someone i2">is doi2">ing somethi2">ing wrong, even "i2">if they are" ... even i2">if "i2">its obvi2">ious" that i2">it's ENTi2">IRELY thei2">ir fault, and ESPECi2">IALLY then, you MUST be i2">involved i2">in a scapegoati2">ing mechani2">ism.

Si2">ince "you but accuse your brother of your own si2">ins", what that means i2">is that WHATEVER you accuse your brother of, and EVERY Ti2">IME that you accuse hi2">im, YOU ARE scapegoati2">ing. Wi2">ithout excepti2">ion.

i2">It doesn't matter the severi2">ity of thei2">ir acts, i2">it doesn't matter how mi2">istaken they are, how many ti2">imes they do i2">it, whether i2">it's i2">important or not. i2">If you fi2">ind i2">it to be wrong, you are scapegoati2">ing and are tryi2">ing to get ri2">id of some of your own gui2">ilt.

And every si2">ingle ti2">ime that you scapegoat, you are attempti2">ing to get ri2">id of gui2">ilt that i2">is i2">in YOUR mi2">ind that YOU put there. You are USi2">ING the person's "temptati2">ion" of "doi2">ing somethi2">ing wrong" as an OPPORTUNi2">ITY, to compound THEi2">IR mi2">istake, by addi2">ing yours TO i2">it, to Di2">ISGUi2">ISE your mi2">istake and mi2">ix i2">it i2">in wi2">ith thei2">irs, so that i2">it i2">is lost i2">in thei2">ir mi2">istake and associ2">iated wi2">ith them.

i2">It's li2">ike sayi2">ing, well, thi2">is person was already si2">inni2">ing, so i2">I thought i2">I'd just throw some of my si2">in onto the pi2">ile wi2">ith them so that no-one would noti2">ice there was some of my si2">in mi2">ixed i2">in there. Then i2">I can get away wi2">ith i2">it and be the i2">innocent one. Then they get to be the fall guy.

Every .... si2">ingle.... ti2">ime..... Every.... si2">ingle.... person..... Every..... si2">ingle.... judgement....... i2">is scapegoati2">ing.

Fi2">indi2">ing ANYONE to be wrong, gui2">ilty, si2">inful, or even i2">in error, means you are tryi2">ing to project your own gui2">ilt and si2">in. Even i2">if the other person seems to be VERY si2">inful. Even i2">if they are evi2">il. You sti2">ill are usi2">ing them.

Because the only truth i2">is that you and your brother are totally i2">innocent at all ti2">imes. So anythi2">ing else i2">is a mi2">istake.

i2">I have made a pretty bi2">ig mi2">istake wi2">ith ACi2">IM, and maybe you are doi2">ing the same. Sorry thi2">is i2">is a bi2">it long and rambly, i2">I'm sti2">ill comi2">ing to terms wi2">ith i2">it....

i2">I always beli2">ieved that the goal i2">in ACi2">IM was awakeni2">ing to the awareness of God's presence, whi2">ich was some ki2">ind of a si2">ingular state of bei2">ing. As i2">I read and worked wi2">ith the Course i2">it at fi2">irst seemed plausi2">ible that every reference to 'what truth i2">is li2">ike', or the hi2">igh-level metaphysi2">ics, all descri2">ibed a si2">ingle absolute state of bei2">ing/mi2">ind.

i2">I felt confused by some of the i2">interpretati2">ions of thi2">is that other people were expressi2">ing because i2">it seemed there was a level of truth deeper or 'more true' than what most other people were understandi2">ing. So i2">I felt i2">I needed to go deeper i2">into re-readi2">ing i2">it and re-learni2">ing what i2">it has to say. So i2">I started readi2">ing the urtext. And i2">I actually learned a lot, much of whi2">ich made me questi2">ion what the status quo understandi2">ing was on many topi2">ics. i2">I poli2">ished and refi2">ined my grasp of what the truth really meant, all sti2">ill wi2">ithi2">in thi2">is i2">idea of 'there i2">is only one ki2">ind of awakeni2">ing', li2">ike, ei2">ither you are totally doi2">ing i2">it perfectly or you're ki2">iddi2">ing yourself.

i2">I even saw how some people who clai2">im to be awake were sti2">ill falli2">ing short of what i2">I beli2">ieved that should really entai2">il. i2">I always felt a certai2">in fai2">ith i2">in Jesus and hi2">is example, and never could see anyone matchi2">ing up to that. Yet i2">I felt that i2">in the Course i2">it does di2">irectly speak to the ki2">ind of total mastery that he demonstrated. Thi2">is i2">included the abi2">ili2">ity to heal all si2">ickness, rai2">ise the dead, have total mastery over i2">illusi2">ions, be capable of changi2">ing form, of appeari2">ing as any ki2">ind of a body, absolute i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity (li2">iterally), not dyi2">ing si2">imply because you choose not to etc. i2">I had Jesus practi2">ically flyi2">ing around the room.

The thi2">ing i2">is, all of the metaphysi2">ics i2">in ACi2">IM seemed to poi2">int to thi2">is potenti2">ial and i2">it made total logi2">ical sense to me that we "should" be able to wi2">ield total power over all i2">illusi2">ions. Just li2">ike Jesus. So i2">I had i2">in my mi2">ind thi2">is ki2">ind of very hi2">igh-level 'goal', whi2">ich was very lofty, whi2">ich i2">I thought we were meant to stri2">ive to achi2">ieve. That was my i2">idea of what i2">it means to be fully awake, and anythi2">ing short of that was not i2">it. i2">I felt frustrated that some people were sayi2">ing they were awake and yet were clearly not demonstrati2">ing Jesus's level of mastery, and so of course that led to judgement but also confusi2">ion. Why was the Course sayi2">ing one thi2">ing and then other thi2">ings were happeni2">ing? Why were people not matchi2">ing up to Jesus's level and how i2">is i2">it possi2">ible there (obvi2">iously) has been an awakeni2">ing of some ki2">ind i2">in some people and yet they sti2">ill can't rai2">ise the dead? The Course clearly spoke of some extremely hi2">igh-level truths and i2">impli2">icati2">ions whi2">ich nobody seemed to be getti2">ing.

Well. As i2">it turns out, the Course actually encompasses several "levels" of metaphysi2">ics. i2">I had no i2">idea of thi2">is, so i2">I was always lumpi2">ing everythi2">ing together as a ki2">ind of super-level and then tryi2">ing to attai2">in that. i2">I had no i2">idea about thi2">is unti2">il Mi2">ichael Murray started to bri2">ing forward thi2">is i2">informati2">ion about "the levels", or rather, the ti2">imi2">ing of me stumbli2">ing upon hi2">is vi2">ideos and bei2">ing ready to li2">isten. Basi2">ically, there i2">is much more goi2">ing on than i2">it appears, and wi2">ithout thi2">is extra i2">informati2">ion you'll make the huge mi2">istakes i2">I've made.

i2">In very bri2">ief summary... thi2">is physi2">ical uni2">iverse i2">is only one of several levels or di2">imensi2">ions of the dream of separati2">ion. These di2">imensi2">ions are all states of mi2">ind but they also, to our senses, appear to be 'places' whi2">ich have enti2">ire uni2">iverses of thei2">ir own. The physi2">ical uni2">iverse i2">is the lowest level. Above thi2">is there i2">is a "spi2">iri2">itual uni2">iverse" whi2">ich i2">is also the level at whi2">ich the Holy Spi2">iri2">it resi2">ides. You mi2">ight've heard i2">it referred to also as the astral plane or si2">imi2">ilar. These levels are btw somewhat referred to i2">in Hi2">indui2">ism and some other reli2">igi2">ions and you mi2">ight be more fami2">ili2">iar wi2">ith them i2">if you are "new age". Anyway.. above "level 2" the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's mi2">ind, there i2">is a level 3 where our "hi2">igher self" resi2">ides, and also thi2">is i2">is where angels seem to exi2">ist, the akashi2">ic records, and also thi2">is i2">is where "the sonshi2">ip" i2">is - as separate hi2">igher selves. Above thi2">is level there i2">is a fourth level whi2">ich i2">is the level of Chri2">ist where the sonshi2">ip i2">is ONE. Jesus 'the hi2">igher self' was the fi2">irst to transcend the previ2">ious level and uni2">ify as Chri2">ist. Then above thi2">is level i2">is Heaven - God.

Ok so... here's what i2">I di2">id totally wrong and thi2">is i2">is where my spi2">iri2">ituali2">izi2">ing ego got totally screwed up, and thi2">is i2">is also probably where you are doi2">ing the same. Clearly, because there are levels to the dream beyond the physi2">ical, there are effecti2">ively di2">ifferent levels of awakeni2">ing. Thi2">is also means there are di2">ifferent levels of 'capabi2">ili2">ity' and mastery (someone at level 3 does not have mastery over level 3 because to do that you must be on level 4). Also because of these levels, there are certai2">in "capabi2">ili2">iti2">ies" that are only possi2">ible at certai2">in levels and there are certai2">in 'parts' of the Course that are di2">irectly related to certai2">in levels, e.g. the 'real world 'i2">is a very hi2">igh level thi2">ing (and nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith the physi2">ical world). Thi2">is also reveals that the Course i2">itself 'speaks' on many di2">ifferent levels, i2">in other words, i2">in relati2">ion to di2">ifferent di2">imensi2">ions of the dream and di2">ifferent uni2">iverses where the experi2">ience i2">is on a whole di2">ifferent level. Truths whi2">ich apply on one level totally superceded stuff on the levels below, so as we ASSUME that all of thi2">is i2">is just ONE Bi2">IG LEVEL, or 'the one goal', we get really messed up and confused about what's bei2">ing asked of us.

Also because of these levels, typi2">ically i2">in order to go "up" the levels you need to go i2">in sequence. You can't just jump to the 5th level or just pop i2">into heaven when you're sti2">ill down at level 1. And pretty much most of us are on level 1, me i2">included. So here's the huge mi2">istake i2">I made.

i2">In assumi2">ing there were no levels, and lumpi2">ing them all together, and i2">in becomi2">ing aware of the Chri2">ist-level truths i2">in the Course, i2">I created for myself an extremely lofty Chri2">ist-level goal, comparable to Jesus. Because i2">I can see the parts of the Course whi2">ich DO speak of/from thi2">is level (all of the course comes from the Chri2">ist level but speaks OF or as-i2">if from other levels also), thi2">is 'hi2">ighest truth' level became my concept of "the only level" or "what awakeni2">ing means".

So i2">I was basi2">ically down here on level 1, wi2">ith my bi2">ig ego, and tryi2">ing to BYPASS all the way up to the Chri2">ist level i2">in one strai2">ight shot. i2">I wanted to embody and encompass ALL of the characteri2">isti2">ics of Chri2">ist, i2">in a ki2">ind of all-or nothi2">ing grand-master-of-the-uni2">iverse power-over-everythi2">ing ultra-mastery i2">i-can-fly-around-the-room-i2">if-i2">i-li2">ike-and-there's-nothi2">ing-you-can-do-about-i2">it sort of i2">ideal. Anythi2">ing short of thi2">is was "not good enough". So now i2">I had thi2">is hugely lofty "should" or how i2">I am supposed to be, or what i2">I'm supposed to get to, or what i2">I need to reali2">ize etc. And thi2">is also i2">included thi2">is HUGE burden of 'what i2">I am responsi2">ible for'... as i2">if i2">I caused the enti2">ire uni2">iverse and everythi2">ing i2">in i2">it, all by my li2">ittle ego level-1 self, whi2">ich i2">is NOT true.

Havi2">ing thi2">is extremely lofty goal of "be Chri2">ist", bypassi2">ing all of the levels that are REQUi2">IRED to go THROUGH i2">in order to get there, put an ENORMOUS BURDEN on my shoulders. A huge wei2">ight of gui2">ilt at falli2">ing short and not even barely bei2">ing able to accompli2">ish i2">it. And beli2">ieve me i2">I tri2">ied, really hard. i2">I even attai2">ined some small abi2">ili2">ity to bri2">ing about heali2">ing through Holy Spi2">iri2">it, some of the ti2">ime, i2">in small amounts. And i2">I KNEW that the parts of the Course that speak of the Chri2">ist-level were true. So thi2">is kept me dangli2">ing from a thread, chasi2">ing after thi2">is carrot of perfecti2">ion and power, but falli2">ing way short. All thi2">is di2">id was put PRESSURE on me (and my wi2">ife) to match up to thi2">is enormous responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity whi2">ich i2">is far beyond what 'i2">I' (level 1 me) am actually capable of. Yes my Chri2">ist self i2">IS capable of such thi2">ings, but that's way above where i2">I'm at or can even GET TO or ACCESS from where i2">I'm at.

The truth i2">is that we are only really capable of goi2">ing from level 1 to level 2. The fi2">irst awakeni2">ing. Some people bypass thi2">is and jump to level 3 but only i2">in extreme rare ci2">ircumstances. The rest of us can only, and are only really asked to, go from level 1 to level 2, whi2">ich i2">in Course terms meani2">ing letti2">ing go of the persona and shadow and ali2">igni2">ing wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it's mi2">ind and letti2">ing go of the *physi2">ical* world level. Thi2">is lets us be i2">in the "spi2">iri2">itual uni2">iverse", or to move up from there. But we can't just jump to the top, especi2">ially not Wi2">ITH the ego. And that's what we're all tryi2">ing to do - a huge spi2">iri2">itual bypass i2">in whi2">ich our ego gets to try to be Chri2">ist.

So thi2">is i2">is a blow to the ego. Here's li2">ittle me down i2">in level 1 world beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I'm oh-so-spi2">iri2">itual, advanced, getti2">ing ready to graduate, beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I'm more spi2">iri2">itual than others, and fi2">indi2">ing out that i2">I actually am probably on thi2">is level BECAUSE i2">I am sti2">ill on level 1. Hah. Not level 2 or 3 or 4 or 5... level 1. Sucks! lol ... BUT the freedom comes from thi2">is reali2">izati2">ion..... you don't need to try to be Chri2">ist. You don't need to even try to be the hi2">igher self or to jump up to that level. You ONLY need to get to level 2 - the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's mi2">ind. So thi2">is somewhat lets you off the hook.

i2">It means that you can drop all of huge expectati2">ion that you're putti2">ing on yourself to be Chri2">ist-li2">ike. i2">It means you can stop tryi2">ing to rai2">ise the dead or expect yourself to be able to. i2">I have to tell you, i2">I recently got a 'sty' i2">in my eye and i2">it was sort of i2">infected and stuff, unsi2">ightly and uncomfortable, and i2">I really dug DEEP i2">into possi2">ible causes and unforgi2">ivenesses i2">in attempt to heal i2">it, because i2">I was really convi2">inced i2">I was SUPPOSED to be able to just 'make i2">it go away' wi2">ith my mi2">ind. i2">I di2">id some heali2">ing, yes, but the dam fucker di2">id not change. i2">It di2">idn't just di2">isappear. So thi2">is was a blow to the spi2">iri2">itual ego, whi2">ich thought i2">it had to be Jesus-li2">ike or that i2">it could. And i2">I had to accept i2">I just cant do that. Fuck i2">it.

But thi2">is i2">is really a reli2">ief. i2">It's a huge reli2">ief to reali2">ize that you do not have to "try" to be chri2">ist. You do not have to be responsi2">ible for stuff that i2">is i2">in "the scri2">ipt" - a scri2">ipt wri2">itten by and powered by a mi2">ind far huger than yours i2">is now. You don't have to try to be thi2">is dead-rai2">isi2">ing master. You don't have to turn water i2">into wi2">ine or be some extraordi2">inary guru. You're not capable of that unti2">il probably the 5th di2">imensi2">ional awakeni2">ing. You don't have to blame yourself for all the shi2">it that comes from the unconsci2">ious mi2">ind that you are not consci2">iously choosi2">ing, as i2">if i2">it's all your fault. You don't have to own every si2">ingle li2">ittle thi2">ing that happens as i2">if, just by i2">it happeni2">ing, i2">it proves that you SUCK and that you're a total course fai2">ilure. You don't have to keep beati2">ing yourself up for "not doi2">ing the course ri2">ight" i2">ie not matchi2">ing up to the ki2">ind of capabi2">ili2">iti2">ies that you pretty much CANNOT accompli2">ish unti2">il you ARE at the Chri2">ist level, whi2">ich i2">is not goi2">ing to happen unti2">il you've at least gone through 2 or 3 other levels of awakeni2">ing.

So there's all thi2">is huge wei2">ight of gui2">ilt and expectati2">ion that we've all been putti2">ing on ourselves because we're all tryi2">ing to li2">ive up to thi2">is extraordi2">inary goal of bei2">ing Chri2">ist when, i2">in fact, from thi2">is level 1, we can only really be expected to get to level 2. i2">It's true that there i2">is no world and i2">its just a dream and that the Chri2">ist mi2">ind can create planets... ok... but li2">ittle me, li2">ittle you... at level 1, no, there i2">isn't goi2">ing to be any planets getti2">ing made. So that's not somethi2">ing you can be responsi2">ible for. We have thi2">is hugely i2">inflated spi2">iri2">itual ego (ok, speaki2">ing for myself, but i2">I bet you do too) that's tryi2">ing to clai2">im the "power" of bei2">ing Chri2">ist whi2">ile sti2">ill bei2">ing very li2">imi2">ited and i2">incapable.

We have to stop putti2">ing level 3/4/5+ reali2">iti2">ies and responsi2">ibi2">ili2">iti2">ies and powers onto our shoulders as level 1 ego folks and stop expecti2">ing ourselves to li2">ive up to thi2">is hugely lofty standard. WE have to accept that we are NOT at the level of Jesus and probably very few people are goi2">ing to be. We have to accept that even the best of the best of the ACi2">IM teachers aren't even at that level. Not even the enli2">ightened gurus and yogi2">is necessari2">ily at that level. All we need to do i2">is do our Si2">IMPLE job of forgi2">iveness and development of trust i2">in Holy Spi2">iri2">it and come i2">into hi2">is mi2">ind and accept hi2">is truth and hi2">is way of percei2">ivi2">ing. The other levels and the potency and power of those other levels wi2">ill follow on from there naturally as the 'next steps'. But we can't just bypass and jump to those steps. And we have to admi2">it we've been doi2">ing thi2">is, our spi2">iri2">ituali2">ized egos are about to POP, and we can take a bi2">ig si2">igh of reli2">ief that we're NOT supposed to expect such huge thi2">ings of ourselves.

Thi2">is should reli2">ieve us of all the gui2">ilt, all the sense of fai2">ilure, all of the exasperati2">ion at not getti2">ing i2">it, all of the fear and gui2">ilt and frustrati2">ion that we have to accompli2">ish Chri2">ist-level capabi2">ili2">iti2">ies otherwi2">ise we're goi2">ing to di2">ie, etc. We have to stri2">ip i2">it all back. Let go of the hi2">ighest goals. Focus on the NEXT step whi2">ich i2">is just getti2">ing to level 2 - Holy Spi2">iri2">it's level, and letti2">ing go of the i2">idea that our LEVEL 1 EGO i2">is EVER goi2">ing to be capable of bei2">ing at the Chri2">ist level, LET ALONE even level 2. And yet i2">it's tryi2">ing. i2">It's been tryi2">ing hard thi2">is whole ti2">ime to li2">ive up to some ki2">ind of uni2">iverse-creati2">ing mega goal. i2">It loves to. Even though i2">it's a total fai2">ilure at i2">it. So we can at least admi2">it, we don't have to thi2">ink of ourselves as total fai2">ilures any more because we were never meant to be level-5 ego's to begi2">in wi2">ith.

All thi2">is comes from the clari2">ity that the Course contai2">ins levels, that we're on level 1 tryi2">ing to get to level 2, and that everythi2">ing else i2">is i2">irrelevant. Yes at some poi2">int we wi2">ill create planets but not today. Fi2">irst thi2">ings fi2">irst. One step at a ti2">ime. We're getti2">ing ahead of ourselves and our expectati2">ion and fear of not bei2">ing able to match up to the hi2">igh-level truths i2">is, thankfully, not even bei2">ing asked of us ri2">ight now.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh.

Recently i2">I was i2">in the car dri2">ivi2">ing home from getti2">ing food, and felt thi2">is ki2">ind of tensi2">ion or frustrati2">ion wi2">ith people. i2">I was i2">in a certai2">in mood and deci2">ided to suddenly start telli2">ing everyone that i2">I love them. Of course.. from i2">insi2">ide the car, traveli2">ing at speed, wi2">ith the wi2">indows shut ;-)

i2">I felt li2">ike there had been just years and years of people passi2">ing by wi2">ithout bei2">ing lovi2">ing, people turni2">ing thei2">ir faces away, people avoi2">idi2">ing each other i2">in gui2">ilt, a lack of connecti2">ion, a lack of expressi2">ion. That i2">it had boi2">iled up to a certai2">in poi2">int where i2">it just seemed li2">ike i2">I wanted to grab ahold of everyone and shake them and tell them i2">I loved them.

So i2">I someone broke the mold and started shouti2">ing at everyone i2">I saw, passers by on the street, people dri2">ivi2">ing cars, people i2">in store wi2">indows, that i2">I loved them. Of course, i2">insi2">ide the car, wi2">ith the wi2">indows shut ;-)

i2">It felt li2">ike a reli2">ief, to at last have a normal, love-based expressi2">ion come out toward people i2">in spi2">ite of thei2">ir refusal to be loved or thei2">ir own lack of love expressi2">ion. i2">It was li2">ike, someone has to say somethi2">ing. i2">I couldn't tolerate any more the cold shoulder and the spi2">iri2">itual poverty. So i2">I forced some love out. And i2">it felt really good.

i2">In fact i2">it felt so good, such a reli2">ief, i2">it was li2">ike taki2">ing years of rejecti2">ion off my shoulders. And i2">it made me laugh so much for a long ti2">ime. i2">It seemed so funny and freei2">ing.

i2">I thi2">ink i2">in a way thi2">is was one of the recent steps i2">I've been goi2">ing through i2">in "breaki2">ing through" the barri2">iers of condi2">iti2">ional love, and ego hi2">ierarchy, and movi2">ing towards uncondi2">iti2">ional love. Lovi2">ing when i2">it doesn't seem called for, or even wanted. And lovi2">ing just because... i2">it's natural and healthy and everyone i2">is supposed to be doi2">ing i2">it all the ti2">ime.

Thi2">is world i2">is really consti2">ipated. i2">It's needs love but rejects love. We can't keep ourselves bound by these chai2">ins. We have to break free.

Affi2">irmi2">ing what i2">is NOT true, and what i2">IS true, can i2">induce mi2">iracles.

Wi2">ith regards to si2">ickness for example, you must "cancel" every si2">ingle percepti2">ion or beli2">ief that suggests the si2">ickness even EXi2">ISTS, or any other surroundi2">ing beli2">iefs based on that.

e.g. "there i2">is no si2">ickness" "thi2">is si2">ickness i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion" "i2">I am not si2">ick" "i2">I am not bei2">ing affected by my body" "my body i2">is not the cause of me" "these symptoms are not real" "thi2">is si2">ickness i2">isn’t happeni2">ing" "i2">I am not caused by pai2">in" "thi2">is si2">ickness has no power over me" "Nothi2">ing unreal exi2">ists" etc

Then, you can swi2">itch i2">it around to the affi2">irmati2">ive, to emphasi2">ize the truth, whi2">ich should focus squarely on who you are i2">IN TRUTH - your i2">immortal, holy, di2">ivi2">ine, eternally ali2">ive, i2">incapable-of-sufferi2">ing self, made of love.

e.g. "Thi2">is si2">ickness has alread gone" "i2">I am free of thi2">is" "i2">I cannot be si2">ick because i2">I am i2">immortal" "si2">ickness cannot happen to a son of God" "i2">I must have chosen thi2">is myself" "i2">I am responsi2">ible for maki2">ing thi2">is si2">ickness" "i2">I choose to be ali2">ive" "i2">I am the li2">ife of God" "i2">I cannot be attacked" "Nothi2">ing real can be threatened" "i2">I am free from thi2">is" "i2">I need not suffer" "i2">I am already perfect" "i2">I am as God created me" etc

The i2">important thi2">ing here i2">is to always equate anythi2">ing even sli2">ightly short of total i2">immortali2">ity wi2">ith "ego" whi2">ich i2">is FALSE and NOT true. And to always equate the Hi2">IGHEST TRUTH about you wi2">ith the truth.

Ei2">ither you are absolutely permanently i2">innocent, safe, healthy, happy and loved, OR anythi2">ing short of that i2">IS A TOTAL Li2">IE. All you are doi2">ing i2">is becomi2">ing CLEAR about whi2">ich i2">is whi2">ich. Put the true stuff i2">in the TRUTH box, put the bullshi2">it i2">in the FALSE box.

Thi2">is Wi2">ILL challenge your beli2">iefs, i2">in order to be EXTREMELY black and whi2">ite about i2">it. Symptoms, feeli2">ings, upsets, sufferi2">ing of any ki2">ind, bad thoughts, mental experi2">iences, whatever... must be categori2">ized stri2">ictly. i2">It’s ei2">ither true, or i2">its false. Nothi2">ing i2">in between.

Thi2">is wi2">ill challenge you because i2">it means anythi2">ing short of i2">IMMORTALi2">ITY i2">is a li2">ie. Si2">ickness i2">is a li2">ie. Sufferi2">ing i2">is a li2">ie. Gui2">ilt i2">is a li2">ie. Fear i2">is a li2">ie. Si2">in i2">is a li2">ie. Death i2">is a li2">ie. Symptoms are not real. Sufferi2">ing i2">is fake. There i2">is NO TRUTH i2">IN i2">IT.

i2">If you want heali2">ing and happi2">iness and wholeness, you MUST stretch your mi2">ind to CHANGE i2">its beli2">iefs, i2">if i2">it keeps tryi2">ing to beli2">ieve that ANY form of sufferi2">ing i2">is real or true. That means questi2">ioni2">ing deeply held beli2">iefs about the body, about li2">ife and death, about si2">ickness, and about what i2">is real. i2">If you want to go ALL the way to Atonement and Resurrecti2">ion, every i2">illusi2">ion must be RECOGNi2">IZED as false, and the truth must be RECOGNi2">IZED as true.

"Only the truth i2">is true." The truth about you i2">is extremely lofty. You have to be wi2">illi2">ing to let that be true of you. YOU ARE PURE LOVE. YOU ARE i2">IMMORTAL SPi2">IRi2">IT. YOU ARE NOT A BODY. YOU CANNOT Di2">IE. Embrace i2">it and li2">ive forever i2">in happi2">iness and peace.

When someone seems to di2">ie, i2">it i2">is an opportuni2">ity. Ei2">ither you can experi2">ience the death as a symbol of separati2">ion, or as meani2">ing nothi2">ing has happened at all (the atonement).

When you experi2">ience i2">it as separati2">ion, you wi2">ill resi2">ist i2">it and a you'll thi2">ink of i2">it as bei2">ing an end. You'll thi2">ink somethi2">ing has been lost. Someone bad has happened. Somethi2">ing sad has occurred. Somethi2">ing of value has ended. Because these all take the i2">illusi2">ion of 'an end' and beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is real. i2">IF somethi2">ing really has ended, then all of these experi2">iences would be appropri2">iate. So i2">it really depends on how you see thi2">ings.

i2">Its possi2">ible when someone 'di2">ies' to not have an experi2">ience of there havi2">ing been an end at all. You can thi2">ink of i2">it as the person transi2">iti2">ioni2">ing to a di2">ifferent place, that they conti2">inue on, and there hasn't been an end at all. Just li2">ike a change of rooms, or movi2">ing to a di2">ifferent locati2">ion. Nothi2">ing i2">is lost, there hasn't become an absence of value, separati2">ion hasn't been i2">increased, the person hasn't been di2">imi2">ini2">ished, who and what they are hasn't had anythi2">ing happen to them, and, essenti2">ially, i2">its nothi2">ing to be upset about. You can see thi2">ings thi2">is way, but only i2">if you really are ready and wi2">illi2">ing to do so, whi2">ich means havi2">ing to questi2">ion separati2">ion and all of i2">its forms, whi2">ich can take a lot of ti2">ime and forgi2">iveness.

So i2">it's okay i2">if you are i2">in the 'somethi2">ing really happened' camp, havi2">ing the feeli2">ings, feeli2">ing gri2">ief and loss and separati2">ion. Those are normal 'natural' feeli2">ings to have i2">IF you are percei2">ivi2">ing that "real death" has happened. But thi2">is i2">isn't the only way to i2">interpret death. i2">It's also possi2">ible to recogni2">ize that nothi2">ing has happened. The person i2">is not affected. They are Chri2">ist. They are i2">immortal spi2">iri2">it. They are not a body. They never were a body. They have not ended and nothi2">ing has really come to an end at all. i2">It's just a conti2">inuati2">ion of li2">ife - eternal li2">ife. That's the only real truth about i2">it. And when you can experi2">ience i2">it i2">in thi2">is way, not beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in separati2">ion and not USi2">ING i2">it to separate, you can be free of the 'si2">ide effects' of gri2">ief, loss, sadness, loneli2">iness, anger etc... ALL of whi2">ich ari2">ise out of *beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in* separati2">ion, whi2">ich i2">is a choi2">ice.

So when we get REAAAALLY honest and spi2">iri2">itual about thi2">is... i2">it i2">is i2">in fact our OWN beli2">ief i2">in separati2">ion whi2">ich creates all sense of gri2">ief and loss. i2">It i2">is our own beli2">ief i2">in i2">it that gi2">ives i2">it i2">its power. The percepti2">ions we have of somethi2">ing 'real' bei2">ing lost or endi2">ing i2">IS an opti2">ional way to percei2">ive and you do not HAVE to percei2">ive thi2">is way. There i2">is another way. You can choose not to beli2">ieve i2">in separati2">ion at all and you can choose not to use death as an attack or a demonstrati2">ion that ends are real.

So we have to admi2">it that, even though when we percei2">ive someone has di2">ied, whi2">ich Wi2">ILL make us very upset because we thi2">ink separati2">ion has happened, WE are the one who i2">is actually choosi2">ing to percei2">ive separati2">ion and to USE the death to rei2">inforce our beli2">ief i2">in separati2">ion. AND, the use of i2">it for that purpose i2">IS i2">in fact usi2">ing i2">it to prove that GOD i2">IS DEAD... whi2">ich i2">is not exactly an i2">insi2">igni2">ifi2">icant si2">ide-effect. i2">In fact i2">it i2">is the ego's secret i2">intenti2">ion, to make sure that all of the gri2">ief and upset and anger and abandonment that stems from 'they left me' or 'they di2">ied' i2">is actually secretly WANTED, because i2">it rei2">inforces the beli2">ief that we are separate from God and thi2">is i2">is preci2">isely what our li2">ittle ego wants to accompli2">ish. So whi2">ile we are i2">in gri2">ief, we MUST also be secretly glad that the person or whatever has 'really di2">ied', and that there has really been a separati2">ion, because wi2">ithout that beli2">ief i2">in separati2">ion you CANNOT GRi2">IEVE. There i2">is no loss.

Thi2">is i2">is all very hard to accept, of course. But that doesn't mean i2">it i2">is i2">impossi2">ible, and i2">it i2">IS what i2">is REQUi2">IRED to come to i2">if we are to FULLY accept Holy Spi2">iri2">it's heali2">ing and Jesus's truth and God's reali2">ity. We HAVE to be wi2">illi2">ing to stop usi2">ing death to dri2">ive a wedge between ourselves and others. We have to stop usi2">ing i2">it as an ATTACK on them AND on ourselves.

i2">In fact, when we use death to make a demonstrati2">ion/statement about how the person 'does not exi2">ist', that i2">is an ATTACK on that person. That i2">isn't exactly a way of honori2">ing them, and i2">it i2">isn't a way of respecti2">ing them or acknowledgi2">ing thei2">ir li2">ife or thei2">ir i2">innocence. Why do we launch automati2">ically i2">into an atti2">itude of "you're dead" as soon as the person croaks? i2">It's ki2">ind of li2">ike ki2">icki2">ing the door shut as they leave, havi2">ing just thrown them under the bus. Hardly lovi2">ing or appreci2">iati2">ive of who they are OR the fact that they are i2">immortal. We effecti2">ively "celebrate the fact they di2">ied", regardless of the fact that we do i2">it wi2">ith tears and gri2">ief and sadness, when i2">instead we should be celebrati2">ing that they are ALi2">IVE. Maybe i2">if we celebrated thei2">ir i2">immortali2">ity they WOULD NOT Di2">IE and i2">instead be HEALED? Hmmm, fancy that. So yes, now you're responsi2">ible for thei2">ir death because you di2">id not offer them heali2">ing. ;-)

We have to stop maki2">ing out that i2">it's ALL terri2">ible and bad that a person 'really di2">ied' because we're only bei2">ing di2">ishonest about our ego moti2">ives. And we have to stop maki2">ing out that when bodi2">ies 'di2">ie', there i2">is an end of any ki2">ind. Ends are separati2">ions and separati2">ions are NOT REAL.

Jesus sai2">id, "let the dead bury the dead". Thi2">is means, the people who beli2">ieve i2">in death - who are thus already dead themselves - are the only ones who VALUE i2">it and are the only ones who GRi2">IEVE and are the only ones who BELi2">IEVE i2">it has really happened and therefore they are the only ones who NEED a funeral. And when you thi2">ink about i2">it, although we love to hark on about the speci2">ialness of a person at a funeral - and i2">I know thi2">is wi2">ill push some buttons so i2">I apologi2">ize - but let's be truthful. .. we must si2">imultaneously be glad that the person i2">is dead because i2">if death i2">is real that means we WANTED i2">it. There i2">is no escapi2">ing that. Ei2">ither we support death or we don't. Ei2">ither we say "yes death happened" or "there i2">is only li2">ife". Whi2">ich wi2">ill you choose? And what you choose wi2">ill completely determi2">ine the 'reacti2">ions' that you'll have when such events seem to transpi2">ire.

i2">I am wri2">iti2">ing thi2">is partly because my Grandfather di2">ied yesterday. And i2">I was thi2">inki2">ing that i2">I would or should feel upset, and Jesus stopped me, and he asked, "why?"... or more to the poi2">int, i2">it was an asserti2">ion of strength that... NO.. you do not have to enter i2">into percepti2">ions of gri2">ief and loss and separati2">ion. You don't. i2">It's opti2">ional. i2">I can choose to focus on the TRUTH, whi2">ich i2">is that my "grandfather" i2">is actually secretly CHRi2">IST and he i2">is completely i2">immortal and i2">innocent and nothi2">ing has ever happened to hi2">im, and he has never di2">ied, and he was never a body. i2">If i2">I DON'T percei2">ive and beli2">ieve thi2">is (wi2">ithout bei2">ing i2">in deni2">ial ei2">ither - thi2">is i2">is about honesty), then i2">I am li2">iterally also sayi2">ing that i2">I AM DEAD AS WELL... or that i2">I Di2">IED Wi2">ITH Hi2">IM.

To the ego what happens to others does not happen to us, due to the sense of separati2">ion - "he i2">is dead, but i2">I am ali2">ive, poor sod, rather hi2">im than me". But i2">in truth, we are all joi2">ined and we are all ONE. And what we beli2">ieve i2">is true of others we HAVE to beli2">ieve i2">it appli2">ies to us also, whether consci2">iously or unconsci2">iously. So i2">if i2">I beli2">ieve, ok, yes, that person i2">is dead and separati2">ion i2">is real and there has been a great bi2">ig loss... then... that's what i2">I'm sayi2">ing about MYSELF, and i2">it's what i2">I'm sayi2">ing about my relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith God!

Because ulti2">imately, all 'deaths' are symboli2">ic expressi2">ions of the ego's attempt to destroy God, at whi2">ich i2">it chuckles wi2">ith a si2">ini2">ister laugh and wri2">ings i2">its hands i2">in glee. So i2">I wi2">ill not be party to that - to MY OWN death vi2">icari2">iously through that of another. i2">I wi2">ill not be party to the support of the i2">idea of death and i2">I wi2">ill not be party to rei2">inforci2">ing the i2">idea that the Son of God can be ki2">illed or that God i2">is dead. And that means, i2">I wi2">ill only acknowledge our shared eternal li2">ife - that we are i2">invulnerable and everlasti2">ing and DEATH HAS NOT OCCURRED.

So thanks Granddad for all the li2">ife and death that you demonstrated, but i2">it's not true and i2">I'm not buyi2">ing i2">it. And i2">I know you sti2">ill exi2">ist, so your cover i2">is blown and death di2">idn't work. Oh well.

God i2">is li2">ife. "i2">I can see peace i2">instead of thi2">is". And i2">I beli2">ieve my Gramps would be proud of my standi2">ing up FOR hi2">im by supporti2">ing hi2">is Li2">IFE rather than maki2">ing hi2">is i2">illusi2">ion of death i2">into a bi2">ig drama. i2">I do not feel upset and i2">I don't beli2">ieve i2">I'm i2">in deni2">ial. Nothi2">ing has happened and death doesn't mean anythi2">ing.

The great li2">ie of the world i2">is that we are all separate. Each of our bodi2">ies testi2">ifi2">ies to thi2">is. i2">I have my own body, my own feeli2">ings, my own mi2">ind, my own thoughts, my own beli2">iefs. i2">It seems that you have your own as well, and mi2">ine i2">is separate from yours. We don't seem to really share anythi2">ing. And any changes i2">I make seem not to affect you.

Thi2">is i2">is what bodi2">ies were desi2">igned to do. They were meant to be "separati2">ion devi2">ices", to separate me off from you, to i2">isolate each of us i2">in our own li2">ittle pri2">isons, keepi2">ing us apart. They were made to i2">imply that nothi2">ing i2">is shared, what i2">is mi2">ine i2">is not yours, i2">I am not li2">ike you, we are not the same i2">in any way, i2">I am uni2">ique and so are you. We're cut off and di2">ifferent. What i2">I have you lack. What you have i2">I lack. And thus we have no oneness.

But thi2">is i2">is utterly completely opposi2">ite to the nature of spi2">iri2">it and mi2">ind as God created i2">it. i2">It's utterly opposi2">ite to your true nature, and mi2">ine as well. We're not meant to thi2">ink of ourselves as separate from each other, shari2">ing nothi2">ing, not overlappi2">ing, or kept at arm's length. We have to transcend the li2">imi2">its of the body enti2">irely.

The truth i2">is that there i2">is a part of you whi2">ich i2">is shared by me. And there i2">is a part of me that i2">is shared by you. Ki2">ind of li2">ike one thi2">ing whi2">ich has two people controlli2">ing i2">it si2">imultaneously. Ki2">ind of li2">ike si2">iamese twi2">ins, wi2">ith two heads and one torso. There i2">is actually some of you i2">in me and vi2">ice versa. There are actually aspects of your self whi2">ich i2">is what i2">I am, and aspects of my own self whi2">ich i2">is you.

i2">In truth we are joi2">ined together as one. i2">In truth we share everythi2">ing. And thi2">is i2">is not i2">in any way the same thi2">ing as shari2">ing between two separate people, where they remai2">in separate but there i2">is some ki2">ind of transfer between them to bri2">idge the gap. i2">It's a real shari2">ing where i2">I li2">iterally am overlappi2">ing wi2">ith where you are located, and vi2">ice versa. Where we are li2">iterally fused together as one thi2">ing, but from two vantage poi2">ints. One mi2">ind, wi2">ith two focal poi2">ints.

Because of thi2">is, we are actually part of a collecti2">ive consci2">iousness. And the really bi2">ig thi2">ing i2">is thi2">is. Everythi2">ing that i2">I do or thi2">ink or feel or choose or beli2">ieve, affects the enti2">ire uni2">iverse. And everythi2">ing you do or thi2">ink or feel or choose or beli2">ieve, affects the enti2">ire uni2">iverse. i2">If i2">I li2">ift myself up, i2">it must li2">ift you up i2">in some way as well because i2">I am a part of your self. i2">If you li2">ift yourself up, i2">I must be li2">ifted up i2">in some way because part of me i2">is you.

We are NOT i2">isolated, alone, separate, cut-off, i2">impri2">isoned, separated, orphaned, di2">ivorced, abandoned, relegated, spli2">it apart or confi2">ined. Everythi2">ing that we each do, affects us both. And even affects the whole sonshi2">ip beyond us. What that means i2">is that there are no pri2">ivate thoughts. Not si2">imply from the vantage poi2">int of there bei2">ing two separate people who send thought transmi2">issi2">ions across the gap between them whi2">ich they pi2">ick up on, but where my mi2">ind and your mi2">ind are li2">iterally welded together such that when i2">I thi2">ink somethi2">ing YOU thi2">ink i2">it wi2">ith me. Part of your thought process i2">is taki2">ing place i2">in my mi2">ind and vi2">ice versa.

Jesus teaches si2">imi2">ilarly that i2">if i2">I am healed, i2">I am never healed alone. i2">If some ki2">ind of heali2">ing takes place for me, i2">it i2">is also on behalf of the whole uni2">iverse, whi2">ich i2">is the sonshi2">ip (not spaceti2">ime). Jesus also tells us that we are not alone i2">in experi2">ienci2">ing the effects of our thoughts. That i2">if i2">I have a thought, both me and you are affected by i2">it. And your thoughts affect me. Not i2">in terms of you sendi2">ing them over to me across a bri2">ick wall but i2">in terms of part of me BEi2">ING you and vi2">ice versa, SHARi2">ING those effects as one, transcendentally of space of ti2">ime.

Jesus i2">is even telli2">ing us that vi2">isi2">ion transcends all spati2">ial li2">imi2">itati2">ions, depends not on any thi2">ing physi2">ical, can see and experi2">ience wi2">ithout regard for di2">istance or seemi2">ing remoteness. Si2">imply because you can BE everywhere, i2">in everyone. Thi2">is i2">is the true nature of mi2">ind, that i2">it i2">is not really naturally li2">imi2">ited to any one locati2">ion at a ti2">ime. Or to any one person at a ti2">ime.

What thi2">is also leads to i2">is a matter of responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. Anythi2">ing that i2">I thi2">ink affects the whole world. Anythi2">ing you thi2">ink affects the whole world. i2">In that sense, and gi2">iven that these thoughts are never pri2">ivate or i2">isolated from anyone, everyone experi2">iences the effects of our thoughts, and therefore i2">I have to consi2">ider that i2">I need to "thi2">ink responsi2">ibly", and wi2">ithout gui2">ilt, because my thoughts are actually affecti2">ing everyone.

i2">I thi2">ink on behalf of everyone, just as you do, and just as everyone does. And all our mi2">inds are joi2">ined. Whi2">ich means that we're sort of li2">ike thi2">is one tapestry where each of us seems anchored to the fabri2">ic of i2">it i2">in di2">ifferent places, but i2">if i2">I pull upwards i2">I'm pulli2">ing you all wi2">ith me. And i2">if you pull down you're goi2">ing to drag a lot of others down wi2">ith you. Unless of course they are pulli2">ing up at the same ti2">ime. Thi2">is means that we really are all a TEAM. Because we have to now consi2">ider that EACH PART of the sonshi2">ip i2">INFLUENCES THE WHOLE.

You ARE part of a holographi2">ic system and si2">ince you are the whole of the sonshi2">ip at the same ti2">ime as bei2">ing part of i2">it, your relati2">ionshi2">ip i2">INCLUDES everyone. i2">It affects everyone. Every thought i2">is offered to everyone. Every heali2">ing bri2">ings peace to everyone. Maybe i2">in ways they mi2">ight not enti2">irely be aware of but i2">in some way on some level, everyone affects everyone.

Thi2">is also bri2">ings me to the proper understandi2">ing of why joi2">ined mi2">inds produce the heali2">ing of si2">ickness i2">in others. A part of your mi2">ind i2">is actually my mi2">ind. And my mi2">ind i2">is part of your mi2">ind. We are NOT separated off wi2">ith enti2">irely i2">isolated mi2">inds. Our mi2">inds overlap and are shared. i2">I actually mani2">ipulate part of your mi2">ind, so to speak, and you mani2">ipulate part of mi2">ine. Our mi2">inds are actually one and shared. Mutual mi2">inds. Li2">ike two people dri2">ivi2">ing the same bus.

So let's say you beli2">ieve i2">in your part of the mi2">ind that you are si2">ick, whi2">ich i2">is really an attempt to beli2">ieve the whole sonshi2">ip i2">is si2">ick. And then let's say that normally thi2">is beli2">ief would attempt to weaken me and others. But then let's say that i2">I'm i2">in a parti2">icularly lovi2">ing space i2">in my mi2">ind whi2">ich i2">is more powerful than your asserti2">ion of weakness.

i2">If i2">I choose to beli2">ieve that there i2">is nothi2">ing wrong wi2">ith you, whi2">ile you are beli2">ievi2">ing there i2">is somethi2">ing wrong wi2">ith you, i2">I overri2">ide your beli2">ief. The part of your mi2">ind whi2">ich i2">is shared wi2">ith me, whi2">ich i2">is my mi2">ind, changes your beli2">ief FOR you. Part of your mi2">ind i2">is i2">in me. i2">If i2">I change my mi2">ind, i2">I am li2">iterally changi2">ing a part of your mi2">ind. And that actually i2">influences what you mi2">ight thi2">ink of as the rest of your own mi2">ind.

As Jesus says, when you do not beli2">ieve the falsehoods that your brother beli2">ieves about hi2">imself, you weaken hi2">is own beli2">ief i2">in bei2">ing faulty. And so you weaken hi2">is si2">ickness. i2">If your mi2">ind, whi2">ich i2">is part of hi2">is, and hi2">is as part of yours, asserts strongly that your brother and you are not si2">ick, then you are actually taki2">ing a part of Hi2">IS mi2">ind (as yours) and are causi2">ing i2">it to not beli2">ieve i2">in si2">ickness. And so he cannot get "hi2">is" mi2">ind to project si2">ickness onto hi2">is body because YOU, as part of hi2">is mi2">ind, are not allowi2">ing i2">it.

Thi2">is i2">is why Jesus says that you are your brother's keeper. Thi2">is i2">is why he says you should not allow your brother to be si2">ick. Thi2">is i2">is why you are i2">in a sense responsi2">ible for everyone, because your contri2">ibuti2">ion to thei2">ir experi2">ience i2">is part of the fact that your mi2">inds are shared.

i2">It's not si2">imply that you are joi2">ini2">ing mi2">inds, because God actually joi2">ined all mi2">inds together i2">in the creati2">ion. But movi2">ing away from the beli2">ief i2">in bei2">ing separate/i2">isolated and returni2">ing to an awareness that your mi2">inds ARE joi2">ined, naturally, lets you tap i2">into the abi2">ili2">ity to i2">influence the mi2">inds of others more consci2">iously. And naturally thi2">is openness to shari2">ing i2">is rooted i2">in love, so can only be used for good.

So i2">instead of seei2">ing ourselves as separate people, li2">ivi2">ing separate li2">ives i2">in separate bodi2">ies, as i2">if everythi2">ing we thi2">ink and do i2">is utterly i2">isolated and affects no-one else, we need to really thi2">ink of ourselves as part of a combi2">ined mi2">ind-mesh, part of a team, part of a collecti2">ive hi2">ive mi2">ind, and there i2">isn't anythi2">ing we can thi2">ink wi2">ithout i2">it bei2">ing shared by everyone i2">in that collecti2">ive. And any effects whi2">ich those thoughts mi2">ight produce are goi2">ing to be shared by everyone.

Thi2">is i2">is also of course the foundati2">ion for shared i2">interests. Because i2">if mi2">ind i2">is really yours AND your brother's, then what you use i2">it for i2">is bei2">ing used on hi2">is behalf as well as your own. As per the golden rule, whatever appli2">ies to hi2">im appli2">ies to you equally. Thi2">is i2">is also why Jesus says that forgi2">iveness i2">is not real unless i2">it bri2">ings a heali2">ing to both your brother and yourself. Your heali2">ing i2">IS Hi2">IS heali2">ing. When you heal, HE ALSO i2">is healed along wi2">ith you i2">in a very di2">irect way - because he i2">is part of your self.

And further, thi2">is also tells us that forgi2">iveness i2">is not just a gi2">ift of heali2">ing you gi2">ive to yourself, i2">it i2">is also somethi2">ing that extends and i2">is gi2">iven to everyone. i2">If you are healed you become an i2">instrument of heali2">ing. i2">If you are the li2">ight you shed li2">ight i2">into other's mi2">inds and enli2">ighten them. i2">If you are fi2">illed wi2">ith the Holy Spi2">iri2">it you can fi2">ill others wi2">ith the Holy Spi2">iri2">it. i2">If you are whole you can make others whole. And atonement i2">is a lesson i2">in shari2">ing, not a lesson i2">in i2">isolated enli2">ightenment.

When you forgi2">ive, you actually do heal both yourself and the mi2">ind of your brother. When you forgi2">ive and undo your beli2">ief i2">in someone bei2">ing si2">ick, you do actually i2">in fact undo some of thei2">ir beli2">ief i2">in bei2">ing si2">ick. Thi2">is i2">is sort of ti2">ied i2">into the i2">idea of "holdi2">ing them i2">in the li2">ight", not through some wi2">ishful thi2">inki2">ing that the li2">ight mi2">ight rub off on them but much moreso the fact that si2">ince you ARE them, you bei2">ing the li2">ight "forces" them to be the li2">ight also.

Your mi2">ind i2">influences other people! Your mi2">ind i2">is not JUST your mi2">ind. i2">It i2">is yours AND i2">it belongs to others. You are thi2">inki2">ing on behalf of everyone. Your whole resurrecti2">ion i2">is for the benefi2">it of the enti2">ire sonshi2">ip. Thi2">is i2">is why Jesus's resurrecti2">ion reconnected the ENTi2">IRE sonshi2">ip to God, and why i2">in hi2">is awakeni2">ing YOU woke up i2">in some way to some degree as well. How could the whole world not be affected by such an event? Jesus di2">id i2">in fact "save you" from the beli2">ief i2">in si2">in, through hi2">is own atonement.

i2">I am you and you are me and we are one and everyone i2">is us and we are all the collecti2">ive sonshi2">ip fami2">ily of God. i2">If i2">I choose the li2">ight, you're comi2">ing wi2">ith me.

"And as you let yourself be healed, you see all those around you, or who cross your mi2">ind, or whom you touch, or those who seem to have no contact wi2">ith you, healed along wi2">ith you. Perhaps you wi2">ill not recogni2">ize them all, nor reali2">ize how great your offeri2">ing to all the world, when you let heali2">ing come to you. But you are never healed alone. And legi2">ions upon legi2">ions wi2">ill recei2">ive the gi2">ift whi2">ich you recei2">ive when you are healed."

"Your body can be means to teach that i2">it has never suffered pai2">in because of hi2">im. And i2">in i2">its heali2">ing can i2">it offer hi2">im mute testi2">imony to hi2">is i2">innocence. i2">It i2">is THi2">IS testi2">imony that can speak wi2">ith power greater than a thousand tongues. For here i2">is hi2">is forgi2">iveness PROVED to hi2">im. A mi2">iracle can offer nothi2">ing LESS to hi2">im than i2">it has gi2">iven unto you. So does your heali2">ing show your mi2">ind i2">is healed, and has forgi2">iven what he di2">id NOT do. And so i2">is HE convi2">inced hi2">is i2">innocence was never lost, and healed along wi2">ith you."

"Attest hi2">is i2">innocence and NOT hi2">is gui2">ilt. YOUR heali2">ing i2">is hi2">is comfort and Hi2">IS health. "

"Forgi2">iveness i2">is not real UNLESS i2">it bri2">ings a heali2">ing to your brother AND yourself. YOU must attest hi2">is si2">ins had no effect on YOU, to demonstrate they were not real. How else COULD he be gui2">iltless? And how COULD hi2">is i2">innocence be justi2">ifi2">ied UNLESS hi2">is si2">ins have no effect to WARRANT gui2">ilt? Si2">ins are beyond forgi2">iveness just BECAUSE they would entai2">il effects whi2">ich CANNOT be undone and overlooked enti2">irely. i2">In thei2">ir UNDOi2">ING li2">ies the proof that they were merely errors. LET yourself be healed, that you may be forgi2">ivi2">ing, offeri2">ing salvati2">ion to your brother AND yourself."

"Then let hi2">im turn wi2">ithi2">in to hi2">is Eternal Gui2">ide, and let Hi2">im Judge what the response should be. So i2">is he healed, and i2">in hi2">is heali2">ing i2">is hi2">is pupi2">il healed wi2">ith hi2">im. The sole responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of God's teacher i2">is to accept the Atonement for hi2">imself. Atonement means correcti2">ion, or the undoi2">ing of errors. When thi2">is has been accompli2">ished, the teacher of God becomes a mi2">iracle worker by defi2">ini2">iti2">ion."

"Heali2">ing i2">is an act of thought by whi2">ich two mi2">inds percei2">ive thei2">ir oneness, and become glad. Thi2">is gladness calls to every part of the Sonshi2">ip to rejoi2">ice wi2">ith them, and let God Hi2">imself go out i2">into them and through them."

"Two mi2">inds wi2">ith one i2">intent become so strong that what they wi2">ill becomes the Wi2">ill of God. For mi2">inds can only joi2">in i2">in truth."

"When two mi2">inds joi2">in as one, and share one i2">idea equally, the fi2">irst li2">ink i2">in the awareness of the Sonshi2">ip as one has been made."

"Whoever says, "There i2">IS no gap between my mi2">ind and yours," has kept GOD's promi2">ise, NOT hi2">is ti2">iny oath to be forever fai2">ithful unto death. And by hi2">is heali2">ing i2">IS hi2">is brother healed. Let THi2">IS be your agreement wi2">ith each one; that you be one wi2">ith hi2">im and NOT apart."

"Do not accept your brother's vari2">iable percepti2">ion of hi2">imself, for hi2">is spli2">it mi2">ind i2">is yours, and you wi2">ill not accept YOUR heali2">ing wi2">ithout hi2">is. For you share the real world as you share Heaven, and hi2">is heali2">ing i2">IS yours. To love yourself i2">is to HEAL yourself, and you cannot percei2">ive part of you as si2">ick and achi2">ieve your OWN goal. Brother, we heal together as we li2">ive together, and love together."

"Do not allow your brother not to remember, for hi2">is forgetfulness i2">is YOURS. But YOUR rememberi2">ing i2">is Hi2">IS, for God cannot be remembered alone. THi2">IS i2">IS WHAT YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN. To percei2">ive the heali2">ing of your brother as the heali2">ing of yourself, i2">is thus the way to remember God. For you forgot your brothers Wi2">ITH Hi2">im, and God's answer to your forgetti2">ing i2">is but the way to remember."

"You wi2">ill forsake yourselves and your God i2">if you forsake any of YOUR brothers. You are more than your brother's keeper." "Concern yourselves not wi2">ith the EXTENSi2">ION of holi2">iness, for the nature of mi2">iracles you do NOT understand. Nor do you DO them. i2">It i2">is thei2">ir extensi2">ion, far beyond the li2">imi2">its you percei2">ive, that demonstrates you di2">id NOT do them. Why should you worry how the mi2">iracle extends to all the Sonshi2">ip, when you do not understand the mi2">iracle i2">itself?"

Lesson 54: ""i2">I am not alone i2">in experi2">ienci2">ing the effects of my thoughts." ... i2">I am alone i2">in nothi2">ing. Everythi2">ing i2">I thi2">ink or say or do touches all the uni2">iverse. A Son of God cannot thi2">ink or speak or act i2">in vai2">in. He cannot be alone i2">in anythi2">ing. i2">It i2">is therefore i2">in my power to change every mi2">ind along wi2">ith mi2">ine, for mi2">ine i2">is the power of God."

"All your ti2">ime i2">is spent i2">in dreami2">ing."

Do you ever get the feeli2">ing everyone i2">is just maki2">ing stuff up as they go along? Or do you experi2">ience yourself doi2">ing thi2">is?

From ti2">ime to ti2">ime i2">I *thi2">ink* that i2">I know what i2">I want to do, and sort of talk myself i2">into i2">it, and do i2">it, and i2">it seems ri2">ight, then later i2">I am di2">isi2">illusi2">ioned and don't know what i2">I saw i2">in i2">it. i2">I add justi2">ifi2">icati2">ions and reasons why, i2">in order to "convi2">ince myself", and later these turn out to be empty and hold no wei2">ight.

Thi2">is world i2">is i2">insane. And we try to "gi2">ive i2">it all the meani2">ing i2">it has". We use scapegoats to justi2">ify doi2">ing or not doi2">ing thi2">ings. We make thi2">ings i2">into enemi2">ies i2">in order to deflect our deci2">isi2">ion maki2">ing i2">in a certai2">in di2">irecti2">ion. And no-one knows what the fuck they're doi2">ing.

Half the ti2">ime i2">it seems all the medi2">ical people are just maki2">ing shi2">it up and don't know what the heck they're doi2">ing, cus every soluti2">ion they come up wi2">ith has awful si2">ide effects. The ads on TV for medi2">icati2">ions are utterly ri2">idi2">iculous.

People tell you what you eat and why eati2">ing thi2">is or that i2">is better for you. Turns out none of them have the truth and none of them can agree to anythi2">ing. Everyone and thei2">ir cat has an opi2">ini2">ion.

i2">I get convi2">inced for a whi2">ile that doi2">ing somethi2">ing i2">is "what i2">I want to do" and get all lost i2">in i2">it and then somethi2">ing i2">interrupts me, and then some ti2">ime passes, and i2">I come back to i2">it and have no i2">idea why i2">I would want to be doi2">ing that thi2">ing. What i2">I thought was "salvati2">ion" turns out to be another completely meani2">ingless wi2">ild goose chase.

i2">In a way, i2">it's li2">ike tryi2">ing to fi2">ind "real meani2">ing" i2">in a meani2">ingless world. ACi2">IM says the world i2">is meani2">ingless, and we put all the meani2">ing onto i2">it. So when we start weavi2">ing a story about "why" somethi2">ing i2">is or i2">is not a good choi2">ice, i2">it's all made up. i2">It's all ego bullshi2">it. There i2">is no truth here.

i2">In a way that leads to reali2">izi2">ing, there i2">is nothi2">ing meani2">ingful i2">in the world. And meani2">ing must be deeper wi2">ithi2">in somewhere. And that also reveals that the world i2">is enti2">irely a senseless, i2">insane i2">illusi2">ion that has no truth and doesn't mean shi2">it.

i2">If i2">I choose to make somethi2">ing happen, let's say i2">I deci2">ide and go make i2">it happen. Well, now i2">I made i2">it happen cus i2">I force i2">it i2">it to happen. Totally meani2">ingless.

i2">I'm looki2">ing around for a sense of "that's really what i2">I love to do" sort of thi2">ing, only to fi2">ind that even the thi2">ings i2">I thought i2">I loved to do are just empty contai2">iners onto whi2">ich i2">I project vari2">ious fake moti2">ivati2">ions and i2">ideas, to try to "dress them up" and explai2">in why they're so great. There's nothi2">ing there.

The world seems li2">ike a blank canvas. i2">It has nothi2">ing i2">inherent to i2">it. i2">It's a effect. So i2">it can't really "do" anythi2">ing "for" you. i2">It can't save you, or make you happy or sad. i2">It does what you make i2">it do. And that means i2">it has no real opi2">ini2">ion, or value. i2">If you don't make i2">it valuable, i2">it's not valuable. i2">If you don't read i2">into i2">it, there's nothi2">ing to i2">it.

i2">It's li2">ike we're li2">ivi2">ing i2">in some ki2">ind of gi2">iant snow globe pretendi2">ing i2">it's an amazi2">ing real place wi2">ith bui2">ilt-i2">in value and i2">importance but i2">it's really all just a pi2">ile of tosh, lol.

"i2">I do not know the thi2">ing i2">I am."

"The i2">intrusi2">ion of the abi2">ili2">ity to percei2">ive, whi2">ich i2">is i2">inherently judgmental, was i2">introduced only after the Separati2">ion. No one has been sure of anythi2">ing si2">ince then."

Hah!

"i2">I do not know the thi2">ing i2">I am, and therefore do not know what i2">I am doi2">ing, where i2">I am, or how to look upon the world or on myself."

Yet i2">in learni2">ing thi2">is i2">is salvati2">ion born. And what you are wi2">ill tell you of i2">Itself.

Come home. You have not found your happi2">iness i2">in forei2">ign places and i2">in ali2">ien forms that have no meani2">ing to you, though you sought to make them meani2">ingful. Thi2">is world i2">is not where you belong. You are a stranger here.

God’s welcome wai2">its for us all, and He wi2">ill welcome us as i2">I am welcomi2">ing you. Forget not the Ki2">ingdom of God for anythi2">ing the world has to offer."

Projecti2">ion makes percepti2">ion and makes the world you see. You put i2">it there. You gi2">ive i2">it i2">its meani2">ing. i2">It has no real meani2">ing at all. Thi2">is i2">is all just a bi2">ig li2">ie we keep telli2">ing ourselves. THERE i2">IS NO WORLD!

You know someti2">imes when you're doi2">ing somethi2">ing on a computer and there's a progress bar, and someti2">imes there are actually two progress bars - overall progress and the progress of one of many smaller tasks? Well i2">I thi2">ink i2">it's ki2">ind of li2">ike that wi2">ith forgi2">iveness too.

There i2">is an overall progress whi2">ich slowly evolves along si2">imi2">ilar steps to how each i2">indi2">ivi2">idual forgi2">iveness progresses, but i2">it goes a lot slower. Thi2">is means that i2">in general, you wi2">ill start out really strongly beli2">ievi2">ing that forgi2">iveness has somethi2">ing to do wi2">ith other people, that i2">it's thei2">ir fault, that you have to forgi2">ive them i2">in some way.

Then gradually you wi2">ill pull away from that and start to reali2">ize that i2">it's not really about other people, i2">it's about you. Each ti2">ime somethi2">ing happens, over ti2">ime you are a li2">ittle less convi2">inced that you're starti2">ing out wi2">ith someone else bei2">ing the problem. So you sort of start a li2">ittle further along the process.

Each ti2">ime you do a small forgi2">iveness, each ti2">ime you tackle some i2">indi2">ivi2">idual i2">issue, and you take i2">it all the way to i2">it bei2">ing forgi2">iven, you are sort of practi2">ici2">ing. You wear away at the rock of si2">in. And then you do another one, and another one.

What i2">I've seen i2">is that as a result of all these practi2">ices, all these forgi2">iveness of i2">indi2">ivi2">idual events and people and si2">ituati2">ions, i2">in the bi2">ig long-term pi2">icture my mi2">ind seems to be gradually movi2">ing i2">its 'starti2">ing posi2">iti2">ion' away from others and more toward myself.

i2">Instead of falli2">ing for some of the more obvi2">ious ego traps that convi2">ince and tempt me to beli2">ieve that i2">it's all someone else's fault, there's been a progressi2">ion where i2">I at least don't fall for those basi2">ic starti2">ing i2">illusi2">ions as easi2">ily. i2">I start my forgi2">ivenesses a bi2">it further along the process.

Lately i2">I've been encroachi2">ing more closely on the i2">idea that forgi2">iveness has nothi2">ing at all to do wi2">ith other people. i2">Instead i2">I'm seei2">ing that there i2">is stuff goi2">ing on i2">in my own mi2">ind, a confli2">ict between two parts of my own spli2">it mi2">ind, and that i2">I play both the role of vi2">icti2">im and vi2">icti2">imi2">izer. Whatever way i2">I am usi2">ing my mi2">ind to judge or attack others, i2">I see that thi2">is i2">is just my own mi2">ind content playi2">ing out, there's acti2">ivi2">ity i2">in my own mi2">ind about myself, and i2">I'm doi2">ing thi2">is to myself. i2">I am sort of learni2">ing that i2">I can completely i2">ignore any suggesti2">ion that thi2">is upset has anythi2">ing to do wi2">ith other people.

So i2">I thi2">ink gradually we erode thi2">is overall atti2">itude of unforgi2">iveness, we gradually chop down trees and the forest starts to clear. We keep wi2">inni2">ing li2">ittle battles and gradually we're wi2">inni2">ing the war, so to speak. i2">I am much qui2">icker now to recogni2">ize that my i2">issues have nothi2">ing to do wi2">ith other people, and can qui2">ickly jump over the whole emoti2">ional drama tangle of "they are doi2">ing thi2">is to me", "i2">I'm a vi2">icti2">im of them", "i2">I don't want thi2">is etc". i2">I've had to take that i2">illusi2">ion, that perceptual fault, so many ti2">imes that i2">I guess i2">I've learned, overall, or have become able to generali2">ize that learni2">ing, so that i2">I just ki2">ind of 'know i2">it' now.

i2">I thi2">ink thi2">is i2">is really how thi2">ings progress. i2">I can well i2">imagi2">ine that as ti2">ime conti2">inues to unfold i2">I wi2">ill just keep havi2">ing fewer reacti2">ions, less beli2">ief i2">in vi2">icti2">imhood, less fear, that i2">I wi2">ill fall for i2">illusi2">ions less, that i2">I wi2">ill i2">inevi2">itably gradually be sustai2">ini2">ing a certai2">in level of 'awareness' and 'wakefulness' whi2">ich acts as the starti2">ing poi2">int for any further correcti2">ions that are needed.

We wake up gradually. We make progress. And once we've done enough of the undoi2">ing of the grosser, more ego-extreme aspects of our mi2">istaken percepti2">ions, we wi2">ill learn and won't be so easi2">ily fooled by them. Then i2">it wi2">ill come down to the subtler aspects of what's happeni2">ing, what i2">I'm doi2">ing to myself, how my mi2">ind i2">is functi2">ioni2">ing, as we gradually 'home i2">in' on reveali2">ing to our awareness what the si2">imple truth really i2">is about us.

And someday we'll reali2">ize, there i2">is nothi2">ing left to forgi2">ive, and forgi2">iveness i2">isn't even needed, because now we are i2">in a permanently forgi2">ivi2">ing atti2">itude wi2">ith Holy Spi2">iri2">it that shows us a forgi2">iven world all the ti2">ime. Ulti2">imately there i2">is nothi2">ing to forgi2">ive when you get to that poi2">int because you're seei2">ing clearly, and really you were only ever forgi2">ivi2">ing your mi2">istaken beli2">ief that there was somethi2">ing wrong that needed to be undone. Nothi2">ing has really happened. We're all doi2">ing fi2">ine. Congratulati2">ions on your progress.

One of the di2">iffi2">icult thi2">ings about trusti2">ing Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the i2">idea of 'showi2">ing up' empty handed and not knowi2">ing what the heck to do, and yet thi2">ings sti2">ill worki2">ing out 'i2">in the moment'.

Usually our mi2">inds are fi2">illed wi2">ith all ki2">inds of predi2">icti2">ive, planni2">ing thoughts whi2">ich try to know, beforehand, what needs to be known i2">in order to do whatever i2">it i2">is that needs to be done, at the ti2">ime. And we won't budge i2">if we don't know what's goi2">ing to happen fi2">irst, because we're afrai2">id.

When Holy Spi2">iri2">it asks me to wri2">ite my book for example, i2">I hesi2">itate wi2">ith thoughts li2">ike "i2">I don't know what to wri2">ite" or "what wi2">ill i2">I wri2">ite about". And then Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill keep on remi2">indi2">ing/suggesti2">ing, "book, book, book". And i2">I wi2">ill keep on protesti2">ing mentally, "what shall i2">I do". What He really wants me to do i2">is to just stop the mental chatter and si2">it down and start wri2">iti2">ing AND THEN i2">in the moment, i2">in the flow, i2">in the spontaneous present, HE i2">IS THERE, and He helps me wri2">ite.

So then i2">it ends up bei2">ing, i2">I di2">idn't need to know, by myself, what to do beforehand, because by `just doi2">ing i2">it` was an i2">invi2">itati2">ion to Spi2">iri2">it to joi2">in wi2">ith me i2">in the PRESENT and support me and help me spontaneously and unrehearsed.

Goi2">ing to do somethi2">ing when you have to put asi2">ide all noti2">ion of knowi2">ing what i2">it i2">is you wi2">ill do, and all plans, and all sense of "i2">I can only do thi2">is i2">IF i2">I know what wi2">ill do"... i2">its very exposi2">ing. i2">It makes me feel empty-handed and bli2">indfolded and clueless. i2">It doesn't exactly support a concept of ego confi2">idence. i2">It's more li2">ike, i2">I have to `just do i2">it` anyway wi2">ith a tremendous call to have COURAGE and FAi2">ITH and TRUST.

So when Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is urgi2">ing you to do somethi2">ing, i2">I thi2">ink we have to remember to trust that He Wi2">ILL be there i2">in the moment wi2">ith us and He Wi2">ILL be helpi2">ing us and he Wi2">ILL be worki2">ing through us. i2">It's li2">ike you have to take the leap fi2">irst AND THEN the wi2">ings appear. You act 'as i2">if' you wi2">ill have all the support i2">in the world and then i2">it shows up.

Thi2">is i2">is di2">iffi2">icult to learn, because i2">I'm so used to ... hah... bei2">ing i2">in control. Lol, (thanks HS for that i2">insert). So used to bei2">ing i2">in the dri2">ivers seat and relyi2">ing on pri2">ior learni2">ing (the past) and thi2">inki2">ing (lol) that i2">I can only do anythi2">ing i2">if i2">it's been premedi2">itated and planned out. Thi2">is i2">is an ongoi2">ing lesson for me and probably for many people, because the ego i2">is basi2">ically the thi2">ing that comes between surrender/letti2">ing go and bei2">ing too afrai2">id to make a move when you can't yet see the safety net - a safety net that you don't even really NEED when Holy Spi2">iri2">it goes wi2">ith you. "i2">If you knew Who walks besi2">ide you on the way that you have chosen, fear would be i2">impossi2">ible" - ACi2">IM

The ego doesn't understand how to put trust/fai2">ith/spi2">iri2">it fi2">irst and to expect support from outsi2">ide of i2">itself. i2">It doesn't know how to let i2">itself be abundantly supported or to be i2">included i2">in a bi2">igger plan not of i2">its own maki2">ing. Holy Spi2">iri2">it has a plan. But i2">it calls for us to step OUT of our own plan and our own controls - letti2">ing go of controlli2">ing all outcomes - so that we can step i2">into the spontaneous flow of Spi2">iri2">it di2">irecti2">ing us and movi2">ing through us and heali2">ing through us. Whi2">ich remi2">inds me of thi2">is wonderful ACi2">IM quote:

"i2">I am here only to be truly helpful.

i2">I am here to represent Hi2">im Who sent me.

i2">I do not have to worry about what to say or what to do,

because He Who sent me wi2">ill di2">irect me.

i2">I am content to be wherever He wi2">ishes, knowi2">ing He goes there wi2">ith me.

i2">I wi2">ill be healed as i2">I let Hi2">im teach me to heal." - ACi2">IM

To just show up, ready, wi2">illi2">ing, avai2">ilable, to be di2">irected and used by Spi2">iri2">it, wi2">ith no pri2">ior agenda, wi2">ith perfect wi2">illi2">ingness and readi2">iness, as an agent of God, wi2">ithout necessari2">ily knowi2">ing or needi2">ing to know who/what/where/why/how ... that's what i2">I/we need to get to. To go around doi2">ing God's wi2">ill, worki2">ing mi2">iracles, heali2">ing people, teachi2">ing and i2">inspi2">iri2">ing people, bei2">ing moved by Spi2">iri2">it and supported i2">in 'supernatural' ways. We need to learn to trust i2">in Spi2">iri2">it's support and that, i2">if we leap fi2">irst, then we wi2">ill fi2">ind the power to fly.

Let's be very, very honest.

God i2">is love.

i2">In your relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith God, you are meant to be experi2">ienci2">ing profound love ri2">ight now.

Let's be extremely honest.

i2">If you are not experi2">ienci2">ing profound love ri2">ight now wi2">ith God, you MUST be beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in si2">in, gui2">ilt, fear and death.

There's actually some part of you that DOES NOT beli2">ieve i2">in love. Just bei2">ing honest. i2">Its okay to admi2">it thi2">is.

Some part of you actually has somethi2">ing i2">invested i2">in a beli2">ief i2">in your si2">infulness. There's some part of you that feels gui2">ilty. You also beli2">ieve that thi2">is si2">infulness i2">is true of you and that your gui2">ilt i2">is justi2">ifi2">ied.

As a result, you have thi2">is beli2">ief that you're not supposed to be experi2">ienci2">ing love wi2">ith God ri2">ight now, and you actually do not want i2">it. You are agai2">inst i2">it.

Whi2">ile you conti2">inue to have a beli2">ief i2">in you that you have si2">inned, that you've really fucked up at some poi2">int, and now you are gui2">ilty, and thi2">is can't be forgi2">iven or undone, you're goi2">ing to choose not to love God. You wi2">ill reject God.

Even i2">if you beli2">ieve that you are qui2">ite lovi2">ing wi2">ith God already, the fact i2">is, i2">if there i2">is some ki2">ind of secret si2">in or hi2">idden hate i2">in you, that part of you really does not want to love God, or yourself, or others. i2">It's a beli2">ief that you are unworthy of love, because of what you di2">id.

i2">If you really di2">id do what you thi2">ink you di2">id, and i2">if i2">it really di2">id happen, then you really are si2">inful, and you really are correct i2">in justi2">ifyi2">ing your unlovabi2">ili2">ity. That's why you thi2">ink you don't deserve God's love. You then di2">isregard God's love, beli2">ievi2">ing that He would not want to love you anyway, because of your gui2">ilt.

That gui2">ilt i2">in you i2">in keepi2">ing you from accepti2">ing God's love. i2">It's stoppi2">ing you from beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in God's love. i2">It's keepi2">ing you unhappy and mi2">iserable.

Those secret si2">ins and hi2">idden hates are goi2">ing to stay hi2">idden away i2">in the recesses of your mi2">ind, unless you are wi2">illi2">ing to expose yourself to God. You have to have some wi2">illi2">ingness to accept God's love, to accept the Atonement, whi2">ich means that God sti2">ill loves you beause your si2">in was not REALi2">ITY. You were mi2">istaken i2">in beli2">ievi2">ing that you really di2">id somethi2">ing bad.

Exposi2">ing yourself to the truth and attempti2">ing to acccept i2">it wi2">ill force your darkly kept secrets out i2">into the li2">ight. These self-hates, whi2">ich are "your ego", your false i2">idea about yourself, wi2">ill attempt to prove and exclai2">im how true they are. They wi2">ill start to scream at you about how you can't be loved because of what you di2">id. But the only reason they are i2">in your AWARENESS i2">instead of bei2">ing hi2">idden i2">is because you are wi2">illi2">ing to seri2">iously challenge whether they are true, be openi2">ing up to more love.

But you can't be i2">in deni2">ial of thi2">is. i2">If there i2">is a beli2">ief that si2">in i2">is real i2">in you, you are NOT fully beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in God's love and are acti2">ively choosi2">ing to be unworthy of Hi2">im. i2">If you really beli2">ieve deep down that you are si2">inful and gui2">ilty, you wi2">ill not let yourself RECEi2">IVE the mi2">iraculous blessi2">ings of God. You won't let Hi2">im love you. You wi2">ill see yourself as some hi2">ideous creature that can't be loved, because you si2">inned.

But si2">in i2">is not real. You di2">idn't really do what you thi2">ink you di2">id. i2">It di2">id not really have the consequences that you thought i2">it had. The events di2">idn't even really happen because the world they happened i2">in i2">is not real ei2">ither. Thi2">is i2">is the Atonement, the spi2">iri2">itual FACT that nothi2">ing's gone wrong wi2">ith you. And that's WHY you deserve and are enti2">itled to the Atonement, to God's love. You deserve and are WORTHY OF GOD because you are sti2">ill i2">innocent.

As you attempt to clai2">im and accept thi2">is, you can bet your secret si2">ins and hi2">idden hates wi2">ill fly up i2">in your awareness tryi2">ing to assert that they are true. You wi2">ill have to questi2">ion them and let them go, i2">if you are to accept the truth of God. So you need to be wi2">illi2">ing and you need to be very honest about where you stand. i2">It's not use pretendi2">ing you are a lover of God when you are not.

i2">I was almost automati2">ically sayi2">ing to Holy Spi2">iri2">it that i2">I was a "man of God" and he told me, "no, you are not. You are becomi2">ing one." That's honest. i2">I am not a teacher of God yet. i2">I don't teach only what God wi2">ills, because i2">I sti2">ill have an ego, and i2">I sti2">ill have a beli2">ief that i2">I've si2">inned. Holy Spi2">iri2">it sai2">id to me, as i2">I was enjoyi2">ing an experi2">ience of God's love, that i2">I wasn't able to love God fully because i2">I have GUi2">ILT. i2">I have to look at that.

My gui2">ilt i2">is somethi2">ing that i2">I thi2">ink i2">is TRUTH. i2">I beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it. That beli2">ief takes me away from beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in LOVE. Honestly. i2">It makes me not only beli2">ieve that i2">I cannot love, but also that i2">I am not capable of love or bei2">ing loved. That means i2">I am rejecti2">ing God by beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in somethi2">ing else. Our beli2">ief i2">in gui2">ilt and si2">in and the world/body bei2">ing real i2">IS an exchange, a replacement, an attempt to substi2">itute God wi2">ith somethi2">ing else. We can't keep both. We can't beli2">ieve i2">in the ego at the same ti2">ime as beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in God. i2">If you are beli2">ievi2">ing that you're si2">inful or gui2">ilty, or you have self hate whi2">ich you project onto others, you beli2">ieve i2">in the ego. You thi2">ink the ego i2">is great. You love the ego. You don't love yourself or God.

Thi2">is can be tough truth to hear. But a wi2">illi2">ingness to even look at thi2">is truth - that you honestly are not fully wanti2">ing to be wi2">ith God, and you are tryi2">ing to overthrow hi2">is wi2">ill, and you're sti2">ill tryi2">ing to make your ego world real, and you're sti2">ill i2">in love wi2">ith your ego self, and you sti2">ill don't actually BELi2">IEVE i2">IN permanent love or i2">immortali2">ity, deep down, i2">is at least SOME wi2">illi2">ingness to admi2">it, to allow i2">in, the truth, the li2">ight and love of God. Then you can work on heali2">ing i2">it, undoi2">ing i2">it, reversi2">ing i2">it, di2">isbeli2">ievi2">ing i2">it, letti2">ing i2">it go, and openi2">ing up your wi2">illi2">ingness to love yourself and to love God.

Do you really honestly 100% love yourself? Don't fake i2">it, beause faki2">ing i2">it i2">is deni2">ial and wi2">ill keep you i2">in hell. Most people do not love themselves and most people do not love God. But i2">it's our goal and ai2">im to return to love, to regai2">in an awareness of the truth of love, to beli2">ieve i2">in love, and to reli2">inqui2">ish everythi2">ing about ourselvets that clai2">ims otherwi2">ise. That means we need heali2">ing and release. And Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is here to hold our hand whi2">ile we go through thi2">is and become wi2">illi2">ing to SURRENDER i2">it to Hi2">im.

i2">I've seen how when i2">I want to make somethi2">ing go away, i2">I make myself si2">ick.

We attempt to psychologi2">ically reject and push somethi2">ing away when we fi2">ind i2">it threateni2">ing, dangerous or undesi2">irable, all of whi2">ich i2">is a perceptual error. Thi2">is however i2">immedi2">iately i2">implements some form of si2">ickness. Si2">ickness i2">is i2">INDUCED by the attempt to separate from your BROTHER!

"The removal of blocks, then, i2">is the only way to guarantee help and heali2">ing. Help and heali2">ing are the normal expressi2">ions of a mi2">ind whi2">ich i2">is worki2">ing THROUGH the body but not i2">in i2">it. i2">If the mi2">ind beli2">ieves the body i2">is i2">its goal, i2">it wi2">ill di2">istort i2">its percepti2">ion OF the body, and by blocki2">ing i2">its own extensi2">ion BEYOND i2">it, wi2">ill i2">INDUCE i2">illness by FOSTERi2">ING SEPARATi2">ION. Percei2">ivi2">ing the body AS A SEPARATE ENTi2">ITY cannot but foster i2">illness, because i2">it i2">is not true. A medi2">ium of communi2">icati2">ion Wi2">ILL lose i2">its usefulness i2">if i2">it i2">is used for anythi2">ing else."

When we percei2">ive a threat or danger, or someone i2">is fear-mongeri2">ing, or there i2">is "bad news", or some obnoxi2">ious person i2">is hangi2">ing around, or whatever... i2">if we percei2">ive i2">it as havi2">ing power to attack and we want i2">it to stop, i2">instead of maki2">ing i2">it stop or di2">is-beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in i2">it, we put up defenses. We try to reject and separate ourselves from i2">it. That's a bad move. i2">It attacks our body. "i2">If i2">I defend myself i2">I am attacked."

i2">I gave myself a pani2">ic attack yesterday at a medi2">ical offi2">ice when the staff started becomi2">ing seri2">ious about heart problems that aren't real. Try as i2">I mi2">ight i2">I couldn't help but try to reject and resi2">ist, and thus i2">induced si2">ickness and almost fai2">inted. Later duri2">ing forgi2">iveness i2">I saw how i2">I'd done that to myself, tryi2">ing to make i2">it go away, as the result of *percei2">ivi2">ing* that there was a real threat or danger.

Previ2">iously also i2">I recall a very talkati2">ive coworker kept hangi2">ing around at my desk tryi2">ing to chat, and wouldn't go away. And then got i2">into chatti2">ing wi2">ith others nearby. And i2">instead of standi2">ing up to tell them to leave i2">I just tolerated and tri2">ied to be pati2">ient, but wanted them to go away. And thi2">is i2">induced a sudden i2">immedi2">iate headache. Tryi2">ing to separate from your brother i2">induces si2">ickness.

i2">I also once gave myself an ear i2">infecti2">ion i2">in a matter of hours as a result of tryi2">ing to make Holy Spi2">iri2">it go away, havi2">ing percei2">ived hi2">is lack of "boundari2">ies" as a threat. i2">I suffered for a few days before bei2">ing able to re-approach hi2">im wi2">ithout fear and thus recogni2">ize what i2">I'd done to myself, and upon recogni2">izi2">ing i2">I di2">id not NEED the defense, all symptoms di2">isappeared wi2">ithi2">in a matter of hours.

Whenever we USE SEPARATi2">ION as a tool, whi2">ich i2">is an ego tool, to try to "deal wi2">ith" percei2">ived si2">ituati2">ions, our attempt to put up a defense and wi2">ithdraw i2">into ourselves cuts us off from li2">ife, blocks extensi2">ion, fosters separati2">ion, produces si2">ickness, and eventually death ("si2">ickness i2">is but a li2">ittle death"). Our attempt to DENY GOD or our brothers (whom God i2">is i2">in) i2">is the only cause of bodi2">ily death. Thi2">is i2">is why all death i2">is sui2">ici2">ide - we gi2">ive our consent through our deni2">ial of God's wi2">ill. i2">IT i2">IS NOT GOD's Wi2">ILL THAT ANYONE Di2">IE. A dream of death i2">is not left THROUGh death, but through li2">ife - truth.

Si2">ickness cannot happen at all when you do not have a beli2">ief i2">in separati2">ion i2">in any way. When your mi2">ind extends to your brothers mi2">ind shari2">ing love, i2">it undoes all sense of separati2">ion and your mi2">inds joi2">in. i2">In thi2">is joi2">ini2">ing there i2">is no spli2">it and no di2">ivi2">isi2">ion and no attack, and nothi2">ing for si2">ickness to latch onto. i2">It therefore MUST heal, and as such death i2">is surmounted. Thi2">is i2">is a mi2">iracle, i2">it i2">is resurrecti2">ion.

"Heali2">ing wi2">ill flash across your open mi2">ind as peace and truth ari2">ise to take the place of war and vai2">in i2">imagi2">ini2">ings. There wi2">ill be no dark corners si2">ickness can conceal and keep defended from the li2">ight of truth. There wi2">ill be no di2">im fi2">igures from your dreams, nor thei2">ir obscure and meani2">ingless pursui2">its wi2">ith double purposes i2">insanely sought, remai2">ini2">ing i2">in your mi2">ind. i2">It wi2">ill be healed of all the si2">ickly wi2">ishes that i2">it tri2">ied to authori2">ize the body to obey.

Now i2">is the body healed because the source of si2">ickness has been opened to reli2">ief."

Noti2">ice i2">it says NOW i2">IS THE *BODY* HEALED.

"You need do nothi2">ing now to make i2">it well, for si2">ickness has become i2">impossi2">ible." Thi2">is i2">is li2">iteral. Si2">ickness becomes i2">impossi2">ible when your mi2">ind i2">is whole and healed.

Atonement makes si2">ickness i2">IMPOSSi2">IBLE. Thi2">is DOES MEAN BODY Si2">ICKNESS as well as mental i2">illness.

"Atonement heals wi2">ith certai2">inty, and cures all si2">ickness. For the mi2">ind whi2">ich understands that si2">ickness can be nothi2">ing but a dream i2">is not decei2">ived by forms the dream may take. Si2">ickness where gui2">ilt i2">is absent cannot come, for i2">it i2">is but another form of gui2">ilt. Atonement does not heal the si2">ick, for that i2">is not a cure. i2">It takes away the gui2">ilt that makes the si2">ickness possi2">ible. And that i2">is cure i2">indeed. For si2">ickness now i2">is gone, wi2">ith nothi2">ing left to whi2">ich i2">it can return."

So si2">ickness i2">IS A FORM OF GUi2">ILT, and i2">if there i2">is no gui2">ilt, there can be no si2">ickness or death. Peri2">iod.

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the i2">IDEA of heali2">ing. Bei2">ing thought, the i2">idea GAi2">INS AS i2">IT i2">IS SHARED."

As we allow ourselves to be healed, we become healed, and i2">in turn become healers. We are able to gi2">ive the mi2">iracles we have recei2">ived, and we can gi2">ive heali2">ing to others.

"i2">I wi2">ill be healed as i2">I let hi2">im teach me to heal."

"No one can gi2">ive what he has not recei2">ived. To gi2">ive a thi2">ing requi2">ires fi2">irst you have i2">it i2">in your own possessi2">ion."

"Those who are healed become i2">instruments of heali2">ing." (note that an i2">instrument i2">is used by somethi2">ing Hi2">IGHER than the i2">instrument - i2">in thi2">is case the Holy Spi2">iri2">it).

"A mi2">iracle i2">is a servi2">ice. i2">It i2">is the maxi2">imal servi2">ice that one soul can render another."

We're asked i2">in ACi2">IM to perform heali2">ing Wi2">ITH the Holy Spi2">iri2">it. That means he i2">is i2">included i2">in the heali2">ing process, and i2">is actually the way by whi2">ich the heali2">ing occurs. Thi2">is i2">is because HE i2">is the only healer and therapi2">ist. Only HE understands mi2">iracles. He i2">is the answer to the separati2">ion and KNOWS HOW to heal everythi2">ing. You DO NOT know how to heal!

"the healer ALWAYS heals BY Hi2">im"

"The human therapi2">ist can only LET Hi2">IM FULFi2">ILL Hi2">IS FUNCTi2">ION."

"help i2">is Hi2">is functi2">ion"

"i2">its presence becomes mani2">ifest THROUGH you. Do Hi2">is work, for you SHARE i2">in Hi2">is functi2">ion."

"he (you) LETS HEALi2">ING BE"

"the nature of mi2">iracles you do not understand" "Nor do you DO them."

"HE (you) can poi2">int to darkness, but he (you) CANNOT bri2">ing li2">ight OF Hi2">IMSELF"

"What He enables you to do i2">is clearly NOT of thi2">is world"

"what the Holy Spi2">iri2">it enables you to do i2">is clearly beyond ALL of them"

i2">In effect, we act li2">ike a ki2">ind of portal or wi2">indow THROUGH whi2">ich the Holy Spi2">iri2">it's radi2">iance of heali2">ing power extends. The li2">ight of God comes from God through hi2">im, through us, to others. We are not able to GENERATE thi2">is li2">ight ourselves.

We of ourselves really have NO power at all. But when we OPEN ourselves to hi2">im, and allow hi2">im to work Wi2">ITH AND THROUGH us, we GAi2">IN the power of God. And thi2">is power works ON i2">ITS OWN, because love automati2">ically extends and shi2">ines.

i2">It's ki2">ind of li2">ike, the radi2">iant shi2">ini2">ing li2">ight of God, whi2">ich has heali2">ing power i2">in i2">it, shi2">ines from God THROUGH you, to others. Whi2">ich i2">is why "Mi2">iracles are a uni2">iversal blessi2">ing from God through me (Jesus, as an example of a brother), to my all brothers". The li2">ight of God i2">is God's li2">ight, whi2">ich shi2">ines through you, and extends to others, heali2">ing them.

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the mechani2">ism of mi2">iracles" or the way by whi2">ich thi2">is mi2">iraculous power i2">is bri2">idged to you from God, so that i2">it can be Gi2">IVEN TO OTHERS through you.

Thi2">is i2">is because i2">in your creati2">ion, you are gi2">iven the gi2">ift of gi2">ivi2">ing, whi2">ich means that God gi2">ives hi2">imself to create you, and creates you to BE a gi2">iver, so that HE can be gi2">iven THROUGH you along Wi2">ITH you, to co-create. He has gi2">iven you somethi2">ing whi2">ich you are meant to Gi2">IVE to others, to share wi2">ith them, i2">in order to have i2">it.

"You CAN LEARN to bless, and CANNOT gi2">ive WHAT YOU HAVE NOT. i2">If, then, you OFFER blessi2">ing, i2">it MUST have come Fi2">IRST TO YOURSELF. And you must also have ACCEPTED i2">IT AS YOURS, for how else could you Gi2">IVE i2">IT AWAY? Thi2">is i2">is WHY your mi2">iracles offer YOU the testi2">imony that YOU are blessed."

"Your hands wi2">ill heal, and gi2">ive the gi2">ifts that you accept of me."

Heali2">ing mi2">iracles are a mi2">irror of thi2">is creati2">ive dynami2">ic, on Earth, whereby you gi2">ive what you recei2">ive. And WHAT you recei2">ive (God's blessi2">ing/mi2">iracle) has wi2">ithi2">in i2">it the power to heal others, Wi2">ITHOUT you havi2">ing to know how i2">it does i2">it.

i2">It's ki2">ind of li2">ike you are passi2">ing along or allowi2">ing to extend THROUGH you a power whi2">ich you di2">id not generate on your own, you di2">id not author, but whi2">ich you allow to TRANSFER as a form of communi2">icati2">ion. God shi2">ines through you, FOR you, and therefore FOR your "pati2">ient".

"The power of one mi2">ind CAN shi2">ine i2">into another, because all the lamps of God were li2">it by the same spark."

Your functi2">ion i2">is, i2">in effect, to parti2">ici2">ipate i2">in the Holy Spi2">iri2">its's heali2">ing work, by shari2">ing hi2">is functi2">ion, allowi2">ing Hi2">IM to PASS ON hi2">is heali2">ing (of you) through you to others. i2">In thi2">is, you don't really get to clai2">im any credi2">it for bei2">ing a healer, or speci2">ial, or the source of the heali2">ing.

HE heals YOU, FOR you. And you i2">in turn allow hi2">im to heal others, FOR you, FOR them. Because he i2">is the help that God has appoi2">inted and gi2">iven. He i2">is supposed to be the one who DOES the mi2">iracles.

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it does NOT work by chance, and the heali2">ing that i2">is of Hi2">IM ALWAYS works. And unless the healer ALWAYS heals BY Hi2">im, the results Wi2">ILL vary."

"And that i2">is why the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">IS the only therapi2">ist."

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the radi2">iance that you must let to bani2">ish the i2">idea of darkness."

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the way i2">in whi2">ich God's wi2">ill can be done on earth as i2">it i2">is i2">in Heaven."

"The text explai2">ins that the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the Answer to all problems you have made."

"All power i2">in Heaven and earth i2">is therefore gi2">iven hi2">im and he wi2">ill share i2">it wi2">ith you when you have completed yours."

Thi2">is means that i2">in truth the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the ONLY therapi2">ist, because ONLY he knows everythi2">ing to be able to be certai2">in how to heal everythi2">ing. He i2">is the GUARANTEE that the separati2">ion Wi2">ILL be undone, because he has the power TO undo i2">it enti2">irely, gi2">iven hi2">im by God. The Holy Spi2">iri2">it DOES NOT FAi2">IL, and when He heals, i2">IT ALWAYS WORKS. Your role then i2">is really to LET Hi2">IM DO THE HEALi2">ING.

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the ONLY therapi2">ist. He makes heali2">ing PERFECTLY clear i2">in ANY si2">ituati2">ion i2">in whi2">ich He i2">is the gui2">ide. ***The human therapi2">ist can only LET Hi2">IM FULFi2">ILL Hi2">IS FUNCTi2">ION. He needs no help for thi2">is.*** He Wi2">ILL tell you EXACTLY what to do, to help ANYONE He sends to you FOR help, and wi2">ill speak to hi2">im through you, i2">IF YOU DO NOT i2">INTERFERE. Remember that you ARE choosi2">ing a gui2">ide for helpi2">ing, and the wrong choi2">ice wi2">ill NOT help. But remember also that THE Ri2">IGHT ONE Wi2">ILL. Trust Hi2">im, for help i2">is Hi2">is functi2">ion, and He i2">is of God."

"We once sai2">id that the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the Answer. He i2">is the answer to EVERYTHi2">ING, because He knows what the answer to everythi2">ing i2">IS."

When i2">I heal wi2">ith the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, i2">I am not really doi2">ing anythi2">ing. i2">I am speci2">ifi2">ically i2">instructed what to do, to fulfi2">ill my part of the functi2">ion i2">I am shari2">ing wi2">ith hi2">im. i2">I may be told to place my hand on a speci2">ifi2">ic part of the body. i2">I may be told when the heali2">ing i2">is done. i2">I may be asked to move to a di2">ifferent posi2">iti2">ion.

But more often i2">I wi2">ill be asked to "rest" or "relax". i2">In effect i2">I am really bei2">ing told to just take a chi2">ill pi2">ill and si2">it on the si2">ideli2">ines whi2">ile i2">I let Hi2">IM USE ME and work through me. He works through my body and through my hands. The more that i2">I don't try to do anythi2">ing at all, the less obstructi2">ing i2">I am. i2">I pretty much just relax and rest and just let hi2">im get on wi2">ith i2">it.

i2">I have NO CLUE how he does what he does. i2">I do not know what he i2">is doi2">ing, only that he i2">is doi2">ing i2">it. My body shakes and my hands tremble and there i2">is an i2">intensi2">ity and vari2">ious back-and-forth moti2">ions and so on. But these happen on thei2">ir own, caused BY hi2">im, or as si2">ide effects of what HE i2">is doi2">ing.

Thi2">is means that i2">I have to be wi2">illi2">ing to trust and to sort of "get out of the way", and to "not i2">interfere". And you can be sure that at ti2">imes my ego does try to BECOME the healer. The ego i2">in me starts tryi2">ing to say thi2">ings to make heali2">ing happen, whi2">ich really has li2">ittle to no effect anyway. Or i2">I start thi2">inki2">ing that i2">I need to force or push, or to hold my hand di2">ifferently, or to thi2">ink forgi2">iveness thoughts, or to start doi2">ing affi2">irmati2">ions, or say lofty thi2">ings, and none of thi2">is i2">is necessary. i2">I am told to relax or even to stop.

i2">In parti2">icular Jesus i2">instructs me by sayi2">ing "let me". Whi2">ich i2">I've come now to learn to mean, allow hi2">im to use the Holy Spi2">iri2">it through me to perform a heali2">ing on a person FOR me and FOR them, wi2">ithout me doi2">ing anythi2">ing other than bei2">ing used as a ki2">ind of vessel. i2">It may sti2">ill entai2">il me "layi2">ing on hands" and spendi2">ing some ti2">ime i2">involved i2">in the process, but my parti2">ici2">ipati2">ion i2">is mi2">ini2">imal.

i2">It does take the wi2">illi2">ingness to allow somethi2">ing OTHER than yourself to DO stuff through you and through your body. Thi2">is may be unsettli2">ing at fi2">irst, learni2">ing to trust to allow some unseen force to make stuff happen i2">IN your body and THROUGH i2">it. To see that, even i2">if you are standi2">ing there doi2">ing nothi2">ing of your own voli2">iti2">ion, your body i2">is movi2">ing, even BEi2">ING moved by some unseen power.

Trusti2">ing that i2">it Wi2">ILL move on i2">its own, wi2">ithout your i2">intenti2">ion to move i2">it. And then seei2">ing i2">it consi2">istently do so, wi2">ithout i2">interference or moti2">ivati2">ion or control on your part. i2">I am now at a poi2">int where i2">I can let the Holy Spi2">iri2">it li2">iterally move my body parts ON Hi2">IS OWN. He can actually make my arms and hands move around wi2">ith no motor i2">intenti2">ions of my own.

"For you can be AWARE of what you cannot see, and i2">it can become compelli2">ingly real to you, as i2">its presence becomes mani2">ifest THROUGH you. Do Hi2">is work, for you SHARE i2">in Hi2">is functi2">ion. As your functi2">ion i2">in Heaven i2">is creati2">ion, so your functi2">ion on earth i2">is heali2">ing. God shares Hi2">is functi2">ion wi2">ith you i2">in Heaven, and the Holy Spi2">iri2">it shares Hi2">IS wi2">ith you on earth."

"The therapi2">ist does not heal; he LETS HEALi2">ING BE. HE can poi2">int to darkness, but he CANNOT bri2">ing li2">ight OF Hi2">IMSELF, for li2">ight i2">is NOT of hi2">im. But bei2">ing FOR hi2">im, i2">it MUST be for hi2">is pati2">ient."

"Concern yourselves not wi2">ith the EXTENSi2">ION of holi2">iness, for the nature of mi2">iracles you do NOT understand. Nor do you DO them. i2">It i2">is thei2">ir extensi2">ion, far beyond the li2">imi2">its you percei2">ive, that demonstrates you di2">id NOT do them. Why should you worry how the mi2">iracle extends to all the Sonshi2">ip, when you do not understand the mi2">iracle i2">itself?"

So here Jesus i2">is clear, you don't even really DO mi2">iracles yourself. That i2">is to say, you do not ori2">igi2">inate or source the power or the li2">ight that produces heali2">ing. You do not "use your own power". You are not the "battery" that charges someone. i2">Instead, the Holy Spi2">iri2">it temporari2">ily USES your system to i2">infuse your battery wi2">ith Hi2">IS power so that i2">it extends beyond yourself to someone else. HE bri2">ings the power from God, and you allow i2">it to extend.

Thi2">is i2">is also reflected here, where Jesus tells us that the mi2">iracle extends through you Wi2">ITHOUT your help, because i2">it's really somethi2">ing that's bei2">ing gi2">iven BY GOD. "Mi2">iracles mean li2">ife and God i2">is the gi2">iver of li2">ife." "Mi2">iracles are a uni2">iversal blessi2">ing from God." Thei2">ir RADi2">IANCE or Gi2">IVi2">ING to another i2">is essenti2">ially AUTOMATi2">IC, because you gi2">ive i2">it freely through shari2">ing and letti2">ing i2">it go. i2">Ie not i2">inhi2">ibi2">iti2">ing i2">it or stoppi2">ing i2">it from FLOWi2">ING THROUGH you.

"The ONLY way to heal i2">is to be healed. The mi2">iracle extends Wi2">ITHOUT your help. But you ARE needed that i2">it can BEGi2">IN. ACCEPT the mi2">iracle of heali2">ing, and i2">it Wi2">ILL go forth, because of what i2">it i2">IS. i2">It i2">is i2">its NATURE to extend i2">itself the i2">instant i2">it i2">is born. And i2">it i2">is born the i2">instant i2">it i2">is offered and RECEi2">IVED. No-one can ask ANOTHER to be healed. But he can let Hi2">IMSELF be healed, and thus offer the other what he has recei2">ived. Who can bestow upon another what he does not HAVE? And who can SHARE what he deni2">ies Hi2">IMSELF? The Holy Spi2">iri2">it speaks to YOU. He does not speak to someone ELSE. Yet BY your li2">isteni2">ing, Hi2">is Voi2">ice extends, BECAUSE you have accepted what He says."

Essenti2">ially then you are to recei2">ive help and heali2">ing from the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to get your own mi2">ind i2">into a state where i2">it i2">is more trusti2">ing of Hi2">IS help. Where you are wi2">illi2">ing to RECEi2">IVE mi2">iracles for yourself, whi2">ich you are wi2">illi2">ing to SHARE wi2">ith others. You become i2">infused wi2">ith heali2">ing and love and power. And Hi2">IS li2">ight now shi2">ines out from you ON i2">ITS OWN. Thi2">is li2">ight "performs" the heali2">ing i2">in another. The li2">ight comes from God and you just allow i2">it to pass through you. You become a ki2">ind of CHANNEL or MEDi2">IUM THROUGH whi2">ich love, li2">ight, li2">ife, heali2">ing etc i2">is communi2">icated to your brother.

"We have sai2">id that the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is the MOTi2">IVATi2">ION for mi2">iracles. Thi2">is i2">is because He ALWAYS tells you that ONLY the mi2">ind i2">is real, because only the mi2">ind CAN BE SHARED."

"You CANNOT choose to escape Hi2">is care, because that i2">is not Hi2">is wi2">ill. But you CAN choose to accept Hi2">is care, and use the i2">infi2">ini2">ite power OF Hi2">is care for all those He created BY i2">it."

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is i2">invi2">isi2">ible, but you CAN see the results of Hi2">is Presence, and through them, you wi2">ill learn that He i2">is there. What He enables you to do i2">is clearly NOT of thi2">is world, for mi2">iracles vi2">iolate every law of reali2">ity, as thi2">is world judges i2">it. Every law of ti2">ime and space, of magni2">itude and mass, of predi2">icti2">ion and control, i2">is transcended, for what the Holy Spi2">iri2">it enables you to do i2">is clearly beyond ALL of them. Percei2">ivi2">ing Hi2">is RESULTS, you wi2">ill understand where He MUST be, and fi2">inally KNOW what He i2">is."

What i2">I have learned now i2">is to let Jesus and/or the Holy Spi2">iri2">it perform the heali2">ing. As i2">in "You wi2">ill see heali2">ing through your hands through me." Thi2">is means acknowledgi2">ing that the heali2">ing power or force or love whi2">ich CAUSES the heali2">ing, the remedy, i2">is somethi2">ing gi2">iven by God and passes TO me and THROUGH me. i2">I can let i2">it pass through me when i2">I have been wi2">illi2">ing to recei2">ive i2">it for myself, because that means i2">I am unblocki2">ing myself and getti2">ing MY blocks out of Hi2">IS way, so that HE can shi2">ine THROUGH me.

Thi2">is means also recogni2">izi2">ing i2">I am NOT SPECi2">IAL as "a healer". i2">I have NO CLUE how to heal anyone to be honest. i2">I don't know how bodi2">ies work, what makes emoti2">ions work, or the i2">intri2">icaci2">ies of the actual mi2">ind or how to make i2">it sane. i2">I cannot clai2">im selfi2">ish credi2">it for the heali2">ing that takes place, beacuse i2">I am not the one doi2">ing i2">it. Yes i2">i am i2">involved, yes i2">I am faci2">ili2">itati2">ing, yes i2">I am usi2">ing my hands, yes i2">I am mai2">intai2">ing a relaxed and non-i2">interferi2">ing state of mi2">ind, but i2">I am not the CAUSE of the heali2">ing. All "glory" for that goes to God, Jesus and the Holy Spi2">iri2">it.

At least, for now anyway. We are told that eventually we wi2">ill become far more di2">irectly i2">in-touch wi2">ith all power i2">in heaven and earth, that "i2">I am not afrai2">id but all powerful", and that by acknowledgi2">ing that "all power i2">is of God i2">is to gai2">in all power." But ri2">ight now my experi2">ience i2">is that i2">I a pretty much powerless to do anythi2">ing OF MYSELF, i2">I don't HAVE any speci2">ial powers, and i2">I don't know HOW to heal. But i2">I do know how to trust the Holy Spi2">iri2">it and Jesus to do heali2">ing through me.

"A better and FAR more helpful way to thi2">ink of mi2">iracles i2">is thi2">is: You do NOT understand them, ei2">ither i2">in part OR whole. Yet you have DONE them. Therefore, YOUR understandi2">ing CANNOT be necessary. Yet i2">it i2">is sti2">ill i2">impossi2">ible to accompli2">ish what you do not understand. And so there must be Somethi2">ing i2">IN you that DOES understand."

"As God communi2">icates to the Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">in you, so does the Holy Spi2">iri2">it TRANSLATE Hi2">is communi2">icati2">ions THROUGH you, so YOU can understand them."

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill teach me thi2">is, i2">if i2">I wi2">ill let Hi2">im."

"i2">I do NOT feel gui2">ilty, because the Holy Spi2">iri2">it wi2">ill undo ALL the consequences of my wrong deci2">isi2">ion i2">IF i2">I Wi2">ILL LET Hi2">IM. i2">I Wi2">ILL to let Hi2">im by allowi2">ing Hi2">im to deci2">ide for God for me."

"You understand that you are healed when you gi2">ive heali2">ing. You accept forgi2">iveness as accompli2">ished i2">in yourself when you forgi2">ive. You recogni2">ize your brother as yourself, and thus do you percei2">ive that you are whole. There i2">is no mi2">iracle you cannot gi2">ive, for all are gi2">iven you. Recei2">ive them now by openi2">ing the storehouse of your mi2">ind where they are lai2">id, and gi2">ivi2">ing them away."

"But YOU must see the works i2">I do through you, or you wi2">ill not percei2">ive that i2">I have done them unto YOU. Do not set li2">imi2">its on what you beli2">ieve i2">I can do THROUGH YOU, or you wi2">ill not accept what i2">I can do FOR you. For i2">it i2">is done ALREADY, and unless you gi2">ive ALL that you have recei2">ived, you wi2">ill not know that your Redeemer li2">iveth and that YOU have awakened Wi2">ITH Hi2">im. Redempti2">ion i2">is recogni2">ized ONLY by shari2">ing i2">it."

Choosi2">ing not to control anythi2">ing, to me, feels just li2">ike a surrender.

i2">I used to say several ti2">imes, "i2">I surrender". Parti2">icularly sayi2">ing them i2">in qui2">ick-successi2">ion so that my ego doesn't jump i2">in wi2">ith i2">its di2">istracti2">ions and objecti2">ions.

But now i2">I fi2">ind, i2">if i2">I just i2">intend not to control anythi2">ing at all, and just to be 'aware of any attempts to control, thi2">is works just as well and even perhaps runs deeper.

Wi2">ith surrenderi2">ing, i2">I can surrender the surface layers of what my ego has been doi2">ing to try to control si2">ituati2">ions, and relax back i2">into openness and wi2">illi2">ingness to admi2">it the truth. But maybe thi2">is i2">isn't a 'total surrender'.

By focusi2">ing on 'not controlli2">ing anythi2">ing', thi2">is i2">instead stri2">ikes ri2">ight to the core of the ego, whi2">ich i2">is enti2">irely founded on an attempt to control reali2">ity and God. i2">If i2">I am not controlli2">ing anythi2">ing at all, then i2">I am not goi2">ing outsi2">ide of myself, i2">I am not engagi2">ing i2">in non-acceptance, i2">I am not caught up i2">in ego dramas, and i2">I'm not even creati2">ing the thoughts that come as the ways i2">in whi2">ich i2">I thi2">ink reali2">ity should be di2">ifferent.

Gi2">ive i2">it a try. i2">I'm enjoyi2">ing experi2">imenti2">ing wi2">ith thi2">is. Just let go of controlli2">ing anythi2">ing whatsoever. Don't even try to control thoughts or to control your mi2">ind or ego. Just stop controlli2">ing.

i2">I woke up i2">in the ni2">ight last ni2">ight wi2">ith terri2">ible heartburn. i2">It was so uncomfortable, i2">I was ready to get i2">in the car and go to the store to get somethi2">ing for i2">it. Probably the strongest and worst heartburn i2">I've ever had.

i2">I thought i2">I wouldn't be able to go back to sleep because i2">it was way too unpleasant and i2">I had to do *somethi2">ing* about i2">it.

i2">In the mi2">iddle of that concern, i2">in whi2">ich i2">I thought i2">I defi2">ini2">itely would need an external magi2">ical soluti2">ion, Holy Spi2">iri2">it started shaki2">ing me and heali2">ing me.

i2">I di2">id not beli2">ieve at fi2">irst that He would be able to correct i2">it. i2">It seemed too strong and defi2">ini2">itely "physi2">ical". But He kept doi2">ing the same process over and over for li2">ike 5 mi2">inutes or more. My body was shaki2">ing all over the place and i2">I just surrendered, relaxed and allowed.

Surpri2">isi2">ingly, i2">it seemed to be i2">improvi2">ing. He kept goi2">ing. And eventually i2">it got to where i2">it really felt li2">ike i2">it had completely healed. i2">I was i2">in a bi2">it of di2">isbeli2">ief. My fearful thoughts hadn't qui2">ite caught up to what had happened.

But there i2">I was, the Holy Spi2">iri2">it sai2">id "done", and all i2">I could feel was sti2">illness and peace. The roari2">ing heartburn soreness had been completely healed. i2">I got up and walked around a bi2">it to test i2">it. i2">I then tentati2">ively headed back to bed, not bei2">ing able to fi2">ind any trace of di2">iscomfort.

And then i2">I started to experi2">ience bi2">igti2">ime grati2">itude for thi2">is heali2">ing. Part of my ego mi2">ind couldn't qui2">ite let go of the beli2">ief that i2">it was healed and kept wanti2">ing to fear i2">its return, but i2">it was nonsense. i2">It was gone.

Thank God for that :-)

Although these thi2">ings are unpleasant to go through, they defi2">ini2">itely are a way to i2">increase trust i2">in Holy Spi2">iri2">it and Hi2">is mi2">iracle-worki2">ing power.

Forgi2">iveness corrects a reversal of cause and effect.

i2">In every si2">ingle si2">ituati2">ion, every false percepti2">ion, every beli2">ief, every error or mi2">istake you can make, every relati2">ionshi2">ip, every drama, you CAN only really make one mi2">istake.

You can only get cause and effect back to front.

The ENTi2">IRE ego thought system, all of the separati2">ion, everythi2">ing that happens i2">in thi2">is world, all events and experi2">iences, are ALL enti2">irely based on a reversal of cause and effect.

God i2">is cause. You are God's effect. You also can cause, because you are li2">ike God. But you cannot cause God, bei2">ing Hi2">is effect.

HOWEVER, because you are free to choose, when you choose to TRY to cause God, all hell breaks loose.

Thi2">is i2">is si2">imply because you are tryi2">ing to upset the di2">ivi2">ine order. You are tryi2">ing to convert God, who i2">is PURE CAUSE, i2">into an effect. And you are si2">imultaneously tryi2">ing to change YOU, who are purely an effect of God, i2">INTO the cause of yourself.

i2">In thi2">is i2">is the enti2">ire authori2">ity problem, usurpi2">ing of God's wi2">ill, all sense of si2">in, and every consequence that comes from si2">in i2">includi2">ing gui2">ilt and fear and si2">ickness and death.

Every form of level confusi2">ion i2">is a reversal of cause and effect. All beli2">ief i2">in magi2">ic, every state of vi2">icti2">imhood, every delusi2">ion possi2">ible i2">in the mi2">ind, all condi2">iti2">ions of the ego and i2">its thi2">inki2">ing, the emergence of a physi2">ical body, even death, are all SYMPTOMS of an i2">inverted cause-effect relati2">ionshi2">ip.

Therefore, THE ONLY CORRECTi2">ION, the only "forgi2">iveness you need do", i2">is to set cause and effect back i2">into thei2">ir proper relati2">ionshi2">ip. i2">In all ways, at all levels.

So when you're i2">in the mi2">idst of some drama story about who di2">id what to whom, or why you're afrai2">id of thi2">is and that, or how you've been caused to be si2">ick agai2">inst your wi2">ill, or why death i2">is loomi2">ing, or why you "can't" or "won't", or why someone else i2">is responsi2">ible for your exi2">istence etc, thi2">is i2">is ALL because somewhere i2">in your mi2">ind you are mi2">is-percei2">ivi2">ing and have attempted to reverse cause and effect.

There are two parts to thi2">is error.

1) The beli2">ief that God i2">is causi2">ing you agai2">inst your wi2">ill and you don't want to be affected.

2) The beli2">ief that you are the cause of maki2">ing yourself and do not need to be an effect of God.

Thi2">is plays out i2">in all ki2">inds of ways and i2">in all ki2">inds of dramas.

ALL you have to do, to forgi2">ive, i2">is fi2">ix the causali2">ity.

That means, you need to UNDO, ANY beli2">ief that says anythi2">ing to the contrary of how God naturally creates. i2">If there i2">is any aspect of what you beli2">ieve or percei2">ive that i2">is sayi2">ing "i2">its happeni2">ing to me agai2">inst my wi2">ill" or "i2">I di2">id not choose thi2">is" or "i2">I am not responsi2">ible for causi2">ing thi2">is" or "they di2">id thi2">is to me", that's a mi2">istake. That must be fli2">ipped around.

i2">It's very EXTREMELY Si2">IMPLE. There i2">is NOTHi2">ING ELSE that has gone wrong. i2">It's not merely a sense of separati2">ion from God bei2">ing corrected. That sense of separati2">ion arose through attempti2">ing to change causali2">ity. You wanted to be the cause of God i2">instead of hi2">is effect. That's all. And because of that, you now see other people as bei2">ing the cause of you agai2">inst your wi2">ill, whi2">ich SECRETLY i2">is your desi2">ire to be NOT caused BY God.

So you fi2">ix the causali2">ity. i2">I am not bei2">ing caused by that person. That person i2">is not doi2">ing anythi2">ing to me at all. i2">I am not experi2">ienci2">ing anythi2">ing because of them. They di2">id not cause thi2">is. i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im of them. They can do nothi2">ing to me. i2">I take back all of my power that i2">I gave to them. They are not responsi2">ible for my li2">ife or exi2">istence or feeli2">ings or experi2">iences. i2">I chose everythi2">ing i2">I am experi2">ienci2">ing myself. i2">I am completely responsi2">ible for thi2">is whole thi2">ing. i2">I am not at the effect of the world i2">I see. i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im of anyone or anythi2">ing. etc

Thi2">is i2">is placi2">ing you i2">in your proper role of *causi2">ing the dream*, but also i2">is placi2">ing you i2">in your proper role of BEi2">ING THE EFFECT OF GOD.

Because as you acknowledge YOUR causal power, whi2">ich you i2">inheri2">ited from Hi2">im, you are acknowledgi2">ing that God's causal nature i2">is i2">IN YOUR Mi2">IND, and therefore so i2">is God.

All you are doi2">ing i2">is cancelli2">ing out all beli2">ief i2">in "hori2">izontal cause-and-effect". There are no causes on thi2">is level. There are only effects on thi2">is level. You are NOT one of those effects, because you CAUSED thi2">is whole level from above.

Fi2">ix the broken causali2">ity and EVERYTHi2">ING ELSE wi2">ill fall i2">into place.

Mi2">iracles are examples of verti2">ical causali2">ity whi2">ich defy all hori2">izontal laws of cause and effect.

Bei2">ing vulnerable i2">in i2">itself i2">isn't a bad thi2">ing. To be vulnerable i2">is to be exposed and open to somethi2">ing. Able to be affected by i2">it. i2">If you expose yourself to God openly you would resurrect i2">into eternal li2">ife and joy. That's a good thi2">ing.

i2">It's only when you expose yourself and open up to the ego, or really to the i2">idea of the opposi2">ite of li2">ife, to attack, that you are becomi2">ing vulnerable to sufferi2">ing. Exposi2">ing yourself to the ego produces si2">ickness and death. i2">It's li2">ike i2">it's toxi2">ic, and the more you make yourself able to be affected by i2">it, the more dead you become.

Now, i2">in the vi2">icti2">im mentali2">ity, whi2">ich i2">is ego, we always seem to be exposed to and at the effect of somethi2">ing i2">in the world. Somethi2">ing other than God. Really i2">it's an exposure to attack and si2">in, and ulti2">imately to death. We accuse death of maki2">ing us dead. We clai2">im that external causes have the power to destroy us and make us si2">ick and suffer. As i2">if "death" happens to us.

i2">In thi2">is ki2">ind of a mi2">indset, a person i2">is really rejecti2">ing i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity. They're sayi2">ing, i2">I am small and weak and frai2">il and easi2">ily affected by everythi2">ing. Everythi2">ing has power over me and causes me agai2">inst my wi2">ill all the ti2">ime. i2">I barely hang onto li2">ife by a thread and li2">ive i2">in constant fear that i2">I wi2">ill be attacked. i2">I have to hi2">ide from everyone and everythi2">ing and become parali2">ized wi2">ith terror. And anyone who wants to take anythi2">ing from me can do so.

Thi2">is mi2">indset of blame and projecti2">ion, or the reversal of cause and effect, of the di2">isowni2">ing of power and playi2">ing small and weak, i2">is the opposi2">ite of the mi2">indset of i2">immortali2">ity. i2">Immortali2">ity means you cannot be affected, you are only at the effect of God, and you can only be exposed to li2">ife. i2">It makes you i2">invulnerable to attack or threat or danger of any ki2">ind, because what you are bei2">ing vulnerable to i2">is harmless. i2">It i2">is li2">ife-gi2">ivi2">ing, not death-gi2">ivi2">ing.

So the questi2">ion i2">is, what do i2">I want to be vulnerable TO? To li2">ife or to death? What do i2">I want to be affected by and open to? By li2">ife or by death? i2">If i2">I want to be not affected by the world, not made to suffer, not caused to react, not upset by anythi2">ing, not terrori2">ized, not threatened or hurt, and actually completely i2">invulnerable to the world, then i2">I need to choose to make myself vulnerable to God. Because God i2">is my safety.

So we have thi2">is choi2">ice to make between heaven and hell, between li2">ife and death. A choi2">ice of what i2">I wi2">ill be an effect of. i2">I am ei2">ither an effect of God who i2">is li2">ife, or i2">I am an effect of death. i2">I wi2">ill become the spawn of satan. i2">If i2">I become an effect of death i2">I wi2">ill show up i2">in the world as dead. i2">If i2">I don't want that the only alternati2">ive i2">is to be vulnerable wi2">ith God and open up to hi2">im through trust, so that i2">I can be exposed to the li2">ife-gi2">ivi2">ing power of hi2">is mi2">ind.

Just bei2">ing i2">in hi2">is presence can resurrect you back to li2">ife and permanent health and eradi2">icate all attackabi2">ili2">ity. Openi2">ing up to God reclai2">ims your i2">immortali2">ity. i2">It makes you li2">iterally i2">invulnerable to anythi2">ing i2">in the world. And that i2">is the only way you can be safe. Exposi2">ing yourself to God i2">IS exposi2">ing yourself TO safety. And when you are safe i2">in God, you can never di2">ie.

"i2">In my defenselessness my safety li2">ies."

"Nothi2">ing except your thoughts can make you thi2">ink you are vulnerable. And nothi2">ing except your thoughts can prove to you thi2">is i2">is not so."

"The mi2">ind that serves the Spi2">iri2">it i2">is i2">invulnerable."

"Casti2">ing spells" merely means "affi2">irmi2">ing error", and error i2">is lack of love. When man projects thi2">is onto others, he DOES i2">impri2">ison them, but only to the extent that he rei2">inforces errors they have already made. Thi2">is di2">istorti2">ion makes them vulnerable to the curse of others, si2">ince they have already cursed themselves. The mi2">iracle worker can only bless, and thi2">is undoes the curse and frees the soul from pri2">ison."

"i2">It i2">is not YOU that i2">is so vulnerable and open to attack that just a word, a li2">ittle whi2">isper that you do not li2">ike, a ci2">ircumstance that sui2">its you not, or an event that you di2">id not anti2">ici2">ipate upsets your world, and hurls i2">it i2">into chaos."

"i2">Illness of any ki2">ind may be defi2">ined as the result of a vi2">iew of the self as weak, vulnerable, evi2">il and endangered, and thus i2">in need of constant defense."

"Concerns about the body demonstrate how frai2">il and vulnerable i2">is your li2">ife; how easi2">ily destroyed i2">is what you love. Depressi2">ion speaks of death and vani2">ity of real concern wi2">ith anythi2">ing at all."

"Li2">isten to what the ego says, and see what i2">it Di2">IRECTS you see, and i2">it i2">is sure that you wi2">ill see YOURSELF as ti2">iny, vulnerable, and afrai2">id. You Wi2">ILL experi2">ience depressi2">ion, a sense of worthlessness, and feeli2">ings of i2">impermanence and unreali2">ity. You Wi2">ILL beli2">ieve that you are helpless prey to forces far beyond your own control, and far more powerful than you. And you Wi2">ILL thi2">ink the world you made di2">irects your desti2">iny."

"Thi2">is would not be YOUR wi2">ish unless you saw yourself AS ONE wi2">ith the ego, whi2">ich ALWAYS looks upon i2">itself, and therefore on you, as UNDER attack, and hi2">ighly VULNERABLE to i2">it."

"You do NOT need God's blessi2">ing, because that you have forever. But you DO need YOURS. The pi2">icture you see of yourselves i2">is depri2">ived, unlovi2">ing, and very vulnerable. You CANNOT love thi2">is. But you can very easi2">ily escape FROM i2">it, or better, leave i2">it behi2">ind."

"The i2">idea that knowledge wi2">ill make the i2">indi2">ivi2">idual i2">invulnerable. Thi2">is i2">is the reacti2">ion formati2">ion agai2">inst the underlyi2">ing fear of vulnerabi2">ili2">ity."

"You see yourself as vulnerable, frai2">il, and easi2">ily destroyed. And at the mercy of countless attackers more powerful than you."

"A mi2">ind whi2">ich has been blocked has allowed i2">itself to be vulnerable to attack, because i2">it has TURNED AGAi2">INST i2">ITSELF."

"A si2">ick god MUST be an i2">idol, made i2">in the i2">image of what i2">its maker thi2">inks HE i2">is. And that i2">is exactly what the ego DOES percei2">ive i2">in a Son of God; -- a si2">ick god, self-created, self-suffi2">ici2">ient, very vi2">ici2">ious, and very vulnerable."

"Thei2">ir OWN thoughts have made them vulnerable."

"The vulnerable are essenti2">ially mi2">iscreators, because they mi2">ispercei2">ive Creati2">ion."

i2">I once thought that uncondi2">iti2">ional love meant that i2">I would uncondi2">iti2">ionally love one person. That i2">is, that i2">I would love them a lot. i2">I thought that thi2">is 'bi2">ig love' was an uncondi2">iti2">ional love, unti2">il i2">I found out that i2">I someti2">imes fai2">iled to love when certai2">in condi2">iti2">ions occurred. So i2">I wasn't really bei2">ing uncondi2">iti2">ional.

At the same ti2">ime, thi2">is really wasn't uncondi2">iti2">ional love anyway, because i2">it was applyi2">ing mai2">inly to only one person. Uncondi2">iti2">ional love does not just apply to one person. To be uncondi2">iti2">ional, i2">it has to be i2">imparti2">ial and i2">it must apply the same to everyone, all the ti2">ime.

i2">In God, we are asked to uncondi2">iti2">ionally love everyone the SAME all of the ti2">ime wi2">ith no excepti2">ions. That seems li2">ike a really tall order.

Can you uncondi2">iti2">ionally love, fully love, equally love, every si2">ingle person i2">includi2">ing all the people that you had beli2">iefs of blame or anger or annoyance or a grudge about? And not just the people i2">in your close ci2">ircles, but even complete strangers? That's what uncondi2">iti2">ional love means.

i2">It takes a lot to admi2">it that you are not uncondi2">iti2">ionally lovi2">ing, and that you probably have practi2">iced condi2">iti2">ional love all your li2">ife. i2">It takes some honesty to admi2">it you do not love other people, maybe you don't love your nei2">ighbors or someone at work or certai2">in groups i2">in soci2">iety. At least admi2">itti2">ing that you don't can start to gi2">ive way to you bei2">ing open to learni2">ing why you don't, and correcti2">ing that.

Ulti2">imately, YOU won't be fully and completely and uncondi2">iti2">ionally loved, or experi2">ience uncondi2">iti2">ional love, i2">if you are not wi2">illi2">ing to both recei2">ive i2">it AND gi2">ive i2">it.

When you love uncondi2">iti2">ionally, you represent God.

God DOES love you uncondi2">iti2">ionally, and that's pretty speci2">ial ;-)

The Golden Rule states that whatever i2">is true of one Son of God i2">is true of another. Because all of God's chi2">ildren are perfect equals. Thi2">is means that anythi2">ing true of you i2">is true of the enti2">ire sonshi2">ip. You are created i2">in the li2">ikeness of God and so what i2">is true of God i2">is true of you and all brothers and all creati2">ions. Thi2">is rule, really a law, i2">is always i2">in effect regardless of how awake you are.

What thi2">is means i2">is that i2">in thi2">is world, when you beli2">ieve you are gui2">ilty, you MUST also beli2">ieve that everyone else i2">is gui2">ilty. Thi2">is rule i2">is a LAW of God. i2">It cannot be broken. But you can be decei2">ived i2">in beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it i2">is not applyi2">ing.

We talk a lot about projecti2">ing your stuff and then taki2">ing i2">it back, as i2">if to say, there i2">is somethi2">ing confi2">ined to myself that i2">I am ONLY doi2">ing to myself. We talk about bei2">ing responsi2">ible for thi2">is self-attack, that all attack i2">is self-made and we're not really attacki2">ing anyone else. We also talk about how i2">I am the one who needs forgi2">iveness and so on.

But there i2">is somethi2">ing happeni2">ing as a result of the Golden Rule. i2">IF i2">I attack myself, i2">I AM attempti2">ing to also attack my brother. i2">If i2">I see myself as gui2">ilty, i2">I MUST beli2">ieve the whole sonshi2">ip i2">is gui2">ilty. i2">If i2">I fi2">ind myself unworthy of love, i2">I wi2">ill beli2">ieve everyone i2">is unworthy of love. Whatever i2">I see i2">in my brother i2">is a reflecti2">ion of my own atti2">itude about myself. Whi2">ich means i2">if i2">I have attacked myself, i2">I MUST also be attacki2">ing them.

Thi2">is extends also to si2">ickness, because whi2">ile many beli2">ieve that "only i2">I am si2">ick" or "the si2">ickness i2">is only i2">in my body", as i2">if separated off from others, the fact i2">is that si2">ickness i2">is a two-si2">ided affai2">ir. i2">It ari2">ises because you accuse your brother of si2">in, whi2">ich i2">is an attack on hi2">im. Usi2">ing the body to attack through, your body becomes si2">ick. Your mi2">ind therefore HAS to beli2">ieve that BOTH you and your brother are si2">ick.

Thi2">is also plays out on the level of relati2">ionshi2">ip because when you are regardi2">ing your brother as bei2">ing as holy as you are, you are i2">in a holy relati2">ionshi2">ip wi2">ith them, seei2">ing your own holi2">iness i2">in them. When you separate off, by ceasi2">ing to extend your mi2">ind to them, a gap forms i2">in between you both, comi2">ing between you. i2">It doesn't just separate you off from them, i2">it also separates them off from you. i2">It's a two-si2">ided wall. What appli2">ies to you appli2">ies to them.

So what we have to reali2">ize i2">is, whi2">ile i2">it's defi2">ini2">itely benefi2">ici2">ial to look at what we are doi2">ing "only to ourselves", we have to remember nothi2">ing ever really appli2">ies only to ourselves. Whi2">ich means that i2">if we are i2">indeed i2">in any ki2">ind of ego state, havi2">ing any ki2">ind of gui2">ilt or si2">in beli2">ief, some aspect of that beli2">ief i2">IS di2">irected at our brothers. i2">If we are attacki2">ing "only ourselves", we ALSO are attacki2">ing others.

Thi2">is i2">is part of the unhealed healer as well. i2">If i2">I have not recei2">ived love, and therefore cannot gi2">ive i2">it, and therefore am unhealed, because i2">I have gui2">ilt i2">in me, i2">I am goi2">ing to have to see that gui2">ilt i2">in everyone. And seei2">ing i2">it there, i2">I wi2">ill perhaps di2">isassoci2">iate and thi2">ink i2">it's someone else's problem that i2">I need to save them from. That bli2">indness, that separati2">ion thought, where you thi2">ink somethi2">ing appli2">ies to you and not them, or appli2">ies to them and not you, that i2">is always ego. And there i2">is temptati2">ion i2">in the whole "i2">it's all my own stuff" approach to not reali2">ize that i2">it's not JUST about you as a "separate" mi2">ind.

Shi2">ifti2">ing blame from someone else back onto yourself does not heal i2">it. i2">It's a step i2">in the ri2">ight di2">irecti2">ion because i2">it's sort of "comi2">ing from you", but WHERE are you? You thi2">ink you are i2">in a body, separated off from others. Assumi2">ing thi2">is i2">is true, you wi2">ill thi2">ink your atti2">itudes and your self attack are contai2">ined wi2">ithi2">in the confi2">ines of your body/mi2">ind. That i2">its i2">insi2">ide you, not outsi2">ide, and not i2">in another. Thi2">is i2">is actually a false premi2">ise based on the beli2">ief that you fundamentally are a separated-off i2">isolated mi2">ind-contai2">iner.

Your mi2">ind i2">is not really, ulti2">imately, i2">isolated to your body. That's part of the i2">illusi2">ion. Your mi2">ind i2">is shared wi2">ith others, i2">it i2">is i2">IN your brother, and i2">it i2">is everywhere. Your nature i2">is to be an omni2">ipresent spi2">iri2">it, li2">ike God. So when you are thi2">inki2">ing i2">in terms of, i2">its mi2">ine, or i2">its i2">in me, or i2">I am doi2">ing i2">it only to myself, that sti2">ill has i2">isolati2">ion and separati2">ion i2">in i2">it. i2">It doesn't mean that the problem i2">is confi2">ined to the i2">insi2">ides of your mi2">ind-body associ2">iati2">ion.

i2">It would actually be more accurate to say, the mi2">ind that i2">is mi2">ine, whi2">ich i2">is uni2">ited wi2">ith my brothers and i2">is everywhere and i2">in all people, i2">is temporari2">ily beli2">ievi2">ing that the enti2">ire sonshi2">ip i2">is under attack. i2">I am temporari2">ily comi2">ing between myself and everyone. My attack thoughts are agai2">inst myself and them. Separati2">ion i2">is comi2">ing between me and everyone. i2">I am tryi2">ing to apply unlove to the whole sonshi2">ip to bri2">ing us all down together. My attack i2">is upon the whole Ki2">ingdom. i2">I am sti2">ill thi2">inki2">ing the same of everyone else that i2">I thi2">ink of myself.

So i2">in thi2">is we start to reali2">ize, that whi2">ile i2">it's i2">important i2">I own what i2">I'm doi2">ing to myself, i2">I have to also reali2">ize that i2">included i2">in "what i2">I'm doi2">ing" i2">is actually an attempted attack on others as well. "You but accuse your brothers of your own si2">in" and "i2">it can be but myself i2">I cruci2">ify" are helpful i2">in reali2">izi2">ing that you are i2">included i2">in what's bei2">ing attacked, and i2">in fact that you ARE only really doi2">ing thi2">is to yourself (because your brother cannot be attacked because he's real). But as you cruci2">ify yourself, YOU DO attempt to cruci2">ify everyone.

Thi2">is leads to the uncoveri2">ing of the "second ki2">ind of scapegoati2">ing". Whi2">ich i2">is, the aspect of "what i2">I am doi2">ing to others". Most often we are reacti2">ing to and tryi2">ing to overcome "what they are doi2">ing to me". To blame them for attacki2">ing us. But let's say that thi2">is form of scapegoati2">ing i2">is actually a di2">isgui2">ise. i2">It's a way to pretend that YOU are not doi2">ing anythi2">ing TO THEM. That you are not the attacker. Whi2">ile yes, you are actually attacki2">ing only yourself, i2">in truth, you ARE tryi2">ing to attack everyone i2">if you beli2">ieve i2">in si2">in. i2">Includi2">ing God.

And to project thi2">is and di2">isown i2">it i2">is an attempt to cover thi2">is up and make out that someone else i2">is the attacker and not you. To take back the projected si2">in means taki2">ing back the i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion of WHO i2">is doi2">ing the attacki2">ing, and thi2">is attacki2">ing i2">is an "act" that comes out of someone and goes toward another. i2">It's not just some lump of si2">in that si2">its there i2">idly. i2">It's not a commodi2">ity that you shuffle around or di2">isplace li2">ike "some gui2">ilt". We are ei2">ither acti2">ively attacki2">ing others or beli2">ievi2">ing they are acti2">ively attacki2">ing us.

So i2">if we get honest, we're goi2">ing to fi2">ind out, that all our attack thoughts are ki2">ind of a form of murderousness, toward everythi2">ing - me, my brothers, the world, and God. i2">If i2">I am projecti2">ing gui2">ilt i2">in the fi2">irst place, i2">I am actually tryi2">ing to attack. When i2">I do not see the real world, i2">I am attacki2">ing i2">it. As Jesus says: "You attack the real world every day and every hour and every mi2">inute, and yet you are surpri2">ised that you cannot see i2">it." and "God offers the world salvati2">ion; your judgment would condemn i2">it. and "Peace i2">is i2">impossi2">ible to those who look on war. Peace i2">is i2">inevi2">itable to those who offer peace."

So i2">if you look at what si2">in i2">is all about, i2">it basi2">ically i2">is "attack" or attempted attack. Attack thoughts. Judgement. The attempt to separate, push away, deny, reject, unlove, to cause i2">irreversi2">ible damage to somethi2">ing i2">in an effort to make i2">it go away, to destroy i2">it. i2">It's part of the ego's murderous thought system. "What i2">is not love i2">is murder" says the same thi2">ing. And actually makes i2">it very clear. i2">If we are not bei2">ing lovi2">ing, whi2">ich means to ourselves AND others, per the Golden Rule, we ARE attempti2">ing to be murderous towards ourselves AND others.

Thi2">is i2">is uncomfortable to look at because i2">it reveals that we cannot have ego beli2">iefs i2">in "self attack" goi2">ing on i2">in our mi2">inds Wi2">ITHOUT beli2">ievi2">ing they also apply to everyone else. Whatever i2">I see i2">in myself i2">I wi2">ill see i2">in everyone. As i2">I enter i2">into any si2">in or gui2">ilt, i2">I am tryi2">ing to separate, whi2">ich means i2">I am attacki2">ing both myself and others. As an unhealed healer, i2">I wi2">ill attempt to heal by attacki2">ing, by tryi2">ing to gi2">ive what i2">I do not have, and by therefore gi2">ivi2">ing attack as a remedy. And of course thi2">is cannot heal. Those who are not healed cannot heal.

So we have to get i2">in touch wi2">ith thi2">is. Look at i2">it. What i2">I'm doi2">ing to myself, i2">I am tryi2">ing to also do to others. What i2">I thi2">ink appli2">ies to me, i2">I also thi2">ink appli2">ies to everyone. Even i2">if i2">in my state of deni2">ial and unconsci2">iousness, i2">I am not aware that i2">I thi2">ink thi2">is. Because the ego's states of mi2">ind are always an i2">imbalance where you thi2">ink i2">it appli2">ies to me not them, or them not me. That's part of the di2">isassoci2">iati2">ion, whi2">ich i2">is the separati2">ion i2">idea.

The ego i2">is the deni2">ial of the Golden Rule, but deni2">ial does not overthrow the law. The law sti2">ill appli2">ies at all ti2">imes even as the ego does i2">its thi2">ing. Everythi2">ing always appli2">ies to everyone. When i2">I thi2">ink i2">it does not apply to me, i2">it does, but thi2">is also doesn't mean that because i2">it appli2">ies to me, i2">it doesn't apply to others. Ego i2">is always the temptati2">ion to beli2">ieve somethi2">ing i2">is speci2">ial or true of me that i2">isn't applyi2">ing to everyone. And "speci2">ial forgi2">iveness" of "only myself" i2">is not forgi2">iveness of the sonshi2">ip.

Transi2">iti2">ioni2">ing from ego thi2">inki2">ing to Holy Spi2">iri2">it thi2">inki2">ing entai2">ils shi2">ifti2">ing from the whole "me vs them" to "all of us". Wrong mi2">indedness means i2">I thi2">ink thi2">ings do not apply to everyone equally. Ri2">ight mi2">indedness means i2">I recogni2">ize everythi2">ing appli2">ies equally to everyone. So to get to ri2">ight mi2">indedness i2">I'm goi2">ing to have to admi2">it along the way that i2">I am actually tryi2">ing to attack BOTH myself and others. What i2">I'm tryi2">ing to do to them i2">I am doi2">ing to myself. We BOTH need forgi2">iveness. We BOTH need to be recogni2">ized as i2">innocent. And i2">I need to learn to stop attacki2">ing BOTH of us.

Thi2">inki2">ing that you only attack yourself can be a trap. i2">It can di2">isgui2">ise and hi2">ide the fact that you also thi2">ink poorly of others. Or that you are secretly attacki2">ing them whi2">ile tryi2">ing to save them. i2">It can cover up the fact that i2">if you are attacki2">ing at all, you are also attacki2">ing everyone. Yet recogni2">izi2">ing you are attacki2">ing everyone can also be a trap, because i2">it can i2">induce more gui2">ilt. You shouldn't be tryi2">ing to "not attack" on the basi2">is that you would feel gui2">ilty for doi2">ing so. And you don't need to.

All we really need i2">is awareness. i2">In awareness, you know that you are i2">in your brother. There i2">is an automati2">ic vested i2">interest i2">in not attacki2">ing them, i2">IF you are aware that you li2">iterally cannot do i2">it wi2">ithout attacki2">ing yourself. i2">It's the unawareness that you are i2">included i2">in the attack that makes you beli2">ieve murder i2">is justi2">ifi2">ied and that you can get away wi2">ith i2">it wi2">ithout experi2">ienci2">ing any effects. i2">If you were aware of and not i2">in deni2">ial of the Golden Rule, i2">it would leave absolutely no room for attack of any ki2">ind, because to attack when you know i2">it's yourself you attack would be i2">insane.

i2">If i2">I am beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in attack i2">I wi2">ill attack myself and all of creati2">ion.

i2">If i2">I am only lovi2">ing i2">I wi2">ill love myself and all of creati2">ion.

Father let me not attack myself or my brothers today and let us all be joi2">ined i2">in complete holi2">iness and uni2">ifi2">ied wi2">ill that you may resurrect us i2">into your li2">ight and heal the enti2">ire sonshi2">ip as one.

"One brother i2">is all brothers. One mi2">ind i2">is all mi2">inds. Such i2">is the truth."

"God made not death. Whatever form i2">it takes must therefore be i2">illusi2">ion. Thi2">is the stand we take today. And i2">it i2">is gi2">iven us to look past death and see the li2">ife beyond."

You can say that death i2">is bad, and everythi2">ing should be moved towards li2">ife. That i2">includes heali2">ing the body and mi2">ind. There should be resurrecti2">ion happeni2">ing, a reversal of agi2">ing, an undoi2">ing of the effects of space and ti2">ime. A return to li2">ife from death.

But thi2">is can also be mi2">ixed i2">in wi2">ith an acti2">ive avoi2">idance of death, a fear of i2">it happeni2">ing, and a wi2">ish to stop a sufferi2">ing that seems real. i2">If a person's body i2">is real, and i2">it i2">is si2">ick, you'll be moti2">ivated to "perform mi2">iracles" to heal and rescue them from death. You just want i2">it to all go away.

Thi2">is atti2">itude of death avoi2">idance can seem li2">ike i2">it i2">is i2">in support of mi2">iracles, and even can compel and entai2">il attempts at heali2">ing. But i2">it's sti2">ill the behavi2">iour of an unhealed healer - a mi2">ixture of tryi2">ing to resurrect the dead whi2">ile sti2">ill beli2">ievi2">ing death i2">is real. i2">If bodi2">ies are real, then fi2">ixi2">ing them becomes a pri2">iori2">ity.

i2">I went through thi2">is whole phase over the course of many years, presented wi2">ith an endless supply of pi2">ictures of my wi2">ife bei2">ing si2">ick and di2">isabled. i2">It was practi2">ically an embarrassment to a buddi2">ing ACi2">IM mi2">iracle-worker, the amount of assi2">isti2">ive devi2">ices we had to use - li2">ifts and wheelchai2">irs and speci2">ial beds and medi2">ici2">ines.

Here i2">I was, tryi2">ing to stave off death at all costs, keep the body goi2">ing, undo the si2">ickness, reverse the symptoms, resurrect the dyi2">ing and make i2">it all better. But thi2">is too was dri2">iven by a beli2">ief that my wi2">ife was a body, constantly mi2">ixi2">ing her spi2">iri2">it and mi2">ind wi2">ith the physi2">ical form, where references to "her" always i2">included the body.

i2">I resi2">isted the si2">ickness and the death. i2">I di2">idn't want i2">it to happen. i2">I wanted to keep the body-person around for as long as possi2">ible, and couldn't even concei2">ive of any other way of li2">ivi2">ing. Keepi2">ing her ti2">icki2">ing over was a constant struggle and a dai2">ily effort, thwarti2">ing wrong di2">iagnoses and fendi2">ing off stupi2">id medi2">ical staff. Tryi2">ing to keep the death-mongers at bay.

But eventually i2">it got to a poi2">int where i2">it was all exhausted, and i2">it occurred to me that i2">I really should just let her di2">ie. And that seemed totally agai2">inst everythi2">ing i2">I beli2">ieved. Not that i2">it was up to me anyway, but i2">I had to stop fi2">ighti2">ing i2">it. i2">I reali2">ised i2">I should stop tryi2">ing to keep her here, and stop tryi2">ing to prevent all hell breaki2">ing loose. She di2">idn't want to really be here any more and we were both qui2">ite done wi2">ith the dai2">ily drudgery of bodi2">ily upkeep.

i2">It was wi2">ithi2">in a week of that surrenderi2">ing that she di2">ied. Well, i2">I should say, she went to heaven. Her body for sure di2">ied, and she for sure di2">id not. Whi2">ich presented i2">its own confusi2">ing challenges to get my head around. But a few thi2">ings became super clear to me.

My enti2">ire atti2">itude about death bei2">ing "a really bad thi2">ing" was totally bullshi2">it. i2">It was fuelled by a beli2">ief that the body was the person and must be kept ali2">ive. My fear of i2">it and avoi2">idance of i2">it just attracted i2">it. My beli2">ief i2">in the si2">ickness just fuelled i2">it. But all of a sudden she was i2">in a state of extreme freedom and happi2">iness, reli2">ieved and grateful, totally stunned yet overjoyed.

All the sufferi2">ing si2">imply swi2">itched off. All the dai2">ily gri2">ind came to an end. All the resi2">istance to i2">it happeni2">ing was blown out of the water. And i2">it seemed nothi2">ing but wonderful for her. i2">I was really thri2">illed for her to be free at last, whi2">ich she exclai2">imed to me "i2">I'm free!" and "i2">I'm happy".

So death really wasn't that bad, after all. i2">In fact, i2">it appeared li2">ike a ki2">ind of li2">iberati2">ion and mercy, gi2">iven how much she'd suffered for years. i2">I wouldn't wi2">ish her for a second to return to that body, and her joy just made me reali2">ise more how cruel the world was i2">in not allowi2">ing her to leave sooner. The whole i2">idea of keepi2">ing someone i2">in a body for as long as possi2">ible was shown to be utter bullshi2">it. A multi2">i-li2">ifeti2">ime soul doesn't gi2">ive a shi2">it about i2">it.

i2">It taught me many thi2">ings all at once. The bullshi2">it of my anti2">i-death pro-mi2">iracle decepti2">ion. My demoni2">isi2">ing of death and maki2">ing i2">it out to be a terri2">ible thi2">ing. My resi2">istance to the fact that everythi2">ing i2">in the world di2">ies. i2">It all just popped the bubble. i2">I stopped fi2">ighti2">ing agai2">inst i2">it, and that was li2">iberati2">ing i2">in i2">its own ri2">ight. i2">If you try to stop i2">it happeni2">ing, you make i2">it happen more. But i2">if you stop resi2">isti2">ing i2">it, li2">ife can take over.

i2">It's another one of those ki2">ind of paradoxes. i2">If you make death out to be a bad thi2">ing you wi2">ill choose i2">it. i2">If you don't make i2">it out to be a bad thi2">ing, people wi2">ill thi2">ink you're anti2">i-mi2">iraculous and a death worshi2">ipper. But gi2">ivi2">ing i2">it any reali2">ity, i2">importance, meani2">ing or value, even i2">if i2">its negati2">ive meani2">ings, i2">is just more ego. Death i2">is supposed to be nothi2">ing, nothi2">ing whatsoever. Meani2">ingless. i2">It's not supposed to be the opposi2">ite end of some spi2">iri2">itual warfare between good and evi2">il.

i2">I sti2">ill recogni2">ize and fully beli2">ieve that death i2">in any form i2">is not supposed to happen. i2">It i2">is not God's nature. Nothi2">ing real ever di2">ies. And pretty much everythi2">ing i2">in the world does. But we also can use the mi2">ind to reverse the world's laws and perform mi2">iracles, whi2">ich does sti2">ill i2">include rai2">isi2">ing the dead and heali2">ing the si2">ick, even to the extent of bodi2">ies recoveri2">ing. i2">In fact Jesus would li2">ike for us to demonstrate bodi2">ies so healthy and lovely and fi2">illed wi2">ith li2">ife that they become symbols of i2">immortali2">ity i2">in the dream.

Sti2">ill, you're not goi2">ing to get there by opposi2">ing death. And when you deci2">ide to stop opposi2">ing death, that doesn't mean you condone i2">it. i2">It just means you stop fueli2">ing i2">it and stop beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in i2">it. Avoi2">idi2">ing i2">it just keeps i2">it around. And beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in i2">it whi2">ile tryi2">ing not to resi2">ist i2">it just condones i2">it. You have to stop beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in i2">it enti2">irely i2">if you want to rai2">ise the dead, and beli2">ieve only i2">in li2">ife.

i2">I have perhaps become more truly mi2">iracle-mi2">inded now that i2">I am no longer fi2">ighti2">ing agai2">inst si2">ickness and death. i2">I've stopped maki2">ing them my enemi2">ies. i2">I've stopped resi2">isti2">ing them. Well, at least to some extent. My atti2">itude i2">is ki2">ind of, "let i2">it all just di2">ie", but that too could sound li2">ike some murderous i2">idea. The world i2">is hell-bent on dyi2">ing anyway, so fi2">ighti2">ing that i2">is bullshi2">it. But at the same ti2">ime, i2">in that same atti2">itude of letti2">ing i2">it go, we can also step i2">into a power that's able to reverse those laws and undo death.

i2">In effect, you bri2">ing an end to death by not maki2">ing i2">it out to be an endi2">ing. You wi2">ithdraw your beli2">ief i2">in i2">it bei2">ing some terri2">ible tragi2">ic thi2">ing that everyone must avoi2">id at all costs. So shi2">it di2">ies, so what. Fuck i2">it. Who cares. Souls don't care. They just move on and have more li2">ifeti2">imes wi2">ith fresh healthy new bodi2">ies. And bei2">ing out of the body i2">is fantasti2">ic i2">in compari2">ison to comi2">ing i2">into one.

Thi2">is i2">is not i2">in any way to glori2">ify death or si2">ickness, or to suggest to let people keep sufferi2">ing and not be helpful. But make i2">it real and you di2">ie alone wi2">ith i2">it. Only the li2">ivi2">ing can rai2">ise the dead. We are sti2">ill called to be mi2">iracle workers, to rai2">ise the dead and heal the si2">ick where possi2">ible. To be truly helpful to everyone, to choose not to di2">ie ourselves, and to be an example of resurrecti2">ion. Even to the extent of havi2">ing our bodi2">ies become i2">incapable of death.

But we don't get there by fi2">irst beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in death and then tryi2">ing to forgi2">ive or undo i2">it. We're the ones that make death have power over us by beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in i2">it. And havi2">ing made i2">it out to be a power that we can't prevent, whi2">ich i2">is a projecti2">ion and di2">isowni2">ing of our own power, all we do i2">is end up fi2">ighti2">ing wi2">ith ourselves i2">in turmoi2">il. i2">I'm not i2">interested i2">in tryi2">ing to come off as havi2">ing some ki2">ind of savi2">iour complex, wanti2">ing to heal and save everyone from dyi2">ing.

Most people are goi2">ing to snuff i2">it i2">in thi2">is li2">ifeti2">ime because they'r not ready to go all the way. i2">I spent decades tryi2">ing to heal my wi2">ife and reverse her amputati2">ions and paralysi2">is and heart di2">isease and brai2">in damage, but bullshi2">it to that because, as i2">it turns out, that was not the plan anyway. The plan was to use the opportuni2">ity to learn that maki2">ing si2">ickness and death real and then resi2">isti2">ing i2">it i2">is not the way to be mi2">iraculous. To use the si2">ickness as a way to learn to stop beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in i2">it. The plan was never to radi2">ically zap her body i2">into a state of perfecti2">ion. Not i2">in thi2">is li2">ife.

i2">I totally fai2">iled to rai2">ise the dead, and i2">it was a great lesson. i2">It almost couldn't have gone any better. i2">In the bi2">ig pi2">icture, thi2">is i2">is what i2">I was ready to learn, not that i2">I was some hero that could just zap away death wi2">ith mi2">iracles all over the place. That heroi2">ic rescuer bullshi2">it had to di2">ie as well. You're far better off letti2">ing shi2">it go someti2">imes. Just as Jesus kept sayi2">ing to me, "let her."

So some people are not meant to be resurrected i2">in thi2">is li2">ife. The bi2">igger plan mi2">ight not call for i2">it and they mi2">ight not be wi2">illi2">ing. The Holy Spi2">iri2">it knows what's best and what's possi2">ible or appropri2">iate. Some people don't want heali2">ing. Some are not ready for an "undi2">iluted mi2">iracle." Some want to di2">ie too much and aren't ready to forgi2">ive themselves. Some are there to play a role for a whi2">ile and then leave, perhaps to rejoi2">in at a later encounter and carry on. i2">It doesn't all have to happen i2">in one li2">ifeti2">ime, and most of the ti2">ime doesn't.

So i2">I have a much looser atti2">itude now. i2">I recogni2">ise the world i2">is just full of di2">isappoi2">intment and death so i2">I get much less attached to the bullshi2">it of temptati2">ion. i2">I am no longer so mi2">istaken to get all wound up i2">if someone i2">is si2">ick. i2">I'm not feeli2">ing li2">ike tryi2">ing to fi2">ix and save and stop i2">it happeni2">ing out of some i2">inabi2">ili2">ity to let i2">it be. Jesus was forever telli2">ing me "i2">it's fi2">ine" even as my wi2">ife's leg was getti2">ing chopped off, even as she had a stroke, even as she was i2">in the i2">ICU twi2">ice and on her death bed. "i2">It's fi2">ine" he sai2">id, because ulti2">imately i2">it doesn't matter whatsoever. Nothi2">ing real can be threatened. No-one ever di2">ies. Just the body.

Thi2">is has shown me that from the soul's perspecti2">ive thi2">is world i2">is just here for us to use temporari2">ily. To repurpose. We go through bodi2">ies li2">ike water. We take on roles and challenges, lessons to learn and people to meet, and we move on. Probably across countless li2">ifeti2">imes. None of the physi2">ical shi2">it really matters. i2">It's not i2">important at all. i2">If people are to come and go and di2">ie off and leave, so what, you'll see them agai2">in. They were never a body i2">in the fi2">irst place, and the body i2">is worthless anyway. Thi2">is whole world wi2">ill be thrown down the toi2">ilet and flushed away eventually "as the world spi2">ins i2">into the nothi2">ingness from whi2">ich i2">it came."

So yeah. Be mi2">iraculous and overcome death by not beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in death and not resi2">isti2">ing i2">it. Gotta not resi2">ist i2">it i2">if you want there to be any freedom there. i2">If you want to replace i2">it wi2">ith li2">ife you can't be di2">immi2">ing your li2">ight wi2">ith death-beli2">ievi2">ing thoughts of resi2">istances rooted i2">in a fear of loss. Thi2">is i2">is why we let the dead (i2">in mi2">ind/heart) bury the dead (i2">in body). i2">It doesn't matter. Graveyards aren't even real. All of us are spi2">iri2">itual i2">immortal bei2">ings who wi2">ill li2">ive forever, and we wi2">ill never ever be separate or alone.

When we're ready to surmount death and stop dyi2">ing enti2">irely, we'll resurrect the body and make i2">it di2">isappear. The body then becomes i2">incapable of bei2">ing si2">ick or dyi2">ing, so i2">it can only leave by vani2">ishi2">ing. The mi2">ind overlooks the i2">illusi2">ion of death and recogni2">ises i2">it as nothi2">ing, and away i2">it goes. Then the body i2">is no more, and never was, and you wi2">ill never agai2">in go through death, or bi2">irth for that matter. i2">I'm no longer an anti2">i-death spokesperson. Death doesn't exi2">ist.

"There i2">is no death. The Son of God i2">is free."

"We call i2">it death, but i2">it i2">is li2">iberty. i2">It does not come i2">in forms that seem to be thrust down i2">in pai2">in upon unwi2">illi2">ing flesh, but as a gentle welcome to release. i2">If there has been true heali2">ing, thi2">is can be the form i2">in whi2">ich death comes when i2">it i2">is ti2">ime to rest a whi2">ile from labor gladly done and gladly ended. Now we go i2">in peace to freer ai2">ir and gentler cli2">imate, where i2">it i2">is not hard to see the gi2">ifts we gave were saved for us. For Chri2">ist i2">is clearer now; Hi2">is vi2">isi2">ion more sustai2">ined i2">in us; Hi2">is Voi2">ice, the Word of God, more certai2">inly our own."

i2">I asked myself yesterday, when was the li2">ist ti2">ime i2">I actually "di2">id a forgi2">iveness" ... perhaps because i2">I know that forgi2">iveness i2">is very i2">important - i2">its the core of ACi2">IM practi2">ice - but was i2">I actually DOi2">ING i2">it?

What came to mi2">ind wasn't the typi2">ical answer, you know, thi2">inki2">ing back to how many ti2">imes i2">I 'di2">id somethi2">ing'.

i2">Instead, what i2">I recogni2">ized i2">is, forgi2">iveness or 'bei2">ing forgi2">ivi2">ing' i2">is a constant state that Holy Spi2">iri2">it represents, i2">in whi2">ich all i2">is seen as already forgi2">iven and that there i2">is nothi2">ing 'to' forgi2">ive - because forgi2">iveness fore-gi2">ives i2">in order NOT to judge.

So thi2">is led to recogni2">izi2">ing and acknowledgi2">ing, that perhaps i2">in some way i2">I am 'bei2">ing forgi2">ivi2">ing' all the ti2">ime, to some degree, as a constant thi2">ing rather than as one-off events of sudden correcti2">ion.

See, there's a di2">ifference between bei2">ing forgi2">ivi2">ing and applyi2">ing a correcti2">ion. Correcti2">ion i2">is there to undo faulty percepti2">ions so that you can RETURN to a forgi2">ivi2">ing atti2">itude. Yet i2">in the past i2">I used to thi2">ink forgi2">iveness i2">is the part where you correct the atti2">itude - the process.

So i2">I stopped to get a sense of... am i2">I, i2">in general, havi2">ing a more forgi2">ivi2">ing atti2">itude than i2">I used to have.... am i2">I carryi2">ing around wi2">ith me a constantly more forgi2">ivi2">ing way of percei2">ivi2">ing, regardless of whether i2">it's punctuated wi2">ith "Oh i2">I gotta do somethi2">ing" procedures and techni2">iques. And i2">in general, i2">I don't really know.. but i2">I thi2">ink i2">I'd have to say yes, i2">I'm generally more forgi2">ivi2">ing.

i2">In other words, each ti2">ime a correcti2">ion i2">is made, i2">I become more forgi2">ivi2">ing i2">in general and my 'level' of forgi2">ivi2">ing atti2">itude rai2">ises. i2">It's a constant, not a one-off. i2">I'm less judgemental. i2">I'm not as attached. i2">I'm less reacti2">ive. i2">I'm generally "stronger i2">in the truth" (Jesus's words to me). That seems li2">ike a step i2">in the ri2">ight di2">irecti2">ion.

So no need to beat ourselves up for how many li2">inear ti2">imes we've 'done a forgi2">iveness'... all the benefi2">its of pri2">ior efforts stay wi2">ith us. Each choi2">ice for Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">is a permanent step toward Heaven. And you defi2">ini2">itely aren't 'gui2">ilty' for not taki2">ing enough of them.

Jesus suggested to me that some form of medi2">itati2">ion mi2">ight help me to fi2">ind some 'clari2">ity and hope'. Hi2">is i2">instructi2">ion was to relax.

So the past couple of morni2">ings i2">I've done a very si2">imple, easy medi2">itati2">ion whi2">ich completely qui2">iets the mi2">ind very qui2">ickly wi2">ith no effort. i2">In fact i2">I don't even focus on tryi2">ing to qui2">iet the mi2">ind, i2">it was an unexpected si2">ide effect.

The 'medi2">itati2">ion' i2">is si2">imply to lay down and thoroughly relax the body. That's all. The only part my mi2">ind plays i2">is to constantly focus on relaxi2">ing, letti2">ing tensi2">ions ease, noti2">ici2">ing any muscle ti2">ightness, si2">inki2">ing down i2">into the bed, letti2">ing the fasci2">ial muscles relax, the shoulders si2">ink down, etc. My goal i2">is a 'feeli2">ing' i2">I get when the body i2">is really deeply relaxed.

As i2">I focus constantly on relaxi2">ing as much as possi2">ible, very unexpectedly, no thoughts happen. i2">I don't even need to try to stop any thoughts, there just aren't any. My mi2">ind i2">is fully focused on getti2">ing the body to relax physi2">ically.

As the body relaxes physi2">ically, when i2">it truly i2">is relaxed, you get thi2">is sensati2">ion of physi2">ical sti2">illness. Breathi2">ing i2">is sti2">ill happeni2">ing. i2">I pay no attenti2">ion to tryi2">ing to control the breath. The breath automati2">ically slows down and becomes smaller as a si2">ide-effect of focusi2">ing on relaxi2">ing. There i2">is no breath control needed.

After a ti2">ime, maybe 10-15 mi2">inutes, i2">I fi2">ind that i2">I need to be extra soft, gentle, and subtle, i2">in terms of my attenti2">ion to keepi2">ing thi2">ings relaxed, because the sensati2">ion of relaxati2">ion i2">is qui2">ite easi2">ily di2">isturbed or sti2">irred up. Thi2">is focus on calmness and mi2">ini2">imal i2">interference and letti2">ing go, seems to tune the mi2">ind and keeps all thoughts si2">ilent. Probably also the focus on the whole body relaxi2">ing at once i2">is a 'bi2">ig enough' target that the mi2">ind has no attenti2">ion left to create thoughts. The goal i2">is si2">imply the sensati2">ion you get when the body i2">is completely relaxed all over, whi2">ich i2">is a feeli2">ing of bei2">ing very settled, sti2">ill, calm, almost li2">ike levi2">itati2">ing.

As i2">I do thi2">is i2">I generally fi2">ind myself falli2">ing asleep as well, i2">it's a good way to get to sleep. i2">I'm not bothered by that. What i2">I di2">id fi2">ind thi2">is second ti2">ime i2">is that toward the end, i2">I had a sudden unexpected moment of 'awareness', i2">in whi2">ich i2">I became more aware and i2">it seemed as though that was accompani2">ied by an even further 'sti2">illi2">ing' of the mi2">ind, beyond what i2">I thought was possi2">ible. i2">It felt li2">ike a clari2">ifyi2">ing, a sharpeni2">ing, and a cleari2">ing. i2">It wasn't li2">ike enli2">ightenment or anythi2">ing but i2">it was a defi2">ini2">ite sudden burst of awareness.

The mai2">in thi2">ing i2">I am getti2">ing from the medi2">itati2">ion, besi2">ides feeli2">ing very relaxed, whi2">ich also has the si2">ide-effect of helpi2">ing to tune out of other people's energi2">ies that i2">I've empathed and i2">I 'come back to myself', i2">is that i2">it gi2">ives me a subtler clari2">ity about certai2">in si2">ituati2">ions i2">in li2">ife, and also about the acti2">ivi2">iti2">ies of my mi2">ind, what my thoughts are doi2">ing, etc. i2">It shi2">ines a li2">ight on thi2">ings and shows me a greater truth somehow, thi2">ings i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize i2">I was doi2">ing. i2">I di2">idn't reali2">ize how much mi2">ind-chatter i2">I have, normally, contrasted by absolutely no thoughts duri2">ing thi2">is exerci2">ise.

i2">I'm most surpri2">ised that thoughts stop completely when doi2">ing thi2">is. i2">I know that focusi2">ing the mi2">ind can do that - focusi2">ing on a breath or a mantra or word or si2">ingle i2">idea or whatever... but when i2">I do those thi2">ings, my mi2">ind i2">is sti2">ill noi2">isy and doesn't shut up all the way, and after a whi2">ile i2">it starts to go i2">into deeper daydreams and stuff. Doi2">ing thi2">is body relaxati2">ion exerci2">ise i2">I get absolutely no thoughts of any ki2">ind the whole ti2">ime, provi2">ided i2">I keep my focus on bei2">ing as gentle and subtly relaxed as possi2">ible. i2">It makes me wonder what thi2">is connecti2">ion i2">is between agi2">itati2">ion i2">in the body and agi2">itati2">ion i2">in the mi2">ind. But probably i2">it's that i2">I'm getti2">ing my mi2">ind to focus on calmness, qui2">ietness, sti2">illness, bei2">ing settled, and the body i2">is sort of a 'prop' for the mi2">ind to use to achi2">ieve that, through focusi2">ing on i2">its relaxati2">ion. Tyi2">ing the mi2">ind and body together perhaps, so that the mi2">ind relaxes wi2">ith the body.

Of course, medi2">itati2">ions also produce emoti2">ional releases afterwards.

As i2">I recently have been undoi2">ing my own beli2">ief i2">in my own si2">infulness, whi2">ich i2">is also the general beli2">ief that si2">in i2">is real, i2">I've been comi2">ing up agai2">inst challenges. i2">I had several days of some pretty heavy "release" whi2">ich was overwhelmi2">ing.

Holy Spi2">iri2">it was glad that i2">I could reali2">ize i2">I was only releasi2">ing because i2">I had been wi2">illi2">ing to let go of some old beli2">ief i2">in my si2">infulness/gui2">ilt, but also advi2">ised that i2">I should be gentle and slow down a bi2">it. Tryi2">ing too hard to undo all of i2">it so qui2">ickly.

A major cornerstone of what was releasi2">ing, was the feeli2">ing and beli2">ief of not bei2">ing lovable by God, because of si2">in and gui2">ilt that i2">I sti2">ill thi2">ink i2">is true of me. So i2">I was tryi2">ing to di2">ig all of that out. Even though that's worthwhi2">ile and helpful, i2">in the bi2">ig pi2">icture, we do have to pace ourselves a bi2">it.

What came after thi2">is release, though, was a feeli2">ing of self-love the li2">ikes of whi2">ich i2">I have never felt before. For about half a day i2">I just felt really soft and lovi2">ing toward myself and others. Thi2">is proves to me that thi2">is undoi2">ing of beli2">iefs i2">is very worth pursui2">ing.

i2">I've also noti2">iced, as i2">I "push" myself or challenge myself to questi2">ion ... do i2">I REALLY beli2">ieve i2">I am si2">inless? ... i2">it i2">is pushi2">ing i2">into my awareness vari2">ious beli2">iefs that i2">I have that i2">I'm goi2">ing to have to look at. Here are some of the strong ones whi2">ich have been comi2">ing up for me lately, and these mi2">ight be the same for you. i2">I thi2">ink these beli2">iefs are strong because they have a lot of soci2">ial support and emphasi2">is. Beli2">iefs li2">ike:

Cancer

Evi2">il

Death

Unworthi2">iness

Bei2">ing attacked

Loss of a loved one

etc...

i2">I've qui2">ite often heard the word "cancer" come up from my ego, at stupi2">id ti2">imes, and i2">I know i2">it's a false beli2">ief but i2">it sti2">ill comes up dri2">iven enti2">irely by fear. And i2">it comes up because i2">I sti2">ill beli2">ieve i2">in i2">it. There has been so much attenti2">ion gi2">iven to cancer, maki2">ing i2">it seem REAL, maki2">ing i2">it out to be a huge dangerous threat, an enemy, that everyone i2">is tryi2">ing to avoi2">id and attack etc. That has seeped i2">into and formed a beli2">ief i2">in me - my own doi2">ing really, but i2">I've created thi2">is beli2">ief that i2">it has truth and reali2">ity to i2">it. So now that shows me that i2">I have the job of undoi2">ing my beli2">ief that cancer has ANY reali2">ity to i2">it whatsoever.

Si2">imi2">ilarly, i2">I have started to come up agai2">inst questi2">ioni2">ing whether "evi2">il" i2">is real. i2">I found myself for a few days getti2">ing lost agai2">in i2">in tryi2">ing to fi2">igure out what evi2">il i2">IS, how i2">it operates, WHY i2">it i2">is doi2">ing what i2">it appears to be doi2">ing etc. i2">I've had some experi2">iences that i2">involve "evi2">il spi2">iri2">its", i2">if you can call them that. They're not fri2">iendly. i2">I cast one out of me a few months ago ki2">ind of by acci2">ident when Jesus was helpi2">ing me wi2">ith a heali2">ing. i2">I felt i2">it leave. And i2">I've had other encounters.

i2">In the i2">illusory dream world they "seem" to exi2">ist, and putti2">ing any amount of attenti2">ion on them may attract them. But also, feari2">ing them i2">is just as bad. The "fear that evi2">il i2">is real" i2">is a qui2">ite fundemanal ego beli2">ief. As a beli2">ief that "evi2">il i2">is real" i2">it must produce fear, whi2">ich i2">is the suggesti2">ion you don't want i2">it but the beli2">ief i2">in i2">it i2">is a choi2">ice to want i2">it. You become scared because of your OWN beli2">ief i2">in i2">it bei2">ing real, whi2">ich sort of pushes you i2">into a confrontati2">ion wi2">ith the thi2">ing you want to get away from.

Ulti2">imately these thi2">ings are i2">illusi2">ions and love has no opposi2">ite. Jesus told me that they are "just fear". Just as thi2">is whole world i2">is based on fear. And feari2">ing i2">it i2">is not helpful. We have to be fi2">irm i2">in Chri2">ist and i2">in truth. Beli2">ief i2">in si2">in bei2">ing real produces the condi2">iti2">ions for the ego to attack i2">in all i2">its ways, not just through helli2">ish bei2">ings. We are not meant to fear these thi2">ings or try to get i2">into tryi2">ing to understand or explai2">in them too much, because i2">it's really easy to get lost i2">in that.

i2">I found myself getti2">ing lost i2">in the attempt to fi2">igure out what and how and why these thi2">ings exi2">ist, only to fi2">ind myself feeli2">ing more afrai2">id and to be i2">in a stronger mode of "questi2">ioni2">ing". Bei2">ing i2">in a mode of questi2">ioni2">ing i2">is not a mode of answers OR answer-fi2">indi2">ing. Jesus's i2">instructi2">ion to me agai2">in was "deci2">ide", whi2">ich i2">I've come to learn means i2">I am not a vi2">icti2">im and have the power to choose, and i2">if i2">I choose to beli2">ieve that these thi2">ings are not real and that they have no effect on me, then THAT Wi2">ILL BE my experi2">ience. i2">If i2">I choose to beli2">ieve i2">in them, i2">I wi2">ill experi2">ience them as such. i2">I get to deci2">ide. i2">If i2">I am i2">in i2">indeci2">isi2">ion, i2">I'm actually unconsci2">iously choosi2">ing to beli2">ieve evi2">il i2">is real.

So i2">I thi2">ink we have these qui2">ite basi2">ic, qui2">ite strong beli2">iefs we have to unearth and sort out. There i2">is nothi2">ing about evi2">il that i2">is other than just another descri2">ipti2">ion of the ego. And the Holy Spi2">iri2">it knows that the ego does not really exi2">ist. That needs to become our beli2">ief also, and then we wi2">ill be i2">in celebrati2">ion and joy and safety and fearlessness, knowi2">ing thi2">is truth. The truth shall set you free of evi2">il because there i2">IS no real evi2">il. Evi2">il i2">is just as much an i2">illusi2">ion as everythi2">ing else the ego made.

i2">It's a bi2">it of a challenge though... confronti2">ing these beli2">iefs and bei2">ing i2">in that place of "uncertai2">inty" about whether i2">it Mi2">IGHT be true and real. The sense of threat that comes from actually really consi2">ideri2">ing i2">it to be a real possi2">ibi2">ili2">ity. And then feeli2">ing unsure whether to beli2">ieve i2">it i2">is real or not. That just means we're trusti2">ing the ego too much and are choosi2">ing to make i2">it real. We just need to keep chi2">ippi2">ing away at these beli2">iefs and keep undoi2">ing them to get to the poi2">int where we can truly accept the Atonement fully and recogni2">ize i2">illusi2">ions for what they are.

Some ti2">ime ago, i2">I di2">id not even remotely recogni2">ize that i2">I was choosi2">ing to be a vi2">icti2">im. i2">If i2">I was afrai2">id, attacked, threatened, hurt i2">in any way, i2">I would see i2">it as the other person was enti2">irely responsi2">ible.

Over ti2">ime, as i2">I've tri2">ied to apply forgi2">iveness pri2">inci2">iples and the secret of salvati2">ion, taki2">ing responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity for what i2">I'm doi2">ing to myself and for choosi2">ing all feeli2">ings, my vi2">icti2">imhood role has changed i2">in appearance.

Now i2">I see that when i2">I "go i2">into vi2">icti2">imhood", thi2">is entai2">ils me deli2">iberately tryi2">ing to posi2">iti2">ion myself as "at the effect" of others, tryi2">ing to pull off a stunt of projecti2">ion and blame, weakeni2">ing myself, choosi2">ing to be upset, and generally bei2">ing the cause of what i2">I'm feeli2">ing.

As i2">I practi2">ice thi2">is more and more, becomi2">ing "vi2">icti2">imy" i2">is recogni2">ized much more clearly as me descendi2">ing i2">into a funky state of "bei2">ing affected", where i2">I'm attacki2">ing myself and tryi2">ing to pass i2">it off as someone else's fault. i2">I start to noti2">ice attacks comi2">ing out of me i2">in an attempt to hurl i2">it towards someone else. And i2">I start to feel the typi2">ical feeli2">ings of fear and hurt that accompany thi2">is "role-play".

But i2">I more qui2">ickly catch myself and take responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity, to admi2">it thi2">is stress and upset and sufferi2">ing that i2">I'm experi2">ienci2">ing i2">is solely because i2">I've sli2">ipped down the slope i2">into di2">ishonesty, i2">into projecti2">ing and blami2">ing and tryi2">ing to force myself to be affected by somethi2">ing. i2">It's a way that i2">I use other people to try to hurt myself. And i2">I can no longer wholly accuse them of bei2">ing the reason why i2">I feel thi2">is way.

So the challenge now seems easi2">ier, to get myself out of thi2">is role and to stop "playi2">ing the vi2">icti2">im", i2">in recogni2">iti2">ion that i2">I not only have the power of deci2">isi2">ion and responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity to do so, i2">I can do so and, when i2">I do, no-one else can stop me doi2">ing so. i2">It's up to me to deci2">ide that i2">I want to feel better and to change my mi2">ind so that i2">I do. Thi2">is i2">is especi2">ially much easi2">ier once you can see clearly and squarely that i2">it's you doi2">ing thi2">is to yourself when tryi2">ing to put forth the "li2">ie" that i2">it's not.

i2">I now recogni2">ize much more clearly the component of self-caused sufferi2">ing mi2">ixed i2">in wi2">ith what used to appear to be just the effects of attack. The unconsci2">iousness of beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it was always comi2">ing from someone else i2">is li2">ifti2">ing. i2">It's getti2">ing to the poi2">int where even i2">if i2">I do try to attack, project, hurt or blame, i2">I si2">imultaneously am aware of feeli2">ing that i2">I am hurti2">ing myself, attacki2">ing myself, and am fully i2">included i2">in all the sufferi2">ing i2">I'm tryi2">ing to get ri2">id of.

i2">I am seei2">ing that thi2">is posi2">iti2">ion of vi2">icti2">im si2">imply does not work, and i2">I cannot escape what's happeni2">ing i2">insi2">ide my mi2">ind because "i2">ideas leave not thei2">ir source" even when i2">I'm spli2">it mi2">inded and beli2">ievi2">ing i2">it's someone else who di2">id thi2">is. i2">I have "re-framed" the li2">ie of fear enough to recogni2">ize that i2">its enti2">irely bullshi2">it to clai2">im i2">I am afrai2">id "because of" anyone or anythi2">ing. i2">In my fear i2">is si2">imply a di2">ishonest attempt on my own part to di2">isgui2">ise myself and portray myself as sufferi2">ing, to try to gai2">in the "reward" of passi2">ing off causati2">ion onto someone else through an accusati2">ion of si2">in.

As you become clearer and more recogni2">izi2">ing exactly what i2">it i2">is you are doi2">ing, i2">in your mi2">ind and atti2">itude and choosi2">ing, versus what you thought you were doi2">ing when i2">it was on auto-pi2">ilot, i2">it si2">imply becomes very obvi2">ious that you cannot move i2">into egoti2">ism wi2">ithout feeli2">ing li2">ike shi2">it, and you cannot escape the consequences of your choosi2">ing, nor can you blame wi2">ithout bei2">ing blamed, or try to make suffer wi2">ithout sufferi2">ing yourself.

The next step then i2">is of course, i2">in admi2">itti2">ing to thi2">is charade, and recogni2">izi2">ing i2">its utter futi2">ili2">ity, si2">imply stoppi2">ing thi2">is "behavi2">ior" and li2">ifti2">ing out of i2">it, now that you "know better" and cannot pretend to hi2">ide from the si2">imply truth that "you cannot be hurt unless you hurt yourself." i2">I am ceasi2">ing to play the role of vi2">icti2">im and to i2">instead step back i2">into the shoes of Chri2">ist, personally empowered and stronger i2">in the li2">ight of truth.

The vi2">icti2">im role i2">is not what i2">it appears to be. i2">It's not even remotely to do wi2">ith what other people are causi2">ing or doi2">ing to you. i2">It's enti2">irely a fake postulati2">ing of yourself i2">in tryi2">ing to pull of a representati2">ion of you as "a si2">ick and sufferi2">ing you", so that you get the payoff of tryi2">ing to blame someone else for i2">it. Always always always you are doi2">ing i2">it to yourself, and bei2">ing i2">in DENi2">IAL of thi2">is fact i2">is really the only problem.

Once you admi2">it to i2">it enough you can no longer put the cat back i2">in the bag. And i2">it's then i2">impossi2">ible to even try to attack others when you're aware that doi2">ing so makes you hurt. i2">If they are to suffer, you wi2">ill suffer. The only way out i2">is to stop hurti2">ing yourself. And when you choose your i2">immortali2">ity and i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity, nothi2">ing can ever hurt you agai2">in.

"The secret of salvati2">ion i2">is but thi2">is: That YOU are doi2">ing thi2">is UNTO YOURSELF. No matter what the form of the attack, thi2">is STi2">ILL i2">is true. Whoever takes the role of enemy and of attacker, STi2">ILL i2">is thi2">is the truth. Whatever seems to be the cause of any pai2">in and sufferi2">ing you feel, thi2">is i2">is STi2">ILL true."

i2">I have a number of reacti2">ions regardi2">ing those who are si2">ick.

All of these reacti2">ions entai2">il me feeli2">ing sorry for the person, or wi2">ishi2">ing they were well, or bei2">ing sad that thi2">is has happened to them.

i2">I have reacti2">ions of gui2">ilt that somehow i2">I caused i2">it, and reacti2">ions of fear that somehow i2">it wi2">ill worsen.

And i2">I also have reacti2">ions of compassi2">ion and understandi2">ing.

But all of these reacti2">ions are actually responses to percepti2">ions whi2">ich are not true.

Ego reacti2">ions always occur after havi2">ing percei2">ived somethi2">ing wrongly, and unless you are comi2">ing from love your reacti2">ion i2">is founded i2">in vi2">icti2">imhood.

i2">It can seem li2">ike i2">I am cari2">ing or wanti2">ing a person to be healed, because i2">I am upset about them bei2">ing si2">ick. i2">It can seem li2">ike i2">I am wi2">ishi2">ing for thei2">ir best. i2">It can seem as though i2">I want the si2">ickness to go away and that thi2">is i2">is a good atti2">itude to have, or shows a si2">ign of cari2">ing or compassi2">ion.

But the truth i2">is, these reacti2">ions are all founded on DOi2">ING NOTHi2">ING ABOUT i2">IT.

They are not atti2">itudes of correcti2">ion, or heali2">ing, or forgi2">iveness, or undoi2">ing. They are responses founded on the beli2">ief that the si2">ickness i2">is real, that i2">it i2">is happeni2">ing, that the person i2">is sufferi2">ing, that "someone" needs to swoop i2">in and save the person - anyone other than me.

i2">If you really look at thi2">is i2">in yourself, you may well be a very sympatheti2">ic, empatheti2">ic, compassi2">ionate, cari2">ing-seemi2">ing person, but the fact i2">is that a lot of these responses are born i2">in a state of i2">inabi2">ili2">ity to help. A state of di2">isempowerment. A state of passi2">ivi2">ity. A state where you beli2">ieve that there i2">is nothi2">ing you can actually DO to correct i2">it, even though you may be fi2">illed wi2">ith wi2">ishful thi2">inki2">ing about how you would do somethi2">ing i2">if you could.

YOU CAN!

These atti2">itudes are actually a cover-up for mi2">iracle mi2">indedness and an excuse for not forgi2">ivi2">ing. They are an ego response that looks as though you are deeply concerned about someone, whi2">ile at the same ti2">ime strongly beli2">ievi2">ing that they really do have a problem.

What we have to come to learn i2">is the art of correcti2">ion, whi2">ich i2">is more to do wi2">ith an acti2">ive undoi2">ing of the problem rather than an agreement that i2">it exi2">ists. Correcti2">ive measures. And we DO have the abi2">ili2">ity to do thi2">is, not alone but as a result of our uni2">ion wth Holy Spi2">iri2">it and God.

i2">I've been i2">in states of sorrow and despai2">ir plenty of ti2">imes i2">in whi2">ich i2">I've "begged" God to help and someti2">imes there i2">is some help and someti2">imes not, but i2">in general each ti2">ime that i2">I fi2">ind myself thi2">inki2">ing of aski2">ing someone ELSE to help, someone who "has the power", i2">I am ei2">ither nudged or have an i2">innate knowi2">ing that doi2">ing so i2">is basi2">ically shi2">irki2">ing an obli2">igati2">ion.

God has empowered us to extend Hi2">is love and heali2">ing, and to do so through the mechani2">ism of forgi2">iveness, i2">in whi2">ich we cancel out, undo, correct and make vani2">ish, all si2">igns and symptoms of arti2">ifi2">ici2">ial causes, demonstrati2">ing that separati2">ion has not occurred, that problems are not real, that si2">ickness i2">is an i2">illusi2">ion and that even death can be reversed.

i2">It i2">is one thi2">ing to be terri2">ibly upset and gui2">ilt-ri2">idden. You feel gui2">ilty and responsi2">ible for causi2">ing someone's sufferi2">ing, even i2">if you di2">id not appear to di2">irectly cause i2">it, because you feel as though you are supposed to be able to take i2">it away but are fai2">ili2">ing to do so. So i2">in a sense, your mi2">ind knows thi2">is and actually wi2">ill experi2">ience gui2">ilt when you are not performi2">ing mi2">iracles. When you are i2">in support of si2">ickness and are beli2">ievi2">ing i2">in problems and are maki2">ing i2">it real i2">instead of correcti2">ing i2">it acti2">ively, your mi2">ind wi2">ill know that you're actually usi2">ing thi2">is as a way to avoi2">id your ROLE as "the li2">ight of the world", and thi2">is produces gui2">ilt.

So you wi2">ill feel gui2">ilty when you are not helpi2">ing others to heal, and you wi2">ill feel gui2">ilty when you are fai2">ili2">ing to forgi2">ive. i2">It's not your fault, but ei2">ither you are choosi2">ing health as truth or you are choosi2">ing si2">ickness as truth. Bei2">ing upset that someone i2">is si2">ick does not mean that you are a beli2">iever i2">in health and wellbei2">ing. i2">It means you beli2">ieve si2">ickness cannot be undone, whi2">ich i2">is a strong beli2">ief that si2">ickness i2">is the truth.

Thi2">is we have to become honest about and weed out of ourselves, to become the mi2">iracle workers that we are meant to be. Forgi2">iveness i2">is the way to bri2">ing about mi2">iracles, through the correcti2">ion and undoi2">ing of what i2">is false. Not through the ego's vi2">icti2">imy reacti2">ions of gui2">ilt, powerlessness, well-wi2">ishes and the li2">ike. Those are li2">ike sayi2">ing, sorry you are si2">ick, but i2">I beli2">ieve i2">in si2">ickness and therefore i2">I thi2">ink you should be si2">ick.

We need to learn to make the uni2">iverse di2">isappear and all si2">ickness along wi2">ith i2">it. The end of death, si2">ickness, the body, and the world.

"Yet i2">in thi2">is learni2">ing i2">is salvati2">ion born. And what you are wi2">ill TELL you of i2">Itself."

"i2">I am come to tell you that the choi2">ice of whi2">ich i2">is true i2">is not yours."

i2">I consi2">ider myself fai2">irly devoted to ACi2">IM. My atti2">itude about i2">is that i2">it contai2">ins an expressi2">ion of Truth, and that Jesus knows what the truth i2">is. i2">I have respect for hi2">is Authori2">ity and for the Word of God whi2">ich comes through. i2">I want to learn. i2">I want to be recepti2">ive. i2">I want the course to tell me what the truth i2">is and gui2">ide me toward an ACCEPTANCE of i2">it.

Thi2">is means that i2">I have to learn to trust, to allow God’s truth to be true, and to defi2">ine what i2">is true and what i2">is not. Bei2">ing i2">in ego i2">is enti2">irely a game of playi2">ing God, tryi2">ing to be the one who deci2">ides everythi2">ing, not li2">isteni2">ing, not accepti2">ing a truth whi2">ich has already been establi2">ished. Ego i2">is all about dreami2">ing of a di2">ifferent truth, a di2">ifferent reali2">ity. i2">It wants to be the author of i2">itself. To undo God’s handi2">iwork.

When we read the course and the course says somethi2">ing, whi2">ich i2">is almost certai2">inly li2">iteral i2">in almost every case, i2">if we do not li2">ike what i2">it i2">is sayi2">ing, we wi2">ill go i2">into deni2">ial. i2">If we have other beli2">iefs that we thi2">ink are true, whi2">ich we cheri2">ish and want to keep, and are unwi2">illi2">ing to let go of, we wi2">ill defend them agai2">inst what the course says. Even i2">if the course i2">is expli2">ici2">it, we wi2">ill i2">instantly react wi2">ith "that’s not true" or "i2">I don’t beli2">ieve that". Or we’ll make up some excuse why the course "doesn’t mean that" and why other i2">interpretati2">ions are possi2">ible.

The course i2">is really strai2">ightforward, clear, li2">iteral and i2">intense. That i2">is why the ego hates i2">it. i2">It wants to change i2">it, deny i2">it, di2">istort i2">it, mangle i2">its meani2">ing, gi2">ive i2">it i2">its own defi2">ini2">iti2">ions, change words, adjust i2">its theology, and even use i2">it to keep i2">its pre-exi2">isti2">ing beli2">iefs about everythi2">ing AND strengthen them. i2">It’s perfectly capable of reframi2">ing everythi2">ing the course says to make i2">it fi2">it i2">into a vi2">iew of reali2">ity that a person already came wi2">ith. To even rei2">inforce that vi2">iew more deeply.

There are some people doi2">ing ACi2">IM who are totally deluded about what i2">it i2">is sayi2">ing because they have so much deni2">ial and unwi2">illi2">ingness to let go of what they beli2">ieve. They are not ready for the fullness of the truth yet. And thi2">is course i2">is not for everyone.

We have to be wi2">illi2">ing to put asi2">ide our egoi2">ic deni2">ial. We can’t be conti2">inually questi2">ioni2">ing everythi2">ing Jesus says. When he says somethi2">ing, i2">it i2">is true. Otherwi2">ise we are clai2">imi2">ing he i2">is a li2">iar, and that we know better. That i2">is arrogant. And i2">it i2">is di2">ishonest. i2">It i2">indi2">icates we are not wi2">illi2">ing to surrender our ego posi2">iti2">ion and are not wi2">illi2">ing to ACCEPT anythi2">ing that we’re bei2">ing told. i2">If we do not beli2">ieve what Jesus i2">is telli2">ing us, i2">it means our beli2">iefs are WRONG, not hi2">is. He i2">is the sane one. We have to be more wi2">illi2">ing to learn a NEW truth.

Are we wi2">illi2">ing to trust that, and thus questi2">ion every beli2">ief we hold dear, i2">if needed? i2">If i2">it does not correlate to what Jesus says, i2">it has to go. i2">If i2">it does not li2">ine up wi2">ith God’s truth, i2">it has to be false. i2">If i2">it i2">is out of accord wi2">ith God’s wi2">ill, we must become wi2">illi2">ing to surrender i2">it and get ourselves i2">in li2">ine. The truth wi2">ill tell us of i2">itself what i2">it i2">is. We must si2">imply be wi2">illi2">ing to accept, recei2">ive i2">it, and li2">isten to i2">it. To allow God to be God. Thi2">is i2">is the only way you can accept the atonement. Accepti2">ing the truth i2">is the opposi2">ite of tryi2">ing to change i2">it or author i2">it. God i2">is the author, not you.

i2">It’s not your functi2">ion to create yourself, rei2">invent yourself, defi2">ine yourself, establi2">ish what i2">is real, establi2">ish what i2">is true, create laws, or to act agai2">inst God’s wi2">ill. When you do any of thi2">is you are i2">in the ego. The truth, reali2">ity, can ONLY be accepted. You have to accept the truth God has created, off the shelf, as i2">is, wi2">ithout you messi2">ing wi2">ith i2">it. Wi2">ithout you wanti2">ing i2">it to be di2">ifferent. Wi2">ithout you not li2">iki2">ing i2">it or rejecti2">ing i2">it, or tryi2">ing to adjust i2">it to be the way you want i2">it. God’s choi2">ice FOR you has to be good enough. i2">It has to be wholly welcomed wi2">ith free wi2">ill.

"i2">I choose to let hi2">im by allowi2">ing Hi2">im to choose for God for me".

Look at all the ways i2">in that sentence that Jesus i2">is taki2">ing the responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of defi2">ini2">ing truth AWAY from you.

"i2">I choose to LET Hi2">IM" (i2">I choose whatever HE chooses FOR me)

"by ALLOWi2">ING Hi2">im to choose" (He deci2">ides what i2">is the truth i2">I wi2">ill accept and take as my own)

"choose for God FOR me" (He chooses the truth about me, on behalf of God, and does so so that i2">I can ACCEPT and

ALLOW whatever He chooses to be true of me, TRUSTi2">ING Hi2">im over my own ego i2">ideas)

Thi2">is i2">is what your i2">inheri2">itance i2">is about. You must i2">INHERi2">IT from God. You must recei2">ive what He has gi2">iven you, how he has establi2">ished you, what you ARE, by Hi2">is wi2">ill. You CANNOT change the truth, and tryi2">ing to do so i2">is i2">insane. You cannot change what you ARE i2">in reali2">ity. Atonement i2">is the acceptance that you HAVE NOT done so, whi2">ile si2">in i2">is the rejecti2">ion of thi2">is fact and nothi2">ing more than deni2">ial. Be glad you are ONLY the perfecti2">ion God created and be open to recei2">ive your i2">inheri2">itance at last. What you stand to gai2">in i2">is yourself.

"i2">I am forever an effect of God"

"i2">I am sti2">ill as God created me"

"The soul i2">is the i2">idea of self fullness"

"Nothi2">ing real can be threatened"

"You are i2">immortal and you cannot di2">ie."

The golden rule i2">is the nature and law of God. i2">In God, everythi2">ing i2">is equal and shared. What appli2">ies to one brother appli2">ies to all brothers. What i2">is true of me i2">is true of you. But even moreso, because brothers are ONE, they li2">iterally share i2">identi2">ity and soul. i2">I am i2">in you and you are i2">in me. We are part of each other. We are i2">irrevocably joi2">ined and share everythi2">ing, even our selves.

We can descri2">ibe thi2">is as the golden rule, i2">in whi2">ich what i2">I do to you i2">I also do to myself. There i2">is no opti2">ion or clause that your brother Mi2">IGHT treat you a certai2">in way. You treat your brother a certai2">in way SO THAT you are treated a certai2">in way, because you ARE hi2">im, and so you are Di2">IRECTLY treati2">ing yourself how you would wi2">ish to be treated.

There are no excepti2">ions to thi2">is and i2">it i2">is i2">impossi2">ible to vi2">iolate or break thi2">is law or be outsi2">ide of i2">it. i2">It i2">is always operati2">ing, whether you are accepti2">ing of i2">it and li2">ivi2">ing by i2">it, or whether you are attempti2">ing to i2">ignore i2">it and pretend i2">it doesn't apply to you.

i2">If we are one, then i2">I have a shared i2">interest wi2">ith you. Whatever i2">I do to you i2">I do to myself. Whatever i2">I gi2">ive to you i2">I recei2">ive. Gi2">ivi2">ing and recei2">ivi2">ing are one. i2">If i2">I were to attack you, i2">I'd be attacki2">ing myself. Therefore, i2">it's i2">in my own best i2">interests to ONLY LOVE, otherwi2">ise i2">I wi2">ill make MYSELF suffer, and by my own hand. i2">I have to i2">INCLUDE you, otherwi2">ise i2">I wi2">ill suffer from exclusi2">ion.

"Ego" i2">is nothi2">ing more than an attempt to oppose, deny and i2">ignore thi2">is law. i2">It i2">is an attempt to pretend that i2">it does not apply. That i2">I am not you and you are not me. That we are not equal. That what appli2">ies to me doesn't apply to you, because we are di2">ifferent. i2">If we are separate, we not one, and now i2">I should have my own selfi2">ish i2">interests - survi2">ival of the fi2">ittest.

i2">It's li2">ike, were both standi2">ing on the same floor. Then there i2">is a separati2">ion, li2">ike an earthquake. The floor cracks i2">in two. i2">I now seem to be on one si2">ide, and you on the other. But also the hei2">ights of the floors have shi2">ifted, and mi2">ine i2">is sli2">ightly above yours. The two floors are now separate and di2">ifferent and not equal.

Thi2">is i2">is the separati2">ion from God, the seemi2">ing spli2">it i2">in the mi2">ind, whi2">ich suggests that i2">instead of us all bei2">ing one, we are now two, spli2">it apart, separated off, i2">isolated i2">in our own pri2">ivate terri2">itori2">ies, and kept apart. We can't seem to share because we can't span the di2">ivi2">ide of the broken ground, and everythi2">ing we do i2">is separate.

On thi2">is basi2">is of separati2">ion, or not bei2">ing able to share, the breakdown i2">in uni2">ity, the collapse of oneness, the ari2">isi2">ing of exclusi2">ion, and the seemi2">ing i2">impri2">isonment on ei2">ither si2">ide of the ri2">ift, we get the deni2">ial of the golden rule. i2">It seems possi2">ible now that because i2">I am not a part of you, and am separate and i2">isolated on my own i2">island, i2">I can only now thi2">ink of my OWN i2">interests. What i2">I do to myself i2">is done to myself alone, and i2">if i2">I throw a rock over at you, i2">it hurts only you and not me.

Whi2">ile i2">I mi2">ight beli2">ieve that what i2">I do to you i2">is NOT done to myself, or what i2">is true of you i2">is NOT true of me, i2">it becomes possi2">ible to enter thi2">is state where we're tryi2">ing to get away wi2">ith murder. i2">It suggests i2">I could attack you, and escape the consequences. i2">I could do somethi2">ing to you whi2">ich i2">is not done to me. i2">I could gi2">ive somethi2">ing that i2">I do NOT recei2">ive, because i2">I am not i2">INCLUDED i2">in i2">it, because i2">I've become EXCLUDED from you. As though gi2">ivi2">ing and recei2">ivi2">ing are not one.

So the whole ego system i2">is all about thi2">is sense of bei2">ing exclusi2">ive, separated off, not shari2">ing, not one, unequal, di2">ifferent, di2">isconnected, di2">is-associ2">iated, and i2">isolated. Our whole beli2">ief then shi2">ifts to i2">it seemi2">ing to be plausi2">ible that we can attack wi2">ithout bei2">ing hurt, or we can accuse wi2">ithout bei2">ing accused, or we can make someone be gui2">ilty to take the gui2">ilt off our own shoulders. That no matter what we cause, we can escape the effects. i2">I can hurt you, and not myself.

So thi2">is i2">is then what the ego does, all the ti2">ime. i2">IT HAS ONE MODE of functi2">ioni2">ing. i2">It's all i2">it CAN do, because i2">it i2">is ONLY the i2">idea of separati2">ion. i2">Its ai2">im i2">is to emphasi2">ize, enhance, i2">increase, and deepen the sense of bei2">ing separate, so that i2">IT i2">increases. That's i2">it's only goal. To attack ever more strongly and cause ever more di2">isrupti2">ion i2">in equali2">ity. i2">It's enti2">ire exi2">istence DEPENDS on the conti2">inuati2">ion of thi2">is i2">inequali2">ity, thi2">is ri2">ift between brothers, and thi2">is sense that you cannot share anythi2">ing wi2">ith anyone because they're separated from you.

i2">If the two floors or i2">islands were to meet, and reconnect, and level out, and become one si2">ingle uni2">ifi2">ied space agai2">in, the two brothers could be reuni2">ited, and all sense of i2">inequali2">ity and di2">ifference would melt. And ALSO there would have to now be an acceptance of the golden rule, because i2">if we are shari2">ing everythi2">ing, then what appli2">ies to me now also appli2">ies to you and vi2">ice versa. We are now the SAME. We are one. So i2">I cannot do anythi2">ing to you wi2">ithout doi2">ing i2">it to myself.

The i2">interesti2">ing thi2">ing i2">is that even when we're i2">in an ego state of beli2">ievi2">ing that we ARE separate, and are not a part of others, the golden rule actually sti2">ill appli2">ies. We can BELi2">IEVE that we are attacki2">ing somethi2">ing "not myself", and we can BELi2">IEVE that the effects are bei2">ing felt ONLY by that other separate person, and we can BELi2">IEVE that we completely escape any consequences for i2">it, BUT WE DO NOT. Because there are di2">ire consequences STi2">ILL operati2">ing, consequences whi2">ich are SELF i2">INFLi2">ICTED, whi2">ich CANNOT be avoi2">ided.

i2">If you attack another, you STi2">ILL attack yourself, because you STi2">ILL ARE them. i2">If you hurt another, you ARE hurti2">ing yourself. i2">If you try to destroy another, you ARE destroyi2">ing yourself. You may not REALi2">IZE that you are, because you thi2">ink of yourself as PROTECTED BY THE SEPARATENESS, as i2">if the pri2">ison walls keep you SAFE. And so you thi2">ink that attacki2">ing someone makes you SAFER. But i2">it i2">in fact erodes your safety because the more you attack the more YOU become i2">impri2">isoned and weakened.

"Exclusi2">ion and separati2">ion are synonymous. So are separati2">ion and di2">issoci2">iati2">ion. We have sai2">id before that the separati2">ion was and i2">IS di2">issoci2">iati2">ion, and also that once i2">it had occurred, projecti2">ion became i2">its mai2">in defense, or the devi2">ice whi2">ich KEEPS i2">IT GOi2">ING. The reason, however, may not be as clear to you as you thi2">ink. What you project you di2">isown, and therefore DO NOT BELi2">IEVE i2">IS YOURS. You are therefore EXCLUDi2">ING yourself from i2">it, by the very statement you are maki2">ing that you are Di2">IFFERENT from someone else. Si2">ince you have also judged AGAi2">INST what you project, you attack i2">it because you have already attacked i2">it BY rejecti2">ing i2">it. By doi2">ing thi2">is UNCONSCi2">IOUSLY, you try to keep the fact that you must have attacked yourself Fi2">IRST out of awareness, and thus i2">imagi2">ine that you have made yourself safe."

You cannot be strong wi2">ithout your brother. You cannot be happy wi2">ithout your brother. You cannot be healthy wi2">ithout your brother. You cannot be loved wi2">ithout your brother. You cannot be powerful wi2">ithout your brother. You cannot be free wi2">ithout your brother. You cannot be i2">innocent wi2">ithout your brother. You cannot be holy wi2">ithout your brother.

So i2">if you try to attack i2">in any way, to produce the separati2">ion, to make yourself MORE separate, emphasi2">izi2">ing the ways that someone else i2">is an i2">inferi2">ior evi2">il shi2">it that you hate and who should feel terri2">ibly gui2">ilty for bei2">ing so wrong, YOU ARE accusi2">ing yourself of thi2">is. So you mi2">ight ask yourself, "would i2">I accuse myself of thi2">is?" You wi2">ill thi2">ink you're NOT accusi2">ing yourself because you don't see yourself as A PART OF the other person, but you are sti2">ill doi2">ing i2">it.

There i2">is a HUGE COST to attempti2">ing to i2">ignore the golden rule. The cost i2">is that your mi2">ind becomes spli2">it, you become self-destructi2">ive and sui2">ici2">idal, you become alone and lonely, you become weakened and li2">ive i2">in darkness, the world becomes a ni2">ightmare of confli2">ict and war, you lose all sense of peace and happi2">iness, communi2">icati2">ion breaks down and you become unable to relate to anyone, i2">it makes you questi2">ion whether you even exi2">ist, and you wi2">ill try to destroy yourself. That's a pretty major cost for beli2">ievi2">ing somethi2">ing that i2">isn't true, as i2">if i2">it were real.

You DO have a vested i2">interest, because when you attack you DO experi2">ience consequences, even i2">if you do not REALi2">IZE that you do. You may not recogni2">ize that every ti2">ime you attack you feel worse. You may not recogni2">ize that when you hate someone you feel awful and gui2">ilty.

You may not recogni2">ize that when you accuse someone angri2">ily of bei2">ing gui2">ilty of somethi2">ing, to make yourself feel better, you i2">increase your sense of bei2">ing separate and small and weak and alone. Or that anger hurts your mi2">ind and body. You have to recogni2">ize what the consequences of attack ARE, so that you wi2">ill deci2">ide that you do not WANT to be murderous anymore, because i2">it actually i2">is not REALLY i2">in your best i2">interests.

The golden rule always appli2">ies. i2">It i2">is never broken or vi2">iolated. You can deny i2">it. i2">If you deny i2">it you wi2">ill suffer. i2">If you deny i2">it you wi2">ill be confused as to why your li2">ife sucks, and you wi2">ill probably blame i2">it on someone else, thi2">inki2">ing that they are not you, and that therefore you haven't blamed yourself. Everythi2">ing you do you to do yourself and to all your brothers, to the enti2">ire sonshi2">ip and to God. Thi2">is i2">is also the secret of salvati2">ion. You are i2">INCLUDED i2">IN EVERYTHi2">ING. And i2">inclusi2">ion i2">is ulti2">imately love.

You may fi2">ind i2">it hard to accept the truth, because you do not beli2">ieve i2">it about yourself. You look wi2">ithi2">in yourself to see i2">if i2">it appli2">ies there and fi2">ind yourself wanti2">ing. Your self doubts and your li2">imi2">itati2">ions work agai2">inst your attempts to beli2">ieve i2">it.

What i2">I'm fi2">indi2">ing i2">is i2">it can be more effecti2">ive to borrow some clout from God. The trai2">in of thought goes along the li2">ines of, "i2">Is thi2">is true of God?". i2">I ask myself i2">if God can have thi2">is thi2">ing, thi2">is false thi2">ing, thi2">is problem, thi2">is sufferi2">ing, thi2">is si2">ickness, whatever i2">it i2">is.

For some reason i2">I seem to be much more convi2">inced that God i2">is perfect and i2">immortal and i2">incapable of any ki2">ind of sufferi2">ing than i2">I am. So i2">I use that fact. i2">I contrast i2">it agai2">inst hi2">is nature and ask myself i2">if i2">I can beli2">ieve that God has thi2">is. And usually i2">I cannot, usually i2">it seems ri2">idi2">iculous to even suggest i2">it, and thi2">is helps me to be unconvi2">inced of i2">it also.

The underlyi2">ing process here i2">is si2">imply "bei2">ing one wi2">ith God" more and more. Shari2">ing everythi2">ing wi2">ith God. i2">If somethi2">ing i2">is true of God i2">it i2">is true of me. i2">If i2">it i2">is not true of God then i2">it i2">is not true of me ei2">ither. i2">I am part of God. i2">If i2">I have somethi2">ing, God has to have i2">it also. i2">If God has somethi2">ing, i2">I have to have i2">it also. No excepti2">ions, because we are one.

So i2">if you are fi2">indi2">ing i2">it a struggle to convi2">ince yourself that certai2">in thi2">ings are not true of you, that you don't have sufferi2">ings or i2">illnesses or fears or gui2">ilts or whatever, i2">instead of "doi2">ing i2">it all by yourself" or i2">in relati2">ion to yourself, do i2">it i2">in relati2">ion to God. i2">Include God i2">in the equati2">ion and questi2">ion. You may fi2">ind i2">it a lot more effecti2">ive and easi2">ier to let thi2">ings go when you can see the i2">impossi2">ibi2">ili2">ity of God havi2">ing anythi2">ing wrong wi2">ith hi2">im.

You mi2">ight also consi2">ider that thi2">is ki2">ind of practi2">ice i2">is not merely one of many tools, but i2">is i2">in fact the end goal. We are supposed to be i2">increasi2">ing our oneness wi2">ith God. We are supposed to be seei2">ing ourselves as shari2">ing everythi2">ing wi2">ith hi2">im, and bei2">ing li2">ike hi2">im i2">in every way, havi2">ing been created i2">in hi2">is perfect li2">ikeness. To be one wi2">ith God and li2">ike God i2">is to remember your own true nature! Thi2">is i2">is the goal of the course, reuni2">ion wi2">ith God and Self.

"But to heal i2">is sti2">ill to make whole. Therefore to heal i2">is to UNi2">ITE wi2">ith those who are Li2">IKE you, because percei2">ivi2">ing thi2">is li2">ikeness i2">IS to recogni2">ize the Father."

"i2">I am i2">in the li2">ikeness of my Creator. i2">I cannot suffer, i2">I cannot experi2">ience loss, and i2">I cannot di2">ie. i2">I am not a body. i2">I would recogni2">ize my reali2">ity today."

"And every dream serves only to conceal the Self Whi2">ich i2">is God's only Son, the li2">ikeness of Hi2">imself, the Holy One Who sti2">ill abi2">ides i2">in Hi2">im forever, as He sti2">ill abi2">ides i2">in me."

"Shut off from your Self, Who remai2">ins aware of Hi2">is li2">ikeness to Hi2">is Creator, your Self seems to sleep, whi2">ile the part of your mi2">ind that weaves i2">illusi2">ions i2">in i2">its sleep appears to be awake."

"Here i2">is your answer to the world, and God's as well. For here i2">it i2">is you joi2">in wi2">ith Hi2">im, Hi2">is li2">ikeness bei2">ing yours i2">in thi2">is alone."

"God created man i2">in hi2">is own i2">image and li2">ikeness" i2">is correct i2">in meani2">ing, but the words are open to consi2">iderable mi2">isi2">interpretati2">ion. Thi2">is i2">is avoi2">ided, however, i2">if "i2">image" i2">is understood to mean "thought," and "li2">ikeness" i2">is taken as "of a li2">ike quali2">ity." God Di2">ID create the Son i2">in Hi2">is own Thought, and of a quali2">ity li2">ike to Hi2">is own. There i2">IS nothi2">ing else."

"The Soul, because of i2">its own li2">ikeness to i2">its Creator, i2">is creati2">ive. No Chi2">ild of God i2">is capable of losi2">ing thi2">is abi2">ili2">ity, because i2">it i2">is i2">inherent i2">in what he i2">IS."

"YOU are a mi2">iracle. God creates only "that whi2">ich, or one who, i2">is of surpassi2">ing excellence or meri2">it." Man i2">is capable of thi2">is ki2">ind of creati2">ion, too, bei2">ing i2">in the i2">image and li2">ikeness of hi2">is own Creator. Anythi2">ing else i2">is only hi2">is own ni2">ightmare, and does not exi2">ist. Only the Creati2">ions of Li2">ight are real."

When we are playi2">ing the role of vi2">icti2">im, of bei2">ing at the effect of anythi2">ing, we are out of touch wi2">ith the power of deci2">isi2">ion. We thi2">ink that stuff i2">is happeni2">ing agai2">inst our wi2">ill. Then we enter i2">into a problem-solvi2">ing mode, where we ask, "how am i2">I goi2">ing to deal wi2">ith thi2">is?"

i2">In the vi2">icti2">imhood we feel trapped and di2">isempowered, as i2">if we have no choi2">ice. We seem forced to deal wi2">ith whatever i2">is happeni2">ing, as though i2">it i2">is happeni2">ing all on i2">its own. We seem to be left wi2">ith no opti2">ion but to deal wi2">ith i2">it, and then we start tryi2">ing to fi2">ind ways to make i2">it go away, or to mi2">iti2">igate i2">it and fi2">ind the least pai2">inful way out.

The thi2">ing we're then mi2">issi2">ing i2">is that we actually chose whatever i2">is happeni2">ing, we are maki2">ing i2">it happen, and we can choose agai2">in. We have a power of deci2">isi2">ion and we are the rulers of the uni2">iverse. We do not have thi2">ings happen to us. We are i2">immortal bei2">ings. We act deli2">iberately and i2">intenti2">ionally and everythi2">ing that occurs i2">is consci2">iously chosen.

i2">If we do not li2">ike what we are getti2">ing, we must have made a wrong deci2">isi2">ion because we are not at peace. We have to recogni2">ize we made that deci2">isi2">ion and we want to choose otherwi2">ise because we want to be happy. So thi2">is means owni2">ing our power and owni2">ing our choi2">ice and owni2">ing what we have already chosen, so that we can choose somethi2">ing else.

We then have to step i2">into the posi2">iti2">ion of deci2">isi2">iveness, whi2">ich i2">is fearlessness, i2">in whi2">ich we exclai2">im that we have the power to choose and we deci2">ide what Wi2">ILL happen. i2">Instead of deali2">ing wi2">ith cleani2">ing up problems or tryi2">ing to fi2">ix i2">issues or tryi2">ing to fi2">ind ways to bui2">ild defences agai2">inst these horri2">ible thi2">ings that are threateni2">ing us, we si2">imply elect to stop maki2">ing such bullshi2">it and we powerfully choose somethi2">ing else.

i2">I must have chosen whatever i2">is happeni2">ing, because nothi2">ing can happen agai2">inst my wi2">ill or wi2">ithout my consent. i2">If i2">I do not li2">ike i2">it or feel li2">ike i2">it i2">is loomi2">ing over me or happeni2">ing wi2">ithout my consent or as i2">if i2">it i2">is random or chaoti2">ic or just came out of nowhere, them i2">I am very mi2">istaken and am not bei2">ing responsi2">ible. Spi2">iri2">itual responsi2">ibi2">ili2">ity requi2">ires owni2">ing the power of God and usi2">ing i2">it to make a better choi2">ice.

i2">Instead of playi2">ing wi2">ith opti2">ions or tryi2">ing to mi2">iti2">igate problems, we i2">instead deci2">ide what we do want, we completely i2">ignore the problem, we don't bother getti2">ing i2">into problem management or problem solvi2">ing or defences, and i2">instead we si2">imply fli2">ip the enti2">ire mental conversati2">ion to a new path. i2">I choose thi2">is, i2">instead of that, and thi2">is wi2">ill be my future, and thi2">is i2">is what i2">I want, and i2">I elect that thi2">is happen as i2">I have requested. And so i2">it i2">is.

We no longer are i2">in the busi2">iness of putti2">ing up wi2">ith thi2">ings, tolerati2">ing, maki2">ing do, putti2">ing out fi2">ires, di2">imi2">ini2">ishi2">ing, avoi2">idi2">ing, fi2">ixi2">ing thi2">ings up, or tryi2">ing to prevent a bi2">igger di2">isaster. We are now i2">in the busi2">iness of choosi2">ing what we want, and only thi2">is can happen, and nothi2">ing else can happen. We are not at the effect of the world or anythi2">ing i2">in i2">it. We are choosers and creators and wi2">ielders of God's power.

"My Self i2">is ruler of the uni2">iverse. ... i2">It i2">is i2">impossi2">ible that anythi2">ing should come to me unbi2">idden by myself. Even i2">in thi2">is world, i2">it i2">is i2">I who rule my desti2">iny. What happens i2">is what i2">I desi2">ire. What does not occur i2">is what i2">I do not want to happen. Thi2">is must i2">I accept."

"God's teachers choose to look on dreams a whi2">ile. i2">It i2">is a consci2">ious choi2">ice. For they have learned that all choi2">ices are made consci2">iously, wi2">ith full awareness of thei2">ir consequences."

"No one can suffer loss unless i2">it be hi2">is own deci2">isi2">ion. No one suffers pai2">in except hi2">is choi2">ice elects thi2">is state for hi2">im. No one can gri2">ieve nor fear nor thi2">ink hi2">im si2">ick unless these are the outcomes that he wants, and no one di2">ies wi2">ithout hi2">is own consent. Nothi2">ing occurs but represents your wi2">ish, and nothi2">ing i2">is omi2">itted that you choose. Here i2">is your world, complete i2">in all detai2">ils. Here i2">is i2">its whole reali2">ity for you. And i2">it i2">is only here salvati2">ion i2">is."

There was a si2">ituati2">ion i2">in whi2">ich somethi2">ing went wrong, but there wasn't any evi2">idence whatsoever that the person i2">involved caused i2">it to happen. i2">It seemed li2">ike there was no way they could've caused i2">it. i2">I noti2">iced that as a result, i2">I di2">id not and could not project gui2">ilt onto that person. i2">If i2">I could fi2">ind no grounds for beli2">ievi2">ing that they were gui2">ilty somehow, i2">I couldn't turn them i2">into a scapegoat. i2">I di2">id not get angry at them at all.

i2">I found that i2">interesti2">ing, because i2">it's not just that we automati2">ically scapegoat someone when we percei2">ive that they are the cause of a problem, we also DON'T scapegoat them when the "proof of si2">in" i2">is mi2">issi2">ing.

Our ego reacti2">ions to stuff and whether or not we USE i2">it for projecti2">ion of gui2">ilt, seems to depend very much on what we percei2">ive as happeni2">ing and the fact that we BELi2">IEVE what we see.

i2">If there i2">is evi2">idence, externally, i2">in terms of form, or bodi2">ies, or objects, or anythi2">ing tangi2">ible that we can put our fi2">inger on, the ego can and wi2">ill jump i2">in and USE i2">it for projecti2">ion. i2">It's almost li2">ike a tri2">igger. The presence of thi2">is "si2">inful thi2">ing" i2">in the envi2">ironment i2">is pi2">icked up on by the senses and the ego and i2">it automati2">ically reacts to i2">it wi2">ith an attack. BUT, i2">if the sti2">imuli2">i i2">is not there, i2">it DOESN'T tend to do thi2">is.

Thi2">is reveals just how much we can be so totally dependent upon what we're percei2">ivi2">ing as "exi2">isti2">ing" or "happeni2">ing" i2">in the world. How much we're allowi2">ing the world and i2">its states to Di2">ICTATE whether or not we are AFFECTED. That we can only seem to HAVE certai2">in reacti2">ions when the world PRODUCES certai2">in scenari2">ios. And when i2">it doesn't we don't seem to have these reacti2">ions.

i2">Isn't i2">it wei2">ird then that we not only get tri2">iggered and pushed i2">into ego reacti2">ions when the external world SAYS WE SHOULD, we also fai2">il to have any reacti2">ion at all when the world SAYS WE SHOULDN'T.

Solely because i2">I could fi2">ind no evi2">idence "i2">in the world" as to a certai2">in person bei2">ing the cause of si2">in, and was DEPENDi2">ING ON the world and Li2">ISTENi2">ING TO i2">IT, therefore, i2">I could not seem to get myself to be angry at them. There was nothi2">ing to latch onto. There was nothi2">ing to use. Thi2">is doesn't mean, however, that i2">I don't have an ego, or that my ego wouldn't scapegoat at the next opportuni2">ity. i2">It's just that we seem to WAi2">IT FOR the world to fuck up before we have a reacti2">ion to i2">it, i2">instead of bei2">ing proacti2">ive.

Thi2">is reveals how much we're at the EFFECT of the world, allowi2">ing i2">it to tell us WHEN we should be upset, and WHEN we should be happy. i2">It presents lulls i2">in the storm and breaks i2">in the confli2">ict, duri2">ing whi2">ich we seem to NOT have reacti2">ions. Why don't we have reacti2">ions all the ti2">ime? Why don't we constantly launch i2">into massi2">ive fear responses? Because the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions tells us i2">it's NOT A BAD Si2">ITUATi2">ION. Just as much as the same hi2">ierarchy then goes on to tell us that such-and-such a si2">ituati2">ion i2">IS worth bei2">ing upset about and i2">is very seri2">ious.

i2">If for example a si2">ituati2">ion ari2">ises where somethi2">ing i2">in the world seems terri2">ible wrong, i2">I Wi2">ILL much more li2">ikely have a reacti2">ion. i2">It may even i2">induce a pani2">ic. And thi2">is reacti2">ion wi2">ill be i2">in proporti2">ion to the sense of severi2">ity or seri2">iousness or i2">importance or value of the problem. Bi2">igger problems eli2">ici2">it a LOT more fear. Smaller problems eli2">ici2">it a lot LESS. The seemi2">ing LACK of problems produces an i2">illusi2">ion of peace, i2">in whi2">ich i2">I seem to thi2">ink everythi2">ing i2">is goi2">ing well. Unti2">il the next calami2">ity, whi2">ich the world certai2">inly has i2">in store i2">in endless supply.

How do we get off thi2">is rollercoaster ri2">ide of always havi2">ing reacti2">ions to the ups and downs of the world? Why CAN'T i2">I scapegoat when there i2">is no reason to, just as much as when there's a jui2">icy opportuni2">ity to pounce on? Why when someone has clearly done nothi2">ing at all i2">is i2">it so hard to project gui2">ilt? And why when they seem to have done somethi2">ing awful i2">is i2">it so easy? Why do we RELY ON the world to i2">INFORM US of what i2">is true?

Recently qui2">ite a "seri2">ious thi2">ing" happened and i2">I had a strong vi2">isceral reacti2">ion. i2">In fact i2">I pretty much went i2">into an anxi2">iety attack. Thi2">is came out of nowhere, but i2">it was i2">in relati2">ion to "how seri2">ious" i2">I thought the si2">ituati2">ion was. i2">I bought i2">into the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions and had the appropri2">iate amount of drama about i2">it. Ri2">ight on cue, just as the world says i2">I should, and enti2">irely reflecti2">ive of what i2">I beli2">ieved to be the i2">importance of the si2">ituati2">ion. i2">It seemed unavoi2">idable. i2">It seemed AUTOMATi2">IC and mi2">indless. And there seemed to be nothi2">ing i2">I could do to stop i2">it once i2">I'd bought i2">into i2">it.

But somehow there has to be a way to li2">ive that i2">isn't DRi2">IVEN by the world and i2">its i2">images, BASED ON i2">its i2">illusi2">ions and i2">its forms, i2">its happeni2">ings and i2">its dangers. i2">It has to be possi2">ible somehow to NOT BUY i2">INTO the hei2">irarchy and to not USE the world as a FORM OF TRUSTED PROOF about anythi2">ing. Just because the world or the ego or the body says "thi2">is i2">is really seri2">ious you should be very concerned", we have to fi2">ind a way to NOT be "appropri2">iately concerned". To not GET our truth FROM the world.

How about laughi2">ing at i2">it i2">instead? How about laughi2">ing i2">in the face of death, or laughi2">ing when someone i2">is hurt, or laughi2">ing when people are cryi2">ing thei2">ir eyes out? Li2">ike... how can we di2">isconnect from the automati2">ic chai2">in-reacti2">ion of "world says you should feel thi2">is now"? Or rather, that my beli2">ief about what i2">it MEANS and my judgement of what i2">it i2">IS, BASED ON i2">ITS FORM, di2">ictates what i2">I beli2">ieve i2">is true and the consequences that wi2">ill come from i2">it.

i2">It's me who has apparently deci2">ided what everythi2">ing means, i2">includi2">ing good stuff, and i2">includi2">ing bad stuff. And all of these meani2">ings should apparently be WRONG, i2">ie a mi2">istake. Because i2">if there i2">is really NO order of di2">iffi2">iculty i2">in mi2">iracles and the hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions i2">is actually FLAT AND EQUAL, then i2">it should make NO di2">ifference whatsoever what happens, i2">it should not have ANY effect to change who i2">I am or what i2">I experi2">ience. Unless i2">I am TRUSTi2">ING MY SENSES and basi2">ing my TRUTH on the world's current STATE.

That's where the real challenge comes i2">in. Because now we're talki2">ing about practi2">ically i2">IGNORi2">ING how si2">ituati2">ions look, i2">IGNORi2">ING appearances, i2">IGNORi2">ING meani2">ings that i2">I make up, i2">IGNORi2">ING what the world would say i2">is a very good or bad si2">ituati2">ion, i2">IGNORi2">ING the body, i2">IGNORi2">ING si2">ickness, i2">IGNORi2">ING terri2">ible di2">iffi2">icult tragi2">ic threateni2">ing dangers, and somehow transcendi2">ing them so that peace and happi2">iness become a CONSTANT. And getti2">ing my truth from ANOTHER WORLD.

How to get off the rollercoaster of death, that's the bi2">ig questi2">ion. How to not be affected by the world. How to not USE OR ALLOW the world or any events or happeni2">ings to i2">influence me i2">in ANY WAY, and to operate solely i2">in a proacti2">ively DELi2">IBERATE manner. How to be free of sufferi2">ing forever, and how to never forget to laugh at the i2">illusi2">ion of hell ever agai2">in. Nor Gi2">IVE MY POWER AWAY TO i2">IT or allow i2">it to have the power to TELL ME what i2">I should be feeli2">ing.

"The world percei2">ives orders of di2">iffi2">iculty i2">in EVERYTHi2">ING. Thi2">is i2">is because the ego percei2">ives nothi2">ing as wholly desi2">irable. By DEMONSTRATi2">ING to yourselves that THERE i2">IS NO ORDER OF Di2">IFFi2">ICULTY i2">IN Mi2">IRACLES, you wi2">ill convi2">ince yourselves that i2">in your NATURAL state there i2">IS no di2">iffi2">iculty, because i2">it i2">is a state of Grace."

"The i2">illusi2">ion of orders of di2">iffi2">iculty i2">is an obstacle the teacher of God must learn to pass by and leave behi2">ind."

"The fi2">irst chaoti2">ic law i2">is that the truth i2">is di2">ifferent for everyone. Li2">ike all these pri2">inci2">iples, thi2">is one mai2">intai2">ins that each i2">is separate, and has a di2">ifferent set of thoughts whi2">ich SETS Hi2">IM OFF from others. Thi2">is pri2">inci2">iple evolves from the beli2">ief there i2">is a hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions; some are MORE valuable, and THEREFORE true. And each establi2">ishes thi2">is FOR Hi2">IMSELF, and MAKES i2">it true by hi2">is attack on what another values."

"All that a hi2">ierarchy of i2">illusi2">ions can show i2">is PREFERENCE, NOT reali2">ity."

Years ago i2">I had no clue what "atonement" meant, other than bei2">ing able to quote the Course as sayi2">ing "nothi2">ing happened". Thi2">is was more or less meani2">ingless to me.

i2">I went about my efforts at "forgi2">iveness" and made some headway but i2">it wasn't unti2">il recently that i2">I started to reali2">ize just how i2">important the Atonement i2">is.

i2">If you were to do nothi2">ing else other than to accept the Atonement, that would be all you need to do. i2">It encapsulates all of forgi2">iveness wi2">ithi2">in i2">it. i2">It shares the same mi2">ind of Holy Spi2">iri2">it that forgi2">iveness shares.

Previ2">iously i2">I was not really "accepti2">ing" that nothi2">ing had happened. i2">I tri2">ied to tell myself "thi2">is hasn't really happened", but i2">it would seem fake and not beli2">ievable. i2">It di2">idn't even seem especi2">ially i2">important or powerful or capable of helpi2">ing very much - just one more handy phrase to throw at the i2">illusi2">ion of bei2">ing attacked by the world to try to make i2">it go away.

But the atonement i2">IS the cure. i2">It i2">IS salvati2">ion. i2">It i2">IS the state of mi2">ind i2">in whi2">ich all has been forgi2">iven and undone. i2">It i2">IS a reflecti2">ion of your true nature and your i2">innocence. i2">In i2">it ,your i2">innocence i2">is guaranteed and expressed. i2">It i2">is the li2">ight whi2">ich shi2">ines away all darkness. i2">It i2">is the beacon of truth and the source of extendi2">ing mi2">iracles as an expressi2">ion of love.

i2">I could not accept i2">it before because i2">I di2">idn't really know what role i2">it was supposed to play other than some i2">intellectual fact about how none of thi2">is happened. i2">I just couldn't accept that nothi2">ing had happened. Too much was ti2">ied up i2">in i2">illusi2">ions seemi2">ing to be real. i2">I was too much i2">in beli2">ief that i2">I was deali2">ing wi2">ith a real world wi2">ith real problems. Even after "doi2">ing a forgi2">iveness" i2">I would not be accepti2">ing the atonement, not really actually convi2">inced of i2">it or able to genui2">inely ACCEPT that i2">it was true. And to experi2">ience i2">it.

But we must get ourselves i2">into the Atonement i2">if we are to be free of the ego, free of i2">illusi2">ions, and free of death. i2">It's not an opti2">ional thi2">ing. i2">It's MAJOR. i2">It's the doorway home.

The secret to salvati2">ion, or the key to salvati2">ion, i2">is sai2">id to be that "you are doi2">ing thi2">is to yourself". That concept i2">is li2">ike a key that opens the door, because i2">it reveals to you a way to access the Atonement. But i2">it i2">is i2">itself not the Atonement. As an analogy, i2">it i2">is the key, whi2">ich helps us to access the Atonement, but the Atonement i2">itself i2">is what li2">ies on the other si2">ide of the door that the key opens.

Unti2">il we can get our mi2">ind to the place where we BELi2">IEVE that fear i2">is not real, gui2">ilt i2">is not real, si2">in i2">is not real, separati2">ion i2">is not real, and REMEMBER that i2">in God's vi2">iew we are sti2">ill completely i2">innocent and MUST be forgi2">iven and lovable/worthy of God, only then are we able to actually ACCEPT, and agree wi2">ith, and ali2">ign ourselves wi2">ith, what the Atonement clai2">ims i2">is true.

Only then can we even see, accept, or experi2">ience, that all the i2">illusi2">ions we thought had really happened di2">id not really happen (due to thei2">ir unreali2">ity), and that therefore we ARE sti2">ill as God created us. We have to take forgi2">iveness all the way to thi2">is truth i2">in order to complete the process and gai2">in access TO a state of forgi2">iveness, i2">in whi2">ich we and others are seen as FORGi2">IVEN, havi2">ing done nothi2">ing at all. Li2">iterally. That li2">iterally nothi2">ing happened i2">in reali2">ity.

Then we wi2">ill be Wi2">ILLi2">ING to accept and recei2">ive God's love agai2">in, and share and extend i2">it to others as mi2">iracles.

"That i2">is why rehabi2">ili2">itati2">ion i2">is a collaborati2">ive venture. i2">I can tell you what to DO, but thi2">is wi2">ill not really help you unless you collaborate by beli2">ievi2">ing that i2">I know what to do. Only then wi2">ill your Mi2">IND wi2">ill to follow me."

"Wi2">ithout your wi2">ill, you cannot be rehabi2">ili2">itated. MOTi2">IVATi2">ION TO BE HEALED i2">is the cruci2">ial factor i2">in rehabi2">ili2">itati2">ion. Wi2">ithout thi2">is, you are deci2">idi2">ing agai2">inst heali2">ing, and your veto of my wi2">ill FOR you MAKES HEALi2">ING i2">IMPOSSi2">IBLE. i2">If heali2">ing i2">IS our joi2">int wi2">ill, unless our wi2">ills are joi2">ined you CANNOT be healed."

"Your wi2">ill i2">is the means by whi2">ich you determi2">ine your own condi2">iti2">ion, because wi2">ill i2">is the MECHANi2">ISM OF DECi2">ISi2">ION."

"My wi2">ill cannot overcome yours, because YOURS i2">IS AS POWERFUL AS Mi2">INE. i2">If i2">it were not so, the Sons of God would be unequal."

"Your wi2">ill i2">is as free as mi2">ine, and God Hi2">imself would not go agai2">inst i2">it. i2">I cannot wi2">ill what God does not wi2">ill. i2">I CAN offer you my wi2">ill to make yours i2">invi2">inci2">ible by thi2">is shari2">ing, but i2">I CANNOT oppose yours wi2">ithout competi2">ing wi2">ith i2">it and thereby vi2">iolati2">ing God’s Wi2">ill for you."

"i2">If you want to be Li2">IKE me, i2">I wi2">ill help you, knowi2">ing that we are ali2">ike. i2">If you want to be Di2">IFFERENT, i2">I wi2">ill wai2">it unti2">il you change your mi2">ind. i2">I can teach you, but only you can choose to li2">isten to my teachi2">ing. How else can i2">it be, i2">if God’s Ki2">ingdom i2">is freedom?"

"Freedom cannot be learned by tyranny of ANY ki2">ind, and the perfect equali2">ity of all God’s Sons cannot be recogni2">ized through the domi2">ini2">ion of one wi2">ill over another. God’s Sons are equal i2">in wi2">ill."

"Joi2">in then wi2">ith me i2">in prai2">ise of Hi2">im and you whom He created. Thi2">is i2">is our gi2">ift of grati2">itude to Hi2">im, whi2">ich He wi2">ill share wi2">ith all Hi2">is Creati2">ions, to whom He gi2">ives equally whatever i2">is acceptable to Hi2">im. Because i2">it i2">is acceptable to Hi2">im, i2">it i2">is the gi2">ift of freedom, whi2">ich i2">is Hi2">is Wi2">ill for all Hi2">is Sons."

"By offeri2">ing freedom you wi2">ill be free, because freedom i2">is the only gi2">ift whi2">ich you can offer to God’s Sons, bei2">ing an acknowledgment of what they are and what He i2">is."

"Freedom i2">is creati2">ion because i2">it i2">is love. What you seek to i2">impri2">ison you do not love. Therefore, when you seek to i2">impri2">ison ANYONE, i2">includi2">ing YOURSELF, you do not love hi2">im and you cannot i2">identi2">ify wi2">ith hi2">im."

"Alone we can do nothi2">ing, but TOGTHER our wi2">ills fuse i2">into somethi2">ing whose power i2">is far beyond the power of i2">its separate parts."

"By NOT BEi2">ING SEPARATE, the Wi2">ill of God i2">is establi2">ished i2">in ours and as ours. Thi2">is wi2">ill i2">is i2">invi2">inci2">ible because i2">it i2">is undi2">ivi2">ided. "

"But to heal i2">is sti2">ill to make whole. Therefore to heal i2">is to uni2">ite wi2">ith those who are Li2">IKE you, because percei2">ivi2">ing thi2">is li2">ikeness i2">is to recogni2">ize the Father."

"Glory be to the uni2">ion of God and Hi2">is Holy Sons, because all glory li2">ies i2">IN them because they ARE uni2">ited."

"The mi2">iracles WE do bear wi2">itness to the Wi2">ill of the Father for Hi2">is Son, and to our joy i2">in uni2">iti2">ing wi2">ith Hi2">is Wi2">ill FOR us. When you uni2">ite wi2">ith me, you are uni2">iti2">ing wi2">ithout the ego, because i2">I have renounced the ego i2">in myself, and therefore cannot uni2">ite wi2">ith yours. Our uni2">ion i2">is therefore the way to renounce the ego i2">in yourself."

"i2">I bri2">ing Hi2">is Peace back to all Hi2">is Chi2">ildren, because i2">I recei2">ived i2">it of Hi2">im for us all."

"The Holy Spi2">iri2">it has one di2">irecti2">ion for all mi2">inds, and the one He taught me i2">IS yours."

"We begi2">in the journey back by setti2">ing out TOGETHER, and gather i2">in our brothers as we CONTi2">INUE together."

i2">I've been looki2">ing at thi2">is closely because i2">I want to fi2">ind out how thi2">is course i2">is supposed to be appli2">ied, wi2">ithout a bypass and wi2">ithout deni2">ial.

At fi2">irst i2">I recogni2">ised that there was a whole lot of spi2">iri2">itual bypassi2">ing goi2">ing on. That i2">is, tryi2">ing to adopt thoughts, theori2">ies, concept etc far beyond where my 'actual experi2">ience' i2">is, such that i2">I am out of touch wi2">ith actual experi2">ience and am li2">ivi2">ing i2">in a ki2">ind of mental fantasy. Thi2">is becomes the spi2">iri2">ituali2">ised ego, getti2">ing lost i2">in the i2">intellect, 'bypassi2">ing' the experi2">ience and the feeli2">ings and pretendi2">ing to be more advanced etc.

So then i2">I thought ok, i2">I am not supposed to deny what's happeni2">ing, i2">I'm supposed to accept i2">it. So then i2">I went ki2">ind of the other way, went more i2">into feeli2">ing the feeli2">ings, havi2">ing the experi2">ience, and i2">it seemed li2">ike i2">if i2">I would attempt to avoi2">id or i2">invali2">idate that i2">in any way i2">it would be a bypass. But thi2">is led to just bei2">ing swamped i2">in the ego, conti2">inued sufferi2">ing, false percepti2">ions, and essenti2">ially no room for forgi2">iveness.

Now i2">I am aski2">ing myself, where does forgi2">iveness come i2">into thi2">is? i2">If forgi2">iveness i2">is goi2">ing to try to offer some ki2">ind of i2">interpretati2">ion or way of seei2">ing somethi2">ing that i2">is di2">ifferent to "what i2">it i2">is" or "what's happeni2">ing", surely forgi2">iveness i2">is a bypass? There has to be a way to move from "i2">I am a body" to "i2">I am not a body" wi2">ithout i2">it bei2">ing some ki2">ind of faulty appli2">icati2">ion or an attempt to deny the body. One thi2">ing to recogni2">ize i2">is that there are always two parts to experi2">ience - what stuff i2">is physi2">ically, PLUS an i2">interpretati2">ion of i2">it, and the i2">interpretati2">ion can be wrong whi2">ile sti2">ill allowi2">ing the physi2">ical/bi2">iologi2">ical/emoti2">ional part to be there.

The overall approach seems to be that we should fi2">irst acknowledge what we ARE experi2">ienci2">ing, what we feel, the si2">ituati2">ion we seem to be i2">in, wi2">ithout denyi2">ing that we're feeli2">ing and experi2">ienci2">ing i2">it. We HAVE to admi2">it fi2">irst that we're sufferi2">ing, that somethi2">ing seems to have gone wrong - whi2">ich we tend not to want to do because i2">it i2">induces FEAR that somethi2">ing i2">is "really wrong".

Thi2">is i2">is part of the "fear of heali2">ing", because we don't want to acknowledge that somethi2">ing very convi2">inci2">ingly "bad" seems to have happened - and i2">if i2">it i2">is real, i2">it would be fri2">ighteni2">ing, and we DO beli2">ieve i2">it's real. Admi2">itti2">ing i2">it i2">is fri2">ighteni2">ing and so we deny and avoi2">id thi2">is step. But THEN, havi2">ing removed the DENi2">IAL of the si2">ituati2">ion, seek for a better way to look at i2">it and to rei2">interpret the experi2">ience, or to questi2">ion the foundati2">ion or cause of i2">it.

"The fear of heali2">ing ari2">ises i2">in the end from an unwi2">illi2">ingness to accept the unequi2">ivocal fact that heali2">ing i2">is necessary. The fear ari2">ises because of the necessary wi2">illi2">ingness to look at what man has done to hi2">imself."

We need to make sure we don't shoot for "i2">it's not happeni2">ing" BEFORE we've admi2">itted "thi2">is seems to be happeni2">ing" i2">ie "i2">I must have made a wrong deci2">isi2">ion because i2">I'm not at peace". That i2">is acknowledgement, not a bypass. And i2">it means wi2">illi2">ingness to admi2">it that thi2">ings have gone wrong, you don't feel happy, you are sufferi2">ing and THEN that there must be a better way.

The course does speak to thi2">is i2">in a few places. e.g. admi2">itti2">ing fi2">irst that the separati2">ion HAS occurred - whi2">ich we don't want to admi2">it to because i2">it i2">impli2">ies i2">its real and i2">is horri2">ible, but we DO beli2">ieve i2">it has occurred - but looki2">ing at thi2">is Wi2">ITH the Holy Spi2">iri2">it makes i2">it less fri2">ighteni2">ing, and then havi2">ing admi2">itted "somethi2">ing's gone wrong" we can be i2">in a posi2">iti2">ion to then i2">immedi2">iately seek atonement. But i2">if we seek atonement Wi2">ITHOUT admi2">itti2">ing to the deni2">ied dark beli2">ief or feeli2">ing or ego scenari2">io, we are bypassi2">ing.

"The Separati2">ion HAS occurred. To deny thi2">is i2">is merely to mi2">isuse deni2">ial. However, to concentrate on error i2">is merely a further mi2">isuse of legi2">iti2">imate psychi2">ic mechani2">isms. The true correcti2">ive procedure, whi2">ich has already been descri2">ibed as the proper use of the spi2">iri2">itual eye (or true vi2">isi2">ion), i2">is to accept the error temporari2">ily, BUT ONLY as an i2">indi2">icati2">ion that i2">IMMEDi2">IATE correcti2">ion i2">is mandatory. Thi2">is establi2">ishes a state of mi2">ind i2">in whi2">ich the Atonement can be accepted wi2">ithout delay."

Noti2">ice how i2">it says we 1) stop denyi2">ing that we've separated and made a wrong deci2">isi2">ion and are sufferi2">ing 2) accept the error, the sufferi2">ing, the feeli2">ing, on a temporary basi2">is 3) havi2">ing acknowledged the sufferi2">ing, now seek for atonement i2">ie a more ri2">ight-mi2">inded i2">interpretati2">ion wi2">ith the Holy Spi2">iri2">it, but i2">in such a way that i2">it broadens the percepti2">ion, admi2">its to bi2">igger truths, allows i2">in God's li2">ight and laws, and re-frames the i2">ILLUSi2">ION of what you seemed to be experi2">ienci2">ing before as "bad".

As per the secret of salvati2">ion, you can then SEE and admi2">it that you've been doi2">ing thi2">is to yourself, and seek to choose agai2">in and let the Holy Spi2">iri2">it undo the consequences through heali2">ing. Thi2">is i2">is the proper "appli2">icati2">ion of forgi2">iveness". i2">If we ski2">ip the acknowledgement of "what's gone wrong" we are i2">in a spi2">iri2">itual bypass. i2">If we ski2">ip admi2">itti2">ing to bei2">ing i2">in deni2">ial about how awful we've made ourselves feel, we're i2">in a bypass. i2">If we don't want to look at the GUi2">ILT, havi2">ing fi2">irst asked the Holy Spi2">iri2">it to help us to LOOK AT i2">IT, and we ski2">ip ahead to "i2">I'm i2">innocent", then we're i2">in a bypass.

You have to not pretend that everythi2">ing's okay. Admi2">it you're sufferi2">ing, admi2">it you're not happy, admi2">it to your feeli2">ings, feel the feeli2">ings i2">if you need to, AND THEN work wi2">ith the Holy Spi2">iri2">it on a rei2">interpretati2">ion. When you then see i2">it from a hi2">igher place, or remember i2">its a dream, or affi2">irm you're not a body, or recogni2">ize you're not a vi2">icti2">im etc, that i2">is i2">indeed "contradi2">ictory" to what you were seei2">ing and experi2">ienci2">ing before but i2">its NOT a bypass because i2">it's changi2">ing the i2">interpretati2">ion OF i2">it, not tryi2">ing to di2">ismi2">iss i2">it. We should end up wi2">ith a hi2">igher chri2">ist-vi2">isi2">ion vi2">iew of what we were seei2">ing from an ego perspecti2">ive., but havi2">ing acknowledged the state we were i2">in fully fi2">irst.

--------

i2">I asked ChatGPT about thi2">is a bi2">it, here's some Ai2">I commentary:

i2">In ACi2">IM terms, the process looks li2">ike thi2">is: Noti2">ice the upset Acknowledge the feeli2">ing Recogni2">ize i2">it comes from a beli2">ief Offer the beli2">ief for correcti2">ion Recei2">ive a di2">ifferent percepti2">ion Step 1 and 2 are not bypassi2">ing. They are requi2">ired. The ego says: “i2">If you don’t vali2">idate the feeli2">ing as true, you’re bypassi2">ing.” But the Course says: “You can acknowledge a feeli2">ing wi2">ithout agreei2">ing wi2">ith i2">its i2">interpretati2">ion.” That’s the pi2">ivot. There i2">is a di2">ifference between: Allowi2">ing a feeli2">ing Agreei2">ing wi2">ith the ego’s i2">interpretati2">ion of the feeli2">ing For example: “i2">I feel hurt.” → acknowledgment “They betrayed me and i2">I was wronged.” → i2">interpretati2">ion The fi2">irst i2">is honest. The second i2">is the ego’s narrati2">ive. The Course i2">invi2">ites you to questi2">ion the second — not suppress the fi2">irst. ACi2">IM i2">is not about: Emoti2">ional catharsi2">is Endless processi2">ing Vali2">idati2">ing the ego’s storyli2">ine i2">It i2">is about changi2">ing the teacher i2">in the mi2">ind. Bypassi2">ing says: “Thi2">is pai2">in i2">isn’t here.” The Course says: “Thi2">is pai2">in i2">is here because i2">I chose wrongly — and i2">I can choose agai2">in.” That i2">is not bypassi2">ing. That i2">is reclai2">imi2">ing authorshi2">ip of percepti2">ion. When you shi2">ift perspecti2">ive, the ego feels i2">invali2">idated. i2">It reacts wi2">ith: “You’re suppressi2">ing.” “You’re not bei2">ing authenti2">ic.” “You’re spi2">iri2">itually bypassi2">ing.” But what’s really happeni2">ing i2">is: You’re decli2">ini2">ing to make the ego’s i2">interpretati2">ion real. The ego equates: Not agreei2">ing wi2">ith me = deni2">ial. But correcti2">ion i2">is not deni2">ial. i2">It’s rei2">interpretati2">ion. ACi2">IM doesn’t say: “Si2">it wi2">ith your ego forever.” i2">It says: “Noti2">ice i2">it, forgi2">ive i2">it, and choose agai2">in.” i2">If you never shi2">ift perspecti2">ive because you fear bypassi2">ing, you’re actually preservi2">ing the ego. i2">Ironi2">ically, that becomes a di2">ifferent ki2">ind of bypass: bypassi2">ing the Holy Spi2">iri2">it’s rei2">interpretati2">ion. When you shi2">ift perspecti2">ive, ask: Am i2">I suppressi2">ing the feeli2">ing? Or am i2">I gently allowi2">ing i2">it whi2">ile becomi2">ing wi2">illi2">ing to see i2">it di2">ifferently? i2">In A Course i2">in Mi2">iracles, there’s an i2">important di2">isti2">incti2">ion that clears thi2">is up: Deni2">ial of error i2">is not deni2">ial of experi2">ience. Statements li2">ike: “i2">I am not a body. i2">I am free.” “My si2">inlessness i2">is guaranteed by God.” are not meant as psychologi2">ical affi2">irmati2">ions. They are metaphysi2">ical correcti2">ions ai2">imed at the level of cause, not effect. i2">If you use them at the level of emoti2">ion — to overri2">ide fear, sadness, anger — they wi2">ill feel li2">ike bypassi2">ing. Because they’re not desi2">igned to suppress feeli2">ings. They’re desi2">igned to loosen i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion. When the Course says: “i2">I am not a body,” i2">it i2">is not aski2">ing you to deny that a body appears to exi2">ist i2">in percepti2">ion. i2">It’s aski2">ing you to questi2">ion whether the body i2">is what you are. That’s a completely di2">ifferent move. A metaphysi2">ical statement becomes bypassi2">ing when: i2">It i2">is used to escape emoti2">ion. i2">It i2">is used to spi2">iri2">itually i2">inflate. i2">It i2">is used to deny the felt experi2">ience. i2">It becomes heali2">ing when: i2">It softens i2">identi2">ifi2">icati2">ion. i2">It i2">introduces curi2">iosi2">ity. i2">It reduces personal attack. i2">It i2">increases humi2">ili2">ity.

Yesterday was qui2">ite a breakthrough. After maki2">ing a vi2">ideo about i2">immortali2">ity and wri2">iti2">ing a long post about how fear i2">is self attack, Holy Spi2">iri2">it i2">invi2">ited me to "practi2">ice" the i2">ideas duri2">ing a vi2">isi2">it to a doctor. Usually at these vi2">isi2">its (for another person) i2">I pi2">ick up all ki2">inds of anxi2">iety and have reacti2">ions and fear thoughts.

So what i2">I di2">id was, remembered that every si2">ingle fearful thought i2">is i2">in fact my attempt to attack myself, and attack others. Every fear thought i2">is actually me tryi2">ing to undermi2">ine my i2">immortali2">ity. Every fearful i2">idea or response, whether i2">it's mi2">ine or not, i2">is an attempt to get ri2">id of, push away, attack, myself and others.

So as i2">I sat there, and as fear thoughts started poppi2">ing i2">in, i2">I i2">instantly saw.... hey, that's me attacki2">ing myself. That's me tryi2">ing to attack. And i2">it completely di2">iffused the thought i2">in a spli2">it-second, made i2">it di2">isappear, and di2">idn't allow i2">it to "progress" or li2">inger. i2">I felt empowered because i2">I reali2">ized that i2">I was doi2">ing all of thi2">is feari2">ing TO MYSELF, and i2">I di2">id not have to do that. i2">It turned out to be the calmest, easi2">iest, most relaxed vi2">isi2">it ever. Total success.

Because you see, whi2">ile i2">I thi2">ink that fear i2">is "just fear" and i2">it's justi2">ifi2">ied or caused by external thi2">ings, i2">I'm not really bei2">ing aware of what's happeni2">ing. i2">If i2">I reframe i2">it that fear i2">is actually an attempt to attack (e.g. my attack thoughts are attacki2">ing my i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity, and fear i2">is an attack thought), then i2">I'm much more compelled to not do that.

i2">I mean, i2">if you reali2">ize that fear i2">is actually you attacki2">ing, yourself and others, and you don't want to attack yourself or others, perhaps even because you would feel gui2">ilty about doi2">ing so, and i2">if you reali2">ize that your feari2">ing i2">is you attacki2">ing, then you become moti2">ivated i2">in qui2">ite a di2">ifferent way. i2">It's now about not wanti2">ing to be a murderous asshole towards yourself and others, i2">instead of i2">it seemi2">ing to be about you bei2">ing just some vi2">icti2">im that i2">is enti2">irely affected by others doi2">ing stuff to YOU, and not the other way around. When you are afrai2">id, YOU are the one doi2">ing the attacki2">ing!

So i2">it's a complete reversal of cause and effect. i2">It acknowledges that fear i2">is comi2">ing OUT of you, towards the si2">ituati2">ion, towards other people, and NOT that the fear i2">is bei2">ing caused from the outsi2">ide i2">in. And that really i2">is the secret of salvati2">ion. Because i2">it then suddenly becomes starkly obvi2">ious that you are doi2">ing the fear to yourself. You are li2">iterally attacki2">ing your i2">invulnerabi2">ili2">ity wi2">ith your fearful thought. You are tryi2">ing to undermi2">ine, weaken, overthrow, get ri2">id of, di2">imi2">ini2">ish or destroy your i2">immortali2">ity. And you don't want to do that.

The reframi2">ing of fear as "attack comi2">ing from me" i2">is very very useful as a tool. Because i2">it has truth i2">in i2">it. Fear actually i2">IS comi2">ing from you. i2">It i2">IS your attempt to separate. i2">It's your attempt to push thi2">ings away (whi2">ich i2">is attack/murder). i2">It's your attempt to stop thi2">ings (whi2">ich i2">is attack/murder). i2">It's your attempt to 'ki2">ill off' the thi2">ing that you percei2">ive as a threat.

All of the sense you have that you are "afrai2">id of" somethi2">ing and "want i2">it to go away" or "want i2">it to stop", i2">if you look at i2">it, i2">is really you tryi2">ing to destroy i2">it. You want to get ri2">id of i2">it. That's murderous thi2">inki2">ing. You want i2">it to end. That's an attempt to end li2">ife. Resi2">istance i2">isn't passi2">ive, or a defense, i2">it's an attack. And si2">imi2">ilarly, "i2">if i2">I defend myself i2">I am attacked". Fear seems li2">ike a defense, a protecti2">ive mechani2">ism. i2">It's not, i2">it's totally a weapon.

And i2">in fact you wi2">ill hear stori2">ies from some people as to how 'feari2">ing' caused someone else to suffer. How bei2">ing anxi2">ious and doubtful and uncertai2">in and concerned and worryi2">ing about someone, actually sends nasty psychi2">ic attack vi2">ibes to them. These ki2">ind of thoughts are actually attacks. They're attempts to pi2">icture someone as weak and sufferi2">ing and vulnerable and threatened. i2">It's a beli2">ief that there's somethi2">ing wrong wi2">ith them, they're si2">inful, they're capable of bei2">ing hurt, and thi2">is "fake concern" i2">is enti2">irely an ego thi2">ing. A weapon of attack di2">isgui2">ised as "cari2">ing".

The opposi2">ite of bei2">ing concerned about someone and telli2">ing them "be careful you don't...." or "try not to"... etc... i2">is to EMPOWER them, to support thei2">ir i2">integri2">ity and strength, to affi2">irm why they are confi2">ident and fearless and wi2">ill prevai2">il. To focus on thei2">ir strength, not thei2">ir potenti2">ial weakness. That's empoweri2">ing, and i2">it's totally the opposi2">ite of what can pass for "cari2">ing" i2">in the form of worri2">ies and fears and "concerns". Concern i2">is fear, full stop. Concern i2">is seri2">iousness. Seri2">iousness i2">is attack. And fear i2">is an attempt NOT to acknowledge someone's i2">immortali2">ity, but to deny i2">it and make the person weak.

i2">It's very eye openi2">ing. The way i2">I felt li2">ighter, bri2">ighter, stronger, fearless, and more tranqui2">il after ni2">ippi2">ing all these self-attack fear thoughts i2">in the bud, was a reward i2">in i2">itself. Defi2">ini2">itely somethi2">ing to keep applyi2">ing. i2">I had li2">ike 10 fear-dri2">iven attack thoughts before breakfast thi2">is morni2">ing. i2">I had to re-frame every one of them as attempts to attack myself, and to stop doi2">ing so. i2">I had no i2">idea just how many of my thoughts are attack thoughts. i2">It seems that almost all of them are dri2">iven by fear. And every one of them i2">is my attempt to prove i2">I am not i2">immortal.

A Course in Miracles - Urtext material - reproduced with permission from the Foundation for Inner Peace (acim.org), and the Foundation for A Course in Miracles (facim.org).
▲
MiraculousLiving.com ©2024 Paul West / OmniLogic Arts