There is considerable debate in the ACIM community about which version of the text and workbook students should use. While the overarching conflict is not so important, the version that you choose does in fact matter largely because you want to be sure that you are using one that works for you. We all know the outline, right? Basically, Helen Schucman channeled the voice of Jesus, wrote it down in shorthand and dictated it to Bill Thetford who typed it up. There were several subsequent edits in the years that followed.
|Published (Last):||7 December 2014|
|PDF File Size:||3.81 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.75 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The Relationship of Miracles and Revelation Remember the point about Miracles as a means of organizing different levels of consciousness. Miracles come from the subconscious below conscious level. Revelations come from the above conscious level. Freud was right about the classification, but not the names. He was also right that the content of consciousness is fleeting. Having no impulses from itself, and being primarily a mechanism for inducing response, it can be very wrong.
Child of God, you were created to create the good, the beautiful, and the holy. Do not lose sight of this. You were right in telling B. I will change the situation from one of inappropriate sexual attraction to one of impersonal miracle-working. Then acknowledge the true creative worth of both yourself AND the other one. This places strength where it belongs. Note that sexual fantasies are ALWAYS destructive or depleting , in that they perceive another in an inappropriate creative role.
He also observed that the tension from id impulses never completely abates. What he should have said is that the shift from miracle-impulses to sexual impulses was debilitating in the first place, because of the level-confusion involved. This set up a state in which real release was impossible. The miracle worker is one who accepts my kind of denial and projection, unites his own inherent abilities to deny and project with mine, and imposes them back on himself and others.
This establishes the total lack of threat anywhere. Together we can then work for the real time of peace, which is Eternal. I inspired Bob ref. But you can still use that. His remark ended with: "Every shut eye is not asleep. He made two kinds of errors. The first is that he saw only how the mechanisms worked in the mentally ill. The second is his own denial of the mechanism of the Atonement.
You cannot understand unconscious activity in these terms, because "content" is applicable ONLY to the more superficial unconscious levels to which the individual himself contributes. This is the level at which he can readily introduce fear, and usually does. Freud was right in calling this level pre-conscious, and emphasizing that there is a fairly easy interchange between preconscious and conscious material.
He was also right in regarding the censor as an agent for the protection of consciousness from fear. HIS major error lay in his insistence that this level is necessary at all in the psychic structure.
If the psyche contains fearful levels from which it cannot escape without splitting, its integration is permanently threatened. His "birth trauma", another valid idea, was also too limited, in that it did not refer to the Separation, which was really a FALSE idea of birth. Physical birth is not a trauma in itself. It can, however, remind the individual of the Separation, which was a very real cause of fear. The idea of "will-THERAPY" was potentially a very powerful one, but Rank did not see its real potential because he himself used his mind partly to create a theory OF the mind, but also partly to attack Freud.
His reactions to Freud stemmed from his own unfortunate acceptance of the deprivation-fallacy, which itself arose from the Separation. In consequence, his theory emphasized rather than minimized the two-edged nature of defenses. This is an outstanding characteristic of his concepts, because it was outstandingly true of him. This characteristic of all later theorists, who do not attempt, as Freud did, to split off the fear in his own form of therapy. No one as yet has fully recognized either the therapeutic value of fear, or the only way in which it can be truly ended.
When man miscreates, he IS in pain. The cause and effect principle here is temporarily a real expeditor. This entails a set of cause and effect relationships which are totally different from those which man introduced into the Miscreation.
The fundamental opponents in the real basic conflict are Creation and miscreation. All fear is implicit in the second, just as all love is inherent in the first.
Because of this difference, the basic conflict IS one between love and fear. So much, then, for the true nature of the major opponents in the basic conflict. Since all such theories lead to a form of therapy in which a re-distribution of psychic energy results, it is necessary to consider OUR concept of libido next.
In this respect, Freud was more accurate than his followers, who were essentially more wishful. Energy CAN emanate from both Creation and miscreation, and the particular ratio between them at a given point in time DOES determine behavior at that time. If miscreation did NOT engender energy in its own right, it would be unable to produce destructive behavior, which it very patently DOES.
Everything that man creates has energy because, like the Creation of God, they it come FROM energy, and are endowed by their creator with the power to create. This, however, does not deprive he creation of its OWN creative power.
To deny this is merely the previously mentioned fallacy of depreciation. Although Freud made a number of fallacies of his own, he DID avoid this one in connection with libido. The later theorists denied the split-energy concept, not by attempting to heal it, but by reinterpreting it instead of redistributing it. This placed them in the illogical position of assuming that the split which their therapies were intended to heal had not occurred.
The result of this approach is essentially a form of hypnosis. A similar deadlock occurs when both the power of Creation and of miscreation coexist. He, thus, places himself in a position where the fearful becomes REAL. This is because everytime I mentioned the Atonement to him, which was quite often, he responded by defending his theory more and more against it. This resulted in his increasingly strong attempts to make the illogical sound more and more logical.
I was very sorry about this, because his was a singularly good mind, and it was a shame to waste it. However, the major purpose of his incarnation was not neglected. Freud was one of the most religious men I have known recently. Unfortunately, he was so afraid of religion that the only way he could deal with it was to regard IT not himself as sick. This naturally prevented healing. It is noteworthy throughout the whole development of his theories that the superego never allied itself with freedom.
The most it could do in this direction was to work out a painful truce in which both opponents LOST. This perception could not fail to force him to emphasize discontent in his view of civilization. The Freudian id is really only the more superficial level of the unconscious, and not the deepest level at all.
This, too, was inevitable, because Freud could not divorce miracles from magic. It was therefore his constant endeavor, even preoccupation to keep on thrusting more and more material between consciousness and the real deeper level of the unconscious, so that the latter became increasingly obscured.
The result was a kind of bedlam, in which there was no order, no control, and no sense. This was exactly how he FELT about it. Perception did not exist until the Separation had introduced degrees, aspects and intervals. The Soul has no levels, and ALL conflict arises from the concept of levels.
Wars arise when some regard others as if they were on a different level. All interpersonal conflicts arise from this fallacy. Only the levels of the Trinity are capable of Unity.
The levels which man created by the Separation are disastrous. They cannot BUT conflict. This is because one is essentially meaningless to another. Freud realized this perfectly, and that is why he conceived as forever irreconcilable the different levels of his psyche. They were conflict-prone by definition, because they wanted different things and obeyed different principles. In our picture of the psyche, there is an unconscious level, which properly consists ONLY of the miracle ability and should be under MY direction; and a conscious level, which perceives or is aware of impulses from both the unconscious and the superconscious.
These are the sources of the impulses it receives. Consciousness is thus the level of perception, but NOT of knowledge.
In this connection, Cayce is more accurate than Freud. Freud gave a very graphic but upside-down account of how the divisions of the mind arose from the bottom UP. Actually, this is impossible, because the unconscious cannot create the conscious. Freud was greatly worried about this, being VERY bright, though misguided, and attempted to get around it by introducing a number of "borderline" areas which merely resulted in fuzziness.
This was particularly unfortunate, because he was capable of going much higher, if he had not been so afraid. This is why he kept pulling the mind DOWN. The ego is as frail as Freud perceived it. The later theorists have tried to introduce a less pessimistic view, but have looked in the wrong direction for their hope. Any attempt to endow the ego with the attributes of the Soul, is merely confused thinking. Freud was more clear-sighted about this, because he knew a BAD thing when he perceived it, but he failed to realize recognize that a bad thing cannot exist.
A Course in Miracles Book
Since Rev. Ponticello spoke last, no one had a chance to answer him. Tony uses and champions an earlier version of the Course. The wording in it makes it easier for him to try to advance his wish to turn A Course in Miracles into a religion, which it is not. Tony is entitled to his opinion, I strongly disagree with that opinion, and the purpose of this message is to point out why. This is not meant as a judgment but as a clarification of the facts. Everything I have seen, heard from them, and carefully researched about them, as well as Helen and Bill, has not only told me they are not liars, but on the contrary; they are among the most honest people I know of.
The word Urtext means original text, and is often used to refer to the original manuscript of a musical score or literary work. The material is much more of a dialogue between Helen and Jesus than the monologue of the later Course, Jesus will often speak personally to Helen and Bill. Helen will often interject and Jesus will respond. Jesus will sometimes step in and correct something Helen wrote down, saying she heard him wrong. This concreteness falls mostly into two categories.