RE: Reclaiming your True Power [ACIM Series Part 4]
Interesting and very comprehensive post, I enjoy your writings and exploration.
I would like to offer a slightly different take when you suggest..
In other systems of non-duality (like Advaita Vedanta) there is only the Ego (duality) on the one hand and All-that-is (non duality, Truth, God etc) on the other
This is not a description of non-duality, or the Direct path, to me. Advaita, as I'm sure you are completely familiar with, alludes to there not being two. ie there is no separation. And this does not mean there is only 'oneness.'
The difficulty, of course, is that there can be no description with a dualistic language for that which is not divided or dual. It's an impossible task. Hence the best we can do is point to what it is not the case.
It's a tricky on for sure. But true Non-duality is only ever a pointer to the ever-existent,how can we say - 'ISness of being?' (maybe) There is never a suggestion of an ego/Truth split as you suggest.
The Course itself infers this in its own way when its speaks of the removing the blocks to the awareness of Loves presence and on innumerable occasions throughout.
We also have a subtle way of making this term 'ego' into somekind of 3rd party in the scene. Your ego, my ego, the ego. The sense of self-doership, me-as-author of my life (the personal 'me'), can grab and run with the idea of this separate ego and hide itself behind a myriad of constructs it can the project onto this public-enemy-No 1 .
Just some observations.
Thanks for sharing this series.
Thank you for your in depth comment!
Regarding Advaita, you are right about the core message being that there is only One, but contrary to ACIM, there is no instance of the decision maker.
Maybe the I AM principle I mentioned, but this is never taught as an agent of free will to decide between the two different thought systems.
Of course, both thought systems are part of the illusion (as I may elaborate in the next part), but what is called "the right mind" in ACIM, is the way of undoing the egos thought system (=to cancel it out).
Yes, there is the concept of Ramana "to use a thorn to remove another thorn", but this whole issue of "to whom is the teaching speaking?" is not resolved with this...
What ACIM has done recently for me, is to bring non-duality from a 25 years exploration with many deep insights, to a daily moment to moment experience.
For me it was no enough to say, that there is no ego. What in my case had to happen, is a deep understanding of how the belief in the ego works and why "we" make the decision for it. In a way it was necessary to find out, how exactly this non-existent ego works and what it makes it seem so real.
Yes, language is tricky, but we can use it, as long as we don't believe it to be the truth. If we believe it to be truth, we fall into the trap many Advaita students do, of avoiding "I", "me" and "mine" in their expressions - thinking that this way they can show their deep understanding of the topic.
You are right, I maybe could have explained the difference in teaching between ACIM and Advaita better, but there are not many readers with such a deep insight in both as you. :) Thank you for giving me the opportunity to elaborate what I wanted to express and thank you for your compliments on my series!
I think that's the beauty of posts such as yours, we can feel our way around and play with our expressions, as it were. I have to say that I don't feel there is a singular expression of non-duality, not one school per se. So it's expression is often deeply influenced by the 'teacher's own inclinations.
I guess the channeled nature of ACIM bypasses much of this aspect.
I agree about the avoiding of the personal pronouns, mental understanding is a million miles from revelation, and there is no way to begin to understand this. :)