"The curriculum the Course proposes is carefully conceived and is explained, step by step, at both the theoretical and practical levels. It emphasises application rather than theory, and experience rather than theology. It specifically states that a universal theology is impossible, but a universal experience is not only possible but necessary"
This is probably a pretty irrelevant post in the big picture, but since I'm sitting at home bored, I'm going to write it anyway LOL.
For the past week, I have been reading Krishnamurti. What is it, finding these books when I am not consciously looking for them? Just like when I stumbled upon ACIM when I made a pact with myself that I would not ever read such a silly book and then one day, there it was, on one of the front tables at the bookstore I frequent by my house.
And then about a week ago, I went to the bookstore to pass the time while my wife shopped. Something that I do quite often. This time something compelled me to read Krishnamurti. So I found a couple of his books to sit and read while waiting, while my wife shopped.
I didn't really know all that much about Krishnamurti. Actually probably didn't really know anything at all about him, though I have heard his name mentioned.
As I read, I couldn't help but feel that what I was reading was actually helping me to understand on an even deeper level of what ACIM was saying. Not only on Truth, on the false self, the conflict only between illusions, the present moment/Now/Holy Instant, but also on using symbols to go beyond them. To look upon our concepts to go beyond them. To look upon ACIM to go beyond it. That true intelligence is not the accumulation of concepts, but the truth that is beyond the concepts. That Truth is not in intellectual knowledge or in some achievement in “enlightenment”, but in experience of a practical application.
What got me really contemplating the importance of this are a couple of things.
I posted my post, “Do I want the Peace of God?” on another course site also. I was curious as to see if others may have had a similar experience to what I experienced. I came back the next day, I found there was no replies to my post. And to be clear that is fine. It is not mandatory for people to reply to other people's posts. But what I did see, was that there was plenty of activity going on, while I was away and what I noticed was that people were going back and forth, about their understanding of the course. Not really in my perception of trying to help others with their own journey of the course, but to flaunt their understanding of the course, as if one person had a better grasp of the course than another. One person would give an explanation and then another would reply with a correction or an agreement while adding their own clever words to display their “spiritual depthness”. What it seemed to be, were people caught up in their concepts of ACIM, even while saying that they were talking about that they were beyond the concepts.
In the bigger picture this is not important I would say, but there is something else that I saw yesterday that made me think about what the course says about how the ego becomes pre-occupied with tangential issues and it stays busy with non essentials.
In a way, this post itself could be said to be pre-occupied with this, for as I mentioned in the beginning, I said that it was not really relevant to the bigger picture or said in another way, not all that important, except in a fragmented perception.
But maybe it could be important, at least in my own journey. For I also saw yesterday on a site on religion and spirituality that I used to get caught up in the same old debates and discussions from the same people that I saw two years ago. Nothing changed. The same arguments or discussions were being said by the same people. The only difference was some of the form, but the content was the same. The question is, what have they achieved? I saw nothing achieved. I saw the same old discussions with the same old results from the same people. Nothing changed and as I read some of the newer posts with the same old concepts, I thought of a couple of course people that have said that they have been having discussions/ debates back and forth for over two years and I am not sure if I have seen anything different just from the time that I have watched them go back and forth with their concepts and discussions. And yesterday on the other course site. I saw this same pattern happening, but on a larger scale, because there were more people that were participating in this.
This got me contemplating about this in my own path. How easy it can be discussing the course and how “we understand it” and trying to get people to “get it” also, can become a substitution for the practical application that the course emphasizes. The intellectualizing of the course. No matter how smart or clever or deep it may seem can be just as much of a distraction as anything else. For when we use our understanding of the course not to simply help ourselves, but to tell people what the course is really about, then are we truly healing?
Yes we learn what we teach, but is telling someone what we think the course is, as if it were a fact actually teaching or telling? I don't really know, I can only put this question out there. I have read people perceive the course in many different ways and at the same time seem to be surprised that other course students see the course in their own way, implying that their perception of it is correct and the other person by this implication is incorrect and are misguided.
But what is really correct? I don't know. I can't tell you. I can only tell you how I perceive the course, but I cannot tell you that what I perceive is the truth. Only my perception of the truth. The one thing that I can do that can point to truth is to apply the practical application that the course emphasizes. Maybe the truth can be said to be in the fruits of the course and not in the intellectual understanding of the course. For what is information without application?
This is not to say that we shouldn't talk about the course or ask questions when we feel stuck. But for myself at least, I can see how I can get caught up in the psychology and the theory of the course as a substitute for applying the course, because I know that I have done this already.
Reading Krishnamurti has helped me to realize that this really is a pathless journey. That the word enlightenment can be romanticized by the ego as something to be achieved as a spiritual accomplishment. Or trying to get the universe to disappear, which is also in my perception not only a future goal that overlooks the Now, but is also a concept that looks to for salvation and security. Two things that are actually illusions. For as the course says, “Our spirit is not in danger because God created it. Our egos are not in danger, because God did not.
Of course it can be just as easy for me to hold onto Krishnamurti's words and make then into a method or a concept as it is for ACIM. I hope that my awareness of this helps me not to fall into that trap and become pre-occupied in another form. LOL, after all, I did preoccupy myself long enough to write this blog, hopefully so that I can look past my concepts to what they point to and not keep me imprisoned by theology.