|
THE ILLUSION OF SEPARATION
(The
following paragraphs within the brackets are inserted here in chronological
sequence from the Special Messages section of the original
Urtext manuscript.)
[This
section is inserted here because it deals with a more fundamental misuse
of knowledge, referred to in the Bible as the cause of the Fall (or
Separation). There are several introductory remarks which are intended
to make these explanations less fear-provoking. The first is a couplet
which I drew to your attention during the fragments of Midsummer Night's
Dream, which you heard last night:
"Be as
thou wast wont to be,
See as
thou wast wont to see."
It is
noteworthy that these words were said by Oberon in releasing Titania
from her own errors, both of being and perceiving. These were the words
which re-established her true identity as well as her true abilities and
judgment. The similarity here is obvious.
There
are also some definitions, which I asked you to take from the
dictionary, which will also be helpful. Their somewhat unusual nature is
due to the fact that they are not first definitions in their
chronological appearance. Nevertheless, the fact that each of them does
appear in the dictionary should be reassuring.
Project
(verb): to extend forward or out.
Project
(noun): a plan in the mind.
World: a
natural grand division. (Note that you originally wrote "word"
instead of "world".)
We will
refer later to projection as related to both mental illness and mental
health. It will also be commented on that Lucifer literally projected
himself from heaven. We also have observed that man can create an empty
shell, but cannot create nothing at all.
This
emptiness provides the screen for the misuse of projection.
The
Garden of Eden, which is described as a literal garden in the Bible, was
not originally an actual garden at all. It was merely a mental state of
complete need-lack. Even in the literal account, it is noteworthy that
the pre-Separation state was essentially one in which man needed
nothing. The Tree of Knowledge, again an overly-literal concept, (as is
clearly shown by the subsequent reference to "eating of the fruit of
the tree") is a symbolic reference to some of the misuses of knowledge
referred to in the section immediately preceding this one. There is,
however, considerable clarification of this concept, which must be
understood before the real meaning of the "detour into fear" can be
fully comprehended. Projection, as defined above, (this refers to the
verb) is a fundamental attribute of God, which he also gave to his Son.
In the Creation, God projected his Creative Ability out of Himself
toward the Souls which He created, and also imbued them with the same
loving wish (or will) to create. We have commented before on the
FUNDAMENTAL error involved in confusing what has been created with what
is being created. We have also emphasized that man, insofar as the term
relates to Soul, has not only been fully Created, but also been created
perfect. There is no emptiness in him. The next point, too, has already
been made, but bears repetition here. The Soul, because of its own
likeness to its Creator, is creative. No Child of God is capable of
losing this ability, because it is inherent in what he IS.
Whenever
projection in its inappropriate sense is utilized, it ALWAYS implies
that some emptiness (or lack of everything) must exist, and that it is
within man's ability to put his own ideas there INSTEAD of the truth.
If you will consider carefully what this entails, the following will
become quite apparent:
First,
the assumption is implicit that what God has Created can be changed by
the mind of Man.
Second,
the concept that what is perfect can be rendered imperfect (or wanting)
is intruded.
Third,
the belief that man can distort the Creations of God (including himself)
has arisen, and is tolerated.
Fourth,
that since man can create himself, the direction of his own creation is
up to him.
These
related distortions represent a picture of what actually occurred in the
Separation. None of this existed before, nor does it actually exist now.
The world, as defined above, WAS made as a natural grand division, or
projecting outward of God. That is why everything which He Created is
like Him.
It
should be noted that the opposite of pro is con. Strictly speaking,
then, the opposite of projecting is conjecting, a term which referred to
a state of uncertainty or guess work. Other errors arise in connection
with ancillary defenses, to be considered later.
For
example, dejection, which is obviously associated with depression,
injection, which can be misinterpreted readily enough, in terms of
possession fallacies (particularly penetration), and rejection, which is
clearly associated with denial. It should be noted also that rejection
can be used as refusing, a term which necessarily involves a perception
of what is refused as something unworthy.
Projection
as undertaken by God was very similar to the kind of inner radiance
which the Children of the Father inherit from Him. It is important to
note that the term "project outward" necessarily implies that the
real source of projection is internal.
This is
as true of the Son as of the Father.
The
world, in its original connotation, included both the proper creation of
man by God, AND the proper creation by man in his Right Mind. The latter
required the endowment of man by God with free will, because all loving
creation is freely given. Nothing in either of these statements implies
any sort of level involvement, or, in fact, anything except one
continuous line of creation, in which all aspects are of the same order.
When the
"lies of the serpent" were introduced, they were specifically called
lies because they are not true. When man listened, all he heard was
untruth. He does not have to continue to believe what is not true,
unless he chooses to do so. All of his miscreations can disappear in the
well known "twinkling of an eye", because it is a visual
misperception.
Man's
spiritual eye can sleep, but as will shortly appear in the notes
(reference Bob, elevator operator) a sleeping eye can still see. One
translation of the Fall, a view emphasized by Mary Baker Eddy, and
worthy of note, is that "a deep sleep fell upon Adam". While the
Bible continues to associate this sleep as a kind of anaesthetic
utilized for protection of Adam during the creation of Eve, Mrs. Eddy
was correct in emphasizing that nowhere is there any reference made to
his waking up. While Christian Science is clearly incomplete, this point
is much in its favor.
The
history of man in the world as he saw it has not been characterized by
any genuine or comprehensive re-awakening, or re-birth.
This is
impossible as long as man projects in the spirit of miscreation. It
still remains within him to project as God projected his own Spirit to
him. In reality, this is his ONLY choice, because his free will was made
for his own joy in creating the perfect.
All fear
is ultimately reducible to the basic misperception of man's ability to
USURP the power of God. It is again emphasized that he neither CAN nor
HAS been able to do this. In this statement lies the real justification
for his escape from fear. This is brought about by his acceptance of the
Atonement, which places him in a position to realize that his own errors
never really occurred.
When the
deep sleep fell upon Adam, he was then in a condition to experience
nightmares, precisely because he was sleeping. If a light is suddenly
turned on while someone is dreaming, and the content of his dream is
fearful, he is initially likely to interpret the light itself as part of
the content of his own dream. However, as soon as he awakens, the light
is correctly perceived as the release from the dream, which is no longer
accorded reality. I would like to conclude this with the Biblical
injunction "Go ye and do likewise."
It is
quite apparent that this depends on the kind of knowledge which was NOT
referred to by the "Tree of Knowledge" which bore lies as fruit. The
knowledge that illuminates rather than obscures is the knowledge which
not only makes you free, but also shows you clearly that you ARE free.
The
preceding sections were inserted because of the necessity of
distinguishing between real and false knowledge. Having made this
distinction, it is well to return to the errors already listed a while
back. It might be well to recapitulate them here.
The
first involved the fallacy that only the physical is real. The second
involved things rather than people. The third involves the endowment of
the physical with non-physical properties. And the fourth clarified the
misuse of knowledge. All of them were subsumed under possession
fallacies. The denial mechanism for three has already been set forth in
some detail, and will also continue after the following:]
The
corresponding denial mechanism for 1) is the sense of PHYSICAL
inability, or IMPOTENCE. The denial mechanism for 2) is often
bankruptcy. Collectors of things often drive themselves well beyond
their financial means, in an attempt to force discontinuance. If this
idea of cessation cannot be tolerated, a strange compromise involving
BOTH insatiable possessiveness and insatiable throwing-away (bankruptcy)
may result. An example is the inveterate or compulsive gambler,
particularly the horse-racing addict. Here, the conflicted drive is
displaced both from people AND things, and is invested in animals. The
implied DEROGATION of people is the cause of the underlying EXTREME
superstition of the horse racing addict.
The
alcoholic is in a similar position, except that his hostility is more
inward than outward directed.
Defenses
aimed at protecting (or retaining) error are particularly hard to undo,
because they introduce second-order misperceptions which obscure the
underlying errors still further.
The
pseudo-corrective mechanism of three is apt to be more varied because of
the more inclusive nature of the error, which has already been
mentioned. Some of the possibilities are listed below:
a.
One aspect of the possession/possessed conflict can be raised to
predominance. If this is attempted in connection with POSSESSING, it
leads to the paranoid solution. The underlying component of "being
possessed" is retained in the "persecution" fantasies, which are
generally concomitants.
b.
If "being possessed" is brought to ascendance, a state of
some sort of possession by external forces results, but NOT with a major
emphasis on attacking others. Attack BY others becomes the more obvious
component. In the more virulent forms, there is a sense of being
possessed by demons, and unless there is vacillation with a), a
catatonic solution is more likely than a paranoid one.
The
FOCUSSED paranoid has become more rigid in his solution, and centers on
ONE source of projection to escape from vacillation. (Aside: It should
be noted that this type of paranoia is an upside-down form of religion,
because of its obvious attempt to unify into oneness.)
Both 1,
2, and 4 and more likely to produce neurotic rather than psychotic
states, though this is by no means guaranteed. However, 3 is inherently
more vulnerable to the psychotic correction, again because of the more
fundamental level confusion which is involved.
It
should be noted, however, that the greater fear which is induced by 3
can ITSELF reach psychotic proportions, thus forcing the individual
closer and closer to a psychotic solution.
It is
emphasized here that these differences have no effect at all on the
miracle, which can heal any of them with equal ease. This is because of
the miracle's inherent avoidance of within-error distinctions. Its
SOLE concern is to distinguish between truth, on the one hand, and ALL
kinds of error, on the other. This is why some miracles SEEM to be of
greater magnitude than others. But remember the first point in this
course, e., that there is no order of difficulty in miracles.
The
emphasis on mental illness which is marked in these notes reflects the
"UNDOING" aspect of the miracle. The "DOING" aspect is, of
course, much more important. But a true miracle cannot occur on a false
basis. Sometimes the undoing must precede it.
At other
times, both can occur simultaneously, but you are not up to this at the
moment.
Further,
insights into mental illness can be misused, and lead to preoccupation
with one's own symptoms. This is why this area is less constructive
for most people than a course primarily devoted to mental health.
However, some professions will find some principles of mental illness
constructive, especially those which are concerned with mental illness
in others. This obviously includes psychologists.
The
obvious correction for ALL types of the possession-fallacy is to
redefine possession correctly. In the sense of "taking over," the
concept does not exist at all in divine reality, which is the only level
of reality where real existence is a meaningful term.
No one
CAN be "taken over" unless he wills to be. However, if he places his
mind under tyranny, rather than authority, he intrudes the
submission/dominance onto free will himself. This produces the obvious
contradiction inherent in any formulation that associates free will with
imprisonment. Even in very mild forms, this kind of association is
risky, and may spread quite unexpectedly, particularly under external
stress. This is because it can be internally controlled ONLY if EXTERNAL
conditions are peaceful. This is not safe, because external conditions
are produced by the thoughts of many, not all of whom are pure in heart
as yet.
Why
should you be at THEIR mercy? This issue is VERY closely related to the
whole possession issue. You insist on thinking that people CAN possess
you, if you believe that their thoughts (or the external environment)
can affect you, regardless of WHAT they think. You are perfectly
unaffected by ALL expressions of lack of love. These can be either from
yourself and others, or from yourself to others, or from others to you.
(I'm glad you passed that test. It was crucial. This is in reference
to Helen's reluctance to take dictations as given.)
Peace is
an attribute in YOU. You cannot find it outside. All mental illness is
some form of EXTERNAL searching. Mental health is INNER peace. It
enables you to remain unshaken by lack of love from without, and
capable, through your own miracles, of correcting the external
conditions, which proceed from lack of love in others.
|