Jim wrote: I have always had an interest in Buddhism, and until I
found acim in 1980,it was my main source of sanity. Although Buddhism
doesn't "handle the issue of God, it joins with acim at the loftiest
level. Buddhism teaches that all suffering comes from wanting and not
wanting, and urges one to let all that go. ACIM lesson 268..("Let all
things be exactly as they are.")
Buddhism then eliminates the concept of separation completely when
it talks about the fact that there is no self or other. This would
include the "other" we have named God.. Acim tells us that all the
universe is inside our Mind. That would have to include Jesus, all
the saints..everyone.. including God. ACIM further attempts to tell
us that at the level of joining there is no point where God ends
and "I" start..
The problem with the "God concept" is that as soon as it is
spoken, it implies God AND self... even though ACIM implies God AS
Self.( "My Self is ruler of the universe." lesson 253) Depending
on the level at which ACIM speaks, it maintains the separation by
talking about Jesus as the elder brother. But I have never found it
to openly say that Jesus and God are concepts in the One mind.
What are your comments on this?
Hey Jim, these are good observations as well as tough questions.
I don't want to nit pick, and I sure don't want to sound like I don't
respect Buddhism, because I do. I agree with you that Buddhism
teaches that all suffering comes from wanting and not wanting and
contains many of the same elements as the Course, but I don't think
Buddhism is aware of the Course's method of how to return to God or
the reason why that method is essential.
First, the element of attaining perfect oneness is something the
two disciplines share. As the Course says, "Heaven is not a place nor
a condition. It is merely an awareness of perfect oneness, and the
knowledge that there is nothing else; nothing outside this oneness,
and nothing else within." (T384) But when you say Buddhism eliminates
the concept of separation completely, that actually presents a
problem. The ego is escaped not by denying it, but by undoing it.
Although Buddhism recognizes that, the Course would say the only way
to completely undo the ego is through the healing of all unconscious
guilt. Only then can we truly escape the concept of separation
completely.
This guilt cannot be forgiven unless the ego thought system is
first looked at. So, in order to
forgive the separation from God, we must first paradoxically
acknowledge that we are dreaming this dream of
separation, ask the Holy Spirit to take over as our Teacher, and
forgive the dream. Only then is our unconscious guilt over the
seeming
separation healed. True, the principle of the Atonement is that the
separation from God never occurred, but
that is not our experience. That's why I think there's an important
distinction between methods like "The Power of Now" and the Course.
Being in the now denies the past and the future, but denial is not
true forgiveness and does not undo our unconscious guilt in a
permanent
way.
As I pointed out in my narration for the chapter, "Near Life
Experiences," the Course says in no uncertain terms, while
emphasizing how vital the Holy Spirit is in this process, "You cannot
cancel out your past errors alone. They will not disappear from your
mind without the Atonement, a remedy not of your making." (T 81) This
is why you have to have the God concept first, because separation is
our experience until the ego is undone. Then, when it finally *is*
undone, perfect oneness is all that's left. *That's* when God is
really no longer a concept in the One mind. Once again, nothing
against Buddhism; it's just that there are features of the Course
that are original, as I'm sure there are features of Buddhism that
are original. Peace, Gary.
