Manipulation
Where does manipulation come from? From our ancestral metaphysical Self’s experience with its reverse mirror-image opposite. A lifeless code that has no self of its own, no power of its own, and therefore must depend on manipulating its host to carry out its agenda. Every act, every sign of its influence, a manipulation. A clear sign that we are in the presence of predatory viciousness that can turn on us at a moment’s notice. Toxic and dangerous. Like geologic reality behind the mask of Mother Earth, waiting to crush, drown, asphyxiate, and incinerate her children at any moment.
If the hallucination is animated by Energy, Energy is part of Mind, Energy-Mind are Real, and its occupants are certain that they’re seeing what’s “there,” then why demand that spacetime matter – the form it’s taken — be disbelieved? The physics of our world isn’t owing to its lacking any sign of connection with metaphysics when it’s packed with them. Plentiful evidence that separation isn’t real even in a world conjured by a joker-magician to prove that it is.
The truth is that it’s only from the perspective of the author of the Course that our world of reversals can be understood for the Vaudeville farce that it is. What perspective is that? The perspective of Mind-Relationship Self-Awareness. That has no Awareness of anything that isn’t aware and part of Creation’s interrelationships. And so its Child, our ancestral Self in a state of self-unawareness, has taken itself out of its Parents’ awareness. Its magic kingdom of nonsense no more detectable to them than a dog whistle to a human. The gift of the biblical Jesus and the Jesus of the Course both was and is his vision from this perspective through Guidance connecting everything in any state of awareness: Definition. The principles and values of Creation. The Conscience of Mind-Relationship that no will, no manipulating reverse-reflection, can ever corrupt.
A herd of reversals
Sapiens’s strength isn’t a Machiavellian “self” pretending to be a herd of beasts instead of a moral individual. Obedient to the “law” of expedience. Speaking the language of obedience, kissing ass in a hierarchy of unrelatability and corruption. Mocking character with integrity, denied of Free Choice and intent on denying it. Its strength lies in its connection to the Psyche of metaphysics, who enjoys the Reality of what the Lombardi Trophy can only symbolize: no competition. Game over. We’ve reached the top and now that we have, every boundary of definition that led us here has melted away. Because expedience put it there; expedience depends on the unrelatability of competition; it’s temporary; and it’s gone. The goal of wildness without definition has been reached and so everything including itself has disappeared like the joke that it is, For lacking definition. Shooting itself in its logical foot.
Whereas Conscience, the constitution of Creation, can’t disappear when it’s the expression and essence of Definition. The moral individual triumphing over the immoral herd of Machiavellian beasts, brandishing their armaments of disarmament. A herd of reversals reversing itself to oblivion.
Hard to follow but at least I’m getting the idea. Whatever seems to be happening here it’s a reversal. And it can be re-reversed back to making sense if we tap into this other perspective through Guidance. That understands why and how it’s a hallucination and can help Sapiens and its ancestral metaphysical Self re-connect with Self-Awareness.
The Fighting 69th doesn’t need Pat O’Brien.
The Course makes all this clear? Not to me it doesn’t. Convincing for being connected to this other perspective, yet questionable for some of the ways it personalizes it to the clinical Freudian psychologists who asked for its help and published it. When it connects with me and its lesson is personalized to my situation, it comes out somewhat different. So I have no quarrel with the principles at the essence of the Course or its author, just its form. Perhaps an inevitable consequence of attempting to capture the dynamics of ideas and character between the covers of a book. But I believe there’s more to it.
Why? Because Jesus recognized the religious nature of Freudian psychology and its inventor. So to communicate with the Course’s Freudian audience he spoke in their language. The language of religion, and Helen and Bill seemed OK with that. Ken Wapnick, Freud’s idolator, embraced it, institutionalized it. I reject it. I’ve worked with the Course’s metaphysics for over 25 years and discovered that its religious trappings are superfluous. Its preoccupation with guilt, forgiveness, and “special relationships” centered around physical intimacy. “Father,” “Son,” “Holy Spirit,” “Holy Instant,” “Atonement,” – terminology reeking of church hierarchy and ritual centered around Pat O’Brien priestly compassion and absolution. The Self that it implies that I am isn’t there.
Without religion Freudian or “Christian”
Likely also an inevitable consequence of trying to bring light to darkness instead of the other way around. The biblical Jesus shook things up but the darkness made sure that his “light” came to look an awful lot like itself. Hierarchical and corrupt, a tower of iconoclastic destruction, a law unto itself wielding predatory abuse in the name of “righteousness.” Presided over by unrelatability in the name of authority’s right to rule, absolute, unquestioned, and infallible.
By the time the lesson of the Course made it through the filter of its scribe’s mindset it had taken on dark overtones of its own. The authoritarian skeptic, Helen Schucman, a patriarchal-religious nobody’s-fool, drawn to Church atmospherics if not to its doctrines. Performing her assignment obedient to the restraints of her profession: the church of Freudian clinical psychology. Body-idolatry posing as scientific objectivism ruled by its god posing as an “atheist.” A violation of Psyche, our metaphysical ancestor’s Innocence, in the name of rooting out guilt.
Its dark overtones manicured into dutiful obeisance by Ken Wapnick. The Course’s illegitimate “primary teacher,” an arch-mimic of academic objectivity, intellectual purity, and loyalty to cause. Motivated by rabid Freudian bias. Exposed by an act of psychological indecency at the end: his being Jesus’ Freudian replacement. No disciple but an apostate. An agent of authoritarian willfulness, master of hypocrisy, a bastard in disguise. The one-and-only legitimate representative of Christ on Earth. Supreme manipulator — a latter-day pope.
Liberated
My enthusiasm for the Course’s metaphysics is undiminished, but there never was any for Freudian pseudo-religious psychology. Curiosity at first to understand it. Wapnick’s forte, explaining his profession but with extreme prejudice for one of its inventors and against another. As much as Freud attracted him he repels me. As much as Jung repelled Wapnick he attracts me. In the end I take away what’s useful and valid from the Course and leave the rest to the religious: Freudians and “Christians.” Wapnick now firmly confined to the role of academic Freudian explicator-priest where he belongs.
You feel better now? Got something off my chest. Much better. Liberated.