15 Comments
Aug 16, 2022Liked by Sean Reagan

I came across this beautiful bookmark prayer by St Teresa of Ávila:

'Let nothing disturb you.

Let nothing frighten you.

Everything changes.

God alone is unchanging.

With patience, all things are possible.

Whoever has God lacks nothing.

God alone is enough.'

Expand full comment
Aug 18, 2022Liked by Sean Reagan

The idea of resigning as image-maker or story-teller includes a great deal of openness and relief for me. Simply being aware of when I am engaging the "other" or the world in that way lately has pretty much been a game-changer on my end. I am incredibly grateful for you and your work in this area. Thank you.

One last niggling thought in regards to this discussion:

If the "other", the people we journey along side, our dogs and trees and flowers and rivers . . . if they are simply pointers towards Love, then they fill the role of mirror, in many ways - reflecting and showing us who we really are, perhaps. And when one sees Love or sees oneself, do they no longer need the mirror?

Thanks again for all that you have poured into this medium and discussion, Sean. I am beyond grateful.

Expand full comment
Aug 17, 2022Liked by Sean Reagan

Thank you for your attention to this inquiry, Sean. At first blush, I thought: yes! Of course! This all makes sense at levels which resist quantifying or qualifying.

Then Krishnamurti's voice started ringing along side what I felt you were saying, and in this tandem tune, I began to process what you were saying in the following way:

We are all in relationship; society doesn't exist without relationship. Yet, there is and always has been tremendous conflict, inter-personally and with the world. It's like, we can grasp that relationship and dialogue is the thing, but we some how process said relationships in a way which causes separation, derision, war . . . anything but peace.

I think this story-telling impulse you speak of, the interjection of ourselves as the main character, is related to the ways in which we make images of ourselves and the other. We write our story by creating our own ideas, our own thoughts and images of one another, in a way which results in our relationships being based on this image.

Psychologically speaking then, in these relationships, it is as if we are traveling in parallel lines, never really meeting inwardly, because we can only connect with the story (or image) and not with what or with whom is really present.

And these images are put together by thought. Right? I mean, the image I create of Sean, the world's greatest ACIM teacher, is made by my thoughts of _________ (fill in the blank.) My thoughts are images of you. And so I wonder: can thought be or know or understand Love?

In this line of reasoning, my relationship to you in this context is only based on whatever images I have created. So, even though you are teaching about, showing us the way in, and exuding Love, is that relationship really Love? Or is it simply a symbol of Love?

I guess maybe you are saying, either way, we do not have to invest in the characters of the story...Sean the Great Teacher, Jessica the One who wants to know it all right now ... LOL!

There is some other way to be in relationship. Some other way to be in the world.

It's like we are always obsessed with knowledge (through thought and image) but we fail to see how incomplete that is and how it causes us to live in the shadow of ignorance.

I think we are being called to examine the complex issues of life in which there is no leader or guru, no master or teacher, no image of anything other than the entire consciousness of mankind at the helm; Love as it's own intelligence and compassion.

And in that way, like a child, we become a light unto our own self.

Whew! Now who is being long-winded?!

I so appreciate this engagement, Sean. If you think I've missed what you are relaying, please continue to clarify and add.

Love,

Jessica

Expand full comment
Aug 16, 2022Liked by Sean Reagan

I am curious about the "how" of this story-less awareness. Meaning, in your practical experience, does the act of adding nothing and doing nothing, paradoxically, require a discipline? I am thinking specifically of how many times a day I add interpretation to what is given all around me. Is the reminder that Jessica is NOT the central figure enough to dissipate the strength of the perceptions coming in on all the levels?

I was thinking about the paragraph in which you wrote about your lovely New Englandy evening of horses and sunflowers. Before you name each thing, before you attached a feeling, category or ownership to what you perceived, you asked: what is it?

I'm really asking, what is it? Is it . . . nothing? Nothing before we sully or confuse or obscure 'it'?

As always Sean, the fact that you exist as teacher and student of this Course and are willing to share, is a reminder to me of how our completeness is fully settled. Thank you.

Expand full comment

This message is wonderful, Sean πŸ™

Expand full comment
Aug 16, 2022Liked by Sean Reagan

Beautiful…thank you

Expand full comment
Aug 16, 2022Liked by Sean Reagan

Exquisitely offered, thank you.

Expand full comment
author

πŸ™

Expand full comment