Thank you Dena. The tension between specificity and its opposite are a real challenge for me.
On the one hand, the desire for specificity - which I unconditionally share with you - IS the problem of ego. The Course is very clear about this:
"Ego illusions are quite specific, although the mind is naturally abstract. Part of the mind becomes concrete, however, when it splits. The concrete part believes in the ego, because the ego depends on the concrete. The ego is the part of the mind that believes your existence is defined by separation" (T-4.VII.2-5).
Really, the problem is the value that attends specificity. It always involves judgment - parsing the whole into parts, valuing some more than others, and then defending the parts we've selected against those we haven't. This upends "the relationships that imply being" (T-4.VII.2:1).
It also arises from the body, which has very specific needs, and appetites that correspond to those needs, and is thus very focused on satiating those appetites. The world is literally the manifestation of - or the extension of - the body's emphasis on specificity.
Critically, the Course does not deny the existence of the body, which includes its natural functioning, but it DOES emphasis that we are NOT the body.
In the end, the search for Truth - for Self-Realization, Awakening, whatever we call it - is about de-emphasizing specificity in favor of generalization. Part of the problem that we have with the Course is that is consistently urges us to adopt a mindset towards our living that is so broadly inclusive as to be literally terrifying.
And we retreat - or I do anyway - back to the illusive comfort of the specific.
On the other hand, I also think it's possible to be too cute by half on this subject. Abstraction and generalization can become defenses against actual application of Course principles. The Course is meant to be lived - Helen was adamant on this point: "[The Course] emphasizes application rather than theory, and experience rather than theology."
So I will give you two rambling answers to your question, which I hope move in the direction of showing how I personally practice responsibility in an ACIM context.
Also, I've been back and forth on publishing this post, but your question felt like the nudge to go ahead with it. It's a bit deeper in the homesteading and how it relates to my course practice.
So the first area of specficity is homesteading. Chrisoula and I have worked hard in our lives to raise and grow as much of our food as possible, and to rely on a network of local farmers and homesteaders for as much of the balance as possible. We don't do this perfectly, we acknowledge the privilege inherent in it, but it IS a disciplined daily practice that integrates both our spiritual desire to be as broadly loving and nonviolent as possible in and with our bodies.
For example, I have spent much of the past week in one of our newer gardens, turning soil, adding compost, tweaking paths, etc. Near dusk one day, I noticed a bald eagle flying east along the river beyond the pasture. I stopped working to follow its flight - the waning moon was on the horizon - and it was so beautiful and clear it seemed to just burn away any desire in me to own or possess anything. I felt so connected to that moment and its manifestation - the soil, my body turning the soil, the eagle flying low through gathering darkness . . .
I believe an ACIM practice discovers its specific form but that the form is given. It's inherent. It's a combination of our ability, interest, and the way in which we feel called to participate in the healing of the world. This looks different for everybody! But underneath the appearance, the love and the openness and the willingness - the vulnerability, the relationship, all of it - is actually the same.
Another specific form that my practice assumes is contemplative prayer, loosely in the tradition of Thomas Merton, whose book "Contemplative Prayer" has been a mainstay of my spiritual life since the late eighties. This is not a formal thing, other than arriving in the morning at 4 a.m. or so, and sitting quietly in darkness, giving attention to the Holy Spirit, and accepting whatever is given in that moment. It's wordless, there's no posture one has to assume, no rules other than listen, be open, don't fake it.
Contemplative prayer is grounded on the practice of discerning between ego and the Holy Spirit, and then giving attention to the Holy Spirit more and more. This is work, sometimes it is incredibly challenging work, but sometimes it is so joyful as to be indescribable. That is very abstract and general! But it arises in the very specific practice of bringing my body to the stillness and darkness and quiet of the world and not doing anything else.
There are lots of other specifics - what we choose to read, who we choose to go deeply into this material with in dialogue, how we view our bodies (emphasizing communication over acquisition, etc) and other bodies, the words we choose, the care we take in meal preparation and sharing, bird-watching, Tarot, et cetera.
Again, the focus is to let the specific arise out of a relationship with the Holy Spirit, that is deeply intimate and abstract and general. The Holy Spirit gives very specific instructions, though! It always directs me back into my living in very formal ways - grow tomatoes, register voters, go to therapy, pray or it's okay to sleep in today, do tai chi, write to your sister/old friend, et cetera.
The form - when it arises from the teaching intention of the holy spirit - is specific but it always reflects, always naturally includes - the abiding love and grace that is our actual inheritance and our true nature which is so general that even talking about it seems silly.
A LOT of babbling there! But I hope it is helpful. Thank you again, Dena, for such a welcome nudge to my thinking.
Thank you so much for taking the time to grace me with your insights.
This was my favorite:
“Realization, Awakening, whatever we call it - is about de-emphasizing specificity in favor of generalization. Part of the problem that we have with the Course is that is consistently urges us to adopt a mindset towards our living that is so broadly inclusive as to be literally terrifying.”
Sean,
You left us on dot, dot, dot! ;-)
I was waiting for the conclusion sentence to tell me how to take full responsibility, and what to put my attention on (which I know you implied).
I assume that I should put my attention on love, but it’s so abstract, and I like concrete steps.
(I’m hooponoponoed out!)
Thank you for reminding me that I need to take 100% responsibility. I’d be interested to hear how you personally do that.
💗
Thank you Dena. The tension between specificity and its opposite are a real challenge for me.
On the one hand, the desire for specificity - which I unconditionally share with you - IS the problem of ego. The Course is very clear about this:
"Ego illusions are quite specific, although the mind is naturally abstract. Part of the mind becomes concrete, however, when it splits. The concrete part believes in the ego, because the ego depends on the concrete. The ego is the part of the mind that believes your existence is defined by separation" (T-4.VII.2-5).
Really, the problem is the value that attends specificity. It always involves judgment - parsing the whole into parts, valuing some more than others, and then defending the parts we've selected against those we haven't. This upends "the relationships that imply being" (T-4.VII.2:1).
It also arises from the body, which has very specific needs, and appetites that correspond to those needs, and is thus very focused on satiating those appetites. The world is literally the manifestation of - or the extension of - the body's emphasis on specificity.
Critically, the Course does not deny the existence of the body, which includes its natural functioning, but it DOES emphasis that we are NOT the body.
In the end, the search for Truth - for Self-Realization, Awakening, whatever we call it - is about de-emphasizing specificity in favor of generalization. Part of the problem that we have with the Course is that is consistently urges us to adopt a mindset towards our living that is so broadly inclusive as to be literally terrifying.
And we retreat - or I do anyway - back to the illusive comfort of the specific.
On the other hand, I also think it's possible to be too cute by half on this subject. Abstraction and generalization can become defenses against actual application of Course principles. The Course is meant to be lived - Helen was adamant on this point: "[The Course] emphasizes application rather than theory, and experience rather than theology."
So I will give you two rambling answers to your question, which I hope move in the direction of showing how I personally practice responsibility in an ACIM context.
Also, I've been back and forth on publishing this post, but your question felt like the nudge to go ahead with it. It's a bit deeper in the homesteading and how it relates to my course practice.
https://seanreagan.com/homesteading-and-acim/
So the first area of specficity is homesteading. Chrisoula and I have worked hard in our lives to raise and grow as much of our food as possible, and to rely on a network of local farmers and homesteaders for as much of the balance as possible. We don't do this perfectly, we acknowledge the privilege inherent in it, but it IS a disciplined daily practice that integrates both our spiritual desire to be as broadly loving and nonviolent as possible in and with our bodies.
For example, I have spent much of the past week in one of our newer gardens, turning soil, adding compost, tweaking paths, etc. Near dusk one day, I noticed a bald eagle flying east along the river beyond the pasture. I stopped working to follow its flight - the waning moon was on the horizon - and it was so beautiful and clear it seemed to just burn away any desire in me to own or possess anything. I felt so connected to that moment and its manifestation - the soil, my body turning the soil, the eagle flying low through gathering darkness . . .
I believe an ACIM practice discovers its specific form but that the form is given. It's inherent. It's a combination of our ability, interest, and the way in which we feel called to participate in the healing of the world. This looks different for everybody! But underneath the appearance, the love and the openness and the willingness - the vulnerability, the relationship, all of it - is actually the same.
Another specific form that my practice assumes is contemplative prayer, loosely in the tradition of Thomas Merton, whose book "Contemplative Prayer" has been a mainstay of my spiritual life since the late eighties. This is not a formal thing, other than arriving in the morning at 4 a.m. or so, and sitting quietly in darkness, giving attention to the Holy Spirit, and accepting whatever is given in that moment. It's wordless, there's no posture one has to assume, no rules other than listen, be open, don't fake it.
Contemplative prayer is grounded on the practice of discerning between ego and the Holy Spirit, and then giving attention to the Holy Spirit more and more. This is work, sometimes it is incredibly challenging work, but sometimes it is so joyful as to be indescribable. That is very abstract and general! But it arises in the very specific practice of bringing my body to the stillness and darkness and quiet of the world and not doing anything else.
There are lots of other specifics - what we choose to read, who we choose to go deeply into this material with in dialogue, how we view our bodies (emphasizing communication over acquisition, etc) and other bodies, the words we choose, the care we take in meal preparation and sharing, bird-watching, Tarot, et cetera.
Again, the focus is to let the specific arise out of a relationship with the Holy Spirit, that is deeply intimate and abstract and general. The Holy Spirit gives very specific instructions, though! It always directs me back into my living in very formal ways - grow tomatoes, register voters, go to therapy, pray or it's okay to sleep in today, do tai chi, write to your sister/old friend, et cetera.
The form - when it arises from the teaching intention of the holy spirit - is specific but it always reflects, always naturally includes - the abiding love and grace that is our actual inheritance and our true nature which is so general that even talking about it seems silly.
A LOT of babbling there! But I hope it is helpful. Thank you again, Dena, for such a welcome nudge to my thinking.
Love,
Sean
Sean,
Thank you so much for taking the time to grace me with your insights.
This was my favorite:
“Realization, Awakening, whatever we call it - is about de-emphasizing specificity in favor of generalization. Part of the problem that we have with the Course is that is consistently urges us to adopt a mindset towards our living that is so broadly inclusive as to be literally terrifying.”
BAM! That’s it.
💗