The Disagreement On Reality

[Grizz Griswold]

There seems to be a disagreement that is very basic and it is even here between us on Avalon. What is your reality? Is it the world of bodies, money, war, survival, the search for happiness from the external etc. etc. or is it Spirit, god, the infinite or all the words we have to label that?

Almost all of us seek the infinite to try to improve our world but isn't that backward? Shouldn't we seek our source for itself alone? and if there be any benefit let that come of itself.

No doubt we are here in the Matrix.....trying to deny that would be a pointless endeavor .....at least for the present we are here....But then again is that who we really are?

Are we the unlimited playing the game of limitation? Like children caught up in their video games that have lost their bearing on reality? Some are beginning to awaken, a little flittering of the eyes and yawns.

There are resources here on Avalon that already provide the means ....will we only take a glance at them and then take off again because of the pull of the Matrix?

I already know what I consider my reality to be and am only asking these questions in hope of awakening others and perhaps to further my awakening process. There is only Love or there is Fear....one is not real.

Most have already read these words but consider them one again.

Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.

Herein lies the peace of God.

It is my sincere wish that we all could see no ones interest as separate and help each other remove the blocks to Loves awareness.

Live in joy.....Grizz

[spiritwind]

Well, here is what I wrote this morning planning to post, deciding not to, now deciding maybe it does have a place right here.

I just had an aha moment I’ve actually had before but wanted to share (what most of you already know anyway) is that the enemy, whatever it is, wherever it emanates, whether from inside or outside, hates, and is repelled by love, genuine heartfelt love for self and other, without judgment (that doesn’t mean without discernment), and just doing everything within our power to maintain that state in our thoughts and actions, is the most powerful thing we can share and do for what we see wrong with this world. And, at least to me, I recognize that this is a choice I make from moment to moment. I am not always successful, but, it is my religion. That’s it. Everything else doesn’t really even matter all that much. So, here’s to loving all. Thank you,

[Grizz Griswold]

Posted by spiritwind (here)
Well, here is what I wrote this morning planning to post, deciding not to, now deciding maybe it does have a place right here.

I just had an aha moment I’ve actually had before but wanted to share (what most of you already know anyway) is that the enemy, whatever it is, wherever it emanates, whether from inside or outside, hates, and is repelled by love, genuine heartfelt love for self and other, without judgment (that doesn’t mean without discernment), and just doing everything within our power to maintain that state in our thoughts and actions, is the most powerful thing we can share and do for what we see wrong with this world. And, at least to me, I recognize that this is a choice I make from moment to moment. I am not always successful, but, it is my religion. That’s it. Everything else doesn’t really
even matter all that much. So, here’s to loving all. Thank you,

Thank you for your post Spiritwind.....Love or Fear....only one is real......Blessings.....Grizz

[greybeard]

A Course in Miracles ," Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.

Herein lies the peace of God."

which you quoted in the OP Grizz, I found to be very helpful.
I agree with all you posted there.

Adyashanti, a good level of spiritual teaching comes through him, gets right to the point with the suggestion that you should ask the question "What is really important?"
He also says "There isnt a person, there never was a person" The ego loves that.
Mooji is excellent, the love just flows through him--we are fortunate in that great non-duality teaching can be found in books, videos, cds these days.

Unfortunately most seem to pay lip service to their spiritual evolution and are easily distracted by the drama of the moment--which passes, then what next!!!!
Oneness seems to be a very fuzzy concept for some.
The reality is that Oneness is "One without a second"
That is literally true ---there is no other---you are that One.

All this external searching for the truth---which truth would that be?
If it comes and goes then its not true.

Truth is eternal unchanging

People begin the "search" in earnest when their destiny calls them to seriously question "Who am I?"

Chris

[Shezbeth]

Thank you for this thread Grizz. I don't have much to add, other than to offer a contrasting investigative viewpoint (which seems appropriate given the title and theme). ^_~

Posted by Grizz Griswold (here)
What is your reality? Is it the world of bodies, money, war, survival, the search for happiness from the external etc. etc. or is it Spirit, god, the infinite or all the words we have to label that?

Can't it be both, and/or all/none of the above? Does there have to be division between these concepts as being factors in the equation? Are those the only 'two' available options?

There is only Love or there is Fear....one is not real.

Again, I see conjecture masking as confirmation or conviction. Why open the matter for discussion if there is no question in your mind? The dichotomy you present appears rather rigid and uncompromising, or have I missed the point? My personal opinion is that both are illusory constructs of the mind, but that is my reasonable conclusion pending further inquiry and not intended as a prescription or a definitive ruling.

I could answer all these questions I pose from my own perception, but that would largely be a bias and psychological transference. I conclude with a rhetorical question subsequent to all previous questions.

How do you (the reader) validate any/all of these dispositions and perceptions, in specific practice and in general experience?

[greybeard]

As allways the difficulty is that mind cant get it.
One of the nearest definitions (for me)
We are form--formless-- both and neither.
We are beyond all description.
It depends on what level one wishes to communicate

One could say it all happens in the mind of God---or Indras dream
Again it depends on which book you read last--smiling.
It would seem that nothing actually happens--there is no time in which events can take place.
Events also need subject and object--there is neither it would seem.
I cut myself I bleed---as does every other living thing.
Every where and no where--space needs time to exist.
Nothing is right nor wrong till thinking makes it so.
And on it goes.
I dont think it is possible to make sense of it though Tim makes sense to me.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post456904

What is beyond dispute is "I am"

Chris

[spiritwind]

Posted by Shezbeth (here)
Thank you for this thread Grizz. I don't have much to add, other than to offer a contrasting investigative viewpoint (which seems appropriate given the title and theme). ^_~

Posted by Grizz Griswold (here)
What is your reality? Is it the world of bodies, money, war, survival, the search for happiness from the external etc. etc. or is it Spirit, god, the infinite or all the words we have to label that?

Can't it be both, and/or all/none of the above? Does there have to be division between these concepts as being factors in the equation? Are those the only 'two' available options?

There is only Love or there is Fear....one is not real.

Again, I see conjecture masking as confirmation or conviction. Why open the matter for discussion if there is no question in your mind? The dichotomy you present appears rather rigid and uncompromising, or have I missed the point? My personal opinion is that both are illusory constructs of the mind, but that is my reasonable conclusion pending further inquiry and not intended as a prescription or a definitive ruling.

I could answer all these questions I pose from my own perception, but that would largely be a bias and psychological transference. I conclude with a rhetorical question subsequent to all previous questions.

How do you (the reader) validate any/all of these dispositions and perceptions, in specific practice and in general experience?

I can give you a very clear example for me. I help my husband take care of a 93 year old woman with severe advanced dementia. When we took the job we were not told nor did we realize right away that her primary problem for her age is the dementia, not any other physical condition. She is actually quite physically strong. I have never really been around someone with this much loss of mental processes who is slowly worsening by the day. I now know all her behaviors are part of this process of brain deterioration but was not really prepared for some of them. For instance, when she first started throwing a mouthful of partially chewed food on the floor I found, to my dismay, that I had a real problem with that that went all the way back to when my kids were little. They got in big trouble for that. At first I wasn’t even sure I could overcome my almost knee jerk angry response to this on the inside. But, I kept working with this, not giving up. I sat and meditated, asking for help, not even really sure where I thought it was coming from. I really wanted to change this because I knew I could not continue my job even, if I became angry every time she displayed a behavior I had a previously programmed response to, especially one that was negative. I still struggle with this and some other behaviors of hers (like saying “I don’t know what I’m doing” for hours), but remarkably I just keep pushing through energetically, for lack of a better way to put it, refusing to accept that I could not change the way I felt/responded. I have learned that I can push through to a place that actually feels quite wonderful and allows me to give her that extra energetic exchange that she so seems to crave without feeling any resentment at all, just compassion, empathy and love. Now, maybe this is easy for some, but, for me it has at times been a struggle. I don’t necessarily think this is bad. More like a learning experience.

She just really wants someone to sit and hold her hand (while she clutches it for dear life) and I can’t even imagine what her inner world is like. It must be very scary. But, I can’t sit there with her like that if I’m feeling suffocated by the situation, so it is a constant learning to set boundaries for me as well (her only interested relative, her daughter, is struggling herself and finds it difficult to spend much time with her mother – hard when they act like they don’t know you are there sometimes). I wish I had a backpack I could just carry her around with while I’m doing other things, but, alas, I’m quite sure that wouldn’t work out. But I am sure she would like it. I know my kids did when they were babies. So, I guess what I was trying to say, is that it is a constant learning/self-reflection process that goes on for me. I’m so very far from perfect, but it’s definitely very worth the effort.

[Grizz Griswold]

Posted by Shezbeth (here)
Again, I see conjecture masking as confirmation or conviction. Why open the matter for discussion if there is no question in your mind? The dichotomy you present appears rather rigid and uncompromising, or have I missed the point? My personal opinion is that both are illusory constructs of the mind, but that is my reasonable conclusion pending further inquiry and not intended as a prescription or a definitive ruling.

I could answer all these questions I pose from my own perception, but that would largely be a bias and psychological transference. I conclude with a rhetorical question subsequent to all previous questions.

How do you (the reader) validate any/all of these dispositions and perceptions, in specific practice and in general experience?

Thank you Shezbeth for your post.....My personal conclusions or even the lack of them are not important, I am no more than someone who is still in darkness looking for my way out. I would prefer that others join with me while walking this pathway that's why I would provoke/evoke others, some who have become complacent, by asking questions and so I end by asking more questions to all that would read them.

Do I have peace of mind?

Do I have anxiety, fear or worry?

Do I see all others as myself?

What is this [everything] for?

Am I drawn to drama?

and greybeards [Chris] question....Who am I?

There are many more questions that could be asked but as for the answers, we all will have to find those out for ourselves.

I hope I can provoke/evoke all that are ready to ask these questions and more.

The answers will come to those that ask.

Let us ask together....all the best.....Grizz

[markpierre]

Posted by Grizz Griswold (here)
Most have already read these words but consider them one again.

Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.
Herein lies the peace of God.

It is my sincere wish that we all could see no ones interest as separate and help each other remove the blocks to Loves awareness.

Live in joy.....Grizz

I don't know about 'most', and I'd venture relatively few and almost none relative to the volume of visitors here, but it's a quote from Jesus in 'A Course in Miracles' that a few of us here know intimately.
Which might put off Christians because it isn't the Bible or Christian rhetoric, and might put off others because it's Jesus. Sort of unfortunate.

It's a reference to a God's eye view of what every individual would consider a shared view of what's actually an isolated individuals view of their own world, which is a limited interpretation of how what they're viewing feels like in their bodies. Based on fear, misinformation and misunderstanding no less. The physical experience of contraction inspires a certain way of thinking, or line of thought and belief, while expansion and relaxation produces another. Others might view it as resistance verses allowance.

Because it's so reasonable, it's hard not to think 'well of course'. But so what? It doesn't do the interpreting for you, but it does direct you to your responsibility for how you interpret what you see, and give you tools to 'see' it differently. It's a different type of seeing, an ability that's lost in amnesia. It can be regained.
So the slaughter and mayhem is real 'because apparently it exists?' doesn't automatically flip to 'oh, this is the condition of my mind, and it's my thinking that's creating an experience of anxiety that feels like chaos and contraction in my nervous system, which translates via my skills of interpretation into a world that's a threat to my existance.' (That realization actually occurred to me in my own awakening experience.) But without the benefit of seeing and observing what's REALLY there, it isn't necessarily obvious that it must be that I need to train my mind to think in a way that gives me better results. There's a bit of work involved.
Getting people to do the work would be the task, if you're on a mission.

It's actually another approach to the 'Law of Attraction' which is a Universal law, not just a way to win the lottery.

'For as he thinketh in his heart , so is he: Eat and drink, saith he to thee; but his heart is not with thee.' 'Proverbs' somewhere, for the Christians, but for you, it's the mandate to think from or through the heart, rather than the mind. I think you're on to it. I think most people who can get on to it are, or will soon enough. Everyone eventually.

It's hard to take anything however reasonable out of the context of the entirety of a teaching. ACIM is a mind training program, not a belief system or philosophy, or a way to avoid looking at what people typically use either the mundane or their belief systems to avoid. Personal responsibility for their own thinking.

So the problem comes down to interpretation of the information your physical senses are gathering. However anyone can overcome that 'problem' is fine. It isn't really a problem if there's a solution. 7+ billion individualized solutions at this count. 'Nothing unreal exists! There ya go!

There's a cool chapter in ACIM referring to 'The Real World' that I came across long into my experience with that world of thought, that expresses what occurred in me in my awakening. He isn't talking about YOUR real world, or MY real world, but THE Real World. We superimpose illusions over Reality through our interpretations of it.

Chapter 11 (God or the Ego), part 7 (The Condition of Reality) is a really cool section. That'll enhance the dialogues you have.

[DeDukshyn]

From a philosophical perspective, the title of this thread is hilarious.

[Grizz Griswold]

Posted by greybeard (here)
As allways the difficulty is that mind cant get it.
One of the nearest definitions (for me)
We are form--formless-- both and neither.
We are beyond all description.
It depends on what level one wishes to communicate

One could say it all happens in the mind of God---or Indras dream
Again it depends on which book you read last--smiling.
It would seem that nothing actually happens--there is no time in which events can take place.
Events also need subject and object--there is neither it would seem.
I cut myself I bleed---as does every other living thing.
Every where and no where--space needs time to exist.
Nothing is right nor wrong till thinking makes it so.
And on it goes.
I dont think it is possible to make sense of it though Tim makes sense to me.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post456904

What is beyond dispute is "I am"

Chris

Thank you Chris, you impart wisdom freely and even on a page on a computer screen it comes through as being from an obvious source of love.


Here is a quote from Eckhart Tolle that seems to relate.

The Truth is far more all-encompassing than the mind could ever comprehend. No thought can encapsulate the Truth. At best, it can point to it. For example, it can say: "All things are intrinsically one (The Pearl of Great Price)." That is a pointer, not an explanation. Understanding these words means feeling deep within you the truth to which they point.

Thanks again friend.....Grizz

[Milneman]

Greetings Griz.

There seems to be a disagreement that is very basic and it is even here between us on Avalon. What is your reality? Is it the world of bodies, money, war, survival, the search for happiness from the external etc. etc. or is it Spirit, god, the infinite or all the words we have to label that?

Almost all of us seek the infinite to try to improve our world but isn't that backward? Shouldn't we seek our source for itself alone? and if there be any benefit let that come of itself.

One early morning, to fight off sleeplessness, I downloaded and printed off a PDF file of a philosophical argument against the existence of God based on the idea that when theodicies are given opposite moral properties, they prove equally valid (if not irrational to most people)...except if they are invalid for the "evil" then why are they any more valid for the "good"?

No doubt we are here in the Matrix.....trying to deny that would be a pointless endeavor .....at least for the present we are here....But then again is that who we really are?

Are we the unlimited playing the game of limitation? Like children caught up in their video games that have lost their bearing on reality? Some are beginning to awaken, a little flittering of the eyes and yawns.

Here's the truth. Capital T. You can test it empirically yourself. If you are in the matrix, how is it possible to break out of the matrix unless you meet someone who's actually broken out of the matrix to help you find your own way out, #1.

#2, how many people have claimed to have broken out of the matrix, only upon second glance demonstrate behaviors that clearly demonstrate they have not broken out, but rather, have simply modulated behaviors from within the matrix and done nothing more than change the glasses they use, so to speak?

There are resources here on Avalon that already provide the means ....will we only take a glance at them and then take off again because of the pull of the Matrix?


You don't need Avalon. In fact, you don't need anything electrical. What one does need is a rational mind and the willingness to question every reality one knows in relation to how one behaves in context to that reality. In other words, you pick your game apart transistor by circuit by copper wire until you have nothing left. This is the problem of evil, so to speak.

How can one know a reality when the world, by the nature of the human being, is to change reality to meet what we want it to see? Is it possible to see reality?

Have you ever awakened in a dream only to realize you were still dreaming? And yet, do we really know the difference between what awake and asleep is? We should! It seems that dreaming occurs when one makes the choice to go to sleep, on condition that eventually one will wake up (maybe choose to wake up)?

So my reality begins with the knowledge that waking up is only conditional on the supposition that one wants to wake up in the first place.

Griz, most people I know want to wake up without having to make the effort.

What does that make one?

Say it with me.

Baa-aaa-aaa-aaa.

I already know what I consider my reality to be and am only asking these questions in hope of awakening others and perhaps to further my awakening process. There is only Love or there is Fear....one is not real.

Most have already read these words but consider them one again.

Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.


Therefore, nothing exists.

Balderdash.

I refute it thus, and kick a stone.

Everything that exists does exist. What also exists is our willingness to see it for what we want it to be rather than the reality of what it really is....and there...

Herein lies the peace of God.



It is my sincere wish that we all could see no ones interest as separate and help each other remove the blocks to Loves awareness.

Live in joy.....Grizz

What about the interest of the cannibal?
Or the rapist?
Or the abortionist?
Or the racist?
Or the suicide bomber?
Or the man with his hand on the shiny red button?
Or the man who shoots a girl because she wants to go to school?
Or the woman who wants her country to be peaceful but is being held hostage by the whim of a man who wants the control of Europe via natural gas?

Situational ethics = epic fail.

Nice ta meet ya.

Milneman

[Shezbeth]

Posted by greybeard (here)
As always the difficulty is that mind cant get it.

I have heard parents say similar things to their children when asked to explain why Santa's reindeer can fly, or how he makes it all the way around the world in a single night, even when accounting for timezones and the Earth's orbit. Meanwhile the truth of Santa Claus (which the parent knows) is,....

Posted by Grizz Griswold (here)
My personal conclusions or even the lack of them are not important, I am no more than someone who is still in darkness looking for my way out. I would prefer that others join with me while walking this pathway that's why I would provoke others, some who have become complacent, by asking questions and so I end by asking more questions to all that would read them.

We are all in the darkness which (IMO) is why questions are so important, and I'm not adverse to walking along side whether that means in cooperation or contention. For starters, I contest the idea that your conclusions are not important as one's conclusions (attitude, perceptions, etc.) determine one's operant position when approaching any topic.

Do I have peace of mind?
Do I have anxiety, fear or worry?
Do I see all others as myself?
What is this [everything] for?
Am I drawn to drama?

Who am I?

In order:

- Not all the time, but mostly.
- Not usually, but from time to time.
- In one context, absolutely and uncontestably. On the other hand some people behave in ways that I can't fathom; That behavior stems from their operant position.
- I don't know, and I am not convinced there is anyone who does.
- Usually no, but there are times where I observe scenarios in which I can be of benefit to a situation.
and
- What is 'I'?

But I liked Milneman's response better.

[GreenGuy]

Great thread, Grizz! This is something - the nature of reality - that I've pondered for many, many years. I've come to the conclusion that there are two true statements:

It's ALL true.

It's ALL lies.

Reconcile those, and you have reality on earth.

[Grizz Griswold]

Here we go again lets see if anyone accepts the following statement as true.

It also is from A Course in Miracles but aligns with many teachings.
Can any of us see ourselves being described here?

We look inside first, decide the kind of world we want to see and then project that world outside, making it the truth as we see it. We make it true by our interpretations of what it is we are seeing. If we are using perception to justify our own mistakes—our anger, our impulses to attack, our lack of love in whatever form it may take—we will see a world of evil, destruction, malice, envy and despair. All this we must learn to forgive, not because we are being "good" and "charitable," but because what we are seeing is not true. We have distorted the world by our twisted defenses, and are therefore seeing what is not there. As we learn to recognize our perceptual errors, we also learn to look past them or "forgive." At the same time we are forgiving ourselves, looking past our distorted self-concepts to the Self That God created in us and as us.

All the best.....Grizz

[Shezbeth]

Posted by GreenGuy (here)
I've come to the conclusion that there are two true statements:

It's ALL true.
It's ALL lies.

Excellently iterated, and in observance of this statement I pose (and answer) the following query.

Which statement is an expression of Love, and which is an expression of Fear? IMO:
It's all true. - Statement of fear
It's all lies. - Statement of love

Does fear divide or does fear unite? If fear divides, than it seems that everything must be true as the reality of division would allow for all things. If love leads toward unity, then it would seem that everything would be a lie, as everything separate from everything is in defiance of encompassed unity.

But really, we're discussing theoretical perceptions of what is either unknown or unknowable; which of THOSE two is currently beyond me.

Posted by Grizz Griswold (here)
Here we go again lets see if anyone accepts the following statement as true.

True? Can't we just operate from 'possible'? How many people (allegedly) accepted as 'true' that the world was flat? How many people once accepted as 'true' that lightning meant the gods were angry? It is possible to accept as 'true' all manner of things that are entirely (and conclusively observable as) untrue.

We look inside first, decide the kind of world we want to see and then project that world outside, making it the truth as we see it. We make it true by our interpretations of what it is we are seeing. If we are using perception to justify our own mistakes—our anger, our impulses to attack, our lack of love in whatever form it may take—we will see a world of evil, destruction, malice, envy and despair. All this we must learn to forgive, not because we are being "good" and "charitable," but because what we are seeing is not true. We have distorted the world by our twisted defenses, and are therefore seeing what is not there. As we learn to recognize our perceptual errors, we also learn to look past them or "forgive." At the same time we are forgiving ourselves, looking past our distorted self-concepts to the Self That God created in us and as us.

This alludes to one of the many (IMO) failings of ACIM, that of half-truth. I agree that an individual consciously affects how they perceive the world in response to the stimuli of the world (6-sense reality, as well as context, experience, the lot), but to say that they decide anything outside themselves is ludicrous. Certainly there is conscious manifestation for the individual,... and the other 7+ billion individuals (assuming animals can't also, which I doubt) who are also 'casting a vote' in this existence. Moreover - as I suggested earlier - an individual can choose to perceive (interpret) all manner of things that are unsupportable and false; Santa Claus and the consumer benefits of quantitative easing are just two examples of this.

Actually, I could spend pages identifying false interpretations when it comes to politics, finance, etc. but I won't; I assume you know.

Further you might be interested to hear that while there is a large body of support, appreciation, and fascination (devotion?) to the ideas presented in ACIM. There is also a significant presence that observes the fallibility, inaccuracy, and vacuous nature of it. Which is true is of course, a disagreement on reality.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, though they would be well suited to recognizing it as an opinion, whether they choose to project it as reality or not.

[PurpleLama]

Here, Grizz, chew on this, if you haven't before....

[Grizz Griswold]

Posted by PurpleLama (here)
Here, Grizz, chew on this, if you haven't before....

Yes I have had a taste of Seths material before but never heard of the book on Personal Reality, maybe some of the others will read it too.

Thanks PurpleLama......Grizz

[markpierre]

Posted by Shezbeth (here)

Further you might be interested to hear that while there is a large body of support, appreciation, and fascination (devotion?) to the ideas presented in ACIM. There is also a significant presence that observes the fallibility, inaccuracy, and vacuous nature of it. Which is true is of course, a disagreement on reality.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, though they would be well suited to recognizing it as an opinion, whether they choose to project it as reality or not.

That's a really good point. Even among the 'Course community' which can be compared sometimes to a church, the discussion and relative devotion or resistance to the ideas and concepts is lost in the land of opinion. While the author states directly that the concepts aren't a representation of 'truth', a theoretic basis is necessary to engage with and encourage minds operating in perception and through concepts.

The idea of 'opinion', or perceived success or failings of the Course beautifully both betrays and exemplifies its purpose entirely. Caught in the world of perception. Those forming 'opinions' can gather that much from reading the introduction. Very few do, or will. Even among it's advocates, and I'll count myself among them.
But I did do one thing correctly, which was apply the lessonwork indiscriminately. It wasn't until long after setting it aside that I recognized the results, and the purpose of the discipline. That might address this question whether rhetorical or sincere;
What is this [everything] for? You can't know, except in retrospect. After the purpose has been revealed. This statement; "I don't know, and I am not convinced there is anyone who does" is both correct and conjecture. I definitely felt that way once. You don't but you will. And there are those who do know, whether anyone else being convinced is useful or not. Not to them. But they will be on to their next experiences.

The 'premise' is this (quoting the introduction);
"It makes a fundamental distinction between the real and unreal; between knowledge and perception. Knowledge is truth, under one law, the law of love or God. Truth is unalterable, eternal and unambiguous. It can be unrecognized, but it can not be changed. It applies to everything that God created, and only what He created is real. It is beyond learning because it is beyond time and process. It has no opposite; no beginning and no end. It merely is."

That's either attractive or it's not. Some people don't like the word 'God', and will reject it on that basis. But if it is attractive it's outside of perception, and so outside of perception you must go. Then it continues to describe the world we think we participate in. Perceptually/mentally we do, spiritually (in Reality) it isn't possible.

"The world of perception on the other hand, is the world of time, of change, of beginnings and endings. It is based on interpretations, not on facts. It is the world of birth and death, founded on the the belief in scarcity, loss, separation and death. It is learned rather than given, selective in its perceptual emphasis, unstable in it's functioning, and inaccurate in its interpretations.
From knowledge and perception respectively, two distinct thought systems arise which are opposites in every respect."

And that's either attractive or it's not. Most people won't engage in a solution until what they 'perceive' has become more unattractive than not. Have a look around. How does what you perceive make you feel? Alive? or just barely. It goes on to describe the dream state of perception; page 10 of the introduction if anyone has the book and actually reads it. Most people prefer to take other peoples word for it.

Success or failure of the Course itself is up the participant. Most individuals who fail, fail to follow the instructions. What I love most, are opinions coming from people who've never even read it, let alone completed the workbook faithfully. Or given it a cursory glance. It's not an easy read.
Other people listen to those opinions, and believe them!

[Milneman]

Posted by Grizz Griswold (here)
Here we go again lets see if anyone accepts the following statement as true.

It also is from A Course in Miracles but aligns with many teachings.
Can any of us see ourselves being described here?

We look inside first, decide the kind of world we want to see and then project that world outside, making it the truth as we see it. We make it true by our interpretations of what it is we are seeing. If we are using perception to justify our own mistakes—our anger, our impulses to attack, our lack of love in whatever form it may take—we will see a world of evil, destruction, malice, envy and despair. All this we must learn to forgive, not because we are being "good" and "charitable," but because what we are seeing is not true. We have distorted the world by our twisted defenses, and are therefore seeing what is not there. As we learn to recognize our perceptual errors, we also learn to look past them or "forgive." At the same time we are forgiving ourselves, looking past our distorted self-concepts to the Self That God created in us and as us.

All the best.....Grizz

I would say we have distorted the world by our twisted desires of what we want to achieve from the world, rather than what we can accomplish by participating in it as it is.

Think of it this way Griz: you might have the arrow pointing in the wrong direction, but at least you've got the arrow.

Is it that we project out to the world and the world gives back what we project, or is it that we have a choice to project or to reflect the world as it really exists? That's a doozie isn't it. Maybe that's the whole point. Life is a struggle to break through the way we want to see the world, to stop the suffering we experience from swimming against the way the world really is, and finding out how simple, and how rewarding being as we should be is.

My prof asked me to explain this process...my term paper was about this in regards to the Russian invasion of Crimea. Doing it is one thing. To actually explain the process is very difficult. I've been through it myself, but putting it to words...there might be my graduate thesis!

It's good to have you on board Griz. You have really good energy. You're going to fit in here well I think!!