Since started talking about level confusion and then we never got back to it, would you
like to give some examples of that kind of confusion? Level confusion? I'm writing a
book on Gnosticism. One of the things that is very helpful, especially when talking about
some of the confusions of the Course, is to contrast or compare and contrast the teachings
of this philosophical movement that flowered in the 1st and 2nd Centuries after the time
of Jesus with the Course. The Course shares the basic same metaphysical teaching that
God did not create this world. But where the Course differs strikingly from the Gnostics,
and this really is the point that we are getting to now is what we would call this confusion
of levels. Because what the Gnostics did is they recognized this world was not created
by God, therefore, it was not where we truly are. But they made the mistake of then saying
that this world was a prison. And then for the Gnostics, or certainly one large group
of them, the greatest sin was to be trapped in the world and thereby making the world
into the enemy. And of course, once you make something into an enemy then you're making
it real. And one of the key injunctions of the Course is not to make the error real.
So that while on the one hand, it's fine to say that the world is an illusion which certainly
is what the Course is teaching us. It's quite another thing to say that because the world
is an illusion, it is sinful or it is evil or the things in this world are sinful or
evil. And that's probably the greatest example we can find of this confusion of levels. Because
on the second level, the Course says that while it is true that the world is an illusion,
this is where you believe you are. And because you believe you are here, there are two ways
in which you look at it. The first way is the ego's way which is to see that everything
in this world either belongs to the victim camp or the victimizer camp; that everything
in this world is used as a device of separation. For the Holy Spirit, the same world is used
as a classroom in which we learn our lessons of forgiveness. And that becomes the means
by which we return home. Two of the great Gnostic mistakes, and you'll find this very
prominent in many students of the Course, is to make the world real by either seeing
it as a place that has to be avoided or seeing it as a place that becomes attractive. These
two forms of the mistake we could call the mistake of asceticism or the mistake of libertinism.
We'll take the libertines first because they're more fun. There were a number of Gnostic groups
that taught that since this world was not real and was under the guiding power of what
they called the demiurge or Yaldabaoth or words like that that we call the ego; that
the way that you would prove that you're not under the domination of this principle was
to break every single moral law that there was. And then a couple of sects taught that
if you got through your lifetime and you didn't get quite through the whole catalogue, then
you've got to come back again until you've finished the job. Now the logic of it makes
sense, that by breaking every moral law, you prove that you're not under the subjugation
of that law. Now the form that that takes with "A Course in Miracles" is people will
say, number one, the Course teaches that we should love everyone the same way. Well, you
can probably add up two and two for that one, right? And of course, it's totally misunderstanding
that what the Course means is that we should love each other in the same way in terms of
how we think, in terms of what our attitude is, not in terms of form. And that's a confusion
of form and content that perhaps we'll get back to later on. In other words, another
way of saying the Course says the body is an illusion, this world is an illusion, I
can do anything I want. I can walk down Broadway and I can have a gun and shoot everybody because
after all it's an illusion, not recognizing, of course, that if you even make the effort
to do that, there's probably some lurking hatred deep within you that you're not aware
of. Another form this takes...in fact, I've heard this personalized...people will say
Ken Wapnick says there is no guilt, therefore I can do whatever I want because I'm not guilty.
At that point, I'd shrink into the microphone if I could. That's one form. And again, it's
mistaking form for content. I think however what's a much more popular form...and this
is true for the Gnostics as well as for many students of the Course, and that is once again
to teach that the world being an illusion is also sinful, therefore, it must be avoided.
And so people will then take the Course to mean that if you really practice this Course
and say repeatedly "I am not a body" that means that you give up sex, you give up money,
that you give up enjoying foods, that you give up beautiful sunsets, etc., etc., etc.
Again, once you do that, you're very subtly making the error real. Now if that's a particular
way the Holy Spirit guides you, then that's between you and him. But there is nothing
in the Course that can be taken to mean that that's what you should do. Because again,
it's the confusion of form and content. As Gloria mentioned and it's a later workbook
lesson that says "My body is a wholly neutral thing." There's a line in Hamlet where Hamlet
says "There's nothing right or wrong but thinking makes it so." There's nothing inherently holy
or inherently unholy about the body because there is no body. The body is totally an illusion.
It doesn't exist. So how could something that doesn't exist be holy or unholy, sinful or
not sinful? What makes something holy in this world is our attitude towards it. In other
words, it's the way that we use it. Which teacher are we placing our body under? If
it's the ego, then no matter what we do, whether we flee the body or we run towards it will
become a reinforcer of guilt. If the Holy Spirit becomes our teacher, then everything,
including this body, becomes a learning instrument. And all the activities of the body can be
used as a way of teaching us the meaning of forgiveness. So please don't make the mistake
of making the error real by seeing anything in this world as being either inherently good
or inherently sinful. There is nothing in the Course that says that you should be a
vegetarian. There is nothing in the Course that says you should be a meat eater. If you
like to be a vegetarian, by all means be a vegetarian, but don't use the Course as a
means of justifying that.