IGNORANCE IS BLISS AS IT SHOULD BE

Let me refer to the text I paraphrased above. It appears to acknowledge a deep level of ignorance and, at first blush, I seems to make the same beginning statement as all religious "foundation texts." We know nothing and must thus approach Knowledge as Suppliants. WRONG! I content that it is suggesting the exact opposite: Enlightenment, Wisdom, Truth, all of these exist in their essence in a place beyond consciousness. if we intend to apply our analytical brains to the task of achieving the supreme level of these attributes, then ignorance as it is commonly understood certainly applies.However, If IGNORANCE is meant in a metaphysical sense, I believe we can consider ourselves upon the right path.

I never quote things correctly and therefore I always paraphrase. I believe the Buddha said 2 things at the most important moments in his life. He said, "all is illusion." He almost immediately said, then, "I am awake." It is generally acknowledged that at this moment, he became the Buddha. I would maintain that he had achieved true IGNORANCE. Paradoxically, it is the goal of enlightenment.

Lest I sound overly esoteric,wasn't Jesus Christ, famous for saying "the kingdom of God lies within." And didn't they often say that, in rebuttal to formalized religious figures?

Now, my friends, this should start a good discussion. I am waiting.

If I am missing something, dear reader, I would beg your indulgence and ask for an explanation. After all, isn't that but this form of communication is all about?

I have read the text for A Course In Miracles twice. It is an understatement to describe it as dense. This complexity was intentional and I was rewarded every time I reread any section for clarification: another level of meaning was discovered.

Here's what's amazing: when I got to the deepest level as I understood it, I realized it's great simplicity. One quote near the end of the manuscript is a great example of what I'm referencing. [I paraphrase as close to the actual wording as possible. I don't like to quote directly because I prefer to filter things through my own understanding. In that way any misunderstanding is attributable only to me.] What this portion of the text says goes as follows: I do not know the thing I am and therefore do not know what I am doing, where I am, or how to look upon the world or on myself.

When I first read this passage, I didn't think of it as breaking new ground. Every religious text I have ever read has had at its core a necessary acknowledgment of the disciples' ignorance. The neophyte is told that although he or she knows nothing now, diligent study will bring revelation.

I still do not believe that this passage is breaking new ground because it does - and we should - acknowledge an initial lack of knowledge on the part of the seeker. It is always the hallmark of wisdom to start from such a point.

Christ and the Buddha entered a place of Supreme solitude. It was deep inside them. They had to travel nowhere. Their challenge had been to ignore the chatter of this illusion. I believe that is our challenge.