Understanding
A Course in Miracles
A
Course in Miracles
is a self study curriculum that guides students toward
a spiritual way of life by restoring their contact with
what it calls the Holy Spirit or internal teacher.
The Course uses
both an intellectual and an experiential approach within
its 650-page Text, 500-page Workbook of 365 daily meditations,
and 90-page Manual for Teachers.
Published by
the nonprofit Foundation for Inner Peace in 1976, the
Course was written down in shorthand over a period of
seven years by Dr. Helen Schucman, a research psychologist
at Columbia University, and typed up by her supervisor
Dr. William Thetford, Director of Columbia-Presbyterian
Medical Center's Department of Psychology.
Schucman said
she heard a Voice that gave her an inner dictation,
and she never claimed authorship of the material,
remaining personally ambivalent about its message
until her death in 1981.
There is no central
organized religion or membership institution built around
the Course, and no "guru" widely accepted
as an embodiment of the teaching.
As a psychological
discipline, the Course encourages the transformation
of the self through the constant practice of forgiveness.
As a spiritual
training it insists on a complete reversal of ordinary
perception, urging acceptance of spirit as the only
reality and the physical world as a mass illusion (similar
to the Buddhist and Hindu notions of samsara and maya,
two terms designating the everyday world we see as a
kind of dream).
While Christian
in language, the metaphysics of the Course is thus more
aligned with Eastern mysticism than traditional Western
religion.
In fact ACIM directly
challenges significant elements of contemporary Christianity,
particularly the doctrines of sin and crucifixion. For
instance, it argues that the significance of the Resurrection
is not that Jesus Christ died to atone for the sins
of humankind but rather that, as an advanced being who
was fully cognizant of the illusory nature of the physical
world, Jesus neither suffered nor died on the cross.
The Course further
maintains that everyone shares the potential to achieve
such an enlightened way of perception.
“As
a spiritual training it insists on a complete
reversal of ordinary perception, urging acceptance
of spirit as the only reality and the physical
world as a mass illusion.”
|
The theological challenge
of the course is intensified by the fact that the authorial
Voice of the Course clearly identifies itself as the
historical Jesus Christ, bringing a correction of traditional
Christianity to the world in modern psychological language.
His corrective
tone is clear in such passages as the following:
"If the
Apostles had not felt guilty, they never could have
quoted me as saying, I come not to bring peace but
a sword. This is clearly the opposite of everything
I taught. Nor could they have described my reactions
to Judas as they did, if they had really understood
me.
I could not
have said, "Betrayest thou the Son of Man with
a kiss?" unless I believed in betrayal.
The whole message
of the crucifixion was simply that I did not...As
you read the teachings of the Apostles, remember that
I told them myself that there was much they would
understand later, because they were not wholly ready
to follow me at the time." —ACIM
Chap 6
While the Course
does not identify itself as philosophically special
to any other teaching, stating that it is only one version
of a universal curriculum, it does suggest that serious
students may progress faster by its use than by any
other spiritual method.
The Course's alleged
authorship and its challenge to Western religious tradition
have served to make it simultaneously popular with people
seeking alternative spiritual guidance and troubling
to its critics.
The Course remains
largely a grassroots phenomenon, not yet a subject of
much discussion in mainstream religion or academic theology.
When it has been discussed, its various critics have
described it in wildly contradictory terms.
Noted psychologist
and author James Hillman, for instance, has gone on
record characterizing the course as "old-fashioned,
self-deluding Christianity."
Yet evangelical
Christian critics want nothing to do with the course,
warning their followers away from it as a satanic message
disguised in Christian language. And while there is
a popular recognition of the course as a centerpiece
of so-called New Age spirituality, one of its chief
interpreters asserts that this is a case of mistaken
identity.
"There has
been some confusion of the Course with superficial New
Age positivism," remarks Kenneth Wapnick, Ph.D.,
who helped edit the original Course manuscript and directs
a major teaching center. "But the Course actually
trains us to become aware of all our negative thoughts,
in order to help us confront all the 'obstacles to the
awareness of love's presence' within our minds."
Since the course
identifies the source of all such obstacles as the ego,
our ordinary sense of self, the course's unwavering
prescription for surrendering those obstacles makes
it an exceptionally demanding discipline.
Adds Wapnick,
"I find the most genuine understanding of the course
among those who are struggling with it, or whose lives
became more problematic after beginning their study."
Another prominent
Course student, president of the Institute of Noetic
Sciences and former University of California regent
Willis Harman, Ph.D., has stated that he regards the
Course as "perhaps the most important writing in
the English language since the Bible."
At the least,
the course's substantial and growing popularity makes
it clear that it is far more than a short-lived spiritualist
fad. Although the fundamental facts of the course's
nature and origin can be briefly summarized, they do
not fully answer the question of what A Course in Miracles
is. Because it can be interpreted on many levels and
even some veteran students do not claim to understand
it completely, an exhaustive answer to the questions
"What is the course?" may actually be impossible.
Since
the course identifies the source of all such
obstacles as the ego, our ordinary sense of
self, the course's unwavering prescription for
surrendering those obstacles makes it an exceptionally
demanding discipline.
|
How
The Course Came To Be
Columbia University
in 1965 was perhaps not the sort of place one would
have expected to find the stirrings of spiritual renewal.
In the College of Physicians and Surgeons, the psychology
professors' struggles to affirm their discipline as
a respectable branch of medical science went forward-attended
by the usual amount of professional jealousy, fierce
competition, and outright back-biting.
In the midst
of this, the reticent and scholarly director of the
Psychology Department of The Columbia-Presbyterian Medical
Center, Dr. William N. Thetford, one day decided that
he'd had enough of the academic sparring. "There
must be another way, and I'm determined to find it,"
he announced in an uncharacteristically forceful speech
to his chief colleague, a sharp-tongued research psychologist,
Dr. Helen Schucman.
Moved by Thetford's
commitment to a change, Schucman vowed to help him.
This alignment of these two professors' sympathies seemed
to catalyze an eruption of mystical energy on Schucman's
part that left the rational scientist in her groping
for explanations.
Unexpectedly Schucman
began to experience a recurrence of the symbolic visions
she had witnessed in her youth—visions which had largely
ceased in young adulthood when she bitterly ended her
search for God. But now, at the age of fifty-six, Schucman
found herself involved in a dramatic progression of
waking dreams and visions in which she was gravitating
toward a mysterious duty she felt she had "somehow,
somewhere, agreed to complete."
In these reveries
she was sometimes spoken to by an inner soundless voice
who clarified the meaning of various events for her.
Over time this voice became an authoritative presence
whom she referred to as the Voice or Top Sergeant. She
was not unaware of the voice's self-professed identity,
but evaded acknowledging it.
As
a psychological discipline, the Course encourages
the transformation of the self through the constant
practice of forgiveness.
|
In the late summer
of l965, Schucman experienced a vision in which she
entered a cave by a windswept seashore and found a large,
very old parchment scroll. Unrolling the aged parchment
with some difficulty, she found a center panel bearing
the simple words "GOD IS."
As she unrolled
the scroll further, more writing was revealed to the
left and right of the center panel. The familiar Voice
told her that if she wanted, she could read the past
on the left panel, and the future on the right—an apparent
offering of clairvoyant capacities. But Schucman pointed
to the words in the center of the scroll and said,
"This
is all I want."
"You made it that time," replied
the Voice, "Thank you."
After this vision,
Schucman's anxiety lessened somewhat and she thought
with relief that her inner turbulence might be receding
for good. At Thetford's suggestion, she had begun recording
her inner experiences, and was about to make an entry
when the Voice spoke clearly in her mind. "This
is a course in miracles," it said with authority,
"Please take notes."
Schucman was
soon on the phone to Thetford, her precarious emotional
equilibrium once again shattered. She told Thetford
what the Voice was suggesting to her and asked in panic,
"What am I going to do?" Thetford was calm
and curious. "Why don't you take down the notes?
We'll look them over in the morning and see if they
make any sense, and throw them out otherwise. No one
has to know."
The
Voice of the Course clearly identifies itself
as Jesus Christ, bringing a clarification of
His message to the world in modern psychological
language.”
|
Thus began sven
years of difficult extracurricular labor for Helen Schucman
as she faithfully, though often unwillingly, scribed
the material that became A Course in Miracles and read
aloud her shorthand notes to Thetford, who volunteered
to type them.
The prolonged
and profound inner conflict that Schucman felt about
her peculiar task is clear in Schucman's unpublished
autobiography. In fact, early in her work she argued
with the Voice about the purpose of the undertaking
and her role:
I soon found I
did not have much option in the matter. I was given
a sort of mental explanation, though, in the form of
a series of related thoughts that crossed my mind in
rapid succession and made a reasonably coherent whole.
According to this
information the world situation was worsening to an
alarming degree. People all over the world were being
called on to help, and were making their individual
contributions as part of an overall, prearranged plan.
I had apparently agreed to take down A Course in Miracles
as it would be given me.
The Voice was
fulfilling its part in the agreement, as I would fulfill
mine. I could sense the urgency that lay behind this
explanation, whatever I might think about its content.