01-05-2016, 12:10 PM
(01-05-2016, 09:33 AM)Bring4th_Plenum Wrote: I personally would use the term 'ego' to reference those tendencies which lean towards a separated self. That is in no way bad in itself; it just is what it is. But that's my own preferencing of using the term - strongly influenced by A Course in Miracles of course
A little bit of a tangent, but this is one of the things that is really difficult about the Course: it defines its terms with so much precision that it makes it difficult to discuss its insights with others. Cuz beyond a certain surface understanding you have to get into this technical description of, for example, the Holy Spirit, and that only begs the question on all the other aspects of the worldview which that definition relies upon to reinforce and reciprocate it. By the time you're done you're waist deep in a conceptual stew as thick as Catholic doctrine.
Also, from a Course perspective, how would you describe the utility of the ego, Plenum? Because so much of the Course revolves around the theme of the ego being some sort of error keeping us from unity and peace. That was one thing that really drew me to the Law of One philosophy: a more coherent explanation of the function of the incarnation. I'm not sure the Course (or for that matter, Bhuddism) has any use for the kind of evolutionary talos implicit in those of Ra's cosmology.
Of course, Ra's cosmology has a lot of juiciness to geek out on, too, so there's always a need for balance.