to seek
I wrote the following paragraphs in response to an item that has since been removed by its originator. All the same, I have decided to leave this here, slightly edited, for whatever interest it may have to others.
I think it may be that there is confusion between the word "alone" and Oneness. Oneness is not the same thing as being alone. Being alone is being separate from all others, whereas oneness is unity with all others. I have experienced that sense of Oneness, and it is not a sense of aloneness at all, it is a sense of complete inclusion of everything, including "myself". In other words, "myself" does not exist at that moment, but rather I am lost in God, if you will, and in becoming lost in God, I am completely whole, completely content, and at peace. There is no separation at that time, obviously, and thus, no aloneness.
It seems to me that there are two ways of approaching God, one is with devotion by the individual toward a loving God, who, therefore, enjoys the relationship with the devotee, and the devotee enjoys the relationship with God. I believe that the suggestion that "God is lonely" is another way of describing that approach, and it is a valid and successful approach. I do not believe that the Course in Miracles is approaching God in this manner.
The other way of approaching God is to become lost in God, without relationship, but total immersion in God, whereby God "takes over" the separated self, and the "individual" is inconsequential. I believe that the Course in Miracles is one variation along this theme, using Christianity terminology as a recognizable and therefore comfortable format for western minds that grew up with that terminology.
I would suggest that the ideal is for any seeker to approach God in whatever manner is most agreeable and fulfilling to that seeker - there is no right or wrong way to approach God, and each individual must find her own way toward God. And no format, whatever its history or its popularity, or its wisdom is necessarily better or worse than any other.
I found in my own life that the devotee path was the most secure and satisfying path, yet, inevitably, as the seeker progresses, the other approach begins to automatically assert itself, and indeed begins to be decipherable and opens up its secrets automatically, and many find both approaches to coexist within the seeker. However, this process is usually a long and tedious practice, taking decades of work, with no guarantee of "success" and much of it involving faith and hope. This is not a process that can be "learned", but rather is a transformation of the individual that is wrought by Grace, and not much else.
I think it may be that there is confusion between the word "alone" and Oneness. Oneness is not the same thing as being alone. Being alone is being separate from all others, whereas oneness is unity with all others. I have experienced that sense of Oneness, and it is not a sense of aloneness at all, it is a sense of complete inclusion of everything, including "myself". In other words, "myself" does not exist at that moment, but rather I am lost in God, if you will, and in becoming lost in God, I am completely whole, completely content, and at peace. There is no separation at that time, obviously, and thus, no aloneness.
It seems to me that there are two ways of approaching God, one is with devotion by the individual toward a loving God, who, therefore, enjoys the relationship with the devotee, and the devotee enjoys the relationship with God. I believe that the suggestion that "God is lonely" is another way of describing that approach, and it is a valid and successful approach. I do not believe that the Course in Miracles is approaching God in this manner.
The other way of approaching God is to become lost in God, without relationship, but total immersion in God, whereby God "takes over" the separated self, and the "individual" is inconsequential. I believe that the Course in Miracles is one variation along this theme, using Christianity terminology as a recognizable and therefore comfortable format for western minds that grew up with that terminology.
I would suggest that the ideal is for any seeker to approach God in whatever manner is most agreeable and fulfilling to that seeker - there is no right or wrong way to approach God, and each individual must find her own way toward God. And no format, whatever its history or its popularity, or its wisdom is necessarily better or worse than any other.
I found in my own life that the devotee path was the most secure and satisfying path, yet, inevitably, as the seeker progresses, the other approach begins to automatically assert itself, and indeed begins to be decipherable and opens up its secrets automatically, and many find both approaches to coexist within the seeker. However, this process is usually a long and tedious practice, taking decades of work, with no guarantee of "success" and much of it involving faith and hope. This is not a process that can be "learned", but rather is a transformation of the individual that is wrought by Grace, and not much else.