VOL. 6, NOS. 1 & 2




Folding Time and Space


QUESTION: I was on the Interstate a couple of summers ago with my partner, and we were going to a business meeting in Boston. It was approximately 9:30 in the morning and we were within sight of the city skyline and about a half an hour away from the business meeting.


Suddenly we both became aware that the skyline of the city had disappeared and we were not on the same road that we had just been on.


Physically we were both kind of shaken, almost like shock -- very cold, sweating. It was the middle of summer, but we were quite comfortable before that.


At least an hour had gone by in the middle of a sentence -- and for me, in the middle of a sip of coffee -- and we were 45 miles northeast of where we had been! It took us approximately two hours to get back to Boston.


The experience shook me a great deal and was a part of some initial experiences around getting involved with the Course, which, for me, really questioned time and space. I was wondering what you might be able to say about this.


RAJ: [Paul: Raj is not giving this in words, although I have asked for confirmation of the images. Evidently, of the two of you, you were the one who was in a place that could allow for this to happen. Literally, the indication is that time and space became folded -- much like if you take a piece of adding machine tape and lay it back against itself two or three times -- and you went through a time/space warp. You went instantly from one place to the other. You were not picked up by a flying saucer. That kind of thing was not involved.]


QUESTION: Well, it's obvious to me, Raj, that at least consciously, other than just producing these sort of major questions, I didn't get much out of it. I'm wondering, since the question has come back to me now, is there more for me in the experience? It seems to be alive to me now. I don't know why.


RAJ: No, there is not. It is simply an experience, which has irrevocably opened up some doors that will not be able to bind you in the future. It is an experience of breakdown of a very significant fixed concept about the nature of things, the nature of the Universe, the nature of time and space. It is significant, but its primary meaning and effect is simply that it is a single experience that will forever cause you to be unable to be bound by the old concept that what is seen and the way you interpret it is "the way it is." That may sound too simple, but that is a major conceptual breakthrough.


QUESTION: Well, it keeps alive in me, in some very real sense -- but I don't know what that means -- that what I'm looking at and what I'm interpreting as a chair or a room, or even as a body, is really always in question, the way I'm looking at it, and yet -- I mean, the question is always there.


RAJ: How fortunate you are. It is the fact that others do not have that question, and cannot conceive of having that question really that constitutes their being locked into the three-dimensional-only frame of reference. You have an irrefutable and unchangeable crack in the door of that conviction.


QUESTION: It's interesting to me, then, that not only the car went through this, but also my partner. I guess I want to explore that. Is this my ...


RAJ: The car behind you did, too!


QUESTION: Say more about that. How does this happen? How can I carry more than me with that and then not other things? What is that sphere of influence?


RAJ: It is too great a sense of power, here, that you are entertaining. The folding, as it were, occurred as a result of allowing, and while the portal was there, it was possible for anyone in that area to move through. There are no innocent victims, of course. It is not as though you caused something that was incongruent for anyone else who was involved.


It is like opening up the door to go outside on a sunny day, and the sun shines in, and for the moment the door is open it shines on and warms the cat that happens to be lying on the floor in a direct line with the sun. And then you ask about your sphere of influence. It is nonsensical.


QUESTION: And yet my Being is involved in this, somehow.


RAJ: Of course, but not in an affective or controlling way.


QUESTION: How is this experience or portal provided for? Are you saying it is there all the time?


RAJ: It is there all the time, absolutely. However, if I may put it this way, the practice of "significant doubt" about the Meaning of what you see is what frees you from the conceptual limits involved in serious convictions about the Meaning of things.


QUESTION: Approximately three weeks ago, I was walking my dog and there was another kind of surprising moment. I walked up to a tree in my front yard. In that moment of coming up to the tree, I just saw this continuum of life as that tree was expressing it -- from the seed through to the tree, and then onto structures and the tree giving off seed. It was a very interesting thing because it happened so very quickly -- so quickly that I was aware of so much that that tree held in it, but yet in a very linear sense. Almost as if there was a story to the tree.


RAJ: This can best be described as a moment of illumination -- one of many moments of illumination that you have had. It occurs in moments of defenselessness and allows you to see more of the Meaning of a thing. These experiences happen because you tend to be particularly unguarded. And if there is anything that you might do to facilitate further experiences of illumination, it would be to not be sure of anything and to be completely allowing.


Now, I am not suggesting that you should try harder, because that will not constitute allowing. But understand that the element that is at work here is defenselessness and not being convicted as to, or by, a preconceived meaning.


QUESTION: These moments of illumination -- you're right that there have been a significant number of them -- are always very surprising. It would be the furthest thing from my mind that there would be any kind of thing like that. It always seems to be a feature of these experiences.


RAJ: This is why I have said that you cannot "think" your way into the Kingdom of Heaven, or reason your way in intellectually. And this is the reason so few do it.


QUESTION: And yet the brain really does seem to want to. For instance, when I'm working with the Course, it's just like I'm reading words, and I don't seem to be able to transcend the meaning of the words that I'm reading. It's like a real "grunt" exercise, like the words, the concepts, the act of reading, my associations are all confronted by the words of the Course. The Course may be providing a great deal of release on levels, which are not conscious, but it's not conscious!


RAJ: That is all right. It is calculated to not engage the ego, to sidestep it, to connect with You at levels other than those at which you are defended by means of your concepts.


QUESTION: Is it possible to become undefended consciously and to experience the Course directly, consciously -- the words of the Course?


RAJ: But you see, the words are not the point. It is the triggering of clarity, which has nothing to do with the Course. No, you cannot get hold of the books, or their purpose. They are sleight of hand, engaging the ego, distracting the ego, while they connect with your Being, and illuminate your Being so that It may have the opportunity to register with you. There is no ultimate meaning of the Course. It is a crutch, if you will, an interim trigger of Awakening, which, in itself, does not embody anything ultimate. It is like a light…


QUESTON: Nor does it describe anything ultimate?


RAJ: The only thing [ultimate that] it describes is your Sonship. But the description is not the Sonship.


A light shines and illuminates a thing. If it does not illuminate the thing, it does not fulfill its purpose. Alone, it is meaningless. To become distracted by, to study or analyze the light is to engage in an irrelevancy. The Course is not ultimate. Its language is not ultimate. It is language that addresses the current ego level of thought and gets past it, thus eventually rendering the ego invalid. Once the ego is invalid, the book will be useless and will speak of nonsense, even though, as a tool for promoting Awakening, it was completely effective.



Joining: Letting Someone In


QUESTION: The Course constantly talks about inviting Jesus into our lives to share our joys and our burdens, and says that he can help us. He can't do it without our inviting him in. But once we do, he then becomes the model for our unfolding. I have a few problems with that.


The way I see Raj deal with Paul in his book, is that Raj simply stood to the side and allowed Paul's Being to unfold in the Totality of what It was. What I'm perceiving the Course as saying is, "model yourself after me," or, "I will provide the miracles and work them through you," and I don't know quite how to come to terms with my own unfolding.


RAJ: First of all -- and this is especially true of the Western world even though it encompasses the whole world -- you are conditioned to be and to function independently. The saying, "But, father, I'd rather do it myself," or, "but, mother, I'd rather do it myself," or, "but, friend, I'd rather do it myself," causes one to be in a constant state of denial of unity with All That Is in the guise of being self-responsible. This is seen to be a virtue, and thereby causes one to continue to justify separation from his fellow man, and from the Father.


Why must you invite Jesus in? It is not because he is Jesus. It is because you need to break this habit of isolated, self-responsible, separation from life. It is not Jesus; it is not the person that you must invite in, because, I will tell you, there is no Personality to me -- that is of the ego. And when there is no personality present, when the ego has yielded to the divine Individuality, then the Christ is what is present. The Christ is the unobstructed presence of the Father. So, what you are inviting in is the unobstructed presence of the Father. But understand that your Guide -- and you do have one -- is also fully awakened, fully free of the ego, and is therefore the Christ, the unobstructed presence of the Father.


What you are being asked to do is to let someone into this very private, self-centered personality that is the be-all and end-all of everything when it is viewed from within the ego's frame of reference, and which must necessarily feel great humiliation if it is not self-sufficient. Yet the humility that is the result of a humiliated ego, the humility of That which you genuinely Are, comes forth in the willingness to join with another. Joining doesn't mean "in appearance." It means in Actuality -- which means, letting someone in. To paraphrase the Bible: If you cannot let in your brother, how can you let in the Father. Now, it was simple wisdom to use Jesus as the focal point in the Course for you to let into your life, because he represents, embodies, the dearest expression of divinity of any who have walked on the globe. Whether you have resistance to "Jesus" or not, you have not escaped the awareness that there was very little questionable about him. I am speaking in the third person here -- "him" and "he" instead of I and me -- because we are, indeed, still talking at a level of personality.


It is not really grasped what Christ-hood is. It is not really grasped what divinity is. So, the most effective tools you have to work with are those individuals who have most clearly expressed divinity in their humanity.


Even though Jesus was perceived by others as being a human being like them, he was, after the baptism, the undistorted and unobstructed presence of the Father, consciously. He was that before, but not totally consciously. And I speak again in terms of "he," because I am nothing more and nothing less than the presence of the Father.


Now, you must have a role model -- someone that there is the greatest willingness to join with, to let in. But, I will tell you that you can let in the Holy Spirit, you can let in your Guide, you can let in the Father, you can let in your Self. And the significance of the "letting in" is not relative to personality at all. The significance of it is in the defenselessness that must occur within you in order to let in and join with another. That is what undoes the ego, because it depends upon the ignorance that comes from isolation, the ignorance that results from a partial and limited view.


I encourage you not to get hung up with the term "Jesus," or the historical picture of him that has been developed, because I am not that Jesus. In other words, I am not the concept everyone has of me. I am me! And this "me" is the presence of the Father. We could say, "this me is the absence of anything pretending to be different from the Father."


If you want to know me, you must let go of everything that would be disturbing to you, because, after all, that would be nothing more than accumulated concepts and pictures which have been handed down to you, and they ought to be disturbing. It is like having an album of pictures of Hawaii, having never gone there, and gazing at them and telling people how much you love Hawaii. You have no idea what Hawaii is! You haven't experienced it yet. So, you are not out of line to have trouble with the concept of Jesus.


You are welcome to open up to me. You are welcome to open up to your Guide. You are welcome to open up to the Holy Spirit. You are welcome to open up to your Self. One is not preferable to the other. But, that you open up is essential to your Awakening, so that the shield of ego structures that seems to cause your separateness from Reality may be pierced by your willingness to join, which is inconsistent with the ego, and therefore constitutes a withdrawal of your investment in the ego that keeps it apparently going.


The Course does not enjoin you to invite Jesus in only. You are enjoined to invite the Holy Spirit in, to yield to It, to let It speak to you, to let It uncover in you what is not essential to your forward movement so that you may gladly let it go.


Again, the point is the willingness to join and release the ego's insistence upon maintaining a sense of complete independence, which means separation.


QUESTION: In line with that answer, my next question would be: I had an involvement with what I thought was an ascended Master, who I felt I was joining with. In You Are the Answer you said that one day you would no longer be Paul's Guide, but that wouldn't be sad for him in any way, that it would be a very natural process. Why was my experience with this entity, who I thought was my teacher -- why did I create such a painful separation for myself? It makes me hesitant to join again.


RAJ: You have heard the idea expressed of parents having to untie the apron strings and let their children move out on their own. We have the reverse situation here.


If you, or Paul for that matter, insist upon bringing apron strings that are not even there and attaching them to someone in whom you wish to invest authority, and therefore become self-irresponsible in the sense of not honoring your own Integrity, and if that insistence is willful enough, then the educational process which involves placing the attention where it needs to be -- in the one who wishes to attach the apron strings -- will be experienced as insulting and uncomfortable. It will be experienced as a betrayal. Not because the "teacher" has misled, but because the teacher is not allowing you to continue to mislead yourself, and the educational process will be done in the most effective way, which will promote the greatest amount of clarity as a result.


You were deferring to this one. You were giving your trust there, but not giving it within yourself. It is not that trust was inappropriately given to your Guide. It was that a withdrawal of trust in your Self occurred simultaneously. So, in effect, you were set on your own two feet clearly. It felt like abandonment when you were being Grounded in what mattered -- which was You. You were thrown back upon your Self.


Now, Paul has not been free of this same experience. You must realize that everything that happens with a "teacher" has you as the focal point, not the teacher. And it is your experience of your Integrity that is to be uncovered. In putting you firmly on your own two feet, you were put in a position where you could not help but begin to actually depend upon your own Integrity. Your Guide was not abandoning you, but doing that which uncovered your Integrity in the most appropriate way at the moment. What made it difficult was that you did not want to look at your Self. You wanted to adoringly do what you were told.


You see, you could have been told what you were doing, and you would have been obedient to what was uncovered. In other words, you would have backed off from investing your faith. But, you would have done it because you were being obedient, not because there was an inner motivation. And that would not have constituted learning.


Now, I do not mean to be too strong here, but waking up is not a party!


It is serious, even though it is constituted of such a clearing of one's experience of one's Integrity that it results in great joy, and great love, and great peace, and great invulnerability, et cetera. But, you see, the ego, if it could, would turn this into a process of "etiquette," where your Guide had better treat you right, "with manners," and not be inappropriate, and not do what you are not expecting, and by all means always express and fulfill the concept that is held as to what a "divine one" is -- longsuffering, patient, gentle, kind, insufferably loving and on and on and on.


Well, I will tell you, those are the ego's definitions of Christ-hood, of divinity, and if they were abided by, your ego would have a secure hold and would never leave.


Those divine ones working with you and everyone else are not present to cater to your ego's definition of "good manners." We are here to uncover the completely illusory nature of the ego, itself. And whatever we do will be insulting to the ego but substantiating to your Individuality, to your true Nature. We will do, at a gut level, at the deepest level of your feelings, that which uncovers your Integrity and promotes your taking hold of It for inner reasons, and not as a matter of simple obedience to a "wise one."


You will not get into the Kingdom of Heaven because you are able to behave in a Christ-like way. You will discover you are in the Kingdom of Heaven when you own and embrace your Christ-hood.


We are promoting not good behavior, but the experience of your divinity, the willingness on your part to invest your trust in Who You divinely Are, and to invest your trust in your unalterable unity with the Father, so that you will not see it as arrogant to claim your Christ-hood, but divinely natural -- again, though, not because you were told to do it, but because there is something in you that has become totally unsatisfied with and intolerable of the limits of the ego.


Now, this one has not abandoned you. This one has not ignored you. This one has still attended to you and will approach you and will respond to you when you are not inclined to give your power away.


You realize that those of the Brotherhood who are totally awakened do not want followers. We want our brothers and sisters -- equals -- with no sense of greater or lesser, no sense of wonderful obedience, but companionship that arises out of the inner experience of our equality with each other.


So, if you, or if Paul, insist upon honoring us to the point of negating or dishonoring yourselves, we will not cooperate with you. We will not cooperate with the ego in you that would distort the purpose and the meaning of the communion and thus delay the awakening that would allow the Brotherhood as a whole to experience Its Integrity consciously. That is done which will promote the inner shift, so that the motivation for one's awakening is a desire within oneself because there is a growing dissatisfaction with the ego "personality."


You see, it is devotion to the Christ that you are that is important, and not devotion to the Christ that I am, or the Christ that this Master is whom you were referring to. And you will not find the Christ of you if your attention is in a direction away from your Self. Not all learning can be accomplished through intellectual processes. Some learning must occur at an experiential level, because that's what truly constitutes the shift.



Women: Rescuing Abusive Men


QUESTION: The women I seem to be around, that I feel are genuine and caring and good women, seem to thrive on rescuing abusive men. They leave good men for down-and-out abusive men and try to help them and nurse them and nurture them along, or whatever, and it just tears them apart.


I don't understand it. Why is this happening so much? Why do they do this?


RAJ: I will put it very simply. Men, for centuries, have cast women in the subservient role of being the servant and nurturer of men, and nothing more. As a result, in order to establish some sense of integrity within themselves, women, over the centuries, turned this imprisonment into a "worthy cause." It thus became their means of creating self-respect for themselves to be the ultimate of nurturing, to be the ultimate in the pleasuring of a man, which necessarily involved the bearing of additional male children to carry on the line of the masculine dominator.


Now, this has resulted, over numerous lifetimes, in an automatic inclination -- instinct, if you will -- to fulfill what is actually the role of "mother" relative to men. And men have moved from mother to mother to mother, and have not engaged in a relationship with a wife, an equal. As a result, women tend to look for those whom they can nurture.


I will tell you something: Someone who is in obvious need is an obvious candidate for nurturing, for lifting out of his ignorance into his status as dominator. So, women frequently select those men who are expressing victimization and weakness so as to fulfill their "female role" of exalting that one into his "birthright," if you will, of Manhood. And these women do it, not realizing that they are continuing to fulfill an inappropriate role -- that of being less than whole, that of being worthless, or not in possession of the experience of fulfillment if they do not nurture and lift and exalt a male.


It is of course true that they get current nurturing of their subservient role from their mothers, and confirmation of it from their fathers. But I will tell you that the inclination to help men to "become" men is not acquired in this lifetime alone. So, it cannot be blamed entirely upon parents in this lifetime or society in this lifetime. But I will tell you something else: Women are going to have to own the fact that as the primary teacher of all of the children, whether male or female, they are the ones who have perpetuated their dominated role, and it is time to stop.


QUESTION: Are these women who are truly trying to mother or rescue abusive men helping them? They aren't, are they? It seems, from my perception, that it is destructive to both!


RAJ: You are absolutely correct. It confirms the helpless or victimized stance that the male is in, and it continues to confirm the victimized and self-disrespectful stance of the female, and it therefore furthers the dilemma. These men are not in their formative years, and if these women were emancipated, they would treat these men entirely differently. They would be more demanding, less nurturing, in the sense of being soft and patient and expressive of positive ideas. They would call for the man to be the man he is, and would have no *truck with the sense of victimization, and would literally spur these men to take hold of themselves or spur them to get out of the way of this independent, emancipated woman, who is unwilling to be subservient/nurturing.


In other words, the women would behave in the way that brought the game to a halt. The result of their attempting to exalt these men is the continuation of the inappropriate acting out of roles of victimization.


Understand that if one is coming from a standpoint of worthlessness, then one's actions must take on the nature of creating worth and validity. And if one is able to find a really wretched man to exalt, and the exaltation occurs, then the creation of self-worth has been far greater than if that woman had found a truly healthy and stable man and just managed to be fully happy with him. So, there is a deep motivation for getting the brightest gold star.


QUESTION: But isn't that a false sense of Reality?


RAJ: It is indeed a false basis for one's actions, because the basis is one of worthlessness needing to be replaced by earned worth. So, one's actions are coming out of a minus rather than a plus. And the one being helped is one seen as in a minus rather than a plus position. And the one being helped sees himself as being in a minus rather than a plus position. And two minuses don't ever make a plus. They make a bigger minus.


QUESTION: There are several women that I am close to who are in this exact situation, and have been, and are continuing to be in a position of rescuing. Once they're out of a rescuing situation, they leave the relationship and go into another. How can I help these women understand the cycle that…?


RAJ: I will tell you something: You will not be able to help them understand until they are uncomfortable with what they are doing, uncomfortable with their life. They are so busy going for the brass ring of establishing their worth that anything you might say would necessarily be interpreted as your encouraging them to stay in their worthlessness by forfeiting the "going for the brass ring." So, they will not be interested in being undermined by your intelligence if they are going to have to forfeit the method by which they are earning their worth. Do not even waste your breath until you are speaking with one who is distressed with her circumstances. Then your intelligence will have a fair chance of being heard as though it were intelligence.





Men: Their Spiritual Quest


[The following questions and answers are from the Carmel, California Workshop, A Weekend with Raj, held July 23-24,1988.]


QUESTION: Throughout written and spoken history the deeds of men are lauded and those of women largely ignored. I've been told the story of a man who wanted only to study the Gita. He was supposed to go to work every day, but instead he went and sat under a tree, studying the Gita. Meanwhile, his wife stayed at home caring for the children and taking handouts from neighbors in order to feed the family. My husband's interpretation of this story was that of an age-old phenomenon of people -- usually men -- searching for more than this world.


I am the mother of two boys, and a woman who feels an overwhelming responsibility to remain pretty well grounded to the here and now of daily living while I have dependent children. This is not to say that I would stifle myself for them, but there's a delicate balance to maintain and many times the scales easily tip toward taking care of them. I need help in understanding the reasons for the difference between what I see as the male and female so that I can have a workable marriage, and also, so that I can raise two boys with better understanding.


RAJ: The very points which you have put together so well ought to serve as guidance, and should give everyone pause for thought and reevaluation.


First of all, I want to point out that it is mothers who raise sons, because fathers are not at home, as you have already indicated. Although the male ego feels a natural desire to achieve, it is mothers who promote the idea of achievement -- at least for centuries they have promoted the very thing that kept them, the mothers, in bondage. So, that must be owned by women, and corrected!


Now, it is time for the spiritual quest to become relevant to the daily life -- the feeding of the children, the meeting of the need for shelter, the meeting of the need for clothing, the meeting of the need for physical health. It is no longer appropriate for the spiritual quest to occur in a cave, in private, separate and apart from the world. As I mentioned yesterday, we are talking this weekend about the correspondence between the divine and the human, the reciprocal nature of Being.


If your husband truly wants to follow his spiritual quest, he will begin to give his attention to discovering God in the provision of food for his children and the provision of a home for his wife and himself. He will look for the experience of unconditional love that allows for the discovery of the divinity of himself and you, in your relationship.


The wonder of finding the need met, no matter what it is, in a practical way, without having had to exert personal ego power to have that need met, is a wonder to experience. To find the magic, the miracle of life that is relevant to the human need, showing that the need is nonexistent because it has been fulfilled, is what it's all about. And you are more in touch with this than he is.


Now, his quest is not misguided, but the dynamics that he perceives go along with this quest are, and there will have to be modifications. But understand that these dynamics have been drummed into him by society, and by his parents -- his mother. So, do not blame him, because he has had the support of the world, so to speak. Be compassionate, but do not be too tolerant of unintelligence and lack of practical wisdom.


QUESTION: I'm sorry, but I need help understanding what you were talking about with "the wonder." I got lost there.


RAJ: You do understand that if there is a need for food and there doesn't seem to be a way to have it easily, and then a way unfolds to have it, that it is a source of great joy and confirms to you the fact that there is a God.


The meeting of the human need in your immediate experience with your children confirms to you the existence of a God, which your husband is attempting to achieve an awareness of by giving his attention somewhere else than with the family. And he is missing the wonder of the confirmation of his faith by looking outside of the immediate family -- his immediate nitty-gritty experience. He is looking for the wonder that you already recognize, and he thinks that it is not where he is, and not present in the mundane details of family life. And yet that is exactly where it is to be found.


QUESTION: So, when he says to me that I'm too practically minded, that I'm too worried about whether we're going to make it through the month or not, that that's appropriate for me in some respect?


RAJ: It is, indeed. It is important for his attention to be brought to the specific place where fulfillment is awaiting his discernment. Do not be afraid to provide that focus by saying, "there is a need here," so that he may bring his intent to follow his spiritual quest to that apparent need and see through it, and find it fulfilled -- no longer continuing to appear to be a need -- and then being able to delight at the confirmation of his faith and the proof that God is relevant, that Reality is relevant to the human condition, the human experience.


QUESTION: Thank you.


RAJ: You see, the spiritual quest, in its ultimate distortion, was called The Crusades. Men left home and went out on the quest. But the fact is that the Kingdom of Heaven is within you. And that is why I keep saying, "Pay attention to where you are." Don't try to rise above where you are, because you are trying to rise above the opportunity to recognize that right where you are is the Kingdom of Heaven, is the presence of the Father being all that there is, and available to be experienced as fulfillment.


But, understand that this is not a popular idea. It is a popular idea to go for the Holy Grail, to search the Universe, to rise above the human condition into bliss, when the bliss is to be found in the experience of the congruence of the divine and the human -- the fact that they are not two, but one, and that one is the visibility and tangibility of the other.


Although I am speaking in split terms, I am not describing something that is actually divided. We can talk about gold. We can talk about its color, its density, its texture, its hardness or softness. Yet, we are talking about one thing, and you cannot separate the hardness or the softness from its color or its texture.


The ego has every single one of you searching for the Holy Grail outside of Yourself. So, until you are free from looking outside of yourself, be compassionate with the fact that your husband is suffering from the same belief. It is understandable even though it needs to be corrected!


QUESTION: He says to me that he's not looking outside of himself, that he is looking within himself.


RAJ: But, you know better. Because when he is looking truly within himself, he is going to become relevant to the very things you are talking to him about. Paying the rent, and having the food that is needed, will be taken care of, because that is where he will delight in discovering the presence of God as the presence of the fulfillment of those needs.


QUESTION: So he won't be so frustrated and feeling so angry about having to do those things?


RAJ: That is correct. You see, society and his ego, together, tell him that he is not going to be able to find God in mammon. And he interprets his world as "mammon." That false interpretation or judgment on the world is what causes everyone to look elsewhere, to rise above it. So, the very process of searching for divinity is "accomplished" by denying it, by turning away from the very place where it is to be discerned and experienced. That is the way the ego works.


We are talking about a turnaround here, one, which no one has been strongly educated to practice. Again, you must realize that it is understandable, it is not unreasonable that your husband is taking this tack, this approach.


To the degree that you can see that it is understandable, you will be less judgmental, even though you know you must bring the attention back to the specific human needs at hand.


QUESTION: Thank you.



Healing: Treatment vs. Yielding


[In 1986 Raj revealed that not only does each one of us have a Guide, we also have what has come to be called a "healing team" which works under the jurisdiction of our Guide for the purpose of revealing our physical health. The following questions and answers are relative to this form of healing.]


QUESTION: My question has to do with metaphysical treatment and the Healing Team. In my case, Christian Science treatment, whether I had asked for it or I was exercising my own understanding, had to do with the declaration of the truth and the realization of that truth in action, in manifestation, in operation. With the Team, it almost seems like White Magic to me because it does not appear to require anything other than my asking. It seems like with the Team there is no conscious responsibility, no realization or learning involved. But, I do have an awareness of underlying, continuous quality Life and a preclusion of error, discord and disease. It's sort of like a subconscious thing rather than something that I am conscious of being able to put to work.


I would like to know, what is my part in this?


RAJ: First of all, you do not tend to be a care-less thinker. I do not have to tell you to "stand porter at the door of thought," because that is your well-established practice and habit. You do not indulge in fantasy, nor do you indulge in fear, nor do you indulge in negative thinking. And if you slip occasionally into any of those, you catch yourself rapidly because of this well-established practice and habit. So, it is not necessary for me to tell you to watch your thoughts, to use inner mental discipline. So, we are attending to, if I may put it this way, the next step for you, which is what all of the metaphysical work is about -- that being arriving at the point through logic of yielding to the Father, yielding to the truth that your reasoning and logic have brought you to the clear discernment of.


Now, there are those who do not have this background that you have, who do not have an established practice and habit of not indulging in fear and not letting their imagination run away with them. With these individuals I do address the need to stand porter at the door of thought, to use discipline so that they are not governed by their emotions, and so that they are not governed by their ignorant preconceptions or concepts.


The instantaneous or very rapid healings that you have experienced did not arise out of the power of the declaration of the Truth, but the acceptance of the truth of the declaration, and the spontaneous yielding to the Father's Will. The metaphysician you worked with knew unequivocally that the strength of the truth did not lie in her declaration of it, but in the degree to which she was not practicing justifications to the contrary. The declaration of Truth for her constituted a movement of willing alignment with What Was -- with "the Fact," as she put it. And to the degree that her personal sense of herself was out of the picture, not accomplishing anything at all, the healings were instantaneous.


You must understand that it was not a result of the power of the declaration.


Your mother, also, did not argue on the side of the belief. It was the yielding to the Fact, the absence of exercising continued declaration of the truth, as though the continuance of it and the force of it were what would bring the healing about, that allowed the truth to be experienced instantaneously. The truth, to them, was true! And they let go into it.


Now, this letting go is not just a letting go into nothing, even though your mother might not have been able to describe to you the fullness of the experience of what she was letting go into. But the Will of the Father is the presence of all of the Meaning of what the Father is. And all of the Meaning of what the Father is is fully realized in every single Individuality who is totally awakened and not claiming a separate selfhood or will from the Father. So, what you are letting go into constitutes a union with the consciously realized Brotherhood of Man, which is the unobstructed presence of the Father in action.


It is not just a yielding into the Father, the vague but dynamically present and omnipotent God, but the experiential communion with the infinitely individualized presence of God, which for lack of better words we call the Brotherhood of Man. So, it constitutes a "relationship," if you will. A consciously experienced relationship. A joining. And what is being joined with is not just another individuality, but the fullness of what Individuality is as the presence of the Father.


Now, the ego sense of self is a very private sense of self, closed off from this communion, this Oneness, because of the fact that this sense of self-hood, in order to maintain itself, must hold itself apart from everything else.


It is very humiliating to this arrogant, supposititious sense of self to have to join with something apparently other than itself, because its claim to selfhood involves the necessity of being able to claim its authorship of its good. Yet, its good is not to be found in its separateness, but rather in its inseparability from the Whole, the Father, the infinite individualized expression of the Father.


Love cuts through the ego because one cannot love or be love alone. Likewise, one cannot experience healing of the ego's distortions alone. And healing has never occurred as an isolated result of an isolated expression of authority. This is why Mary Baker Eddy indicated that "the human mind [the ego] plays no part in the healing process." This is why a declaration of truth, the Power of Positive Thinking, the practice of affirmations, in themselves, can accomplish nothing. At their very best they can constitute a declaration of truth with such clarity that it becomes easy to perceive what one needs to align himself with, and thereby be in a position of ceasing to exercise personal authority and yield to the authority of That which is already the Fact.


Standing porter at the door of thought, practicing mental self-discipline simply allows one to arrive at the point of "letting go and letting God." It is in that letting that the healing occurs. And that is always the way it has been.


It is simply time now to begin to recognize the presence of your brothers and sisters as the active presence of the Will of the Father because they are exercising and claiming no other Will but the Father's.


QUESTION: By that do you mean "the Brotherhood"?


RAJ: That is what I mean.


QUESTION: Totally Awakened.


RAJ: Yes.


QUESTION: Not my earthly brothers and sisters…


RAJ: ... who are still dreaming, no. It is time for this family of man to come into a clearer and more conscious awareness of itself.


Asking for help from the Healing Team constitutes an act of investment of trust in the Actuality and Presence of this Brotherhood that is Actual. It provides a focus for "letting in" more of the Totality of your Being as the presence of the Father claiming no other identity than the Father.


You, as an intellect, have never ever been responsible for any healing you have experienced, or that another might have seemed to have experienced as a result of your clarity. The ego cannot be clear.


If clarity has been experienced, it is because you have let it fill you, and you have not claimed any other point of view. And if you have let it fill you, then you have been defenseless against the communion, and there has been only one Will present. It is important to understand this because it is still possible for the ego to suggest that metaphysical healing is the result of the clear thinking of the human mind. And that the healing has been the result of a practice of authority or sovereignty from the level of the intellect.


Properly used, the discipline of the intellect allows you and everyone else to arrive at a point of letting it go. Because the intellect has proven so conclusively that there is a God to let go into, you can dare to let go into It, and thus join with the Father. But understand again that the Father is not just the Father. The Father is the constituting presence of every single Individuality that exists. And when those Individualities are in possession of their right mind -- meaning, claiming no other Mind than the Father -- then union with the Father means union with the Brotherhood of Man.


So, this approach, if you will, constitutes the next valid step in your spiritual growth; that of yielding any sense of private authority and thereby discovering the transformational healing power of your union with God, which means your union with every single Individualization of the Father. This, for lack of better words, constitutes a relationship with your Brother, and therefore requires a defenselessness, an act of Love, a letting in of your Brother.


Now, I have said before that you cannot get into the Kingdom of Heaven in a crowd, or in a group -- that you get into the Kingdom of Heaven alone, as a result of your very own steps. But, by the same token, you cannot get into the Kingdom of Heaven without joining. It is your responsibility to become defenseless. No one else can do that for you. It is a singular and isolated act. But it is an act of joining consciously and on purpose. And in the joining, the sense of being isolated and separate in any way dissolves.


The choice and the act of letting yourself into the Kingdom of Heaven, letting the Kingdom of Heaven into you, is an isolated act of joining, and that is what is beginning here in this approach to healing. "Approach" is not the best word, but we will use it for now.


It continues to be important for you to think clearly, to stand porter at the door of thought, to consciously practice intelligence -- not because the intelligence has power over erroneous conditions, but because it allows you to arrive at the point of trusting into your divinity, trusting into the Father, yielding to and joining with the one Will of God.


QUESTION: I don't feel I'm understanding your intent. It has to do with your statement about not being able to be loved alone or to be able to be loving alone. I say, when I hear that, "but, I am alone," and it sounds like you're saying, "Well, when you're alone, you can't experience love." And sometimes it does seem like that.


RAJ: It is simple. If you are feeling love, if you are being love, you are not alone! The experience is not a private experience. It is felt by all who are totally Awake, consciously, and it is felt by those who are dreaming, unconsciously. But, the experience of being love is never private.


Now, healing is something which occurs when one reaches outside of the tiny sense of aloneness and is willing to join with God by means of prayer or petition, or with one's Healing Team, or with the Holy Spirit, or with me, or with a practitioner, or with a minister, or with whomever that one extends the willingness to embrace. But, the act of solitude, the act of isolation, the act of being alone -- and I promise you it is always an act or decision -- blocks the universal experience, and that is what results in the problem, of whatever form, that that one feels the need of healing for. It is the claim to privateness, it is the claim to separation, which manifests as illness or disease or grief or loneliness. That is why, when you asked the question in Winnipeg, I brought out that loneliness is actually an attack on God, because it is an act of being private, an act of separating.


One cannot love when one is justifying and claiming separation or separateness. The two are totally incompatible. It is not that if you appear to be alone, without a mate or without many companions, that you are incapable of being love or experiencing love. It is that if, in spite of that physical sense of distance between you and others, in spite of that, you dare to love, and you dare to open up to the love that you are embraced by, embraced with, from all of the Brotherhood that is awake, and the Father, you are not justifying and maintaining aloneness, isolation.


QUESTION: Raj, am I correct in feeling that I am loving, and I am loved, generally speaking, and that I am not truly lonely? I do experience a sense of lonesomeness for certain individuals or certain circumstances, but am I fooling myself in thinking that I am not lonely?


RAJ: Absolutely not. You see, when you asked the question in the last conversation, it had to do with the difference between independently demonstrating health as a result of one's own metaphysical clarity, spiritual clarity, and what I was bringing out was that the healing never resulted from individual private clarity. The clarity always brought you to the point where you could trust into the everpresence and omnipresence of the Father, and that constituted the joining that I was speaking of. And it was from the joining from the release of the sense of total personal responsibility for your well-being, that you had the experience of healing. You get the point?




RAJ: And so it is time to completely release that sense of being a personal or private healer as a result of one's personal or private thoughts, no matter how well they ring of the truth. Because it isn't the thoughts that do it. It is the thoughts that bring you to the point where you can dare to yield to God. And yielding to the Father, letting yourself abide in and be supported by what God is, constitutes the joining that allows the Oneness to be experienced as healing.


QUESTION: Raj, I relate to that in the concept of being responsible for myself. But, you just said something about being a healer, like a Christian Science practitioner, or any metaphysical practitioner of any background. When someone comes and says, as I am with you now, "I don't understand this," or, "I don't feel well. Will you help me?" It seems as though there is a focalized request or demand and acknowledgment. They wouldn't be there at your doorstep if they weren't acknowledging that they, too, see the oneness with the Father. So, when someone comes to me and says, "I have a problem. I want to talk to you about it," in the past I would have drawn on what I have learned, to share.


RAJ: You have very seldom relied on pat answers, and the rehearsal of specific words. You have, whether consciously put into words or not, said, "Father, help me to be the transparency for Truth here." You have allowed the words, and the quotes, to arise out of a deeper impulsion in you. You have not, unless you were under great stress at the moment, grasped for quotations, pat answers. You have not relied upon your memory.


Now, you are asking me, Raj, questions. But I am not fooled into answering as "Raj," because I am the place where God shines through, and nothing else. So, you ask, and God answers. And when somebody has come to you, you have, generally speaking not been sucked into answering the questions as [person], and you have let God answer. And when you, [person], have been out of the way most completely, what has occurred has been healing.


But, I do not tell you, "Do not ask me, Raj, questions, because Raj is not here to answer them." I do not quibble about the format, just as you do not quibble about the format. Those practitioners who are "the most effective," are the ones who are out of the way the most, and know that they, personally -- they as a human mind -- play no part in the healing process. But, the people calling upon them may think that they are calling upon Joe or John or Mary or Vera, or whoever. And one doesn't quibble over it. But, nevertheless, the practitioners who are worth their salt, do manage, as time goes on, to convey the fact that they, personally, are not responsible, that they are being the transparency, the place, where Truth may express Itself. And they do this so that those individuals who are coming to them and learning how to practice, might not bring into play a sense of their own personal responsibility in the healing process.


The healing has always come from the release of and diminishment of the sense of private selfhood, separate and apart from the allness of God. And the problems have always arisen out of the establishment and maintenance of a sense of private selfhood, which is called egotism -- self-made self-governed, independent, not connected with, not having to cooperate with or be subject to anything other than its own arrogant, private, and selfish self-expression. That is what creates the illusion. That is what creates the pain. That is what creates the sorrow, et cetera.


When the Healing team works with you, it is the Father revealing You to you. It is not highly skilled divine Individualities functioning as Individualities. They are being nothing more and nothing less than the presence of the Will of God. And that is the Fact. And so you are reaching out to and yielding to, and allowing yourself to be embraced by nothing more and nothing less than the presence of God.


But, God is constituted of What He Is, and What He Is is infinitely Self-expressed, and His infinite Self-expression is Himself. And so there are Individualities who can be identified as a Healing Team. And their claim to validity as Individualities arises out of the Fact that God is truly all that is there, and that His Will is being perfectly expressed. That there is a Healing Team that you call upon is not just a conceptual structure that is being allowed for the time being until you can see that it is really all God, and then we won't have to talk about the Healing Team, or those Individualities.


So, there is a two-fold aspect here. You are, at the bottom line, yielding to God, joining with God, when you ask for help from the Healing Team. You are also yielding to and joining with others of the Brotherhood of Man, and opening yourself up to your own experience of "relationships" with the Brotherhood, so that your Oneness is experienceable not only with the Source but with the infinite manifestation of the Source. This is very expansive and relieving, because it begins to bring you into a clearer experience of your divinity, and what those words, "your divinity," means, because you cannot be divine alone!


Your divinity, because you are the complete expression of the Father, from whom nothing has been withheld, embraces every other Individuality who exists.


QUESTION: By "Individuality," you mean totally awakened Individualities.


RAJ: And even those who are dreaming still, yes. But those who are dreaming are not in a position of communicating with you or being present with you consciously with a sense of their unity with you.


QUESTION: Are you speaking of this "third-dimensional dream"?


RAJ: Yes. And there is third-dimensional dreaming going on elsewhere as well, even among those who have passed on. It is not just localized to what you call your universe.



Conversations with Raj is made up of actual questions and answers drawn, with permission, from private conversations with Raj and public Workshops. Rajpur, an Ascended Master, is an Individuality making himself known by means of conscious channeling through Paul Norman Tuttle for the purpose of facilitating the major shift of consciousness which mankind is entering into. 


Conversations with Raj is published monthly by Paul Norman Tuttle, 1221 Toledo St., Bellingham, WA 98226. Phone: 206-734-4418. Subscription price, prepaid, one year $36.00; single copy $3.00. Copyright Ó 1989 by Paul Norman Tuttle. All rights reserved.