 So we're going to start today and go through the Dreamer of the Dream section. Suffering is an emphasis upon all that the world has done to injure youth. Here is the world's demented version of salvation, clearly shown. Like to a dream of punishment in which the Dreamer is unconscious of what brought on the attack against himself, he sees himself attacked unjustly and by something not himself. I think that sentence really gets into two central ideas, attacked unjustly. So that's the old thing of it's not fair and by something not himself. That's where the subject object split comes in. That's something not himself could be another person. Other than himself, which he identifies as a person, it could be a dog. Someone could feel themselves perceived as attacked by a hurricane or tornado. But it is something that is not himself. You can tell beneath all of those things, which seem to be quite varied in form, still the subject object split. There's something that is doing the attacking and there's something that's being attacked. And again, if we took that in a little deeper, it would be the body identification or the personhood, which is the subject. Person versus something. Or it could be the strange variation, which is summarized maybe by the statement, I keep beating myself up over this where it's the body and the person that seems to do things to themselves. But this is not the real self, of course. It's just an image. They talk about self-inflicted wounds or drawing pain to myself or attracting pain in some form or this and that. And that's all still... Self-hate. It's still broken up as if the self is an image in linear time. And somehow as if you can think of times when you've done things to harm yourself or whatever. Or even seem to be doing something. It would seem that somebody who had a knife who inflicted a wound on the arm, that would seem to be a self-inflicted wound. But that still isn't self. That's the image. That's just another image just like an image of an intruder coming into a house, so to speak, and coming in and inflicting a wound, which seemed to be different than a self-inflicted wound. But in those cases, bodies can seem to harm other bodies. And bodies can even seem to harm themselves. But all of them are projections. All of them are images. Sirs, are you saying that it's always a case of... There's always a person involved and there's always something else. And the conflict seems to be between the person and something else. I'm trying to translate this over to when you project on to the person that you identify with. And then it's the person you identify with against or in conflict with life. So the person you identify becomes the object, the subject and the object. I think it's what you're saying. It's like you can even make what seems to be one thing filled with the subject and the object. When you say self-inflicted wound, is this one actually inflicting harm or injury or attacking oneself? And the basic premise of the course is that mind cannot attack. Good. Hallelujah, thank heavens. That's why mind is innocent. Because mind cannot attack. The wrong mind is part of this construction where it's identified. The mind believes it has left its abstract reality and it's taken on form and bodies can seem to attack. So the illusion of attack seems to occur in form. And there is a sense of that. I mean, even in expressions when we say I'm warring myself or I'm fighting against myself or how emotions that we have, that there's almost two parts of me that are in conflict. Even in expression, part of me knows or part of me feels or part of me, whatever, is it? Yeah, parts, you know, that aren't always congruent or something. They don't agree. And that way, whether it's self-inflicted wound in terms of physical or I'm having a war in my mind right now or whatever, all of them are just statements of the wrong mind. What mind is warring with itself. And it seems, it's very careful when you even get into warring and talk about different parts. It's again that the right mind and the wrong mind are not at war. The right mind does not respond. The right mind does not respond. The wrong mind, you could say attacks or even better, is just a belief system of attack. Not like it's an entity. So it's the illusion of attack. And the images that are always seeming to be at war, the different parts, are always different segments and aspects of an illusion. In other words, when someone says, for example, well, I'm going to, like a runner, I'm not really competing against other runners, but I'm competing with myself. It's really just two images. It's like the mind holding off maybe like an ideal time for running the mile or whatever. Or maybe it's some time that it's run in the past. So it's a past image of a time that is run. And now it believes that it's a separate image from that now, and it's going to try to run and beat that time. So we're always talking about, whenever we're talking about competition with oneself or attacking oneself or whatever, there are images that are involved in that. So what's the image, or the image involved in someone doing it? They seem to be the one doing it and the one receiving it. The one attacking and the one being attacked. The arm, kind of like you could say that's holding the knife. And the arm is getting it. What I hear you saying, too, is just a demonstration of the duality, which is the wrong mind. It doesn't take two of anything to demonstrate duality, not two bodies or not an attacker and a person being attacked by a victim and a victimizer. It's the duality in the mind. It's not the physical duality of a subject and an object. It's projected out that way. Even if you set a self-inflicted wound, there would be the kind of the hand that was holding the knife and the arm that was getting the wound. You can still see the duality perceived in the world. Even in that example, you could say, well, it's just one person, one body. Well, wait a minute. One's holding the knife and one's receiving the blow, so to speak. See, it's not... When you were saying it's in the mind, the whole key is to see the mind. It doesn't want to see that. It's just holding on to a false belief system. So it projects the split out of the world and it does see duality. You could just say plain duality. That is cleaning what is one into parts. That's where all the extremes come in that we've talked about. Hot, cold, fast, slow, male, female, high, low, on and on and on, all the seeming extremes. Right arm, left arm. Right arm was nice. Left arm without a knife. You could break it up any way you wanted, but the whole key is to start to see that there isn't any duality in the world. The world's just a screen. It comes back to our borderland discussion where the key thing is to learn what is the same and what is different. What is the same? All the images. Everything on the screen is the same. What is different? The right mind and the wrong mind. Two different purposes in mind. They are different. They like it all. One's a reflection of reality, the other one's non-existent. They're different in every way. So that's what we keep coming back to all the time. It's just a clear, clear understanding of what is the same. You can tell that all of the seeming upsets that have come up over the last several weeks or years and whatever have always been an ambiguity about that distinction. You have to believe that specifics are different for them to be important. Whether there's this kind of the number of cookies in a jar or not, whether the rug is this clean or not, whether you go on and on and on. All the seeming difficulties that come up have the underlying assumption that there are aspects of this world that are different from other aspects. And consequently, some can be better than others. Some can be better than others. And causation. As simple as the little thing you were just sharing about the pamphlet that the newsletter, so to speak, or whatever you call it, could excerpts from the dialogue, could wet the appetite for the pamphlets. You can see the causation even in subtle ways is in there. The point of all of this is to come to the awareness that images are images or images. Illusions are one. That there isn't any causation in the world. Talk about rest. What would you need to do? And what conflict could you feel if you realized there wasn't duality in the world? There wasn't hierarchies of images. Miracles would be universal. Miracles would be... There would be no order of difficulty in miracles. You would have on your hands the last miracle. And the first. The miracles is kind of like taking this idea of the atomenance as if it's strung out, the mind believes in linear time, as if it's a string, like beads on a string. The first bead was the same as the last bead. The beads in between were somehow helping collapse the string so that the first bead and the last bead could come together and be seen as one and the same. The first miracle and the last miracle was and is the atomen. And the only reason that this is a course in miracles and is being described in terms of becoming more miracle-minded and thinking habitually, miracle-minded, and right-mindedness and that is because the mind believes in linear time. So that's a metaphor. The miracle is a metaphor of all those beads in between. Holy encounters are the same way. It seems as if it's described as if whenever you meet anyone, remember it's a holy encounter. Well, as you see the body components that are described in that metaphor, as you see anyone, as you see him, you will see yourself. As you treat him, you will treat yourself. As you think of him, you will think of yourself. When we're going to be traveling to some of these places out west, you'll start to see that they're starting to come to the idea that there's only one miracle about the atomen. There's only one holy encounter. There's only one holy instant. You know, it's transcending the metaphors and coming to that state of mind that sees all that was just like stepping stones. There's only one holy relationship. It's not described that way, and of course the miracle is a lot of time.