Did You Mean Poor or Poor?

Logion 54, is another gem, and a "prequel" to the NT, because it is quoted in the canonical gospel literature (Mt 5:3, Lk 6:20). And it has caused its fair share of misunderstandings by being taken literally, all of which revolves around guilt. Within the Jesus material this expression "poor" is obviously closely related to the idea of "rich" as in why a "rich man" is unlikely to enter the Kingdom. What Jesus evidently is talking about is riches and poverty in worldly terms, but he never addresses the physical, the specific, the concrete - he warns us all along that it all comes to us ("those outside") in parables - so he is talking about "valuing the valueless," as the expression goes in the Course. I.e. we spend most of our time being rich in the things of the world, which are worthless, not just possessions, but especially special relationships. They are valuable to us because they reconfirm the false self. Thus the ego reckons them to be of value. The subtle difference here is that you can be wealthy and not very attached to money, or wealthy and be a miserable scrooge. So none of this is about the amount of things anyone possesses, but about how much stock he sets in the things of the world. Simply therefore, the more we value the things of the world, the more we block ourselves from the Kingdom - it just all gets in the way.

Another way of looking at this misunderstanding, is that it's part of the ego's basic lack of comprehension, because within the framework of the dualistic consciousness of this world of time and space, it is bound to take the appearance at face value, because not to do so necessitates questioning the ego itself, which is a no no (to the ego). This is why Jesus says, that to "those outside" it all comes in parables, for unless we are "inside" with Jesus, we are destined to take this world literally. When we join with Jesus (in the mind) and "follow him" (in the mind), we will see that everything in the dualistic world is just a symbol, and it's up to the chooser if we want to be in hell and choose to look at it with the ego, or if we want to play with the nice kids in Heaven, and look at it with the eyes of the Holy Spirit, or Jesus.

"Poor" therefore in the context of this saying is similar in meaning to the "alone" we've found elsewhere. It is like the cleaning out the Augias stables in Greek mythology, just ridding ourselves of all the extra baggage which is holding us back. This is what the forgiveness process of the Course is all about as well. It's those attachments to "old stuff" which are the "obstacles to love's presence," which the Course talks about, and as long as we cling to them, we shut ourselves out of the Kingdom. The story of the ego, is simply a pile of resentments from an imaginary past (for it does not exist except in my memory), which in catch-22 manner, which would do Yossarian proud, are used to replace our vision in the present with the perception based on the past, thus justifying decisions in the presence which reinforce the ego and the separation, and thus validate the past. When we no longer choose for the past and the ego, the Kingdom is simply ours, for it always was, we simply suffered a bout of amnesia while we followed the pied piper that is the ego.

In short, Jesus meant "poor" as not invested in the values of the world, which would make us rich in the eyes of the world, but poor in spirit, for they are the idols which are the ego's magical spell, which keeps the spirit outside. Conversely "poor" in worldly attachments, would make us "rich" in spirit, for ours is the Kingdom.