Here is the comment

“Consciousness, the level of perception, was the first split introduced into the mind after the separation, making the mind a perceiver rather than a creator. Consciousness is correctly identified as the domain of the ego. The ego is a wrong-minded attempt to perceive yourself as you wish to be, rather than as you are. Yet you can know yourself only as you are, because that is all you can be sure of. Everything else is open to question.” ~ Holy Spirit or Jesus in A COURSE IN MIRACLES

RJS: I have tremendous respect for ACIM. Tremendous. The discrepancy is very simple to explain if one will take into consideration how terribly sadly limited human language is. TERMS MUST BE FOREVER CLARIFIED by the person using them! Rupert Spira is so good at driving this point home.
Well, here goes: If you’re using the term consciousness or awareness to imply ego and don’t deviate from that implication, fine.
If you happen to be referring to a total absence of things – things that have names and labels, you’re then merely pointing to Absolute Pure Awareness, Spirit, God, without names labels – just a pure ocean of Absolute Awareness.
It’s simply not being used the same way that paragraph in acim is employing it. No reference to human ego, human mind or even human existence is intended.