Namaskar Mana ji,
Apologies, I must beg your indulgence for a little longer. I am hitting the wall of imprecise words creating paradoxes due to duality/nonduality, and finding it very difficult to explain what is in my heart. But I feel I may be missing something important. I don't know how I can express this and still be concise and short...
I understand what you are saying, it is truth. But I cannot agree that Bhakti is only a result of Surrender. Bhakti is Surrender, it is devotion and love. I do not think you can have one without the other. I am defining Bhakti here as complete Devotion and Love to one's Ista Devata, as I understand it that is the classic meaning of the word, and the root denotes giving and/or receiving one's share. Bhakti isn't a goal to achieve, it is complete trust, love, devotion and surrender to God and, if you have one, to Guru. Realization is the natural conclusion of complete Surrender/Bhakti. To to have Bhakti, one at first needs a direction in which to Surrender, or express Bhakti, even though in the end it is Surrender both to and of the Self. Knowing only that there is an Immanent God and nothing else is not enough of a direction for most, thus the question I posed above.
It is interesting that there is another thread concurrent with this one that definitely explains what I am trying to say better than I seem to be able to: C. Smith ji's thread on Surrender and Love. Particularly Devotee ji's observations in the second post, and specifically point B.
Thank you so much for engaging with me in this, it is incredibly helpful in smoothing out the knots of confusion in my own mind and reaching a deeper understanding. In doing this, it helps me to quiet my thoughts and surrender even more. I am very grateful.
~Pranams
Bookmarks