Namasté Devotee
I have now read Yajvan’s excellent reply, which I would like to address seperately and Smaranam’s good response. Thank you for your replies.
My initial post was to capture the thoughts of others as much as to address my own interest in worship and surrender. I wanted to hear it from both dualist and non-dualists alike, as to be honest I appreciate the thought provoking replies. The responses were varied and helpful, which is why I ask questions. With your kind offer to discuss I wish to try to explain my thoughts with use of lines from your post above as guides. I would be interested if you wish to pick up on this point below and I encourage criticism or questions should the reader feel they arise:
As long as there is "I", there is duality ... & there is God .... as real as "I" is .... and there is a need to surrender .... as real as the "I" & God.
You are absolutely correct. This is the perfect non-dual statement. So what is my point and where does it leave the apparent “I” (as each of us is this “I”, it is probably best to answer this from our own perspective rather than to assume it is just “me” that lacks greater understanding).
Once the “I” is seen as nothing apart from non-dual Brahman should we really, for example, become a wandering monk and live from alms? No, because how can the question arise when it is known completely that all is just happening. As the effect is contained in the cause. Once this is known then there cannot be an ego separate from the whole which acts on its own cause as its cause is the greater cause. So what is meant to happen, simply happens. Perhaps a man who is a hard working business man receives grace and is self-realised (choose an expression you prefer). The business man continues to run his business and care for his family whilst knowing “Aham Brahamasi” if that is what is “willed” for him. That self-realised man continues to live his life, however he may no longer be living his life for him, but rather life is being lived. This does not imply passivity, but the passivity is the inaction in action which Krishna speaks of in the Gita. The business man deals with emotions and reactions of the business and customer concerns but silence and bliss is his nature.
So there is no need for complete surrender for the non-dualist, as you correctly state. However there are still objects and all the complexity of modern life when we are not asleep or in turiya.
.You can't have "I", "You" & all being God-consciousness as the reality is in Turiya ... all simultaneously.
The reality is Turiya, but in the waking state there is still an “I” a “you” and a “God” and this needs to be understood.
Once Bharman is known then the miracle is that being (sat) is experienced as an apparent “I” with a “you” an a “God”, even if on the waking state we can only explain these phenomena as “thoughts”. These are all experienced not only as the experiencer among separate objects but as the whole and part of Brahman from the Advaitin perspective. Likewise to say that worship or “surrender” no longer holds a role is to say that “I should become a monk and live on alms”, it is to imply an individual choice of selection and deselection based on my likes, which we know to imply duality. However, and this is my point, if worship (or any choices and action) arise then that is what is right, everything has its place. It is not that there is a doer seeking reward from worship, it is as spontaneous as trying to stop a falling glass, it just happens and already in that happening is the purpose and the justification for all existence. It happens in the waking state, which by its very nature has the apparent objects and subject.
So the apparent “I” does just what it needs to do, including being an “I” and including worship if that happens. However the doing and the existence is different. To say to myself that “I don’t need to worship” is a part of the illusion as it implies that I am separate from my action. It is similar to if I say that without Turiya I am no longer part of the Brahman, which is not right. Do we have a choice on our state of wake, sleep or turiya? No, no because all states are non-dual Brahman and so all needs to be taken as relatively true. It all appently happens, but it still happens.
As mentioned I am happy for criticism or feedback, so if the reader doesn’t agree, please say why and "I" am open to advancement.
Bookmarks