Master Class in Surrender - 12th Sept. 2016

Yes, because we say that when I find, I find that there is no meaning, no purpose to go to. Just this what is happening itself must be the purpose of existence. Existing, existence experiencing itself as existence in this play must be the purpose right now. Therefore, if this is true, then can we, upon this seeing truly, can we continue to carry an intention?

Intention implies some idea about what the future should contain, isn't it? No, no, no intention. Because by intention, we are already imagining something in the future that doesn't exist. Therefore, we have seen that this, if we can say anything which is purposeful, is just the experiencing of this right now. This is the meaning that we give to life. Therefore, all intention, which by definition implies what should happen then, is meaningless, you see. Now, without intention, would you say that there is still some need to surrender something? And what surrender, if it is not just the dropping of these intentions?

There is... if there are no intentions, there is no need to surrender.

Exactly. And you've seen that to have an intention after the insight that all there is is just this—the purpose is just this which is already unfolding as is—therefore, to hold the intention seems like just an idea not aligned to the truth. And a surrender is a surrendering of all of our intention. And if it is seen that intention is powerless and useless anyway, then what is left to surrender?

Nothing. That's good.

So would you say that not having an intention is to live a surrendered life? Life is already surrendered, yes. Then what does our surrender actually imply? When we say that 'I refuse to surrender' or 'I am surrendering,' what does it actually imply?

That implies that if we are holding on to something, if we are holding on to any idea or intention, whatever... basically whatever we are holding on to, that is to be surrendered. And ultimately the one who is holding these things—I mean the idea of the ego identity—that has to be...

Very good, very good. Therefore, as long as we have something which can be surrendered, there is a meaning to surrender. But when we see that there is nothing to be surrendered, then it's just like that, yes. So would you then say that the truest recognition of surrender is to see that it has always been surrendered? It is only one Consciousness which is the one doer and one experiencer of all that has happened, yes. Then we have... in this way, then even the burden, the seeming burden that 'I have to surrender' or 'I am not surrendering,' all these ideas can also be dropped, isn't it?

Yes, it's very good. Because again, whether to surrender or not to surrender implies a 'me' has to be.

Yes, exactly. A 'me' has to do a surrender. Exactly, exactly. So surrender is again a recognition of the state of this recognition—that this is already as is. Therefore, the Master's instruction that 'hand it over,' to surrender to Consciousness or surrender to existence, is a pointer towards the truth of what already is. So when we say that 'Yes, it is now handed over to existence,' we start to see that it has always been this way, and this pretend doership is now very light or mostly dissolved. Does this mean then that I don't have to do anything at all?

Me? The actions? If actions have to happen, they will happen. The individual doer of that is the main point. Yes, something has to arise and some action has to come, it will come. There is no individual doer of that.

Very good. So we can say that 'I don't have to do anything,' that is also true, and still actions do happen. It's a paradox, but both go together. Now, if the questioner doesn't have this insight and they still feel like they have a choice, a sense of choice about what to do or not do, what would your advice be for them?

If there is a feeling that we have a choice, then we should choose not to believe our thoughts. Yes, just don't go with the thoughts or just don't believe what the mind is selling.

Very good. I'm done with my questions. He's saying that if there's a sense that there is still some choice, then make the choice not to go with your thoughts or to believe your thought. It had been said that as long as there's a sense that 'I have a choice to do something,' then choose to do the inquiry, and then the realization that even the doing of the inquiry was also only Grace. The only seeming choice... that's the only seeming choice. In fact, he was very specific, like Pratik said also, he said that the only choice you have right now is not to go with the stream of thoughts, you see. And ultimately you will see that even that was not a choice. That's it. That makes it so clear and simple, isn't it? Because all that we do to trouble ourselves in this play is to ride on this mound of thought.