Renunciation

[Guest guest]

The Secret of Renunciation

 

Much has been written by many people from many different and

divergent Faiths and Sects about this most difficult of subjects.

Renunciation is recommended in the interests of attaining to the

supposed requisite of humility in regard to surrendering the Ego or

surrendering to whatever God or mode of belief to which one adheres

or in which one believes.

 

Yet the nature of Will precludes any success at this due to the fact

that the Will must be used if one is to give up anything. Thus in the

final analysis we cannot give up the Will.

 

It has been written a million, million times that we have free Will

in order to be willing to surrender; many religions all over the

world teach that God gave us free Will and he/she or it will never

break that covenant with us. There are even television programs,

which are also created in such a way as to illustrate this fact to

millions of eager viewers.

 

Much of our lives are spent learning to release of let go of the past

and to forgive, let go and move on etc..

 

However there hardly ever seems to be any consistent way to deal with

or learn how to renounce, let go, release or forgive etc… Many

religious leaders tell us to forgive, to let go, to have faith and so

on, while the world is often a place of great discord. There are at

any one time, more than a few wars raging on this planet which we all

call home; but most of them are religiously or politically motivated

and or instigated. There is also a great deal of conflict within the

actual borders of many countries for the same reasons.

 

Renunciation or Faith is always a matter of trust, but how can we

have faith in what we do not understand or know to be true or real?

How can we accept the things we do not recognize or are not

comfortable with? How can we transcend our own fear of the unknown?

Where or who is this God in which we all believe but call by

different names? What is the perfect political system upon which we

can all agree, and what would its' tenets and beliefs be founded upon?

 

In the current world political situation there are countless systems

of government and as many if not more religions or religious sects

all claiming to be the way to truth. In many cases it is actually

recommended that the exclusion of other beliefs and/or political

ideals is necessary. Citing such things as they, (other religions,

sects, political systems) are not going to be saved by God --- or

these political systems or regimes are disruptive of world peace or

contravene human rights etc. calling them contemptible and worthy of

rejection or exclusion from acceptance.

 

There is absolutely no general agreement of consensus as regards who

or what god is; much less how to worship him/her/it . Nor is there

any agreement upon what manner of government is the optimum for human

happiness and prosperity. This document will attempt to go some way

toward addressing these complicated issues. Toward this end there

will be the employment of concepts of self-realization (The

realization or final recognition of the true nature of The Self who

dwells within us all). To this end there must be a complete and total

expose of the lies and half-truths to which we as individual beings,

are subject. A body of truth must also be arrives at that will

hopefully bring us to the conclusion of the oneness, of not just our

humanity, but also a unity of being that transcends all our physical,

racial, religious and species-specific beliefs.

 

To reveal how we are wired, or programmed as regards our individual

beliefs etc, we must take a long hard look at what motivates us as

individuals. So then let us begin..

 

First we will need to strip the individual down to his/or her

essentials before we can even begin to tackle the concepts of belief

or god etc. To that end there are quite a number of components which

influence how or what we think, or to what we as regards

our ideals and/or belief systems both politically and religiously

speaking.

 

The very existence of us as individuals and our self-esteem of self-

image and hence our experience of life, is inextricably tied to and

defined by an inner image we have of ourselves, this of course is

what we think of as ourselves. As "The Sum of OUR I" if you like.

 

This self has many attributes, which for the sake of this document we

will refer to as "I-ness".

 

Now then the attributes of this "I-ness" are:

 

1. The image or thought of what is believed to be the Soul or

the one we refer to when we say "I".

 

¨ This referred to - or implied "I" is seen in a different way

by each and every being in existence, which leads us to believe we

actually exist as individuals. This is the beginning of our different

religious and political belief systems.

 

We begin here. The I we think we are, s to a religious,

social or political ideal or combination of ideals which validates

our specific conception of "I-ness" and everything progresses from

here.

 

We as children are more often than not, programmed by our parents

inserting us into social situations with which they are comfortable

and which also validate their own "I-ness".

 

We are taught then first by our families then by our peers, then

clubs, churches and extended socioeconomic groups to whose ideals,

beliefs, and so on to which our parents to a some degree, .

 

These groups all have one thing in common, they are "GROUPS to which

others add their voices." GROUPS which numbers greater than one

person attend, to, or put forward as a better alternative

than GROUPS to which others might etc..

 

Some Example Groups are:

 

1. I-ness "Those things or attributes which we think define us

as individuals.

 

2. The attribute of I-ness I call MY…

 

3. "MY" Family.

 

4. My Friends

 

5. My School Classes and groups of friends at school.

 

6. MY Whole school group.

 

7. MY neighbourhood group or residents and so on.

 

8. MY groups such as the group of football supporters or

sporting code or team or club of supporters, which we might follow.

 

9. MY group of colleagues such as work mates. Or trade fellows

or groups of professionals such as doctors, professors, priests,

pastors, or team members etc.

 

10. MY group or religion to which an individual might belong or

believe in or attend and sub-groups or sects of these groups.

 

11. MY group of those who believe in a certain God to the exclusion

of others who do not.

 

12. MY group such as the collective group of sects of believers such

as different sects or branches of a given religion such as is given

the heading of Christians or Muslims or Jains, Sikhs, Buddhists,

Hindus and so on.

 

13. MY group of people or individuals who dwell in such and such a

city etc.

 

14. MY citizens who are united under one political affiliation.

 

15. MY complete group who are the citizens of a given country.

 

16. My Racial group to which we belong.

 

17. The Groups who believe in the superiority of a given race over

others.

 

18. The group to which we all belong "Humanity"

 

19. The Species to which we belong.

 

20. The group called those who are sentient. or living.

 

21. And the collective known as The Cosmic consciousness.

 

Subscription to any one or all of these groups to the exclusion of

any other is a type of Ego, which allows us an I-ness as a matter of

course. This I-ness therefore begins deep inside our being and

extends outward into every aspect of our lives. These group

subscriptions all bring about the definition called "I-Ness". The

above list is by no means anything like an exhaustive list of those

groups, it is merely an indication of the part ego plays in our lives.

 

From this it can very readily be seen that the ego exists as an ever

ascending hierarchy. Such that to finally become free of the ego,

would require the absolute transcendence, not only of what we believe

to be our very self; but also of existence itself, due to the fact

that collectively the group of beings and things which exist can be

seen to be the extended I-ness.

>From this it can also be seen that it would be absurd to think that

through renouncing ones affiliations with all the groups to which one

s and within which one finds oneself would be nigh on

impossible.

 

Renunciation itself also presents a problem because it is thought

that renunciation means giving up the actual object to which one is

attached or from which one derives a sense of ego or self because

there must be someone to renounce this or that. We become a

renunciate…. Who is holding on to rejection or exclusion. We must

understand that true renunciation is to put an end to judgment. It is

to accept everything and everyone. It is to renounce renunciation or

exclusivity.

 

For example we go around saying I am a golfer, or I play golf. We

say "I do such and such" which implies an entity by reference to I-

ness. We think such things as "I am a Sanyasin", I am a swami and so

forth. We may think now I am pure, now I am worthy when the body or

mind has been purified etc. But this is incorrect because the body

and its condition have absolutely nothing to do with the limitation

of truth.

 

What does matter is that we do not exclude anything from the

omnipresence of the truth, or from the omniscience of whatever we

believe God to be. It is to come to see that there is no such thing

as a type of knowledge which is in itself (apart from any application

of it) inherently evil. It is we who make it evil by our application

of it.

 

We always have a choice to love or to hate, but due to our group

subscriptions we often choose hate over love because to choose love

in circumstances which would bring the group ideals into conflict

would be to bring our self-hood, definition or ego into conflict,

which would make us feel threatened. Our position in the hierarchy of

the group might also be threatened in the same way.

 

So there is a personal Ego

 

A Family Ego

 

A Group or peer-group Ego

 

A neighborhood Ego

 

A suburb Ego

 

A city Ego

 

A State Ego

 

A country Ego

 

A race Ego

 

A Species ego

 

And a Soul Ego.

 

All must be put to rest not by renouncing who or what we are but by

accepting the multiplicity and diversity of the Omnipresent Being

which is present as each and every particle of the whole Cosmos.

 

Why? To renounce a single part, or to get rid of or reject a single

part of the whole of anything, is to reject the whole. For example if

you reject your wife's hand you reject her because she is inseparable

from her hand. Does it not make more sense to renounce your erroneous

ideas of specialness and superiority which are based upon the various

levels of Ego?

 

The idea that there is a select or special group or a certain

category or manifestation of being that is superior to all others is

a contradiction of the very thought we all employ when we say that

God is omnipresent.

 

If a religion has the concept of omnipotence, omnipresence or

omniscience incorporated into a description of God, then that

religion cannot escape from guilt if it believes it is special or

that god favours them in any way above any other part of HIS OWN

OMNIPRESENCE… because that would contradict the very omnipresence

itself. If such a religion were also to say that God rejects any

other sect, being, religion, or part of himself or any knowledge,

then that thought is also a contradiction of his own omniscience

because it would imply that god is limited in his knowership to only

knowledge which is constructive of the group Ego.

 

On the other hand if an adherent to a given religion were to state

that God does not know evil then that is a contradiction also because

either God is omniscient or he isn't. If he isn't then he is not God.

Also if he did not know evil then he could not see any imagined

stains of sins either. If it was also stated that God did not accept

evil then again he would be rejecting a part of his very omnipresence.

 

Many religions attach importance to the existence of the body even

in death but it is utterly unimportant because the body is made of

mere matter just as the rest of the Cosmos is.

 

To think otherwise is again a contradiction of the omnipresence of

God because physics shows us that there is no disconnection of the

matter of our bodies from the rest of the Cosmos. Nor is there any

disconnection with the space between our atoms from the space in

which all things exist, along with the space between the atoms of the

existent things (the objective universe) either. This however only

answers the physical aspect of existence.

 

Yet many religions will say what of the soul which dwells within the

body? Trumpeting about going to their idea or conception of heaven,

hell or reincarnation and so on, within which the ideals of their

group ego/consciousness will be honored. Any one can understand that

this too is a contradiction of the omnipresence of God, because how

can there be a hierarchy in the knowership of God unless he values

favoritism above integration. Which would mean his knowledge is not

open-ended as omniscience would require because it would imply that

one form of knowledge is superior to another.

 

Now then we come to the Soul itself. If there are many souls and Not

ONE living as all. Then there is more than One in omnipresence which

would again contradict the very nature of the god in which these

religions believe. So then upon death that Soul-Part of the ONE SOUL,

due to the inherent Will of the God part that is masquerading as I-

ness, will again become what that God decrees. This will obviously

follow the course of that which that God-Soul-Part believes it is and

tells itself to be at the time of death.

 

So on the one hand there is the existence of the individual soul but

in reality that individual is a mere reflection in the consciousness

of the God of his one Single Soul. It is not an individual separate

entity at all. Else God's very own nature of omnipresence is directly

irrevocably contradicted. There are not many consciousnesses… there

is ONE There are not many souls there is Only One. Any other way of

thinking of this is a contradiction of the existence of The God in

which most religions believe.

 

There are no separate particles, there can be no movement of any

particle of a mass without an effect in the rest of that mass, such

that when a hand or a single atom moves, the entire universe moves to

accommodate the presence of the hand or particle in a given space,

but space does not move nor does it change, it is a constant because

a thing always moves in a space equal to itself or equal to its

volume (which is the same thing).

 

So then when a thing moves though it appears to move or exist

independently of the universe it does not move at all, the universe

moves. When a person thinks, he thinks he thinks inside himself, but

the space in which he thinks is the same space in which the WHOLE

COSMOS exists this is so because the space inside him is not

disconnected in any way from that absolute space. Upon enlightenment

a huge star is seen inside that space this is the actual Cosmos

shining in the absolute space. The star is utterly massive but it

takes up no more than what appears to be a room sized space, but this

is because the space it is in is infinite.

 

That light shines in all pieces of matter as the photons of light

which manifest that matter in space, but there is no disconnection of

the atoms from the atoms' containing-space, nor from the space in the

atoms with the outer-space. That massive ball of light is a the mass

of group I-ness called existence and is defined by the space in which

it sits, yet remove that space and the space in which it sat

disappears into absolutely infinite space. Because in the absence of

Cosmos or light space has no meaning at all. Nor do any other

concepts.

 

So then where has the individual soul gone in all this? Has it gone

to some unimaginable realm or heaven etc, where again it can enjoy

the exclusiveness of the group to which it d while it was in

the flesh? As if segregation or fragmentation would have any meaning

to an Omnipresent omniscient God who recognizes himself in all being

and forms as well as in infinite formless consciousness which

transcends existence itself.

 

Either God is omnipresent or he is not it is that simple. There

cannot be two or many in him unless the thought that there are many

is an illusion, a trick or a device to engender or project a degree

of ego upon an otherwise unitary completely omnipresent, omniscient

entity who exists as all that exists. So then if he is not

omnipresent nor omniscient then he is not omnipotent either because

if there are more than One beings in existence he is not the only

power that exists, because we can choose to defy him or deny his

existence.

 

Many actually to this denial also but the question can be

asked of them:

 

In what does the thoughts arise in your so-called separate mind-

space which cannot be separated from the absolute space as described

above?

 

The answer to this might be they arise in my head and are a product

of my brain etc.

 

But the reply would be; so who directs your Will to imagine a pink

elephant as has just been suggested to you? Does your mind appear in

the absence of thought? Or does it appear only when you think? Who

looks at the thoughts that arise, could it be the physical matter of

your brain (which when you are dead has no thought waves in it) or

could it be that you are the unknowable watcher of the thoughts who

dwells in the space that does not stop at the edge of your body or

even at the end of the Universe, as has been shown above.

 

So then to remove the ego of group consciousness, we should not

renounce things or people as objects but renounce the idea of

difference, renounce the idea that there is an individual who could

renounce a thing. Renounce the thought that we exist as separate

beings or individual Souls or Ego and so on.

 

This will lead to the realization that the thinker is the absolute,

whose nature is like Infinite Space, and to the understanding that

the one who shines as the cosmos is none other than ones real self-

inclusive of all else and exclusive of none save exclusion itself.

 

Yet this is not easy to achieve due to the latent tendencies stored

as memories in the brain, but these are nothing more than habits or

programs which run when the group program or belief is contravened or

brought into conflict by new instructions given the mind by the Will.

 

At first there will be a feeling of discomfort then perhaps negative

emotions will arise followed by tricks the mind has here-to-for used

to make us remain in the comfortable and familiar. We must understand

the ego is going to kick up one hell of a ruckus because its very

existence as an individual depends upon the existence of segregation

and the belief in its uniqueness.

 

The thought of ownership or possession, or description of attributes-

of-self – of I-ness or ME, not actual possessions, is the habit which

makes one continue to define oneself as existing as an individual who

is by its very nature going to live in discord and disharmony because

the individual can only be split away from God through constant

adjustment, change, discord or contention. This is why karma or the

law of cause and effect are the very ground of the existence of

everything that appears to exist in this Universe.

 

So then it would appear that the lack of acceptance of each others

individuality or group-belief systems is the cause of warring or

discordant various group consciousnesses or egos in fact all

disharmony between all beings either individual or otherwise but this

is not so at all.

 

Because as stated above our very desire for separation from the

unity of gods omnipresent consciousness is impossible without discord.

 

The situation is that the answer is not a matter of accepting each

others belief systems or right to exist within a certain group, no

the answer lies in understanding the nature of the omniscience of

God.

 

Toward an understanding of that omniscience we will talk of how all

knowledge, no matter the branch, import or content in regard to any

group definition or reason for that groups or religions existence is

part of what the omnipresent consciousness of God knows about its own

nature.

 

It is in short all within the scope and range of his knowledge. We

have already shown that there are no individuals, so the knower in

all of us is none other than he himself; else his own omnipresence

goes begging.

 

It might be argued that there is a human soul or that God dwells in

us in tandem with our own soul, but this is incorrect too as that

would preclude the existence of 2 in omnipresence. Which is

impossible also.

 

To arrogantly maintain that only humans have a soul (if such a thing

existed as an individual) would mean that God (who is the SOUL in us)

does not know what ants or dogs or cats or dolphins or any other

creature knows because there is no soul in them. Ask what makes them

live? What moves them out of the way of danger etc…

 

Factually most of us in the west either consciously or unconsciously

to the Darwinian theory of instinct causing lower creatures

to behave in certain ways, but modern science has proved otherwise in

almost all cases as does ones own experience with such animals as

horses, dogs and cats not to mention the enigmatic dolphins and

Chimpanzees. Even the lowly house fly can navigate through obstacles

in a room in which It has never been before proving it has a degree

of self-awareness, else it would crash into all obstacles it had not

seen before. Nor could It navigate between narrow spaces as it so

skillfully does, due to not having any spatial awareness or the

dimensions of its own body.

 

No the only thing that makes any sense is that the sum of all the

knowledge known by all creatures is his very omniscience. For example

a given creature or being knows what it knows about its environment,

this is its universe. A dog does not know a germs universe nor does a

cat or a fish. So then to all intents and purposes these are

different universes or dimensions of knowledge, think of the

uncountable creatures which have died, are living and will live in

the future and it is easy to see that the limit of his omniscience

can never be reached. This is his consciousness.

 

That which is CONSCIOUS as opposed to what that ONE WHO IS CONSCIOUS

is conscious of VIS CONSCIOUSNESS… exists as and in all the beings

everywhere, this is his omnipresent BEING while his I-ness is the

entire Cosmos.

 

To Him there are no species, no groups, no religions and no

individuals. He sees nothing but his very self everywhere. That is

his Omniscient Omnipresence. His omnipotence exists as both his

manifestation and his power to know himself. It is in short His Will

which manifests as the law of cause and effect in the Cosmos.

 

While seen from the individual perspective there seems to be

countless other beings, the truth of the matter is that there is

nowhere at all where a separate entity could exist due to the

Omnipresent Nature of God. As is shown above even science can prove

that there is utterly no hope of separation or individuality given

the nature of the atom.

 

True renunciation therefore is renunciation of I-ness only. But that

I-ness is very difficult to give up if we do not understand that the

whole Cosmos is seen by the Ego as itself.

 

Existence of the Cosmos connotes I-ness. Why?

 

Existence implies that there is a knower of that which exists. Else

it could not be known to exist.

 

So I am either a man or The One True Being. If a man then I am

destined to run the round of I-ness forever because I do not

acknowledge the existence of the knower beyond existence. If I am

really the One True Self in disguise then I am the knower beyond

existence, existing in diversity as the consciousness in all beings

everywhere.

 

All thoughts or thinking appears in the Absolute space as shown

earlier such that he who thinks in all of us is that ONE… He is not

solely the Individual, nor is he the body…He has no specific body and

will not admit of one…. His omniscience is his knowership of all

modes of being and awareness on all and every level and branch of

knowledge up to his own nature itself. There is no division in his

knowership or consciousness what-so-ever. If there was he is not

omnipresent nor omniscient. God in that case would be a farcical

being living in the pipe dream of a mad opium smoker.

 

If I say I am a man, it is not that man which has said this, it is I

The Absolute who says it… so I obey my own law and limit myself to

being that man… If on the other hand I the absolute say I am that

absolute then I also must obey that command too.

 

If you want to worship me then accept my omniscience and my

omnipresence …. If you wish to reject my omnipresence or my

omniscience then you have rejected me and no matter what you do you

will never know me. If you think you can own me or exclude any part

of me then also you will never know who I am. In short if you think

you or anyone or anything is separate from me then you are far, far

away from me.

 

So you must renounce exclusion. If you include all in my Love then

you too are included… not otherwise.

 

Neti-Neti is the Cry! Not this not this… No I am not this nor this

nor that …. I AM ALL!….

 

 

 

Om