Sneaky! Isn’t this what Berkeley did, posit a God-observer to explain the continuity of existence?
So mind and existence seem to be kindred spirits.
Yes, kinfolk fer sure! But I still think whatever it is ‘existence’ points to might not require mind, whereas whatever it is ‘mind’ points to definitely requires existence. I.e. existence wins, it’s fundamentaler. (Not arguing my point, just singing my song, like a pseudo-philosophical blue jay.)
I like this. Which is why I think the conversation about the ‘quiet brain’ is relevant. A brain that is completely occupied cannot be truly open to whatever is ‘out there’ (the universe as a whole?) to manifest.
I choose to surrender because I’m unable to prevail and I hope that my surrender will be met with mercy. I’m initiating a transaction, a quid pro quo. It’s all about me, negotiating, angling, settling for what I can get.That’s what “surrender” is.
I think a better metaphor for the awakening of intelligence is driving on the highway and, suddenly seeing that the road drops off a cliff, I slam on the brakes. It’s an unforseeable, uncalculated, choiceless act.
Not bad - but we need a metaphor that involves having 2 (or more) choices, realising that they all lead to the same place (back where we started), and thus accepting non-action/non-choice (psychological death or surrender etc)
I haven’t ever tried to surrender in this way, so I can’t talk from experience, but it seems likely to lead to delusion and suffering.
I’m talking about a surrendering in which you kind of let yourself be possessed by that to which you surrender, you let the wall between you and it dissolve, you become(are) it. I’ve experienced this type of surrendering often, though (so far) not to the mystery, I’m too frightened to let that happen!