Experimenting with Submission

Read any Tantra and you will probably find at least one chapter espousing the benefits of Guru worship. Within many Tantric traditions finding an appropriate Guru to guide you on your spiritual path and prepare you for full initiation is an essential aspect of the practice. This is even the case in the non-dual Tantras.

According to non-dualism we are all complete – each of us contains God in It’s entirety. Nothing else needs to be added. We just need to recognise this state within ourselves.  The guru then, is not someone who is more complete than their disciples. Rather, they are someone who has a clearer understanding of their own completeness.

This recognition, of their own non-duality, could have been caused in one of several ways. Firstly, there could have been a spontaneous descent of power. This was seen as the rarest method of achieving enlightenment, reserved for the lucky few – these ones didn’t even need a guru! Secondly, they could have achieved enlightenment after a period of contemplation and practice or, thirdly, it could have been the result of a transmission of power.

Both the practice route and the transmission route required a guru. A guru was responsible for exposing their followers to the teachings of their Tantric lineage, without which they would be unable to follow an appropriate form of practice. Gurus were also seen as a repository – or perhaps a lightning rod – of Tantric power, capable of transmitting this to their students at the point of initiation. Some did argue though that this transmission of power could occur outside of an initiation ceremony – with a touch, a look, or even remotely. According to this argument, even those who experienced an apparently spontaneous descent of power perhaps had an unseen guru to thank.

So, gurus were seen as perfected Tantric practitioners, with an enlightened understanding of the true nature of existence and they were essential to the transmission and continuation of Tantric enlightenment. As a result, many Tantric lineages emphasised the importance of guru worship.

Many modern practitioners familiar with multiple scandals involving the abuse of power are probably rightly suspicious of worshipping anyone. I myself have argued that this is an unnecessary and antiquated concept. Given their importance as transmitters of traditional Tantric lineages, and the fact that all the traditional Tantric lineages were extinguished in the Middle Ages, it could be argued that no qualified gurus actually exist anymore, and so modern practitioners must find their own path.

Plus, if we accept a non-dual interpretation of reality, then almost anyone or anything could be considered a guru. There is an obvious wisdom in this. We can – and probably should – learn from every experience and every encounter we have. A person doesn’t have to be given the title of “guru” to be a teacher. I have argued in another blog that nature and the natural world may be the best available guru of all.

But in dismissing the concept of “guru” I have perhaps also unwittingly dismissed the importance of “worship”. Those of us raised in a dualist religious tradition (such as myself) probably think we understand the concept of worship. We believe it is reverence for some higher being. Someone or something who is intrinsically superior to us. But that isn’t even a possibility in non-dualist traditions. There is no higher being. We all possess the potential of becoming our own higher being. So why place any emphasis on any form of worship at all?

Perhaps because worship isn’t only about reverence. Perhaps, in a non-dual tradition, worship is more about submission.

After all, the greatest obstacle to enlightenment is ego, in particular an attachment to our ego – our own sense of self. And many of the techniques taught in the Tantras are designed to challenge our egotistical self. Indeed, my own argument that nature can be an appropriate guru could be seen as a projection of my own ego. I enjoy nature. I like sitting naked in the woods and observing the natural world. I’ve just chosen a guru that matches my own interests!

Maybe then, the worship is more important than the guru. Maybe guru worship isn’t about learning from an appropriate guru, but about submitting your ego to their will, their interests, their desires. Instead of worrying about what’s good for you, submit to what’s good for them.

This is just a theory for me at the moment. But my intention is to start experimenting with submission. To submit myself to the interests of another, whilst recognising them as their own version of an undivided God, and taking the opportunity to learn.

This could be a dangerous path. Submitting yourself entirely to someone else’s will is a voluntary abandonment of self-agency – which isn’t the same as abandoning ego. After all, within Tantra the goal is to be an authentic version of self rather than an egotistical one – but authenticity doesn’t involve surrendering responsibility. So, there will need to be some kind of discernment. Even the Tantras recognised this. But discernment, as far as the Tantras were concerned, came at the point of selecting a guru; not the form of worship. A practitioner must be careful to select an appropriate guru, but once selected, they should worship them unconditionally.

The same caution should be practiced today. If you are unduly submissive many will interpret this as a weakness. They will manipulate and abuse you for their own profit or pleasure. There should be some degree of discernment then. But maybe this ought to be based on character rather than request.

I suspect there’ll be resistance from my ego and my constructed sense of self. I think there’ll be boundaries that I will need to edge towards and ultimately beyond. For every two steps forward, I may find myself taking another back. But maybe this is Tantra, as much as yoga or meditation. Maybe there can be no Tantra without submission.