Tulsidas “Meet everyone with affection, one never knows in what form the Lord appears!
So I hear that God is present everywhere, lifeforms are nothing but embodiments of God, getting their source of energy from the perpetual machine of God.
And I start thinking of the solicitors who showed up at my door, to whom I have been so unkind (only) when they decided to hold a discussion about the validity of showing up un-announced at my door. I wonder how that figures in the big scheme of things?
How would I behave if I was enlightened - in touch with my atman? Would I exhibit lot more patience with them? Probably? I did spoil their mood and their day when I was so unkind to them - after they starting doing their debate over the validity of their presence at my door. So, was I meant to do that - in the big scheme of things - that was bound to happen. But if they represent God, then why do they need to experience such rebuke? I really wonder.
Your comments on this are welcome
More anecdotes on this - and I quote (based upon - Hanuman is always present when we are singing or talking of Ram and his praise)
Once Lord Rama asked Hanuman, "How do you contemplate on Me?" "At the physical level, You are my Master and I am Your servant. At the mental level, I am a spark of thy Divine Self. At the Atmic level, You and I are one," said Hanuman.
Pleased with Hanuman’s reply, Lord Rama presented him with a pearl necklace, which was given to Mother Sita by her father, King Janaka, at the time of her marriage. Hanuman held this very valuable necklace in his hand, began to remove all the pearls one by one from the necklace, and kept it near his ear for some time and then after biting each one of them, threw them away. Sita was surprised to see Hanuman behaving thus. She thought that Hanuman had not given up his monkey traits. Rama knew the intention behind this act of Hanuman. However, in order to make Sita understand this, He asked, "Hanuman, why are you biting and throwing away such precious pearls?" Hanuman replied, "O Lord, I am examining whether I could listen to Your name in the pearls. Since I could not hear, I am throwing away. The pearl is no better than a stone if there is no Rama Nama in it. I want only You." Listening to this statement of Hanuman, Rama offered Himself by embracing Hanuman. The inner meaning of this is Rama is where Hanuman is and vice-versa. Hanuman is one who realized the unity of the individual and God. Consequently, Hanuman was always in a state of bliss.Hanuman is given various appellations such as Santhudu, Gunavanthudu, Balavantadu (one of peace, virtues and strength). He derived his strength from the Divine name of Lord Rama. Many people confine the Divine Name only to the lips but Hanuman chanted the name of Rama from the depth of his heart. Poison will remain poison even if it is put in a precious vessel studded with diamonds, pearls, emeralds etc. The divine ambrosia will not lose its taste even if it is put in a brass vessel. Likewise, it is the purity of heart, not the external appearance that matters…
Hanuman tearing open his chest to reveal Ram and Sita .... where is the story on that?
And I couldn't help but continue my thoughts down this path - from shastrix.blogspot.com/
and I quote from the blog penned just yesterday
Came to the end of the chapter on Swami AkhandAnanda and saw the following:
To see God in all beings is the culmination of the Vedantic experience. Swami Akhandananda had that experience, so he served all as God. A few years before his passing away, the swami told a monk his life's philosophy: "The Master has still kept me alive for his work. Distribute your Self among others and bring other souls within yourself. You will see how much joy you will get from it. On the other hand if you are always busy about yourself, you will be entangled within yourself, you will kill your Self, and you will die. [Not knowing the Self is akin to suicide or death.] The more you disseminate yourself among the people, the more you will attain bliss and that will lead you to Self-realization."John Steinbeck says something similar in his plain-delicious biography (excerpt) of his great friend, Ed Ricketts: (page 7, middle)
Knowing Ed Ricketts was instant. After the first moment I knew him, and for the next eighteen years I knew him better than I knew anyone, and perhaps I did not know him at all. Maybe it was that way with all of his friends. He was different from anyone and yet so like that everyone found himself in Ed, and that might be one of the reasons his death had such an impact. It wasn't Ed who had died but a large and important part of oneself.