Science Of Identity Foundation - Jagad Guru Chris Butler

Q: — Our Jesus Christ has called God as Father not exactly on these grounds; Jesus introduced himself as God’s son for something else.
A: — Yes, about Jesus’ son-hood you say: “The son is the complete revelation of the Father whose nature he shares, and of whose powers he is the sole heir, the only begotten son, and he is in absolute dependance [sic] on the Father. ‘My Father and I are one. My Father workest hitherto and I work.’ The son can do nothing except what he seeth the Father do. As son, he knows the Father; as God he can speak for God. As wholly dependant on the Father, and wholly obedient to His will, the message is true.”
Now the ideal of regard based on the sense of gratitude of the son to the Supreme Father is not absent because of the conception of Jesus’ son-hood of God on account of his being His heir in respect of His nature, power and attributes. I think that you conceive of God as the Supreme Father in imitation of Christ, His son, and read hymns to Him with various praises indicative of gratefulness. In our Gaudiya Philosophy there is no sense of gratitude or any other cause at the root of the love or attachment towards God. Where there is some cause, the Gaudiya Philosophy does not call such love as causeless or motiveless. The attribution of Parenthood to God must have some cause behind it. Him or her whom we call father or mother and who are adorable, we cannot worship, when, averse to God, we stay in the mother’s womb; even after being born we cannot do so in our infancy or childhood. Rather we being their indulged pets treat them as our servants. There is no devotional piety during those periods when instead of worshipping them, we demand and accept service from them. It is no mean outrage on such adorable parents to convert them to servants. This is the effect of our desires. Thus we see that human or other beings do not acquire fitness for serving parents from the very beginning. Though with the growth of intelligence we show some efforts to serve them, generally this has its origin in a retributive sense of gratitude or dutifulness in return for the benefit received from them. Often we show such efforts in order to inherit the property earned by them with labour and left behind them. Under the circumstances it is in the sense of gratitude or obedience to established order originating from motives, that is at the root of the conception of parent-hood; there is absolute want in it of causeless or motiveless love.
The offering of service to the master in consideration that if the money paid by him as wages is not discharged, there will be sin committed - amounts to trafficking. The service of God or attribution of Parenthood to Him or calling Him as the Sustainer, Protector, Saviour, Affectionate, Gracious, etc., arising out of the sense of awe, hope, dutifulness or gratitude, all these originate from some motive or cause and, as such, are far from His service and worship arising from the natural love of the soul towards Him.  

**********************************************************************************************    

The chief historical proponent of such “I am God”ism philosophy was Sripad Shankaracharya. Shankaracharya lived and preached throughout India in the eighth century. The preaching of Shankaracharya and his followers was so strong that, practically speaking, it drove Buddhism out of India. Today, throughout India and the world, Shankaracharya’s teachings (or slight variations of them) are still having a tremendous influence on people.
In Calcutta, India, for example, we can see the ridiculous sight of a starving, sore-infested man meditating on the side of the road: “I am God. I am God.” In America and Europe, you’ll find many so-called yogis and gurus who are directly or indirectly in Shankaracharya’s line of “I am God” ism teachers.
Science of Identity Foundation - Siddhaswarupananda