"The whole will always be contradictory, only the part can be consistent – because the whole has to consider the opposite also. The opposite is there. It exists.

"Philosophers can be consistent because their understanding is partial. They can be neat and clean, they can afford to be logical. I cannot afford it, because if I try to be consistent immediately the whole thing becomes untrue. The opposite has to be involved, the opposite has to be absorbed.

"For example, when I say: 'Surrender and I will do the rest,' this is one part. Why am I saying it? I am saying it so that you can surrender totally. If you can feel this and trust this, that the remaining shall be done, your surrender can be complete.

"If you have a fear, a distrust, then even after surrender you will have to do something, then the surrender cannot be complete. If after surrender you have also to do something, then you have to retain yourself, you have to hold back – surrender cannot be total. And when surrender is not total it is not surrender at all. Surrender can only be total, you cannot surrender in part. You cannot say: 'I surrender half' – because the half that has been retained will be against the surrender. It can only be retained against it.

"So surrender can only be total. It is just like a circle, a geometric circle. It cannot be half; you cannot draw a half circle. If you draw it you cannot call it a circle. A circle must be complete. Half, then it is something else, not a circle at all. Surrender can only be total. It is also a circle, a spiritual circle. You surrender from end to end. Nothing is left behind.

"To help this, I say: Surrender, and the remaining will be done by me. The emphasis that I shall do – you simply surrender – is to make your surrender total. But I know that if you have surrendered, there is no need for anything to be done, not even on my part. Surrender itself is the thing, nothing else is needed. The very phenomenon of surrendering is enough."