Authority bias is the tendency to believe, obey, or internalize something too quickly because it comes from a person, institution, lineage, sacred role, or socially elevated source that appears trustworthy, holy, learned, powerful, or superior. In ordinary psychology, this bias reduces independent evaluation. In spiritual life, it becomes even more powerful because authority is often wrapped in sacred symbolism, emotional need, existential longing, and the desire for certainty. The seeker may not merely trust authority; the seeker may sanctify it.
From a cognitive-psychological perspective, authority bias operates because uncertainty creates dependence, hierarchy influences judgment, and the mind often substitutes status for verification. Under emotional or spiritual pressure, people may treat confidence, role, costume, institution, public reverence, or sacred language as evidence of truth.
From a Gita-based perspective, this same distortion can be understood through attachment, fear, egoic dependence, clouded discernment, and the desire to escape the burden of inward responsibility. The mind seeks relief, order, and belonging, and may surrender its own obligation to see truthfully.
This chapter argues that authority bias becomes spiritually dangerous when reverence replaces discrimination, obedience replaces inquiry, and sacred role begins to overshadow the truth that guidance was meant to serve.
Misplaced authority can temporarily misguide a seeker, but a sincere seeker may still awaken later through suffering, discernment, scriptural correction, grace, or contact with a truer source.
The more tragic danger is that uncorrected authority may block its own awareness, diminish its own blessings, and lower its own consciousness by confusing influence with realization and obedience with spiritual legitimacy.
The chapter also argues that early recognition of misplaced authority is morally urgent. Blind trust does not merely harm the seeker; it strengthens the authority structure itself and can gradually enable larger collective distortion. When warning signs are ignored early, dependence may ripen into institutional rigidity, communal delusion, abuse, or even catastrophic violence justified by sacred certainty.
For this reason, timely discernment and honest distancing from distorted authority are not acts of rebellion against truth, but acts of protection for truth. In both psychology and the Gita, correction requires self-awareness, inquiry, ethical clarity, satsang, scriptural depth, guidance from genuinely realized beings, and the courage to prefer truth over hierarchy.
Every spiritual path raises the question of guidance. Human beings do not easily see clearly on their own. They seek teachers, elders, monks, gurus, texts, communities, and examples. This is not weakness. It is part of the structure of learning. Yet what helps the path can also distort it. The same need for guidance that protects the seeker from confusion can also make the seeker vulnerable to misplaced trust. This is where authority bias enters spiritual life.
Authority bias rarely appears as bias from within. It feels like reverence, loyalty, humility, discipline, surrender, or devotion. A person assumes, often unconsciously, that a statement is true because the speaker is respected, that a path is safe because an institution is old, that an interpretation is correct because it comes from a monk or guru, or that a conclusion is sacred because it is clothed in scriptural language. The mind then begins granting truth-value not primarily on the basis of reality, but on the basis of status.
In spiritual settings, this becomes especially powerful because existential questions are involved. People come seeking not only information, but healing, moral order, purity, belonging, absolution, meaning, and liberation. Under such conditions, the authority figure may become more than a guide. The figure may become an emotional anchor, a moral substitute, or a psychic regulator of certainty. Once this happens, discernment weakens. Questioning begins to feel disloyal. Warning signs are reinterpreted as tests of faith. Suffering is spiritualized to preserve hierarchy. The seeker may no longer ask whether the authority is truthful, corrective, ethical, and inwardly clear.
Yet the consequences of misplaced authority do not fall equally on teacher and disciple. A seeker misled by distorted authority may still awaken later through humility, suffering, scriptural depth, or grace. Confusion may become instruction. Blind trust may, through painful correction, deepen discernment. But the authority figure who remains uncorrected may move in the opposite direction. By accepting reverence without self-purification, role without humility, and influence without truthfulness, authority may begin blocking its own awareness and diminishing its own blessings. The role remains elevated outwardly while consciousness declines inwardly.
This makes early recognition essential.
Distorted authority rarely begins in its most catastrophic form. It begins with emotional overvaluation, exemptions from scrutiny, interpretive control, suppression of sincere questioning, and the gradual transfer of truth from reality to role. If these signs are seen early, timely distance may protect both the seeker and the moral field of the community. If they are ignored, blind trust may gradually strengthen the very structure that later produces harm, collective delusion, or violence.
The Bhagavad Gita does not reject guidance. It insists on it. But it does not teach thoughtless submission. It joins humility with inquiry, devotion with discernment, and surrender with truth. This chapter therefore asks: when does authority purify the path, and when does it corrupt it? How does reverence become dependence? How does sacred role begin to eclipse truth? How can a seeker receive guidance without surrendering conscience? And why is early recognition of misplaced authority sometimes one of the most compassionate and spiritually responsible forms of discernment?
A Scientific and Gita-Based Framework of Authority Bias
Psychology describes authority bias as the tendency to attribute greater truth, correctness, or legitimacy to claims made by those perceived as authoritative. Such authority may arise from title, expertise, age, clothing, institutional role, public status, ritual position, confidence, or social reverence. The bias becomes stronger when the individual feels uncertain, dependent, anxious, morally overwhelmed, or in need of order.
This distortion is not limited to formal obedience. It can appear in subtle forms: reduced questioning, emotional deference, selective trust, interpretive passivity, overestimation of moral credibility, and the quiet replacement of personal discernment with borrowed certainty. A person may begin assuming that because someone is respected, they must also be ethical; because someone is eloquent, they must also be truthful; because someone is spiritually intense, they must also be inwardly purified.
The Gita provides a deeper spiritual frame for this problem. It recognizes the need for guidance, but it also portrays the mind as conditioned by attachment, fear, desire, and confusion. In that state, the seeker may become dependent not on truth itself, but on what authority seems to promise: certainty, relief, identity, direction, and protection from ambiguity.
Thus authority bias is not only a social shortcut. It is a spiritual vulnerability of the conditioned mind.
7.1 What Authority Bias Is
7.2 Why the Mind Trusts Authority So Quickly
7.3 Reverence, Dependence, and the Need for Certainty
7.4 Teachers, Gurus, Monks, and Spiritual Role
7.5 When Sacred Role Replaces Truth
7.6 Charisma, Purity, and the Halo of Authority
7.7 Authority Bias in Childhood and Family Conditioning
7.8 Collective Authority Bias in Communities and Institutions
7.9 Misuse of Scripture and Sacred Legitimacy
7.10 A Gita-Based Understanding of Guidance and Discernment
7.11 Why Genuine Teachers Strengthen Discernment Rather Than Replace It
7.12 How Authority Bias Leads to Spiritual Harm
7.13 When Misplaced Authority Misguides the Seeker but Diminishes Itself
7.14 Early Recognition of Misplaced Authority as Protection Against Future Catastrophe
7.15 Practices for Correcting Authority Bias
7.16 From Reverence to Truthful Guidance
7.1 What Authority Bias Is
Authority bias is the tendency to accept or prioritize an idea because it comes from a person or source perceived to have authority. The content may be partly true, fully true, partly false, or dangerously distorted; the bias lies in how quickly truth is assumed on the basis of source rather than examined through discernment.
In spiritual life, this may involve unquestioned acceptance of a teacher’s interpretation, emotional loyalty to an elder, passive submission to group leaders, or internalized belief that sacred clothing, scriptural fluency, or institutional recognition automatically guarantee purity of perception. The seeker may no longer ask, “Is this true?” but instead ask, often unconsciously, “Who said this?”
The issue is not that authority is always misleading. The issue is that authority is often granted more epistemic and moral weight than it deserves. This makes the mind easier to guide, but also easier to control.
7.2 Why the Mind Trusts Authority So Quickly
The mind trusts authority quickly because authority reduces uncertainty. A trusted figure can simplify complexity, organize confusion, and relieve the burden of independent judgment. This is especially attractive when a person is afraid, grieving, spiritually hungry, morally uncertain, or overwhelmed by life.
Psychologically, this operates through social conditioning, hierarchy sensitivity, perceived expertise, emotional dependency, and the desire for certainty.
Under pressure, people often prefer confidence to ambiguity. A strong voice, clear rule, sacred tone, or public reputation can feel safer than the slower work of discernment.
In spiritual life, this tendency is magnified. The seeker may want not only answers, but absolution, meaning, purity, and inward direction. At that point, the authority figure may become emotionally fused with truth itself. The mind then stops evaluating the authority and begins leaning on it.
7.3 Reverence, Dependence, and the Need for Certainty
Reverence is not the problem. True reverence can soften pride, deepen humility, and prepare the heart for learning. The danger begins when reverence becomes dependence. Then the seeker is no longer honoring truth through a guide; the seeker is psychologically relying on the guide to hold truth in place.
Dependence alters perception. The person may begin suppressing questions, minimizing contradiction, and reinterpreting discomfort as personal failure rather than possible warning. The authority figure becomes too important to examine. The relationship is no longer only spiritual. It becomes regulatory. The guide calms anxiety, organizes identity, and secures belonging. Once this happens, discernment weakens because truth now feels costly.
The Gita-based correction is subtle but important. Surrender is not the same as dependency. Humility is not the same as passivity. Devotion is not the same as relinquishing one’s responsibility to see clearly.
7.4 Teachers, Gurus, Monks, and Spiritual Role
The spiritual world includes real hierarchies of experience, maturity, realization, and insight. Not all guidance is equal. Some teachers truly do see more clearly than their students. This must be said plainly, because the correction of authority bias should not collapse into anti-authoritarian confusion.
Yet the presence of genuine hierarchy does not eliminate the possibility of distortion. Teachers, monks, gurus, renunciants, scholars, and community leaders remain human unless genuinely transformed. The sacred role may reflect real discipline, but it can also attract projection, inflate identity, and shield uncorrected tendencies from scrutiny. A spiritual role can become a vehicle of service — or a shelter for ego.
Authority bias becomes dangerous when sacred role itself is mistaken for truth, or when the role protects the person from examination. A mature seeker must learn to distinguish between spiritual position and spiritual transparency.
7.5 When Sacred Role Replaces Truth
One of the gravest forms of authority bias occurs when sacred role becomes more important than truth itself. In this condition, what matters is not whether something is accurate, ethical, or reality-aligned, but whether it preserves the authority structure. The teacher must remain unquestioned, the institution must remain pure in image, the lineage must remain above critique, and the sacred narrative must remain intact.
When this happens, truth is no longer primary. It becomes secondary to preservation. Criticism is recast as offense, conscience as rebellion, grief as impurity, and honest concern as ego. The spiritual community then begins protecting status rather than protecting reality.
This is not merely a moral problem. It is a perceptual problem.
The sacred role becomes a lens that distorts judgment. People stop seeing the person or teaching directly; they see the halo around it.
7.6 Charisma, Purity, and the Halo of Authority
Authority bias often overlaps with halo effect. A teacher who is eloquent, radiant, disciplined, learned, emotionally powerful, aesthetically refined, or publicly revered may be assumed to be wise in all things. One visible strength begins generating generalized trust.
This is especially common in spiritual life, where charisma is easily confused with realization, intensity with purity, sacred symbolism with maturity, and verbal depth with ethical clarity. A person may speak beautifully about surrender and still remain inwardly manipulative. A teacher may embody austerity and still lack compassion. A renunciant may possess strong discipline and still remain clouded by pride.
The mind is drawn to coherence. It prefers to believe that admired qualities travel together. But they do not always do so. This is why discernment must remain active even in the presence of genuine admiration.
7.7 Authority Bias in Childhood and Family Conditioning
Authority bias often begins long before formal spiritual life. It can be conditioned in childhood through family hierarchy, fear-based obedience, emotional dependency, punishment, idealization of elders, or the learned belief that questioning is dangerous or disrespectful. In such environments, authority is not merely external. It becomes an internalized structure.
This matters spiritually because later teachers and institutions are often interpreted through earlier authority templates. A seeker conditioned to obey may confuse silence with virtue. One conditioned to fear disapproval may equate correction with shame. One raised under emotionally inflated authority may unconsciously seek the same structure in spiritual life, mistaking familiarity for safety.
Thus authority bias is not only about the present teacher. It may also be about earlier unresolved relationships to power, dependence, and legitimacy.
7.8 Collective Authority Bias in Communities and Institutions
Authority bias becomes stronger in communities because it is socially reinforced. If many people defer to the same figure, repeat the same narrative, and model the same loyalty, individual hesitation weakens. Doubt becomes isolating. Agreement becomes the price of belonging.
Institutions amplify this further through ritual structure, rank, tradition, vocabulary, and collective memory. What the group has already sanctioned begins to feel self-evidently trustworthy. An authority figure then benefits not only from personal charisma, but from communal reinforcement. The group’s reverence becomes part of the evidence.
This is why entire communities can normalize unhealthy obedience while feeling deeply spiritual. They are not only trusting an authority figure. They are trusting one another’s trust.
7.9 Misuse of Scripture and Sacred Legitimacy
Authority bias becomes especially difficult to detect when power is clothed in scripture. A leader may cite sacred texts to legitimize obedience, silence critique, spiritualize suffering, or reinterpret red flags as ego resistance. Once scripture is fused with authority, the seeker may feel that questioning the human figure is tantamount to questioning the sacred itself.
This is one of the most serious distortions in spiritual life. Scripture should refine interpretation, not be used to close it. Sacred text can guide surrender, but it can also be selectively weaponized to protect hierarchy, shame conscience, and preserve control.
A mature spiritual culture therefore needs not only scriptural literacy, but scriptural honesty. The question is not merely, “Can a verse be cited?” but, “How is it being used, by whom, and toward what end?”
7.10 A Gita-Based Understanding of Guidance and Discernment
The Gita affirms the need for guidance, but it does not endorse passive submission. Krishna instructs Arjuna, but he does not erase Arjuna’s responsibility to understand. The dialogue itself is significant: Arjuna questions, resists, grieves, reflects, asks again, and gradually comes to clarity. The process is not mechanical obedience. It is transformed understanding.
The verse often cited on this theme, 4.34, is crucial because it joins humility with inquiry: truth is approached through surrender, questioning, and service. That combination matters. Humility alone can become dependency. Questioning alone can become arrogance. Service alone can become submission. The integration of all three protects the path.
In this sense, the Gita offers a model of authority purified by truth.
Krishna is not asking Arjuna to stop thinking. He is asking him to think beyond confusion.
7.11 Why Genuine Teachers Strengthen Discernment Rather Than Replace It
One of the clearest tests of authentic guidance is this: does the teacher strengthen the seeker’s discernment, or gradually replace it? A genuine guide may challenge, humble, and correct the seeker, but over time the result should be greater inward clarity, not greater psychic captivity.
A false or unhealthy authority structure makes the seeker progressively less able to see without the authority’s mediation. A genuine guide makes the seeker more truthful, less ego-driven, more able to distinguish projection from reality, more ethically awake, and less dependent on emotional flattery. In short, authentic authority purifies perception. It does not monopolize it.
This is why realized guidance is not threatened by sincere questioning. It may resist egoic argument, but it does not need blindness in order to survive.
7.12 How Authority Bias Leads to Spiritual Harm
When authority bias remains uncorrected, several distortions become possible. Dependency deepens. Group narratives harden. Ethical breaches are minimized. Emotional injury is normalized. Public image becomes more important than truth. The seeker may internalize blame, silence conscience, or remain in spiritually harmful environments because leaving feels like betrayal rather than sanity.
In severe cases, authority bias can help sustain exploitation, psychological manipulation, suppression of doubt, and collective denial. The person suffering under it may still describe the experience in devotional language because the authority structure has colonized interpretation itself.
The tragedy is not only that harm occurs. It is that harm can become spiritually misread as purification.
7.13 When Misplaced Authority Misguides the Seeker but Diminishes Itself
Misplaced authority does not affect the teacher and the seeker in the same way. A seeker misled by false or inflated authority may still awaken later through suffering, discernment, grace, self-reflection, scriptural correction, or the guidance of a truer source. Confusion, though painful, can become a stage in purification. A mistaken teacher may delay clarity, but need not destroy the soul’s capacity for truth.
The condition of the authority figure is often more serious. When a person accepts spiritual power without corresponding humility, self-correction, or inner purification, authority begins to work against awareness rather than for it. The role may remain elevated, the followers may remain loyal, and the outer image may remain impressive, but inwardly consciousness can decline. The person begins confusing influence with realization, obedience with validation, and reverence with spiritual attainment. In that state, authority does not simply misguide others; it blocks its own blessings.
From a psychological perspective, this occurs because uncorrected authority easily becomes self-sealing. The more others defer, the less contradiction is encountered. The less contradiction is encountered, the less self-examination is required. Over time, the authority figure may become increasingly insulated from reality, increasingly dependent on admiration, and increasingly unable to perceive moral or spiritual decline. This is one of the deepest dangers of authority bias: it does not only weaken the disciple’s discernment; it may also erode the teacher’s remaining capacity for honest self-awareness.
From a spiritual perspective, misplaced authority lowers consciousness because it strengthens egoic appropriation. What was meant to be service becomes possession. What was meant to be guidance becomes control. What was meant to be a channel for grace becomes a structure for self-importance. In such a state, the flow of blessing is obstructed not because the Divine has become absent, but because pride, misuse of influence, and resistance to correction have made the inner instrument less transparent.
The seeker, by contrast, may still be recoverable through humility and awakening. Once disillusionment begins, the misled disciple may learn to distinguish devotion from dependence, reverence from blindness, and surrender from psychological captivity. Pain may become instruction. False authority may become a severe but transformative lesson in discernment. Thus, temporary misguidance need not end the seeker’s path. It may deepen it, if truth is eventually preferred over emotional loyalty.
But the authority figure who continues to misuse trust while resisting correction may descend further into self-deception. The disciple may lose time; the false authority may lose inward light. The seeker may emerge wounded but wiser; the authority may become more externally powerful and inwardly diminished. This is why spiritual tradition places such seriousness upon humility in teachers.
Misleading others is harmful, but hardening oneself against truth may be the deeper tragedy.
7.14 Early Recognition of Misplaced Authority as Protection Against Future Catastrophe
One of the most important functions of discernment is not merely to correct harm after it has become visible, but to recognize its early signs before it matures into catastrophe. Misplaced authority rarely begins in its most dangerous form. It often begins with small exemptions from scrutiny, emotional overvaluation of a leader, selective reinterpretation of discomfort, suppression of sincere questioning, and the gradual replacement of truth with reputation. What later becomes collective harm is often first visible as subtle distortion.
From a psychological perspective, early recognition matters because authority bias strengthens through repetition and social reinforcement. The more blind trust is given, the more difficult it becomes to interrupt the authority structure later. Admiration turns into dependence, dependence into silence, silence into normalization, and normalization into moral passivity. Once this process becomes collective, even obvious warning signs may be reinterpreted as attacks, tests of faith, or misunderstandings. What could have been corrected early through distance and reflection may then require painful rupture.
This is why timely distancing from misplaced authority is not always rebellion. It may be an act of moral clarity. To step back from a distorted authority structure before it deepens is sometimes the very thing that prevents larger harm. Early distancing protects perception. It prevents the mind from becoming increasingly conditioned by flattery, fear, ritualized loyalty, or group pressure. It also weakens the false authority by refusing to feed it with unquestioned trust. Blind trust does not merely strengthen the leader’s position externally; it can strengthen the leader’s delusion internally.
In spiritual terms, this has serious implications. A false or inflated authority may begin by misguiding a few seekers, but when left unchecked it can distort an entire community, normalize injustice, and eventually contribute to collective violence, psychological abuse, or moral collapse. Harm on a large scale is rarely spontaneous. It is often built through many earlier moments in which discernment was silenced, warning signs were ignored, and reverence was mistaken for righteousness. Thus, recognizing misplaced authority early is one of the ways catastrophic consequences are prevented before they become woven into collective destiny.
The Gita supports this deeper principle by repeatedly placing discernment above emotional confusion and attachment. The seeker is not called to surrender truth for the sake of social loyalty. Rather, the seeker is called to perceive clearly and act from purified understanding. In that light, distancing from distorted authority may sometimes be the beginning of fidelity to dharma rather than a departure from it.
For this reason, early warning signs should never be dismissed as spiritually immature simply because they are uncomfortable. When sincere inquiry is shamed, when a leader becomes insulated from correction, when suffering is spiritualized to preserve hierarchy, when dissent is treated as impurity, or when fear begins replacing truthfulness, the time for discernment has already arrived. If such signs are recognized early, the seeker may step back before deeper harm unfolds. If they are ignored, blind trust may gradually empower the very structure that later produces ruin.
True spiritual maturity therefore includes the courage to recognize misplaced authority before it becomes catastrophic. It is easier to correct distortion at the stage of discomfort than at the stage of devastation. Early discernment, honest distance, and refusal to strengthen false authority through passive trust may protect not only the individual seeker, but the entire moral field of the community.
7.15 Practices for Correcting Authority Bias
Authority bias is corrected not by rejecting guidance, but by purifying one’s relationship to it. The seeker must learn to receive instruction without abandoning discernment.
Helpful questions include:
Am I trusting this because it is true, or because it is spoken with confidence?
Does this guidance make me more honest, more awake, and more capable of correction?
Is questioning allowed in a sincere and disciplined way?
Am I becoming clearer, or more dependent?
Is sacred language being used to illuminate truth, or to block examination?
Does this authority deepen humility in everyone, including itself?
Practices that help include meditation, journaling, scriptural study, satsang with honest people, consultation outside closed authority systems, patient observation of outcomes, and willingness to distinguish spiritual discomfort from spiritual harm.
7.16 From Reverence to Truthful Guidance
The correction of authority bias does not require cynicism. It requires maturity. A seeker can honor teachers, revere scripture, respect lineages, and receive correction deeply while still remaining devoted to truth above personality, institution, or role.
This movement asks the seeker to shift from borrowed certainty to clarified understanding. Reverence remains, but it no longer blinds. Humility remains, but it no longer collapses into passivity. Guidance remains, but it no longer replaces conscience.
A spiritually mature person does not reject authority. Nor does such a person worship it. They allow authority to serve truth.
Authority bias in spiritual life is dangerous because it allows sacred role, charisma, and social reverence to take the place of clear seeing. The seeker may still use the language of surrender, service, and humility, but inwardly what is occurring may be dependency, fear, passivity, and the transfer of responsibility for discernment to another.
Psychology shows how uncertainty, hierarchy, and emotional need make the mind vulnerable to authority. The Gita shows that guidance is necessary, but must be joined with inquiry, humility, and truthfulness. Both perspectives converge on the same necessity: the seeker must become capable of receiving guidance without surrendering conscience.
Misplaced authority may temporarily misguide a sincere seeker, but it can also corrode the authority figure’s own awareness when reverence is accepted without purification. And when blind trust is not corrected early, small distortions can ripen into communal delusion, moral collapse, and catastrophic harm. For this reason, correction must come early, not only after devastation has become visible.
When authority is purified by truth, it protects the path. When truth is subordinated to authority, the path is endangered. Spiritual maturity lies not in the rejection of guidance, but in learning how to distinguish genuine authority from the mind’s hunger to be ruled. In this way, reverence becomes safer, discernment becomes stronger, and truth remains greater than role.
Bhagavad Gītā. Relevant verses: 4.34, 10.10, 16.4, 16.23–24, 18.30–32, 18.66.
Cialdini, R. B. (2009). Influence: Science and Practice. Boston: Pearson.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In Studies in Social Power (pp. 150–167).
Haidt, J. (2012). The Righteous Mind. New York: Pantheon.
Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Kelman, H. C., & Hamilton, V. L. (1989). Crimes of Obedience. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371–378.
Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to Authority. New York: Harper & Row.
Pronin, E., Lin, D. Y., & Ross, L. (2002). The bias blind spot. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(3), 369–381.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–47).
Tetlock, P. E. (2005). Expert Political Judgment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Yogananda, Paramahansa. Autobiography of a Yogi.
If authority bias shows how the mind can surrender truth too quickly to a person, rank, or sacred role, the next question concerns why painful impressions often dominate spiritual perception more than grace, support, and quiet blessing. Why does one criticism outweigh many acts of care? Why does hurt often speak louder than healing?
The next chapter turns to negativity bias in spiritual life: how suffering, fear, humiliation, and threat become exaggerated centers of meaning, and how the seeker learns to perceive pain truthfully without allowing it to become the whole of reality.
