Q.: Is surrender a means to overcome and vanquish the vasanas [tendancies of the mind], thus resulting in Realisation?
B.: Yes: provided it is unconditional, surrender is a fool proof way to Realise the Self.

Q.: What is the guarantee that I shall Realise the Self if I surrender?
B.: You are missing the point of surrender.

Q.: How so?
B.: To surrender is to let go of everything without anticipating or expecting anything in return. Letting go of everything also encompasses abandoning the aspiration to Realise the Self. Suppose you are holding a red-hot iron ball. Your hand is quivering in unbearable pain. Somebody suggests to you that you let go.
         If your response is, “What benefit will I obtain if I let go?” will not the other person wonder, “Poor fellow! The pain of holding that dreadful thing in his hand – has it addled his brains?”
         That is how it is to me having now listened to your question. Samsara is intolerably painful. Why look for reasons to let go of it? If samsara still appears as being acceptable to one – no matter however remotely or infinitesimally so – can he Realise the Self? One who does not see samsara as actually being the horribly excruciating misery that it indeed really is – will he Realise the Self?

 
Q.: Suppose I surrender yet fail to Realise the Self – what then?
B.: Yes, that possibility is always there from the ego’s point of view.

 
Q.: But just now you said: “Surrender is a fool proof way to Realise the Self.”
B.: What did the preceding words say? Surrender works only if it is unconditional. That means your mind must be genuinely reconciled to the possibility that anything can happen or not happen, including one’s failure to Realise the Self.

Q.: So, success in Realising the Self is made possible only if I wholeheartedly accept the possibility that I may fail to Realise the Self?
B.: Such acceptance must be natural or genuine. For instance, it must not be self-imposed so that the condition “For Realisation to be made possible, the mind ought to stand reconciled to the possibility that anything can happen or not happen, including one’s failure to Realise the Self.” may be attempted to be rendered satisfied.

 
Q.: The path of surrender seems less fastidious compared to “Who-am-I?” Have I made a correct observation?
B.: You say you find surrender suitable for your temprament.
     Adopt it.

Q.: In the “Who-am-I?” path, if a thought occurs, one asks “To whom has this thought occured?” Likewise, in the surrender method?
B.: In the initial stages you may counter worldly thoughts with the counter-thought, “This is God’s business, since I have surrendered all to Him. What locus standi [reason] have I to involve myself in it?” As one’s mind ripens, however, the need to achieve subjugation [power/control] over thoughts by using other thoughts gradually tapers off.
          As soon as a thought arises, it is directly reined in. Be it saranagati [surrender] or vichara [Self-enquiry], in either case the purpose of the abhyasa [practise] is only to arrest further development of the thought, and the mind should be returned to its native state of pure Subjective Consciousness, sustained effortlessly and volitionlessly [without will], as soon as the sadhaka [disciple] observes that the mind has begun to depart from that state.

Q.: Is surrender a means to overcome and vanquish the vasanas, thus resulting in Realisation?
B.: Yes: provided it is unconditional, surrender is a fool proof way to Realise the Self.

Q.: The idea sounds complicated.
B.: On the other hand, it is so utterly simple that trying to communicate it semantically leads us into a hopeless quagmire of complicated-sounding ideas. TOTALLY LET GO and the Self stands Realised: that is all there is to Realisation.