THOUGHTS | ON SERVICE When does service become sacred?

                    From loftiest Brahman to the yonder worm, 

 And to the veritably tiniest snippet, 

 far and wide is the same God, the All- Love, 

 Friend, offer mind, soul, body, at their bases. 

 These are His multifarious forms before thee, 

 Rejecting them, where seekest thou for God? 

 Who loves all beings without distinction, 

He indeed is worshiping stylish his God. 

                                                  — Swami Vivekananda 

There were two sisters, one was married and other was a bachelorette. They possessed a ranch and participated its yield fifty- fifty. The soil was rich and they reaped a rich crop every time. All went well for a many times. also commodity extraordinary happed. 

 

 The wedded family began to wake up with a launch from his sleep at night and suppose, “ It isn't fair. My family is n’t married. He needs to save further for the future than me. I'm a wedded man with a woman

 and five kiddies. I've all the security in the world. But what security has my poor family? Who'll look after him in his old age? My kiddies will watch for me when I'm old. My family’s need is lesser than mine. ” With that the wedded man would leave his bed, steal over to his family’s granary and pour there a sackful of his own share of grain. 

 

Now the other family too began to get these nocturnal attacks. He'd wake up from his sleep and suppose, “ It’s too bad that I should accept an equal share of the ranch’s yield as my family who has a family to maintain. I'm single and my requirements are minimum. He has got to support his woman

 and children. He deserves a larger share. ” So this family would get up, take a sackful of grain from his stock and empty it stealthily into his wedded family’s granary. 

 

 Once it so happed that they got out of the bed at the same time and ran into each other, each carrying a grain- filled sack on his reverse! Times latterly, when the city wanted to make a tabernacle( the story of the two sisters, who had passed down, had blurted out by also), the people there chose the spot where the two sisters had met that night. “ This is the holiest of all places in this city, ” the elders said, and a tabernacle was constructed there. 

 Service( sevā) is indeed a sacred exertion and the place where service is done is a holy place. Above all, only a holy person can give true service. Why true service? Is there similar a thing as false service? There is, but of course it isn't called by that name. That complicates matters. So we must begin by relating the distinction between the two kinds of service. 

 

 One kind of service we're all familiar with. It's commodity good done for others urged by the passions of duty, pity or guilt, or with the desire for name and fame, or for happiness then and henceforth, or just as a part of social ritual. Service is a misnomer really for such an act. It's presumably right to call it “ good work, ” because it does help the person served to some extent and may bring a feeling of satisfaction to the bone

who offers the service. 

 

But that’s about all it does and nothing further. It brings lasting fulfillment neither to the bone

 who's served nor to the bone

 who serves. Nor does it bring the joy of freedom. It's possible to do similar good work and yet remain selfish, arrogant, frustrated, indeed immoral. Spiritually speaking, this variety of so- called service perpetuates ignorance and, in the long run, helps neither the person nor society. It's clear that there's nothing particularly sacred about thiswork.However, ” also we had better qualify the term with the adjective “ false, If we must call it “ service. ” 

 

 But there's the other variety of service which elevates the person and benefits society. This service isn't the result of pity, duty or guilt. It's the result of the perception of solidarity, of oneness, of identity, with the person served. There's no vacillation or computation before doing this kind of service. It's a robotic act which comes to a person as naturally as breathing. It's free indeed from the idea “ I'm doing this service. ” It's a free immolation with no strings attached. Both the giver and the receiver feel blessed and upraised. 

This is service, and to distinguish it from the important- too-common variety described before, let us call this “ true ” service. This is the kind of service saints and authentically holy men and women offer. What this means really is that if you and I are suitable to extend this kind of service to everyone and everything around us, we too shall come authentically holy. 

 

 Perception of Oneness 

 

 Perception of oneness is the mama of true service. But how numerous of us actually perceive oneness? We only see diversity far and wide. No two effects are exactly identical. Indeed halves aren't identical in every respect. The introductory distinction we witness in life is between this person who's me and everything differently that isn't me — the distinction between the “ I ” and the “ not-I. ” I'm different from the rest and the rest differ amongthemselves.However, God too is different from me, just as God is different from everyone and everything differently, If there's some being called God. Differences galore far and wide. 

 

 I can perceive oneness only if there'soneness.However, the question is, why do I not perceive it? Vedanta preceptors tend to answer it in this way “ We do n’t perceive oneness because we do n’t want to perceive it, If it's true that onenessexists.However, does that mean the sun does n’t live? ” 

 If we close our eyes and deny the sun because we do n’t perceive it.This can be combated , of course, by saying that everyone sees the sun and the denial by any person would be easily invalid and inferior. But similar isn't the case with oneness. The fact is, no bone

 sees oneness, though quite a number of people talk or write about it. The perception of the numerous is a universal experience and can not be wished down by simply saying that it's the result of ignorance. 

 

 This may not be true, still. It's relatively each right to say, “ I don't perceive oneness, ” but what right have I to claim that no bone

 perceives oneness? If commodity is true in my case, must it be true for others also? I'm not the standard by which the world ought to be judged. The claim “ no bone

 perceives oneness ” is an overreach. We can concede, still, that the number of people who perceive oneness is in all liability extremely small, nearly bitsy, as compared to the billions who perceive the numerous. 

It's natural to wonder why these sprinkle of people who see oneness could be right and the legions who see the numerous could be wrong. piecemeal from the fact that the verity of oneness is validated by the Holy Writ( see, for case, Chāndogya Upaniṣad,3.14.1 and Kaṭhopaniṣad,2.1.10- 11) and is also being admitted by scientists and scholars( read, for case, jottings of Ken Wilber, Abraham Maslow, David Bohm, and Fritzof Capra), the experience of oneness is known to have brought total, irrevocable fulfillment, joy and freedom to those who perceived oneness. How can this be the result of a false experience? 

 

 passing the numerous, on the other hand, isn't known to have brought total fulfillment, bliss and freedom to anyone. On the negative, as we know from our own life, it perpetuates the sense of space, thrall, fault, and the interspersing experience of transitory happiness and anguish. These are the very effects every one of us is floundering to overcome. If the experience of oneness can help us overcome these — and we know it has helped a many stalwart and determined souls in every generation — also it seems reasonable to assume that there must be commodity wrong with our present experience of seeing the numerous. That “ commodity wrong, ” according to the Gītā(5.15,7.25), is ignorance. 

 

When did this ignorance come upon us? Every kind of ignorance seems like it noway had abeginning.However, “ When did my ignorance start? ” I ’ll presumably end up saying that it’s always been there, If I'm ignorant of the speed of light and ask. But my ignorance can evaporate the moment someone tells me what the speed of light is. It’s futile to worry about when my ignorance started. I ’m noway going to know the answer. All I need to do is to fete the presence of ignorance and concentrate on how I can get relieve of it. 

 

 The system is simple enough. Then are Sri Ramakrishna’s words 

 

Still, you must remove the one to get the other, “ If one thing is placed upon another. Can you get the alternate thing without removing the first? ”( Gospel,p. 944) 

 

 And then are Holy Mother’s 

“ You have rolled different vestments on a roll — red, black and white. While unrolling you'll see them all exactly in the same way. ”( training of Sri Sarada Devi,p. 32) 

 

 The knowledge of my true tone is covered by ignorance. To get knowledge, ignorance has to be removed first. This is what Sri Ramakrishna’s words signify. Holy Mother’s words deal with the way that separate knowledge from ignorance. She says that I've to go back the same way I came. From the experience of oneness I've ever arrived at the experience of themany.However, I can go overhead by tracing the same way in the rear direction, If I know the way that brought me down from the heights of oneness to the depths of multifariousness. 

From the One to the numerous 

 

 In the beginning there was only the tone. There was no bone

 differently. The tone was all that was. It was complete( pūrṇa), eternal( nitya), horizonless( ananta), inseparable( akhaṇḍa), pure( śuddha), conscious( buddha), and free( mukta).( See Chāndogya Upaniṣad,6.2.1, Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad,1.4.10, Taittirīyopaniṣad,2.1.1, Kaṭhopaniṣad,1.2.18, Gitā, 2. 23- 25). 

 Also commodity mysterious seems to have happed. A kind of division suddenly took place in what was really inseparable. The tone, the one and only reality, ever came disintegrated into three supposedly different realities God( also called paramātman, the supreme tone), the world( occasionally called anātman, thenon-self), and me( called jīvātman, the individual tone). When cracks appear, they've a tendency to spread. So a farther fragmentation of these realities was ineluctable. The world got divided and subdivided into innumerous number of objects and brutes of all sizes, shapes, colors, and characteristics. The extent of these divisions and the variety in the macrocosm are mind- boggling. 

 

 Divisions took place in the individual tone too. To begin with, there was the egregious division into body and mind, and the not- so- egregious disgruntlement of the two from the inner tone( pratyagātman). The mind was subdivided into the unconscious( called id) and the conscious( called pride) fractions. These divisions were strange. They divided the personality without taking apart the individual fractions. It was like a broken marriage but the unfortunate couple continuing to live under the same roof. Naturally this gave rise to stress and strain. The body and mind were separate but they continued to impact each other. The unconscious and the conscious corridor of the mind were divided but they continued to pull and drag the person, frequently in mutually contrary directions. 

The net result of all these multiple fragmentations was that the tone came limited and localized. The tone( ātman), the real me, came linked with a body and a mind, and alienated from everything differently. My identification with the body and mind too wasn't stable. occasionally I linked with the body, occasionally with the mind, occasionally with both, and occasionally with neither( as in deep sleep). I came alienated from the spiritual substance of my being and, worse, didn't indeed know that I was so alienated. 

 

 The conscious part of my mind came alienated from the unconscious as well as from the world around. In this way the tone came indeed more narrowed down as it got linked not with the whole personality but only with a scrap of it at any given time. The other fractions therefore remained alienated, and it's these fractions that destroyed my peace, upset my harmony, and burgled me of the sense of fulfillment and wholeness. therefore I came, so to speak, alienated from myself. 

 Important has been written about tone- disaffection. Some of the stylish minds in the fields of gospel, psychology and sociology have pored over the problem of disaffection. Their interpretations varied because their ideas of the tone varied and also because their perspectives and approaches were different. nonetheless, they've come up with precious perceptivity and have amended our understanding of this central problem of mortal actuality. 

 

 We've seen how we descended from the state of oneness to the state of mutually clashing numerous. From the one to the numerous the descent is complete. The fall — allegorized in the story of Adam and Eve was from the state of oneness. From one have surfaced the numerous, and the numerous must combine back into the one. The fallen me must rise again. The upward march toward concinnity must begin. The broken fractions constituting “ the numerous ” must be joined, the divisions must be removed. It's then that service comes into the picture. 

From the numerous to the One 

 

 There are two approaches to the problem of prostrating the numerous. First the popular approach. When pieces have to be joined together, we use an glue. Love is the glue that joins the numerous into one total. Love grows in an liberal person and expresses itself through service. So first and foremost we must each come liberal and force ourselves to immolate for others and to do good to others. 

In this approach, the tone is bodied and certain moral rules are thrust upon it. We're anticipated to come liberal, loving and charitable. The end is to come someone different from what we are. This involves dispensable struggle and generally produces inner conflicts. also, we infrequently succeed completely in the struggle to come this and that. People go on trying to come liberal and, to prove the point, doing good to others, but in the process produce a lot of unhappiness for themselves and frequently for others as well. 

 

 utmost of the sweats at social service in ultramodern times show this miracle. In advanced countries, social service is more systematized and, in a sense, it comes naturally to the people there as a result of times of social discipline and parenting. Thousands of small and big institutions and millions of men and women, youthful and old, are engaged in levy services of every kind. One would anticipate that, with so numerous liberal people around, ultramodern societies would be ideal. Would to God it was so! But we see that crime, violence, rape, medicine dependence , neurosis etc are steadily adding and the social fabric is worsening in numerous corridor of the world. 

How do we explain this strange miracle? When tone- alienated people do social service, they only increase their tone- disaffection and, accordingly, their egoism. This is what the Gītā(6.6) says

बन्धुरात्मात्मनस्तस्य येनात्मैवात्मना जित । अनात्मनस्तु शत्रुत्वे वर्तेतात्मैव शत्रुवत् ॥ 

           bandhur- ātmā ātmanas tasya yena ātmaiva ātmanā jitaḥ; 

                  anātmanas- tu śatrutve varteta ātmaiva śatruvat. 

 

 “ To the( tone- held) person who has conquered the tone by the tone, the tone is a friend. But in the( tone- alienated) person whose tone has come inimical, the tone behaves like an adversary. ” 

Those portions of my personality from which I'm alienated act like adversaries and I develop a kind of abomination for them. But they're all corridor of my own tone and my abomination is really a subtle kind of tone- abomination. This produces inner instability and the fear of facing myself. 

 

 tone- abomination can manifest itself in two ways.( 1) I may project my tone- abomination outward upon other people and therefore essay to cover up my inner abomination, fear and mistrust by accumulating everything for myself and refusing to partake it with others. They will naturally conclude that I'm a selfish person.( 2) It's also possible that my tone- abomination may get projected inward and I may try to escape from myself through “ service. ” I ’ll decide to come liberal by trying to break others ’ problems — the underpinning, undeclared( and frequently unacknowledged) reason being my fear of being left alone to defy my own problems. Others may praise my “ bigheartedness ” without realizing that I'm spending all my time and energy for others not out of a sense of duty, compassion, sympathy, or love for them( though these may be the putative reasons) but to avoid the horror and pain of defying myself in the silence of my heart. 

 Indeed, it isn't too unusual to see this passing indeed in the lives of those who turn to spiritual life. Well- meaning but tone- alienated people busy themselves with so- called service, imagining they're seeing God in others, and end up after some time filled with disillusion, frustration and, in a many cases, indeed naked apathy. numerous associations launch service systems with important fanfare and enthusiasm, but are gradationally reduced to petty politicking and to being controlled by power-empty people. Why all this happens shouldn't surprise us. For, service rendered by tone- alienated people is no service at each in the true sense of the term. It's only a form of escape, and performance has nothing to do with spiritual life. 

 

 A better approach to service is the empirical approach. Then I'm not anticipated to come anyone or anything; I simply have to be my true tone. Bigheartedness is my true nature. Love is only the dynamic aspect of the each- percolating concinnity of actuality and this also is my true nature. I do n’t have to move heaven and earth to come liberal or try to fill myself with love. I only need to fete that I'm liberal formerly. I've all the love in the world formerly within me. 

 Still, why do I not feel it? putatively, some negative medium — “ disaffection ” — is operating within me and acting as a chain to the incarnation of these robotic traits of my personality, If that's so. All I've to do is remove the hurdles or exclude disaffection — and my essential selflessness and love will shine forth in a most natural way. 

 

 We've seen that as a result of disaffection, my mindfulness gets localized and linked with a scrap rather than the total of my personality. The remaining fractions are left in the dark, out of the field of my mindfulness. To remove disaffection, I must expand my mindfulness and concentrate its light in every niche and corner of my personality. Through the practice of deep, healthy tone- soul-searching or tone- analysis and the help of an illuminated spiritual schoolteacher, the disaffection of the conscious mind from the unconscious can be removed. Absolute chastity of life, violent prayer and other spiritual practices exclude the disaffection of the psyche from the true inner tone. The disaffection of the inner tone from the supreme Self is overcome through advanced knowledge and the grace of God. This is the final stage and, of course, I can be nowhere near it until the earlier stages are crossed. 

But where does service come into the picture? Is it a means tode-alienation or only a result of it? It's both a means and a result. As a means, service not only helps to exclude the disaffection of the person from the world but is also an important aid to remove the disaffection within one’s personality. Service as a means demands exacting conviction, great operation, and extraordinary fortitude, and is understandably lower than perfect. Service as a result is natural, robotic, and perfect. 

 

 Service as a Means 

 Service shouldn't be accepted in a big way until at least a certain quantum of expansion of mindfulness has taken place. Learners are advised not to go toward the deep- end of the swimming pool until they've learned at least the overtures of swimming. In the field of service too a analogous ruleapplies.However, we must have at least the primary qualifications necessary to be a true garçon, If we want to do true service. When the process ofde-alienation is set in stir to some extent, service comes in as a catalytic agent to speed up the process. 

 

 I mentioned the necessity of exacting conviction. What conviction? The conviction that oneness exists. Though I may not have yet “ perceived ” oneness, I must be induced to the core that it exists nonetheless. Not only that; bare conviction isn't enough. I must be prepared to make an all out trouble to live — in study, word and action with the mindfulness of the concentrated actuality. 

“ Learn to make the world your own. No bone

 is a foreigner, my child; the whole world is your own. ” When Sarada Devi told this to a convert she was pertaining to the underpinning oneness of all creation. Mother’s words feel to be suggest not “ oneness ” but “ belonging. ” “ The world is my own ” is easily different from “ I'm the world. ” But when put into practice, Mother’s tutoring leads not to the experience of “ belonging ” to the world but to the experience of identity with it. 

 

 Just as I'm no foreigner to myself, nothing in the world should be a foreigner to me. The love, care and attention that I bestow on myself must be offered to the whole world too, because the world is my own tone in a different form. To serve with this idea obviously requires great operation, inner strength and dogged perseverance — particularly because the immediate fallout of this practice may not always be affable and endearing. 

Three questions arise( 1) The act of service needs at least two, the garçon and the served; how is service possible when there's only oneness?( 2) Is it possible to live and serve with the idea of oneness without actually perceiving it?( 3) Is it easy to cultivate this approach to service? 

 

 All the three questions are fluently answered. Let us begin with the first How is service possible when there's only oneness? Service can take place indeed when there's oneness. When my toe is snubbed , do I not tend it with all care and do everything to heal it? Granted, the hands that tend the toe are different from it, but the fact remains that they belong to one body amped by one conscious being. In the same way, service is possible in this macrocosm which is, as it were, the gross body of the one, conscious, Supreme Being.( Gitā, 13. 13- 15) 

The alternate question, Is it possible to live with the idea of oneness without actually perceiving it? To live with the idea of commodity without perceiving it, isn't as delicate as we imagine it to be. We've no difficulty accepting that the defensive ozone subcaste around the earth is steadily depleting and the peering hole in the subcaste is hanging some populated areas of our earth. With the exception of a many scientists, none of us has perceived all this, have we? Do n’t we accept it as true and try to do commodity to forestall the disaster? analogous is the case withoneness.However, there's no reason why we can not take the word of the spiritually enlightened about oneness, If we can take the word of the scientists about the ozone subcaste.

The words of the spiritually enlightened are far more secure than the words of those who deal with physical lores. It does n’t take long for one scientific proposition to be contradicted by another and one technology to be supplanted by another. The scientists are right only so long as they aren't proved wrong, and history shows us that it's noway long enough. On the other hand, the words of the spiritually enlightened have stood the test of time for the last God- knows- style- numerous centuries. The verity of oneness was placarded centuries agone

 and is elevated in the Vedas, the oldest literature known to us moment. It was true also and it's true moment, because there were people who perceived it also and there are people who perceive it moment. 

 

 Let it not be imagined, thus, that this discussion is theoretical or only an intellectual exercise. In every generation there are people who have lived with the unshakeable conviction that oneness exists. They've moulded their lives on this conviction, and ultimately endured oneness. This consummation brought them total freedom, absolute perfection, and indefinablebliss.However, it's possible for you and me as well, If this was possible forsome.However, it's clearly possible at present and in future too, If it was possible in the history. 

 Now the third question Is it easy to cultivate this kind of nondualistic approach to service? The verity is that “ easy ” and “ delicate ” are relative terms. What's easy for one may be delicate for another and what generally makes the difference is the intensity of faith in oneself, a establishment determination to succeed, and dogged perseverance. With these in good measure, nothing is delicate; without these, nothing is easy. 

 

 Two styles are recommended for those who find it delicate to serve continually with the idea of oneness of all creation. One system is to maintain the constant mindfulness of one’s true nature as the spiritual tone( ātman), distinct from body and mind. All exertion is “ outside ” — simply forces of nature( prakṛti) acting and interacting upon one another. I'm only their substantiation, innocent and untouched( Gitā, 3. 27- 28). All work is done only for work’s sake, not out of any other consideration or stopgap( Gitā, 18. 9). 

The alternate system is suited particularly to those with a generally spiritual disposition. Then all conduct are done for the sake of God. The results of conduct are offered to God. All work is God’s work. As a sucker, I'm only a menial of God carrying out my master’s orders. Or, I can looks upon myself as a child of God, and all other beings as God’s children, and I can serve them with that idea in mind.( CW, 3. 83 – 84) 

 

 In his lectures on air yoga, Swami Vivekananda has described both these styles for prostrating attachments and freeing oneself from the list nature of air( see CW, 1. 32, 56- 60, 87- 90, 98- 107). Whichever of these styles I borrow, sooner or latterly I ’ll discover that they lead me to the mindfulness of concinnity underpinning the endless diversity in the macrocosm. I may not still “ perceive ” oneness, but I can no longer misdoubt it. I begin to have a kindly

 vague but patient feeling that the whole macrocosm is a cosmic, multidimensional conscious being( virāt puruṣa), and I joyfully serve this cosmic being as well as I can. 

This is service as means at its stylish. As said before, this accelerates the process ofde-alienation or reintegration. When this process reaches its logical conclusion, service as means has fulfilled its purpose. Whatever service I do thenceforward is robotic and perfect. It's service not as a means tode-alienation but as a wholesome result of it. 

 

 Service as a Result 

When my mindfulness expands, it not only removes the disaffection within my personality but also transcends at some stage the hedge of the body, and gradationally engulfs further and further of the world around. When I'm fullyde-alienated, all borders evaporate. Nothing limits me. I perceive the bone

 , horizonless, conscious being within and without. My every little act becomes a deification, every word a benediction. I discover that my true tone isn't different from the true tone in each and every critter around. I perceive knowledge palpitating indeed in objects that are typically considered insensible( Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad,3.8.11, Muṇḍakopaniṣad,2.2.11, Chāndogya Upaniṣad,7.25.1- 2, Gītā, 4. 24, 10. 20). I find that there's only one tone appearing in innumerous forms( Kaṭhopaniṣad,2.2.2,2.2.9- 10, Chāndogya Upaniṣad,6.3.2). My love for my true tone doesn't discord with my love for others, because I see my own tone in all, and I see all in my own tone( Īśāvāsyopaniṣad, 6- 7 and Gitā, 6. 29- 32). I come immersed in the bliss of my tone. I perceive oneness far and wide. I come free from all duties, liabilities, scores. Nothing binds me( Gitā, 3. 17- 18). Yet I do n’t stop working. Out of the wholeness of my heart, out of the robotic love that gushes forth from my being for the total of creation, I continue to serve( Gitā, 3. 25). This is true service. 

 

 When I'm spiritually illumined, my service need not always take the form of external exertion. I'll do good to the world by just being who I am. My bare presence will do prodigies and I ’ll radiate peace, harmony, bliss each around. Whoever comes within the route of my influence will come blessed and get the strength, stopgap and faith necessary to pursue advanced life. 

 Frequently we may know nothing about those who are spiritually illumined. “ The loftiest men, ” said Swami Vivekananda, 

 

 “ are calm, silent, and unknown. They're the men who really know the power of study; they're sure that, indeed if they go into a delve

 and close the door and simply suppose five nay studies and also pass down, these five studies of theirs will live through eternity. Indeed, similar studies will access through the mountains, cross the abysses, and travel through the world. They will enter deep into mortal hearts and smarts, and raise up men and women who'll give them practical expression in the workings of mortal life. ”( CW, 1. 106) 

 Similar illuminated bones

 appear in every generation a many among them come given; most pass down unknown. Known or unknown, they're the topmost donors of humanity. Through their lives we learn what this life is each about; through the kind of service they do we understand what true service means. 

 Summary 

 

 We've seen that true service is an act of godliness and it has its origin in the perception of the concinnity of all actuality. Through some mysterious quip this concinnity was disturbed. The one, concentrated actuality came disintegrated into numerous putatively different subsistence. This produced disaffection, stress, conflicts and, inescapably, anguish. 

To overcome this, the numerous have to be resolved back into the one. In other words, disaffection must be removed. Since the breaking up into the numerous is basically the apparent fragmentation and localization of the each- percolating knowledge, the resolving into the one calls for a progressive metamorphosis and expansion of knowledge. 

 

 Several factors play important places in thede-alienation process. Service is one of them. It acts as a catalyst to the process, handed it's done with the establishment conviction( at this stage, there's no factual perception) in the oneness of all that exists. This purifies the heart and helps annihilate the colorful boundaries that stand as hurdles to the broadening of mindfulness. When the process ofde-alienation is complete and I return to being a completely integrated being, I come perfect and am suitable to perceive “ the bone

 ” behind the apparent and illusory “ numerous. ” also, and only also, can I offer true service, which does lasting good to the world.( CW 5. 285) 

 Still, who serves whom? The answer is, I serve myself, If everything is eventually one. How the bone

 , inseparable reality got divided into the numerous is, really speaking, a crazyquestion.However, it only means it was noway inseparable to start with, If the inseparable could really get divided. On the other hand, if it really was inseparable, also absolutely nothing can divide it. also what was all this discussion about the descent of the one to come the numerous and the ascent of the numerous to come the one? If it's insolvable for the one to come the numerous, how did the insolvable come possible? 

 

 The insolvable can come possible only through ignorance. Which is to say, only ignorance can make the insolvable appear as possible. Nothing but the ignorance of a curled rope in a semlit room can turn it into a snake. Obviously, the rope’s metamorphosis is only illusory. The mindfulness that it’s only a rope, not a snake, drives down the ignorance and the snake vanishes. In precisely the same way, ignorance divides the inseparable, absolute Being, knowledge and Bliss( sat- cit- ānanda) into innumerous fractions. The divisions, obviously illusory, evaporate when overrun by the expanding mindfulness that reveals the concentrated nature of all that exists. 

Why should I serve myself? No reason why I should, really. But when I discover ignorance having its sway over me, the only way I can kill it off is through knowledge, and service done in the proper spirit is an necessary aid to the accession of knowledge. Once the floodlight of supreme knowledge dispels the caliginous darkness of ignorance, I come free. The service I do thenceforward is a free, robotic, perfect immolation — not for the sake of knowledge, which I formerly have but for the good of the world which I easily see as my own tone in another form. 

                           Source:Vedanta society,Veda,ramkrishna mission and Wikipedia