Katha upanishhad verse I.2.23

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

On Wed, 9 Apr 1997, Gummuluru Murthy wrote:

[..]

> But, isn't lethargy a property of the mind only ? Even the buddhi
> (the intellect) is not touched by it, let alone the Atman, the Lord of the
> chariot.
>
> I define lethargy as the disinclination of the mind to apply to the task
> at hand. Body has nothing to do with it and it simply follows. For even
> the most "lethargic" person has an active mind. If the buddhi is pure,
> the concept of lethargy vainshes.
>
> Thus, I submit that the argument that acceptance of non-volition would
> lead to lethargy does not hold.

Not so. What is the entity that accepts non-volition? It is not the Atman,
because there is nothing for the Atman to accept or reject. If it is the
buddhi, you have to accept that the manas, citta and buddhi are constantly
interacting with one another. If the manas has not been trained well
enough, so that it remains disinclined to apply to the task at hand, but
the buddhi accepts non-volition at an intellectual level, what then? Isn't
there the possibility that the lethargic mind, however active, will
continue to be disincline to apply itself to the task at hand? Precisely
because the acceptance of non-volition will cause the lethargic mind to
think that there is no task at all? Are you saying that a pure buddhi can
only go with a well-trained manas, or that only a pure buddhi can accept
non-volition?

The problem is that so long as one talks of volition, or non-volition, or
tasks at hand to be accomplished, one is still in duality. The very fact
that one still talks of the presence or absence of free will indicates
that one has still not gone beyond duality.

Vidyasankar