Katha upanishad verse I.2.23

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Charles Wikner wrote:

[...]

> But to return to some semblance of sanity: so long as there is
> not-Self, there is ego; and where there is ego, there is volition.
> (Or, if you prefer, where there is prak.rti, there is rajas.)
>

Completely agree. Nobody could have said it better.

And so long as there is ego, promises have to be kept.

[..]

>
> > Acceptance of non-volition by the jeeva is a dharmic concept.
>
> Surely non-volition and dharma are contradictory?
>

Indeed. dharma requires the assumption of kartr.tva and kartA, which
implies volition.

> The concept of non-volition is pure poison at the vyaavahaarika level;
> it does, however, have a useful explanatory function at the praatibhaasika

Yes, yes.

I will post excerpts from the teachings of HH Sri Chandrasekhara Bharati
on the matter of fate and free will soon.

S. Vidyasankar