Pressure and A-dvaita

[Cameron Reilly]

At 20:54 30/04/97 -0400, Jaldhar wrote:

>On Tue, 29 Apr 1997, Cameron Reilly wrote:
>
>>
>> I think that this is where an understanding of non-volition is important.
>>
>> I would very much contend that one can be driving a Toyota and earning US$
>> and *still* be detached. Such an individual (is there such a thing? forgive
>> the terminology) would not differentiate between having the Toyota and not
>> having the Toyota. Because he (or she) would not consider his (or her) self
>> to have any control over 'events'... no volition... one accepts the
>> universe as it appears unconditionally... and understands that 'having' or
>> 'not-having' are the different ends of the same piece of string, why is one
>> 'good' and the other 'bad'? Only in the mind world of duality do they
>> appear separate.
>>
>
>Only in the mind world of duality are there Toyotas so you haven't really
>answered the question.
>
>Even if an owner doesn't care about his car he is still responsible for
>pedestrians, other drivers, the environment, traffic rules, taxes, tolls,
>and road works.  Surely this requires volition.  If the owner isn't
>aware of these things it means he is irresponsible not detached. So I
>agree with Prasad that owning a car, chasing after dollars etc. is
>incompatible with detachment.

While one still considers oneself to be an individual, with free will and
volition, then all of these observations are correct. When one no longer is
fooled by appearances, when one sees into the true nature of things, then
these apparant conflicts no longer become relevant.

Regards,
Cameron