Search & Read
Take a Stand Where You Will
Kent: Hi, James.
Thanks so much for the chat with you and Sundari. It was experiential bliss, which is always fun.
I have a confusion. I’ll do my best to explain it.
That fact that there is a confusion is known to me and I can dismiss it. Do I dismiss the confusion(s) as an object known to me (mithya) OR should I be acknowledging it as I am doing so in writing to you this question?
It seems to always comes down to “how do I live?” which is also known thought-object in me and can be dismissed. Do I dismiss everything that is mithya? Or because I am seemingly living in this seeming reality, I address them for some reason? As an example, you can’t say to me that the reason I should address them is “for peace of mind,” because that is also mithya and I don’t need peace of mind to be who/what I am.
I am happy to speak/write with you or Sundari to help me clear this confusion up. It is stemming from the relationship with the wife. It’s always the spouse, isn’t it? ☺ I can handle it all, whatever it is, but the question is… should I? How do I play now in this reality? Then the questions comes again… should I even care, because all these questions are thought-objects?
I have no idea if this is coming across clearly… yet do I need to mind? Do I mind? That is also a related question because that seeming part of me, the discriminator, that minds is mithya too.
~ Much love
James: Hi, Kent.
Discrimination, which is moksa, i.e. freedom from confusion, is distinguishing the self from the doer. What is true for the self is only true for the self, not for the doer. As the self, you can dismiss every thought because thoughts don’t affect the self. But thoughts and the actions that flow from the doer affect the doer. So if you are the self, there is no problem. If you are the doer, there is obviously a problem. If you are the self and you want the doer to be happy, then you have to address the issues that affect the doer. If you want the doer to be happy in its relationship with its wife, you have to see to it that it follows husband dharma, however Kent and his wife have structured it. Or the doer needs to effect a redefinition of the rules that is acceptable to both husband and wife. If the doer you is thinking that marriage was a mistake, then it needs to either man up and take the relationship as it stands as prasad (no resentment allowed!) or to plot an escape that will produce as little suffering as possible for all concerned. Karma yoga won’t work in the long run, because the basic conflict between your doer’s desires and her doer’s desires had not been properly addressed and laid to rest. Your doer wants freedom and hers wants to depend on an object, i.e. Kent.
Of course you don’t want to hurt her feelings, but she is hurting her feelings anyway because she expects things from you that you are incapable of giving her. So there is going to be pain either way – for the doers. But for you it is all just a big “so what?” Knowing the difference between you and the doer is freedom. Take a stand where you will.
~ Much love, Ramji