Is having options to choose from an expression of freedom, or is it rather a sign of confusion and restlessness of the mind?
Suppose you drive with your car and at the train crossing the barrier is starting to go down. Not only the law tells you to stop but most of all your reasoning and your experience tells you to stop because you know accidents can happen. But still at least theoretically you also have the option to drive through.
If you would interpret the situation in a neutral way, you would accept this train is going to pass now and there is no way to drive through. Only your desire to save time by driving over this train crossing before the barrier comes completely down produces a necessary choice between the option to stop and the option to drive through.
In that particular situation is that freedom to think that you have the option to drive through? Or is it foolishness? Is it confusion and restlessness of your mind that gives you even only the thought that it would be an option to drive through a closing barrier?
Is an option not just like other worldly phenomena something without an own individuality, something that we create in our mind and then consider it to be real? But is it really real? Or is it only real to ourselves, and to our confused and restless mind? Does our mind by creating options try to convince us that there is a ‘me’ and that by having these illusory options this ‘me’ is free?
If by overcoming our dualistic thinking the mind stops to look for individuality behind phenomena and things and accepts everything with a neutral perception, is there still a question of having options? And is the freedom not rather been found in the fact that our mind doesn’t have to start reflecting about options and not has to start making an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages every option would bring along? And so you can think even further: is ‘advantage’ or disadvantage’ on its turn not only convention? Can any worldly phenomena based on its own nature be advantageous or disadvantageous?
This hollowness of options is not to be confused with a causal deterministic system, like for example the concept of karma, which through previous deeds and actions makes choices for us, and also not with an all providing God who makes the decisions for us. It is about the confusion of our mind that is created because we perceive worldly phenomena only through dualistic definitions, and that way makes us believe we have to choose between certain things or actions.
Or in another way formulated: is the act of creating and choosing between options exactly that what makes us clinging more intensively to what we consider to be ‘me’, our ego?