Every­thing hap­pens ac­cord­ing to the will of God. Is at­tach­ment a mere con­cept? If at­tach­ment is a con­cept, how do you get your­self at­tached? You can speak on at­tach­ment, but you can­not be at­tached. A con­cept is dif­fer­ent from an ex­pe­ri­ence. A per­son can speak on ad­vai­ta, non-du­al­i­ty, which is the "God is One" con­cept. Has he ex­pe­ri­enced? The con­cept is dif­fer­ent. Peo­ple are ex­perts in con­cepts and pre­cepts, but very poor in prac­tice. They are im­pov­er­ished in prac­tice, but they are schol­ars in con­cepts and pre­cepts. At­tach­ment is not a con­cept if you are at­tached. Iden­ti­fi­ca­tion of the body is not a con­cept, but a re­al­i­ty. You are the do­er. It is hap­pen­ing; I think this is my body. I am at­tached to my fam­i­ly. I am at­tached to my job. These are things go­ing on. Every­thing hap­pens ac­cord­ing to the will of God. This is a point we have to un­der­stand here.

Where there is at­tach­ment, the very word "at­tach­ment" has a mean­ing when there is de­tach­ment. When there is noth­ing like de­tach­ment, the mean­ing of the word "at­tach­ment" is gone. There is day be­cause there is night; when there is no night, the word "day" has no mean­ing. So at­tach­ment has mean­ing be­cause there is de­tach­ment, or else it will lose its mean­ing. To be­lieve that "I am the do­er" is ego. And with re­gard to iden­ti­fi­ca­tion of the body, if I feel iden­ti­fied, it means that there is scope for non-iden­ti­fi­ca­tion. When I say that I am iden­ti­fied, it means I can al­so dis-iden­ti­fy. You can al­so get your­self dis-iden­ti­fied. So where there is at­tach­ment, there is a pos­si­bil­i­ty for de­tach­ment. Where there is body iden­ti­fi­ca­tion, there is a pos­si­bil­i­ty for body non-iden­ti­fi­ca­tion. Where there is a feel­ing of do­er­ship, there can be non-do­er­ship al­so. This is all du­al­i­ty. How­ev­er, the re­al­i­ty is be­yond it. The re­al­i­ty is non-dual.

There­fore, the will of God is non-dual. That du­al­i­ty, that Di­vin­i­ty, at the op­er­a­tional lev­el, is, on one side, at­tach­ment, and, on the oth­er side, de­tach­ment–like two sides of the same coin. Is it at­tach­ment or de­tach­ment? Is it both, and it is nei­ther of the two. Both are present, and yet how can both be present at the same time? It is some­thing like this. There­fore, re­al­i­ty is non-dual. Day and night are dual; that is cor­rect. But tru­ly speak­ing, they are non-dual. The sun does not rise, nor does it set. There is noth­ing like sun­rise and sun­set. When the Earth turns, it is day. When it turns fur­ther, it is night. We still say sun­rise and sun­set. There­fore, func­tion­al­ly you are dual; but tru­ly speak­ing, you are non-dual.

Sub­mit­ted by the Sri Sathya Sai Ba­ba Or­gan­i­sa­tion of T&T