Let me first say that I'm not very familiar with his teachings, despite the buzz. I've only personally read the article in question and another one of his that talks about mistakes and clouds. I presume, since you speak with confidence about his teachings, that you are more knowledgable about them than I am. I've been struggling with the idea that there must be some foundation of things beyond which you mustn't degrade your tastes or desires simply because you can't attain them for as long as I can remember. What I understand by "foundation" is a floor, a bottom - the baseline on the measure tape. If I understand your words correctly, you mean to say that there is such a foundation and that anything beyond it is undesirable because of self-absolution of responsibility and the degradation of the self that follows. Do I understand your words correctly? Correct me if I don't: you provide a perspective I've never encountered before.
It does. Thank you. I wish it could be less vague, but, as you've said, every person is different. I hope it's okay if I ask you one more thing. If a person says they like spending time with you but, for whatever reason, can never seem to find the time unless you put effort into making it (say, by visiting them at home or at work), what does that say about the person and about the relationship?
Perhaps it was unwise of me to bring up the question without a proper context, since it impedes your ability to provide insight. Either way, I appreciate the advice. It's been good to learn things from a more healthy perspective, since mine is quite a bit skewed still.