"Sorry that that tangential paragraph triggered you."
It was more the entire thrust of your article expressed in that paragraph rather than a tangent.
"Could it be that you feel unconsciously guilty about the implicit conflict between your mystical hobby and your life in the corporate world of sales? "
LOL no.
"Or are the standards of profiting from sales in a capitalistic marketplace supposed to be perfectly consistent with nondual wisdom?"
Yes, nondual wisdom encompasses all the conflicts in human behaviour actually. But I try to be ethical in my selling (I sell a product that is genuinely useful and I don't lie to people). I don't see a contradiction between making a living to support myself and my loved ones in an ethical way, and seeking mystical experience. Mysticism is an integrative experience.
"Nevertheless, the heroes of mysticism like Jesus and the Buddha give up the profane life because they deem it absurd compared to the mystical experience of cosmic oneness. "
Actually Jesus was supposedly sent to Earth by God to specifically save humanity, it wasn't a free choice to give up "profane life" it was supposedly destiny. Which is why I'm not a Christian.
The Buddha gave up his kingship in his journey and tried asceticism among other paths, because he wanted to understand suffering and wondered if his privilege was holding him back from truths about the nature of being. However he actually realised that asceticism is not the way to enlightenment, and thus he came up with "The Middle Way" which is about balance.
"Those who try to have it both ways are in danger of being hypocrites. The most respectable reason why these half-in, half-out folks wouldn’t sell all their possessions and go live in a cave somewhere is that they suspect the mystical experience isn’t as complete as it’s supposed to be."
Or maybe it's because most mystical teachings don't actually proclaim that one needs to sell all their possessions and live in a cave to achieve enlightenment. In Buddhism there is the idea of a "Bodhisattva", someone who achieves enlightenment but chooses to remain in the world and in society to help others. In Hinduism the path to enlightenment (moksha) includes first achieving material wealth and comfort, having a family, experiencing physical, emotional and aesthetic pleasure to the full, and only once all your responsibilities are done then you start the process of renunciation (which helps you come to terms with death).
I really think you have a fixed idea in your head about what the path of mysticism is (spoiler alert, there is no one path, and asceticism is not the most common path). Alan Watts talks about the state of being able to hold the feeling of mystical oneness in your mind while also choosing to "play the game" of ordinary life, participating in social conventions, capitalism. The idea of "play" not being in the sense of not being sincere about it, but more in the sense of artistry. As in, you play your life and your role the way someone plays a concerto. Recognising that you are choosing to participate in it, but that you make your own meaning from it.
If you want to go away and become a hermit, that's a choice, but if you're doing absolutely nothing you may as well not be alive. And most mystics I've come across or encountered works by, revel in their lives to the full.
"Similarly, there’s something undignified about the prospect of living as a naïve child forever, even though that’s precisely the state of mind Jesus says is needed for entrance to God’s kingdom (Mark 10:15, Matt.19:14). Hence the comparison of mine which you find offensive and cynical. Take it up with Jesus, will you?"
Fuck you Jesus! (LOL)
