O.M. His mind has Free Choice in determining that it would be _right _to try it? Y.M. Yes. O.M. Then if by reason of his inborn cowardice he simply can _not _essay it, what becomes of his Free Will? Where is his Free Will? Why claim that he has Free Will when the plain facts show that he hasn’t? Why contend that because he and David _see _the right alike, both must _act _alike? Why impose the same laws upon goat and lion? Y.M. There is really no such thing as Free Will? O.M. It is what I think. There is _will_. But it has nothing to do with _intellectual perceptions of right and wrong, _and is not under their command. David’s temperament and training had Will, and it was a compulsory force; David had to obey its decrees, he had no choice. The coward’s temperament and training possess Will, and _it _is compulsory; it commands him to avoid danger, and he obeys, he has no choice. But neither the Davids nor the cowards possess Free Will—will that may do the right or do the wrong, as their _mental _verdict shall decide. _Not Two Values, But Only One_ Y.M. There is one thing which bothers me: I can’t tell where you draw the line between _material _covetousness and _spiritual _covetousness. O.M. I don’t draw any. Y.M. How do you mean? O.M. There is no such thing as _material _covetousness. All covetousness is spiritual. Y.M. _All _longings, desires, ambitions _spiritual, _never material? O.M. Yes. The Master in you requires that in _all _cases you shall content his _spirit _—that alone. He never requires anything else, he never interests himself in any other matter. Y.M. Ah, come! When he covets somebody’s money—isn’t that rather distinctly material and gross? O.M. No. The money is merely a symbol—it represents in visible and concrete form a _spiritual desire. _Any so-called material thing that you want is merely a symbol: you want it not for _itself_, but because it will content your spirit for the moment. Y.M. Please particularize. O.M. Very well. Maybe the thing longed for is a new hat. You get it and your vanity is pleased, your spirit contented. Suppose your friends deride the hat, make fun of it: at once it loses its value; you are ashamed of it, you put it out of your sight, you never want to see it again. Y.M. I think I see. Go on. O.M. It is the same hat, isn’t it? It is in no way altered. But it wasn’t the _hat _you wanted, but only what it stood for—a something to please and content your _spirit_. When it failed of that, the whole of its value was gone. There are no _material _values; there are only spiritual ones. You will hunt in vain for a material value that is _actual, real—_there is no such thing. The only value it possesses, for even a moment, is the spiritual value back of it: remove that end and it is at once worthless—like the hat. Y.M. Can you extend that to money?