Is it not that the green attracted you more than the red, so you were under the compulsion of green, you thought that you freely chose the green one but this is because the green attracted you, you were under the spell of greenness and you were caught by that spell and you chose this. You think that you are free, − is not true. In any case you may say that mere presentation of options, although it gives you the sense of freedom, it does not necessarily mean that you are really free in choosing one against the other. Mere presentation of options does not necessarily mean that you are free.
When you say that two options are presented, were you not bound only by two options, apart from your choosing green, which was also a compulsion, where you were also not bound by the fact that you had only two choices, you were not free actually by having third choice at all. The fact that you're bound by the two options only is also bondage. You are bound to have only two options, why not are you not free to have other choices also, only two options are given to you that also is bondage. And even when you choose as I said, you chose because green attracted you. Therefore, in what way were you free, only you had a sense of freedom, that's all, you felt you were free but when you analyse, you feel that you were fooled actually by attraction of greenness. You were really not free that is why although we have the sense of freedom, we don't really have the actuality of freedom. It is a very important distinction, the sense of freedom, which does not correspond with the actuality of freedom. If you examine all the choices that you have made in the world, in your whole life even when options were given to you, you will find ultimately that you chose this because of this compulsion or that compulsion. Now this will help us at arriving at the real definition of freedom.
You cannot have a real freedom unless the following conditions are fulfilled. First that you should have before you not one, or two or three options, you should have any number of options, it's very important statement. You can be really free only when you have before you any number of options, so long as only a few options are present, you are compelled within the boundary, only of those options. So, you cannot really be free, unless you have any number of options. You should have all possible options, not only all but all possible options, even if you have all options, even that is not complete, all possible options, anything that can be opted for should be present before you. And you should be told now any number of options are present. I'm only giving you the pure definition of freedom. When shall we say that an action is free, unless you have before you any number of options, all options, all possible options, unless you have before you this, you cannot say you are really free, this is the definition that I'm giving you. Whether it is possible or not, I'm not asking just now. If you really claim to be free, you should be able to say that I had any number of options, all possible options; this is the first condition of freedom. But this is not enough. Merely presentation of a number of choices,….