I."God dwells wherever [a person] lets [God] in."
             As a response to the popular belief that one must "abandon the external and internal reality of earthly being," Buber argues that one should do the opposite if he truly wants to let God dwell in him. This passage is only true, in Buber's terms, if the individual would allow God in himself-that is, the individual accepts willingly that God has given to him as a human individual. A relevant passage from Buber demonstrates this assertion, wherein he used the example of Adam as an example of an individual who 'hid' himself in order to escape responsibilities from God, which in effect, meant that God does not dwell in him:
             Adam hides himself to avoid rendering accounts, to escape responsibility for his way of living. Every man hides for this purpose, for every man is Adam and finds himself in Adam's position. To escape responsibility for his life, he turns existence into a system of hideouts. And in thus hiding again and again "from the face of God," he enmeshes himself more and more deeply in perversity.
             This passage demonstrates an important insight into Buber's religious philosophy. While rejection of existence is considered ideal and a sign of religious transcendence for other systems of religious belief, Buber's interpretation of this action is considered a direct deviation from God's will: for man to assume responsibility for whatever responsibilities in life God has given him. It is only in acceptance of God's will, then, that the individual can truly say, in Buberian terms, that God dwells in him.
             Comparing Buber's religious philosophy against Lao Tzu, it becomes apparent that the latter has subsisted achieving non-existence in the world in order to achieve transcendence. In the Tao Te Ching, Lao Tzu posits, "It is better to leave the vessel unfilled, than to attempt to carry it when it
             ...