Right, the collective evolutionary will that controls our species like a puppet can be ascetically circumvented, he says. That same will underlies everything in monistic terms, according to him. Why call it a "will" if it encompasses psychology, biology, and physics? Because of the analogy I quoted.

If your point is that that monistic will is impersonal, I agree that that's his view. But this just makes "impersonal, blind will" oxymoronic. His account is incoherent to the extent that it's anthropocentric. He's just humanizing physical inertia by comparing it to the will of living things.