Destroying the ego

reply to post by Bluesma


Ive often thought, it's not about destroying the Ego but integrating it with self-realization. I have got no idea how this would work but letting the Ego know you are going to destroy it seems like unnatural. Integrating it seems to me the way to go.

Originally posted by DrunkYogi
reply to post by Bluesma

 

Ive often thought, it's not about destroying the Ego but integrating it with self-realization. I have got no idea how this would work but letting the Ego know you are going to destroy it seems like unnatural. Integrating it seems to me the way to go.

I suppose it depends very much on how far you want to take it. It would be helpful if we all learned to act, rather than react, but not everyone wants to be that self-aware. We live in a society where we are too often defined by what we do (occupationally) and what we have (possessively), it is difficult to break free from that and simply be defined by our actions in any given moment. There is an inherent need to distinguish ourselves primarily. That is a hard cycle for many people to break. We are led to quantify and qualify ourselves, and essentially, you become invisible or rather indistinguishable, when you drop that facade, because those who live within those constraints have difficulty in perceiving you otherwise. So, yes, perhaps integration is more do-able. I know that at this point in my life, I define myself as 'Mum', no other definition has any meaning to me and I find it extremely hard to react or even act, outside of that 'box'. Destruction of that aspect of my ego, to my mind, would be detrimental to my child, and I cannot work around that, therefore, I accept it as integral. And I suppose, given that it has a basis both physiologically and neurologically, then it is not merely ego, but since I also take pride in being told that my son is a 'credit to me', that ego is as much a factor.

Originally posted by DrunkYogi
reply to post by Bluesma

 

Ive often thought, it's not about destroying the Ego but integrating it with self-realization. I have got no idea how this would work but letting the Ego know you are going to destroy it seems like unnatural. Integrating it seems to me the way to go.

My title was more describing the belief system that I do not agree with, and was making an argument against.
To me, whatever you include when you say "I" is the ego. Whatever the self consciousness choose to acknowledge. But apparently that varies for everyone, and kind of goes counter to what the majority of people want to do. For ego is considered a bad thing, and everything that is undesireable or to be rejected from the self.

For me, that is "the Shadow"- a term meant to refer to all the parts of ourself that we reject and deny; those parts of self we put into suppression in subconscious, and that, as a result, will always be pressing to come out through our acts in negative forms.

My thinking on this idea of "changing-" or "transforming" ego purposefully and willingly, entails acknowledging the parts you wish to change (beliefs, ideas, values, behaviors, habits...) and using the aid of an example to transform them.

But even to get there, one must already be including them as part of the self! If they are in suppression and denial, (in the "Shadow" ) you cannot have any influence upon them (except the daily exercise of trying to keep them down and repressed ).

reply to post by Bluesma


Each time I see the title of your thread, I wonder who are these people who wish to destroy the ego?

As far as I can recall, no-one who has posted here supports the idea of ego destruction.

Maybe I have misunderstood what has been shared, but I was under the impression that those in the supposedly anti-ego camp simply promote dis-identifcation with ego, or recognizing that self is not the ego which is presented to the world.

I have previously used the example of an actor and the character he plays. In the case of the actor, there is normally no conflict between the self-as-actor and the role they are playing. In the same way, someone who has ceased to identify the self with ego continues to "play" the ego character which is associated with self in this life. The ego character is not necessarily "bad" or in need of destroying, it is just seen for what it is.

reply to post by mysticnoon


Well, I don't like to name individuals, because the topic is not about specific individuals, but a concept that any individual could have... but if it will help to make clear what sort of dialogue I am speaking of, in this thread, Angie and Itisnowagain represent rather well what I speak of.

But anyone who expresses the need to do away with any individualization, any sense of "I" as separate from "Not I". Ego means individualization, so to get rid of individualization means to get rid of ego.

Any ideals which value the complete rejection of individual will would count, for me, as being part of that type of ideal/belief.

If one looks at ego instead as the set of ideas, concepts values and beliefs one has, then this sort of comment illustrates a belief that it is good to destroy ego-

(itisnowagain)

meaning that ideas, beliefs and structure need to be washed away.

Of course, the rest of my argument to that being that even if they are "washed away" the mind will simply become like a sponge and absorb new ideas and concepts within the vicinity. Therefore it can only transform, not disappear, and you do not have to submit to anyone elses demand that you "wash" or erase, your mind. You can choose whe,n where, how, and with whom you do so. (even if they claim you are being not cooperative, egotistical, unenlightened, or otherwise bad or inferior )

reply to post by Bluesma


Yes, I see now how much of the problem lies in the definition of the term ego.

I regard the ego as everything assciated with one's own identity which is not the soul or spirit. Essentially, the ego identity is the vehicle through which spirit operates in this dimension.

I'd really appreciate it if you all would listen to it.

The concept of ego cannot be destroyed but it can be watched and studied - when it is being watched and it is you that is watching then you are free of it.
The ego is what you 'think' you are - it is an image built over time of the person you believe you are - it is made of what you believe in (what you support - be it football teams or just the country you were born in). People have an idea of who they are and they have labels, flags and banners that define them that separate them from others - it enables conflict. It makes people gang up and fight and defend. So if you want to get people to fight and compete - like you want to have a war - you can build up the ego in a team of people and it will make them fighters. Ego is ego - there is no good or bad ego. Ego makes conflict.

What is the 'self concept'? A concept is an idea. Are you any of the things you think you are?
What are you really?
Have you ever heard the term 'neti neti'? It means 'not that not that'. Whatever the mind or others say you are, know that you are not that. It is taken for granted that you are a thing, a 'concept' but it s confusing because you aren't really any thing in particular.
Would you consider it safe to say that you are no 'thing' in particular? So no matter what idea you have of yourself it is never correct.

If you have a label like 'American' and then move from America but have 'identified' yourself as an 'American' it will hurt when that label is removed from you. To attach yourself to a label will cause pain. Are you a label?

Originally posted by mysticnoon
reply to post by Bluesma

 

Yes, I see now how much of the problem lies in the definition of the term ego.

I regard the ego as everything assciated with one's own identity which is not the soul or spirit. Essentially, the ego identity is the vehicle through which spirit operates in this dimension.

Okay, but if the soul rejects the vehicle, leaving to other vehicles to control, program, use, abuse, or whatever, then the soul cannot be said to be "operating" it.

It is then just neglecting it.

This is where I percieve inner conflicts happen- because matter has consciousness... (not necessarily self consciousness though). The physical body has consciousness, and when neglected and abused, it gets resentful, fearful, angry..... the avoidance of merging with the body ends up making the body consciousness a very negative thing indeed!

It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy (no pun was intended, but it works), in a sense, and illustrates how our beliefs and ideas form reality. Beliving your ego is negative/bad makes it so!

(sorry, you probably read my other post before I tried to shorten it)

Originally posted by Itisnowagain


What is the 'self concept'? A concept is an idea. Are you any of the things you think you are?

I am when I decide I am. When I decide to experience being something else, I change my ideas and concepts to a form I wish to be next.

Would you consider it safe to say that you are no 'thing' in particular? So no matter what idea you have of yourself it is never correct.

I have already answered this question when you asked it of me before.

Yes, it can be said, I have said it and it is correct.
Yet, truth has layers.

One does not have to reject the superficial ones in order to get to the deeper ones.

If you have a label like 'American' and then move from America but have 'identified' yourself as an 'American' it will hurt when that label is removed from you. To attach yourself to a label will cause pain. Are you a label?
Should a 'label' be given that much power?
Labels divide that which is whole. This division allows for conflict. If you are conflicted 'inside' then there will be 'external' conflict as well.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
If you have a label like 'American' and then move from America but have 'identified' yourself as an 'American' it will hurt when that label is removed from you. To attach yourself to a label will cause pain. Are you a label?
Should a 'label' be given that much power?
Labels divide that which is whole.

N'importe quoi! A peach has different parts, that can be named or looked at individually. That does not mean they are no longer part of the whole. Just recognizing the existence of the fruit, does not make it no longer part of the tree, or the tree no longer part of the forest, or the forest no longer part of the planet, the planet no longer part of the galaxy, etc.

My body has attachments to people, and I do not see how rejecting those attachments as having any value is of benefit. It has value, for a certain layer of my being. I did not enter matter and physicality to run away from such experiences as emotion, love, loss, and all the other colors of physical existence. I do not search to avoid these.

Originally posted by Bluesma
My body has attachments to people, and I do not see how rejecting those attachments as having any value is of benefit. It has value, for a certain layer of my being. I did not enter matter and physicality to run away from such experiences as emotion, love, loss, and all the other colors of physical existence. I do not search to avoid these.

You attach yourself to the label 'American' - you do not have to reject anything - just recognize what labels are and what they do. It is about seeing a label (a word) arise and know that you are not that. If you decide that you are that then you will know that deep down it is not entirely correct - because you are no thing in particular.

Are you trying to fit in?
I don't think a peach has the same issue - the peach does not identify itself.

I still don't understand why you feel the need to fill yourself up with someone else's beliefs and ideas - a new prison - a new set of conditioning. Out of one prison into another. Who can you trust?
Why not get out of all prisons?

Ego is the division and the conflict.
Enlightenment is the egoless state.

Are you trying to fit in?

I feel very frustrated, because I have explained this at length in this thread, many times. So it feels less like you don't understand, and more like you are trying to change my opinion on this!

Yes, in order to function within a group of peoples efficently, one must know and integrate their values, ideals, ethics and concepts about reality.

If you think you might be returning to live in a certain environment, it is useful to hold on to that set of concepts for use when you arrive. To have the appropriate language come out of your mouth, to have acceptable and comprehensible jokes, and a chain of thought they can grasp, a behavior which fits in with the rituals.

A very blunt but easy to grasp example- if i let go of my american values , then when going to the US, I would take off my top at the beach. I would be arrested and that would be a big hassle. (there is a scene like this in the movie "Martha Marcy May Marlene" in which a girl tries to readjust to the common american society again after escaping a cult-)

Another example is knowing that in France one should not make mention of money in public, just as one should not make mention of sex in public in the US.


Otherwise, these all become obstacles to communication and interaction.

If you are just visiting an environment, then it is less important to integrate these things , as you do not plan on nurturing long term relations. You can remain in an isolated "hermit" type of existence, as I did, not talking to people, not having a job, not being a part of exterior activity at all. You can spend each day alone in nature meditating.

Your assertions that you are free of all thought, I am sorry but I cannot accept that as true. You are using language- which requires thought. You are attempting to communciate concepts to "an other".

You did not invent the language you are using. Therefore, that is concepts that were instilled in you from others. The word "ego" you did not invent.

For this mind and body to interact with others, it needs structure to use as tools. If you attempt to "remove" all structure, it will simply absorb new structures from the immediate environment. I do not see this is something one "should" do, only that it IS. And the thigns you do, the thigns you say, even iof you claim you didn't choose them they just "happened" all come forth from the subconscious then- and that is very very influencialable. ESPECIALLY if the conscious awareness flees to it's other levels of being, leaving it unattended and vulnerable to whoever is present and communicating ideas.

And there you have brain washing, mind control, and hypnotic suggestion.

Originally posted by Bluesma

Your assertions that you are free of all thought, I am sorry but I cannot accept that as true. You are using language- which requires thought. You are attempting to communciate concepts to "an other".

Where did I assert that I am free of thought?
I see every thought (word) arise as it arises.

reply to post by Itisnowagain

Where did I assert that I am free of thought?
I see every thought (word) arise as it arises.

what happens when you fall asleep what are you aware of then?

Originally posted by Bluesma
A very blunt but easy to grasp example- if i let go of my american values , then when going to the US, I would take off my top at the beach. I would be arrested and that would be a big hassle. (there is a scene like this in the movie "Martha Marcy May Marlene" in which a girl tries to readjust to the common american society again after escaping a cult-)

It helps to know the culture and ways of a specific country but to identify oneself with a label - 'American' - it will cause suffering. Like when your father implied that you are no longer considered 'American' - you cried for days.

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

Where did I assert that I am free of thought?
I see every thought (word) arise as it arises.

what happens when you fall asleep what are you aware of then?

Nothing. No appearance is appearing in deep sleep - not that I am aware of.

Originally posted by Bluesma

Are you trying to fit in?

If you think you might be returning to live in a certain environment, it is useful to hold on to that set of concepts for use when you arrive. To have the appropriate language come out of your mouth, to have acceptable and comprehensible jokes, and a chain of thought they can grasp, a behavior which fits in with the rituals.

Otherwise, these all become obstacles to communication and interaction.

It is about wanting to fit in and be accepted.
When you can accept yourself completely - then you will find you fit in everywhere. This is all about not feeling secure in yourself.
It seems that you are still looking for 'home'.
'There's no place like home'.

Know thyself - find out what you really are and be done with it.