Comparing the ego and true self

Hey everyone! I like writing and have started a blog recently which deals with human thoughts, feelings, and behavior. I like to put updated posts on here as well since a lot of you on this forum also appear to enjoy these topics. This topic is "comparing" the ego and the true self. I quote the word comparing because I know there is irony in it (since the true self does not 'compare') but I'm having difficulty coming up with a better title so i'm leaving it as is. Anyway, here is the post. For plagiarism purposes, the link I am copying this from is in my signature.


Comparing true self and the ego



The human ego, as mentioned in the previous post, is the false sense of self created by attaching one's self to thoughts rather than a state of natural being. One may be so attached to thought that they have no idea it is unnatural. Being attached to thoughts is an unnatural state which creates chronic emotional and physical stress.

A comparison in nature would be ripples created in a lake by throwing a rock into the lake. The rock makes contact with the water in the lake and creates circular ripples which expand outward from the point of contact to the shore. These ripples represent a temporary state of tension in the water due to encountering a stimulus (rock). Over a certain amount of time, the ripples and turbulence will naturally level out and the water becomes still again.

In the human mind, thoughts are triggered when one encounters a stimulus. These thoughts are meant to naturally flow through one without attachment, much like ripples naturally flow through a lake before the lake naturally returns to stillness. The thoughts will eventually subside and one will return back to their inner calmness and natural sense of being; when one attaches to thoughts and does not let them go, it creates constant tension and stress that are not natural, much like if a lake had continuous ripples and turbulence.

How can one detect if they are attached to their thoughts or not? Below are some examples of comparing the true self with ego, starting with the true self.

The true self:
- "Knows"
- Observes thought
- Deals only in facts
- Is objective without personalizing
- Loves all people and things unconditionally
- Is non-judgmental
- Allows the process of life to naturally occur
- Stays in the present/lives in the moment
- Makes decisions based on intuition
- Sees the self as being seperate yet connected to all people and things
- Is always content
- Sees no right or wrong, but instead sees gained knowledge, wisdom, and experience
- Creates unity by accepting all situations
- Sees "mistakes" as learning experiences, forgives, and moves on

The ego:
- "Thinks"
- Attaches to thought
- Consists only of opinions, or 'beliefs'
- Is subjective and personalizes everything
- Loves conditionally based on personal beliefs, thoughts, and expectations
- Is judgmental
- Bases life's meaning on fulfilled or unfulfilled goals and expectations originating from thought
- Is always comparing something to the past or planning for the future
- Makes decisions based on thoughts, rationalization, how it affects one's self
- Sees the self as being completely separate to other people and things
- Is never fully content (only temporarily)
- Believes in being "right" or "wrong"
- Creates separation by comparing situations
- Sees mistakes as a weakness within one's self and holds grudges

reply to post by Subconsciously Correct
Do you perceive ego as separate from true self?

I like your posts, I've read also the previous one.
I hope to see more of your writings, even if the audience at ATS isn't so big as you may have expected for topics like these. I feel like the answer to all our questions is in knowing our real self; yet for some seems to be easier than for others.
Good luck with your blog!

I like where your head is at and you have recieved my first flag would get a star but I haven't figured out how to do that yet lol.

BardingTheBard
reply to post by Subconsciously Correct

 

Do you perceive ego as separate from true self?

edit on 12-9-2013 by BardingTheBard because: Ergo!

I figured I would get this reply at some point (and it is a legitimate question). I do not feel they are separate, but that the ego and attachment to thoughts can cause separation. For the purpose of the blog I have written it for those who may be new to this concept of detachment from thought. I will get into the specifics of how the ego can become passive and how thoughts can be directed when aligned with the true self, but I will save that for a future blog post. I alluded to that in the very first post "about this blog" but I have decided to take baby steps to get there. Thanks for your reply!

reply to post by Subconsciously Correct

Glad it could be raised early! Thank you for the response.

Do you perceive the ego as being capable of "acting"?

reply to post by Subconsciously Correct


Nice topic, have you read 'Ego - The False Center
From Beyond the Frontier of the Mind by Osho"?

reply to post by Subconsciously Correct


No.

You're trying to break consciousness apart, and if done, you would lose the self.

You cannot separate the thinker from his thoughts without losing the thinker.

To even suggest awareness, you are suggesting thought. You cannot be aware of something without a thought of something.

You should stop listening to demons and actually think for yourself.

Bleeeeep, I appreciate the reply, although I'm not sure where the idea of separation is coming from. In fact, I am suggesting the exact opposite. Thoughts are a part of consciousness, correct, but thoughts by themselves are not consciousness. Become aware of thoughts, but do bot become attached to thoughts. One is not the thinker, although one can think. The post actually suggests not separating from anything, but being one with all. To attach to one's thoughts is to ignore the rest of self. To naturally observe thoughts as part of the grand whole, one is accepting all parts of self.

Again, thanks for the reply.

Bleeeeep
You cannot be aware of something without a thought of something.

Seeing and hearing can happen without thought being present.
In fact if you are listening - really listening - thought stops.

Bleeeeep

You should stop listening to demons and actually think for yourself.

edit on 9/13/2013 by Bleeeeep because: (no reason given)

Wow, demons ? Really ?

You played the "demon" card this early in the thread ?

reply to post by Subconsciously Correct


To the person who to Subconsciously Correct to "stop listening to demons":

If by demons you means something hateful and sinister, then I highly doubt a demon would be telling people to create unity and to love others unconditionally - unity of all through accepting differences.

To the original post:

The easiest way to 'find' true self is to realize that it is already here. It is the 'ego' the false image of self that is not already here.

When you realize that you are Here, and not over "There", you realize that the thought of you being over "there" was a false image of yourself all along.

Until it happens - until it is present - it is a false image of self.

"Goals" are not about looking towards a "future", more importantly, it's about looking at the Now in order to make the changes that you want Now - in each now changes are available and to live with the joy of making changes now is what will eventually be known as "achieving the goal" - but by then it would have been complete without the extreme longing and desire of looking towards the future.

Another way of saying it is this:

There is no goal to open the refrigerator door if I am hungry, it just happens instinctively without thought. This is pure action from self.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


No because seeing and hearing requires focus or a train of thought. The information would still come to you, sure, but you would not see it, nor hear it, nor be aware of it, unless you focused on it. Essentially, you would become unaware of it by not thinking about it.

An easy way to test what I just said is to, right now, become aware of what is in your peripheral vision. Until just now, if you just focused on it, you did not see what was around you. Yes, your eyes were aware of it, and your brain was aware of it, but the you, your mind, your self, was not.

reply to post by Subconsciously Correct


Hey nice OP. You kind of hit enlightenment on the head with your breakdown. Ive had the experience of being at one with myself and its everything you describe and more. Sometime i question how to get back there and yet i know i have to give everything i know, up. Anyways your post made me revisit my experience so thumbs up!

reply to post by SadistNocturne


One should not not judge for then one may have to use one's conscience. One should detach one's self from one's ego so one does not think about the pain one might have caused, and then feel remorseful, and repentant. One should only do what one's primal instinct tells one. Oh look at the clock, it's 11:11. One must feel mystified at one's place in the universe of one now.

Hyperbole? Yeah a little - but that really is the message you guys are singing. And the mighty "ones" you're getting the bad advice from, they're not ones of a one grand consciousness - they're demons and they're trying to corrupt you by having you believe you're God.

Bleeeeep
An easy way to test what I just said is to, right now, become aware of what is in your peripheral vision. Until just now, if you just focused on it, you did not see what was around you. Yes, your eyes were aware of it, and your brain was aware of it, but the you, your mind, your self, was not.

There is a seeing of these words (reading is happening) on the screen and then when the bit where it said 'become aware of what is in your peripheral vision' - then the focus changed all by itself.

I am not seeing - seeing is happening. I did not change the focus it just happened.

Thought ('I') likes to claim ownership of what has happened by saying 'I did that' but it all just happens - even the thought.

If the thought 'I did that' is believed then that is the separation - it 'seems' that there is something separate to the happening and then the dynamic of 'it is happening to me' occurs. Then there is a belief that 'I can stop the happening' - there is no 'I' that can stop anything or change anything because the happening is just happening.

reply to post by warriorscholar81


Click the little blank star above my post and watch it turn blue!

Thats all you have to do.

Bleeeeep
reply to post by SadistNocturne

 

One should not not judge for then one may have to use one's conscience. One should detach one's self from one's ego so one does not think about the pain one might have caused, and then feel remorseful, and repentant. One should only do what one's primal instinct tells one. Oh look at the clock, it's 11:11. One must feel mystified at one's place in the universe of one now.

Hyperbole? Yeah a little - but that really is the message you guys are singing. And the mighty "ones" you're getting the bad advice from, they're not ones of a one grand consciousness - they're demons and they're trying to corrupt you by having you believe you're God.

Throw in some "thee"s and "thou"s and I think well all feel at home with your Elizabethian speech!

And, well, please take your pious state of being with regards to knowledge of "the true God" and well, just, be at peace. Mods, please acknowledge my forced respectfulness


- SN

reply to post by Bleeeeep


My personal experience is different. My thoughts are not me. They are a separate thing I am the observer that choices wether to pay attention to those thoughts or not. Awareness is not thought and to me that is evident without thinking.. Try not thinking for a wee while you will not cease to exist. You function. Your perception changes.

nice op/sf)

reply to post by purplemer


You've misunderstood what I said.

I agree - you are not your thoughts, but you are the thinker of the thoughts; and to stop the thinker, to remove his thoughts, you would be removing the thinker. A thinker is not a thinker without his/her thoughts.

Nor can there be awareness without a concept of what you are aware of. You may not have a fixed concept, or idea, of what it is you are observing, but you do have the thought that you are observing, or are being aware, of something. Without that thought of your awareness of something, you are not aware of something.

Think of it like "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts", in that, if separated from the whole, the sum is less than what it was.

e.g. If you take apart a car, it becomes car parts, where it was once a vehicle.