Destroying the ego

reply to post by Itisnowagain


I made no claim that you were fighting and defending. You'll have to take that up with the other person who feels that.

But I wonder how your child makes sense of this, and if you teach them to sy to the teacher, "I did not do my homework- homework was done."

Or to your spouse, "I do not need to say I love you, for you do not exist, we are one."

Or to your boss, "Finish that report before tonight? What "tonight"? There is no tonight. There is only now!"


It just seems not very pragmatic! ( I hope you understand this is meant in a friendly way, and my questions are sincere)

reply to post by Bluesma


I would imagine that when someone relates to another who shares their perspective, then the conversations may indeed play out as in your examples (concerning itsnowagain).

In my own life, if I am in discussion with another astrologer (one of my interests), any non-astrologer listening in would feel at a complete loss trying to follow the conversation, as everyday events are talked about in terms of their astrological correspondences. However, with everyone else, I talk normal.

Just general ponderations on the subject of the change-ability of ego, that thread on the soldier in Vietnam is interesting!

I just realized that there were questions posed here- such as why am I discussing this subject?
Is it because I am seeking something? I realize I didn't expose my personal interest in the subject.

It seems to be a theme I have had going in my life since before I can remember. Without giving a full run down of everything, the most current "shift" I have had to deal with was my adaptation to french culture.

I did not think I woudl be staying here and fought for a logn time to retain my ego as was- with it's views, principles and values. I knew I would need those upon my return.
In a concrete way, I similarly did not take french nationality, nor get a french drivers license.

It was not until I'd been here 13 years, and my father said to me on the phone, "We Americans thank you for your concern." after the attack of 9/11. He made me aware that despite all my loyalty, America didn't consider me one of them anymore. I was being stupid.

I cried for many days. Then I sucked it up and began forming a french ego- with french values and conceptualizations about the nature of reality. I got my french nationality, I got the drivers license, I made effort to learn french activities and social games, and traditions.

For a few years, it was as if I had two egos. I had trouble translating for people because it meant switching back and forth not only in language, but in emotion, focus, motives, values. I could speak from my french self or m american self.

In some ways, debating with americans, speaking "for the french" helped me to project my american attitudes outside and move myself into the french perspective.
I began to understand this is also how relationships of power work- you project a part of yourself onto another and it allows you to move into the other part.

You can face your powerful authority this way, or your submissive energy this way.

Then later, they all get re-integrated again. Eventually they melded into one ego which has neither totally french values, nor american, but somewhere in between. I feel more balanced than before with a wider view.

The ego was integrated- not destroyed. It was not "bad" I simply wished to enlarge it and transform it, into a vehicle for consciousness that has the tools for two very different environments.

If I had looked it as my americn side being "bad" (turning individualism into a sin) then I would not have the tools to operate effectively in that environment. But I could have done that- I could have started out hating my previous self and attitudes, and the change would have happened quicker.

I am going home in a few days, and that is always a strange experience, as this new me has to interact with a very different environment, and knowign I will be slightly out of phase because of my french side. i even have people ask me where my accent is from!

But this is my personal reason for considering this topic and writing about it in general, right now.

reply to post by Bluesma

The ego was integrated- not destroyed. It was not "bad" I simply wished to enlarge it and transform it, into a vehicle for consciousness that has the tools for two very different environments.

That's what it's all about to me...integration of all experiences, emotions, etc., yet remaining as 'one', but the ego is only a small part of the 'one', so it can change.

I think you'll be just fine, because as you say, you are going 'home'.

reply to post by InTheLight


This is what tends to be so hard to express- that my "self" has layer upon layer, upon layer, and though some are more superficial and can be observed by another (my behavior, expressions, visual appearence)

others are deeper, and they influence that superficial layer, but nobody else can see them (my values, ethics, framework of belief on reality)

And others go even deeper, to point of consciousness that has no intent, no preference, nothing specific about it.

But that deepest level of self, is not worth trying to share in language on a board. It has nothing to say, it has no emotional state, it is observer.

Only going up in more superificial layers, is there things to be said, expressed, differentiation.

If everyone here wants to call "ego" that most superficial layer, that others can see and hear- fine.

The definition of the word is "self" or "self awareness" and I experience much more to self than just that layer, so I cannot agree with the idea that self is bad, or a prison to escape, no more than a person could say hair on your body is a prison, and only in shaving it off can one be happy.

But I guess we all have different experience of self and what it is.

Originally posted by Bluesma
reply to post by InTheLight

 

This is what tends to be so hard to express- that my "self" has layer upon layer, upon layer, and though some are more superficial and can be observed by another (my behavior, expressions, visual appearence)

others are deeper, and they influence that superficial layer, but nobody else can see them (my values, ethics, framework of belief on reality)

And others go even deeper, to point of consciousness that has no intent, no preference, nothing specific about it.

But that deepest level of self, is not worth trying to share in language on a board. It has nothing to say, it has no emotional state, it is observer.

Only going up in more superificial layers, is there things to be said, expressed, differentiation.

If everyone here wants to call "ego" that most superficial layer, that others can see and hear- fine.

The definition of the word is "self" or "self awareness" and I experience much more to self than just that layer, so I cannot agree with the idea that self is bad, or a prison to escape, no more than a person could say hair on your body is a prison, and only in shaving it off can one be happy.

But I guess we all have different experience of self and what it is.

But that deepest level of self, is not worth trying to share in language on a board. It has nothing to say, it has no emotional state, it is observer.

I agree with the self as being an observer, however some may be asleep, so I (a physical entity with an enlightened and/or unenlightened consciousness) intend to give it a panaoramic and all-encompassing (well, at least I'll try) view of all that is my extemely short existence and learning experience here.

Originally posted by Bluesma
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

I made no claim that you were fighting and defending. You'll have to take that up with the other person who feels that.

But I wonder how your child makes sense of this, and if you teach them to sy to the teacher, "I did not do my homework- homework was done."

Or to your spouse, "I do not need to say I love you, for you do not exist, we are one."

Or to your boss, "Finish that report before tonight? What "tonight"? There is no tonight. There is only now!"

It just seems not very pragmatic! ( I hope you understand this is meant in a friendly way, and my questions are sincere)

I do not speak non dual language in every day situations. I am on a forum sharing what I know about the subject at hand.

I can see that there are many on ats who think that I don't see people or work or socialize - they think that I don't have a life - I don't 'have' a life - I 'am' life. Life is happening - it does not stop when non duality is realized. It stays the same but is completely different - it is easy and amusing. It is so much fuller and there is no anxiety or fear. It's totally amazing.
I would like everyone to have it and that is why I share.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

I do not speak non dual language in every day situations. I am on a forum sharing what I know about the subject at hand.

I can see that there are many on ats who think that I don't see people or work or socialize - they think that I don't have a life - I don't 'have' a life - I 'am' life. Life is happening - it does not stop when non duality is realized. It stays the same but is completely different - it is easy and amusing. It is so much fuller and there is no anxiety or fear. It's totally amazing.
I would like everyone to have it and that is why I share.

Well, there, I can honestly say, we share the same perspective on something.

I can understand this, and it is what I have tried to explain to you before.

Except the difference seems to be in our current intents on forums. I was active on quite a few New Agey type of forums.

In my case, I used to spend much time sharing my, let's say, for sake of a better word- more "enlightened" or wider- higher, view. That non-dualistic, non- individualistic, consciousness. I didn't use the word "I" hardly ever, at most I would write "we" sometimes.

And yet in the other part of experience, in physical, day to day life as an individual (in person) I had a different persona I showed to the world. A different way of behaving, communicating. It i snot that the "we" or nameless "everything/nothing" was no logner present in such contexts, it was that I was hiding it.

In time, I felt the urge to merge these parts though. Having such different ways of being separated did not feel "whole" to me. I guess in the same way I undertook merging my french perspective and american perspective, I have been working towards merging a "high" perspective and a "low" perspective into a coherent and cohesive whole.

This seems to attract those who are on either extreme to try to "save me"- to pull me back down to the ground and be more "realistic" or to lift my view to the heavens and make me more "enlightened".

I appreciate the concern and the intent to "aid" me... but we might not be in the same sense of intent at this time.

reply to post by Bluesma


Whatever it is that I am does not change when I go to work - it is always the same - it is the one constant.
I know what I am - I am nothing in particular.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by Bluesma

 

Whatever it is that I am does not change when I go to work - it is always the same - it is the one constant.
I know what I am - I am nothing in particular.

Of course you know that that is true of me too then.
I do not feel the need or desire to make anyone else know that though.
I also decided to make my behavior as an individual more stable as well.

Instead of having one side of being that is always constant and the other always changing,
I am experiencing a slow steady dance between the two. Nothing "better" about that, it is just a choice.

Originally posted by Bluesma

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by Bluesma

 

Whatever it is that I am does not change when I go to work - it is always the same - it is the one constant.
I know what I am - I am nothing in particular.

Of course you know that that is true of me too then.

It is true for you....... but you still think you are two. You are trying to reconcile the two. There seems to be an idea of a self that is controlling another self.

reply to post by Itisnowagain




You know what?
I have been polite, but I have had enough.

For someone who knows there is no me, you sure like to tell me a lot about me.
You continually go back to telling me "You don't know..." "You think..." .

While asserting "I know..." "I think...."


This is just the usual spiritual dick measuring contest. If it makes you feel good to believe that everyone else is lost, no one else knows the secrets of the universe as you do, and they all need you to penetrate your vision in them, and it is just a matter of convincing them they do....

It is obvious why this topic attracted you. But I am done with your crap. Your "egoless" self, sure does a rather good job of shutting down all creativity between others, monopolizing conversations, and negating any value except itself.

You can continue to claim it is not your true essence, I will agree, nonetheless, it is your responsibility to keep it in check in public.

I am not my dog, nonetheless, I have the ability to keep it from jumping on or peeing on others in public.
So do you.

reply to post by Bluesma


What emotion are you sharing Bluesma? It's quite funny. In fact, what exactly are you saying? You shouldn't doubt about yourself because of what Itisnowagain is saying, he has no intent in hurting people even if ego was a burden he would be carrying.

One should observe what exactly one feels and why. What you expressed is something that was lingering everlong. We can choose to be like that, always. One even could always find a reason to be so. Admit, what you felt is so 'disturbing'. Rise abuv!

Originally posted by Bluesma
Your "egoless" self, sure does a rather good job of shutting down all creativity between others, monopolizing conversations, and negating any value except itself.

If I may add another perspective?

While I agree that there is little scope for an in-depth dialogue with postings of that nature, I still find them oddly refreshing, kind of like a little rest-break from all the intensity of many of the discussions going on here.

Everyone's posts have some value.... for someone.

yes, some posts are meant as enlightening considerations. Which could lead to further discussion of the subject.

Originally posted by Bluesma
reply to post by InTheLight

 

This is what tends to be so hard to express- that my "self" has layer upon layer, upon layer, and though some are more superficial and can be observed by another (my behavior, expressions, visual appearence)

others are deeper, and they influence that superficial layer, but nobody else can see them (my values, ethics, framework of belief on reality)

And others go even deeper, to point of consciousness that has no intent, no preference, nothing specific about it.

But that deepest level of self, is not worth trying to share in language on a board. It has nothing to say, it has no emotional state, it is observer.

Only going up in more superificial layers, is there things to be said, expressed, differentiation.

If everyone here wants to call "ego" that most superficial layer, that others can see and hear- fine.

The definition of the word is "self" or "self awareness" and I experience much more to self than just that layer, so I cannot agree with the idea that self is bad, or a prison to escape, no more than a person could say hair on your body is a prison, and only in shaving it off can one be happy.

But I guess we all have different experience of self and what it is.

We all experience the self differently, uniquely because that is what we all are...unique. I appreciate reading your slant on this and I would hope you will continue for the benefit of the other people here that enjoy sharing the oh so hard to explain experiences of the human condition within and without.

Here is a great movie starring David Carradine about 'destroying' the ego. Made by Bruce Lee before he died.
It's called The Silent Flute.

It's in English.

Originally posted by Angle
reply to post by Bluesma

 

What emotion are you sharing Bluesma? It's quite funny. In fact, what exactly are you saying? You shouldn't doubt about yourself because of what Itisnowagain is saying, he has no intent in hurting people even if ego was a burden he would be carrying.

One should observe what exactly one feels and why. What you expressed is something that was lingering everlong. We can choose to be like that, always. One even could always find a reason to be so. Admit, what you felt is so 'disturbing'. Rise abuv!

I have expressed this to Itisnowagain before, many times, in fact, but this was perhaps a bt more forceful than in the past.

The emotion is a negative- it is a "no" , it is- I reject your attempt to dictate to me who I am, what I am, what I feel, what I think.

We all have the right to speak for ourselves, and when someone repeatedly chooses to do that, even when you have made it clear you are not interested in looking for someone else to do that, we have the right to say "No".

He himself said he is not looking for a guru or leader - so he knows and understands what that is- I am not either, at this time, and he should be able to grasp another saying, "No thank you" to his attempts. So the "No" got more forceful.

The number of PMs I got from people who have been wanting to say that to him was surprising, and showed that the idea that we MUST nod and agree to some stranger coming along and telling you that what you have in your mind is "dirty" (as he said to me) has been WAY too prevalent.

But he provided a super example of exactly what this thread was about.

Originally posted by mysticnoon

Originally posted by Bluesma
Your "egoless" self, sure does a rather good job of shutting down all creativity between others, monopolizing conversations, and negating any value except itself.

If I may add another perspective?

While I agree that there is little scope for an in-depth dialogue with postings of that nature, I still find them oddly refreshing, kind of like a little rest-break from all the intensity of many of the discussions going on here.

Everyone's posts have some value.... for someone.

I'm sure that is true. But I do not see any need for me to continue to be polite to his assertions that my mind is dirty and needs to be cleaned by him, when I have gently and repeatedly explained that what he has to offer as a "new" thought pattern and behavior is not adapted to my intents at this time- this way of speaking, behaving and percieving is not conducive to my goal to emerge from a life of introversion and introspection, to become more extroverted and social.

I am sure his way is great for someone out there, and he should keep his eyes open for their willing reception of it.

But just as an after thought, part of what would make me reject this perception even IF I was looking to go within, is the contradictory structure in it. The assertion of no ego, while simultaneously asserting "I am more aware (awake, wise, or otherwise superior) than you- you need to be more like me."

Which even the "Love and Light" club will admit is just about as egotistical and you can get.
This is a common contradiction you find in the philosophies of "bad ego" hunting.