|
Ego
Dec 1, 2011 15:18:36 GMT
Post by popee on Dec 1, 2011 15:18:36 GMT
Trying to understand Ego is a big paradox Who is examining what, what is examining who? Its almost an impossible task, circular by nature Step back and look, but who is "stepping back"? How do you look at the back-stepper?
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 1, 2011 15:52:17 GMT
Post by freethinker on Dec 1, 2011 15:52:17 GMT
Trying to understand Ego is a big paradox Who is examining what, what is examining who? Its almost an impossible task, circular by nature Step back and look, but who is "stepping back"? How do you look at the back-stepper? What is your definition of the word? Doesn't appear to resemble Jung's. Gotta have the word definition first, popee.
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 1, 2011 16:24:06 GMT
Post by popee on Dec 1, 2011 16:24:06 GMT
You're putting me on the spot there freethinker. lol Mine, or Jung's? hmmm? I like mine better. lol
Ego is what makes you, you. The source of the "I" complex. A defense mechanism, protecting the body (and mind?). But malleable, not fixed. Learning from each experience, adapting as it goes.
And (to some spiritual enthusiasts) the source of our disconnect with God. The part of ourselves that "takes the credit" for His work.
===
It is a difficult question actually. I'll have to think about it. I'd be curious to see yours, and everyone else's definition.
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 1, 2011 17:30:36 GMT
Post by gurthbruins on Dec 1, 2011 17:30:36 GMT
I see no use for the term, personally. I support maximum self-love, without it there is no other love. And maximum self-knowledge: without it there is no knowledge.
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 1, 2011 18:53:00 GMT
Post by popee on Dec 1, 2011 18:53:00 GMT
Self is another one of those funny little words in need of a definition.
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 1, 2011 18:57:57 GMT
Post by popee on Dec 1, 2011 18:57:57 GMT
Who are you? Really.
Are you [name], the body, the mind? What constitutes your identity? Is that identity eternal?
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 1, 2011 19:29:11 GMT
Post by withinsilence on Dec 1, 2011 19:29:11 GMT
I couldn't explain this any better so here is how I understand it:
Osho: “the moment the “should” disappears the ego collapses
Osho – missing has a tremendous attraction, because it is only through missing that the ego can survive. It is only through searching, seeking, desiring, that the ego exists; it exists in the tension between that which is and that which should be. The moment the “should” disappears, the ego collapses. Hence all ethical systems, all moralities, are nourishments for the ego. The moral man is the most egoistic man in the world. And the mechanism is very simple. Seeking, searching, you live in the future, which is not; and the ego can exist only with that which is not, because it itself is not. If you are in the moment, in the present, the ego has no possibility of surviving even for a single moment. The present is and the ego is not, like light is and darkness is not. Bring light in, and darkness disappears. Even to say that it disappears is not right, because it was not there in the first place, so how can it disappear? It was a pure absence. The absence of light, that’s what darkness is. The absence of the present, that’s what the ego is. Not to be herenow, that’s what the ego is — not to be herenow, to be somewhere else, seeking and searching for a faraway goal, looking at a faraway distant star. The farther away the goal, the bigger the ego. Hence people who are not worldly have bigger egos than the so-called poor worldly people. Spiritual people have bigger egos, naturally; their goal is very far away, distant, beyond death, above the seven skies. God is their goal, or moksha or nirvana — goals which look almost impossible. The possible goal can give you only a small ego, and that too only for the time being. Once the goal is achieved you will start feeling frustrated. That’s what happens every day. You wanted a beautiful house, now you have got it, and suddenly frustration sets in. The ego needs a new goal to survive; now it starts fantasizing about a bigger palace. You were seeking and searching for a woman; now you have got her, and the moment you have got her you are finished with her. It may take a few days for you to recognize the fact, that is another matter, but you are finished with her. Now your ego needs another woman so that the journey can continue. The ego is constantly journeying from the present to some nonexistential future. If you ask me, this is my definition of samsara, the world. The ego journeying from the present to the future is the world. And the ego not journeying at all, simply being herenow, is the end of samsara: you are in nirvana, samadhi, enlightenment. Hence enlightenment cannot be reduced to a goal. If you reduce it to a goal, you have missed the whole point. All the buddhas of all the ages have been telling you a very simple fact: Be — don’t try to become. Within these two words, be and becoming, your whole life is contained. Being is enlightenment, becoming is ignorance. But you have been taught to become this, to become that. And the mind is so cunning, and the ways of the ego are so subtle that it even turns God, nirvana, enlightenment, truth, into goals; it starts asking how to achieve them. They are not to be achieved, they cannot be achieved; the achieving mind is the only barrier. They are already here. You have to drop the achieving mind, you have to forget journeying from this point to that, you simply have to relax and be, and all is attained. Lao Tzu calls it wu-wei, action without action. You have not moved a single inch, and you have arrived; this is wu-wei. You have not gone anywhere, you have not even thought of going anywhere, and you are already there. Suddenly the recognition comes, “I never lost the home, I only fell asleep and started dreaming about achieving.” Those who give you goals are your enemies. Those who tell you what to become and how to become it, are the poisoners. The real master simply says, “There is nothing to become. You are already that, it is already the case. Stop running after shadows. Sit silently and BE. Sitting silently, doing nothing, the spring comes and the grass grows by itself. Source – Osho Book “The Book of Wisdom”
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 1, 2011 19:58:12 GMT
Post by withinsilence on Dec 1, 2011 19:58:12 GMT
MY vision of a right education is to teach people how to grow the ego and how to be able to drop it; how to become great minds and yet be ready any moment to put the mind aside. You should be able to just put your personality, your ego, your mind, on and off, because these are good things if you can use them. But you should know the mechanism, how to put them off. Right now you know only how to put them on. Osho now lets have some fun getting into peoples heads and we'll see who truly is realized and who isn't...shall we?
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 1, 2011 19:58:16 GMT
Post by popee on Dec 1, 2011 19:58:16 GMT
Dag gum dude, that was impressive. Osho, of course.
I never really looked into his work, some blockages relating to Rolls Royces and such. But that was da bomb, as they say. And frankly, nothing more needs to be said. Just reside in that, and fork the rest.
And ... its not like its hard .. residing in the present moment, but leaving there can be so sudden, and so subtle, its easy to miss. And the next thing you know, you're off on some tangent, thinking about stuff, which doesn't amount to a hill of beans.
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 1, 2011 20:08:22 GMT
Post by withinsilence on Dec 1, 2011 20:08:22 GMT
Dag gum dude, that was impressive. Osho, of course. I never really looked into his work, some blockages relating to Rolls Royces and such. But that was da bomb, as they say. And frankly, nothing more needs to be said. Just reside in that, and fork the rest. And ... its not like its hard .. residing in the present moment, but leaving there can be so sudden, and so subtle, its easy to miss. And the next thing you know, you're off on some tangent, thinking about stuff, which doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Osho is the shiznet popee. Don't read into the Rolls Royce stuff as you and all the others "judging" him for this was his way of showing you that your still stuck in your ego i.e. he "shouldn't" have them! hehehe Seriously, Osho is my personal favorite realized man, I love this guy, he is sooooo reachable, you can relate to him like no others as he is a bridge of love, understanding and one of the most if not the most remarkably intelligent, knowledgeable, well read and aware human beings with an awesome sense of humor too. This guy will tell you the cold hard truth of everything you ever wanted and did not want to know. Study his work. IMVHO hehe
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 1, 2011 20:27:03 GMT
Post by withinsilence on Dec 1, 2011 20:27:03 GMT
MY vision of a right education is to teach people how to grow the ego and how to be able to drop it; how to become great minds and yet be ready any moment to put the mind aside. You should be able to just put your personality, your ego, your mind, on and off, because these are good things if you can use them. But you should know the mechanism, how to put them off. Right now you know only how to put them on. Osho now lets have some fun getting into peoples heads and we'll see who truly is realized and who isn't...shall we? I am shattering your egos, because your egos are a kind of shell that surrounds you and keeps you oblivious of the reality. It keeps you encapsulated within yourself, does not allow you to open your eyes and see what is happening. Osho
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 2, 2011 0:19:25 GMT
Post by tathagata on Dec 2, 2011 0:19:25 GMT
I see no use for the term, personally. I support maximum self-love, without it there is no other love. And maximum self-knowledge: without it there is no knowledge. Brilliant!
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 2, 2011 0:27:56 GMT
Post by tathagata on Dec 2, 2011 0:27:56 GMT
Osho was my constant companion for almost twenty years, he and Bodidharma rolling a close second where the things that helped me most, they are almost polar opposites in some ways, but both were shameless and utterly liberated lol
Check out Red Pines book on, and translations of Bodidharmas sermons.
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 2, 2011 0:31:51 GMT
Post by freethinker on Dec 2, 2011 0:31:51 GMT
I see no use for the term, personally. I support maximum self-love, without it there is no other love. And maximum self-knowledge: without it there is no knowledge. Brilliant! "Brilliant"? In the context of the Guinness add, I agree.
|
|
|
Ego
Dec 2, 2011 1:31:09 GMT
Post by popee on Dec 2, 2011 1:31:09 GMT
lol
|
|