Page 1 of 1

The Ego?

PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 8:25 pm
by Xanth
I've read statements about the Ego in regards to Spiritual Growth.

Some statements say that you must drop the ego.
Others say you have to work through the ego.
Yet even others say that ego doesn't exist at all.

What do you think?

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 6:29 pm
by wstein
The ego exists (for humans anyway) as much as personality does.

The ego has a valuable role in terms of sustaining the physical/mental life form. Its job is to look out for things that threaten survival and raise alarm about them. Properly functioning in that role, its a valuable thing at the incarnation level. Without it, beings tend not to live as long.

Most humans however have elevated the importance of the ego (and intellect and emotions) to the point of putting them in charge of their lives. If these 'tools' are in charge, the spirit is no longer doing what it incarnated for. As such, any tool left in charge is an impediment to spiritual pursuit. What needs to happen for spiritual growth is for spirit to take back ownership of the life experience and allow the tools serve their intended purposes. Sorry, autopilot doesn't fly so well in the spiritual arena.

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 3:48 am
by Phantom
I would describe it more as setting it aside. You need it to function in day to day life. You cannot just be in an altared state all the time. But what I do think it causes problems in my case it clutters the channel with junk. In phasing or projection you would be bombarded by it's generated thoughtforms which are not higher level and can be unpleasant. getting it to let go of it's control is like trying to control a reflex....like blinking or swallowing. it's probably why they practice intense impulse control in the east. holding unnatural positions for long periods when your impulse is to protect your body and reposition. Though it might be instructive for learning how to deal with the ego I don't think it's exactly the same the practice of putting it in a back seat is it's own discipline.

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 2:59 pm
by Majic
Isn't the ego more a product of other processes and it would be a lot easier to control an emotion at the instant of generation and so not feel the ego. Identify these inflection points early and work from there, the same objective attuitude that is needed to phase

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:49 pm
by Phantom
My experience is that it is the part of us that says " I am" it is also the part that identifies us with a bodysuit. The hardwiring so to speak. Every instinct will go against letting go of it. It's much harder to control Emotions are a byproduct of it in part. ... they come from other places too. The older you are the more set you are into this which makes it hard for older people to disengage it. Sometimes even at the point of death where the disengament happens naturally you'll see people hanging on to it even to the point of staying in a body that is essentially dead.

I won't get into the gory detail of that but I've been with enough people who are dying to see whats happening.

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Sun Sep 21, 2014 1:35 am
by Methiculous
You can't live with it.
You can't live without it.

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Sun Sep 21, 2014 10:21 am
by Xanth
Methiculous wrote:You can't live with it.
You can't live without it.

That's pretty succinct.
Everything believes that enlightenment is when you rid yourself of your ego.
When the reality is that, if you were do that, you would then have no more reason to put food to your mouth... or draw another breath.
Doing so would be your physical demise.

You can, however, learn to live THROUGH your ego.

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Mon Sep 22, 2014 5:21 pm
by Majic
Or get your ego to live with you

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Mon Sep 22, 2014 6:09 pm
by Xanth
Majic wrote:Or get your ego to live with you

That's probably an easier way to understand it, yes. :)

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Mon Sep 22, 2014 6:51 pm
by wstein
Methiculous wrote:You can't live with it.
You can't live without it.
Of course you can live with it, you are now. Of course you can live without it, though probably not quite as long. On second thought, as much havoc as some allow their egos to cause, they might live longer without it.

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:43 am
by Szaxx
Put the physical in autopilot and the things the ego swamps start to be heard.
Too many deny the existance of anything 'extra' and materialism covers the facts that there may be a little more to existance than what the peers tell you there is.

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Wed Feb 25, 2015 4:34 pm
by MeditationMann
You all have very good points!

The ego is used as a means to function on this plane of existence. The ego has a strong desire for worldly things and many times the ego will take control because we live in a society that is governed by ego-crazed men.

I think it would work best in our favor if we understand the ego and how to control it. If we simply stopped trying to use it we would become disruptive and unstable. It allows us to have communication with other people and if we lack the ability to function in a certain way around certain people then we would be unable to build a connection with anyone (from a physical standpoint) and would live a very lonely life. If we want to grow we need to unite because we are all one at the core and until we realize that we will never be able to truly ascend the way that we need to. Since the ego is a face that we have to put on to be able to build this connection with others we often get too caught up in the various lives that we are living and forget to focus on the most important one, which is the path of the self.

I actually heard a really good analogy in a book, it said the ego is like a small boat in a body of water that is endless. The ego wants to keep you in the boat where you are safe and comfortable, but in order for us to step into our higher self it would require us to step outside of the boat where we will become one with the rest of the body of water (the universe).

I actually wrote a blog about the ego if you would be interested in checking it out:
http://thecodycodex.com/your-ego-controls-you/

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 7:54 pm
by AstralPhreak
Ego is a power if you can visualise it like that. Ego is something that gives you wings. You need this to push yourself a litlle further. But, you can abuse this power and become a bad person. But i don't see how a litlle "head held high" can be a bad thing.

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:39 am
by Xanth
AstralPhreak wrote:Ego is a power if you can visualise it like that. Ego is something that gives you wings. You need this to push yourself a litlle further. But, you can abuse this power and become a bad person. But i don't see how a litlle "head held high" can be a bad thing.

You're 100% correct. It's not a bad thing.
A lot of people mistakenly make it out as something bad, but honestly... if you were to "somehow" get rid of your ego, you would die.
As you said, our ego is the drive which keeps us alive here.

When people say that you need to "drop" your ego... they misunderstand.
Your ego is ALWAYS there, you can't get rid of it... all you can do is learn to live THROUGH it, not allowing it to control your life. :)

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 8:26 am
by rainbow_light
I agree that ego, as it's conventionally understood (it's defined in the Oxford dictionary as "A person’s sense of self-esteem or self-importance"), is necessary and helpful--at least in the sense that some belief in the value of one's abilities is necessary in order to survive and have a positive impact on others. I strongly disagree that the "self" part is necessary and helpful though. (I define self as, at its root, a subtle, sub-verbal thought structure which divides experience into subject and object. This thought structure is almost never recognised as such and so becomes a truism. And such an experience of stupefaction then grows to include a wider sense of self which encompasses our thoughts, feelings, body, intentions, etc.)

Besides the entire Buddhist tradition (and probably others to some extent) attesting to this, I know from my own experience, having practiced Buddhist meditation for several years, that there is a clear correlation between the strength of my sense of self and the degree to which I'm prone to unpleasantness and suffering. In fact, I believe I can say with confidence at this stage that the self is the ultimate source of the vast majority, if not all, of the suffering in the world.

This is because it causes us to value a limited, impermanent entity (which amounts to just a collection of reified thoughts) over the whole of our experience. The vulnerability of this entity naturally causes us (i.e. it) anxiety out of concern for its safety, and causes us to reject certain sensations and cling to others, which is suffering. This point has been verified and expanded on countless times by Dzogchen practitioners (and probably practitioners from other traditions, both inside and outside of Buddhism) who are able to collapse these thought structures and experience the difference this makes in their lives. Those who are freed from them on a more or less permanent basis seem to uniformly benefit from this--of course the lives of many have been documented, including those still alive, whom you can read about online. It's unheard of for Enlightenment per se to have negative effects of any kind.

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Wed Feb 03, 2016 11:58 am
by Xanth
Hi rainbow_light! Welcome to the forum! :)

rainbow_light wrote:I agree that ego, as it's conventionally understood (it's defined in the Oxford dictionary as "A person’s sense of self-esteem or self-importance"), is necessary and helpful--at least in the sense that some belief in the value of one's abilities is necessary in order to survive and have a positive impact on others. I strongly disagree that the "self" part is necessary and helpful though. (I define self as, at its root, a subtle, sub-verbal thought structure which divides experience into subject and object. This thought structure is almost never recognised as such and so becomes a truism. And such an experience of stupefaction then grows to include a wider sense of self which encompasses our thoughts, feelings, body, intentions, etc.)

Would you be able to further clarify the "self" part you mention above in relation to the ego? Is it used in the context of how you defined it?
Personally, I use the term "ego" a bit more diverse than what the Oxford dictionary defines it. Although... it's a definitely a good starting place! :)

Re: The Ego?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 8:47 am
by rainbow_light
Sure: I just mean to point out that self-esteem and self-importance don't just involve valuing some quality/ability/thing that one possesses, but valuing one's self (i.e. the intuitive sense of self that we all possess) for having those qualities/abilities/things.

E.g. if we're born into high social status, we come to identify as someone important, and develop big egos as a result. We can't just possess something valuable without thinking "that's me" or "that's mine". But something like social status is impermanent, and so if we lose it, we feel a part of ourselves is lost, which is painful. If we reflect on it, we find that we were identifying with something that was never actually us in the first place.

So I disagree that the ego is helpful and necessary because the ego depends on a sense of self, and I don't think the self is at all helpful or necessary.

Although I would add the caveat that I do think a healthy sense of self-esteem is also important insofar as it's necessary in order to best practice the methods that liberate the mind from the self.