... but I like my ego...

[hyok]

"It is necessary to understand that I Am, In order that I may know that I

Am Not, So that, at last, I may realize that, I Am Not, therefore I Am."

 

- Ask the Awakened by Wei Wu Wei

 

 

 

Destroy the ego to maintain the ego! YESSSS!

[Marblehead]

"It is necessary to understand that I Am, In order that I may know that I

Am Not, So that, at last, I may realize that, I Am Not, therefore I Am."

 

- Ask the Awakened by Wei Wu Wei

Destroy the ego to maintain the ego! YESSSS!

 

 

I like my ego too.

 

Be well!

[Lucky7Strikes]

"It is necessary to understand that I Am, In order that I may know that I

Am Not, So that, at last, I may realize that, I Am Not, therefore I Am."

 

- Ask the Awakened by Wei Wu Wei

Destroy the ego to maintain the ego! YESSSS!

 

I AM = Yang, I AM NOT = Yin

 

Too much Yang, you suffer from frustration and get detached. Too much Yin, you make no progress and betray life's dynamic nature.

 

Don't cycle back and forth!

 

Haha, do both and you grow, expand and more and more approach the true eternal Way! .

 

Integrate, cultivate, renew...repeat!

Edited August 12, 2009 by Lucky7Strikes

[Sunya]

of course you like your ego, you ARE your ego, LOL

[ryansmith]

I AM = Yang, I AM NOT = Yin

 

Too much Yang, you suffer from frustration and get detached. Too much Yin, you make no progress and betray life's dynamic nature.

 

Don't cycle back and forth!

 

Haha, do both and you grow, expand and more and more approach the true eternal Way! .

 

Integrate, cultivate, renew...repeat!

 

 

Never thought of it that way in terms of yin and yang. Makes sense. Thanks for the post.

[Tao99]

there are differing definitions of ego/self in psychology, philosophy, etc. I like this one:

 

I USED TO HAVE AN EGO

 

I used to have an ego. I was a strapping, buff, college football player all the girls wanted. That's really who I thought I was; I am THAT. But these egos/selves/personalities are all impermanent. I thought that THAT was me, I am THAT. THAT is who I am in some real, essential, core way. But 20 years later I see that it was all a temporary ego-self, that wasn't really "me" in any real, core way. And that ego-self perception of "me" no longer exists. It wasn't really "me" anyway. It was a delusionary ego coagulation that I thought had ongoing core reality -- it was just a impermanent, temporary mock up of something I called my "self".

 

Return to that moment when you were first born and had no "self", no personality (ego-selves), and no mental content - no thoughts, hopes, likes, dislikes, nothing. You were just an empty (no content) emptiness (no self). This is the natural mind condition, the ego-less, pure mind or Tranquility called Samadhi in Zen. Practicing Zen is manifesting the imperturbability of Samadhi in daily life.

 

(* story for descriptive purposes only and not true*)

Edited August 13, 2009 by Tao99

[Marblehead]

Hi Tao99,

 

Interesting perspective. I would like to ask a question though. (Let's say you are that football player.)

 

Weren't you really THAT at that point in time? In my mind we are always 100% what we are at any given point in time. The fact that years later we become something else doesn't really change the fact that we were such and such 20 years ago does it?

 

Be well!

[Birch]

I love this question!

 

I'll add another 2!

 

How does it feel to be you right now?

 

How did it feel to be you when you were 10 years old?

[Tao99]

I think its mostly a technique to bring about effortless unclinging and unattachment to tempory coagulated ego-selves. Its for the person who says I just have to be hot, young, or be married, or on the football team, or have a b/g-friend, or have a nice car, or have kids, etc etc. or I won't be myself. It helps to crush and transcend these ego-coagulations. And then I think it also does lead you to wonder what else is there, underneath it all (processes/core) that I call me, in all these passing, temporary ego-coagulations.

Edited August 13, 2009 by Tao99

[hyok]

I'd like to keep my sense of humor. :-|

[Sunya]

I'd like to keep my sense of humor. :-|

 

whos this I? where is it?

[Birch]

 

It's everywhere!

 

Kidding;-)

 

Try the "shift perspective" trick that Scott showed me. Your sense of humour will stay intact.

 

Anyway, what are the implications of there being no "you"? Some folks will use that idea to become nihilistic and no longer care for themselves or anyone else, some folks will take better care of themselves because they can ease up with a lot of the "I have to's".

Some will take better care of each other.

 

I like the last 2 best.

[Tao99]

whos this I? where is it?

 

Its kinda unfair to question the use of "I" in a sentence because its an unavoidable grammatical part. And "I" really just refers to THAT which am I, and that could be a spirit-core or a flow of processes. Either way it can be used.

 

And I think his point was a good one of what would you want to be there, at the beginning, middle, and end?

[findley]

The ego should be seen as a gift-- not a curse.

 

'he who conquers others is strong; he who conquers himself is strongest' --or whatever

[dwai]

"It is necessary to understand that I Am, In order that I may know that I

Am Not, So that, at last, I may realize that, I Am Not, therefore I Am."

 

- Ask the Awakened by Wei Wu Wei

Destroy the ego to maintain the ego! YESSSS!

 

Ego is not the "I am". Ego is simply a premise that is built upon the Self due to ignorance and identification with the senses and physical body. The "I" is Consciousness...it is also the innate Chi that animates every living being.

 

Though I like the Quote and it makes perfect sense. But not in the conventional sense of "ego" (as is equated to the Self by mistake by most). The "I" is Te, and therefore Tao.

[Lucky7Strikes]

Ego is not the "I am". Ego is simply a premise that is built upon the Self due to ignorance and identification with the senses and physical body. The "I" is Consciousness...it is also the innate Chi that animates every living being.

 

Though I like the Quote and it makes perfect sense. But not in the conventional sense of "ego" (as is equated to the Self by mistake by most). The "I" is Te, and therefore Tao.

 

All experiences of I ness is the Self. . Even the ego.

 

Dwai, btw, if all is of Consciousness, who has the freedom to realize that there is no Ego?

 

Why do "you" struggle in the first place if you believe it to be illusory?

[Marblehead]

All experiences of I ness is the Self. . Even the ego.

 

Dwai, btw, if all is of Consciousness, who has the freedom to realize that there is no Ego?

 

Why do "you" struggle in the first place if you believe it to be illusory?

 

Funny. You made me think the question: Why does Buddhism say that they have to loose their ego if there is no ego in the first place?

 

Isn't that called a contradiction?

 

Be well!

[Vajrahridaya]

All experiences of I ness is the Self. . Even the ego.

 

Dwai, btw, if all is of Consciousness, who has the freedom to realize that there is no Ego?

 

Why do "you" struggle in the first place if you believe it to be illusory?

 

It's not one consciousness, it's consciousness', in groups of consensual complex co-dependent agreements for the period of times of co-experiencing. These realizations are spontaneous and not complex really. Which people can't seem to get for the most part, that when one experiences and see's emptiness directly not in a dualistic sense, which is seeing the simple/complexity simultaneously in a beyond thought inclusive of thought paradigm. It's all simultaneous.

 

It's not one big mindstream, though experientially so for those that agree to that, thus the origination of such experience depends upon cooperation on subconscious consensus.

 

If one follows the meaning of the words deep into the ramifications of, one should have an epiphany while reading.

 

 

 

Funny. You made me think the question: Why does Buddhism say that they have to loose their ego if there is no ego in the first place?

 

Isn't that called a contradiction?

 

Be well!

 

One looses the grasping identification. It's not a transformation in that sense, it's a realization. Thus consciousness is not altered, it's just dis-en-hardened.

[Marblehead]

If one follows the meaning of the words deep into the ramifications of, one should have an epiphany while reading.

 

Nope. I didn't have one. I must have missed the point. Oh well.

 

Be well!

[Lucky7Strikes]

So from what I learned from all that mumble jumble past month,

 

The ego or a sense of self identity has its place in the evolution of the spirit. To simply "let go" leads one to a static state of "acceptance of everything" or a false belief of merging into some other source.

 

As the Yin Yang symbol shows, this Yin state will mature to its full potential only for its Yang essence to rise again. When the Yang state fully matures, the inner Yin will guide the practitioner again into the other direction. Creation and destruction, birth and death, over and over again in its own limitations.

 

Most people today are leading very individualistic lives of the Yang principle. When they get tired they get into all sorts of spiritual and religious sects that urge the individual to "surrender" the ego or the self. Both approaches are not wholesome.

 

As findley says, the ego is a gift. The ego can really be limited and unlimited. It is the sense of I-ness and will that are very real. Yet one must also see this self-existence as interrelated to everything else in the universe.

 

Both the Yin and the Yang must be embraced and harmonized in order for "you" to truly become the full potential of the Tao or a Buddha. Enlightenment is not static (if it is... ). Hopefully it isn't.

[Vajrahridaya]

it is also the innate Chi that animates every living being.

 

 

It's just endless co-karmic-arisings since beginninglessness. The movement is based upon striving arising from a sense of lack. The enlightened striving is based upon the sense of offering to those that experience a sense of lack.

 

So, this is the difference between Samsaric action and complexity and Nirvanic action and complexity. It's just intention that changes, not really the appearance per say, in an absolute sense. It's just the state of inner interpretation, or inner perception. Samsaric experiencing is a mis-cognition of experience period. Nirvana is a correct cognitive experience of Samsara.

 

Nope. I didn't have one. I must have missed the point. Oh well.

 

Be well!

 

You'd really have to focus... and contemplate the considerations, as in unpack. Yes, some might and some might not. So be it. I wish I could talk the perfect way for all beings considering the complexity of all the nuances of neurosis per person. The Buddha was really good at that, which is why he was a wheel turning Buddha. I'm not even a Buddha... just someone on the Bodhisattva path with a level of experiencing that may be deemed abnormal to most here on Earth. But basically this is what I'm saying about the difference between Hinayana interpretation and Mahayana interpretation of spiritual practice, which changes the over-all fruit.

[Marblehead]

One looses the grasping identification. It's not a transformation in that sense, it's a realization. Thus consciousness is not altered, it's just dis-en-hardened.

 

I like that word you just created: dis-en-hardened. Is that the same as 'lighten up'?

 

I do agree with you though. Grasping (for anything) is not good. I am told that I should lessen my desires, lessen my ego, and stop my freaking seeking. I do prefer the word 'awareness' over 'realization' though.

 

Be well!

 

 

I like what you said there above Lucky7.

 

Be well!

[宁]

Err... Hi!

 

 

 

This is a Very Good answer that was once posted by Michael Winn over his HealingDao Forum.

It's about THE EGO THAT WHIPES OUR BUTT DAILY

It's dedicated to all un-buddhist-ed Taoists left out there on the TTB

 

Wendy,

it's a good question. I was referring to letting go of any personal pattern.

I think letting go is fine a first stage strategy - it can open up new space. It's simple, like breathing out.

But as you and Fajin have pointed out, it can be deceptive - usually only the symptom that is aggravating you consicously is released, and underlying patterns may remain. Breathing out is great, but its not the deep solution.

 

 

The reeason its difficult to change deep patterns I believe is because the Self has so many subtle layers and dimensions to it, that getting to the level - or to one level above the space where the pattern exists - requires deep work. It's hard to release a pattern at the same level at which it was created.

 

Once you let go of a pattern, or a whole group of them (as in your dramatic example of suddenly allowing in a higher perspective) - you still need a structure to hold whatever new patterns that are allowed to come in or be created from within. You, for example, apparently were unable to fully hold the immensity of the glimpse you were given in your moment of rapid expansion to another level of self. The rest of you had to grow for some years to catch up to that vision.

 

That is why "killing the ego" doesn't work, or "letting go of the ego" doesn't work in the long run. It is just another way of saying: Attack the Five Shen! They are misbehaving! Kill them!

 

The ego is needed to provide human structure. it is a functional part of the whole, so it cannot be killed without killing the whole. Besides, who is going to feed you or wipe your butt if there's no personal ego to take care of details? The ego or personal self is really the cauldron of transformation, and you want a strong cauldron that won't crack when you begin loading in powerful new vibrational patterns into it.

It's why I agree with Fajin, transformation of the structure is needed to provide stability in the process. Orbit and Fusion of Five element patterns are both initial structures used in alchemy to replace what is being dissolved or released. They resonate with univeral patterns of harmony and balance. They focus the new chi coming in, after the old is breathed out.

 

And more importantly, they offer a path of communication and interaction with the Original Spirit, which wants to become more conscious here - but cannot, if the field is too polarized by ego/shen disturbances.

 

hope this helps.

michael

 

[Vajrahridaya]

 

As findley says, the ego is a gift. The ego can really be limited and unlimited. It is the sense of I-ness and will that are very real. Yet one must also see this self-existence as interrelated to everything else in the universe.

 

Both the Yin and the Yang must be embraced and harmonized in order for "you" to truly become the full potential of the Tao or a Buddha. Enlightenment is not static (if it is... ). Hopefully it isn't.

 

Buddhahood is not static, it's just constant recognition of D.O./Emptiness on an experiential level, where the awareness is constantly inspired by infinite interconnection/compassion. It's flipping your beginningless history of interconnection as an individual mind stream clinging to an identity for joy and pleasure, into an endless recognition of interconnection of pure offering... love in action... compassion towards your beginningless connections. Thus those that connect with you as a Buddha, have connected with you previously as a non-Buddha. Life is not simple. The realization is simple, but it's actualization is deeply complex in it's nuances. Those that have flipped the subconscious... consciously through meditation and start going through the Tandra states of meditation, where one flips through the subconscious files, the abstract connections within one's endless history, one starts experiencing past lives too directly and one starts seeing abstract beyond sense logic.

 

Seems like non-sense for those without experience of this, I know. Probably much like what it sounded like to people who were described the pyramid's back before the day's of cameras on the other side of the world by world travelers to their listeners.

 

I like that word you just created: dis-en-hardened. Is that the same as 'lighten up'?

 

I do agree with you though. Grasping (for anything) is not good. I am told that I should lessen my desires, lessen my ego, and stop my freaking seeking. I do prefer the word 'awareness' over 'realization' though.

 

Be well!

I like what you said there above Lucky7.

 

Be well!

 

There is a process where one uses the desires and seeking in a way that is beneficial though. Seeking for the truth of the nature of things, desiring the inner experience of freedom through meditation. One should indeed use that energy in a way that is positive and not suppressive. Seeking freedom through meditation is like trying to fly by jumping off a cliff. In a way... It's using desire to end itself.

 

The Mahayana way of using seeking liberation is by offering that desire to the upliftment of all beings. Saying and praying to one's own mind. I seek liberation for the sake of all beings!! May I realize the bliss of liberation in order to help all beings realize this essential truth of existence. It's a catch 22 in way's worth contemplating.

 

Trying to kill the ego only empowers the ego, because that act gives it the benefit of existing in a tangible sense. Using it selflessly is a better way to just turn it into a vessel of positive offering.

[Marblehead]

Hi Little1,

 

That was a good post. Thanks for sharing it with us. I am in general agreement with it.

 

Be well!

 

 

 

Hi Vajrahridaya,

 

We are in general agreement on this one.

 

Every time I observe to gain understanding I am seeking (to gain knowledge). The point is, we need to know when to stop and allow this new information to become established in our mind.

 

Indeed, we are not told to remove all desires. That would be unnatural. But we are told to lessen them so we can be more at peace with our Self.

 

Be well!