Ego and enlightenment

[3bob]

I'd say one can not deny the import of the following Buddhist account in relation to "mind" and "beyond the beyond"

 

Mahasaccaka Sutta - Majjhima Nikaya #36: On the Buddha: "When his mind was "concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of imperfection, malleable, wieldy, steady and attained to imperturbability" he directed it to the "true knowledges" that gave rise to his incredible breakthrough in consciousness known in the sutras as Anuttara Samyak Sambodhi. So we see that the Jhanas are not only at the heart of his teaching, but also were at the heart of his own practise".

 

Underline by me, which I believe point to something different than killing "mind" per-se... not unlike an idea of an implosion and transmutation of all forms of gathered energy including that of "mind" which was needed for His breakthrough.

Edited August 5, 2015 by 3bob

[Karl]

Hehehehehehehehe...you are clueless.  You obviously do not understand the meaning of the word "life setbacks."    Is so easy to kill your ego.  Getting fired from your long cherished job???  Getting a brutal breakup with your girlfriend?  Getting a divorce?  You have no freaking ideas.  You think this is all some mind and word games. Hahahahahahaha.....  Like I said, there are greater ego than yours and would have no problems killing your ego.  Time and the eventuality are the enemies of the ego.  They would come for your long cherished ego. 

 

I have no idea what you are saying.

 

I'm getting into well into middle age, so I've had many, many, many setbacks. At one point I seriously considered killing myself after years of manic depression. Those kind of things provide great incentive to discover a solution. I found one. I have no idea if it's the only one, but it works.

[ChiForce]

I have no idea what you are saying. I'm getting into well into middle age, so I've had many, many, many setbacks. At one point I seriously considered killing myself after years of manic depression. Those kind of things provide great incentive to discover a solution. I found one. I have no idea if it's the only one, but it works.

The ego is in denial.  Classic case of defense mechanism.....   Is so much easy to play the word and mind games until things in life is blowing up in your face.  Is all matter of time because divorce is common.  Job security is rare and few.  Accidence like fire and nature disasters can ruin your home and you would lose everything.  Time.....the power of Time.  The greatest enemy of the ego.  Its nemesis.  Ah...Kali Ma... the great goddess of Time...    

Edited August 5, 2015 by ChiForce

[Karl]

The way to destroy it is to let go of the ego attachments to forms and life situations that one holds dear to..like a marriage, your good job, and your relationship.  Some obviously has no ideas what is an ego until shits in life is blowing up in their faces..... 

 

That's loving reality. Anytime there is attachment then love that reality. It's only when it's thought that something should be the way it is that the problems occur. If you feel fear, despair, sadness, then allow it and love that reality too. Never push away that which is feared, notice it, pay attention to it, love the reality of it. This has to be done consistently. Once freed enough from the constant turmoil of emotion then it was possible to develop higher reasoning skills. To learn how to learn and separate out rope from snake.

[Karl]

The ego is in denial.  Classic case of defense mechanism.....  Is so much easy to play the word and mind games until things in life is blowing up in your face.   

 

Yes, it is.

If anybody was 'in denial' or defending, then that would be me and me alone. I don't require something to blame.

[ChiForce]

That's loving reality. Anytime there is attachment then love that reality. It's only when it's thought that something should be the way it is that the problems occur. If you feel fear, despair, sadness, then allow it and love that reality too. Never push away that which is feared, notice it, pay attention to it, love the reality of it. This has to be done consistently. Once freed enough from the constant turmoil of emotion then it was possible to develop higher reasoning skills. To learn how to learn and separate out rope from snake.

Heheheheheheehe....loving reality???  Hehehehehehehe........ego says it can deal with life setbacks by loving the reality of it...  Most of us are lucky enough not to have experienced hardships.  Please, spare us the ego talks.  Loving the reality?  You won't love it if your house gets burn down and forcing to sleep in shelters.  Or all the things you work so hard to achieve in life and all of a sudden they are  GONE or taken away from you because you lost your jobs.  You have a divorce.  Or your parents passing away.  Every time the ego speaks...I couldn't help it but to laugh at it...hehehehe   

[Karl]

I'd say one can not deny the import of the following Buddhist account in relation to "mind" and "beyond the beyond"

 

Mahasaccaka Sutta - Majjhima Nikaya #36: On the Buddha: "When his mind was "concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of imperfection, malleable, wieldy, steady and attained to imperturbability" he directed it to the "true knowledges" that gave rise to his incredible breakthrough in consciousness known in the sutras as Anuttara Samyak Sambodhi. So we see that the Jhanas are not only at the heart of his teaching, but also were at the heart of his own practise".

 

Underline by me, which I believe point to something different than killing "mind" per-se... not unlike an idea of an implosion and transmutation of all forms of gathered energy including that of "mind" which was needed for His breakthrough.

 

Can you translate that into 'thick as a brick' working mans English ?

All those descriptions of 'mind' are objective descriptions. They might apply to a piece of polished metal, say, like Gold.

Then 'true knowledges'. What does that mean ?

[Karl]

Heheheheheheehe....loving reality???  Hehehehehehehe........ego says it can deal with life setbacks by loving the reality of it...  Most of us are lucky enough not to have experienced hardships.  Please, spare us the ego talks.  Loving the reality?  You won't love it if your house gets burn down and forcing to sleep in shelters.  Or all the things you work so hard to achieve in life and all of a sudden they are  GONE or taken away from you because you lost your jobs.  You have a divorce.  Or your parents passing away.  Every time the ego speaks...I couldn't help it but to laugh at it...hehehehe   

 

Love not like. They are different. Yes, if my house burns down I love that, but I do not like that. I accept that it is that way and don't seek to reject the feelings of pain, discomfort, grief etc, or the reality of the situation. It's unpleasant, but that isn't rejected either.

 

That's all I can tell you. It works for me.

 

 

[Boy]

Is ego transcendence considered to be the final stage before enlightenment? I’ve included definitions of ego transcendence below, which may need redefining.

 

Ego-transcendence: 1. The act or condition of going beyond ego or egoity, as in love, service, non-egoic discipline, or undivided attention for another. 2. An evolutive practice or technique which involves moving beyond prior limitations. This technique is known as essential for spiritual and psychological progress: see SADHANA. 3. A state or condition in which spiritual ecstasy is experienced by virtue of the release of a spirit-being from the confines of ego and egocentrism. 4. Any experience or process through which the spirit-being comes to know itself as it is, i.e., spirit and not ego or lower mind.

 

http://soulprogress.com/html/Glossary/EgoTranscendenceGlossary.html

Yes. 4.

[3bob]

" I'd say "true knowledges" means what the Buddha said in His own words in relation to same, namely: 

 

"There is, O monks, an unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed. Were there not, O monks, this unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed, there would be no escape from the world of the born, originated, created, formed. Since, O monks, there is an unborn, unoriginated, uncreated and unformed, therefore there is an escape from the born, originated, created, formed."

 

The summation and fact of which is not knowable through the powers of reason, although point-able to with reason.

 

(Btw, I'm more into Vedic teachings but I gotta give Buddhist teachings their due credit)

[Bindi]

As others have suggested perhaps overcoming ego is a matter of chipping away at acknowledging the parts of ourselves that we would prefer to ignore or deny, but even then I think there must be a core of ego that remains, Ramana’s root (ego) thought, and so there must be a final confrontation on some level.

One simple guage of my ego that appeals to me at the moment is to notice how authentically aligned I am to ‘thinking of others’ as opposed to ‘thinking of myself’. This might not be the ultimate guage but for now it’s a simple way for me to see where I fall short, and in falling short to know that I haven’t yet 'arrived' (to believe that one has 'arrived' seems to me to be a remarkably common ego delusion).

Edited August 6, 2015 by Bindi

[C T]

 

One simple guage of my ego that appeals to me at the moment is to notice how authentically aligned I am to ‘thinking of others’ as opposed to ‘thinking of myself’. This might not be the ultimate guage but for now it’s a simple way for me to see where I fall short, and in falling short to know that I haven’t yet 'arrived' (to believe that one has 'arrived' seems to me to be a remarkably common ego delusion).

Very common indeed. A plausible reason why ego, which is inextricably linked to the 6 senses, can never be satisfied (hence the concept of 'dissatisfaction>craving>suffering'), and also why delusion marks conventional modes of existence, imo, is explained quite clearly in the short clip below.. 

 

 

If the above explanation makes sense, then its clear that ego is not one's real nature. We can make our own deduction once we are able to recognise ego's illusory yet tangible link to emotions, feelings, thoughts, action and so on. It is incorrect to argue for its existence or non-existence for that is like arguing for the existence or non-existence of a rainbow - what is clear is that it can be caused to arise, and can also be caused to subside. Its up to the individual to see thru its ephemeral characteristics and not get duped by the ever-enchanting charades. 

[Karl]

" I'd say "true knowledges" means what the Buddha said in His own words in relation to same, namely: 

 

"There is, O monks, an unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed. Were there not, O monks, this unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed, there would be no escape from the world of the born, originated, created, formed. Since, O monks, there is an unborn, unoriginated, uncreated and unformed, therefore there is an escape from the born, originated, created, formed."

 

The summation and fact of which is not knowable through the powers of reason, although point-able to with reason.

 

(Btw, I'm more into Vedic teachings but I gotta give Buddhist teachings their due credit)

 

You realise that's a logical syllogism ?

Buddah hasn't provided the first proof-that there is an "unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed."

However, logic proves that to be true. The rest of the syllogism is then entirely valid given that the universe is uncreated.

And you said we had gone off topic ? Buddah was using Aristotlian logic to validate his conclusion. It's not perfect but it certainly shows how he was proceeding.

 

Very cool. New respect for Buddah. I've not looked at Confuciusian philosophy, but I would be amazed if he wasn't using the same process. So, there were Greek, Chinese and Indian philosopher 2.5 K years ago developing logical argument along pretty much identical lines. Learning higher reasoning ability and dispensing with myth.

 

Enlightenment then was quite clearly the use of logic, in place of early practices of mysticism, thought Brahmans, austerities and prolonged meditation.

[Bud Jetsun]

Heheheheheheehe....loving reality???  Hehehehehehehe........ego says it can deal with life setbacks by loving the reality of it...  Most of us are lucky enough not to have experienced hardships.  Please, spare us the ego talks.  Loving the reality?  You won't love it if your house gets burn down and forcing to sleep in shelters.  Or all the things you work so hard to achieve in life and all of a sudden they are  GONE or taken away from you because you lost your jobs.  You have a divorce.  Or your parents passing away.  Every time the ego speaks...I couldn't help it but to laugh at it...hehehehe   

 

What situation disables the potential to think your own thoughts?

 

Retain mindfully embracing experience without fear and you can not suffer. To not do so would be purposely incompassionate to yourself.

 

The material world can provide perceptions to our senses. It is exclusively in our choice of interpretation and embracing these perceptions with fear or love that determines if we suffer.

 

Pain and pleasure are merely an interpretation choice apart.

[Karl]

As others have suggested perhaps overcoming ego is a matter of chipping away at acknowledging the parts of ourselves that we would prefer to ignore or deny, but even then I think there must be a core of ego that remains, Ramana’s root (ego) thought, and so there must be a final confrontation on some level.

One simple guage of my ego that appeals to me at the moment is to notice how authentically aligned I am to ‘thinking of others’ as opposed to ‘thinking of myself’. This might not be the ultimate guage but for now it’s a simple way for me to see where I fall short, and in falling short to know that I haven’t yet 'arrived' (to believe that one has 'arrived' seems to me to be a remarkably common ego delusion).

 

You will always be thinking of yourself-even when you are thinking of others and that's entirely natural.

 

It's the false identification with the mind/body. It's thinking there is an ego stopping you from being the way you envisage, instead of realising you are simply you are as you are and being contented, as that, unified and whole.

 

As soon as you say 'fall short' then that is the trap you have set yourself. 'Fall short' means 'I did not achieve what I thought I should achieve'. Now you are disagreeing with reality. You are trying to force reality to bend to your will. This is, as Ramana said 'to be after the world'.

 

The way to stay aligned is to accept each reality unquestioningly. Even when the thought happens 'I should be accepting these things and I am not' then this must also be accepted as reality. 'I reject reality' is the same thing. Accept that though as reality because that IS the reality.

 

There is no arriving, there is no place to get to, or from.

 

 

[C T]

In my understanding, its not helpful to assert or negate ego. It is both there and not there simultaneously. Just because someone has walked surefootedly for 9,999 steps does not mean he or she will not trip on the next one. Ego is a bit like that. And so is the process of spiritual work. A problem could arise when the walker deems that one faltering step to negate the previous 9999 made, or, to make the assumption that all future steps are dictated or determined by having faltered just that one time. 

[Owledge]

Is ego transcendence considered to be the final stage before enlightenment? I’ve included definitions of ego transcendence below, which may need redefining.

 

You talk about enlightenment as if it was a yes/no thing, which is quite unenlightened.

I'll just assume you meant to say full enlightenment... which is a somewhat less unenlightened term to use.

 

When I was in such a state, I had been coaxed into giving up my will to live, or to cling to things I identified with my existence and individual identity. This might usually feel like losing your mind, which totally makes sense in the truest sense of the word, and the uncomfortable thing is that full enlightenment without physical death might actually manifest as such, depending on how well you can handle it. (So if the energy practice is meant to open the path, the most important practice aspect is probably the honing of character and preparation for such a state. It would mean that you don't attain anything you haven't already achieved, but that the focus on the goal is the driving motivation for such rigorous development of virtue.)

 

What was fact during that state I had been coaxed into is hard to say because then my mind was occupied with different things.    There really isn't any factual stuff then; it's difficult to describe because it's beyond the rational mind's grasp.

 

https://twitter.com/Dowlphin/status/627172286462861312

 

If you have a problem with accepting that you are God and the universe and everything but at the same time nothing, then full enlightenment might not be your thing.

 

It's easy to talk about it casually, but when you actually experience the state it's all HOLY SHIT!

 

I'm happy I reached it with help of psychedelics, because it enabled me to see it in contrast to a mind that's not fully prepared, thus I was able to see the state's self-serving nature; how if you want to become divine, the final necessary step is abandonment of the desire to become divine. You merely allow a process of shedding of all fears to continue, don't resist, have faith. You'd become a mere avatar, a conduit. People who can still talk about it are able to because they retain some ego. If you attained the theoretical extreme, you might not be able to tell, you wouldn't care, you wouldn't know.

 

 

DISCLAIMER: This was all written during a state of extreme boredom, which is now somewhat less extreme, so I consider these words very valuable.

 

Edited August 6, 2015 by Owledge

[gendao]

I think you will find the dissolution of the ego in every main religion in one form or another, except maybe Daosim. I mean no disrespect but it seems that Daoism is concerned more with becoming, with mastering, with elevating and accomplishing rather than surrender. I think Daoism attempts to expand the I thought through trying to take control of every aspect of the material and energetic world and balance it, perform tricks with it, become immortal... Not that there is anything wrong with that but it seems to be counter to dissolving the ego.

Again, I have not studied much Daoism so shoot me..

 

In Christianity you find ideas like selfless service, loving your neighbor, treating other as you want to be treated, not casting any stones, charity etc... These are all forms of diminishing the self(ego). -note, this is the small self here, in Ramana-ian terms.

Actually, Daoism is about the realization of our True Nature (note: not True Self).

Whereas Christianity doesn't even acknowledge a Unified Self, much less non-dual "emptiness."  It definitely preaches an eternal egoic divide between localized and Divine bandwidths of consciousness.

[Spotless]

Ego is a pattern.

 

It is a pattern within which we are identified.

 

As one shifts to non-pattern, fragments of the ego patterns will still exist.

 

For a time it appears that the ego is completely gone - and by contrast it is (but it is not).

 

One loses identification with the patterns - but the shifts from existing remaining patterns and no-pattern are known and felt.

It is not now "total control" - it is actually ego-control-will to non-ego no-control no-effort no-will flow.

Edited August 6, 2015 by Spotless

[Kubba]

It is the total dissolution of the subjectiv observer when just processes are left what is called full enlightement. What they call ego is seeer, doer, thinker, preceiver.

No entity that is subjectiv stays when enlightened.

Since there is the one who preceives and there are doubts, there is no end of the movie.

[maldor]

I have experienced "bliss".

 

It is very hard to describe. I would characterise it as "loss of ego", but it is more about realisation than a "loss" and I am at odds with expressing what I mean by ego. All I know is I felt like everyone was my newly born child and I theirs. It was extraordinary. Happiness was irrelevant.

 

Also the above reply to Karl is patronising and unwilling to accept different uses of terminology in a field that has very little in the way of solid definitions.

Edited August 7, 2015 by maldor

[Seeker of Wisdom]

[3bob]

Hello TI, (or others that would like to comment along the lines of this comment )

 

In your recent quote I wonder why Ramana keeps using the term "killing" that tends to have a certain connotation?  I can partly relate to same in a certain sense or in a manner of speaking but I find a description along the lines of eight limbed yoga more conducive to discussions along these lines;  in my own words I might use the image of gates - thus one opens and goes through one gate and leaves behind or detaches from whatever was active and binding them in that realm and then on to next gate and the next becoming more free from things behind the previous gates as they progress, which doesn't mean the killing or burning down of such gates and realms per-se but the power to open and close them for one's self as needed.  Extrapolate that sort of process up to the toughest gate of creation itself, for mind can not pass that gate and can not conceive of passing that gate where it no longer exists and cannot reach, for up to that point it has largely been master but the deeper master lies beyond what could be called the first and last gate.  (first to manifest as pure energy, last to un-manifest as pure energy)  I also believe I understand what Ramana is talking about in falling into a still, sleep like rest, which in my analogy used here  could be likened to getting stuck part way through a gate, (or in an in-between part of a realm) that could be difficult to break free of.  (and where the Grace of the Sat Guru would surely help!)  Lastly, or another way of looking at this subject from a God level or Supreme Being level is that Siva can not "kill" Shakti to find or free himself - far from it since there is a quintessential and unbreakable connection!  ...or btw. with some correlation to Taoism in that Tao "goes far" and "returns". (yet never really left, and was never really lost)

 

Good day

Edited August 7, 2015 by 3bob

[Tibetan_Ice]

Hello TI, (or others that would like to comment along the lines of this comment )

 

In your recent quote I wonder why Ramana keeps using the term "killing" that tends to have a certain connotation?  I can partly relate to same in a certain sense or in a manner of speaking but I find a description along the lines of eight limbed yoga more conducive to discussions along these lines;  in my own words I might use the image of gates - thus one opens and goes through one gate and leaves behind or detaches from whatever was active and binding them in that realm and then on to next gate and the next becoming more free from things behind the previous gates as they progress, which doesn't mean the killing or burning down of such gates and realms per-se but the power to open and close them for one's self as needed.  Extrapolate that sort of process up to the toughest gate of creation itself, for mind can not pass that gate and can not conceive of passing that gate where it no longer exists and cannot reach, for up to that point it has largely been master but the deeper master lies beyond what could be called the first and last gate.  (first to manifest as pure energy, last to un-manifest as pure energy)  I also believe I understand what Ramana is talking about in falling into a still, sleep like rest, which in my analogy used here  could be likened to getting stuck part way through a gate, (or in an in-between part of a realm) that could be difficult to break free of.  (and where the Grace of the Sat Guru would surely help!)  Lastly, or another way of looking at this subject from a God level or Supreme Being level is that Siva can not "kill" Shakti to find or free himself - far from it since there is a quintessential and unbreakable connection!  ...or btw. with some correlation to Taoism in that Tao "goes far" and "returns". (yet never really left, and was never really lost)

 

Good day

Hi Bob,

  I kind of like the term 'death'. It signifies extinction, or the resolving of illusion. 

  Once it is discovered that the snake is not a snake but a rope, the snake "dies". There never was a snake in the first place, so it never really died, but to the consciousness that perceived it as such, it metaphorically died. 

 

  Much the same for Patanjali's samyama.  There is an object, there is a subject, there is sustained attention. When the three fuse together, everything gets brighter and brighter, the body and the senses no longer appear and then continuity of consciousness explodes, one is aware that there was something else watching, beyond.

 

  Many years ago I spent three and a half hours meditating, trying to realize the star above the head. I had heard so many people talking about it that I wanted to see it. There was supposed to be a star above the head, about 8 inches or so. So, I focused all my attention on that area and kept at it. Three and a half hours later, I popped out of the top of my physical head and found myself in a large empty space that resembled outer space, except that there were no stars to be seen. I could make out very faint lights in the background, but they were more like impressions of lights, or intentions of lights. The overwhelming sensation that I felt when I popped out was that I was dying, was going to die, or had died. A great fear overtook me so I stopped the meditation. 

 

 Later, I went back and explored this space. When I resolved that I would overcome the fear of death, I tried to jump into that huge space. Well much to my surprise I hit a barrier which appeared as a sheet of celophane/rainbow lightning and it bounced me back to my center of awareness.. 

 

 That feeling of the fear of death had to be overcome in order to take the next step. So, I don't see anything strange with Ramana's idea of killing the ego (mind, small self, conceptual mind, thinker etc). 

 

  According to Ramana, the ego is not the Western concept of ego, it is the aham-vritti.

from " Ramana Maharshi – Be As You Are – by David Godman"

 

 

Q: But is not the aham-vritti only one of the three forms in which the ego manifests itself. Yoga Vasishtha and other ancient texts describe the ego as having a threefold form.

 

A: It is so. The ego is described as having three bodies, the gross, the subtle and the causal, but that is only for the  purpose of analytical exposition. If the method of enquiry were to depend on the ego’s form, you may take it that any enquiry would become altogether impossible, because the forms the ego may assume are legion. Therefore, for the purposes of self-enquiry you have to proceed on the basis that the ego has but one form, namely that of aham-vritti.

...

 

Q: It is said that the Self is beyond the mind and yet the realization is with the mind. ‘The mind cannot think it. It cannot be thought of by the mind and the mind alone can realize it.’ How are these contradictions to be reconciled?

 

A: Atman is realized with mruta manas [dead mind], that is, mind devoid of thoughts and turned inward. Then the mind sees its own source and becomes that [the Self]. It is not as the subject perceiving an object. When the room is dark a lamp is necessary to illumine and eyes to cognise objects. But when the sun has risen there is no need of a lamp to see objects. To see the sun no lamp is necessary, it is enough that you turn your eyes towards the self-luminous sun. Similarly with the mind. To see objects the reflected light of the mind is necessary. To see the Heart it is enough that the mind is turned towards it.

Then mind loses itself and Heart shines forth. The essence of mind is only awareness or consciousness. When the ego, however, dominates it, it functions as the reasoning, thinking or sensing faculty. The cosmic mind, being not limited by the ego, has nothing separate from itself and is therefore only aware. This is what the Bible means by ‘I am that I am’. When the mind perishes in the supreme consciousness of one’s own Self, know that all the various powers beginning with the power of liking [and including the power of doing and the power of knowing] will entirely disappear, being found to be an unreal imagination appearing in one’s own form of consciousness. The impure mind which functions as thinking and forgetting, alone is samsara, which is the cycle of birth and death. The real ‘I’ in which the activity of thinking and forgetting has perished, alone is the pure liberation. It is devoid of pramada [forgetfulness of Self] which is the cause of birth and death

 

 

There are many parallels to this concept of permanently doing away with something in order to realize what lies beyond. If the you who is looking is wearing rose colored glasses, take the glasses and never put them back on. Crush them, grind them up.  Makes sense to me. 

 

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by the Shiva and Shakti example..  I thought it was Shakti who awakens and then seeks Shiva? 

 

According to Ramana, Shiva is God.. 

 

Q: I have faith in murti dhyana [worship of form]. Will it not help me to gain jnana?

 

A: Surely it will. Upasana [meditation] helps concentration of mind. Then the mind is free from other thoughts and is full of the meditated form. The mind then becomes one with the object of meditation, and this makes it quite pure. Then think who is the worshipper. The answer is ‘I’, that is, the Self. In this way the Self is ultimately gained.

 

Worshipping the formless reality by unthought thought is the best kind of worship. But when one is not fit for such formless worship of God, worship of form alone is suitable. Formless worship is possible only for people who are devoid of the ego-form. Know that all the worship done by people who possess the ego-form is only worship of form.

 

The pure state of being attached to grace [self], which is devoid of any attachment, alone is one’s own state of silence, which is devoid of any other thing. Know that one’s ever abiding as that silence, having experienced it as it is, alone is true mental worship [manasika-puja]. Know that the performance of the unceasing, true and natural worship in which the mind is submissively established as the one Self, having installed the Lord on the Heart-throne, is silence, the best of all forms of worship. Silence, which is devoid of the assertive ego, alone is liberation. The evil forgetfulness of Self which causes one to slip down from that silence, alone is non-devotion [vibhakti]. Know that abiding as that silence with the mind subsided as non-different from Self, is the truth of Siva bhakti [devotion to God].

 

When one has completely surrendered oneself at the feet of Siva, thereby becoming of the nature of the Self, the resulting abundant peace, in which there is not even the least room within the Heart for one to make any complaint about one’s defects and deficiencies, alone is the nature of supreme devotion. One’s thus becoming a slave to the Lord and one’s remaining quiet and silent, devoid even of the egotistical thought ‘I am his slave’, is Self-abidance, and this is the supreme knowledge

Edited August 7, 2015 by Tibetan_Ice

[dwai]

Is ego transcendence considered to be the final stage before enlightenment? I’ve included definitions of ego transcendence below, which may need redefining.

 

Ego-transcendence: 1. The act or condition of going beyond ego or egoity, as in love, service, non-egoic discipline, or undivided attention for another. 2. An evolutive practice or technique which involves moving beyond prior limitations. This technique is known as essential for spiritual and psychological progress: see SADHANA. 3. A state or condition in which spiritual ecstasy is experienced by virtue of the release of a spirit-being from the confines of ego and egocentrism. 4. Any experience or process through which the spirit-being comes to know itself as it is, i.e., spirit and not ego or lower mind.

 

http://soulprogress.com/html/Glossary/EgoTranscendenceGlossary.html

Ego exists as long as the body exists. Ego is the mind. What goes away is the attachment to the Ego. There is always the clarity and empty awareness but the mind flows like a stream of debris beneath the surface. This mind is what helps us operate in this world. We eat, sleep, wake, drink, poop, pee etc because of the mind. 

 

My teacher put it this way to me - "To think that somehow the Ego dies is wrong. It just doesn't control our actions anymore. It becomes a servant of the Spiritual mind...that empty clarity/awareness that is always present". I see experientially that it is true. This is what happens when we take the spiritual experiences (samadhis) into our everyday life. 

 

Here's a wonderful snippet of Advaita Master Ramesh Balsekar talking about it...

 

Edited August 7, 2015 by dwai