Ego

[candid]

If none of us had egos we'd be staring at blank pages. There would be no questions to ask or answers to offer. There would be nothing to strive for and nothing to attain. There would be no opinions at all. No points of view. No perspectives. No uniqueness. No individuality. No relevance. No relationship(s). And without these things there would be no I-Ching. The desire for sageness is ego driven. The desire for rightness is ego driven. All desire is ego driven.

Its wonderful to put away ego for awhile. Its wonderful to experience the lightness and freedom without ego for awhile. Its like a nice hot bath or shower. 'Calgon, take me away!' But we are by nature ego creatures, and our hunger for experience, and its accompanying obligations, call us back into our ego again. Dare I say, its hard-wired into our species nature?

I think about this all the time. This ego thing. How much to keep? How much to refine? How much to ignore? How much to destroy? I mean, I carry dead corpses in my wagon too. All the time I think about this. To be, or not to be? That's a hellava question.

I think an ego needs to be creative in some way. It needs to express its own tao. (does ego have a tao?) In the creative action the ego dissolves, but is not destroyed. Rather, it comes to life as though its 'another life' moving through it. This, I believe, is ego's tao. Giving honor to the Sage by 'doing'. Enthusiasm! Don't kill it! (not that you could) Dance with it!

To me, ego is soul. To me, one's soul expresses itself through ego. Ego has gotten a bad rap.

Its only when ego becomes dominant that we're subject to delusion. When my little man starts thinking he's the big man, or - the Great Man! HaHaHa!!

 

[joang]

Candid, to continue along that track...
if there were no ego, there would be no strugle... if there were no strugle, our lives would be boring... boring to us who live them, and boring to S/he Who watches.

Since the opposing forces of yin and yang activate the entire universe, of course they act upon and within us as well. Perhaps that is what we are seeing playing out on this forum currently...hmmm?

Namaste,
Joan

 

[joang]

That didn't make much sense. The words fell short of conveying the thought.

 

[candid]

made sense to me.. I hear it as all part of the dance. dancing usually takes two. at least its more fun that way.

 

[dharma]

I agree Candid. Ego has gotten a bad rap. It is so misunderstood. Ego wants so badly to dance but when we judge our personal dances as too uncivilized, or too impractical, and sometimes even too exciting we suppress our souls. In that sense, the ego is never quite dominant because it is never truly free, imo. It's *fear* that stifles ego's enthusiasm for unique identity expression and chains its unique style by ruling and controling its movements. Ego has gotten a bum rap...fear is the real tyrant.

You asked: "Does ego have a tao?" and Yi said: #16 Didn't you call it Enthusiasm, too?

 

[wanderer]

Let's see... no hopes, no ambitions, no relationships, no possessions, no John Lennon songs, and no I Ching. What would he have left? Eternal bliss perhaps, how boring.

A golfing buddy of mine once said that "It is much easier to hit the big ball (earth) than to hit the little ball (the golf ball)" The ego is the big ball. Impossible not to be able to hit it.

I do not believe that I will ever eliminate my ego. I just want to notice it at work when I can.

 

[candid]

Dharma - "In that sense, the ego is never quite dominant because it is never truly free, imo. It's *fear* that stifles ego's enthusiasm.."

That's interesting. We are raised to believe that we can not trust ourselves (our ego). Culture provides the fear-myths and so we begin hiding away little but important parts of ourselves. There, they develop into insecurities based on unreasonable fears. Outwardly we either withdraw further into our fear based personal myth, or we outwardly compensate with an ego image. But this image isn't ego's tao, its only an image, a facade. And even the facade is fine, unless we mistake it for the original.

I used to look at Jimmi Hendrix's album covers and other images of him, and wonder why a cat so amazingly talented needed to dress so.. mmm ya know.. flashy? And why did he sing about doing chicks so much? With all that incredible talent why did he need those other things? The answer is pretty obvious now. In Wanderer's image, the little ball and the big ball. Its all part of the package which allows genius to be expressed.

 

[anita]

A facade...hmmm. People, for example tell me to dress more soberly so people will take me more seriously ... well, they used to anyway, till they discovered that what counts in the end is what I do and not how I appear. So in my case, if I dress soberly, THAT is a facade!

Best for your Quest

Anita

 

[candid]

Anita.. interesting point. It could be ego which holds back our natural bent and preferences. Yi says we should never rule out the possibility of inhibition. Glad you don't suffer too much from it. Clothing is a way to express what's inside. You just do it with enthusiasm!

 

[pedro]

Candid, and all, interesting discussion, I've been asking myself these same questions, and I agree there is a lot of misconception surrounding the ego's villain role.

When the masters talk about suppressing the ego, they leave something out without saying, which is the obvious enough fact that we simply cannot live without the ego. We are conditioned creatures, all of us, even buddhas, and as such we must still conform to the material world where the ego is our only skill and means of survival. Giving away the ego cannot mean more than coma, or plain death. Its precisely the same with desires, we cannot, we should not repress desires. Desire is also a hard-wired thing and we should be grateful to be blessed with the capacity to feel desire, to savour it (isn't it what makes us feel alive?). No, the problem with the ego is not the ego itself, and the problem with desire is not desire itself, the problem is attachment to both of them. It is not desiring, but anxiously gratifying the senses in an endeless vicious cycle. Not expressing our ego creatively, merely clinging to short-mindedness, prejudice and arrogance.

I happen to believe that souls choose a particular life to incarnate, the one with the experiences (lessons, challenges) they need to learn through the "semester". If that is so, then our particular ego, at least its driving qualities (which can be tapped by introspection, serious astrology, psychoanalysis, the yi, etc) is pretty much our souls choice (as much as our birth), and fulfilling our potential in our lives, that urge to express our creativity to the fullest, is intrinsically connected with our soul's journey, it is US. So if we are to really live the lives our souls intended to, we cant abandon the ego, but we should instead express it to the best of its essence, and that is what is meant by the "suppression". We merely have to suppress what is not our essential ego but our egotistic demands. Of course most people would be better off abandoning all concepts for a start, simply because all concepts are wrong in the sense they are dualist and all dualisms are human conventions, not absolute realities. And by abandoning this false views they would be able to perceive more clearly what their inner essence is, and could then progress further. But the goal is not suppression itself, quite the opposite, it is expressing our individual creativity to the fullest, and for that we need a nice clean healthy ego.

This raises some more questions. If our souls are able to select in advance a particular life with the challenges we need to learn from this incarnation, then this means that life is set up in advance, at least in coarse details. Astrology (or the Yi) wouldn't work (and it does!) if there werent some rigid rules governing the operation of our physical conditioned bodies. In truth I came to believe the conclusion I was trying so hard to avoid, that we as conditioned creatures do not possess free will, because what we expect to be free for us to choose is not really free (from the universal rules and our own egotism, for a start) until we decide to choose from the essential ego. We cannot expect our egotistic wishes to be any more than just that: wishes!. How could the universe be ruled like that, everyone's egotistic impulses trying to prevail over everyone else's? No, the only action that has any free will of its own is the action which is rooted on our "(bad)self-less" nature. That is the only action with correct intention, the intention that stems from our deepest core. And that pure intention, from the real ego we should express, is none other than the universe's intention, God's intention if you will. We cannot express ourselves to the fullest until we chose to align our intention with the creator's. In a sense that is our only free choice. That is wu wei as far as I have understood it.

 

[hilary]

I should probably wait until I have straightened this out before posting... except that I'm too impatient to wait the necessary 50 years or whatever.

I get the inarticulate feeling from your last paragraph, Pedro, that somehow there is a dimension missing. You seem (as far as I can follow, anyway) to be working towards an either/or: either lots of little egotistic impulses, lots of little selves seeking fulfilment, or one great self, one intention and one deep core. If we lived in two dimensions, we would be able to go either right or left. But I think that infinity always turns out to have another dimension beyond every either/or.

What if the one intention were in a qualitatively different direction? So I become totally, freely and unpredictably (from any dimension in which prediction means anything ) myself, and you become totally, freely and unpredictably yourself, infinite snowflakes, and Intention/Fulfilment grows.

Or is this just part of what you were saying anyway?

 

[dharma]

Agreeing here with what everyone is saying except that occasionally someone will again, inadvertantly, describe the ego in a disparaging way in an effort to explain why we do "bad" things. And though this input is small and meant only to fill in the gap, it confuses the whole issue and brings us right back to "the-ego-sucks" theory.

What keeps tripping us up in our understanding, and maintaining that understanding when we finally have it, is in believing that our experiences are "lessons" or "tests" when in fact they are not. As long as we believe that God/Life is testing us and that all our experiences are lessons, we keep believing that being challenged (especially in negative ways) is what we "need" to grow. This is a myth. It's a lie.

All that negative lessons challenge us to do is to hang-on tightly to our spirits lest they be broken, while the wonder of who we are, waits hopefully in the wings to one day "live" -to run free, to be grand, to NOT be afraid.

The wonder of who we are is present from the moment we are born into this world and eager to BE all that we are hard-wired to be. Positive reinforcement is the safe environment that ego seeks to emerge confidently. Validation, Confirmation, Celebration, and Love, all signal a green light to Ego. Anything else is threatening to its survival and makes it timidly crawl back inside until its safe to come out.

We are meant to retain our child-like sense of wonder and joy and encourage each other to greatness. Our purpose towards each other is to lift-up, not put-down. We don't help each other expand and grow to the magnificent sizes we are capable of being when we either sit back apathetically or piss all over other people because we believe we are here to teach others lessons.

Judging is insulting. Criticizing is demeaning. Admonishing is abusive. Belitting is disrespectful. Censuring is wounding. No one "needs" to grow this way. In fact, people often go into therapy in order to experience other ways of growing. For instance, Validation is supportive and athenticating. Confirmation is cheerful and hopeful. Celebration is festive and optimistic.

Ego is never bad. Ego is always good. Ego should be King/Queen of one's domain. It's fear and destructive behavior towards each other that is ineffectual. It's fear and internalized destructive behavior towards ourselves that keep us attached to our desires. Get rid of the fear and destructiveness in its many guises and you finally get rid of desire. You desire nothing when you are free to have and be all that you really are.

 

[wanderer]

The ego works like a muscle. If we use that muscle, we get achievement. We can achieve good and evil. The counter muscle to ego is acceptance. It's result is the cosmic and peace.

Ego gets a bad rap because most of the evil in the world stems from misjudged achievement. But most of the accomplishments in the world stem from ego gone right.

This is the essence of Yin and Yang. Yang is strong. And Yang in a strong place brings achievement. Yin is yielding. Yin in the correct place brings understanding and growth. It is when Yang is in a weak place that evil occurs. And it is when Yin is in a strong place that we let evil occur.

It is when balance is found that all things prosper.

 

[heylise]

I have put Dharma's entire mail in my 'wisdom' folder. Great!!
LiSe

 

[dharma]

LiSe,
thank you for the validation. this comes so sparingly and so feels incredibly wonderful when it does.


<CENTER>

</CENTER>


Wanderer,
thank you for sharing your incredible wisdom. it seems you have bucketfuls.

 

[wanderer]

Dharma,

Just a thought.

Judging, criticism, belittling, and the like are also ego driven. Virtually everything that we "do" is ego driven, from the most exquisite poem and building, to the most disgraceful act of inhumanity.

You are absolutely right when you say that no child deserves those abuses. I have seen the results of such abuses "up close and personal" in the foster kids that I have known.

We need to foster that which is good, and learn to modify what is evil. That is our best choice.

 

[shelley]

So...

Ego ergo sum?

 

[dharma]

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

Judging, criticism, belittling, and the like are also ego driven. Virtually everything that we "do" is ego driven, from the most exquisite poem and building, to the most disgraceful act of inhumanity.<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>
they may be ego-driven but are negative habits that don't work and need to be "unlearned", while validation, support, authenticating, confirmation, good cheer, hope, optimisim are all natural and inate responses that we were born with and need to be allowed to surface again through deliberate practice.

Shelley,
I don't understand your question. Are you asking if the final consensus is that ego is everything?

 

[shelley]

Sorry Dharma,

It was a pretty lame pun on 'I think therefore I am', intended to mean (from very inaccurate latin) 'I have an ego therefore I am'. Perhaps being limply facetious at this juncture was inappropriate. (I just liked the sound of 'Ego, ergo'!)

Actually, what you have said about life's challenges describes exactly my own experience. Whilst the challenges in my life have undoubtedly taught me some very valuable lessons, it was only when a therapist helped me, by validation, confirmation, celebration and Love to make sense of it that I began learning to '"live" -to run free, to be grand, to NOT be afraid' (so beautifully put - thank you).

Love,

Shelley

 

[candid]

Dharma, you make some wonderful thoughts to ponder. Let me ask you this, how would you define an egomaniac.. just by way of example say, Hitler? What would you attribute his evil to, if not his ego? And if you answer, 'fear', then could you also answer what part his ego played in his evil deeds?

I'm not seeing ego as moral or immoral, as good or as bad, but as a functioning part that could be corrupted.

 

[candid]

By way of genenerally accepted definitions:

1. appropriate self-esteem: somebody?s idea of his or her own importance or worth, usually of an appropriate level


2. inflated opinion of yourself: an exaggerated sense of your own importance and a feeling of superiority to other people


3. psychoanalysis part of the mind containing consciousness: in Freudian psychology, one of three main divisions of the mind, containing consciousness and memory and involved with control, planning, and conforming to reality
See also id
See also superego


4. philosophy the self: the individual self, as distinct from the outside world and other selves


[Early 19th century. From Latin, ?I.?]

 

[candid]

I just asked Yi which hexagram best describes ego?

45.4 changing to 8

Wow

Line 4 nails a pure ego to a T. (not meant as a Christ metaphor, though it seems to fit well enough) I think its worth posting.

Great good fortune. No blame.

This describes a man who gathers people around him in the name of his ruler. Since he's not striving for any special advantages for himself but is working unselfishly to bring about general unity, his work is crowned with success, and everything becomes as it should be.

*stunned*

 

[joang]

Candid, I think the Yi is referring to you. Are you not working to bring about general unity?

 

[anita]

As far as I have learned about Ego on my Path, it is to me - (example) the hurt and resentment I feel when I feel I am wronged. It is because of the ego that I feel this way and my goal really is to get rid of it. I can do this by being calm and centred and remembering that mere words from someone should not upset me for they are just sounds. If they do, it means I'm unduly attached to them. In this regard, I'd like to share with all of you Maitreya Buddha's motto:

The wondrous dharma of Maitreya Buddha is infinite. Even though he is beaten, he will never take revenge beacuse he has tolerance.Although he is cursed, he will allow it beacuse he is generous. He always does his best and devotes his life to everyone. He helps others achieve success, but he never tries to get reawrds for it. His wish is nothing but to save all people.

To be like this, is to realise my own divinity. Sounds much like 45.4 doesn't it Candid?

 

[candid]

Joan - Yes, I do work toward general unity, but so do several others here. Also, my question wasn?t in relation to me personally but to Yi?s meaning for the word, ego. So that?s how I apply the answer.

Anita - Great to hear another perspective on it. Yes, it does sound like 45.4. Is Maitreya a real and historical figure? The only reference to him I know of is that of alleged spiritual being who is channeled through a medium, a modern day prophet who is said to be of the highest order.

But let me ask you, is not the quest for enlightenment and release of egotistic drives *still* motivated by one's own ego? I mean, what is it that leads you toward seeking this experience of elevated being ness if not ego? What else could it possibly be?

 

[pedro]

Hilary, your point is well taken. That hidden dimension you speak about is precisely what I was trying to put in words by "walking on the borderline". Its an effortless state, we are there when we dont try to be either/or, when we maintain our individuallity by not clinging to either side of the coin, neither the void, neither the world. The egoless state (and by this I mean just a completely unselfish state) is a consequence, rather than a cause, we should just refrain from doing any effort in either way, and so remain in the middle. Its easy to know, hard to follow, but all complicated problkems have a simple solution, and this one's is just: not! I think it all becomes pretty natural when we try not to act (exclusively) for our own self satisfaction (and it takes me a while to find just a single action that I do on a daily basis that is not motivated one way or the other by personal interest)

Dharma, Im not sure I understand your point, you seem to be concerned with expressing positive traits, and thats fine, but I also sense a bitter resentment against the negative ones. Perhaps quite understandably, but that perspective reflects a dichotomy that cannot be too healthy, as all dualisms aren't. If you want to motivate yourself and others with those ideals, fine, but IMHO it is still just half of the truth and completely arbirary. Where does good end and bad starts? And in the end it just furthers the illusion of separation that we all suffer from. If you allow me to express my opinion, I think you are trying too hard.

"believing that our experiences are "lessons" or "tests" when in fact they are not."

Why not? Perhaps this sound too much like schoolchildren being tested by our master, but I dont believe in God as an entity or even a principle, and so this could only be something we teach ourselves. But what my personal experience has long convinced me is that each and every atom in the universe is fighting for its room in the puzzle, and all that you can accomplish in life must be done by a continuous negotiation with everything else. I cannot find room for myself unless I gently push others aside. Elbow room is a luxury in the universe and this whole process is our only means of evolving, at least while we remain attached to the dualistic conventions (as we probably ever will)

So masochism appart, I do believe we need those lessons, even the painful ones, cause if we dont sucumb under them we are reborn inevitably stronger, and for me thats the whole point. What we dont need is people telling us how to live our lives, or criticizing our individuallity, our right to BE, but that is just an unavoidable flaw of human nature, and its very rare to find a person that doesnt commit the same mistakes they preech. And we can learn even from those people.